Korn, Ottodiscovery of manuscriptC,45edition of 1868: use of manuscriptB; attitude towards Heinsius,40-42lapsusandlassuscommon variant readings,383-84law, Ovid's expertise in,434-35Lenz (Levy), F.edition of 1922,48-49edition of 1938,49-50levels of diction withinEx PontoIV,11-12Luck, G.1963,50-51manuscripts ofEx PontoIV,23-34Antuerpiensis Musei Plantiniani Denucé 68 (M),28-30fragmentum Guelferbytanum, Cod. Guelf. 13.11 Aug. 4° (G),23-24Francofurtanus Barth 110 (F),30-31Hamburgensis scrin. 52 F (A),23Holkhamicus 322 (H),31Laurentianus 36 32 (I),32Lipsiensis bibl. ciu. Rep. I 2° 7 (L),32Monacensis latinus 384 (B),25-28Monacensis latinus 19476 (C),25-28Parisinus lat. 7993 (P),33Turonensis 879 (T),32-33vulgate manuscripts (MFHILT),28-29
mare(ablative singular),242Merkel, Rudolfedition of 1853,40edition of 1884,45Morrow, Rob,xmunus opusque= 'creation',160murmur,406nature of this edition,viiNémethy, Gezacommentary of 1915,48neque=sed ... non,203nequebefore vowel, vs.nec,203nigeras a moral quality,423-24
nihilvs.nil,262Nireus' handsomeness as a commonplace,397numbers higher thannovem, Roman poets' avoidance of usual names for,288Numidamasculine substantive and adjective,294-95obliquus= 'swirling',335opportunity presented by theEx Pontoto future editors and commentators,iiiOvid's attitude towards his wife,9Ovid's life and literary production in exile,1-4Owen, S. G.edition of 1894,45edition of 1915,46-47pennavs.pinna,28,203pentameter endingstrisyllabic,294quadrisyllabic,164-166pentasyllabic,181-182
perfect subjunctive vs. future perfect indicative forms,215polyptoton, Ovid's use of,278,378potior= 'more important',301principes viri,268prose words inEPIV,12quiused forquis("qui sit"),178-179quod= 'granted that',337-338quoque magis,293reasons why the text in this edition differs from that of earlier editors,iiires lassae (fessae),383-84
Riese, Alexanderindependence of judgment in 1874 edition,44Severus,18-19Sextus Pompeius,6,146poems addressed to,12-14simple verbs used for compound ones,281Suillius (P. Suillius Rufus),260poem addressed to (viii),14-15summotumvs.submotum,468suscenserevs.succensere,415syllepsis, Ovid's use of,234ter quarter= 'infinitely',296Thersites' ugliness as a commonplace,396third declension accusative plural endings:-esvs.-is,27-28titles of the individual poems,34
Tuticanus,8,17-18Ulysses' voyage a favourite topic of the Roman poets,330-31ut in populo= 'in the crowd',216Vestalis,8,21,244viderit= 'let him look to himself',151-152Virgil,AenI 608, Ovid's interpretation of,321Weber, W. E.Corpus Poetarum Latinorum(1833); attitude towards Heinsius,39-40Wheeler, A. L.text and translation (1924),49Williams, W. H.commentary (1881): focus on Indo-European philology,44
This is an index to those textual emendations first appearing in this edition.Where a critic's name is not supplied, the emendation was proposed by the Editor.
GermanicusAratea26:343HoraceCarmIII xiv 19:306MelaII 7:349Ovid,HeroidesIX 101:233Ovid,Ars AmatoriaIII 803-04 (R. J. Tarrant):398Ovid,MetamorphosesVI 233:306IX 711:233XI 493:386XIV 233:335Ovid,FastiV 580:196Ovid,TristiaIII vi 7:303,421III x 38:246Ovid,Ex PontoII v 15-16:293III iv 58:284-85IV i 16 (J. N. Grant):57IV i 21:57,154IV ii 17 (A. Dalzell):60,168IV ii 17 (R. J. Tarrant):60,168IV iii 32:65,187-188IV iii 50 (R. J. Tarrant):67,195IV iv 34:70IV vi 15:77,231-32IV vi 15 (J. N. Grant):77,232IV vi 34 (R. J. Tarrant):78,239IV vi 38:78,240-241IV vi 38 (D. R. Shackleton Bailey):78,241IV viii 16:87,263IV viii 60:90,275IV viii 71 (R. J. Tarrant):91,279IV ix 41:96,298IV ix 59-60:97,303IV ix 73:98,306IV ix 103 (R. J. Tarrant):101,315-16IV ix 113:102,318IV ix 115-16 (R. J. Tarrant):102,318IV ix 133-34:104,322-23IV ix 134 (C. P. Jones):104,323IV x 76:112,355-56IV xi 15:114,365IV xii 13 (R. J. Tarrant):116,375IV xii 50:119,387-88IV xiii 31-32 (punctuation):122IV xiii 45:123,408IV xiv 6:125,412IV xiv 23:127IV xiv 33:128IV xv 2:131IV xv 25-26:133,438IV xv 34 (R. J. Tarrant):134,440-41IV xv 34:134,440-41IV xv 42:135IV xvi 3:136,448-49IV xvi 35 (C. P. Jones):141,463-64IV xvi 39 (punctuation):141,464IV xvi 51-52:142,469-70Pliny the ElderNHXXXIV 34 (R. J. Tarrant):419Porphyrionon Hor.SatI v 87:372PropertiusIII xiv 14:350SuetoniusTiberius18:299TacitusAnnII 66:308
FOOTNOTES:[1]The evidence for Ovid'serrorand the many theories advanced to explain it are gathered and fully discussed in J. C. Thibault'sThe Mystery of Ovid's Exile(Berkeley: 1964).[2]For these references I am indebted to page xxxv of A. L. Wheeler's excellent introduction to the Loeb edition of theTristiaandEx Ponto. For the date of Tiberius' triumph, see SymeHistory in Ovid40.[3]Professor Tarrant notes however that unlike I-III the fourth book was not written within a very short time; if Ovid had collected what he thought worth publishing of his output over several years, it would not be surprising to find it longer than the preceding collections.[4]Professor E. Fantham notes as well the central placement of poem ix, with itslaudes Augusti.[5]Full information on what is known of each of the addressees will be found in the introductions to the poems in the commentary.[6]Ovid had used a similar technique inTrI i, where he gives his book instructions for its voyage to Rome, including directions on how it should approach Augustus.[7]Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me in particular that lines 63-64 on the apotheosis of Augustus being in part accomplished through poetry are one of the few instances in the poetry of exile of Ovid's earlier mischievous irony towards Augustus—a sign of a return on Ovid's part to his earlier form.[8]However, Albinovanus' poem on Germanicus' campaigns may have had a strong geographical element; as Professor E. Fantham notes, Ovid may here be appealing to this interest, or demonstrating competitive skill in handling the topic.[9]The manuscripts were probably produced at the same German centre. Professor R. J. Tarrant has noted the presence of theEx Pontoin book-lists of the eleventh and early twelfth centuries from Blaubeuern, Tegernsee, Bamberg, Egmond, and Cracow (Texts and Transmission263); he suggests Tegernsee to me as a probable candidate for the production ofBandC.[10]G. P. Goold ("Amatoria Critica",HSPh69 [1965] 10) has an interesting discussion of the problems in establishing Ovid's orthography. For accusative plural endings in the third declension, he concludes that-isfor Ovid can be neither established nor excluded.[11]In recent years much progress has been made in identifying the manuscripts Heinsius used. See the monograph of Munari and the articles of Reeve and Lenz listed in the bibliography.[12]Electa minora ex Ovidio, Tibullo et Propertio, London, 1705. The book was reprinted as late as 1860 (Brit. Mus. Gen. Catalogue, vol. 177, col. 470). I quote some of the notes on x in the commentary and apparatus.[13]'Diligenter autem et religiose tractaui codicem et singulas epistolas bis, et in locis uexatis saepius contuli. Neque tamen, quae hominum est imbecillitas, aciem oculorum quaedam effugisse, negabo' (xi-xii).[14]A. Grafton has noted that Heinsius' publisher Elzevier seems to have been unwilling to alter the text as it already existed (JRSLXVII [1977], 173). I owe my knowledge of Heinsius' editorial practices as here described to Professor R. J. Tarrant, who has examined the Harvard copies of the 1664 edition of Heinsius' text (without notes), the 1670 Leiden edition of Bernard Cnippingius, which reproduces Heinsius' notes, and the 1663 reprint of Daniel Heinsius' edition.[15]Consequently any statements I make on Heinsius' editorial practices are based on explicit statements in his notes.[16]My knowledge of the manuscript is drawn from André's apparatus.[17]He collated four other manuscripts,M,Bernensis bibl. munic. 478,Diuionensis bibl. munic. 497, andBritish Library Burney 220, but gives their readings only occasionally.[18]These figures are taken from Platnauer 17 and from page vii of Riese's preface to his edition.[19]A drinking-vessel holding one third of asextarius(OLDtriens3).[20]Compare SuetAug89 3 'componi tamen aliquid de se nisi et serio et a praestantissimis offendebatur, admonebatque praetores ne paterentur nomen suum commissionibus obsolefieri ['be cheapened in prize declamations'—Rolfe]'.[21]PIR1A 343;PIR2A 479; PW 1,1 1314 21-40; Schanz-Hosius II 266 (§315); Bardon 69-73.[22]Macrobius does include the explanation for the freezing-over. In view of his fuller account, I believe that Macrobius drew his material from Gellius' source and not from Gellius. It is of course possible enough that Macrobius conflated Gellius with another source.[23]This seems the best solution to the awkwardness of the line as currently printed. Gellius IX xiv 21 gives two examples of dativefaciefrom Lucilius. Plautus regularly usesfide(Aul667,Pers193,Poen890,Trin117) anddie(Am546,Capt464,Trin843); dativepubeis found atPseud126. Sallust and Caesar usefide(Iug16 3;BGV 3 7); at the time of Germanicus,fideis found at HorSatI iii 94-95 'quid faciam si furtum fecerit, aut si / prodiderit commissafidesponsumue negarit?', andpernicieat Livy V 13 5.[24]PIR1I 493;PIR2I 756; PW X,l 1035 26; Schanz-Hosius 349 (§ 336)[25]Instances atHerVI 99,AmI xiv 13 & II vii 23,AAII 675, III 81 & III 539,MetXIII 117, XIII 854 & XIV 684,FastIII 143, III 245 & VI 663,TrI v 79, II 135, V x 43, V xii 21 & V xiv 15,EPI vii 31, II xi 23, III ii 103, III iv 45, III vi 35, IV x 45, the present passage, and IV xiv 45. (Ovid's imitator uses the expression atHerXVII 199.) The preponderance of this presumably colloquial expression in the poems of exile is noteworthy.[26]PIR1T 314; PW VII A,2 1611 62; Schanz-Hosius 272 (§ 318 16)[27]Honestus XXI 1-2 Gow-Page (Garland of Philip); discussed by Professor Jones atHSCP74 (1970) 249-55.[28]PW XV,2 1481 3; JacobyFGrHno. 184.[29]PIR1D 131;PIR2D 153; Schanz-Hosius 174-76 (§ 275-76); Bardon 52-57.[30]PIR1P 473; SymeHO73-74; Bardon 65-66; J. Schwartz, "Pompeius Macer et la jeunesse d'Ovide",RPhXXV (1951) 182-94. Macer is discussed in the section of Schanz-Hosius dealing with Ovid's catalogue of poets (269-72; § 318); I give references to Schanz-Hosius below only for poets dealt with outside this section.[31]PIR1A 1236;PIR2A 1488; PW 11,2 2490 13
[1]The evidence for Ovid'serrorand the many theories advanced to explain it are gathered and fully discussed in J. C. Thibault'sThe Mystery of Ovid's Exile(Berkeley: 1964).
[1]The evidence for Ovid'serrorand the many theories advanced to explain it are gathered and fully discussed in J. C. Thibault'sThe Mystery of Ovid's Exile(Berkeley: 1964).
[2]For these references I am indebted to page xxxv of A. L. Wheeler's excellent introduction to the Loeb edition of theTristiaandEx Ponto. For the date of Tiberius' triumph, see SymeHistory in Ovid40.
[2]For these references I am indebted to page xxxv of A. L. Wheeler's excellent introduction to the Loeb edition of theTristiaandEx Ponto. For the date of Tiberius' triumph, see SymeHistory in Ovid40.
[3]Professor Tarrant notes however that unlike I-III the fourth book was not written within a very short time; if Ovid had collected what he thought worth publishing of his output over several years, it would not be surprising to find it longer than the preceding collections.
[3]Professor Tarrant notes however that unlike I-III the fourth book was not written within a very short time; if Ovid had collected what he thought worth publishing of his output over several years, it would not be surprising to find it longer than the preceding collections.
[4]Professor E. Fantham notes as well the central placement of poem ix, with itslaudes Augusti.
[4]Professor E. Fantham notes as well the central placement of poem ix, with itslaudes Augusti.
[5]Full information on what is known of each of the addressees will be found in the introductions to the poems in the commentary.
[5]Full information on what is known of each of the addressees will be found in the introductions to the poems in the commentary.
[6]Ovid had used a similar technique inTrI i, where he gives his book instructions for its voyage to Rome, including directions on how it should approach Augustus.
[6]Ovid had used a similar technique inTrI i, where he gives his book instructions for its voyage to Rome, including directions on how it should approach Augustus.
[7]Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me in particular that lines 63-64 on the apotheosis of Augustus being in part accomplished through poetry are one of the few instances in the poetry of exile of Ovid's earlier mischievous irony towards Augustus—a sign of a return on Ovid's part to his earlier form.
[7]Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me in particular that lines 63-64 on the apotheosis of Augustus being in part accomplished through poetry are one of the few instances in the poetry of exile of Ovid's earlier mischievous irony towards Augustus—a sign of a return on Ovid's part to his earlier form.
[8]However, Albinovanus' poem on Germanicus' campaigns may have had a strong geographical element; as Professor E. Fantham notes, Ovid may here be appealing to this interest, or demonstrating competitive skill in handling the topic.
[8]However, Albinovanus' poem on Germanicus' campaigns may have had a strong geographical element; as Professor E. Fantham notes, Ovid may here be appealing to this interest, or demonstrating competitive skill in handling the topic.
[9]The manuscripts were probably produced at the same German centre. Professor R. J. Tarrant has noted the presence of theEx Pontoin book-lists of the eleventh and early twelfth centuries from Blaubeuern, Tegernsee, Bamberg, Egmond, and Cracow (Texts and Transmission263); he suggests Tegernsee to me as a probable candidate for the production ofBandC.
[9]The manuscripts were probably produced at the same German centre. Professor R. J. Tarrant has noted the presence of theEx Pontoin book-lists of the eleventh and early twelfth centuries from Blaubeuern, Tegernsee, Bamberg, Egmond, and Cracow (Texts and Transmission263); he suggests Tegernsee to me as a probable candidate for the production ofBandC.
[10]G. P. Goold ("Amatoria Critica",HSPh69 [1965] 10) has an interesting discussion of the problems in establishing Ovid's orthography. For accusative plural endings in the third declension, he concludes that-isfor Ovid can be neither established nor excluded.
[10]G. P. Goold ("Amatoria Critica",HSPh69 [1965] 10) has an interesting discussion of the problems in establishing Ovid's orthography. For accusative plural endings in the third declension, he concludes that-isfor Ovid can be neither established nor excluded.
[11]In recent years much progress has been made in identifying the manuscripts Heinsius used. See the monograph of Munari and the articles of Reeve and Lenz listed in the bibliography.
[11]In recent years much progress has been made in identifying the manuscripts Heinsius used. See the monograph of Munari and the articles of Reeve and Lenz listed in the bibliography.
[12]Electa minora ex Ovidio, Tibullo et Propertio, London, 1705. The book was reprinted as late as 1860 (Brit. Mus. Gen. Catalogue, vol. 177, col. 470). I quote some of the notes on x in the commentary and apparatus.
[12]Electa minora ex Ovidio, Tibullo et Propertio, London, 1705. The book was reprinted as late as 1860 (Brit. Mus. Gen. Catalogue, vol. 177, col. 470). I quote some of the notes on x in the commentary and apparatus.
[13]'Diligenter autem et religiose tractaui codicem et singulas epistolas bis, et in locis uexatis saepius contuli. Neque tamen, quae hominum est imbecillitas, aciem oculorum quaedam effugisse, negabo' (xi-xii).
[13]'Diligenter autem et religiose tractaui codicem et singulas epistolas bis, et in locis uexatis saepius contuli. Neque tamen, quae hominum est imbecillitas, aciem oculorum quaedam effugisse, negabo' (xi-xii).
[14]A. Grafton has noted that Heinsius' publisher Elzevier seems to have been unwilling to alter the text as it already existed (JRSLXVII [1977], 173). I owe my knowledge of Heinsius' editorial practices as here described to Professor R. J. Tarrant, who has examined the Harvard copies of the 1664 edition of Heinsius' text (without notes), the 1670 Leiden edition of Bernard Cnippingius, which reproduces Heinsius' notes, and the 1663 reprint of Daniel Heinsius' edition.
[14]A. Grafton has noted that Heinsius' publisher Elzevier seems to have been unwilling to alter the text as it already existed (JRSLXVII [1977], 173). I owe my knowledge of Heinsius' editorial practices as here described to Professor R. J. Tarrant, who has examined the Harvard copies of the 1664 edition of Heinsius' text (without notes), the 1670 Leiden edition of Bernard Cnippingius, which reproduces Heinsius' notes, and the 1663 reprint of Daniel Heinsius' edition.
[15]Consequently any statements I make on Heinsius' editorial practices are based on explicit statements in his notes.
[15]Consequently any statements I make on Heinsius' editorial practices are based on explicit statements in his notes.
[16]My knowledge of the manuscript is drawn from André's apparatus.
[16]My knowledge of the manuscript is drawn from André's apparatus.
[17]He collated four other manuscripts,M,Bernensis bibl. munic. 478,Diuionensis bibl. munic. 497, andBritish Library Burney 220, but gives their readings only occasionally.
[17]He collated four other manuscripts,M,Bernensis bibl. munic. 478,Diuionensis bibl. munic. 497, andBritish Library Burney 220, but gives their readings only occasionally.
[18]These figures are taken from Platnauer 17 and from page vii of Riese's preface to his edition.
[18]These figures are taken from Platnauer 17 and from page vii of Riese's preface to his edition.
[19]A drinking-vessel holding one third of asextarius(OLDtriens3).
[19]A drinking-vessel holding one third of asextarius(OLDtriens3).
[20]Compare SuetAug89 3 'componi tamen aliquid de se nisi et serio et a praestantissimis offendebatur, admonebatque praetores ne paterentur nomen suum commissionibus obsolefieri ['be cheapened in prize declamations'—Rolfe]'.
[20]Compare SuetAug89 3 'componi tamen aliquid de se nisi et serio et a praestantissimis offendebatur, admonebatque praetores ne paterentur nomen suum commissionibus obsolefieri ['be cheapened in prize declamations'—Rolfe]'.
[21]PIR1A 343;PIR2A 479; PW 1,1 1314 21-40; Schanz-Hosius II 266 (§315); Bardon 69-73.
[21]PIR1A 343;PIR2A 479; PW 1,1 1314 21-40; Schanz-Hosius II 266 (§315); Bardon 69-73.
[22]Macrobius does include the explanation for the freezing-over. In view of his fuller account, I believe that Macrobius drew his material from Gellius' source and not from Gellius. It is of course possible enough that Macrobius conflated Gellius with another source.
[22]Macrobius does include the explanation for the freezing-over. In view of his fuller account, I believe that Macrobius drew his material from Gellius' source and not from Gellius. It is of course possible enough that Macrobius conflated Gellius with another source.
[23]This seems the best solution to the awkwardness of the line as currently printed. Gellius IX xiv 21 gives two examples of dativefaciefrom Lucilius. Plautus regularly usesfide(Aul667,Pers193,Poen890,Trin117) anddie(Am546,Capt464,Trin843); dativepubeis found atPseud126. Sallust and Caesar usefide(Iug16 3;BGV 3 7); at the time of Germanicus,fideis found at HorSatI iii 94-95 'quid faciam si furtum fecerit, aut si / prodiderit commissafidesponsumue negarit?', andpernicieat Livy V 13 5.
[23]This seems the best solution to the awkwardness of the line as currently printed. Gellius IX xiv 21 gives two examples of dativefaciefrom Lucilius. Plautus regularly usesfide(Aul667,Pers193,Poen890,Trin117) anddie(Am546,Capt464,Trin843); dativepubeis found atPseud126. Sallust and Caesar usefide(Iug16 3;BGV 3 7); at the time of Germanicus,fideis found at HorSatI iii 94-95 'quid faciam si furtum fecerit, aut si / prodiderit commissafidesponsumue negarit?', andpernicieat Livy V 13 5.
[24]PIR1I 493;PIR2I 756; PW X,l 1035 26; Schanz-Hosius 349 (§ 336)
[24]PIR1I 493;PIR2I 756; PW X,l 1035 26; Schanz-Hosius 349 (§ 336)
[25]Instances atHerVI 99,AmI xiv 13 & II vii 23,AAII 675, III 81 & III 539,MetXIII 117, XIII 854 & XIV 684,FastIII 143, III 245 & VI 663,TrI v 79, II 135, V x 43, V xii 21 & V xiv 15,EPI vii 31, II xi 23, III ii 103, III iv 45, III vi 35, IV x 45, the present passage, and IV xiv 45. (Ovid's imitator uses the expression atHerXVII 199.) The preponderance of this presumably colloquial expression in the poems of exile is noteworthy.
[25]Instances atHerVI 99,AmI xiv 13 & II vii 23,AAII 675, III 81 & III 539,MetXIII 117, XIII 854 & XIV 684,FastIII 143, III 245 & VI 663,TrI v 79, II 135, V x 43, V xii 21 & V xiv 15,EPI vii 31, II xi 23, III ii 103, III iv 45, III vi 35, IV x 45, the present passage, and IV xiv 45. (Ovid's imitator uses the expression atHerXVII 199.) The preponderance of this presumably colloquial expression in the poems of exile is noteworthy.
[26]PIR1T 314; PW VII A,2 1611 62; Schanz-Hosius 272 (§ 318 16)
[26]PIR1T 314; PW VII A,2 1611 62; Schanz-Hosius 272 (§ 318 16)
[27]Honestus XXI 1-2 Gow-Page (Garland of Philip); discussed by Professor Jones atHSCP74 (1970) 249-55.
[27]Honestus XXI 1-2 Gow-Page (Garland of Philip); discussed by Professor Jones atHSCP74 (1970) 249-55.
[28]PW XV,2 1481 3; JacobyFGrHno. 184.
[28]PW XV,2 1481 3; JacobyFGrHno. 184.
[29]PIR1D 131;PIR2D 153; Schanz-Hosius 174-76 (§ 275-76); Bardon 52-57.
[29]PIR1D 131;PIR2D 153; Schanz-Hosius 174-76 (§ 275-76); Bardon 52-57.
[30]PIR1P 473; SymeHO73-74; Bardon 65-66; J. Schwartz, "Pompeius Macer et la jeunesse d'Ovide",RPhXXV (1951) 182-94. Macer is discussed in the section of Schanz-Hosius dealing with Ovid's catalogue of poets (269-72; § 318); I give references to Schanz-Hosius below only for poets dealt with outside this section.
[30]PIR1P 473; SymeHO73-74; Bardon 65-66; J. Schwartz, "Pompeius Macer et la jeunesse d'Ovide",RPhXXV (1951) 182-94. Macer is discussed in the section of Schanz-Hosius dealing with Ovid's catalogue of poets (269-72; § 318); I give references to Schanz-Hosius below only for poets dealt with outside this section.
[31]PIR1A 1236;PIR2A 1488; PW 11,2 2490 13
[31]PIR1A 1236;PIR2A 1488; PW 11,2 2490 13