Completion of a commentary on Ovid, Tristia 2 (with a particular focus on lines 359-578)

奥维德的《Tristia2》是奥维德流亡诗歌的核心文本，但也揭示了其他作家和奥维德本人的文学作品(特别是《阿玛托里亚》，在这部作品中，奥维德认为这是导致他被流放的两个主要原因之一)。《特里夏2》包含了许多读者的解释问题，特别是关于奥维德与他的收信人(这封文学书信的指定收信人皇帝·奥古斯都，以及这首诗的其他隐含读者)交谈的方式，以及奥维德提供的作者目录，作为那些在他之前写过色情作品而没有因写作而受到惩罚的人的例子，奥维德对许多重要的古代文学作品提供了倾向性的解释。这些问题在我打算进行研究的评论部分(第359-578行)是至关重要的。我的逐行评论将阐明用法、韵律、语调以及作为任何学术经典评论的主要内容的历史和文学典故的种类。此外，我将在整个过程中特别关注文学解释学的关键领域(《特里夏2》吸引了最近学者最大的兴趣之一，但这一领域需要对整个作者目录进行进一步的详细评论)。《特里夏2》在奥古斯都的诗歌中提供了一个非常不同寻常的前景，提供了一个文学史的愿景，虽然有倾向性，但值得深入探讨，并与西塞罗、贺拉斯和昆蒂利安关于文学的其他更著名的声明放在一起。评注本身及其导言中的详细说明将进一步探讨这项工作的一般关系，这是非常必要的。我的评论也始终集中在政治问题上，阐明了诗人和驱逐他的首领之间的联系，以及奥维德反映奥古斯坦晚期帝国意识形态运作的方式。因此，我的研究应该阐明一首诗，这首诗对于整个奥维德语料库，以及对已故奥古斯丁统治者的历史，希腊和罗马文学史，文学道歉的历史，以及从古典到现代文学中流亡艺术家的形象都是重要的。

Ovid's Tristia 2 is a text which stands at the heart of Ovid's exilic poetry, but also sheds much light on literary works by other authors and by Ovid himself (in particular, the Ars amatoria, which Ovid in this work identifies as one of the two major causes of his banishment). Tristia 2 contains many problems of interpretation for the reader, particularly with reference to the way in which Ovid talks to his addressees (the emperor Augustus, the named addressee of this literary epistle, as well as other implied readers of the poem) and the catalogue of authors Ovid provides as examples of those who have written erotic works before him and have not been punished for their writing, offering tendentious interpretations of many major works of ancient literature. Such issues are crucial in the portion of the commentary (lines 359-578) on which I intend to conduct research.My line by line commentary will illuminate the sorts of issues of usage, metre, tone, and historical and literary allusions that are the staple of any scholarly classical commentary. In addition, I will focus particular attention throughout on the key area of literary hermeneutics (one of the aspects of Tristia 2 to have attracted the greatest amount of interest from recent scholars, but an area which requires further detailed comment on the entire catalogue of authors). Tristia 2 offers a very unusual vista in Augustan poetry by providing a vision of literary history, which, while tendentious, deserves to be explored in depth and set alongside other, more famous pronouncements on literature by Cicero, Horace, and Quintilian. Detailed notes in the commentary itself and its introduction will furthermore provide a much needed exploration of the generic affiliations of this work. My commentary also focuses throughout on political issues, elucidating the connections between the poet and the princeps who banished him, and the ways in which Ovid reflects the workings of late Augustan imperial ideology. My research should therefore illuminate a poem which is important for Ovid's corpus as a whole, as well as for the history of the late Augustan principate, Greek and Roman literary history, the history of the literary apologia, and the figure of the exiled artist in literature from the classical to the modern age.