In the article concerning the final stanza of Carm. 2, 14 (vv. 25–18: absumet heres Caecuba dignior /servata centum clavibus et mero /tinguet pavimentum superbo, /pontificum potiore cenis) the author supports the idea expressed by Prof. Alexander I. Zaicev in a presentation to students of the Classical Gymnasium (the text was published in 2000): The vivid scene counterbalances the preceding one — the gloomy description of Cocytus («Yes, the heir will cause material damage — but this is nothing compared to what we will have to see Cocytus. This is what is called anticlimax: it is a clash of various kinds of negative emotions, and as a result, the reader’s impression is enriched»). Thus, the scene with the libation (as the mention of the spilled wine is suggested to be understood here) can be considered as one of the “extremes” Horace repeatedly advices avoiding in his Book 2: not only in the most famous poem (to Licinius, Carm. 2, 10), but also in his ode to Dellius (Carm. 2, 3). The latter poem is similar both in content and composition to the poem under consideration: in both poems, the poet alternates between the gloom of the constant expectation of death and two ways to forget it (joie de vivre for Dellius and piety for Postumus). The fact that the endings of the poems are different (the ode to Dellius ends with a crossing into the underworld) may be either conscious the result of desire of the poet for variety, or a reflection of the personal characteristics of the addressees of the odes — Postumus (about whom we know nothing) and Quintus Dellius, known only for repeatedly changing sides in the Civil Wars (Vell. 2, 84 et al.). The other passages briefly mentioned by Prof. Zaicev and conveyed in the article are: Carm. 1, 5 (vv. 12–13); 1, 22 (the main message); 2, 7 (v. 13 and generally concerning the translation by Pushkin); 2, 20 (vv. 9–10).