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_.