=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: he polie de / autik' anamnesei tauta se panta kome]'.

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.