Talk:Metamorphoses

Form

While this may be called an epic, it is a rather unusual one, in that there is no single thread running through it, as in Homer or Virgil. The subject, changes, is embodied in the form, which is always jumping about, breaking off and returning. Kenney has pointed out that this begins in the very first sentence, "in nova fert animus mutatas dicere formas/ corpora". You start by thinking he means "My mind is leading me on to something new", but then the appearance of the word "corpora" makes you realise that "nova" has to be taken with it, and this metamorphosises the sentence. At present I cannot give a reference to Kenney, but may be able to do so later. Seadowns (talk) 15:06, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

'First written'

(inserted for readability ... said: Rursus (^mbork³) 12:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC))

What is meant by the Metamorphoses was the "first written"? First written what? There are many extant earlier works in Greek myth, not to mention those that have been lost. --Chinasaur 04:56, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

"Since it was first written" = "since it was written". - Nunh-huh 05:11, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There's nothing in this article about what a genius Ovid was, or the stunning beauty of his work. Does that violate neutrality rules or something?Celsiana 23:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

well there are many works that are far better but none that cover this area of the gods and goddesses this well -[meeks]

I'm surprised that this article doesn't mention how Augustus is compared to Jupiter, making Ovid's mockery and critique of Jupiter almost subversive. The silencing of mortals, the theft of their voices and cooption of their meaning by gods through metamorphosis could be interpreted to reflect Augustus's habit of destroying prophetic scrolls and executing malcontents. The epilogue is also pretty much a direct mockery of Augustus's attepts to immortalize himself. The articles's description of the Metamorphoses as bereft of deeper meaning is in my opinion quite innacurate. Worlorn 10:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this article is inadequate. (1) The section "Manuscript tradition" tells us platitudinally that the modern texts are okay but contains no details on the manuscripts. Then again, maybe the section should be deleted; does the general reader really care about the manuscript tradition? (2) Very little is said about English translations. Some mention should be made of the principal translations and their critical reception. (3) The section on adaptations is thin; I suspect there have been many, many other works influenced by Ovid. What about the Divine Comedy, for instance, or Handel's opera Semele? – Sorry to rant. I'd love to work on this myself, but I don't know much about the Latin classics. Grommel 21:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Manuscript tradition

The initial paragraph of the section on the Transmission of the Metamorphoses is riddled with errors, so I am deleting most of it.

There is no evidence that the Church tried to suppress the Met. in Late Antiquity, or was even concerned about it being "pagan" (as if all the other works of Classical literature didn't mention the gods!).

The citation provided to Alan Cameron's "Greek Mythography in the Roman World" is misleading. On the relevant page, Cameron mentions in passing the theory of Urusla Hunt (1925), who suggested that the Late Antique commentary on the Metamorphoses, known as the Narrationes, was meant to sanitize Ovid's poem. Of course, Cameron then proceeds to dismiss this argument - so in fact the citation provided directly contradicts the content of the paragraph.

Also, the fact that the Narrationes - a late antique commentary on the Metamorphoses - was written largely contradicts one of the points of this paragraph. As written it suggests that the fact that there are no ancient scholia surviving on the Metamorphoses is an indication of ecclesiastical opposition to it. But the writing of commentaries (a related form of scholarly work to the composition of scholia) rather contradicts this idea.

Also, the fact that the earliest MSS of the Metamorphoses are from the 11th century is *normal* for works of Classical Latin literature. There are a few exceptions (e.g., the Aeneid), for which we have surviving Late Antique or Early Medieval MSS, but for the vast majority of Latin works, we have no surviving MSS prior to the Carolingian Renaissance.

Oh, and Petrus Berchorius wrote the Ovidius Moralizatus in the 14th Century, not in Late Antiquity - so it is actually *later* than the supposedly "very late" 11th century MS. (This fact can be ascertained simply by clicking the link for his name.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.47.139 (talk) 14:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

(Signed by Bot) Deleting isn't editing. Perhaps a more responsible, logged-in editor will want to improve this section.--Wetman (talk) 22:44, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Forgive me for being a non-logged-in-editor. I was under the impression that deleting fabrications was something that might improve the general quality of the article. The whole "Ovid was frowned on in Late Antiquity" line that is used here is false - no Classicist currently living subscribes to it. So it didn't seem that it was worthy of reply. This time I added a sentence about the consistent popularity of Ovid in Late Antiquity from the preface of the new Tarrant OCT of the Met. Hopefully that will not be reverted. 66.31.47.139 (talk) 16:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Not being logged it is not a problem in itself, but blanking without an explanation (i.e. edit summary) can look suspicious. I recommend you start adding comments so we can be sure of the intent. (John User:Jwy talk) 22:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

The first rambling, silly part of this section is directly contradicted by the strightforward second part. Are we really to assume that Jerome's and Augustine's critiques of the work amount to attempts at censorship? Deleting it would indeed be an improvement. At a minimum sources that do not contradict what is being asserted should be required to keep it. Rwflammang (talk) 18:31, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Constellations?

Outside this article, it is alleged that "Metamorphoses" contains sagas attached to the constellations. If true, perhaps it should be added of someone knowledgeable enough, perhaps. (Not me, not yet, I'm not knowledgeable!) ... said: Rursus (^mbork³) 12:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Pt

In September 30, 2009, I applied the article Metamorfoses in wikipedia in Portuguese in a featured article, and I did. If you could take a look at the article, maybe you like this, without even understand my language. I would be immensely happy if a group of editors of Wikipedia in English willing to upgrade this article in the wiki en. as we did in the wiki pt., because of its artistic importante. Thank you very much. Auréola (talk) 22:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

nn sa na vas pas il faut mettre les chanes  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.236.254.207 (talk) 14:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC) 

Latin or Greek (writing)

I realize that Ovid was a Roman, but was the Metamorphoses originally written in Latin or Greek (as the language of culture)?TCO (talk) 20:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Latin. Deor (talk) 21:01, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

external links cleanup

I have removed one link to a site that was a domain for sale and one inappropriate insertion. Is there more work needed before the request for cleanup can be removed?

I work many hours each day in Japanese, but I could not see keeping this link for en.wiki

 http://ovidmeta.jp/search/p/index.php

as there are other links which are more accessible and there is fr.wikipedia.org for French text.

G. Robert Shiplett 20:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The Moralized Metamorphoses

There should be more information on the Moralized Metamorphoses and societies influence on their origin.Alexisolson (talk) 18:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)alexisolson

Template:U Write it, then. You're an editor! Ogress _smash! 21:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

The page does currently exist, but only in French. S.C. Kaplan (talk) 19:34, 8 September 2015 (UTC)User:S.C.Kaplan

Where's Morpheus?

The lead-sentence of the article Morpheus (mythology) reads: "Morpheus is the Ancient Greek god of dreams who appears in Ovid's Metamorphoses".

However, the word "Morpheus" is not even mentioned once here in Metamorphoses. This seems rather odd. -- Rfassbind – talk 14:12, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Morpheus appears in the story of Ceyx and Alcyone in Book XI. Since he isn't really the focus of the story, I don't see any particular reason to mention him specifically in this article. Deor (talk) 14:45, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Metamorphoses. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090601062538/http://special.lib.gla.ac.uk/exhibns/chaucer/influences.html to http://special.lib.gla.ac.uk/exhibns/chaucer/influences.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:37, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Portal bar

Hello. Below the external links, I added a portal bar. What do you think?
Adèle Fisher (talk) 20:34, 1 March 2018 (UTC).

Merger of Rhoetus

Rhoetus must be the most inconsequential person in this epic. The stub of Rhoetus has been unsourced and unimproved for 25 years. What do you think about a merger or redirect? Bearian (talk) 02:38, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Setindexify. On its own, I doubt the article could pass WP:GNG, though this figure also seems too obscure to deserve a mention at this page (and the one thing that can be said about him beyond the passage from the Metamorphoses – that Ovid's invention of him may have been inspired by a figure in Virgil – would be out of place here). That said, it'd also be a pity to redirect the page and lose our coverage of this figure (however obscure he might be). The RE has entries on four other mythological figures of the same name, and covering all five of them in a set index article seems a reasonable solution to me (and this tends to be common practice for figures of the same name from classical mythology). – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:10, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Setindexify - per Michael Aurel. Psychastes (talk) 14:29, 2 June 2025 (UTC)