^{page 264 note 1} Otis, B., Ovid as an Epic Poet (ed. 1, Cambridge, 1966), 339;Google Scholar cf. Schanz-Hosius, , Geschichte der römischen Literatur, ii (Munich, 1935), 243–9.Google Scholar

^{page 264 note 2} e.g. W. Kraus, s.n. P. Ovidius Naso, R.E. xviii (1942), 1961; E. J. Kenney, ‘The poetry of Ovid's exile’, Proc. Camb. Philol. Soc. N.S. xi (1965), 37–49.

^{page 264 note 3} R. Marache, ‘La révolte d'Ovide exilé contre Auguste’, in Ovidiana (ed. N. I. Herescu, Paris, 1958), 412 ff.; W. Marg, ‘Zur Behandlung des Augustus in den “"Tristien” Ovids’, in Ovid (ed. Albrecht, M. V. and Zinn, E., Wege der Forschung xcii [1968]),Google Scholar 502 ff.; Meise, E., Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Julisch-Claudischen Dynastie (Munich, 1969), esp. Anhang I (p. 223): ‘Die Verbannung Ovids’.Google Scholar

^{page 264 note 4} 313–572.

^{page 264 note 5} Otis, op. cit. (ed. I), 339. The suggestion that literary opposition might be combined with political conformity had been made by others, e.g. Gardthausen, , Augustus and seine Zeit (Leipzig, 1904),Google Scholar 1243 f. The conserva tive position that Ovid was an Augustan vates in the line of Vergil and Horace who had no interest in politics has recently been restated by Vulikh, N. V. in Vestnik Drevnei Istorii ciu (1968), 151–60: ‘In the “Letters” Ovid speaks as a loyal citizen who serves his state and princeps in the city of Tomi. In the ‘Tristia’, Ovid speaks out against the despotism of Augustus, attacking him not for his statesmanship, but for his attitude to literature and poets. Here, for the first time in literary history, Ovid sets the theme of ‘emperor and poet’ and dwells on the conflict between despotism and poetic genius.’Google Scholar

^{page 264 note 6} Otis, op. cit. (ed. 2, 1968), 351,368. Cf. Marache, loc. cit. 416, who says that the reference to dice in Trist. 2. 471 f. ‘est une attaque ouverte’. Wilkinson, L. P., Ovid Recalled (Cambridge, 1955), 303, says that in Tristia 2 Ovid attempts ‘to discomfort his not invulnerable oppressor’ and perhaps to ‘appeal over the emperor's head to public opinion’.Google Scholar

^{page 265 note 1} See, for example, H. Last, ‘The Social Policy of Augustus’, in C.A.H. x (1934), 425–64; Brunt, P. A., Italian Manpower (Oxford, 1971), Appendix g (p. 558): ‘The Augustan Marriage Laws’.Google Scholar

^{page 265 note 2} Suetonius, Div. Aug. 34. I.

^{page 265 note 3} Dio 56. 10. 1.

^{page 265 note 4} Suet. Div. Aug. 34. 2 ‘abolitionem (legis) publico spectaculo pertinaciter postulante equite. ’. Since Dio 56. II. I explicitly states that Germanicus was in Dalmatia during the demonstration which he describes, there may (if Dio's chronology is right) have been two separate incidents.

^{page 265 note 5} Loc. cit. 455.

^{page 265 note 6} Pliny, N.H. 7. 149.

^{page 265 note 7} On the question of whether Augustus had any clear idea of calling a halt to Roman expansion at any particular point cf. Brunt, P. A., J.R.S. liii (1963), 170–6,Google Scholar and Wells, C. M., The German Policy of Augustus (Oxford, 1972).Google Scholar

^{page 265 note 8} Dio 54. 25. 5 f.

^{page 266 note 1} Dio 55. 13. 4. On conscription in the early empire cf. Brunt, P. A., ‘Conscription and Volunteering in the Roman Imperial Army’, Scripta Classics Israelica i (1974), 90 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 266 note 2} Dio 55. 23. I. On the need to revise the terms of service cf. P. A. Brunt, Italian Manpower, 334 f.

^{page 266 note 3} Tac. Ann. 1. 31. The call-up is also mentioned by Macrobius Sat. I. I I. 32. Cf. Brunt, P. A., Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie and Epigraphik xiii (1974), 161 ff.; Dio 56. 23. 2 f. It is hardly surprising that the Pannonian legions were continually on the point of mutiny: Dio 56. 12. 2, 13. 1 (A.D. 9).Google Scholar

^{page 266 note 4} Suet. Div. Aug. 25. 2.

^{page 266 note 5} VelleillS 2. III.

^{page 266 note 6} Dio 55. 31. 1.

^{page 266 note 7} Suet. Div. Aug. 24. I tells of an eques who was punished ‘quod duobus filiis adulescentibus causa detrectandi sacramenti pollices amputasset’.

^{page 266 note 8} Dio 55. 24.9 and 25. I. Dio notes in this context that ex-quaestors and ex-tribunes had to be forced by lot to take on the expensive office of aedile in A.D. 5.

^{page 266 note 9} Dio 55. 25. 2. Cf. Res Gestae Divi Augusti 17. 2.

^{page 266 note 10} Dio 55. 25. 5.

^{page 266 note 11} Dio 55.31.4.

^{page 267 note 1} Dio 55. 31. 2 says that this was due to the ‘needs of the war’; in the context, it could be taken to refer to the need to avoid unrest during the crisis.

^{page 267 note 2} Cf. Dio 56. 2–10. 3 and Suet. Div. Aug. 34. 2.

^{page 267 note 3} C.A.H. x. 452 Cf. Dio 56. to. But discontent at the high level of taxation continued: Dio 56. 28. 4 (A.D. 13).

^{page 267 note 4} Dio 55. 26.4.

^{page 267 note 5} Dio 54. 2. 4.

^{page 267 note 6} Dio 55. 27.; cf. Suet. Div. Aug. 25. 2, where the clause ‘praeterquam incendiorum causa et si tumultus in graviore annona metueretur’ presumably refers to the vigiles.

^{page 267 note 7} Reynolds, P. K. B., The Vigiles of Imperial Rome (Oxford, 1926), 17 f.Google Scholar

^{page 267 note 8} Suet. Div. Aug. 42. 3; Dio. 55. 26. 1.

^{page 267 note 9} Dio 55. 31. 3 f.; cf. J. Wilhelm, ‘Das römische Sakralwesen unter Augustus als Pontifex Maximus’ (Diss. Strassburg, 1915), 84 f.

^{page 267 note 10} Dio 55. 28. 2; cf. Bowersock, G., Augustus and the Greek World (Oxford, 1965), 105 (Thessaly), 105 ff. (Athens, A.D. 13).Google Scholar

^{page 267 note 11} Velleius 2. 100 names Iullus Antonius, Quinctius Crispinus, Appius Claudius, Sempronius Gracchus, and a Scipio. Cf. Meise, op. cit. (above p. 264 n. 3), 5–27.

^{page 268 note 1} Pliny, N.H. 7. 149 ‘consilia parricidae palam facta’; Seneca, de brew. vit. 4. 6 confirms that Augustus was threatened (‘itertun timenda cum Antonio mulier’). Cf. Dio 55. 10. 15.

^{page 268 note 2} Dio 55. 14 f. Cf. Groag, R.E. iv. 1288.

^{page 268 note 3} Dio 55. 27. 2; if this is the Plautius Rufus of Suet. Div. Aug. 19, the plot will have involved L. Aemilius Paullus (cos. A.D. I) and his wife, Augustus' granddaughter Julia, who—according to the Scholiast to Juvenal 6. 158—had already been banished once before she was finally exiled in A.D. 8. Perhaps this was the occasion in A.D. 6 to which Suetonius refers in Claud. 26: ‘Aemiliam Lepidam Augusti proneptem. quod parentes eius Augustum offenderant, virginem adhuc repudiavit.’ Suetonius' comment suggests that Julia's husband shared her disgrace. The L. Aemilius Lepidus who died as an Arval Brother in A.D. 13 or 14 (C.I.L. vi. 2023) was not the same person: cf. Fritzler, R.E. x (1917), 906 ff., and Meise, op. cit. 35–48, who suggests that Julia was only banished once, the Scholiast being confused by the fact that there was an ‘official’ as well as a ‘real’ explanation for her banishment. He also thinks that Ovid was involved (223 ff.).

^{page 268 note 4} Cf. Gardthausen, R.E. x (1917), 183 f.

^{page 268 note 5} Tac. Ann. 1. 72. 4.

^{page 268 note 6} Tacitus, in his summary of the hostile comments at Augustus' death (Ann. 1. to), does not give the impression that he thought the regime was threatened in these years (he only mentions the Varus disaster and Livia's machinations).

^{page 268 note 7} Another Augustan poet to liken the princeps to a god was Horace (Odes 3. 5. I, I. 12. 49). Such comparisons were not made only of emperors—cf. Horace, Sat. I. 7. 24 (Brutus, while in Asia). Regrettably, there seems to be no evidence that the attitude of Augustan poets was inspired by Hellenistic panegyric. There is epigraphical evidence that divine honours were still being paid to proconsuls in their own provinces as late as 8 B.C., and it was not until A.D. II that Augustus established a monopoly (Dio. 56. 25. 6). Cf. Bowersock op. cit. 119.

^{page 269 note 1} Cf. Res Gestae Divi Augusti 3. I; 34. 2.

^{page 269 note 2} Odes 3. 14. 5.

^{page 269 note 3} Cf. Marache, op. cit. 413.

^{page 269 note 4} S. G. Owen notes in his commentary (Oxford, 1924) that the rituals Ovid had in mind (‘Ausonias matres’) must have been quite exceptional for the Magna Mater, but does not place the occasion in the context of the famine of A.D. 5–8.

^{page 269 note 5} The reader may consult Thibault, J. C., The Mystery of Ovid's Exile (Berkeley, 1964). The evidence from Ovid's own poems is assembled by Owen in the introduction to his commentary.Google Scholar

^{page 269 note 6} A traditional topos: cf. Cicero, N.D. 2. 167 ‘magna di curant, parva neglegunt’.

^{page 270 note 1} It may of course be that in the absence of opportunities for research at Torn Ovid had to make as much use as he could of his own works.

^{page 270 note 2} Suet. Div. Aug. 71. i, who goes on to quote a letter of Augustus' to Tiberius. Cf. Plut. Ant. 33, Moratia 319 f–320 a; Marache, 416; K. Scott, ‘Another of Ovid's Errors’, C.J. xxvi (1930/1), 293 ff.

^{page 271 note 1} It is interesting that when Pliny defends himself against the charge that as a senator he should refrain from writing poetry, he refers to the precedent of Augustus, among others (Ep. 5. 3. 2). The specimen of Augustus' verses quoted by Martial II. 20 suggests that these compositions could be as spicy as anything we find in Ovid; but this example was written as propaganda during the war against M. Antonius, and belongs to the different, and traditionally Roman, genre of political invective.

^{page 271 note 2} For Ovid's connections with the aristocratic family of M. Valerius Messalla Corvinus, in whose household he had been educated, cf. A. L. Wheeler, ‘Topics from the life of Ovid’, A.J.P. xlvi (1925), pp. x-28. I must express my particular thanks for comments and corrections to Prof. P. A. Brunt, Prof. E. J. Kenney, Dr. O. Murray, Prof. W. J. N. Rudd, Prof. Dr. J. Vogt, and Dr. M. Winterbottom.