Part 2

Two of Ovid's correspondents were orators. Gallio, the addressee of the eleventh poem, is frequently quoted by the elder Seneca. He was a senator; both Tacitus and Dio give accounts of how he fell into disfavour with Tiberius for proposing that ex-members of the Praetorian guard be granted the privilege of using the theatre seats reserved for members of the equestrian order (_Ann_ VI 3; LVIII 18 4). Brutus, the recipient of the sixth poem and dedicatee of the first three books of the _Ex Ponto_, is not mentioned by other writers, but it appears from vi 29-38 that he had a considerable reputation as a forensic orator, although some allowance must be made for possible exaggeration in Ovid's description of his close friend. The poem contains six lines on the death of Fabius Maximus, to whom Ovid had addressed _EP_ I ii and III iii; perhaps he and Brutus had been associates.

Five epistles are addressed to Ovid's fellow poets. Cornelius Severus, the recipient of the second poem, was one of the most famous epic poets of the day; he is mentioned by Quintilian (X i 89), and the elder Seneca preserves his lines on the death of Cicero (_Suas_ VI 26), Albinovanus Pedo, the recipient of the tenth epistle, was known as a writer of hexameter verse and of epigram. He served in Germanicus' campaign of AD 15 (Tac _Ann_ I 60 2), and the elder Seneca preserves a fragment of his poem on Germanicus' campaigns (_Suas_ I 15). It might be argued that in addressing him Ovid is once again trying to win Germanicus' favour. But in view of his intimacy with Ovid (mentioned at Sen _Cont_ II 2 12), Albinovanus seems a natural choice to receive one of Ovid's letters. Tuticanus, the recipient of the twelfth and fourteenth poems and author of a _Phaeacid_ based on Homer (mentioned at xii 27 and again in the catalogue of poets at xvi 29), is known only through the _Ex Ponto_; the same is true of Carus, author of a poem on Hercules and, as already mentioned, tutor of the sons of Germanicus.

Vestalis, the recipient of the seventh poem, is in a class separate from the other recipients of Ovid's verse epistles. As _primipilaris_ of the legion stationed in the vicinity, he would of course have been without influence at Rome, but as (apparently) the prefect of the region around Tomis, he presumably had some control over Ovid's circumstances.

The traitorous friend to whom the third poem is addressed was a real person, for Ovid is quite explicit when speaking of their past together and of the friend's perfidy towards him; the same cannot be said of the _inuidus_ to whom is addressed the concluding poem of the book, a defence of Ovid's reputation as a poet.

Cotta Maximus, the younger son of Tibullus' patron Messalla, is prominently mentioned at xvi 41-44 as an unpublished poet of outstanding excellence. He is the recipient of six letters in the earlier books of the _Ex Ponto_. Syme finds it significant that there is no poem in _EP_ IV addressed to Cotta: 'Ovid ... was now concentrating his efforts elsewhere: Germanicus, the friends of Germanicus, Sextus Pompeius ... The tardy tribute may perhaps be interpreted as a veiled reproach' (_HO_ 128). But arguments from silence are dangerous; and Ovid's mention of Cotta seems flattering enough.

It is perhaps safer to postulate a change in Ovid's feelings towards his wife. She is never mentioned in _EP_ IV, although she had been the recipient of some eight earlier letters from exile (_Tr_ I vi, III iii, IV iii, V ii, xi, xiv, _EP_ I iv, III i; _Tr_ V v was written in honour of her birthday). At _EP_ III vii 11-12 Ovid indicates that his wife's efforts on his behalf had not matched his hopes:

nec grauis uxori dicar, quae scilicet in me quam proba tam timida est experiensque parum.

The fact that Ovid chose not to address any verse epistle to his wife during his final years at Tomis may well reflect a cooling in his attitude towards her.

Differences between _Ex Ponto_ IV and the earlier poetry from exile

The criticism most often made of Ovid's poems from exile is that they are repetitive and therefore monotonous. _EP_ III ix 1-4 shows that the same criticism was made while Ovid was still alive:

Quod sit in his eadem sententia, Brute, libellis, carmina nescio quem carpere nostra refers: nil nisi me terra fruar ut propiore rogare, et quam sim denso cinctus ab hoste loqui.

Ovid does not attempt to deny the criticism, but explains that he wished to obtain the assistance of as many people as possible:

et tamen haec eadem cum sint, non scripsimus isdem, unaque per plures uox mea temptat opem.

(41-42)

nec liber ut fieret, sed uti sua cuique daretur littera, propositum curaque nostra fuit. postmodo collectas utcumque sine ordine iunxi: hoc opus electum ne mihi forte putes. da ueniam scriptis, quorum non gloria nobis causa, sed utilitas officiumque fuit.

(51-56)

Ovid's explanation is reasonable enough, and is confirmed by the speed with which he composed the first three books of the _Ex Ponto_ once he knew that it was safe to name people in his verse. The first three books of the _Ex Ponto_, like the _Tristia_, were written with the single objective of securing Ovid's recall, and this naturally caused a certain repetition of subject-matter.

By the time Ovid wrote the poems that would form the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_, he had lived in Tomis for six or more years, and it must have been clear to him that his chances of recall were slight. The result of this is a diminished use of his personal situation as a theme for his verse. Often he introduces his plight in only one or two distichs of a poem, subordinating the topic to the poem's main theme. The result of this technique can be seen in such extended passages as the descriptions of the investiture of the new consul (iv & ix), the address to Germanicus on the power of poetry (viii), or the catalogue of poets that concludes the book. In all of these passages Ovid's desire for recall is only a secondary theme.

The mixing of levels of diction

As well as variety of subject, the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ shows a variation in style that is typical of Ovid's letters from exile. The poems use the metre and language of elegiac verse. But at the same time they are _letters_, and are strongly influenced by the structure and vocabulary of prose epistles. This influence is naturally more obvious at some points than at others; and even within a single poem there can be a surprising degree of variation in the different sections of the poem.

Some poems tend more to one extreme than the other. The eleventh poem, a letter of commiseration to Gallio on the death of his wife, is extensively indebted to the genre of the prose letter of consolation; this prose influence is evident in such passages as:

finitumque tuum, si non ratione, dolorem ipsa iam pridem suspicor esse mora

(13-14)

At the opposite extreme is the final poem of the book, a defence of Ovid's poetry; as this was a traditional poetic subject, the level of diction throughout the poem is extremely high, particularly in the catalogue of poets that forms the main body of the poem.

An interesting result of the mixture of styles is the presence in the poems of exile of words and expressions which belong essentially to prose, being otherwise rarely or never found in verse. Some instances from _Ex Ponto_ IV are _ad summam_ (i 15), _conuictor_ (iii 15), _abunde_ (viii 37), _ex toto_ (viii 72), _di faciant_ (ix 3), _secreto_ (ix 31), _respectu_ (ix 100), _quominus_ (xii 1), _praefrigidus_ (xii 35), and _tantummodo_ (xvi 49).

Both in subject and style the sixteen poems of _Ex Ponto_ IV show a wide variety, worthy of the creator of the _Metamorphoses_. The following section examines the special characteristics of each of the poems.

The letters to Sextus Pompeius

Sextus Pompeius is the recipient of poems i, iv, v, and xv; only Cotta Maximus and Ovid's wife have more letters from exile addressed to them. It is clear from the opening of IV i that Pompeius had himself prohibited Ovid from addressing him; and Ovid is careful to present himself as a client rather than a friend; the tone is of almost abject humility, and he shows circumspection in his requests for assistance.

In the opening of the first poem, Ovid describes how difficult it had been to prevent himself from naming Pompeius in his verse; in the climactic ten lines he declares that he is entirely Pompeius' creation. Only in the transition between the topics does he refer to future help from Pompeius, linking it with the assistance he is already providing:

nunc quoque nil subitis clementia territa fatis auxilium uitae fertque feretque meae.

(25-26)

The fourth poem is a description of how Fama came to Ovid and told him of Pompeius' election to the consulship; Ovid then pictures the joyous scene of the accession. At the end of the poem he indirectly asks for Pompeius' assistance, praying that at some point he may remember him in exile. The device of having Fama report Pompeius' accession to the consulship serves to emphasize the importance of the event and raise the tone of the poem. Ovid had earlier used Fama as the formal addressee of _EP_ II i, which described his reaction to the news of Germanicus' triumph. In the fifth poem Ovid achieves a similar effect through the device of addressing the poem itself, giving it directions on where it will find Pompeius and what consular duties he might be performing[6]. Only in the concluding distich does Ovid direct the poem to ask for his assistance.

[Footnote 6: Ovid had used a similar technique in _Tr_ I i, where he gives his book instructions for its voyage to Rome, including directions on how it should approach Augustus.]

The fifteenth poem contains Ovid's most forceful appeal for Pompeius' assistance. It is interesting to observe the techniques Ovid uses to avoid offending Pompeius. The first part of the poem is a metaphorical description of how Ovid is as much Pompeius' property as his many estates or his house in Rome. This leads to Ovid's request:

atque utinam possis, et detur amicius aruum, remque tuam ponas in meliore loco! quod quoniam in dis est, tempta lenire precando numina perpetua quae pietate colis.

(21-24)

He then attempts to compensate for the boldness of his request. First he says that his appeal is unnecessary:

nec dubitans oro; sed flumine saepe secundo augetur remis cursus euntis aquae.

(27-38)

Then he apologizes for making such constant requests:

et pudet et metuo semperque eademque precari ne subeant animo taedia iusta tuo

(29-30)

He ends the poem with a return to the topic of the benefits Pompeius has already rendered him.

The letter to Suillius addressing Germanicus

No poem in the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ is addressed to a member of the imperial family, but the greater part of IV viii, nominally addressed to Suillius, is in fact directed to his patron Germanicus. Suillius' family ties with Ovid and his influential position would have made it natural for Ovid to address him in the earlier books of the _Ex Ponto_ or even in the _Tristia_; and it is clear from the opening of the poem that Suillius must have distanced himself from Ovid:

Littera sera quidem, studiis exculte Suilli, huc tua peruenit, sed mihi grata tamen

In the section that follows, Ovid asks for Suillius' assistance, rather strangely setting forth his own impeccable family background and moral purity; then he moves to the topic of Suillius' piety towards Germanicus, and in line 31 begins to address Germanicus with a direct request for his assistance. In the fifty-eight lines that follow he develops the argument that Germanicus should accept the verse Ovid offers him for two reasons: poetry grants immortality to the subjects it describes; and Germanicus is himself a poet. In this passage Ovid allows himself a very high level of diction; as the topic was congenial to him, the result is perhaps the finest extended passage of verse in the book[7].

[Footnote 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.]

Ovid ends his address to Germanicus by asking for his assistance; only in the final distich of the poem does he return to Suillius.

The letters to Brutus and Graecinus

Only two of the ten addressees named by Ovid in _EP_ IV were recipients of earlier letters from him. Brutus, to whom IV vi is addressed, was also the addressee of _EP_ I i and III ix, while Graecinus, to whom IV ix is addressed, was the recipient of _EP_ I vi and II vi.

There is some difference between Ovid's treatment of Brutus and Graecinus in _EP_ IV and in the earlier poems. _EP_ IV vi is highly personal, being mostly devoted to a lengthy description of Brutus' apparently conflicting but in fact complementary qualities of tenacity as a prosecuting advocate and of kindness towards those in need; no poem in the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ is more completely concerned with the addressee as a person. In contrast, nothing is said of Brutus in _EP_ I i, where he acts as the mere recipient of the plea that he protect Ovid's poems, or in III ix, where Brutus is the reporter of another's remarks on the monotony of Ovid's subject-matter. The address to Graecinus in IV ix, on the other hand, is much less personal than in I vi and II vi. The part of _EP_ IV ix concerned with Graecinus describes his elevation to the consulship, and was clearly written (in some haste) to celebrate the event. The earlier poems are more concerned with Graecinus as an individual: in _EP_ I vi Ovid describes at length Graecinus' kindliness of spirit and his closeness to his exiled friend, while in II vi Ovid admits the justice of the criticism Graecinus makes of the conduct which led to his exile, but thanks him for his support and asks for its continuance.

The letters to Tuticanus

The two letters to Tuticanus show a similar dichotomy.

Of the two poems, xii is more personal and more concerned with poetry. The first eighteen lines are a witty demonstration of the impossibility of using Tuticanus' name in elegiac verse, while the twelve verses that follow recall their poetic apprenticeship together. In the final twelve lines, referring to Tuticanus' senatorial career, Ovid asks him to help his cause in any way possible.

Poem xiv is far less personal than the earlier epistle. The only mention of Tuticanus is at the poem's beginning:

Haec tibi mittuntur quem sum modo carmine questus non aptum numeris nomen habere meis, in quibus, excepto quod adhuc utcumque ualemus, nil te praeterea quod iuuet inuenies.

The bulk of the poem is a defense against charges raised by some of the Tomitans that he has defamed them in his verse. Ovid answers that he was complaining about the physical conditions at Tomis, not the people, to whom he owes a great debt. It is characteristic of the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ that Ovid complains less of his exile than in his earlier verse from exile; this poem furnishes the most explicit demonstration that the years spent in exile and the dwindling likelihood of recall has made Ovid reach an accommodation with his new conditions of life.

The topic of the poem clearly has no relation to Tuticanus; Professor R. J. Tarrant points out to me Ovid's use of the same technique in some of the _Amores_, such as I ix (_Militat omnis amans_), and II x, to Graecinus on loving two women at once, where there is no apparent connection between the addressee and the subject of the poem. Professor E. Fantham notes that the bulk of xiv could even have been written before Ovid chose Tuticanus as its addressee.

Other letters to poets

Three other poems in the book are addressed to poets. In all of them poetry itself is a primary subject.

The letter to Severus

The second poem in the book, addressed to the epic poet Severus, opens with a contrast of the situations of the two poets. The main body of the poem is concerned with the difficulty of composing under the conditions Ovid endures at Tomis, and the comfort that he even so derives from pursuing his old calling. The poem is well constructed and the language vivid. A particularly fine example of the use Ovid makes of differing levels of diction is found at 35-38:

excitat auditor studium, laudataque uirtus crescit, et immensum gloria calcar habet. hic mea cui recitem nisi flauis scripta Corallis, quasque alias gentes barbarus Hister obit?

The emotional height of the tricolon, where Ovid describes poetic inspiration, gives way to a comparatively prosaic distich where he explains that the conditions necessary for inspiration do not exist at Tomis.

At the poem's conclusion Ovid reverts to Severus, asking that he send Ovid some recent piece of work.

The letter to Albinovanus Pedo

In the tenth poem of the book, poetry is not the main subject; instead, Ovid describes the hardships he endures at Tomis, and then describes at length the reasons the Black Sea freezes over. Towards the end of the letter, however, he explains why he is writing a poem to Albinovanus on this seemingly irrelevant topic[8]. The language recalls the poem to Severus:

'detinui' dicam 'tempus, curasque fefelli; hunc fructum praesens attulit hora mihi. abfuimus solito dum scribimus ista dolore, in mediis nec nos sensimus esse Getis.'

[Footnote 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.]

(67-70)

In the poem's concluding lines he links his own situation with the _Theseid_ Albinovanus is engaged on: just as Theseus was faithful, so Albinovanus should be faithful to Ovid.

The letter to Gallio

This letter is remarkable for its economy of structure, and indeed is so short as to seem rather perfunctory. Only twenty-two lines in length, it is a letter of consolation addressed to Gallio on the death of his wife. In the first four lines Ovid apologizes for not having written to him earlier. Ovid's exile serves as a bridge to the main topic of the poem:

atque utinam rapti iactura laesus amici sensisses ultra quod quererere nihil

(5-6)

The remainder of the poem consists of the ingenious interweaving of various commonplaces of consolation. The poem is a good illustration of the secondary importance Ovid often gives his own misfortune in the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_.

The letter to Carus

The thirteenth poem, like the second letter to Tuticanus, shows Ovid's acceptance of his life in Tomis. In it he tells Carus of the favourable reception given a poem he had written in Getic on the apotheosis of Augustus. The poem's opening is of interest as showing Ovid's consciousness of verbal wit as a special characteristic of his verse. He starts the poem with a play on the meaning of Carus' name, then tells him that the opening will by itself tell him who his correspondent is. In the lines that follow he discusses the individuality of his own style and that of Carus; this serves to introduce the subject of his Getic verse.

The letter to Vestalis

The subordination of the topic of Ovid's exile to another subject can be clearly seen in the seventh poem of the book, addressed to Vestalis, _primipilaris_ of a legion stationed in the area of Tomis. As in the letter to Gallio, mention of Ovid's personal misfortune is confined to one short passage near the start of the poem:

aspicis en praesens quali iaceamus in aruo, nec me testis eris falsa solere queri

(3-4)

The descriptions that follow of wine freezing solid in the cold and of the Sarmatian herdsman driving his wagon across the frozen Danube are so picturesque that the reader's attention is drawn away from Ovid's personal situation. Ovid describes the poisoned arrows used in the region; then, in language recalling his letter to Gallio, expresses his regret that Vestalis has had personal experience of these weapons:

atque utinam pars haec tantum spectata fuisset, non etiam proprio cognita Marte tibi!

(13-14)

The remainder of the poem is a description of Vestalis' capture of Aegissos. The description is conventional and unfelt; Ovid seems merely to have assembled a few standard topics of military panegyric.

The third poem

Poem iii, addressed to an unidentified friend who had proved faithless, is a well-crafted but not particularly original warning that Fortune is a changeable goddess, and his friend might well find find himself one day in Ovid's position. The familiar examples of Croesus, Pompey, and Marius are used; as the last and therefore most important example Ovid uses his own catastrophe. The device recalls the _Ibis_, where Ovid's final curse is to wish his enemy's exile to Tomis.

Poem xvi

The concluding poem of the book is a defence of Ovid's poetry. The poem's argument is that poets generally become famous only after their death, but that Ovid gained his reputation while still alive. The greater part of the poem is a catalogue of Ovid's contemporary poets, the argument being that even in such company he was illustrious.

As elsewhere he equates his exile with death; the defence of his poetry therefore includes only the poetry that he wrote before his exile.

TEXTUAL INTRODUCTION

The Manuscripts

The manuscript authority for the text of the fourth book of the _Ex Ponto_ is significantly poorer than for the earlier books because of the absence of _A_, _Hamburgensis scrin. 52 F_. This ninth-century manuscript has been recognized since the time of Heinsius as the most important witness for the text of the _Ex Ponto_; it breaks off, however, at III ii 67.

The manuscript authorities for the fourth book can be placed in three categories. The fragmentary _G_ is from a different tradition than the other manuscripts. _B_ and _C_ are closely related, and offer the best witness to the main tradition. The other manuscripts I have collated are more greatly affected by contamination and interpolation; of them _M_ and _F_ show some independence, while no subclassification can be made of _H_, _I_, _L_, or _T_.

_G_

The _fragmentum Guelferbytanum_, _Cod. Guelf. 13.11 Aug. 4°_, generally dated to the fifth or sixth century, is the oldest manuscript witness to any of Ovid's poems. Part of the collection of the Herzog August Bibliothek in Wolfenbüttel, it was discovered by Carl Schoenemann, who published his discovery in 1829; details of his monograph will be found in the bibliography. The two pieces of parchment are a palimpsest, having been reused in the eighth century for a text of Augustine; later they were incorporated into a bookbinding. As a result of this treatment they are in extremely poor condition.

_G_ contains all or part of ix 101-8, ix 127-33, xii 15-19, and xii 41-44. To make it perfectly clear when _G_ is a witness to the text, I have not grouped it with other manuscripts, but have always specified it by name. If _G_ is not mentioned in an apparatus entry, it is not extant for the text concerned.