=60. NIMBIFERI VINDICIS IGNE= is my correction of the manuscripts' NIMBIFERO and NVBIFERO. The unmodified _uindicis_ and modified _igne_ of the manuscript readings might be defended by _EP_ II ix 77 'quicquid id est [whatever Ovid has committed], habuit moderatam uindicis iram', but _uindicis_ is there defined by the following 'qui nisi natalem nil mihi dempsit humum', and _moderatam_ is a more suitable epithet for _iram_ than is _nimbifero_ for _igne_ in the present passage., At _Tr_ II 143-44 'uidi ego pampineis oneratam uitibus ulmum, / quae fuerat _saeuo fulmine_ tacta Iouis', the manuscripts divide between _saeuo_ and _saeui_, which has a good claim to be considered the true reading; in any case, _Iouis_ is less in need of a defining adjective than _uindicis_ in the present passage. Finally, the genitive here is strongly supported by _Ibis_ 475-76 'ut Macedo rapidis icta est cum coniuge flammis, / sic precor _aetherii uindicis_ igne cadas'. The corruption may have been induced by a wish to introduce interlocking word order: for a similar instance see at ii 9 _Baccho uina Falerna_ (p 164). But in fact substantive and epithet are constantly found linked at the caesura of the pentameter: the strong break in the metre at that point no doubt made the construction more readily acceptable there than in other positions. I have printed _nimbiferi_ in preference to _nubiferi_ because Jupiter is linked with _nimbi_ at two other passages. The first of these is _Am_ II i 15-16 'in manibus _nimbos et cum Ioue fulmen_ habebam, / quod bene pro caelo mitteret ille suo', and the second _Met_ III 299-301, where Ovid describes Jupiter's preparations to descend on Semele: 'aethera conscendit uultuque sequentia traxit / nubila, quis _nimbos_ immixtaque fulgura uentis / addidit et tonitrus et ineuitabile fulmen'. =61-62. SIC VICTOR LAVDEM SVPERATIS LIBER AB INDIS ... TRAXIT.= Bacchus' conquest of India is also mentioned by Ovid at _Fast_ III 465-66 'interea Liber depexos crinibus Indos / uicit et Eoo diues ab orbe redit', _Fast_ III 719-20, and _Tr_ V iii 23-24. =61-62. VICTOR= should be taken both with _Liber_ and _Alcides_. =61-62. LIBER ... ALCIDES.= The same pairing (both times in the context of Augustan panegyric) at _Aen_ VI 801-5 'nec uero _Alcides_ tantum telluris obiuit, / fixerit aeripedem ceruam licet, aut Erymanthi / pacarit nemora et Lernam tremefecerit arcu; / nec qui pampineis uictor iuga flectit habenis / _Liber_, agens celso Nysae de uertice tigris' and Hor _Carm_ III iii 9-15. Ovid may have made similar mention of Bacchus and Hercules in his panegyric of Augustus. =61-62. SIC ... LAVDEM ... ALCIDES CAPTA TRAXIT AB OECHALIA.= Hercules attacked and captured Oechalia in order to carry off Iole, the king's daughter. This was his last exploit, for it led to Deianira's sending him the poisoned robe which caused his death. The capture of Oechalia is also mentioned at _Her_ IX _passim_ (the poem perhaps not by Ovid) and _Met_ IX 136-40.