After having been for some while the butt of conservative critics, verse transpositions in Propertius have, mainly thanks to the work of G. P. Goold, again become respectable among scholars. In his edition of Catullus, Tibullus, and Propertius J. J. Scaliger (first edition: Paris 1577,2Antwerp 1582, several times reprinted), the great archeget of the method, had subjected the other great elegist of Propertius’ generation to the same treatment,2 and in fact one of Scaliger's transpositions is supported by external evidence: 1.5.71–6 belong after 6.32; this is confirmed by Ovid's imitation in Trist. 2.447ff. Trist. 2. 459–60 (scit, cui latretur, cum solus obambulet, ipsel cui totiens clausas excreet ante fores) echo Tib. 1.6.31f. (ille ego sum, nee me iam dicere uera pudebit.l instabat tola cui tua node canis) and 5.73 (et simulat transire domum, mox deinde recurritl solus et ante ipsas exscreat usque fores). That Ovid should have brought together in one distich verses from two different Tibullian poems may not seem wholly impossible, but much less likely than that the lines in Tibullus were also consecutive, in particular because the distich immediately preceding 459f. clearly refers to the situation of Tib. 1.6.