sed leve pondus erat nec quod cognoscere possent
Solis equi, solitaque iugum gravitate carebat
(Ovid Metamorphoses book 2)
At first I thought it might be like this, as my first explorations of Ovid seem to show that a -que word is often used as a caesura (i.e. the que comes in the second half - here with elision of course).
– ⏑ ⏑/– ⏑ ⏑/ – ‖ –/– ⏑ ⏑/– ⏑ ⏑/– ⏑ Solis equi, solitaque iugum gravitate carebat;
... but in these cases (i.e. a caesura before -que), this then inevitably puts a lot of semantic emphasis on the previous word, here solita, "habitual". That seems to be OK, you can probably have the adjective "habitual" hanging in the air the space of a caesura...
But looking at it again, I am wondering: maybe it should be:
– ⏑ ⏑/– ‖ ⏑ ⏑/ – –/– ⏑ ⏑/– ⏑ ⏑/– ⏑ Solis equi, solitaque iugum gravitate carebat;
... obviously Ovid himself has (maybe!) put a comma there (or someone has, in this Oxford Classical Texts edition)... and the sense groups seem to make more sense. But on the other hand, this makes the second half of the line a real mouthful: not impossible to say, but a bit "heavy", sort of inelegant. I am doing a lot of reading out loud as I get to grips with Ovid.
More generally, how often do unusual caesurae in fact occur? In Ovid, for example. Where do these commas come from? Are they Ovid's? If so, does a comma usually coincide with the caesura?
PS I'm not entirely sure about iugum: maybe this consists of 3 vowels, in fact. That would make all the feet into dactyls (apart from the final one), but wouldn't change the question.