=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 Andre's 'Je vis au loin, ici, ou 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.