The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Last Poems of Ovid, by Ovid This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org ** This is a COPYRIGHTED Project Gutenberg eBook, Details Below ** ** Please follow the copyright guidelines in this file. ** Title: The Last Poems of Ovid Author: Ovid Release Date: June 24, 2007 [eBook #21920] Language: English Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 ***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 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Edition, with Commentary, of the Fourth Book of the _Epistulae ex Ponto_ by Mark Bear Akrigg, Ph.D. * * * * * Original (unpublished) edition Copyright 1985 by Mark Bear Akrigg First published edition, corrected and augmented Copyright 2006 by Mark Bear Akrigg * * * * * This edition and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 Project Gutenberg 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 THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE LAST POEMS OF OVID*** ******* This file should be named 21920-8.txt or 21920-8.zip ******* This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/1/9/2/21920 Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will be renamed. Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. *** START: FULL LICENSE *** THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at http://www.gutenberg.org/license). Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works 1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. 1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. 1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. This particular work is one of the few copyrighted individual works included with the permission of the copyright holder. Information on the copyright owner for this particular work and the terms of use imposed by the copyright holder on this work are set forth at the beginning of this work. 1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United States. 1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: 1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed: This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org 1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. 1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. 1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. 1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg-tm License. 1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. 1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. 1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided that - You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work. - You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. 1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. 1.F. 1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. 1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. 1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem. 1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS,' WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. 1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. 1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life. Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official page at http://pglaf.org For additional contact information: Dr. Gregory B. Newby Chief Executive and Director gbnewby@pglaf.org Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS. The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit http://pglaf.org While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate. International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook's eBook number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII, compressed (zipped), HTML and others. Corrected EDITIONS of our eBooks replace the old file and take over the old filename and etext number. The replaced older file is renamed. VERSIONS based on separate sources are treated as new eBooks receiving new filenames and etext numbers. Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: http://www.gutenberg.org This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. EBooks posted prior to November 2003, with eBook numbers BELOW #10000, are filed in directories based on their release date. If you want to download any of these eBooks directly, rather than using the regular search system you may utilize the following addresses and just download by the etext year. http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext06 (Or /etext 05, 04, 03, 02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90) EBooks posted since November 2003, with etext numbers OVER #10000, are filed in a different way. The year of a release date is no longer part of the directory path. The path is based on the etext number (which is identical to the filename). The path to the file is made up of single digits corresponding to all but the last digit in the filename. For example an eBook of filename 10234 would be found at: http://www.gutenberg.org/1/0/2/3/10234 or filename 24689 would be found at: http://www.gutenberg.org/2/4/6/8/24689 An alternative method of locating eBooks: http://www.gutenberg.org/GUTINDEX.ALL *** END: FULL LICENSE ***