About the lecture

In this lecture, we think about the relationship between the version of the myths contained in Heroides 1, 3 and 7, and the ‘original’ versions in the Odyssey, Iliad and Aeneid, focusing in particular on the moments where Ovid’s version differs from the original. As we move through the module, we consider: (i) Duncan Kennedy’s argument that we are encouraged to read Heroides 1 as a subjective (fallible) account, versus the objective, authoritative account provided in Homer’s Odyssey; (ii) Alessandro Barchiesi’s argument that our interpretation of Ovid’s version of the myth is ‘controlled’ by our knowledge of Homer’s Odyssey, which demonstrates the authoritativeness of epic versus love elegy; (iii) Joseph Farrell’s argument that, in the world of love elegy, male letter-writers tend to be deceptive, while female letter-writers tend to be sincere, and that Penelope’s account in Heroides 1 should be seen as more authoritative than the account provided by Homer’s Odyssey; (iv) Ovid’s praise for Ulysses in another poem for being able to tell same story differently each time (Ars Am. 2.128), and Ovid’s self-presentation as a similarly talented story-teller.

Suggested reading:
– A. Barchiesi, Speaking Volumes: Narrative and Intertext in Ovid and other Latin poets (2001)
– J. Farrell, ‘Reading and Writing the Heroides’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 98 (1998), pp. 307-38
– L. Fulkerson, ‘The Heroides: Female Elegy?’ in P. Knox, ed. A Companion to Ovid (2013), pp. 78-89
– D. Kennedy, ‘The Epistolary Mode and the First of Ovid’s Heroides’, The Classical Quarterly 34.2 (1984), pp. 413-422

About the lecturer

Sharon Marshall is Associate Professor in Classics and Ancient History at the University of Exeter and teaches predominantly classical literature and the ancient languages. Her interest in inclusive and innovative pedagogy underpins her own teaching practice, inspired by her research on Classics education in both historical and contemporary contexts.