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_