Ovidio: Malsamoj inter versioj

7 699 bitokojn aldonis ,  antaŭ 4 monatoj
sen resumo de redaktoj
Neniu resumo de redakto
Neniu resumo de redakto
Etikedoj: Iksokodo Disambiguation links
{{Informkesto homo}}
{{Informkesto verkisto
|dosiero =Turner Ovid Banished from Rome.jpg
|dato de morto =[[17]]
|loko de morto = [[Konstanco (Rumanio)|Tomoi, nuna Konstanco]], [[Rumanio]]
 
}}
 
 
Li fariĝis fama, sed en 8 p.K. imperiestro [[Aŭgusto Cezaro]] ekzilis lin. La kaŭzo ne estas klara. La ''Ars Amatoria'' pri amoro ja eble ofendis Aŭguston, laŭ kelkaj, sed tio ne estas sole per si mem kaŭzo sufiĉa. Ŝajne Ovidio sciis ian malluman sekreton pri Aŭgusto aŭ ties filino [[Julia]]. Ovidio estis ekzilita al la marbordo de [[Pontuso]] (la [[Nigra Maro]]), kie li loĝis ĝis sia morto. Iuj kleruloj argumentis ke la tuta ekzilhistorio estas mistifikado de Ovidio mem.<ref>A. D. F. Brown, "The unreality of Ovid’s Tomitan exile", Liverpool Classical Monthly 10.2 (1985), p. 18–22.</ref>
 
In AD 8, Ovid was banished to [[Constanța|Tomis]], on the [[Black Sea]], by the exclusive intervention of the Emperor [[Augustus]], without any participation of the [[Roman Senate|Senate]] or of any [[Roman law|Roman judge]].<ref>See ''Trist''. II, 131–32.</ref> This event shaped all his following poetry. Ovid wrote that the reason for his exile was ''carmen et error'' – "a poem and a mistake",<ref>Ovid, ''Tristia'' 2.207</ref> claiming that his crime was worse than [[murder]],<ref>Ovid, ''Epistulae ex Ponto'' 2.9.72</ref> more harmful than poetry.<ref>Ovid, ''Epistulae ex Ponto'' 3.3.72</ref>
 
The Emperor's grandchildren, [[Julia the Younger]] and [[Agrippa Postumus]] (the latter adopted by him), were also banished around the same time. Julia's husband, [[Lucius Aemilius Paullus (consul 1)|Lucius Aemilius Paullus]], was put to death for a [[Conspiracy (political)|conspiracy]] against [[Augustus]], a conspiracy of which Ovid potentially knew.<ref>Norwood, Frances, "The Riddle of Ovid's Relegatio", ''Classical Philology'' (1963) p. 158</ref>
 
The [[Lex Julia|Julian marriage laws of 18 BC]], which promoted [[monogamy|monogamous]] marriage to increase the population's birth rate, were fresh in the Roman mind. Ovid's writing in the ''Ars Amatoria'' concerned the serious crime of [[adultery]]. He may have been banished for these works, which appeared subversive to the emperor's moral legislation. However, in view of the long time that elapsed between the publication of this work (1 BC) and the exile (AD 8), some authors suggest that [[Augustus]] used the poem as a mere justification for something more personal.<ref name="José González Vázquez 1992 p.10">José González Vázquez (trans.), Ov. ''Tristes e Pónticas'' (Editorial Gredos, Madrid, 1992), p. 10 and Rafael Herrera Montero (trans.), Ov. ''Tristes; Cartas del Ponto'' (Alianza Editorial, Madrid, 2002). The scholars also add that it was no more indecent than many publications by [[Propertius]], [[Tibullus]] and [[Horace]] that circulated freely in that time.</ref>
 
[[Image:Turner Ovid Banished from Rome.jpg|thumb|280px| ''Ovid Banished from Rome'' (1838) by [[Joseph Mallord William Turner|J.M.W. Turner]].]]
In exile, Ovid wrote two poetry collections, ''[[Tristia]]'' and ''[[Epistulae ex Ponto]]'', which illustrated his sadness and desolation. Being far from Rome, he had no access to libraries, and thus might have been forced to abandon his ''[[Fasti (poem)|Fasti]]'', a poem about the Roman calendar, of which only the first six books exist – January through June.
 
The five books of the elegiac ''Tristia'', a series of poems expressing the poet's despair in exile and advocating his return to Rome, are dated to AD 9–12. The ''Ibis'', an elegiac curse poem attacking an adversary at home, may also be dated to this period. The ''[[Epistulae ex Ponto]]'', a series of letters to friends in Rome asking them to effect his return, are thought to be his last compositions, with the first three books published in AD 13 and the fourth book between AD 14 and 16. The exile poetry is particularly emotive and personal. In the ''Epistulae'' he claims friendship with the natives of Tomis (in the ''Tristia'' they are frightening barbarians) and to have written a poem in their language (''Ex P''. 4.13.19–20).
 
Yet he pined for Rome&nbsp;– and for his third wife, addressing many poems to her. Some are also to the Emperor Augustus, yet others are to himself, to friends in Rome, and sometimes to the poems themselves, expressing loneliness and hope of recall from banishment or exile.<ref>The first two lines of the ''Tristia'' communicate his misery:''Parve – nec invideo – sine me, liber, ibis in urbem; ei mihi, quod domino non licet ire tuo!''
: "Little book – for I don't begrudge it – go on to the city without me; Alas for me, because your master is not allowed to go with you!"</ref>
 
The obscure causes of Ovid's exile have given rise to endless explanations from scholars. The medieval texts that mention the exile offer no credible explanations: their statements seem incorrect interpretations drawn from the works of Ovid.<ref>J. C. Thibault, ''The Mystery of Ovid's Exile'' (Berkeley-L. A. 1964), pp. 20–32.</ref> Ovid himself wrote many references to his offense, giving obscure or contradictory clues.<ref>About 33 mentions, according to Thibault (''Mystery'', pp. 27–31).</ref>
 
In 1923, scholar J. J. Hartman proposed a theory that is little considered among scholars of Latin civilization today: that Ovid was never exiled from Rome and that all of his exile works are the result of his fertile imagination. This theory was supported and rejected{{clarify|date=October 2013}} in the 1930s, especially by [[Netherlands|Dutch]] authors.<ref>A. W. J. Holleman, "Ovid's exile", ''Liverpool Classical Monthly'' 10.3 (1985), p. 48.<br />H. Hofmann, "The unreality of Ovid's Tomitan exile once again", ''Liverpool Classical Monthly'' 12.2 (1987), p. 23.</ref>
 
In 1985, a research paper by Fitton Brown advanced new arguments in support of Hartman's theory.<ref>A. D. F. Brown, "The unreality of Ovid's Tomitan exile", ''Liverpool Classical Monthly'' 10.2 (1985), pp. 18–22.</ref> Brown's article was followed by a series of supports and refutations in the short space of five years.<ref>Cf. the summary provided by A. Alvar Ezquerra, ''Exilio y elegía latina entre la Antigüedad y el Renacimiento'' (Huelva, 1997), pp. 23–24</ref> Among the supporting reasons Brown presents are: Ovid's exile is only mentioned by his own work, except in "dubious" passages by [[Pliny the Elder]]<ref>''Naturalis Historia'', 32.152: "His adiciemus ab Ovidio posita animalia, quae apud neminem alium reperiuntur, sed fortassis in Ponto nascentia, ubi id volumen supremis suis temporibus inchoavit".</ref> and [[Statius]],<ref>''Silvae'', 1.2, 254–55: "nec tristis in ipsis Naso Tomis".</ref> but no other author until the 4th&nbsp;century;<ref>Short references in Jerome (''Chronicon'', 2033, an. Tiberii 4, an. Dom. 17: "Ovidius poeta in exilio diem obiit et iuxta oppidum Tomos sepelitur") and in ''Epitome de Caesaribus'' (I, 24: "Nam [Augustus] poetam Ovidium, qui et Naso, pro eo, quod tres libellos amatoriae artis conscripsit, exilio damnavit").</ref> that the author of ''[[Heroides]]'' was able to separate the poetic "I" of his own and real life; and that information on the geography of Tomis was already known by [[Virgil]], by [[Herodotus]] and by Ovid himself in his ''[[Metamorphoses]]''.{{Ref label|d|d|none}}<ref>A. D. F. Brown, "The unreality of Ovid's Tomitan exile", ''Liverpool Classical Monthly'' 10.2 (1985), pp. 20–21.</ref>
 
Orthodox scholars, however, oppose these hypotheses.<ref>J. M. Claassen, "Error and the imperial household: an angry god and the exiled Ovid's fate", ''Acta classica: proceedings of the Classical Association of South Africa'' 30 (1987), pp. 31–47.</ref> One of the main arguments of these scholars is that Ovid would not let his ''Fasti'' remain unfinished, mainly because this poem meant his consecration as an imperial poet.<ref>Although some authors such as Martin (P. M. Martin, "À propos de l'exil d'Ovide... et de la succession d'Auguste", ''Latomus'' 45 (1986), pp. 609–11.) and Porte (D. Porte, "Un épisode satirique des ''Fastes'' et l'exil d'Ovide", ''Latomus'' 43 (1984), pp. 284–306.) detected in a passage of the ''Fasti'' (2.371–80) an Ovidian attitude contrary to the wishes of [[Augustus]] to his succession, most researchers agree that this work is the clearest testimony of support of Augustan ideals by Ovid (E. Fantham, ''Ovid: Fasti. Book IV'' (Cambridge 1998), p. 42.)</ref>
 
== Verkaro ==
228 531

redaktoj