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.]