TWO CRITICAL NOTES ON AUSONIUS

The following two conjectures are inspired by D. R. Shackleton Bailey's excellent paper 'Ausoniana' (AJP 97 [1976]
248ff.).
Parent. praef. 5ff. nenia, funereis satis officiosa querellis,
annuane tacitis munerapraetereas,
quae Numa cognatis sollemniadedicat umbris,
ut gradusaut mortis postulataut generis.

In examining the different interpretations of the rather curious

phrase gradus mortis, Sh. Bailey comes to the conclusion that
mortis is corrupt (248): "Surely ut ... postulat refers, not to
the order, but to the quality of the tributes, and the determining
factor in that, besides the degree of the relationship will be the
affection felt by the poet." Yes. As for Sh. Bailey's suggestion
mentis (i.a. Ov. Met. 2.368f. is compared), this reading is no
doubt possible, though perhaps a bit puzzling for the reader of
the poem. I therefore suggest meriti[s]. The final -s may have
been added under the influence of generis or cognatis.1 But the
introduction of the noun mors in this context is certainly due to
psychological reasons.
Epist. 27.75ff. quod si intervallispatiumtolerabilelimes
poneretexiguus (quamvislonga omnia credant
qui simul esse volunt), faceret tamen ipsa propinquos
cura locos, mediis iungensdistantiaverbis;
Santonusut sibi Burdigalam,mox iungitAginnum
illa sibi et populos Aquitanicaruracolentes;

"If only Paulinus (of Nola) were not so very far away, in
Caesarea Augusta (Saragossa), the distance could be bridged
1 By the way, one observes, how easily meriticould be

changedto meritisby
perseveration.Anyone who checks the beginningof this poem in an edition
will find that vv. 4-9 all have the ending-is at the penthemimeresin the MSS,
and the same endingoccurs in nine other words withinthese same six verses!
AMERICANJOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY 98 247-248 (1977)
Copyright ? 1977 by The Johns Hopkins University Press

248

LENNARTHAKANSON

by an intermediate town, presumably as rendezvous" (Sh.

Bailey, 260). Ausonius makes it clear what he means, by
examples in vv. 79ff. Like Sh. Bailey, I certainly doubt that
verbis is right: as he points out, this could only mean letters,
"but even in Spain Paulinuscould be reached by letters (such
as this one)." The main purpose of Sh. Bailey's note on this
passage was doubtless to point out the hitherto unrecognised
fact that verbis is corrupt,for he appears himself to be uncertain whether his suggestion vinclis ('links') is right. Ausonius
seems to express the idea that the distance between two places
can be bridgedby an intermediateplace: should we not read
mediis iungens distantia terris ("bridging the distance be-

tween the remote (regions) with the help of the intermediate

region")?
LENNART HAKANSON
UNIVERSITY OF LUND