Talk:Ossian

Authenticity
This article seems to leave it open as to whether or not Ossian was actually based on an ancient Gaelic manuscript, as opposed to a creation of MacPherson. While I'm not an expert on 3rd century Irish primary sources, I was under the impression that there was a fairly strong consensus that the work was MacPherson's own creation.

I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I don't believe that this is considered a matter of debate these days; and as such the current article risks being misleading. Could someone with more background knowledge give an opinion?
 * good point--I tried to clarify things. Rjensen (talk) 01:32, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I am also under the impression that Ossian was a relatively modern creation, but I get the sense it took some time for a consensus to evolve. An 1879 American source is convinced that an antique Ossian was the real author: The lead gives the impression that from the start there was a consensus among critical readers that it was a fake, and I find this doubtful. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2012 (UTC) I have given a reference for an "OR" tag, and removed said tag as per further research on the subject, to wit; the authenticity and inter-related influence, through Romantic Literary fervour, of James Macpherson's claim of merely "translating" bardic poetry from a supposed legendary figure of Gaelic Oral History. That aside, it must be kept in mind,that the original statement of authenticity concerning,"Fingal, an Ancient Epic Poem in Six Books, together with Several Other Poems composed by Ossian, the Son of Fingal, translated from the Gaelic Language", was from the outset,misleading if not wholly mendacious. Macpherson, must have known, for himself, the boggy and bottomless ground on which he erected his 'translation' would never bear the weight of judicious opprobrium,both literary and philological, bearing down upon it. No less than the British Library, an institution not given to a rashness of judgment, deems the work "a pastiche" at present (Oct.2016). And yes, the criticism started immediately after publication and has continued ever more forcefully since. Sometimes the Romantic yearning for a connection to a Golden Age,which never existed, is stronger than the brightest of minds, even those of our contemporaries, may withstand.Bjhodge8 (talk) 06:04, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Untitled
I believe this page should be left alone or merged with the James Macpherson page.

Discussion of the Gaelic sagas should be on the Oisín and Finn Mac Cumhail pages. This page should discuss the James MacPherson adaptation of those sagas in English. [Anonymous comments]


 * It certainly isn't logical to combine Ossian with James MacPherson: he wrote other things too, and his biography is separate from his individual works. I therefore agree with the last of the three comments above.
 * I also believe Ossian, as the name of a work by MacPherson, should stay separate from Oisín. Andrew Dalby 15:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * There seems to be a consensus to keep the pages separate, but to keep them clearly distinguished. I've done this, and removed the merge tags. --Nicknack009 16:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * yes, no need to merge this anywhere, just treat it as an article on a 18th century work of literature. dab (&#5839;) 12:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

These poems had a huge effect on early nineteenth century Hungarian poetry. János Arany, one of the Hungarian classics (and a great translator of Shakespeare) has a poem, entitled Homer and Ossian. Would that be too particular a set of facts to include here? varbal 00:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Not at all. Add it in. Ossian had a big influence on other literatures that were then emerging into full national consciousness. Andrew Dalby 09:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed, please add it.--Cúchullain t/ c 22:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Some thoughts from someone trying to be less ignorant about this subject matter. The structure of the associated articles is currently problematic at the dab, and this page functioning as the entry point for material associated with Ossian (or Oisín). I just stubbed Ossianic Society (Dublin, 1853), but note there is an earlier society with that name, now subsumed to the Gaelic chair at Edinburgh University. It seems unbalanced to have MacPherson's Ossian here, rather than the dab page, but either way the 'Ossianic' path of enquiry needs to account for these; a couple of deft moves would be better than reams of hat-notes. cygnis insignis 08:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Broken link
The first external link no longer works. That's it.

Art
The Ossian poems where a major influence on Romantic paintings. This should be addressed.--Kworkpratt 19:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Translation & creativity issues
I would like to suggest the addition of a short reference to issues about creativity in translation. As an example of what I am talking about: the renowned "Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam" translated by Edward Fitzgerald is sometimes referred to as "The Rubaiyat of FitzOmar", not out of petty criticism, but out of positive recognition for the creativity he displayed in his translation. It is sometimes difficult to track some of Fitz's passsages in the original (i.e. he seems to have invented some). One of the themes of Argentinian Jorge Luis Borges' writing was whether a translator could actually improve a piece, and how much could be added. Yet Fitzgerald's creative and free translation is regarded as a classic, but some still regard Mac Pherson's compilation as somehow tainted.

I think this has relevance to the article, firstly, as it does seem as though Mac Pherson's name was smeared out of a rather petty and narrow view of what literature and translation should be about (perhaps politically/culturally motivated?), and secondly, this is touches upon broader issues in literature everywhere (and everywhen).

Any thoughts or comments?

Oisinoc 16:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The differences are that Fitzgerald's creative contribution was never denied, the orginals were available to compare with the translation, and he was a good poet. MacPherson was a bad one. If the poems had literary value in their own right, they'd still be read and quoted. It's not a "rather petty and narrow view of what literature and translation should be" when the translation claims to be a reconstruction of an ancient epic. That's what was disputed. If it had been published as an original work, it would have been just another forgotten dull epic poem. A comparable case is Thomas Chatterton, who published forgeries of middle-English verse. Paul B (talk) 11:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * We mention Johnson's opinion, it would be interesting to have other published views on the literary merits or otherwise of the poems. The Literary Encyclopedia source states "One of the most important works of the movement of Sensibility and a seminal text for the early Romantic movement, the enthusiasm and controversy generated by the poems, and the influence they had upon two generations of European writers, artists and musicians, made Ossian one of the most important names in English literature in the second half of the eighteenth century.... Though neglected for much of the twentieth century, Ossian is once again enjoying some critical currency." Whether the enthusiasm was entirely due to the supposed provenance seems questionable, but verified expert opinion on the current "critical currency" is needed for the article. . . dave souza, talk 13:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, they were out of print for a long time. I read Fingal many years ago in an old edition when it was very difficult to find a copy. Now they are freely available online. I still find the poems insufferably dull. Of course there's no way officially to measure poetic merit, but the sheer lack of editions, anthologised passages and appreciative criticial commentary creates an implicit consensus. As we know, consensus can change, and no-one disputes the historical importance of the work. Paul B (talk) 15:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Stub
the stub Fragments of Ancient Poetry collected in the Highlands of Scotland should  be combined with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.208.61 (talk) 12:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Original art
There is a piece of contemporary art here that is by an artist for whom notability has not been established. Perhaps it should be removed? Leoniceno (talk) 12:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

not poems
Why have they been referred to as poems for almost 300 years? They're not poetry. They're prose. And not even good prose. The article should mention this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.112.55.166 (talk) 05:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe the term used often is 'prose poetry'. The reason they continue to be called poetry is that they were ostensibly translated from material that was definitely poetry. But you're right, they're not very good, even if they were massively popular. Sort of like X-factor contestents will be viewed in years to come... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.71.145 (talk) 15:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

This article is TERRIBLE !!!
This article is terrible !! Unbelievably bad !! It's merely a collection of criticisms about a set of prose-poems; it's an argument about something THAT IS NEVER PRESENTED !!! What is the basic plot of the poems?! (Not presented !) Where are there samples of the poems?! (Not presented !)

This is like an argument about, say, Plato's Republic without telling the reader who Plato was or what the Republic was about, and without presenting the reader with any of the text from the Republic.

This article should be deleted. It's just awful.

Cwkmail (talk) 21:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I look forward to reading your edits to improve the article. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 23:56, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I came to this encyclopedia article to learn who Ossian was and what the poem was about. I did not come here to write an article.  What is the point of creating an article about a subject if the article is little more than a blank page?  If you know who Ossian was, would you at least post that information? Cwkmail (talk) 11:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Fair enough - although a more useful response would have been to point out the shortcomings in hopes that they will be rectified, not suggest that the whole article be erased. If every imperfect wikipedia article was erased because it annoyed somebody, wikipedia would be empty. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 12:38, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * And would that be such a bad result? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.77.172 (talk) 21:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, except to idiots. The article clearly says that "Ossian" is derived from Oisín. There's nothing else to say about "who Ossian was". Cwkmail's request is meaningless. If you want to know "what the poem was about", request a page on Fingal (poem). Paul B (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Gaelic text?
I don't think it is clear from the present article whether Macpherson ever published a Gaelic text of the purported original poems, or whether his English 'translation' of the poems is the sole basis for his claims. I guess the latter, but it is a rather basic point that ought to be clearly stated one way or the other.109.149.185.233 (talk) 15:38, 9 October 2017 (UTC)


 * There are:
 * Some Scottish-Gaelic dictionaries mentioning Ossian or works by him like in the list of abbreviation. E.g. in R. A. Armstrong's dictionary there is "Com. _ _ _ Comala, one of Ossian's Poems." But well, it could refer to Macpherson's English text or to a Gaelic text unrelated to Macpherson.
 * German works like:
 * Ossian's Gedichte. Rhythmisch übersetzt von J. G. Rhode ("Zweiter Theil", Berlin, 1800; "Nach der zweyten verbesserten Ausgabe. Dritter Theil", Wien, 1827) and Ossians Gedichte. Rhythmisch bearbeitet von Eduard Brinckmeier (Braunschweig, 1839). It could however be based on the English text like Ossian's Gedichte. Nach Macpherson. Von Ludwig Schubart (II. Band, Wien, 1808).
 * Die Gedichte Ossians des Celtischen Helden und Barden. Aus dem Englischen und zum Theile der Celtischen Ursprache übersetzt von Freyherrn von Harold (2nd ed., Mannheim, 1787). In the title it is "... Translated from English and partly from the Celtic original language ...".
 * Ossian's Gedichte. Aus dem Gälischen von Christian Wilhelm Ahlwardt [Ossian's Poems. Translated from the Gaelic by author] (Leipzig, 1846). It could be translated from English but than he would fool the readers. In the introduction Ahlwardt mentions Macfarlan and Gaelic, Latin and English texts.
 * Leabhar na Feinne. Vol. I. Gaelic texts. Heroic Gaelic ballads collected in Scotland chiefly from 1512 to 1871, copied from [...]. Arranged by J. F. Campbell (London, 1872). In the book Ossian is sometimes mentioned, though sometimes in a negative way like this: "I do not think that Ossian ever composed this [Scottish-Gaelic poem], though I received it under his name." So there might be Ossianic or pseudo-Ossianic Scottish-Gaelic texts and they might be unrelated to Macpherson and his English text.
 * The Poems of Ossian, in the original Gaelic, with a literal Translation into Latin, by the late Robert Macfarlan. Together with a Dissertation on the Authenticity of the Poems, by Sir John Sinclair. And a Translation from the Italian of the Abbè Cesarotti's Dissertation on the Controversy respecting the Authenticity of Ossian, with Notes and a supplemental Essay, by John M'Arthur. Published unter the Sanction of the Highland Society of London (three volumes, 1807). So there is some Scottish-Gaelic text, though it could be a translation from English into Gaelic or could be unrelated to Macpherson's English text.
 * The Poems of Ossian In the Original Gaelic With a Literal Translation Into English and a Dissertation on the Authenticity of the Poems by the Rev. Archibald Clerk Together with the English Translation by Macpherson. In two Volumes (1870). The article Archibald Clerk mentions it in "He edited the poems of Ossian in Gaelic with a translation into English (1870)".
 * Conclusion: There is some Scottish-Gaelic Ossianic or pseudo-Ossianic text. And the article should mention it and explain what it is. ATM the article is too focused on Macpherson and his text, and the possibility that there might be (pseudo-)Ossianic works unrelated to him is only mentioned marginally in "In 1952 [...]" and "Perhaps the strongest evidence [...]".
 * -80.133.101.193 (talk) 23:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid this is all a chimaera. Macpherson claimed he was "translating", but never produced the Gaelic; Occam's razor would conclude, and critics at the time did conclude, that it was all made up, and there never was a Gaelic original text. Perhaps there was, as some charitable critics like Shippey suggest, some kind of oral tradition that Macpherson heard the tail-end of, but even that may be too generous. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:32, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ossian. 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/20110726060119/http://www.floridabibliophilesociety.org/Fingal.html to http://www.floridabibliophilesociety.org/Fingal.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) 19:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Complete lies
The article states ". Ossian is based on Oisín, son of Finn or Fionn mac Cumhaill, anglicised to Finn McCool," which is entirely false. Firstly "Oisín" is an Irish form and the form "oisean" going back at least 500 years in Scotland. Then it seems to just go on to explain that all legends of Ossian in Scotland were just stolen from Ireland which is incredibly rude and ignores common sense since even just by MacPherson we know that he could not read Irish so then how could he steal from an Irish source? This just needs removed.

Caros
The article claims that the Roman Emperors "Caros" in these 18th-century poems is a reference to Carausius. The name seems more similar to the emperor Carus than Carausius. Where is the identification with Carausius based on? Dimadick (talk) 23:14, 8 June 2023 (UTC)