Yet this world, like Ovid’s, is still perforated by the temporality of forum (444), carceris (453) and even imi tecta tyranni. Is not even the domain of the gods beyond the finis imperii for Rome? Certainly, Ovid may not deliberately juxtapose the powerful verb sustinet (447) with the parenthesis on the following line to emphasise the pettiness of the epic stereotype, in a subversive depiction of the capriciousness of belief itself. It is unlikely too that the spondaic hemistich imi tecta tyranni works with the anaphora of pars (444) to produce a powerful metaphor for Augustan totalitarianism. Arguably, however, even the opportunity for these misreadings is potentially
Yet this world, like Ovid’s, is still perforated by the temporality of forum (444), carceris (453) and even imi tecta tyranni. Is not even the domain of the gods beyond the finis imperii for Rome? Certainly, Ovid may not deliberately juxtapose the powerful verb sustinet (447) with the parenthesis on the following line to emphasise the pettiness of the epic stereotype, in a subversive depiction of the capriciousness of belief itself. It is unlikely too that the spondaic hemistich imi tecta tyranni works with the anaphora of pars (444) to produce a powerful metaphor for Augustan totalitarianism. Arguably, however, even the opportunity for these misreadings is potentially