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).