The reference in this passage to a legal procedure is rather curious, as is the connected reference in 41-42. But it is clear from Ovid's verse that he had a solid practical expertise and interest in law. In his youth he had been one of the _tresuiri monetales_ or _capitales_ (_Tr_ IV x 33-34), and had also served in the centumviral court (_Tr_ II 93-94; _EP_ III v 23-24). He must have been known for his knowledge of law as well as for his fairness in order to be selected as arbitrator in private cases: 'res quoque priuatas statui sine crimine iudex, / deque mea fassa est pars quoque uicta fide' (_Tr_ II 95-96). E. J. Kenney has presented some interesting statistics concerning the frequent occurrence of legal terms in Ovid's poetry ("Ovid and the Law", _Yale Classical Studies_ XXI [1969] 241-63) comparing the number of occurrences of certain legal terms in Ovid and in Lucretius, Catullus, Virgil, Propertius, Tibullus, and the _Odes_ of Horace. _Ius_ and _lex_ are not much more common in Ovid than in the other poets (the proportions being 134:59 and 74:60 respectively for Ovid and the other poets combined); this is not surprising, since these common words could hardly be considered technical terms. _Arbiter_ (7:4) and _lis_ (23:10) are not much more common in Ovid than in the other poets. But it will be seen from the following list how fond Ovid was of legal terminology: _legitimus_ (16:0), _iudex_ (47:12), _iudicium_ (39:7), _index_ (26:1), _indicium_ (36:8), _arbitrium_ (23:6), _reus_ (23:5), _uindex_ (26:5), _uindicare_ (16:6), _uindicta_ (11:0), _asserere_ (3:0), _assertor_ (1:0). Compare as well the play on legal terminology at _AA_ I 83-86 (with Hollis's notes), and the use of such terms as _addicere_ (_Met_ I 617), _fallere depositum_ (_Met_ V 480 & IX 120), _usus communis_ (_Met_ VI 349), _transcribere_ (_Met_ VII 173), _primus heres_ (_Met_ XIII 154), _rescindere_ (_Met_ XIV 784), _accensere_ (_Met_ XV 546), _subscribere_ (_Tr_ I ii 3), _sub condicione_ (_Tr_ I ii 109), and _acceptum referre_ (_Tr_ II 10). =13. OPES ... PATERNAS.= Pompeius appears to have been very wealthy. Seneca speaks of the wealth of a Pompeius (presumably the son of Ovid's patron--so Syme _Ten Studies_ 82, _HO_ 162), who was murdered by Gaius Caligula (_Tranq_ 11 10). =13. REM PARVAM= _MHIT_ PARVAM REM _BCFL_. Either reading is possible enough. On balance, I believe _paruam rem_ to be an intentional scribal alteration to avoid the incidence of a spondaic word in the fourth foot of the hexameter; for a discussion of the phenomenon, see at i 11 _uellem cum_ (p 150). In an older poet, the alliteration of _paruam pone paternas_ would be a strong argument for the reading (see page 15 of Munro's introduction to his commentary on Lucretius), but Ovid did not use the device in his poetry.