Compton, Todd M. 2006. Victim of the Muses: Poet as Scapegoat, Warrior and Hero in Greco-Roman and Indo-European Myth and History. Hellenic Studies Series 11. Washington, DC: Center for Hellenic Studies. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:hul.ebook:CHS_Compton.Victim_of_the_Muses.2006.
Chapter 23. Ovid: Practicing the Studium Fatale
alterius facti culpa silenda mihi:
nam non sum tanti, renovem ut tua vulnera, Caesar
quem nimio plus est indoluisse semel.
altera pars superest, qua turpi carmine factus
arguor obsceni doctor adulterii.
* * *
at si, quod mallem, vacuum tibi forte fuisset,
nullum legisses crimen in Arte mea.
illa quidem fateor frontis non esse severae
scripta, nec a tanto principe digna legi:
non tamen idcirco legum contraria iussis
sunt ea Romanas erudiuntque nurus.
By Ovid’s account, then, he was exiled for a “poem” and a “mistake.” This would seem simple enough, though the error is not specified. But then one wonders which was the more important crimen. Peter Green argues that participation in a political scandal of some sort was the reason for the exile, and that the mention of Ovid’s poetry was mere window dressing, a prophasis for the real crime.  While such an interpretation is possible, much evidence argues against it.  In the passage quoted above, Ovid calls his political offence an error, a very mild word, hardly enough to cause the harsh sentence of exile. Elsewhere, he says it should be called culpa, not a facinus. 
“Something noxious and odious” must be expelled to cleanse the state.
me miserum! certas habuit puer ille sagittas.
uror, et in uacuo pectore regnat Amor.
sex mihi surgat opus numeris, in quinque residat;
This passages touches on the theme in the legendary Homer tradition of the poet as persecuted by his inspiring god:  Cupid is saeve puer, “cruel boy,” (Amores 1.1.5); he is ferus ‘savage’, his arrow wounds, pierces violently, and brands (Art of Love 1.9); in Metamorphoses 1.45, his wrath is again cruel.