Title: The Last Poems of Ovid
Author: Ovid, 43 BC-18?
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.


*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Last Poems of Ovid" ***


Copyright (C) 2006 by Mark Bear Akrigg



THE LAST POEMS OF OVID

A New Edition, with Commentary, of the Fourth Book of the _Epistulae ex
Ponto_

by Mark Bear Akrigg, Ph.D.

       *       *       *       *       *

Original (unpublished) edition Copyright 1985 by Mark Bear Akrigg

First published edition, corrected and augmented Copyright 2006 by Mark
Bear Akrigg

       *       *       *       *       *

This edition and commentary are dedicated to

ROB MORROW

_"quo non mihi carior alter"_



TABLE OF CONTENTS


Acknowledgments      i

Preface      ii

Introduction      1

Textual Introduction      23

P. OVIDI NASONIS _EPISTVLARM EX PONTO_ LIBER QVARTVS      54

I. Ad Sextum Pompeium      56

II. Ad Seuerum      59

III. Ad ingratum      63

IIII. Ad Sextum Pompeium      68

V. Ad Sextum Pompeium      72

VI. Ad Brutum      76

VII. Ad Vestalem      81

VIII. Ad Suillium      86

IX. Ad Graecinum      93

X. Ad Albinouanum      105

XI. Ad Gallionem      113

XII. Ad Tuticanum      115

XIII. Ad Carum      120

XIV. Ad Tuticanum      125

XV. Ad Sextum Pompeium      131

XVI. Ad inuidum      136

COMMENTARY      144

I. To Sextus Pompeius      146

II. To Cornelius Severus      161

III. To an Unfaithful Friend      177

IV. To Sextus Pompeius      199

V. To Sextus Pompeius      213

VI. To Brutus      226

VII. To Vestalis      244

VIII. To Suillius      258

IX. To Graecinus      286

X. To Albinovanus Pedo      325

XI. To Gallio      359

XII. To Tuticanus      370

XIII. To Carus      389

XIV. To Tuticanus      410

XV. To Sextus Pompeius      429

XVI. To a Detractor      446

Bibliography      471

Index of topics discussed      477

Index of textual emendations      489



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


The Editor gratefully acknowledges the permission of the Herzog August
Bibliothek for the use of Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel: Cod.
Guelf. 13.11 Aug. 4° (fragmentum Guelferbytanum).



PREFACE


It is a pleasure to present to the public this digital edition, with
commentary, of _Ex Ponto_ IV, the final poems written by the Roman poet
Ovid, published after his death as a posthumous collection quite
separate from the earlier _Ex Ponto_ I-III.

These poems have a special place among Ovid's works, but have not
received the attention which they deserve. In particular, there has been
no full modern commentary on these poems.

This text presented in this edition is based on my personal examination
of ten manuscripts. I have also restored to the text certain readings
commonly accepted by editors until the nineteenth century. Finally, the
edition contains several dozen new textual conjectures by myself and
others.


The intended audience of this edition

This edition is intended to serve as a guide to the poems for
intermediate and advanced students of Latin poetry. However, I have
deliberately made it as straightforward as possible, and my hope is that
even a beginning student of Latin poetry embarking on the study of these
poems will find the commentary helpful.

This edition is also directed towards present and future Latin textual
critics.

My expectation when starting my research for this edition was that I
would be presenting a text that differed little from that to be found in
current editions. However, I made two discoveries during my research
into the text.

The first discovery was that many important textual corrections
generally accepted in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries had been
suppressed by editors in the course of the nineteenth century. I have
restored many of these readings to the text, and others will be found in
the textual apparatus.

The second discovery was that there was a surprisingly large number of
passages which appeared to be corrupt and for which it was possible to
suggest corrections. Given the long history of Latin textual criticism,
and Ovid's central position in Roman literary history, it was surprising
to find that so much remained to be done. Yet such was the case.

Nothing is more certain than that this book of poems as well as the
three earlier books of the _Ex Ponto_ represent an outstanding
opportunity for future editors and commentators to contribute to the
progress of Latin scholarship.


History of this edition

I originally prepared this edition and commentary during my time as a
graduate student at the University of Toronto. Upon its completion (and
my graduation) in 1985, a copy was deposited at the National Library of
Canada.

Had I followed a university teaching career after graduation, I would
undoubtedly have taken the necessary steps to publish the edition, if
only in pursuit of academic promotion. But I instead chose a career in
the software industry, which both removed the external incentive to
publish the edition, and denied me the time that I would have needed to
prepare it for publication.

However, I wished to ensure that future editors and commentators were
aware of the edition and would be able to make use of it. I therefore
decided to publish two short articles drawn from the edition. These
articles were intended to make generally available two textual
conjectures which I considered likely to be correct. But the articles
were also intended to make future editors aware that I had worked on the
text of Ovid, so that they would seek out my unpublished edition.

The first article ("An Intrusive Gloss in Ovid _Ex Ponto_ 4.13")
appeared in _Phoenix_ (vol. 40, p. 322) in 1986: it reported the
restoration of IV xiii 45 discussed at page 408 of the commentary.
_Phoenix_ is published by the Classical Association of Canada, and since
my own training in the classical languages had taken place almost
entirely in Canada, it seemed appropriate that my first publication
should be in a Canadian journal.

To my surprise and pleasure, my short article attracted a critique by
Professor Allan Kershaw ("_Ex Ponto_ 4.13: A Reply", _Phoenix_, vol. 42,
p. 176), followed by a learned defense of my conjecture by Professor
James Butrica ("Taking Enemies for Chains: Ovid _Ex Ponto_ 4.13.45
Again", _Phoenix_, vol. 43, pp. 258-59).

Four years later, I published a second article ("A Palaeographical
Corruption in Ovid, _Ex Ponto_ 4.6"), which appeared in the May 1990
issue of the _Classical Quarterly_ (pp. 283-84). This article reported
the restoration of IV vi 38 discussed at pages 240-41 of the commentary.
I selected the _Classical Quarterly_ because of its prominence within
the world of classical scholarship, and in particular because of its
close association with the modern history of Latin textual criticism: it
was in the _Classical Quarterly_ that many of the learned articles of A.
E. Housman first appeared.

My hope had been that these two articles would serve as a signpost that
would lead editors to my edition. The publication of J. A. Richmond's
Teubner edition of the _Ex Ponto_ in 1990 proved that this plan was
inadequate. Professor Richmond had indeed discovered the existence of my
edition: it received a prominent and flattering mention at the end of
his preface. However, he stated that he received the microfilm of the
edition too late for use in his edition!

In his review of Richmond's Teubner edition in the _Classical Review_
(n.s. 42, 2 [1992], pp. 305-06), Professor James Butrica highlighted a
number of proposed emendations from my edition.

It had become clear there was considerable outside interest in the work
that I had done, and that simply having a copy of an unpublished edition
on deposit at the National Library of Canada was not a sufficient means
of making the edition available to the public, so over the years that
followed I gave some consideration to how I might publish the edition so
that it would be conveniently available to students of Latin poetry.

Early in 2006, I was working as a volunteer proofreader for the Project
Gutenberg digital library: I noticed that the LibraryBlog library
included some public domain classical editions comparable in scope to my
own. Prompted by this, I decided that I would publish my edition online
in order to make it instantly accessible free of charge to anyone
wishing to use it. This seemed in every way preferable to seeking out a
university press, going through the time-consuming process of seeking
the necessary grants to subsidize publication, in order to produce a
printed book so expensive that no student and not many libraries could
afford to purchase a copy.


Nature of this edition

In essence, this is a corrected version of the original typescript.
Typing errors have been corrected, and minor errors have been set right.

All statements made and conjectures proposed should be considered to
have been made in 1985.


The HTML and Text versions of this edition

This digital edition is being made available in two versions.

The _HTML version_ takes advantage of the Unicode character set to
present Greek passages using the Greek alphabet, and to present certain
other special characters, such as the macron. It also offers hyperlinks
from the table of contents and from the indices to the relevant sections
of the edition.

Popular and useful as HTML is, it does not offer the universality of
ASCII text. Essentially every computer can display plain ASCII text
correctly. The _Text version_ is presented so that the edition can be
read on any computer, large or small, new or old. However, this
portability comes at a price. The ISO 8859-1 ASCII character set does
not include the Greek alphabet, nor does it include certain special
characters which form part of this edition.

Therefore, the Text version of this edition presents Greek passages
transliterated into the Latin alphabet. Similarly, in the textual
apparatus any capital letter occurring in the report of a manuscript
should be considered to be that letter in lower case, with a macron
(dash) above.

When the textual apparatus reports a manuscript correction where
the original reading is no longer legible, the HTML version underlines
the corrected letters, but the Text version uses capitalization.
For example, the Text version reports "facTisque _B2c_" at iii 25:
a later hand in _B_ has erased the original fourth letter, and has
replaced it with "t".

In the commentary, when metre is being discussed and a Latin word is
quoted, any vowel in that word which is capitalized is long, and any
vowel which is not capitalized is short. I have occasionally pointed out
explicitly that a word is metrically inconvenient because it has a
series of short vowels: in the HTML edition, because the actual letters
are marked short, these statements will appear to be redundant.

In the Latin text, the start and end of passages which are deeply
corrupt and therefore difficult to correct are indicated by an
asterisk, instead of the usual dagger (obelus).

Finally, in the critical apparatus, 'æ' is used where a manuscript has
'e' with a cedilla.


Enhancements made: the indices

In order to make the digital edition as useful as possible, I have added
this preface, a full table of contents, and two indices.

The first index (starting on page 477) is an index of _topics
discussed_. It is a selective rather than an exhaustive index for the
following two reasons:

(1) A commentary is already in effect indexed by the text it is linked
to. If, for instance, readers wish to find what the commentary has to
say about a certain passage, all they need do is turn to the part of the
commentary dealing with that passage.

(2) A digital edition can be searched online very quickly and easily. A
reader wishing to find any mention of the eminent Dutch textual critic
Nicolaus Heinsius could find every mention of Heinsius in the edition
simply by using "Heinsius" as a search argument.

However, some of the discussions in the commentary do not have an
obvious link to the text, nor would they necessarily be found quickly by
an electronic search. An example would be the discussion of "Simple
verbs used for compound ones" at page 281.

Also, there were some parts of the introduction and commentary which I
wanted to highlight to the reader as being of possible interest:
including references to these in the index would serve this purpose.

For similar reasons, I have included (starting on page 489) an index of
textual emendations first proposed in this edition. Some of these
emendations involve works other than _Ex Ponto_ IV, and authors other
than Ovid. The index of textual emendations makes these corrections easy
to find.


The debt I owe to others

I was able to create this edition only because of the help that I have
received over the years from others.

My basic training in the classical languages took place at the
University of British Columbia, where I completed my B.A. in 1974, and
my M.A. in 1977. It is impossible to repay the debt I owe to every
single member of the Classics Department at that time.

Professor Charles Murgia of the University of California (Berkeley)
initiated me into the mysteries of Latin palaeography and textual
criticism.

I created this edition while a Ph.D. candidate at the Department of
Classics at the University of Toronto. I owe an enormous debt of
gratitude to Professor Richard Tarrant, who encouraged me to undertake
the edition, posed many excellent questions, and offered many excellent
suggestions.

I owe a similar debt to Professor Alexander Dalzell, Professor Elaine
Fantham, Professor J. N. Grant, and Professor C. P. Jones, all of them
members of the Graduate Department of Classics at the University of
Toronto when I was creating the edition.

I have known Rob Morrow for twenty-one years, and he has touched every
aspect of my life. The study of Latin poetry is a field of endeavour far
removed from his usual interests: but even here he has made an important
contribution in the work he did in scanning the original typescript, and
in his continuing encouragement and support during the months I worked
on creating this digital edition. It is to him, with deep affection and
gratitude, that I dedicate this edition.



INTRODUCTION


In AD 8, when he was fifty years of age, Ovid was abruptly banished from
Rome to Tomis, an exile from which he never returned. In his poetry from
exile, he gives two reasons for the banishment: the publication of the
_Ars Amatoria_, and an unnamed error (_Tr_ II 207; _EP_ III iii
71-72)[1]. The _Ars Amatoria_ had been published some years previously,
being generally dated on the basis of _AA_ I 171-72 to 2 BC or shortly
thereafter; compare _Tr_ II 545-46. The error was clearly the real cause
of the banishment; what precisely this _error_ was Ovid does not reveal,
but it appears from _Tr_ II 103-4 and _Tr_ III v 49-50 to have been the
witnessing of some action that was embarrassing to the imperial family.
Beyond this nothing is known, for Ovid was careful to avoid compounding
his original mistake by mentioning what it consisted of.

[Footnote 1: The evidence for Ovid's _error_ and the many theories
advanced to explain it are gathered and fully discussed in J. C.
Thibault's _The Mystery of Ovid's Exile_ (Berkeley: 1964).]

The catastrophe which befell Ovid did not put an end to his poetic
activity; from the eight or nine years of his exile we possess a corpus
of elegiac verse that substantially exceeds in bulk the combined
production of Tibullus and Propertius.

The first work produced by Ovid was book I of the _Tristia_. Although it
is perhaps not literally true that Ovid wrote much of the poetry on
shipboard (_Tr_ I xi 3-10), all of the poems are directly related to the
circumstances of his downfall and his journey to exile; and it is
reasonable to suppose that the book was published shortly after Ovid's
arrival in Tomis.

In his first poems from exile, Ovid had attempted to engage the sympathy
of the public on his behalf; his next production was a direct appeal to
Augustus in the 578-line elegiac poem that comprises the second book of
the _Tristia_. The poem is written with Ovid's usual clarity and
elegance, but its failure to secure his recall is not surprising. The
poem deals only with the publication of the _Ars Amatoria_, which was
not the true cause of the exile; and rather than admitting his guilt and
appealing to Augustus' clemency, Ovid tactlessly argues that Augustus
had been wrong to exile him.

The years 10, 11, and 12 saw the publication of the final three books of
the _Tristia_. The charge of monotony that is generally brought against
Ovid's poetry from exile (and was brought by his friends at the time;
Ovid makes his defence in _EP_ III ix) is most nearly true of these
three books of verse. He was unable to name his correspondents and vary
his poetry with personal references as he was to do in the _Ex Ponto_;
and the pain of exile was so fresh as to exclude other topics.

Not all of Ovid's literary efforts in exile were devoted to his letters.
It appears from _Fast_ IV 81-82 and VI 666, as well as from the
dedication to Germanicus at the start of the first book (at _Tr_ II 551
Ovid says he dedicated the work to Augustus) that the _Fasti_ in the
edition we possess is a revision produced by Ovid in exile after the
death of Augustus.

In AD 12 Ovid produced the _Ibis_. The greater part of the poem is a
series of curses showing such minute mythological learning that many of
them have not been explained; but the poem's lengthy exordium is a
powerful treatment of Ovid's circumstances and Ibis's perfidy that has
been considered Ovid's most perfect literary creation (Housman 1041).

Many scholars also ascribe the composition of the final six _Heroides_
to the period of Ovid's exile; but although the literary appeal of these
three sets of double epistles is considerable, I believe that their
comparative diffuseness of manner indicates that Ovid was not their
author. They are, however, clearly modelled on the _Heroides_ written by
Ovid, and I have frequently quoted from them in the commentary.

In AD 12 Ovid must have received some indication that it was safe for
him to name his correspondents. He took full advantage of this new
opportunity to induce his friends to work on his behalf; it is clear
from Ovid's references to his fourth year of exile (I ii 26, I viii 28)
and to Tiberius' triumph of 23 October AD 12 (II i 1 & 46, II ii 75-76,
II v 27-28, III i 136, III iii 86, III iv 3)[2] that all three books
were written within the space of a single year: as fast a rate of
composition as can be proved for any part of Ovid's life. The three
books were published as a unit: the opening poem of the first book and
the closing poem of the last are addressed to Brutus, who was therefore
the dedicatee of the collection; both poems are apologies for Ovid's
verse. No such framing poems are found at the start of books II or III,
or at the end of books I and II, although the addressees of II i and III
i, Germanicus and Ovid's wife, were clearly chosen for their respective
importance and closeness to Ovid.

[Footnote 2: For these references I am indebted to page xxxv of A. L.
Wheeler's excellent introduction to the Loeb edition of the _Tristia_
and _Ex Ponto_. For the date of Tiberius' triumph, see Syme _History in
Ovid_ 40.]


_Ex Ponto_ IV

The fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ constitutes a work separate from the
three books composed in AD 12. The earliest datable poem in the book is
the fourth, written shortly before Sextus Pompeius' consulship in AD 14;
the latest is the ninth, written in honour of Graecinus' becoming
suffect consul in AD 16. Of the books of Ovid's verse which are
collections of individual poems, the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ is
the longest, being some 926 lines in length (excluding the probably
spurious distichs xv 25-26 and xvi 51-52). The mean average length of
such books is 764 lines; and the next longest after _Ex Ponto_ IV is
_Am_ III, with 824 lines (excluding the spurious fifth poem). I take the
length of the book as an indication that in its present form it is
probably a posthumous collection: Ovid's editor either gathered the
individual poems to form a single book that was unusually long, or
added a few later poems to a book previously assembled by Ovid[3].

[Footnote 3: Professor Tarrant notes however that unlike I-III the
fourth book was not written within a very short time; if Ovid had
collected what he thought worth publishing of his output over several
years, it would not be surprising to find it longer than the preceding
collections.]

Syme (_HO_ 156) argues that the order of the poems indicates that Ovid
survived to publish or at least to arrange the book: the fact that the
first and penultimate poems are addressed to Sextus Pompeius indicates
that Ovid dedicated the book to him. Professor R. J. Tarrant points out
to me correspondences of structure between _EP_ IV and some of Ovid's
earlier books. If the sixteenth and final poem of _EP_ IV is considered
a _sphragis_-poem, as is indicated by _Nasonis_ in the opening line, we
are left with a fifteen-poem book of which the first and last poems are
addressed to Sextus Pompeius, and in which the middle poem is addressed
to Germanicus through his client Suillius[4]. The same structural
outline of 1-8-15 appears in _Amores_ I and III--the opening and closing
poems of both books are concerned with Ovid's verse, while the eighth
poem of each book stands somewhat apart from the other poems: _Am_ I
viii is about the procuress Dipsas, while III ix (the eighth poem in the
book after the removal of the spurious fifth poem) is the elegy on the
death of Tibullus.

[Footnote 4: Professor E. Fantham notes as well the central placement of
poem ix, with its _laudes Augusti_.]


Ovid's addressees in _Ex Ponto_ IV

Sextus Pompeius, _consul ordinarius_ in 14, and himself a relative of
Augustus, is the recipient of no less than four letters in _EP_ IV[5].
It is significant that he is not the recipient of any of Ovid's earlier
letters from exile; this is discussed in the next section.

[Footnote 5: Full information on what is known of each of the addressees
will be found in the introductions to the poems in the commentary.]

In the attention Ovid gives Sextus Pompeius there can be seen, according
to Syme (_HO_ 156), a deliberate attempt to gain the favour of
Germanicus, who is mentioned in connection with Sextus Pompeius at v 25.
It is interesting that in viii Ovid addresses Germanicus' quaestor
Suillius (and in the course of the poem addresses Germanicus), and that
the recipient of xiii is Carus, the tutor of Germanicus' sons. But it is
only natural that Ovid, when at last permitted, should address so
influential a man as his benefactor Sextus Pompeius; and it does not
seem strange that he should address his fellow poet Carus, still less
that he should send a letter to Suillius, husband of his stepdaughter
Perilla.

C. Pomponius Graecinus, the recipient of ix, must have had some
political influence, since the poem is in celebration of his becoming
suffect consul in 16. But he probably owed this influence to his brother
Flaccus, a close friend of Tiberius who succeeded Graecinus as _consul
ordinarius_ for 17, and whom Ovid gives prominent mention at ix 57 ff.
Graecinus must have been an old associate of Ovid, since he has the rare
distinction of being mentioned by name in a poem written by Ovid before
his exile (_Am_ II x 1).

Two of Ovid's correspondents were orators. Gallio, the addressee of the
eleventh poem, is frequently quoted by the elder Seneca. He was a
senator; both Tacitus and Dio give accounts of how he fell into
disfavour with Tiberius for proposing that ex-members of the Praetorian
guard be granted the privilege of using the theatre seats reserved for
members of the equestrian order (_Ann_ VI 3; LVIII 18 4). Brutus, the
recipient of the sixth poem and dedicatee of the first three books of
the _Ex Ponto_, is not mentioned by other writers, but it appears from
vi 29-38 that he had a considerable reputation as a forensic orator,
although some allowance must be made for possible exaggeration in Ovid's
description of his close friend. The poem contains six lines on the
death of Fabius Maximus, to whom Ovid had addressed _EP_ I ii and III
iii; perhaps he and Brutus had been associates.

Five epistles are addressed to Ovid's fellow poets. Cornelius Severus,
the recipient of the second poem, was one of the most famous epic poets
of the day; he is mentioned by Quintilian (X i 89), and the elder Seneca
preserves his lines on the death of Cicero (_Suas_ VI 26), Albinovanus
Pedo, the recipient of the tenth epistle, was known as a writer of
hexameter verse and of epigram. He served in Germanicus' campaign of AD
15 (Tac _Ann_ I 60 2), and the elder Seneca preserves a fragment of his
poem on Germanicus' campaigns (_Suas_ I 15). It might be argued that in
addressing him Ovid is once again trying to win Germanicus' favour. But
in view of his intimacy with Ovid (mentioned at Sen _Cont_ II 2 12),
Albinovanus seems a natural choice to receive one of Ovid's letters.
Tuticanus, the recipient of the twelfth and fourteenth poems and author
of a _Phaeacid_ based on Homer (mentioned at xii 27 and again in the
catalogue of poets at xvi 29), is known only through the _Ex Ponto_; the
same is true of Carus, author of a poem on Hercules and, as already
mentioned, tutor of the sons of Germanicus.

Vestalis, the recipient of the seventh poem, is in a class separate from
the other recipients of Ovid's verse epistles. As _primipilaris_ of the
legion stationed in the vicinity, he would of course have been without
influence at Rome, but as (apparently) the prefect of the region around
Tomis, he presumably had some control over Ovid's circumstances.

The traitorous friend to whom the third poem is addressed was a real
person, for Ovid is quite explicit when speaking of their past together
and of the friend's perfidy towards him; the same cannot be said of the
_inuidus_ to whom is addressed the concluding poem of the book, a
defence of Ovid's reputation as a poet.

Cotta Maximus, the younger son of Tibullus' patron Messalla, is
prominently mentioned at xvi 41-44 as an unpublished poet of outstanding
excellence. He is the recipient of six letters in the earlier books of
the _Ex Ponto_. Syme finds it significant that there is no poem in _EP_
IV addressed to Cotta: 'Ovid ... was now concentrating his efforts
elsewhere: Germanicus, the friends of Germanicus, Sextus Pompeius ... The
tardy tribute may perhaps be interpreted as a veiled reproach' (_HO_
128). But arguments from silence are dangerous; and Ovid's mention of
Cotta seems flattering enough.

It is perhaps safer to postulate a change in Ovid's feelings towards his
wife. She is never mentioned in _EP_ IV, although she had been the
recipient of some eight earlier letters from exile (_Tr_ I vi, III iii,
IV iii, V ii, xi, xiv, _EP_ I iv, III i; _Tr_ V v was written in honour
of her birthday). At _EP_ III vii 11-12 Ovid indicates that his wife's
efforts on his behalf had not matched his hopes:

    nec grauis uxori dicar, quae scilicet in me
      quam proba tam timida est experiensque parum.

The fact that Ovid chose not to address any verse epistle to his wife
during his final years at Tomis may well reflect a cooling in his
attitude towards her.


Differences between _Ex Ponto_ IV and the earlier poetry from exile

The criticism most often made of Ovid's poems from exile is that they
are repetitive and therefore monotonous. _EP_ III ix 1-4 shows that the
same criticism was made while Ovid was still alive:

    Quod sit in his eadem sententia, Brute, libellis,
      carmina nescio quem carpere nostra refers:
    nil nisi me terra fruar ut propiore rogare,
      et quam sim denso cinctus ab hoste loqui.

Ovid does not attempt to deny the criticism, but explains that he wished
to obtain the assistance of as many people as possible:

    et tamen haec eadem cum sint, non scripsimus isdem,
      unaque per plures uox mea temptat opem.

(41-42)

    nec liber ut fieret, sed uti sua cuique daretur
      littera, propositum curaque nostra fuit.
    postmodo collectas utcumque sine ordine iunxi:
      hoc opus electum ne mihi forte putes.
    da ueniam scriptis, quorum non gloria nobis
      causa, sed utilitas officiumque fuit.

(51-56)

Ovid's explanation is reasonable enough, and is confirmed by the speed
with which he composed the first three books of the _Ex Ponto_ once he
knew that it was safe to name people in his verse. The first three books
of the _Ex Ponto_, like the _Tristia_, were written with the single
objective of securing Ovid's recall, and this naturally caused a certain
repetition of subject-matter.

By the time Ovid wrote the poems that would form the fourth book of the
_Ex Ponto_, he had lived in Tomis for six or more years, and it must
have been clear to him that his chances of recall were slight. The
result of this is a diminished use of his personal situation as a theme
for his verse. Often he introduces his plight in only one or two
distichs of a poem, subordinating the topic to the poem's main theme.
The result of this technique can be seen in such extended passages as
the descriptions of the investiture of the new consul (iv & ix), the
address to Germanicus on the power of poetry (viii), or the catalogue of
poets that concludes the book. In all of these passages Ovid's desire
for recall is only a secondary theme.


The mixing of levels of diction

As well as variety of subject, the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ shows a
variation in style that is typical of Ovid's letters from exile. The
poems use the metre and language of elegiac verse. But at the same time
they are _letters_, and are strongly influenced by the structure and
vocabulary of prose epistles. This influence is naturally more obvious
at some points than at others; and even within a single poem there can
be a surprising degree of variation in the different sections of the
poem.

Some poems tend more to one extreme than the other. The eleventh poem, a
letter of commiseration to Gallio on the death of his wife, is
extensively indebted to the genre of the prose letter of consolation;
this prose influence is evident in such passages as:

    finitumque tuum, si non ratione, dolorem
      ipsa iam pridem suspicor esse mora

(13-14)

At the opposite extreme is the final poem of the book, a defence of
Ovid's poetry; as this was a traditional poetic subject, the level of
diction throughout the poem is extremely high, particularly in the
catalogue of poets that forms the main body of the poem.

An interesting result of the mixture of styles is the presence in the
poems of exile of words and expressions which belong essentially to
prose, being otherwise rarely or never found in verse. Some instances
from _Ex Ponto_ IV are _ad summam_ (i 15), _conuictor_ (iii 15),
_abunde_ (viii 37), _ex toto_ (viii 72), _di faciant_ (ix 3), _secreto_
(ix 31), _respectu_ (ix 100), _quominus_ (xii 1), _praefrigidus_ (xii
35), and _tantummodo_ (xvi 49).

Both in subject and style the sixteen poems of _Ex Ponto_ IV show a wide
variety, worthy of the creator of the _Metamorphoses_. The following
section examines the special characteristics of each of the poems.


The letters to Sextus Pompeius

Sextus Pompeius is the recipient of poems i, iv, v, and xv; only Cotta
Maximus and Ovid's wife have more letters from exile addressed to them.
It is clear from the opening of IV i that Pompeius had himself
prohibited Ovid from addressing him; and Ovid is careful to present
himself as a client rather than a friend; the tone is of almost abject
humility, and he shows circumspection in his requests for assistance.

In the opening of the first poem, Ovid describes how difficult it had
been to prevent himself from naming Pompeius in his verse; in the
climactic ten lines he declares that he is entirely Pompeius' creation.
Only in the transition between the topics does he refer to future help
from Pompeius, linking it with the assistance he is already providing:

    nunc quoque nil subitis clementia territa fatis
      auxilium uitae fertque feretque meae.

(25-26)

The fourth poem is a description of how Fama came to Ovid and told him
of Pompeius' election to the consulship; Ovid then pictures the joyous
scene of the accession. At the end of the poem he indirectly asks for
Pompeius' assistance, praying that at some point he may remember him in
exile. The device of having Fama report Pompeius' accession to the
consulship serves to emphasize the importance of the event and raise the
tone of the poem. Ovid had earlier used Fama as the formal addressee of
_EP_ II i, which described his reaction to the news of Germanicus'
triumph. In the fifth poem Ovid achieves a similar effect through the
device of addressing the poem itself, giving it directions on where it
will find Pompeius and what consular duties he might be performing[6].
Only in the concluding distich does Ovid direct the poem to ask for his
assistance.

[Footnote 6: Ovid had used a similar technique in _Tr_ I i, where he
gives his book instructions for its voyage to Rome, including directions
on how it should approach Augustus.]

The fifteenth poem contains Ovid's most forceful appeal for Pompeius'
assistance. It is interesting to observe the techniques Ovid uses to
avoid offending Pompeius. The first part of the poem is a metaphorical
description of how Ovid is as much Pompeius' property as his many
estates or his house in Rome. This leads to Ovid's request:

    atque utinam possis, et detur amicius aruum,
      remque tuam ponas in meliore loco!
    quod quoniam in dis est, tempta lenire precando
      numina perpetua quae pietate colis.

(21-24)

He then attempts to compensate for the boldness of his request. First he
says that his appeal is unnecessary:

    nec dubitans oro; sed flumine saepe secundo
      augetur remis cursus euntis aquae.

(27-38)

Then he apologizes for making such constant requests:

    et pudet et metuo semperque eademque precari
      ne subeant animo taedia iusta tuo

(29-30)

He ends the poem with a return to the topic of the benefits Pompeius has
already rendered him.


The letter to Suillius addressing Germanicus

No poem in the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ is addressed to a member of
the imperial family, but the greater part of IV viii, nominally
addressed to Suillius, is in fact directed to his patron Germanicus.
Suillius' family ties with Ovid and his influential position would have
made it natural for Ovid to address him in the earlier books of the _Ex
Ponto_ or even in the _Tristia_; and it is clear from the opening of the
poem that Suillius must have distanced himself from Ovid:

    Littera sera quidem, studiis exculte Suilli,
      huc tua peruenit, sed mihi grata tamen

In the section that follows, Ovid asks for Suillius' assistance, rather
strangely setting forth his own impeccable family background and moral
purity; then he moves to the topic of Suillius' piety towards
Germanicus, and in line 31 begins to address Germanicus with a direct
request for his assistance. In the fifty-eight lines that follow he
develops the argument that Germanicus should accept the verse Ovid
offers him for two reasons: poetry grants immortality to the subjects it
describes; and Germanicus is himself a poet. In this passage Ovid allows
himself a very high level of diction; as the topic was congenial to him,
the result is perhaps the finest extended passage of verse in the
book[7].

[Footnote 7: Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me in particular that
lines 63-64 on the apotheosis of Augustus being in part accomplished
through poetry are one of the few instances in the poetry of exile of
Ovid's earlier mischievous irony towards Augustus--a sign of a return on
Ovid's part to his earlier form.]

Ovid ends his address to Germanicus by asking for his assistance; only
in the final distich of the poem does he return to Suillius.


The letters to Brutus and Graecinus

Only two of the ten addressees named by Ovid in _EP_ IV were recipients
of earlier letters from him. Brutus, to whom IV vi is addressed, was
also the addressee of _EP_ I i and III ix, while Graecinus, to whom IV
ix is addressed, was the recipient of _EP_ I vi and II vi.

There is some difference between Ovid's treatment of Brutus and
Graecinus in _EP_ IV and in the earlier poems. _EP_ IV vi is highly
personal, being mostly devoted to a lengthy description of Brutus'
apparently conflicting but in fact complementary qualities of tenacity
as a prosecuting advocate and of kindness towards those in need; no poem
in the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ is more completely concerned with
the addressee as a person. In contrast, nothing is said of Brutus in
_EP_ I i, where he acts as the mere recipient of the plea that he
protect Ovid's poems, or in III ix, where Brutus is the reporter of
another's remarks on the monotony of Ovid's subject-matter. The address
to Graecinus in IV ix, on the other hand, is much less personal than in
I vi and II vi. The part of _EP_ IV ix concerned with Graecinus
describes his elevation to the consulship, and was clearly written (in
some haste) to celebrate the event. The earlier poems are more concerned
with Graecinus as an individual: in _EP_ I vi Ovid describes at length
Graecinus' kindliness of spirit and his closeness to his exiled friend,
while in II vi Ovid admits the justice of the criticism Graecinus makes
of the conduct which led to his exile, but thanks him for his support
and asks for its continuance.


The letters to Tuticanus

The two letters to Tuticanus show a similar dichotomy.

Of the two poems, xii is more personal and more concerned with poetry.
The first eighteen lines are a witty demonstration of the impossibility
of using Tuticanus' name in elegiac verse, while the twelve verses that
follow recall their poetic apprenticeship together. In the final twelve
lines, referring to Tuticanus' senatorial career, Ovid asks him to help
his cause in any way possible.

Poem xiv is far less personal than the earlier epistle. The only mention
of Tuticanus is at the poem's beginning:

    Haec tibi mittuntur quem sum modo carmine questus
      non aptum numeris nomen habere meis,
    in quibus, excepto quod adhuc utcumque ualemus,
      nil te praeterea quod iuuet inuenies.

The bulk of the poem is a defense against charges raised by some of the
Tomitans that he has defamed them in his verse. Ovid answers that he was
complaining about the physical conditions at Tomis, not the people, to
whom he owes a great debt. It is characteristic of the fourth book of
the _Ex Ponto_ that Ovid complains less of his exile than in his earlier
verse from exile; this poem furnishes the most explicit demonstration
that the years spent in exile and the dwindling likelihood of recall has
made Ovid reach an accommodation with his new conditions of life.

The topic of the poem clearly has no relation to Tuticanus; Professor R.
J. Tarrant points out to me Ovid's use of the same technique in some of
the _Amores_, such as I ix (_Militat omnis amans_), and II x, to
Graecinus on loving two women at once, where there is no apparent
connection between the addressee and the subject of the poem. Professor
E. Fantham notes that the bulk of xiv could even have been written
before Ovid chose Tuticanus as its addressee.


Other letters to poets

Three other poems in the book are addressed to poets. In all of them
poetry itself is a primary subject.


The letter to Severus

The second poem in the book, addressed to the epic poet Severus, opens
with a contrast of the situations of the two poets. The main body of the
poem is concerned with the difficulty of composing under the conditions
Ovid endures at Tomis, and the comfort that he even so derives from
pursuing his old calling. The poem is well constructed and the language
vivid. A particularly fine example of the use Ovid makes of differing
levels of diction is found at 35-38:

    excitat auditor studium, laudataque uirtus
      crescit, et immensum gloria calcar habet.
    hic mea cui recitem nisi flauis scripta Corallis,
      quasque alias gentes barbarus Hister obit?

The emotional height of the tricolon, where Ovid describes poetic
inspiration, gives way to a comparatively prosaic distich where he
explains that the conditions necessary for inspiration do not exist at
Tomis.

At the poem's conclusion Ovid reverts to Severus, asking that he send
Ovid some recent piece of work.


The letter to Albinovanus Pedo

In the tenth poem of the book, poetry is not the main subject; instead,
Ovid describes the hardships he endures at Tomis, and then describes at
length the reasons the Black Sea freezes over. Towards the end of the
letter, however, he explains why he is writing a poem to Albinovanus on
this seemingly irrelevant topic[8]. The language recalls the poem to
Severus:

    'detinui' dicam 'tempus, curasque fefelli;
      hunc fructum praesens attulit hora mihi.
    abfuimus solito dum scribimus ista dolore,
      in mediis nec nos sensimus esse Getis.'

[Footnote 8: However, Albinovanus' poem on Germanicus' campaigns may
have had a strong geographical element; as Professor E. Fantham notes,
Ovid may here be appealing to this interest, or demonstrating
competitive skill in handling the topic.]

(67-70)

In the poem's concluding lines he links his own situation with the
_Theseid_ Albinovanus is engaged on: just as Theseus was faithful, so
Albinovanus should be faithful to Ovid.


The letter to Gallio

This letter is remarkable for its economy of structure, and indeed is so
short as to seem rather perfunctory. Only twenty-two lines in length,
it is a letter of consolation addressed to Gallio on the death of his
wife. In the first four lines Ovid apologizes for not having written to
him earlier. Ovid's exile serves as a bridge to the main topic of the
poem:

    atque utinam rapti iactura laesus amici
      sensisses ultra quod quererere nihil

(5-6)

The remainder of the poem consists of the ingenious interweaving of
various commonplaces of consolation. The poem is a good illustration of
the secondary importance Ovid often gives his own misfortune in the
fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_.


The letter to Carus

The thirteenth poem, like the second letter to Tuticanus, shows Ovid's
acceptance of his life in Tomis. In it he tells Carus of the favourable
reception given a poem he had written in Getic on the apotheosis of
Augustus. The poem's opening is of interest as showing Ovid's
consciousness of verbal wit as a special characteristic of his verse. He
starts the poem with a play on the meaning of Carus' name, then tells
him that the opening will by itself tell him who his correspondent is.
In the lines that follow he discusses the individuality of his own style
and that of Carus; this serves to introduce the subject of his Getic
verse.


The letter to Vestalis

The subordination of the topic of Ovid's exile to another subject can be
clearly seen in the seventh poem of the book, addressed to Vestalis,
_primipilaris_ of a legion stationed in the area of Tomis. As in the
letter to Gallio, mention of Ovid's personal misfortune is confined to
one short passage near the start of the poem:

    aspicis en praesens quali iaceamus in aruo,
      nec me testis eris falsa solere queri

(3-4)

The descriptions that follow of wine freezing solid in the cold and of
the Sarmatian herdsman driving his wagon across the frozen Danube are so
picturesque that the reader's attention is drawn away from Ovid's
personal situation. Ovid describes the poisoned arrows used in the
region; then, in language recalling his letter to Gallio, expresses his
regret that Vestalis has had personal experience of these weapons:

    atque utinam pars haec tantum spectata fuisset,
      non etiam proprio cognita Marte tibi!

(13-14)

The remainder of the poem is a description of Vestalis' capture of
Aegissos. The description is conventional and unfelt; Ovid seems merely
to have assembled a few standard topics of military panegyric.


The third poem

Poem iii, addressed to an unidentified friend who had proved faithless,
is a well-crafted but not particularly original warning that Fortune is
a changeable goddess, and his friend might well find find himself one
day in Ovid's position. The familiar examples of Croesus, Pompey, and
Marius are used; as the last and therefore most important example Ovid
uses his own catastrophe. The device recalls the _Ibis_, where Ovid's
final curse is to wish his enemy's exile to Tomis.


Poem xvi

The concluding poem of the book is a defence of Ovid's poetry. The
poem's argument is that poets generally become famous only after their
death, but that Ovid gained his reputation while still alive. The
greater part of the poem is a catalogue of Ovid's contemporary poets,
the argument being that even in such company he was illustrious.

As elsewhere he equates his exile with death; the defence of his poetry
therefore includes only the poetry that he wrote before his exile.



TEXTUAL INTRODUCTION

The Manuscripts


The manuscript authority for the text of the fourth book of the _Ex
Ponto_ is significantly poorer than for the earlier books because of the
absence of _A_, _Hamburgensis scrin. 52 F_. This ninth-century
manuscript has been recognized since the time of Heinsius as the most
important witness for the text of the _Ex Ponto_; it breaks off,
however, at III ii 67.

The manuscript authorities for the fourth book can be placed in three
categories. The fragmentary _G_ is from a different tradition than the
other manuscripts. _B_ and _C_ are closely related, and offer the best
witness to the main tradition. The other manuscripts I have collated are
more greatly affected by contamination and interpolation; of them _M_
and _F_ show some independence, while no subclassification can be made
of _H_, _I_, _L_, or _T_.


_G_

The _fragmentum Guelferbytanum_, _Cod. Guelf. 13.11 Aug. 4°_, generally
dated to the fifth or sixth century, is the oldest manuscript witness to
any of Ovid's poems. Part of the collection of the Herzog August
Bibliothek in Wolfenbüttel, it was discovered by Carl Schoenemann, who
published his discovery in 1829; details of his monograph will be found
in the bibliography. The two pieces of parchment are a palimpsest,
having been reused in the eighth century for a text of Augustine; later
they were incorporated into a bookbinding. As a result of this treatment
they are in extremely poor condition.

_G_ contains all or part of ix 101-8, ix 127-33, xii 15-19, and xii
41-44. To make it perfectly clear when _G_ is a witness to the text, I
have not grouped it with other manuscripts, but have always specified it
by name. If _G_ is not mentioned in an apparatus entry, it is not extant
for the text concerned.

_G_ is written in uncial script, with no division between words but with
indentation of the pentameters. Its one contribution to the
establishment of the text is at ix 103, where it reads _quamquam ... sit_
instead of the more usual _quamquam ... est_ found in the other
manuscripts. In general, the text offered by _G_ is surprisingly poor.
At ix 108 it reads _fato_ for _facto_, at ix 130 it has the false and
unmetrical spelling _praeces_, at ix 132 it has _misscelite_ for _misi
caelite_, at xii 17 it reads _lati_ for _dilati_, and at xii 19 _naia_
for _nota_. These errors demonstrate that the rest of the tradition does
not descend from _G_.

Korn gives an accurate transcription of the fragment in the introduction
to his edition; photographs of parts of the fragment can be found at
Chatelain, _Paléographie des classiques latins_, tab. xcix, 2 and E. A.
Lowe, _Codices Latini Antiquiores_, vol. IX, p. 40, no. 1377.


_B_ and _C_

_Monacensis latinus 384_ and _Mon. lat. 19476_, both dated by
editors to the twelfth century, are descended from a common ancestor.
This is easily demonstrated by the large number of shared errors not
found in other manuscripts[9]. At iv 36 _B_ and _C_ have _intendunt_
for the correct _intendent_, at viii 6 _uolo_ for _uoco_, at viii 18
_perueniemus_ for _inueniemur_ (_-ntur_,_-mus_), at viii 44 _illa_ for
_ulla_, at viii 89 _cara_ for _care_, at ix 44 _fingit_ for _finget_, at
ix 71 _quod_ for _cum_ (_FILT_) and _ut_ (_HM_), at ix 92 _praestat_ for
_perstat_, at ix 97 _et_ for _ut_, at xiii 5 _certe est_ for _certe_,
and at xiv 30 _culpatus_ for _culpatis_. In some of these passages _B_'s
still visible original reading has been corrected by a later hand. In
other passages it is clear from the signs of correction that _B_
originally agreed with _C_ in distinctive readings now preserved in C
alone: _subito_ for _sed et_ (iii 27), _erat_ for _eras_ (vi 9),
_occidit_ for _occidis_ (vi 11), _suspicit_ for _suscipit_ (ix 90),
_parent_ for _darent_ (xvi 31).

[Footnote 9: The manuscripts were probably produced at the same German
centre. Professor R. J. Tarrant has noted the presence of the _Ex Ponto_
in book-lists of the eleventh and early twelfth centuries from
Blaubeuern, Tegernsee, Bamberg, Egmond, and Cracow (_Texts and
Transmission_ 263); he suggests Tegernsee to me as a probable candidate
for the production of _B_ and _C_.]

_B_ and _C_ on the whole offer a better text than any other manuscript.
At iii 44 _B1_ and _C_ omit the lost pentameter, where the other
manuscripts offer interpolations. At iv 11 they alone give the probably
correct _solus_ for _tristis_, at xii 3 _aut_ for _ast_, and at xvi 31
_tyrannis_ (conjectured by Heinsius) for _tyranni_. At v 40 _C_ and _B2_
alone have the correct _mancipii ... tui_ for _mancipium ... tuum_.

Both manuscripts naturally have readings peculiar to themselves. _B_ has
about fifty unique readings. It places iii 11-12 after 13-14, omits v
37-40, and interchanges viii 49-50 and 51-52. At iv 34 _B_ alone has
_erunt_ (for _erit_), conjectured by Heinsius; _C_ omits the word.
Similarly, at xi 21 _B_ and _F1_ have _mihi_, omitted by _C_; the other
manuscripts have _tibi_. _B_ has _ab_ at i 9 for the other manuscripts'
_in_; _ab_ is possibly the true reading.

Under the influence of Ehwald, modern editors have wrongly taken some of
_B_'s other readings to be correct, placing _aspicerem_ in the text for
_prospicerem_ at ix 23, _ara_ for _ora_ at ix 115, and _illi_ for
_illum_ at ix 126. At ix 73 editors print _B_ and _T_'s _quem_, which is
clearly an interpolation for the awkward transmitted reading _qua_.

Unlike _C_, _B_ has been quite heavily corrected by later hands.

_C_ has more than one hundred readings peculiar to itself. Two of them I
have accepted as correct: _summo_ (for _summum_; _H_ has _mundum_) at
iii 32, and _horas_ (that is, _oras_) at vii 1; the reading is also
given by _I_. It is possible that _C_'s _correptior_ should be read at
xii 13 for _correptius_. At xiv 38 _C_'s _sceptius_ is the manuscript
reading closest to the correct _Scepsius_ restored by Scaliger.

Most of _C_'s errors are trivial, but at some points it departs widely
from the usual text. It omits ix 47 and xiv 37, and interchanges the
second hemistichs of iii 26 and 28; xvi 30 is inserted by a later hand,
perhaps in an erasure. At viii 43 it has _in uita_ for _officio_, at
xiii 12 _contra uiam_ for _nouimus_, at xiv 36 _in_ for _loci_, and at
xv 31 _colloquio_ for _uerum quid_.

_C_ also contains a greater number of purely palaeographical errors than
any other manuscript: _hunc_ for _nunc_ (i 25), _humeris_ for _numeris_
(ii 30), _hec_ for _nec_ (ix 30), _lucos_ for _sucos_ (x 19), _hasto_
for _horto_ (xv 7), _ueiiuolique_ for _ueliuolique_ (xvi 21), _pretia_
for _pr(o)elia_ (xvi 23).

_B_ and _C_ sporadically offer the third declension accusative plural
ending _-is_ (ix 4 _fascis_ _C_, ix 7 _partis_ _C_, ix 73 _rudentis_
_B_, x 17 _cantantis_ _B_, xii 30 _albentis_ _B_). But more usually all
manuscripts, including _B_ and _C_, have the accusative in _-es_:
compare for example ii 27 _partes_, iii 53 _purgantes_, ix 35
_praesentes_, and ix 42 _fasces_. The manuscripts show a similar
variation in the earlier books of the _Ex Ponto_. The ninth-century
Hamburg manuscript (_A_) sometimes offers accusatives in _-is_ where the
other manuscripts, even _B_ and _C_, have _-es_ (I iv 23 _partis_, I v
11 _talis_, I vi 39 _ligantis_, I vi 51 _turris_). At I ii 4, _A_ has
_omnes_, where _C1_ has _omnis_, and in general even in _A_ the
accusative in _-es_ is the predominant form. For example, _A_ offers
_auris_ at II iv 13 and II ix 25, but _aures_ at I ii 127, I ix 5, II v
33, and II ix 3. In view of the instability of the manuscript
evidence[10], I have normalized the ending to _-es_ in all cases,
considering the instances of _-is_ to be scribal interpolations.

[Footnote 10: G. P. Goold ("Amatoria Critica", _HSPh_ 69 [1965] 10) has
an interesting discussion of the problems in establishing Ovid's
orthography. For accusative plural endings in the third declension, he
concludes that _-is_ for Ovid can be neither established nor excluded.]

Similarly, I have used the form _penna_ at iv 12 and vii 37, where _C_
offers _pinna_. _Penna_ is the form given in the ancient manuscripts of
Virgil, and attested by Quintilian.


_MFHILT_

The other manuscripts I have collated belong to the vulgate class. They
are not related to each other in the sense that _B_ and _C_ are related,
nor does any of them possess independent authority as does _G_. Within
the group firm lines of affiliation are hard to establish, and each of
the manuscripts attests a handful of good readings that are found in few
or none of the others, either by happy conjecture, or because a reading
that was in circulation at the time as a variant chanced to get copied
into a few surviving manuscripts. Professor R. J. Tarrant has noted that
the presence of the _Ex Ponto_ in north-central France 'can be traced
from the eleventh century onwards, first from echoes in Hildebert of
Lavardin and Baudri de Bourgeuil, later from the extracts in the
_Florilegium Gallicum_, and finally from the complete texts [which
include our _H_ and _F_] ... that emanate from this region toward the end
of the twelfth century' (_Texts and Transmission_ 263); the vulgate
manuscripts seem to have been propagated from the text current in the
region of Orléans.

_M_ and _F_ show some originality. Their readings at xvi 33 differ
somewhat from the version of that passage in _HILT_. _F1_'s
interpolation for the missing pentameter at iii 44 differs from that of
_MHILT_, while _M_ has an interpolated distich following x 6 that is
not otherwise attested.

Of the other manuscripts, _I_ agrees with _C_ in reading _horas_
(=_oras_) for _undas_ at vii 1, while _T_ is the only manuscript
collated to have the correct _laeuus_ at ix 119 in the original hand
(_F2_ gives it as a variant reading). Similarly, _H_ and _L_ each have a
few peculiar variants.

As a group _MFHILT_ offer a good picture of the readings current in the
later mediaeval period, and only rarely have I been obliged to cite a
vulgate manuscript from the editions of Heinsius, Burman, or Lenz as
testimony for a variant.


_M_

Heinsius did not have knowledge of _B_ or _C_, and seems to have
considered his _codex Moreti_ (preserved at the Museum Plantin-Moretus
in Antwerp as 'Latin, n° 68 [anc. 43] [salle des reliures, n° 32]' in
Denucé's catalogue of the museum's collection) to be the best of the
poor selection of manuscripts available; at xvi 33, understandably
despairing of restoring the true reading, he accepted _M_'s reading
pending the discovery of better manuscripts.

_M_ was dated by Heinsius to the twelfth or thirteenth century; Denucé
assigns it to the twelfth century.

At viii 85 _M_ alone has the correct _ullo_ for the other manuscripts'
_illo_; this could naturally have been recovered by conjecture. At x 1
it has _cumerio_, the closest reading in the manuscripts collated to
the correct _Cimmerio_; but Professor R. J. Tarrant informs me that
_Cimmerio_ is also found in _British Library Harley 2607_.

_M_ has suffered from a certain degree of interpolation. Following x 6
there is the spurious distich _set cum nostra malis uexentur corpora
multis / aspera non possum perpetiendo mori_. At ii 9 _Falerno_ is a
deliberate alteration of _Falerna_. At x 49 _Niphates_ is an
interpolation from Lucan III 245. At xiii 47 _duorum_ (also given as a
variant reading by _F2_) looks like an attempt to correct the cryptic
transmitted reading _deorum_, and at xv 15 _tellus regnata_ is
presumably a metrical correction following the loss of _-que_ from
_regnataque terra_, the reading of the other manuscripts. At xvi 25
_eticiusque_ looks to be a deliberate alteration of _Trinacriusque_, but
I am not sure what the interpolation means.


_F_

_Francofurtanus Barth 110_, used by Burman, shows some signs of
independence. At iii 44, where a pentameter has been lost, _B_ and _C_
omit the line, while the other manuscripts, including _M_, have the
interpolation _indigus effectus omnibus ipse magis_; _F_ has the
separate interpolation _Achillas Pharius abstulit ense caput_, also
found in Heinsius' _fragmentum Louaniense_. _F_ omits viii 51-54, at xi
1 reads _Pollio_ for _Gallio_, and at xvi 33 has a reading somewhat
different from those offered by the other manuscripts.

_F_ alone of the manuscripts collated offers the correct _audisse_ (for
_audire_) at x 17. At xi 21 it and _B_ alone have the correct _mihi_
for _tibi_ (omitted by _C_). At xiv 7 it has the probably correct
_muter_ for _mittar_, also found in _Bodleianus Canon. lat. 1_ and
_Barberinus lat. 26_, both of the thirteenth century. With the exception
of _muter_, these readings could have been recovered by conjecture;
given the separative interpolation at iii 44, _F_ differs surprisingly
little from the other manuscripts.


_H_

The thirteenth-century _Holkhamicus 322_, now _British Library add.
49368_, contains (with _I_) the correct _hanc_ at i 16, the other
manuscripts having _ha_, _ah_ (_B_), or _a_ (_C_). At xvi 30, where I
have printed _leuis_, the reading of most manuscripts, _H_ has _leui_,
the conjecture of Heinsius; Professor R. J. Tarrant informs me that the
same reading is found in _Othob. lat. 1469_. At iv 45 _H_'s _qua libet_
is the manuscript reading closest to Heinsius' correct _quamlibet_; most
manuscripts have _quod licet_.

Most other variants in _H_ are trivial errors, although there seems to
have been deliberate scribal alteration at x 18 (_sucus amarus erat_ for
_lotos amara fuit_), xiv 38 (_Celsius_ for the usual _Septius_; Scaliger
restored _Scepsius_), xvi 3 (_ueniet_ for _uenit et_; presumably the
intermediate step was _uenit_), and perhaps at xiv 31 (_miserabilis_ for
_uitabilis_).


_I_

The thirteenth-century _Laurentianus 36 32_, Lenz's and André's _m_, has
the correct _perstas_ at x 83 for _praestas_; its reading is also found
in _P_ and as a variant of _F2_. At vii 1 it shares with _C_ the reading
_horas_ (=_oras_), which I have printed in preference to the usual
_undas_.

At viii 15 _I_ has the hypercorrect _nil_ for _nihil_, and at xiii 26
_ethereos ... deos_ for _aetherias ... domos_, but in general has few
signs of deliberate alteration.


_L_

_Lipsiensis bibl. ciu. Rep. I 2° 7_, of the thirteenth century, has
_haec_ at ix 103 for the other manuscripts' _et_. _Haec_ restores sense
to the passage, and was the preferred reading of Heinsius; I consider it
a scribal conjecture, now rendered obsolete by Professor R. J. Tarrant's
more elegant _quae_. _L_'s text has clearly been tampered with at xiv 41
(_populum ... uertit in iram_ for _populi ... concitat iram_), but in
general seems to have suffered little from interpolation. It is,
however, of little independent value as a witness to the text.


_T_

_Turonensis 879_, written around the year 1200, was first fully collated
by André for his edition; Lenz had earlier reported its readings for IV
xvi and part of I i. At ix 119 only _T_ and _F2_ of the manuscripts
collated have the correct _laeuus_, although other manuscripts come
close, and the reading could have been recovered by conjecture. At xv 40
_T_ reads _transierit saeuos_ for _transit nostra feros_; clearly
_nostra_ was at some point lost from the text, and metre forcibly
restored.


_P_

I have also collated the thirteenth-century _Parisinus lat. 7993_,
Heinsius' _codex Regius_. At ix 46 _P_ offers the correct _cernet_ for
_credet_; _cernet_ is also the reading of _M_ after correction by a
later hand and of the thirteenth-century _Gothanus membr. II 121_. At vi
7 _P_ alone of collated manuscripts agrees with _C_ in reading
_praestat_ for the correct _perstat_. _P_ agrees with _L_ in reading
_niuibus_ for the other manuscripts' _nubibus_ at v 5, _adeptum_ for
_ademptum_ at vi 49, _signare_ for _signate_ at xv 11, and in the
orthography _puplicus_ for _publicus_ at ix 48, ix 102, xiii 5, and xiv
16. The manuscript has many corruptions: a few examples are i 30 _igne_
for _imbre_, ii 18 _supremo_ for _suppresso_, iv 6 _pace_ for _parte_,
vi 34 _uirtus_ for _uirus_, vii 15 _piacula_ for _pericula_, ix 42
_praeterea_ for _praetextam_, x 63 _in harena_ for _marina_, xiv 39
_conuiuia_ for _conuicia_, and xvi 24 _sacri_ for _scripti_. However,
_P_ has no unique variants with any probability of correctness. To have
given a full report of _P_ would have involved a considerable expansion
of an already long apparatus, and I have cited the manuscript only
occasionally, where a reading is only weakly attested by the other
manuscripts.


Titles

_MF_ and _B2H2I2T2_ usually supply titles for the poems. As will be seen
from the apparatus, there is considerable variation among the titles,
and there is no reason to suppose that they form an authentic part of
the transmitted text.


The manuscript authority for the text of _Ex Ponto_ IV

By and large the manuscripts of the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ offer
a remarkably uniform text of the poems, and one which, considering the
late date of the manuscripts, is in surprisingly good condition. I
believe that all the manuscripts, with the exception of _G_, are
descended from a single archetype. _B_ and _C_ are the best witnesses to
the text of the archetype, although the other, more heavily contaminated
and interpolated manuscripts are indispensable, since they correct the
peculiar errors of _B_ and _C_.


The present edition

The apparatus of this edition is intended to be a full report of
_BCMFHILT_ and of the fragmentary _G_; some reports are also given of
_P_. It includes corrections by original and by later hands.

When no manuscripts are specified for the lemma in an entry, the lemma
is the reading for those manuscripts not otherwise specified. For
instance, the entry

deductum carmen] carmen deductum _M_

indicates that _deductum carmen_ is the reading of _BCFHILT_, while
_carmen deductum_ is the reading of _M_.

I have from time to time cited from earlier editions readings of
manuscripts which I have not collated. To make it clear that I have not
personally verified these readings, I have added in parentheses after
the citation the name of the editor whose report I am using. Professor
R. J. Tarrant has inspected some nine manuscripts to see what readings
they offered in some particularly vexed portions of the poems; I have
similarly indicated when I am obliged to him for information on a
manuscript.

The _excerpta Scaligeri_ mentioned at xiii 27 I know of through
Heinsius' notes as printed in Burman's edition; according to M. D. Reeve
(_RhM_ CXVII [1974] 163), the original excerpts are still extant in Diez
8° 2560, a copy of the _editio Gryphiana_ of 1546. Reeve also gives
identifications of certain of Heinsius' manuscripts; when citing
Heinsius' codices, I give the modern name when the manuscript has been
identified and is still extant.

The greater number of the manuscripts dealt with have been corrected,
some heavily. In my apparatus _B1_ means "the original hand in _B_" and
_B2_ means "a correcting hand in B". _B2ul_ indicates that the reading
of _B2_ is clearly marked as a variant reading. _B2gl_ indicates that
the entry is marked in the manuscript as a gloss; _B2(gl)_ indicates a
gloss not marked as such. I have reported glosses where they contribute
to the understanding of a textual problem.

If different correctors have been at work in different passages, both
are called _B2_. If a later hand has made a correction after _B2_, the
later hand is called _B3_. When I place _B1_ in an entry but do not
report _B2_, it can be assumed that _B2_ has the lemma as its reading.

Sometimes a corrector has altered the original text so much (without
however erasing it entirely) that only the altered reading can be made
out. In such cases I have used the siglum _B2c_. Where a corrector has
inserted or altered only certain letters of a word, I have indicated
this in the HTML version of this edition by underlining the letters
involved. In the Text version, these letters are capitalized.

Where the correction is apparently by the original scribe, _Bac_
indicates the original reading, and _Bpc_ the correction.

The asterisk is used to indicate illegible letters, and the solidus (/)
erasures.

When reporting variants, I have tried to indicate the spellings actually
found in the manuscripts, but since mediaeval spellings do not in
themselves constitute variant readings, they have not usually been
reported when the text is not otherwise disturbed. I have been more
generous with proper names, but have often excluded confusions of
_ae_, _oe_, and _e_, of _i_ and _y_, of _ph_ and _f_, of _c_ and _t_,
the doubling of consonants, and the loss or addition of the aspirate.

The apparatus is intended to include a comprehensive listing of all
conjectures proposed. When the author of a conjecture is not a previous
editor of the poems, I have given a reference either to the publication
where the emendation was first proposed, or to the earliest edition I
have consulted which reports the emendation. Conjectures of Bentley are
from Hedicke's _Studia Bentleiana_. Conjectures of Professor R. J.
Tarrant, Professor J. N. Grant, and Professor C. P. Jones were
communicated to me by their authors.


Printed editions

The first editions of the works of Ovid were printed in 1471 by
Balthesar Azoguidus at Bologna and by Conradus Sweynheym and Arnoldus
Pannartz at Rome. The Bologna edition was edited by Franc. Puteolanus,
and the Rome edition by J. Andreas de Buxis. Lenz's edition gives
numerous readings from both editions; to judge from his reports, their
texts of the _Ex Ponto_ were derived from late manuscripts of no great
value. The Roman edition, however, contained the elegant correction of
_iactate_ to _laxate_ at ix 73.

For my knowledge of other early editions of the _Ex Ponto_ I have relied
upon Burman's large variorum edition of the complete works of Ovid,
published at Amsterdam in 1727. The edition contains notes of various
editors of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, among them
Merula, Naugerius, Ciofanus, Fabricius, and Micyllus. Although I have
occasionally quoted from these notes, they are in general of
surprisingly little use, containing for the most part unlikely variant
readings from unnamed manuscripts and explanations of passages not
really in need of elucidation.

The principal event in the history of the editing of the _Ex Ponto_ was
the appearance at Amsterdam in 1652 of Nicolaus Heinsius' edition of
Ovid. Heinsius took full advantage of the opportunity his travels as a
diplomat gave him of searching out manuscripts, thereby gaining a direct
knowledge of the manuscripts of the poems which has never since been
equalled[11]. Heinsius also possessed an unrivalled felicity in
conjectural emendation. Some of his conjectures are unnecessary
alterations of a text that was in fact sound, some of his necessary
conjectures are trivial, and are already found in late manuscripts of
the poems or could have been made by critics of less outstanding
capacities; but many are alterations which are subtle and yet necessary
to restore sense or Latinity. The present edition returns to the text
many conjectures and preferred readings of Heinsius that were ejected by
editors of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

[Footnote 11: In recent years much progress has been made in identifying
the manuscripts Heinsius used. See the monograph of Munari and the
articles of Reeve and Lenz listed in the bibliography.]

The edition of Heinsius formed the basis of all editions published
during the two centuries that followed. Of these editions the most
important was the 1727 variorum edition of Burman already referred to.
It is from the copy of that edition at the University of Toronto Library
that I have obtained my knowledge of Heinsius' notes. Burman was
apparently the first editor to make use of _F_. On occasion he differs
from Heinsius in his choice of readings. At xvi 44 he made the
convincing conjecture _Maxime_ (codd _maxima_), subsequently confirmed
by _B_ and _C_. His notes are informative; and my note on x 37-38 in
particular is greatly indebted to him.

For poem x Burman reproduced some notes from an anthology of Latin verse
for use at Eton, produced by an anonymous editor in 1705[12].

[Footnote 12: _Electa minora ex Ovidio, Tibullo et Propertio_, London,
1705. The book was reprinted as late as 1860 (_Brit. Mus. Gen.
Catalogue_, vol. 177, col. 470). I quote some of the notes on x in the
commentary and apparatus.]

In 1772 Theophilus Harles published at Erlangen his edition of the
_Tristia_ and _Ex Ponto_ 'ex recensione Petri Burmanni'. Harles was the
first editor to make use of _B_. In the introduction to his edition
Harles relates how he wrote von Oeffele, librarian to the Elector of
Bavaria, asking if there was any manuscript in the Elector's library
that might be helpful in preparing his edition, and thereby learned of
the existence of _B_. It is clear from Harles' introduction that he
fully appreciated the manuscript's importance; and in his notes he gives
many of its readings, pointing out where it confirmed suggestions of
Heinsius and Burman. However, his text is simply reprinted from Burman's
variorum edition.

W. E. Weber's text of _Ex Ponto_ IV in his 1833 _Corpus Poetarum
Latinorum_ is in effect a reprint of the Heinsius-Burman vulgate, except
that at viii 59 he prints the manuscripts' incorrect accusative form
_Gigantes_ (Heinsius _Gigantas_). But this fidelity to the vulgate text
seems not to have been the editor's intention: in his introduction he
speaks of 'Heinsianae emendationes felices saepe, superuacuae saepius
... quarum emendationum partem Mitscherlichius eiecit [Göttingen, 1796; I
have not seen the edition], maiorem eiicere Iahnius coepit [Leipzig,
1828: the part of the edition containing the _Ex Ponto_ was never
published]. dicendum tamen, etiamnunc passim haud paucas fortasse latere
Heinsii et aliorum correctiones minus necessarias in uerbis Ouidianis,
quas accuratior codicum inter se comparatio, opus sane immensi laboris,
extrudet'. It would be understandable enough if Weber, faced with the
labour of editing the entire corpus of Latin poetry, found himself
unable to effect a radical revision of the text of the _Ex Ponto_.

In 1853 there appeared at Leipzig the third volume of Rudolf Merkel's
first Teubner edition of the works of Ovid, containing his text of the
_Ex Ponto_. The part of Merkel's introduction dealing with the _Ex
Ponto_ is entirely concerned with describing the appearance,
orthography, and readings of the ninth-century _Hamburgensis scrin. 52
F_. The manuscript ends, however, at III ii 67, and Merkel says nothing
of the basis for his text of the later poems, which in general is the
Heinsius-Burman vulgate.

In 1868 B. G. Teubner published at Leipzig Otto Korn's separate edition
of the _Ex Ponto_. Korn's apparatus is the first to have a modern
appearance; but this appearance is deceptive, for of the twenty sigla
Korn uses, ten are for individual or several manuscripts collated by
Heinsius, and only five are for manuscripts collated by Korn himself.
The edition is important, since Korn was the first editor to make
substantial use of _B_ in constituting his text. Usually he printed the
text of _B_ in preference to the vulgate: 'Ceterum eas partes in quibus
_A_ caremus, [Greek: b] [=_B_] libri uestigia secutus restitui, prorsus
neglectis recentiorum exemplarium elegantiis, quorum ad normam N.
Heinsius, cuius in tertio quartoque libro R. Merkelius assecla est,
textum conformauit' (xv).

There was some reason to review critically the vulgate established by
Heinsius and Burman. Even Heinsius was capable of error; examples of
this in _Ex Ponto_ IV include his preference for the inelegant _idem_
for _ille_ at iii 17, for the impossible _ullo_ instead of the better
attested _nullo_ at v 15, and for the obvious interpolation _domitam
... ab Hercule_ at xvi 19 instead of _domito ... ab Hectore_. His most
pervasive fault is a partiality for elegant but unnecessary emendation:
often he is guilty of rewriting passages which are in themselves
perfectly sound. A typical instance is vii 30: Heinsius' _globos_ is
elegant enough, but there is no reason to suspect the transmitted
_uiros_.

Some of the readings proposed or preferred by Heinsius had been
unnecessary or wrong, but many had been necessary to make sense of the
text; and Korn is often guilty of damaging the text by excluding
readings not found in _B_. The supreme example of this is his
restoration of the manuscripts' reading _iactate_ for _laxate_ at ix 73.

Korn used the collation of _B_ by Harles, which had errors and omissions
(in his preface Harles had warned that his report might contain
errors[13]), so that at i 9 Korn prints _in istis_ and at x 83
_perstas_, without noting in his apparatus that _B_'s false readings
were _ab istis_ and _praestas_ respectively. He was aware that at xi 21
_B_ read _mihi_, but printed _tibi_ nonetheless, although Burman had
already explained why _mihi_ was the correct reading.

[Footnote 13: 'Diligenter autem et religiose tractaui codicem et
singulas epistolas bis, et in locis uexatis saepius contuli. Neque
tamen, quae hominum est imbecillitas, aciem oculorum quaedam effugisse,
negabo' (xi-xii).]

A curious feature of Korn's edition is its dual apparatus: below the
report of manuscript variants is a listing of passages where his text
differs from those of Heinsius and Merkel: 'Lectiones discrepantes
editionum Heinsii et Merkelii adposui, ut et quantopere Ouidius
Heinsianus a genuina forma discrepet dilucide perspiciatur, et quibus
locis a Merkelio discesserim facilius adpareat' (xxxii). Korn ejects
such obviously correct readings as _leuastis_ at vi 44 and _laxate_ at
ix 73; in each instance the true reading is printed in large type at the
bottom of the page. In addition, Korn rather unfairly included as
different readings what were in fact only spellings which did not
conform to the purified orthography then coming into use. _Cymba_ does
not differ from _cumba_ (viii 28), nor is _Danubium_ a variant for
_Danuuium_ (ix 80), nor again is _Vlysses_ different from _Vlixes_ (x
9). Finally, the second apparatus at several points misrepresents what
Heinsius actually thought.

Korn's confusion on this point is understandable, since determining
Heinsius' textual preferences is often more difficult than it might at
first appear. Editions were published under his name which did not
incorporate all his preferred readings[14]; even the lemmas to his notes
are taken from the edition of Daniel Heinsius, and are not a guide to
Heinsius' own view of the text, which can only be discovered by reading
the actual notes[15]. A good example of this can be found at x 47. Here
Heinsius' text reproduces the standard reading _Cratesque_. The lemma in
his note is _Oratesque_, the reading of Daniel Heinsius' edition. In the
note itself Heinsius indicates his preference for the conjecture
_Calesque_, communicated to him by his friend Isaac Vossius. Here Korn,
along with all modern editors, prints _Calesque_ in his text; he reports
_Cratesque_ as Heinsius' reading.

[Footnote 14: A. Grafton has noted that Heinsius' publisher Elzevier
seems to have been unwilling to alter the text as it already existed
(_JRS_ LXVII [1977], 173). I owe my knowledge of Heinsius' editorial
practices as here described to Professor R. J. Tarrant, who has examined
the Harvard copies of the 1664 edition of Heinsius' text (without
notes), the 1670 Leiden edition of Bernard Cnippingius, which reproduces
Heinsius' notes, and the 1663 reprint of Daniel Heinsius' edition.]

[Footnote 15: Consequently any statements I make on Heinsius' editorial
practices are based on explicit statements in his notes.]

Korn made one important conjecture in _Ex Ponto_ IV, printing _decretis_
at ix 44 for the manuscripts' _secretis_.

For the third volume of his complete edition of Ovid, published at
Leipzig in 1874, Alexander Riese drew on Korn's edition, but was less
radical in following the readings of _B_: 'nec eclecticam quam dicunt N.
Heinsii nec libri optimi rigide tenacem O. Kornii rationem ingressus
mediam uiam tenere studui' (vii). Riese restores Heinsius' preferred
reading in only about a quarter of the places where it was deserted by
Korn; even so, no editor since has shown such independence in the
selection of readings.

In 1881 there appeared at London a text of _Ex Ponto_ IV with
accompanying commentary by W. H. Williams. The text, which Williams says
is drawn from the "Oxford variorum edition of 1825", seems in general to
be a reprint of the Heinsius-Burman vulgate with some readings drawn
from Merkel's first edition. In spite of occasional conjectures and
notes on variant readings, based on information drawn from Burman and
Merkel, Williams is not generally concerned with the constitution of the
text: his note on x 68 _curasque fefelli_ is 'so Tennyson in the "In
Memoriam'". The commentary, which is about eighty pages long, consists
largely of discussions of the cognates of various Latin words in other
Indo-European languages, 'though the limits of the work preclude more
than the _data_ from which a competent teacher can deduce the principles
of comparative philology'. A typical note is that on i 11 _scribere_:
'from [root] skrabh = to dig, whence scrob-s and scrofa = 'the grubber,'
_i.e._ the pig; Grk. [Greek: graphô] by loss of sibilant and
softening'. The edition has been only occasionally useful in editing the
poems or writing the commentary.

In 1884 Merkel published his second edition of the poems of exile. In
his previous edition he had in general followed Heinsius and Burman in
the fourth book; in the new edition, without specifically saying so
(although in his introduction he mentions the "codex Monacensis
uetustior"), he generally alters his text so as to conform with _B_'s
readings. He does not always desert his former text, rightly retaining
_hanc_ at i 16, _quamlibet_ at iv 45, and _tempus curasque_ at x 67; he
also keeps _lux_ at vi 9 and _domitam ... ab Hercule_ at xvi 19.

In his 1874 monograph _De codicibus duobus carminum Ouidianarum ex Ponto
datorum Monacensibus_ Korn had made known the existence of _C_. S. G.
Owen's first edition of the _Ex Ponto_, printed in Postgate's _Corpus
Poetarum Latinorum_ in 1894, was the first edition to report this
manuscript as well as _B_. His text is unduly partial to the readings of
_B_ and _C_, and his well-organized apparatus is so abbreviated as to be
deceptive. It cannot be relied upon even for reports of _B_ and _C_. At
ix 73 it gives no hint that for four centuries editors had read
_laxate_; many of Heinsius' preferred readings are similarly consigned
to oblivion. At vi 5-6 he reports Housman's ingenious repunctuation,
presumably communicated to him by its author.

In 1896 Rudolf Ehwald published his monograph _Kritische Beiträge zu
Ovids Epistulae ex Ponto_. I am often indebted to Ehwald for references
he has collected; my notes on i 15 _ad summam_ and xiii 48 _quos laus
formandos est tibi magna datos_ could not have been written without the
assistance of his monograph. This said, the fact remains that Ehwald's
judgment and linguistic intuition were exceptionally poor. He had not
relied on Korn's apparatus for his knowledge of _B_, but had collated it
himself; and the intent of his monograph was to establish _B_'s
authority as paramount. A typical example can be seen at ix 71. Here
_FILT_ offer _cum ... uacabit_ and _MH_ have _ut ... uacabit_, while the
reading of _B_ and _C_ is _quod uacabit_. In one of the examples Ehwald
adduces, _Fast_ II 18, _uacat_ is found in only a few manuscripts, and
it can easily be seen how it arose from _uacas_; all the other examples
are instances of _quod superest_ or _quod reliquum est_. The cumulative
effect of these examples is to demonstrate that _quod ... uacabit_ is not
a possible reading. This insensitivity to the precise meaning of the
passages he discusses is usual with Ehwald, and his book, although
useful, is an extremely unsafe guide to the textual criticism of the
poems. It has unfortunately exercised a decisive influence on all
succeeding editions.

The first of these editions was Owen's 1915 Oxford Classical Text of the
poems of exile. In the preface Owen acknowledges the influence of
Ehwald: "adiumento primario erat R. Ehwaldi, doctrinae Ouidianae iudicis
peritissimi, uere aureus libellus ... in quo excussis perpensisque
codicibus poetaeque locutione ad perpendiculum exacta rectam Ponticarum
edendarum normam uir doctus stabilire instituit' (viii). In most
instances Owen follows Ehwald's recommendations, altering _in_ to _ab_
at i 9, _prospicerem_ to _aspicerem_ at ix 23, and at ix 44 abandoning
Korn's _decretis_ for the manuscripts' _secretis_.

Owen's reliance on Ehwald was noticed by Housman (903-4) in his short
and accurate review of Owen's edition: 'In the _ex Ponto_ Mr Owen had
displayed less originality [than in his 1889 and 1894 editions of the
_Tristia_] and consequently has less to repent of. Most of the changes
in this edition are made in pursuance of orders issued by R. Ehwald in
his _Kritische Beiträge_ of 1896; but let it be counted to Mr Owen for
righteousness that at III.7.37 and IV.15.42 he has refused to execute
the sanguinary mandates of his superior officer'.

As in Owen's earlier edition, the apparatus is so short as to be
misleading. His choice of manuscripts is too small, and exaggerates the
importance of _B_ and _C_; even of these two manuscripts his report is
inadequate. At ix 73 he rightly prints _laxate_; the apparatus gives no
indication that this is a conjecture, and that all manuscripts,
including _B_ and _C_, read _iactate_, which he had printed in 1894. At
xi 21, where _B_ gives _mihi_, indicated by Burman as the correct
reading, Owen prints _tibi_ and does not mention the variant in the
apparatus. The situation is naturally worse with readings of manuscripts
other than _B_ and _C_, and with conjectures. In general, Owen's
apparatus can be trusted neither as a report even of the principal
readings of the few manuscripts he used, or as a register of critics'
views of the constitution of the text.

In the same year as Owen's second text there appeared at Budapest Geza
Némethy's commentary on the _Ex Ponto_, of which twenty-six pages are
devoted to the fourth book. The notes are too sparse and elementary to
form an adequate commentary, consisting largely of simple glosses. They
are a useful supplement to a plain text of the poems, however, and
Némethy sometimes notices points missed by others: he correctly glosses
_Augusti_ as "Tiberii imperatoris" at ix 70. The notes are based on
Merkel's second edition; Némethy lists in a preface his few departures
from Merkel's text.

In 1922 Friedrich Levy published his first edition of the _Ex Ponto_ as
part of a new Teubner edition of the works of Ovid. The apparatus was a
reduced version of that prepared by Ehwald, 'Qui ut totus prelis
subiceretur ... propter saeculi angustias fieri non potuit'. Levy's text
is virtually identical to Owen's, but the apparatus is more complete.
It contains a full report of _B_ and _C_, and also of the
thirteenth-century _Gothanus memb. II 121_. This last manuscript has the
correct _cernet_ at ix 46, where most manuscripts read _credet_; but
otherwise its readings are of very poor quality, consisting of simple
misreadings (i 24 _magnificas_ for _munificas_, vii 30 _uento_ for
_uenit_, viii 37 _habendus_ for _abunde_), simplified word order (vi 25
_tuas lacrimas pariter_ for _tuas pariter lacrimas_, xvi 39 _et iuuenes
essent_ for _essent et iuuenes_), and intrusive glosses (viii 61
_captiuis_ for _superatis_, xvi 47 _me laedere_ for _proscindere_). The
manuscript does not deserve the important place it has in the editions
of Levy, Luck, and André[16]; Ehwald presumably included it in his
apparatus because of its easy accessibility to him at Gotha, where he
lived. No other manuscripts are regularly reported, so Levy's apparatus
gives a false impression of the evidence for the text, although he often
reports isolated readings from the manuscripts of Heinsius.

[Footnote 16: My knowledge of the manuscript is drawn from André's
apparatus.]

Levy omitted conjectures 'quatenus falsae uel superuacuae uidebantur';
the result is that Korn's elegant _decretis_ does not appear even in the
apparatus at ix 44, and the same fate befalls Scaliger's _coactus_ at
xiii 27.

In 1924 the Loeb Classical Library published A. L. Wheeler's text and
translation of the _Tristia_ and _Ex Ponto_. His text is based on
Merkel's second edition, on Ehwald's _Beiträge_, and on Owen's Oxford
Classical Text. In several places he rightly abandons _B_'s reading,
printing _hanc_ for _ah_ at i 16 and _perstas_ for _praestas_ at x 83;
at iv 45 he was clearly tempted to print Heinsius' _quamlibet_. His
judgment is good, and if Ehwald and Owen had supplied him with more
information on other manuscripts and on the Heinsius-Burman vulgate, his
text might well have superseded all previous editions. His translation
is accurate, and in corrupt passages indicates the awkwardness of the
original; I have often quoted from it.

In 1938 there appeared the elaborate Paravia edition of F. W. Levy, who
in the period following his earlier edition had altered his name to F.
W. Lenz. The text is virtually unchanged from his edition of 1922, but
has a much larger apparatus, which includes a large number of
conjectures omitted from the earlier edition; I am indebted to Lenz for
many of the conjectures I report, particularly at xvi 33. The large size
of the apparatus is, however, deceptive; most of the manuscripts he knew
of only from the reports of Heinsius, Korn and Owen, and the reports are
therefore incomplete: the only manuscripts reliably reported are _B_ and
_C_. Since Lenz does not usually give the lemma for the variants
reported, it is difficult to tell which manuscripts offer the reading in
the text. Much space is wasted by reports of the readings of several
heavily interpolated mediaeval florilegia; more is wasted by an undue
attention to mediaeval spellings and attempts to reproduce abbreviations
and to show the precise appearance of secondary corrections. These
factors combine to render the apparatus virtually unreadable.

In 1963 Georg Luck published the Artemis edition of the _Tristia_ and
_Ex Ponto_, with a German translation by Wilhelm Willige. Luck shows
some independence from Lenz, at i 16 printing _hanc_ for _ah_, at iii 27
_sed et_ for _subito_, at viii 71 _mauis_ for _maius_, at viii 86
_distet_ for _distat_, at ix 73 _laxate_ for _iactate_, at xii 13
_producatur_ for _ut dicatur_, and at xiv 7 _muter_ for _mittar_, each
time rightly. He suggests a new conjecture for the incurable xvi 33, and
a new and possibly correct punctuation of xii 19. The apparatus is
misleading, consisting of isolated readings from _B_ and _C_ and a small
number of readings from other manuscripts. No indication is given that
_hanc_ at i 16 or _pars_ at i 35 are found only in a few manuscripts,
and not in _B_ or _C_. Luck criticizes modern editors for ignoring the
discoveries of their predecessors, and rightly prints Heinsius'
_Gigantas_ (codd _-es_) at viii 59. However, he shows no direct
knowledge of Heinsius' notes or of the Burman vulgate, making no mention
of such readings as _Gete_ for _Getae_ at iii 52, _leuastis_ for
_leuatis_ at vi 44, or _fouet_ for _mouet_ at xi 20. The oldest edition
named in his apparatus is that of Riese.

In 1977 F. Della Corte published an Italian translation of the _Ex
Ponto_ with an accompanying commentary, of which fifty-eight pages are
devoted to the fourth book. Most of the commentary consists of extended
paraphrase of the poems; I have found it of little assistance.

The most recent text of the _Ex Ponto_ is the 1977 Budé edition of
Jacques André. His text is essentially that of Lenz, although at ix 23
he rightly prints _prospicerem_ instead of _B_'s _aspicerem_. There are
a significant number of misprints in the text, apparatus, and notes, and
other signs of carelessness as well.

André makes full reports of only four manuscripts in his apparatus, _B_,
_C_, _T_, and _Gothanus membr. II 121_[17]. This is an inadequate
sampling. _B_ and _C_ form a distinct group, and the Gotha manuscript
is too corrupt to merit a central part in an apparatus. The result is
that _T_ is the sole good representative of the vulgate class of
manuscripts that is regularly cited.

[Footnote 17: He collated four other manuscripts, _M_, _Bernensis bibl.
munic. 478_, _Diuionensis bibl. munic. 497_, and _British Library Burney
220_, but gives their readings only occasionally.]

For knowledge of many of his secondary manuscripts, André seems to have
depended on the edition of Lenz. Since much of Lenz's information was
drawn from Heinsius and other earlier editors, this means that André is
often giving unverified information from collations made more than three
centuries previously. He did not realize that the Antwerp manuscript he
collated (our _M_) was Heinsius' _codex Moreti_, whose readings Lenz
sometimes reports; the result is that he reports the same manuscript
twice, under the sigla _M_ and _N_.

At ix 127 he cites the sixth-century Wolfenbüttel fragment in support of
the unassimilated spelling _adscite_ (the assimilated form _ascite_ is
supported by the inscriptions and by the ancient manuscripts of Virgil).
In fact, the word is not found in the fragment, which preserves only the
first three letters of the line.

Finally, André shows insufficient knowledge of the Heinsius-Burman
vulgate; this is evident not only from the text but from the
introduction, where he prefaces his list of principal editions by saying
'Nous ne mentionnerons que les editions fondées sur des principes
scientifiques, dont la première est celle de R. Merkel, Berlin, 1854'
(the edition was published at Leipzig in 1853).

In spite of what I have said against it, André's edition has
considerable merit. His apparatus is the first to supply a lemma for
each variant reading reported, and is clear and easy to read. His
selection of manuscripts is inadequate, but at least he makes a full
report of the four manuscripts he uses. The apparatus is in every way a
great improvement on that of Lenz. At the same time, he provides a clear
prose translation, an informative introduction, ample footnotes, and
thirteen pages of "notes complémentaires". His notes sometimes come
close to forming a true commentary, and I often quote from them.

In preparing this edition of the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_, I have
carefully read all the editions discussed above, and have attempted to
include a comprehensive list of conjectures in the apparatus. I have
read Burman's variorum edition with particular attention, and have often
restored readings favoured by Heinsius to the text. A complete
examination of the manuscripts must await a full edition of all four
books of the _Ex Ponto_; but on the basis of published editions I have
selected the nine manuscripts that appeared most likely to assist in
establishing the text, and have included full reports of their readings
in the critical apparatus. I believe that even this preliminary
apparatus gives a clearer picture of the evidence for the text of _Ex
Ponto_ IV than any previous edition.



P. OVIDI NASONIS

EPISTVLARM EX PONTO LIBER QVARTVS



CONSPECTVS SIGLORVM



_G_

Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel: Cod. Guelf. 13.11 Aug. 4°
(fragmentum Guelferbytanum)
saec v/vi

continet ix 101-8 et 127-33, xii 15-19 et 41-44. uersus saepe non integri.


_B_

Monacensis lat. 384
saec xii


_C_

Monacensis lat. 19476
saec xii


_M_

Antuerpiensis Musei Plantiniani Denucé 68
saec xii/xiii
codex Moreti Heinsianus


_F_

Francofortanus Barth 110
saec xiii


_H_

Holkhamicus 322, nunc British Library add. 49368
saec xiii


_I_

Laurentianus 36 32
saec xiii
primus Mediceus Heinsii


_L_

Lipsiensis bibl. ciu. Rep. I 2° 7
saec xiii


_T_

Turonensis 879
saec xii/xiii

       *       *       *       *       *

Interdum aduocatur:


_P_

Parisinus lat. 7993
saec xiii
Regius Heinsii



I


    Accipe, Pompei, deductum carmen ab illo
      debitor est uitae qui tibi, Sexte, suae.
    qui seu non prohibes a me tua nomina poni,
      accedet meritis haec quoque summa tuis;
    siue trahis uultus, equidem peccasse fatebor,     5
      delicti tamen est causa probanda mei.
    non potuit mea mens quin esset grata teneri;
      sit precor officio non grauis ira pio.
    o quotiens ego sum libris mihi uisus in istis
      impius in nullo quod legerere loco!             10
    o quotiens, alii uellem cum scribere, nomen
      rettulit in ceras inscia dextra tuum!

incipit liber quartus _B2_ incipit quartus sexto pompeio _M_ liber
·iiii· sexto pompeio _F_ incipit ·iiii· sexto pompeio _H2(?)_ ad
pompeium lib ·iiii· _I2_ hanc epistulam mittit sexto pompeio _L_ || 1
deductum carmen] carmen deductum _M_ || qui] cui _Williams_ || seu] si
_ILF2ul_ || 4 accedet] accedat _M_ || summa] summe _C_ || 5 trahis]
trahes _Owen (1894)_ || uultus _om C_ || equidem] equid e _B_ || 7 quin
esset] esset quin _H_ || 9-10 _add F2 in marg_ || 9 o] di _B_ dii _I_ ||
in] ab _B_ || istis] illis _F_ || 10 quod] quid _F2_ || 11 alii] aliis
_L_ aliIS _M2c_ || uellem cum scribere] cum uellem scribere _B_ uellem
conscribere _F1_ uellem describere _P_

    ipse mihi placuit mendis in talibus error,
      et uix inuita facta litura manu est.
    'uiderit! ad summam,' dixi 'licet ipse queratur,  15
      hanc pudet offensam non meruisse prius.'
    da mihi, si quid ea est, hebetantem pectora Lethen,
      oblitus potero non tamen esse tui;
    idque sinas oro, nec fastidita repellas
      uerba, nec officio crimen inesse putes,         20
    et leuis haec meritis referatur gratia tantis;
      si minus, inuito te quoque gratus ero.
    numquam pigra fuit nostris tua gratia rebus,
      nec mihi munificas arca negauit opes.
    nunc quoque nil subitis clementia territa fatis   25
      auxilium uitae fertque feretque meae.

13 mendis] mensis _C_ || 14 manu est] manu _T_ || 15 summam] summum _LT_
finem _F2(gl)_ || ipse _FTP_ ille _BCMHIL_ || 16 hanc _HI_ ha _MFLT_ ah
_B_ a _C_ hunc _J. N. Grant_ || meruisse] merunisse _Mac_ || 18 non] nec
_L_ || 19 _quid pro_ nec _H, incertum_ || fastidita] fastidia _F1_ || 20
putes] putas _L_ puta _I_ puto _Bac, ut uid_ || 21 et] sed _fort
legendum_ || leuis] lenis _L_ || haec meritis] e meritis _F1T_ emeritis
_HM2_ || 23 numquam] non quam _M_ || 24 mihi _om C_ || negauit] negabit
_C_ || 25 nunc] hunc _C_ || quoque] quisque _C_ || nil] non _MpcF1_ nunc
_P_ || 26 feretque _Heinsius_ refertque _MFHILTB2_ referta _C_ refert
_B1_

    unde rogas forsan fiducia tanta futuri
      sit mihi? quod fecit quisque tuetur opus,
    ut Venus artificis labor est et gloria Coi,
      aequoreo madidas quae premit imbre comas,       30
    arcis ut Actaeae uel eburna uel aerea custos
      bellica Phidiaca stat dea facta manu,
    uindicat ut Calamis laudem quos fecit equorum,
      ut similis uerae uacca Myronis opus,
    sic ego sum rerum non ultima, Sexte, tuarum       35
      tutelaeque feror munus opusque tuae.

27 unde] un* _B1_ || futuri] futura _ITF2_ || 28 quisque _ex_ quique _C,
ut uid_ || 29 ut] et _T_ || est] et _Iac_ || 30 aequoreo] equoreas _Tac_
|| 31 arcis] artis _LP_ || ut Actaeae] et actee _T_ ut athee _L_
utaaceae _C, ut uid_ || eburna] uberna _C_ || aerea _fragmentum
Louaniense Heinsii (Korn, Lenz), codex Iunianus Heinsii (Korn); uide
Haupt Opuscula 584_ aurea _Heinsius_ enea _(=aenea) BMFHILT, contra
metrum_ anea _C_ || 32 Phidiaca] phasadica _C_ || facta] ficta
_Heinsius_ || 33 Calamis _BCIacL_ calais _MFIpcTP_ cala bis _H, ut uid_
|| laudem] laudes _B2_ || quos] quas _Bac_ que _Iac, ut uid_ || sum]
pars _excerpta Politiani_ res _M2(gl?)_ || non] pars _F_ _om P_ ||
ultima] ultimæ (=ultimae) _C_ || 36 tuae] teuæ (=teuae) _C_



II


    Quod legis, o uates magnorum maxime regum,
      uenit ab intonsis usque, Seuere, Getis;
    cuius adhuc nomen nostros tacuisse libellos,
      si modo permittis dicere uera, pudet.
    orba tamen numeris cessauit epistula numquam       5
      ire per alternas officiosa uices;
    carmina sola tibi memorem testantia curam
      non data sunt--quid enim quae facis ipse darem?
    quis mel Aristaeo, quis Baccho uina Falerna,
      Triptolemo fruges, poma det Alcinoo?            10
    fertile pectus habes, interque Helicona colentes
      uberius nulli prouenit ista seges.
    'mittere ad hunc carmen frondes erat addere siluis.'
      haec mihi cunctandi causa, Seuere, fuit.

seuero _B2H2_ seuero amico suo _M_ ad mauximum _F1 [sic]_ ad seuerum
_F2I2_ hanc epistulam mittit seuero _L_ || 1 regum] rerum _C_ uatum
_M1FIL_ || 2 intonsis] intensis _H_ euxinis _M1_ inuisis _F2ul_ || 5
orba ... numeris] uerba ... numerus _C_ || cessauit] cessabit _B1_ || 6
uices] uias _T_ || 8 quae] quod _T_ || 9 Falerna] falerno _M_ || 10
triptolemo] triptolomo _CL_ tritolemo _F_ tritolomo _IT_ || det] dat
_FT_ || 11 interque] inter _I_ || 13 ad hunc carmen] carmen ad hunc
_fragmentum Louaniense Heinsii (Lenz)_ || 14 cunctandi] cunctanti _FH_
cunctadi _I_

    nec tamen ingenium nobis respondet ut ante,       15
      sed siccum sterili uomere litus aro;
    scilicet ut limus uenas excaecat *in undis*,
      laesaque suppresso fonte resistit aqua,
    pectora sic mea sunt limo uitiata malorum,
      et carmen uena pauperiore fluit.                20
    si quis in hac ipsum terra posuisset Homerum,
      esset, crede mihi, factus et ipse Getes.
    da ueniam fasso: studiis quoque frena remisi,
      ducitur et digitis littera rara meis.
    impetus ille sacer qui uatum pectora nutrit,      25
      qui prius in nobis esse solebat, abest;
    uix uenit ad partes, uix sumptae Musa tabellae
      imponit pigras, paene coacta, manus,

17 uenas excaecat _MFIT_ cum uenas cecat _BCHL_ uenas cum caecat
_Castiglioni (Lenz)_ || in undis] in unda _F_ in aruis _Dalzell_
inundans _Madvig (Lenz)_ apertas _uel_ aquarum _Tarrant_ hiulcas _Merkel
olim (1884)_ || 18 laesaque] lessaque _Mac_ lapsaque _Merkel (1884)_ ||
resistit] resistat _L_ || 21 Homerum] homorum _H1_ _quid Cac, incertum
(hameo?)_ || 22 ipse _MFH_ ille _BCILT_ || 23 studiis] studii _FIMpc_ ||
quoque frena] frena quoque _Iac_ || 26 _quid pro_ qui _HP, incertum_ ||
nobis] uobis _M_ || abest] adest _T_ || 27 uix sumptae ... tabellae
_BCMFHL_ (uix _ex_ uin _C, ut uid_) uix sumpta ... tabella _T_ assumpte
... tabelle _I_ || 28 imponit] imposuit _I_

    paruaque, ne dicam scribendi nulla uoluptas
      est mihi, nec numeris nectere uerba iuuat,      30
    siue quod hinc fructus adeo non cepimus ullos,
      principium nostri res sit ut ista mali,
    siue quod in tenebris numerosos ponere gestus
      quodque legas nulli scribere carmen idem est.
    excitat auditor studium, laudataque uirtus        35
      crescit, et immensum gloria calcar habet.
    hic mea cui recitem nisi flauis scripta Corallis,
      quasque alias gentes barbarus Hister obit?
    sed quid solus agam, quaque infelicia perdam
      otia materia surripiamque diem?                 40

29 ne] nec _L_ || uoluptas] uolumptas _CM1_ uoluntas _FL_ || 30 numeris]
humeris _Cac_ || nectere] flectere _T_ || _32 add in marg I1, ut uid_ ||
32 sit ut] fuit _I (in ras?)_ fiat ut _H1_ fiat _H2_ || ista] illa _FIP_
|| 33 gestus] gressus _I1PF2ul_ gestus [_sic_] _F3ul_ || 34 legas] legam
_L_ legant _F2ul_ || idem est] obest _F1I1LP_ || 36 calcar] carcar _C_
|| habet] habes _Bac_ || _37 om P_ || 37 hic] haec _T_ || Corallis]
coraillis _Mac_ || 38 Hister] inster _L_ || obit _Damsté (Mnemosyne LXVI
32)_ habet _codd_ || 39 quaque] quamque _BC_ || 40 materia] materiam
_Bac_ || diem] **dem _Mac_

    nam quia nec uinum nec me tenet alea fallax,
      per quae clam tacitum tempus abire solet,
    nec me, quod cuperem si per fera bella liceret,
      oblectat cultu terra nouata suo,
    quid nisi Pierides, solacia frigida, restant,     45
      non bene de nobis quae meruere deae?
    at tu, cui bibitur felicius Aonius fons,
      utiliter studium quod tibi cedit ama,
    sacraque Musarum merito cole, quodque legamus
      huc aliquod curae mitte recentis opus!          50

41 quia nec _BCH(Iac)_ me nec _IpcP_ neque me _MFLT_ || uinum] unum _C_
|| nec me] neque me _T_ || 42 tacitum _add I1 in marg_ tantum _C_ || 43
nec me] nec _Iac_ hec me _C, ut uid_ || 45 frigida] frigora _C_ ||
restant] restat _IP_ || 46 meruere] metuere _L_ || 47 at] ac _LP_ ||
Aonius] adonius _I_ | | 48 cedit] cedat _T_ || ama] amas _M2ul_ || 50
aliquod] aliquid _CP_



III


    Conquerar an taceam? ponam sine nomine crimen,
      an notum qui sis omnibus esse uelim?
    nomine non utar, ne commendere querela,
      quaeraturque tibi carmine fama meo.
    dum mea puppis erat ualida fundata carina,         5
      qui mecum uelles currere primus eras;
    nunc, quia contraxit uultum Fortuna, recedis,
      auxilio postquam scis opus esse tuo.
    dissimulas etiam, nec me uis nosse uideri,
      quisque sit audito nomine Naso rogas.           10
    ille ego sum, quamquam non uis audire, uetusta
      paene puer puero iunctus amicitia;

ad ingratum _MFB2H2_ ad inuidum _I2_ || 1 conquerar] con****ar _M1_
(confitear _primitus?_) || sine _add M2_ || 2 qui sis] quis sis _HLTM2_
|| 3 ne] nec _(Bac)CH_ || commendere] commendare _CL_ || querela]
querelam _Cpc_ quelelam _Cac_ || 4 carmine] carmi/ne _I_ nomine _H_ || 5
dum] cum _M_ || 7 nunc quia] dum mea _F1_ || contraxit] traxit _M1_
abtraxit [_sic_] _M2_ || 9 me uis] uis me _IpcT_ uis _Iac_ || uideri]
fateri _M2ulF2ul_ tueri _P_ || 10 quisque] quique _HacP_ || sit _add
C1?_ || 11-12 _post 13-14 ponit B_ || 11 quamquam] qVAMQVAM _I2?c_
qUm _C (=quoniam)_ quamuis _M2ul_ || 12 iunctus] uinctus _HP_ ||
amicitia] amicia _M_

    ille ego qui primus tua seria nosse solebam,
      et tibi iucundis primus adesse iocis;
    ille ego conuictor densoque domesticus usu;       15
      ille ego iudiciis unica Musa tuis.
    ille ego sum quem nunc an uiuam, perfide, nescis,
      cura tibi de quo quaerere nulla subit.
    siue fui numquam carus, simulasse fateris;
      seu non fingebas, inueniere leuis.              20
    aut age, dic aliquam quae te mutauerit iram;
      nam nisi iusta tua est, iusta querela mea est.

13 tua] sua _L_ || 14 iocis] locis _M2ul_ locus _P_ || 15 ille ego] ille
_Bac_ || DOMESticus _F1c_ denso _(Fac)_ || 16 unica] uinea _L_ || 17
ille] i/LE _B1c_ idem _(Bac)CM1H_ || ego sum] ego _Tac_ ego iudicii
_Bac_ || quem nunc an uiuam _Leidensis Heinsii_ qui nunc an uiuam
_BCMFHILT_ quem nunc an uiuat _Heinsius_ || 18 subit _Heinsius_ fuit
_codd_ || 19 fui] fuit _(Bac)CP_ || simulasse] simulare _F1_ || fateris]
fereris _Heinsius_ || 20 leuis] lenis _H_ || 21 aut age] eia age
_'uterque Medonii [=Bodleianus Rawl G 105, 106] pro diuersa lectione',
probante Heinsio_ || aliquam quae te mutauerit [mutauerat _C_ mutauit
_F_] iram _BCMFHIL_ aliquid quod te mutauit in iram _T_ || 22 est,
iusta] est ista _Iac_

    quod te nunc crimen similem uetat esse priori?
      an crimen coepi quod miser esse uocas?
    si mihi rebus opem nullam factisque ferebas,      25
      uenisset uerbis charta notata tribus.
    uix equidem credo, sed et insultare iacenti
      te mihi nec uerbis parcere fama refert.
    quid facis, a demens? cur, si Fortuna recedat,
      naufragio lacrimas eripis ipse tuo?             30
    haec dea non stabili quam sit leuis orbe fatetur
      quem summo dubium sub pede semper habet.
    quolibet est folio, quauis incertior aura:
      par illi leuitas, improbe, sola tua est.

23 quod te nunc crimen similem] quod te nunc similem crimen _H_ quae te
consimilem res nunc _FIL_ || uetat] ueta _L1_ || 24 an] aut _B_ || 25
facTisque _B2c_ || 26 charta notata tribus] parcere fama refert _C_ ||
27 sed et] sed te _I_ subito _(B1)C_ || 28 te ... nec] et ... non _T_ ||
parcere fama refert] charta notata tribus _C_ || 29 a] o _M1FILT_ ||
recedat _TM2_ recedit _BCM1FHIL_ 30 tuo] meo _HI_ || 31 stabili]
stabilis _L_ || quam sit leuis orbe] quam leuis orbe _C_ quantum sit in
orbe _L_ || 32 quem _fragmentum Boxhornianum Heinsii (=Leid. Bibl. Publ.
180 G)_ quae _BCMFHILT_ || summo dubium _scripsi_ summo dubio _C_ summum
dubio _BMFILT_ mundum dubio _H_ dubio summum _fort scribendum_ || 33
quauis] quamuis _MLP_ || aura] aura est _MF_ || 34 par _ex_ per _M, ut
uid_ || sola] fTa _L(=facta)_ || tua est] tuE E _C_

        omnia sunt hominum tenui pendentia filo,          35
          et subito casu quae ualuere ruunt.
        diuitis audita est cui non opulentia Croesi?
          nempe tamen uitam captus ab hoste tulit.
        ille Syracosia modo formidatus in urbe
          uix humili duram reppulit arte famem.           40
        quid fuerat Magno maius? tamen ille rogauit
          summissa fugiens uoce clientis opem.
        cuique uiro totus terrarum paruit orbis
          .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .

35 omnia] omina _M1FILT_ euentus _F2(gl)_ || pendentia] pedentia _I_ ||
36 ruunt] cadunt _M2ul_ || 38 tamen] etiam _Riese_ || 39 Syracosia
_Heinsius_ syracusia _CMFHILT_ siracuNa _B2c_ syracusa _Gothanus II 121,
saec xiii (André) 'etiam bene'--Heinsius_ || formidatus] fortunatus _M_
|| 40 famem] famen _C_ famE _L_ || 41 Magno maius] maius magno _I_ ||
ille] ipse _MI_ || 43-44 _damnat Bentley_ || 44 _om B1C_ indigus
effectus omnibus ipse magis _MHILTF2_ [(indigus: indiguus _M_ indigens
_F2ul_) (indigus ... omnibus: omnibus ... indigus _I_) (effectus: est
factus _IL_ effectis _Ellis[Owen 1894]_) (ipse: ille _T_) (magis: fuit
_F2ul_)] achillas pharius abstulit ense caput _F1_ _fragmentum
Louaniense Heinsii (Burman)_

    ille Iugurthino clarus Cimbroque triumpho,        45
      quo uictrix totiens consule Roma fuit,
    in caeno latuit Marius cannaque palustri,
      pertulit et tanto multa pudenda uiro.
    ludit in humanis diuina potentia rebus,
      et certam praesens uix facit hora fidem.        50
    'litus ad Euxinum' si quis mihi diceret 'ibis,
      et metues arcu ne feriare Gete',
    'i bibe' dixissem 'purgantes pectora sucos,
      quicquid et in tota nascitur Anticyra'.
    sum tamen haec passus nec, si mortalia possem,    55
      et summi poteram tela cauere dei.
    tu quoque fac timeas, et quae tibi laeta uidentur
      dum loqueris fieri tristia posse puta.

45 ille] ipse _I_ || Iugurthino] iuigurtino _M, ut uid_ || Cimbroque]
cimboque _B_ || 47 latuit Marius _M_ iacuit marius _H_ marius latuit _L_
marius iacuit _BCFIT_ || 50 uix] non _M2ul_ || facit _R.J. Tarrant_
feret _BC_ habet _MFHILT_ || 52 Gete _Heinsius e codicibus_ Getae _edd_
|| 53 i bibe] ebibe _B_ || purgantes pectora sucos] purgantia pocula
sompnos _F2ul_ || 54 Anticyra] anticera _MI_ || 55 nec] ne _L_ || 57
laeta] lenta _Iac_



IIII


    Nulla dies adeo est australibus umida nimbis
      non intermissis ut fluat imber aquis,
    nec sterilis locus ullus ita est ut non sit in illo
      mixta fere duris utilis herba rubis;
    nil adeo Fortuna grauis miserabile fecit           5
      ut minuant nulla gaudia parte malum.
    ecce domo patriaque carens oculisque meorum,
      naufragus in Getici litoris actus aquas,
    qua tamen inueni uultum diffundere causam
      possim fortunae nec meminisse meae.             10
    nam mihi cum fulua solus spatiarer harena
      uisa est a tergo penna dedisse sonum.

de consulatu sexti pompe(i)i _FB2H2_ pompeio amico suo _M_ ad sextum
pompeium _I2_ || 3 nec] non _F_ || 4 rubis _ex_ iubis _F_ || 6 ut] quin
_M2ul_ || nulla] ulla _M2ul_ || parte _BCMFHILT, sicut coni Bentley_
pace _P_ || 8 aquas] aquis _H_ || 9 uultum] uultumque _L_ || diffundere]
defendere _P, I ut uid_ || causam] causa _BCT_ || 10 possim] possem _L_
possum _F_ || nec] non _I_ || 11 cum] dum _FIT, sicut coni Bentley_ ||
solus _BC_ tristis _MFHILT_ || spatiarer] spatiare _Fac_ paciarer _Mpc_
paciare _Mac_ || 12 penna] pinna _C_

    respicio, neque erat corpus quod cernere possem;
      uerba tamen sunt haec aure recepta mea:
    'en ego laetarum uenio tibi nuntia rerum,         15
      Fama, per immensas aere lapsa uias:
    consule Pompeio, quo non tibi carior alter,
      candidus et felix proximus annus erit.'
    dixit et, ut laeto Pontum rumore repleuit,
      ad gentes alias hinc dea uertit iter.           20
    at mihi dilapsis inter noua gaudia curis
      excidit asperitas huius iniqua loci,
    ergo ubi, Iane biceps, longum reseraueris annum,
      pulsus et a sacro mense December erit,
    purpura Pompeium summi uelabit honoris,           25
      ne titulis quicquam debeat ille suis.
    cernere iam uideor rumpi paene atria turba
      et populum laedi deficiente loco,

13 neque _CMHL_ nec _BFIT_ || erat corpus _BCFL_ corpus erat _MHIT_ ||
19 rumore] sermone _H_ || 20 ad gentes] agentes _C_ || 23 reseraueris]
reseruaueris _L_ || 25 summi ... honoris] summo ... honore _I_ || uELABit
_F2c, ut uid_ || 27 paene atria] penetralia _I, F2ul ut uid_ laeta atria
_Burman, qui et_ plena atria _coniecit_

    templaque Tarpeiae primum tibi sedis adiri
      et fieri faciles in tua uota deos,              30
    colla boues niueos certae praebere securi,
      quos aluit campis herba Falisca suis,
    cumque deos omnes, tum quos impensius aequos
      esse tibi cupias, cum Ioue Caesar erunt.
    curia te excipiet, patresque e more uocati        35
      intendent aures ad tua uerba suas.
    hos ubi facundo tua uox hilarauerit ore,
      utque solet tulerit prospera uerba dies,

29 tibi ... adiri] tibi ... adire _L_ te ... adire _H2ul_ || 31 certae]
cerno _Owen (1915)_ certant _Damsté (Mnemosyne XLVII 33-34)_ || 32
Falisca] falesca _B_ palistra _F2ul ut uid_ || _post 32 distichon
excidisse putat Ehwald (_KB_ 63)_ || 33 omnes, tum quos _HL_ omnes tunc
quos _BCMFIT_ tunc hos ores _P_ omnes, tunc hos _Ehwald_ || 34 cupias]
capias _B, ut uid_ cupies _fort scribendum_ || erunt _B, sicut coni
Heinsius_ erit _MFHILT_ _om C_ || 35 curia te] cura te _H_ curiaque
_Heinsius_ || excipiet] excipias _C_ || patresque] partesque _C_ || e
_BCM_ ex _FHILT_ || uocati] uocari _C_ || 36 intendent] intendunt _BC_
|| ad _ex_ at _C_ || 37 hilarauerit] hilauerit _Mac_

    egeris et meritas superis cum Caesare grates
      (qui causam facias cur ita, saepe dabit),       40
    inde domum repetes toto comitante senatu,
      officium populi uix capiente domo.
    me miserum, turba quod non ego cernar in illa
      nec poterunt istis lumina nostra frui!
    quamlibet absentem, qua possum, mente uidebo:     45
      aspiciet uultus consulis illa sui.
    di faciant aliquo subeat tibi tempore nostrum
      nomen, et 'heu' dicas 'quid miser ille facit?'
    haec tua pertulerit si quis mihi uerba, fatebor
      protinus exilium mollius esse meum.             50

40 qui] que _Bac, ut uid_ || facias cur ita, saepe dabit _Riese_ facias
cur ita saepe, dabit _edd_ || dabit] dabunt _LF2ul_ || 43 cernar] cernor
_MIL_ cenor _H_ || 45 quamlibet _Heinsius_ qua libet _H1_ qua licet
_MacP_ quo licet _L_ quod licet _BCMpcFIT_ et licet _H2ul_ scilicet
_Castiglioni (Lenz)_ || mente _in ras F2_ || 46 aspicIET _I1c_ aspicuum
_(Iac)_ || 47 di _B_ dii _CMFHILT_ || nostrum] nomen nostrum _C_ || 48
miser ille facit] facit ille miser _T_ || 49 pertulerit] protulerit _H_
|| 50 mollius] micius _F2ul(=mitius)_



V


    Ite, leues elegi, doctas ad consulis aures,
      uerbaque honorato ferte legenda uiro.
    longa uia est, nec uos pedibus proceditis aequis,
      tectaque brumali sub niue terra latet.
    cum gelidam Thracen et opertum nubibus Haemon      5
      et maris Ionii transieritis aquas,
    luce minus decima dominam uenietis in urbem,
      ut festinatum non faciatis iter.
    protinus inde domus uobis Pompeia petetur;
      non est Augusto iunctior ulla foro.             10
    si quis ut in populo qui sitis et unde requiret,
      nomina decepta quaelibet aure ferat;

sexto pompeio _B2H2_ pompeo amico suo _M_ ad sextum pompeium _F_ ad
eundem sextum pompeium _I2_ || 4 latet] letet _Cac_ || 5 cum gelidam]
congelidam _F1_ || Thracen] tracem _I_ tracE _F_ || opertum] opertam
_L_ || nubibus] niuibus _LP_ || Haemon _Laurentianus 38 39, saec xv
(Lenz); Ven. Marcianus XII 106, saec xv (Lenz); editio princeps
Bononiensis (Lenz)_ hemum _BCMFHILT_ || 6 Ionii] ycarii _F2ul_ || aquas]
aquis _Mac?_ iter aquas _C_ _quid F2ul, incertum (extasis?)_ || 7 luCE
_F2c_ 8 faciatis] facietis _Cpc_ facetis _Cac_ || 9 Pompeia] ponpeia _C_
|| petetur _FT_ petatur _BCMHIL_ || 10 ulla] illa _CI_ || 11 qui] que
_Iac_ || requiret _BMFH_ requirat _CILT_

    ut sit enim tutum, sicut reor esse, fateri
      uera, minus certe ficta timoris habent.
    copia nec uobis nullo prohibente uidendi          15
      consulis, ut limen contigeritis, erit:
    aut reget ille suos dicendo iura Quirites,
      conspicuum signis cum premet altus ebur,
    aut populi reditus positam componet ad hastam,
      et minui magnae non sinet urbis opes,           20
    aut, ubi erunt patres in Iulia templa uocati,
      de tanto dignis consule rebus aget,
    aut feret Augusto solitam natoque salutem,
      deque parum noto consulet officio.
    tempus ab his uacuum Caesar Germanicus omne       25
      auferet; a magnis hunc colit ille deis.

13 fateri] fatendum _F_ futuri _(Bac)_ uerum _L2(gl)_ || 14 uera
_Hilberg, Die Gesetze der Wortstellung im Pentameter des Ovid 35-36
(fateri uera)_ uerba _codd (uerba ... habent)_ ficta _ex_ minus ficta _M_
|| 15 uobis] nobis _L_ || nullo] ullo _P, probante Heinsio_ || 18 cum
premet] comprimet _F1_ || altus] alter _B1_ || 19 positam] ualidam _H_
|| componet] componit _L_ || ad] in _F_ || 20 opes] opem _I_ || 21 aut]
at _H1_ || ubi erunt] ubi _C_ || uocati] uoocati _M_ || 23 aut feret
_BCFHILTM3ul_ aFferet _M2c_ || 24 parum noto] parum nato _C_ patrum toto
_Burman_ || 25 ab] et _BC_ || uacuum] uacuo _Heinsius_

    cum tamen a turba rerum requieuerit harum,
      ad uos mansuetas porriget ille manus,
    quidque parens ego uester agam fortasse requiret.
      talia uos illi reddere uerba uolo:              30
    'uiuit adhuc uitamque tibi debere fatetur,
      quam prius a miti Caesare munus habet.
    te sibi, cum fugeret, memori solet ore referre
      barbariae tutas exhibuisse uias,
    sanguine Bistonium quod non tepefecerit ensem,    35
      effectum cura pectoris esse tui,
    addita praeterea uitae quoque multa tuendae
      munera, ne proprias attenuaret opes.
    pro quibus ut meritis referatur gratia, iurat
      se fore mancipii tempus in omne tui.            40

27 turba] cura _Heinsius_ || requieuerit] requierit _Cac_ requieurit
_F1_ || 30 reddere uerba] uerba reddere _I_ || 32 a miti] * miti _Fac_
amiti _BM1H_ amitti _L_ _om Iac_ || 33 referre] fateri _F_ || 35
Bistonium] bistanium _L_ || tepefecerit] tepefecerat _M_ tepecerit _Iac_
|| 36 cura] pura _Iac_ || _37-40 add B2 in margine_ || 37 uitae quoque]
sunt uite _M_ || 40 mancipii ... tui _CB2_ mancipium ... tuum _MFHILTB3_
mancipio ... tuo _Brissonius ('lib. VI. de Form. pag. 517'--Burman)_
mancipio ... tuum _Merkel (1853)_ || tempus] tepus _M_

    nam prius umbrosa carituros arbore montes,
      et freta ueliuolas non habitura rates,
    fluminaque in fontes cursu reditura supino,
      gratia quam meriti possit abire tui.'
    haec ubi dixeritis, seruet sua dona rogate;       45
      sic fuerit uestrae causa peracta uiae.

41 carituros] carituras _L_ || ueliuolas] ueliferas _M1_ || 44 possit]
posset _L_ 45 haec] hoc _MT_ || 46 peracta] peraC ta _F2c_



VI


    Quam legis ex illis tibi uenit epistula, Brute,
      Nasonem nolles in quibus esse locis.
    sed tu quod nolles, uoluit miserabile fatum;
      ei mihi, plus illud quam tua uota ualet.
    in Scythia nobis quinquennis Olympias acta         5
      iam tempus lustri transit in alterius.
    perstat enim Fortuna tenax, uotisque malignum
      opponit nostris insidiosa pedem.
    certus eras pro me, Fabiae laus, Maxime, gentis,
      numen ad Augustum supplice uoce loqui;          10

bruto _B2H2_ bruto amico suo _M_ ad brutum _FI2_ || 1 illis] ipsis _T_
|| 3 tu quod] tu qui _Lac, ut uid_ quod tu _IT_ || 4 ei _edd_ hei
_Barberinus lat. 26, saec xiii (Lenz)_ et _BCM1FILT_ si _H_ heu _M2ul_
|| illud] istud _H_ || ualet] ualent _FIT_ _H, ut uid_ || 5 Scythia]
sythia _HIL_ scithica _M_ || Olympias acta _LT_ olympias acta est
_BMFHI_ olimpia facta est _C_ || 5-6 Olympias acta iam _Housman (Owen)_
Olympias acta est. iam _edd_ || 7 perstat] praestat _CP_ || 8 opponit]
opposuit _H_ || nostris _in loco a prima manu relicto add F2_ nostrIs
_B2c_ || insidiosa] insidiosam _Cac_ inuidiosa _FHM2_ || 9 eras] erat
_(B1)C_ || pro me, Fabiae] fabie pro me _I_ || laus _BCMHILTF3_ dux _F1_
lux _F2, probante Burman_ || maxime] maxima _CP_

    occidis ante preces, causamque ego, Maxime, mortis
      (nec fueram tanti) me reor esse tuae.
    iam timeo nostram cuiquam mandare salutem;
      ipsum morte tua concidit auxilium.
    coeperat Augustus detectae ignoscere culpae;      15
      spem nostram terras deseruitque simul.
    quale tamen potui de caelite, Brute, recenti
      uestra procul positus carmen in ora dedi;
    quae prosit pietas utinam mihi, sitque malorum
      iam modus et sacrae mitior ira domus.           20
    te quoque idem liquido possum iurare precari,
      o mihi non dubia cognite Brute nota;
    nam cum praestiteris uerum mihi semper amorem,
      hic tamen aduerso tempore creuit amor,

11 occidis] occidit _(B1)C_ || preces] pedes _M_ || causamque] causAQVE
_B2c_ || ego _add F2_ || 12 fueram] fuero _BC_ fuerim _British Library
Burney 220, saec xii-xiii (André)_ || 13 timeo nostram cuiquam] timeo
cuiquam nostram _F_ nostram cuiquam timeo _I_ || 14 tua] tuæ
_C(=tuae)_ || concidit] consul _Bac_ constitit _Némethy_ || 15 Augustus]
augstus _Iac_ augustum _Lac_ || detectae _scripsi_ deceptae _codd_
decepti _J. N. Grant_ || 18 positus] positis _C_ || 21 te quoque] teque
_I_ || idem] iam _F_ || possum] possim _F_ possem _T_ || 22 cognite]
condite _M2ul_ || nota] fide _LTM2ulF2ul_ || 24 hic] plus _T_ ||
aduerso] auerso _H_ || creuit _ex_ creauit _H_

    quique tuas pariter lacrimas nostrasque uideret   25
      passuros poenam crederet esse duos.
    lenem te miseris genuit Natura, nec ulli
      mitius ingenium quam tibi, Brute, dedit,
    ut qui quid ualeas ignoret Marte forensi
      posse tuo peragi uix putet ore reos.            30
    scilicet eiusdem est, quamuis pugnare uidentur,
      supplicibus facilem, sontibus esse trucem.
    cum tibi suscepta est legis uindicta seuerae,
      uerba uelut taetrum singula uirus habent;
    hostibus eueniat quam sis uiolentus in armis      35
      sentire et linguae tela subire tuae,
    quae tibi tam tenui cura limantur ut omnes
      istius ingenui pectoris esse negent.

26 crederet] diceret _F2ul_ || 27 lenem] lene _C_ || 29 ignoret] ignorat
_TP_ || Marte _BCHI_ in arte _MFLT_ || 30 tuo] tuos _M_ || 31 eiusdem
est] eisdem est _Fac, ut uid_ eiusdem _Heinsius 'cum tribus libris'_ ||
uidentur _BMFH, sicut coni Bentley_ uidetur _CILT_ || 33 est] est seuere
_Mac_ || 34 taetrum _R. J. Tarrant_ tinctum _BCM1FHILT_ tritum _M2ul_
coctum _M2ul_ tinctu _Ehwald (_KB_ 83)_ tinguat _Merkel (1884)_ || 36
linguae _ex_ linge _B_ || 37 limantur] limatur _C_ || 38 ingenui
pectoris _scripsi_ ingenium corporis _codd_ ingenium nominis _D. R.
Shackleton Bailey_

    at si quem laedi fortuna cernis iniqua,
      mollior est animo femina nulla tuo;            40
    hoc ego praecipue sensi, cum magna meorum
      notitiam pars est infitiata mei.
    immemor illorum, uestri non immemor umquam
      qui mala solliciti nostra leuastis, ero,
    et prius hic nimium nobis conterminus Hister     45
      in caput Euxino de mare uertet iter,
    utque Thyesteae redeant si tempora mensae,
      Solis ad Eoas currus agetur aquas,

40 auxilium subito tu sibi [_sic_] ferre soles _M2 in marg_ || 41 hoc]
haec _FHL_ || 43 uestri] uestrum _Heinsius_ || 44 mala _F2 in ras_ ||
solliciti _BCM2ul_ sollicite _M1FHILT_ || leuastis _Barberinus lat. 26,
saec xiii (Heinsius)_ leuatis _BCMFHILT_ || ero] ope _C_ || 45 hic] hinc
_HTP_ || nimium nobis] nimium uobis _BC_ nobis nimium _IacT_ || Hister]
inster _L_ || 46 Euxino] euxini _I_ euxinum _T_ eximio _F_ || uertet]
uertit _FP_ || 47 utque] atque _BHL2_ ante _codd Feschii et Hafniensis
Heinsii_ || si] ceu _Heinsius ('ante, Thyesteae redeant ceu tempora
mensae, / solis ad Eoas currus agetur aquas')_ || tempora] fercula
_'malim reponi, sed obstant libri ueteres'--Heinsius_

    quam quisquam uestrum qui me doluistis ademptum
      arguat ingratum non meminisse sui.              50

49 doluistis] lugetis _T_ || ademptum] adempto _Basileensis F IV 26,
saec xiii-xiv (Korn), probante Heinsio_ adeptum _LP_ || 50 arguat]
arguar _B_



VII


    Missus es Euxinas quoniam, Vestalis, ad oras,
      ut positis reddas iura sub axe locis,
    aspicis en praesens quali iaceamus in aruo,
      nec me testis eris falsa solere queri;
    accedet uoci per te non irrita nostrae,            5
      Alpinis iuuenis regibus orte, fides.
    ipse uides certe glacie concrescere Pontum,
      ipse uides rigido stantia uina gelu,
    ipse uides onerata ferox ut ducat Iazyx
      per medias Histri plaustra bubulcus aquas,      10
    aspicis et mitti sub adunco toxica ferro,
      et telum causas mortis habere duas;

uestali _B2H2_ ad uestalem amicum suum _M_ ad uestalem _FI2_ hanc
epistulam misit uostali _L_ || 1 Euxinas] exunias _I_ || horas [=_oras_]
_CI_ undas _BMFHLT_ || 2 locis] getis _T_ || 3 praesens] praeses _P_ ||
iaceamus] aceamus _Cac_ || 4 queri] loqui _IM2ul_ || 5 nostrae] semper
_Iac_ || 6 Alpinis] Arpinis _Verpoorten (Lenz)_ || 8 uina] rura _F2ul_
|| 9 ut ducat Iazyx _BCMFHIT_ [Iazyx _Merula (Burman)_ iahis _B_ ayzys
_C1_ iazys _C1?ul_ iatis _M_ iazis _F_ yacis _H_ hiacis _I_ yases _T_]
trahat ut glatiati _L_ educat ut altas _P_ || 10 bubulcus] bububcus _B_
|| _11-12 post 13-14 ponit T_ || 11 et mitti] et miti _Iac_ admitti
_F2ul_ || adunco] aduuco _Lac_ || 12 telum] ferum _T_ uulnus _F2ul_

    atque utinam pars haec tantum spectata fuisset,
      non etiam proprio cognita Marte tibi!
    tenditur ad primum per densa pericula pilum,      15
      contigit ex merito qui tibi nuper honor;
    sit licet hic titulus plenis tibi fructibus ingens,
      ipsa tamen uirtus ordine maior erit.
    non negat hoc Hister, cuius tua dextera quondam
      puniceam Getico sanguine fecit aquam,           20
    non negat Aegissos, quae te subeunte recepta
      sensit in ingenio nil opis esse loci;

13 spectata] speculata _L_ || 14 _quid pro_ etiam _H, incertum_ ||
proprio] propria _B_ || 15 tenditur _Owen_ tenditis _BCMFHIpcL_ tendis
et _T_ tendet _Iac, ut uid_ tendisti _Merkel_ tendit is _Oberlin ('sc.
Mars, cf. 45'--Owen 1894)_ tendis at [_uel_ et] ad _temptauit
Castiglioni (Lenz)_ || 17 plenis] plenus _(Fac)I_ || plenis tibi
fructibus ingens, _edd_ plenus tibi fructibus, ingens _Ehwald_ || ingens
_'corruptum'--Riese; om Mac_ || 18 erit] erat _duo codd Burmanni_ inest
_Heinsius_ adest _Heinsius_ || 19 hoc] hIc _B2c_ haec _I, ut uid_ ||
19-21 negat ... negat] neget ... negat _unus ex Thuaneis Heinsii
(=Parisinus lat. 8256 uel 8462)_ neget ... neget _Burman_ || 21 Aegissos
_uide _CIL_ III pag. 1009_ egisos _I1T_ ecisos _I2, ut uid_ egiros _FLP_
egyros _H_ egilos _C_ egylos _B_ egypsos _M_ || recepta] recepto _F1HP_
|| 22 opis] opIS _I1c_ opus _FH(Iac)_

    nam, dubium positu melius defensa manune,
      urbs erat in summo, nubibus aequa, iugo.
    Sithonio regi ferus interceperat illam            25
      hostis, et ereptas uictor habebat opes,
    donec fluminea deuecta Vitellius unda
      intulit exposito milite signa Getis.
    at tibi, progenies alti fortissima Donni,
      uenit in aduersos impetus ire uiros;            30
    nec mora: conspicuus longe fulgentibus armis
      fortia ne possint facta latere caues,
    ingentique gradu contra ferrumque locumque
      saxaque brumali grandine plura subis.
    nec te missa super iaculorum turba moratur,       35
      nec quae uipereo tela cruore madent:

23 dubium] dubium est _CL_ dubum _Iac_ || manune _BCT_ manuue _MpcFHIL_
manu _Mac_ || 24 urbS/ _F2c_ || iugo] loco _I_ || 25 Sit(h)onio _BCMFIT_
sidonio _H_ scithonio _L_ || 26 ereptas] erectas _Bac_ eruptas _C_ || 27
deuecta] deuectus _L_ || 29 Donni _CB1?ul_ domni _IT, M ut uid_ dOni
_H_ dompni _L_ dauni _F_ domu _B1_ || 30 uiros] globos _Heinsius_ || 31
conspicuus] conspicuis _IP_ || 34 saxaque ... plura] pluraque ... saxa _F_
|| subis] su/bis _H_ || 35 moratur] miratur _C_ || 36 madent] rubent
_Gottorphianus Heinsii_ uirent _Heinsius_

    spicula cum pictis haerent in casside pennis,
      parsque fere scuti uulnere nulla uacat.
    nec corpus cunctos feliciter effugit ictus,
      sed minor est acri laudis amore dolor;          40
    talis apud Troiam Danais pro nauibus Aiax
      dicitur Hectoreas sustinuisse faces.
    ut propius uentum est admotaque dextera dextrae,
      resque fero potuit comminus ense geri,
    dicere difficile est quid Mars tuus egerit illic, 45
      quotque neci dederis quosque quibusque modis:
    ense tuo factos calcabas uictor aceruos,
      impositoque Getes sub pede multus erat.
    pugnat ad exemplum primi minor ordine pili,
      multaque fert miles uulnera, multa facit,       50

37 haerent] horrent _L_ || pennis] pinnis _C_ || 38 parsque _ex_ pasque
_M_ || fere] fero _Heinsius_ || uacat] caret _PM2(gl)F2(gl)_ || 39
////ictus _I_ || 40 minor] minus _BacP_ || acri] acro _B_ acer _P_ actae
_Iunianus Heinsii_ altae _auctor electorum Etonensium_ || 41 Aiax] iaiax
_C_ || 42 Hectoreas] hectoas _Bac_ || 43 ut] et _M2ul_ || propius]
proprius _FacH_ || dextera dextrae] dextre dextera _Iac_ dextera dextre
est _B (dextre E)_ dextera dextra est _C (dextraE)_ || 44 potuit
_om C_ || ense] esse _C_ || 46 quotque] quodque _CP_ || dederis] dederas
_L_ || quosque] quotque _H_ || 47 aceruos] acerbos _C, Mac ut uid_ || 48
multus] uictus _H_ || erat] eat _Cac_

    sed tantum uirtus alios tua praeterit omnes
      ante citos quantum Pegasus ibat equos.
    uincitur Aegissos, testataque tempus in omne
      sunt tua, Vestalis, carmine facta meo.

51 tantum] tamen et _M_ || aliOs _M2?c_ || 52 ibat] ibit _BP_ || 53
Aegissos _uide ad 21_ egisos _T_ egiros _CFHL_ egyros _B_ egipsos _I_
egypsos _M_ || 54 sunt] sint _F1_ || facta] ficta _C_



VIII


    Littera sera quidem, studiis exculte Suilli,
      huc tua peruenit, sed mihi grata tamen,
    qua, pia si possit superos lenire rogando
      gratia, laturum te mihi dicis opem.
    ut iam nil praestes, animi sum factus amici       5
      debitor: et meritum uelle iuuare uoco.
    impetus iste tuus longum modo duret in aeuum,
      neue malis pietas sit tua lassa meis.
    ius aliquod faciunt adfinia uincula nobis
      (quae semper maneant inlabefacta precor),       10
    nam tibi quae coniunx, eadem mihi filia paene est,
      et quae te generum, me uocat illa uirum.
    ei mihi, si lectis uultum tu uersibus istis
      ducis, et adfinem te pudet esse meum!

swillio _B2_ suillo amico suo _M_ ad suillium _F_ suillo _H2_ ad suillum
_I2_ hanc epistulam mittit suillo _L_ || 1 exculte] exculta _L_ exulte
_M_ || Suilli] suille _TP_ || 3 possit _Gothanus II 121, saec xiii
(Lenz), Barberinus lat. 26, saec xiii (Lenz)_ posset _BCMFHILT_ ||
rogando] precando _T_ || 5 iam nil] mihi nil _HT_ mihi non _ILP_ || 6
uoco] uolo _B1C_ || 7 modo] mihi _MFT_ || Duret _F2c_ || 12 generum] gerum
_H1, ut uid_ || 14 te] t* _B1(tu?)_

    at nihil hic dignum poteris reperire pudore       15
      praeter fortunam, quae mihi caeca fuit;
    seu genus excutias, equites ab origine prima
      usque per innumeros inueniemur auos,
    siue uelis qui sint mores inquirere nostri,
      errorem misero detrahe, labe carent.            20
    tu modo si quid agi sperabis posse precando,
      quos colis exora supplice uoce deos.
    di tibi sunt Caesar iuuenis: tua numina placa.
      hac certe nulla est notior ara tibi.
    non sinit illa sui uanas antistitis umquam        25
      esse preces; nostris hinc pete rebus opem.

15 at] et _T_ || nihil] nil _I_ || reperire] re/perire _F_ || pudore]
pudoris _T_ || 16 caeca] saeua _Riese_ laeua _fort legendum_ || 17 seu]
si _M1_ || excutias] inquiras _F1M2ul_ || 18 inueniemur _HILB2ulF2ul_
inuenientur _MF1T_ perueniemus _B1C_ || 19 ueliS/ _F2c_ || qui sint
mores] qui sunt mores _I, ut uid_ mores qui sint _M_ || inquirere]
inquire _M_ || nostri] nostros _I, probante Heinsio_ || 20 detrahe] dete
_I1_ || 22 exora] excola _Bac_ || 23 di] at _C_ || sunt] sint _BCFM2ul_
|| 24 nulla est] nulla _FT_ || notior] certior _I_ || 25 non] nec _I_ ||
sinit] sinet _I_ || illa] ara _M1_ || 26 rebus] *ebus _B_

    quamlibet exigua si nos ea iuuerit aura,
      obruta de mediis cumba resurget aquis;
    tunc ego tura feram rapidis sollemnia flammis,
      et ualeant quantum numina testis ero.           30
    nec tibi de Pario statuam, Germanice, templum
      marmore; carpsit opes illa ruina meas.
    templa domus facient uobis urbesque beatae;
      Naso suis opibus, carmine, gratus erit.
    parua quidem fateor pro magnis munera reddi,      35
      cum pro concessa uerba salute damus;
    sed qui quam potuit dat maxima gratus abunde est,
      et finem pietas contigit illa suum,

27 quamlibet] qualibet _I_ qua libet _BpcC_ || iuuerit] pauerit _unus
Vaticanus, unde_ fouerit _Heinsius_ || 29 tunc] nunc _C_ || 30 ualeant
quantum] quantum ualeant _F_ || 31 Pario] phario _LF2H2I2_ || 32
carpsit] carsit _Cac_ carp*it _B2c_ capsit _Fac_ || meas] meos _L_ || 33
facient uobis] facient nobis _C_ faciant uobis _FI, probante Heinsio_
uobis facIANT _M2c, ut uid_ || urbesque] urbeque _F1_ || beatae] batæ
_Cac_ bate _F_ || 37 sed] si _T_ || quam] quantum _B2_ || abunde _C_ ab
unde _B_ habunde _MHILT, F2c in ras_ || est _om I1_

    nec quae de parua pauper dis libat acerra
      tura minus grandi quam data lance ualent,       40
    agnaque tam lactens quam gramine pasta Falisco
      uictima Tarpeios inficit icta focos.
    nec tamen officio uatum per carmina facto
      principibus res est aptior ulla uiris.
    carmina uestrarum peragunt praeconia laudum,      45
      neue sit actorum fama caduca cauent;
    carmine fit uiuax uirtus, expersque sepulcri
      notitiam serae posteritatis habet;
    tabida consumit ferrum lapidemque uetustas,
      nullaque res maius tempore robur habet.         50

39 nec quae] nequæ _C_ || pauper dis libat] pauper delibat _F_ dis
pauper libat _ML_ || acerra] acerba _C (=acerua)_ || 40 minus] minos _C_
|| lance] luce _M_ || 41 lactens] lactans _F1_ || 43 officio] in uita
_C_ || 44 aptior] altior _P_ aPtior _F2c_ gratior _Heinsius ex tredecim
codicibus_ || ulla] illa _B1C_ || 45 uestrarum] uastarum _Burman_
certarum _Heinsius_ || laudum] laudem _Iac, ut uid_ rerum _M2ul_ || 46
actorum _MFIT_ auctorum _BCHL_ || 47 sepulcri] sepul**ri _Mac_ || _49-50
in marg add F2; post 51-52 ponit B1_ || 49 t//Abida _I2c, ut uid_ ||
consumit] cumsumit _F2, fort BCI_

    scripta ferunt annos: scriptis Agamemnona nosti,
      et quisquis contra uel simul arma tulit;
    quis Thebas septemque duces sine carmine nosset
      et quicquid post haec, quicquid et ante fuit?
    di quoque carminibus, si fas est dicere, fiunt,   55
      tantaque maiestas ore canentis eget:
    sic Chaos ex illa naturae mole prioris
      digestum partes scimus habere suas;
    sic adfectantes caelestia regna Gigantas
      ad Styga nimbiferi uindicis igne datos;         60
    sic uictor laudem superatis Liber ab Indis,
      Alcides capta traxit ab Oechalia;
    et modo, Caesar, auum, quem uirtus addidit astris,
      sacrarunt aliqua carmina parte tuum.

_51-54 om F_ || 51 Agamemnona] agamenona _IL_ nosti] nostis _MH_ ||
contra] _quid B2, non liquet_ || 54 haec] has _Heinsius_ || 55 dicere]
credere _T_ || 58 suas] duas _F2ul: 'id est oriens et occidens' (F2gl)_
|| 59 Gigantas _Heinsius_ gigantes _codd_ || 60 nimbiferi _scripsi;
possis et_ nimbigeri _legere_ nimbifero _BCI_ nibifero _T_ nubifero
_MFHL_ fulmineo _P_ fumoso _M2(gl)_ || uindicis] uindice _B_ || datos]
das _M1_ || 62 capta traxit] traxit capta _Iac_ || Oechalia _edd_
oethalia _BI_ ethalia _C(Fac)L_ etholia _MHPTFpc_ || 63 addidit] addiuit
_Bac_ addit _F1Iac_ abdidit _L_

    si quid adhuc igitur uiui, Germanice, nostro      65
      restat in ingenio, seruiet omne tibi.
    non potes officium uatis contemnere uates;
      iudicio pretium res habet ista tuo.
    quod nisi te nomen tantum ad maiora uocasset,
      gloria Pieridum summa futurus eras.             70
    si dare materiam nobis quam carmina mauis,
      nec tamen ex toto deserere illa potes:
    nam modo bella geris, numeris modo uerba coerces,
      quodque aliis opus est, hoc tibi lusus erit,
    utque nec ad citharam nec ad arcum segnis Apollo, 75
      sed uenit ad sacras neruus uterque manus,
    sic tibi nec docti desunt nec principis artes,
      mixta sed est animo cum Ioue Musa tuo.

65 igitur _om Hac_ || uiui] riui _Hertzberg ad Prop IV i 59_ || 68
iudiciO _B2c_ || tuo _ex_ suo _T, ut uid_ || 69 quod] qui _T_ || nomen]
numen _'unus Heinsii cum prima editione, ut Augustus
intelligatur'--Burman_ || tantum] tanto _C_ || 71 si _R. J. Tarrant_ sed
_codd_ || mauis _IF2ul_ maius _BF1 utrumque legere possis in CMHLT_ ||
72 nec] non _I_ || 74 quodque] quod _Bac_ || lusus] ludus _MLI2_ leue
_L2(gl)_ || 75 citharam] citharum _C_ || Apollo _FILT_ apollo est _BCMH_
|| 77 docti desunt nec _BF1T_ docte desunt nec _LF2_ docti nec desunt
_CM_ desunt docti nec _HI_

    quae quoniam nec nos unda summouit ab illa
      ungula Gorgonei quam caua fecit equi,           80
    prosit opemque ferat communia sacra tueri
      atque isdem studiis imposuisse manum,
    litora pellitis nimium subiecta Corallis
      ut tandem saeuos effugiamque Getas,
    clausaque si misero patria est, ut ponar in ullo  85
      qui minus Ausonia distet ab urbe loco,
    unde tuas possim laudes celebrare recentes
      magnaque quam minima facta referre mora.
    tangat ut hoc uotum caelestia, care Suilli,
      numina, pro socero paene precare tuo.

79 nos] uos _Hac_ || summouit] dimouit _H_ || 81 tueri] tuenti _BpcF1_
|| 82 atque] at sit _F2ul_ || isdem _CFIac_ iisdem _T_ hi(i)sdem
_MHIpcL_ his dem _B1_ his det _B2, ut uid_ || 83 pellitis] peditis _ex_
proditis _C, ut uid_ || Corallis] coraulis _M_ || 84 effugiamque]
effugi*m _F1_ || 85 misero patria est] misero est patria _H_ || in _add
M2_ || ullo _M_ illo _BCFHILT_ || 86 minus] minor _F2ul_ || Ausonia]
ausonio _C_ ausoniA _F2c_ || distet] distat _BCT_ distET _M2c, ut uid_
|| loco] locus _F_ || 87 recentes] recenter _Heinsius_ || 88 quam] cum
_H_ || minima _BCHILTM2, F2 in ras_ nimia _M1_ || 89 tangat] tangant
_CacH_ || care] cara _BacC_ || Suilli] suille _T_ || 90 socero _ex_ cero
_M_ || paene] pena _Bac_



IX


    Vnde licet, non unde iuuat, Graecine, salutem
      mittit ab Euxinis hanc tibi Naso uadis;
    missaque di faciant auroram occurrat ad illam
      bis senos fasces quae tibi prima dabit,
    ut, quoniam sine me tanges Capitolia consul,      5
      et fiam turbae pars ego nulla tuae,
    in domini subeat partes, et praestet amici
      officium festo littera nostra die.
    atqui ego si fatis genitus melioribus essem,
      et mea sincero curreret axe rota,              10
    quo nunc nostra manus per scriptum fungitur, esset
      lingua salutandi munere functa tui,

racino _B2_ grecino amico suo _M_ ad grecinum _FI2_ grecino _H2_ hanc
epistulam mittit grecinno _L_ || 1 unde] inde _T_ || iuuat] uiuat _F_ ||
Graecine] grecinne _LT_ || 2 Euxinis] exinis _C, ut uid_ (ecinis _Lenz,
André_) || 3 di _BC_ dii _MFHILT_ || 4 fasces] fascis _C_ faces
_F1IacPac_ || 5 ut] et _MITF2ulH2ul_ || 7 domini] domino _Iac_ _om M1_
|| partes et praestet _F2 in ras_ || partes] partis _C_ || praestet]
pRAt _L_ || 8 officium] officium et _Mac, ut uid_ || festo
_Burman_ iusto _T, sicut coni Merkel_ iusso _BCMFHIL_ || littera] litora
_C_ || 9 atqui _unus e duobus Hafniensibus Heinsii_ atque _BCM1FHILT_
ast _M2ul_ || genitus] genitis _F1_ || 12 lingua] linga _I1_ ||
salutandi] salutanti _C_

    gratatusque darem cum dulcibus oscula uerbis,
      nec minus ille meus quam tuus esset honor;
    illa, confiteor, sic essem luce superbus          15
      ut caperet fastus uix domus ulla meos.
    dumque latus sancti cingit tibi turba senatus,
      consulis ante pedes ire iuberer eques,
    et quamquam cuperem semper tibi proximus esse,
      gauderem lateris non habuisse locum;            20
    nec querulus, turba quamuis eliderer, essem,
      sed foret a populo tum mihi dulce premi.
    prospicerem gaudens quantus foret agminis ordo,
      densaque quam longum turba teneret iter;
    quoque magis noris quam me uulgaria tangant,      25
      spectarem qualis purpura te tegeret;

14 minus ... meus quam] meus ... minus quam _M_ minus ... meusque _C_ minor
... meus quam _T_ || tuus _add I in marg_ || 16 ulla] illa _BacMac_ || 17
cingit] cinget _MIF2_ tanget _ F2ul_ || tibi _add F2_ || 18 iuberer]
uiderer _unus Vaticanus, probante Heinsio_ || 19 cuperem _add F2_
cuper** _H_ || 20 lateris] lateri _MFL_ || 22 sed] sic _F_ || tum] tunc
_MFH_ || 23 prospicerem] aspicerem _B_ respicerem _Riese_ || _25-26
damnant Heinsius Bentley_ || 25 quoque] quodque _L_ utque _F2ulM2gl_ ||
tangant _BC_ tangunt _MFHILT_ || 26 tegeret] regeret _L_

    signa quoque in sella nossem formata curuli
      et totum Numidae sculptile dentis opus.
    at cum Tarpeias esses deductus in arces,
      dum caderet iussu uictima sacra tuo,            30
    me quoque secreto grates sibi magnus agentem
      audisset media qui sedet aede deus,
    turaque mente magis plena quam lance dedissem,
      ter quater imperii laetus honore tui.
    hic ego praesentes inter numerarer amicos,        35
      mitia ius urbis si modo fata darent,
    quaeque mihi sola capitur nunc mente uoluptas,
      tunc oculis etiam percipienda foret.

_27-28 damnat Merkel (1884)_ || 27 curuli] curili _I_ || 28 Numidae
_edd_ numidi _BCMHILT_ nimidi _F_ || sculptile] scalpule _C_ scutile
_F1_ scVLPTILE _M2c_ || opus] ebur _T_ || 29 at] et _HL_ || arces] artes
_Bac_ || 30 dum] cum _CL_ || iussu] iusso _B_ || 31 grates _ex_ magnus
_T_ || 33 plena quam] plenaque _CF1_ quam plena _I_ || 34 ter] terque
_B2_ || laetus] plenus _T_ || 35 hic] tunc _Housman (Owen 1894)_ hinc
_Merkel (1884), Schenkl (Owen)_ sic _Merkel (1853)_ || ego] mihi _C_ ||
36 ius urbis si _editio Aldina 1502_ ius uerbis si _B1CMF1IT_ ius uerbi
si _H_ ius nobis si _F2_ uim uerbis si _B2, F3 ut uid_ si uerbis uim _L_
|| 37 quaeque] quoque _C, ut uid_

    non ita caelitibus uisum est, et forsitan aequis:
      nam quid me poenae causa negata iuuet?          40
    mente tamen, quae sola domo non exulat, usus
      praetextam fasces aspiciamque tuos.
    haec modo te populo reddentem iura uidebit,
      et se decretis finget adesse tuis,
    nunc longi reditus hastae supponere lustri        45
      cernet et exacta cuncta locare fide,
    nunc facere in medio facundum uerba senatu
      publica quaerentem quid petat utilitas,

39 aequis] aequos _C_ || 40 causa] culpa _Heinsius_ || negata] nagata
_C_ || iuuet] foret _Bac, 'unde uerum eliciendum'--Riese_ || 41 domo
_scripsi_ loco _codd_ foco _fort legendum_ || usus _Heinsius_ utor _BCL_
utar _MFHIT_ utens _Williams (utens ... aspiciamque)_ || 42 aspiciamque]
aspiciensque _Williams (utar ... aspiciensque)_ || 43 haec] nec _Bac_ ||
44 decretis _Korn_ secretis _codd_ secreto _Wheeler_ || finget] fingit
_B, C ut uid_ || tuis] locis _Etonensis B. k. 6.18, saec xiii (Lenz),
probante Heinsio (secretis ... locis)_ || 45 longi] longe _TF2 (=longae)_
|| lustri] lutri _Hac_ lustra _F2ul_ || 46 cernet _P, Gothanus membr. II
121, saec xiii (André)_ credet _BCFHILT_ cERNet _M2c_ || exacta]
perfecta _M2(gl)I2(gl)_ || _47 om C_ || 48 publica] puplica _LP_ ||
petat] petit _M_

    nunc pro Caesaribus superis decernere grates,
      albaue opimorum colla ferire boum.              50
    atque utinam, cum iam fueris potiora precatus,
      ut mihi placetur principis ira roges;
    surgat ad hanc uocem plena pius ignis ab ara,
      detque bonum uoto lucidus omen apex.
    interea, qua parte licet, ne cuncta queramur,     55
      hic quoque te festum consule tempus agam.
    altera laetitiae est nec cedens causa priori:
      successor tanti frater honoris erit.
    nam tibi finitum summo, Graecine, Decembri
      imperium Iani suscipit ille die,                60
    quaeque est in uobis pietas, alterna feretis
      gaudia, tu fratris fascibus, ille tuis;

50 albaue _BCI_ albaque _MFHLT_ || opimorum] primorum _IT_ || 51 iam] tu
_FT_ || potiora] maiora _P_ || 52 principis] numinis _M_ || 53 pius]
prius _Iac_ || 57 laetitiae est _LT_ laetitia est _BCFHI_ letici* est
_M_ laetitiae _Heinsius e tribus codd_ || cedens _BCLpcT_ credens _Lac_
cendens _M_ cedet _FHI_ || _59-60 fort spurii_ || 59 Graecine] DEgrecine
_M1c_ (= grecine _ex_ decembri[-is?]) || Decembri] decembris _M_ || 60
suscipit] suspicit _(Bac)C_ suscipiet _M2(gl)_ || 61 uobis] nobis
_(F1)H_ || alterna] aterna _C, ut uid_

    sic tu bis fueris consul, bis consul et ille,
      inque domo binus conspicietur honor,
    qui quamquam est ingens, et nullum Martia summo   65
      altius imperium consule Roma uidet,
    multiplicat tamen hunc grauitas auctoris honorem,
      et maiestatem res data dantis habet;
    iudiciis igitur liceat Flaccoque tibique
      talibus Augusti tempus in omne frui!            70
    cum tamen a rerum cura propiore uacabit,
      uota precor uotis addite uestra meis,
    et si quae dabit aura sinum, laxate rudentes,
      exeat e Stygiis ut mea nauis aquis.

63 fueris consul] consul fueris _T_ fueris _B1_ || bis consul et ille]
bis consul et ipse _H_ et ille _Mac_ || 64 binus] bimus _Gudianus 228
(Owen 1894), probante Heinsio_ || honor] honos _L_ || 65 quamquam]
quamque _C_ || nullum] nullium _BacP_ || 67 auctoris] actoris _MFI_ ||
69 Flaccoque] flacco _T_ || 71 cum _FILT_ quod _BC_ ut _MH_ quum _Weise
(Ehwald _KB_ 48)_ || a] ab _B_ || propiore] propriore _CFL_ || uacabit]
uacabis _Riese_ || 72 uotis] uestris _Mac_ || 73 et] _quid B, incertum_
|| quae _scripsi_ qua _CMFHIL_ quem _BT_ || sinum] sonum _Williams_ ||
laxate _editio princeps Romana 1471_ iactate _codd_ || rudentes]
rudentis _B_ || 74 exeat] et exeat _C_ || e _BCH_ a _MFILT_ || Stygiis]
stigis _Cac_

    praefuit his, Graecine, locis modo Flaccus, et illo
      ripa ferox Histri sub duce tuta fuit:
    hic tenuit Mysas gentes in pace fideli,
      hic arcu fisos terruit ense Getas,
    hic raptam Troesmin celeri uirtute recepit,
      infecitque fero sanguine Danuuium.              80
    quaere loci faciem Scythicique incommoda caeli,
      et quam uicino terrear hoste roga,
    sintne litae tenues serpentis felle sagittae,
      fiat an humanum uictima dira caput,
    mentiar, an coeat duratus frigore Pontus,         85
      et teneat glacies iugera multa freti.

75 praefuit] praefugit _C_ || 77 Mysas gentes _BT_ misas gentis _C_
missas gentes _FI_ missus gentes _L_ gentes missas _MH_ sibi commissas
_F2(gl)_ commissas _H2(g1)_ || 78 fisos] fortes _M2ul_ || 79 Troesmin
_Heinsius; uide _CIL_ V 6183-88, 6195_ troesmen _C_ troesenen _B1_
troien _L_ troezen _HITB2_ troezem _F_ trozenam _M_ || 80 infecitque]
infecit _M1_ || Danuuium _Korn_ danubium _codd_ || 81 quaere] queri _T_
|| Scythicique incommoda caeli _add F2_ || Scythicique] siticique _I_ ||
82 terrear] terreat _C_ || hoste] ense _H_ || 83 serpentis] serpentes
_Iac_ || felle] sola _C_ || 85 mentiar] effluat _FL_ anfluat _P_ * fluAT
_M2c_

    haec ubi narrarit, quae sit mea fama require,
      quoque modo peragam tempora dura roga.
    non sumus hic odio, nec scilicet esse meremur,
      nec cum fortuna mens quoque uersa mea est;      90
    illa quies animo quam tu laudare solebas,
      illa uetus solito perstat in ore pudor,
    [sic ego sum longe, sic hic, ubi barbarus hostis
      ut fera plus ualeant legibus arma facit,]
    re queat ut nulla tot iam, Graecine, per annos    95
      femina de nobis uirue puerue queri.

87 ubi] ubi _uel_ tibi _B_ || narrarit] narraret _C_ narrauit _F1_ ||
fama] fata _F2_ || 90 nec] hec _C_ || uersa mea] mea uersa _H1_ rapta
mea _F_ || 91 animo _'optimus Vaticanus', probante Heinsio_ animi
_BCMFHILT_ || 92 perstat] praestat _BC_ || _93-94 damnat Merkel; 93
'uersus suspectus'--Heinsius; post_ longe _hexametri finem, pentametrum,
hexametri initium excidisse putat Ehwald_ || 93 sic ego sum longe [-æ
_C_] sic hic _BCMFHILT_ sic ego sum, sic hic sanctis _Korn_ sic ego sum
longe, Scythicis _Owen (ed. Tristium 1889, p. xxxviii)_ || longe] lenis
_Némethy_ || 95 re ... nulla _MHIL_ rem ... nullam _BCFT_ tot iam] iam tot
_L_ || 96 uirue] uirque _M_

    hoc facit ut misero faueant adsintque Tomitae
      (haec quoniam tellus testificanda mihi est):
    illi me, quia uelle uident, discedere malunt;
      respectu cupiunt hic tamen esse sui.           100
    nec mihi credideris: extant decreta quibus nos
      laudat et immunes publica cera facit;
    conueniens miseris quae quamquam gloria non sit,
      proxima dant nobis oppida munus idem.
    nec pietas ignota mea est: uidet hospita terra   105
      in nostra sacrum Caesaris esse domo.

97 hoc] hec _H_ quies animi _H2(gl)_ || facit ut] facit et _BC_ facITVt
_F2c_ faciunt _(F1)_ || misero faueant adsintque] faueant assint
miseroque _T_ || adsintque] adsinque _Cac_ aDsintque _F2c_ absintque
_(F1)_ || 98 quoniam] _quid M2c in ras, incertum (ipsum?)_ || mihi est]
michi _M_ || 99 illi] ille _Iac_ || malunt] malint _Heinsius_ || 100
respectu ... sui] respectu ... suo _ML_ || cupiunt] cupiant _Heinsius_ ||
101 nec] neu _Heinsius_ || mihi] si _B2(gl?)_ || 102 immunes] in munem
_B_ || publica] puplica _LP_ || cera _BCMHILF2ul_ cura _T_ causa
_F1F2ul(sic)_ terra _F2ul_ || 103 quae _R. J. Tarrant_ haec _L, probante
Heinsio_ et _BCMFHIT_ ea _Heinsius_ || gloria] gratia _Heinsius_ || sit
_G_ est _CMFHILT quid B, non liquet_

    stant pariter natusque pius coniunxque sacerdos,
      numina iam facto non leuiora deo,
    neu desit pars ulla domus, stat uterque nepotum,
      hic auiae lateri proximus, ille patris.        110
    his ego do totiens cum ture precantia uerba,
      Eoo quotiens surgit ab orbe dies;
    tota (licet quaeras) hoc me non fingere dicet
      officii testis Pontica terra mei.
    [Pontica me tellus, quantis hac possumus ora,    115
      natalem ludis scit celebrare dei,]
    nec minus hospitibus pietas est cognita talis,
      misit in has si quos longa Propontis aquas;

107 pariter _GBMFHILT_ pariterque _C_ || coniunxque _GBCMpcFHILT_
natusque _Mac_ || 108 iam ... non _GBCMFHLT_ non ... iam _I_ || facto]
fato _G_ || 109 neu] ne _BC_ || 110 auiae _BCILM2ul_ liuie _M1FHTI2gl_
|| proximus] protimus [_sic_] _H1_ || 112 surgit] fugit _M_ || orbe] ore
_H1_ || _113-14 damnat Williams_ || 113 licet] uelim _fort legendum_ ||
hoc me non _BCT,Hac?_ hec me non _FHIL_ me numquam _M_ || _115-16 damnat
R. J. Tarrant_ || 115 possumus] nos possumus _I_ || ora] ara _B_ || 116
dei] diem _HP_ || 117 cognita] condita _F_ || 118 longa] loga _M_

    is quoque, quo laeuus fuerat sub praeside Pontus,
      audierit frater forsitan ista tuus.            120
    fortuna est impar animo, talique libenter
      exiguas carpo munere pauper opes,
    nec uestris damus haec oculis, procul urbe remoti,
      contenti tacita sed pietate sumus;
    et tamen haec tangent aliquando Caesaris aures:  125
      nil illum toto quod fit in orbe latet.
    tu certe scis haec, superis ascite, uidesque,
      Caesar, ut est oculis subdita terra tuis;

119 is] hic _M1_ his _P_ || laeuus fuerat _TF2ul_ letus fuerat _BC_
leuius fuerat _LP_ leuuus fuerat _M_ leuior fuerat _F1H_ fuerat letuus I
|| 120 audierit] audierat _F_ || ista] illa _M_ || 121 fortuna est]
fortuna _H1_ || 122 exiguas] exiguus _Bac_ || 123 haec] hoc _F_ || urbe]
orbe _Iac_ || 124 sed pietate] haec pietate _ex_ haec pietate haec
pietate _I_ || /sVmus _B2c_ || 125 et] ut _C_ set _L_ || tamen haec
tangent] tanget tamen hoc _F_ || aures] iram _Iac_ || 126 nil] non _CL_
|| illum] illi _B1_ || fit _BFI_ sit _LT possis alterutrum legere in
CMH_ || 127 tu certe] tu c _seruat G_ _spatium quinque litterarum
reliquit C_ en certe _M2ul_ || haec] hoc _FIT_ || ascite] adscite _B_
accite _M_ acs.cite _F_ || 128 ut _'legendum ex ueteribus'--Naugerius_
et _BCMFHILT_

    tu nostras audis inter conuexa locatus
      sidera sollicito quas damus ore preces.        130
    perueniant istuc et carmina forsitan illa
      quae de te misi caelite facta nouo;
    auguror his igitur flecti tua numina, nec tu
      immerito nomen mite parentis habes.

129 conuexa] onu _seruat G_ connexa _L_ || 130 sollicito _GB2CMFHILT_
sollito _B1_ || preces _CMHIT_ praeces _G_ Pces _BFL_ || 131
perueniant _GBC_ peruenient _FHILT_ perueniunt _M_ || istuc _GBCMFHI_
illuc _LT_ || forsitan _GBCFHILT_ forsita _M_ || 132 misi] miss _G_ ||
facta _GBCpcMFHILT_ facto _Cac_ || 133-34 nec ... immerito] nec _seruat
G_ nam ... e merito [_unde_ ex merito _C. P. Jones_] _fort legendum_ ||
134 mite] mitte _Fac_ || habes] habet _B1_



X


    Haec mihi Cimmerio bis tertia ducitur aestas
      litore pellitos inter agenda Getas.
    ecquos tu silices, ecquod, carissime, ferrum
      duritiae confers, Albinouane, meae?
    gutta cauat lapidem, consumitur anulus usu,       5
      atteritur pressa uomer aduncus humo.
    tempus edax igitur praeter nos omnia perdit;
      cessat duritia mors quoque uicta mea.

albinouano _B2_ albino uano _H2_ albinouano amico suo _M_ ad albino
uanom _F_ ad albinouanum _I2_ hanc epistulam mittit albinouano _L_ || 1
Haec] hic _MF_ || Cimmerio _British Library Harley 2607 (Tarrant)_
cumerio _M1_ in etiam memori _C_ in ********** _B1_ in hemonio _HITP_ in
euxino _F_ in EXINO _B2c_ bistonio _LM2ul_ || aestas] aetas _C_ || 2
pellitos] pellitas _BH_ pellito _C_ || 3 ecquos ... ecquod _Laurentianus
36 2, saec xv (Lenz)_ et quos ... et quod _BMFHILT_ at quos ... et quod
_C_ || carissime] h°iNe _L_ || 4 Albinouane] albino uane _H_ || 6
atteritur _Heinsius_ et teritur _codd_ deteritur _Heinsius_ || _post 6
hos uersus habet M:_ set cum nostra malis uexentur corpora multis /
aspera non possum perpetiendo mori || 7 perdit _I_ perdet _BCMFHLT_ || 8
cessat duritia] duritia cessat _Cac_ cesset duritia _Castiglioni (Lenz)_
|| mea. _edd_ mea? _Riese, Castiglioni_

    exemplum est animi nimium patientis Vlixes
      iactatus dubio per duo lustra mari;             10
    tempora solliciti sed non tamen omnia fati
      pertulit, et placidae saepe fuere morae.
    an graue sex annis pulchram fouisse Calypso
      aequoreaeque fuit concubuisse deae?
    excipit Hippotades, qui dat pro munere uentos,    15
      curuet ut impulsos utilis aura sinus,
    nec bene cantantes labor est audisse puellas,
      nec degustanti lotos amara fuit:
    hos ego qui patriae faciant obliuia sucos
      parte meae uitae, si modo dentur, emam.         20

9 exemplum est animi _BCMFLT_ (anini _T_) exemplum animi est _H_
exemplum animi _I_ || 10 dubio ... mari] 'cbio ... mori _C_ || 11 non]
quae _'liber unus Bers[manni]. & ego inueni in editione Vicentina. &
Ciofano pro textu est'--Auctor Electorum Etonensium_ || 12 pertulit] non
tulit _Auctor Elect. Eton. (quae tamen ... non tulit)_ || morae] m-ore
_F_ || 13 pulchram _ex_ pulcham _M_ || Calypso] calipson _FH_ || 14
aequoreaeque] equoreque _Iac_ Aeaeaeque _Merkel_ || concubuisse]
incubuisse _T_ || deae] deo _C_ || 15 Hippotades] hypodates _FHT_ || 17
cantantes] cantantis _B_ || audisse _F_ audire _BCMHILT_ || 18 lotos
_B1C_ lothos _MFLTH2I2_ lethes _I1P_ sucus _H1_ _quid B2, incertum
(votos?)_ || amara] amarus _H1_ || fuit] erat _H_ || 19 faciant] faciunt
_H_ || sucos] lucos _C_ || 20 meae] meæ est _C_

    nec tu contuleris urbem Laestrygonos umquam
      gentibus obliqua quas obit Hister aqua,
    nec uincet Cyclops saeuum feritate Piacchen,
      qui quota terroris pars solet esse mei!
    Scylla feris trunco quod latret ab inguine monstris, 25
      Heniochae nautis plus nocuere rates.
    nec potes infestis conferre Charybdin Achaeis,
      ter licet epotum ter uomat illa fretum,
    qui, quamquam dextra regione licentius errant,
      securum latus hoc non tamen esse sinunt.           30

21 urbem _BCMT_ urbes _FHIL_ || Laestrygonos _BC_ lestrigonis _MFIT_
listrigonis _HL_ || 22 quas] quos _T_ || Hister] inster _L_ **ster _C_
|| 23 feritate] pietate _BC, Iac ut uid_ || Piacchen _B_ piaechen _C_
phiacem _T_ piacE _MFHIL_ || 24 mei] mihi _T_ || 25 Scylla] silla
_CP_ || feris] ferox _IT_ || quod] quae _M2ul_ quamuis _H_ || latret]
latrat _FM2ul_ || 26 Heniochae _edd_ enioche _CFH_ en*oche _B1_ emioche
_M, ut uid_ enochie _ITB2_ emochee _L_ || nautis] multis _I_ nobis _B2_
|| 27 nec] non _L_ || Charybdin] caripdin _I_ charydin _C_ || Achaeis]
ach--eis _I_ || 28 epotum _B_ et potum _C_ epotet _MFHILT_ || ter uomat]
ter uomet _H1_ euomat _C_ || illa] ore _M2ul_ || 29 quamquam] quamuis
_T_ || errant _BCFH_ errent _MILT_ || 30 latus] natus _C_ || hoc non]
non _Mac I1_

    hic agri infrondes, hic spicula tincta uenenis;
      hic freta uel pediti peruia reddit hiemps
    ut, qua remus iter pulsis modo fecerat undis,
      siccus contempta naue uiator eat.
    qui ueniunt istinc uix uos ea credere dicunt;     35
      quam miser est qui fert asperiora fide!
    crede tamen; nec te causas nescire sinemus
      horrida Sarmaticum cur mare duret hiemps.
    proxima sunt nobis plaustri praebentia formam
      et quae perpetuum sidera frigus habent;         40
    hinc oritur Boreas, oraeque domesticus huic est,
      et sumit uires a propiore polo.

31 infrondes] frondes _C_ || 32 hic] hec _L_ || uel] quae _I1_ ||
reddit] fecit _M2ul_ || 34 naue] nauu _Cac, ut uid_ || 35 istinc] istuc
_MFI_ || uix uos] uix nos _BL_ uos uix _T_ || credere] crederer _H_ ||
36 fert] foret _Cac_ || 37 tamen] tantum _L_ mihi _M2c in ras_ || nec te
causas _BCMFHLT_ (te _in ras M2c_) causas nec te _I_ || 39 praebentia]
ducentia _F, probante Burman_ || 40 perpetuum _M2ul_ praecipuum
_BCM1FHILT_ || 41 hinc] hic _FL_ || huic] hinc _L_ 42 uires ... polo
_'Meynke, recte?'--Riese_ uires ... loco _codd_ mores ... locus _Merkel
(1884)_ || a propiore] asperiore _H1_ a superiore _H2ul_

    at Notus, aduerso tepidum qui spirat ab axe,
      est procul, et rarus languidiorque uenit.
    adde quod hic clauso miscentur flumina Ponto,     45
      uimque fretum multo perdit ab amne suam.
    huc Lycus, huc Sagaris Peniusque Hypanisque Calesque
      influit, et crebro uertice tortus Halys;
    Partheniusque rapax et uoluens saxa Cinapses
      labitur, et nullo tardior amne Tyras,           50

43 at _BCMF2HILT_ et _F1_ set _F2[sic]_ || aduerso] auerso _Bentley_ ||
tepidum] tepidus _MH2c_ tepide _F2ul_ || 46 multo] misto _M2ul(=mixto)_
|| 47 Lycus] lucus _I_ || Peniusque _Heinsius ex Plin. _NH_ VI 14_
peneusque _CI_ paneusque _BMHT_ poneusque _L_ panesque _F_ || Hypanisque
_Heinsius 'ex libris antiquis'_ hitanisque _B_ hyranisque _C ut uid, M
ut uid_ hytanusque _F_ hytanesque _T_ hitaneusque _ex_ hitanque _I_
hythausque _H_ iponesque _L_ || Calesque _I. Vossius ex 'Eustathio
Scholiis in Periegeten' (Heinsius)_ catesque _BCMFHLT_ charesque _I_ ||
48 crebro] crebo _B_ torto _I_ || tortus] pulsus _M_ || Halys _B_ halis
_H_ alis _MFILT_ hilas _C_ || 49 Partheniusque _BHL_ partheniasque _C,
ut uid_ parthemiusque _IT_ parthiniusque _M_ partenusque _F_ || Cinapses
_BC; fluuius prorsus ignotus_ Cynapses _edd_ cinapsis _L_ tynapses _H_
cinaspes _FIT_ niphates _M (ex Luc. III 245)_ Cinolis _Auctor Electorum
Etonensium 'Cinolis emporium Arriano'_ || 50 et nullo] et ullo _I_ hanc
aliquo _Leidensis Heinsii_ haud aliquo _Heinsius_

    et tu, femineae Thermodon cognite turmae,
      et quondam Graiis Phasi petite uiris,
    cumque Borysthenio liquidissimus amne Dirapses
      et tacite peragens lene Melanthus iter,
    quique duas terras, Asiam Cadmique sororem,       55
      separat et cursus inter utramque facit,
    innumerique alii, quos inter maximus omnes
      cedere Danuuius se tibi, Nile, negat;
    copia tot laticum quas auget adulterat undas,
      nec patitur uires aequor habere suas.           60
    quin etiam, stagno similis pigraeque paludi,
      caeruleus uix est diluiturque color;

51 Thermodon] themodon _C_ || turmae _BCM_ turbe _FHILT_ || 52 Graiis
_CM_ grais _BHILT_ a grais _F_ || Phasi] phasis _H1_ || 53 Borysthenio
_editio princeps Romana 1471_ boristenico _BCML_ boristonico _F_
boistronico _I_ boistonico _T_ boistenio _H_ || liquidissimus]
rapidissimus _T_ || Dirapses _BCFHLT; fluuius ignotus_ diraspes _I_
daraspes _M_ Lycastus _Auctor Electorum Etonensium, probante Riese_ ||
54 Melanthus] melantis _T_ || Cadmique] _add I2 in loco a prima manu
relicto_ cathmique _B_ || 56 inter] interque _M_ || 57 alii] amnes _M1_
|| omnes] omnis _B_ || 58 Danuuius _Korn_ danubius _codd_ || negat]
neget _F1_ || 59 laticum] liticum _L_ || 61 quin] qui _CP, fort Fac_ ||
pigraeque] nigreque _T_

    innatat unda freto dulcis, leuiorque marina est,
      quae proprium mixto de sale pondus habet.
    si roget haec aliquis cur sint narrata Pedoni,    65
      quidue loqui certis iuuerit ista modis,
    'detinui' dicam 'tempus, curasque fefelli;
      hunc fructum praesens attulit hora mihi.
    abfuimus solito dum scribimus ista dolore,
      in mediis nec nos sensimus esse Getis.'         70
    at tu, non dubito, cum Thesea carmine laudes,
      materiae titulos quin tueare tuae,
    quemque refers imitere uirum; uetat ille profecto
      tranquilli comitem temporis esse fidem.

63 marina est] marina _ILT_ || 64 pondus] nomen _ILB2_ momen _Wakefield
ad Lucr. VI 474_ || 65 roget] rogat _CT_ || 67 detinui ... tempus,
curasque _excerpta Politiani_ detinui ... tempus curamque _LT_ detinui
... curas tempusque _BCMFHI_ diminui ... curas tempusque _codex Petri
Danielul (Burman), sicut coniecerat Burman_ distinui ... curas, tempusque
_Auctor Electorum Etonensium_ || 68 fructum praesens] praesens fructum
_F_ || 69 abfuimus] afluimus _B1_ aff*uimus _C_ absumus a _M_ ||
scribimus] scripsimus _MFL_ || dolore] labore _M_ || 71 dubito] dubiTO
_M2cF2c, ut uid_ dubites _F3ul, ut uid_ || cum] tum _C_ || 73 quemque]
queque _C_ || imitere] imite** _C (folium lacerum)_ imitare _HLT, Ipc ut
uid_ imita _Iac ut uid_

    qui quamquam est factis ingens et conditur a te   75
      uir tantus quanto debuit ore cani,
    est tamen ex illo nobis imitabile quiddam,
      inque fide Theseus quilibet esse potest.
    non tibi sunt hostes ferro clauaque domandi,
      per quos uix illi peruius isthmos erat,         80
    sed praestandus amor, res non operosa uolenti:
      quis labor est puram non temerasse fidem?
    haec tibi, qui perstas indeclinatus amico,
      non est quod lingua dicta querente putes.

75 quamquam est] quamquam _MP_ || factis ingens] ingens factis _F_
ingens actis _T_ factis uiges _P_ || conditur] conditus _HT_ cognitus
_F_ || a te] arte _L_ || 76 uir] uix _LT_ || tantus quanto _L_ tanto
quantus _BacCFHITpc_ tantVS quantus _M2c_ tanto quanto _BpcTac_ quanto
tantus _fort legendum_ || 77 est] et _I_ || ex] in _C_ || nobis] uobis
_H_ || imitabile] imitabibe _C_ || quiddam] quoddam _L_ quidquam _M2ul_
|| 78 fide _MFH_ fidem _BCILT_ || 80 quos _in ras M2_ || illi _MFHIL_
ulli _BCT_ || 81 operosa] oNerosa _M2c_ laboriosa _I2(gl)_ || 83 qui]
quae _C_ cum _L_ || perstas _IPF2ul_ praestas _BCMF1HT_ pRAs _L_
|| 84 non est] non _B1_



XI


    Gallio, crimen erit uix excusabile nobis
      carmine te nomen non habuisse meo.
    tu quoque enim, memini, caelesti cuspide facta
      fouisti lacrimis uulnera nostra tuis.
    atque utinam rapti iactura laesus amici            5
      sensisses ultra quod quererere nihil;
    non ita dis placuit, qui te spoliare pudica
      coniuge crudeles non habuere nefas.
    nuntia nam luctus mihi nuper epistula uenit,
      lectaque cum lacrimis sunt tua damna meis.      10
    sed neque solari prudentem stultior ausim
      uerbaque doctorum nota referre tibi,
    finitumque tuum, si non ratione, dolorem
      ipsa iam pridem suspicor esse mora.

gallioni _B2H2_ gallioni amico suo _M_ pollioni _F_ ad gallionem _I2_
hanc epistulam mittit gallioni _L_ || 1 Gallio] pollio _F_ || 3 cuspide]
cupide _Mac_ || 6 quererere] querere _BCP_ || 7 dis placuit] displicuit
_(B1)_ || spoliare _ex_ poliare _F_ || 8 habuere] hUere _IT
(=habuere)_ hubuere _Cac_ || 9 nam] iam _F_ || 10 damna] uerba _TF2ul_
|| meis] nostris _M_ mihi _Ehwald_ || 12 uerbaque] uerba _B1_ || nota]
uota _L_ uerba _C_ || 13 dolorem] putarem _C_ || 14 iam] tam _I_ ||
pridem] prima _Cac_

    dum tua perueniens, dum littera nostra recurrens  15
      tot maria ac terras permeat, annus abit.
    temporis officium est solacia dicere certi,
      dum dolor in cursu est, et petit aeger opem.
    at cum longa dies sedauit uulnera mentis,
      intempestiue qui fouet illa, nouat.             20
    adde quod (atque utinam uerum mihi uenerit omen!)
      coniugio felix iam potes esse nouo.

15 perueniens _scripsi_ peruenit _codd_ || 16 ac _BCML_ et _FHIT_ || 17
officium est ... certi] officium ... certi est _M_ || 19 at] aut _C_ ||
longa] longua _uel_ longna _M_ || dies] quies _L_ || 20 fouet _Heinsius_
mouet _codd_ || nouat] mouet _T(M1)(F1)_ || 21 utinam] utinam ut _F_ ||
mihi _BF1_ tibi _MHILTF2 om C_



XII


    Quominus in nostris ponaris, amice, libellis,
      nominis efficitur condicione tui.
    aut ego non alium prius hoc dignarer honore,
      est aliquis nostrum si modo carmen honor.
    lex pedis officio fortunaque nominis obstat,       5
      quaque meos adeas est uia nulla modos.
    nam pudet in geminos ita nomen scindere uersus
      desinat ut prior hoc incipiatque minor,
    et pudeat si te qua syllaba parte moratur
      artius appellem Tuticanumque uocem.             10
    et potes in uersum Tuticani more uenire,
      fiat ut e longa syllaba prima breuis,

tuticano _B2H2F_ tu_[_ti _add M2]_cano amico suo _M_ han _[sic]_
epistulam mittit tuticano _L_ || 3 aut _BC_ ast _MFHILT_ || 5
fortunaque] naturaque _excerpta Scaligeri, probante Heinsio_ || 6 modos]
pedes _I_ || 8 desinat] desinet _Iac_ || hoc] hic _T_ || 9 pudeat] pudet
_H_ || te qua] te quA _B2c_ qua te _H1P_ || moratur] moretur _FHT_ || 10
Tuticanumque] Tuditanumque _Heinsius olim (Burman); uide Val Max VII
viii 1_ || 11 et] non _M_ nec _FIpc_ at _Camps (_CQ_ n.s. IV [1954]
206-7)_

    aut producatur quae nunc correptius exit,
      et sit porrecta longa secunda mora.
    his ego si uitiis ausim corrumpere nomen,         15
      ridear, et merito pectus habere neger.
    haec mihi causa fuit dilati muneris huius,
      quod meus adiecto faenore reddet amor,
    teque canam quacumque nota, tibi carmina mittam,
      paene mihi puero cognite paene puer,            20
    perque tot annorum seriem, quot habemus uterque,
      non mihi quam fratri frater amate minus,
    tu bonus hortator, tu duxque comesque fuisti,
      cum regerem tenera frena nouella manu;

13 aut] nec _R. J. Tarrant (nec potes ... nec producatur)_ || producatur
_MHI (ut M2[gl])_ ut ducatur _LTB2F2ul_ ut dicatur _B1CF1_ || correptius
_BFLT_ correptior _C, fort recte_ correctius _MHI_ || 14 sit] si _BacP_
|| porrecta] producta _F1_ || 16 merito _GBCFHILT_ cunctis _M_ || 17
dilati] lati _G_ || muneris _GBCMF1HILT_ nominis _F2ul_ || 18 reddet
_GCMIT_ reddit _BFHL_ || amor _GBCFHI1L_ ager _TI2; add M2 (in ras?)_ ||
19 canam quacumque nota, tibi _edd_ canam, quacumque nota tibi _Luck_ ||
quacumque nota] quacumquenaia _G_ quantumque licet _I_ || tibi
_GBCMFHIL_ mea _T_ || 20 mihi ... puer] mihi _om Iac_ puer ... mihi _CT_
|| 22 fratRI _F2?c_ || 23 tu duxque] mihi duxque _FL_

    saepe ego correxi sub te censore libellos,        25
      saepe tibi admonitu facta litura meo est,
    dignam Maeoniis Phaeacida condere chartis
      cum te Pieriae perdocuere deae.
    hic tenor, haec uiridi concordia coepta iuuenta
      uenit ad albentes inlabefacta comas.            30
    quae nisi te moueant, duro tibi pectora ferro
      esse uel inuicto clausa adamante putem.
    sed prius huic desint et bellum et frigora terrae,
      inuisus nobis quae duo Pontus habet,
    et tepidus Boreas et sit praefrigidus Auster,     35
      et possit fatum mollius esse meum,

25 saepe] nempe _M1_ || 26 tibi] tui _L_ tuo _T_ mihi _H2ul, ut uid_ ||
litura] litV/ra _F2c_ littera _(F1)_ || meo] mea _T_ tuo _H2ul, ut uid_
|| 27 dignam _(B1)CTpc_ dignum _MFHILTacB2c_ || Phaeacida] pheatica _IL_
eacida _C_ || 28 cum] cU/ _I (=cum)_ || Pieriae _BCF1T_ pieride _HF2_
pierides _IL_ pyeriDES _M2c_ || deae] tue _M2ul_ || 29 uiridi] in uiridi
_L_ || 30 albentes] albentis _B_ || 31 nisi _ex_ ubi _L_ || 32 inuicto]
inuito _uel_ inuecto _'libri nonnulli ueteres', unde_ inducto _Heinsius
olim_ || 33 desint] desunt _M1_ deerint _M2ul, ut uid_ || 35
praefrigidus] praefigidus _B1Hac_ perfrigidus _ILF2_

    quam tua sint lapso praecordia dura sodali;
      hic cumulus nostris absit abestque malis.
    tu modo per superos, quorum certissimus ille est
      quo tuus assidue principe creuit honor,         40
    effice constanti profugum pietate tuendo
      ne sperata meam deserat aura ratem.
    quid mandem quaeris? peream nisi dicere uix est,
      si modo qui periit ille perire potest.
    nec quid agam inuenio, nec quid nolimue uelimue,  45
      nec satis utilitas est mihi nota mea.
    crede mihi, miseros prudentia prima relinquit,
      et sensus cum re consiliumque fugit;

37 lapso] lasso _BCM_ || dura] clausa _M2ul_ || sodali _ex_ sobali _B_
|| 38 nostris _add F2_ || abestque _ex_ absitque _M_ || malis] meis _C_
|| 40 honor] amor _C_ || 42 ne _GBCMFHIT_ nec _L_ || deserat _GBCMHILT_
desinat _F_ || 45 nolimue] molimne _B_ || uelimue] uelim _B1_ || 46 mihi
... mea] mea ... mihi _CFT_ || nota] mora _L_ || 47 relinquit] reliquit
_MF_ relinquat _Iac, ut uid_ refugit _Cac_ || 48 re] me _Mac, ut uid_
spe _Heinsius_

    ipse, precor, quaeras qua sim tibi parte iuuandus,
      quaque uia uenias ad mea uota, uide.            50

49 quaeras] uideas _M1_ || qua sim] qua sum _L_ sim qua _C_ || tibi _add
M2_ || iuuandus] iuuanda _Cac_ || 50 quaque ... uide _LF3_ quaque ... uale
_F1T_ quoque ... uide _IacM2ul_ quoque ... uado _BCHIpc_ quoque ... modo
_M1_ quoque ... uale _F2I2ul_ || uia uenias _scripsi_ uiam facias _codd_



XIII


    O mihi non dubios inter memorande sodales,
      qui quod es, id uere, Care, uocaris, aue!
    unde saluteris color hic tibi protinus index
      et structura mei carminis esse potest,
    non quia mirifica est, sed quod non publica certe; 5
      qualis enim cumque est, non latet esse meam.
    ipse quoque ut titulum chartae de fronte reuellas
      quod sit opus uideor dicere posse tuum;
    quamlibet in multis positus noscere libellis,
      perque obseruatas inueniere notas;              10
    prodent auctorem uires, quas Hercule dignas
      nouimus atque illi quem canis ipse pares.

ad sodalem _B2_ caro amico suo _M_ ad carum _FI2_ caro _H2_ || 1
memorande] numerande _C_ || 2 qui quod es, id _BCFI_ qui quod id es _MH_
quique quod es _LT, fort recte_ || aue] ades _T_ || 3 saluteris _MFT_
salutaris _BCHIL_ || protinus] proximus _CT_ || 5 mirifica] miririfica
_B_ murifica _C_ || publica] puplica _LP_ || certe] certe est _BC_ || 6
cumQVE _B2c?_ || est, non] non _L_ || 7 ut _add M2_ || 8 quod ... uideor]
quid ... uidear _Heinsius_ || tuum] meum _F2ul_ || 11 prodent] produnt
_ILF2ul_ credent _C_ || auctorem] actorem _MF_ || dignas] dipnas _Cac_
|| nouimus] contra uiam _C (conT uiA)_ || illi] ille _C_ || quem]
que _C_ || ipse] esse _MT_

    et mea Musa potest proprio deprensa colore
      insignis uitiis forsitan esse suis;
    tam mala Thersiten prohibebat forma latere        15
      quam pulchra Nireus conspiciendus erat.
    nec te mirari si sint uitiosa decebit
      carmina quae faciam paene poeta Getes.
    a pudet, et Getico scripsi sermone libellum,
      structaque sunt nostris barbara uerba modis,    20
    et placui (gratare mihi) coepique poetae
      inter inhumanos nomen habere Getas.
    materiam quaeris? laudes de Caesare dixi;
      adiuta est nouitas numine nostra dei.

13 et] at _C_ || colore] colure _Cac, ut uid_ || 14 insignis] insiGnis
_B2c, ut uid_ ansignis _Cac_ || suis] meis _F1_ || 15 Thersiten]
therseten _C_ || prohibebat] prohibebit _H1, ut uid_ || forma latere]
latere forma _Iac_ || 16 Nireus _edd_ nereus _codd_ deus maris _F2(gl)_
|| 17 sint] sunt _L_ || decebit] licebit _L (fort ex_ decebit_)_ || 18
Getes] gethas _F1_ || 19 Getico scripsi] geticos scripsi _(Bac)_ ||
libellum] libellos _I_ || 20 structaque] scriptaque _I_ || nostris]
nobis _H1_ || 22 inhumanos] inhumanas _Cpc_ humanas _Cac_ || 23 laudes
de Caesare dixi _edd olim_ laudes: de Caesare dixi _J. Gilbert, Jahrb.
für kl. Ph. 1896, 62 (Owen 1915)_ || laudes] laudem _M_

    nam patris Augusti docui mortale fuisse           25
      corpus, in aetherias numen abisse domos,
    esse parem uirtute patri qui frena coactus
      saepe recusati ceperit imperii,
    esse pudicarum te Vestam, Liuia, matrum,
      ambiguum nato dignior anne uiro,                30
    esse duos iuuenes firma adiumenta parentis
      qui dederint animi pignora certa sui.
    haec ubi non patria perlegi scripta Camena,
      uenit et ad digitos ultima charta meos,
    et caput et plenas omnes mouere pharetras,        35
      et longum Getico murmur in ore fuit,

25 mortale] immortale _Tac_ || 26 aetherias ... domos] ethereos ... deos
_I_ || numen] nomen _BC(M1)L_ || 27 parem ... patri] parem ... patr* _B_
patrem ... patri _(Hac)_ patri ... parem _M_ || uirtute] in uirtute _L_ ||
coactus _excerpta Scaligeri_ rogatus _codd_ || 28 recusati] recusari _C_
|| ceperit] ceperat _L_ cepit _F, fort ex_ recepit || inPERIi _F2c_ ||
29 Vestam] uestem _M_ deam _M2(gl)_ uastam _FacP_ testem _H_ || 30
ambiguum] ambiguum est _MFIL2(gl)_ || 31-32 esse duos iuuenes firma
adiumenta parentis qui _interpunxi_ esse duos iuuenes, firma adiumenta
parentis, qui _edd_ || 32 qui] cui _'editi plures'--Burman_ || dederint]
dederAnt _M2c_ dederit _L1_ || certa] cara _I_ || sui] fui _C_

    atque aliquis 'scribas haec cum de Caesare,' dixit
      'Caesaris imperio restituendus eras.'
    ille quidem dixit; sed me iam, Care, niuali
      sexta relegatum bruma sub axe uidet.            40
    carmina nil prosunt; nocuerunt carmina quondam,
      primaque tam miserae causa fuere fugae.
    at tu, per studii communia foedera sacri,
      per non uile tibi nomen amicitiae
    (sic uincto Latiis Germanicus hoste catenis       45
      materiam uestris adferat ingeniis,
    sic ualeant pueri, *uotum commune deorum*,
      quos laus formandos est tibi magna datos),

37 haec] hac _C_ || de] tu _BacC_ tu de _Bpc_ || 38 imperio] imperii _C_
|| eras] eris _M1ILF2ul_ || 39 me iam] iam me _T_ || Care] kare _M_ ||
40 uidet] tenet _F_ || 43 at tu] ast ego _F1_ || studii] studui _C_ ||
foedera] federe _Bac_ || 45 uincto _scripsi_ capto _codd_ || 46 uestris]
nostris _MIL_ || adferat] afferet _F1_ praebeat _I_ offerat _Heinsius_
47 pueri, uotum commune deorum _edd_ pueri, uotum commune, deorum
_Postgate (Owen 1894)_ || uotum commune deorum _corruptum_ || deorum]
duorum _M1F2ul_ augusti et liuie _F2gl_ suorum _Heinsius_ || 48 quos
... formandos] quos ... formandOs _M2c_ quis ... formandis _LPF2ul_ || laus
est] est laus _F_ tibi ... est _H_ (laus _H2[gl] ad finem uersus)_ ||
magna] mag** _L_ maga _F1_ || datos] datOs _M2c_ deos _I?ul_ data _L_
datis _F2ulP_ datur _F2ul_

    quanta potes, praebe nostrae momenta saluti,
      quae nisi mutato nulla futura loco est.         50

49 potes] potest _Bac_ || praebe nostrae] nostrae praebe _FI_ || momenta
_Vaticanus 1595, saec xv (Mercati [Lenz]), sicut coni Scaliger et
Gronouius_ monimenta _BCMFHILT_ || 50 mutato _ex_ muto _B_



XIV


    Haec tibi mittuntur quem sum modo carmine questus
      non aptum numeris nomen habere meis,
    in quibus, excepto quod adhuc utcumque ualemus,
      nil te praeterea quod iuuet inuenies.
    ipsa quoque est inuisa salus, suntque ultima uota  5
      quolibet ex istis scilicet ire locis;
    nulla mihi cura est terra quo muter ab ista,
      hac quia quam uideo gratior omnis erit.

epistula ad tuticanum _B2_ tuticano amico suo _M_ tuticano _F2H2_ ad
tuticanum _I2_ || 1 quem _BMFLT; add I2 in spatio a prima manu relicto_
que _CH_ || sum modo] summo _(B1)_ || 4 te _Berolinensis Diez. B. Sant.
1, saec. xiii (Lenz), Bodleianus Rawlinson G 105ul (Tarrant)_ me
_BCMFHILT_ || 5 est _om I1_ || inuisa] non uisa _C_ || 6 ex istis] ex
illis _C_ Euxinis _Castiglioni (Lenz)_ || scilicet] ilicet _fort
legendum_ || 7 terra quo muter [mutar _F2_] ab ista _F1, Bodleianus
Canon. lat. 1, saec xiii (Tarrant), Barberinus lat. 26, saec xiii
(Lenz)_ terra quo mittar ab ista _BCMFHILT_ terra quam muter ut ista
_Heinsius_ [nulla prior cura est] terra quam muter ut ista _Heinsius_
terra nisi muter ut ista _Heinsius_ terrae quo muter ab Histro
_Williams_ || 8 quia quam] quamquam _C_

    in medias Syrtes, mediam mea uela Charybdin
      mittite, praesenti dum careamus humo.           10
    Styx quoque, si quid ea est, bene commutabitur Histro,
      si quid et inferius quam Styga mundus habet.
    gramina cultus ager, frigus minus odit hirundo,
      proxima Marticolis quam loca Naso Getis.
    talia suscensent propter mihi uerba Tomitae,      15
      iraque carminibus publica mota meis.
    ergo ego cessabo numquam per carmina laedi,
      plectar et incauto semper ab ingenio?
    ergo ego, ne scribam, digitos incidere cunctor,
      telaque adhuc demens quae nocuere sequor?       20

9 medias] medi*s _B_ || Syrtes] syr*tis _B1, ut uid_ systes _C_ ||
Charybdin _CH_ caribdim _BT_ caribdI _MFL_ caripdI _I_ || 10
mittite _BpcILF2ul_ mitte _MH_ mittat _BacC_ mittant _F1_ mutE _T_
(mittE _legit André)_ || 12 inferIVS _F1c_ || 13 gramina] carmina _C_
flamina _Bentley_ || 14 Marticolis] in articolis _C_ || 15 suscensent
_C_ succensent _BMpcFHILT_ successent _Mac_ || 16 publica] puplica _LP_
|| mota meis] nota meis _H_ meis _I1_ est [meis] _I2(gl?)_ || 17 laedi]
læde _Cac_ || 18 plectar] plectat _L_ || incauto] incapto _M_ || 19
incidere] incindere _F_ || 20 telaque] tela _M_ || sequor] sequar _CP_

    ad ueteres scopulos iterum deuertor et illas
      in quibus offendit naufraga puppis aquas?
    sed nihil admisi, nulla est mea culpa, Tomitae,
      quos ego, cum loca sim uestra perosus, amo.
    quilibet excutiat nostri monimenta laboris:       25
      littera de uobis est mea questa nihil.
    frigus et incursus omni de parte timendos
      et quod pulsetur murus ab hoste queror.
    in loca, non homines, uerissima crimina dixi;
      culpatis uestrum uos quoque saepe solum.        30
    esset perpetuo sua quam uitabilis Ascra
      ausa est agricolae Musa docere senis;

21 deuertor] deuertar _B_ || et] ad _M2, 'quinque libri. quod
placet'--Heinsius_ || 22 offendit] effudit _F1_ || naufraga] naufagra
_H_ || 23 sed] at _fort legendum_ || 24 Quos _B2c_ || 25 excutiat]
excuriat _L_ || 27 frigus] frugus _C_ || de _om I1_ || timendos]
timendus _L_ || 29 in] non _C_ || crimina] carmina _H_ || 30
culpatis] culpatus _BacC_ || solum] locum _MH_ || 31 _'uersus
suspectus'--Heinsius_ || quam uitabilis] quam miserabilis _H_ quam
uitiabilis _A. G. Lee (PCPhS 181 [1950-51] 3), fort recte_ ut
illaudabilis _Bentley_ || Ascra] ascre _BCH, fort recte_ || 32
agricolae] argolici _I2ul_

    et fuerat genitus terra qui scripsit in illa,
      intumuit uati nec tamen Ascra suo.
    quis patriam sollerte magis dilexit Vlixe?        35
      hoc tamen asperitas indice docta loci est.
    non loca, sed mores scriptis uexauit amaris
      Scepsius Ausonios, actaque Roma rea est;
    falsa tamen passa est aequa conuicia mente,
      obfuit auctori nec fera lingua suo.             40
    at malus interpres populi mihi concitat iram,
      inque nouum crimen carmina nostra uocat.

33 et] **t _M1_ at _Puteaneus Heinsii (=Parisinus lat. 8239, saec xiii)
(Lenz), Laurentianus 36 2, saec xv (Lenz), edd ante Korn_ non _uel_ nec
_fort legendum_ || in] ut _L_ || 34 intumuit] intimuit _I1_ || Ascra]
illa _I_ || 36 indice] iudice _IL_ || docta _B_ doctus _C_ dicta
_MFHILT_ nota _excerpta Scaligeri, sex codd Heinsii, probante Riese_ ||
loci est] loci _FT_ in est _C_ (I E) || _37 om C_ || 37 non] nec
_L_ || sed mores] sermones _L_ || 38 Scepsius _Scaliger, Castig. in
Catull. 15, 19 (=32, ed. 2) (Lenz)_ sceptius _C_ septius _MFT_ sepTius
_B2c_ septiVS _L2c_ septi _L1, ut uid_ sepcius _I_ celsius _H_ ||
Ausonios] ausononios _uel_ ausonomos _L_ || actaque _MFT_ actaue _BHIL_
acte ue _C_ || 39 falsa] fassa _M1_ || est _om C_ || 40 auctori] actori
_CacF1_ || fera] sua _F1_ || 41 populi ... concitat iram] populum
... uertit in iram _L_ || 42 inque] isque _F_

    tam felix utinam quam pectore candidus essem!
      extat adhuc nemo saucius ore meo.
    adde quod Illyrica si iam pice nigrior essem,     45
      non mordenda mihi turba fidelis erat.
    molliter a uobis mea sors excepta, Tomitae,
      tam mites Graios indicat esse uiros;
    gens mea Paeligni regioque domestica Sulmo
      non potuit nostris lenior esse malis.           50
    quem uix incolumi cuiquam saluoque daretis,
      is datus a uobis est mihi nuper honor:
    solus adhuc ego sum uestris immunis in oris,
      exceptis si qui munera legis habent;

43 tam] iam _C_ || pectore] pectorore _H_ || candidus] callidus _H_ ||
_44-45 in marg add B1F2_ || 44 nemo ... meo] meo ... nemo _H1_ || 45
Illyrica] ilira _L_ || essem] eem _M_ || 46 non] nec _(Fac?)L_ ||
mordenda] mordeda _M_ || 47 uobis] nobis _L_ || 48 Graios _edd_ gratos
_BCMFHIL_ raros _T_ geticos _'unus Vaticanus ... aeque bene [ac
"Graios"!], nisi uis rectius'--Ciofanus_ || 49 gens] ius _C_ ||
Paeligni] pEligni _L_ || 50 lenior _MpcFpcHIT_ leuior _BC(Mac)FacL_
|| 51 uix] uos _F2_] || Incolumi] incolumi _B2c_ in colonia _C_ || 52
is] i/s _B_ est _M_ || est] is _M_ || 53 adhuc] ad hunc _C_ || sum _om
F1_ || oris] aruis _L_ || 54 si qui] siquid _T_ || munera] mumera _C_

    tempora sacrata mea sunt uelata corona,           55
      publicus inuito quam fauor imposuit.
    quam grata est igitur Latonae Delia tellus,
      erranti tutum quae dedit una locum,
    tam mihi cara Tomis, patria quae sede fugatis
      tempus ad hoc nobis hospita fida manet.         60
    di modo fecissent placidae spem posset habere
      pacis, et a gelido longius axe foret.

57 grata] gata _Hac_ || IGITVR Latone _F2c_ || 59 cara] cala _Cac_ grata
_B2_ || 59 Tomis _HLB2_ tomus _B1T_ thOmVS _I2c, ut uid_ domus _CF1_
thomos _MF2ul_ || quae _BMLT_ quae a _CFHI_ || 61 placidae] placidam _B_
|| 62 foret] forent _F2, ut uid_



XV


    Si quis adhuc usquam nostri non immemor extat,
      quidue relegatus Naso requirit, agam:
    Caesaribus uitam, Sexto debere salutem
      me sciat; a superis hic mihi primus erit.
    tempora nam miserae complectar ut omnia uitae,    5
      a meritis eius pars mihi nulla uacat,
    quae numero tot sunt, quot in horto fertilis arui
      Punica sub lento cortice grana rubent,

sexto pompeio _B2MFH2_ ad sextum pompeium _I2_ || 1 usquam ... extat]
usquam ... extet _Guethling (Lenz)_ extat ... usquam _M_ || 2 requirit
_Bodleianus Auct. F 2 1 (Tarrant), Laurentianus 38 39 (Lenz), editio
princeps Bononiensis (Lenz), 'ex duobus' Heinsius_ requirat _BCMFHLT_
requiret _I, British Library Burney 220 (Tarrant), Bodleianus Rawlinson
G 105 (Tarrant), Othob. lat. 1469, saec xv (Tarrant)_ || agam] agat
_fort legendum_ || 5 miserae] supere _H_ || 6 pars] noster pars _Bac_ ||
7 horto ... arui] hasto ... arui _C_ horto ... agri _TP_ horti ... aruo
_Williams_ || 8 lento] lecto _'Basil. et hoc probat Barth. Aduers.
xxxvii.10'--Burman_

    Africa quot segetes, quot Tmolia terra racemos,
      quot Sicyon bacas, quot parit Hybla fauos.      10
    confiteor; testere licet--signate, Quirites!
      nil opus est legum uiribus, ipse loquor.
    inter opes et me, rem paruam, pone paternas,
      pars ego sum census quantulacumque tui;
    quam tua Trinacria est regnataque terra Philippo, 15
      quam domus Augusto continuata foro,
    quam tua rus oculis domini Campania gratum,
      quaeque relicta tibi, Sexte, uel empta tenes,
    tam tuus en ego sum, cuius te munere tristi
      non potes in Ponto dicere habere nihil.         20

9 Tmolia terra _BM2ul_ tinolia t. _C_ thimolia t. _L_ thimola t. _T_
timula t. _I, ut uid_ mollia t. _HP_ etholia t. _F1_ gnosia t. _F2ul_
habet methina _M1_ || racemos] ramos _Mac_ || 10 Sicyon] sicio _B1_
scithion _T_ || Hybla] hilba _Bac_ || 11 testere] testare _(M1)LI1P_
tristare _F1_ narare _I2ul_ || signate] signare _LP_ || 12 est _om Fac_
|| loquor] loquar _Mpc_ || 13 rem paruam _MHIT_ paruam rem _BCFL, fort
recte_ || 15 Trinacria] tinacria _H_ || regnataque terra] regnaque terra
_I1_ tellus regnata _M_ || philippo] phiUppo _C_ || 19 tristi] cristi
_L_ || 20 potES _H2c_

    atque utinam possis, et detur amicius aruum,
      remque tuam ponas in meliore loco!
    quod quoniam in dis est, tempta lenire precando
      numina perpetua quae pietate colis.
    [erroris nam tu uix est discernere nostri         25
      sis argumentum maius an auxilium.]
    nec dubitans oro; sed flumine saepe secundo
      augetur remis cursus euntis aquae.
    et pudet et metuo semperque eademque precari
      ne subeant animo taedia iusta tuo;              30
    uerum quid faciam? res immoderata cupido est;
      da ueniam uitio, mitis amice, meo.

21 amicius] micius _Bpc (=mitius)_ amicitius _L_ || aruum] auum _Mac_ ||
23 precando] rogando _HF2ul_ || _25-26 spurios puto. 'ambiguus hic locus
est, eoque difficilior quoque, et obscurior'--Micyllus; 'xv 25 libri
"Erroris nam", quod nisi aegre intellegi nequit, quamquam nec correctio
satisfacit'--Merkel (1884), qui_ maeroris _pro_ erroris _coniecit_ || 25
nam] iam _FI_ discernere] decernere _MI1_ || 26 maius] magis _I_ nauis
_F1_ || auxilium] axilium _M_ xilium _I1_ || 27 flumine] flAmine _M2c,
ut uid_ || saepe secundo] saepe _F1_ secundo saepe _Iac_ || 29
semperque] semper _C_ || 30 iusta] iussa _F1_ || 31 uerum quid]
colloquio _C_ || faciam] fac in _I_

    scribere saepe aliud cupiens delabor eodem;
      *ipsa locum per se littera nostra rogat.*
    seu tamen effectus habitura est gratia, seu me    35
      dura iubet gelido Parca sub axe mori,
    semper inoblita repetam tua munera mente,
      et mea me tellus audiet esse tuum;
    audiet et caelo posita est quaecumque sub ullo
      (transit nostra feros si modo Musa Getas),      40

33 aliud cupiens] uolens aliud _I_ || delabor] dilabor _L_ || _34 uix
sanus; seclusit Merkel (1884)_ || 34 ipsa locum ... rogat] inque locum
... redit _temptauit Tarrant_ || per se littera ... rogat] pro se tristia
... rogant [_uel_ petunt] _temptaui_ || per se ... rogat] per se ... petit
_unus Heinsii_ per se ... facit _unus Heinsii_ pro se ... facit _Heinsius_
|| 35 me] nos _M2ul_ || 37 munera] carmina _F1_ munere _F2ul_ nomina
_F3ul, ut uid_ || 38 mea] tua _H_ || me] te _(F1)_ || audiet _FHIT_
audiat _BCML_ || 39 audiet] audiat _L_ || est _om M_ || ullo] illo _Mac,
sicut coni Bentley_ || 40 transit nostra feros] transierit seuos _T_

    teque meae causam seruatoremque salutis
      meque tuum libra norit et aere magis.

41 seruatoremque] serut.atoremque _M_ seruataremque _L_ || 42 meque]
neque _C_ || tuum libra norit et aere magis _Barberinus lat. 262ul
(Lenz), F3? (M = magis)_ tuum libra norit et aere minus _BCMHILT_
(libra _ex_ liba _I_) tuum libra norit et aere datum _F1_ || suum [libra
norit et aere] minus _F2ul_ [tellus ... quaecumque ... ] meque, tuum
libra, nouit, et aere, minus _Gronouius, _Obs._ II i_ meque tuum libra
norit et aere tuum _Heinsius_ tuae libra norit et aere manus _Rappold
(Owen 1915)_ tuae libra norit et aere domus _temptaui; cf Suet _Aug_ 61
1_



XVI


    Inuide, quid laceras Nasonis carmina rapti?
      non solet ingeniis summa nocere dies,
    famaque post cineres maior uenit. at mihi nomen
      tum quoque, cum uiuis adnumerarer, erat.
    cum foret et Marsus magnique Rabirius oris        5
      Iliacusque Macer sidereusque Pedo,
    et, qui Iunonem laesisset in Hercule, Carus,
      Iunonis si iam non gener ille foret,
    quique dedit Latio carmen regale, Seuerus,
      et cum subtili Priscus uterque Numa,           10

ad inuidum _B2MI2_ ad inimicum _H2_ || 1 carmina] carmia _M_ || 3 uenit.
at _scripsi_ uenit et _BCMFILT_ ueniet _H_ || nomen] uoto _H (noto?)_ ||
4 tum] tunc _F_ || uiuis] uiuus _H_ || erat] eat _Cac_ || 5 cum foret et
_FHT_ cumque foret _BCMIL_ || Rabirius _MFI_ sabirius _BC_ rabarius _T_
rabirtius _H_ rabilinus _L_ Sabellius _Barth, _Adu._ xxxvii 10 (Burman)_
|| 6 Iliacusque] iliacus _H_ || sidereusque] sidere/usque _B_
Cecropiusque _Bentley; cf x 71 'cum Thesea carmine laudes'_ || PEdo
_M2c_ || 7 Iunonem laesisset] iunonem lesissent _Bac, ut uid_ lesisset
iunonem _M_ || Carus] karus _B_ || 8 Iunonis] iunonisque _H_ || si iam]
siam _C1_ || gener ... foret _BCMFHT (_fOret _M1c)_ neger foret _L_ foret
genus _I_

    quique uel imparibus numeris, Montane, uel aequis
      sufficis, et gemino carmine nomen habes,
    et qui Penelopae rescribere iussit Vlixem
      errantem saeuo per duo lustra mari,
    quique suam *Trisomen* imperfectumque dierum      15
      deseruit celeri morte Sabinus opus,
    ingeniique sui dictus cognomine Largus,
      Gallica qui Phrygium duxit in arua senem,

11 imparibus numeris] imparibus _[spatium septem litterarum]_ his _H_ ||
12 sufficis, et] sufficis _Mac_ || 13 Penelopae] penelopi _H_ penolope
_CI_ || 13 solinus _H2(gl) in marg_ || 15 Trisomen _C (trisoM)_
trisomem _B1_ trosenE _L_ trionE _F_ troinE _I_ trozenen _M_
troezen _T_ tr****m _H_ troilem _B2_ Troezena _quidam apud Micyllum_
Tymelen _temptauit Heinsius_ Thressen _[=Hero] M. Hertz (Lenz)_ Chrysen
_Roeper (Riese)_ Troesmin _Ehwald_ Troesmen _Owen_ Sinatroncen
_['Parthorum regis nomen'] Bergk, _Opusc._ I 664 pro_ suam t. ||
imperfectumque] imperfectamque _H_ imperfectum _I1_ interruptumque
_Bergk_ || 16 deseruit] destituit _Bergk_ || Sabinus] salinus _(M1)T_
solius _F2ul_ || 17 dictus] dignus _I_ || 18 Gallica] gallia _M1_ ||
duxit] dixit _M1_ || arua] arma _B1?ulHI_

    quique canit domito Camerinus ab Hectore Troiam,
      quique sua nomen Phyllide Tuscus habet,         20
    ueliuolique maris uates, cui credere posses
      carmina caeruleos composuisse deos,
    quique acies Libycas Romanaque proelia dixit,
      et Marius scripti dexter in omne genus,
    Trinacriusque suae Perseidos auctor, et auctor    25
      Tantalidae reducis Tyndaridosque Lupus,

19 domito ... ab Hectore] domitam ... ab hectore _FM2ul_ domitam ... ab
hercule _Gothanus II 121, saec xiii (André), probante Korn_ ||
Camerinus] caMinus _T_ caminus _F_ || 20 sua nomen Phyllide Tuscus]
fata nomen pillide tuscus _C_ sua tuscus phillide nomen _L_ sua nomen
Phyllide Fuscus _Heinsius ('nomen magis Romanum')_ || 21 ueliuolique]
ueiiuolique _C_ || uates] nomen _Merkel ad Ibin p. 377 (Owen)_ || posses
_BCMHILT_ possis _F, fort recte_ || 23 quique] cuique _C_ || proelia]
pretia _C_ || dixit] salustius _M2gl_ || 24 Marius scripti] marius
scriptor _C_ scriptor marius _B_ || 24 dexter] promptus _M, fort in ras_
_P_ || 25 Trinacriusque _BCFL_ tinacriusque _IT_ tenar*sque _H_
eticiusque _M_ || Perseidos] perseidis _BCI_ Peneidos _Ehwald
(=Daphnes)_ || auctor ... auctor] auctor ... actor _H_ actor ... actor _F_
|| et] set _F2_ || Tyndaridosque] tyndaridisque _MI_

    et qui Maeoniam Phaeacida uertit, et une
      Pindaricae fidicen tu quoque, Rufe, lyrae,
    Musaque Turrani tragicis innixa coturnis,
      et tua cum socco Musa, Melisse, leuis;          30
    cum Varius Gracchusque darent fera dicta tyrannis,
      Callimachi Proculus molle teneret iter,

27 Maeoniam] meonidE _H_ || Pheacida _L_ PHEAcida _M2c_ pheatida _I_
pheicida _H_ ecaeida _B1_ aeacida _C_ hetaterA _F_ hecateida _T_
ecateida _B2_ || et une _HLB2_ et unE _M2c_ et una _IT_ et uni _B1C_ in
anguem _F; 'latet aliquid'--Burman_ || 28 lyrae] l*ræ _Cac_ || 29
Musaque] uisaque _C_ || 29 Turrani _BCMLT_ turani _FI_ tiranni _H_
Thorani _Heinsius_ || tragicis] gtragicis _T_ || innixa] innexa _T_ ||
_30 (in ras?) add C2_ || 30 et tua] ipseque _C2_ || socco] socio _C2, ut
uid_ || Melisse _MFB2_ mel isse _B1_ molisse _IL_ molasse _T_ melose _H_
molesse _C2_ (malesse _legunt Lenz, André_) || leuis] leui _H_ _Othob.
lat. 1469, saec xv (Tarrant), sicut coni Heinsius_ || 31 Varius _LTB2ul_
uariis _C_ uarus _B1MFHI_ || Gracchusque _edd olim_ graccusque _T,
probante Ehwald_ gra*ccusque _B_ gracusque _HIL_ gratusque _CMF_ || 31
darent] daret _F_ parent _(B1)C_ || tyrannis _BC, sicut coni Heinsius_
tyranni _MFHILT_ || 32 Proculus] proculuus _M_ pro cuIus _B2c_ prochius
_C_

    *Tityron antiquas Passerque rediret ad herbas,*   33
      aptaque uenanti Grattius arma daret,

_33 locus desperatus. 'haec nec Latina sunt, nec satis intelligo quid
sibi uelint'--Heinsius_

Tityron antiquas Passerque rediret ad herbas _B1C_
(Passerque _ex_ passerque _Riese_) titirus antiquas et erat qui pasceret
herbas _HILT_ (titirus: tiarus _Iac_) (pasceret: diceret _L_)
[tityron antiquas] et erat qui gigneret [herbas] _B3ul_
titirus eternas caneret qui procreet herbas _F_ (procreet: pasceret _F2ul_)
titirum et antiquas recus.basse referret ad umbras _M_
[tityron antiquas] recubasse refertur [ad herbas] _B2_
Tityron aprica recubantem pangeret umbra _Heinsius (Korn)_
Tityron aprica recubasse referret in umbra _Heinsius (Korn)_
Tityron apricus recubasse referret ad umbras [_uel_ undas] _Heinsius (Korn)_
Tityrus antiquis armentaque pasceret herbis _Withof (Korn)_
Tityrus antiquas pastorque rediret ad herbas _Korn_
Tityrus antiquas rursus reuocaret ad herbas _Madvig (Adu. crit. II praef)_
Tityrus antiquas capras ubi pasceret herbas _Madvig (Adu. crit. II 105)_
Tityrus apricans, ut erat, qui pasceret, herbas _Bergk (Opusc. I 667)_
Tityron Andinasque esset qui diceret herbas _Roeper (Korn)_
Tityron antiquas pastorem exciret ad herbas _Owen (1915)_
Tityron antiquas carmenque referret ad herbas _Schneiderhan (Lenz)_
Tityron antiquas Passer reuocaret ad herbas _Luck_

33 antiquas] eternas _F_ intactas _uel_ ac uacuas _uel_ ac uirides
_Riese_ || 34 aptaque ... arma] altaque ... arma _M_ armaque ... apta _I_
|| uenanti] uenati _C_ uenandi _F2ul_ || Grattius _Buecheler e cod
illius poetae (RhM 35 [1880] 407)_ gratius _CFLT_ gracius _BMHI_

    Naiadas Satyris caneret Fontanus amatas,          35
      clauderet imparibus uerba Capella modis,
    cumque forent alii, quorum mihi cuncta referre
      nomina longa mora est, carmina uulgus habet,
    essent et iuuenes quorum, quod inedita cura est,
      appellandorum nil mihi iuris adest              40
    (te tamen in turba non ausim, Cotta, silere,
      Pieridum lumen praesidiumque fori,

35 Naiadas _C. P. Jones_ naiadas a _HLI2_ nayades a _MT_ naidas a
_BCFI2_ || Fontanus] fontusanus _M_ montanus _H, ut uid_ || 38 longa
mora] mora longa _L_ || uulgus habet] uulgus habent _HIac_ fama tenet
_T_ || _39-40 spurios putat Williams_ || 39 essent et iuuenes] _quid
pro_ essent _C, incertum_ et iuuenes essent _H_ || iuuenes quorum, quod
_interpunxi_ iuuenes, quorum quod _edd_ || cura _unus Thuaneus Heinsii
(=Parisinus lat. 8256 uel 8462)_ causa _BCMFHILT_ || 41 tamen in] tanta
in _M1L_ tamen e _Heinsius_ || 42 lumen] numen _'editi aliquot'--Burman_
|| praesidiumque fori] praesidiumque meum _H1; uide Hor _Carm_ I i 2_

    maternos Cottas cui Messallasque paternos,
      Maxime, nobilitas ingeminata dedit),
    dicere si fas est, claro mea nomine Musa          45
      atque inter tantos quae legeretur erat.
    ergo summotum patria proscindere, Liuor,
      desine neu cineres sparge, cruente, meos.
    omnia perdidimus; tantummodo uita relicta est,
      praebeat ut sensum materiamque mali.            50
    [quid iuuat extinctos ferrum demittere in artus?
      non habet in nobis iam noua plaga locum.]

43 maternos] fraternos _B1CH_ || Cottas] coctas _L_ || cui _om FIL_ ||
Messallasque _BCM_ messalosque _IL_ messalinosque _HT_ messalanosque _F_
|| 44 Maxime _B1CMpc, sicut coni Burman_ maxima _MacFHILTB2_ ||
ingeminata] cui geminata _F_ || 46 legeretur] regeretur _BCpc_ regaretur
_Cac_ || 47 proscindere] procindere _Fac_ praescindere _T_ discindere
_I_ || 48 neu] nec _IF_ ne _H_ || 49 relicta] retenta _T, ut uid
(retNta)_ || 50 ut] ut ca _Tac_ || _51-52 spurios puto_ || 51
demittere _Berolinensis Diez. B. Sant. 1, saec xiii (Lenz), Laurentianus
36 2, saec xv (Lenz), editio princeps Bononiensis (Lenz)_ dimittere
_BCMFHILT_ || artus] albis _C_ (astus _Lenz; André dubitanter_) ||
explicit liber ouidii de ponto fe li ci ter sint bona scribenti sint
uita salusque legenti _B_ explicit liber ouidii de ponto _C_ explicit
liber publii·o·n·de ponto _M_ explicit ouidius de ponto uade sed
incultus qualem decet exulis esse _F_ explicit o de ponto _H_ hic liber
explicit gratia christo detur _L_



COMMENTARY


=EPISTVLARVM EX PONTO LIBER QVARTVS.= The precise title of these poems is
uncertain. The one mention Ovid makes of the poems' title is of little
assistance: 'inuenies, quamuis non est miserabilis index, / non minus
hoc illo triste quod ante dedi' (_EP_ I i 15-16). The earliest
manuscript of the poems, the ninth-century _Hamburgensis scrin. 52 F_
(extant to III ii 67), gives no title at the start of the poems, but has
'EX PONTO LIBER ·II· EXPLICIT' at the end of the second book. Later
manuscripts generally call the poems the _De Ponto_ or _Epistulae de
Ponto_. The original name was probably not present in the archetype;
these titles were perhaps invented with the aid of the first distich of
the first poem: 'Naso Tomitanae iam non nouus incola terrae / hoc tibi
_de Getico litore_ mittit opus'. Heinsius strongly preferred _Ex Ponto_
to _De Ponto_ ('nihil magis inscitum aut barbarum hac inscriptione'),
citing in its support the first line of _Tr_ V ii 'Ecquid, ut _e Ponto_
noua uenit epistula, palles'. In reality _ex_ and _de_ are equally
acceptable Latin (Cic _Att_ XV xxvi 5; _Fam_ XIV xx), but _Ex Ponto_ is
the title found in the oldest manuscript of the poems and has become
usual since Heinsius' time; in the absence of further evidence it may be
allowed to stand.

Heinsius made two other suggestions for the poems' title. The first,
_Pontica_, seems best suited for a poem describing the geography of the
area around Tomis or the characteristics of its inhabitants. His second
suggestion, _Epistulae Ponticae_, is attractive, but without any
particular probability.



I. To Sextus Pompeius


Sextus Pompeius, _consul ordinarius_ in AD 14, is the most illustrious
of Ovid's correspondents in the _Ex Ponto_; patron of Valerius Maximus,
he was related to Pompey the Great (Sen _Ben_ IV 30 2) and to Augustus
(Dio LVI 29 5). For discussions of his career, see Syme _HO_ 156-62,
Pauly-Wissowa XXI,2 2265 61, and Dessau _PIR_ P 450. He is the recipient
of four poems in the fourth book, but is nowhere mentioned in the first
three books of the _Ex Ponto_. Since Pompeius helped Ovid during his
journey to exile (v 31-38), their relationship must have been of long
standing; clearly Pompeius had indicated to Ovid his preference not to
be mentioned in his verse, even after it had become clear to most of
Ovid's friends that being named by him would carry no penalty. In _EP_
III vi, Ovid exhorts a timid friend to allow him to name him; there is
no indication, however, that the poem was addressed to Pompeius.

Ovid seems to have been best served in exile by those of his friends who
were of no particular eminence. In _Tr_ III iv 3-8 & 43-44 he complains
not only of the treatment he has received from Augustus, but also of the
lack of assistance from those of his friends most in a position to help.
Once Sextus Pompeius had indicated he was willing to be named publicly,
Ovid could not ignore the influence that a man of such position could
bring to bear; hence the number of poems addressed to him in the fourth
book.

Ovid starts the poem with an elaborate assertion of his past and present
desire to mention Pompeius in his verse (1-22), and then briefly
recounts the services Pompeius has rendered to him, and will continue to
render (23-26). The reason he is confident that Pompeius will continue
to assist him is that Pompeius' past assistance has been such that he is
now, in effect, Pompeius' creation, and brings glory to him in the way
that great works of art do for their creators (27-36).

=1. DEDVCTVM.= 'Composed'. _Deducere_ is often used in reference to the
drawing of fibres from the wool on the distaff and the shaping of the
thread (Catullus LXIV 311-14). From this meaning derive the two senses
the word can have when referring to poetry, 'composed' and 'finely spun,
delicate'. The first sense is seen here and at _Tr_ I i 39, _EP_ I v 13,
and at _Tr_ V i 71 'ipse nec emendo, sed ut hic _deducta_ legantur', and
the second at _Ecl_ VI 4-5 'pastorem, Tityre, pinguis / pascere oportet
ouis, _deductum_ dicere carmen', where _deductum ... carmen_ represents
the [Greek: Mousan ... leptaleên] of Callimachus _Aetia_ I 24; Servius
comments on the metaphor from spinning. It has been suggested that _Met_
I 4 'ad mea perpetuum _deducite_ tempora carmen' shows this meaning as
well; see Kenney _Ouidius Prooemians_ 51-52.

Hor _Ep_ II i 225 'tenui deducta poemata filo' stands somewhere between
the two senses.

=2. DEBITOR ... VITAE.= See v 33-36 (Ovid's letter speaking to Pompeius)
'te sibi, cum fugeret, memori solet ore referre / barbariae tutas
exhibuisse uias, / sanguine Bistonium quod non tepefecerit ensem, /
effectum cura pectoris esse tui'. The passage suggests that Pompeius
supplied Ovid with a bodyguard for his journey overland from Tempyra to
Tomis, either in an official capacity--Dessau suggests (_PIR_ P 450)
that Pompeius might have been proconsul of Macedonia--or, more probably,
from his Macedonian estates, for which Dessau and Syme (_HO_ 157) cite
xv 15.

=3. QVI.= Williams' CVI is possibly correct; the line would then refer to
the _titulus_ of the poem in a published text.

=3. SEV NON PROHIBES.= 'If you do not try to prevent'. The context makes
it clear that Pompeius will not in fact prevent Ovid from mentioning
Pompeius in his poem. This conative sense is much more commonly found
with the imperfect than with the present; the only way it can be
dispensed with in this passage is if _cui_ is read and, as Professor R.
J. Tarrant suggests, _prohibes_ taken to refer to the later inclusion of
the poem in a published collection.

=4. ACCEDET MERITIS.= Pompeius' even allowing Ovid to name him would count
as a favour. Nowhere in the poem does Ovid specify why Pompeius might
prefer not to be named.

=4. ACCEDET MERITIS HAEC QVOQVE SVMMA TVIS.= 'This sum will be added to
the favours you have done me'. Professor J. N. Grant points out to me
the technical terms of finance used in the passage: _debitor ... accedet
... summa_. I once thought that _summa_ was equivalent in sense to
_cumulus_ ('addition') at _EP_ II v 35-36 'hoc tibi facturo, uel si non
ipse rogarem, / _accedat cumulus_ gratia nostra leuis', but have found
no parallel for this sense of _summa_.

=5. TRAHIS VVLTVS.= 'Frown'--compare iii 7 'contraxit uultum Fortuna',
viii 13-14 'ei mihi, si lectis uultum tu uersibus istis / ducis', _Am_
II ii 33 'bene uir traxit uultum rugasque coegit', and _Met_ II 774
'ingemuit uultumque una ac [_Housman_: ima ad _codd_] suspiria duxit'.

=5-6. EQVIDEM PECCASSE FATEBOR, / DELICTI TAMEN EST CAVSA PROBANDA MEI.=
'Yes, I shall certainly confess my guilt, but the reason for my offence
is one that necessarily wins approval'. Ovid uses the correct legal
terminology; compare Cic _Mur_ 62 _'fatetur_ aliquis se _peccasse_ et
sui [_Halm_: cui _uel_ eius _codd_] _delicti_ ueniam petit'. Other
instances in Ovid of _peccasse fateri_ at hexameter-ends are _Am_ III
xiv 37, _Met_ III 718, VII 748 & XI 134, and _EP_ II iii 33.

For Ovid's close acquaintance with the law see at xv 12 (pp 434-35).

=7. NON POTVIT MEA MENS.= Compare _Tr_ V ix 25-26 'nunc quoque se, quamuis
est iussa quiescere, quin te / nominet inuitum, uix mea Musa tenet'.

=8. OFFICIO.= Used again of Ovid's writing of verse-epistles at _Tr_ V ix
33-34 'ne tamen _officio_ memoris laedaris amici, / parebo iussis--parce
timere--tuis'.

=8. OFFICIO ... PIO.= The words similarly combined at _Tr_ III iii 84 and
_Tr_ V vi 4 'officiique pium ... onus'. The adjective ('loyal') is a
favourite term of commendation in the poems of exile, applied to _fides_
(_Tr_ V xiv 20, _EP_ III ii 98), coupled with _memor_ (_Tr_ IV v 18, V
iv 43), or used to characterize the inseparable friends of myth such as
Theseus and Pirithous (_Tr_ I ix 31) or Castor and Pollux (_Tr_ IV v
30).

=9.= IN. _B_'s AB is possibly correct, _ab istis_ meaning 'to judge by
them, on the basis of their evidence'. Professor R. J. Tarrant cites
Prop III iii 38 'ut reor _a facie_, Calliopea fuit'.

=11. ALII VELLEM CVM SCRIBERE.= The line confirms that Ovid was not at
liberty to name Sextus Pompeius in his poems even after he had begun the
composition of the first three books of the _Ex Ponto_.

Ovid similarly indicates his frustrated desire to name his correspondent
at _Tr_ IV v 10 'excidit heu nomen quam mihi paene tuum' and at _EP_ III
vi 1-2 'Naso suo (posuit nomen quam paene!) sodali / mittit ... hoc breue
carmen'.

=11. VELLEM CVM.= _B_ offers CVM VELLEM, which I take to be a simple
corruption to prose word-order. It is however the reading printed by
Owen; and it could be argued that _cum uellem_ is the correct reading,
and was altered to _uellem cum_ for metrical reasons. Lucretius and
Catullus were fond of placing a spondaic word in the fourth foot of the
hexameter; in the Augustan age practice altered, and the pattern was
generally avoided; compare _Aen_ I 1 'Arma uirumque cano, _Troiae qui_
primus ab oris'. It was, however, permitted occasionally, especially
when the previous foot ended in a long monosyllable (Platnauer 20-22).
Scribes quite often alter such lines so as to remove the spondaic word
from coinciding with the fourth foot; an instance of this can be seen at
line 7 'non potuit mea mens quin esset grata teneri', where _H_ offers
the scribal alteration _esset quin_. For a full discussion see Housman
269.

=13. MENDIS.= This is probably a form of _mendum_ rather than of _menda_;
compare Cic _II Ver_ II 104 'quid fuit istic antea scriptum? quod
_mendum_ ista litura correxit?' and _Att_ XIII xxiii 2 ' tantum
librariorum _menda_ tolluntur'. I have found no earlier instance in
verse of _mendum_ meaning 'error' in this sense; Ovid in his poems of
exile uses the terms of his craft more readily than any of his
predecessors.

=14. VIX INVITA FACTA LITVRA MANV EST.= _Vix_ goes with _facta_; André
seems to take it with _inuita_ ('ma main l'effaçait presque à regret').

=15. VIDERIT= is a complete sentence meaning 'let him look to himself'.
Compare the following examples: 'nona terebatur miserae uia; _"uiderit_
[_sc_ Demophoon]" inquit / et spectat zonam pallida facta suam' (_RA_
601-2), '"uiderit! insanos" inquit "fateamur amores"' (_Met_ IX 519),
'cur tamen est mihi cura tui tot iam ante peremptis? / _uiderit_!
intereat, quoniam tot caede procorum / admonitus non est' (_Met_ X
623-25), '_uiderit_! audentes forsque deusque iuuat' (_Fast_ II 782),
'_uideris_! [_cod Ambrosianus G 37 sup (saec xiv), sicut coni
Heinsius_: uiderit _codd plerique_] audebo tibi me scripsisse fateri'
(_EP_ I ii 9). The idiom is found with an expressed subject at _AA_ II
371 '_uiderit_ Atrides: Helenen ego crimine soluo' and _AA_ III 671-72
'_uiderit_ utilitas: ego coepta fideliter edam: / Lemniasin gladios in
mea fata dabo'. It is clearly derived from the use of _uiderit_ 'look
after, take care of' with an expressed object, as at _Her_ XII 209-11
'quo feret ira sequar! facti fortasse pigebit-- / et piget infido
consuluisse uiro. / _uiderit_ ista deus qui nunc mea pectora uersat!'.
Although _uiderit_ in these passages clearly has a jussive sense, it is
probably future perfect in origin, since _uidero_ 'I shall look after'
is quite frequent in Terence and Cicero: see Martin on Ter _Ad_ 437 'de
istoc ipse uiderit' and _OLD uideo_ 18b.

=15. AD SVMMAM= means 'in short' or 'to sum up', and is used to introduce
a recapitulation of what has just been expressed or concluded. The line
should therefore be taken as the end of a debate which Ovid has had with
himself. For the idiom, Ehwald (_KB_ 45) cites Cic _Att_ VII vii 7, XIV
i 1, Hor _Ep_ I i 106 'ad summam, sapiens uno minor est Ioue, Petronius
_Sat_ 37 5 'ad summam, mero meridie si dixerit illi tenebras esse,
credet', 37 10, 57 3 & 9, 58 8 (in all these passages the narrator's
neighbour at table is the speaker) and 71 1 (Trimalchio speaking).
Professor R. J. Tarrant cites Sen _Apoc_ 11 3 'ad summam, tria uerba
cito dicat et seruum me ducat'.

AD SVMMVM is the reading of _L_ and _T_ and is printed by Burman (who
punctuates _uiderit ad summum_) and Merkel (_ad summum dixi_). _OLD
summus_ 8b gives only one instance of _ad summum_, where it means 'at
most' (Scribonius Largus 122). The phrase does not seem appropriate to
the present context.

=15. IPSE= (_FTP_) is so much better in sense ('although _he_ may object')
than the ILLE of most manuscripts that I have followed all previous
editors in accepting it.

=16. HANC.= This, the reading of _H_ and _I_ (perhaps recovered by
conjecture), must be preferred to HA (AH, A), the reading of the other
manuscripts, since without it _licet ipse queratur_ would have to be
linked to _uiderit_, which seems awkward. The corruption of _hAc_ to
_ha_ is not difficult, especially in view of the following _pudet_;
compare _Met_ IX 531 'pudet, a pudet edere nomen'.

=17. SI QVID EA EST.= 'If it really exists'. The affirmation would be 'est
aliquid Lethe'; compare Prop IV vii 1 'Sunt aliquid Manes: letum non
omnia finit'.

=17. HEBETANTEM PECTORA.= I have found no other instance in Ovid of this
transferred sense of _hebetare_, but compare _Aen_ II 604-6 'omnem quae
nunc obducta tuenti / mortalis hebetat uisus tibi ... nubem eripiam' and
_Aen_ VI 731-32. The transferred sense is found at Celsus II i 11
'Auster aures hebetat ... omnis calor ... mentem hebetat'; compare as well
Pliny _NH_ XVIII 118 '[faba ...] hebetare sensus existimata' and Suet
_Cl_ 2 'animo simul et corpore hebetato'.

_Oblitus_ in 18 indicates that _pectus_ is virtually equivalent to
'mind' or even 'memory'. In Ovid it often has the sense 'poetic
feeling', as at xii 16 'pectus habere neger'.

=17. LETHEN.= Compare _Tr_ IV i 47-48 'utque soporiferae biberem si pocula
Lethes, / temporis aduersi sic mihi sensus abest'.

=21. ET= can be construed, as connecting with the preceding _nec_; compare
_Fast_ VI 325 '_nec_ licet _et_ longum est epulas narrare deorum'. SED
should however possibly be read, the word contrasting with the preceding
_nec_ as at ii 15-16 'nec tamen ingenium nobis respondet ut ante, /
_sed_ siccum sterili uomere litus aro'. The error could easily be
induced by the final _s_ of the preceding _putes_; compare _Med_ 55-56
'par erui mensura decem madefiat ab _ouis_ / (_sed_ [_uar_ et] cumulent
libras hordea nuda duas)'.

=21. LEVIS HAEC ... GRATIA.= 'This unimportant expression of gratitude'.
The same use of _leuis_ at _EP_ II v 35-36 'hoc tibi facturo, uel si non
ipse rogarem, / accedat cumulus gratia nostra leuis'.

=21. HAEC MERITIS REFERATVR GRATIA.= Similar phrasing at _Met_ V 14-15
'meritisne haec gratia tantis / redditur?', _Tr_ V iv 47 'plena tot ac
tantis referetur gratia factis', _EP_ I vii 61 'emeritis referenda est
gratia semper', and _EP_ III i 79-80 'nec ... debetur meritis gratia
nulla meis'.

=23. NVMQVAM PIGRA FVIT NOSTRIS TVA GRATIA REBVS.= Wheeler rightly points
out Ovid's play in 21-23 on the varying senses of _gratia_ (thanks),
_gratus_ (grateful), and _gratia_ (favour, kindness).

=26. FERETQVE= is Heinsius' correction for the REFERTQVE of the
manuscripts (REFERT _B1_, REFERTA _C_); it is made necessary by the
following _fiducia tanta futuri_. Owen, Lenz, and André report
_feretque_ as the reading of the thirteenth-century _Canonicianus lat
1_, but Professor R. J. Tarrant, who has examined the manuscript,
informs me that it in fact reads _refertque_.

For the pattern compare _Tr_ III viii 12 'quae non ulla tibi _fertque
feretque_ dies' and _Tr_ II 155-56 'per superos ... qui _dant_ tibi longa
_dabuntque_ / tempora'.

The corruption was natural enough, particularly in view of such passages
as _Fast_ VI 334 'errantes _fertque refertque_ pedes', _Tr_ I vii 5-6
(to a friend who owned a ring with Ovid's portrait) 'hoc tibi ... senti
... dici, / in digito qui me _fersque refersque_ [_codd_: ferasque
_Heinsius_] tuo', and _Tr_ V xiii 29 'sic _ferat ac referat_ tacitas
nunc littera uoces'.

=28. QVOD FECIT QVISQVE TVETVR OPVS.= 'Everyone protects the work he has
created'. This is hardly a commonplace of ancient poetry, and the
catalogue which follows of famous works of art does not serve to
illustrate it.

=29-34.= Ovid's description of the works of Apelles, Phidias, Calamis, and
Myron was influenced by Propertius' catalogue of artists at III ix 9-16;
in particular, he imitates 10-12 'exactis Calamis se mihi iactat equis;
/ in Veneris tabula summam sibi poscit Apelles; / Parrhasius parua
uindicat arte locum', and 15 'Phidiacus signo se Iuppiter ornat eburno'.
Professor E. Fantham points out to me the inclusion of Apelles, Calamis,
and Myron as canonical figures in a catalogue of artists at Cic _Brut_
70 and of all four in a similar catalogue at Quint XII x 6-9.

=29. VENVS.= Ovid is speaking of the famous Aphrodite Anadyomene painted
by Apelles (fourth century BC) in Cos; hence the epithet _Coi_ later in
the line--Apelles was in fact from Colophon. Ovid had probably seen the
picture in Rome, for Augustus brought it there from Cos (Strabo XIV 2
19; Pliny _NH_ XXXV 91).

Ovid refers to the painting at _Am_ I xiv 33-34 and _Tr_ II 527-28. At
_AA_ III 223-24 (quoted in the next note) Ovid seems to be describing a
cut gem copied from the painting.

=30. AEQVOREO MADIDAS QVAE PREMIT IMBRE COMAS.= _Imbre_ depends on
_madidas_. _Premit_ is equivalent to _exprimit_, as is shown by _AA_ III
224 'nuda Venus madidas _exprimit_ imbre comas'. For _exprimere_ taking
as object that out of which something is pressed or squeezed see Celsus
IV 24 and Pliny _NH_ XXIX 31.

The Romans would not have found _aequoreo ... imbre_ strange. Although
the primary transferred sense of _imber_ would be rain-water, it is used
of sea-water as early as Ennius _Ann_ 497-98 Vahlen 'ratibusque
fremebat / imber Neptuni', and without defining qualifier at _Aen_ I
123.

=31. ACTAEAE= = the metrically difficult _Atheniensis_. The word is
generally confined to high poetry (_Ecl_ II 24, _Met_ II 554 & 720,
VI 711, VII 681 & VIII 170), but its first occurrence is in prose, at
Nepos _Thras_ 2 1 'hoc initium fuit salutis Actaeorum'; some manuscripts
read _Atticorum_, which may be right.

=31. VEL EBVRNA VEL AEREA CVSTOS.= There were at Athens two famous statues
of Athena sculpted by Phidias: 'Phidias ... fecit ex _ebore auroque_
[_Mayhoff_: aeque _codd_] Mineruam Athenis quae est in Parthenone stans,
ex _aere_ uero ... Mineruam tam eximiae pulchritudinis ut formae cognomen
acceperit ['was named the Minerva Formosa']' (Pliny _NH_ XXXIV 54); the
second, less famous statue is described at Pausanias I 28 2.

Heinsius' note is something of an oddity. He begins by reading AVREA for
the AENEA of most manuscripts, taking _uel eburna uel aurea custos_ to
refer to the chryselephantine statue in the Parthenon, 'sed altius
consideranti locum apparet de duplici statua Mineruae agi, altera
eburnea, altera aenea'. _Aenea_ therefore continued to be the accepted
reading until 1873, when Haupt (_Opuscula_ 584) pointed out that it was
unmetrical, and restored _aerea_, found in some manuscripts.

The inverse error occurs at _Her_ VI 32, where most manuscripts have the
unmetrical _aeripedes_ for _aenipedes_. But Merkel, followed by Palmer,
considered 31-38 an interpolation; and _aeripedes_ may have been what
the interpolator wrote.

=32. PHIDIACA ... MANV.= Ovid is recalling Prop III ix 15 'Phidiacus
... Iuppiter'. For the Latin poets' use of a personal adjective for the
genitive of the noun, see Austin's interesting note on _Aen_ II 543
_Hectoreum_.

=33. VINDICAT VT CALAMIS LAVDEM QVOS FECIT EQVORVM.= 'As Calamis lays
claim to the praise given his horses'. Calamis, a sculptor of the fifth
century BC, was particularly famous for his statues of horses; see Pliny
_NH_ XXXIV 71 'habet simulacrum et benignitas eius ['Praxiteles'
generosity is seen in one of his statues']; Calamidis enim quadrigae
aurigam suum imposuit, ne melior in equorum effigie defecisse in homine
crederetur. ipse Calamis et alias quadrigas bigasque fecit equis sine
aemulo expressis'.

=33. QVOS FECIT EQVORVM.= Similar instances of hyperbaton at 28 'quod
fecit quisque tuetur opus', _Met_ IV 803 'pectore in aduerso quos fecit
sustinet angues', and _Fast_ VI 20 'tum dea quos fecit sustulit ipsa
metus'.

=34. VT SIMILIS VERAE VACCA MYRONIS OPVS.= The _Cow_ of Myron (late fifth
century BC) was his most famous work. Praise of the statue's lifelike
appearance was a stock theme of Hellenistic writers of epigram; it
appears from Pliny _NH_ XXXIV 57 that the poetry written about the
statue was as notable as the statue itself. Thirty-six poems of the
Palatine Anthology deal with the theme (IX 713-42 & 793-98). Ausonius
wrote eight epigrams on the same subject (_Ep_ LXVIII-LXXV), of which I
quote LXVIII as a typical example of what both the Greek and Latin
epigrams are like:

    Bucula sum, caelo ['chisel'] genitoris facta Myronis
      aerea: nec factam me puto, sed genitam,
    sic me taurus init, sic proxima bucula mugit,
      sic uitulus sitiens ubera nostra petit.
    miraris quod fallo gregem? gregis ipse magister
      inter pascentes me numerare solet.

The statue was in Athens during Cicero's lifetime (_II Verr_ IV 135);
Ovid is likely to have seen it during his visit to the city (_Tr_ I ii
77). He would certainly have seen the four statues of cattle sculpted by
Myron which Augustus placed in his temple of Apollo, and which
Propertius described: 'atque aram circum steterant armenta Myronis, /
quattuor artificis, uiuida signa, boues' (II xxxi 7-8).

=35. VLTIMA.= 'Smallest, least important'. For this rare sense compare Hor
_Ep_ I xvii 35 'principibus placuisse uiris non ultima laus est', _Cons
ad Liuiam_ 44 'ultima sit laudes inter ut illa tuas', Vell Pat I 11 1,
and the other instances cited by _OLD ultimus_ 9.

=35. SVM= ('I am not the least of your possessions') seems unobjectionable
enough; most editors have, however, accepted PARS from the _excerpta
Politiani_.

=36. MVNVS OPVSQVE= is a Latin phrase with the general meaning of
'creation'. It is used in this sense at Cic _Tusc_ I 70 'haec igitur et
alia innumerabilia cum cernimus, possumusne dubitare quin iis praesit
aliquis uel effector ... uel ... moderator tanti _operis et muneris_?',
_ND_ II 90, _Off_ III 4 'nulla enim eius ingenii [_sc_ Africani]
monumenta mandata litteris, nullum _opus_ otii, nullum solitudinis
_munus_ extat', and _Met_ VII 435-36 (to Theseus) 'quodque suis securus
arat Cromyona colonus, / _munus opusque_ tuum est'.



II. To Cornelius Severus


Cornelius Severus (Schanz-Hosius 268-69 [§ 317]) was one of the most
famous poets contemporary with Ovid; of him Quintilian said 'etiam si
uersificator quam poeta melior ['even if his facility outruns his
inspiration'], si tamen (ut est dictum) ad exemplar primi libri bellum
Siculum perscripsisset, uindicaret sibi iure secundum locum [_sc_ after
Virgil]' (X i 89). The elder Seneca quoted with approval Severus' lines
on the death of Cicero, as the finest lament produced on the subject
(_Suas_ VI 26: Winterbottom _ad loc_ refers to a commentary by H.
Homeyer, _Annales univ. Saraviensis [phil. Fak.]_ 10 [1961], 327-34).
_EP_ I viii was addressed to a different Severus: in the third and
fourth lines of the present poem, Ovid expresses his embarrassment at
having addressed no poem to Severus previously, and in the earlier poem
no mention is made of the addressee's poetry.

The poem is an apology to Severus for Ovid's not having sent a poem to
him before; he offers two excuses for the omission. In the first
fourteen lines, he flatters Severus by saying that so good a poet hardly
needs to receive verse from someone else; in the twenty-four lines that
follow he describes how his poetry, because of the conditions at Tomis,
is now less abundant and of poorer quality than before. The subject is
one Ovid had employed before: _Tr_ III xiv, a request for indulgence to
Ovid's verse, and _Tr_ V xii, a reply to a friend who had urged him to
write more poetry, treat the same topic in much the same way. The theme
is similar to that of Catullus LXVIII 1-40, where the poet explains
that his brother's death has caused his lack of interest in poetry.

In 39-46 Ovid moves to the somewhat discordant topic (which serves
however to re-emphasize his misery at Tomis) of how he continues to
write poetry to take his mind off present evils, a theme he had used
several times before, most notably in _EP_ I v. He ends the poem with a
request that Severus send him some of his recent work (47-50).

=1. QVOD LEGIS.= Similar beginnings to verse-epistles at _Her_ III 1
'_Quam legis_ a rapta Briseide littera uenit', _Tr_ V vii 1, _EP_ I vii
1-2 'Littera pro uerbis tibi, Messaline, salutem / _quam legis_ a saeuis
attulit usque Getis', and _EP_ III v 1 '_Quam legis_ unde tibi mittatur
epistula quaeris?'.

Compare as well _Her_ X 3-4 '_Quae legis_ ex illo, Theseu, tibi litore
mitto / unde tuam sine me uela tulere ratem'. This poem has suffered
from two separate interpolations at its beginning. Certain manuscripts
start the poem with the distich 'Illa relicta feris etiam nunc, improbe
Theseu, / uiuit et haec aequa mente tulisse uelis', which is universally
condemned; but the formulaic nature of 3-4 suggests that 1-2 'Mitius
inueni quam te genus omne ferarum, / credita non ulli quam tibi peius
eram', found in all manuscripts, is a second interpolation. Micyllus was
the first to see this; a recent discussion at Kirfel 69-70.

=1. VATES MAGNORVM MAXIME REGVM.= Severus apparently wrote a poem dealing
with pre-Republican Rome, to judge from xvi 9 his most famous work:
'quique dedit Latio carmen regale, Seuerus'. Heinsius took the two
passages as meaning that Severus was a writer of tragedy, citing _Tr_ II
553 'et dedimus tragicis scriptum regale cothurnis'; compare as well Hor
_Sat_ I x 42-43 'Pollio regum / facta canit pede ter percusso ['in
iambic trimeter']'. Heinsius' suggestion is possible enough, but since
Seneca and Quintilian speak of Severus as an epic poet and there is no
mention of the stage in this poem, it should be rejected.

Similar language is used of epic poetry at _Ecl_ VI 3 'cum canerem
_reges_ et proelia' and Prop III iii 1-4 'Visus eram ... reges, Alba,
tuos et _regum facta_ tuorum, / tantum operis, neruis hiscere posse
meis'.

=1. REGVM.= VATVM (_M1FIL_) is a conscious or unconscious attempt to
extend the etymological figure seen in _magnorum maxime_.

=5-6. ORBA TAMEN NVMERIS CESSAVIT EPISTVLA NVMQVAM / IRE PER ALTERNAS
OFFICIOSA VICES.= Other mentions of what was clearly an extensive prose
correspondence between Ovid and his friends at _Tr_ V xii 1-2 and _EP_ I
ix 1-2.

=6. OFFICIOSA.= 'Attentive'. The preface to Martial XII gives a good
illustration of the sense: 'consequimur ut molesti potius quam ut
officiosi esse uideamur'.

_Officiosus_ occurs five times in the _Ex Ponto_, but only four times in
the rest of Ovid's poetry.

=9-10.= Aristaeus was famous for his beekeeping (Virgil _G_ IV 315-558).
Bacchus was the god of wine, and Triptolemus had disseminated the
knowledge of grain-farming (_Met_ V 646-61). Alcinous might seem a
strange companion to these three, but evidently Homer's description of
Alcinous' orchard (_Od_ VII 112-31) made a strong impression on the
Latin poets. From Ovid compare _Am_ I x 56 'praebeat Alcinoi poma
benignus ager' and _Met_ XIII 719-20 'proxima Phaeacum felicibus obsita
pomis / rura petunt', from Propertius III ii 13 'nec mea Phaeacas
aequant pomaria siluas', and from Virgil _G_ II 87 'pomaque et Alcinoi
siluae' 'the fruit-trees of Alcinous'.

=9. BACCHO VINA FALERNA.= Heinsius preferred _M_'s BACCHO VINA FALERNO.
But the passage he cited in its support, Silius III 369-70 'Tarraco
... uitifera, et Latio tantum cessura Lyaeo' is not in fact parallel:
_Lyaeo_ there stands for _uino_, and the passage means 'Tarraco, rich in
vines, conceding priority to Latin wine alone'. Ovid wished to balance
the hexameter with the pentameter, and used a standard epithet to fill
out the metre.

=10. ALCINOO.= Note the quadrisyllable ending, and compare _EP_ II ix
41-42 'quis non Antiphaten Laestrygona deuouet? aut quis / munifici
mores improbet _Alcinoi_?'. In his later poetry Ovid shows a steadily
increasing willingness to allow his pentameters to end with words other
than disyllables. Every pentameter of the amatory poems and the first
fifteen _Heroides_ ends in a disyllable. Two quadrisyllabic endings
occur in the later books of the _Fasti_: V 582 _fluminibus_ and VI 660
_funeribus_. In the first five books of the _Tristia_ there are eight
such endings, in the first three books of the _Ex Ponto_ there are
seven, while in the fourth book there are no less than fourteen
instances of quadrisyllabic endings: nearly as many as in all the rest
of Ovid's corpus put together.[18] 'Sermo magis etiam quam illic [_sc_
in the _Tristia_] ... neglectus est et degenerauit' Riese remarked, but
it can reasonably be doubted that a poet of Ovid's facility would break
the rule of the disyllabic ending except by choice. A moderation of the
rule became general: the author of _Her_ XVI-XXI (whom I do not believe
to have been Ovid) allowed _pudicitiae_ (XVI 290), _superciliis_ (XVII
16), and _deseruit_ (XIX 202) (Platnauer 17); a count of pentameters in
Martial V shows the proportion of non-disyllabic endings at 20%--the
shorter the poem, the more freely they are admitted. Quadrisyllable
endings are frequent in the metrically strict Claudian.

[Footnote 18: These figures are taken from Platnauer 17 and from page
vii of Riese's preface to his edition.]

Ovid admitted quadrisyllable endings more freely if they were proper
names. Of the twenty-one quadrisyllable verse-endings in the _Ex Ponto_,
six involve proper nouns: II ii 76 _Dalmatiae_, ix 42 _Alcinoi_, the
present passage, IV iii 54 _Anticyra_, viii 62 _Oechalia_, and ix 80
_Danuuium_. Professor E. Fantham points out to me that Ovid follows
Propertius' similar practice: 42 of the 166 quadrisyllable pentameter
endings in Propertius are proper names (Platnauer 17).

The fifteen other instances in the _Ex Ponto_ of quadrisyllabic
pentameter-endings are II ii 6 _perlegere_, ii 70 _imperium_, iii 18
_articulis_, v 26 _ingenium_, III i 166 _aspiciant_, IV v 24 _officio_,
vi 6 _alterius_, vi 14 _auxilium_, ix 48 _utilitas_, xiii 28 _imperii_,
xiii 46 _ingeniis_, xiv 4 _inuenies_, xiv 18 _ingenio_, xiv 56
_imposuit_, and xv 26 _auxilium_.

For Ovid's use of trisyllabic and pentasyllabic endings, see at ix 26
_tegeret_ (page 294) and iii 12 _amicitia_ (p 181).

=11. FERTILE PECTVS HABES.= Compare _Tr_ V xii 37-38 'denique non paruas
animo dat gloria uires, / et _fecunda_ facit _pectora_ laudis amor'.

=11. INTERQVE HELICONA COLENTES.= Poets are also described as being on
Parnassus at _Tr_ IV i 50, x 23 & x 120. Helicon is the goal of poets at
Hor _Ep_ II i 218 (cited at 36).

=12. PROVENIT= continues the agricultural metaphor of _fertile pectus_.
For _prouenire_ = 'grow', see _AA_ III 101-2 'ordior a cultu: cultis
bene Liber ab uuis / prouenit', _Fast_ IV 617 'largaque prouenit
cessatis messis in aruis', and _Nux_ 10; for the metaphorical sense see
_Am_ I iii 19-20 'te mihi materiem _felicem_ in carmina praebe-- /
_prouenient_ causa carmina digna sua' and _Her_ XV 13-14 'nec mihi
dispositis quae iungam carmina neruis / _proueniunt_'.

For _uberius ... prouenit_ compare Caesar _BG_ V 24 'eo anno frumentum in
Gallia propter siccitates _angustius prouenerat_'.

=13. MITTERE AD HVNC CARMEN.= Burman printed without comment MITTERE
CARMEN AD HVNC, the reading of Heinsius' _fragmentum Louaniense_. It
seems to be a mere normalization of the hyperbaton; the elimination of
the elision (_mittere ad_) may have been a factor as well.

=13. AD HVNC= indicates that Ovid cannot have addressed these words in the
first instance directly to Severus, but must here be recollecting his
earlier thoughts. I have therefore placed the line in quotation marks.

=15. NEC TAMEN.= 'This was the principal reason; a second reason, however,
was that ...'

=15. INGENIVM= = 'poetic talent', as often. Compare viii 66, xvi 2, _Tr_
III vii 47, _EP_ II ii 103, _EP_ II v 21 (quoted at 20 _uena
pauperiore_), _EP_ II v 26, and _EP_ III iv 11.

=15. RESPONDET= introduces the agricultural image of 18 'sed siccum
sterili uomere litus aro', for the word here means 'yield'. _OLD_
_respondeo_ 8c cites for the literal sense Virgil _G_ II 63-64 'truncis
oleae melius, propagine uites / respondent', Columella II 1 3 'humus ...
magno faenore ... colono respondet', Col III 3 4; for a transferred use
see Sen _Ep_ LXXXI 1 'non respondeant [_sc_ beneficia] potius quam non
dentur'.

=16. SICCVM ... LITVS ARO.= Proverbial for a useless activity. See Otto
_harena_ 4 and compare _Tr_ V iv 47-48 'plena tot ac tantis referetur
gratia factis, / nec sinet ille [Ovid] litus arare boues'.

_Sterili_ is transferred by hypallage from _litus_; _siccum_ serves no
purpose beyond providing a balancing epithet.

=17. VENAS EXCAECAT=, the reading of most codices, is obviously correct as
against the VENAS CVM CAECAT of _BCHL_. Ovid uses _excaecare_ again at
_Met_ XV 270-72 'hic fontes natura nouos emisit, at illic / clausit
... flumina prosiliunt aut _excaecata_ [_uar_ exsiccata] residunt'.

=17. IN VNDIS= is probably corrupt; if it is retained, from the context it
must mean 'in the water of springs' (Professor A. Dalzell). Williams
suggests 'in the case of water', marking the analogy with _pectora sic
mea sunt limo uitiata malorum_ in 19.

For _undis_ as a corrupt hexameter ending, compare _Met_ XV 276
'redditur Argolicis ingens Erasinus in aruis [_codd_: in undis _Sen_ NQ
_III 26 4_]', _Met_ VIII 162 'liquidus Phrygiis Maeandros in aruis
[_uar_ liquidis Phrygius ... in undis]', and _Met_ XIV 155 'sedibus
Euboicam Stygiis emergit in urbem [_uar_ sedibus euboicis stigiis
emersus ab undis]'.

The line seems to have passed without comment until Merkel's second
edition: '_in undis_ minus bene positum uidetur; temptabam _hiulcas,_
quod expressisset Statius Theb. VIIII 450 _hiulcis flumina uenis
Suggerit_ ['he (the river Asopos) opens his springs wide and adds his
streams']'. There seems no obvious reason, however, for Ovid to define
the springs as 'gaping'.

Madvig conjectured INVNDANS, the corruption of which would be easy; but
_uenas_ seems more in need of a modifier than _limus_--Professor R. J.
Tarrant suggests APERTAS or AQVARVM, Professor A. Dalzell IN ARVIS.

Professor Tarrant also suggests to me that _in undis_ could well have
originated as a gloss on _uenas_.

=18. LAESAQVE.= There seems no reason to replace this with Merkel's
LAPSAQVE ('flowing back'?), which even seems to contradict the sense of
_resistit_.

The same sense of _laesus_ at _Am_ III vii 32 'deficiunt laesi carmine
['spell'] fontis aquae'.

=20. VENA PAVPERIORE.= The same image of Ovid's poetic talent at _Tr_ III
xiv 33-34 'ingenium fregere meum mala, cuius et ante / fons infecundus
_paruaque uena_ fuit' and _EP_ II v 21-22 'ingenioque meo, _uena_ quod
_paupere_ manat, / plaudis, et e riuo flumina magna facis'.

=23. DA VENIAM FASSO.= As a poet himself, Severus would be particularly
shocked at Ovid's admission he has virtually ceased to write poetry.
Similar phrasing at III ix 45-46 'confesso ignoscite, docti: / uilior
est operis fama salute mea'.

=23. FRENA REMISI.= 'I have let go of the reins' = 'I have stopped writing
poetry'; for the sense, compare _Aen_ VII 599-600 (of Latinus) 'nec
plura locutus / saepsit se tectis rerumque reliquit habenas'.

The metaphor of the poet as driver is found as early as Bacchylides (V
176-78) and Pindar (_Ol_ VI 22 ff). A full list of Greek and Latin
passages is included in Henderson's note on _RA_ 397-98; the image is
particularly frequent in Roman didactic poetry, being found even at
Columella X 215-16. See as well Kenney _Nequitiae Poeta_ 206. In Ovid
the image is found at _AA_ I 39-40 & 264, II 426, III 467-68 & 809-10,
_RA_ 397-98, _Fast_ I 25-26, II 360, IV 10, and VI 586. The only
instances I have found that are not from Ovid's didactic verse are the
present passage and xii 23-24 'tu bonus hortator, tu duxque comesque
fuisti, / cum regerem tenera frena nouella manu'.

=24. DVCITVR.= 'Is formed, written'. The same sense at _Met_ I 649 (of Io)
'_littera_ ... quam pes in puluere _duxit_' and _Met_ X 215-16 'AI AI /
flos habet inscriptum, funestaque _littera ducta_ est'.

=25. IMPETVS ILLE SACER.= 'The famous divine impulse'. Similar phrasing at
_Fast_ VI 5-6 'est deus in nobis; agitante calescimus illo: / impetus
hic sacrae semina mentis habet'.

=25. VATVM PECTORA NVTRIT.= _Nutrit_ here seems to mean 'sustain'. Its
usual transferred sense is 'cause to grow', as at III iv 26 (the only
other passage I have found where the verb is used of poetry) and Hor _C_
IV iv 26.

=27. VIX VENIT AD PARTES ... MVSA.= 'My Muse with difficulty performs her
functions'. _Partes_ in the sense of 'theatrical role' (Ter _Ph_ 27)
early acquired the extended sense of 'role', 'function', or 'duty'.
Burman cites as parallels _Am_ I viii 87 'seruus et _ad partes_ sollers
ancilla parentur' and _Nux_ 68; compare as well _AA_ II 546 'cum, tener,
_ad partes_ tu quoque, somne, uenis' and _EP_ III i 41-42 'utque iuuent
alii, tu debes uincere amicos, / uxor, et _ad partes_ prima uenire
tuas'.

=27. SVMPTAE ... TABELLAE.= Compare _Met_ IX 523-25 'scribit damnatque
_tabellas_ ... inque uicem _sumptas_ ponit positasque _resumit_'.

=29. NE DICAM.= I have found no other instance of the expression in verse,
but it is common in Cicero (Kühner-Stegmann II i 825).

=30. NVMERIS NECTERE VERBA.= 'Bind words to metre'. I take _numeris_ as a
dative; no close parallel presents itself, but compare _Aen_ IV 239-40
'pedibus talaria nectit / aurea'.

=33. NVMEROSOS ... GESTVS.= Compare _Am_ II iv 29 'illa placet _gestu
numerosaque bracchia_ ducit', _AA_ II 305 '_bracchia_ saltantis, uocem
mirare canentis', and Prop II xxii 5-6 'siue aliquis molli diducit
candida _gestu_ / bracchia, seu uarios incinit ore modos'. Heinsius
thought GRESSVS (_I1PF3ul_) possible as well, citing Varro _LL_ IX 5
'_pedes_ male _ponere_ atque imitari uatias ['bow-legged men']
coeperit', Martianus Capella IX 909 'licet pulchris rosea numeris ac
libratis _passibus_ moueretur', and Maximianus (6th century) _El_ III 27
'suspensos ponere _gressus_'. But the strong manuscript authority for
_gestus_ and the parallels in Ovid mark it as clearly preferable to
_gressus_.

=33. PONERE.= The verb seems strange, but Burman cited in its support Val
Max VIII vii 7 'Roscius ... nullum umquam spectante populo _gestum_, nisi
quem domi meditatus fuerat, _ponere_ [_codd_: promere _E. Schulze_]
ausus est'.

=35-36. LAVDATAQVE VIRTVS / CRESCIT.= For this commonplace of ancient
literature see _Otto_ _ars_ 3 and compare _RA_ 393 'nam iuuat et studium
famae mihi creuit honore', _Tr_ V xii 37-38 'denique non paruas animo
dat gloria uires, / et fecunda facit pectora laudis amor', _EP_ III ix
21 'scribentem iuuat ipse fauor minuitque laborem', Prop IV x 3, and Cic
_Tusc_ I 4.

=36. IMMENSVM GLORIA CALCAR HABET.= The same metaphor at _Tr_ V i 75-76
'denique nulla mihi captatur gloria, quaeque / ingeniis _stimulos
subdere_ fama solet', _EP_ I v 57-58 'gloria uos _acuat_; uos, ut
recitata probentur / carmina, Pieriis inuigilate choris', and Hor _Ep_
II i 217-18 'uatibus addere _calcar_ / ut studio maiore petant Helicona
uirentem'.

_Immensum_ seems rather strange; I have found no good parallel for it.

=37. HIC MEA CVI RECITEM ... CARMINA.= A constant complaint of Ovid in
exile. Compare _Tr_ III xiv 39-40 'nullus in hac terra, recitem si
carmina, cuius / intellecturis auribus utar, adest', _Tr_ IV i 89-90,
and _Tr_ V xii 53 'non liber hic ullus, non qui mihi commodet aurem'.
Perhaps it is significant that Ovid does not complain in the present
passage that he has no books available: certainly he must have had a
substantial library at hand when he composed the _Ibis_.

=38. BARBARVS HISTER.= The same phrase in the same position (leaving space
for the disyllable) at _EP_ III iii 26 'et coit astrictis _barbarus
Hister_ aquis'.

_Hister_ was the name of the lower course of the Danube (Pliny _NH_ IV
79). Ovid uses the metrically convenient _Hister_ fifteen times in the
_Ex Ponto_, as against two instances only of _Danuuius_ (IV ix 80 & x
58).

=38. OBIT= _Damsté_ HABET _codd_. In support of _obit_ Damsté cited x 22
'gentibus obliqua quas _obit_ Hister aqua' (_Mnemosyne_ XLVI 32). As
Professor R. J. Tarrant points out, the only meaning that can be
attached to _quasque alias gentes barbarus Hister habet_ is 'the other
people that live in the Danube'; he compares _Her_ VI 135-36 'prodidit
illa patrem; rapui de clade Thoanta. / deseruit Colchos; me mea Lemnos
habet' and _Aen_ VI 362 (Palinurus speaking) 'nunc me fluctus habet'.
_EP_ III ii 43-44 'nos ... quos procul a uobis Pontus et [_uar_ barbarus]
Hister habet', cited by Lenz in support of _habet_, is not a good
parallel in view of the different subject (_Pontus et Hister_ instead of
_Hister_ alone).

Lenz cited _Tr_ II 230 'bellaque pro magno Caesare Caesar obit' for a
variant _habet_; Professor Tarrant cites another instance of the
corruption at _Met_ I 551-52 'pes modo tam uelox pigris radicibus
haeret, / ora cacumen obit'.

=39. MATERIA= = 'means' (_OLD materia_ 8).

=41. NEC VINVM NEC ME TENET ALEA FALLAX.= The same statement at _EP_ I v
45-46 'nec iuuat in lucem nimio marcescere uino, / nec tenet incertas
alea blanda manus'. For Ovid's temperance, compare _EP_ I x 30 'scis
mihi quam solae paene bibantur aquae'.

_Me tenet_ in the present passage should perhaps be translated 'holds my
attention' (_OLD teneo_ 22) rather than 'attracts' (Wheeler).

=41. VINVM.= For wine as a diversion from sorrow, compare Tib I ii 1 'Adde
merum uinoque nouos compesce dolores' (with Smith's note) and Tib I v 37
'saepe ego temptaui curas depellere uino'.

=42. TACITVM TEMPVS.= Similar phrases at _AA_ II 670 'iam ueniet _tacito_
curua senecta pede', _Fast_ VI 771 '_tacitis_ ... senescimus annis', _Tr_
III vii 35-36 'senectus / quae _strepitus passu non faciente_ uenit',
_Tr_ IV vi 17 '_tacito_ pede lapsa uetustas' and _Tr_ IV x 27 '_tacito_
passu labentibus annis'.

=43. QVOD CVPEREM.= At _EP_ I viii 39-62 Ovid, having detailed the urban
pleasures he has lost, speaks of his agricultural pursuits in Italy, and
laments that this diversion is not available to him at Tomis. The two
passages add personal meaning to his description at _Met_ XIV 623-34 of
Pomona's gardening and his prescription at _RA_ 169-98 of agriculture as
a diversion from an unhappy love-affair.

=43. SI PER FERA BELLA LICERET.= Compare _EP_ II vii 69-70 'tempus in
agrorum cultu consumere dulce est: / non patitur uerti barbarus hostis
humum' and _EP_ III viii 6 'hostis ab agricola uix sinit illa [_sc_
loca] fodi'. At _Tr_ III x 57-66 Ovid gives a vivid description of what
could happen to the farmers of Tomis in a raid.

=44. NOVATA= = 'restored to fertility through ploughing'. Ovid more
commonly uses _renouare_, as at _Tr_ V xii 23-24 'fertilis, assiduo si
non renouetur aratro, / nil nisi cum spinis gramen habebit ager', _Am_ I
iii 9, _Met_ I 110 & XV 125, _Fast_ I 159, and _Tr_ IV vi 13.

=45. RESTANT= is not strictly logical, but a similar attraction of number
is confirmed by metre at _Tr_ I ii 1 'Di maris et caeli--quid enim nisi
uota _supersunt_?'; RESTAT (_IP_) must therefore be rejected.

Similar confusions occur in the manuscripts at _Met_ XIV 396 'nec
quicquam antiqui [_Berolinensis Heinsii_: antiquum _codd plerique_] Pico
nisi nomina _restant_' and _Tr_ IV x 85 'si tamen extinctis aliquid nisi
nomina _restant_'.

=47. TV, CVI BIBITVR FELICIVS AONIVS FONS.= For the image of the poet
drinking from Hippocrene see Prop III iii 5-6 'paruaque tam magnis
admoram fontibus ora, / unde pater sitiens Ennius ante bibit'. Both here
and at II x 25 Propertius speaks of Hippocrene as the spring of epic
poetry specifically.

=47. FELICIVS.= 'With happier result'; compare _Ibis_ 559 'nec tibi, si
quid amas, felicius Haemone [=_quam Haemoni_] cedat'.

=47. AONIVS FONS.= Platnauer (13) cites only four instances from the
elegiac poets of hexameters ending in monosyllables: Prop II xxv 17
'amor, qui', _Am_ II ix 47 'Cupido, est', the present passage, and _EP_
IV ix 101 'quibus nos'. Ehwald and Levy compare _Met_ V 573 'quae tibi
causa fugae, cur sis, Arethusa, sacer _fons_'. The coincidence suggests
that in both passages Ovid was recalling a line-ending from an earlier
poet. Alternatively, Professor E. Fantham suggests to me that Ovid may
here have deliberately created an awkward line-ending so as to mock
himself and bear out his claim of waning inspiration.

=47-50.= Ovid returns to the subject of his poem's opening, Severus'
poetry.

=48. VTILITER ... CEDIT.= Similar phrasing at _EP_ II vii 19 '[iam liquet
...] obseruare deos ne quid mihi _cedat amice_'.

=49. MERITO.= 'With justification'; Severus' previous service to the Muses
has brought him fame and not, as in Ovid's case, disaster.

=50. HVC ALIQVOD CVRAE MITTE RECENTIS OPVS.= A similar request at _EP_ III
v 29-30 (to Cotta Maximus) 'quod licet, ut uidear tecum magis esse,
legenda [_Burman_: legendo _uel_ loquendo _codd_] / saepe precor studii
pignora mitte tui'.

=50. CVRAE= = 'poetic toil', as at _Tr_ II 11-12 'hoc pretium _curae_
[_fragmentum Treuirense (saec x)_: uitae _codd plerique_] uigilatorumque
laborum / cepimus', _EP_ I v 61 'cur ego sollicita poliam mea carmina
_cura_?', and _EP_ III ix 29. At xvi 39 and _Tr_ II 1 the word means
'product of poetic toil'.



III. To An Unfaithful Friend


By the time Ovid wrote this poem, the letter of reproach was a genre
familiar to him: each book of the _Tristia_ (with the obvious exception
of II) contains such a poem (I viii; III xi; IV ix; V viii), and in the
_Ibis_ Ovid had, by the extended treatment of a number of standard
topics within the subject, created a poem of over six hundred lines.

Ovid begins the poem by stating that he has heard about his friend's
faithlessness; he asks what possible excuse there might be for this
behaviour (1-28). He then warns his friend that Fortune is changeable,
and gives four examples of famous men who fell from prosperity (29-48).
He ends the poem by stating once again that Fortune is undependable, and
gives his own catastrophe as an instance; his friend should remember
this, and moderate his behaviour accordingly (49-58).

The poem has points of contact with the earlier poems of reproach. _Tr_
I viii is addressed to a friend who failed to visit Ovid after his
disaster: he can scarcely believe his friend is human. In _Tr_ III xi,
Ovid asks his enemy why through his actions he makes his punishment even
worse. _Tr_ IV ix is a warning that if Ovid's enemy does not cease
attacking him, he will through his poetry make his enemy's name infamous
throughout the world. _Tr_ V viii, the poem closest in theme to the
present one, is a warning to his enemy that Fortune is changeable and
Augustus merciful, so he and Ovid might one day change situations.

The _Ibis_, being primarily a catalogue of literary curses, stands
somewhat apart from the other poems of reproach in structure as in size;
yet the opening of the poem, in which Ovid describes his enemy's conduct
and the ways he might respond, offers a number of parallels to the
present poem.

=1. CONQVERAR AN TACEAM.= Kenney (_Nequitiae Poeta_ 204-5), commenting on
_AA_ I 739 'conquerar an moneam', cites other instances of the same
rhetorical device at _Aen_ III 39 ' eloquar an sileam?' and _Met_ IX 147
'conquerar an sileam?', as well as the present passage.

=1. CONQVERAR.= The choice of verb is significant: this poem is a
rhetorical _conquestio_ transferred to verse. Kenney cites Cicero's
definition of _conquestio_ at _Inu_ I 106: 'conquestio est oratio
auditorum misericordiam captans ... id locis communibus efficere
oportebit, per quos Fortunae uis in omnes et hominum infirmitas
ostenditur; qua oratione ... animus hominum ... ad misericordiam
comparatur, cum in alieno malo suam infirmitatem considerabit'.

=1. PONAM SINE NOMINE CRIMEN.= 'Shall I put my accusation in my poem
without naming you?'. The same sense of _ponere_ at _Tr_ I v 7
'_positis_ pro nomine signis', _Tr_ IV iv 7, and _EP_ III vi 1-2 'Naso
suo (_posuit_ nomen quam paene!) sodali / mittit ab Euxinis hoc breue
carmen aquis'.

=2. QVI SIS.= The boundary between adjectival _qui_ and pronominal _quis_
in Latin was not absolute; and just as one finds such forms as _quis
clamor_ (_Met_ III 632), so it seems to have been Latin practice to use
_qui_ before forms of _esse_ in indirect discourse, perhaps in order to
avoid a double _s_-sound. Some instances of this from verse are _Ecl_ I
18 'iste deus _qui sit_ da, Tityre, nobis', _Ecl_ II 19 'nec _qui sim_
quaeris, Alexi', _Aen_ III 608-9 '_qui sit_ fari ... hortamur', _Met_ XIV
841 'mihi nec _quae sis_ dicere promptum est', _Met_ XV 595 'is _qui
sit_ signo, non nomine dicam', _Fast_ V 191 'ipse doce _quae sis_',
_Ibis_ 52 'teque breui _qui sis_ dissimulare sinam', _Ibis_ 61 '_qui
sis_ nondum quaerentibus edo', and _EP_ III vi 57 'teque tegam, _qui
sis_'. In some of these passages _quis_ is found as a variant reading;
given the ease of corruption, the rule should perhaps be made canonical,
and such passages as _Met_ I 248-49 '_quis sit_ laturus in aras / tura'
supplied with forms of _qui_ even when, as in this instance, there is
only weak manuscript support. (Professor R. J. Tarrant prefers, however,
to retain _quis_ at _Met_ I 248, seeing a difference between expressions
of identity [_qui sis ... dicam_] and of description [_sit_ and _laturus_
go closely together]).

The use of _qui_ seems to have extended to past subjunctives of _esse_
as well as present: compare _Met_ XI 719 'qui [_uar_ quis] foret
ignorans'. For discussions see Löfstedt II 79-96 and Shackleton Bailey
on _Att_ III x 2 'possum obliuisci _qui fuerim_, non sentire qui sim?'.

In preclassical Latin _qui_ is found for _quis_ even in direct
questions: _OLD qui_ A4a cites Pl _Capt_ 833 'qui uocat', Ter _Ph_ 990
'qui nominat me', and Scipio minor V 19 Malcovati3 'qui spondet mille
nummum'. The usage must have continued in spoken Latin, for it is found
at Vitruvius VII 5 6 and Petronius 62 8.

=3. NOMINE NON VTAR, NE COMMENDERE QVERELA.= An interesting indication of
the confidence Ovid felt in his poetry. In his earlier poems of
reproach, Ovid had represented his not naming the person as an act of
forbearance (_Tr_ IV ix 1-4; _Ibis_ 51-54).

=3. COMMENDERE QVERELA.= Oxymoron.

=5. DVM MEA PVPPIS ERAT VALIDA FVNDATA CARINA.= The common ancient
metaphor of shipwreck also used of Ovid's exile at _Tr_ I i 85-86, _Tr_
II 99-102, _Tr_ III iv 15-16 'dum tecum uixi, dum me leuis aura ferebat,
/ haec mea per placidas cumba cucurrit aquas', _Tr_ V xii 50, and _EP_
II iii 25-28.

=7. CONTRAXIT VVLTVM.= See at i 5 _trahis uultus_ (p 149).

=9-10= form a tricolon, where each phrase represents the same action in
progressively more specific terms: (1) 'dissimulas etiam' (2) 'nec me
uis nosse uideri' (3) 'quisque sit audito nomine Naso rogas'.

=9. DISSIMVLAS.= The same word in similar contexts at _Tr_ I i 62
'dissimulare uelis, te liquet esse meum', _Tr_ III vi 2, _Tr_ IV iii 54,
_Tr_ IV iv 28, and _EP_ I ii 146.

=9. NEC ME VIS NOSSE VIDERI.= 'You don't want others to think you know
me'. Similar thought and language at _Tr_ IV iii 51 'me miserum si turpe
putas mihi nupta uideri!' and _EP_ II iii 29-30 'cumque alii _nolint_
etiam _me nosse uideri_, / uix duo proiecto tresue tulistis opem'.

=10. QVISQVE SIT. QVIQVE SIT= (_HacP_) could be defended, _sit_
determining the form _qui_, even with the intervening enclitic, but
given the prevalence of relative _quique_ at line-beginnings in Ovid
(compare xvi 9, 11, 15, 19 & 23) it seems better to take it as a trivial
error.

=11, 13, 15, 17. ILLE EGO.= The same idiom to stir someone's memory at
_Fast_ III 505-6 '_illa ego sum_ cui tu solitus promittere caelum: / ei
mihi, pro caelo qualia dona fero' and _EP_ I ii 129-32 '_ille ego sum_
qui te colui, quem festa solebat / inter conuiuas mensa uidere tuos: /
_ille ego qui_ duxi uestros Hymenaeon ad ignes, / et cecini fausto
carmina digna toro'. R. G. Austin, discussing the spurious proem to the
_Aeneid_ (_CQ_ LX, n.s. XVIII [1968] 110-11), cites _Tr_ V vii 55-56
'_ille ego_ Romanus uates--ignoscite, Musae!-- / Sarmatico cogor plurima
more loqui', _Met_ I 757-58 '_ille ego_ liber, / ille ferox tacui',
Statius _Sil_ V v 38 & _Theb_ IX 434, and Silius XI 177-82: 'It will be
noticed ... that all these examples represent the new situation as a fall
from grace'.

=12. AMICITIA.= Ovid allows pentasyllabic words to end the pentameter only
in the poetry of exile (Platnauer 17). There are eight such words in the
_Tristia_, and four in the _Ex Ponto_: I ii 68 _patrocinium_, II ix 20
_Ericthonius_, this passage, and xiii 44 _amicitiae_ (Platnauer 17;
Riese vii). This distribution contrasts with Ovid's increasing fondness
in the _Ex Ponto_ for trisyllabic and quadrisyllabic endings, for which
see at ix 26 _tegeret_ and ii 10 _Alcinoo_.

The later _Heroides_ have two pentasyllabic pentameter-endings, XVI 290
_pudicitiae_ and XVII 16 _superciliis_.

=13-14. ILLE EGO QVI PRIMVS TVA SERIA NOSSE SOLEBAM, / ET TIBI IVCVNDIS
PRIMVS ADESSE IOCIS.= The same joining of _seria_ and _ioci_ (or _lusus_)
at _Tr_ I viii 31-32, _EP_ I ix 9-10, _EP_ II iv 9-10 '_seria_ multa
mihi tecum conlata recordor, / nec data _iucundis_ tempora pauca
_iocis_', and _EP_ II x 41-42. It is found in prose and early Latin:
Luck at _Tr_ I viii 31-32 cites Cic _Fin_ II 85 'at quicum _ioca, seria,
ut dicitur_, quicum arcana, quicum occulta omnia? tecum, optime', Pliny
_Ep_ II xiii 5 'cum hoc _seria_, cum hoc _iocos_ miscui', Pliny _Ep_ IV
xvii 5 'nihil a me ille secretum, non _ioculare_, non _serium_, non
triste, non laetum', and Ennius _Ann_ 239-40 Vahlen3 'cui res audacter
magnas paruasque iocumque / eloqueretur'.

=15. CONVICTOR.= The word belongs properly to prose, the only other
occurrences in verse being two passages in Horace's _Satires_: I iv 96
'me ... _conuictore_ usus amicoque' & I vi 47 'quia sim tibi, Maecenas,
_conuictor_'. _Conuictus_ is similarly found in verse twice only, in
Ovid's poetry of exile (_Tr_ I viii 29-30 '_conuictu_ causisque
ualentibus ... temporis et longi iunctus amore tibi' & _EP_ II x 9-10
'quam [_sc_ curam] tu uel longi debes _conuictibus_ aeui, / uel mea quod
coniunx non aliena tibi est').

=15. DENSOQVE.= 'Frequent, often recurring'. This sense of _densus_ is not
found elsewhere in Ovid, but compare Virgil _G_ IV 347 '_densos_ diuum
numerabat amores', Statius _Theb_ VI 421, and Juvenal IX 35-37 'quamuis
... blandae assidue _densaeque_ tabellae / sollicitent'. The closest
parallel for the poetic singular cited by _OLD densus_ 3a is Martial IX
lxxxvii 1-2 'Septem post calices Opimiani / _denso_ cum iaceam
triente[19] blaesus'.

[Footnote 19: A drinking-vessel holding one third of a _sextarius_
(_OLD_ _triens_ 3).]

=15. DOMESTICVS.= Apparently the only instance of the substantive in
verse. The word is common enough in prose, and formed part of the spoken
language, for it is found in reported speech at Petronius 45 6.

=17. QVEM= _Leidensis Heinsii_ QVI _codd plerique_. _Qui_ cannot be
connected with _nescis_, and so is without antecedent. The scribe was
probably influenced by 11, 13, and 15, in which _ille ego_ is completed
by a nominative clause.

For _quem ... an uiuam_ compare _EP_ III vi 57 '_te_que tegam, _qui
sis_'.

=17. VIVAM.= Heinsius' VIVAT is unnecessary: the assimilation of person
seems reasonable enough in view of such passages as _EP_ I ii 129-31
'ille ego sum qui te _colui_ ... ille ego qui _duxi_ uestros Hymenaeon ad
ignes'.

=18. SVBIT= _Heinsius_ FVIT _codd_. The preceding _nescis_ requires a verb
with present meaning; and _fuit_ seems impossible to construe as a true
perfect (with present result). Heinsius' _subit_ seems an elegant
solution: certain manuscripts offer the same corruption of _subit_ to
_fuit_ at _Met_ IX 93-94 'lux _subit_, et primo feriente cacumina sole /
discedunt iuuenes' and _Met_ XIV 827-28 'pulchra _subit_ facies et
puluinaribus altis / dignior'.

=19-20. SIVE FVI NVMQVAM CARVS, SIMVLASSE FATERIS; / SEV NON FINGEBAS,
INVENIERE LEVIS.= For a similar opposition (either alternative being
discreditable), see _Met_ IX 23-24 'nam, quo te iactas, Alcmena nate,
creatum, / Iuppiter aut falsus pater est aut crimine uerus'.

=21. AVT.= 'Otherwise'. For the use of _aut_ as a disjunctive adverb
rather than a conjunction compare xii 3 'aut ego non alium prius hoc
dignarer honore' and the passages there cited. Here, as at xii 3, the
idiom has been misunderstood by scribes, with such resulting variants in
late manuscripts as EIA ('uterque Medonii pro diuersa lectione';
accepted by Heinsius) and DIC (_Gothanus II 121_; printed by Burman).

=21. IRAM.= 'Cause for anger'. This seems to be the only instance of the
meaning, _ira_ not being found even as a predicative dative; but compare
the use of _laudes_ to mean 'acts deserving praise', as at viii 87 'tuas
... laudes ... recentes'.

=23. QVOD TE NVNC CRIMEN SIMILEM= seems to be the correct reading; the
line connects with the _an crimen ..._ of 24. QVAE TE CONSIMILEM RES
NVNC (_FIL_) looks like a rewriting of the line, perhaps following the
loss of _crimen_ by haplography (_cr_iM _s_im_ilE_). There seems
no good reason why Ovid would have used the emphatic _consimilem_
instead of the more usual _similem_.

=25. SI ... OPEM NVLLAM ... FEREBAS.= 'If you had no intention of assisting
me'--the inceptive or conative imperfect (Woodcock 200). Similar
phrasing at _Tr_ I viii 9-10 'haec ego uaticinor, quia sum deceptus ab
illo / _laturum_ misero quem mihi rebar _opem_' and _EP_ II vii 46 'et
nihil inueni quod mihi _ferret opem_'.

=25. REBVS ... FACTISQVE.= 'Through financial help or action on my behalf'.
Ovid does not use this sense of _res_ elsewhere in his poetry.

=26. VERBIS ... TRIBVS.= 'A few words'. For the idiom Williams cites
Plautus _Mil_ 1020 '"breuin an longinquo sermoni?" "tribu' uerbis"' and
_Trin_ 963 'adgrediundust hic homo mi astu.--heus, Pax, te tribu' uerbis
uolo'; from comedy, _OLD tres_ b cites Ter _Ph_ 638. From the classical
period compare Sen _Apocol_ 11 3 'ad summam, tria uerba cito dicat, et
seruum me ducat', Sen _Ep_ 40 9, and Quint IX iv 84 'haec omnia in
tribus uerbis'; Camps sees _tres_ as having the same indefinite meaning
at Prop II xiii 25-26 'sat mea sit magno [_Phillimore_: sit magna _uel_
sat magna est _codd_] si tres sint pompa libelli / quos ego Persephonae
maxima dona feram'.

=27. SED ET= was the standard reading until Ehwald's defence (_KB_ 63) of
SVBITO, the reading of (_B1_) and _C_.

Ehwald's reasoning was that _sed et_ would indicate that the news of his
friend's slandering him was additional information, and that Ovid
already knew something of his friend's behaviour. But this is precisely
the case: Ovid has just finished saying that his friend has done nothing
to help him (9-10), and now he gives the additional information that his
friend is even working against him. Ehwald supported the asyndeton that
_subito_ creates by quoting _Met_ XV 359-60 'haud equidem credo: sparsae
quoque membra uenenis / exercere artes Scythides memorantur easdem',
where in fact _quoque_ seems a convincing parallel to _sed et_.

=27. INSVLTARE IACENTI.= 'Torment in my misery'. Ovid plays on the literal
meanings of _iacere_ and _in-saltare_; for the latter, see _Aen_ XII
338-39 'caesis / hostibus insultans'. Ovid uses _insultare_ in only
three other passages. All are from the poems of exile, and all are about
the ill-treatment accorded Ovid: _Tr_ II 571 'nec mihi credibile est
quemquam _insultasse iacenti_', _Tr_ III xi 1, and _Tr_ V viii 3-4
'curue / casibus insultas quos potes ipse pati?'.

=29. A DEMENS.= _A_ indicates a certain amount of sympathy with the person
addressed, as can be seen from _Tr_ V x 51-52 'quid loquor, _a demens_?
ipsam quoque perdere uitam, / Caesaris offenso numine, dignus eram' and
_Ecl_ II 60-61 'quem fugis, _a demens_? habitarunt di quoque siluas /
Dardaniusque Paris'. _O_ (_M1FILT_) would indicate rather less sympathy:
compare _Met_ III 640-41 'dextera Naxos erat: dextra mihi lintea danti /
"quid facis, _o demens_? quis te furor" inquit "Acoete?"'.

=29. RECEDAT= (_TM2_) is no doubt a scribal conjecture, but a correct one:
'Why, in case disaster should strike ...'. Most manuscripts have
RECEDIT.

=31. ORBE= probably means 'wheel'; compare Tib I v 70 'uersatur celeri
Fors leuis orbe _rotae_' and _Cons ad Liuiam_ 51-52 (quoted in the next
note). However, Professor E. Fantham points out to me that it could also
mean 'sphere': she cites Pacuvius 366-67 Ribbeck2 (_Rhet Her_ II 36)
'Fortunam insanam esse et caecam et brutam perhibent philosophi, /
_saxoque_ instare in _globoso_ praedicant _uolubilei_'. Smith at Tib I v
70 gives numerous instances of both images.

=32. QVEM=, found in Heinsius' _fragmentum Boxhornianum_ (=Leid. Bibl.
Publ. 180 G), must be right as against the QVAE of the other
manuscripts; if a definition is to be given after the preceding 'haec
dea non stabili quam sit leuis orbe fatetur', it should be a definition
of the wheel, not the goddess. But the resulting _quem summum dubio_
seems very awkwardly phrased, and further emendation is probably needed.

The obvious solution would be to read 'quem summo [_C_ in fact reads
_summo_] _dubium_ sub pede semper habet'. This would give _orbis_ a
standard epithet, as at _Tr_ V viii 7-8 'nec metuis _dubio_ Fortunae
stantis in _orbe_ / numen' and _Cons ad Liuiam_ 51-52 'nempe per hos
etiam Fortunae iniuria mores / regnat et _incerta_ est hic quoque nixa
_rota_'. In support of the rather more difficult _summo ... pede_
(='toes') Professor R. J. Tarrant cites Sen _Suas_ II 17 'insistens
_summis digitis_ ['toes']--sic enim solebat quo grandior fieret', Sen
_Tro_ 1090-91 'in cacumine / erecta _summos_ [_uar_ summo] turba
librauit _pedes_', and _Met_ IV 562 'aequora destringunt _summis_
Ismenides _alis_'; compare as well _Met_ IX 342-43 'in adludentibus
undis / _summa pedum_ taloque tenus uestigia tingit'.

A second solution might be to read 'quem _dubio summum_ sub pede semper
habet'; the transfer of _dubius_ from _orbis_ to _pes_ seems acceptable
enough, and _Met_ IV 134-36 'oraque buxo / pallidiora gerens exhorruit
aequoris instar, / quod tremit exigua cum summum stringitur aura' offers
a good parallel to _summum_.

The image of Fortune standing on her wheel occurs elsewhere in Ovid's
poems of exile at _Tr_ V viii 7-8 (quoted above) and _EP_ II iii 55-56
'scilicet indignum, iuuenis carissime, ducis / te fieri comitem stantis
in orbe deae'.

=33. QVOLIBET EST FOLIO ... INCERTIOR.= For the proverb, see Otto _folium_
1; and from Ovid compare _Am_ II xvi 45-46 'uerba puellarum, foliis
leuiora caducis, / inrita qua uisum est uentus et unda ferunt', _Her_ V
109-10 'tu leuior foliis tum cum sine pondere suci / mobilibus uentis
arida facta uolant', and _Fast_ III 481-82 (Ariadne speaking) 'Bacche
leuis leuiorque tuis quae tempora cingunt / frondibus'.

=33. QVAVIS INCERTIOR AVRA.= Compare _Her_ VI 109-10 'mobilis Aesonide
uernaque incertior aura, / cur tua polliciti pondere uerba carent?'.
Otto (_uentus_ 1) cites as well Prop II v 11-13 'non ita Carpathiae
uariant Aquilonibus undae, / nec dubio nubes uertitur atra Noto, / quam
facile irati uerbo mutantur amantes', _Her_ XVIII 185-86 (Leander to
Hero) 'cumque minus firmum nil sit quam uentus et unda, / in uentis et
aqua spes mea semper erit?', and Calpurnius _Ecl_ III 10 'mobilior
uentis o femina!'.

The _folium_ and _uentus_ images of the present line are found together
at Prop II ix 33-35 'non sic incerto mutantur flamine Syrtes, / nec
folia hiberno tam tremefacta Noto, / quam cito feminea non constat
foedus in ira'.

=34. PAR ILLI= = _par illius leuitati_. Similar compressions at vi 40
'mollior est animo femina nulla tuo' and commonly.

=37-38.= Ovid gives four instances of unexpected catastrophe, two from
Greek history, two from Roman; the greater importance of the Roman
examples is emphasized by their position and by the doubling of the
space allotted to each example from two lines to four. There is a
similar transition at Prop II vi 19-20 'cur exempla petam Graium? tu
criminis auctor / nutritus duro, Romule, lacte lupae'.

The Greek examples may have been a traditional pairing: Croesus and
Dionysius are mentioned together at Lucian _Gall_ 23 as notable
instances of personal catastrophe.

=37. OPVLENTIA CROESI.= Croesus as the archetype of wealth also at _Tr_
III vii 41-42 'nempe dat ... Fortuna rapitque, / Irus et est subito qui
modo Croesus erat'.

The story of Croesus' downfall and the subsequent sparing of his life by
Cyrus is taken from Herodotus I 86-88.

It is clear from his poetry that Ovid had a good knowledge of at least
the first book of Herodotus:

(1) _Met_ III 135-37 'sed scilicet ultima semper / expectanda dies
homini est, dicique beatus / ante obitum nemo supremaque funera debet'
may have been drawn from Solon's advice to Croesus at Herodotus I 32 7:
'[Greek: ei de pros toutoisi] [if in addition to having prosperity while
alive] [Greek: eti teleutêsei ton bion eu, houtos ekeinos ton su
zêteeis, ho] [[Greek: ho] _add Stein_] [Greek: olbios keklêsthai axios
esti; prin d' an teleutêsêi, epischein mêde kaleein kô olbion, all'
eutychea]'.

(2) At _Fast_ II 79-118 Ovid tells the story of Arion found at Herodotus
I 23-24.

(3) At _Fast_ II 663-66 there occurs the clearest instance of borrowing:
Ovid uses the story of the border dispute between Sparta and Argos
(Herodotus I 82) in the course of his discussion of the god Terminus:
'si tu signasses olim Thyreatida terram, / corpora non leto missa
trecenta forent, / nec foret Othryades congestis lectus [_Barth_: tectus
_codd_] in armis. / o quantum patriae sanguinis ille dedit!'.

=37. AVDITA EST CVI NON.= Compare _Met_ XV 319-20 '_cui non audita est_
obscenae Salmacis undae / Aethiopesque lacus?'.

=38. NEMPE TAMEN VITAM CAPTVS AB HOSTE TVLIT.= 'Even so, it is undeniable
that he became a prisoner, and received his life as a gift from his
enemy'. _Vitam ferre_ also at _EP_ II i 45 (from a description of
Germanicus' triumph of AD 12) 'maxima pars horum _uitam_ ueniamque
_tulerunt_'.

=39. ILLE ... FORMIDATVS.= Equivalent to _ille_ with a defining
_qui_-clause: 'The famous man who had once been feared ...'. Ovid is
referring to Dionysius II, the student of Plato, who was expelled from
Syracuse in 344 and became a schoolmaster in Corinth. Valerius Maximus
(VI ix ext 6) also gives Dionysius as an example of unexpected disaster,
and Plutarch (_Timoleon_ 14) cites him as an example of the operations
of Fortune. For an account of Dionysius' life at Corinth, see Justinus
XXI v. There was a Greek proverb '[Greek: Dionysios en Korinthôi]' (Cic
_Att_ IX ix 1; Quintilian VIII vi 52), apparently referring to his
continued lust for power: 'Dionysius ... Syracusis expulsus Corinthi
pueros docebat: usque eo imperio carere non poterat' (Cic _Tusc_ III
27). Discussions of the proverb at Otto _Dionysius_ and Shackleton
Bailey on _Att_ IX ix 1.

=39. SYRACOSIA ... IN VRBE.= Restored by Heinsius from the manuscripts'
unmetrical SYRACVSIA, as at _Fast_ VI 277. The same confusion between
[Greek: Syrakosios] and [Greek: Syrakousios] is found in the manuscripts
of Pindar (_Ol_ I 23), the Attic form supplanting the original Doric.
The same corruption is found in some ninth-century manuscripts of Virgil
at _Ecl_ VI 1 'Prima Syracosio dignata est ludere uersu' and in the
Veronese scholia, and in the manuscripts of Claudian _carm min_ LI 6
(Housman 1273).

=40. HVMILI ... ARTE.= For the low social position of the schoolmaster in
antiquity, see Bonner 146-62, and compare especially Juvenal VII 197-98
'si Fortuna uolet, fies de rhetore consul; / si uolet haec eadem, fiet
de consule rhetor' and Pliny _Ep_ IV xi 1 'nunc eo decidit ut exul de
senatore, rhetor de oratore fieret'.

=41. MAGNO MAIVS.= 'Greater than (Pompey) the Great'. Even in the letters
of Cicero, Pompey is occasionally called _Magnus_ without further
identification (_Att_ I xvi 12). Other plays on the name at _Fast_ I
603-4 'Magne, tuum nomen rerum est mensura tuarum; / sed qui te uicit
nomine maior erat' and Lucan I 135 'stat magni nominis umbra', where
Getty cites Velleius II 1 4 'Pompeium magni nominis uirum'.

=42. CLIENTIS OPEM.= After the final defeat at Pharsalus, Pompey fled to
Egypt and sought the protection of Ptolemy XIII (Caesar _BC_ III 103,
Plutarch _Pomp_ 77).

Pompey similarly treated as the victim of Fortune at Cic _Tusc_ I 86 and
through much of Lucan VII-VIII; compare as well _Anth Lat_ Riese 401
'Quam late uestros duxit Fortuna triumphos, / tam late sparsit funera,
Magne, tua'.

Compare as well _Anth Lat_ 415 39-40 'spes Magnum profugum toto
discurrere in orbe / iusserat et pueri regis adire pedes'; the distich
follows a description of the hardships undergone by Marius.

=44.= The line is omitted by _B1_ and _C_; other manuscripts offer (with
minor variations) INDIGVS EFFECTVS OMNIBVS IPSE MAGIS or ACHILLAS
PHARIVS ABSTVLIT ENSE CAPVT, a line apparently devised with the aid of
Juvenal X 285-86 'Fortuna ... uicto _caput abstulit_' and Lucan VIII
545-46 'ullusne in cladibus istis / est locus Aegypto _Phariusque_
admittitur _ensis_?', both passages concerned with Pompey's murder by
Achillas. Clearly a line of the poem was lost in transmission.

Heinsius and Bentley felt that the entire distich should be deleted; but
43 seems acceptable enough, and it is appropriate that the description
of Pompey's downfall be balanced with the four-line mention of Marius
that follows. It would be strange if Pompey's sensational murder were
overlooked, as this was regarded by the poets as the ultimate reversal
of his fortunes: compare Manilius IV 50-55, Juvenal X 283-86 (which is
joined to a mention of Marius' reversal) and _Anth Lat_ 401-3 Riese.

=45. ILLE= goes with Marius two lines on--'the famous Marius'.

=45. IVGVRTHINO ... CIMBROQVE TRIVMPHO.= Marius rose to prominence in the
Jugurthine war, celebrating his triumph in 104; in 101 his defeat in the
Po valley of the Cimbri, a Germanic tribe originally from Jutland, ended
a twelve-year military threat to Rome.

=47. IN CAENO LATVIT MARIVS.= In 88 Sulla, whose command against
Mithridates had been transferred to Marius by a special law, marched on
Rome and induced the Senate to name Marius an outlaw; Marius was forced
to escape to Africa, at one point on the route hiding in the marshes of
Minturnae. This ordeal is mentioned by the poets who deal with Marius,
but they consider that he reached the low point of his fortunes when he
arrived at Carthage. Compare Manilius IV 47-49, Juvenal X 276-77
'exilium et carcer Minturnarumque paludes / et mendicatus uicta
Carthagine panis' and _Anth Lat_ 415 33-38 Riese.

=47. LATVIT MARIVS= _M_ IACVIT MARIVS _H_ MARIVS LATVIT _L_ MARIVS IACVIT
_BCFIT_. _Iacere_ and _latere_ could each be corrupted to the other with
ease: such corruptions occur in certain manuscripts at _Met_ I 338 and
_Fast_ II 244 (_iacere_ corrupted to _latere_) and _Fast_ II 467, II 587
& III 265 (_latere_ corrupted to _iacere_). Although it is weakly
attested, _latuit_ should be read here in view of the use of _abdere_ at
Velleius II xix 2 'paludem Maricae, in quam se fugiens consectantis
Sullae equites _abdiderat_' and Lucan II 70 'exul limosa Marius caput
_abdidit_ ulua', and of [Greek: kryptein] at Plutarch _Marius_ 37 5:
_latere_ is often virtually a passive form of _abdere_.

_Marius latuit_ looks like a normalization of word order from the
emphatic _latuit Marius_.

=47. CANNAQVE PALVSTRI.= _Canna palustris_ is a standard feature of Ovid's
marshes; see _AA_ I 554, _RA_ 142, and _Met_ IV 298 & VIII 337. At _RA_
142 Henderson comments 'Ovid probably means the plant called in this
country [Scotland] Reed (_Phragmites communis_, a grass), which the
Italians call _canna di palude_; smaller than _harundo_ (_Arundo donax_,
the Greek [Greek: kanna] and Italian canna), it nevertheless often
reaches a height of 6 or 7 feet'.

=48. MVLTA PVDENDA.= The entire sequence of events during Marius' flight
to Africa.

=50. FACIT= _R. J. Tarrant_. For _fidem facere_ ('induce belief') compare
_Met_ VI 565-66 'dat gemitus fictos commentaque funera narrat, / et
lacrimae _fecere fidem_' and Caesar _BC_ II 37 1 'nuntiabantur haec
eadem Curioni, sed aliquamdiu _fides fieri_ non poterat: tantam habebat
suarum rerum fiduciam'. Ehwald (_KB_ 63) defends FERET (_BC_), quoting
_Aen_ X 792 'si qua _fidem_ tanto est operi _latura_ uetustas', but the
true meaning of this line is 'if antiquity can ever win belief for a
deed so grand' (Jackson Knight); the idiom cannot be fitted into the
present passage with acceptable meaning. HABET, the reading of most
manuscripts, does not account for FERET, but is in itself acceptable
enough; compare _Her_ XVI 59-60 'ecce pedum pulsu uisa est mihi terra
moueri-- / uera loquar ueri [_Heinsius_: uero _codd_] uix _habitura
fidem_' and Cic _Flac_ 21 'sed fuerint incorruptae litterae domi; nunc
uero quam _habere_ auctoritatem aut quam _fidem_ possunt?'.

=51. SI QVIS MIHI DICERET.= Compare _Tr_ IV viii 43-44 'hoc mihi si Delphi
Dodonaque diceret ipsa, / esse uideretur uanus uterque locus'.

=52. GETE= is read from the manuscripts by Heinsius; the form is the same
as at _Met_ X 608 'Hippomene uicto', _Fast_ IV 593 'uictore Gyge', _EP_
II iv 22 'in Aeacide Nestorideque', and _EP_ I viii 6 'dura pharetrato
bella mouente Gete [_uar_ Geta]'. All editors but Heinsius print GETAE,
but this is contrary to Ovid's usage: compare (to take only a few
instances) _Ibis_ 637 '_Sarmaticas_ inter _Geticasque sagittas_', _EP_ I
i 79 'inque locum _Scythico_ uacuum mutabor ab _arcu_', and _EP_ III v
45 'ipse quidem _Getico_ peream uiolatus ab _arcu_'. The only apparent
exceptions to the rule I have found are _Tr_ IV i 21 'Sinti [_Ehwald_:
inter _codd_ Sintae _Iac. Gronouius_] nec militis ensem', where the
compound expression alters matters somewhat, and _Fast_ V 580 '_Parthi_
[_uar_ Parthis] signa retenta _manu_', where _Partha_ should probably be
read; compare _Fast_ VI 244 '_Mauras_ pertimuere _manus_ [_codd_: minas
_Alton_]' and _EP_ I iii 59-60 'altera Bistonias pars est sensura
sarisas, / altera _Sarmatica_ spicula missa _manu_'.

_Getes_ is also used as an adjective at xiii 18 'paene poeta Getes'.

=53. I BIBE ... ANTICYRA.= A hendiadys for 'Go drink all the mind-purging
hellebore that grows in Anticyra'.

=53. PVRGANTES ... SVCOS.= For discussions of _elleborus_ see Theophrastus
_HP_ IX 10, Pliny _NH_ XXV 47-61, and Aulus Gellius XVII xv. There were
two varieties of the plant, black and white (from the colour of their
roots): the former was a laxative, the latter induced vomiting and was
thought to sharpen the intellect; compare Val Max VIII vii ext 5, Pliny
_NH_ XXV 52, Martianus Capella IV 327, and the other passages cited by
Brink at Hor _AP_ 300.

=54. ANTICYRA.= Three places of this name are known from ancient sources;
it is not known which of them Ovid had in mind. One was a city in
Locris on the north side of the entrance to the Corinthian Gulf; the
second was a city near Mount Oeta (Strabo IX v 10), and the third an
island of uncertain location (Pliny _NH_ XXV 52). It is possible that
Hor _AP_ 300 'tribus Anticyris caput insanabile' should be taken to mean
that all three places were famous for hellebore, but ps-Acron glosses
_tribus Anticyris_ as 'tribus ... potionibus [_Keller_: potus _codd_]
... aut multo elleboro', which Brink accepts, citing Hor _Sat_ II iii
82-83 'danda est ellebori multo pars maxima auaris; / nescio an
Anticyram ratio illis destinet omnem' and Persius IV 16 'Anticyras
... sorbere meracas' for the metonymy, and Petronius 88 4 'Chrysippus, ut
ad inuentionem sufficeret, ter elleboro animum detersit' for the number.
The last two places at least seem to have been known for their
hellebore; compare Pliny _NH_ XXV 49 'plurimum autem nascitur in Oete
monte et optimum uno eius loco circa Pyram' and XXV 52 'Drusum quoque
apud nos ... constat hoc medicamento liberatum comitiali morbo ['epilepsy']
in Anticyra insula'.

=57. TV QVOQVE FAC TIMEAS.= That is, his friend should start to behave
better towards him. For a similar exhortation at the end of a poem of
reproach, see _Tr_ I viii 49-50 'effice peccati ne sim memor huius, et
illo / officium laudem quo queror ore tuum'; even in the _Ibis_ there is
a veiled offer of reconciliation: 'et neque nomen in hoc nec dicam facta
libello, / teque breui qui sis dissimulare sinam. / postmodo, _si
perges_, in te mihi liber iambus / tincta Lycambeo sanguine tela dabit'
(51-54).

=58. DVM LOQVERIS.= Compare _Am_ I xi 15 'dum loquor, hora fugit' and Hor
_Carm_ I xi 7-8 'dum loquimur, fugerit inuida / aetas'; Nisbet and
Hubbard cite _ad loc_ Persius V 153 and Petronius 99 3, noting that the
_sententia_ is not found before Horace.



IV. To Sextus Pompeius


In this second poem addressed to Sextus Pompeius, Ovid celebrates the
news that Pompeius is to be _consul ordinarius_ in the following year.
As Pompeius was consul in 14, Ovid probably wrote the poem shortly after
the election of magistrates in 13.

Poems iv and v form a pair, the first being an account of Ovid's
reaction on learning of Pompeius' election, the second being a letter to
the new consul. Both poems have points of contact with poem ix, a letter
of congratulation sent to Graecinus on his becoming suffect consul.

The poem begins with general reflections that no sadness is absolute,
which prepare for the description of how the news came to Ovid of
Pompeius' election (1-20). He pictures to himself the ceremonies that
will take place (21-42), and ends with the hope that in the midst of the
festivities Pompeius will still be able to remember him (43-50).

=1-6.= In these lines Ovid reverses the usual ancient sentiment that no
pleasure is unalloyed. Compare Hor _Carm_ II x 17-18 'non, si male nunc,
et olim / sic erit'. For the more usual thought, see _Met_ VII 453-54
'nulla est sincera uoluptas, / sollicitique aliquid laetis interuenit'
and _Fast_ VI 463 'interdum miscentur tristia laetis'.

=1. AVSTRALIBVS VMIDA NIMBIS.= An image used elsewhere by Ovid as a
metaphor of his unhappiness: see _Tr_ I iii 13 'hanc animo nubem dolor
ipse remouit', _Tr_ V v 22 'pars uitae tristi cetera nube uacet', and
_EP_ II i 5-6 'tandem aliquid pulsa curarum nube serenum ['cloudless']
uidi'.

=1. VMIDA.= For the dampness of the south wind, compare _Met_ I 65-66
'contraria tellus / nubibus assiduis pluuiaque madescit ab Austro'.

=2. NON INTERMISSIS ... AQVIS.= _Non intermissis_ in the same metrical
position at _EP_ I iv 16 'non intermissis cursibus ibit equus';
_intermissus_ used of bad weather at _Tr_ II 149-51 'uentis agitantibus
aera [_uar_ aequora] non est / aequalis rabies continuusque furor, / sed
modo subsidunt _intermissique_ silescunt'.

=7. DOMO PATRIAQVE CARENS OCVLISQVE MEORVM.= Similar phrasing at _Tr_ III
vii 45 'cum caream patria uobisque domoque', _Tr_ III xi 15-16 'quod
coniuge cara, / quod patria careo pignoribusque meis', _Tr_ V v 19 (of
his wife) 'illa domo nataque sua patriaque fruatur', _Tr_ I v 83, _Tr_
IV vi 19, _Tr_ IV ix 12, _Tr_ V x 47, _EP_ I iii 47, and _EP_ II ix 79.

=7. OCVLISQVE MEORVM.= Compare _Tr_ V iv 27-30 'nec patriam magis ille
suam desiderat ... quam uultus _oculosque_ tuos, o dulcior illo / melle
quod in ceris Attica ponit apis'. _Oculisque meorum_ seems to mean
'regards des miens' (André) rather than 'the sight of my own' (Wheeler);
compare _Aen_ XI 800-1 'oculosque tulere / cuncti ad reginam', _Met_
VII 256 'et monet arcanis oculos remouere profanos', Persius V 33
'permisit sparsisse oculos ['to look where I chose']', and from prose
Cic _Fam_ IX ii 2 'ut uitemus oculos hominum'.

=9. VVLTVM DIFFVNDERE.= The action opposite to _trahis uultus_ (i 5);
compare _Met_ XIV 272 'diffudit uultus' and from prose Sen _Ep_ 106 5
'nisi dubitas an uultum nobis mutent, an frontem astringant, an _faciem
diffundant_'. It is probably from this expression that _diffundere_
acquired the extended sense of 'mentally relax' (_OLD diffundo_ 5), for
which compare _Met_ IV 766 'diffudere animos', _Met_ III 318 'Iouem
... diffusum nectare', and _AA_ I 218 'diffundetque animos omnibus ista
dies'.

=9. CAVSAM.= CAVSA (_BCT_) is grammatical enough, but corruption from _qua
... causam_ to _qua ... causa_ is more likely than the inverse.

The construction of the sentence is rather complex: Ovid's normal
practice would be to employ an objective genitive with _causa_.

=10. POSSIM= _BCMHIT_ POSSEM _L_ POSSVM _F_. The clause is in primary tense
sequence following the true perfect _inueni_, which represents the
present result of a past action. Compare _fecit ... minuant_ in 5-6.

=10. NEC MEMINISSE= = _et obliuisci_. _Nec (non) meminisse_ is metrically
useful for filling the second hemistich of the pentameter up to the
disyllable; so used at vi 50 'arguat ingratum non meminisse sui', _Tr_
IV iv 40 & V xiii 18, and _EP_ II iv 6.

=11. SOLVS= _BC_. TRISTIS, the reading of the other six manuscripts, is
tempting, as being the less neutral of the two adjectives, and was
accepted without question by Heinsius and Burman. If it is accepted, one
could argue that Ovid refers back to the word at 21 'dilapsis ... curis'.
But _solus_ is shown to be correct by the passage Ovid is here
imitating, Virgil _G_ I 388-89 'tum cornix plena pluuiam uocat improba
uoce / et _sola_ in sicca secum _spatiatur harena_'. _Solus_ was lost
through haplography ('fulua solus': the elongated 's' form common in
manuscripts would have facilitated the error) and _tristis_ interpolated
to restore the metre. Ehwald believed (_KB_ 63) that the error arose
from _tristis_ having been written above _solus_ in the archetype, but
there is no reason to accept this, since the one could not stand as a
gloss for the other.

=11. SPATIARER HARENA.= The phrase is taken from Virgil _G_ I 388-89
(quoted in the previous note); Ovid imitates the passage again at _Met_
II 572-73 'lentis / passibus, ut soleo, summa _spatiarer harena_'.

=12. VISA EST A TERGO PENNA DEDISSE SONVM.= 'I thought I heard a wing
rustle behind me'. A similar advent of an unseen deity at _Met_ III
96-98 'uox subito audita est; neque erat cognoscere promptum / unde, sed
audita est: "quid, Agenore nate, peremptum / serpentem spectas? et tu
spectabere serpens"'. Compare as well _Met_ V 294-98 'Musa loquebatur:
pennae sonuere per auras, / uoxque salutantum ramis ueniebat ab altis. /
suspicit et linguae quaerit tam certa loquentes / unde sonent hominemque
putat Ioue nata locutum; / ales erat'.

=12. PENNA= _BMFHILT_ PINNA _C_. _Pinna_ and _penna_, perhaps from
different roots, were confused even in antiquity. The ancient
manuscripts of Virgil offer _pinna_ as the spelling even for the meaning
'wing', but Quintilian clearly took _penna_ as the correct spelling for
this sense: 'quare ['therefore'] discat puer ... quae cum quibus
cognatio; nec miretur cur ... a pinno quod est acutum [_sc_ fiat] securis
utrimque habens aciem _bipennis_, ne illorum sequatur errorem qui, quia
a pennis duabus hoc esse nomen existimant, pennas auium dici uolunt'. (I
iv 12).

=13. NEQVE ERAT= _CMHL_ NEC ERAT _BFIT_. Virgil had a very strong
preference for _neque_ before words starting with a vowel, but Ovid did
not follow this rule: compare _Met_ I 101 'nec ullis', 132 'nec adhuc',
223 'nec erit', 306 'nec ablato', and 322 'nec amantior'. However, it
seems better to accept _neque_ as the true reading in view of the good
manuscript support and the parallel at _Met_ III 96-97 'uox subita
audita est (neque [_uar_ nec] erat cognoscere promptum / unde, sed
audita est)'.

=13. NEQVE ERAT CORPVS.= 'But there was no body'. _Neque_ (_nec_)
represents _sed ... non_ as well as _et ... non_.

It is one of Ovid's favourite devices to describe the aspect of gods
when they appear to him, as at _Am_ III i 7-14 (Elegy and Tragedy),
_Fast_ I 95-100 (Janus), _Fast_ III 171-72 (Mars), _Fast_ V 194 (Flora),
_Fast_ V 637-38 (Tiber), and _EP_ III iii 13-20 (Amor). The only other
passage where Ovid says he did not see the god is _Fast_ VI 251-54, but
Vesta had no traditional appearance that Ovid could make use of: compare
_Fast_ VI 298 'effigiem nullam Vesta ... habet'.

The reason that Ovid did not describe Fama was that the picture of Fama
as a winged monster which Virgil had made standard (_Aen_ IV 174-88)
could not easily be integrated into the poem. The only description of
Fama in Ovid is at _Met_ IX 137-39 'Fama loquax praecessit ad aures, /
Deianira, tuas, quae ueris addere falsa / gaudet, et e minima sua per
mendacia crescit'. At _Met_ XII 39-63 there is a memorable description
of Fama's dwelling-place. Fama is also personified (but with no
descriptions) at _EP_ II i 19-20 & II ix 3.

=16. PER IMMENSAS AERE LAPSA VIAS.= Similar phrasing at _EP_ III iii 77-78
(Amor speaking) 'ut tamen aspicerem consolarerque iacentem, / _lapsa per
immensas est mea penna uias_'.

=17. QVO NON TIBI CARIOR ALTER.= Compare _Tr_ III vi 3 'nec te mihi carior
alter', _Tr_ IV vi 46 'qua nulla mihi carior, uxor', and _EP_ II viii 27
'per patriae nomen, quae te tibi carior ipso est'.

=18. CANDIDVS ET FELIX PROXIMVS ANNVS ERIT.= Compare _Fast_ I 63-64 'ecce
tibi _faustum_, Germanice, nuntiat _annum_ / inque meo primus carmine
Ianus adest'. No doubt both passages echo the phrasing of a New Year
wish or prayer.

=18. CANDIDVS.= 'Favourable'. Compare _Tr_ V v 13-14 (on his wife's
birthday) 'optime natalis! quamuis procul absumus, opto / _candidus_
huc uenias', Prop IV i 67-68 'Roma, faue, tibi surgit opus, date
_candida_ ciues / omina, et inceptis dextera cantet auis!', and _Fast_ I
79-80 'uestibus intactis Tarpeias itur in arces, / et populus _festo
concolor_ ipse suo est'.

=19. DIXIT ET= has a definite epic flavour, being found in Virgil at _Aen_
I 402 & 736, II 376, III 258, IV 659, V 477, VI 677, VIII 366 & 615, IX
14, X 867, XI 561 & 858, XII 266 & 681, and _G_ IV 499; from Ovid
compare _Met_ I 466-67 'dixit et eliso percussis aere pennis / impiger
umbrosa Parnasi constitit arce', I 762 'dixit et implicuit materno
bracchia collo', III 474, IV 162 & 576, V 230 & 419, VIII 101, and VIII
757. A close parallel at _EP_ III iii 93-94 (Amor has been speaking with
Ovid) 'dixit et aut ille est tenues dilapsus in auras, / coeperunt
sensus aut uigilare mei'.

=22. EXCIDIT.= 'I forgot'; the opposite of _subit_ 'I remember'. The idiom
is standard Latin (_OLD excido1_ 9b); Ovidian instances at _Her_ XII 71,
_Am_ II i 18, _Met_ VIII 449-50 'excidit omnis / luctus et a lacrimis in
poenae uersus amorem est', _Met_ XIV 139, _Fast_ V 315, _Tr_ I v 14,
_EP_ II iv 24, and _EP_ II x 8 'exciderit tantum ne tibi cura mei'.

=23. VBI ... RESERAVERIS ANNVM.= 'When you have unlocked the year'. Compare
Ovid's descriptions of Janus at _Fast_ I 99 'tenens baculum dextra
_clauemque_ sinistra' and _Fast_ I 253-54 '"nil mihi cum bello: pacem
postesque tuebar / et" _clauem_ ostendens "haec" ait "arma gero"'.

=23. LONGVM ANNVM.= André translates, 'l'année longue à venir', citing Cic
_Phil_ V 1 'Nihil umquam longius his Kalendiis Ianuariis mihi uisum
est', to which _OLD longus_ 14a adds (among other passages) Caesar _BG_
I 40 13 'in longiorem diem collaturus' and Sen _Ep_ 63 3 'non differo in
_longius_ tempus'; but the meaning 'far off' seems unsuited to the
present context. _Longum_ should be taken in its usual sense; it perhaps
emphasizes that the whole year is still ahead.

=24. SACRO MENSE.= _Sacer_ because of the religious ceremonies marking the
New Year.

=25-28.= The first action of the new consul was to take auspices at his
home and to assume the consular toga: compare Livy XXI 63 10 (217 BC;
Flaminius has entered his consulship while absent from Rome) 'magis pro
maiestate uidelicet imperii Arimini quam Romae magistratum initurum et
in deuersorio hospitali quam apud penates suos praetextam sumpturum'
(Mommsen _Staatsrecht_ I3 615-17).

=26. NE TITVLIS QVICQVAM DEBEAT ILLE SVIS.= There are two possible ways of
understanding this line.

One way is to take _titulis_ as referring to Pompeius' earlier
magistracies, 'as if the series of offices were a score which Pompey
would pay in full when he became consul' (Wheeler). A similar use at
_Her_ IX 1 'Gratulor Oechaliam titulis accedere nostris'.

_Titulis_ does not have to be taken as a strict reference to the offices
Pompeius had already held, but can have the wider sense of 'reputation,
honour'. Compare the opening line of _Her_ IX quoted above; Professor R.
J. Tarrant cites _Met_ XV 855 'sic magnus cedit _titulis_ Agamemnonis
Atreus' and Juvenal VIII 241.

The second way to take the passage is, with Némethy, to understand
_titulis ... suis_ as being equivalent to _maioribus suis, qui magnos
titulos habent_, the _tituli_ being the inscriptions below the
_imagines_ of Pompeius' ancestors. A parallel for the sense at _EP_ III
i 75-76 'hoc domui _debes_ de qua censeris, ut illam / non magis
officiis quam probitate colas'. Professor E. Fantham suggests a
refinement: _titulis ... suis_ should be taken in the sense 'achievements
of his ancestors'. Compare Prop IV xi 32 'et domus est titulis utraque
fulta suis'.

=27. PAENE ATRIA.= Heinsius preferred PENETRALIA, the reading of _I_ and
_F2_ ('sed ne sic quidem locus mihi uidetur plane in integrum
restitutus'), apparently objecting to _paene_. The word seems weak
enough, especially in view of Virgil _G_ I 49 'illius immensae
_ruperunt_ horrea messes', but Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me
a similarly weak _paene_ at _Tr_ III xi 13-14 'sic ego belligeris a
gentibus undique saeptus / terreor, hoste meum paene premente latus'.
Burman conjectured LAETA and PLENA; neither seems very convincing.

For _atria_ compare _Her_ XVI 185-86 'occurrent denso tibi Troades
agmine matres, / nec capient Phrygias _atria_ nostra nurus'.
_Penetralia_, although poorly attested, is in itself appropriate enough,
since the new consul began his magistracy in front of his _penates_:
Festus (Mueller 208; Lindsay 231) defined the _penetralia_ as the
'penatium deorum sacraria'.

=28. ET POPVLVM LAEDI DEFICIENTE LOCO.= The jostling of a crowd similarly
described at _Am_ III ii 21-22 'tu tamen a dextra, quicumque es, parce
puellae; / contactu lateris laeditur ista tui'.

=29-34.= The new consul, accompanied by lictors, left his house and went
in solemn procession to the Capitoline, where he took his place on the
curule chair, and then sacrificed to Iuppiter Optimus Maximus. A meeting
of the Senate followed, held in the temple of Jupiter.

At ix 17-32 Ovid gives a similar description of the consul's entering on
his office.

=29. TARPEIAE ... SEDIS.= _Capitolinus_ is metrically awkward; hence the
synecdoche from the _Tarpeia rupes_, the part of the Capitoline from
which criminals were hurled. Similar tropes at viii 42 'uictima Tarpeios
inficit icta focos', ix 29 'at cum Tarpeias esses deductus in arces',
and commonly in the poets.

=30. FACILES IN TVA VOTA.= 'Receptive to your prayers'; for this frequent
sense of _facilis_ compare _Her_ XII 84 'sed mihi tam _faciles_ unde
meosque deos?', _Met_ V 559 'optastis _facilesque_ deos habuistis', _Tr_
IV i 53 'sint precor hae [the Muses] saltem _faciles_ mihi', _EP_ II ii
19-20 'esse ... fateor ... _difficilem_ precibus te quoque iure meis',
_Her_ XVI 282 'sic habeas _faciles in tua uota deos_', and Grattius 426.

=31-32.= The asyndeton in this distich is odd, given the preceding series
of connectives. If the text is unsound, however, alteration of _certae_
to _certant_ (Damsté) or _cerno_ (Owen) is not the cure. By using
_certae_ Ovid is indicating that there will be a clean blow with the
axe, a good omen for the coming year. For the opposite omen, see _Aen_
II 222-24 (describing Laocoon) 'clamores simul horrendos ad sidera
tollit: / qualis mugitus, fugit cum saucius aram / taurus et _incertam_
excussit ceruice securim'.

=31-32. BOVES NIVEOS ... QVOS ALVIT CAMPIS HERBA FALISCA SVIS.= Compare
_Am_ III xiii 13-14 'ducuntur _niueae_ populo plaudente _iuuencae_, /
_quas aluit campis herba Falisca suis_' and _Fast_ I 83-84 (a
description of the sacrifices on January 1st) '_colla_ rudes operum
_praebent_ ferienda iuuenci, / _quos aluit campis herba Falisca suis_'.

=33-34. CVMQVE DEOS OMNES, TVM QVOS IMPENSIVS AEQVOS / ESSE TIBI CVPIAS,
CVM IOVE CAESAR ERVNT.= _Cupias_ must be supplied with _deos omnes_--'You
will wish the favour of all the gods; those gods whose favour you will
particularly wish will be Caesar and Jupiter'. The omission of the verb
from the _cum_-clause seems very strange, however, and Ehwald (_KB_
63-64) is possibly correct in supposing a distich to have fallen from
the text after 32; in this case, _cumque deos omnes_ is probably far
removed from its original form.

=33. OMNES, TVM QVOS.= Ehwald wished to read OMNES, TVNC HOS (_P_ reads
TVNC HOS ORES), _hos_ referring to the gods of the Capitol who had been
named in the distich missing after 32; but this would leave _cum Ioue
Caesar erunt_ without a predicate.

=33. AEQVOS.= 'Favourable'; compare _Her_ I 23 'sed bene consuluit casto
deus _aequus_ amori'; _Tr_ I ii 6 '_aequa_ Venus Teucris, Pallas
_iniqua_ fuit', _Tr_ III xiv 29 '_aequus_ erit scriptis', and _Tr_ IV i
25.

=35. E MORE VOCATI.= 'Convened, as is traditional'. After the sacrifice on
the Capitoline, the new consul addressed the assembled Senate; compare
Livy XXVI 26 5 'M. Marcellus cum idibus Martiis consulatum inisset,
senatum eo die _moris modo causa_ habuit ['held a session of the Senate
simply because it was traditional to do so']' and Livy XXI 63 8 'ne die
initi magistratus Iouis optimi maximi templum adiret, ne senatum inuisus
ipse et sibi uni inuisum uideret consuleretque'.

=36. INTENDENT AVRES.= The expression is not found elsewhere in Ovid, or
in Virgil; but compare Manilius II 511 'at nudus Geminis _intendit_
Aquarius _aurem_'. The expression is presumably an extension of _oculos
(aciem) intendere_, for which see Cic _Tusc_ IV 38, _Ac_ II 80, and Tac
_Ann_ IV 70.

=37. FACVNDO TVA VOX ... ORE.= For Pompeius' eloquence, Némethy cites Val
Max II vi 8 '_facundissimo_ ... sermone, qui ore eius quasi e beato
quodam eloquentiae fonte manabat' and IV vii ext 2 'clarissimi ac
_disertissimi_ uiri'.

=37. HILARAVERIT.= The verb is rare and elevated in tone. Compare Cic
_Brut_ 44 (of Pericles' oratory) 'huius suauitate maxime hilaratae
Athenae sunt', Catullus LXIII 18, and _Ecl_ V 69.

=38. VTQVE SOLET, TVLERIT PROSPERA VERBA DIES.= Compare _Fast_ I 175-76
(Ovid to Janus) '"at cur _laeta_ tuis dicuntur _uerba_ Kalendis, / et
damus alternas accipimusque preces?"'.

=40.= Riese's punctuation 'facias cur ita, saepe dabit' seems preferable
to the alternate 'facias cur ita saepe, dabit', as placing more emphasis
on Augustus and being perhaps an echo of _Tr_ IV ii 12 'munera det
meritis, _saepe datura_, deis'.

=42. OFFICIVM POPVLI= = _populum officium facientem_; the same metonymy at
_Met_ XV 691-93 (of Aesculapius) 'restitit hic agmenque suum _turbaeque
sequentis_ / _officium_ placido uisus dimittere uultu / corpus in
Ausonia posuit rate'.

=44. NEC POTERVNT ISTIS LVMINA NOSTRA FRVI.= Other non-personal subjects
at Cic _Am_ 45 (_animus_) and ps-Quint _Decl_ VII 10 'uulneribus illis
non fruentur _oculi_'. In all of these passages the transition from an
expressed personal subject to a faculty or part of the personality seems
fairly natural.

=45. QVAMLIBET= is a correction by Heinsius: 'far away as you might be
...'. The QVOD (QVA) LICET of most manuscripts anticipates the following
_qua possum_, contrary to Ovid's practice.

=45. QVA POSSVM, MENTE.= A commonplace of the poems of exile: compare ix
41-42 'mente tamen, quae sola domo non exulat, usus / praetextam fasces
aspiciamque tuos', _Tr_ III iv 56, _Tr_ IV ii 57 'haec ego summotus
_qua possum mente uidebo_', _EP_ I viii 34 'cunctaque mens oculis
peruidet usa suis', _EP_ II iv 8, _EP_ II x 47, and _EP_ III v 47-48.

=47. SVBEAT TIBI.= See at xv 30 _subeant animo_ (p 440).



V. To Sextus Pompeius


The poem was written shortly after Pompeius' accession to the consulship
(compare 4 'tectaque brumali sub niue terra latet' and 24 'deque _parum
noto_ consulet officio'). It takes the form of a set of instructions to
the poem on what it should do when it reaches Rome. Ovid tells the poem
it should look for Pompeius, and includes a short description of some of
the consular functions Pompeius might be carrying out (1-26). He then
instructs the poem in what it is to say to Pompeius: it should describe
to him Ovid's gratitude for past and present services, and promise
(using several _adynata_ as illustrations) that this gratitude will be
eternal (27-46).

A close parallel to this poem is furnished by _Tr_ III vii, in which
Ovid tells the poem where it is to seek his stepdaughter Perilla and
what it is to say to her. Similar personifications are found in _Tr_ I
i, in which Ovid gives instructions to his book on what it should do
when it reaches Rome and the prudence it should show, in _Tr_ III i,
where the book describes its arrival in Rome, in _Tr_ V iv, where the
letter tells of Ovid's misery and his loyalty to his friend, and in
Ovid's exhortation to his _elegi_ at _Fast_ II 3-6. The device is not
unique to Ovid, being found at Catullus XXXV, Hor _Ep_ I xx, and Statius
_Sil_ IV iv.

=1. LEVES ELEGI.= The same phrase at Am II i 21 'blanditias _elegosque
leues_, mea tela, resumpsi'.

=1. DOCTAS AD CONSVLIS AVRES.= 'To the ears of a consul who appreciates
poetry'. Compare Hor _Ep_ I xiii 17-18 'carmina quae possint oculos
_aurisque_ morari / Caesaris' and Prop II xiii 11-12.

=2. HONORATO ... VIRO.= Dative of agent with _legenda_.

=2. HONORATO= refers specifically to Pompeius' consulship. _Honor_ is
often used with the restricted sense of 'magistracy'.

=3. LONGA VIA EST.= Compare _Tr_ I i 127-28 (the end of Ovid's
instructions to his book) 'longa uia est, propera! nobis habitabitur
orbis / ultimus, a terra terra remota mea'.

=3. LONGA VIA EST, NEC VOS PEDIBVS PROCEDITIS AEQVIS.= The _uia longa_ is
seen as a possible cause of the metre's lameness at _Tr_ III i 11-12.

=3. NEC ... PEDIBVS ... AEQVIS.= Ovid often mentions the alternating pattern
of elegiac verse: compare xvi 11 _numeris ... imparibus ... uel aequis_
and the passages there cited, _Am_ III i 8 (of Elegy) 'et, puto, pes
illi _longior alter_ erat', and _EP_ III iv 85-86 'ferre etiam molles
elegi tam uasta triumphi / pondera _disparibus_ non potuere _rotis_'.

=5. HAEMON= _Laurentianus 38 39 (saec xv), Ven. Marcianus XII 106 (saec
xv), editio princeps Bononiensis_ HAEMVM _BCMFHILT_. I follow Heinsius
and Burman in printing _Haemon_, in consideration of the preceding
_Thracen_: it seems neater to have both place-names in their Greek
forms. _Haemum_ is similarly the transmitted reading at _Met_ VI 87 (of
the tapestry created by Minerva) 'Threiciam Rhodopen habet angulus unus
et _Haemon_' and _Met_ X 76-77 (of Orpheus) 'in altam / se recipit
Rhodopen pulsumque Aquilonibus _Haemon_', the preferable _Haemon_ being
found only in certain late manuscripts.

=6. TRANSIERITIS.= In early Latin this would necessarily have been a
perfect subjunctive, the future perfect indicative being
_transieritis_ with the second 'i' short; but after Ennius and
Plautus the forms (like _-erIs_ and _-eris)_) are used
indifferently, according to metrical necessity. See Platnauer 56 and
Kühner-Stegmann I 115-16.

=7. LVCE MINVS DECIMA DOMINAM VENIETIS IN VRBEM.= '[Starting from
Brundisium] you will arrive in Rome before the tenth day'. The same
idiom at _Fast_ V 379 'nocte minus quarta promet sua sidera Chiron'.

=8. VT FESTINATVM NON FACIATIS ITER.= The trip would probably be not much
shorter than ten days. André cites Livy XXXVI 21 and Plutarch _Cato
maior_ 14 3 for Cato's five-day journey from Hydruntum (Livy; Hydruntum
is about seventy-five kilometres southeast of Brundisium) or Brundisium
(Plutarch) in 191 to announce the victory over Antiochus III at
Thermopylae; both authors mention the journey for its speed. The more
leisurely journey from Rome to Brundisium described in Hor _Sat_ I v
seems to have taken about fifteen days; see Palmer on I v 103.

=9.= Either =PETETVR= (_FT_) or PETATVR (_BCMHIL_) is possible enough.
_Petetur_ seems the better reading in view of _uenietis_ (7) and _erit_
(16), the corruption perhaps having been induced by _faciatis_ in the
preceding line. But the jussive _petatur_ could be continuing from _ite_
in the first line; compare Statius _Sil_ IV iv 4-5 'atque ubi Romuleas
uelox penetraueris arces, / continuo dextras flaui _pete_ Thybridis
oras'.

=10. NON EST AVGVSTO IVNCTIOR VLLA FORO.= Compare xv 16 'quam domus [_sc_
tua] Augusto continuata foro'.

=11. SI QVIS VT IN POPULO.= 'If someone in the crowd'. This seems to be
the sense of _ut in populo_; Wheeler's translation 'as may happen in the
crowd' will work here and at _Tr_ I i 17-18 'si quis _ut in populo_
nostri non immemor illi [=_illic_], / si quis qui quid agam forte
requirat, erit', but not at _Tr_ II 157-58 'per patriam, quae te tuta et
secura parente est, / cuius _ut in populo_ pars ego nuper eram' or at
Hor _Sat_ I vi 78-80 (Horace describes his schooldays) 'uestem seruosque
sequentis / _in magno ut populo_ si qui uidisset, auita / ex re praeberi
sumptus mihi crederet illos'.

A similar idiom appears at _Tr_ II 231-32 'denique _ut in tanto_ quantum
non extitit umquam / _corpore_ pars nulla est quae labet imperii'

=11. QVI SITIS ET VNDE.= Similar phrasing at _Ilias Lat_ 554-55 'nomen
genusque roganti, / _qui sit et unde'_.

=12. NOMINA ... QVAELIBET ... FERAT.= _Ferat_ = 'receive as answer'. Compare
Livy V 32 8 '[M. Furius Camillus] cum accitis domum tribulibus
clientibusque ... percontatus animos eorum _responsum tulisset_ se
conlaturos quanti damnatus esset, absoluere eum non posse, in exilium
abiit' and XXI 19 11.

=12. DECEPTA ... AVRE.= Compare _Met_ VII 821-23 'uocibus ambiguis
_deceptam_ praebuit _aurem_ / nescio quis nomenque aurae tam saepe
uocatum / esse putat nymphae'.

=14. VERA, MINVS= _Hilberg_ VERBA MINVS _codd_. For the phrase _uera
fateri_ Hilberg (35-36) cited as parallels _Met_ VII 728 & IX 53, _Tr_ I
ix 16, _EP_ III i 79 'si uis _uera fateri_', _EP_ III ix 19 'quid enim
dubitem tibi _uera fateri_?', to which add _EP_ II iii 7. For the
contrast of _uera_ and _ficta_ Hilberg cited _EP_ III iv 105-6 'oppida
turritis cingantur eburnea muris, / _fictaque_ res _uero_ [_codd_: uerae
_Riese_] more putetur agi'; see as well _Tr_ I ix 15-16 'haec precor ut
semper possint tibi _falsa_ uideri; / sunt tamen euentu _uera fatenda_
meo'. For the corruption of _uera_ to _uerba_ he cited _Fast_ I 332,
_Tr_ III vi 36, III xi 33 & IV iii 58, and Prop III xxiv 12 'naufragus
Aegaea uera [_Passerat_: uerba _codd_] fatebar [_uar_ fatebor] aqua';
for the position of _uera_ he cited _EP_ III i 46 & IV xiii 26. The
corruption was no doubt assisted by the isolated position of _uera_ at
the start of the pentameter.

=15-16. COPIA NEC VOBIS NVLLO PROHIBENTE VIDENDI / CONSULIS ... ERIT.=
'Even if no one stops you, you will not be able to see the consul
[because he will be busy]'. Heinsius preferred to read VLLO (_P_), but
this does not yield sense: it would have to mean 'you will be able to
see the consul if no one prevents you' or 'you will be unable to see
the consul if anyone prevents you'; neither of these meanings would
cohere with what follows.

=15. COPIA.= 'Opportunity'; compare _Met_ XI 278 '_copia_ ... facta est
adeundi tecta tyranni', _EP_ III i 135-37 'cum domus Augusti ... laeta
...  plenaque pacis erit, / tum tibi di faciant adeundi _copia_ fiat',
and _Aen_ I 520 'coram data _copia_ fandi', XI 248 (=I 520) & XI 378.

=16. CONTIGERITIS.= See on 6 _transierItis_.

=17. DICENDO IVRA.= The plural is poetic, the standard phrase being _ius
dicere_: _OLD ius2_ 4b cites Livy III 52 6 alone for the plural.

=17-26.= Ovid lists in order of ascending importance some of the
activities Pompeius as consul might be engaged in, starting with the
hearing of lawsuits and ending with visits to the imperial family. For a
shorter instance of the device of listing the recipient's possible
activities, see _Tr_ III vii 3-4 (Ovid tells his letter to seek Perilla)
'aut illam inuenies dulci cum matre sedentem, / aut inter libros
Pieridasque suas'.

=18. CONSPICVVM ... SIGNIS EBVR.= _Signis_ = 'bas-relief'; the sense is
confined to verse (_OLD signum_ 12b). Compare ix 27 'signa ... in sella
... formata curuli', _Met_ V 80-82 'altis / extantem signis ... cratera',
_Met_ XII 235-36 'signis extantibus asper / antiquus crater', _Met_ XIII
700, Lucr V 1427-28 'ueste ... purpurea atque auro signisque ingentibus
apta', _Aen_ V 267, V 536 & IX 263, Prop IV v 24, Statius _Theb_ I 540,
and Silius II 432.

=18. CVM PREMET ALTVS EBUR.= 'When he sits tall on the curule chair'. The
same situation similarly described at _Fast_ I 81-82 'iamque noui
praeeunt fasces, noua purpura fulget, / et noua conspicuum pondera
sentit ebur'; compare as well _Med Fac_ 13 'matrona _premens altum_
rubicunda sedile' and _Met_ V 317 'factaque de uiuo _pressere_ sedilia
saxo'.

=19. REDITVS ... COMPONET.= 'Will be arranging the [state's] income'. For
_reditus_ compare _Am_ I x 41 'turpe tori _reditu_ census augere
paternos' and _EP_ II iii 17-18 'at _reditus_ iam quisque suos amat, et
sibi quid sit / utile sollicitis supputat ['calculates'] articulis'. For
_componet_ compare Cic _II Verr_ IV 36 '_compone_ hoc quod postulo de
argento' and Tac _Ann_ VI 16 5.

=19. POSITAM ... AD HASTAM.= A spear placed in the ground was a symbol of
magisterial authority, and as such was always present at the letting of
tax contracts. For the language compare Cic _Leg Agr_ II 53 'ponite ante
oculos uobis Rullum ... _hasta posita_ ... auctionantem'. For _hasta_ with
the specific meaning of 'contract-letting', see Livy XXIV 18 11
'conuenere ad eos frequentes qui _hastae huius generis_ adsueuerant'.
The practice is recalled in the modern Italian term for 'auction',
_uendita all'asta_.

=20. MINVI MAGNAE.= A word play on _minus_ and _magis_ at least; but
Professor E. Fantham points out to me that Ovid probably had in mind the
phrase _maiestatem populi Romani minuere_ (Cic _Inu_ II 53 & _Phil_ I
21); Pompeius will not allow the interests of the state to be damaged.

=21. IN IVLIA TEMPLA= = _in curiam Iuliam_. Caesar had started the
construction of a new senate-house in 44; it was opened by Augustus in
29. The building, as restored by Diocletian, survives substantially
intact: see Nash I 301.

=22. TANTO DIGNIS CONSVLE REBVS.= Note the separation of the epithets from
the nouns, and the high level of diction produced by the hyperbaton.

=23. AVT FERET ... SOLITAM ... SALVTEM= = _aut, ut solet, salutabit_.

=23. NATOQVE.= Tiberius, son of Ti. Claudius Nero, had been adopted by
Augustus in AD 4.

=24. DEQVE PARVM NOTO CONSVLET OFFICIO.= 'Will be asking advice about his
unfamiliar office'. It still being winter, Pompeius would not have been
very long in office, and so would not yet have been very familiar with
his duties. Burman objected to this notion ('nec Ovidium tam adulandi
imperitum fuisse puto, ut ignorantiam aut seruitutem tam imprudenter
obiiceret Pompeio') and conjectured DEQVE PATRVM TOTO CONSVLET OFFICIO,
that is, 'consulet Caesares, _quale uelint esse officium_ totius
senatus'. But the conjecture is unattractive, and the problem not as
great as Burman thought: both Ovid and Pompeius would wish to emphasize
the importance of the Caesars.

=25. AB HIS VACVVM.= A prose usage, paralleled in Ovid by _EP_ I i 79
alone 'inque locum Scythico _uacuum_ mutabor _ab arcu_'. Elsewhere Ovid
has nine instances of _uacuus_ with the simple ablative and two
instances of _uacuus_ with the genitive, while Virgil never has _uacuus_
with a complement. ET HIS VACVVM, given by _B_ and _C_, is perhaps an
attempt to restore normal poetic idiom.

=26. A MAGNIS ... DEIS.= 'After the great gods'--Augustus and Tiberius. Dio
says that it was remarked after Augustus' death that both of the consuls
for the year were related to the emperor (LVI 29 5); it is strange that
Ovid nowhere mentions Pompeius' link with the imperial family.

For the sense of _ab_, compare for example _Ecl_ V 48-49 'nec calamis
solum aequiperas, sed uoce magistrum: / fortunate puer, tu nunc eris
alter _ab illo_' and Statius _Theb_ IV 842.

=27. CVM TAMEN ... REQVIEVERIT.= After it has arrived in Rome, the poem
should not vex Pompeius by approaching him when he is busy. At _Tr_ I i
93-96 Ovid in the same way advises his book when it should approach
Augustus, and at _EP_ III i 135-40 gives similar directions to his wife.
Compare as well _Met_ IX 572-73 (a messenger carries Byblis' declaration
of love to her brother) 'apta minister / tempora nactus adit traditque
fatentia [_H. A. Koch_: latentia _codd_] uerba' and _Met_ IX 610-12
(Byblis' explanation of the failure of her suit) 'forsitan et missi sit
quaedam culpa ministri: / non adiit apte, nec legit idonea, credo, /
tempora, nec petiit _horam animumque uacantem_'.

=27. A TVRBA RERVM.= 'De ces multiples affaires' (André). Heinsius
conjectured CVRA, citing ix 71 (addressed to Graecinus as consul) 'cum
tamen _a rerum cura_ propiore uacabit'. The conjecture is elegant
enough, but the manuscript reading seems sufficiently supported by _Her_
II 75-76 (Phyllis to Demophoon) 'de tanta _rerum turba_ factisque
parentis / sedit in ingenio Cressa relicta tuo' and _EP_ III i 144 'per
_rerum turbam_ tu quoque oportet eas'; compare as well Columella XI 2
25.

=28. MANSVETAS ... MANVS.= The same phrase in the same position at Prop III
xvi 9-10 'peccaram semel, et totum sum pulsus in annum: / in me
_mansuetas_ non habet illa _manus_'. _Mansuetus_ is foreign to poetic
vocabulary, not being found in Virgil or Horace, and only three times in
Propertius (I ix 12, I xvii 28, III xvi 10): in Ovid it occurs elsewhere
only at _Tr_ III vi 23 'numinis ut laesi fiat mansuetior ira' and _Ibis_
26.

=28. PORRIGET ILLE MANVS.= _Manus_ = _manum_; for the latter, compare
_Her_ XVIII 15-16 'protinus haec scribens "felix i littera" dixi, / "iam
tibi formosam _porriget illa manum_"'. Alternatively, the phrase could
be taken to indicate Pompeius' gesture of welcoming to a suppliant: at
_Met_ III 458 Narcissus, saying how he wished to embrace his reflection,
says 'cumque ego _porrexi tibi bracchia_, porrigis ultro'.

=31-32. VIVIT ADHVC VITAMQVE TIBI DEBERE FATETVR, / QVAM PRIVS A MITI
CAESARE MVNVS HABET.= See on i 2 _debitor ... uitae_, and compare _Tr_ V
ix 11-14 'Caesaris est primum munus, quod ducimus auras; / gratia post
magnos est tibi habenda deos. / ille dedit uitam; tu quam dedit ille
tueris, / et facis accepto munere posse frui': the similarity of
phrasing makes it all but certain that the poem was addressed to
Pompeius.

=33. MEMORI ... ORE.= The phrase belongs to high poetic diction: compare
_Met_ VI 508 'absentes pro se _memori_ rogat _ore_ salutent', _Met_ X
204 (Apollo to the dead Hyacinthus) 'semper eris mecum _memorique_
haerebis in _ore_', and _AA_ III 700 'auditos _memori_ detulit _ore_
sonos'.

=35. SANGVINE BISTONIVM QVOD NON TEPEFECERIT ENSEM.= Another instance of
high poetic diction: compare _Her_ I 19 'sanguine Tlepolemus Lyciam
_tepefecerat_ hastam', _Aen_ IX 333-34 'atro _tepefacta_ cruore /
terra', _Aen_ IX 418-19 'hasta ... traiecto ... haesit _tepefacta_
cerebro', and Hor _Sat_ II iii 136.

=37-38. ADDITA PRAETEREA VITAE QVOQVE MVLTA TVENDAE / MVNERA.= The dative
expresses purpose. For the sense of _tueri_ 'sustain', compare _Tr_ V ix
13 'uitam ... quam dedit ille _tueris_', Cic _Deiot_ 22 'atque antea
quidem maiores copias alere poterat; nunc exiguas uix _tueri_ potest',
Livy V 4 5, XXIII 38 12 & XXXIX 9 5, and Pliny _NH_ XXXIII 134 'M.
Crassus negabat locupletem esse nisi qui reditu annuo legionem _tueri_
posset'.

=38. NE PROPRIAS ATTENVARET OPES.= This may be a reference to the
financial burden of living in exile, but more probably refers to the
actual financial loss Ovid suffered in exile: 'ditata est spoliis
perfida turba meis' (_EP_ II vii 62). It is clear from _Tr_ I vi 7-8
that Ovid had feared such losses from the beginning of his exile.

_Attenuare_ is a very strong verb: compare _Met_ VIII 843-45 (of
Erysichthon) 'iamque fame patrias altique uoragine uentris /
_attenuarat_ ['had exhausted'--Miller] opes, sed inattenuata manebat /
tum quoque dira fames'.

=39. PRO QVIBVS VT MERITIS REFERATVR GRATIA.= Similar language to Pompeius
at i 21 'et leuis haec _meritis referatur gratia_ tantis'.

=40. MANCIPII ... TVI= (_CB2_) 'belonging to your property' seems a much
more elegant construction than the other manuscripts' MANCIPIVM ... TVVM
'your slave', and was conjectured by Heinsius; in support of _mancipium
... tuum_ Burman cited viii 65-66 'si quid adhuc igitur uiui, Germanice,
nostro / restat in ingenio, _seruiet_ omne tibi'.

=41-44.= Ovid uses the common device of listing _adynata_; the second
version of the device at _Tr_ I viii 1-10, where Ovid says that now his
friend has betrayed him he expects to see the _adynata_ occur.
Comprehensive listings of _adynata_ in ancient literature given by Smith
on Tib I iv 65-66, Shackleton Bailey on Prop I xv 29, Nisbet and Hubbard
on Hor _Carm_ I ii 9, xxix 10 & xxxiii 7, and by Gow on Theocritus I
132-36.

=42. VELIVOLAS= occurs once more at xvi 21 'ueliuolique maris uates', and
nowhere else in Ovid's poetry. It is found at Lucretius V 1442 and
_Aen_ I 224 'mare ueliuolum', and was from old Latin poetry: Macrobius
(_Sat_ VI v 10) cites instances from Livius Andronicus (Morel 58) and
Ennius (_Ann_ 380 Vahlen3; _Andromache_ 74 Ribbeck3).

=43. SVPINO.= 'Backwards'; almost the reverse of _praeceps_. The same
sense at _Med Fac_ 40 'nec redit in fontes unda _supina_ suos'.

=45. DIXERITIS.= See on 6 _transieritis_.

=45. SVA DONA.= Compare _Her_ XII 203 (Medea to Jason) 'dos mea tu sospes'
and Sen _Med_ 142 'muneri parcat meo [=_uitae suae_]' & 228-30.

=46. SIC FVERIT VESTRAE CAVSA PERACTA VIAE.= 'So you will have carried out
the reason for your journey'. The same sense of _causa_ at _Met_ VI
449-50 'coeperat aduentus causam, mandata referre / coniugis' and of
_peragere_ (always with _mandata_ as object) at _Met_ VII 502, XI 629 &
XIV 460, _Fast_ III 687, and _Tr_ I i 35-36 'ut _peragas mandata_,
liber, culpabere forsan / ingeniique minor laude ferere mei'.

Professor E. Fantham points out to me that Ovid may here be playing on a
second sense of _causam peragere_, 'end a speech [in court]', for which
see _Met_ XV 36-37 'spretarumque agitur legum reus ... _peracta_ est /
causa prior ['the case for the prosecution'--Miller], crimenque patet'
and _Her_ XXI 152.



VI. To Brutus


Of the Brutus to whom this poem is addressed nothing is known beyond
what Ovid here tells us. He was an advocate, by Ovid's testimony an
eminent one (29-38), and had been among the few who stood by Ovid at the
time of his exile (23-26). The collection of _Ex Ponto_ I-III was
apparently dedicated to him, since the first poem of the first book and
the last poem of the third book are addressed to him, but the two poems
fail to give any further information on him or on his relationship to
Ovid.

Ovid starts the poem with the reflection that he has now spent five
years at Tomis (1-6). Fortune has tricked him: Fabius Maximus died
before he could appeal to Augustus, Augustus before he could pardon Ovid
(7-16). He hopes that the poem he has written on the apotheosis of
Augustus will win him pardon; Brutus' fine qualities guarantee that he
shares Ovid's wishes (17-22). The poem ends with a eulogy of Brutus'
character and an assurance of Ovid's eternal gratitude to those friends
who stood by him (23-50).

=1. QVAM LEGIS.= See at ii 1 _quod legis_ (p 162).

=3-4. SED TV QVOD NOLLES, VOLVIT MISERABILE FATVM; / EI MIHI, PLVS ILLVD
QVAM TVA VOTA VALET.= For the play on _nolle_/_uelle_ and the thought of
4, compare _Met_ IX 757-58 'quodque ego, _uult_ genitor, _uult_ ipsa
socerque futurus, / at _non uult_ natura, potentior omnibus istis'.

=5. QVINQVENNIS.= Ovid often mentions the time he has spent in exile: see
_Tr_ IV vi 19-20 (AD 10) 'ut patria careo, _bis_ frugibus area trita
est, / dissiluit nudo pressa _bis_ uua pede', _Tr_ IV vii 1-2 '_Bis_ me
sol adiit gelidae post frigora brumae, / _bisque_ suum tacto Pisce
peregit iter', _Tr_ V x 1-2 (AD 11-12) 'Vt sumus in Ponto, _ter_ frigore
constitit Hister, / facta est Euxini dura _ter_ unda maris', _EP_ I ii
25-26 (AD 12-13) 'hic me pugnantem cum frigore cumque sagittis / cumque
meo fato _quarta_ fatigat hiemps', _EP_ I viii 27-28 'ut careo uobis,
Stygias detrusus in oras, / _quattuor_ autumnos Pleias orta facit', _EP_
IV x 1 (AD 14) 'Haec mihi Cimmerio _bis tertia_ ducitur aestas', and
_EP_ IV xiii 39-40 'sed me iam, Care, niuali / _sexta_ relegatum bruma
sub axe uidet'.

Ovid's first full year of exile was AD 9; since Augustus died on 19
August 14, this poem can be securely dated to the final few months of
that year.

=5. OLYMPIAS= in Latin can mean a period of four or of five years; Ovid
may have used _quinquennis_ to remove the ambiguity. _Olympias_
elsewhere in classical poetry apparently only at Manilius III 596, where
it also denotes a five-year period.

=5-6. OLYMPIAS ACTA / IAM= _Housman_ OLYMPIAS ACTA EST. / IAM _edd_. The
subject of _transit_ must be _Olympias_, since otherwise the pentameter
is without a subject. Wheeler offers 'the time is now passing to a
second lustrum', which does not account for the genitive _lustri
... alterius_ (a second _tempus_, in the accusative, would have to be
understood), while André gives 'et déjà j'entre dans un second lustre',
which does not explain the person of _transit_. The editors' reading
could be retained, and _Olympias_ understood as the subject of the
pentameter; but it seems simpler to follow Housman in omitting _est_
(with _L_ and _T_) and joining the two lines in a single sentence.

_Transit_ is in strict terms illogical, since an Olympiad once completed
(_acta_) cannot pass into a second period of time, but the idiom seems
natural enough in view of Ovid's use of _transire_ with seasons at _Met_
XV 206 '_transit in aestatem_ post uer robustior annus'; compare as well
_Fast_ V 185 (to Flora) 'incipis Aprili, _transis in tempora Maii_'.

=7. PERSTAT ENIM FORTVNA TENAX.= In Ovid's case, Fortune does not show her
typical inconstancy.

=8. OPPONIT NOSTRIS INSIDIOSA PEDEM.= Otto _pes_ 7 cites this passage and
Petronius 57 10 'et habebam in domo qui mihi _pedem opponerent_ hac
illac'.

=9-10. CERTVS ERAS ... LOQVI.= 'You had made up your mind to speak'. The
same idiom at _Her_ IV 151-52, _Her_ VII 9 'certus es, Aenea, cum
foedere soluere naues ...?', _Met_ IX 43, X 394 & XI 440; the impersonal
construction at _Met_ V 533, IX 53 'certum est mihi uera fateri' & X
38-39.

=9. FABIAE LAVS, MAXIME, GENTIS.= Similar phrasing at _EP_ III iii 2 'o
sidus Fabiae, Maxime, gentis, ades'. This passage seems to be the
earliest instance of _laus_ 'object of praise; reason for praise' used
of a person: _TLL_ VII.2 1064 73 ff. cites from classical Latin only
_Eleg Maec_ 17-18 'Pallade cum docta Phoebus donauerat artes; / tu decus
et _laudes_ huius et huius eras', Valerius Flaccus II 243-44 'decus et
patriae _laus_ una ruentis, / Hypsipyle', Silius XIII 824, and Martial I
xlix 2-3 'nostraeque _laus_ Hispaniae ... Liciniane'. LVX (_F2_), printed
by Burman, is acceptable enough (compare Cic _Cat_ IV 11 'hanc urbem,
_lucem_ orbis terrarum'), but is clearly a guess based on _F1_'s DVX.

For a full discussion of the career of Paullus Fabius Maximus, _consul
ordinarius_ in 11 BC, see Syme _HO_ 135-55. He is the recipient of _EP_
I ii, a request to plead for Ovid with Augustus, and _EP_ III iii, an
account of Ovid's vision of Amor which ends with a plea for Fabius'
assistance. He is prominently mentioned at Hor _Carm_ IV i 9-12 as a
suitable prey for Venus, and it appears from Juvenal VII 94-95 that he
was a famous patron of literature: Ovid mentions his _scripta_ at _EP_ I
ii 135. We learn from the same poem that Ovid's wife was a member of
Fabius' family: 'ille ego de uestra cui data nupta domo est' (136).

=10. SVPPLICE VOCE LOQVI.= Similar phrasing at _Met_ VI 33 '_supplice
uoce_ roga: ueniam dabit illa roganti'. The adjectival use of _supplex_
is not confined to verse; _OLD supplex_ 2 cites instances from Caesar
and Suetonius.

=11. OCCIDIS ANTE PRECES.= 'You died before making your request'. Since
Fabius is named in an inscription (_CIL_ VI 2023a, line 17; cited by
Froesch 209) as having participated in the election of Drusus to the
Arval Brotherhood on 15 May AD 14, he must have died very shortly before
Augustus.

=11-12. CAVSAMQVE EGO, MAXIME, MORTIS ... ME REOR ESSE TVAE.= The death of
Fabius, so soon before that of Augustus, seems to have raised popular
suspicions. Tacitus (_Ann_ I 5 1-2) mentions a rumour that Fabius had
secretly accompanied Augustus to Planasia to visit Agrippa Postumus and
that his wife had warned Livia of this; Augustus heard of this, and at
Fabius' funeral she was heard blaming herself for his death. If Fabius'
death occurred under strange circumstances, Ovid's accusation against
himself of having been its cause may have special point.

For a full discussion of the circumstances of Fabius' death, see Syme
_HO_ 149-51.

=12. NEC FVERAM TANTI.= 'But I was not worth this much'. _Fueram_ has the
sense of the imperfect, as at _AA_ I 103-4 'tunc neque marmoreo
_pendebant_ uela theatro, / nec _fuerant_ liquido pulpita rubra croco';
other instances at _Her_ V 69, _AA_ II 137, _AA_ III 429 & 618, and _Tr_
III xi 25. A full discussion at Platnauer 112-14: he cites thirteen
instances from Propertius, who seems to have been fondest of the idiom,
and only one certain instance from Tibullus, II v 79 'haec fuerant
olim'.

FVERO (_BC_) gives the sense 'but I will be discovered not to have been
worth this much'; the tense seems difficult to fit to the context.

FVERIM (_British Library Burney 220, saec xii-xiii_) 'but I hope I was
not worth so much' is quite possibly correct, and would account for the
corruption to _fuero_.

=12. NEC ... TANTI.= Similar phrasing at _Met_ X 613 (Atalanta ponders
Hippomenes' willingness to risk death to gain her hand) '_non_ sum me
iudice _tanti_'.

=13. MANDARE.= 'Consign'; a legal term for charging others with carrying
out business on one's behalf, which carried certain obligations with it.
See Gaius III 155-62, Just _Inst_ III 26, and the discussion at Buckland
514-21.

=15. DETECTAE ... CVLPAE= _scripsi_ DECEPTAE ... CVLPAE _codd_. _Me decipit
error_ is a phrase used by Ovid to mean 'I am making a mistake'; see
_EP_ III ix 9-12 'auctor opus laudat ... iudicium tamen hic non _decipit
error_ ['I do not make this error of judgment'], / nec quicquid genui
protinus illud amo'. Ovid uses the expression very often for the
"mistake" which led to his exile: see _Tr_ I iii 37-38 (Ovid to his
friends on the night of his exile) 'caelestique uiro quis me _deceperit
error_ / dicite pro culpa ne scelus esse putet', _Tr_ IV i 23 'scit
quoque [_sc_ Musa] cum perii quis me _deceperit error_', and _EP_ II ii
61 'quasi me nullus _deceperit error_'. He uses _decipere_ once when
speaking of the other cause of his exile: 'o puer [_sc_ Amor], exilii
_decepto_ causa magistro' (_EP_ III iii 23). Wheeler took _deceptae_ to
refer to Ovid: 'Augustus had begun to pardon the fault I committed in
error'. This kind of extreme hypallage, with the true modified noun not
expressed, does not however seem to be Ovid's practice, although found
in the Silver poets: Statius _Theb_ IX 425 'deceptaque fulmina' means
'the thunderbolts thrown by Jupiter at the request of Semele, who had
been _deceived_ by Juno'. Professor J. N. Grant suggests DECEPTI to me;
but the genitive of the first person is rare in Ovid, and the perfect
participle without expressed noun seems difficult. Owen saw the
difficulty with _deceptae_, and in his second edition referred to Livy
XXII 4 4 'id tantum hostium quod ex aduerso erat conspexit; ab tergo ac
super caput _deceptae_ insidiae'. But _deceptae_ (which has been
variously emended) there means _occultae_, as explained by Housman
(521-22), who cited Prop II xxiv 35-36 'Phrygio fallax Maeandria campo /
errat et ipsa suas _decipit_ unda uias' and Sen _HF_ 155 for the same
sense; and _occultae_ is clearly not the meaning here required, since
Ovid's misdemeanour was all too visible.

Being unable to explain _deceptae_, I have conjectured _detectae_. Ovid
seems to have committed his _error_ in two stages. First he committed
the original misdemeanour; then he kept silent about it when it might
have been better for him to speak. Compare _Tr_ III vi 11-13 'cuique
ego narrabam secreti quicquid habebam, / excepto quod me perdidit, unus
eras. / id quoque si scisses, saluo fruerere sodali'. Later this
misdemeanour was discovered: for the arrival of the news of this
discovery when Ovid was visiting Elba with Cotta Maximus, see _EP_ II
iii 83-90. It is to this discovery that _detectae_ refers: 'Augustus had
begun to forgive the misdemeanour that had been revealed'. For this use
of _detegere_ compare _Met_ II 544-47 'ales / sensit adulterium
Phoebeius [_coruus_, the raven], utque latentem / _detegeret culpam_,
non exorabilis index, / ad dominum tendebat iter' and Livy XXII 28 8
'necubi ... motus alicuius ... aut fulgor armorum fraudem ... detegeret'.

Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me the parallel problem at _Met_
IX 711 'indecepta pia mendacia fraude latebant', where context requires
_indecepta_ to have the meaning 'undetected'. _Indecepta_ might be taken
to support _deceptae_ in the present passage, but I am more inclined to
read _indetecta_ for _indecepta_: of the various conjectures made,
Zingerle's _inde incepta_ is most commonly accepted.

At _Her_ IX 101-2 'tolle procul, _decepte_, faces, Hymenaee, maritas /
et fuge turbato tecta nefanda pede!', _detecte_ should similarly be
read. _Detecte_ better explains why Hymenaeus should flee; also,
Hymenaeus has not been deceived, for it appears from 61-62 'spes bona
det uires; fratris [_Palmer_: fratri _codd_] nam nupta futura es; /
illius de quo mater, et uxor eris' that Macareus had fully intended to
marry Canace.

=16. SPEM NOSTRAM TERRAS DESERVITQVE SIMVL.= The _-que_ should of course
be taken with _terras_.

This is a typical instance of Ovid's love of _syllepsis_, of giving a
single verb two objects (or more), each of which uses a different
meaning of the verb. Compare, from many instances, ix 90 'nec cum
fortuna mens quoque uersa mea est', _Her_ VII 9 'certus es, Aenea, cum
foedere soluere naues', _Met_ II 601-2 'et pariter uultusque deo
plectrumque colorque / excidit', _Met_ VIII 177, _Fast_ III 225, _Fast_
III 857 'hic [the messenger of Ino] ... corruptus cum semine', _Fast_ V
652 'montibus his ponunt spemque laremque suum', and _EP_ II vii 84
'meque simul serua iudiciumque tuum'.

=16. DESERVITQVE.= Ovid does not use _deserere_ with things as object
until his poetry of exile: compare _Tr_ I ix 65 'nec amici _desere_
causam'. Instances in the later _Heroides_ at XV 155 'Sappho _desertos_
cantat amores' and XVI 260 'orantis medias _deseruere_ preces'; in both
cases the objects are virtually equivalent to persons.

=17. TAMEN.= 'In spite of my dejection'.

=17-18. DE CAELITE ... RECENTI ... CARMEN.= The poem does not survive. At
xiii 25-32 Ovid describes a similar poem on the apotheosis of Augustus,
written in Getic.

=17. RECENTI.= 'New, freshly created'. Used in similar contexts at _Met_
IV 434-35 'umbraeque _recentes_ ... simulacraque functa sepulcris', VIII
488 'fraterni manes animaeque _recentes_', X 48-49 'Eurydicenque uocant:
umbras erat illa _recentes_ / inter', and especially XV 844-46 'Venus
... Caesaris eripuit membris nec in aera solui / passa _recentem_ animam
caelestibus intulit astris'.

=18. VESTRA= = 'of you [plural] at Rome'.

=18. CARMEN IN ORA DEDI.= 'I sent a poem for you to recite from and speak
of'. _Dare_ meaning 'send' is usually restricted to use with _litteras_
(_OLD do_ 10; compare Cic _Att_ II i 12 & IX viiB 1, Livy XXVII 16 13).

For _in ora_, compare Catullus XL 5 'an ut peruenias _in ora_ uulgi
[_sc_ hoc facis]?', Hor _Ep_ I iii 9 ' ... Titius, Romana breui uenturus
_in ora_', Prop III ix 32 (to Maecenas) 'et uenies tu quoque _in ora_
uirum', _Tr_ V vii 29-30 'non tamen ingratum est quodcumque obliuia
nostri / impedit et profugi nomen _in ora_ refert', and Livy II 36 3.
The only instance I have found of the expression being used of a thing
rather than a person other than this passage is also from Ovid: 'illud
opus ... nunc incorrectum populi peruenit _in ora_, / in populi quicquam
si tamen ore mei est' (_Tr_ III xiv 21-24). Neither passage would have
seemed strange to the Romans, given the close identification between
poet and work: compare Ennius' famous 'uolito uiuo' per ora uirum' and
_Met_ XV 878 'ore legar populi'.

=19. QVAE PIETAS.= 'This demonstration of loyalty'.

=20. SACRAE ... DOMVS.= Augustus' house called 'magni ... Iouis ... domum' at
_Tr_ III i 38; compare as well _EP_ III i 135 'domus Augusti, Capitoli
more colenda'.

=20. MITIOR IRA.= Compare _EP_ III iii 83 'pone metus igitur: _mitescet_
Caesaris _ira_'.

=21. LIQVIDO POSSVM IVRARE.= 'I can swear unambiguously'. The only other
instance of this sense in verse apparently III iii 49-50 'scis tamen et
_liquido_ iuratus dicere possis / non me legitimos sollicitasse toros'.
From prose compare Cic _II Verr_ IV 124 'confirmare hoc _liquido_,
iudices, possum, ualuas magnificentiores ... nullas umquam ullo in templo
fuisse', _II Verr_ III 136, _Fam_ XI 27 7 'alia sunt quae _liquido_
negare soleam', and Sen _Ben_ VII 9 5.

=22. NON DVBIA ... NOTA.= The phrase logically belongs with the preceding
line: on the firm evidence of Brutus' past behaviour (described in
23-42), Ovid can confidently state that Brutus prays for his
restoration. _Non dubia_ by litotes for _certa_ (for which see _Her_ XX
207 'te ... nimium miror, _nota certa_ furoris'); _nota_ 'tangible sign,
evidence' similarly used at _Met_ I 761 (_generis_). FIDE (_LTM2ulF2ul_)
is an obvious gloss for _nota_.

=23. VERVM ... AMOREM.= 'Sincere love' (Wheeler); compare _Met_ V 61
'_ueri_ non dissimulator _amoris'_ and _Tr_ IV iv 71 'et comes exemplum
_ueri_ Phoceus _amoris_'.

=25. TVAS ... LACRIMAS NOSTRASQVE.= The tears of Ovid's friends at his
departure described at _Tr_ III iv 39-40, _EP_ I ix 17-18, and _EP_ II
xi 9-10 (to Rufus) 'grande uoco lacrimas meritum quibus ora rigabas, /
cum mea concreto sicca dolore forent'.

=26. PASSVROS POENAM CREDERET ESSE DVOS.= Compare _Tr_ V iv 37-38 (Ovid's
letter speaking) 'quamuis attonitus, sensit tamen omnia, _nec te / se
minus aduersis indoluisse suis_'.

=27. LENEM TE MISERIS GENVIT NATURA.= Compare Cic _Tusc_ II 11 'te
_natura_ excelsum quendam uidelicet et altum et humana despicientem
_genuit_' and Ennius _Ann_ 112 Vahlen3 (of Romulus) 'qualem te patriae
custodem di _genuerunt_'.

=29. MARTE FORENSI.= Similar metaphor for the lawcourts at _Fast_ IV 188
'et fora _Marte suo_ litigiosa uacent', _Tr_ III xii 17-18 'ludis /
cedunt uerbosi garrula _bella_ fori' and _Tr_ IV x 17-18 'frater
... fortia uerbosi natus ad _arma_ fori'. According to Ovid real wounds
were suffered in the forum at Tomis: 'adde quod iniustum rigido ius
dicitur ense, / dantur et in medio uulnera saepe foro' (_Tr_ V x 43-44).

=30. POSSE TVO PERAGI VIX PVTET ORE REOS.= Similar language at _Tr_ I i
23-24 'protinus admonitus repetet mea crimina lector, / _et peragar
populi publicus ore reus_'. _Peragere_ refers to the prosecution of a
defendant carried to its end, but does not imply success for the
prosecutor: see Pliny _Ep_ III ix 30 and Ulpian _Dig_ XLVIII v 2 1 'non
alias ad mulierem possit peruenire, nisi reum peregerit [_sc_
adulterii]; peregisse autem non alias quis uidetur, _nisi et
condemnauerit_'.

=31. QVAMVIS PVGNARE VIDENTVR= _BMFH_. Given the dependent _pugnare_, it
seems hardly possible to read the VIDETVR given by the other
manuscripts. The same problem arises at _Met_ VIII 463-64 '_pugnant_
materque sororque, / et diuersa trahunt unum duo nomina pectus', where
the manuscripts divide between _pugnant_ and _pugnat_; for an
unambiguous parallel, see _Her_ XIX 173 'nunc, male res iunctae, calor
et reuerentia _pugnant_'.

Heinsius further suggested deleting _est_ from the preceding _scilicet
eiusdem est_ 'cum tribus libris', but the change in number does not seem
unduly harsh.

=32. SVPPLICIBVS FACILEM.= See on iv 30 _faciles in tua uota_, and compare
_Am_ II iii 5-6 (to his girl's eunuch) 'mollis in obsequium _facilisque
rogantibus_ esses, / si tuus in quauis praetepuisset amor' and _Her_ XVI
197-98 'da modo te _facilem_, nec dedignare maritum ... Phrygem'.

Ovid is here indirectly referring to his own situation: compare _EP_ III
iii 107-8 'at tua _supplicibus_ domus est adsueta _iuuandis_, / _in
quorum numero me precor esse uelis_'.

=33. LEGIS VINDICTA.= 'The exacting of punishment on behalf of the law'.
The law has been broken, and therefore demands retribution; Brutus acts
on its behalf. For the sense of the genitive compare Val Max I 1 ext 3:
(Dionysius of Syracuse committed many acts of sacrilege, but punishment
was visited on him after his death in the form of his son's ignominious
career) 'lento enim gradu ad _uindictam sui_ diuina procedit ira
tarditatemque supplicii grauitate pensat'.

=33. LEGIS ... SEVERAE.= _Seuerae_ here serves as a standard epithet and
has no such special force as at _EP_ III iii 57-58 'uetiti ... _lege
seuera_ / credor adulterii composuisse notas'.

=34. VERBA VELVT TAETRVM SINGVLA VIRVS HABENT.= The same image at _EP_ III
iii 105-6 'ergo alii noceant miseris optentque timeri, / _tinctaque
mordaci spicula felle gerant_'.

=34. TAETRVM= _R. J. Tarrant_ TINCTV _Ehwald_ TINCTVM _codd_. _Tinctum_ is
impossible: if the word were used, it would have to go with _uerba_.
Compare _Ibis_ 53-54 'liber iambus / _tincta_ Lycambeo sanguine _tela_
dabit', _Ibis_ 491 '[tamque cadas domitus ...] quam qui _dona_ tulit
Nesseo _tincta_ ueneno', _EP_ III i 26 _'tinctaque_ mortifera tabe
_sagitta_ madet', and _EP_ III iii 106 _'tinctaque_ mordaci _spicula_
felle gerant'. Ehwald's _tinctu_ is linguistically and palaeographically
somewhat better than Merkel's _tinguat_: for similar corruptions compare
_Fast_ III 612 'flet tamen _admonitu_ motus, Elissa, tui', where many
manuscripts read _admonitus_, and _Tr_ I iv 9 'pinea texta sonant pulsu
[_Rothmaler_: pulsi _codd_], stridore rudentes'. Even so, 'Each of your
words carries poison, as though it had been dipped in it' seems awkward.
For Professor Tarrant's _taetrum_ compare Lucretius I 936 'absinthia
taetra', _Dirae_ 23 'taetra uenena', and _Hal_ 131 'nigrum ... uirus'.

=34. VIRVS HABENT.= Compare _Tr_ IV i 84 'aut telo _uirus habente_ perit'
& III x 64 'nam uolucri ferro tinctile _uirus inest_'.

=35-36. HOSTIBVS EVENIAT QUAM SIS VIOLENTVS IN ARMIS / SENTIRE.= _Hostibus
eueniat_ is a common phrase in Ovid: compare _Am_ II x 16-17 '_hostibus
eueniat_ uita seuera meis! / _hostibus eueniat_ uiduo dormire cubili',
_Am_ III xi 16, _AA_ III 247, _Fast_ III 493-94 'at, puto, praeposita
est fuscae mihi Candida paelex! / _eueniat nostris hostibus_ ille dolor
[_recc quidam_: color _codd plerique_]!', and _Her_ XVI 219-20 (Paris to
Helen) '_hostibus eueniant_ conuiuia talia nostris, / experior posito
qualia saepe mero!'.

=37. QVAE TIBI TAM TENVI CVRA LIMANTVR.= 'Which are sharpened by you with
such painstaking care'. For this meaning of _limare_ compare Pliny _NH_
VIII 71 'cornu ad saxa _limato_' and Cic _Brut_ 236 '[M. Piso ...]
habuit a natura genus quoddam _acuminis_, quod etiam arte _limauerat_'.

=37-38. VT OMNES / ISTIVS INGENVI PECTORIS ESSE NEGENT.= 'So that all
would deny that they are the product of your kindly spirit'; for this
sense of _ingenuus_ compare Catullus LXVIII 37-38 'quod cum ita sit,
nolim statuas nos mente maligna / id facere aut _animo_ non satis
_ingenuo_'. _Ingenui pectoris_ is my correction for the manuscripts'
INGENIVM CORPORIS, which could only mean 'so that all would deny that
the talent of your body exists'; Ovid can hardly be identifying the
_tela_ of 36 with Brutus' _ingenium_. Wheeler translates 'On these [the
missiles of your tongue] you use the file with such extreme care that
none would recognize in them your real nature', and André 'que personne
ne croirait qu'un tel esprit habite ton corps'; neither translation fits
the Latin. Shackleton Bailey's INGENIVM NOMINIS still leaves unsolved
the problem of _ingenium_.

The corruption of _ingenui_ to _ingenium_ (or rather, _ingeniU_) is
simple enough; and the interchange of _pectus_ and _corpus_ is a common
error.

=42. NOTITIAM ... INFITIATA.= _Infitiari_ used similarly at _EP_ I vii 27
'nec tuus est genitor nos _infitiatus_ amicos'.

=43. IMMEMOR ... IMMEMOR.= Professor R. J. Tarrant points out the similar
epanalepsis at Hor _Ep_ I xi 9 '_oblitusque_ meorum, _obliuiscendus_ et
illis'.

=44. SOLLICITI= _BCM2ul_ SOLLICITE _M1FHILT_. The adjective with adverbial
meaning would be especially liable to corruption. The same construction
at _Am_ II iv 25 'dulce canit flectitque _facillima_ uocem'.

=44. LEVASTIS= _Barberinus lat. 26, saec xiii_ LEVATIS _BCMFHILT_. If 44
were taken in isolation, _leuatis_, which most editors print, would be
acceptable enough; compare _Tr_ IV i 49 ' iure deas igitur ueneror mala
nostra _leuantes_' and _EP_ III vi 13-14 'nec scelus admittas si
consoleris amicum, / mollibus et uerbis aspera fata _leues_'. But it is
clear from 42 'est infitiata' and 49 'doluistis' that Ovid is speaking
of the time of his banishment, and so _leuastis_ must be read. Compare
_Tr_ I v 75 'me deus oppressit, nullo _mala nostra leuante_', _EP_ II
vii 61-62 'recta fides comitum poterat _mala nostra leuare_: / ditata
est spoliis perfida turba meis', and _EP_ III ii 25-26 'pars estis pauci
melior, qui rebus in artis / ferre mihi nullam turpe putastis [_uar_
putatis] opem'.

=45-50.= Compare the listing of _adynata_ at the end of v (41-44), which
again illustrates Ovid's eternal gratitude (to Sextus Pompeius). Here
the personal detail (_hic nimium nobis conterminus Hister_) makes the
_adynaton_ reflect Ovid's own circumstances.

=46. DE MARE.= The same form of the ablative at _Tr_ V ii 20 'pleno de
mare'. Compare Ovid's frequent use of the metrically convenient ablative
in _-e_ of third-declension adjectives.

=47-48.= Thyestes' feast cited as a proverbial example at _Met_ XV 62
(Pythagoras is urging a vegetarian diet) 'neue Thyesteis cumulemus
uiscera mensis', _Tr_ II 391-92 'si non Aeropen [_Politianus_: Meropen
_uel_ Europen _codd_] frater sceleratus amasset, / auersos Solis non
legeremus equos', Lucan I 534-44, and Martial III xlv 1-2 'Fugerit an
Phoebus mensas cenamque Thyestae / ignoro: fugimus nos, Ligurine, tuam'.

=47. VTQVE ... SI= = _et, quasi_. All of the instances of the idiom cited
by Lewis & Short _ut_ II A 2e and _OLD ut_ 8d are from prose, except for
Ter _Eun_ 117 and Lucilius 330 Marx. In none of these passages is _ut_
separated from _si_: the hyperbaton elevates the phrase and makes more
natural its use in verse.

=49. QVI ME DOLVISTIS ADEMPTVM.= 'Who mourned my exile' is the meaning
imposed by context, but the phrase would usually mean 'who mourned my
death': compare _EP_ I ix 41 'iure igitur lacrimas Celso libamus
_adempto_', and the similar use of _raptus_ for the exiled Ovid at xi 5
and xvi 1. For Ovid's considering his exile as his death, see xvi 1-4,
_Tr_ III iii 53 'cum patriam amisi, tunc me periisse putato', and _EP_ I
ix 56 'et nos extinctis adnumerare potest'.



VII. To Vestalis


Vestalis, a younger son of Cottius, monarch of a small kingdom in the
Alps (see at 29 [p 253]), was _primipilaris_ of the legion of the area
(perhaps the _V Macedonica_). He had just been named administrator of
the region around Tomis (see at 1); as an important local official, he
was a natural choice as recipient of one of Ovid's letters.

The poem starts with a description of the harsh climate of Tomis, to
which Vestalis along with Ovid can now testify, and of the savagery of
the inhabitants (1-12). This serves as a bridge to a compliment to
Vestalis on being named _primipilaris_ (13-18), and to the main body of
the poem, a long and rather conventional description of how Vestalis led
the final attack in the recovery of Aegissos (19-52). In the concluding
distich Ovid declares that he has rendered immortal the deeds of
Vestalis.

=1. ORAS= (_CI_) seems more suited to the nature of Vestalis' command than
VNDAS, the reading of the other manuscripts. After _Euxinas_, corruption
from _oras_ to _undas_ would be very easy, the inverse less so. Ovid
does not elsewhere use _Euxinae orae_, the usual substantives with
_Euxinus_ being _aquae_, _mare_, _fretum_, and, closest in meaning,
_litus_, for which see iii 51 'litus ad Euxinum ... ibis', _Tr_ V ii
63-64 'iussus ad Euxini deformia litora ueni / aequoris', and
_Tr_ V iv 1.

=2. POSITIS ... SVB AXE= in effect acts as a single adjective meaning
'northern'; _axe_ plays a subordinate role and so does not require an
epithet. The phrasing may be based on Accius 566-67 Ribbeck2 '[ora ...]
_sub axe posita_ ad Stellas septem, unde horrifer / Aquilonis stridor
gelidas molitur niues'. _Lycaonio ... sub axe_ at _Tr_ III ii 2.

=3. ASPICIS EN PRAESENS.= Compare ix 81-86, where Ovid invites Graecinus
to ask his brother Flaccus, recently stationed in the Pontus, about
conditions of life in the area.

=3. IACEAMVS.= 'Lie suffering': similarly used at _EP_ I iii 49 'orbis in
extremi _iaceo_ desertus harenis', I vii 5, II ix 4 & III i 85 'ut minus
infesta _iaceam_ regione labora'.

=4. FALSA ... QVERI.= Perhaps a common phrase: Professor R. J. Tarrant
cites Sallust _Iug_ 1 '_Falso queritur_ de natura sua genus humanum'.

=5-6. ACCEDET ... FIDES.= 'People will believe'. Compare Cic _Diu_ I 5
'Cratippusque ... isdem rebus _fidem tribuit_, reliqua diuinationis
genera reiecit' and Tac _Germ_ 3 4 'ex ingenio quisque _demat uel addat
fidem_' 'each can believe or disbelieve this according to his
disposition'.

=5-6. NON IRRITA ... FIDES= = _rata fides_, a phrase meaning
'trustworthiness', _rata_ having no special force. Compare _Met_ III 341
'prima _fide_ [genitive] ... _ratae_ temptamina', _Tr_ I v 49-50 'multa
credibili tulimus _ratamque_, / quamuis acciderint, non habitura
_fidem_', and _Tr_ III x 35-36 'cum sint praemia falsi / nulla, _ratam_
debet testis habere _fidem_'. Note the hyperbaton in all these passages.

=6. ALPINIS IVVENIS REGIBVS ORTE.= See at 29 _progenies alti fortissima
Donni_ (p 253). For the language, compare Hor _Carm_ I i 1 'Maecenas
atauis edite regibus'.

=7. IPSE VIDES CERTE GLACIE CONCRESCERE PONTVM.= At ix 85-86 Ovid tells
Graecinus to ask his brother Flaccus 'mentiar, an coeat duratus frigore
Pontus, / et teneat glacies iugera multa freti'.

Similar language at _Tr_ III x 37-38 'uidimus ingentem glacie consistere
pontum, / lubricaque [_codd_: lubrica cum _fort scribendum_] immotas
testa premebat aquas'.

=8. IPSE VIDES RIGIDO STANTIA VINA GELV.= The same picture more explicitly
given at _Tr_ III x 23-24 'nudaque consistunt, formam seruantia testae,
/ uina, nec hausta meri, sed data frusta bibunt'.

=9-10. IPSE VIDES ONERATA FEROX VT DVCAT IAZYX / PER MEDIAS HISTRI
PLAVSTRA BVBVLCVS AQVAS.= Similar descriptions at _Tr_ III x 33-34
'perque nouos pontes, subterlabentibus undis, / _ducunt Sarmatici
barbara plaustra boues_' and _Tr_ III xii 29-30 'nec mare concrescit
glacie, nec ut ante per Histrum / stridula Sauromates _plaustra
bubulcus_ agit'.

=9. IAZYX.= The _Iazyges Sarmatae_ are mentioned by Pliny (_NH_ IV 80) and
by Strabo (VII 3 17), who describes them as one of several tribes
living between the Borysthenes (Dnepr) and the Danube. They are also
listed by Pompey, under the name of 'Iazyges Metanastae', the Wandering
Iazyges (_Geog_ III 7); the 'Iazyges' he describes as living along the
shore of the Maeotis (III 5 19). Tacitus mentions the nation at _Ann_
XII 29 4 (Vannius, king of the Suebi, is under attack) 'ipsi manus
propria pedites, eques e Sarmaticis Iazygibus erat' and at _Hist_ III 5
(the _principes Sarmatarum Iazygum_ are enlisted to ensure the defence
of Moesia in the absence of the regular troops; their offer to raise
infantry as well as supplying their usual force of cavalry is rejected
because of the fear of future treachery).

The name of the tribe was difficult metrically, so here Ovid calls them
_Iazyges_, while at _Tr_ III xii 30 (cited in the previous note) he
calls them _Sauromatae_. At _EP_ I ii 77 he solves the difficulty
through hendiadys: 'quid _Sauromatae_ faciant, quid _Iazyges_ acres'.

=11. ASPICIS.= Ovid here uses verbs of seeing in an interesting way. At 7
and 9 he has _uides_; then _aspicis_ suggests continuity but at the same
time movement toward a new subject, and with a military detail
introduced so as to introduce Vestalis' experience of war; then in 13-14
the emphasis is changed by the contrary-to-fact past optative _utinam
... spectata fuisset_.

=11. ASPICIS ET MITTI SVB ADVNCO TOXICA FERRO.= 'You behold how poison is
hurled on the barbed steel' (Wheeler). The _telum_ of 12 should be taken
to be a spear, since _mittere_ never seems to be used of arrows. At
_Ibis_ 135 the _hasta_ is mentioned as the special weapon of the
Iazyges.

=11. ADVNCO.= The spear had hooks. Compare _Met_ VI 252-53 'quod [_sc_
ferrum] simul eductum est, pars et pulmonis _in hamis_ / eruta cumque
anima cruor est effusus in auras', where Bömer cites among other
passages Curtius IX 5 23 'corpore ... nudato animaduertunt _hamos inesse
telo_ nec aliter id sine pernicie corporis extrahi posse quam ut secando
uulnus augerent' and Prop II xii 9 'et merito _hamatis_ manus est armata
sagittis'.

=13-14. ATQVE VTINAM PARS HAEC TANTUM SPECTATA FVISSET, / NON ETIAM
PROPRIO COGNITA MARTE TIBI.= A similar opposition at _Met_ III 247-48 (of
Actaeon) _'uelletque uidere, / non etiam sentire_ canum fera facta
suorum'.

=15. TENDITVR= _Owen_ TENDITIS _codd_. The number of _tenditis_ is
inappropriate to the context. Owen's _tenditur_, independently
conjectured two years later by Ehwald (_KB_ 84), seems a somewhat more
elegant solution to the problem than Merkel's TENDISTI. It puts the
weight of the line on _ad primum ... pilum_ rather than on Vestalis
himself; the pentameter, with its emphasis on the _honor_, suggests that
this is right.

=15. PRIMVM PILVM.= Compare _Am_ III viii 27-28 'proque bono uersu
_primum_ deducite _pilum_! / nox [_A. Y. Campbell_: hoc _uel_ hic
_codd_] tibi, si belles [_Madvig_: uelles _codd_], possit, Homere,
dari'. The _primipilaris_ was the commander of the first century of the
first cohort of the Roman legion, and hence first in rank among the
legion's centurions.

=17. PLENIS= is the reading of all but two of the manuscripts collated.
For this sense of _plenus_ ('abundant'), compare _Am_ I viii 56 '_plena_
uenit canis de grege praeda lupis', _Nux_ 91-92 'illa [the tree that is
not near a road] suo quaecumque tulit dare dona colono / et _plenos_
fructus adnumerare potest', Hor _Sat_ I i 57, and Cic _Sex Rosc_ 6
'alienam pecuniam tam _plenam_ atque praeclaram'. Ehwald read PLENVS
(_FacI_), joining _ingens_ with _uirtus_ in the following line, arguing
that the honour would not seem a great one to a member of a royal
family. But Ovid devoted four lines to describing Vestalis' new rank: he
must have believed that Vestalis would consider it a very great honour
indeed. As well, if _ingens_ is connected with _titulus_, _uirtus
... maior_ gains point.

=17. PLENIS ... FRVCTIBVS.= For the wealth of the _primipilaris_, see _Am_
III viii 9-10 'ecce recens diues parto per uulnera censu / praefertur
nobis sanguine pastus eques'. In that poem the newly-rich
_primipilaris_, Ovid's rival in love, is given a character very
different from that of Vestalis.

=17. INGENS= is used at ix 65 of another office, the consulship.

=18. IPSA TAMEN VIRTVS ORDINE MAIOR ERIT.= A similar sentiment at _EP_ II
ix 11-14 (to king Cotys) 'regia, crede mihi, res est succurrere lapsis
... fortunam decet hoc istam ['this befits your position'], _quae maxima
cum sit, / esse potest animo uix tamen aequa tuo_'.

=19. NON NEGAT HOC HISTER.= For the device of calling to witness the
scenes of military exploits compare Catullus LXIV 357 'testis erit
magnis uirtutibus unda Scamandri' and the passages there cited by
Fordyce. For _non negat_ Professor A. Dalzell cites Catullus IV 6-7
'negat ... negare'.

=20. PVNICEAM GETICO SANGVINE FECIT AQVAM.= Similar language at ix 79-80
(of Flaccus) 'hic raptam Troesmin celeri uirtute recepit, / _infecitque
fero sanguine Danuuium_'.

=21. AEGISSOS.= The city, the modern Tulcea, is situated about 110
kilometres directly north of Tomis (Constanta) on the southernmost
branch of the Danube, 60 kilometres from the mouth of the river. At _EP_
I viii 11-20 Ovid describes the recapture of the city from the Getes;
evidently the city had been lost once again.

_Aegissos_ is the spelling certified by three of the five sources cited
by Mommsen (_CIL_ III page 1009), namely Hierocles _Synecdemus_ 637 14,
_Notitia dignitatum_ 99, and Procopius _Aed_ IV 7 20. The _Itinerarium
Antoninianum_ (226 2) offers _Aegiso_ (ablative); Ehwald (_KB_ 41),
citing Mommsen, took this as sufficient justification for retaining the
single _s_ of the _Ex Ponto_ manuscripts, although the now lost
Strasbourg manuscript had _egissus_ at I viii 13 (and an indication of
an alternative ending in _-os_). The _Ravenna Cosmography_ (4 5),
Mommsen's final source, reads _Aegypsum_.

=27. TE SVBEVNTE RECEPTA.= 'Recaptured on your attack'. Intransitive
_subire_ in this sense belongs to military vocabulary: compare Caesar
_BG_ VII 85 'alii tela coniciunt, alii testudine facta _subeunt_' and
Curtius IV 2 23. For instances from military prose of _subire_ with a
direct object see Caesar _BG_ II 27 '_subire_ iniquissimum locum',
Hirtius _BG_ VIII 15, _Bell Alex_ 76 2 '_subierant_ iniquum locum', and
_Bell Hisp_ 24 2.

=22. INGENIO ... LOCI.= 'The nature (i.e. difficulty) of its terrain'. The
same standard phrase at Tac _Ann_ VI 41 'locorumque ingenio', _Hist_ I
51 'diu infructuosam et asperam militiam tolerauerant _ingenio loci_
caelique ['climate']', and from Ovid _Tr_ V x 17-18 'tumulus defenditur
ipse / moenibus exiguis ingenioque loci' and _EP_ II i 52 '[oppida ...]
nec satis _ingenio_ tuta fuisse _loci_'.

=22. NIL OPIS.= The expression is rather prosaic: compare Cic _Fam_ IV i 1
'_aliquid opis_ rei publicae tulissemus'.

=23. DVBIVM= _BMFHIT_ DVBIVM EST _CL_. The same variant in many
manuscripts at _EP_ III i 17-18 (Ovid is addressing Tomis) 'nec tibi
sunt fontes laticis nisi paene marini, / qui potus _dubium_ sistat
alatne sitim'.

=24. NVBIBVS AEQVA.= 'As high as the clouds'. For this use of _aequus_
compare _Aen_ IX 674 'abietibus iuuenes patriis in [_Heyne_: et _codd_;
_cf Il XII 132_ '[Greek: hestasan hôs hote te dryes ouresin
hypsikarênoi]'] montibus aequos', Statius _Ach_ I 173 'aequus uertice
matri', Sen _Ep_ 94 61 'aequum arcibus aggerem ... et muros in miram
altitudinem eductos', and _Aen_ IV 89 '_aequataque_ machina caelo'.

=25. SITHONIO= = _Thracio_.

=25. INTERCEPERAT.= _Intercipere_ 'capture' common in Livy (IX 43 3, XXI 1
5, XXVI 51 12, XXXVI 31 10); compare Ammianus XX 7 17 & XX 10 3 'locis
... recuperatis quae olim barbari intercepta retinebant ut propria'.

=26. EREPTAS VICTOR HABEBAT OPES.= Similar phrasing at _Fast_ III 49-51
'hoc ubi cognouit contemptor Amulius aequi / (nam _raptas_ fratri
_uictor habebat opes_), / amne iubet mergi geminos'.

=27. FLVMINEA ... VNDA.= _Flumineus_ does not occur elsewhere in the
_Tristia_ or _Ex Ponto_; _fluminea ... aqua_ at _Fast_ II 46 & 596.

=27. VITELLIVS.= This Vitellius is presumably one of the four sons of
Publius Vitellius, grandfather of the emperor. Suetonius wrote of the
sons, Aulus, Quintus, Publius, and Lucius, that they were 'quattuor
filios amplissimae dignitatis cognomines ac tantum praenominibus
distinctos' (_Vit_ 2 2). Heinsius suggested Aulus (_cos_ AD 32) was the
one here meant, 'nisi ad L. Vitellium patrem [_sc_ principis] referre
mauis'. 'On the general and reasonable assumption', wrote Syme (_HO_
90), 'this is P. Vitellius'. But Suetonius calls P. Vitellius 'Germanici
comes', and he is heard of in 15 assisting Germanicus in a campaign (Tac
_Ann_ I 70 1): it is perhaps more likely that Publius would have been
with Germanicus at the time of the capture of Aegissos, and that another
of the brothers is meant. Certainty is in any case not attainable.

=29. PROGENIES ALTI FORTISSIMA DONNI.= For the phrasing, compare _EP_ II
ix 1-2 'Regia _progenies_, cui nobilitatis origo / nomen in Eumolpi
peruenit usque ['goes back to'], Coty'.

The Donnus here referred to is Vestalis' grandfather (_CIL_ V 7817), or
possibly a more distant ancestor. Vestalis' father, Cottius, became a
client of Augustus; at XV 10 7 Ammianus mentions the worship still
accorded Cottius 'quod iusto moderamine rexerat suos, et ascitus in
societatem rei Romanae quietem genti praestitit sempiternam'. At _Nero_
18 Suetonius mentions as one of the few additions to the empire under
Nero the 'regnum ... Alpium defuncto Cottio'. This Cottius would probably
have been Vestalis' older brother; André is therefore right to infer
that Vestalis 'n'était pas l'héritier du trône, ce qu'Ovide n'aurait pas
manqué de signaler'.

=30. IMPETVS.= _Impetus_ + infinitive usually indicates a mad impulse: the
only other exception in Ovid is _Met_ V 287-88 (one of the Muses
speaking) '_impetus ire fuit_; claudit sua tecta Pyreneus / uimque
parat, quam nos sumptis effugimus alis'.

=31. CONSPICVVS LONGE FVLGENTIBVS ARMIS.= Modelled on _Aen_ XI 769
'_insignis longe_ Phrygiis _fulgebat_ in _armis_'.

=32. FORTIA NE POSSINT FACTA LATERE CAVES.= Vestalis would in any case
have fought bravely; so that his deeds would not pass unnoticed, he led
the attack.

=33. INGENTIQVE GRADV.= When Ovid elsewhere use _ingens gradus_ (_passus_)
he gives the phrase a humorous tone: see _Am_ III i 11 'uenit et
_ingenti_ uiolenta Tragoedia _passu_', _AA_ III 303-4 'illa uelut
coniunx Vmbri rubicunda mariti / ambulat _ingentes_ uarica fertque
_gradus'_, and _Met_ XIII 776-77 (of Polyphemus) 'gradiens _ingenti_
litora _passu_ / degrauat'. The straightforwardness of this passage is
of a piece with the rest of the poem.

For an example of the normal epic use of this detail, see _Aen_ X 572
'longe gradientem'.

=33. FERRVM LOCVMQVE= reflects 23 'dubium _positu_ melius defensa
_manune_'.

=34. SAXAQVE ... GRANDINE PLVRA.= The same phrase in the same metrical
position at _Ibis_ 467-68 'aut te deuoueat certis Abdera diebus, /
_saxaque_ deuotum _grandine plura_ petant'.

=35. MISSA SVPER IACVLORVM TVRBA.= 'The crowding missiles hurled from
above' (Wheeler).

=38. FERE.= Heinsius' FERO would involve the repetition of _fero_ in 44;
and _fero uulnere_ would be rather feeble when applied to a shield.

Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me that Ovid's description of
Vestalis' exploit may have served as a distant model for Lucan's
account of how a centurion named Scaeua rallied Caesar's forces and led
an attack against Pompey's encampment (VI 140-262). Scaeua was made
_primipilaris_ in reward for his bravery (Caesar _BC_ III 53 5).

=40. SED MINOR EST ACRI LAVDIS AMORE DOLOR.= Similar language of a similar
exploit at _Met_ XI 525-28 'ut miles, numero praestantior omni, / cum
saepe adsiluit defensae moenibus urbis, / spe potitur tandem _laudisque
accensus amore_ / inter mille uiros murum tamen occupat unus'. Ovid's
description of Vestalis' exploit is little more than a string of
conventional phrases.

=40. ACRI.= 'Sharp'. Compare ii 36 'immensum gloria _calcar_ habet'.

=41-42. TALIS APVD TROIAM DANAIS PRO NAVIBVS AIAX / DICITVR HECTOREAS
SVSTINVISSE FACES.= Compare _Met_ XIII 7-8 (Ajax speaking of Ulysses) 'at
non Hectoreis dubitauit cedere flammis, / quas ego sustinui, quas hac a
classe fugaui' and _Met_ XIII 384-85 (the death of Ajax) 'Hectora qui
solus, qui ferrum ignesque Iouemque / sustinuit totiens, unam non
sustinet iram'. All three passages are drawn from _Il_ XV 674-746, the
description of how Ajax repulsed Hector's attempt to set the Greek ships
afire, and in particular from 730-31 '[Greek: enth ar' ho g' hestêkei
dedokêmenos, encheï d' aiei / Trôas amyne neôn, hos tis pheroi akamaton
pyr]'.

=41. PRO NAVIBVS.= 'In front of the ships'; a reminiscence of _Il_ XV 746
(the final line of the book) '[Greek: dôdeka de proparoithe neôn
autoschedon outa]'.

=43. DEXTERA DEXTRAE.= Ovid used syncope in _dextera_ where metrically
convenient. Elsewhere when he employs the two forms he is usually
describing the joining of hands in pledge or friendship. See _Her_ II 31
'commissaque _dextera dextrae_', _Her_ XII 90 '_dextrae dextera_ iuncta
meae', and _Met_ VI 447-48 '_dextera dextrae_ / iungitur'. For a
different use, see _Met_ III 640-41 '_dextera_ [_uar_ dextra] Naxos
erat: _dextra_ mihi lintea danti / "quid facis, o demens? quis te
furor," inquit "Acoete?"'.

=45-46. DICERE DIFFICILE EST QVID MARS TVVS EGERIT ILLIC, / QVOTQVE NECI
DEDERIS QVOSQVE QVIBVSQVE MODIS.= As Professor E. Fantham points out to
me, this _praeteritio_ takes the place of a full _aristeia_ detailing
Vestalis' exploits.

=46. QVOSQVE QVIBVSQVE MODIS.= Compare _quotque quibusque modis_ in an
erotic context at _Am_ II viii 28, and _Tr_ III xii 33-34 'sedulus
occurram nautae, dictaque salute, / quid ueniat quaeram _quisue quibusue
locis_'.

=47. ENSE TVO FACTOS CALCABAS VICTOR ACERVOS.= Compare _Met_ V 88 (of
Perseus) 'extructos morientum _calcat aceruos_'.

=50. MVLTAQVE FERT MILES VVLNERA, MVLTA FACIT.= A similar conjunction of
verbs at _Fast_ II 233-34 'non moriuntur inulti, / _uulneraque_ alterna
_dantque feruntque_ manu'.

=52. IBAT.= IBIT (_BP_) is printed by all modern editors except André, and
is possibly correct: compare _Am_ II iv 31-32 'ut taceam de me, qui
causa tangor ab omni, / illic Hippolytum pone, Priapus _erit_' for the
future tense used of a mythological character, and _EP_ II xi 21-22
'acer et ad palmae per se cursurus honores, / si tamen horteris, fortius
_ibit_ [_uar_ ibat] equus' for the corruption of future to imperfect.

=53. TEMPVS IN OMNE.= Similar promises of immortality at _Tr_ I vi 36 (to
his wife) 'carminibus uiues _tempus in omne_ meis', _EP_ II vi 33-34 (to
Graecinus) 'crede mihi, nostrum si non mortale futurum est / carmen, in
ore frequens posteritatis eris', and _EP_ III i 93 (to his wife) 'nota
tua est probitas testataque _tempus in omne_'.

Vestalis is known to us only through this poem.



VIII. To Suillius


This poem, nominally addressed to Suillius, husband of Ovid's
stepdaughter, is in fact directed to Germanicus, of whose staff Suillius
was a member (see at 23 [pp 264-65]).

Ovid begins the poem by expressing his pleasure at receiving, at last, a
letter from Suillius, saying he hopes that Suillius does not feel
ashamed of being related to him by marriage (1-20). He then asks him to
address Germanicus on his behalf (21-26). In 27-30 he says how grateful
he will be if Germanicus assists him; at 31 he begins to address
Germanicus directly in a tripartite defence of poetry. The first part
(31-42) builds on 34 'Naso suis opibus, _carmine_, gratus erit': Ovid is
now poor, but can still offer Germanicus his poetry. The second section
(43-66) builds on 43-44 'nec tamen officio uatum per _carmina_ facto /
principibus res est aptior ulla uiris', and explains how verse brings
immortality to great men and their deeds. The third section (67-78)
offers culminating evidence for the value of poetry: Germanicus is
himself a poet. Ovid moves from this to a final plea that Germanicus
help his fellow-poet: once removed from Tomis, he will praise him in
verse (79-88). In the final distich of the poem, he asks Suillius to
assist his prayer.

The structure of the poem is similar to that of _Tr_ V ii. In that poem
Ovid addresses his wife for the first thirty-eight lines, telling her
of his misery and asking her to approach Augustus on his behalf. In the
six lines that follow, he asks himself what he will do if she fails him;
he answers that he will make his own direct approach to Augustus. The
final thirty-four lines are his prayer to Augustus, in which he
describes the hardships he endures at Tomis and begs for a mitigation of
his punishment. It is remarkable that in both poems direct addresses to
members of the imperial family should be disguised in this way: it seems
probable that _Tr_ II, Ovid's long defence of his conduct, had been
received by Augustus with hostility, and that he was thenceforth more
circumspect.

=1-2. SERA QVIDEM ... GRATA TAMEN.= _Tamen_ goes with _grata_, balancing
_quidem_. For instances of the separate _serus tamen_ idiom ('it is late
in happening, but it does in fact happen') see Nisbet and Hubbard at Hor
_Carm_ I xv 19.

=1. SERA QVIDEM.= It seems that in spite of his being a close relative of
Ovid, Suillius, like Sextus Pompeius (see the introduction to i), had
been reluctant to be openly associated with him.

=1. STVDIIS EXCVLTE.= 'Refined'. _Studiis_ adds little to the force of
_exculte_: the same idiom at Quintilian XII ii 1 'mores ante omnia
oratori _studiis_ erunt _excolendi_' and Cic _Tusc_ I 4 'ergo in Graecia
musici floruerunt, discebantque id omnes, nec qui nesciebat satis
_excultus doctrina_ putabatur'.

=1. SVILLI.= P. Suillius Rufus (_PW_ IV A,l 719-22; _PIR1_ S 700) is
otherwise chiefly known to us from three passages of Tacitus: Suillius
is presented as 'strong, savage, and unbridled' (Syme _Tacitus_ 332). At
_Ann_ IV 31, Tacitus describes how, in 24, Tiberius insisted that
Suillius, convicted of accepting a bribe, be relegated to an island
rather than merely be exiled from Italy; what seemed cruelty at the time
later seemed wisdom in view of his later behaviour as a favourite of
Claudius. At _Ann_ XI 1-7 Tacitus describes how Suillius' excesses
resulted in a proposal in the Senate to revive the _lex Cincia_ of 204
BC, by which advocates had been forbidden remuneration: the proposal was
modified by Claudius at the instance of Suillius and others affected so
as to establish a maximum fee of ten thousand sesterces. At _Ann_ XIII
42-43 (AD 58) Tacitus tells how Suillius, 'imperitante Claudio
terribilis ac uenalis', was charged with extortion as proconsul of Asia
and with laying malicious charges under Claudius. Banished to the
Balearic islands, he led a luxurious existence, remaining unrepentant.

=3-4. PIA SI POSSIT SVPEROS LENIRE ROGANDO / GRATIA.= Compare 21 'si quid
agi sperabis posse _precando_'.

=5-6. ANIMI SVM FACTVS AMICI / DEBITOR.= 'Your friendly purpose has placed
me in your debt' (Wheeler). The genitive similarly used for the cause of
indebtedness at i 2 _'debitor_ est _uitae_ qui tibi, Sexte, suae' and
_Tr_ I v 10 'perpetuusque _animae debitor huius_ ero'.

=6. MERITVM VELLE IVVARE VOCO.= 'I call the desire to help a favour
already given'. Otto _uelle_ 2 cites _EP_ III iv 79 'ut desint uires,
_tamen est laudanda uoluntas_', Prop II x 5-6 'quod si deficient uires,
audacia certe / laus erit: in magnis _et uoluisse sat est_', _Pan Mess_
3-7, _Laus Pisonis_ 214; the same proverb at Sen _Ben_ V 2 2 'uoluntas
ipsa rectum petens laudanda est'.

=7. IMPETVS ISTE TVVS LONGVM MODO DVRET IN AEVVM.= Similar phrasing at
_EP_ II vi 35-36 (Graecinus has been rendering Ovid assistance) 'fac
modo permaneas lasso, Graecine, fidelis, / _duret et in longas impetus
iste moras_'.

=9. IVS ALIQVOD.= 'A certain claim on each other'. The same phrase for a
similar situation at _EP_ I vii 60 (to Messalinus, elder brother of
Cotta Maximus) '_ius aliquod_ tecum fratris amicus habet'.

=9. ADFINIA.= The _adfinis_ was a relative by marriage, commonly, as here,
a son-in-law; a relative by common descent was a _cognatus_.

=9. ADFINIA VINCVLA.= _Vinculum_ used of family relationships at _Met_ IX
550 (Byblis wishes to marry her brother) 'expetit ... _uinclo_ tecum
propiore ligari' and Cic _Planc_ 27 'cum illo maximis _uinclis_ et
propinquitatis et _adfinitatis_ coniunctus'.

=10. INLABEFACTA.= The word elsewhere in Latin only at xii 29-30 'haec
... concordia ... uenit ad albentes _inlabefacta_ comas'. Ovid is fond of
using negative participles of this type.

=11-12. NAM TIBI QVAE CONIVNX, EADEM MIHI FILIA PAENE EST, / ET QVAE TE
GENERVM, ME VOCAT ILLA VIRVM.= The same type of circumlocution at _Her_
III 45-48 (Briseis to Achilles) "diruta Marte tuo Lyrnesia moenia uidi;
... uidi ... tres cecidisse _quibus_ [_Bentley_: tribus _codd_] _quae
mihi, mater erat_'.

=11. EADEM MIHI FILIA PAENE EST.= This is presumably Perilla, the
recipient of _Tr_ III vii, whom Ovid there speaks of in terms
appropriate to a stepfather.

=13-14. EI MIHI, SI LECTIS VVLTVM TV VERSIBVS ISTIS / DVCIS, ET ADFINEM
TE PVDET ESSE MEVM.= A similar lament at _EP_ II ii 5-6 '_ei mihi, si
lecto uultus_ tibi nomine non est / qui fuit, et dubitas cetera
perlegere!'; both passages are followed by defences of Ovid's character.

For _uultum ... ducis_ see at i 5 _trahis uultus_ (p 149).

=15. NIHIL= _BCMFHLT_ NIL _I_. Copyists were more prone to alter _nil_ to
_nihil_ than the inverse; but in 1919 Housman demonstrated that _nihil_
was Ovid's invariable form for the latter half of the first foot by
pointing out that in all of the twenty-odd passages where the
manuscripts offer _nihil_ or _nil_ at that position the following word
invariably begins with a vowel (_Collected Papers_ 1000-1003). There
would be no reason for such an avoidance of consonants if Ovid had
allowed _nil_ in this position; he must therefore have used _nihil_
alone.

=16. FORTVNAM, QVAE MIHI CAECA FVIT.= The image of Fortune being blind to
a single individual seems very strange. Professor R. J. Tarrant suggests
that _caeca_ could mean 'unforeseeing', and by _fortunam_ Ovid could be
referring to his own previous circumstances; alternatively, _caeca_
might be a corruption induced by the familiar image of the blind
goddess, replacing an original SAEVA (Riese) or LAEVA, for which compare
Silius III 93-94 'si promissum uertat _Fortuna_ fauorem, / _laeuaque sit
coeptis_'.

=17-18. SEV GENVS EXCVTIAS, EQVITES AB ORIGINE PRIMA / VSQVE PER
INNVMEROS INVENIEMVR AVOS.= A similar claim at _Tr_ IV x 7-8 'usque a
proauis uetus ordinis heres, / non modo fortunae munere factus eques'.
The status of _eques_ was not hereditary except in the case of a
senator's son. The Paeligni did not receive the citizenship until after
the Social War; to be born to equestrian status, and to assume that he
could have had a senatorial career (_Tr_ IV x 35), Ovid must have
belonged to one of the dominant families of the region.

=17. EXCVTIAS.= 'Examine'. Ovid plays on the primary meaning of the word,
'shake out', at _Am_ I viii 45-46 'has quoque quae frontis rugas in
uertice portant [_Burman_: quas ... portas _codd_] / _excute_; de rugis
crimina multa cadent'. The transferred meaning had lost any sense of
metaphor by Ovid's time, however; see especially _Tr_ II 224
'_excutiasque_ oculis otia nostra ['the product of my leisure
hours'--Wheeler] tuis'.

=19-20. SIVE VELIS QVI SINT MORES INQVIRERE NOSTRI, / ERROREM MISERO
DETRAHE, LABE CARENT.= A similar claim of no fault beyond his _error_ at
_EP_ II ii 15-16 'est mea culpa grauis, sed quae me perdere solum / ausa
sit, et _nullum maius adorta nefas_'.

=20. ERROREM ... DETRAHE.= At _Met_ II 38-39 the same phrase with a
different meaning: (Phaethon to his father) 'pignora da, genitor, per
quae tu uera propago / credar, et hunc animis _errorem_ ['doubt']
_detrahe_ nostris*.

=20. LABE CARENT.= The same sense of _labes_ at _Tr_ I ix 43 'uitae _labe
carentis_' and Prop IV xi 41-42 'neque ulla _labe_ mea nostros erubuisse
focos'; compare as well the phrase _sine labe_ at _Tr_ II 110 (_domus_),
_Tr_ IV viii 33 (_decem lustris ... peractis_), _EP_ I ii 143
(_praeteriti anni_), _EP_ II vii 49 (_uita prior_), _Her_ XVII 14
(_tenor uitae_), and _Her_ XVII 69 (_fama_).

=22. QVOS COLIS ... DEOS.= A similar definition of the imperial family at
_EP_ II ii 123 '_quos colis ad superos_ haec fer mandata sacerdos'.

=23. DI TIBI SVNT CAESAR IVVENIS.= _BCFM2ul_ read SINT; but the indicative
seems to be required by the preceding 'quos _colis_ ... deos' and the
following '_tua numina_ placa' and 'hac certe nulla est notior _ara_
tibi'.

=23. CAESAR IVVENIS.= Germanicus; he would have acquired the cognomen
_Caesar_ on his adoption by Tiberius in AD 4. _Iuuenis_ probably refers
to Germanicus' title of _princeps iuuentutis_, which _EP_ II v 41-42
indicates he must have held: 'te _iuuenum princeps_, cui dat Germania
nomen, / participem studii Caesar habere solet'. Germanicus' holding of
the title is not elsewhere attested.

At _Ann_ IV 31 5, Tacitus identifies Suillius as 'quaestorem quondam
Germanici'; at _Ann_ XIII 42 4, he represents Suillius as saying of
himself and Seneca 'se quaestorem Germanici, illum domus eius adulterum
fuisse'. His service under Germanicus was clearly a principal fact of
his life.

=25-26. ANTISTITIS ... PRECES.= Here _antistes_ is virtually equivalent to
_cultor_, as at _Tr_ III xiv 1 '_Cultor et antistes_ doctorum sancte
uirorum'; compare as well _Met_ XIII 632-33 'Anius, quo ... _antistite_
Phoebus / rite _colebatur_'.

=27-28. QVAMLIBET EXIGVA SI NOS EA IVVERIT AVRA, / OBRVTA DE MEDIIS CVMBA
RESVRGET AQVIS.= Ovid here mixes two nautical metaphors: if a ship is
overwhelmed by high seas, a favouring breeze will not be of great
assistance.

=28. OBRVTA DE MEDIIS CVMBA RESVRGET AQVIS.= Similar wording at [Sen]
_Oct_ 345-48 '[cumba ...] _obruta_ ... ruit in pelagus rursumque salo /
pressa _resurgit_'.

=29. TVNC EGO TVRA FERAM RAPIDIS SOLLEMNIA FLAMMIS.= Perhaps a verbal
reminiscence of _Aen_ IX 625-26 'Iuppiter omnipotens, audacibus adnue
coeptis. / ipse tibi ad tua templa _feram sollemnia_ dona'.

=29. TVRA ... SOLLEMNIA.= The phrase does not occur elsewhere in Ovid; but
compare the passage from _Aen_ IX quoted above, as well as the
conjunction of words at _Tr_ III xiii 16 'micaque _sollemni turis_ in
igne sonet'.

=29. RAPIDIS= is here used as a standard epithet; its full force
('destructive') at _Met_ II 122-23 'tum pater ora sui sacro medicamine
nati / contigit et _rapidae_ fecit patientia _flammae_', _Met_ XII
274-75 'correpti _rapida_, ueluti seges arida, _flamma_ / arserunt
crines', and _EP_ III iii 60 (to Amor) 'sic numquam _rapido_ lampades
_igne_ uacent'.

=31-32. NEC TIBI DE PARIO STATVAM, GERMANICE, TEMPLVM / MARMORE.=
Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me the reference to Virgil _G_ III
13-16 'et uiridi in campo _templum de marmore_ ponam ... in medio mihi
Caesar erit templumque tenebit'; _Parii lapides_ are mentioned at III
34. Here Ovid makes the temple literal, and conducts his _recusatio_ in
the terms used by love-poets.

=32. CARPSIT OPES ... MEAS.= 'Has destroyed my wealth'. This is not
strictly true, since Ovid at v 38 says that Pompeius give him gifts
(Ovid's letter speaking) 'ne proprias attenuaret opes'.

The same use of _carpere_ at ix 121-22 'fortuna est impar animo, talique
libenter / exiguas _carpo_ munere pauper opes' and _Am_ I viii 91 'et
soror et mater, nutrix quoque _carpat_ amantem'.

=34. NASO SVIS OPIBVS, CARMINE, GRATVS ERIT.= Compare _Am_ II xvii 27
'sunt mihi pro magno felicia carmina censu' and _Am_ I iii entire.

=37. QVAM POTVIT ... MAXIMA.= For the idiom compare Cic _Fam_ XIII vi 5
'_quam maximas_ ... gratias agat' and _ND_ II 129 'gallinae ['hens']
... cubilia sibi nidosque construunt eosque _quam possunt mollissime_
substernunt'.

=37. GRATVS ABVNDE EST.= Apparently the only instance in classical poetry
of _abunde_ modifying an adjective. The prose authors cited by the
lexica are Sallust, Livy, Valerius Maximus, Curtius, the elder Pliny,
and Quintilian. _Abunde_ elsewhere in Ovid only at _Met_ XV 759 'humano
generi, superi, fauistis abunde!' and _Tr_ I vii 31 'laudatus abunde'.

=38. FINEM PIETAS CONTIGIT ILLA SVVM.= 'That act of piety has reached its
objective', that is, has made the giver _gratus_.

=39-42.= For the sentiment compare _EP_ III iv 81-82 'haec [_sc_ laudanda
uoluntas] facit ut ueniat pauper quoque gratus ad aras, / et placeat
caeso non minus agna boue'.

=41-42. GRAMINE PASTA FALISCO / VICTIMA TARPEIOS INFICIT ICTA FOCOS.=
Compare iv 29-32 'templaque Tarpeiae primum tibi sedis adiri ... colla
boues niueos certae praebere securi, / quos aluit campis _herba Falisca_
suis'.

=42. INFICIT.= 'Stain'. _Inficere_ in the context of a sacrifice also at
_Met_ XV 134-35 '[uictima ...] percussa ... sanguine cultros / inficit'
and Hor _Carm_ III xiii 6.

=44. PRINCIPIBVS ... VIRIS.= A fixed colloquial idiom: _OLD princeps1_ 5
cites Plautus _Amphitruo_ 204 'delegit _uiros_ primorum _principes_' and
Hor _Ep_ I xvii 35 '_principibus_ placuisse _uiris_ non ultima laus
est'. There was a parallel expression _principes feminae_: see Pliny
_NH_ VIII 119 and Tac _Ann_ XIII 42 (Suillius compares himself to
Seneca) 'an grauius aestimandum sponte litigatoris praemium honestae
operae adsequi quam corrumpere cubicula principum feminarum?'.

=45. CARMINA VESTRARVM PERAGVNT PRAECONIA LAVDVM.= _Praeconia_ in a
similar context at _Tr_ II 65 'inuenies uestri _praeconia_ nominis illic
[in the _Metamorphoses_]'; used with _peragere_ at _Tr_ V i 9 'ut
cecidi, subiti _perago praeconia_ casus'.

=45. LAVDVM.= 'Deeds meriting praise'; compare 87 'tuas ... laudes
... recentes'. The meaning is found even in prose: see Caesar _BC_ II 39
4 'haec tamen ab ipsis inflatius commemorabantur, ut de suis homines
_laudibus_ libenter praedicant' and the other passages cited at _OLD_
_laus1_ 3b.

=46. ACTORVM.= AVCTORVM (_BCHL_) is possible enough; but _actorum_ accords
better with the preceding _laudum_.

=46. CADVCA.= 'Impermanent'. The sense is frequent in Cicero: see _Rep_ VI
17 'nihil est nisi mortale et _caducum_ praeter animos' and _Phil_ IV
13. Elsewhere in Ovid the usual sense of the word is 'ineffectual': see
_Fast_ I 181-82 'nec lingua _caducas_ / concipit ulla preces, dictaque
pondus habent' and _Ibis_ 88 'et sit pars uoti nulla caduca mei'.
Similar uses at _Her_ XV 208 & XVI 169.

=47. CARMINE FIT VIVAX VIRTVS, EXPERSQVE SEPULCRI / NOTITIAM SERAE
POSTERITATIS HABET.= For the immortality given by verse, compare from
Ovid _Tr_ V xiv 5 (to his wife) 'dumque legar, mecum pariter tua fama
legetur' and _EP_ III ii 35-36 (to those friends who assisted him) 'uos
etiam seri laudabunt saepe nepotes, / claraque erit scriptis gloria
uestra meis'. The topic is closely related to that of the poet's own
immortality, for which, in Ovid, see xvi 2-3 'non solet ingeniis summa
nocere dies, / famaque post cineres maior uenit' and _Met_ XV 871-79.

For other poets' treatment of the immortality given by verse, see Prop
III ii 17-26, Hor _Carm_ IV ix, Pindar _Nem_ VII 11-16, Gow on
Theocritus XVI 30, and Murgatroyd on Tib I iv 63-66.

=47. VIVAX VIRTVS.= Compare Hor _AP_ 68-69 'mortalia facta peribunt, /
nedum sermonum stet honos et gratia _uiuax_'.

=47. EXPERSQVE SEPVLCRI.= The diction of this line is very elevated:
Professor R. J. Tarrant compares _Met_ IX 252-53 (Jupiter speaking of
Hercules) 'aeternum est a me quod traxit, et _expers_ / atque immune
_necis_' and _Cons Liu_ 59-60 'Caesaris adde domum, quae certe _funeris
expers_ / debuit humanis altior esse malis'. The following line's
_notitiam ... habet_ is in comparison an anticlimax.

=49. TABIDA CONSVMIT FERRVM LAPIDEMQVE VETVSTAS.= Iron and flint were
proverbial for hardness: compare x 3-4 'ecquos tu silices, ecquod,
carissime, ferrum / duritiae confers, Albinouane, meae?', _Her_ X
109-10, _AA_ I 473-76, _Met_ XIV 712-13, _Fast_ V 131-32, _Tr_ IV vi
13-14, and _EP_ II vii 39-40; other passages are cited by Smith at Tib I
iv 18 'longa dies molli saxa peredit aqua'. At I 313-16, Lucretius,
discussing the invisible wearing away of substances, says 'stilicidi
casus _lapidem_ cauat, uncus aratri / _ferreus_ occulte decrescit uomer
in aruis, / strataque iam uolgi pedibus detrita uiarum / saxea
conspicimus'.

=51. SCRIPTA FERVNT ANNOS.= The phrase completes the sentence begun in the
previous distich, as is shown by the parallel passages _Am_ I x 61-62
'scindentur uestes, gemmae frangentur et aurum; / _carmina quam
tribuent, fama perennis erit_' and _Am_ I xv 31-32 'ergo cum silices,
cum dens patientis aratri / depereant aeuo, _carmina morte carent_'.

=51. FERVNT.= 'Withstand'; the same sense at _Tr_ V ix 8 'scripta
_uetustatem_ si modo nostra _ferunt_', Cic _Am_ 67 'ea uina quae
_uetustatem ferunt_', Silius IV 399-400 'si modo _ferre diem_ ... carmina
nostra ualent', and Quintilian II 4 9 'sic et _annos ferent_ et
uetustate proficient'.

=51-53. AGAMEMNONA ... THEBAS.= The two great cycles of Greek heroic
mythology. The same conjunction at _Am_ III xii 15-16 'cum _Thebae_, cum
_Troia_ foret, cum Caesaris acta, / ingenium mouit sola Corinna meum'
and _Tr_ II 317-20 'cur non Argolicis potius quae concidit armis /
uexata est iterum carmine _Troia_ meo? / cur tacui _Thebas_ et uulnera
mutua fratrum / et septem portas sub duce quamque suo'; compare as well
Prop II i 21 '[canerem ...] nec ueteres _Thebas_ nec _Pergama_, nomen
Homeri'. Lucretius, arguing that the world was created at a definite
moment, wrote 'cur supera ['before'] bellum _Thebanum_ et funera
_Troiae_ / non alias alii quoque res cecinere poetae?' (V 326-27).

=52. QVISQVIS CONTRA VEL SIMVL ARMA TVLIT.= The leaders of the Greeks and
Trojans.

The line's structure parallels 54 'quicquid post haec, quicquid et ante
fuit'. Both are conspicuous by their lack of adornment.

=55. DI QVOQVE CARMINIBVS, SI FAS EST DICERE, FIVNT.= This is possibly a
reference to Herodotus II 53, where Herodotus says that Homer and Hesiod
established the Greek pantheon; for Ovid's borrowings from Herodotus,
see at iii 37 _opulentia Croesi_ (p 189). The same idea previously in
Xenophanes (fr. 11 Diels).

The line looks ahead to 63-64 'et modo, Caesar, auum, quem uirtus
addidit astris, / sacrarunt aliqua carmina parte tuum'.

=55. SI FAS EST DICERE.= Ovid here apologizes for the shocking statement
he is making. Up to this point poetry has helped give lasting fame to
what was already a fact, but here poetry is actually making something
happen (or appear to happen). At _Am_ III xii 21-40 Ovid similarly
describes how poets created the myths.

=57-64.= Ovid follows the same sequence in the _Metamorphoses_, describing
the separation of Chaos at I 5-31, the attack of the Giants at I 151-55,
Bacchus' conquest of India at IV 20-21 & 605-6, and Hercules' capture of
Oechalia at IX 136; he foretells Augustus' apotheosis at XV 868-70.
Professor R. J. Tarrant points out that these lines may well be
referring specifically to the earlier poem.

=57-58. SIC CHAOS EX ILLA NATVRAE MOLE PRIORIS / DIGESTVM PARTES SCIMVS
HABERE SVAS.= 'Thus we know Chaos now has its divisions after having been
arranged in order from the famous mass that was its previous nature'.
Ovid describes the separation of the elements at _Met_ I 25-31 and
_Fast_ I 103-10; see also _Ecl_ VI 31-36.

I take _illa_ ('famous') to refer to the familiarity through the poets
and philosophers of the notion of the separation of Chaos into the four
elements. Alternatively, Professor A. Dalzell points out to me that
_illa_ could have a pejorative sense.

=58. DIGESTVM.= 'Separated'. At _Met_ I 7 Ovid calls Chaos 'rudis
_indigestaque_ moles'.

=59. ADFECTANTES CAELESTIA REGNA GIGANTAS.= At _Am_ III xii 27 Ovid,
speaking of false legends created by the poets, says 'fecimus Enceladon
iaculantem mille lacertis'.

In his youth, Ovid had attempted but later abandoned a poem on the
battle of the Giants against Jupiter 'designed to glorify Augustus under
the guise of Jupiter' (Owen _Tristia II_ p. 77): the language he uses
at _Tr_ II 333-40 seems too explicit to be a mere instance of the
love-poet's defence of his subject-matter: 'at si me iubeas domitos
Iouis igne Gigantas [_Heinsius_: Gigantes _codd_] / dicere, conantem
debilitabit onus. / diuitis ingenii est immania Caesaris acta / condere,
materia ne superetur opus. / _et tamen ausus eram_; sed detrectare
uidebar, / quodque nefas, damno uiribus esse tuis.[20] / ad leue rursus
opus, iuuenalia carmina, ueni, / et falso moui pectus amore meum'. He
refers to the same poem again at _Am_ II i 11-18 'ausus eram, memini,
_caelestia_ dicere bella / centimanumque Gyen--et satis oris erat-- / cum
male se Tellus ulta est, ingestaque Olympo / ardua deuexum Pelion Ossa
tulit. / in manibus nimbos et cum Ioue fulmen habebam, / quod bene pro
caelo mitteret ille suo-- / clausit amica fores! ego cum Ioue fulmen
omisi; / excidit ingenio Iuppiter ipse meo'.

[Footnote 20: Compare Suet _Aug_ 89 3 'componi tamen aliquid de se nisi
et serio et a praestantissimis offendebatur, admonebatque praetores ne
paterentur nomen suum commissionibus obsolefieri ['be cheapened in prize
declamations'--Rolfe]'.]

The actual descriptions of the Giants' rebellion in Ovid's surviving
poems are brief (_Met_ I 151-62 & 182-86, _Fast_ V 35-42), but
references to the rebellion are frequent (_Met_ X 150-51, _Fast_ I
307-8, _Fast_ IV 593-94, _Fast_ V 555, _Tr_ II 71, _Tr_ IV vii 17, _EP_
II ii 9-12). The accounts at _Met_ V 319-31 of the flight of some of the
gods to Egypt and at _Fast_ II 459-74 of Venus' flight to the Euphrates
are no doubt derived from Ovid's earlier researches.

=59. ADFECTANTES.= 'Unlawfully seeking to obtain'; compare _Met_ I 151-52
'neue foret terris securior arduus aether, / _adfectasse_ ferunt _regnum
caeleste Gigantas_' and _Fast_ III 439 'ausos _caelum adfectare
Gigantas_'. This sense is found in prose: compare Livy I 50 4 'cui enim
non apparere _adfectare_ eum imperium in Latinos?'. At Livy I 46 2 the
word is used without the conative sense: 'neque ea res Tarquinio spem
_adfectandi_ regni minuit'.

=59. GIGANTAS= _Heinsius_. The manuscripts have GIGANTES, which Lenz,
Wheeler, and André print. In classical Latin poetry, Greek nouns of the
third declension with plural nominatives in _[Greek:-es]_ and plural
accusatives in _[Greek:-as]_ retained these endings. Housman 836-39
gives many instances where metre demonstrates an accusative in
_[Greek:-as]_. In Ovid when such an ending occurs, some manuscripts
commonly offer the normalized _-es_; at _Tr_ II 333, as here, all
manuscripts offer _Gigantes_, again corrected by Heinsius.

Such apparent violations of the rule as _Fast_ I 717 'horreat
AeneadAs et primus et ultimus orbis', _Fast_ III 105-6 'quis tunc aut
HyadAs aut Pliadas Atlanteas / senserat' and Virgil _G_ I 137-38
'nauita tum stellis numeros et nomina fecit, / PleiadAs, HyadAs,
claramque Lycaonis Arcton' are of course no real exceptions, the
lengthening of short closed vowels at the ictus being permitted
(Platnauer 59-62).

=60. AD STYGA NIMBIFERI VINDICIS IGNE DATOS.= 'Hurled to the underworld by
the lightning-bolt of cloud-gathering Jupiter'. This was Jupiter's
first use of the weapon: see _Fast_ III 439-40 'fulmina post ausos
caelum adfectare Gigantas / sumpta Ioui: _primo tempore inermis erat_'.

=60. NIMBIFERI VINDICIS IGNE= is my correction of the manuscripts'
NIMBIFERO and NVBIFERO. The unmodified _uindicis_ and modified _igne_ of
the manuscript readings might be defended by _EP_ II ix 77 'quicquid id
est [whatever Ovid has committed], habuit moderatam uindicis iram', but
_uindicis_ is there defined by the following 'qui nisi natalem nil mihi
dempsit humum', and _moderatam_ is a more suitable epithet for _iram_
than is _nimbifero_ for _igne_ in the present passage., At _Tr_ II
143-44 'uidi ego pampineis oneratam uitibus ulmum, / quae fuerat _saeuo
fulmine_ tacta Iouis', the manuscripts divide between _saeuo_ and
_saeui_, which has a good claim to be considered the true reading; in
any case, _Iouis_ is less in need of a defining adjective than
_uindicis_ in the present passage. Finally, the genitive here is
strongly supported by _Ibis_ 475-76 'ut Macedo rapidis icta est cum
coniuge flammis, / sic precor _aetherii uindicis_ igne cadas'.

The corruption may have been induced by a wish to introduce interlocking
word order: for a similar instance see at ii 9 _Baccho uina Falerna_ (p
164). But in fact substantive and epithet are constantly found linked at
the caesura of the pentameter: the strong break in the metre at that
point no doubt made the construction more readily acceptable there than
in other positions.

I have printed _nimbiferi_ in preference to _nubiferi_ because Jupiter
is linked with _nimbi_ at two other passages. The first of these is
_Am_ II i 15-16 'in manibus _nimbos et cum Ioue fulmen_ habebam, / quod
bene pro caelo mitteret ille suo', and the second _Met_ III 299-301,
where Ovid describes Jupiter's preparations to descend on Semele:
'aethera conscendit uultuque sequentia traxit / nubila, quis _nimbos_
immixtaque fulgura uentis / addidit et tonitrus et ineuitabile fulmen'.

=61-62. SIC VICTOR LAVDEM SVPERATIS LIBER AB INDIS ... TRAXIT.= Bacchus'
conquest of India is also mentioned by Ovid at _Fast_ III 465-66
'interea Liber depexos crinibus Indos / uicit et Eoo diues ab orbe
redit', _Fast_ III 719-20, and _Tr_ V iii 23-24.

=61-62. VICTOR= should be taken both with _Liber_ and _Alcides_.

=61-62. LIBER ... ALCIDES.= The same pairing (both times in the context of
Augustan panegyric) at _Aen_ VI 801-5 'nec uero _Alcides_ tantum
telluris obiuit, / fixerit aeripedem ceruam licet, aut Erymanthi /
pacarit nemora et Lernam tremefecerit arcu; / nec qui pampineis uictor
iuga flectit habenis / _Liber_, agens celso Nysae de uertice tigris' and
Hor _Carm_ III iii 9-15. Ovid may have made similar mention of Bacchus
and Hercules in his panegyric of Augustus.

=61-62. SIC ... LAVDEM ... ALCIDES CAPTA TRAXIT AB OECHALIA.= Hercules
attacked and captured Oechalia in order to carry off Iole, the king's
daughter. This was his last exploit, for it led to Deianira's sending
him the poisoned robe which caused his death. The capture of Oechalia is
also mentioned at _Her_ IX _passim_ (the poem perhaps not by Ovid) and
_Met_ IX 136-40.

=62. OECHALIA.= For the quadrisyllable ending to the pentameter, see at ii
10 _Alcinoo_ (p 164).

=63. AVVM.= Augustus. In AD 4 Augustus adopted Tiberius (son of Livia's
first husband, Ti. Claudius Nero), and Tiberius adopted Germanicus, son
of his brother Drusus.

=63. QVEM VIRTVS ADDIDIT ASTRIS.= Compare _Aen_ VIII 301 (of Hercules)
'salue, uera Iouis proles, decus _addite diuis_'.

Augustus died on 19 August AD 14; on 17 September the Senate decreed
_caelestes religiones_ for him (Tac _Ann_ I 10 8; _Fasti Amiternini,
Antiates, & Oppiani_, at Ehrenberg-Jones 52). Augustus' apotheosis is
also mentioned at ix 127-32 and xiii 23-26.

=64. ALIQVA ... PARTE.= The same phrase in the same metrical position at
_Fast_ I 133-34 (Janus speaking) 'uis mea narrata est. causam nunc disce
figurae: / iam tamen hanc _aliqua_ tu quoque _parte_ uides'.

=64. CARMINA.= Ovid is referring to his own poems (in Latin and Getic) on
Augustus' apotheosis, also mentioned at vi 17-18 'de caelite ... recenti
... carmen', ix 131-32 'carmina ... de te ... caelite ... nouo', and xiii
25-26.

=65-66. SI QVID ADHVC IGITVR VIVI, GERMANICE, NOSTRO / RESTAT IN INGENIO,
SERVIET OMNE TIBI.= Compare Prop IV i 59-60 'sed tamen exiguo
_quodcumque_ e pectore _riui_ / fluxerit, hoc patriae _seruiet omne
meae_', which Ovid is clearly imitating. Hertzberg _ad loc_ conjectured
RIVI for our passage, which may well be right; but _uiui_ seems to agree
better with _restat_.

=67. VATIS ... VATES.= For an extreme instance of Ovid's favourite figure
of _polyptoton_ (Quintilian IX 3 36-37), see the account at _Met_ IX
43-45 of Achelous' wrestling-match with Hercules: 'inque gradu stetimus,
certi non cedere, eratque / cum _pede pes_ iunctus, totoque ego pectore
pronus / et _digitos digitis_ et _frontem fronte_ premebam'. Other
instances of polyptoton with _uates_ at _Fast_ I 25 (to Germanicus) 'si
licet et fas est, _uates_ rege _uatis_ habenas' and _EP_ II ix 65 (to
Cotys, king of Thrace, apparently a writer of poetry) 'ad _uatem uates_
orantia bracchia tendo',

=67. VATES.= Approximately nine hundred lines survive of a version of
Aratus generally attributed to Germanicus, who might have been composing
the poem at the time Ovid was writing: Augustus' apotheosis is mentioned
at 558-60. It is possible however that Tiberius was the poem's author:
he is known to have written a _Conquestio de morte L. Caesaris_ and to
have composed Greek verse (Suet _Tib_ 70). For a full discussion see the
introduction to Gain's edition of the _Aratus_.

=69-70. QVOD NISI TE NOMEN TANTVM AD MAIORA VOCASSET, / GLORIA PIERIDVM
SVMMA FVTVRVS ERAS.= Compare _Met_ V 269-70 (the Muses to Minerva) 'o
nisi te uirtus opera ad maiora tulisset, / in partem uentura chori
Tritonia nostri'.

There is a striking parallel to this passage in Quintilian's address to
Domitian in his catalogue of poets: 'hos nominamus quia Germanicum
Augustum ab institutis studiis deflexit cura terrarum, parumque dis
uisum est esse eum maximum poetarum' (X i 91-92).

=70. GLORIA PIERIDVM SVMMA.= _Gloria_ similarly used at _EP_ II xi 28
'maxima Fundani _gloria_, Rufe, soli', _Aen_ VI 767 'proximus ille
Procas, Troianae _gloria_ gentis', and Val Max IV iii 3 'Drusum
... Germanicum, eximiam Claudiae familiae _gloriam_'. The term was used
in particular of fine cattle: see _AA_ I 290 'candidus, armenti gloria,
taurus', _Pan Mess_ (_Corp Tib_ III vii) 208 'tardi pecoris ... _gloria_
taurus' and _Aetna_ 597 '_gloria_ uiua Myronis' (on Myron's _Cow_ see at
i 34 _ut similis uerae uacca Myronis opus_ [p 158]).

=71. SI DARE= _R. J. Tarrant._ The manuscripts' SED DARE is a possible
reading; but Professor Tarrant's slight change removes the awkwardness
of _nec tamen_ following immediately upon _sed_.

=71. MAVIS= _IF2ul_ MAIVS _BF1_. Either of the two variants could be read
from _CMHLT_. The preferable reading is _mauis_, since it links more
closely to _potes_ in the pentameter, and would be especially liable to
corruption after _maiora_ two lines previous. I have found no good
parallel for singular _maius_ 'a more important thing': for the plural
_OLD maior_ 5 cites from verse _Fast_ IV 3 'certe maiora canebas' and
its model, _Ecl_ IV 1 'paulo maiora canamus'.

=72. NEC TAMEN EX TOTO DESERERE ILLA POTES.= Graecinus was another of
Ovid's addressees who, while a soldier, kept up his other pursuits:
'artibus ingenuis [=_lIberAlibus_], quarum tibi maxima cura
est, / pectora mollescunt asperitasque fugit. / nec quisquam meliore
fide complectitur illas, / qua sinit officium militiaeque labor' (_EP_ I
vi 7-10).

=72. EX TOTO.= 'Altogether'. Compare _EP_ I vi 27-28 'spes igitur menti
poenae, Graecine, leuandae / non est _ex toto_ nulla relicta meae'. The
idiom was probably subliterary: the only instances from the time of Ovid
cited by _OLD totum_ 2 are Celsus III 3 71b 'neque _ex toto_ in
remissionem desistit' and Columella V 6 17 'antequam _ex toto_ arbor
praeualescat'.

=73. NVMERIS ... VERBA COERCES.= 'You arrange words in metrical patterns'.
Similar wording at Cic _Or_ 64 'mollis est enim oratio philosophorum
... nec _uincta numeris_ ['not in rhythmic prose'], sed soluta liberius'.

Professor E. Fantham points out to me that Ovid may also be playing on
_numerus_ 'military contingent' (_OLD numerus_ 9): 'you draft words in
squads'.

=75-76. NEC AD CITHARAM NEC AD ARCVM SEGNIS APOLLO, / SED VENIT AD SACRAS
NERVVS VTERQVE MANVS.= Apollo is similarly described at _Met_ X 107-8 (of
Cyparissus) 'nunc arbor, puer ante deo dilectus ab illo / _qui citharam
neruis et neruis temperat arcum_'.

=76. VENIT= = _conuenit_. In Latin verse a simple verb can carry the sense
of any of its compounds, even when this sense is quite different from
the usual meaning of the simple verb. Compare Catullus LXIV 21 'tum
Thetidi pater ipse _iugandum_ Pelea _sensit_', "where it is plain that
iugandum is for coniugandum, and this leads the reader to the conclusion
that sensit is for consensit, where the omission decidedly affects the
sense" (Bell 330).

The line should not be taken as an instance of the expression _uenire ad
manum_ (_OLD uenio_ 7c), since the idiom's sense 'be convenient' does
not fit the context here: for the sense compare Livy XXXVIII 21 6 'quod
[_sc_ saxum] cuique temere trepidanti _ad manum uenisset_' and
Quintilian II xi 6 'abrupta quaedam, ut forte _ad manum uenere_,
iaculantur'. _Venire in manus_ offers a somewhat more satisfactory
meaning, almost equivalent to 'have, hold' (compare Cic _Q Fr_ II xv
[xiv] i 'quicumque calamus _in manus meas uenerit_' and Persius III 11
'_inque manus_ chartae nodosaque _uenit_ harundo'), but seems to be a
separate idiom.

=79. QVAE QVONIAM NEC NOS.= 'Since she continues to give poetic
inspiration to myself as well as to you'. _Quae quoniam_ seems very
prosaic, but Ovid uses the phrase again at _Tr_ I ix 53-54 '_quae_ [_sc_
coniectura] _quoniam_ uera est ... gratulor ingenium non latuisse tuum'.

=79-80. VNDA ... VNGVLA GORGONEI QUAM CAVA FECIT EQVI.= Hippocrene, the
spring of the Muses, said to have been created by the hoof-beat of
Pegasus. Similarly described at _Met_ V 264 'factas pedis ictibus
undas', _Fast_ V 7-8 'fontes Aganippidos Hippocrenes, / grata Medusaei
signa ... equi' and Persius prol 1 'fonte ... caballino'.

=80. VNGVLA ... CAVA.= Professor J. N. Grant points out to me the possible
borrowing from Ennius _Ann_ 439 Vahlen3 'it eques et plausu _caua_
concutit _ungula_ terram'.

=80. GORGONEI ... EQVI.= The same phrase in the same metrical position at
_Fast_ III 450 'suspice [_sc_ caelum]: _Gorgonei_ colla uidebis _equi_'.
For the birth of Pegasus from the blood of the Gorgon Medusa, see _Met_
IV 784-86,

=81. COMMVNIA SACRA TVERI.= _Sacra_ similarly used of poetry at _Tr_ IV i
87, _Tr_ IV x 19 'at mihi iam puero caelestia _sacra_ placebant', _EP_
II x 17 'sunt tamen inter se _communia sacra_ poetis', and _EP_ III iv
67 'sunt mihi uobiscum _communia sacra_, poetae'. For _tueri_ 'observe,
maintain' compare Cic _Tusc_ I 2 'mores et instituta uitae resque
domesticas ac familiaris nos profecto et melius _tuemur_ et lautius'.

=82. ISDEM STVDIIS IMPOSVUISSE MANVM.= Similar phrasing at _Tr_ IV i 27-28
'non equidem uellem ... _Pieridum sacris imposuisse manum_'.

=82. IMPOSVISSE= has the sense of the present infinitive, as is shown by
_tueri_ in the previous line; compare as well ii 27-28 'uix sumptae Musa
tabellae / _imponit_ pigras, paene coacta, _manus_'. For the idiom, see
Platnauer 109-12. It is particularly frequent in the latter half of the
pentameter, immediately before the disyllable: compare, from many
instances, _AA_ III 431-32 '_ire_ solutis / crinibus et fletus non
_tenuisse_ decet' and _Tr_ IV viii 5-12 'nunc erat ut posito deberem
fine laborum / _uiuere_, me nullo sollicitante metu, / quaeque meae
semper placuerunt otia menti / _carpere_ et in studiis molliter _esse_
meis, / et paruam _celebrare_ domum ueteresque Penates ... inque sinu
dominae carisque sodalibus inque / securus patria _consenuisse_ mea'.
The idiom, although more common in elegiac verse, is also found in epic:
compare _Aen_ X 14 'tum _certare_ odiis, tum res _rapuisse_ licebit'.

=83. LITORA PELLITIS NIMIVM SVBIECTA CORALLIS.= Compare ii 37 'hic mea cui
recitem nisi flauis scripta Corallis'. Strabo mentions the Coralli as
inhabiting the region near Haemus (VII 5 12); they are rather obscurely
described at Val Fl VI 89-94 'densique leuant uexilla Coralli, /
barbaricae quis signa rotae, ferrataque dorso / forma suum ['of pigs'],
truncaeque Iouis simulacra columnae; / proelia nec rauco curant
incendere cornu, / indigenas sed rite duces et prisca suorum / facta
canunt ueterumque, uiris hortamina, laudes'.

Nothing else is known of the tribe.

=83. PELLITIS.= Elsewhere in Ovid only at x 2 'pellitos ... Getas'.

=83. NIMIVM SVBIECTA.= Compare vi 45 'nimium nobis conterminus Hister'.

=85. VLLO= _M_ ILLO _BCFHILT_. _Illo_ is not a possible reading, since of
course most parts of the empire would have been less isolated than
Tomis. Ovid does not specify a preferred place of exile at either _Tr_
IV iv 49 'nunc precor hinc alio iubeat discedere' or _EP_ III i 29-30
'non igitur mirum ... altera si nobis usque rogatur humus', nor in any of
the passages listed in the next two notes.

=86. QVI MINVS ... DISTET.= For this constant prayer of the exiled Ovid,
see _Tr_ II 575-78 (the concluding lines) 'non ut in Ausoniam redeam,
nisi forsitan olim, / cum longo poenae tempore uictus eris; / tutius
exilium pauloque quietius oro, / ut par delicto sit mea poena suo',
_Ibis_ 28, _EP_ III i 4 & 85, _EP_ III iii 64, _EP_ III vii 30, _EP_ III
ix 38, and _EP_ III ix 1-4 'Quod sit in his eadem sententia, Brute,
libellis, / carmina nescio quem carpere nostra refers, / _nil nisi me
terra fruar ut propiore rogare_, / et quam sim denso cinctus ab hoste
loqui'.

=86. DISTET= _FHILM2c_. Lenz and André print DISTAT (_BCT_); however, the
defining subjunctive seems to be required, and is supported by _EP_ II
viii 36 'daque procul Scythico _qui sit_ ab hoste locum'.

=87. LAVDES.= See at 45 _laudum_ (p 268).

=88. MAGNAQVE QVAM MINIMA FACTA REFERRE MORA.= At _EP_ III iv 53-60 Ovid
speaks of how a poem of his on a recent triumph has been late in being
written, and will be late in reaching Rome: 'cetera certatim de magno
scripta triumpho / iam pridem populi suspicor ore legi. / illa bibit
sitiens lector, mea pocula plenus; / illa recens pota est, nostra
tepebit aqua. / non ego cessaui, nec fecit inertia serum: / ultima me
uasti distinet [_scripsi_: sustinet _codd_] ora freti. / dum uenit huc
rumor properataque carmina fiunt / factaque eunt ad uos, annus abisse
potest'.

=90. SOCERO PAENE ... TVO.= See at 11 _eadem mihi filia paene est_ (p
262).



IX. To Graecinus


C. Pomponius Graecinus (_PIR1_ P 540), suffect consul in 16, was the
recipient of _EP_ I vi, an appeal for his assistance, and of _EP_ II vi,
a request that he be more lenient towards Ovid's faults and continue to
assist him. He must have been an old friend of Ovid, for _Am_ II x is
addressed to him ('Tu mihi, tu certe, memini, Graecine, negabas / uno
posse aliquem tempore amare duas'), and he was clearly a literary patron
(_EP_ I vi 7-8 'artibus ingenuis, _quarum tibi maxima cura est_, /
pectora mollescunt asperitasque fugit').

The poem begins with Ovid's wish that his letter might arrive on the day
Graecinus becomes consul (1-4). He imagines himself present when
Graecinus enters his magistracy; since he will not be there, he will at
least in his mind imagine Graecinus carrying out his consular functions
(5-56). He then speaks of Graecinus' brother Flaccus, who will succeed
him as _consul ordinarius_ for 17: the two brothers will take pleasure
in each other's office (57-65). He describes the brothers' devotion to
Tiberius, and asks for their assistance in obtaining his removal from
Tomis (65-74). The mention of his exile serves as a bridge to the topic
of his life in Tomis. Flaccus can attest to the hardships Ovid endures,
since he was recently stationed in the area (75-86). Once Graecinus has
learned of these hardships from Flaccus, he should ask what Ovid's
reputation in Tomis is. He will learn that Ovid is well liked, and has
even received public honours (87-104). His loyalty to the imperial
family is well known: Flaccus may have heard of this, Tiberius will
eventually learn of it, but Augustus has certainly observed it from
heaven; Ovid's poems are perhaps inducing Augustus to yield to his
prayers (105-34).

The poem is the longest in the book, and combines several almost
unrelated sections dealing with a number of subjects. The first section
of the poem, the celebration of Graecinus' nomination to the consulship,
is very heavily indebted to IV iv, Ovid's first poem on Sextus Pompeius'
election to the consulship. The section detailing Flaccus' presence near
Tomis owes something to IV vii, the letter to Vestalis. The description
of Ovid's reputation in Tomis is new, and shows a softening of his
attitude towards his fellow-townsmen, but the description of his piety
to the imperial family owes much to III ii, a letter of thanks to Cotta
for the gift of images of the members of the family. The poem's
discursiveness and large number of derived elements suggest a hasty
composition.

=1. GRAECINE.= Graecinus became a _frater Arualis_ in 21 (_CIL_ VI 2023);
the C. Pomponius Graecinus of _CIL_ XI 5809 (Iguvium) seems not to have
survived to enter the Senate (Syme _HO_ 74-75). Graecinus is not
mentioned in literary sources apart from Ovid, but his brother Flaccus
was rather more famous: see at 75 (p 308).

=3. DI FACIANT= looks like a colloquial expression. Other instances at iv
47-48 '_di faciant_ aliquo subeat tibi tempore nostrum / nomen', _Tr_ V
xiii 17, and Prop II ix 24.

=3. AVRORAM= here is virtually equivalent to _diem_; it is not found
elsewhere in the poetry of exile, but compare _Fast_ I 461 & II 267-68
'tertia post idus nudos aurora Lupercos / aspicit'.

=3. OCCVRRAT.= 'Arrive', as commonly: compare Cic _Phil_ I 9, Livy XXXVII
50 7 '_ad comitiorum tempus occurrere_ non posse', and Pliny _Ep_ VI
xxxiv 3 'uellem Africanae [_sc_ pantherae] quas coemeras plurimas _ad
praefinitum diem occurrissent_'.

=4. BIS SENOS= = _duodecim_, metrically difficult because of its
initial three consecutive short vowels. Roman poets avoid using the
usual names for numbers above _nouem_, with the obvious exceptions of
_centum_ and _mille_; sometimes, as here, metrical exigencies left them
with no alternative. For _bis seni_ (_sex_) Tarrant at Sen _Ag_ 812 _bis
seno ... labore_ cites Ennius _Ann_ 323 Vahlen2, _Ecl_ I 43, _Aen_ I 393,
Prop II xx 7, _Met_ VIII 243, _Fast_ I 28, Sen _Tro_ 386 & _Oed_ 251,
and from Greek Callimachus _Aetia_ I fr. 23 19 Pfeiffer.

=6. TVRBAE.= Compare iv 27 'cernere iam uideor rumpi paene atria _turba_'.

=7. IN DOMINI SVBEAT PARTES.= _Partes_ = 'function'; see at ii 27 _uix
uenit ad partes ... Musa_ (p 170). For _subeat_ 'undertake' compare
Quintilian X i 71 'declamatoribus ... necesse est secundum condicionem
controuersiarum plures _subire personas_' and the passages cited at _OLD
subeo_ 7b.

=8. FESTO= _Burman_ IVSSO _BCMFHIL_ IVSTO _T, sicut coni Merkel_. _Iusso_
has been explained since Merula as meaning that Ovid hopes the letter
will arrive on the day it is told to; but the word seems rather
strange, and lacks the point it has in the passages cited by Ehwald
(_KB_ 64), _AA_ II 223-24 'iussus adesse foro, _iussa_ maturius _hora_ /
fac semper uenias, nec nisi serus abi' and Prop IV vi 63-64 (of
Cleopatra) 'illa petit Nilum cumba male nixa fugaci, / hoc unum, _iusso_
non moritura _die_' (she would commit suicide at a time of her own
choosing), or at _Aen_ X 444 (cited by Owen in 1894) 'socii cesserunt
_aequore iusso_', where _iusso_ stands by hypallage for _iussi_. The
meaning of _iusto_ is inappropriate for the present passage, as will be
seen from Suet _Tib_ 4 2 'retentis ultra _iustum tempus_ ['the time
allowed'] insignibus'. Burman's conjecture _festo_ was not placed in the
text even by its author, but it seems a reasonable solution to the
difficulty. For it Burman cited 56 'hic quoque te _festum_ consule
_tempus_ agam'; see as well _Fast_ I 79-80 'uestibus intactis Tarpeias
itur in arces, / et populus _festo_ concolor ipse suo est'. The
corruption of so straightforward an epithet may seem unlikely, but
compare Prop IV xi 65-66 'uidimus et fratrem sellam geminasse curulem; /
consule quo, _festo_ [_Koppiers_: facto _codd_] _tempore_, rapta soror'.

=9. ATQVI= _unus e duobus Hafniensibus Heinsii_. The ATQVE of _BCMFHILT_
is possibly right. For the adversative sense here required, _OLD_
_atque_ 9 cites Plautus _Aul_ 287-88 '_atque ego_ istuc, Anthrax,
aliouorsum dixeram, / non istuc quod tu insimulas', _Mer_ 742, and Ter
_Heaut_ 189 (apparently a misprint for 187 'atque etiam nunc tempus
est') from comedy, but from the classical period only Cic _Att_ VI i 2
'ac putaram paulo secus' and _Fam_ XIV iv 5 '_atque ego_, qui te
confirmo, ipse me non possum', and instances of _ac tamen_ at _Fam_ VII
xxiii 1, Caesar _BC_ III 87 4, and Tac _Ann_ III 72. In view of the
doubtful status of adversative _atque_ at the time of Ovid and the ease
of corruption of _atqui_ to _atque_ I have followed Heinsius in reading
_atqui_. Heinsius similarly restored _atqui_ from his _codex
Richelianus_ for the other manuscripts' _atque_ at _Tr_ II 121-24
'corruit haec ... sub uno ... crimine lapsa domus. / _atqui_ ea sic lapsa
est ut surgere, si modo laesi / ematuruerit Caesaris ira, queat'; and
_atque_ is found for the correct _atqui_ in some manuscripts at Hor
_Sat_ I ix 52-53 '"magnum narras, uix credibile!" "atqui / sic habet"'
and _EP_ I ii 33-34 '_atqui_ / si noles sanus, curres hydropicus', and
in most manuscripts at _Ep_ I vii 1-5 'Quinque dies tibi pollicitus me
rure futurum / Sextilem totum mendax desideror. _atqui_, / si me uiuere
uis sanum recteque ualentem, / quam mihi das aegro, dabis aegrotare
timenti, / Maecenas, ueniam'.

=10. SINCERO.= 'Unbroken'.

=12. SALVTANDI MVNERE ... TVI.= Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me
the notably prosaic use of the defining gerundive.

=13. GRATATVS= has the force of a present participle, as is shown by _cum
dulcibus ... uerbis_; André mistranslates 'après t'avoir félicité, je
t'embrasserai avec des mots tendres'. The perfect participle of deponent
verbs takes past or present meaning indifferently, according to
context.

=16. VT CAPERET FASTVS VIX DOMVS VLLA MEOS= seems strange, as does
Némethy's explanation 'poeta elatus superbia tectum uertice tangere sibi
uidetur'. Perhaps the distich means something like 'on that day I would
be filled with a pride which no ancestry, no matter how illustrious,
could justify'.

=16. FASTVS.= 'Haughtiness'--Wheeler. The same sense at _AA_ II 241-42
'exue _fastus_, / curam mansuri quisquis amoris habes' and _Aen_ III
326-27 (Andromache speaking) 'stirpis Achilleae _fastus_ iuuenemque
superbum ... tulimus'. Ovid generally uses _fastus_ of the arrogance of
women to their suitors (_Am_ II xvii 9, _Met_ XIV 762, _Fast_ I 419);
the word is not found elsewhere in the poetry of exile.

=17. DVMQVE LATVS SANCTI CINGIT TIBI TVRBA SENATVS.= Compare iv 41 'inde
domum repetes toto comitante senatu'; Ovid is here obviously referring
to the earlier procession _from_ the new consul's house.

=20. LATERIS ... LOCVM= is a strange phrase, but is made easier by _latus
... cingit_ in 17. Compare also such passages as _Met_ II 448-49 'nec
... iuncta deae lateri nec toto est agmine prima' and _Aen_ X 160-61
'Pallas ... sinistro / adfixus lateri'. It is possible that _latus_ here
means 'companion', as at Martial VI lxviii 4 'Eutychos ille, tuum,
Castrice, dulce latus'.

=20. HABVISSE= is equivalent to _habere_, as is shown by _esse_ in the
preceding line. For the idiom, see at viii 82 _imposuisse_ (p 282) and
xi 2 _habuisse_ (p 361).

=21. TVRBA QVAMVIS ELIDERER.= _Elidere_ similarly used of a crowd's
jostling at Sen _Clem_ I 6 1; an extended description at Juvenal III
243-48.

=23. PROSPICEREM.= Owen in his second edition, Wheeler, and Lenz follow
Ehwald (_KB_ 64) in printing _B_'s ASPICEREM. Ehwald argued that
_prospicerem_, 'survey from a distance', was inappropriate in view of
the preceding _turba quamuis eliderer_. But the verb should be taken not
with the pentameter that precedes, but with the one that follows,
'densaque quam longum turba teneret iter': _prospicerem_ seems very
appropriate. Riese conjectured RESPICEREM 'look back at', but emendation
seems unnecessary.

Compounds of _specere_ (the simple verb is used by Plautus and Ennius)
are peculiarly liable to confusion: _prospicere_ is similarly corrupted
to _aspicere_ in some manuscripts at _Met_ III 603-4 'ipse quid aura
mihi tumulo promittat ab alto / _prospicio_' and _Met_ XI 715-16 'notata
locis reminiscitur acta fretumque / _prospicit_', and other instances of
variation of prefix will be found at _Met_ II 405, VI 343, XI 150, XIV
179, XV 577, 660 & 842, _Fast_ I 139 & 461, V 393 & 561, and _Her_ XIX
21.

=25-26.= Heinsius and Bentley questioned the authenticity of these lines,
but the distich does not seem lame enough to warrant excision, and
_tegeret_ (see below) is paralleled elsewhere.

=25. QVOQVE MAGIS NORIS.= 'Listen: this will make you understand better'.
Ovid is very fond of _quoque magis_ and the corresponding _quoque
minus_, particularly at line-beginnings. He generally uses the formula
to denote the emotion which information he then gives should induce.
Compare _Met_ I 757-58 '"quo"que "magis doleas, genetrix" ait, "ille ego
liber, / ille ferox tacui"', _Met_ III 448-50 (Narcissus to his
reflection) 'quoque magis doleam, nec nos mare separat ingens ... exigua
prohibemur aqua', _Met_ XIV 695-97 'quoque magis timeas ... referam tota
notissima Cypro / facta', _Tr_ I vii 37-38, and _EP_ I viii 9-10 'quoque
magis nostros uenia dignere libellos, / haec in procinctu carmina facta
leges'; similar instances of _quoque minus_ at _Met_ II 44, VIII 579,
620 & 866, and _EP_ III ii 52. The present passage shows the same idiom,
but with the difference that a subordinate clause (_quam me uulgaria
tangant_) depends on the verb (_noris_) introduced by the _quoque magis_
clause.

The same formula is used with a different sense, the _quoque_ being an
ablative of degree of difference, at _Am_ III ii 28 and _Met_ IV 64
'quoque magis tegitur, tectus magis aestuat ignis'.

_EP_ II v 15-16 'quoque magis moueare malis, doctissime, nostris, /
credibile est fieri condicione loci' reads oddly; something has probably
been lost from the text after the hexameter.

=25. VVLGARIA.= 'Commonplace, ordinary'. Compare Hor _Sat_ II ii 38 and
Cic _De or_ II 347 'neque enim paruae [_sc_ res] neque usitatae neque
uulgares admiratione aut omnino laude dignae uideri solent'.

=25. TANGANT.= 'Impress'; compare _Her_ V 81 'non ego miror opes, nec me
tua regia tangit', _Her_ VI 113, _Her_ VII 11, _Met_ IV 639, _Met_ X
614-15 'nec forma _tangor_ (poteram tamen hac quoque tangi), / sed quod
adhuc puer est: non me mouet ipse, sed aetas', and _Fast_ V 489, as well
as _Her_ XVI 83. For _tangere_ with a neuter plural subject see _Aen_ I
462 'mentem mortalia _tangunt_'.

=26. TEGERET.= There are twenty trisyllabic pentameter endings in
Tibullus, thirty in Propertius, but only five in Ovid, all in the _Ex
Ponto_: I i 66 _faciet_, I vi 26 _scelus est_, I viii 40 _liceat_, III
vi 46 _uideor_, and this passage (Platnauer 15-16). Quadrisyllabic
endings are similarly frequent in the poetry of exile: see at ii 10
_Alcinoo_ (p 164).

=27. SIGNA ... IN SELLA ... FORMATA CVRVLI.= For _signum_ 'bas-relief' see
at v 18 _conspicuum signis ... ebur_ (the phrase also of the curule
chair).

=28. NVMIDAE SCVLPTILE DENTIS OPVS.= Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to
me the clear imitation of Prop II xxxi 12 'ualuae, Llbyci nobile dentis
opus'.

=28. NVMIDAE ... DENTIS= _edd_ NVMIDI ... DENTIS _codd_. The masculine first
declension substantive _Numida_ is occasionally used as an adjective:
compare _AA_ II 183 'Numidasque leones' (some manuscripts read
_Numidosque_) and Juvenal IV 99-100 'ursos ... Numidas'. André prints
_Numidi_, citing a nominative _Numidus_ at _CIL_ VIII 17328, the
variant at _AA_ II 183, and Apicius VI 8 4 'pullum Numidum' (where
there is a variant _Numidicum_, which André printed in his 1974 edition
of Apicius). But given the support for the first-declension form offered
by the Juvenal passage and the better manuscripts of the _Ars Amatoria_,
the danger in adducing a doubtful passage of Apicius and a single
inscription to determine poetic usage, and the ease of corruption to the
second declension, it seems better to assume that Ovid here used the
first declension form.

_Numidae ... dentis_ is high poetic diction: compare _Met_ XI 167-68
'instructam ... fidem gemmis et _dentibus Indis_', Catullus LXIV 47-48
'puluinar ... _Indo_ ... _dente_ politum', Prop II xxxi 12 (quoted above),
and Statius _Sil_ III iii 94-95 'Indi / dentis honos'.

=28. SCVLPTILE.= The word does not seem to occur again in Latin until
Prudentius _Steph_ X 266.

=29. TARPEIAS ... IN ARCES.= See at iv 29 _Tarpeiae ... sedis_ (p 208).

=30. DVM= expresses purpose; if it were temporal, the verb would be
_cadit_ instead of _caderet_: compare 17-18 '_dumque_ latus sancti
_cingit_ tibi turba senatus, / consulis ante pedes ire iuberer eques'.

=31. SECRETO= represents Ovid's response to the bidding _fauete linguis_.
The word is frequent in comedy, but is very rare in verse, being
virtually confined to satire (Hor _Sat_ I ix 67, Juvenal I 95).

=31-32. MAGNVS ... DEVS= = Iuppiter Optimus _Maximus_. Compare _AA_ II 540
'eris _magni_ uictor in arce _Iouis_'.

=33. TVRAQVE MENTE MAGIS PLENA QVAM LANCE DEDISSEM.= The same notion of
sincerity of feeling being more important than size of gifts at viii
35-40.

=34. TER QVATER ... LAETVS.= 'Infinitely happy'; compare Prop III xii 15
'_ter quater_ in casta felix, o Postume, Galla!', _Aen_ I 94 'o _terque
quaterque_ beati', _AA_ II 447-48, and _Tr_ III xii 25-26 'o _quater_ et
_quotiens non est numerare beatum_ / non interdicta cui licet urbe
frui!'. The phrase is common in Ovid, but he generally uses it to mean
'several times': compare _Am_ III i 31-32 'mouit ... _terque quaterque_
caput', _Met_ II 49, _Met_ IV 734 '_ter quater_ exegit repetita per ilia
ferrum', _Met_ VI 133, _Met_ IX 217, _Met_ XII 288, _Fast_ I 576, and
_Fast_ I 657 '_ter quater_ euolui signantes tempora fastos'.

=35. HIC.= 'Hier auf dem Kapitol'--Ehwald (_KB_ 65). The idiom is somewhat
strange, but seems well enough supported by _Met_ XIV 372-73 '"per o,
tua lumina" dixit / "quae mea ceperunt, perque _hanc_, pulcherrime,
formam"' and _Her_ XVI 137, passages cited by R, J. Tarrant at Sen _Ag_
971 'dummodo _hac_ ['your'] moriar manu'. Compare as well Prop I xi
17-18 'non quia perspecta non es mihi cognita fama, / sed quod in _hac_
omnis _parte_ ['at Baiae'] timetur [_codd_: ueretur _Lachmann_] amor'
and Fedeli _ad loc_.

=36. MITIA ... SI ... FATA DARENT.= 'If the Fates had been kind, and given'.

=36. VRBIS= _editio Aldina 1502_ VERBIS _codd_. _Ius urbis_ = _ius urbis
habitandae_; compare _Met_ XIII 471-72 'genetrici corpus inemptum /
reddite, neue auro redimat ius triste sepulcri [=_sepeliendi_]'.

=37-38. MENTE ... OCVLIS.= Similarly contrasted at _Met_ XV 62-64 'isque,
licet caeli regione remotos, / _mente_ deos adiit et, quae natura
negarat [_'Medic. rectius' (Heinsius)_: negabat _codd_] / uisibus
humanis, _oculis_ ea _pectoris_ hausit'.

=38. NON ITA CAELITIBVS VISVM EST.= 'The gods decided otherwise'. Compare
xi 7 'non ita dis placuit', _Met_ VII 699, _Tr_ IV viii 15-16 (Ovid had
hoped for a peaceful and happy old age) 'non ita dis uisum est, qui me
terraque marique / actum Sarmaticis exposuere locis'. These passages are
probably all echoes of _Aen_ II 426 'dis aliter uisum'.

=40. IVVET= _BpcCMFHILT_ FORET _Bac 'unde uerum eliciendum'--Riese_. But
the correction is by the original hand (Owen suggested that the error
was induced by _foret_ at the end of the preceding distich), and _iuuet_
is unobjectionable: Ovid is explaining his admission in the previous
line that the gods were perhaps just in his case--claiming he was
innocent, that is, that the gods had been unjust, would be of no
assistance to him.

=41. MENTE TAMEN, QVAE SOLA DOMO NON EXVLAT, VSVS.= See at iv 45 _qua
possum, mente_ (p 211).

=41. QVAE SOLA DOMO NON EXVLAT.= Similar wording at _Tr_ III iv 45-46
'Nasonisque tui _quod adhuc non exulat unum_ / nomen ama'.

=41. DOMO NON EXVLAT.= _Domo_ is my conjecture for the transmitted LOCO,
which is strange and difficult to construe. FOCO is also possible; but
the singular would be unusual. For _domo_ compare Ter _Eun_ 610 'domo
exulo nunc'.

=42. PRAETEXTAM FASCES ASPICIAMQVE.= The _-que_ logically belongs with
_fasces_, joining it with _praetextam_: such dislocations are common in
the pentameter because of its strict metrical requirements.

According to the manuscripts the preceding line ends with VTAR; I have
printed Heinsius' VSVS, since there would otherwise be an asyndeton
between _utar_ and _aspiciam_. There are similar errors at 57 and xi 15
(_cedet_ for _cedens_; _peruenit_ for _perueniens_): here we may have a
deliberate alteration by a scribe who did not understand the force of
the delayed enclitic and sought a verb to couple _aspiciam_ with.

=44. DECRETIS= _Korn_ SECRETIS _codd_ SECRETO _Wheeler_. Korn's conjecture
makes the pentameter an amplification of the hexameter, a common pattern
in Ovid; its corruption to _secretis_ would be easy. Ehwald (_KB_ 39-40)
retained _secretis_, citing Tac _Ann_ III 37 '_secreta_ ['solitary
designs'--Grant] patris mitigari' and Pliny _Pan_ 53 6 (we should
rejoice in our present good fortune under Trajan, and weep at the
tribulations endured under previous emperors) 'hoc _secreta_ nostra
['our private thoughts'], hoc sermones, hoc ipsae gratiarum actiones
agant'. But in a list of the consul's public functions such a deviation
of subject seems inappropriate. Wheeler's _secreto_ is a little forced:
'my mind ... shall fancy itself present unseen at your actions'. Ehwald
objected that Korn did not explain what his conjecture meant; but
_decernere_ was used of the consuls' judicial decisions (Cic _Att_ XVI
xvi a 4(6) 'consulum decretum').

=45. LONGI ... LVSTRI.= The epithet seems to have no special force: compare
iv 23 'longum ... annum'.

=45. REDITVS HASTAE SVPPONERE.= See at v 19 _reditus ... componet_ (p 219).

=46. CERNET= _PM2c, Gothanus membr. II 121 (saec xiii)_ CREDET _BCFHILT_.
_Cernet_ seems preferable to _credet_ as continuing the image of
_uidebit_ in 43.

=46. EXACTA CVNCTA LOCARE FIDE.= Graecinus will be careful and
incorruptible in assigning taxation contracts. For _fide_ compare v 20
'et minui magnae non sinet urbis opes'; for _exacta_ compare Suet _Tib_
18 'cum animaduerteret Varianam cladem temeritate et neglegentia ducis
accidisse ... curam ... solita [_scripsi; confer Liu XXVII 47 1
'multitudo ... maior solita_' solito _codd_] _exactiorem_ praestitit'.

=48. PVBLICA QVAERENTEM QVID PETAT VTILITAS.= The consul acted as chairman
of the Senate, proposing the order of the day, and asking the senators
in order of seniority for their _sententiae_ on the appropriate action
for the question under discussion.

=48. PVBLICA ... VTILITAS.= 'The people's interest'. For _utilitas_ compare
_Met_ XIII 191 'utilitas populi', Cic _Part Or_ 89 'persaepe euenit ut
_utilitas_ cum honestate certet', Cic _Sul_ 25 '_populi utilitati_ magis
consulere quam uoluntati', and Livy VI 40 5 & VIII 34 2 'posthabita
filii caritas _publicae utilitati_'.

=49. PRO CAESARIBVS= = _pro Caesarum factis_. Compare _Res Gestae_ 4 'ob
res a me aut per legatos meos auspicis [=_auspiciis_] meis terra marique
prospere gestas quinquagiens et quinquiens _decreuit senatus_
supplicandum esse dis immortalibus. dies autem per quos _ex senatus
consulto_ supplicatum est fuere DCCCLXXXX'.

=49. CAESARIBVS.= Tiberius, Germanicus, and Drusus. Similarly used at _EP_
II vi 18 (to Graecinus) 'omnia _Caesaribus_ [Augustus and Tiberius] sic
tua facta probes'.

=49. DECERNERE GRATES.= 'Propose (in the Senate) the decreeing of thanks'.
The sense of _decernere_ is common in prose: see Cic _Prou Cons_ 1,
_Att_ VII i 7, and the other passages at _OLD decerno_ 6.

=49. GRATES= appears occasionally in prose (Tarrant at Sen _Ag_ 380
_reddunt grates_ cites Livy XXIII 11 12, Curtius IX 6 17, and Vell Pat
II 25 4), but in hexameter and elegiac verse is the necessary
representative for _grAtiAs_.

=51. CVM IAM FVERIS POTIORA PRECATVS.= For _potior_ 'more important'
compare Caesar _BC_ I 8 (a reported remark of Pompey) 'semper se rei
publicae commoda priuatis necessitudinibus habuisse _potiora_', Livy
VIII 29 2, and the many passages at _OLD potior2_ 4. The usage belongs
to prose: Ovid elsewhere and Virgil always use _potior_ to mean either
'more powerful' or 'preferable'.

=53-54. SVRGAT ... DETQVE.= The apodosis of an implied condition: 'If you
prayed for me, the fire would rise'.

=53. SVRGAT AD HANC VOCEM PLENA PIVS IGNIS AB ARA.= The same favourable
omen at _Met_ X 278-79 (Pygmalion has finished his prayer to Venus)
'amici numinis omen, / flamma ter accensa est apicemque per aera duxit'.

=53. PLENA ... AB ARA.= Another indication of Graecinus' devotion to the
Caesars.

=53. PIVS.= 'Holy'; compare _pia tura_ at _Am_ III iii 33, _Met_ XI 577,
and _Tr_ II 59, _pia sacra_ at _Tr_ V v 2, and _pio ... igne_ at _Tr_ V v
12.

=54. LVCIDVS.= Proleptic: 'The flame-tips would become bright and furnish
a good omen for your prayer'.

=55. NE CVNCTA QVERAMVR.= 'So that not everything I say will be a
complaint'.

=57. LAETITAE EST= _LT_. Most manuscripts have LAETITIA EST. Similarly at
_Met_ VIII 430 'illi _laetitiae est_ cum munere muneris auctor' most
codices read _laetitia est_. Heinsius thought LAETITIAE possibly correct
here, as might be the case also in the _Metamorphoses_: _laetitiae_
could easily have been misread as _laetitia E_ [=_est_], with
_laetitiae est_ as a later correction.

=58. FRATER.= L. Pomponius Flaccus (_PIR1_ P 538), _consul ordinarius_ for
17. As the greater honour would indicate (Graecinus was _consul
suffectus_), Flaccus was more prominent than his brother and, unlike
Graecinus, is several times mentioned in literary sources outside Ovid.
At II 129 Velleius Paterculus speaks of Flaccus' ability and modesty,
and Suetonius (_Tib_ 42 1) names him as a drinking-companion of the
emperor, made propraetor of Syria by Tiberius. Tacitus says that Flaccus
proposed the _supplicationum dies_ following the discovery in 16 of
Libo's plot against Tiberius (_Ann_ II 32 3); at _Ann_ II 41 2 he names
Flaccus as consul at the time of Germanicus' great triumph in 17, and at
VI 27 3 mentions Flaccus' death in 34 while propraetor of Syria. For
Flaccus' special mission to Thrace shortly after the time this poem was
written, see at 75 (p 308).

_EP_ I x is addressed to Flaccus, but gives little information except
that Flaccus had, like Graecinus, given help to Ovid (37-40). Ovid's
relations with Flaccus were clearly not as intimate as those with his
brother.

=59-60.= The distich may be an interpolation, or at least deeply corrupted
in its present form. Professor E. Fantham points out to me that the
construction of _die_ with both _summo ... Decembri_ and _Iani_ is
awkward, and that _dies Iani_ does not seem to be used elsewhere in
Latin literature. The tense of _suspicit_ is strange as well: a future
would normally be expected here.

=61. QVAEQVE EST IN VOBIS PIETAS.= 'Your family-feeling is so great that
...' The same idiom at _Met_ V 373 'quae iam patientia nostra est',
_EP_ I vii 59, _EP_ II ii 21-22 'quaeque tua est pietas in totum nomen
Iuli, / te laedi cum quis laeditur inde [=_ex illis_] putas', and Hor
_Sat_ I ix 54-55 'quae tua uirtus, / expugnabis'. The sense is frequent
in prose (_OLD qui1_ A 12).

The expression is used as a simple relative with the implication of size
only from context at _Tr_ III v 29 'quaeque tibi linguae est facundia,
confer in illud' and _Tr_ III vi 7-8 'quique est in caris animi [_codd_:
animo _fort legendum; uide ad 91_] tibi candor amicis-- / cognitus est
illi quem colis ipse uiro'.

=61-62. ALTERNA ... GAVDIA.= Flaccus will first rejoice to see Graecinus
become consul; then Graecinus will have the pleasure of seeing Flaccus
consul.

=64. BINVS= seems sufficiently confirmed, as Ehwald points out (_KB_
51-52) by _bis ... bis_ in the preceding line; BIMVS, conjectured by
Heinsius and found in certain late manuscripts, seems ingenious but
unnecessary. Ehwald compares _Ecl_ III 30 '_bis_ uenit ad mulctram,
_binos_ alit ubere fetus'.

=64-65. HONOR ... INGENS.= At vii 17 Ovid calls the rank of _primipilaris_
'titulus ... ingens'.

=65-66. MARTIA ... ROMA.= The same phrase at _Tr_ III vii 52 and _EP_ I
viii 24; compare as well _Aen_ I 276-77 'Romulus ... Mauortia condet /
moenia'. Mars, father of Romulus and Remus, was peculiarly the god of
Rome: compare _Fast_ I 39-40 & III 85-86 'Mars Latio uenerandus erat,
quia praesidet armis: / arma ferae genti remque decusque dabant'.

The reference to Mars is very apt in view of the primarily military
nature of the republican consul's office.

=67. MVLTIPLICAT TAMEN HVNC GRAVITAS AVCTORIS HONOREM.= Flaccus had been
nominated for the consulship by Tiberius.

For language and sentiment compare _Met_ VIII 430 'illi laetitiae est
cum munere muneris _auctor_'.

=67. GRAVITAS= is linked with Hercules at _Met_ IX 270, with Jupiter at
_Met_ I 207 (considered suspect by Merkel) and II 847, with all the
Olympian gods at _Met_ VI 73, and with Augustus at _Tr_ II 512.
Underneath the ostensible connection to Jupiter at _Met_ II 846-47 'non
bene conueniunt nec in una sede morantur / maiestas et amor' Professor
R. J. Tarrant sees an allusion to Augustus.

=69-70. IVDICIIS IGITVR LICEAT FLACCOQVE TIBIQVE / TALIBVS AVGVSTI TEMPVS
IN OMNE FRVI.= Compare _EP_ II vi 17-18 (to Graecinus) 'quodque soles
animo _semper_, quod uoce precari, / omnia Caesaribus sic _tua facta
probes_'.

=70. AVGVSTI= = _Tiberii_; his name in inscriptions is TI·CAESAR·AVG
(Sandys 235).

=71. CVM= _FILT_ QVOD _BC_ VT _MH_ QVVM _Weise_. The archetype was
illegible at this point, and the manuscripts offer various supplements.
Of these _cum_ seems the most appropriate. Ehwald favoured _quod_ (_KB_
48), but all except one of the passages he cited are instances of _quod
superest_ or _quod reliquum est_. The one relevant passage he cited was
_Fast_ II 17-18 (to Augustus) 'ergo ades et placido paulum mea munera
uultu / respice, pacando _si quid_ ab hoste _uacat_'. Many manuscripts
however offer _uacas_ (for which compare Prop II xxxii 7 'quodcumque
uacabis'), and the corruption to the third person seems an easy one.
_Vacare_ in general does not seem to occur with an expressed impersonal
subject.

=71. CVRA PROPIORE.= The same phrase at _Met_ XIII 578-79 '_cura_ deam
_propior_ luctusque domesticus angit / Memnonis amissi'.

=73. SI QVAE DABIT AVRA SINVM.= 'If some wind should give the opportunity
of filling my sails'. _Quae_ is my correction for QVA (_CMFHIL_), which
would make the sentence mean 'If the wind should in some way ...'. The
difficulty here is with the apparently already existing _aura_: what
breeze is Ovid referring to? QVEM (_BT_) presents the same difficulty
('If the breeze should offer any opportunity ...') and in any case looks
like a scribal correction. I take _qua_ to be an unmetrical form
corrupted from the rare form _quae_ of the indefinite adjective. For the
form, compare Ter _Heaut_ 44 'si _quae_ [_Bembinus (saec iv-v)_: qua
_recc_] [_sc_ fabula] laboriosast, ad me curritur', Hor _Sat_ I iv 93-95
'mentio si _quae_ [_uar_ qua] ... te coram fuerit, defendas, ut tuus est
mos', Hor _Sat_ II vi 10 'o si urnam argenti fors _quae_ mihi monstret',
and _CIL_ I 583 37 'SEIQVAE CAVSA ERIT'. _Quae_ in the present passage
offers the same notion of a fresh breeze rising as is found at viii
27-28 'quamlibet exigua si nos ea [_sc_ ara] iuuerit _aura_, / obruta de
mediis cumba resurget aquis' and _Tr_ IV v 19-20 'remis ad opem luctare
ferendam / _dum ueniat_ placido mollior _aura_ deo'.

_Quae_ should possibly be written at _Met_ VI 231-33 'praescius imbris
... rector / carbasa deducit ne _qua_ leuis effluat aura', but Professor
R. J. Tarrant points out that _qua_ can be defended by taking _leuis_ to
mean 'nimble', a sense supported here by _effluat_. A strong case could
be made for reading _quae_ at Hor _Carm_ III xiv 19-20 'Spartacum si
_qua_ potuit uagantem / fallere testa'.

=73. SINVM.= _Sinus_ in the sense of 'sail' is common enough (_Am_ II xi
38, _AA_ III 500, _Fast_ V 609, and _Aen_ III 455 & V 16; the origin of
the metonymy seen at Prop III ix 30 'uelorum plenos ... sinus'); but the
brachylogy here 'opportunity of filling my sails' is remarkable.

=73. LAXATE= _editio princeps Romana_ IACTATE _codd_. Korn, Lenz, and
André print the manuscript reading, and Korn offers three parallel
passages in its defence, none of which stands up to examination. The
first is _EP_ III ii 5-6 'cumque labent alii _iactataque_ uela
relinquant, / tu lacerae remanes ancora sola rati', where _iactata_
means 'storm-whipped'; compare Statius _Theb_ VII 139-41 'uento /
incipiente ... laxi _iactantur_ ubique rudentes'. At Cic _Tusc_ V 40 (a
Spartan to a wealthy sea-merchant) 'non sane optabilis quidem ista
... rudentibus apta fortuna', 'Well, your fortune depends on your cables,
and I don't think it something to be sought for', _iactare_ does not
appear. The third passage, Virgil _G_ II 354-55 'seminibus positis
superest diducere terram / saepius ad capita ['roots'] et duros
_iactare_ bidentis', hardly seems relevant.

For _laxate rudentes_ 'let out the sails' Heinsius cited _Aen_ III
266-67 'tum litore funem / deripere excussosque iubet _laxare_ rudentis'
'Next he commanded us to fling hawsers from moorings and uncoil and ease
the sheets' (Jackson Knight), _Aen_ VIII 707-8 'uentis ... uela dare et
_laxos_ iamiamque immittere funis', Cic _Diu_ I 127, Lucan V 426-27
'pariter soluere rates, totosque rudentes / _laxauere_ sinus', and Lucan
IX 1004.

=74. E STYGIIS ... AQVIS.= Similar phrasing at _Met_ X 697 'Stygia ... unda,
_Met_ XI 500 'Stygia ... unda', _Aen_ VI 374 'Stygias ... aquas', _Aen_
XII 91 'Stygia ... unda', and _Cons Liu_ 410 'Stygia ... aqua'.

Ovid often uses the phrasing of his exile: see _Tr_ I ii 65-66 'mittere
me _Stygias_ si iam uoluisset in _undas_ / Caesar, in hoc uestro non
eguisset ope', _Tr_ IV v 22, _EP_ I viii 27 'careo uobis, _Stygias_
detrusus in _oras_', and _EP_ II iii 44 'a _Stygia_ quantum mors
[_codd_: sors _Heinsius_] mea distat aqua?'. For Ovid's exile as the
equivalent of death, see at vi 49 _qui me doluistis ademptum_ (p 243).

=75. PRAEFVIT HIS ... LOCIS MODO FLACCVS.= At _Ann_ II 64-67 Tacitus
reports how, following the death of Augustus, Rhescuporis attacked and
imprisoned his brother Cotys (addressee of _EP_ II ix), alleging a plot
against himself; on their father's death, the kingdom of Thrace had been
divided between them, Cotys receiving the better regions. Tiberius
insisted that Rhescuporis release his brother and come to Rome to
explain the situation; Rhescuporis then killed his brother, claiming it
was a suicide. 'nec tamen Caesar placitas semel artes mutauit, sed
defuncto Pandusa, quem sibi infensum Rhescuporis arguerat [_scripsi_:
arguebat _M_], Pomponium Flaccum, _ueterem stipendiis_ et arta cum rege
amicitia eoque accommodatiorem ad fallendum ob id maxime Moesiae
praefecit'; the previous service mentioned by Tacitus is no doubt the
command Ovid is here referring to.

Flaccus succeeded in trapping Rhescuporis and bringing him to Rome; he
was found guilty and sent in exile to Alexandria, where he died.
Velleius Paterculus placed the episode first in his list of memorable
events of Tiberius' reign (II 129); it is briefly mentioned at Suet
_Tib_ 37 4.

=75. FLACCVS.= 'Ab hoc Flacco uolunt quidam Valachiam ['Wallachia'] fuisse
dictam olim _Flacciam_, quod nomen sensim corruptela sermonis transiit
in Valachiam. Vide Georgii a ['von'] Reychersdorff Chorographiam
Transyluaniae. pag. 33 [first published in 1595; see _British Museum Gen
Cat_ 200 383] qui addit hinc [_sic_] adhuc Romanum ibi sermonem durare,
licet admodum corruptum. sed hae fabulae'--Burman. Clearly the existence
of Rumanian was not widely known in Western Europe at the time Burman
wrote.

=77. MYSAS GENTES= = _Moesos_. Strabo (VII 3 10; cited by André) claims a
common origin for the [Greek: Moisoi] of Europe and the [Greek: Mysoi]
of Asia. For the Greek form, compare Ovid's use of _Getes_ for _Geta_
and _Sauromates_ for _Sarmata_.

=78. ARCV FISOS ... GETAS.= For the bow as the typical Getic weapon, see
iii 52 'arcu ... Gete", _EP_ III v 45 'Getico ... arcu' and _Ibis_ 635
'Geticasque sagittas'.

=78. ENSE.= The _gladius_, typical weapon of the Roman legionary. For the
precise equivalence of the two terms, see Quintilian X i 11. In Ovid's
poetry, the proportion of instances of _ensis_ to instances of _gladius_
is about 90:30; in the poetry of exile, it is 21:3. For a discussion of
_ensis_/_gladius_, with statistics, see Axelson 51; the only poets to
admit _gladius_ more freely than Ovid are Lucan and Juvenal.

=79. TROESMIN= _Heinsius_ TROESMEN _C_ TROESENEN _B1_ TROEZEN _uel similia
codd plerique_. Troesmis, the modern Galati, is located on the north
bank of the Danube, about 160 kilometres inland from Aegissos (Tulcea).
Heinsius did not have the assistance of _CIL_ V 6183-88 & 6195, but
seems nonetheless to have conjectured that _Troesmin_ was a possible
reading ('sed legendum, [Greek: Trôismis] uel [Greek: Trôsmis]'). Korn
was the first to place _Troesmin_ in the text.

=79. CELERI VIRTVTE.= 'With a bold surprise attack'.

=80. INFECITQVE FERO SANGVINE DANVVIVM.= Compare the similar description
of Vestalis' recapture of Aegissos: 'non negat hoc _Hister_, cuius tua
dextera quondam / _puniceam Getico sanguine fecit aquam_' (vii 19-20).

=80. DANVVIVM.= According to Owen at _Tr_ II 192 this, and not DANVBIVM
(the reading of the manuscripts), is the spelling certified by the
inscriptions. Manuscripts divide between the two spellings at Hor _Carm_
IV xv 21 and Tac _Germ_ I 1.

=81-86.= Ovid similarly calls Vestalis as his witness at vii 3-4 'aspicis
en praesens quali iaceamus in aruo, / nec me testis eris falsa solere
queri'.

=81. INCOMMODA.= The word is not found elsewhere in Ovid, and is not used
in verse, except for satire (Hor _AP_ 169; Juvenal XIII 21). It is
particularly common in Caesar.

=81. CAELI= = 'climate', as commonly (_Tr_ III iii 7, Prop II xxviii 5,
Cic _Att_ XI xxii 2).

=82. QVAM VICINO TERREAR HOSTE ROGA.= An imitation of Tib I i 3 'quem
labor assiduus _uicino terreat hoste_'.

=83. SINTNE LITAE TENVES SERPENTIS FELLE SAGITTAE.= Similar descriptions
of poisoned arrows at _Tr_ IV i 77 'imbuta ... tela uenenis', _Tr_ IV i
84, _Tr_ III x 64, _Tr_ V vii 16 'tela ... uipereo lurida felle', _EP_ I
ii 16 'omnia uipereo spicula felle linunt', _EP_ III i 26, and _EP_ III
iii 106.

=84. FIAT AN HVMANVM VICTIMA DIRA CAPVT.= Human sacrifice similarly
mentioned at _Tr_ IV iv 61-62 'illi quos audis hominum gaudere cruore, /
paene sub eiusdem sideris axe iacent'.

=85. MENTIAR.= Professor J. N. Grant points out to me the asyndeton
following _quaere ... sintne_. Compare the similar problem at iv 31-32.

=85. AN COEAT DVRATVS FRIGORE PONTVS.= Similar wording at vii 7 'ipse
uides certe glacie concrescere Pontum', _Tr_ II 196 'maris astricto quae
coit unda gelu', and _Tr_ III x 37.

=86. IVGERA MVLTA FRETI.= According to _TLL_ VII.2 629 7-8 this is the
unique instance of _iugerum_ being applied to water. The transferred
sense is natural enough in view of the poets' application to the sea of
such words as _campus_ and _arua_.

=89. NON SVMVS ... ODIO.= Basically a prose use; but compare _Met_ II 438
'huic odio nemus est', _Fast_ VI 558, _EP_ II i 4 'iam minus hic odio
est quam fuit ante locus', and _Ecl_ VIII 33 'tibi est odio mea
fistula'.

Owen's second edition has the misprint '_nec_ sumus hic odio',
reproduced by Wheeler. The error was induced by _nec_ at the start of
the pentameter.

=90. NEC CVM FORTVNA MENS QVOQVE VERSA MEA EST.= For Ovid's use of
syllepsis, see at vi 16 _spem nostram terras deseruitque simul_ (p 234).
For the sentiment of this line, compare Sen _Med_ 176 'Fortuna opes
auferre, non animum potest', where Costa cites Accius 619-20 Ribbeck2
'nam si a me regnum Fortuna atque opes / eripere quiuit, at uirtutem non
quiit', Sen _Ben_ IV 10 5, Sen _Ep_ XXXVI 6, and Euripides fr. 1066
Nauck.

=91. ILLA QVIES ANIMO.= _Animo_ is locative; or perhaps _in_ should be
supplied from the following line: for the joining of a noun with a
following preposition already with a complement, see Clausen on Persius
I 131 'abaco numeros et secto in puluere metas'. I read _animo_ (found
in one of Heinsius' Vatican manuscripts) because of the parallel
structure it gives with the following _in ore_, but ANIMI (_BCMFHILT_)
is possible enough: _OLD quies_ 7 cites _quies animi_ at Celsus III 18
5.

=91. QVAM TV LAVDARE SOLEBAS.= The same phrase at _Her_ XV 193 'haec sunt
illa [_sc_ pectora], Phaon, _quae tu laudare solebas_'. For the
persistence of Ovid's old habits, compare _EP_ I x 29-30 (he remains a
moderate drinker, as formerly).

=93-94. SIC EGO SVM LONGE, SIC HIC, VBI BARBARVS HOSTIS / VT FERA PLVS
VALEANT LEGIBVS ARMA, FACIT= is clearly corrupt, as will be seen from
Wheeler's 'Such is my bearing in this far land, where the barbarian foe
causes cruel arms to have more power than law' and André's 'Je vis au
loin, ici, où un ennemi barbare donne aux armes cruelles plus de force
qu'aux lois'. Merkel ejected the distich, which seems the best solution;
it is not necessary to the poem's structure, and the iterated _facit ut_
in unrelated clauses at 94 and 97 is suspicious. Also, as Professor R.
J. Tarrant notes, the _ut_ in 94 makes one expect that _ut_ in 95 will
be correlative, when it in fact continues the thought of 93 (or rather
of 91-92, after 93-94 are excised).

Heinsius thought 93 alone to be suspect; if so, the meaning lying behind
the text is probably something like 'What I once was at Rome, I still am
here'.

=93-94. HIC, VBI BARBARVS HOSTIS, / VT FERA PLVS VALEANT LEGIBVS ARMA
FACIT.= Similar statements at _Tr_ V vii 47-48 'non metuunt leges, sed
cedit uiribus aequum, / uictaque pugnaci iura sub ense iacent' and _Tr_
V x 43-44; see also Otto _lex_ 3.

=93. BARBARVS HOSTIS.= The same phrase at _Tr_ III x 54, _Tr_ IV i 82, and
_EP_ II vii 70.

=95. RE ... NVLLA= _MHIL_ REM NVLLAM _BCFT_. The verb _queri_ can take a
direct object, or be constructed with _de_ + ablative, but not both;
this would in effect give the verb two objects. _Re ... nulla_ removes
this difficulty and is obviously prone to corruption, the true object
_de nobis_ being postponed to the following line.

=96. FEMINA ... VIRVE PVERVE= = 'anyone'; compare _Tr_ III vii 29-30 'pone,
Perilla, metum: tantummodo _femina nulla / neue uir_ a scriptis discat
amare tuis', and Ovid's use of _femina uirque_ 'everyone' at _Met_ VI
314-15 '_femina uirque_ timent cultuque impensius _omnes_ ... uenerantur
numina', _RA_ 814, _Tr_ I iii 23, and _Tr_ II 6. The repeated _u_ in
_uirue_ would not have offended the Romans: compare for instance _Tr_
III vii 30 'neue uir', _Am_ I viii 97 'uiri uideat toto uestigia lecto',
and _Met_ XII 204 'poteratque uiri uox illa uideri'; conscious
alliteration at _Am_ III vii 59 'uiuosque uirosque' and _Met_ XIII 386
'inuictumque uirum uicit'.

=98. HAEC QVONIAM TELLVS TESTIFICANDA MIHI EST.= Similar phrasing at
_Ibis_ 27-28 (of Augustus) 'faciet quoque forsitan idem / _terra_ sit ut
propior _testificanda mihi_'.

=100. RESPECTV ... SVI.= 'Out of consideration for themselves'. _Respectus_
elsewhere in Ovid only at _Tr_ I iii 99-100 (of his wife after his
departure) '[narratur ...] uoluisse mali [_Madvig_: mori _codd_]
moriendo ponere sensus, / _respectu_ tamen non periisse _mei_'.
_Respectus_ is found in Phaedrus, Martial, and Juvenal, but not in
Virgil, Horace, or Propertius.

=101. NEC MIHI CREDIDERIS= in its absolute use here seems colloquial:
elsewhere Ovid uses _nec ... credideris_ to introduce a dependent clause
(_Tr_ V xiv 43; _EP_ I viii 29).

=101. EXTANT DECRETA QVIBVS NOS / LAVDAT ET IMMVNES PVBLICA CERA FACIT.=
The same honour described in greater detail at xiv 51-56.

=101. EXTANT= ('there exist') is somewhat more forceful than the nearly
equivalent _sunt_: compare xiv 44 '_extat_ adhuc nemo saucius ore meo',
Cic _Planc_ 2 'uideo ... hoc in numero neminem ... cuius non _extet_ in me
summum meritum', and Cic _Diu_ I 71.

=102. PVBLICA CERA= = _tabulae publicae_, 'public records', for which
compare Cic _Arch_ 8 & _Fl_ 40, and Livy XXVI 36 11. The same metonymy
at Val Max II x 1, where _tabulae_ and _cera_ are used as synonyms, and
at Hor _Ep_ I vi 62 'Caerite cera', where commentators cite Aulus
Gellius' mention of _tabulae Caerites_ (XVI 13).

=103. QVAE= _R. J. Tarrant_ HAEC _L, probante Heinsio_ ET _BCMFHIT_.
_Quae_ connects with _idem_ in the following line and provides a more
satisfactory sense than _et_, which would make the sentence mean that
Ovid did not consider the decrees something to boast of. _Quae
quamquam_ is preferable to _haec quamquam_ since it connects better
with the preceding line and is obviously more prone to corruption; but
for a similar corruption of _haec_ compare Prop II xxiii 1 'fuit indocti
haec [_uar_ et] semita uulgi'. For _quae_ Professor Tarrant cites _EP_
III v 9-10 '_quae quamquam_ lingua mihi sunt properante per horas /
lecta satis multas, pauca fuisse queror' and _EP_ III viii 23-24 '_quae
quamquam_ misisse pudet ... tu tamen haec quaeso consule missa boni'.

=103. QVAMQVAM ... SIT= _G_ QVAMQVAM ... EST _BCMFHILT_. For the subjunctive
Luck compares _Met_ XIV 465 'admonitu quamquam luctus renouentur amari'
and _Met_ XV 244-45 '_quae_ [_sc_ elementa] _quamquam_ spatio distent,
tamen omnia fiunt / ex ipsis'; in the first passage a few manuscripts
and in the second the majority offer the indicative. Ovid usually has
the indicative following _quamquam_; but _sit_ should be taken as the
correct reading here in view of _G_'s early date.

=105. NEC PIETAS IGNOTA MEA EST.= At xiii 19-38 Ovid describes an instance
of his _pietas_, the reciting to the Getes of a poem in Getic on
Tiberius.

=105-10.= The figures of the imperial family had been a gift of Cotta
Maximus, for which _EP_ II viii was a letter of thanks. For a discussion
of Ovid's treatment of the imperial family, particularly in the poems of
exile, see K. Scott "Emperor Worship in Ovid", _TAPA_ LXI [1930] 43-69.

=106. CAESARIS.= Augustus, as is made clear by the next line.

=107. NATVSQVE PIVS.= Tiberius; see at viii 63 _auum_ (p 277). For
Tiberius' piety to Augustus' memory compare Tac _Ann_ IV 37 4 (AD 25;
Tiberius speaking) 'cum diuus Augustus sibi atque urbi Romae templum
apud Pergamum sisti non prohibuisset, _qui omnia facta dictaque eius
uice legis obseruem_, placitum iam exemplum ... secutus sum'.

=107. CONIVNXQVE SACERDOS.= Livia, priestess of the deified Augustus;
Germanicus was his _flamen_. For the language compare Vell Pat II 75 3
'Liuia ... genere, probitate, forma Romanarum eminentissima, quam postea
_coniugem_ Augusti uidimus, quam transgressi ad deos _sacerdotem_ ac
filiam'.

=108. FACTO ... DEO.= See at viii 63 _quem uirtus addidit astris_ (p 277).

=109. VTERQVE NEPOTVM.= Germanicus and Drusus.

=111. PRECANTIA VERBA= = _preces_. The same phrase at _Met_ VI 164, IX
159, and XIV 365.

=112. EOO ... AB ORBE.= The same phrase at _Fast_ III 466 & V 557.

=113-14.= Williams suggested deleting this distich: 'The distance between
_Tota_ and _Pontica terra_, the use of _licet_=if, and _Pontica terra_
immediately followed by _Pontica tellus_, point to an interpolation'.

The hyperbaton of _tota ... Pontica terra_ seems standard enough.
Wheeler translates _licet quaeras_ as 'you are free to inquire', which
may be right; however, the phrase does indeed seem awkward, and _licet_
may be an intrusive gloss that has displaced _uelim_: compare _Her_ IV
18 'fama--_uelim quaeras_--crimine nostra uacat'. The repetition of
_Pontica terra_ and _Pontica ... tellus_ is a very strong argument for
deleting one of the two distichs. However, 115-16 seems more likely to
be the interpolation in view of the difficulties discussed in the next
note.

=115. ORA.= Ehwald (_KB_ 65) read ARA (_B_), citing Dessau _ILS_ 154 14-15
'ara(m) numini Augusto pecunia nostra faciendam curauimus; _ludos_ / ex
idibus Augustis diebus sex p(ecunia) n(ostra) faciendos curauimus'; but
the _ara_ and _ludi_ are clearly separate items in the inscription,
which does not support the phrasing _ara natalem ludis celebrare_.

Even with _ora_, 115-16 read rather oddly: the notion of an individual
conducting _ludi_ is strange, and the singular _dei_ seems rather vague
after the collective _his_ of 111. If the distich is excised (as
Professor R. J. Tarrant suggests) 113-14 round out the paragraph that
began with 105 (note the correspondence of _uidet hospita terra_ in 105
with _testis Pontica terra_ in 114), and 117 introduces _hospites_ as a
second class of witnesses.

=118. LONGA.= Not 'distant' (Wheeler) but 'long'; compare _Met_ XIII 407
'longus in angustum qua clauditur Hellespontus'. _Longus_ meaning
'distant' is extremely rare: _OLD longus_ 6 cites only Silius VI 628
'remeans longis ... oris' and ps-Quintilian _Decl_ 320 6 'longas terras
... peragraui' (Lewis and Short add Justinus 18 1 'longa a domo
militia'). The normal Latin words for 'distant' were _longinquus_ and
_longe_ (ancestor of French _loin_).

=119. IS= in its various forms occurs only seven times in _EP_ IV: the
other occurrences are of feminine singular _ea_ at i 17, viii 27 & xiv
11, of _eius_ at xv 6 (its only occurrence in the _Ex Ponto_), of
accusative _id_ at i 19, and of accusative neuter plural _ea_ at x 35.

The elegiac poets avoided the use of _is_, preferring _hic_, _ille_, and
_iste_. The singular nominative forms were the only ones used relatively
freely by Ovid (about forty instances of each); Tibullus and Propertius
avoided even these (Platnauer 116; Axelson 70-71).

=119. QVO LAEVVS FVERAT SVB PRAESIDE PONTVS.= See at 75 _praefuit his
... locis modo Flaccus_ (p 308).

=119. LAEVVS ... PONTVS= = _Euxini litora laeua_ (_Tr_ IV i 60). A similar
brachylogy at _EP_ I iv 31 'iunctior Haemonia est _Ponto_ quam Roma
_sinistro_ [_Burman_: sit Histro _codd_]'.

=119. PRAESIDE.= This seems to be the first instance of _praeses_
'governor' in Latin. It is found in prose from Tacitus and Suetonius on:
Trajan even uses it in his official correspondence (Pliny _Ep_ X xliv).

=119. FVERAT.= See at vi 12 _nec fueram tanti_ (p 230).

=121. AVDIERIT.= Probably a perfect subjunctive 'may have heard', although
possibly an epistolary future perfect indicative ('when you receive
this, your brother will perhaps [_forsitan_] have heard'). For the
perfect subjunctive compare _Met_ X 560-62 _'forsitan audieris_ aliquam
certamine cursus / ueloces superasse uiros'.

=121. FORTVNA EST IMPAR ANIMO.= Similar phrasing at _Tr_ V v 46-47 (on his
wife's birthday) 'at non sunt ista gaudia nata die, / sed labor et curae
_fortunaque moribus impar_'; but note the different sense of _fortuna_.

=121. FORTVNA.= 'My means' (Wheeler). The sense is rare but classical;
_OLD fortuna_ 12 cites among other passages Cic _Fam_ XIV 4 2 'periculum
fortunarum ['possessions'] et capitis sui' and Caes _BG_ V 43 4.

=122. CARPO ... OPES.= For the sense of _carpo_ see at viii 32 _carpsit
opes ... meas_ (p 266).

=126. ILLVM= _CMFHILTB2_ ILLI _B1_. Either accusative or dative would be
acceptable enough with _latere_. The earliest instances from verse given
by _TLL_ VII.2 997 49 are Lucretius III 280 for the dative and _Aen_ I
130 for the accusative. I retain the accusative because it is the
reading of most manuscripts, including _B_'s close relative _C_. There
are similar variants involving the object of _latere_ at _Fast_ V 361:
the accusative given by most manuscripts is generally read in preference
to the dative.

=127-29. TV ... TV.= For the anaphora of _tu_ in hymns or solemn prayer,
see the passages collected by Nisbet and Hubbard at Hor _Carm_ I x 9 and
by Tarrant at Sen _Ag_ 311.

=127. SVPERIS ASCITE.= _Asciscere_ is generally used of admission to the
citizenship or to the Senate: for parallels to the metaphorical use
here, see Tarrant at Sen _Ag_ 812-13 'tuus ille bis seno meruit labore /
_adlegi caelo_ magnus Alcides'.

=128.= Causal =VT= [_'ex ueteribus' Naugerius_] seems an appropriate
correction for the manuscripts' lame ET.

=129-30. NOSTRAS ... PRECES.= The hyperbaton adds elevation and dignity to
the prayer.

=129-30. INTER CONVEXA ... SIDERA= = _inter sidera conuexi caeli_; the
hypallage adds further to the elevation of the passage. For _conuexa_
compare Festus (58 Muller; 51 Lindsay) 'conuexum est ex omni parte
declinatum, _qualis est natura caeli_, quod ex omni parte ad terram
uersum declinatum est', _Met_ I 26 'ignes _conuexi_ uis et sine pondere
_caeli_', _Ecl_ IV 50, and Cic _Arat_ 560 (314). In particular compare
_Aen_ I 607-8, which Ovid is clearly imitating: 'dum montibus umbrae /
lustrabunt, _conuexa_ polus dum _sidera_ pascet'. There is some question
as to whether _conuexa_ should there be taken with _sidera_, or as the
object of _lustrabunt_: Ovid clearly took it with _sidera_.

=130. SOLLICITO QVAS DAMVS ORE PRECES.= For the general wording compare
_Tr_ III viii 20 'tum quoque _sollicita mente rogandus_ erit' and _EP_
III i 148 'nil nisi _sollicitae_ sint tua uerba _preces_': for
_sollicito ... ore_ compare _sollicita uoce_ at _Met_ X 639 & XIV 706.

=131. PERVENIANT ISTVC.= Compare _EP_ II ii 95 'si tamen haec audis et uox
mea _peruenit istuc_ [=_Romam_]'.

=131-32. CARMINA ... QVAE DE TE MISI CAELITE FACTA NOVO.= Ovid also
mentions his poems on Augustus' apotheosis at vi 17-18, viii 63-64 &
xiii 25-26.

=133-34. NEC TV / IMMERITO NOMEN MITE PARENTIS HABES.= 'Et ce n'est pas
sans raison que tu portes le doux nom de Père' (André) must be correct
as against Wheeler's 'for not undeservedly hast thou the gracious name
of "Father"', since _nec_, although it can mean _et ... non_ or _sed
... non_, cannot mean _nam ... non_; the proof of this is the frequent
occurrence of _neque enim_.

The litotes _non (haud, nec) immerito_ is common enough in Latin: see
the many examples at _TLL_ VII.1 457 26 ff. But in the four
instances given of _nec immerito_, it never serves to introduce a new
phrase as here. At Plautus _St_ 28 'decet _neque_ id _immerito_ eueniet'
it introduces a second verb which amplifies the preceding one, while it
modifies preceding verbs at Ter _Ad_ 615 'tanta nunc suspicio de me
incidit _neque_ ea immerito', Val Max IV vii 1 'inimicus patriae fuisse
Ti. Gracchus existimatus est, _nec immerito_, quia potentiam suam
saluti eius praetulerat', and Quintilian X i 104 'habet amatores--_nec
immerito_--Cremuti libertas'. One would expect a clause of causation to
follow _auguror his igitur flecti tua numina_, and I think it possible
that Ovid wrote NAM TV / E MERITO (Professor C. P. Jones suggests EX
MERITO). Both the corruption from _e merito_ and the subsequent
interpolation of _nec_ would be easy enough. For _e(x) merito_, compare
vii 16 'contigit _ex merito_ qui tibi nuper honor'.

=133. NEC TV.= The elegiac poets admitted a monosyllabic ending to the
hexameter if it was preceded by another monosyllable closely linked to
it in sense: see Platnauer 13. For true monosyllabic endings, see at ii
47 _Aonius fons_.

=134. NOMEN MITE PARENTIS= = _nomen parentis, quod significat te mitem
esse_. At _Tr_ I i 73 and _EP_ II viii 51 members of the imperial family
are called _mitissima numina_. There is another instance of hypallage
with _nomen mite_ (a different sense of _mitis_ being used) at _Fast_ V
64 '_nomen_ et aetatis _mite_ [_codd_: rite _Riese_] senatus erat', 'the
very name of senate signified a ripe old age' (Frazer).

=134. PARENTIS= = _patris patriae_. For the title compare _Res Gestae_ 35
(the final achievement listed by Augustus) 'tertium decimum consulatum
cum gerebam, senatus et equester ordo populusque Romanus uniuersus
appellauit me _patrem patriae_, idque in uestibulo aedium mearum
inscribendum esse et in curia et in foro Aug. sub quadrigis quae mihi
ex s.c. positae sunt decreuit'. Suetonius describes the conferring of
the title at _Aug_ 58.



X. To Albinovanus Pedo


The poem is the only one in the _Ex Ponto_ addressed to Albinovanus.
Considering the elder Seneca's express testimony that Albinovanus was a
close friend of Ovid (see at 4 [pp 327-28]), this is rather surprising;
perhaps Albinovanus, an associate of Germanicus (Tac _Ann_ I 60 2), had,
like some of Ovid's other friends, asked not to be mentioned in his
verse.

The poem begins with the statement that Ovid is now in his sixth year of
exile; unlike flint and iron, he is not touched by the passing of time
(1-8). He says that his tribulations are like those of Ulysses, but more
severe; there follows a comparison of his experiences with those of
Ulysses (9-30). He then describes the bleakness of the climate, and how
the sea freezes over in winter (31-34). He has heard that his accounts
are not believed at Rome, and will therefore explain the reasons for the
sea's freezing over (35-38). At Tomis the north wind prevails, and the
salinity of the sea is reduced by the influx of many large rivers (which
are listed in a catalogue); the sea's freezing is caused by these two
factors (39-64). He is telling all this to Albinovanus to pass the time;
Albinovanus is writing poetry as well, about Theseus, who is an example
for him to follow (65-82). Ovid does not wish to imply that Albinovanus
is not already doing everything possible to assist him (83-84).

The poem combines with remarkable ease a number of quite disparate
subjects, and is in this sense reminiscent of Tibullus. Most of the
subjects had been used previously in the poetry of exile; in particular,
see _Tr_ I v 57-84 for an extended comparison of the trials of Ulysses
and those of Ovid. The disquisition on the reasons for the Euxine's
freezing over is, however, new. It seems to have been drawn from a
geographical or physical treatise which has left its mark elsewhere in
Latin literature: see at 37-38 (p 340-42).

=1. CIMMERIO= _British Library Harley 2607 (Tarrant)_ CVMERIO _M1_ IN
ETIAM MEMORI _C_ IN ********** _B1_ IN HEMONIO _HITP_ IN EVXINO _F_ IN
exino _B2c_ BISTONIO _LM2ul_ Many centuries had passed since the
Cimmerians had inhabited Scythia; even Herodotus, who tells the story of
their departure, seems to regard the event as belonging to the distant
past (IV 11-12). Homer was vaguely aware of the nation: at _Od_ XI 13-19
(imitated at _Pan Mess_ 64-66), he speaks of the '[Greek: Kimmeriôn
andrôn ... polis]' by the stream of Ocean, which never receives sunlight.

For _Cimmerio_ Burman compared Claudian _Cons Stil_ I 129 'nunc prope
Cimmerii tendebat litora _Ponti_'; see as well _In Eutr_ I 249 'extra
_Cimmerias_, Taurorum claustra, paludes'.

=1. BIS TERTIA ... AESTAS.= The poem is therefore dated to the summer of
14. For Ovid's mentions of the length of his exile, see at vi 5
_quinquennis_ (p 227).

=3. ECQVOS ... ECQVOD= _Laurentianus 36 2, saec xv_ ET QVOS ... ET QVOD
_BCMFHILT_. The same corruption is found in certain manuscripts at _Met_
III 442-45 (Narcissus speaking) '"_ecquis_, io siluae, crudelius"
inquit "amauit? ... _ecquem_ ... qui sic tabuerit longo meministis in
aeuo?"' and commonly. Other instances of _ecquis_ in emotionally
heightened questions at _Fast_ IV 488, _Tr_ I vi 11, _EP_ III i 3, and
_Her_ XXI 106.

=3. SILICES ... FERRVM.= See at viii 49 _tabida consumit ferrum lapidemque
uetustas_ (p 270).

=4. ALBINOVANE.= Albinovanus Pedo[21] and Ovid seem to have been close
friends. Ovid mentions him again at xvi 6 'sidereusque Pedo', and he was
the source of the famous anecdote in the elder Seneca (_Cont_ II 2 12)
of how Ovid chose as the three lines in his poems he most wished to
retain the same three verses a group of his friends most wished to
remove.

[Footnote 21: _PIR_1 A 343; _PIR_2 A 479; PW 1,1 1314 21-40;
Schanz-Hosius II 266 (§315); Bardon 69-73.]

He was a famous raconteur: the younger Seneca calls Pedo _fabulator
elegantissimus_ at _Ep_ CXXII 15-16 when repeating one of his anecdotes.

At the time this poem was written, Albinovanus was engaged on a
_Theseid_ (71). Quintilian perhaps had this poem in mind when he
included a rather slighting mention of Albinovanus in his catalogue of
epic poets at X i 90: 'Rabirius ac Pedo non indigni cognitione, si
uacet'. He may, however, have been thinking of Albinovanus' poem on
Germanicus' campaigns, of which the elder Seneca preserves some
twenty-three hexameters (_Suas_ I 15; commentary by V. Bongi, _Istituto
Lombardo di scienze e lett. Rendiconti [Classe di Lettere]_ ser. 3 13
[1949], 28-48. Norden and others have attributed Morel _Incert_ 46
'ingenia immansueta suoque simillima caelo' to the same poem). Martial
several times mentions Albinovanus as a writer of epigrams (II lxxvii 5,
V v 5 & X xx (xix) 10); this fits well with the younger Seneca's
description of Albinovanus as _fabulator elegantissimus_.

At _Ann_ I 60 2, Tacitus mentions Pedo as 'praefectus finibus Frisiorum'
in Germanicus' campaign of 15.

=5-6. LAPIDEM ... ANVLVS ... VOMER.= See at viii 49 _tabida consumit ferrum
lapidemque uetustas_ (p 270), and compare _AA_ I 473-76 'ferreus assiduo
consumitur _anulus_ usu, / interit assidua _uomer_ aduncus humo. / quid
magis est saxo durum, quid mollius unda? / dura tamen molli saxa
cauantur aqua'.

=6. ATTERITVR= _Heinsius_. Korn and Riese printed the manuscripts' ET
TERITVR, for which Riese cited _Tr_ I iv 9-10 'pinea texta sonant pulsu
[_Rothmaler_: pulsi _codd_], stridore rudentes, / ingemit _et_ nostris
ipsa carina malis' and _Tr_ III iv 57-58 'ante oculos errant domus,
urbsque et forma locorum, / accedunt_que_ suis singula facta locis', but
these are extended descriptions of single events, not lists of separate
examples.

Elsewhere in Ovid, the only form found of _atterere_ is _attritus_: this
circumstance perhaps contributed to the corruption of the present
passage.

=6. ATTERITVR PRESSA VOMER ADVNCVS HVMO.= Professor R. J. Tarrant points
out to me the hypallage in this passage. _Pressus_ is to be taken twice,
with _uomer_ and with _humo_: the earth is _pressed down_ as the plough
is _pressed_ into it.

=7. TEMPVS EDAX.= The same phrase at _Met_ XV 234; compare as well _edax
... uetustas_ at _Met_ XV 872.

=7. PRAETER NOS.= At _EP_ II vii 39-45, Ovid (with a series of images
parallel to that of the present passage) says that he is in fact being
worn away by the hardships he is enduring: 'ut ... caducis / percussu
crebro _saxa_ cauantur aquis, / sic ego continuo Fortunae uulneror ictu
... nec magis assiduo _uomer_ tenuatur ab usu, / nec magis est curuis
Appia trita rotis, / pectora quam mea sunt serie calcata malorum'.

=8. PERDIT= _I_ PERDET _BCMFHLT_. The tense is made probable by the
preceding _cauat ... consumitur ... atteritur_ and the following _cessat_;
compare as well _Tr_ IV vi 17-18 'cuncta pot_est_ ... uetustas / praeter
quam curas attenuare meas'. Third conjugation verbs in the third person
are for obvious reasons peculiarly apt to corruption of tense and mood.
The alteration from present to future is rather less common than the
inverse corruption, for an instance of which see at xii 18 _reddet_ (p
378).

=8. CESSAT DVRITIA MORS QVOQVE VICTA MEA.= Death does not conquer Ovid,
but is conquered by him. Professor E. Fantham points out to me the
baroque inversion in the phrase, citing as a parallel Sen _Tr_ 1171-75,
where Hecuba says that death fears her and flees her.

Riese placed a question mark at the end of the line, but since in 7 Ovid
asserts unambiguously that time does not affect him, there seems no
reason to make the following line a question. In his poems from exile
Ovid often expresses his wish to die; see _Tr_ III viii 39-40 'tantus
amor necis est querar ut cum Caesaris ira / quod non offensas uindicet
ense suas', _Tr_ III xiii 5-6, IV vi 49-50, and V ix 37-38.

=9. EXEMPLVM EST ANIMI NIMIVM PATIENTIS VLIXES.= Ovid frequently compares
his trials in exile to those undergone by Ulysses. The longest instance
of this is _Tr_ I v 57-84; compare as well _Tr_ III xi 61-62 'crede
mihi, si sit nobis collatus Vlixes, / Neptuni minor est quam Iouis ira
fuit', _Tr_ V v 1-4, and _EP_ I iii 33-34, II vii 59-60 & III vi 19-20.

Ulysses' voyage was a favourite subject of the Latin poets. For a
surviving example, see Prop III xii 23-36. An indication of the
subject's popularity is the fact that _Pan Mess_ 45-49 'nam seu diuersi
fremat inconstantia uulgi, / non alius sedare queat; seu iudicis ira /
sit placanda, tuis poterit mitescere uerbis. / non Pylos aut Ithace
tantos genuisse feruntur / Nestora uel paruae magnum decus urbis Vlixem'
is followed not by a description of Ulysses' eloquence, as would have
been appropriate, but by a narrative of his travels (52-81): this
illogical sequence was no doubt induced by the poet's familiarity with
similar descriptions of Ulysses' voyage in the poetry of his time.

Professor E. Fantham cites Seneca's use of Ulysses as an _exemplum
patientiae_ at Sen _Dial_ II 2 1, where Hercules is compared to Ulysses.

=9. EXEMPLVM EST.= Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me the unusual
baldness of the phrase. In Ovid's earlier verse _exemplum_ has an
instructional or minatory overtone (_AA_ III 686, _Met_ IX 454). The
flatter use of _exemplum_ seems to be typical of the poetry of exile:
compare _EP_ III i 44 'coniugis exemplum diceris esse bonae', and _Tr_ I
v 21, IV iii 72 & IV iv 71.

=9. NIMIVM PATIENTIS= = [Greek: polytlas] (_Il_ VIII 97, _Od_ V 171, et
saep.). The sense of _nimium_ seen here is not generally found in
poetry, or even in literary prose; the instances cited by _OLD nimium2_
2 are all from comedy, Cato, and the letters of Cicero.

=10. DVO LVSTRA.= Compare xvi 13-14 'Vlixem / errantem saeuo per _duo
lustra_ mari' and _AA_ III 15-16 'est pia Penelope _lustris_ errante
_duobus_ / et totidem lustris bella gerente uiro'.

=11. SOLLICITI ... FATI= is based on such phrases as _sollicita uita_ (Prop
II vii 1) and _sollicitissima aetas_ (Sen _Breu Vit_ 16 1). Similar
phrasing at _Tr_ IV x 116 'nec me _sollicitae_ taedia _lucis_ habent'.

=11. PLACIDAE SAEPE FVERE MORAE.= Compare Prop III xii 23-24 'Postumus
alter erit miranda coniuge Vlixes: / non illi _longae_ tot nocuere
_morae_'.

=13. SEX ANNIS.= According to Homer (_Od_ VII 261), Ulysses left Calypso
in the eighth year of his stay on her island. André points out that
Hyginus _Fab_ CXXV 16 has Ulysses on the island for one year only; for
other estimates of the length of Ulysses' stay, see Roscher III 627.
Ovid was probably influenced by the _bis ... tertia_ of the poem's
opening. _Cimmerio_ in 1 furnishes another connection with Ulysses (_Od_
XI 14; quoted at 1).

=13. FOVISSE.= Compare _Od_ V 118-120 (Calypso speaking) '[Greek:
Schetlioi este, theoi, zêlêmones exochon allôn, / hoi te theais agaasthe
par' andrasin eunazesthai / amphadiên, hên tis te philon poiêset'
akoitên]'.

=13. CALYPSO= _BCMILT_. Lenz and André print CALYPSON (_FH_). Roman poets
followed the Greek declension of feminine proper nouns ending in
[Greek:-ô]; compare _Pan Mess_ 77 'fecunda Atlantidos arua _Calypsus_
[_uar_ calipsos]'. The accusatives of such nouns are of the same form as
the nominative. See for example _Aen_ IV 383-84 'et nomine _Dido_ /
saepe uocaturum' and _Aen_ VII 324-25 'luctificam _Allecto_ dirarum ab
sede dearum / infernisque ciet tenebris', cited by Charisius 63 (Keil);
neither he nor Servius shows knowledge of an accusative in _-on_.
Scribes, however, found the declension puzzling; and it is common to
find the pseudo-accusative in _-on_ offered by some manuscripts whenever
the true form in _-o_ occurs; this has happened at _Her_ VI 65 'ultimus
e sociis sacram conscendis in _Argo_', _Her_ VII 7 'certus es ire tamen
miseramque relinquere _Dido_ [_edd_: Didon _codd_]', _Her_ XII 9 'cur
umquam Colchi Magnetida uidimus _Argo_', _Am_ II ii 45 'dum nimium
seruat custos Iunonius _Io_', _Am_ II xix 29 'dum seruat Iuno mutatam
cornibus _Io_', and Prop I xx 17-18 'namque ferunt olim Pagasae
naualibus _Argo_ [_edd_: Argon _codd_] / egressam longe Phasidos isse
uiam'. Modern editors often print the spurious form, even at _AA_ I 323
'et modo se Europen fieri, modo postulat _Io_', where all manuscripts
offer the correct reading.

For a full discussion of this and the inverse corruption (for instance
of _Iason_ to _Iaso_), see Goold 12-14.

=14. AEQVOREAEQVE.= Compare _Am_ II xvii 17-18 'creditur _aequoream_ Pthio
Nereida regi, / Egeriam iusto concubuisse Numae' and _AA_ II 123-24 'non
formosus erat, sed erat facundus Vlixes, / et tamen _aequoreas_ torsit
amore deas'. Merkel's AEAEAEQVE is ingenious but unnecessary.

=15. HIPPOTADES= = _Aeolus_. The same patronymic at _Met_ IV 663, XI 431,
XIV 86, XIV 224 & XV 707.

=15. QVI DAT PRO MVNERE VENTOS.= Compare _Met_ XIV 223-26 'Aeolon ille
refert Tusco regnare profundo, / Aeolon Hippotaden, cohibentem carcere
_uentos_; / quos bouis inclusos tergo, _memorabile munus_, / Dulichium
sumpsisse ducem' and _Od_ X 19-26.

=17. NEC BENE CANTANTES LABOR EST AVDISSE PVELLAS.= The description is
intentionally prosaic. For the Homeric account of the Sirens see _Od_
XII 37-54 & 153-200.

=17. AVDISSE= _F_ AVDIRE _BCMHILT_. _Audire_ cannot stand, as the present
tense conflicts with _fuit_ in the following line. For _est audisse_
representing _fuit audire_, compare _Met_ IX 5-6 (Achelous hesitates
before recounting his wrestling-match with Hercules) 'referam tamen
ordine: nec tam / turpe _fuit uinci_ quam _contendisse decorum est_'.

=18. NEC DEGVSTANTI LOTOS AMARA FVIT.= See _Od_ IX 82-104 for Homer's
account of the Lotus-eaters.

=18. NEC ... AMARA= = _et dulcis_. Compare _Od_ IX 94 '[Greek: lôtoio
... meliêdea karpon]'.

=18. DEGVSTANTI.= The verb is extremely rare in the sense 'taste, sample';
this is the only instance of the meaning found in poetry, although a
transferred use is found at Lucretius II 191-92 'ignes ... celeri flamma
_degustant_ tigna trabesque' and _Aen_ XII 375-76 'lancea ... summum
_degustat_ uulnere corpus'.

Ovid uses the somewhat more common _gustare_ in a similar context at
_Tr_ IV i 31-32 'sic noua Dulichio lotos _gustata_ palato / illo quo
nocuit grata sapore fuit'.

=21. VRBEM LAESTRYGONOS= = '[Greek: Lamou aipy ptoliethron, / Têlepylon
Laistrygoniên]' (_Od_ X 81-82) or 'Lami ueterem Laestrygonos ... urbem'
(_Met_ XIV 233), where the crews of all the ships but Ulysses' own were
killed and eaten; accounts of this at _Od_ X 76-132 and _Met_ XIV
233-42. Ovid refers again to the episode at _EP_ II ix 41 'quis non
Antiphaten Laestrygona deuouet?'.

=21. LAESTRYGONOS= _BC_ LE(-I-)STRYGONIS _MFHILT_. _Laestrygonos_ =
[Greek: Laistrygonos] (_Od_ X 106). At _Met_ XIV 233 (cited above) all
manuscripts offer _Laestrygonis_; the Greek genitive should probably be
read as here.

=22. GENTIBVS OBLIQVA QVAS OBIT HISTER AQVA.= Similar wording at ii 37-38
'hic mea cui recitem nisi flauis scripta Corallis, / quasque alias
gentes barbarus Hister obit?'.

=22. OBLIQVA= apparently refers to the swirling of a river's eddies. The
sense 'winding' generally given the word would fit at _Met_ IX 17-18
(Achelous to the father of Deianira) 'dominum me cernis aquarum /
cursibus _obliquis_ inter tua regna fluentum', but not at _Met_ VIII
550-53 (Achelous to Theseus) '"succede meis" ait "Inclite, tectis, /
Cecropide, nec te committe rapacibus undis: / ferre trabes solidas
_obliquaque_ uoluere magno / murmure saxa solent"' or _Her_ VI 87 'illa
refrenat aquas _obliquaque_ flumina sistit'. At _Met_ I 39 'fluminaque
_obliquis_ cinxit decliuia ripis', _obliquis_ should be taken with
_flumina_, and _decliuia_ with _ripis_; or possibly both adjectives
should be taken with both nouns.

=23. VINCET.= Like _superare_, _uincere_ has the twin meanings of
'surpass' and 'defeat'.

=23. CYCLOPS.= The same pairing of the Laestrygonians and Polyphemus at
_EP_ II ii 113-114 (to Messalinus; he should address Augustus on Ovid's
behalf) 'nec tamen Aetnaeus uasto Polyphemus in antro / accipiet uoces
Antiphatesue tuas'.

=23. FERITATE= goes with _uincet_: 'will surpass in savagery'. I once
thought PIETATE (_BCIac_) was the correct reading, connecting the word
with _saeuum_ and taking it as a reference to human sacrifice; but this
seems strained and obscure. _Pietate_ may be an intrusion from
ecclesiastical Latin; Professor R. J. Tarrant suggests that it is
possibly an anticipation of the following _Piacchen_.

=23. PIACCHEN= _B_ PIAECHEN _C_. See the critical apparatus for the other
forms offered by the manuscripts. As the king's name is not elsewhere
recorded, its true form must remain in doubt.

=24. QVI QVOTA TERRORIS PARS SOLET ESSE MEI.= With Burman, Weber, and
Wheeler I take the line as a statement: compare _EP_ II x 31 'et _quota
pars_ haec sunt rerum quas uidimus ambo' (cited by Williams), where
_quota_, as here, takes the meaning 'how small' from context. Most
editors take it as a question, for which compare _Am_ II xii 9-10
'Pergama cum caderent bello superata bilustri, / ex tot in Atridis _pars
quota_ laudis erat?'.

=25-27. SCYLLA ... CHARYBDIN.= Ovid gives similar descriptions of Scylla at
_Am_ III xii 21-22 and _EP_ III i 122, of Charybdis at _Am_ II xvi
25-26, and of Scylla and Charybdis at _Her_ XII 123-26 and _Met_ XIII
730-33. All such descriptions in Latin poetry of course derive
ultimately from _Od_ XII 73-110.

=25. QVOD LATRET AB INGVINE MONSTRIS.= Professor R. J. Tarrant points out
to me Ovid's imitation here of _Ecl_ VI 74-75 'Scyllam ... candida
succinctam latrantibus inguina monstris'; the _rates_ and _nautae_ of
Ovid's line 26 are in lines 76 and 77 of the Virgilian passage.

=25. QVOD.= 'Granted that'. Bömer at _Met_ VII 705 claims that the only
passage where this is the necessary meaning of _quod_ is _Priapea_ VI 1
'quod sum ligneus ... Priapus ... prendam te tamen', but it seems to be
the meaning required at Lucretius II 532-35 'nam _quod_ rara uides magis
esse animalia quaedam / fecundamque minus naturam cernis in illis, / at
regione locoque alio terrisque remotis / multa licet genere esse in eo
numerumque repleri'.

All six instances of the idiom cited by the _OLD_ (_quod_ 6c) are from
poetry. In the two instances already cited, _quod_ is followed by the
indicative, as is the case at Prop III ii 11-16. _Quod_ in this sense
followed by the subjunctive seems to be an Ovidian idiom; it is used by
him at _Her_ IV 157-61 '_quod_ mihi _sit_ genitor, qui possidet aequora,
Minos, / quod _ueniant_ proaui fulmina torta manu, / quod _sit_ auus
radiis frontem uallatus acutis, / purpureo tepidum qui mouet axe
diem-- / nobilitas sub amore iacet!' and _Met_ VII 704-7 'liceat mihi
uera referre / pace deae: quod _sit_ roseo spectabilis ore, / quod
_teneat_ lucis, _teneat_ confinia noctis, / nectareis quod _alatur_
aquis, ego Procrin amabam', and by an imitator of Ovid at _Her_ XVIII
41.

=26. HENIOCHAE NAVTIS PLVS NOCVERE RATES.= The Heniochi lived on the
eastern shore of the Euxine and were, as Ovid indicates, known as
pirates (Strabo XI 2 12-13).

=27. INFESTIS ... ACHAEIS.= Mela includes the Achaei and the Heniochi in
his list of 'ferae incultaeque gentes uasto mari adsidentes' (I 110).
The two nations are grouped together by Strabo (XII 2 12) and Pliny
(_NH_ VI 30).

=28. EPOTVM ... VOMAT.= Professor R. J. Tarrant cites the verbal similarity
at (pseudo-Ovidian) _Am_ III v 18 'iterum _pasto pascitur_ ante cibo'.

=28. EPOTVM= _B_ ET POTVM _C_ EPOTET _MFHILT_. _Epotet_ is supported by
_Her_ XII 125 'quaeque uomit totidem fluctus totidemque resorbet' and Od
XII 105-6 '[Greek: tris men gar t' aniêsin ep êmati, tris d' anaroibdei
/ deinon]'. Professor A. Dalzell points out in particular '[Greek: tris
... tris]' paralleling _ter ... ter_ in the present passage. But at _RA_
740 Ovid wrote 'hic uomit epotas [_uarr_ et potat; hic potat; optatas;
acceptas; aequoreas] dira Charybdis aquas'; and the corruption to
_epotet_ seems much more probable than the inverse. Ovid elsewhere uses
only the perfect participle of _epotare_.

=29. LICENTIVS ERRANT.= Ovid is clearly imitating _Aen_ VII 557-58 (Juno
to Allecto) 'te super aetherias _errare licentius_ auras / haud pater
ille uelit, summi regnator Olympi', apparently the only other instance
of _licentius_ in classical verse.

=31-32= act as a bridge to the next major section of the poem, and do not
in themselves contribute to what has been said.

=31. INFRONDES= is a _hapax legomenon_.

=32. HIC FRETA VEL PEDITI PERVIA REDDIT HIEMPS.= Other mentions of the
sea's freezing at vii 7, _Tr_ II 196, III x 35-50 & V x 2, and _EP_ III
i 15-16 (to the Pontus) 'tu glacie freta uincta tenes, et in aequore
piscis / inclusus tecta saepe natauit aqua'.

Parts of the Black Sea do in fact freeze: 'In winter, spurs of the
Siberian anticyclone (clear, dry, high-pressure air mass) create a
strong current of cold air, and the northwestern Black Sea cools down
considerably, with regular ice formation' (article on "Black Sea",
_Encyclopaedia Britannica_, Macropaedia vol. 2, pp. 1096-98 [Chicago:
1974]).

=32. HIEMPS.= For the last one hundred years, the spelling given in
editions of Latin texts has generally been _hiems_ (some exceptions are
Palmer's _Heroides_, the Paravia Virgil, and Reynolds' editions of
Seneca), but the spelling in the ancient manuscripts of Virgil is
invariably _hiemps_. Munro's argument for this spelling seems
unanswerable: 'obeying the almost unanimous testimony of our own [i.e.
_O_ and _Q_ of Lucretius] and other good mss. we cannot but give
_umerus_ _umor_ and the like: also _hiemps_. I have heard it asked what
then is the genitive of _hiemps_; to which the best reply perhaps would
be what is the perfect of _sumo_ or the supine of _emo_. The Latins
wrote _hiemps_, as they wrote _emptum_ _sumpsi_ _sumptum_ and a hundred
such forms, because they disliked _m_ and _s_ or _t_ to come together
without the intervention of a _p_ sound; and our mss. all attest this:
_tempto_ likewise is the only true form, which the Italians in the 15th
century rejected for _tento_' (Lucretius ed. 4 vol. 1 p. 33).

=33-34. VT, QVA REMVS ITER PVLSIS MODO FECERAT VNDIS, / SICCVS CONTEMPTA
NAVE VIATOR EAT.= Ovid has in mind Virgil's description of the freezing
of a Scythian river (_G_ III 360-62) 'concrescunt subitae currenti in
flumine crustae, / undaque iam tergo ferratos sustinet orbis, / puppibus
illa prius, patulis nunc hospita plaustris'.

=35. QVI VENIVNT ISTINC VIX VOS EA CREDERE DICVNT; / QVAM MISER EST QVI
FERT ASPERIORA FIDE.= For Ovid's fear that his accounts of what he has
undergone will not be believed, see vii 3-4 and _Tr_ I v 49-50, III x
35-36 & IV i 65-66. In particular, see ix 85-86 'mentiar, an coeat
duratus frigore Pontus, / et teneat glacies iugera multa freti'.

=37-38. NEC TE CAVSAS NESCIRE SINEMVS / HORRIDA SARMATICVM CVR MARE DVRET
HIEMPS.= Ovid's principal explanation of the freezing of the Euxine, the
low salinity of the water, is found in four other Latin authors. At IV
718-28, Valerius Flaccus offers a catalogue of rivers similar to that of
Ovid, and, like Ovid, gives the cold winter winds as a subsidiary reason
for the freezing. It is quite possible that Ovid is Valerius' source;
but this is very unlikely to be the case for Macrobius _Sat_ VII xii
28-38 (cited by Burman). The passage is a discussion of why, although
oil congeals, wine and vinegar do not. Wine does not freeze because it
contains elements of fire; this is why Homer called it [Greek: aithopa
oinon]. Vinegar does not freeze because it is so bitter; it is like
seawater, which because of its bitterness does not congeal. 'nam quod
Herodotus historiarum scriptor contra omnium ferme qui haec quaesiuerunt
opinionem scripsit [IV 28], mare Bosporicum, quod et Cimmerium appellat,
earumque partium mare omne, quod Scythicum dicitur, id gelu constringi
et consistere, aliter est quam putatur'. It is not the seawater that
freezes, but the layer of fresh water above it, which comes from the
rivers that flow into the Euxine. Macrobius goes on to explain that
there is an outflow of fresh water to the Mediterranean and an influx of
seawater, with perfect correctness: the _Encyclopaedia Britannica_
article cited at 32 notes that 'Flows in the Bosporus are complex, with
surface Black Sea water going out and deep, saltier water coming in from
the Sea of Marmara*.

There can be very little doubt, given the identity of the explanations
and the similarity of language, that Ovid and Macrobius were drawing on
a common source. The same source is reflected at Gellius XVII viii
8-16. Here Taurus the philosopher asks Gellius why oil often congeals,
but wine does not. Gellius answers that wine is fiery by nature, which
is why Homer called it [Greek: aithopa oinon]. Taurus responds that wine
is indeed known to have fire in it, for it warms the body when drunk;
yet vinegar, in spite of its cooling effects, never freezes; perhaps
things which are light and smooth are more prone to freezing. It is also
worth asking why fresh water freezes, but seawater does not. 'tametsi
Herodotus ... historiae scriptor contra omnium ferme qui haec
quaesiuerunt opinionem scribit mare Bosporicum, quod Cimmerium
appellatur, earumque partium mare omne quod Scythicum dicitur, gelu
stringi et consistere'. No explanation for the freezing-over is
given.[22]

[Footnote 22: Macrobius does include the explanation for the
freezing-over. In view of his fuller account, I believe that Macrobius
drew his material from Gellius' source and not from Gellius. It is of
course possible enough that Macrobius conflated Gellius with another
source.]

Ammianus Marcellinus XXII 8 48 gives the same two explanations for the
Euxine's freezing as Ovid: 'quicquid autem eiusdem Pontici sinus
Aquilone caeditur et pruinis, ita perstringitur gelu ut nec amnium
cursus subteruolui credantur, nec per infidum et labile solum gressus
hominis possit uel iumenti firmari, quod uitium numquam mare sincerum,
sed permixtum aquis amnicis temptat'. At XXII 8 46 he once again
mentions the sweetness of the Euxine's waters.

Lucan describes the freezing of the Euxine (V 436-41), but gives no
explanation of the cause.

=39. PLAVSTRI PRAEBENTIA FORMAM ... SIDERA.= The Great Bear. Other mentions
of the constellation at _Met_ X 446-47 'inter ... triones / flexerat
obliquo plaustrum temone Bootes', _Tr_ III iv b 1-2 (47-48), III x 3-4 &
V iii 7-8, and _EP_ I v 73-74. Compare as well Germanicus _Aratea_ 24-26
'axem Cretaeae dextra laeuaque tuentur / siue Arctoe seu Romani
cognominis Vrsae / Plaustraue [_Grotius_:-que _codd_], quae facie
[_scripsi (datiuum)_[23]: facies _codd_] stellarum proxima uerae
[_Barth_: uera _uel_ uero _codd_]', _Her_ XVIII 152, Sen _Ag_ 66-68, and
Lucan V 23 'Hyperboreae plaustrum glaciale sub Vrsae'.

[Footnote 23: This seems the best solution to the awkwardness of the
line as currently printed. Gellius IX xiv 21 gives two examples of
dative _facie_ from Lucilius. Plautus regularly uses _fide_ (_Aul_ 667,
_Pers_ 193, _Poen_ 890, _Trin_ 117) and _die_ (_Am_ 546, _Capt_ 464,
_Trin_ 843); dative _pube_ is found at _Pseud_ 126. Sallust and Caesar
use _fide_ (_Iug_ 16 3; _BG_ V 3 7); at the time of Germanicus, _fide_
is found at Hor _Sat_ I iii 94-95 'quid faciam si furtum fecerit, aut si
/ prodiderit commissa _fide_ sponsumue negarit?', and _pernicie_ at Livy
V 13 5.]

_Praebentia formam_ is elevated diction: Professor R. J. Tarrant cites
Lucretius V 581-83 'luna ... claram speciem certamque _figuram_ /
_praebet_'.

=40. PERPETVVM= _M2ul_ PRAECIPVVM _BCM1FHILT_. _Praecipuum_ could be
defended by _EP_ III i 13-14 (to the Pontus) 'nec tibi pampineas
autumnus porrigit uuas, / cuncta sed immodicum tempora frigus habet',
but _praecipuus_ in fact always seems to have the notion of
'outstanding' or 'superior', which does not seem appropriate to the
present passage. For _perpetuum_ compare _Tr_ III ii 7-8 'plurima sed
pelago terraque pericula passum / ustus ab _assiduo_ frigore Pontus
habet', _Tr_ III x 14 '[niuem ...] indurat Boreas _perpetuamque_ facit',
_Tr_ V ii 65-66 'me ... cruciat _numquam sine frigore_ caelum, /
glaebaque canenti _semper_ obusta gelu', _EP_ I iii 49-50 'orbis in
extremi iaceo desertus harenis, / fert ubi _perpetuas_ obruta terra
niues', and _EP_ II vii 72 'frigore _perpetuo_ Sarmatis ora riget'.

=41. HINC ORITVR BOREAS.= Compare _Tr_ III xi 7-8 'barbara me tellus et
inhospita litora Ponti / cumque suo _Borea_ Maenalis ursa uidet' and
_Ibis_ 11-12 'ille relegatum gelidos _Aquilonis ad ortus_ / non sinit
exilio delituisse meo'.

=41. DOMESTICVS.= The word is rare in verse; Ovid uses it as a substantive
at iii 15 'ille ego conuictor densoque _domesticus_ usu'. Here Ovid may
be recalling the language of _Met_ VI 685-86 (of Boreas) 'ira, / quae
solita est illi nimiumque _domestica_ uento'.

=42. VIRES.= Merkel proposed MORES, citing Virgil _G_ I 50-52 'at prius
ignotum ferro quam scindimus aequor, / uentos et uarium caeli
praediscere _morem_ / cura sit' and Statius _Sil_ III ii 87 'quos tibi
currenti praeceps gerat Hadria _mores_'. The second passage is not to
the point, since it means 'what sort of obedience to your wishes do you
expect from the Adriatic as you make your voyage'. In any case,
Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me the poor logic of Merkel's
proposed text: Ovid is deriving the _natura loci_ from its surroundings;
he should not now be saying that Boreas gets his _mores_ from the area.
The reading of the manuscripts seems acceptable enough if one accepts
Meynke's _polo_ for _loco_ ('he gathers strength from the nearby North
Pole'). For _sumit uires_ compare _Met_ VIII 882 (Achelous speaking)
'armenti modo dux _uires_ in cornua _sumo_', _Met_ XI 510-11 'ut
... solent _sumptis_ incursu _uiribus_ ire ... feri ... leones' and Hor
_Ep_ I xviii 85 'neglecta solent incendia _sumere uires_'. Professor R.
J. Tarrant compares such phrases as _sumere iras_ (_Met_ II 175),
_animos_ (_Met_ III 544-45), and _cornua_ (_AA_ I 239, _Tr_ IV ix 27).

=42. POLO= _Meynke_ LOCO _codd_. The pointlessness of _loco_ is made clear
enough by Wheeler's 'and he takes on strength from a place nearer to
him'. Meynke's _polo_ removes the difficulty, answers well to the
following 'at Notus, _aduerso_ tepidum qui spirat ab _axe_', and is
supported by the language of _Met_ II 173 'quaeque _polo_ posita est
glaciali _proxima_ Serpens', and _Fast_ IV 575-76 (of Ceres) 'errat et
in caelo liquidique immunia ponti / adloquitur gelido _proxima_ signa
_polo_'. For the corruption, compare the common misreading of _locum_
for _solum_.

=43. ADVERSO ... AB AXE.= Ovid here seeks a contrast with _polo_ in the
previous line; but clearly he means only that the south wind comes from
the opposite direction, not that it originates at the South Pole.

Bentley conjectured AVERSO for _aduerso_, and the two words are
obviously prone to interchange: compare _Tr_ I iii 45 (of Ovid's wife,
after his departure) 'multaque in auersos [_Heinsius_: aduersos _codd_]
effudit uerba Penates' and the variations among the manuscripts at
Virgil _G_ I 218 'auerso ... astro', _Aen_ XII 647 'auersa uoluntas', and
Sen _Tr_ 1123 'auersa cingit campus' (on which see Housman 1076). But
_aduerso_ 'opposite' seems to have the sense required here.

=43. TEPIDVM QVI SPIRAT.= For the construction compare _Met_ IX 661 'sub
aduentu _spirantis lene_ Fauoni' and Avienus _Descr Orb_ 847 'uel qua
_lene_ Notus _spirat_'. The trivialized TEPIDVS QVI SPIRAT is found in
_MH2c_. _Tepidus Notus_ occurs four times in Ovid (_Am_ I iv 12, I vii
56 & II viii 20, and _Tr_ III xii [xiii] 42).

=44. LANGVIDIORQVE VENIT.= Compare _EP_ II i 1-2 'Huc quoque Caesarei
peruenit fama triumphi, / _languida_ quo fessi uix uenit _aura Noti_'.

=46. AB AMNE.= Similar instrumental uses of _ab_ at _Her_ X 138 'tunicas
lacrimis sicut _ab imbre_ graues', _AA_ III 545 'ingenium placida
mollitur _ab arte_', _Met_ I 65-66 'contraria tellus / nubibus assiduis
pluuiaque madescit ab Austro', _Met_ IV 162-63 'pectus ... adhuc _a
caede_ tepebat', and _Fast_ V 323 'caelum nigrescit _ab Austris_'.

=47-58.= For the lengthy catalogue, typical of Ovid, compare the listing
of Actaeon's dogs at _Met_ III 206-25 (in particular at 217 'et Dromas
et Canache Sticteque et Tigris et Alce') and the catalogue of trees that
came to listen to Orpheus sing (_Met_ X 90-107).

=47. LYCVS.= A number of rivers had this name in the ancient world. Ovid
presumably means the Paphlagonian Lycus referred to by Virgil at _G_ IV
366-67 'omnia sub magna labentia flumina terra / spectabat diuersa
locis, Phasimque Lycumque ...'.

=47. SAGARIS.= The modern Sakarya; it flows into the Black Sea about 125
kilometres east of Istanbul. It is mentioned at Pliny _NH_ VI 1 4
'Sangaris fluuius ex inclutis. oritur in Phrygia, accipit uastos amnes
... idem Sagiarius plerisque dictus'.

=47. PENIVSQVE.= The 'flumen et oppidum Penius' are mentioned at Pliny
_NH_ VI 14 as being in the region of the Caucasus on the Euxine coast;
nearby were 'multis nominibus Heniochorum gentes'. The river seems not
to be mentioned elsewhere in ancient literature.

=47. HYPANISQVE.= The modern Bug empties into the Black Sea about 50
kilometres east of Odessa. It is mentioned again by Ovid at _Met_ XV
285-86 'quid? non et Scythicis Hypanis de montibus ortus, / qui fuerat
dulcis, salibus uitiatur amaris?' and Virgil _G_ IV 370 'saxosumque
sonans Hypanis'.

=47. CALESQVE.= Isaac Vossius made this correction for the manuscripts'
CATESQVE (_I_ has CHARESQVE) on the basis of 'Eustathio Scholiis in
Periegeten'. Heinsius aptly cited a description of the occasionally
violent flow of the river at Thucydides IV 75 2.

As indicated by this passage, the modern Alapli flows into the Black Sea
near Eregli, about 200 kilometres east of Istanbul.

=48. CREBRO VERTICE TORTVS HALYS.= An imitation of _Aen_ VII 566-67
'fragosus / dat sonitum saxis et _torto uertice_ torrens'. _Tortus_ when
used of water generally refers to the disturbance caused by rowing
(_Fast_ V 644; Catullus LXIV 13; _Aen_ III 208).

=48. HALYS.= The modern Kizil Irmak flows into the Black Sea about 600
kilometres east of Istanbul. André compares Apollonius' description of
the river (II 366-67) '[Greek: rhoai Halyos potamoio / deinon
ereugontai]'.

=49-50.= The three rivers mentioned in these lines are all named for their
swiftness.

=49. PARTHENIVSQVE RAPAX.= The modern Bartin flows into the Black Sea
about 280 kilometres east of Istanbul and about 240 kilometres west of
Sinop. It is in fact a very calm river: this information was available
to Ovid from Apollonius II 936-37 '[Greek: Parthenioio rhoas
halimurêentos, / prêutatou potamou]' (cited by André).

=49. VOLVENS SAXA.= Similar phrasing at _Met_ VIII 552-53 '[undae ...]
ferre trabes solidas obliquaque _uoluere_ magno / murmure _saxa_
solent'.

=49. CINAPSES= _BC_ CINAPSIS _L_ TYNAPSES _H_ CINASPES _FIT_ NIPHATES _M_.
Editors read CYNAPSES; but since the river is not otherwise known,
restoration is dangerous. _M_'s reading looks like an interpolation from
Lucan III 245 'Armeniusque tenens _uoluentem saxa_ Niphaten' (cited by
Micyllus).

=50. NVLLO TARDIOR= = _uelocior omni_; André mistranslates 'le plus lent
des fleuves'. Compare _Tr_ I v 1 'O mihi post nullos umquam [_uar_ ullos
numquam] memorande sodales' and _EP_ I iii 65-66 'Zmyrna uirum tenuit,
non Pontus et hostica tellus, / paene _minus nullo_ Zmyrna petenda
loco'.

=50. TYRAS.= The modern Dnestr flows into the Black Sea about fifty miles
south of Odessa; near its mouth is the city of Ovidiopol. The river is
briefly mentioned at Pliny _NH_ IV 82 & 93, and at Mela II 7, where it
is called the 'Tyra'; this however seems to be a scribal error induced
by the following _separat_.

=51. THERMODON.= The modern Terme flows into the Black Sea about 100
kilometres southeast of the mouth of the Kizil Irmak (Halys). It was
conventional to mention the Amazons in connection with the river (_Met_
XII 611, _Aen_ XI 659-60, Prop III xiv 13-14, Ammianus Marcellinus XXII
8 17). Professor E. Fantham suggests to me that Ovid may here be
providing Albinovanus with material for the part of his _Theseid_
dealing with Theseus' expedition against the Amazons.

Ovid also mentions the Thermodon at _Met_ I 248-49 (the story of
Phaethon) 'arsit et Euphrates Babylonius, arsit Orontes / Thermodonque
citus Gangesque et Phasis et Hister'. As in the present distich, the
Thermodon and Phasis, both prominent in mythology, are mentioned
together.

=51. TVRMAE= _BCM_ TVRBAE _FHILT_. There is a similar variation among the
manuscripts at _AA_ III l-2 'Arma dedi Danais in Amazonas; arma
supersunt / quae tibi dem et _turmae_, Penthesilea, tuae'. From other
descriptions of the Amazons, the Auctor Electorum Etonensium aptly
compares Val Fl IV 603 (_cateruas_) and 607 (_turma_); compare as well
Statius _Sil_ I vi 56 (_turmas_). It is possible that _turma_ should be
read at Prop III xiv 13-14 'qualis Amazonidum nudatis bellica mammis /
Thermodontiacis _turba_ lauatur aquis'; but this would make _bellica_
redundant.

=53. BORYSTHENIO ... AMNE= = _BorYsthenE_. The river is the modern Dnepr,
which flows into the Black Sea about 120 kilometres east of Odessa,
about 50 kilometres east of the mouth of the Bug (Hypanis). For the
metrical device here employed, compare Prop II vii 17-18 'hinc etenim
tantum meruit mea gloria nomen, / gloria ad hibernos lata
_Borysthenidas_', Avienus _Descr Orb_ 448 'inde _Borysthenii_ uis sese
_fluminis_ effert' & 721 'ora _Borysthenii_ qua _fluminis_ in mare
uergunt'.

=53. LIQVIDISSIMVS= is not found elsewhere in Ovid.

=53. DIRAPSES.= The river is not mentioned elsewhere.

=54. MELANTHVS.= The modern Melet Irmak flows into the Black Sea about 25
kilometres west of Trabzon (Trapezus). It is mentioned in passing at
Pliny _NH_ VI 11.

=55-56. QVIQVE DVAS TERRAS, ASIAM CADMIQVE SOROREM, / SEPARAT ET CVRSVS
INTER VTRAMQVE FACIT.= The Tanais (Don) is named as the border between
Europe and Asia by Pliny (_NH_ IV 78) and Avienus (_Descr Orb_ 28 &
861). Compare as well Lucan III 272-76 'qua uertice lapsus / Riphaeo
Tanais diuersi nomina mundi / imposuit ripis Asiaeque et terminus idem /
Europae, mediae dirimens confinia terrae, / nunc hunc, nunc illum, qua
flectitur, ampliat orbem'.

Vibius Sequester (_Geog Lat min_ [Riese] p. 212) has an entry 'Hypanis
Scythiae qui, ut ait Gallus "uno tellures diuidit amne duas": Asiam enim
ab Europa separat'. The Hypanis cannot be the river Ovid is here
referring to, for it has already been mentioned in 47; but, as Lenz saw,
the line from Gallus could well have been in Ovid's mind as he wrote
this passage. Professor R. J. Tarrant notes that the extraordinary
_Cadmique sororem_ could well be a borrowing from the earlier poet.

=57-58. INTER MAXIMVS OMNES / CEDERE DANVVIVS SE TIBI, NILE, NEGAT.= A
similar conjunction at _Tr_ III x 27-28 'ipse, papyrifero qui non
angustior amne, / miscetur uasto multa per ora freto'. Herodotus
compares the courses of the Nile and the Danube, concluding '[Greek:
houtô ton Neilon dokeô dia pasês tês Libyês diexionta exisousthai tôi
Istrôi]' (II 34), referring to the length of the rivers, however,
rather than their volume of discharge. At _NQ_ III 22 Seneca mentions
the belief of some that because of their large size and the fact that
their sources were both unknown the Nile and the Danube must both have
been formed at the creation of the world, unlike other rivers. At IV 1
1-2 he argues against those who equated the two rivers, pointing out
that the source of the Danube was known to be in Germany, and that the
two rivers flood at different times of the year.

=59. COPIA TOT LATICVM QVAS AVGET ADVLTERAT AQVAS.= The comparative
freshness of the waters of the Black Sea was well known in antiquity.
Besides the passages cited at 37-38, see Polybius IV 42 3 and
Philostratus _Imag_ I 13 7.

=61-62. QVIN ETIAM, STAGNO SIMILIS PIGRAEQVE PALVDI, / CAERVLEVS VIX EST
DILVITVRQVE COLOR.= Ovid's drinking water was, on the other hand, rather
brackish: 'est in aqua dulci non inuidiosa uoluptas: / aequoreo bibitur
cum sale mixta palus' (_EP_ II vii 73-74).

=63. INNATAT VNDA FRETO DVLCIS.= Similar wording at Macrobius _Sat_ VII 12
32 'superficies maris, cui dulces aquae _innatant_, congelascit'.

=64. PONDVS= _B1CMFHT_ NOMEN _ILB2_. Wakefield conjectured MOMEN on the
basis of Lucretius VI 473-74 'quo magis ad nubis augendas multa uidentur
/ posse quoque e salso consurgere momine ponti'. But _pondus_ seems
appropriate to the context in a way that _momen_ 'heaving' does not.
_Nomen habe(n)t_ is a frequent line-ending in Ovid, occurring some
twenty-five times (once in _Her_ XVI). _Proprium nomen_ occurs in Ovid
at _Fast_ V 191-92 (Ovid is addressing Flora) 'ipsa doce quae sis.
hominum sententia fallax: / optima tu _proprii nominis_ auctor eris'
and _EP_ I viii 13-14 'Caspius Aegissos, de se si credimus ipsis, /
condidit et _proprio nomine_ dixit opus'. The phrase would have been
very familiar to the scribes from grammatical treatises ('proper noun').
A combination of these circumstances no doubt induced the error.

Professor A. Dalzell suggests to me that _momen_ is perhaps correct, the
notion being that the salt water keeps moving, and so does not freeze.
_Pondus_ would then be a (mistaken) gloss that has displaced _momen_
from the text; _nomen_ would be a simple misreading of _momen_.

=66. CERTIS ... MODIS.= 'Metre'; compare _Fast_ III 388 'ad _certos_ uerba
canenda _modos_', Tib II i 51-52 'agricola ... primum ... cantauit _certo_
rustica uerba _pede_' and Manilius III 35 '_pedibus_ ... iungere
_certis_'.

=67. DETINVI ... TEMPVS, CVRASQVE FEFELLI= _excerpta Politiani_ DETINVI
... TEMPVS CVRAMQVE FEFELLI _LT_ DETINVI ... CVRAS TEMPVSQVE FEFELLI
_BCMFHI_. _Tempus fallere_ 'make time pass unnoticed' is perfectly
acceptable Latin; compare _Tr_ III iii 11-12 'non qui labentia tarde /
_tempora_ narrando _fallat_ amicus adest', _Her_ I 9-10 'nec mihi
quaerenti spatiosam _fallere noctem_ / lassaret uiduas pendula tela
manus', _Met_ VIII 651 'interea medias _fallunt_ sermonibus _horas_',
_Tr_ IV x 112-14 'tristia ... carmine fata leuo. / quod quamuis nemo est
cuius referatur ad aures, / sic tamen absumo _decipioque diem_', and
_Her_ XIX 37-38 'tortaque uersato ducentes stamina fuso / feminea tardas
_fallimus_ arte _moras_'. The difficulty with the manuscript reading in
the present passage is that _detinui curas_ is without parallel.
Heinsius therefore accepted Politian's reading, citing in its support
_Met_ I 682-83 'sedit Atlantiades et euntem multa loquendo / _detinuit_
sermone _diem_'. The Auctor Electorum Etonensium objected that _detinui
tempus_ was inappropriate: 'poeta tempus detinere noluit, quod scilicet
per se morari atque haerere uidebatur inuisum'. He conjectured DISTINVI
CVRAS and Burman DIMINVI CVRAS, which he later found in one of his
manuscripts. But _detinere_ here can have the same meaning 'occupy, keep
busy' as it has at the _Metamorphoses_ passage, where A. G. Lee cites
the present passage (with Politian's reading) and _Tr_ V vii 39
'_detineo studiis animum_ falloque dolores'.

The interchange of adjoining metrically and grammatically equivalent
substantives is very common.

=67-68. "DETINVI" DICAM "TEMPVS, CVRASQVE FEFELLI; / HVNC FRVCTVM
PRAESENS ATTVLIT HORA MIHI".= The thought of the passage also at ii 39-40
& 45 'quid nisi Pierides, solacia frigida, restant', _Tr_ V i 33-34 'tot
mala pertulimus, quorum medicina quiesque / nulla nisi in studio est
Pieridumque mora', and _EP_ I v 53-55 'magis utile nil est / artibus
his, quae nil utilitatis habent. / consequor ex illis casus obliuia
nostri'.

=69. ABFVIMVS SOLITO ... DOLORE.= Compare Cic _Fam_ IV iii 2 'a multis et
magnis molestiis abes'; I have found no parallel from verse.

=71. CVM THESEA CARMINE LAVDES.= See at 4 _Albinouane_ (p 327).

=71. THESEA.= For Theseus as the type of loyalty, compare _Tr_ I iii 66 'o
mihi Thesea pectora iuncta fide!', I v 19-20, I ix 31-32, V iv 25-26
(Ovid's letter speaking) 'teque Menoetiaden, te qui comitatus Oresten, /
te uocat _Aegiden_ Euryalumque suum', and _EP_ II iii 43, II vi 26 & III
ii 33-34 'occidit et Theseus et qui comitauit Oresten; / sed tamen in
laudes uiuit uterque suas'. From other authors, Otto _Theseus_ cites
Prop II i 37-38, Martial VII xxiv 3-4 & X xi 1-2, Claudian _Ruf_ I 107,
Ausonius _Epist_ XXV 34, Apollinaris Sidonius _Ep_ III xiii 10, _Carm_ V
288 & _Carm_ XXIV 29. Professor R. J. Tarrant notes that in Bion fr. 12
(Gow) there is a pairing of Theseus/Pirithous and Orestes/Pylades
similar to what we find in Ovid.

=72. TITVLOS.= 'Claims to glory'; compare _Met_ VII 448-49 (to Theseus)
'si _titulos_ annosque tuos numerare uelimus, / facta prement annos' and
_Met_ XII 334 'uictori titulum ... Dictys Helopsque dederunt'.

=73. VETAT ILLE PROFECTO.= 'I am quite certain that he does not allow
...'

=74. TRANQVILLI ... TEMPORIS= implies _sed non temporis aduersi_.

=75. CONDITVR A TE.= Ovid does not elsewhere use a person as the object of
_condere_, although at _Tr_ II 335-36 he uses a person's achievements as
object: 'diuitis ingenii est immania Caesaris acta / condere'.

=76. TANTVS QVANTO= _L_ TANTO QVANTVS _BacCFHITpc_ TANTus QVANTVS _M2c_
TANTO QVANTO _BpcTac_ QVANTO TANTVS _fort legendum_. The transmitted
reading, _tanto quantus_, can be construed: Professor E. Fantham
translates 'a man so great as should have been sung with this mighty
style'. This however subordinates Theseus to Albinovanus, while the
purpose of the line is to emphasize Theseus' greatness. _Tanto quanto_
is generally printed: it is acceptable enough (compare _EP_ II ix 11-12
'regia, crede mihi, res est succurrere lapsis, / conuenit et _tanto_,
_quantus_ es ipse, uiro'), but is very weakly attested, and does not
explain the transmitted reading. I have printed _L_'s _tantus quanto_;
_quanto tantus_ might also be read.

=76. QVANTO ... ORE.= For _os_ 'grandness of utterance' Professor R. J.
Tarrant compares _Am_ II i 11-12 'ausus eram, memini, caelestia dicere
bella ... et satis _oris_ erat'.

=78. INQVE FIDE THESEVS QVILIBET ESSE POTEST.= For the use of mythological
figures as character types, compare _RA_ 589 'semper habe Pyladen
aliquem qui curet Oresten' and Martial VI xi 9-10 'ut praestem Pyladen,
aliquis mihi praestet Oresten. / hoc non fit uerbis, Marce: ut ameris,
ama'.

=79-82.= Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me how the example of
Theseus balances the comparison with Ulysses at the start of the poem.
Earlier Ovid argued against a difference of scale between his own case
and the mythic figure's: here he insists on it.

=79. HOSTES ... DOMANDI.= For lists of these enemies, see _Her_ II 69-70
'cum fuerit Sciron lectus toruusque Procrustes / et Sinis' and the
Athenians' hymn of praise to Theseus at _Met_ VII 433-50.

=79. CLAVAQVE.= For Theseus' club see _Her_ IV 115-16 (Phaedra to
Hippolytus) 'ossa mei fratris _claua_ perfracta trinodi / sparsit humi'
and _Her_ X 77 'me quoque, qua fratrem, mactasses, improbe, _claua_'.
Ovid mentions the club of Hercules about a dozen times.

=80. VIX ILLI.= For _uix_ 'with difficulty' _OLD uix_ 1 cites _Fast_ I 508
'uix est Euandri uixque retenta manu'.

Most editors print VIX VLLI (_BCT_), which is possible enough. _Vix
illi_ seems rather more forceful, however, as making the point that even
Theseus was able to make the dangerous journey only with difficulty, and
that before him the road was impassable. Compare _Met_ VII 443-44 'tutus
ad Alcathoen, Lelegeia moenia, limes / composito Scirone patet'.

=81. OPEROSA.= The word in the sense 'troublesome' seems confined to prose
except for this passage and _Her_ II 63-64 'fallere credentem non est
_operosa_ puellam / gloria; simplicitas digna fauore fuit'.

=83. PERSTAS= _IPF2ul_. Compare _Tr_ IV i 19-20 'me quoque Musa leuat
Ponti loca iussa petentem: / sola comes nostrae _perstitit_ illa fugae'
and _Tr_ V xiv 19-20 'quae ne quis possit temeraria dicere, persta
[_uar_ praesta] / et pariter serua meque piamque fidem'. PERSTAS, the
reading of most manuscripts, would have no acceptable meaning in the
present passage; it has no object, and the intransitive meaning, 'stand
out', is clearly inappropriate. The error may have been induced by _Tr_
IV v 23-24 'teque, quod est rarum, _praesta_ constanter ad omne /
indeclinatae munus amicitiae'; more probably, it is an aftereffect of
_praestandus_ in 81.

=83. INDECLINATVS= governs _amico_. The only other instance of the word in
classical Latin seems to be _Tr_ IV v 24, quoted at the end of the last
note.

=84. LINGVA QVERENTE.= Ovid elsewhere uses persons as the subject of
_queri_, except for similar uses of metonymy at xiv 26 '_littera_ de
uobis est mea _questa_ nihil' and _Tr_ V xi 1-2 'Quod te nescioquis per
iurgia dixerit esse / exulis uxorem, _littera questa_ tua est'.



XI. To Gallio


The poem is a letter of condolence to the famous rhetor Junius Gallio,
an old friend of Ovid (see at 1). Ovid starts the poem by saying that
Gallio should certainly be mentioned in his poetry, because he helped
Ovid at the time of his catastrophe (1-4). This one misfortune should
have been enough for him, but now he has lost his wife (5-8). Ovid wept
on receiving the news, but will not attempt to comfort him, since by now
the grief is in the past, and he would risk renewing it (9-20). Also
(and he hopes this will turn out to be the case), Gallio may already
have remarried (21-22).

The poem is one of the shortest in Ovid's canon (_Am_ II iii is
shorter), and has few parallels with his other poems. The one that comes
closest is _EP_ I ix, addressed to Cotta Maximus, which describes Ovid's
reaction on hearing of the death of Celsus. There are some verbal
parallels as well with _EP_ I iii, Ovid's answer to Rufinus' letter of
consolation on his exile. In the commentary I cite passages from Ser.
Sulpicius Rufus' famous letter to Cicero on the death of his daughter
Tullia (_Fam_ IV v) and from Seneca's treatises of consolation; Ovid was
clearly making use of the common topics of the genre.

=1. GALLIO.= Junius Gallio[24], adoptive father of the younger Seneca's
elder brother, is often cited by the elder Seneca, who considered him
one of the four supreme orators of his time (_Contr_ X praef. 13). At
_Suas_ III 6-8, Seneca discusses Gallio's fondness for the Virgilian
phrase _plena deo_ (which, oddly, is not found in our text of the poet),
and quotes Gallio as saying that his friend Ovid was also very fond of
the phrase. Quintilian and Tacitus did not share Seneca's high opinion
of Gallio: Quintilian criticizes the lack of restraint in his style (IX
ii 92), while at _Dial_ 26 1 Tacitus has Messalla say how he prefers 'G.
Gracchi impetum aut L. Crassi maturitatem quam calamistros ['curling
irons' = 'excessive ornament'] Maecenatis aut tinnitus Gallionis'.

[Footnote 24: _PIR_1 I 493; _PIR_2 I 756; PW X,l 1035 26; Schanz-Hosius
349 (§ 336)]

In AD 32 Gallio proposed in the Senate that ex-members of the Praetorian
guard be permitted to use the theatre seats reserved for members of the
equestrian order; this resulted in a bitter and sarcastic letter from
Tiberius to the Senate attacking Gallio's presumption; he was first
exiled, then brought back to custody in Rome after it was decided that
Lesbos, chosen by him, was too pleasant a place of exile (Tac _Ann_ VI
3; Dio LXVIII 18 4).

=1. EXCVSABILE.= The word is extremely rare, and is not found in verse
outside the _Ex Ponto_: compare I vii 41-42 'quod nisi delicti pars
_excusabilis_ esset, / parua relegari poena futura fuit' and III ix
33-34 'nil tamen e scriptis magis _excusabile_ nostris / quam sensus
cunctis paene quod unus inest'.

=2. HABVISSE= could have the usual past sense of the perfect infinitive,
but more probably is equivalent to _habere_: compare ix 20 'gauderem
lateris non _habuisse_ locum' and see at viii 82 _imposuisse_ (p 282).

=3-4. CAELESTI CVSPIDE FACTA ... VVLNERA.= 'Wounds inflicted by no human
weapon'. The _cuspis_ is attributed to Mars at _Am_ I i 11, to Neptune
at _Met_ XII 580, and to Athena at _Fast_ VI 655. At Sen _Ag_ 368-71
'tuque, o magni nata Tonantis / inclita Pallas, / quae Dardanias saepe
petisti / cuspide terras', R. J. Tarrant cites _HF_ 563 (Dis), _HF_ 904
& _Phaed_ 755 (Bacchus), _HO_ 156 (Hercules), and Juvenal II 130 (Mars).
Professor Tarrant points out to me that the _cuspis_ does not seem to be
attributed to Jupiter, no doubt because the _fulmen_ was too firmly
established as his weapon. Ovid is therefore not making his customary
specific equation of Augustus with Jupiter.

=4. FOVISTI.= _Fouere_ was a technical term in medicine for bathing
something in a liquid (Cato _Agr_ 157 4, Celsus IV 2 4, Columella VI 12
4). The word occurs in this sense in poetry: see _Met_ II 338-39 'nomen
... in marmore lectum / perfudit lacrimis et aperto pectore _fouit_',
_Met_ VIII 654 (perhaps spurious; the passage is one where textual
doublets occur), _Met_ X 186-87 (Hyacinthus has just been struck by
Apollo's discus) 'deus conlapsos ... excipit artus, / et modo te
_refouet_, modo tristia uulnera siccat', _Met_ XV 532 'et lacerum _foui_
Phlegethontide corpus in unda', and _Aen_ XII 420 '_fouit_ ea uulnus
lympha longaeuus Iapyx'.

=5. RAPTI.= The word could be taken to mean 'dead'; compare xvi 1 'Nasonis
... rapti', where the context shows this is the meaning, and _EP_ I ix
1-2 (to Cotta Maximus) 'Quae mihi de _rapto_ tua uenit epistula Celso, /
protinus est lacrimis umida facta meis'. For the similarly ambiguous use
of _ademptus_, see at vi 49 _qui me doluistis ademptum_ (p 243).

=6. QVOD QVERERERE.= For the phrase, compare _Am_ I iv 23-24 (Ovid is
listing the signals his girl should use at the dinner-table) 'si quid
erit de me tacita _quod_ mente _queraris_, / pendeat extrema mollis ab
aure manus', _Tr_ V i 37 (of Fortune) '_quod querar_, illa mihi pleno de
fonte ministrat', _Her_ XIX 79, and _Her_ XX 34 & 94.

=7-8. PVDICA / CONIVGE.= Being _pudica_, she deserved to
survive--Professor E. Fantham points out to me here Ovid's use of what
could be called the _quid profuit_ topic.

The reference to Gallio's wife seems rather cool in tone. For some very
warm descriptions of recently deceased wives, see Lattimore 275-80.

=8. NON HABVERE NEFAS.= This sense of _habere_, very common in prose, does
not seem to occur elsewhere in Ovid; but Professor R. J. Tarrant cites
_Aen_ V 49-50 'dies ... adest quem semper acerbum, / semper honoratum
... _habebo_'.

=9. LVCTVS= = _causae luctus_. Other instances of this sense of _luctus_,
which seems to be confined to poetical passages of great emotional
content, at _Met_ I 654-55 (Inachus to Io) 'tu non inuenta reperta /
_luctus_ eras leuior', _Met_ IX 155, and _Aen_ VI 868 (Aeneas has just
seen Marcellus) 'o nate, ingentem _luctum_ ne quaere tuorum'.

=10. LECTAQVE CVM LACRIMIS SVNT TVA DAMNA MEIS.= Compare _EP_ I ix 1-2
(quoted above at 5 _rapti_) and _Fam_ IV v 1 (Ser. Sulpicius Rufus to
Cicero) 'Postea quam mihi renuntiatum est de obitu Tulliae, filiae tuae,
sane quam pro eo ac debui grauiter molesteque tuli communemque eam
calamitatem existimaui'.

=10. TVA DAMNA.= Compare _Fast_ II 835-36 (Lucretia has just killed
herself) 'ecce super corpus _communia damna_ gementes / obliti decoris
uirque paterque iacent' and _Tr_ IV iii 35 'tu uero tua damna dole,
mitissima coniunx'.

=11. SED NEQVE SOLARI PRVDENTEM STVLTIOR AVSIM.= Compare _Fam_ IV v 6
'plura me ad te de hac re scribere pudet, ne uidear _prudentiae_ tuae
diffidere'. For the opposite reasoning, see Sen _Cons Marc_ 1 1 'Nisi
te, Marcia, scirem tam longe ab infirmitate muliebris animi quam a
ceteris uitiis recessisse et mores tuos uelut aliquod antiquum exemplar
aspici, non auderem obuiam ire dolori tuo'.

=12. VERBAQVE DOCTORVM NOTA.= Compare _EP_ I iii 27-30 (to Rufinus, who
has written him a letter of consolation on his exile) 'cum bene
firmarunt animum _praecepta_ iacentem, / sumptaque sunt nobis pectoris
arma tui, / rursus amor patriae _ratione ualentior omni_, / quod tua
fecerunt scripta retexit opus', and Sen _Cons Marc_ 2 1 'scio a
praeceptis incipere omnes qui monere aliquem uolunt, in exemplis
desinere'.

=13-14. FINITVMQVE TVVM ... DOLOREM / IPSA IAM PRIDEM SVSPICOR ESSE MORA.=
Compare _EP_ I iii 25-26 'cura quoque interdum nulla medicabilis arte
est-- / aut, ut sit, longa est extenuanda mora', _Fam_ IV v 6 'nullus
dolor est quem non longinquitas temporis minuat ac molliat', and _Cons
Marc_ 8 1 'dolorem dies longa consumit'. For a variation of the theme,
see _Cons Marc_ 1 6 'illud ipsum naturale remedium temporis, quod
maximas quoque aerumnas componit, in te una uim suam perdidit'.

The topic of time as the healer of pain is common in ancient literature
from New Comedy on: see Tarrant on Sen _Ag_ 130 'quod ratio non quiit,
saepe sanauit mora', Otto _dies_ 6, and Kassel 53.

=13. SI NON RATIONE.= _Ratio_ similarly used to counter strong emotion
(without success) at _EP_ I iii 27-30 (quoted at 12), _Met_ VII 10-11
(Medea falls in love with Jason) '_ratione_ furorem / uincere non
poterat', and _Met_ XIV 701-2 (similar phrasing for Iphis' falling in
love with Anaxarete).

=14. IPSA ... MORA.= 'By the mere passage of time'.

=15-16. DVM TVA PERVENIENS, DVM LITTERA NOSTRA RECVRRENS / TOT MARIA AC
TERRAS PERMEAT, ANNVS ABIT.= Similar phrasing at _EP_ III iv 59-60 'dum
uenit huc rumor properataque carmina fiunt / factaque eunt ad uos, annus
abisse potest'.

=15. PERVENIENS= is my correction for the manuscripts' _peruenit_. The
perfect tense of _peruenit_ conflicts with the following _permeat_ and
_abit_. It might be argued that the perfect is acceptable, since Ovid is
speaking of a past event; but he would not have used the perfect of an
action which took place over a considerable period of time. For
_perueniens ... permeat_ referring to a past event, compare Ovid's use of
the present _uenit_ in the very similar passage _EP_ III iv 59-60
(quoted at the end of the last note).

The postponement of _permeat_ to the following line made the corruption
of _dum ... perueniens_ to _dum ... peruenit_ simple enough.

=17. TEMPORIS OFFICIVM EST SOLACIA DICERE CERTI.= Here Ovid says that
words of comfort should not be offered too late; at _RA_ 127-30 he says
they should not be offered too early: 'quis matrem, nisi mentis inops,
in funere nati / flere uetet? non hoc illa monenda loco est. / cum
dederit lacrimas animumque impleuerit aegrum, / ille dolor uerbis
emoderandus erit'.

For the same concern with time as in the present passage and medical
imagery similar to that in 19-20, see _Cons Marc_ 1 8 and _Cons Hel_ 1 2
'dolori tuo, dum recens saeuiret, sciebam occurrendum non esse, ne illum
ipsa solacia irritarent et accenderent; nam in morbis quoque nihil est
perniciosius quam immatura medicina. expectabam itaque, dum ipse uires
suas frangeret et ad sustinenda remedia mora mitigatus tangi se ac
tractari pateretur'. See as well the passages cited at Kassel 52-53:
from modern literature he quotes Sterne _Tristram Shandy_ III 29
'Before an affliction is _digested_ consolation ever comes too
soon;--and after it is digested--it comes too late: so that you see
... there is but a mark between those two, as fine almost as a hair, for
a comforter to take aim at'.

=18. DVM DOLOR IN CVRSV EST.= Compare _RA_ 119 _'dum furor in cursu est_,
currenti cede furori' and _Met_ XIII 508-10 (Hecuba speaking) '_in
cursuque meus dolor est_: modo maxima rerum ... nunc trahor exul, inops,
tumulis auulsa meorum'.

=18. AEGER.= The substantive _aeger_ is quite common in both verse and
prose, but always with the meaning 'physically ill'; even when used, as
here, with a transferred meaning, the sense of metaphor is still
present. Compare _RA_ 313-14 'curabar propriis aeger Podalirius herbis,
/ et, fateor, medicus turpiter _aeger_ eram', _EP_ I iii 17 'non est in
medico semper releuetur ut _aeger_', and _EP_ III iv 7-8 'firma ualent
per se, nullumque Machaona quaerunt; / ad medicam dubius confugit
_aeger_ opem'.

The adjective, however, is used by the poets from Ennius on (_Sc_ 254 &
392 Vahlen3), particularly in the phrases _mens aegra_ and _animus
aeger_, to indicate a state of mental anguish. Compare, from Ovid, _Tr_
III viii 33-34 'nec melius ualeo quam corpore mente, sed aegra est /
utraque pars aeque', _Tr_ IV iii 21, IV vi 43 & V ii 7, _EP_ I iii 89-90
'uereor ne ... frustra ... iuuer admota perditus _aeger ope_', I v 18 & I
vi 15 'tecum tunc aberant _aegrae solacia_ mentis', and _Ibis_ 115;
from other poets, compare _Cons ad Liuiam_ 395, Hor _Ep_ I viii 8, and
_Aen_ I 208 & IV 35. The same use of the adjective is found occasionally
in the historians (Sallust _Iug_ 71 2, Livy II 3 5, etc).

=19. LONGA DIES= = _tempus_. Compare _Met_ I 346, _Met_ XIV 147-48 (the
Sibyl to Aeneas) 'tempus erit cum de tanto me corpore paruam / _longa
dies_ faciet', and _Tr_ I v 11-14 'spiritus et uacuas prius hic
tenuandus in auras / ibit ... quam subeant animo meritorum obliuia
nostro, / et _longa_ pietas excidat ista _die_'.

=19. VVLNERA MENTIS.= Ovid is fond of this metaphorical sense of _uulnus_;
see _Met_ V 425-27 'Cyane ... inconsolabile _uulnus_ / _mente_ gerit
tacita', _Tr_ IV iv 41-42 'neue retractando nondum coeuntia rumpam /
_uulnera_: uix illis proderit ipsa quies', _EP_ I iii 87-88 'nec tamen
infitior, si possent nostra coire / _uulnera_, praeceptis posse coire
tuis', and _EP_ I v 23 'parcendum est animo miserabile _uulnus_
habenti'. To judge from Seneca, the metaphor was usual in treatises of
consolation: 'antiqua mala in memoriam reduxi et, ut scires
[_Schultess_: uis scire _codd_] hanc quoque plagam esse sanandam,
ostendi tibi aeque magni _uulneris_ cicatricem' (_Cons Marc_ 1 5),
'itaque utcumque conabar manu super plagam meam imposita ad obliganda
_uulnera_ uestra reptare' (_Cons Hel_ 1 1).

=20. FOVET= _Heinsius_ MOVET _codd_. For the meaning of _fouet_ see at 4
_fouisti_ (p 361). _Mouet_ here is to some extent supported by Ovid's
use of such verbs as _tangere_ and _tractare_ in contexts like that of
the present passage; compare _EP_ I vi 21-22 'nec breue nec tutum
peccati quae sit origo / scribere; _tractari uulnera_ nostra timent',
_EP_ II vii 13, and _EP_ III vii 25-26 'curando fieri quaedam maiora
uidemus / uulnera, quae melius non _tetigisse_ fuit'. But _tractare_ and
_tangere_ are neutral in force, while _mouet_ here would mean 'disturb',
as at Hor _Carm_ III xx 1-2 'Non uides quanto _moueas_ periclo, /
Pyrrhe, Gaetulae catulos leaenae?' and Lucan VIII 529-30 'bustum
cineresque _mouere_ / Thessalicos audes bellumque in regna uocare?'. As
Professor R. J. Tarrant comments, if _mouet_ were read in the present
passage, _intempestiue_ would lose the appropriateness it has when
_fouet_ is read: there is no proper time to "disturb" a wound.

=20. NOVAT.= Similar phrasing at _Tr_ II 209 'nam non sum tanti _renouem_
ut tua _uulnera_, Caesar' and _RA_ 729-30 'admonitu refricatur amor,
_uulnusque nouatum_ / scinditur'.

=21. ADDE QVOD.= Professor E. Fantham points out to me how extraordinary
the occurrence of this phrase in the last distich of the poem is. Of the
twenty-five instances of the idiom in Ovid's poems[25], none except the
present passage occur in the final distich of a poem or book. The other
examples all occur in the middle of an argument, or lead into another
distich containing a final injunction or proof of an argument. As
Professor J. N. Grant suggests to me, this poem therefore furnishes
another example of Ovid's favourite device of unexpectedly altering a
poem's tone in the final distich, for a discussion of which see at xiv
61-62 (p 427).

[Footnote 25: Instances at _Her_ VI 99, _Am_ I xiv 13 & II vii 23, _AA_
II 675, III 81 & III 539, _Met_ XIII 117, XIII 854 & XIV 684, _Fast_ III
143, III 245 & VI 663, _Tr_ I v 79, II 135, V x 43, V xii 21 & V xiv 15,
_EP_ I vii 31, II xi 23, III ii 103, III iv 45, III vi 35, IV x 45, the
present passage, and IV xiv 45. (Ovid's imitator uses the expression at
_Her_ XVII 199.) The preponderance of this presumably colloquial
expression in the poems of exile is noteworthy.]

=21. MIHI= _BF1_ TIBI _MHILTF2_ _om C_. As Burman saw, _mihi_ must be the
correct reading, the perfect subjunctive acting as a past optative:
'certe ego _mihi_ praeferrem: utinam mihi, mentionem facienti noui tui
coniugii, uerum illud omen uenerit, neque fallar, sed tu iam uxorem
duxeris, ut ego uoueo'. _Tibi_ is hardly possible, since an omen to
Gallio indicating that he had remarried would be superfluous.



XII. To Tuticanus


Tuticanus[26] (known only from the _Ex Ponto_) seems from the testimony
of the poem (19-30) to have been a close friend of Ovid; he is mentioned
again at xiv 1-2 and xvi 27. It is reasonable to suppose that, like
Sextus Pompeius, he had previously been unwilling to allow Ovid to
mention him in his verse.

[Footnote 26: _PIR_1 T 314; PW VII A,2 1611 62; Schanz-Hosius 272 (§ 318
16)]

The poem opens with a discussion of the difficulty of fitting Tuticanus'
name into elegiac verse: Ovid could split the name between verses, or
alter the quantity of one or another of the name's syllables, but
neither procedure would be acceptable to Ovid or to his readers (1-18).
He has known Tuticanus since early youth; they assisted each other in
their verse (19-30). He is quite certain that Tuticanus will not desert
him (31-38). He should use his influence with Tiberius to assist Ovid;
but Ovid is so confused after his hardships that he cannot suggest
precisely what Tuticanus should do; he leaves this to Tuticanus'
judgment (39-50).

The appeal for assistance is a constant theme of the poetry of exile;
and the recalling of their assisting each other with their poetry is
paralleled by _EP_ II iv, in which Ovid recalls how he used to submit
his verse to Atticus for criticism, and by _Tr_ III vii, Ovid's letter
to his stepdaughter Perilla, whom he assisted when she first began
writing verse. The opening discussion of the metrical difficulty of
Tuticanus' name finds parallels elsewhere in Latin and Greek literature
(see at 1-2), but is remarkable for its fullness. The explanation for
this fullness may well be Tuticanus' being a fellow poet: he would be
amused by the use of his own name for the witty discussion of the
handling of metrical difficulties with which he himself would be
familiar enough.

=1-2. QVOMINVS IN NOSTRIS PONARIS, AMICE, LIBELLIS, / NOMINIS EFFICITVR
CONDICIONE TVI.= A constant problem for the Latin poets was the
impossibility of using words with cretic patterns (a long syllable,
followed by a short syllable, followed by another long syllable) in
hexameter or elegiac verse. The fact played an important part in
determining Latin poetic vocabulary; for instance, such an ordinary word
as _femina_, cretic in its oblique cases, is usually represented through
metonymy by such words as _nurus_ and _mater_. Proper names presented a
special problem, which could however occasionally be solved through the
use of special forms or circumlocutions; hence such lines as 'cumque
_Borysthenio_ liquidissimus _amne_ [=BorYsthenE] Dirapses' (x
53) and '_Scipiadas_ [=ScIpiOnes], belli fulmen, Carthaginis
horror' (Lucretius III 1034). Sometimes, as in the present passage, such
avenues were not available, and the poet was simply unable to use the
name he wanted. From Greek authors Marx, commenting on Lucilius 228-29,
cites Critias fr. 5 '[Greek: ou gar pôs ên tounoma epharmozein
elegeiôi]' Archestratus fr. 29 (Brandt) '[Greek: ichthyos auxêthentos
hon en metrôi ou themis eipein]' and _Ep Gr_ 616 (Kaibel) '[Greek: ou
gar en hexametroisin hêrmosen tounom' emon]' In Latin, the best-known
reference to this difficulty is Hor _Sat_ I v 86-87 'quattuor hinc
rapimur uiginti et milia raedis, / mansuri oppidulo, quod uersu dicere
non est'. On the passage Porphyrion comments 'Aequum Tuticum significat
[this is disputed by modern commentators, since the town's known
location does not fit with Horace's indication; no certain candidate has
been proposed], cuius nomen hexametro uersu compleri [_codd_: contineri
_fort legendum_] non potest. hoc autem sub exemplo Lucili posuit. nam
ille in sexto Saturarum [228-29 Marx] sic ait: "seruorum est festus dies
hic, / quem plane hexametro uersu non dicere possis"'. In his comment on
the passage from Horace, Lejay cites Martial IX xi 10-17 (Martial wanted
to mention Flavius Earinus, whose name starts with three
consecutive short vowels) 'nomen nobile, molle, delicatum / uersu dicere
non rudi uolebam: / sed tu, syllaba contumax, rebellas. / dicunt
Eiarinon tamen poetae, / sed Graeci, quibus est nihil negatum, / et quos
[Greek: Âres Ares] decet sonare: / nobis non licet esse tam disertis /
qui Musas colimus seueriores', Rutilius Namatianus 419-22 (of
Volusianus [short 'o', 'u', and 'i'] Rufius) 'optarem uerum
complecti carmine nomen, / sed quosdam refugit regula dura pedes. /
cognomen uersu ueheris [_Préchac_: ueneris _uel_ uenens _codd_],
carissime Rufi; / illo te dudum pagina nostra canit', and Apollinaris
Sidonius _Carm_ XXIII 485-86 'horum nomina cum referre uersu / affectus
cupiat, metrum recusat'.

Professor C. P. Jones cites the discussion at Pliny _Ep_ VIII iv 3-4.
Pliny, writing to Caninius, who is composing a poem in Greek on the
Dacian war, discusses the difficulty of using _barbara et fera nomina_
in the poem: 'sed ... si datur Homero et mollia uocabula et Graeca ad
leuitatem uersus contrahere extendere inflectere, cur tibi similis
audentia, praesertim non delicata sed necessaria, non detur?'.

For a further discussion of the topic, see L. Radermacher, "Das Epigramm
des Didius", _SAWW_ 170,9 [1912] 1-31.

=1. QVOMINVS= is rare in Augustan verse; but compare _AA_ II 720 'non
obstet tangas quominus illa [_sc_ loca] pudor'.

=3. AVT= _BC_ AST _MFHILT_. The false reading was probably induced by a
failure to understand the meaning of _aut_ 'otherwise', for which
compare iii 21 '_aut_ age, dic aliquam quae te mutauerit iram', _Met_
VII 699, _Met_ X 50-52 'hanc [_sc_ Eurydicen] simul et legem Rhodopeius
accipit heros, / ne flectat retro sua lumina donec Auernas / exierit
ualles; _aut_ inrita dona futura', and _Tr_ I viii 43-45 'quaeque tibi
... dedit nutrix ubera, tigris erat. / _aut_ mala nostra minus quam nunc
aliena putares'.

=2. CONDICIONE.= 'Nature'. Compare Lucretius II 300-1 'et quae consuerint
gigni gignentur eadem / _condicione_ et erunt et crescent uique
ualebunt'.

=4. SI MODO.= 'If, that is ...' Compare 43-44 'quid mandem quaeris?
peream nisi dicere uix est, / _si modo_ qui periit ille perire potest'.

=5. LEX PEDIS.= 'The rules of metre'. _Lex_ used similarly at Hor _Carm_
IV ii 10-12 'per audaces noua dithyrambos / uerba deuoluit numerisque
fertur / _lege_ solutis', Cic _Or_ 58 'uersibus est certa quaedam et
definita _lex_', and Columella XI 1 1.

=5. FORTVNAQVE.= The sense of the word is difficult. It seems, as
Professor R. J. Tarrant notes, to combine the idea of 'condition, state'
(compare for example _Aen_ II 350 'quae sit rebus _fortuna_ uidetis')
with that of 'unfortunate circumstances', giving the general sense 'the
fact that you have the bad luck to possess a metrically impossible
name'. Three lines before, Ovid used _nominis ... condicione tui_; and in
the present line he seems to have been influenced by the common phrase
_condicio et fortuna_, 'allotted circumstances of life', for which
compare Cic _Off_ I 41 'est autem infima _condicio et fortuna_
seruorum', _Mil_ 92 'in infimi generis hominum _condicione atque
fortuna_'. At _II Verr_ I 81 Cicero similarly adapts the expression to
suit his context: 'Lampsacenis ... populi Romani _condicione_ sociis,
_fortuna_ seruis, uoluntate supplicibus'.

=7. NOMEN SCINDERE.= That is, split the name so that the hexameter
(_uersus prior_) would end in _TUti-_ and the following pentameter
(_uersus minor_) begin with _-cAnus_. Such word-divisions are not
permissible in Augustan verse; from earlier poetry Professor C. P. Jones
cites Ennius _Ann_ 609 Vahlen3 'saxo _cere_ comminuit _brum_'.

=8. HOC= = _nomine tuo_.

=9-14.= Ovid lists the three possible ways of scanning the name so as to
remove the cretic: _TUticanus_, _TuticAnus_, and _TUtIcAnus_.

=9. MORATVR= = _longa est_. The _TLL_ cites Velius Longus VII 55 5 Keil
'hanc ... naturam esse quarundam litterarum, ut _morentur_ et
enuntiatione sonum detineant'.

=11. ET= _BCHIacLT_ NON _M_ NEC _FIpc_. _Nec_, printed by some editors,
cannot by itself be correct, for there is no negative with the
corresponding _producatur_ in the following distich. A negative is
implicitly supplied for _potes ... uenire_ and _producatur_ by 15-16 'his
ego si uitiis ...', but Professor R. J. Tarrant is possibly right to
suggest that _nec_ should be read both here and (replacing _aut_) at the
beginning of 13.

W. A. Camps (_CQ_ n.s. IV [1954] 206-7) has pointed out that it is
somewhat odd that 'The first two possibilities are introduced, in lines
7 and 9, in terms that disclaim them at once' and that 'the third and
fourth possibilities are added without disclaimer ... in terms that would
be quite appropriate to serious suggestions'. He suggests reading _at_,
so that 11-12 represent an imaginary rejoinder to Ovid's rejection of
the possibilities already suggested; Ovid's rejoinder is given at 15
'his ego si uitiis ...'. But _at potes_ is difficult: Ovid could have
written 'at, puto, potes', speaking in his own person to raise an
objection he would then counter, or he could have represented Tuticanus
as saying 'at ... possum'; but it is hard to see how he could have
written 'at potes'.

=13. PRODVCATVR= _MHI_ VT DVCATVR _LTB2F2ul_ VT DICATVR _B1CF1_.
_Producere_ is the correct technical term for 'lengthen'; compare
Quintilian VII ix 13 '_productio_ quoque in scripto et correptio in
dubio relicta causa est ambiguitatis' & IX iii 69 'uoces ['words']
... _productione_ tantum uel correptione mutatae'. _Vt ducatur_ is
unlikely to be right. _Ducatur_ could certainly stand for _producatur_
(although this would destroy the balance with the following
_correptius_), but the verb is clearly indicated as a potential
subjunctive by the preceding _potes ... uenire_; and _ut_ (which would in
any case be taken as correlative with _ut_ in line 12) cannot stand with
this construction. _Vt dicatur_, Ehwald's preferred reading ('dicatur et
sit secunda [syllaba] productâ morâ longa'--_KB_ 68), is even less
likely to be right, since _dicere_ in this context could only mean
'pronounce', as at Cic _Or_ 159 '"inclitus" dicimus breui prima littera,
"insanus" producta'.

=13. EXIT.= _Exire_ similarly used of words being uttered at _Her_ VIII
115-16 (Hermione speaking) 'saepe Neoptolemi pro nomine nomen Orestae /
_exit_, et errorem uocis ut omen amo'. _OLD exeo_ 2d gives other
instances from Cicero (_Brutus_ 265), Seneca (_Ben_ V 19 4), and
Quintilian (XI iii 33), but from verse outside Ovid only Martial XII xi
3, where the word has a somewhat different meaning: 'cuius Pimpleo lyra
clarior exit ab antro?'.

=14. PORRECTA= is equivalent to _longa_, and belongs to _secunda_ (_sc_
syllaba) by hypallage. Compare Quintilian I vi 32 'aut correptis aut
_porrectis_ ... litteris syllabisue' & I vii 14 'usque ad Accium et ultra
_porrectas_ syllabas geminis, ut dixi, uocalibus scripserunt [that is,
they wrote _uiita_ for _uita_ and so on; such spellings occur sometimes
in inscriptions]', and Rutilius Lupus I 3.

=15. VITIIS.= _Vitium_ similarly used for faults of diction at _AA_ III
295-96 'in _uitio_ decor est: quaerunt male reddere uerba; / discunt
posse minus quam potuere loqui', Cic _de Or_ I 116, and Quintilian I v
17, a discussion of the shortening and lengthening of vowels; this he
includes among the 'quae accidunt in dicendo _uitia_'. Ovid is probably
combining this sense with that of 'poetic weakness', for which compare
_Tr_ I vii 39-40 'quicquid in his igitur _uitii_ rude carmen habebit, /
emendaturus, si licuisset, eram' and the use of _uitiosus_ at xiii 17
and _Tr_ IV i 1 and IV x 61.

=16. MERITO PECTVS HABERE NEGER.= 'People would quite rightly say that I
was ignorant'. Compare _Met_ XIII 290-91 & 295 (Ulysses is speaking of
Ajax's claim to the arms of Achilles) 'artis opus tantae rudis et _sine
pectore_ miles / indueret? neque enim clipei caelamina nouit ... postulat
ut capiat _quae non intellegit_ arma!'.

=17-18. MVNERIS ... QVOD MEVS ADIECTO FAENORE REDDET AMOR.= _Adiecto
faenore_ = 'with interest added on'; Ovid will make up for his past
negligence by sending Tuticanus more than one poem ('tibi _carmina_
mittam'). It is clear from the opening distich of poem xiv that Ovid
sent the poem to Tuticanus very soon after the composition of xii: 'Haec
tibi mittuntur quem sum _modo_ carmine questus / non aptum numeris nomen
habere meis'.

A similar use of _faenus_ at _EP_ III i 79-81 'nec ... debetur meritis
gratia nulla meis. / redditur illa quidem grandi cum _faenore_ nobis'.

The variant AGER (_TM2I2_) for _amor_ was clearly induced by such
passages as Tib II vi 21-22 'spes sulcis credit aratis / semina quae
magno _faenore_ reddat _ager_', _RA_ 173-74 'obrue uersata Cerealia
semina terra, / quae tibi cum multo _faenore_ reddat _ager_', and _EP_ I
v 25-26 'at, puto ... sata cum multo _faenore_ reddit _ager_': these
passages refer to the original meaning of _faenus_ ('faenum appellatur
naturalis terrae fetus; ob quam causam et nummorum fetus _faenus_ est
uocatum'--Festus 94 Muller, 83 Lindsay).

=18. REDDET= _GCMIT_ REDDIT _BFHL_. Numerous instances of similar
corruptions in Lucan and Juvenal given by Willis (166-67), who remarks
'The general trend seems to be from other tenses to the present, and
from other persons and numbers to the third person singular'.

=19. QVACVMQVE NOTA.= 'With whatever method of indicating your name is
possible'. For the collocation of _nota_ and _nomen_, see _Aen_ III
443-44 'insanam uatem aspicies, quae rupe sub ima / fata canit foliisque
_notas et nomina_ mandat'.

Luck joins the phrase with the following _tibi carmina mittam_, but the
construction seems somewhat cumbersome; it is probably better to retain
the comma after _nota_ and take the phrase with _teque canam_.

=20-22. PVERO ... PVER ... FRATRI FRATER.= For Ovid's use of polyptoton,
see at viii 67 _uatis ... uates_ (p 278).

=23. DVXQVE COMESQVE.= The same phrase at _Tr_ III vii 18 (to his
stepdaughter Perilla) 'utque pater natae _duxque comesque_ fui' and _Tr_
IV x 119-20 (to his Muse) 'tu _dux et comes_ es, tu nos abducis ab
Histro, / in medioque mihi das Helicone locum'.

=24. FRENA NOVELLA.= For the image, see at ii 23 _frena remisi_ (p 169).
_Nouellus_ is a rare word in poetry. In prose, the word is often used of
young plants or farm animals; and here _frena nouella_ may well be a
metonymy for _frena nouellorum equorum_. Alternatively, the word could
be equivalent to _noua_ 'new, unfamiliar', as at _Fast_ III 455 'iamque
indignanti _noua frena_ receperat ore'. In either case, Ovid is clearly
referring to the beginning of his poetic career.

=25. SAEPE EGO CORREXI SVB TE CENSORE LIBELLOS.= Compare _Tr_ III vii
23-24 (to Perilla) 'dum licuit, tua saepe mihi, tibi nostra legebam; /
saepe tui _iudex_, saepe magister eram'. _Censore_ was probably still
felt as a metaphor; the only precedent given at _OLD censor_ 2b is Hor
_Ep_ II ii 109-10 'at qui legitimum cupiet fecisse poema / cum tabulis
_animum censoris_ sumet _honesti_', which is virtually a simile.

=26. SAEPE TIBI ADMONITV FACTA LITVRA MEO EST.= Similar phrasing in a
similar context at _EP_ II iv 17-18 (to Atticus) 'utque meus lima rasus
liber esset amici, / _non semel admonitu facta litura tuo est_'.

=27. DIGNAM MAEONIIS PHAEACIDA ... CHARTIS.= 'A Phaeacid worthy of the
Homeric original you were translating'. It is clear from xvi 27 that
Tuticanus produced a translation rather than a new work in imitation of
Homer: 'et qui Maeoniam Phaeacida _uertit_'.

=27. MAEONIIS= = 'Homeric', Homer being considered a native of Maeonia
(Lydia). The same use at _RA_ 373 'Maeonio ... pede', _EP_ III iii 31-32
'Maeonio ... carmine', and Prop II xxviii 29 'Maeonias ... heroidas'; the
word in this sense perhaps brought into standard poetic vocabulary by
Horace (_Carm_ I vi 2 'Maeonii carminis', _Carm_ IV ix 5-6 'Maeonius
... Homerus').

=27. CHARTIS= = _carminibus_. Compare _AA_ II 746 'uos eritis _chartae_
proxima cura meae'. The metonymy is not found in Virgil or Propertius,
but compare Lucretius IV 970 'patriis ... _chartis_' = 'Latinis uersibus'
(I 137) and Hor _Carm_ IV ix 30-31 'non ego te meis / _chartis_
inornatum silebo' (where Kiessling-Heinze point out that _chartis_
refers to the poem in its published state being transmitted to others,
rather than to the poem at its moment of composition).

=28. CVM TE PIERIAE PERDOCVERE DEAE.= For the poet's being divinely
taught, compare Prop II x 10 & IV i 133, _Her_ XV 27-28 'at mihi
Pegasides blandissima carmina dictant; / iam canitur toto nomen in orbe
meum', and the disclaimers at Prop II i 3 and _AA_ I 25-28 'non ego,
Phoebe, datas a te mihi mentiar artes, / nec nos aeriae uoce monemur
auis, / nec mihi sunt uisae Clio Cliusque sorores / seruanti pecudes
uallibus, Ascra, tuis'. The topic is an important one in ancient
literature, the most influential passages being the opening of Hesiod's
_Theogony_ (referred to in the passage just cited) and the beginning of
Callimachus' _Aetia_.

=29. TENOR.= 'Course'; the same use at _Her_ VII 111-12 (Dido speaking)
'durat in extremum uitaeque nouissima nostrae / prosequitur fati qui
fuit ante _tenor_'.

=29. VIRIDI ... IVVENTA.= Ovid is perhaps imitating _Aen_ V 295 'Euryalus
forma insignis _uiridique iuuenta_'. Similar phrasing at _AA_ III 557
'uiridemque iuuentam', _Tr_ IV x 17 'frater ad eloquium _uiridi_
tendebat ab aeuo', and _Tr_ III i 7-8 'id quoque quod _uiridi_ quondam
male lusit in aeuo / heu nimium sero damnat et odit opus'; at the last
passage Luck aptly cites _Met_ XV 201-3 'nam tener et lactens puerique
simillimus aeuo / uere nouo [_sc_ annus] est; tunc _herba nitens_ et
roboris expers turget'.

=30. ALBENTES ... COMAS.= For the synecdoche compare Callimachus _Ep_ LXIV
(=_Anth Pal_ V xxiii) 5-6 '[Greek: hê poliê de / autik' anamnêsei tauta
se panta komê]'.

Ovid would have been about sixty years of age at the time of this poem,
old by Roman standards; but his father lived to ninety, and was survived
by his wife (_Tr_ IV x 77-80).

=30. INLABEFACTA= occurs in classical Latin only here and at viii 9-10
'ius aliquod faciunt adfinia uincula nobis / (quae semper maneant
_inlabefacta_ precor)'.

=31-32. QVAE NISI TE MOVEANT, DVRO TIBI PECTORA FERRO / ESSE VEL INVICTO
CLAVSA ADAMANTE PVTEM.= Compare _Her_ II 137 'duritia _ferrum_ ut superes
_adamantaque_ teque', _Her_ X 109-10, and _Met_ IX 614-15 (Byblis on her
brother) 'nec rigidas silices solidumue in pectore _ferrum_ / aut
_adamanta_ gerit'.

Professor R. J. Tarrant notes the unexpected shift in the thought of the
poem: earlier it was Ovid who was guilty of delaying in sending
Tuticanus any sign of his friendship. Ovid might be postponing the real
point of the letter for reasons of tact: Tuticanus has acted as though
his long association with Ovid meant nothing to him, but Ovid does not
want to complain of this openly, and so stresses his own failure to send
Tuticanus a letter.

=33-36.= The set of _adynata_ is remarkable for the way Ovid makes each of
them relate to his own hardships; even Boreas and Notus have a specific
connection, since Ovid complains so often of the climate of Tomis.

=35. TEPIDVS BOREAS ... SIT.= A comparable inversion of nature described at
_Ibis_ 34 'et tepidus gelido flabit ab axe Notus' (before Ovid will
forgive his enemy).

=35. PRAEFRIGIDVS= appears here for the first time in Latin; it occurs
later in Celsus and the elder Pliny. _Praegelidus_, however, is found at
Livy XXI 54 7.

=36. ET POSSIT FATVM MOLLIVS ESSE MEVM.= The personal reference in the
last element of the series of _adynata_ is a clear break with the
conventions of the topic. The last (and therefore greatest) curse in the
_Ibis_ has a similar personal reference: 'denique Sarmaticas inter
Geticasque sagittas / his precor ut uiuas et moriare locis'.

=37. LAPSO= _FHILT_ LASSO _BCM_. _Lapso ... sodali_ seems to me the
preferable reading, since it contrasts Ovid's former life in Rome with
his disgrace and exile; but _lasso_ is well attested and can be
construed easily enough. Unfortunately, parallels from the poems of
exile are of little use, since in most of them the one word could easily
be read for the other: 'tu quoque magnorum laudes admitte uirorum, / ut
facis, et lapso [_uar_ lasso] quam potes adfer opem' (_EP_ II iii
47-48), 'fac modo permaneas lasso [_uar_ lapso], Graecine, fidelis, /
duret et in longas impetus iste moras' (_EP_ II vi 35-36), 'regia, crede
mihi, res est succurrere lapsis [_uar_ lassis], / conuenit et tanto,
quantus es ipse, uiro' (_EP_ II ix 11-12), 'digne uir hac serie, lapso
[_uar_ lasso] succurrere amico / conueniens istis moribus esse puta'
(_EP_ III ii 109). Professor R. J. Tarrant cites similar variants in the
text of Seneca at _HF_ 646 & 803 and _Thy_ 616 & 658.

A clear decision can be made, however, for the phrase _res lassae_; it
is certified as the correct term by the parallel phrase _res fessae_,
for which see _Aen_ III 145 'quam _fessis_ finem _rebus_ ferat' and
_Aen_ XI 335 'consulite in medium et _rebus_ succurrite _fessis_', cited
by Luck at _Tr_ I v 35. For _res lassae_ in Ovid, compare _Tr_ I v 35
'quo magis, o pauci, _rebus_ succurrite _lassis_', _Tr_ V ii 41 'unde
petam _lassis_ solacia _rebus_?', _EP_ II ii 47 'nunc tua pro _lassis_
nitatur gratia _rebus'_, and _EP_ II iii 93 'respicis antiquum _lassis_
in _rebus_ amicum'; in each of these passages _lapsis_ is found as a
variant for _lassis_. Similarly, the sixth-century _codex Romanus_ reads
_lapsis_ at Virgil _G_ IV 449 'uenimus hinc _lassis_ quaesitum oracula
rebus'.

=38. HIC CVMVLVS NOSTRIS ABSIT ABESTQVE MALIS.= Festus defines _cumulus_
as a heap added to an already full measure (s.u. _auctarium_, 14 Muller,
14 Lindsay). The transferred sense is common in Cicero (_Prou Cons_ 26,
_S Rosc_ 8, _Att_ XVI iii 3), and is found elsewhere in Ovid at _EP_ II
v 35-36 'hoc tibi facturo uel si non ipse rogarem / accedat cumulus
gratia nostra leuis' and _Met_ XI 205-6 'stabat opus: pretium rex
infitiatur et addit, / perfidiae _cumulum_, falsis periuria uerbis'.

=38. ABSIT ABESTQVE.= The more natural _abest absitque_ cannot be placed
in a pentameter.

=39. PER SVPEROS, QVORVM CERTISSIMVS ILLE EST.= Similar line-endings at
_Ibis_ 23-24 'di melius! _quorum longe mihi maximus ille est_, / qui
nostras inopes noluit esse uias' and _EP_ I ii 97-98 'di faciant igitur,
_quorum iustissimus ipse est_, / alma nihil maius Caesare terra ferat'.

=40. QVO ... PRINCIPE.= Professor R. J. Tarrant points out that Augustus
must here be meant, since it appears from 20 that Ovid and Tuticanus
were contemporaries: Tuticanus must by the time of the poem's writing
have been in later middle age, rather late to be prospering only under
Tiberius. T. P. Wiseman (268) has suggested that Ovid's Tuticanus might
be the son of a Tuticanus Callus known to have been senator before 48
BC.

=41-42. EFFICE ... NE SPERATA MEAM DESERAT AVRA RATEM.= 'See to it that the
breeze I hope for does not fail to come to my ship'. _Deserere_
generally refers to something failing one that was originally operative:
compare Cic _Att_ VII vii 7 'nisi me lucerna desereret' ('if the lamp
were not going out'--Shackleton Bailey), Plautus _Mer_ 123 'genua hunc
cursorem deserunt' and the other passages cited at _OLD desero_ 2b. But
_sperata_ indicates that the breeze cannot yet be present; other
instances of the same metaphor at viii 27-28 'quamlibet exigua si nos ea
_iuuerit_ aura, / obruta de mediis cumba resurget aquis', ix 73 'et si
quae _dabit_ aura sinum, laxate rudentes', and _Tr_ IV v 19-20 'utque
facis, remis ad opem luctare ferendam, / _dum ueniat_ placido mollior
aura deo',

=43. QVID MANDEM QVAERIS.= Similar wording at _EP_ III i 33-34 (to his
wife) '_quid facias quaeris?_ quaeras hoc scilicet ipsa [_Riese_: ipsum
_codd_]: / inuenies, uere si reperire uoles'.

Ovid's pretense of not knowing what to tell Tuticanus to do was an
ingenious solution to his friends' complaint that he was constantly
repeating the same instructions to them (_EP_ III vii 1-6). Professor
R. J. Tarrant points out the balance with the poem's start, where Ovid
pretends not to know how to address Tuticanus.

=43. PEREAM NISI DICERE VIX EST.= Similar doubt expressed at _Tr_ IV iii
31-32 'quid tamen ipse precer dubito, nec dicere possum / affectum quem
te mentis habere uelim'. _Peream nisi_, which Ovid plays on in the next
line, is colloquial and foreign to poetic diction: instances at _OLD
pereo_ 3b.

=44. SI MODO QVI PERIIT ILLE PERIRE POTEST.= Similar phrasing at _Tr_ I iv
27-28 'uos animam saeuae fessam subducite morti, / _si modo qui periit
non periisse potest_'.

=45. NEC QVID NOLIMVE VELIMVE.= Compare _Met_ XI 492-93 '_nec_ se
... fatetur / scire ratis [_codd_: satis _fort scribendum_] rector
... _quid iubeatue uetetue_' and _Tr_ I ii 31-32 'rector in incerto est
_nec quid fugiatue petatue_ / inuenit'.

=46. NEC SATIS VTILITAS EST MIHI NOTA MEA.= 'And I am at a loss to know
what is to my advantage'. _Satis_ strengthens the sentence: compare Ter
_Hec_ 877 'ego istuc sati' scio', 'I know that very well'. For
_utilitas_, see at ix 48 _publica ... utilitas_ (p 300).

=48. SENSVS= here means 'judgement' or 'good sense', as at Prop II xii 3
'is primum uidit sine _sensu_ uiuere amantes' and Val Max I vi ext 1 'si
quod uestigium in uecordi pectore _sensus_ fuisset'. Elsewhere in Ovid
_sensus_ carries the meaning 'awareness, consciousness'.

=48. CVM RE= _codd_ CVM SPE _Heinsius_. _Cum re_, 'along with my fortune',
seems somewhat out of place; but Burman pointed out that _consilium et
res_ seems to have been a Latin phrase, citing Sallust _Iug_ 74 'neque
illi _res neque consilium_ aut quisquam hominum satis placebat' and Ter
_Eun_ 240-41 'itan parasti te ut spes nulla relicua in te siet tibi? /
simul _consilium cum re_ amisti?'.

=50. QVAQVE VIA VENIAS AD MEA VOTA, VIDE.= This is a provisional
restoration of the line. The manuscript reading which most closely
approaches this text is that of _L_ and _F3_, QVAQVE VIAM FACIAS AD MEA
VOTA, VIDE; the other manuscripts have the same text, except that QVOQVE
is found in some for _quaque_, while for _uide_ there are the variants
MODO, VADO, and VALE.

My restoration is based on 6 '_quaque_ meos _adeas_ est _uia_ nulla
modos' and _Fast_ I 431-32 (Priapus approaches the sleeping nymph Lotis)
'a pedibus tracto uelamine _uota_ / _ad sua felici coeperat ire uia_'.

Before Professor E. Fantham brought this passage to my attention, I had
thought that _M_'s _quoque uiam facias ad mea uota modo_ was correct.
_Modo_ is weak and does not fit well with the preceding _qua ... parte_,
but at least is acceptable Latin; for _quo ... modo_ compare _Med_ 1-2
'Discite quae faciem commendet cura, puellae, / et _quo_ sit uobis forma
tuenda _modo_' and _Ibis_ 55-56 'nunc _quo_ Battiades inimicum deuouet
Ibin, / _hoc_ ego deuoueo teque tuosque _modo_'.

The image in _quoque ... uado_ ['ford'] is rather strange, and for this
sense of the word Ovid seems to have used the plural (_Met_ III 19;
_Met_ IX 108). At _Fast_ IV 300 'sedit limoso pressa carina _uado_',
_uado_ means 'river-bottom'.

Ovid does not end any one of his dozens of verse epistles with _uale_,
so the reading of _FTI2ul_ must be discounted.

If my restoration is correct or nearly correct, the original corruptions
would have been of _uia_ to _uiam_ and of _uenias_ to _facias_; the
latter corruption might have been a deliberate interpolation to procure
a governing verb for _uiam_, or might have been a misreading of or
conjectural restoration for a damaged archetype. The variant _quoque_
for _quaque_ and the different variants for _uide_ would have been
secondary corruptions, unless they also were the result of a damaged
archetype.

=50. VIDE.= For _uide_ at the end of the pentameter, compare _EP_ II ii
55-56 'num tamen excuses erroris origine factum, / an nihil expediat
tale mouere, uide'. It must however be said that _uide_ is somewhat
strange following the subjunctive _quaeras_.



XIII. To Carus


Nothing is known of the Carus to whom this poem is addressed beyond what
Ovid tells us: that he wrote a poem on Hercules (11-12; xvi 7-8) and
that he was teacher of the sons of Germanicus (47-48).

The poem begins with a pun on the meaning of Carus' name (1-2). This
opening will in itself demonstrate to Carus who his correspondent is
(3-6). Carus can himself be recognized through his style (7-12). Ovid
does not claim that his poetry is excellent, only that it is individual;
if his poetry is poor, it is because he is almost a Getic poet now
(13-18). He has written a poem in Getic, which was well received
(19-22). It was a description of the apotheosis of Augustus and a
laudation of the members of the imperial family (23-32). When he
finished reciting the poem, he was applauded; one person even suggested
that his piety merited a recall (33-38). But it is now the sixth year of
his exile, and poems will not assist him, since in the past they have
done him harm. Carus should use his influence to secure Ovid's recall
(39-50).

Certain elements of the poem, such as the flattering references to
Carus' poetry and the request for his help, are commonplaces of the
poetry of exile; the list of the members of the imperial family is
similarly paralleled in Ovid's other poems (see at 25-32 [p 400]). Ovid
nowhere else explicitly describes any of his Getic poems.

=1. MEMORANDE= _BMFHILT_ NVMERANDE _C_. For _memorande_ compare _Tr_ I v 1
'O mihi post nullos umquam _memorande_ sodales'. _Numerande_ is in
itself acceptable enough: see ix 35 'hic ego praesentes inter
_numerarer_ amicos'.

=2. QVI QVOD ES, ID= _BCFI_ QVI QVOD ID ES _MH_ QVIQVE QVOD ES _LT_. For
the use of _id_, Ehwald (_KB_ 47) cited _Fast_ II 23-24 'quaeque capit
lictor domibus purgamina uersis ['swept out'] / torrida cum mica farra,
uocantur _idem_ [_sc_ februa]', Hor _Sat_ II iii 139-41 (of Orestes)
'non Pyladen ferro uiolare aususue sororem / Electram, tantum male dicit
utrique uocando / hanc Furiam, hunc _aliud_', Sen _Ben_ I 3 10 'id
quemque uocari iubent', and Tac _Germ_ 6 'definitur et numerus: centeni
ex singulis pagis sunt, _id_que ipsum inter suos uocantur' ['they are
called "The Hundred"']'.

_Quique quod es_ is, however, an attractive reading: compare _Tr_ I v
1-2 'O mihi post nullos umquam memorande sodales, / _et cui_ praecipue
sors mea uisa sua est'. _Quique quod_ is obviously prone to haplography;
on the other hand, it could be a rewriting of _qui quod id es_, which is
itself presumably a simple corruption through interchange of _qui quod
es id_. I therefore print _qui quod es id_, although with some
hesitation.

=2. VERE.= 'Justly'. For the same adverb used once again of names
"properly" applied, see _Tr_ V x 13-14 'quem tenet Euxini mendax
cognomine litus, / et Scythici _uere_ terra _sinistra_ freti'.

=2. CARE.= Luck among others believes that Carus is also addressed at _Tr_
III v 17-18 'sum quoque, _care_, tuis defensus uiribus absens / (scis
"carum" ueri nominis esse loco)'; but it seems excessively ingenious to
make Ovid say 'I call you _carus_ instead of your real name, Carus'.
Still, as Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me, the passage is odd,
in that Ovid elsewhere uses _care_ only in conjunction with another
vocative (compare viii 89 '_care_ Suilli' and _Tr_ III iv 1-2 '_care_
quidem ... sed tempore duro / cognite'); _care_ may have been used as a
metrical equivalent to the suppressed name, in the way the "cover names"
in elegy correspond to the shape of the alleged actual names of the
women. Unlike _care_, _carissime_ is often found by itself (_Tr_ I v 3,
III iii 27, III vi 1, IV vii 19 & V vii 5; _EP_ II iv 21 & IV x 3).

=2. AVE= occurs in Ovid only here and at _RA_ 639-40 'nec ueniat seruus,
nec flens ancillula fictum / suppliciter dominae nomine dicat "aue!"',
and is not common in writing. It was, however, frequent in everyday
speech, as is clear from Sen _Ben_ VI 34 3 'uulgare et publicum uerbum
et promiscuum ignotis "aue"'.

=3. SALVTERIS= _MFT_ SALVTARIS _BCHIL_. Ovid usually employs the
subjunctive in indirect questions; this is demonstrated by metre at such
passages as _Fast_ VI 385-86 'increpat illos / Iuppiter et sacro quid
_uelit_ ore docet', _Tr_ II 294 '_sustulerit_ quare quaeret
Ericthonium', _Tr_ II 297-98 'Isidis aede sedens cur hanc Saturnia
quaeret / _egerit_ Ionio Bosphorioque mari', _Tr_ V xiv 1-2 'Quanta tibi
_dederim_ nostris monumenta libellis ... uides', _EP_ I i 55-56 'talia
caelestes fieri praeconia gaudent, / ut sua quid _ualeant_ numina teste
probent' and _EP_ II vii 3 'subsequitur quid _agas_ audire uoluntas'.

I have found two passages where metre demonstrates that Ovid used the
indicative in an indirect question, _Met_ X 637 'quid _facit_ [_codd
plerique_: quod facit _recc_ quidque agat _Heinsius_ quid factum
_Merkel_ quid uelit _Nick_ quid facti _Rappold_ dissidet _Korn_ quid
sciat _Slater_] ignorans amat et non sentit amorem' and _EP_ I viii
25-26 'sed memor unde _abii_ queror, o iucunde sodalis, / accedant
nostris saeua quod arma malis'. But in the first passage _faciat_ would
have an ambiguous meaning, since it could represent either _quid facio_
or _quid faciam_, and in the second _abierim_, with its short 'a', 'i',
and 'e', would be metrically intractable.

It is difficult to say whether the scribes were more prone to influence
by the subjunctive normal in classical Latin prose, or by the indicative
of the Romance languages and of ecclesiastical Latin. I print the
subjunctive in view of Ovid's usual practice, and in particular because
of _EP_ I ii 5 'forsitan haec a quo _mittatur_ epistula quaeras' and
_EP_ III v 1 'Quam legis unde tibi _mittatur_ epistula quaeris?'. But
Professor R. J. Tarrant notes that the need for a dependent subjunctive
would be more strongly felt with _quaerere_ in these two passages than
with the _index_ of the present passage.

Not all poets were as strict as Ovid in using the subjunctive in
indirect questions. Propertius at III v 26-46 has the following verbs
in a series of indirect questions: _temperet_, _uenit_, _deficit_,
_redit_, _superant_, _captet_, _sit uentura_, _bibit_, _tremuere_,
_luxerit_ (from _lugere_), _coit_, _exeat_, _eat_, _sint_ (uar _sunt_),
_furit_, _custodit_, _descendit_, _potest_.

=3. COLOR HIC.= 'The style of this opening'. Ovid is presumably referring
to its playful tone. Compare _Tr_ I i 61 (to his poem) 'ut titulo
careas, ipso noscere _colore_', at which Luck cites Martial XII ii 17-18
'quid titulum poscis? uersus duo tresue legantur, / clamabunt omnes te,
liber, esse meum'.

_Color_ is not found in precisely this sense until Horace. For a
discussion of its development, see Brink at Hor _AP_ 86 _operumque
colores_.

=4. STRVCTVRA.= This passage is the first instance cited by _OLD_
_structura_ 1b of _structura_ in this transferred sense, which becomes
common in Silver prose, particularly Quintilian (I x 23, VIII vi 67, IX
iv 45). Lewis and Short point out that Cicero uses the word in similar
contexts only as a simile: compare _Brut_ 33 'ante hunc [_sc_ Isocratem]
enim uerborum _quasi structura_ et quaedam ad numerum conclusio nulla
erat', _Or_ 149 '_quasi structura quaedam_', and _Opt Gen_ 5 'et
uerborum est _structura quaedam'_.

There are two instances in Ovid of _struere_ with a similar meaning,
both from the _Ex Ponto_. One is from line 20 of this poem ('_structa_
... uerba'), while the other is at II v 19 '_structos_ inter fera proelia
uersus'.

=5. MIRIFICA= is a colloquialism. Common in the letters of Cicero, the
word (according to _TLL_ VIII 1060 52) is not found in Livy, Vitruvius,
Celsus, Curtius, or Tacitus. The only poets apart from Terence and Ovid
cited as using the word are Accius, Ausonius, and the author of the
_Ciris_ (although the passage where the word occurs, 12-13, is corrupt);
see also Catullus LIII 2, LXXI 4, and LXXXIV 3. For a discussion of
_mirificus_, see Axelson 61, and of the similarly colloquial _mirifice_
Hofmann 78.

=5. PVBLICA= = 'usual, ordinary'. Compare _Am_ III vii 11-12 'et mihi
blanditias dixit dominumque uocauit, / et quae praeterea _publica_ uerba
iuuant', _AA_ III 479-80 'munda, sed e medio consuetaque uerba, puellae,
/ scribite: sermonis _publica_ forma placet', and Sen _Ben_ VI 34 3
(quoted at 2 _aue_).

=6. QVALIS ENIM CVMQVE EST.= A common phrase in the poets when they speak
of their own verse: compare Catullus I 8-9 'quare habe tibi quidquid hoc
libelli / _qualecumque_', Hor _Sat_ I x 88-89 'quibus [_sc_ amicis]
haec, sunt _qualiacumque_, / arridere uelim, doliturus, si placent spe /
deterius nostra' (at which Bentley cited the present passage), Martial V
lx 5 '_qualiscumque_ legaris ut per orbem', and Statius _Sil_ II praef
'haec _qualiacumque_ sunt, Melior carissime, si tibi non displicuerint,
a te publicum accipiant; sin minus, ad me reuertantur' (both passages
cited by Munro, _Criticisms_ 5).

=7. VT TITVLVM CHARTAE DE FRONTE REVELLAS.= The same hypothetical case at
_Tr_ I i 61-62 '_ut titulo careas_, ipso noscere _colore_; / dissimulare
uelis, te liquet esse meum' and _EP_ II ix 49-52 (to King Cotys) 'nec
regum quisquam magis est instructus ab illis [_sc_ the liberal arts]
... carmina testantur, quae _si tua nomina demas_ / Threicium iuuenem
composuisse negem'.

=7. CHARTAE.= See at xii 27 _chartis_ (p 380).

=7. REVELLAS= 'tear away' is surprisingly strong in its overtones. It is
found only here in the poems of exile, six times in the other elegies,
and fifteen times in the _Metamorphoses_.

=8. QVOD SIT OPVS VIDEOR DICERE POSSE TVVM.= 'I think I could say which
work was yours'. Heinsius' QVID SIT OPVS VIDEAR is a strange error: the
interrogative adjective is acceptable enough, while the notion of the
subjunctive must of course be contained in _posse_, not in the verb that
governs it.

=11. PRODENT AVCTOREM VIRES.= 'His strength will reveal the poet's
identity'. The same sense of _prodere_ at _Met_ II 433 'impedit amplexu
nec se sine crimine _prodit_', _Met_ XIV 740-41 'adapertaque ianua
factum / prodidit', and _Am_ I viii 109 'uox erat in cursu, cum me mea
_prodidit_ umbra'. _Vires_ again used of poetic skill at _Tr_ I vi 29
'ei mihi non magnas quod habent mea carmina _uires_', _Tr_ IV ix 16
'Pierides _uires_ et sua tela dabunt', _EP_ III iii 34, and _EP_ III iv
79.

=13. DEPRENSA.= _Deprendere_ 'recognize, detect' is also found at _Met_ II
93-94 'utinamque oculos in pectore posses / inserere et patrias intus
_deprendere_ curas' and _Met_ VII 536-37 'strage canum primo uolucrumque
ouiumque boumque / inque feris subiti _deprensa_ potentia morbi', as
well as at Livy XLII 17 7 (_uenenum_) and Celsus III 18 3 '[phrenetici
...] summam ... speciem sanitatis in captandis malorum operum
occasionibus praebent, sed exitu _deprenduntur_'. This seems to be a
semi-medical sense; Professor R. J. Tarrant suggests that _colore_ may
bear the secondary meaning 'complexion' in this passage.

=15. TAM MALA THERSITEN PROHIBEBAT FORMA LATERE.= For Thersites' ugliness,
see _Il_ II 216-19 '[Greek: aischistos de anêr hypo Ilion êlthe· /
pholkos eên, chôlos d' heteron poda· tô de hoi ômô / kyrtô, epi stêthos
synochôkote· autar hyperthe / phoxos eên kephalên, psednê d' epenênothe
lachnê]'.

For the modern reader, Thersites' ugliness is hardly his leading
characteristic; but at _EP_ III ix 9-10 Ovid again refers to his
appearance: 'auctor opus laudat: sic forsitan Agrius [his father] olim /
Thersiten facie dixerit esse bona'. Other mentions of Thersites'
ugliness at Lucian _Dial Mort_ XXV (Thersites argues that he is now as
handsome as Nireus) and Epictetus _Diss_ II 23 32 (Thersites is
contrasted with Achilles), to which Professor C. P. Jones adds from
Greek epigram _Greek Inscr. Brit. Mus._ IV ii 1114; other citations from
late Greek authors at PW V A,2 2457 18-38 & 2464 23-66 and Roscher V 670
23 ff.

=16. NIREVS.= For the beauty of Nireus, see _Il_ II 671-74 '[Greek: Nireus
au Symêthen age treis nêas eïsas, / Nireus Aglaïês hyios Charopoio t'
anaktos, / Nireus, hos kallistos anêr hypo Ilion êlthe / tôn allôn
Danaôn met' amymona Pêleïôna]'. This is the only mention of Nireus in
the poem; but Demetrius (_Peri Hermeneias_ 62; cited by Cope at
Aristotle _Rhet_ 1414a) remarks that because of Homer's use of
epanaphora (the repetition of Nireus' name) and dialysis (asyndeton)
'[Greek: schedon hapax tou Nireôs onomasthentos en tôi dramati
memnêmetha ouden hêtton ê tou Achilleôs kai tou Odysseôs]'. Ovid
mentions Nireus again at _AA_ II 109-12 'sis licet antiquo Nireus
adamatus Homero ... ingenii dotes corporis adde bonis'; see also Hor
_Epod_ XV 22 'forma ... uincas Nirea', Hor _Carm_ III xx 15 (where Nireus
is paired with Ganymede) and Prop III xviii 27 'Nirea non facies, non
uis exemit Achillem'; from Greek epigram Professor C. P. Jones cites
Peek _Griech. Versinschr._ 1728 (Merkelbach _ZPE_ 25 [1977] 281).

=16. CONSPICIENDVS.= The word is metrically suited to the second half of
the pentameter, before the disyllable: compare Tib I ii 70 & II iii 52,
_Fast_ V 118 & V 170, and _Tr_ II 114.

=17. MIRARI SI= is a colloquialism: most of the passages from verse cited
at _TLL_ VIII 1067 14 are from Plautus and the hexameter poems of
Horace; from Propertius compare II iii 33 'haec ego nunc _mirer si_
flagret nostra iuuentus?' and from Ovid _Her_ X 105 'non equidem _miror
si_ stat uictoria tecum' and _Tr_ I ix 21 'saeua neque _admiror_ metuunt
_si_ fulmina'.

=19. A PVDET, ET GETICO SCRIPSI SERMONE LIBELLVM.= The rest of the distich
after _a pudet_ explains the exclamation ('I have even written ...'),
and so the punctuation should mark the break. The idiom is different
from the _et pudet et_ construction seen at xv 29 'et pudet et metuo ['I
am both embarrassed and afraid'] semperque eademque precari' and _Tr_ V
vii 57-58 'et pudet et fateor ['I confess with embarrassment'], iam
desuetudine longa / uix subeunt ipsi uerba Latina mihi'.

The only other instance of independent _a pudet_ in Ovid is _AA_ III
803-4 'quid iuuet et uoces et anhelitus arguat oris; / a pudet, arcanas
pars habet ista notas', which, however, Professor R. J. Tarrant suspects
is part of an interpolation.

=19. GETICO ... SERMONE.= Ovid repeatedly claims to have learned Getic and
Sarmatian: compare _Tr_ III xiv 47-48 'Threicio Scythicoque fere
circumsonor ore, / et uideor Geticis scribere posse modis', _Tr_ V vii
55-56 'ille ego Romanus uates--ignoscite, Musae!-- / Sarmatico cogor
plurima more loqui', _Tr_ V xii 58 'nam didici Getice Sarmaticeque
loqui', and _EP_ III ii 40 (identical to _Tr_ V xii 58).

It is of course not possible to prove that Ovid did or did not learn
Getic and write poetry in that language. But in the absence of other
evidence, it seems better to suppose that he did learn the language
since (a) he claims to have do so, (b) Latin and Greek would hardly have
been widely spoken in the region, and (c) a man with Ovid's linguistic
facility would have had little difficulty in learning the languages of
the region.

=20. STRVCTAQVE ... VERBA.= Compare Cic _de Or_ III 171 'struere uerba',
and see at 4 _structura_ (p 393).

=20. NOSTRIS ... MODIS.= Ovid did not use native rhythms, but instead used
Latin metres.

=21. ET PLACVI.= Luck compares _EP_ I v 63-64 'forsitan audacter faciam,
sed glorior Histrum / ingenio nullum maius habere meo', but it is clear
enough from the context that Ovid was there speaking of his Latin
poetry.

=21. GRATARE.= _Gratari_ is extremely rare in Latin, being found only in
the poets and historians; _grAtulAri_ was of course not
available (except for _grAtulor_) for use in dactylic verse.
Other instances of the word in Ovid at ix 13 _'gratatusque_ darem cum
dulcibus oscula uerbis', _Her_ VI 119 'nunc etiam peperi; _gratare_
ambobus, Iason!', _Her_ XI 65, _Met_ I 578, VI 434, IX 244 & 312, and
_Fast_ III 418.

=22. INTER INHVMANOS ... GETAS.= The same phrase in the same metrical
position at _EP_ I v 65-66 'hoc ubi uiuendum est satis est si consequor
aruo / _inter inhumanos_ esse poeta _Getas_' and _EP_ III v 27-28 'quem
... fatum ... _inter inhumanos_ maluit esse _Getas_'.

=23. LAVDES DE CAESARE DIXI.= In 1896 J. Gilbert ingeniously proposed the
punctuation 'laudes [potential subjunctive]: de Caesare dixi'. But _laus
de_ + ablative instead of the more usual objective genitive construction
is supported by Tac _Ann_ I 12 'addidit laudem de Augusto'. Nipperdey
there explains _de_ by equating _laus_ with _oratio_ and _sermo_, both
of which take _de_ as a normal construction; but it appears from the
present passage that _laus de_ may have been a special term for
panegyric. Professor E. Fantham notes that Ovid may have been seeking a
synonym for _laudAtiO_.

=24. ADIVTA EST NOVITAS NVMINE NOSTRA DEI.= _Nouitas nostra_ could mean
either 'my novel attempt' (Wheeler, Lewis and Short) or 'my
inexperience'; if the latter, _adiuta_ would bear the uncommon but quite
valid meaning 'compensated for'; _OLD adiuuo_ 7 cites passages from
Cicero (_Fam_ V xiii 5 'ea quibus secundae res ornantur, aduersae
adiuuantur'), Livy, and Ulpian.

=25-32.= Similar catalogues of the imperial family occur at _Met_ XV
834-47, _Tr_ II 161-68, _Tr_ IV ii 7-12, _EP_ II ii 69-74, and _EP_ II
viii 29-34; these passages are quoted from below.

=25-26. NAM PATRIS AVGVSTI DOCVI MORTALE FVISSE / CORPUS, IN AETHERIAS
NVMEN ABISSE DOMOS.= Other mentions of the deified Augustus at vi 15-16
'coeperat Augustus detectae ignoscere culpae; / spem nostram terras
deseruitque simul' and viii 63-64 'et modo, Caesar, auum, quem uirtus
addidit astris, / sacrarunt aliqua carmina parte tuum'. Ovid had
predicted Augustus' apotheosis: see _Met_ XV 838-39 'nec nisi cum senior
Pylios aequauerit annos, / aetherias sedes cognataque sidera tanget',
_Tr_ II 57-58 'optaui peteres caelestia sidera tarde, / parsque fui
turbae parua precantis idem', and _Tr_ V ii 51-52, V v 61-62, V viii
29-30 & V xi 25-26.

Augustus' apotheosis was similar to those of Hercules, Aeneas, Romulus,
and Julius Caesar: compare the descriptions at _Met_ IX 262-72 'interea
quodcumque fuit populabile flammae / Mulciber abstulerat, nec
... quicquam ab imagine ductum / matris habet, tantumque Iouis uestigia
seruat ... maiorque uideri / coepit et _augusta_ fieri grauitate
uerendus. / quem pater omnipotens inter caua nubila raptum / quadriiugo
curru radiantibus intulit astris', _Met_ XIV 603-4 'quicquid in Aenea
fuerat mortale, repurgat [_sc_ Numicius] / et respersit aquis; pars
optima restitit illi', _Met_ XIV 824-28 'abstulit [_sc_ Mars] Iliaden:
corpus mortale per auras / dilapsum tenues ... pulchra subit facies et
puluinaribus altis / dignior', and _Met_ XV 844-46 'Venus ... Caesaris
eripuit membris neque in aera solui / passa recentem animam caelestibus
intulit astris'.

=25. PATRIS AVGVSTI.= _Patris_ to make it clear that Ovid is not speaking
of Tiberius Caesar _Augustus_.

=26. CORPVS ... NVMEN.= Precisely the same distinction is found in
Velleius' description of Augustus' apotheosis and the start of Tiberius'
reign: 'post redditum caelo patrem et _corpus_ eius humanis honoribus,
_numen_ diuinis honoratum, primum principalium eius operum fuit
ordinatio comitiorum' (II 124 3).

=27. PAREM VIRTVTE PATRI.= Compare _EP_ II viii 31-32 (to Augustus, about
Tiberius) 'perque tibi _similem uirtutis imagine_ natum, / moribus
agnosci qui tuus esse potest'.

=27-28. FRENA ... IMPERII.= The same metaphor at _Tr_ II 41-42 'nec te
quisquam moderatius umquam / _imperii_ potuit _frena_ tenere sui', _EP_
II ix 33 'Caesar ut _imperii_ moderetur _frena_ precamur', and _EP_ II v
75 (of Germanicus) 'succedatque suis orbis moderator _habenis_'.

At _Fast_ I 531-34 Ovid uses the same metaphor, as here, of Tiberius'
accession to power: (Carmenta is prophesying Rome's future) 'et penes
Augustos patriae tutela manebit: / hanc fas _imperii frena_ tenere
domum. / inde nepos natusque dei [Tiberius was the adopted son of
Augustus, and therefore the grandson of Julius Caesar], licet ipse
_recuset_, / pondera caelesti mente paterna feret'. In all of these
passages Ovid may have had in mind _Aen_ VII 600 (of Latinus) 'saepsit
se tectis _rerumque_ reliquit _habenas_'.

=27-28. FRENA ... SAEPE RECVSATI ... IMPERII.= At _Tr_ V iv 15-16 Ovid had
used _frena recusare_ of a horse: 'fert tamen, ut debet, casus patienter
amaros, / more nec indomiti _frena recusat_ equi'. This perhaps
influenced his choice of words here.

=27. COACTVS= _excerpta Scaligeri_ ROGATVS _codd_. Ovid is referring to
the second meeting of the Senate after the death of Augustus (the first
meeting had been devoted to funeral arrangements); at this meeting there
had been some confusion over Tiberius' intentions. _Rogatus_ is awkward
to construe, since Tiberius must already have been asked to accept
power: otherwise he could not have refused the offer. The difficulty of
_rogatus_ is clearly shown by the description of the scene in Tacitus:
'et ille [_sc_ Tiberius] uarie disserebat de magnitudine imperii sua
modestia. solam diui Augusti mentem tantae molis capacem: se in partem
curarum ab illo uocatum experiendo didicisse quam arduum, quam subiectum
fortunae regendi cuncta onus, proinde in ciuitate tot inlustribus uiris
subnixa non ad unum omnia deferrent: plures facilius munia rei publicae
sociatis laboribus executuros ... senatu ad infimas obtestationes
procumbente, dixit forte Tiberius se ut non toti rei publicae parem, ita
quaecumque pars sibi mandaretur eius tutelam suscepturum ... fessus
... clamore omnium, expostulatione singulorum flexit paulatim, non ut
fateretur suscipi a se imperium, sed ut negare et _rogari_ desineret'
(_Ann_ I 11-13). Scaliger's conjecture is supported by (and is probably
based on) the corresponding description at Suetonius _Tib_ 24
'principatum ... diu ... recusauit ... tandem quasi _coactus_ et querens
miseram et onerosam iniungi sibi seruitutem, recepit imperium'.

Professor A. Dalzell notes, however, that Suetonius' description is an
imperfect parallel, since _coactus_ is there modified by _quasi_; he
suggests to me that _rogatus_ could be accepted, if it is taken closely
with _recusati_--Tiberius finally accepted what he had many times been
offered and had many times refused.

=29. VESTAM.= Ovid similarly equates Livia with Venus and Juno at _EP_ III
i 117-18 'quae Veneris formam, mores Iunonis habendo / sola est caelesti
digna reperta toro', and implicitly equates her with Juno at _Fast_ I
650 'sola toro magni digna reperta Iouis'. These appear to be instances
of metaphor rather than true equations; but PW XIII,1 913-14 cites
inscriptions indicating a cult of Livia-as-Juno.

=29-30. LIVIA ... AMBIGVVM NATO DIGNIOR ANNE VIRO.= Tiberius is mentioned
by Ovid in connection with Livia at _Fast_ I 649, a description of the
rededication of the temple of Concordia in AD 10: 'hanc tua constituit
genetrix et rebus et ara', but does not figure in Ovid's other mentions
of Livia (_Fast_ V 157-58, _Tr_ II 161-62, _EP_ II viii 29-30, and _EP_
III i 117-18); these passages would have been written before Tiberius'
assumption of power.

For the coupling of both Augustus and Tiberius with Livia, Professor C.
P. Jones cites '[Greek: hê doious skêptroisi theous auchousa Sebastê /
Kaisaras]' from an epigram of Ovid's contemporary Honestus.[27]

[Footnote 27: Honestus XXI 1-2 Gow-Page (_Garland of Philip_); discussed
by Professor Jones at _HSCP_ 74 (1970) 249-55.]

=30. AMBIGVVM.= The same use of _ambiguum_ (which may be an Ovidian
peculiarity) at _Met_ I 765-66 '_ambiguum_ Clymene precibus Phaethontis
an ira / mota magis' and _Met_ XI 235-36 'est specus in medio, natura
factus an arte / _ambiguum_, magis arte tamen'.

=30. ANNE.= The word is found at _Am_ III xi 49-50 'quicquid eris, mea
semper eris; tu selige tantum, / me quoque uelle uelis, _anne_ coactus
amem' and _Fast_ VI 27-28 (Juno speaking) 'est aliquid nupsisse Ioui,
Iouis esse sororem / fratre magis dubito glorier _anne_ uiro'; the
resemblances between this and the present passage are obvious. Bömer _ad
loc_ cites instances of _anne_ from Plautus (_Amph_ 173), Terence (_Eun_
556), Cicero (_Fin_ IV 23, _Att_ XII xiv 2), and Virgil (_G_ I 32 & II
159, _Aen_ VI 864).

=31. DVOS IVVENES.= Germanicus and Drusus. For other mentions of them, see
_Tr_ II 167 'tui, sidus iuuenale, nepotes', _Tr_ IV ii 9 'et qui
Caesareo iuuenes sub nomine crescunt', _EP_ II ii 71-72 'praeterit ipse
suos animo Germanicus annos, / nec uigor est Drusi nobilitate minor',
and _EP_ II viii 33-34.

=31. ADIVMENTA.= The word is rare in verse (but see Lucretius VI 1022 and
Silius XI 605 & XVI 12), and Ovid here seems to be giving a version of
the construction in which people are said to be _adiumento_, as at Cic
_Att_ XII xxxi 2 'magno etiam adiumento nobis Hermogenes potest esse in
repraesentando ['in making cash payment'--Shackleton Bailey]', Varro
_LL_ V 90, and _Rhet Her_ III 29. _TLL_ I 704 1 cites "Caecil. _mort._
18" for 'duo minores, qui sint adiumento', which resembles the present
passage, but I do not understand the reference: "Caecil." does not
appear in the table of authors.

=33. NON PATRIA ... SCRIPTA CAMENA.= 'Written in a poem that was not in
Latin'. This is the only instance in Ovid of this sense of _Camena_,
which seems to have been a Horatian idiom: see _Carm_ II xvi 38
'spiritum Graiae tenuem Camenae', _Ep_ I i 1-3 'Prima dicte mihi, summa
dicende Camena ... Maecenas', and _AP_ 275 'tragicae ... Camenae'.
Professor R. J. Tarrant cites Martial XII xciv 5 'fila lyrae moui
Calabris exculta Camenis', which possibly refers to Horace.

=36. MVRMVR.= The hum caused by the exchange of approving comments.
Compare _Met_ XIII 123-24 'finierat Telamone satus, uulgique secutum /
ultima _murmur_ erat'. Livy (XXXII 22 1) has a _murmur_ of mingled
praise and dissent following a speech: '_murmur_ ortum aliorum cum
adsensu, aliorum inclementer adsentientes increpantium'. Other _murmura_
are disapproving or anxious, as at _Met_ I 206, VIII 431 & IX 421, and
_Aen_ XII 238-39.

The Latin _murmur_ could be quite loud: Martial uses the word of a
lion's roar (VIII liii [lv] 1).

=40. SEXTA ... BRVMA.= The poem must have been written in the winter of 14.

=41. NOCVERVNT.= _Nocere_ again used of the _Ars Amatoria_ at xiv 20
'telaque adhuc demens quae _nocuere_ sequor?' and _Tr_ IV 1 35.

=42. PRIMAQVE TAM MISERAE CAVSA FVERE FVGAE.= The second cause was of
course Ovid's _error_ (_EP_ III iii 67-72).

=43. STVDII COMMVNIA FOEDERA SACRI.= Similar references to shared poetic
interests at viii 81 '_communia sacra_ tueri', _EP_ II v 60 (to Salanus,
a famous orator) 'seruat _studii foedera_ quisque sui', _EP_ II ix 63-64
(to Cotys, king of Thrace, who was a writer of verse) 'haec quoque res
aliquid tecum mihi _foederis_ adfert; / eiusdem _sacri_ cultor uterque
sumus', _EP_ II x 17 'sunt tamen inter se _communia sacra_ poetis', and
_EP_ III iv 67 'sunt mihi uobiscum _communia sacra_, poetae'.

The _foedera_ would carry the obligation of mutual assistance.

=44. PER NON VILE TIBI NOMEN AMICITIAE.= 'By the name of friendship which
is not cheap in your eyes' (Wheeler). Professor R. J. Tarrant cites
similar invocations at _Tr_ I viii 15 'illud _amicitiae_ sanctum et
uenerabile nomen', and _EP_ II iii 19-20 'illud _amicitiae_ quondam
uenerabile _nomen_ / prostat', III ii 43 & III ii 100.

=44-46. AMICITIAE ... INGENIIS.= For Ovid's use of quadrisyllable endings
for pentameters, see at ii 10 _Alcinoo_ (p 164).

=45-46. SIC VINCTO LATIIS GERMANICVS HOSTE CATENIS / MATERIAM VESTRIS
ADFERAT INGENIIS.= Compare _EP_ II viii 39-40 'sic fera quam primum
pauido Germania uultu / ante triumphantes serua feratur equos'.
Germanicus celebrated his triumph in 17: see Tac _Ann_ II 41.

_Vestris_ is a true plural referring to Carus and other poets who might
be inspired by Germanicus' exploits. For this use of _uester_ to address
one member of a collectivity, see Austin on _Aen_ I 140 and Fordyce on
Catullus XXIX 20.

=45. VINCTO= is my restoration for the manuscripts' CAPTO, which I am
unable to construe with _catenis_. _Vincto_ was first corrupted to
_uicto_, which was then displaced by the gloss _capto_. For the picture
compare _AA_ I 215 'ibunt ante duces onerati colla catenis'; for
_uincto_ compare Livy VII 27 8 'eos _uinctos_ consul ante currum
triumphans egit', and for _uincto ... catenis_ compare Caesar _BG_ I 53
'trinis catenis uinctus'.

=47. PVERI.= The sons of Germanicus: Nero, Drusus III, and Gaius Caligula.

=47. VOTVM COMMVNE DEORVM.= Wheeler translates 'the source of universal
prayers to the gods'. But it seems difficult to take _uotum_ in this
sense, and impossible to construe _deorum_. André translates 'c'est le
voeu de tous les dieux', but it seems strange to have gods forming a
_uotum_. Postgate placed a comma before _deorum_; but Germanicus and
Agrippina were not gods. Heinsius conjectured SVORVM, but this seems
rather forced. I suspect that _deorum_ is correct, the sense of the
passage being close to that of _Fast_ II 63-64 'templorum positor,
templorum sancte repostor, / sit superis opto mutua cura tui'; but what
originally stood in place of _uotum_ is not clear.

=48. QVOS LAVS FORMANDOS EST TIBI MAGNA DATOS.= 'Whose entrustment to you
for education is an immense honour'. For the construction Ehwald (_KB_
68) cites _Aen_ IX 92 (Cybebe asks that Aeneas' ships be rescued from
fire) 'prosit nostris in montibus ortas', 'let it profit them that it
was in my mountains that they had their origin' (Jackson Knight).

=49. MOMENTA.= 'Influence'. Compare Caesar _BC_ III 70 2 'ita paruae res
magnum in utramque partem _momentum_ habuerunt', Livy I 47 6, Hor _Ep_ I
x 15-16 'ubi gratior aura / leniat et rabiem Canis et _momenta_ Leonis',
and Manilius II 901 (of the fifth temple) 'hic _momenta_ manent nostrae
plerumque salutis'.

=49. MOMENTA= _Vaticanus 1595 (saec xv), sicut coni Scaliger et Gronouius_
MONIMENTA _BCMFHILT_. Similarly, most manuscripts have _monimenta_ at
_Met_ XI 285-86 (Ceyx to Peleus) 'adicis huic animo ['my kindly nature']
_momenta_ potentia, clarum / nomen auumque Iouem'.

=49-50. SALVTI, / QVAE NISI MVTATO NVLLA FVTVRA LOCO EST.= A similar
qualification of _salus_ at _Met_ IX 530-31 'quam nisi tu dederis non
est habitura salutem / hanc tibi mittit amans'; Bömer _ad loc_ cites
other word-plays with _salus_ at _Her_ IV 1, XVI 1 & XVIII 1, and at
_Tr_ III iii 87-88.

=50. MVTATO ... LOCO.= See at viii 86 _qui minus ... distet_ (p 284).



XIV. To Tuticanus


In his first poem to Tuticanus, Ovid had promised that other poems would
follow: 'teque canam quacumque nota, _tibi carmina mittam_' (xii 19).
The present poem was written quite shortly after xii, perhaps in AD 16:
'Haec tibi mittuntur quem sum _modo_ carmine questus / non aptum numeris
nomen habere meis'.

The opening distich indicates that the poem is addressed to Tuticanus.
The dedication is a perfunctory one, however, since he is not referred
to at any other point of the letter: Ovid perhaps felt that he had
fulfilled any obligations he had to Tuticanus with the highly personal
earlier poem.

In 3-14 Ovid expresses at length his wish to be sent anywhere, even the
Syrtes, Charybdis, or the Styx, as long as he can escape Tomis. Such
complaints as these have caused the Tomitans to be angry with him
(15-22). But he has been misunderstood: he was complaining not of the
people but of the land. Hesiod criticized Ascra, Ulysses Ithaca, and
Metrodorus Rome, all with impunity, but Ovid's verse has once more
caused him trouble (23-44). The Tomitans have been as kind to him as the
Paeligni would have been: they have even granted him immunity from
taxation, and publicly crowned him (45-56). After this lengthy account
of the Tomitans, he moves to an unexpectedly quick summing-up: Tomis is
as dear to him as Delos is to Latona (57-60). This conclusion is
immediately undercut by the final distich: his only wish is that Tomis
were not subject to attack, and that it had a better climate. This type
of undercutting is paralleled elsewhere in Ovid's verse: I discuss these
passages at 61-62.

At ix 97-104 Ovid had mentioned the Tomitans' sympathy for him; but the
present poem is unique for the praise Ovid bestows on them, and
furnishes a striking contrast to the horrific picture of Tomis in, for
instance, _Tr_ V x. A primary purpose of Ovid's poetry from exile was to
secure recall, and so he no doubt intentionally emphasized his
hardships; it is clear enough from this poem that at the same time he
was in fact reaching an accommodation with his new conditions of life.

=3. VTCVMQVE.= 'Somehow (in spite of my hardships)'. The word is used by
Ovid only in the poetry of exile, and only in this sense: compare _Ibis_
9-10 'quisquis is est (nam nomen adhuc _utcumque_ tacebo), / cogit
inassuetas sumere tela manus' and _EP_ III ix 53 'postmodo collectas
[_sc_ litteras] utcumque sine ordine iunxi'. This is a prose sense of
_utcumque_, common in Livy; when the word is used in verse, it generally
means 'whenever' (Hor _Epod_ XVII 52, _Carm_ I xvii 10, I xxxv 23, II
xvii 11, III iv 29 & IV iv 35) or 'however' (_Aen_ VI 822; the only
instance of the word in Virgil).

=4. TE= _Berolinensis Diez. B. Sant. 1, saec xiii Bodleianus Rawlinson G
105ul_ ME _BCMFHILT_. _Me_ seems unlikely to be right, for the phrase
'nil me praeterea quod iuuet inuenies' would not only be awkward in
itself, but would also be in apparent contradiction with the following
'ipsa quoque est inuisa salus', where _salus_ refers back to _utcumque
ualemus_.

=4. INVENIES.= See at ii 10 _Alcinoo_ (p 164).

=5. VLTIMA VOTA.= 'My utmost wish'. For this sense of _ultimus_ compare
Cic _Fin_ III 30 'summum bonum, quod _ultimum_ appello', Livy XXVII 10
11 'aurum ... quod ... ad _ultimos_ casus ['the greatest emergencies']
seruabatur promi placuit', Hor _Carm_ II vii 1-2 'O saepe mecum tempus
in _ultimum_ / deducte Bruto militiae duce' (_tempus_ has the same
meaning as _casus_ in the passage from Livy), and Petronius 24 'non
tenui ego diutius lacrimas ... ad _ultimam_ perductus tristitiam'.

=6. SCILICET= seems difficult to explain in this context, and the
translators ignore its presence. ILICET ('at once') should possibly be
read: the corruption of the rarer word to the more common would be easy
enough in view of the final _s_ of the preceding _istis_.

=7. MVTER= _F1_ _Bodleianus Canon. lat. 1, saec xiii Barberinus lat. 26,
saec xiii_. _Muter_ is so much choicer than the better attested _mittar_
that I have followed editors from Ciofanus to Merkel in printing it.
Gronovius (_Obseruationes_ III 1) made a strong case for _muter_, citing
Virgil _G_ II 50 (where however the meaning of _mutata_ is disputed),
Hor _Sat_ II vii 63-64 'illa tamen se / non habitu _mutatue_ loco
peccatue superne', Claudian _Rap Pros_ I 62 'rursus corporeos animae
_mutantur_ in artus' (where _mittuntur_ is a variant reading, which Hall
prints), and from Ovid _Tr_ V ii 73-74 'hinc ego dum _muter_, uel me
Zanclaea [_Politianus_: Panchea _codd_] Charybdis / deuoret aque
[_Heinsius_: atque _codd_] suis ad Styga mittat aquis', and _EP_ I i 79
'inque locum Scythico uacuum _mutabor_ ab arcu'; compare as well Cic
_Balb_ 31 'ne quis inuitus ciuitate _mutetur_' and Livy V 46 11 'quod
nec iniussu populi _mutari_ finibus posset'.

=11. SI QVID EA EST.= See at i 17 _si quid ea est_ (p 153).

=11. BENE.= 'Profitably'. Compare Tac _Ann_ III 44 'miseram pacem uel
bello _bene mutari_'. The word in this sense is generally used in
describing good commercial investments: see Plautus _Cur_ 679-80
'argentariis _male credi_ qui aiunt, nugas praedicant, / nam et _bene_
et male _credi_ dico', Sen _Suas_ VII v 'si _bene_ illi pecunias
_crediderunt_ faeneratores', Cic _II Verr_ V 56 'ut intellegerent
Mamertini _bene_ se apud istum tam multa pretia ac munera _conlocasse_',
and Livy II 42 8.

=11. COMMVTABITVR.= _Commutare_ was a commercial term: it is used of
selling at Cic _Clu_ 129 'ad perniciem innocentis fidem suam et
religionem pecunia _commutarit_', Columella XII 26 2 'reliquum mustum
... aere _commutato_', _Dig_ II xv 8 24 'si uinum pro oleo uel oleum pro
uino uel quid aliud _commutauit_', and _CIL_ I 585 27.

=12. SI QVID ET INFERIVS QVAM STYGA MVNDVS HABET.= Professor R. J. Tarrant
notes another instance of the same idea at Sen _Thy_ 1013-14 'si quid
infra Tartara est / auosque nostros'.

=13. GRAMINA.= 'Weeds'. Compare _Met_ V 485-86 'lolium tribulique fatigant
/ triticeas messes et inexpugnabile _gramen_' and _Tr_ V xii 24 'nil
nisi cum spinis _gramen_ habebit ager'; _TLL_ VI.2 2165 65 notes as well
Columella IV 4 5 'omnesque herbas et praecipue _gramina_ extirpare, quae
nisi manu eleguntur ... reuiuiscunt'.

CARMINA, the reading of _C_, is a frequent corruption of _gramina_,
occurring as a variant at _Met_ II 841 & XIV 44 and _Fast_ VI 749; it
gives no obvious sense in this passage. Bentley's FLAMINA is ingenious
but unattractive.

=14. MARTICOLIS= is possibly an Ovidian innovation, being found elsewhere
only at _Tr_ V iii 21-22 'adusque niuosum / Strymona uenisti
Marticolamque Geten'.

=14. NASO.= The use of the third person adds to the emotive power of the
tricolon 'ager ... hirundo ... Naso'.

=15-16. TALIA SVSCENSENT PROPTER MIHI VERBA TOMITAE, / IRAQVE CARMINIBVS
PVBLICA MOTA MEIS.= For the similar omission of the _est_ of a perfect
passive, even in the presence of a parallel finite verb, see _Met_ VII
517-18 'Aeacus ingemuit tristique ita uoce _locutus_: / "flebile
principium melior fortuna secuta est"'.

=15. SVSCENSENT.= The word is foreign to high poetry. It occurs in Ovid
only here and at _EP_ III i 89-90 'nec mihi _suscense_, totiens si
carmine nostro / quod facis ut facias teque imitere rogo'; the only
instances from other poetry cited at _OLD suscenseo_ are from _Her_
XVI-XXI and Martial.

SVSCENSENT is the spelling of _C_; the other manuscripts have
SVCCENSENT. I print _susc-_ because that is the spelling given by the
ninth-century Hamburg manuscript at _EP_ III i 89 (cited above), where
most manuscripts offer _succ-_. _Succ-_ is, however, quite possibly
correct, for although _susc-_ is the spelling of the ancient manuscripts
of Plautus and Terence (and of the older manuscripts of the _Heroides_),
_succ-_ is found at Livy XLII 46 8 in the fifth-century Vienna codex.

=18. PLECTAR.= Similar uses at _Tr_ III v 49 'inscia quod crimen uiderunt
lumina, _plector_' and _EP_ III iii 64 (Ovid to Amor) 'meque loco
_plecti_ commodiore uelit'.

=18. AB INGENIO= is parallel to _per carmina_ in the preceding line; for
the idiom, see at x 46 _ab amne_ (p 346).

=20. TELAQVE ... QVAE NOCVERE SEQVOR.= See at xiii 41 _nocuerunt_ (p 406).

=23. SED NIHIL ADMISI.= 'But I have committed no crime'--Wheeler. Compare
_EP_ III vi 13 'nec scelus _admittas_ si consoleris amicum'. _Admittere_
in this sense belonged to daily speech: _TLL_ I 752 77 cites Plaut
_Trin_ 81, Ter _HT_ 956 'quid ego tantum sceleris _admisi_ miser',
Lucilius 690 Marx, and Hor _Ep_ I xvi 53.

=25. EXCVTIAT.= See at viii 17 _excutias_ (p 263).

=25. NOSTRI MONIMENTA LABORIS= is rather grand, perhaps because Ovid
intended the poem to come near the end of the collection. At _Tr_ III
iii 78 Ovid's _libelli_ are called his most lasting _monimenta_, and at
_EP_ III v 35 Ovid flatteringly refers to Maximus Cotta's _monimenta
laboris_.

=26. LITTERA DE VOBIS EST MEA QVESTA NIHIL.= This, of course, is
manifestly untrue. See _Tr_ V x entire, and compare for instance _Tr_ V
vii 45-46 'siue homines [_sc_ specto], uix sunt homines hoc nomine
digni, / quamque lupi saeuae plus feritatis habent'.

=28. ET QVOD PVLSETVR MVRVS AB HOSTE QVEROR.= Compare _EP_ III i 25 'adde
metus _et quod murus pulsatur ab hoste_'.

=30. SOLVM= _BCFILT_ LOCVM _MH_. The interchange is very common (examples
at _Met_ I 345 & VII 57); the reverse corruption in some manuscripts at
_EP_ II ii 96 'sit tua mutando gratia blanda _loco_'.

=31-40.= The argument Ovid here employs ("other have done what I have
done, and not suffered for it") is that used at _Tr_ II 361-538 to
excuse the _Ars Amatoria_.

=31-40. VITABILIS.= A. G. Lee has ingeniously conjectured VITIABILIS
(_PCPhS_ 181 [1950-51] 3). It would have the sense _uitiosa_; Lee
compares such words as _aerumnabilis_, _perniciabilis_, and
_lacrimabilis_. He argued that Hesiod nowhere said that Ascra was
'always to be avoided' (although this is a natural inference from _Op_
639-40) and that the variants _miserabilis_, _mirabilis_, and
_mutabilis_ 'point to the conclusion that the archetype was here
difficult to make out'. For _uitium_ used of localities he cited _EP_
III ix 37 'quid nisi de _uitio_ scribam regionis amarae', and for the
word _uitiabilis_ (in the sense 'corruptible') Prudentius _Apoth_ 1045
and _Ham_ 215 (there is a variant _uitabilis_ in a ninth-century
manuscript of the _Hamartigenia_).

Lee's argument is a good one, but _uitabilis_ does not seem in itself
objectionable enough to be removed from the text. The variant readings
he cites are from unnamed manuscripts of Burman, and are not safe
evidence for the condition of the archetype. It can be said in Lee's
favour that Heinsius and Bentley before him clearly found _uitabilis_
somewhat strange: Heinsius considered the verse suspect, while Bentley
conjectured VT ILLAVDABILIS.

=31. ASCRA= _MFILT_. I take ASCRE (_BCH_) to be a hypercorrect formation
by the scribes; _Ascra_ is metrically guaranteed at 34 'Ascra suo' and
_AA_ I 28 'Ascra tuis'. It is possible that _Ascre_ is correct, although
its use would be strange so close to _Ascra_ in 34: Ovid certainly used
both _nympha_ and _nymphe_ (_Her_ IX 103; _Met_ III 357).

=32. AGRICOLAE ... SENIS.= For Hesiod as an old man compare _AA_ II 3-4
'laetus amans donat uiridi mea carmina palma, / praelata Ascraeo
Maeonioque _seni_', Prop II xxxiv 77 'tu canis Ascraei _ueteris_
praecepta poetae', and _Ecl_ VI 69-70 'hos tibi dant calamos, en accipe,
Musae, / Ascraeo quos ante _seni_'.

=35. SOLLERTE ... VLIXE.= _Sollerte_ could represent either [Greek:
polymêchanos] (_Il_ II 173) or [Greek: polytropos] (_Od_ I 1). I believe
that Ovid was translating [Greek: polytropos], since Livius Andronicus
in translating _Od_ I 1 had used _uersutus_ to represent the adjective:
'Virum mihi, Camena, insece _uersutum_'. It is clear from Cic _Brut_ 236
'genus ... acuminis ... quod erat in reprehendendis uerbis _uersutum et
sollers_' that the Romans regarded the two adjectives as having much the
same force.

At Hor _Sat_ II v 3-5 [Greek: polymêchanos] is translated by _dolosus_:
(Tiresias to Ulysses) 'iamne doloso / non satis est Ithacam reuehi
patriosque penates / aspicere?'.

=36. HOC TAMEN ASPERITAS INDICE DOCTA LOCI EST.= At _Od_ IX 27 Ulysses
describes Ithaca to Alcinous as '[Greek: trêchei'] [=_aspera_] [Greek:
all' agathê kourotrophos]'.

=36. DOCTA= (_B_; _C_ has DOCTVS) seems clearly preferable to DICTA,
offered by most of the manuscripts, which cannot be construed with _hoc
... indice_. The difficulty with _docta_ is that the passive of _docere_
seems in general to have been used of the person taught, not the thing;
this is no doubt what induced Riese to print NOTA, found in certain of
Heinsius' manuscripts. Still, the construction seems logical enough in
view of the double accusative construction of the verb in the active.

=38. SCEPSIVS.= Metrodorus[28] of Scepsis (a town on the Scamander, about
60 kilometres upstream from Troy) was famous for his hatred of Rome; see
Pliny _NH_ XXXIV 34 'signa quoque Tuscanica per terras dispersa quin
[_Detlefsen_: quae _codd_] in Etruria factitata sint non est dubium.
deorum tantum putarem ea fuisse, ni Metrodorus Scepsius, cui cognomen
[Professor R. J. Tarrant suggests that '[Greek: Misorômaios]' has fallen
out of the text around this point] a Romani nominis odio inditum est,
propter MM statuarum Volsinios expugnatos obiceret'. According to
Plutarch (_Lucullus_ 22) and Strabo (_Geog_ XIII 1 55), he was a close
confidant of Mithridates; apparently, when on a mission to Tigranes, he
privately advised him not to give Mithridates the requested assistance
against Rome. Tigranes reported this to Mithridates; Metrodorus was
either executed by Mithridates, or died of natural causes while being
sent back to him. Cicero mentions Metrodorus and his phenomenal memory
at _de Or_ II 360.

[Footnote 28: PW XV,2 1481 3; Jacoby _FGrH_ no. 184.]

The present passage is more specific than any other surviving reference
to Metrodorus' anti-Roman sentiments; Ovid had perhaps read the
_scripta_ in question.

As both Cicero and Pliny use the epithet 'Scepsius', Ovid's reference
would have been immediately understood: _MEtrodOrus_ could not
be used in elegiac verse.

=38. ACTAQVE ROMA REA EST.= Similar verse-endings at _RA_ 387-88 'si mea
materiae respondet Musa iocosae, / uicimus, et falsi criminis _acta rea
est_', _Fast_ IV 307-8 'casta quidem, sed non et credita: rumor iniquus
/ laeserat, et falsi criminis _acta rea est_', and _Tr_ IV i 26 'cum
mecum iuncti criminis acta [_sc_ Musa] rea est'; other instances of
_reus agi_ at _Her_ XIV 120, _Met_ XV 36, _Tr_ I i 24, _Tr_ I viii 46,
and _Her_ XX 91. See at xv 12 _nil opus est legum uiribus, ipse loquor_
(p 434) for a full discussion of Ovid's use of legal terminology.

=39. FALSA ... CONVICIA= has a place in the rhetoric of Ovid's argument,
balancing _uerissima crimina_ at 29.

=40. OBFVIT AVCTORI NEC FERA LINGVA SVO.= _Obesse_ is used of Ovid's own
situation at _Tr_ I i 55-56 'carmina nunc si non studiumque quod
_obfuit_ odi, / sit satis', IV i 25 'scilicet hoc ipso nunc aequa [_sc_
Musa], quod _obfuit_ ante', IV iv 39 'aut timor aut error nobis, prius
_obfuit_ error' & V i 65-68. Compare as well _Tr_ II 443-44 'uertit
Aristiden Sisenna, nec _obfuit_ illi / historiae turpis inseruisse
iocos'.

=41. MALVS= = _malignus_.

=41. INTERPRES.= The word probably combines the senses of 'translator' and
'interpreter'; that is, the person intentionally misconstrued the
meaning of certain passages.

As André points out, Ovid's statement here that his Latin poems have
caused him difficulty in Tomis indicates that Latin was not as
completely unknown in the city as Ovid claims at, for example, _Tr_ III
xiv 47-48, V vii 53-54 'unus in hoc nemo est populo qui forte Latine /
quamlibet [_Heinsius_: quaelibet _codd_] e medio reddere uerba queat' &
V xii 53-54 'non liber hic ullus, non qui mihi commodet aurem, /
uerbaque significent quid mea norit, adest'; compare as well _Tr_ III
xiv 39-40.

=42. INQVE NOVVM CRIMEN CARMINA NOSTRA VOCAT.= _In crimen uocare_ was a
normal idiom: compare Cic _Scaur_ (e) 'custos ille rei publicae
proditionis est _in crimen uocatus_' and _Fam_ V xvii 2 'ego te, P.
Sitti, et primis temporibus illis quibus in inuidiam absens et _in
crimen uocabare_ defendi'.

=42. NOVVM CRIMEN.= The _uetus crimen_ was of course the accusation that
the _Ars Amatoria_ was immoral. Professor E. Fantham suggests to me that
_nouum_ could have the meaning 'unprecedented', as at Cic _Lig_ 1
'_Nouum crimen_, C. Caesar, et ante hunc diem non auditum propinquus
meus ad te Q. Tubero detulit'. Ovid would therefore be saying that the
kind of geographical _maiestas_ the Tomitans were accusing him of did
not constitute a proper charge.

=43. PECTORE CANDIDVS.= 'Kind of heart'. This sense of _candidus_ is
constantly misunderstood by modern commentators. The basic transferred
sense of the word is 'kind' or 'generous towards others'. This can be
clearly seen in such passages as _Tr_ III vi 5-8 'isque erat usque adeo
populo testatus, ut esset / paene magis quam tu quamque ego notus, amor;
/ quique est in caris animi [_codd_: animo _fort legendum_] tibi
_candor_ amicis-- / cognita sunt ipsi quem colis ipse uiro', _Tr_ IV x
130-32 'protinus ut moriar non ero, terra, tuus. / siue fauore tuli siue
hanc ego carmine famam, / iure tibi grates, _candide_ lector, ago',
_Tr_ V iii 53-54 'si uestrum merui _candore_ fauorem, / nullaque iudicio
littera laesa meo est', _EP_ II v 5, _EP_ III ii 21-22 'aut meus excusat
caros ita _candor_ amicos, / utque habeant de me crimina nulla fauet',
and _EP_ III iv 13 'uiribus infirmi uestro _candore_ ualemus'.

For _pectore candidus_ compare from other authors Hor _Epod_ XI 11-12
'candidum / pauperis ingenium', Val Max VIII xiv praef 'candidis
... animis' and Scribonius Largus praef 5 26 'candidissimo animo'.

=44. EXTAT ADHVC NEMO SAVCIVS ORE MEO.= Ovid makes similar claims at _Tr_
II 563-65 'non ego mordaci destrinxi carmine quemquam ... _candidus_ a
salibus suffusis felle refugi' and _Ibis_ 1-8 'Tempus ad hoc, lustris
bis iam mihi quinque peractis, / omne fuit Musae carmen inerme meae
... nec quemquam nostri nisi me laesere libelli ... unus ... perennem /
_candoris_ titulum non sinit esse mei'. André says of the present
passage, 'C'est oublier le poème _Contre Ibis_', but Housman wrote 'Who
was Ibis? Nobody. He was much too good to be true. If one's enemies are
of flesh and blood, they do not carry complaisance so far as to chose
the dies Alliensis for their birthday and the most ineligible spot in
Africa for their birthplace. Such order and harmony exist only in worlds
of our own creation, not in the jerry-built edifice of the demiurge
... And when I say that Ibis was nobody, I am repeating Ovid's own words.
In the last book that he wrote, several years after the Ibis, he said,
ex Pont. IV 14 44, "extat adhuc nemo saucius ore meo"' (1040). Housman
is wrong to adduce this line as though it were a statement made under
oath (compare the claim made in 26 'littera de uobis est mea questa
nihil'). It is nonetheless true that in the extant poems of reproach
Ovid does not identify the person he is addressing.

=45. ADDE QVOD.= See at xi 21 _adde quod_ (p 368).

=45. ILLYRICA ... PICE NIGRIOR.= For the formula, Otto (_pix_) cites this
passage and _Il_ IV 275-77 '[Greek: nephos ... melanteron êute pissa]'
and from Latin poetry _AA_ II 657-58 'nominibus mollire licet mala:
fusca uocetur / _nigrior Illyrica_ cui _pice_ sanguis erit', _Met_ XII
402-3 'totus _pice nigrior_ atra, / candida cauda tamen', _EP_ III iii
97 'sed neque mutatur [_uar_ fuscatur] _nigra pice_ lacteus umor', _Her_
XVIII 7 'ipsa uides caelum _pice nigrius_', and Martial I cxv 4-5 'sed
quandam uolo nocte _nigriorem_, / formica, _pice_, graculo, cicada'.

=45. ILLYRICA ... PICE.= A famous mineral pitch was produced near
Apollonia; André cites Pliny _NH_ XVI 59 'Theopompus scripsit in
Apolloniatarum agro picem fossilem non deteriorem Macedonica inueniri',
_NH_ XXXV 178, and Dioscorides I 73.

=45. NIGRIOR.= The man who was _niger_ had qualities opposite to those of
the man who was _candidus_; that is, he habitually thought and spoke
evil of others. This is illustrated by Hor _Sat_ I iv 81-85 'absentem
qui rodit amicum, / qui non defendit alio culpante, solutos / qui captat
risus hominum famamque dicacis, / fingere qui non uisa potest, commissa
tacere / qui nequit--hic _niger_ est, hunc tu, Romane, caueto'. The
same sense is seen at _Sat_ I iv 91 & 100, and at Cic _Caec_ 28
'argentarius Sex. Clodius cui cognomen est Phormio, nec minus _niger_
nec minus confidens quam ille Terentianus est Phormio'. A similar sense
of _ater_ is seen at Hor _Epod_ VI 15-16 'an si quis _atro_ dente me
petiuerit, / inultus ut flebo puer'; Lindsay Watson _ad loc_ (in an
unpublished University of Toronto dissertation) cites Hor _Ep_ I xix 30
'nec socerum quaerit quem uersibus oblinat _atris_' for the same
meaning.

A specific connection is often made between blackness and envy: compare
_Met_ II 760 (the home of _Inuidia_ is _nigro squalentia tabo_) and
Statius _Sil_ IV viii 16-17 (_atra Inuidia_).

Catullus XCIII 2 'nec scire utrum sis albus an _ater_ homo' and similar
passages at Cic _Phil_ II 41 and Apuleius _Apol_ 16 are examples of an
unrelated idiom meaning 'I know absolutely nothing about you'.

=46. MORDENDA.= For biting as an image of malice, Watson at Hor _Epod_ VI
15 'atro dente' cites Cic _Balb_ 57 'in conuiuiis rodunt, in circulis
uellicant; non illo inimico, sed hoc malo dente carpunt', and Val Max IV
7 ext 2 'malignitatis dentes'; Professor R. J. Tarrant cites Hor _Sat_
II i 77 and Martial V xxviii 7 'robiginosis cuncta dentibus rodit'. The
image is of course used at times specifically of jealousy; Watson cites
_Tr_ IV x 123-24 'nec, qui detrectat praesentia Liuor iniquo / ullum de
nostris dente momordit opus' and _EP_ III iv 73-74 'scripta placent a
morte fere, quia laedere uiuos / liuor et iniusto carpere dente solet',
and Professor Tarrant cites Hor _Carm_ IV iii 16 'et iam dente minus
mordeor inuido' and Pindar _P_ II 52-53 '[Greek: eme de chreôn /
pheugein dakos adinon kakagorian]'.

=47. MEA SORS= = _ego sortem grauem passus_.

=48. GRAIOS.= The more poetic _Graius_ is more than four times as common
in Ovid as _Graecus_, which, apart from _Her_ III 2, is only found in
the _Fasti_ (I 330, IV 63 & V 196) and the _Tristia_ (III xii 41, V ii
68 & V vii 11).

=49. GENS MEA PAELIGNI REGIOQVE DOMESTICA SVLMO.= This line is a type of
hendiadys, the first half of the line being redefined by the second. The
other cities of the Paeligni were Corfinium and Superaequum.

=51-52. INCOLVMI ... SALVOQVE.= The two words, equivalent in meaning, were
used together as a common Latin phrase; see Caesar _BC_ I 72 3
'mouebatur etiam misericordia ciuium ... quibus _saluis atque
incolumibus_ rem obtinere malebat' & II 32 12 '_saluum atque incolumem_
exercitum', Cic _Fin_ IV 19, _Diuin in Q Caec_ 72, _Inuen_ II 169, and
Livy XXIII 42 4 '_saluo atque incolumi_ amico', XXIX 27 3 & XLI 28 9.

=53. IMMVNIS= is also used without a qualifying word or phrase at Plautus
_Tr_ 354, Sall _Iug_ 89 4 'eius [_sc_ oppidi] apud Iugurtham immunes',
Cic _Off_ III 49 'piratas _immunes_, socios uectigales habemus', Cic
_Font_ 17, Livy XXXIV 57 10 'urbes ... liberas et _immunes_' & XXXVII 55
7, and _CIL_ XIV 4012 4. For a recent discussion of _immunitas_, see V.
Nutton, "Two Notes on Immunitas: _Digest_ 27,1,6,10 and 11", _JRS_ 1971,
52-63.

=54. EXCEPTIS SI QVI MVNERA LEGIS HABENT.= The phrase is difficult.
Perhaps legal magistrates enjoyed immunity from taxation; if this is
what Ovid is saying, _munera legis_ is related to such expressions as
_consulatus munus_ (Cic _Pis_ 23) and _legationis munus_ (_Phil_ IX 3).
_Munus_ by itself of magistrates' duties is quite common.

Professor E. Fantham suggests to me, however, that _munera legis_ is a
reference to civic duties, or liturgies, that Greek cities imposed on
certain of their citizens, and Ovid may be saying that citizens
performing such liturgies at Tomis procured exemption from regular
taxation.

Wheeler translates 'those only excepted who have the boon by law'. This
seems difficult; but Professor A. Dalzell notes that the strangeness of
the phrasing may be the results of Ovid's striving for a play on
_munera_/_immunis_.

=55. CORONA.= Professor C. P. Jones notes that the _corona_ indicates that
Ovid was probably invested with a local priesthood.

=57-58. DELIA TELLVS, / ERRANTI TVTVM QVAE DEDIT VNA LOCVM.= Accounts of
this at _Met_ VI 186-91 (Niobe speaking) 'Latonam ... cui maxima quondam
/ exiguam sedem pariturae terra negauit! / nec caelo nec humo nec aquis
dea uestra recepta est: / exul erat mundo, donec miserata uagantem /
"hospita tu terris erras, ego" dixit "in undis" / instabilemque locum
Delos dedit' and in the passages cited by Williams at _Aen_ III 76 and
Tarrant at Sen _Ag_ 384f.

=61-62. DI MODO FECISSENT PLACIDAE SPEM POSSET HABERE / PACIS, ET A
GELIDO LONGIVS AXE FORET.= In this final distich Ovid unexpectedly
reverts from his gratitude to the Tomitans to the subject of the first
part of the poem, the inhospitality of the region.

This passage provides an example of the technique pointed out in the
_Amores_ by Douglass Parker ("The Ovidian Coda", _Arion_ 8 [1969])
whereby Ovid unexpectedly modifies a poem's tone in the concluding
distich. In _Am_ I x Ovid rails against his girl because she has asked
him for a present: 'nec dare, sed pretium posci dedignor et odi; / quod
nego poscenti, desine uelle, dabo!' (63-64). In _Am_ II xiv Ovid scolds
his girl for having an abortion: 'di faciles, peccasse semel concedite
tuto, / et satis est; poenam culpa secunda ferat!' (43-44). In II xv,
Ovid imagines that he becomes the ring he is giving his girl: 'inrita
quid uoueo? paruum proficiscere munus; / illa data tecum sentiat esse
fide!' (27-28). _Am_ I vii, I xiii, I xiv, and II xiii are other
examples of the device.

=62. A GELIDO ... AXE.= Compare XV 36 'dura iubet _gelido_ Parca _sub axe_
mori' and _Her_ VI 105-6 (Hypsipyle to Jason) 'non probat Alcimede
mater tua--consule matrem-- / non pater, _a gelido_ cui uenit _axe_
nurus'.



XV. To Sextus Pompeius


The poem, the fourth and last in the book to be addressed to Pompeius,
is an elaborate appeal to him to continue his assistance.

It starts with the assertion that Pompeius, after the Caesars, is
principally responsible for Ovid's well-being (1-4). The favours
Pompeius has done for Ovid are innumerable and extend throughout his
life (5-10). Ovid will of his own volition declare that he is as much
Pompeius' property as Pompeius' estates in Sicily and Macedonia, his
house in Rome, or his country retreat in Campania; because of Ovid,
Pompeius now has property in the Pontus (11-20). Ovid asks him to
continue working on his behalf (21-24). He knows that he does not have
to urge Pompeius, but he cannot help himself (27-34). No matter whether
he is recalled or not, he will always remember Pompeius; all lands will
hear that it is he who saved Ovid, and that Ovid belongs to him (35-42).

The poem effectively combines a number of commonplaces of the works of
exile, subordinating them to the central theme of Ovid's indebtedness to
Pompeius. The topic of Ovid as Pompeius' property is to a certain extent
foreshadowed in _EP_ I vii, throughout which Ovid refers to himself as a
client of Messalinus' family: 'ecquis in extremo positus iacet orbe
tuorum, / me tamen excepto, qui precor esse tuus?' (5-6); it is found
explicitly at i 35-36 'sic ego sum rerum non ultima, Sexte, tuarum /
tutelaeque feror munus opusque tuae'. Syme (_HO_ 156) believes that the
addressing of the first and penultimate letters to Pompeius constitutes
a dedication of the book to Pompeius. However, as Syme recognizes, the
abnormal length of the book indicates that it may be a posthumous
collection (see page 4 of the introduction); if so, the arrangement of
the poems is presumably by Ovid's literary executor.

The poem is remarkable for the cluster of legal terms at 11-12. The
passage is evidence for Ovid's expertise and interest in law. For other
indications of this in his works, see at 12 (p 434).

=1. SI QVIS ... EXTAT.= Pompeius is kept in the third person through line
10; Ovid thereby indicates that he is making a public declaration.

=1. EXTAT.= As Riese pointed out, the choice in 1-2 is between _extat
... requirit_ and _extet ... requirat_; the problem is that the
manuscripts give _extat ... requirat_, _requirit_ being found only in a
few manuscripts of Heinsius, while _extet_ is a conjecture of Guethling.
Owen (1894) thought that the ending of _extat_ caused _requirit_ to be
corrupted to _requirat_; on the other hand, the alteration of _extet_ to
_extat_ would be all but automatic. There is a similar difficulty at
_Tr_ I i 17-18 'si quis ut in populo nostri non immemor illi [=_illic_],
/ si quis qui quid agam forte _requirat_ erit', where most manuscripts
have _requiret_. Both passages seem to involve the assimilation of
_requirere_ to the mood of the verb immediately following. I print
_extat ... requirit_ in consideration of _Tr_ III x 1-2 'Si quis adhuc
istic _meminit_ Nasonis adempti, / et _superest_ sine me nomen in urbe
meum' (cited by Lenz), _Tr_ III v 23-24 'si tamen interea quid in his
ego perditus oris-- / quod te credibile est quaerere--_quaeris_, agam'
and _Tr_ V vii 5 'scilicet ut semper quid agam, carissime, _quaeris_'.

=3. CAESARIBVS= = _Augusto et Tiberio_. Augustus is similarly given
primary credit for Ovid's survival at v 31-32 'uiuit adhuc uitamque tibi
debere fatetur, / quam prius a miti Caesare [=_Augusto_] munus habet'.

=4. A SVPERIS ... PRIMVS.= The same idiomatic use of _ab_ 'after' at v
25-26 'tempus ab his uacuum Caesar Germanicus omne / auferet; _a magnis_
hunc colit ille _deis_' and _Fast_ III 93-94 (of the month of March)
'quintum Laurentes, bis quintum Aequiculus acer, / _a tribus_ hunc
_primum_ turba Curensis habet'.

=5. TEMPORA ... OMNIA.= Compare i 23 '_numquam_ pigra fuit nostris tua
gratia rebus'.

=5. COMPLECTAR.= _Complecti_ in the weak sense 'include, take in' is found
in Ovid only here and at _Tr_ I v 55 'non tamen idcirco _complecterer_
omnia uerbis'. The usage is common in prose (_OLD complector_ 8).

=6. MERITIS.= Compare i 21-22 'et leuis haec _meritis_ referatur gratia
tantis; / si minus, inuito te quoque gratus ero'.

=7-10. QVAE NVMERO TOT SVNT.= Ovid is very fond of using this type of
catalogue to indicate great number. Compare _AA_ I 57-59 ('tot habet tua
Roma puellas'), _AA_ II 517-19 ('tot sunt in amore dolores'), _AA_ III
149-50 (the many ways women can ornament themselves), _Tr_ V vi 37-40
(the number of Ovid's ills), and _EP_ II vii 25-28 ('nostrorum ... summa
laborum').

=8. LENTO CORTICE.= 'Tough skin'.

=8. GRANA.= Ovid does not use pomegranates in his similar catalogues
elsewhere. Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me how Ovid elaborates
the novel item of comparison in a full distich with several picturesque
details (_Punica_, _lento cortice_, _rubent_), then reviews familiar
elements rather more quickly in 9-10, with geography the ordering
principle.

=9. AFRICA QVOT SEGETES.= Compare _EP_ II vii 25 'Cinyphiae segetis citius
numerabis aristas' (the Cinyps was a river in Libya).

=9. SEGETES ... RACEMOS.= Compare _AA_ I 57 'Gargara quot _segetes_, quot
habet Methymna _racemos_'.

=9. TMOLIA TERRA= = _Lydia_. The adjective _Tmolius_ (from _Tmolus_, a
mountain in Lydia famous for its wines) occurs only here.

=10. QVOT SICYON BACAS.= Compare _AA_ II 518 'caerula quot bacas Palladis
arbor habet'. For Sicyonian _bacae_ compare Virgil _G_ II 519 'Sicyonia
baca' and _Ibis_ 317 'oliuifera ... Sicyone'.

=10. QVOT PARIT HYBLA FAVOS.= _Fauos_ stands by a type of metonymy for
_apes_; compare _AA_ II 517 'quot apes pascuntur in Hybla', _AA_ III 150
'nec quot apes Hybla nec quot in Alpe ferae', and _Tr_ V vi 38 'florida
quam multas Hybla tuetur apes'. For a similar metonymy, see _EP_ II vii
26 'altaque quam multis floreat Hybla thymis'.

=11. CONFITEOR; TESTERE LICET.= 'I make a public deposition; you,
Pompeius, may be a witness'. The deposition is to the effect that Ovid
is now Pompeius' property by virtue of the many gifts Pompeius has made
to him.

=11. TESTERE ... SIGNATE.= André cites _Dig_ XXII v 22 'curent magistratus
cuiusque loci _testari_ uolentibus et se ipsos et alios testes uel
_signatores_ praebere'.

=11. SIGNATE, QVIRITES.= After addressing Pompeius directly (_testere
licet_), Ovid addresses those witnessing the _mancipatio_. As Professor
A. Dalzell points out, this was achieved _ex iure Quiritium_; there is a
similar direct address to the witnessing _Quirites_ in the formula for
establishing a will (Gaius II 104).

Professor Dalzell also notes the abrupt change of audience; typical of
Propertius, this is a very unusual procedure in Ovid.

For _signare_ used without an object, compare Suet _Cl_ 9 2 'etiam
cognitio falsi testamenti recepta est, in quo et ipse _signauerat_' &
_Nero_ 17 'cautum ut testamentis primae duae cerae testatorum modo
nomine inscripto uacuae _signaturis_ ostenderentur'.

Ovid uses _testis_ and _signare_ in a similarly metaphorical sense at
_EP_ III ii 23-24 (he forgives those friends who deserted him in his
disaster) 'sint hac [_M (Heinsius)_: hi _codd_] contenti uenia,
_signentque_ [_uarr_ sientque; fugiantque] licebit / purgari factum me
quoque _teste_ suum'

=12. NIL OPVS EST LEGVM VIRIBVS, IPSE LOQVOR.= Ehwald (_KB_ 52) aptly
cites Quintilian V vii 9 'duo genera sunt testium, aut uoluntariorum aut
eorum quibus in [in _add editio Aldina_] iudiciis publicis lege
denuntiari solet ['or those who are summoned _sub poena_ in trials']'.

The reference in this passage to a legal procedure is rather curious, as
is the connected reference in 41-42. But it is clear from Ovid's verse
that he had a solid practical expertise and interest in law. In his
youth he had been one of the _tresuiri monetales_ or _capitales_ (_Tr_
IV x 33-34), and had also served in the centumviral court (_Tr_ II
93-94; _EP_ III v 23-24). He must have been known for his knowledge of
law as well as for his fairness in order to be selected as arbitrator in
private cases: 'res quoque priuatas statui sine crimine iudex, / deque
mea fassa est pars quoque uicta fide' (_Tr_ II 95-96). E. J. Kenney has
presented some interesting statistics concerning the frequent occurrence
of legal terms in Ovid's poetry ("Ovid and the Law", _Yale Classical
Studies_ XXI [1969] 241-63) comparing the number of occurrences of
certain legal terms in Ovid and in Lucretius, Catullus, Virgil,
Propertius, Tibullus, and the _Odes_ of Horace. _Ius_ and _lex_ are not
much more common in Ovid than in the other poets (the proportions being
134:59 and 74:60 respectively for Ovid and the other poets combined);
this is not surprising, since these common words could hardly be
considered technical terms. _Arbiter_ (7:4) and _lis_ (23:10) are not
much more common in Ovid than in the other poets. But it will be seen
from the following list how fond Ovid was of legal terminology:
_legitimus_ (16:0), _iudex_ (47:12), _iudicium_ (39:7), _index_ (26:1),
_indicium_ (36:8), _arbitrium_ (23:6), _reus_ (23:5), _uindex_ (26:5),
_uindicare_ (16:6), _uindicta_ (11:0), _asserere_ (3:0), _assertor_
(1:0). Compare as well the play on legal terminology at _AA_ I 83-86
(with Hollis's notes), and the use of such terms as _addicere_ (_Met_ I
617), _fallere depositum_ (_Met_ V 480 & IX 120), _usus communis_ (_Met_
VI 349), _transcribere_ (_Met_ VII 173), _primus heres_ (_Met_ XIII
154), _rescindere_ (_Met_ XIV 784), _accensere_ (_Met_ XV 546),
_subscribere_ (_Tr_ I ii 3), _sub condicione_ (_Tr_ I ii 109), and
_acceptum referre_ (_Tr_ II 10).

=13. OPES ... PATERNAS.= Pompeius appears to have been very wealthy. Seneca
speaks of the wealth of a Pompeius (presumably the son of Ovid's
patron--so Syme _Ten Studies_ 82, _HO_ 162), who was murdered by Gaius
Caligula (_Tranq_ 11 10).

=13. REM PARVAM= _MHIT_ PARVAM REM _BCFL_. Either reading is possible
enough. On balance, I believe _paruam rem_ to be an intentional scribal
alteration to avoid the incidence of a spondaic word in the fourth foot
of the hexameter; for a discussion of the phenomenon, see at i 11
_uellem cum_ (p 150).

In an older poet, the alliteration of _paruam pone paternas_ would be a
strong argument for the reading (see page 15 of Munro's introduction to
his commentary on Lucretius), but Ovid did not use the device in his
poetry.

=15. TRINACRIA= = _Sicilia_, unusable because it begins with three
consecutive short vowels; compare _Met_ V 474-76 (of Ceres) 'terras
tamen increpat omnes / ingratasque uocat nec frugum munere dignas, /
_Trinacriam_ ante alias'.

André avoids the literal meaning of the passage, joining _terra_ with
_Trinacria_ as well as with _regnataque ... Philippo_ and taking it to
mean 'estate': 'ta terre de Trinacrie et celle où régna Philippe'. But
this sense of _terra_ is rare in Latin (Martial IX xx 2, Apuleius _Met_
IX 35), it is difficult to see how _regnataque ... Philippo_ could stand
as an epithet in such a case, and it is clear enough that Ovid is
imitating _Aen_ III 13-14 '_terra_ ... acri quondam _regnata Lycurgo'_,
as he does at _Her_ X 69 'tellus iusto regnata parenti', _Met_ VIII 623
'arua suo quondam regnata parenti', and _Met_ XIII 720-21 'regnataque
uati / Buthrotos Phrygio'. In these lines Ovid states that Pompeius owns
Sicily, Macedonia, and Campania, and by the hyperbole indicates the size
of Pompeius' holdings. Seneca similarly mentions how the Pompeius
murdered by Gaius Caligula possessed 'tot flumina ... in suo orientia, in
suo cadentia'.

=16. QVAM DOMVS AVGVSTO CONTINVATA FORO.= Compare v 9-10 'protinus inde
domus uobis Pompeia petetur: / _non est Augusto iunctior ulla foro'_.

=18. QVAEQVE RELICTA TIBI, SEXTE, VEL EMPTA TENES.= The line seems rather
prosaic. For the thought, compare Cic _Off_ II 81 'multa
_hereditatibus_, multa _emptionibus_, multa dotibus tenebantur sine
iniuria'; for this sense of _relicta_, compare Nepos _Att_ 13 2 'domum
habuit ... ab auunculo hereditate _relictam_', Livy XXII 26 1 'pecunia a
patre _relicta_', and Martial X xlvii 3 'res non parta labore, sed
_relicta_'.

=19. TAM TVVS EN EGO SVM.= Professor A. Dalzell notes the play on the dual
sense of _tuus_ (devoted/belonging to you) which is probably the basis
of the entire poem. For _tuus_ 'devoted' compare _Tr_ II 55-56 '[iuro
...] hunc animum fauisse tibi, uir maxime, meque, / qua sola potui,
mente fuisse _tuum_' and the other passages cited at _OLD tuus_ 6.

=19. MVNERE.= The word is difficult. 'Gift' seems strange in view of the
stress placed on Pompeius' ownership of Ovid. Professor E. Fantham
suggests to me that the phrase could mean 'by virtue of whose sad
_service_ you cannot say you own nothing in the Pontus', while Professor
R. J. Tarrant suggests that _munere_ could mean 'responsibility,
charge', with _cuius_ (=_mei_) as an objective genitive.

=21. ATQVE VTINAM POSSIS, ET DETVR AMICIVS ARVVM.= This elliptical use of
_posse_ seems to be colloquial. The only instance cited by _OLD_
_possum_ 2a from verse is Prop IV vii 74 'potuit [_uar_ patuit], nec
tibi auara fuit'; there as well the tone is that of lively speech.

=21. AMICIVS ARVVM.= The same phrase at _Met_ XV 442-43 (Helenus to
Aeneas) 'Pergama rapta feres, donec Troiaeque tibique / externum patrio
contingat _amicius aruum_'. The use of the adjective _amicus_ of things
rather than person is in the main a poetic usage, but compare Cic
_Quinct_ 34 'breuitas postulatur, quae mihimet ipsi _amicissima_ est',
_ND_ II 43 'fortunam, quae _amica_ uarietati constantiam respuit', and
_Att_ XII xv 'nihil est mihi _amicius_ solitudine'; other instances in
the elder Pliny and Columella.

=22. REMQVE TVAM PONAS IN MELIORE LOCO.= Compare _EP_ I iii 77-78 'liquit
Agenorides Sidonia moenia Cadmus / poneret ut muros _in meliore loco_'.

=24. NVMINA PERPETVA QVAE PIETATE COLIS.= Tiberius and Germanicus are
meant. For Pompeius' devotion to Germanicus, compare v 25-26 'tempus ab
his uacuum Caesar Germanicus omne / auferet; a magnis hunc colit ille
deis'.

=25-26. ERRORIS NAM TV VIX EST DISCERNERE NOSTRI / SIS ARGVMENTVM MAIVS
AN AVXILIVM.= This distich does not belong in the text: it is in itself
unintelligible, and interrupts a natural progression from 24 to 27. I am
not certain that the distich is a simple interpolation, since there is
nothing in the context to which it is an obvious gloss. Possibly it has
been inserted from another letter from exile, in which its meaning would
have been clear from context.

_Argumentum_ is difficult. Wheeler translates, 'For 'tis hard to
distinguish whether you are more the proof of my mistake or the relief',
and notes 'Apparently Pompey could prove (_argumentum_) that "error"
which Ovid regarded as the beginning of his woes'. But this seems a
strange thing to say, for Ovid's _error_ was hardly in need of
demonstration.

_Auxilium_ is used in its medical sense, _erroris_ being equivalent to
_morbi_ or _uulneris_; compare _RA_ 48 'uulneris auxilium' and the
passages collected at _OLD remedium_ 1.

=25. DISCERNERE.= Gronovius argued (_Obseruationes_ III xiii) that
DECERNERE (_MI1_) should be read here, since _decernere_ has the
required sense 'uel decertare uel iudicare et certum statuere', whereas
_discernere_ means 'separare, dirimere, distinguere, diuidere'. On the
evidence of the lexica, however, Gronovius' distinction breaks down,
since _discernere_ meaning 'decide, determine, make out' is common
enough: compare Sallust _Cat_ 25 3 'pecuniae an famae minus parceret
haud facile _discerneres_', Cic _Rep_ 2 6 'ne nota quidem ulla pacatus
an hostis sit _discerni_ ac iudicari potest', Varro _LL_ VII 17 'quo
_discernitur_ homo mas an femina sit', and Livy XXII 61 10 'quid ueri
sit _discernere_'. I therefore let _discernere_ stand.

=29-30. ET PVDET ET METVO SEMPERQVE EADEMQVE PRECARI / NE SVBEANT ANIMO
TAEDIA IVSTA TVO.= Compare _EP_ III vii entire (an apology to his friends
for the monotony of his verse), and especially the opening lines: 'Verba
mihi desunt eadem tam saepe roganti, / iamque pudet uanas fine carere
preces. / taedia consimili fieri de carmine uobis, / quidque petam
cunctos edidicisse reor'.

=30. SVBEANT ANIMO.= _Subire animo_ occurs also at _Tr_ I v 13. Ovid
uses _subire_ with the dative several times in the poetry of exile
(_Tr_ I vii 9, II 147, III iii 14 & V vii 58; _EP_ I ix 11, II x 43
& IV iv 47), but not beforehand; earlier he has the accusative (_Met_
XII 472) or the simple verb (_Met_ XV 307). The dative construction is
taken up by the author of the later _Heroides_ (XVI 99, XVIII 62).

=31. RES IMMODERATA CVPIDO EST.= _Cupido_ similarly called _immoderata_ at
Apuleius _Plat_ II 21; elsewhere qualified as _immodica_ (Livy VI 35 6)
and _immensa_ (_Aen_ VI 823, Tac _Ann_ XII 7).

=33. DELABOR.= Cicero uses the word for moving from one subject to another
(_OLD delabor_ 5b); here the metaphorical sense 'fall' is still active.

=34. IPSA LOCVM PER SE LITTERA NOSTRA ROGAT.= This line as it stands is
clearly corrupt. I do not understand Wheeler's 'my very letters of their
own accord seek the opportunity'; André's 'c'est la lettre qui,
d'elle-meme, demande le sujet' seems equally difficult, although _locus_
can certainly have the meaning 'subject, topic of discussion' (_OLD_
_locus_ 24b).

The only parallel I have found is _Fast_ II 861 'iure uenis, Gradiue:
_locum tua tempora poscunt_'. If _littera_ is retained in the present
passage, this parallel is of little assistance, since _locum_ there
means 'a place within a larger work', and Ovid's poetry cannot ask for a
_locus_ in that sense. Taking the passage from the _Fasti_ as a
parallel, I once thought that Ovid wrote _ipsa locum pro se tristia
nostra rogant_ (or _petunt_); for the noun _triste_ compare _Fast_ VI
463 'scilicet interdum miscentur _tristia_ laetis', _Ecl_ III 80-81
'_triste_ lupus stabulis, maturis frugibus imbres, / arboribus uenti,
nobis Amaryllidis irae', and Hor _Carm_ I xvi 25-26 'nunc ego mitibus /
mutare quaero _tristia_'. I now consider this unlikely, since the
personal adjective _nostra_ with _tristia_ seems unidiomatic; but I
still believe that _littera_ is the key to the corruption.

Professor R. J. Tarrant has tentatively suggested something like _inque
locum ... redit_, but questions whether _in locum_, even just after
_eodem_, can have the sense _in eundem locum_. Professor Tarrant also
points out to me the possible relevance of _locus_ in the sense _locus
communis_ (compare Sen _Suas_ I 9 'dixit ... _locum_ de uarietate
fortunae'); Ovid might be saying that his poetry had made rather
frequent use of the _locus de exilio_. In this case, _rogat_ would
require emendation.

One of Heinsius' manuscripts read _per se ... facit_, which is just
possibly correct. Heinsius proposed _pro se ... facit_, which I do not
understand.

=35. HABITVRA= is a good instance of the future participle used to express
what is inevitably destined to happen (with _Parca_ balancing in the
pentameter); for the sense, see Tarrant on Sen _Ag_ 43 'daturus coniugi
iugulum suae'.

=37. INOBLITA= = _memori_. Apparently the only instance of the word in
classical Latin.

=39. CAELO ... SVB VLLO.= Bentley oddly conjectured ILLO, the reading of
_Mac_, which gives the sense 'under the Tomitan sky'. This obviously
contradicts the following _transit nostra feros si modo Musa Getas_.

=41. SERVATOREM= occurs in Ovid only here and at _Met_ IV 737-38 (of
Perseus) 'auxiliumque domus _seruatoremque_ fatentur / Cassiope
Cepheusque pater'. In prose it is several times used in a civic context
(Cic _Pis_ 34, _Planc_ 102, Livy VI 20 16 & XLV 44 20; _CIL_ IX 4852 in
a dedication to _Ioui optimo maximo seruatori conseruatori ... ex uoto
suscepto_). The solemn overtones of _seruatorem_ must be part of what
Ovid means for his own land and for the rest of the world to hear and
know; the poem thus ends with an implied pronouncement to balance the
public statement of the opening.

=42. MEQVE TVVM LIBRA NORIT ET AERE MAGIS.= This line clearly refers to
_mancipatio_, the receiving of property (including slaves), which is
described by Gaius as follows: 'adhibitis non minus quam [_Boeth._: quod
_cod_] quinque testibus ciuibus Romanis puberibus, et praeterea alio
eiusdem condicionis qui libram aeneam teneat, qui appellatur libripens
['scale-holder'--de Zulueta], is qui mancipio accipit, aes [aes _add
Boeth._] tenens, ita dicit: "hunc ego hominem ex iure [_Boeth._: iUst
_cod_] Quiritium meum esse aio isque mihi emptus esto hoc aere aeneaque
libra", deinde aere percutit libram, idque aes dat ei a quo mancipio
accipit quasi pretii loco' (I 119).

MAGIS is found as a secondary reading in _F_ and in the
thirteenth-century _Barberinus lat. 26_; the reading of most manuscripts
is MINVS, which seems to me impossible. Several explanations of _minus_
have been advanced:

(i) Gronovius took the line to mean 'tuus sum, immo mancipium tuum, nisi
quod sola libra et aes mea mancipatione abfuerunt'. This retention of
_minus_, however, involves Ovid in a qualifying retraction just when he
seems to be aiming for a ringing conclusion. As well, the instances of
_minus_ cited by Gronovius do not in fact illustrate this passage: among
them are _EP_ I vii 25-26 'uno / nempe salutaris quam prius ore minus',
_Met_ XII 554-55 'bis sex Herculeis ceciderunt me minus uno ['except for
me alone'] / uiribus', and Manilius I 778 'Tarquinio ... minus reges',
'the kings, except for Tarquin'.

Gronovius seems to have realized that difficulties remained, and
proposed to read NOVIT in 42 and make 41-42 a relative clause dependent
on _tellus_ in 38, so that the concluding lines of the poem would mean
'mea tellus, Sulmo, Roma, Italia, me tuum esse audiet. sed audiet idem
etiam, quaecumque sub alia quauis caeli parte terra posita est, et te,
meum seruatorem, meque, libra et aere tuum, minus nouit'. Once again,
_minus_ seems to weaken the poem fatally.

(ii) Ehwald (_KB_ 71) followed Gronovius' second explanation, retaining
the manuscripts' _norit_, and glossing 'tellus, quae sub ullo caelo
posita est et te, meae salutis seruatorem, meque, libra et aere tuum,
minus norit'.

(iii) Némethy followed Gronovius' first explanation, adding as an
illustration _AA_ I 643-44 'ludite, si sapitis, solas impune puellas: /
hac _minus_ [_Burman_: magis _codd_] est una fraude tuenda [_Naugerius
ex codd suis_: pudenda _codd_] fides'. The citation does not strengthen
the case for _minus_.

(iv) André wrote '_Minus_ me paraît avoir le sens de _citra_ "sans aller
jusqu'à", i.e. "sans même avoir recours à la mancipation": "tu es mon
maître de ma propre volonté, et non, comme tu l'es de tes autres
propriétés, par achat."' But the meaning seems to weaken the force of
the poem.

I have with reluctance adopted _libra ... et aere magis_, taking it in
the sense _magis quam libra et aere_ ('I am yours even more than I would
be if I had been acquired through _mancipatio_'). The closest parallel I
have found for this compressed use of the ablative is the idiom at v 7
'luce minus decima', 'before the tenth day'.

Of the other readings, _F1_'s _tuum ... datum_ cannot itself be correct,
although it may offer a clue to the truth. Heinsius' _tuum ... tuum_ is
grammatical enough, but (as Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me)
makes Ovid say that he is Pompeius' literally through _mancipatio_. As
well, the repetition seems odd. Rappold's _tuae ... manus_ cannot be
right, since _manus_ did not have the sense of _mancipium_, except for
the limited meaning of a husband's authority over his wife. Still,
Rappold's conjecture may be a step in the right direction, particularly
in view of v 39-40 'pro quibus ut meritis referatur gratia, iurat / se
fore _mancipii_ tempus in omne _tui_'.



XVI. To a Detractor


The anonymous detractor to whom Ovid apparently addresses this poem is
probably fictional; at 47 he substitutes _Liuor_, dropping the pretence
of speaking to a single enemy.

Ovid begins the poem by asking his detractor why he criticizes Ovid's
verse. A poet's fame increases after his death; Ovid's fame was great
even while he was still alive (1-4). There were many poets contemporary
with Ovid (5-38). There were also younger poets, not yet published, whom
he will not name, with the necessary exception of Cotta Maximus (39-44).
Even among such poets, he had a reputation. Envy should therefore cease
to torment him; he has lost everything but life, which is left only so
that he can continue to experience pain (45-50).

The poem is of particular interest because of the catalogue of the poets
of the earlier part of the reign of Tiberius. It is a reminder of how
much Latin verse has been lost, for of the poets listed only Grattius
survives.

Similar catalogues of poets are found at Prop II xxxiv 61-92 and _Am_ I
xv 9-30, the poets listed being however not contemporaries but
illustrious predecessors. _Tr_ IV x 41-54 is complementary to the
present poem, being a list of the leading Roman poets at the beginning
of Ovid's career. All of these poems come last in their book, and it
seems clear enough that the present poem was meant to close a published
collection. Other links exist with the earlier poems: mention is
similarly made in them of the poet's fame after his death (Prop II xxxiv
94, _Am_ I xi 41-42, _Tr_ IV x 129-30), and _Am_ I xv (which Professor
R. J. Tarrant suggests may have ended the original edition in five books
of the _Amores_) is, like the present poem, addressed to _Liuor_.

=1. INVIDE, QVID LACERAS NASONIS CARMINA RAPTI.= Compare the question that
opens _Am_ I xv 'Quid mihi, Liuor edax, ignauos obicis annos, /
ingeniique uocas carmen inertis opus'. For _inuide ... laceras_ compare
Cic _Brutus_ 156 '_inuidia_, quae solet _lacerare_ plerosque'.

=1. LACERAS.= _Lacerare_ 'attack verbally' is a prose usage, found in
Cicero, the historians, and the elder Seneca (_OLD lacero_ 5; _TLL_
VII.2 827 50).

The primary meaning of _lacerare_ behind this usage is _mordere_;
_lacerare_ is found in this literal sense at Cic _De or_ II 240
'_lacerat_ lacertum Largi _mordax_ Memmius', Phaedrus I xii 11
'_lacerari_ coepit _morsibus_ saeuis canum', and Sen _Clem_ I 25 1.

For _mordere_ in the same transferred sense, see at xiv 46 _mordenda_ (p
424).

=1. NASONIS ... RAPTI.= 'Of Ovid, who is now dead'. For _rapti_, see at xi
5 _rapti_ (p 362).

=2. NON SOLET INGENIIS SVMMA NOCERE DIES.= The same thought at _Am_ I xv
39-40 'pascitur in uiuis Liuor; post fata quiescit, / cum suus ex merito
quemque tuetur honos' and _EP_ III iv 73-74 'scripta placent a morte
fere, quia laedere uiuos / Liuor et iniusto carpere dente solet'.

=3. CINERES= = _mortem_. Bömer at _Met_ VIII 539 _post cinerem_ (where
_cinerem_, as Bömer saw, means 'cremation'), cites among other passages
Prop III i 35-36 'meque inter seros laudabit Roma nepotes: / illum _post
cineres_ auguror esse diem', Martial I i 2-6 'Martialis ... cui, lector
studiose, quod dedisti / uiuenti decus atque sentienti, / rari _post
cineres_ habent poetae' and Martial VIII xxxviii 16 'hoc et _post
cineres_ erit tributum'.

=3. AT= is my correction for the manuscripts' ET. The point that Ovid was
famous _even_ while alive is made by _tum quoque_ later in the verse;
the only meaning that could therefore be given to _et mihi nomen_ is
'even I had a name, even when I was alive', which is inappropriate,
since in this poem Ovid is not belittling his poetic talent.

_At_ seems to be the obvious solution, giving the sense 'poets usually
become famous after they die; I, _however_, was famous even while
alive'. Compare _Tr_ IV x 121-22 (to his Muse) 'tu mihi, quod rarum est,
uiuo sublime dedisti / nomen, ab exequiis quod dare fama solet' and
Martial I i 2-6 (cited in the previous note). The more usual situation
of obscurity during the poet's lifetime followed by posthumous fame is
described at Prop III i 21-24.

Professor C. P. Jones points out to me that _et_ can have an adversative
sense (_OLD et_ 14a). But the two instances there cited from Augustan
verse are examples of _nec ... et_ (_Fast_ V 530; _Tr_ V xii 63 'nec
possum _et_ cupio non nullos ducere uersus'). Where _et_ alone carries
the adversative sense, it is generally used to join two opposing verbs
or verbal phrases: compare Cic _Tusc_ I 6 'fieri ... potest ut recte quis
sentiat _et_ id quod sentit polite eloqui non possit' and Sen _NQ_ II 18
'quare aliquando non fulgurat _et_ tonat?'.

=4. CVM VIVIS ADNVMERARER.= For Ovid's considering himself already dead,
compare _EP_ I ix 56 'et nos extinctis adnumerare potest' and _EP_ I vii
9-10 'nos satis est inter glaciem Scythicasque sagittas / uiuere, si
uita est mortis habenda genus'.

Ovid is the first poet to use _adnumerare_ in this sense ('reckon in
with'), and only in his poems of exile; it is afterwards found at _Her_
XVI 330 and Manilius V 438.

=5-36.= It is possible to discern a rough order in the catalogue of names;
first come the writers of epic and Pindaric verse (5-28), then the
dramatists (29-31), and finally the writers of lighter verse (32-36).

=5. CVM FORET ET= _FHT_ CVMQVE FORET _BCMIL_. Clearly either _et_ or
_-que_ was lost, and one or both inserted to restore the metre. _Cumque_
would be a continuation of _at mihi nomen ..._, which seems an inelegant
construction. _Cum foret et_, introducing a sentence of forty-two lines
ending in 'dicere si fas est, claro mea nomine Musa / atque inter
tantos quae legeretur erat' seems preferable; this very long sentence
serves not as a continuation of the statement in 3-4, but as evidence
for it.

=5. MARSVS.= Domitius Marsus[29] is often mentioned by Martial as a writer
of epigram, sometimes being coupled with Catullus and Albinovanus Pedo
(I praef, II lxxi 3 & lxxvii 5, V v 6, VII xcix 7). A friend of
Maecenas, he wrote an epic poem on the Amazons (Martial IV xxix 8), and
at least nine books of _fabellae_ (Charisius I 72 Keil). Quintilian
quotes from his treatise on _urbanitas_ (VI iii 102 ff.); and he is
cited as an authority by the elder Pliny (_NH_ I 34).

[Footnote 29: _PIR_1 D 131; _PIR_2 D 153; Schanz-Hosius 174-76 (§
275-76); Bardon 52-57.]

The scholiasts and grammarians preserve seven fragments (Morel 110-11),
the most interesting being the four lines on the death of Tibullus: 'Te
quoque Vergilio comitem non aequa, Tibulle, / Mors iuuenem campos misit
ad Elysios, / ne foret aut elegis molles qui fleret amores / aut caneret
forti regia bella pede'.

=5. MAGNIQVE RABIRIVS ORIS.= Similar phrasing at Virgil _G_ III 294 'magno
nunc ore sonandum', Prop II x 12 'magni nunc erit oris opus', and _AA_ I
206 (to Gaius) 'et magno nobis ore sonandus eris'. In the last two
passages, as here, there is a specific reference to epic verse.

=5. RABIRIVS.= Velleius Paterculus (II 36 3) mentions Rabirius
(Schanz-Hosius 267-68 [§ 316]; Bardon 73-74) alongside Virgil: 'paene
stulta est inhaerentium oculis ingeniorum enumeratio, inter quae maxima
nostri aeui eminent princeps carminum Vergilius Rabiriusque'. Quintilian
speaks of him with rather less admiration: 'Rabirius ac Pedo non indigni
cognitione, si uacet' (X i 90). Seneca (_Ben_ VI 3 1) quotes a passage
of his with Mark Antony speaking; presumably one of his poems dealt with
the civil war.

Five short fragments of Rabirius survive (Morel 120-21).

=6. ILIACVSQVE MACER.= Pompeius Macer[30] was one of Ovid's closest
friends; he is the addressee of _Am_ II xviii and _EP_ II x. The son of
Theophanes of Mytilene, Pompey's confidant, he was intimate with
Tiberius (Strabo XIII 2 3); under Augustus he had served as procurator
of Asia and had been placed in charge of the libraries at Rome (Suet
_Iul_ 56 7). Two poems in the Greek Anthology are generally attributed
to him (VII ccxix; IX xxviii).

[Footnote 30: _PIR_1 P 473; Syme _HO_ 73-74; Bardon 65-66; J. Schwartz,
"Pompeius Macer et la jeunesse d'Ovide", _RPh_ XXV (1951) 182-94. Macer
is discussed in the section of Schanz-Hosius dealing with Ovid's
catalogue of poets (269-72; § 318); I give references to Schanz-Hosius
below only for poets dealt with outside this section.]

_Iliacus_ is explained by _Am_ II xviii 1-3 'Carmen ad iratum dum tu
perducis Achillem ['while you are writing a poem about the Trojan war up
to the starting-point of the _Iliad_'] / primaque iuratis induis arma
uiris, / nos, Macer, ignaua Veneris cessamus in umbra' and _EP_ II x
13-14 'tu canis aeterno quicquid restabat Homero, / ne careant summa
Troica bella manu'; Macer had written poems narrating those parts of the
Trojan war not covered by the _Iliad_.

The Macer mentioned at Tr IV x 43-44 must be a different person, for he
is described as already being _grandior aeuo_ in Ovid's youth.

=6. SIDEREVSQVE PEDO.= On Albinovanus Pedo, see at x 4 _Albinouane_ (p
327).

For _sidereus_ ('divine' or 'resplendent'), Bardon aptly cited Columella
X 434 (written in hexameters) '_siderei_ uatis ... praecepta Maronis'.

=7. ET, QVI IVNONEM LAESISSET IN HERCVLE, CARVS.= This is the Carus to
whom xiii is addressed: compare xiii 11-12 'prodent auctorem uires, quas
Hercule dignas / nouimus atque illi quem canis ipse pares'.

As Jupiter's son by Alcmene, Hercules suffered from Juno's enmity until
his deification.

=8. IVNONIS SI IAM NON GENER ILLE FORET.= Perhaps Carus' poem included
Hercules' marriage to Hebe.

=9. SEVERVS.= On Severus, the addressee of poem ii, see the introduction
to that poem; for _quique dedit Latio carmen regale_, see at ii 1 _uates
magnorum maxime regum_ (p 162).

=10. SVBTILI ... NVMA.= Numa is otherwise unknown. _Subtilis_ means 'clean
and elegant in style'; compare Cic _De or_ I 180 'oratione maxime
limatus atque _subtilis_' and _Brutus_ 35 'tum fuit Lysias ... egregie
_subtilis_ scriptor atque elegans, quem iam prope audeas oratorem
perfectum dicere'.

=10. PRISCVS VTERQVE.= Only one poet of this name is known, Clutorius (Tac
_Ann_ III 49-51) or C. Lutorius (Dio LVII 20 3) Priscus. All that is
known of him is the manner of his death: in AD 21 he was put to death
for composing and reciting a premature poem on the death of Drusus.

=11. IMPARIBVS NVMERIS ... VEL AEQVIS.= Like Ovid, Montanus wrote both
elegiac and hexameter verse.

For _impar_ used of elegiac verse, compare Hor _AP_ 75 (the earliest
instance) 'uersibus _impariter_ iunctis', _Am_ II xvii 21, _Am_ III i
37, _AA_ I 264, _Tr_ II 220, _EP_ II v 1 (_disparibus_), _EP_ III iv 86
(_disparibus_), _EP_ IV v 3 (_nec ... aequis_), and line 36 of the
present poem.

=11. MONTANE.= Iulius Montanus is mentioned in passing at Sen _Cont_ VII 1
27, where he is called _egregius poeta_; in Donatus' life of Virgil (29)
his admiration of Virgil's manner of reciting is mentioned, on the
authority of the elder Seneca. The younger Seneca, calling him
'tolerabilis poeta et amicitia Tiberi notus et frigore', tells some
amusing anecdotes about the length of his recitations and his fondness
for describing sunrises and sunsets (_Ep_ CXXII 11-13). He quotes from
him twice (Morel 120).

=13-14. ET QVI PENELOPAE RESCRIBERE IVSSIT VLIXEM / ERRANTEM SAEVO PER
DVO LUSTRA MARI.= All that is known of Sabinus is what Ovid says here and
in his list of Sabinus' poems at _Am_ II xviii 27-34 'quam cito de toto
rediit meus orbe Sabinus / scriptaque diuersis rettulit ille locis! /
candida Penelope signum cognouit Vlixis; / legit ab Hippolyto scripta
nouerca suo. / iam pius Aeneas miserae rescripsit Elissae, / quodque
legat Phyllis, si modo uiuit, adest. / tristis ad Hypsipylen ab Iasone
littera uenit; / det uotam Phoebo Lesbis amata lyram' (this line, like
the letter of Sappho, has been considered suspect; see R. J. Tarrant,
"The Authenticity of the Letter of Sappho to Phaon (_Heroides XV_)",
_HSPh_ 85 [1981] 133-53).

Since the letter of Ulysses is the first one mentioned in the list at
_Am_ II xviii 29, it was presumably the first poem in Sabinus'
collection of epistles; hence Ovid's use of it here to indicate the
entire collection.

Line 14 may be an echo of one of Sabinus' poems.

=15. TRISOMEN= _C_ TRISOMEM _B1_. For the many other variants, see the
apparatus. The word is clearly corrupt; correction is difficult in the
absence of further information on Sabinus. TROEZENA (a conjecture
reported by Micyllus) seems unattractive. Heinsius had difficulty with
the passage: 'an _Tymelen_? opinor certe nomen puellae a Sabino
decantatae hic latere'. TROESMIN, suggested by Ehwald (_JAW_ CIX [1901]
187), is unlikely--why would Sabinus have wished to recount Vestalis'
capture of the city?--but not, as claimed by Vollmer (PW I A,2 1598 34),
unmetrical: lengthening is common enough before the main caesura
(although I have found no example of lengthened _-in_). Bardon (61)
wished to read TROEZEN (which is in fact the reading of _T_), apparently
not realizing that an accusative form is required.

=15-16. DIERVM ... OPVS.= Sabinus apparently started work on a
calendar-poem, which may have resembled the _Fasti_; compare _Fast_ I
101 'uates operose _dierum_'.

=16. CELERI= = 'premature'.

=17. INGENIIQVE SVI DICTVS COGNOMINE LARGVS.= For the play on the name
compare xiii 2 'qui quod es, id uere, Care, uocaris, aue'. Nothing is
known of Largus beyond what Ovid here tells us.

=18. GALLICA QVI PHRYGIVM DVXIT IN ARVA SENEM.= Largus described Antenor's
migration to Venetia and founding of Patavium, for which see _Aen_ I
242-49 and Livy I 1.

=18. GALLICA ... ARVA.= Patavium was in Cisalpine Gaul.

=18. PHRYGIVM ... SENEM.= At _Il_ III 149-50 Antenor is listed among the
'[Greek: dêmogerontes ... gêraï dê polemoio pepaumenoi]' sitting on the
Trojan wall who see Helen approach.

=19. DOMITO ... AB HECTORE TROIAM.= 'The story of Troy after the death of
Hector'. _Gothanus II 121_ has the interpolation DOMITAM ... AB HECTORE,
which Korn printed.

=19. CAMERINVS.= Nothing is known of this poet.

=20. SVA PHYLLIDE.= Presumably Tuscus' equivalent of Gallus' Lycoris.
However, as Professor A. Dalzell points out, the reference to love
poetry is odd in a sequence of epic and didactic writers.

=20. TVSCVS= is not otherwise certainly known. Kiessling (_Coniectanea
Propertiana_, Greifswald, 1875) proposed that he was the "Demophoon"
addressed in Prop II xxii; this suggestion has won support from Birt
[_RhM_ XXXII [1877] 414), Bardon (61; I owe these references to him),
and André, but does not seem extremely convincing, especially since
Propertius had been writing some three decades earlier. Merkel, in his
edition of the _Tristia_ (p. 373), identifies him with the grammarian
Clodius Tuscus, without offering a reason.

=21. VELIVOLIQVE MARIS VATES.= It is not known who this was, or what the
precise subject of the poem might have been; perhaps it resembled the
_Halieutica_. André mentions that Varro Atacinus has been proposed, but
does not name the author of the suggestion, which seems rather fanciful;
as he points out, Varro had died some fifty years previously. Luck in
his edition has proposed Abronius Silo, of whom two hexameters survive
(Sen _Suas_ II 19 = Morel 120), but, as André remarks, the fact that he,
like Ovid, was a follower of the rhetor Porcius Latro is hardly
sufficient evidence for the identification.

For _ueliuolique_ see at v 42 _ueliuolas_ (p 224).

=22. CAERVLEOS ... DEOS= = 'the gods of the sea'. Compare _Met_ II 8
'_caeruleos_ habet unda deos'.

=23. ACIES LIBYCAS ROMANAQVE PROELIA.= The poem may have concerned the
Jugurthine war, or Caesar's African campaign; compare _Fast_ IV 379-80
'illa dies Libycis qua Caesar in oris / perfida magnanimi contudit arma
Iubae'.

For the juxtaposition of opposing proper adjectives (_Libycas Romana_),
see Tarrant on Sen _Ag_ 613-13a _Dardana tecto / Dorici ... ignes_.

=24. ET MARIVS SCRIPTI DEXTER IN OMNE GENVS.= For the phrasing compare
_Tr_ II 381-82 '_omne genus scripti_ grauitate tragoedia uincit: / haec
quoque materiam semper amoris habet' and _Tr_ II 517-18 'an _genus hoc
scripti_ faciunt sua pulpita ['stage'] tutum, / quodque licet, mimis
scaena licere dedit?'. _C_'s MARIVS SCRIPTOR and _B_'s SCRIPTOR MARIVS
were no doubt induced by the hyperbaton of _scripti ... genus_.

Marius is not otherwise known.

=25. TRINACRIVSQVE ... AVCTOR.= In view of the following _auctor ... Lupus_,
_Trinacrius_ should be taken as a proper name, and not as an adjective.
The adjectival form of the name is, however, suspicious, and may be a
corruption far removed from what Ovid wrote.

=25. SVAE= seems strange, and is probably corrupt. Wheeler translated
'Trinacrius who wrote of the _Perseid_ he knew so well', while André
ignored _suae_ altogether: 'l'auteur trinacrien de la "Perséide"'.

=25-26. AVCTOR / TANTALIDAE REDVCIS TYNDARIDOSQVE LVPVS.= Lupus (otherwise
unknown) apparently wrote of the return of Menelaus and Helen to Sparta.

_Tantalides_ is used only here of Menelaus. Elsewhere in Latin verse it
is used of Agamemnon, Atreus, and Pelops: see _OLD Tantalides_. Ovid is
here using the diction of high poetry.

=27. ET QVI MAEONIAM PHAEACIDA VERTIT.= Tuticanus; his translation of the
Phaeacian episode of the Odyssey is mentioned at xii 27-28. As that poem
explains, his name could not be used in elegiac verse: hence the
periphrasis in this passage.

=27. ET VNE= _HLB2_ ET VNe _M2c_ ET VNA _IT_ ET VNI _B1C_ IN ANGVEM _F_.
_Vne_ was liable to corruption because of the hyperbaton with _Rufe_ in
the next line, and because of the rarity of the vocative of _unus_. For
_unus_ in the sense 'unique, outstanding', compare Catullus XXXVII 17
'tu praeter omnes _une_ de capillatis' ('you outstanding member of the
long-haired set'--Quinn) and Prop II iii 29 'gloria Romanis _una_ es tu
nata puellis'.

=27-28. VNE / PINDARICAE FIDICEN TV QVOQVE, RVFE, LYRAE.= An imitation of
Hor _Carm_ IV iii 21-23 'totum muneris hoc tui est / quod monstror
digito praetereuntium / _Romanae fidicen lyrae_'.

=28. RVFE.= Otherwise unknown. André correctly points out that he is
unlikely to be the Rufus addressed in _EP_ II xi, 'dont Ovid n'aurait
pas manqué alors de vanter le talent poétique'. Bardon (59) mentions
that A. Reifferscheid ("Coniect. noua", _Ind. lect. Bresl._, 1880/81,
p. 7) identified this Rufus with the Pindaric poet Titius of Hor _Ep_ I
iii 9-10, thereby creating 'le très synthétique Titius Rufus'. But there
is nothing very compelling about the identification.

=29. MVSAVE TVRRANI.= The poet is not otherwise certainly known. Bardon
(48) reports the conjectures of Hirschfeld ("Annona", _Philologus_,
1870, p. 27) identifying him with C. Turranius, _praefectus annonae_ at
the time of Augustus' death (Tac _Ann_ I 7) and of Munzer (_Beitr. zur
Quellenkritik_ 387-89), identifying him with the geographical writer
Turranius Gracilis mentioned by the elder Pliny (_NH_ III 3, IX 11).

=29. INNIXA COTVRNIS.= The _coturnus_ was distinguished by its high sole;
hence _innixa_ ('supported by'). Compare _Am_ III i 31 (of Tragedy)
'pictis _innixa coturnis_' and Hor _AP_ 279-80 'Aeschylus ... docuit
magnumque loqui _nitique coturno_'.

=29. COTVRNIS.= As Brink at Hor _AP_ 80 points out, _coturnus_ (not
_cothurnus_) is the spelling favoured by the best manuscripts of Virgil
and Horace.

=30. ET TVA CVM SOCCO MVSA, MELISSE, LEVIS.= _H_ offers LEVI, also
conjectured by Heinsius, which may be right: the epithet with _socco_
would provide a pleasing balance with the preceding _tragicis
... coturnis_. On the other hand, Professor R. J. Tarrant in support of
_leuis_ cites _RA_ 375-76 'grande sonant tragici, tragicos decet ira
coturnos: / usibus e mediis _soccus_ habendus erit' and Hor _AP_ 80
'_socci_ ... grandesque coturni'; in both passages _soccus_ has no
adjective.

Propertius uses _Musa leuis_ of his verse (II xii 22); compare as well
_Tr_ II 354 'Musa iocosa' (Ovid's amatory verse), _EP_ I v 69 'infelix
Musa', Lucretius IV 589 & _Ecl_ I 2 'siluestrem ... Musam', and
Quintilian X i 55 'Musa ... rustica et pastoralis' (the poetry of
Theocritus).

_Leuis_ is used of comedy at _Fast_ V 347-48 'scaena _leuis_ decet hanc
[_sc_ Floram]: non est, mihi credite, non est / illa coturnatas inter
habenda deas' and Hor _AP_ 231 'effutire _leues_ indigna Tragoedia
uersus'.

=30. MELISSE.= Thanks principally to Suetonius _Gram_ 21, we are
comparatively well informed about Melissus (Schanz-Hosius 176-77 [§
277]; Bardon 49-52). Brought up a slave (his father had disowned him at
birth), he was given a good education by the man who accepted him, and
was given to Maecenas, who manumitted him. He wrote one hundred and
fifty books of _Ineptiae_. 'Fecit et nouum genus togatarum inscripsitque
trabeatas'; it is no doubt these plays that Ovid is here referring to.

=31. VARIVS.= Possibly the famous author of the _Thyestes_ and editor of
the _Aeneid_ (Schanz-Hosius 162-64 [§ 267]; Bardon 28-34; fragments at
Morel 100-1 and Ribbeck 265). Riese objected to the identification on
chronological grounds (the _Thyestes_ was produced in 29 BC), but the
date of his death is unknown, and he may have survived to the time of
Ovid's exile.

=31. GRACCHVSQVE.= The manuscripts omit the aspirate, and Ehwald cites
_CIL_ VI 1 1505 for a mention of _Ti. Sempronius Graccus_, but in his
discussion of the aspirate Quintilian makes it clear that _Graccus_ was
an obsolete spelling (I v 20).

Gracchus (Bardon 48-49) is mentioned by Priscian, Nonius, and the author
of the _De dubiis nominibus_, who among them preserve four fragments and
three titles (Ribbeck 266). One of the titles is a _Thyestes_; Professor
R. J. Tarrant plausibly suggests that Ovid may here be alluding to the
plays by Varius and Gracchus on the theme with his words _cum ... darent
fera uerba tyrannis_, Atreus being the archetype of the tyrant in
tragedy.

Nipperdey proposed that Ovid's Gracchus was the Sempronius Gracchus
implicated in the disgrace of Julia (Vel Pat II 100 5); see Syme _HO_
196 and Furneaux on Tac _Ann_ I 53 4. The identification is however far
from certain.

=32. CALLIMACHI PROCVLVS MOLLE TENERET ITER.= Proculus is otherwise
unknown. Ehwald suggested (_JAW_ 43 [1885] 141) that he was a dramatic
poet like Varius and Gracchus, citing a mention of the '[Greek: satyrika
dramata, tragôidiai, kômôidiai]' of Callimachus in the _Souda_. But
Callimachus' primary reputation was hardly that of a tragedian; and
_molle ... iter_ must be a reference to _Aetia_ 25-28: '[Greek: kai tod'
anôga, ta mê pateousin hamaxai / ta steiben, heterôn d' ichnia mê kath
homa / [_Hunt: _diphron el]ain mêd' hoimon ana platyn, alla keleuthous /
[_Pfeiffer: _atripto]us, ei kai steinoterên elaseis]'.

For _mollis_ used specifically of elegy (the _Aetia_ were in elegiac
verse), see _EP_ III iv 85 and Prop I vii 19 (cited by André); for the
word in an overtly Callimachean context, see Prop III i 19 '_mollia_,
Pegasides, date uestro serta poetae'.

_Tenere_ here has the sense 'keep to', as at _Met_ II 79 'ut ... uiam
_teneas_' and Q Cic (?) _Pet_ 55 'perge _tenere_ istam uiam quam
institisti [_Gruterus_: instituisti _codd_]'; Professor R. J. Tarrant
rightly sees a suggestion of conscious artistic preference, and a faint
allusion to the places where Augustan poets renounce the attractions of
higher poetry.

=33. TITYRON ANTIQVAS PASSERQVE REDIRET AD HERBAS= _B1C_. For the many
variants and emendations proposed, see the apparatus.

Housman has offered a defence of _B_ and _C_'s version of this line
(937-39). He accepted Riese's printing of _Passer_ as a proper name ('M.
Petronius Passer' is mentioned at Varro _RR_ III 2 2), and took the
passage to mean 'He wrote bucolics, or, as Ovid puts it, he went back to
Tityrus and the pastures of old': the construction is 'cum Passer
rediret ad Tityron antiquasque herbas'. In writing the line, Ovid
resorted to three devices, 'each of them legitimate, but not perhaps
elsewhere assembled in a single verse'. The first is the delay of the
preposition _ad_ after _Tityron_, which it governs; the second is the
delay of _-que_, which properly belongs with _antiquas_; and the third
is the placing of the verb between its two objects. For each of these
devices Housman furnishes convincing parallels.

Housman's argument is ingenious and informative, but I do not believe
that he is right in defending the line: the accumulation of difficulties
is suspicious, and the divergence of the manuscripts is greater here
than at any other point in the book. Heinsius wrote of the line, 'haec
nec Latina sunt, nec satis intelligo quid sibi uelint'. Like Heinsius, I
believe the line to be deeply corrupted and, in the absence of further
evidence, impossible to correct.

=34. APTAQVE VENANTI GRATTIVS ARMA DARET.= Compare Grattius 23 'carmine et
arma dabo et uenandi [_cod_: uenanti et _Vlitius_] persequar artis'.

=34. GRATTIVS.= The manuscripts have GRATIVS (_CFLT_) or GRACIVS (_BMHI_);
and _Gratius_ is what editors both of Ovid and Grattius printed until
Buecheler pointed out (_RhM_ 35 [1880] 407) that _Grattius_ is the only
form found in inscriptions, and is what is given in the oldest
manuscript of Grattius, _Vindobonensis 277_ (saec viii/ix), which
predates the manuscripts of _EP_ IV by at least four hundred years.

=35. NAIADAS= _C. P. Jones_ NAIADAS A _HLI2_ NAYADES A _MT_ NAIDAS A
_BCFI2_. Ovid elsewhere invariably uses the dative of agent with
_amatus_ (_Am_ I v 12, II viii 12, III ix 55-56, _AA_ II 80, _Tr_ I vi
2, II 400, III i 42, IV x 40).

As Professor Jones notes, following the interpolation of _a_, the
shorter form _Naidas_ was introduced in _BCFI1_ to restore metre.

=35-36. FONTANVS ... CAPELLA.= Neither poet is otherwise known.

=36. IMPARIBVS ... MODIS.= See at 11 _imparibus numeris ... uel aequis_ (p
453).

=37-38. QVORVM MIHI CVNCTA REFERRE / NOMINA LONGA MORA EST.= Similar
phrasing at _Met_ XIII 205-6 '_longa referre mora est_ quae consilioque
manuque / utiliter feci spatiosi tempore belli' and _Fast_ V 311-12
(Flora speaking) '_longa referre mora est_ correcta obliuia damnis; / me
quoque Romani praeteriere patres'.

=39-40. ESSENT ET IVVENES QVORVM, QVOD INEDITA CVRA EST, / APPELLANDORVM
NIL MIHI IVRIS ADEST.= All editors, misled no doubt by 37, mispunctuate
this passage, placing a comma before _quorum_ instead of after: this
destroys the gerundive _quorum ... appellandorum_, leaving the pentameter
without a construction.

Williams proposed excising this distich, the reasons being (1) the
sudden change from _forent_ to _essent_, (2) the use of _inedita_, which
is not found elsewhere, (3) the use of _cura_ in a sense, 'written
work', that is found only in late Latin, and (4) the prose turn of
_quorum ... appellandorum_. To which it can be replied that (1) _forent_
and _essent_ are equivalent, and metrical convenience alone could
justify the change, (2) the use of negatived perfect participles such as
_inedita_, _indeclinatus_ (x 83), and _inoblita_ (xv 37) is a hallmark
of Ovid's style, (3) _cura_ is used in this sense by Tacitus (_Dial_ 3
3 & 6 5; _Ann_ III 24 4 & IV 11 5); its earlier use in verse is not
surprising, and (4) gerundives were allowed in Latin verse; here, as at
ix 12 '_salutandi_ munere functa _tui_', the hyperbaton compensates for
any awkwardness.

=39. CVRA= _unus Thuaneus Heinsii_ CAVSA _BCMFHILT_. The same error in
some manuscripts at _Her_ I 20 'Tlepolemi leto _cura_ nouata mea est',
and _Fast_ I 55 'uindicat Ausonias Iunonis _cura_ Kalendas'; the inverse
corruption at _Am_ II xii 17 and _Fast_ IV 368.

In 1894 Owen printed _causa_. The word can certainly have the meaning he
attributed to it ('[Greek: hypothesis]', 'theme'), as at Prop II i 12
'inuenio _causas_ mille poeta nouas', but this does not seem appropriate
to the context here. In his later edition Owen returned to the usual
reading.

=41. APPELLANDORVM.= _Appellare_ used with the same sense (_OLD appello2_
11) at III vi 6 '_appellent_ ne te carmina nostra rogas';
_nOminAre_ was not available for Ovid's use.

=41-44. COTTA ... MAXIME.= M. Aurelius Cotta Maximus Messalinus[31]
(_Forschungen in Ephesos_ III 112 no. 22; cited by Syme _HO_ 117) was
the younger son of Messalla, the patron of Tibullus; he was the
recipient of six of the _Epistulae ex Ponto_ (I v, I ix, II iii, II
viii, III ii & III v). He is undoubtedly the M. Aurelius or Aurelius
Cotta recorded by Tacitus as consul for 20 (_Ann_ III 2 3 & 17 4). He
was born much later than his brother Messalinus (the addressee of _EP_ I
vii and II ii), who was consul in 3 BC; the chronology is confirmed by a
mention of him as praetor in 17 (_Inscriptiones Italiae_ XIII i p. 298;
see Syme _Ten Studies_ 52), and by Ovid's testimony that Cotta was born
after Ovid had become acquainted with his family (_EP_ II iii 69-80).
Cotta was clearly a very close friend of Ovid; this can be seen
particularly from _EP_ II iii, in which Ovid recounts how Cotta sent the
first letter of comfort after his catastrophe (67-68) and tells how he
confessed his _error_ to Cotta.

[Footnote 31: _PIR_1 A 1236; _PIR_2 A 1488; PW 11,2 2490 13]]

Tacitus gives some information on Cotta's public career. In AD 16, in
the aftermath of the discovery of Libo's plot against Tiberius, Cotta
proposed that Libo's image not be in his descendants' funeral
processions (_Ann_ II 32 1). In 20, as consul, he similarly proposed
penalties against Piso's family (_Ann_ III 17), and in 27 he is
mentioned as attacking Agrippina so as to please Tiberius (_Ann_ V 3).
The most interesting mention of him is at _Ann_ VI 5 (AD 32), where
Tacitus tells of how Tiberius himself intervened in favour of Cotta
after he had been charged with _maiestas_; the eventual result was that
charges were laid against Cotta's chief accuser.

=42. PIERIDVM LVMEN.= At _EP_ III v 29-36 Ovid asked Cotta to send him
some of his poetry.

For the sense of _lumen_ here ('ornament'), _OLD lumen_ 11 cites among
other passages Cic _Sul_ 5 'haec ornamenta ac _lumina_ rei publicae' and
_Phil II_ 54 (of Pompey) 'imperi populi Romani decus ac _lumen_ fuit'.

=42. PRAESIDIVMQVE FORI= = 'defender of the law'. Compare vi 33-34 'cum
tibi suscepta est _legis uindicta seuerae_, / uerba uelut taetrum
singula uirus habent'.

=43. MATERNOS COTTAS.= This passage should be taken in conjunction with
_EP_ III ii 103-8 (to Cotta) 'adde quod est animus semper tibi mitis, et
altae / indicium mores nobilitatis habent, / quos Volesus patrii
cognoscat nominis auctor, / quos Numa maternus non neget esse suos, /
adiectique probent genetiua ad nomina Cottae, / si tu non esses,
interitura domus'. The simplest explanation of these two passages is
that Cotta had been adopted by a maternal uncle, the last surviving
Aurelius Cotta.

The question of Cotta's maternal ancestry is a vexed one; for a full
discussion see Syme _HO_ 119-21.

The present passage was written with Prop IV xi 31-32 in mind: 'altera
_maternos_ exaequat turba _Libones_, / et domus est titulis utraque
fulta suis'.

=44. NOBILITAS INGEMINATA.= In a famous study (_Kleine Schriften_ I 1 ff.;
trans. _The Roman Nobility_ [1969]), Matthias Gelzer demonstrated that
the usual meaning of _nobilis_ was 'descended from a consul'. Cotta was
descended from a consul on both sides.

At _Met_ XIII 144-47 Ovid uses _nobilitas_ to mean 'descent from a god':
(Ulysses speaking) 'mihi Laertes pater est, Arcesius illi, / Iuppiter
huic ... est quoque _per matrem_ Cyllenius _addita_ nobis / _altera
nobilitas_: deus est in utroque parente!'.

=44. INGEMINATA.= A verbal echo of _EP_ I ii 1-2 (to Fabius Maximus)
'Maxime, qui tanti mensuram nominis imples, / et _geminas_ animi
_nobilitate_ genus'.

=46. ATQVE INTER TANTOS QVAE LEGERETVR ERAT.= This is the end of the
sentence that began at 5.

=46. INTER TANTOS.= Compare _EP_ III i 55-56 (Ovid has just compared
himself to Capaneus, Amphiaraus, Ulysses, and Philoctetes) 'si locus est
aliquis _tanta inter nomina_ paruis, / nos quoque conspicuos nostra
ruina facit'.

=47. SVMMOTVM= _codd_ SVBMOTVM _edd_. The assimilated _summ-_ is standard
in the manuscripts of Virgil and Lucretius, and should not be altered.

=47. PROSCINDERE= = 'revile, defame'. This seems to be the first instance
of the word in this sense; the other examples cited by _OLD_ _proscindo_
3 are Val Max V iii 3, Val Max VIII 5 2 'C. Flauium eadem lege accusatum
testis _proscidit_', Pliny _NH_ XXXIII 6, and Suet _Cal_ 30 2 'equestrem
ordinem ut scaenae harenaeque deuotum assidue _proscidit_'. The word
connects with _laceras_ in the first line of the poem, and with _neu
cineres sparge, cruente, meos_ in 48.

=49. OMNIA PERDIDIMVS.= The same phrase at _Met_ XIII 527-28 (Hecuba
speaking) '_omnia perdidimus_: superest cur uiuere tempus / in breue
sustineam proles gratissima matri'.

=49. TANTVMMODO= is a prose word. It occurs elsewhere in Ovid only at
_Fast_ III 361 'ortus erat summo _tantummodo_ margine Phoebus' and at
_Tr_ III vii 29-30 'pone, Perilla, metum; _tantummodo_ femina nulla /
neue uir a scriptis discat amare tuis'. Being a colloquial term, it is
found in satire (Hor _Sat_ I ix 54) and comedy (Ter _Ph_ 109).

=50. SENSVM MATERIAMQVE MALI.= 'An occasion for pain, and the ability to
feel it'. For _sensum_ compare _EP_ I ii 29-30 'felicem Nioben ... quae
posuit _sensum_ saxea facta _mali_ [_uar_ malis]' and _EP_ I ii 37
'uiuimus ut numquam _sensu_ careamus amaro'. For _materiam_ compare
_Her_ VII 34 'materiam curae praebeat ille meae!', _Met_ X 133-34 'ut
leuiter pro materiaque doleret / admonuit' and _EP_ I x 23-24 'dolores,
/ quorum materiam dat locus ipse mihi'.

=51-52. QVID IVVAT EXTINCTOS FERRVM DEMITTERE IN ARTVS? / NON HABET IN
NOBIS IAM NOVA PLAGA LOCVM.= I believe this distich is an interpolation
for the following reasons:

(1) Lines 49-50 form an effective ending, which 51-52 weaken. In 49-50
Ovid says that life is all that is left to him; and in 52 it is stated
that he is already wounded in every place possible. These statements are
contradictory.

(2) The use of a weapon in 51 is at odds with the rending metaphor of
_laceras_ (1) and _proscindere_ (47).

(3) There seems something peculiar about _ferrum demittere in artus_;
the examples of _demittere_ with this sense in the _Metamorphoses_
involve _ilia_ (IV 119, XII 441), _armi_ (XII 491), and _iugulum_ (XIII
436; similar phrasing at _Her_ XIV 5).

The distich's fabrication was assisted by _EP_ II vii 41-42 'sic ego
continue Fortunae uulneror ictu, / _uixque habet in nobis iam noua plaga
locum_'.



BIBLIOGRAPHY


_1. Editions and commentaries_

F. Puteolanus, _P. Ovidii Nasonis Opera Omnia_. Bologna, 1471.

J. Andreas de Buxis, _P. Ovidii Nasonis Opera Omnia_. Rome, 1471.

N. Heinsius, _P. Ovidii Nasonis Opera Omnia_. Amsterdam, 1652.

_Electa minora ex Ovidio, Tibullo, et Propertio_. London, 1705.

P. Burman, _P. Ovidii Nasonis Opera Omnia_. Amsterdam, 1727.

T. Harles, _Publii Ovidii Nasonis Tristium Libri V Ex Ponto Libri IIII_.
Erlangen, 1772.

W. E. Weber, _Corpus Poetarum Latinorum_. Frankfurt, 1833.

R. Merkel, _P. Ovidius Naso_, vol. 3: _Tristia. Ibis. Ex Ponto Libri.
Fasti. Halieutica_. Leipzig, 1853.

O. Korn, _P. Ovidii Nasonis Ex Ponto Libri Quattuor_. Leipzig, 1868.

A. Riese, _P. Ovidii Nasonis Carmina_, vol. 3: _Fasti. Tristia. Ibis. Ex
Ponto. Halieutica. Fragmenta_. Leipzig, 1874.

W. H. Williams, _Ovid. The Pontic Epistles. Book IV_. London, 1881.

R. Merkel, _P. Ovidius Naso_, vol. 3: _Tristia. Ibis. Ex Ponto Libri.
Fasti._ Leipzig, 1884, reprinted 1902.

S. G. Owen, in J. P. Postgate's _Corpus Poetarum Latinorum_, vol. 1.
London, 1894.

S. G. Owen, _P. Ovidi Nasonis Tristium Libri Quinque Ibis Ex Ponto Libri
Quattuor Halieutica Fragmenta_. Oxford, 1915, reprinted 1963.

G. Némethy, _Commentarius Exegeticus ad Ovidii Epistulas ex Ponto_.
Budapest, 1915.

G. Némethy, _Supplementum Commentariorum ad Ovidii Amores, Tristia, et
Epistulas ex Ponto_. Budapest, 1922.

R. Ehwald and F. W. Levy, _P. Ovidius Naso_, vol. 3: _Tristium Libri V.
Ibis. Ex Ponto Libri IV_. Leipzig, 1922.

A. L. Wheeler, _Ovid. Tristia. Ex Ponto_. Cambridge (Massachusetts) and
London, 1924, reprinted 1975.

F. W. Lenz, _P. Ovidi Nasonis Epistulae ex Ponto_. Turin, 1938.

G. Luck, _Publius Ovidius Naso. Briefe aus der Verbannung_, with a
German translation by W. Willige. Zurich and Stuttgart, 1963.

F. della Corte, _Ovidio. I Pontica_ [translation and commentary], 2
vols. Genoa, 1977.

J. André, _Ovide. Pontiques._ Paris, 1977.


_2. Works cited_

Austin, R. G., ed. _P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Secundus_. Oxford,
1964; reprinted 1966.

Axelson, B., _Unpoetische Wörter. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der
lateinischen Dichtersprache_. Lund, 1945.

Bardon, H., _La littérature latine inconnue_. Tome II: _L'époque
impériale_. Paris, 1956.

Bell, A. J., _The Latin Dual and Poetic Diction. Studies in Numbers and
Figures_. London and Toronto, 1923.

Birt, T., "Animadversiones ad Ovidii heroidum epistulas", _RhM_ 32
(1877), 386-432.

Bömer, F., _P. Ouidius Naso. Die Fasten_. 2 vols. Heidelberg, 1957-58.

Bömer, F., _P. Ouidius Naso. Metamorphosen. Kommentar_. Heidelberg,
1969-(in progress).

Bonner, S. F., _Education in Ancient Rome. From the elder Cato to the
younger Pliny_. London, 1977.

Brink, C. O., ed. _Horace on Poetry. The 'Ars Poetica'_. Cambridge,
1971.

Buckland, W. W., _A Text-book of Roman Law from Augustus to Justinian_.
Third edition, revised by Peter Stein. Cambridge, 1963; corrected
reprint, 1975.

Chatelain, E., _Paléographie des classiques latins_. Paris, 1894-1900.

Cope, E. M., ed. _The Rhetoric of Aristotle_. London, 1877; reprint
edition, New York, 1973.

Costa, C. D. N., ed. _Seneca. Medea_. Oxford, 1973.

Ehrenberg, V. and A. H. M. Jones, _Documents Illustrating the Reigns of
Augustus and Tiberius_. Second edition. Oxford, 1955; reprinted 1963.

Ehwald, R., "Jahresbericht über Ovid von Mai 1894 bis Januar 1902",
_JAW_ 109 (1901), 162-302.

Ehwald, R., _Kritische Beiträge zu Ovids Epistulae ex Ponto_. Gotha,
1896.

Fordyce, C. J., _Catullus. A commentary_. Oxford, 1961; corrected
reprint, 1968.

Gain, D. B., ed. _The Aratus ascribed to Germanicus Caesar_. London,
1976.

Getty, R. J., ed. _M. Annaei Lucani De Bello Ciuili Liber I_. Cambridge,
1940; reprint edition, New York, 1979.

Goold, G. P., "Amatoria Critica". _HSPh_ 69 (1965), 1-107.

Gow, A. S. F., ed. _Theocritus_. 2 vols. Cambridge, 1950.

Gronovius, J. F., _Observationum Libri Quattuor_, ed. F. Platner,
Leipzig, 1755; reprint edition, Leipzig, 1831. (_Observationum Libri
Tres_, Leiden, 1639; second edition, 1662).

Haupt, M., _Opuscula_. Leipzig, 1875; reprint edition, Hildesheim, 1967.

Hedicke, E., _Studia Bentleiana_. Part V: _Ovidius Bentleianus_.
Freienwald, 1905.

Henderson, A. A. R., ed. _P. Ovidi Nasonis Remedia Amoris_. Edinburgh,
1979.

Hilberg, I., _Die Gesetze der Wortstellung im Pentameter des Ovid_.
Leipzig, 1894.

Hofmann, J. B., _Lateinische Umgangsprache_. Third edition. Heidelberg,
1951.

Housman, A. E., _The Classical Papers of A. E. Housman_, edited by J.
Diggle and F. R. D. Goodyear. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1972.

Kassel, R., _Untersuchungen zur griechischen und römischen
Konsolationsliteratur_. Munich, 1958.

Kenney, E. J., "Nequitiae Poeta", in _Ovidiana_, pp. 201-9, ed. N. I.
Herescu. Paris, 1958.

Kenney, E. J., "Ovid and the Law", _YClS_ XXI (1969) 243-63.

Kenney, E. J., "Ouidius Prooemians", _PCPhS_ 202, n.s. 22 (1976), 46-53.

Kiessling, A. G., _Coniectanea Propertiana_. Greifswald, 1876.

Kirfel, E.-A., _Untersuchungen zur Briefform der Heroides Ovids_. Bern
and Stuttgart, 1969.

Korn, O., _De codicibus duobus carminum Ouidianorum ex Ponto datorum
Monacensibus_. Breslau, 1874.

Lattimore, R. A., _Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs_. Urbana, 1962.

Lejay, P., ed. _Horace. Satires_. Paris, 1911; reprint edition,
Hildesheim, 1966.

Lenz, F. W., "Die Wiedergewinnung der von Heinsius Benutzten
Ovidhandschriften in den letzten fünfzig Jahren", _Eranos_ 51 (1953)
66-88 & 61 (1963) 98-120.

Löfstedt, E., _Syntactica_. Vol. 2: _Syntaktisch-Stilistische
Gesichtspunkte und Probleme_. Lund, 1933; reprinted 1956.

Lowe, E. A., _Codices Latini Antiquiores_. 12 vols. Oxford, 1934-71.

Luck, G., ed. _P. Ovidius Naso. Tristia_. 2 vols. Heidelberg, 1967-77.

Madvig, J. N., _Adversaria Critica_. Vol 2: _Emendationes Latinae_.
Copenhagen, 1873.

Martin, R. H., ed. _Terence. Adelphoe_. Cambridge, 1976.

Marx, F., ed. _C. Lucilii Carminum Reliquiae_. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1904;
reprint edition, Amsterdam, 1963.

Merkel, R., ed. _P. Ovidii Nasonis Tristium libri quinque et Ibis_.
Berlin, 1837.

Mommsen, T., _Römische Staatsrecht_. 3 vols. Third edition. Leipzig,
1887; reprint edition, Graz, 1952.

Morel, W., ed. _Fragmenta poetarum Latinorum epicorum et lyricorum
praeter Ennium et Lucilium_. Leipzig, 1927.

Munari, F., _Catalogue of the MSS of Ovid's Metamorphoses_. London,
1957.

Munari, F., "Supplemento al catalogo dei manoscritti delle Metamorfosi
ovidiane", _RFIC_ 93 (1965) 288-97.

Munari, F., "Secondo supplemento al catalogo dei manoscritti delle
Metamorfosi ovidiane", _Studia Florentina Alexandro Ronconi Sexagenario
Oblata_, pp. 275-80, Rome, 1970.

Munro, H. A. J., _Criticisms and Elucidations of Catullus_. Cambridge,
1878; reprint edition, New York, 1938.

Munro, H. A. J., ed. _T. Lucreti Cari De Rerum Natura Libri Sex_. 3
vols. Fourth edition. London, 1886; reprinted 1908; reprint edition, New
York, 1978.

Murgatroyd, P., _Tibullus I_ [commentary]. Pietermaritzburg, 1980.

Nash, E., _Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome_. 2 vols. London, 1961.

Nisbet, R. G. M. and M. Hubbard, _A Commentary on Horace: Odes Book 1_.
Oxford, 1970.

Otto, A., _Die Sprichwörter und Sprichwörtlichen Redensarten der Römer_.
Leipzig, 1898; reprint edition, Hildesheim, 1962.

Owen, S. G., ed. _P. Ovidi Nasonis Tristium liber secundus_. Oxford,
1924.

Palmer, A., ed. _P. Ovidi Nasonis Heroides_. Oxford, 1898.

Platnauer, M., _Latin Elegiac Verse. A study of the metrical usages of
Tibullus, Propertius & Ovid_. Cambridge, 1951; reprint edition, Hamden
(Connecticut), 1971.

Radermacher, L., "Das Epigramm des Didius", _SAWW_ 170,9 (1912) 1-31.

Reeve, M. D., "Heinsius's Manuscripts of Ovid", _RhM_ 117 (1974) 133-36
& 119 (1976) 65-78.

Ribbeck, O., ed. _Tragicorum Romanorum Fragmenta_. Leipzig, 1897.

Roscher, W. H., _Ausführliches Lexikon der Griechischen und Römischen
Mythologie_. 6 vols. Leipzig, 1884-1937.

Sandys, J. E., _Latin Epigraphy_. Second edition. London, 1927; reprint
edition, Chicago, 1974.

Schoenemann, C. P. C., _Bibliothecae Augustae sive notitiarum et
excerptorum codicum Wolfenbuttelensium specimen_. Helmstadt, 1829.

Schwartz, J., "Pompeius Macer et la jeunesse d'Ovide", _RPh_ 25 (1951)
182-94.

Scott, K., "Emperor Worship in Ovid", _TAPhA_ 61 (1930), 43-69.

Shackleton Bailey, D. R., _Propertiana_. Cambridge, 1956.

Smith, K. F., ed. _The Elegies of Albius Tibullus_. New York, 1913;
reprint edition, Darmstadt, 1978.

Syme, R., _History in Ovid_. Oxford, 1978.

Syme, R., _Tacitus_. 2 vols. Oxford, 1958.

Syme, R., _Ten Studies in Tacitus_. Oxford, 1970.

Tarrant, R. J., ed. _Seneca. Agamemnon_. Cambridge, 1976.

Tarrant, R. J., "The Authenticity of the Letter of Sappho to Phaon
(_Heroides_ XV)", _HSPh_ 85 (1981) 133-53.

Tarrant, R. J., article on "Ovid", section on the _Ex Ponto_, _Texts and
Transmission_, ed. L. D. Reynolds, Oxford, 1983, pp. 262-65.

Thibault, J. C., _The Mystery of Ovid's Exile_. Berkeley, 1964.

Wickham, E. C., ed. _Quinti Horati Flacci opera omnia_. 2 vols. Oxford,
1891.

Willis, J. _Latin Textual Criticism_. Urbana, 1972.

Woodcock, E. C., _A New Latin Syntax_. London, 1959; reprinted 1971.



INDEX OF TOPICS DISCUSSED

_The scope of this index is described at pages vii-viii of the Preface._


_ad summam_ = 'in short', 152

addressees in _Ex Ponto IV_, 6-9

advantages offered by digital editions (ebooks), vi-vii

Albinovanus Pedo, 7-8, 327-328

André, J.
  text and translation of 1977, 51-53

apotheoses of Hercules, Aeneas, Romulus, Julius Caesar, and Augustus as
  described by Ovid, 401

articles arising from this edition, iv-vi

_aut_ = 'otherwise', 184, 373


Black Sea, freezing of, 339
  accuracy of Ovid's account, 341
  source for Ovid's account of its freezing, 340-42
  Ammianus Marcellinus' explanation, 342
  Aulus Gellius' explanation, 342
  Lucan's description, 342
  Macrobius' explanation, 341
  Valerius Flaccus' explanation, 341

Brutus, 7, 16, 226

Burman, Peter
  folio edition of the works of Ovid (1727), 37-38


_Calypso_ accusative, 332

_candidus_ =  'kind of heart', 421-22

Carus, 8, 20

_certus eras_ = 'you had made up your mind', 228

conative imperfect tense, 185

conative present tense, 148

Cornelius Severus, 7

Cotta Maximus, 8-9, 465-66

Cottius, 244, 253

_coturnus_ vs. _cothurnus_, 459

cretics, impossibility of using in elegiac verse, 371-73

critical apparatus, conventions used in creating, 34-37


_decipere_: _Me decipit error_ = 'I am making a mistake', 231

_deductum_ =  (1) 'composed', (2) 'finely spun, delicate', 147

Della Corte, F.
  translation and commentary of _Ex Ponto_ (1977), 51

deponent verbs, perfect participle of, 290

differences between _Ex Ponto IV_ and Ovid's earlier poems from exile, 9-11

Donnus, ancestor of Vestalis, 253


editions of the _Ex Ponto_ before Heinsius, 37

Ehwald, Rudolf
  _Kritische Beiträge zu Ovids Epistulae ex Ponto_ (1896), 45-46

_ensis_ vs. _gladius_, 309-310

_eques_: Ovid's status as a member of the equestrian order, 263

_Ex Ponto_ IV a work entirely separate from _EP_ I-III; its structure, 4-5

_Ex Ponto_ vs. _De Ponto_: correct title of the collection, 145

_excidit_ = 'I forgot', 205

_excutere_ = 'examine', 263


Fabius Maximus, 7

_facie_ dative singular of _facies_, 343

_fueram_ equivalent to imperfect, 230


Gallio, 7, 19-20

_Gete_ ablative singular of _Getes_, 195-196

Giants' rebellion, Ovid's unfinished poem about, 272-273

_Gracchus_ vs. _Graccus_, 461

Graecinus, 6-7, 16, 286

_Graius_ vs. _Graecus_, 425

_gratari_ used by the poets in place of the metrically
  difficult _gratulari_, 399


Harles, Theophilus
  edition of 1772; his discovery of manuscript _B_ of the _Ex Ponto_, 39

Heinsius, Nicolaus
  central role in the history of Ovid's text, 37-38
  controversial emendations, 41
  difficulty in determining preferred readings of, 42-43

Herodotus, Ovid's knowledge of, 190, 271

hexameter endings, monosyllabic, 175-176, 323

hexameter, fourth foot
  use of spondees, 150-151

_hiemps_, spelling of, 339-40

history of this edition, iv-vii


Iazyges Sarmatae (Pontic tribe), 246-47

indices, rationale for the two, vii-viii

indirect questions
  Ovid's preference for subjunctive vs. indicative, 391-92
  Propertius' indifference to subjunctive vs. indicative, 392-93

_ingenium loci_ = 'difficulty of its terrain', 251

intended audience of this edition, ii

_is_ vs. _hic_, _ille_, and _iste_, 319


Junius Gallio, 359-60


Korn, Otto
  discovery of manuscript _C_, 45
  edition of 1868: use of manuscript _B_; attitude towards Heinsius, 40-42


_lapsus_ and _lassus_ common variant readings, 383-84

law, Ovid's expertise in, 434-35

Lenz (Levy), F.
  edition of 1922, 48-49
  edition of 1938, 49-50

levels of diction within _Ex Ponto_ IV, 11-12

Luck, G.
  edition of 1963, 50-51


manuscripts of _Ex Ponto_ IV, 23-34
  Antuerpiensis Musei Plantiniani Denucé 68 (_M_), 28-30
  fragmentum Guelferbytanum, Cod. Guelf. 13.11 Aug. 4°  (_G_), 23-24
  Francofurtanus Barth 110 (_F_), 30-31
  Hamburgensis scrin. 52 F (_A_), 23
  Holkhamicus 322 (_H_), 31
  Laurentianus 36 32 (_I_), 32
  Lipsiensis bibl. ciu. Rep. I 2° 7 (_L_), 32
  Monacensis latinus 384 (_B_), 25-28
  Monacensis latinus 19476  (_C_), 25-28
  Parisinus lat. 7993 (_P_), 33
  Turonensis 879 (_T_), 32-33
  vulgate manuscripts (_MFHILT_), 28-29

_mare_ (ablative singular), 242

Merkel, Rudolf
  edition of 1853, 40
  edition of 1884, 45

Morrow, Rob, x

_munus opusque_ = 'creation', 160

_murmur_, 406


nature of this edition, vii

Némethy, Geza
  commentary of 1915, 48

_neque_ = _sed ... non_, 203

_neque_ before vowel, vs. _nec_, 203

_niger_ as a moral quality, 423-24

_nihil_ vs. _nil_, 262

Nireus' handsomeness as a commonplace, 397

numbers higher than _novem_, Roman poets' avoidance of usual names for, 288

_Numida_ masculine substantive and adjective, 294-95


_obliquus_ = 'swirling', 335

opportunity presented by the _Ex Ponto_ to future editors
  and commentators, iii

Ovid's attitude towards his wife, 9

Ovid's life and literary production in exile, 1-4

Owen, S. G.
  edition of 1894, 45
  edition of 1915, 46-47


_penna_ vs. _pinna_, 28, 203

pentameter endings
  trisyllabic, 294
  quadrisyllabic, 164-166
  pentasyllabic, 181-182

perfect subjunctive vs. future perfect indicative forms, 215

polyptoton, Ovid's use of, 278, 378

_potior_ = 'more important', 301

_principes viri_, 268

prose words in _EP_ IV, 12


_qui_ used for _quis_ ("_qui sit_"), 178-179

_quod_ = 'granted that', 337-338

_quoque magis_, 293


reasons why the text in this edition differs from that of earlier editors, iii

_res lassae (fessae)_, 383-84

Riese, Alexander
  independence of judgment in 1874 edition, 44


Severus, 18-19

Sextus Pompeius, 6, 146
  poems addressed to, 12-14

simple verbs used for compound ones, 281

Suillius (P. Suillius Rufus), 260
  poem addressed to (viii), 14-15

_summotum_ vs. _submotum_, 468

_suscensere_ vs. _succensere_, 415

syllepsis, Ovid's use of, 234


_ter quarter_ = 'infinitely', 296

Thersites' ugliness as a commonplace, 396

third declension accusative plural endings: _-es_ vs. _-is_, 27-28

titles of the individual poems, 34

Tuticanus, 8, 17-18


Ulysses' voyage a favourite topic of the Roman poets, 330-31

_ut in populo_ = 'in the crowd', 216


Vestalis, 8, 21, 244

_viderit_ = 'let him look to himself', 151-152

Virgil, _Aen_ I 608, Ovid's interpretation of, 321


Weber, W. E.
  _Corpus Poetarum Latinorum_ (1833); attitude towards Heinsius, 39-40

Wheeler, A. L.
  text and translation (1924), 49

Williams, W. H.
  commentary (1881): focus on Indo-European philology, 44



INDEX OF TEXTUAL EMENDATIONS

_This is an index to those textual emendations first appearing in this edition.
Where a critic's name is not supplied, the emendation was proposed by
the Editor._


Germanicus
  _Aratea_ 26: 343

Horace
  _Carm_ III xiv 19: 306

Mela
  II 7: 349

Ovid, _Heroides_
  IX 101: 233

Ovid, _Ars Amatoria_
  III 803-04 (R. J. Tarrant): 398

Ovid, _Metamorphoses_
  VI 233: 306
  IX 711: 233
  XI 493: 386
  XIV 233: 335

Ovid, _Fasti_
  V 580: 196

Ovid, _Tristia_
  III vi 7: 303, 421
  III x 38: 246

Ovid, _Ex Ponto_
  II v 15-16: 293
  III iv 58: 284-85
  IV i 16 (J. N. Grant): 57
  IV i 21: 57, 154
  IV ii 17 (A. Dalzell): 60, 168
  IV ii 17 (R. J. Tarrant): 60, 168
  IV iii 32: 65, 187-188
  IV iii 50 (R. J. Tarrant): 67, 195
  IV iv 34: 70
  IV vi 15: 77, 231-32
  IV vi 15 (J. N. Grant): 77, 232
  IV vi 34 (R. J. Tarrant): 78, 239
  IV vi 38: 78, 240-241
  IV vi 38 (D. R. Shackleton Bailey): 78, 241
  IV viii 16: 87, 263
  IV viii 60: 90, 275
  IV viii 71 (R. J. Tarrant): 91, 279
  IV ix 41: 96, 298
  IV ix 59-60: 97, 303
  IV ix 73: 98, 306
  IV ix 103 (R. J. Tarrant): 101, 315-16
  IV ix 113: 102, 318
  IV ix 115-16 (R. J. Tarrant): 102, 318
  IV ix 133-34: 104, 322-23
  IV ix 134 (C. P. Jones): 104, 323
  IV x 76: 112, 355-56
  IV xi 15: 114, 365
  IV xii 13 (R. J. Tarrant): 116, 375
  IV xii 50: 119, 387-88
  IV xiii 31-32 (punctuation): 122
  IV xiii 45: 123, 408
  IV xiv 6: 125, 412
  IV xiv 23: 127
  IV xiv 33: 128
  IV xv 2: 131
  IV xv 25-26: 133, 438
  IV xv 34 (R. J. Tarrant): 134, 440-41
  IV xv 34: 134, 440-41
  IV xv 42: 135
  IV xvi 3: 136, 448-49
  IV xvi 35 (C. P. Jones): 141, 463-64
  IV xvi 39 (punctuation): 141, 464
  IV xvi 51-52: 142, 469-70

Pliny the Elder
  _NH_ XXXIV 34 (R. J. Tarrant): 419

Porphyrion
  on Hor. _Sat_ I v 87: 372

Propertius
  III xiv 14: 350

Suetonius
  _Tiberius_ 18: 299

Tacitus
  _Ann_ II 66: 308





*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Last Poems of Ovid" ***

Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.