Prof. Carrasco’s main text is a letter in verse composed by Horace for his friend Julius Florus (Epistle 2.2). In the letter Horace makes an elegant (maybe a little forced) apology for being a poor correspondent: he likens himself to the seller of a slave. Horace had earlier confessed to being lazy, and Florus can now raise no objection to his laziness, just as the purchaser of a slave may not raise an action against the seller if the seller has been similarly forthcoming, before the sale, about the slave’s attributes. The slave seller Horace portrays in the letter speaks in great detail about the qualities of the (conjured) slave, and the various edicts on slave sales are easily detectable. Prof. Carrasaco’s interest is not in mining the letter for law, but in showing how deeply the knowledge — and even the cadences — of slave law runs in Horace, his correspondent, and his public audience. When we see juristic disputes used for comedic effect, and the rules of the aediles’ edict reduced to throwaway lines, we’re equally surprised by the cosiness with particulars and startled by the utter coolness of their portrayal.