000			02067cam a2200277zu 4500
001			88915134
003			FRCYB88915134
005			20250107174527.0
006			m o d
007			cr un
008			250107s2021 fr | o|||||0|0|||eng d
020			_a9781433176982
035			_aFRCYB88915134
040			_aFR-PaCSA _ben _c _erda
100	1		_aDettmer, Helena
245	0	1	_aIssues of Unity in Ovid's Tristia _c['Dettmer, Helena']
264		1	_bPeter Lang _c2021
300			_a p.
336			_btxt _2rdacontent
337			_bc _2rdamdedia
338			_bc _2rdacarrier
650		0	_a
700	0		_aDettmer, Helena
856	4	0	_2Cyberlibris _uhttps://international.scholarvox.com/netsen/book/88915134 _qtext/html _a
520			_aIn his 1995 Teubner edition, J. B. Hall separates Tristia 1.5, 1.9, 3.4, 4.4, 5.2, and 5.7 into two poems. One reviewer of Hall’s edition is highly critical of the editor for not justifying the separation of these poems despite the fact the divisions have manuscript support. Because of the sorry state of the textual transmission of Ovid's Tristia, it is sometimes difficult to determine the beginning and end of an individual poem if that poem resumes thematically and verbally where the previous poem concludes. The aim of this study is to show that definitive evidence can be offered to justify division of these six elegies into two poems. Structure combined with theme serves as an analytical tool that defines the beginning and end of the twelve literary pieces under consideration and highlights their artistry. Resolution of the issue of unity enhances our interpretation of the independent poems and our understanding of the complex interplay among poems within each poetry-book. The careful and often brilliant craftsmanship of the poems and of the books in which they appear reaffirms that Ovid’s repeated deprecation of the quality of his literary work composed during his period of exile in the Black Sea region is simply a pose to attract sympathy and support from his Roman audience.
999			_c50729 _d50729