The Ibis, being primarily a catalogue of literary curses, stands somewhat apart from the other poems of reproach in structure as in size; yet the opening of the poem, in which Ovid describes his enemy's conduct and the ways he might respond, offers a number of parallels to the present poem.
1. CONQVERAR AN TACEAM. Kenney (Nequitiae Poeta 204-5), commenting on AA I 739 'conquerar an moneam', cites other instances of the same rhetorical device at Aen III 39 ' eloquar an sileam?' and Met IX 147 'conquerar an sileam?', as well as the present passage.
1. CONQVERAR. The choice of verb is significant: this poem is a rhetorical conquestio transferred to verse. Kenney cites Cicero's definition of conquestio at Inu I 106: 'conquestio est oratio auditorum misericordiam captans ... id locis communibus efficere oportebit, per quos Fortunae uis in omnes et hominum infirmitas ostenditur; qua oratione ... animus hominum ... ad misericordiam comparatur, cum in alieno malo suam infirmitatem considerabit'.
1. PONAM SINE NOMINE CRIMEN. 'Shall I put my accusation in my poem without naming you?'. The same sense of ponere at Tr I v 7 'positis pro nomine signis', Tr IV iv 7, and EP III vi 1-2 'Naso suo (posuit nomen quam paene!) sodali / mittit ab Euxinis hoc breue carmen aquis'.
2. QVI SIS. The boundary between adjectival qui and pronominal quis in Latin was not absolute; and just as one finds such forms as quis clamor (Met III 632), so it seems to have been Latin practice to use qui before forms of esse in indirect discourse, perhaps in order to avoid a double s-sound. Some instances of this from verse are Ecl I 18 'iste deus qui sit da, Tityre, nobis', Ecl II 19 'nec qui sim quaeris, Alexi', Aen III 608-9 'qui sit fari ... hortamur', Met XIV 841 'mihi nec quae sis dicere promptum est', Met XV 595 'is qui sit signo, non nomine dicam', Fast V 191 'ipse doce quae sis', Ibis 52 'teque breui qui sis dissimulare sinam', Ibis 61 'qui sis nondum quaerentibus edo', and EP III vi 57 'teque tegam, qui sis'. In some of these passages quis is found as a variant reading; given the ease of corruption, the rule should perhaps be made canonical, and such passages as Met I 248-49 'quis sit laturus in aras / tura' supplied with forms of qui even when, as in this instance, there is only weak manuscript support. (Professor R. J. Tarrant prefers, however, to retain quis at Met I 248, seeing a difference between expressions of identity [qui sis ... dicam] and of description [sit and laturus go closely together]).
The use of qui seems to have extended to past subjunctives of esse as well as present: compare Met XI 719 'qui [uar quis] foret ignorans'. For discussions see Löfstedt II 79-96 and Shackleton Bailey on Att III x 2 'possum obliuisci qui fuerim, non sentire qui sim?'.
In preclassical Latin qui is found for quis even in direct questions: OLD qui A4a cites Pl Capt 833 'qui uocat', Ter Ph 990 'qui nominat me', and Scipio minor V 19 Malcovati3 'qui spondet mille nummum'. The usage must have continued in spoken Latin, for it is found at Vitruvius VII 5 6 and Petronius 62 8.
3. NOMINE NON VTAR, NE COMMENDERE QVERELA. An interesting indication of the confidence Ovid felt in his poetry. In his earlier poems of reproach, Ovid had represented his not naming the person as an act of forbearance (Tr IV ix 1-4; Ibis 51-54).
3. COMMENDERE QVERELA. Oxymoron.
5. DVM MEA PVPPIS ERAT VALIDA FVNDATA CARINA. The common ancient metaphor of shipwreck also used of Ovid's exile at Tr I i 85-86, Tr II 99-102, Tr III iv 15-16 'dum tecum uixi, dum me leuis aura ferebat, / haec mea per placidas cumba cucurrit aquas', Tr V xii 50, and EP II iii 25-28.