Book contents
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures and Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- Chapter 1 Introduction
- Chapter 2 Canons
- Chapter 3 Periodisations
- Chapter 4 Author and Identity
- Chapter 5 Intertextuality
- Chapter 6 Mediaeval Latin
- Chapter 7 Neo-Latin
- Chapter 8 Reception
- Chapter 9 National Traditions
- Chapter 10 Editing
- Chapter 11 Latin Literature and Linguistics
- Chapter 12 Latin Literature and Material Culture
- Chapter 13 Philosophy
- Chapter 14 Political Thought
- Chapter 15 Latin Literature and Roman History
- Chapter 16 Latin Literature and Greek
- Envoi
- Index Locorum
- General Index
- References
Chapter 14 - Political Thought
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 January 2024
Book contents
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures and Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- Chapter 1 Introduction
- Chapter 2 Canons
- Chapter 3 Periodisations
- Chapter 4 Author and Identity
- Chapter 5 Intertextuality
- Chapter 6 Mediaeval Latin
- Chapter 7 Neo-Latin
- Chapter 8 Reception
- Chapter 9 National Traditions
- Chapter 10 Editing
- Chapter 11 Latin Literature and Linguistics
- Chapter 12 Latin Literature and Material Culture
- Chapter 13 Philosophy
- Chapter 14 Political Thought
- Chapter 15 Latin Literature and Roman History
- Chapter 16 Latin Literature and Greek
- Envoi
- Index Locorum
- General Index
- References
Summary
Roman concepts and institutions have been formative for Western political forms and the Romans’ thinking about power has had a deeper influence on Western traditions of political thought than is recognized in political theory. Recent developments have sparked the interest of political theorists in genres and artefacts that convey thinking about politics through means besides distinct argumentation. At the same time, the political turn in the study of Latin literature has opened the field to theoretical questions beyond the range of usual literary training. This chapter surveys issues, such as freedom, institutions, and foundation, which are central to Roman political thought, and maps a variety of methods for approaching how the Romans thought about politics. These include: close reading, rhetorical analysis, conceptual history, comparison with other media and cultural artefacts, and metaphorology. Illustrative interpretations span art and inscriptions, poetry and prose, with excurses on the reception and transformation of Roman political thinking in Augustine and Machiavelli. A sample reading of the death of Turnus in the Aeneid argues for a broad intellectual toolkit.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature , pp. 753 - 816Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024
References
Adorno, T. (1991) ‘On lyric poetry and society’, in Notes to Literature, Vol. 1 (trans. S. W. Nicholsen), New York (German orig. 1958).Google Scholar
Agamben, G. (1998) Homo sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life (trans. D. Heller-Roazen), Stanford (Italian orig. 1995).Google Scholar
Agamben, G. (2000) Means without End: Notes on Politics (trans. V. Binetti and C. Casarino), Minneapolis.Google Scholar
Anderson, B. (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London.Google Scholar
Ando, C. (2000) Imperial Ideology and Provincial Loyalty in the Roman Empire, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Ando, C. (2011) Law, Language, and Empire in the Roman Tradition, Philadelphia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ando, C. (2015) Roman Social Imaginaries: Language and Thought in Context of Empire, Toronto.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arena, V. (2012) Libertas and the Practice of Politics in the Late Roman Republic, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Armitage, D. (2012) ‘What’s the big idea? Intellectual history and the longue durée’, History of European Ideas 38: 493–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armitage, D. (2017b) ‘On the genealogy of quarrels’, Critical Analysis of Law 4: 178–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asmis, E. (2004) ‘The state as partnership: Cicero’s definition of res publica in his work On the State’, History of Political Thought 25: 569–99.Google Scholar
Asmis, E. (2005) ‘A new kind of model: Cicero’s Roman constitution in De republica’, AJPh 126: 377–427.Google Scholar
Bannon, C. (1997) The Brothers of Romulus: Fraternal pietas in Roman Law, Literature, and Society, Princeton.Google Scholar
Barchiesi, A. (2001) Speaking Volumes: Narrative and Intertext in Ovid and Other Latin Poets, London.Google Scholar
Bartsch, S. (1997) Ideology in Cold Blood: A Reading of Lucan’s Civil War, Cambridge, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, S. (2012a) ‘The art of sincerity: Pliny’s Panegyricus’, in Rees 2012: 148–93 (reprint of Bartsch 1994: 148–87).Google Scholar
Bartsch, S. (2012b) ‘Praise and doublespeak: Tacitus’ Dialogus’, in Ash 2012: 119–54 (revised version of Bartsch 1994: 101–25).Google Scholar
Batstone, W. W. (1991) ‘A narrative gestalt and the force of Caesar’s plain style’, Mnemosyne 44: 126–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beard, M. (1993) ‘Looking (harder) for Roman myth: Dumézil, declamation and problems of definition’, in Graf, F., ed., Mythos in mythenloser Gesellschaft: Das Paradigma Roms (Stuttgart and Leipzig), 44–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bevir, M. (2011) ‘The contextual approach’, in Klosko, G., ed., The Oxford Handbook of the History of Political Philosophy (Oxford), 11–23.Google Scholar
Blumenberg, H. (1997) Shipwreck with Spectator: Paradigm of a Metaphor for Existence (trans. S. Rendall), Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Braund, S. (1998) ‘Praise and protreptic in early imperial panegyric’, in Whitby 1998, 53–76. Reprinted in Rees 2012, 85–108.Google Scholar
Breed, B. (2006) Pastoral Inscriptions: Reading and Writing Virgil’s Eclogues, London.Google Scholar
Breed, B., Damon, C. and Rossi, A., eds. (2010) Citizens of Discord: Rome and Its Civil Wars, Oxford and New York.Google Scholar
Brooks, P. (2010) ‘Literature as law’s other’, Yale Journal of Law and Humanities 22: 349–67.Google Scholar
Brown, P. R. L. (1972) ‘Political society’, in Markus, R. A., ed., Augustine: A Collection of Critical Essays (New York), 311–29.Google Scholar
Brunner, O., Conze, W. and Koselleck, R. (2004) Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe: Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Bryen, A. Z. (2018) ‘Labeo’s iniuria: violence and politics in the age of Augustus’, Chiron 48: 17–52.Google Scholar
Castoriadis, C. (1975) L’Institution imaginaire de la société, Paris. Trans. K. Blamey as The Imaginary Institution of Society, Cambridge, MA, 1987.Google Scholar
Chaplin, J. D. and Kraus, C. S., eds. (2009) Livy: Oxford Readings in Classical Studies, Oxford.Google Scholar
Connolly, J. (2007) The State of Speech: Rhetoric and Political Thought in Ancient Rome, Princeton.Google Scholar
Connolly, J. (2009a) ‘Fear and freedom: a new interpretation of Pliny’s Panegyricus’, in Urso, G., ed., Ordine e sovversione nel mondo greco e romano (Pisa), 259–78.Google Scholar
Connolly, J. (2009b) ‘Virtue and violence: the historians on politics’, in Feldherr 2009: 181–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connolly, J. (2010) ‘Political theory’, in Barchiesi, A. and Scheidel, W., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Roman Studies (Oxford), 713–27.Google Scholar
Connolly, J. (2011) ‘Fantastical realism in Cicero’s postwar panegyric’, in Urso, G., ed., Dicere laudes (Pisa), 161–79.Google Scholar
Connolly, J. (2017) ‘The Romans tried to save the republic from men like Trump. They failed’, Village Voice, 17 January 2017.Google Scholar
Corbeill, A. (2002) ‘Rhetorical education in Cicero’s youth’, in May, J. M., ed., Brill’s Companion to Cicero: Oratory and Rhetoric (Leiden), 23–48.Google Scholar
Corbeill, A. (2007) ‘Rhetorical education and social reproduction in the Republic and early Empire’, in Dominik, W. and Hall, J., eds., A Companion to Roman Rhetoric (Malden, MA), 69–82.Google Scholar
Cornwell, H. (2017) Pax and the Politics of Peace: Republic to Principate, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cresci, L. R. and Gazzano, F., eds. (2018) De imperiis: l’idea di impero universale e la successione degli imperi nell’antichità, Rome.Google Scholar
Cugusi, P. and Sblendoria Cugusi, M. T., eds. (2001) Marco Porcio Catone censore. Opere, 2 vols., Turin.Google Scholar
Damon, C. (1999) ‘The trial of Cn. Piso in Tacitus’ Annals and the Senatus consultum de C. Pisone patre: new light on narrative technique’, AJPh 120: 143–62.Google Scholar
Davis, G. (1991) Polyhymnia: The Rhetoric of Horatian Lyric Discourse, Berkeley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dominik, W. J. (1997) ‘The style is the man: Seneca, Tacitus and Quintilian’s canon’, in Dominik, W. J., ed., Roman Eloquence: Rhetoric in Society and Literature (London), 50–68.Google Scholar
Dufallo, B. (2007) The Ghosts of the Past: Latin Literature, the Dead, and Rome’s Transition to a Principate, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
Dufallo, B., ed. (2018) Roman Error: Classical Reception and the Problem of Rome’s Flaws, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dugan, J. (2005) Making a New Man: Ciceronian Self-Fashioning in the Rhetorical Works, Oxford.Google Scholar
Dugan, J. (2013) ‘Cicero and the politics of ambiguity: interpreting the Pro Marcello’, in Steel, C. and Blom, H. van der, eds., Community and Communication: Oratory and Politics in Republican Rome (Oxford), 211–25.Google Scholar
du Plessis, P., Ando, C. and Tuori, K., eds. (2016) The Oxford Handbook of Roman Law and Society, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ernst, W. (2014) ‘Plinius, Epistulae 8.14: Abstimmungsprobleme im römischen Senat’, Fundamina 20: 240–57.Google Scholar
Farr, J. (1989) ‘Understanding conceptual change politically’, in Ball, T., Farr, J. and Hanson, R. L., eds., Political Innovation and Conceptual Change (Cambridge), 24–49.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. and Nelis, D., eds. (2013) Augustan Poetry and the Roman Republic, Oxford.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. C. (1998) Literature and Religion at Rome: Cultures, Contexts and Beliefs, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. C. (2002) ‘Vna cum scriptore meo: poetry, principate, and the traditions of literary history in the Epistle to Augustus’, in Woodman, A. J. and Feeney, D. C., eds., Traditions and Contexts in the Poetry of Horace (Cambridge), 172–87.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. C. (2004) ‘Sacrificial ritual in Roman poetry’, in Barchiesi, A., Rüpke, J. and Stephens, S., eds., Rituals in Ink (Stuttgart), 1–22.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. C. (2009) ‘Horace and the Greek lyric poets’, in Lowrie, M., ed., Horace’s Odes and Epodes: Oxford Readings in Classical Studies (Oxford), 202–31.Google Scholar
Ferenczi, A. and Hardie, P., eds. (2014) New Approaches to Horace’s Ars poetica (= MD 72.1), Pisa.Google Scholar
Fertik, H. and Hanses, M., eds. (2019) Above the Veil: Revisiting the Classicism of W. E. B. Du Bois (= IJCT 26.1), Boston.Google Scholar
Fiori, R. (1996) Homo sacer: dinamica politico-constituzionale di una sanzione giuridico-religiosa, Naples.Google Scholar
Flower, H. I. (2017) The Dancing Lares and the Serpent in the Garden: Religion at the Roman Street Corner, Princeton.Google Scholar
Fowler, A. (1982) Kinds of Literature: An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. (2001) Satires of Rome: Threatening Poses from Lucilius to Juvenal, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. (2014) ‘Recusatio as political theatre: Horace’s letter to Augustus’, JRS 104: 105–32.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. (2018a) ‘Donald Trump and Rome’s mad emperors’, Common Dreams, 29 April 2018.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. (2018b) ‘Donald Trump and the Tiberian lie’, Common Dreams, 4 December 2018.Google Scholar
Gajda, A. (2010) ‘Tacitus and political thought in early modern Europe, c. 1530–c. 1640’, in Woodman, A. J., ed., The Cambridge Companion to Tacitus (Cambridge), 253–68.Google Scholar
Gallia, A. (2009) ‘Potentes and potentia in Tacitus’ Dialogus de oratoribus’, TAPhA 139: 169–206.Google Scholar
Geue, T. (2014) ‘Editing the opposition: Horace’s Ars poetica’, in Ferenczi and Hardie 2014, 143–72.Google Scholar
Gibson, R. K. and Morello, R. (2012) Reading the Letters of Pliny the Younger: An Introduction, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gibson, R. K. and Whitton, C., eds. (2016) The Epistles of Pliny. Oxford Readings in Classical Studies, Oxford.Google Scholar
Goff, B. (1995) ‘Introduction’, in Goff, B., ed., History, Tragedy, Theory: Dialogues on Athenian Drama (Austin), 1–37.Google Scholar
Goldhill, S. (1999) ‘Programme notes’, in Goldhill, S. and Osborne, R., eds., Performance Culture and Athenian Democracy, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Grewing, F., Acosta-Hughes, B. and Kirichenko, A., eds. (2013) The Door Ajar: False Closure in Classical Antiquity, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Gurd, S. A. (2012) Work in Progress: Literary Revision as Social Performance in Ancient Rome, Oxford.Google Scholar
Hadot, P. (1995) Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault, Oxford.Google Scholar
Haimson Lushkov, A. (2010) ‘Intertextuality and source-criticism in the Scipionic trials’, in Polleichtner, W., ed., Livy and Intertextuality (Trier), 93–133.Google Scholar
Haley, E. W. (2003) Baetica felix: People and Prosperity in Southern Spain from Caesar to Septimius Severus, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
Hammer, D. (2008) Roman Political Thought and the Modern Theoretical Imagination, Norman, OK.Google Scholar
Hammer, D. (2014) Roman Political Thought: From Cicero to Augustine, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampsher-Monk, I., Tilmans, K. and van Vree, F., eds. (1998) History of Concepts: Comparative Perspectives, Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardie, P. (1993) The Epic Successors of Virgil: A Study in the Dynamics of a Tradition, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Heinze, R. (1972) ‘Auctoritas’, in Heinze, R., Vom Geist des Römertums (Darmstadt), 43–58.Google Scholar
Hellegouarc’h, J. (1963) Le vocabulaire latin des relations et des partis politiques sous la république, Paris.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. (1998) Fighting for Rome: Poets and Caesars, History and Civil War, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hölkeskamp, K.-J. (2010) Reconstructing the Roman Republic: An Ancient Political Culture and Modern Research, Princeton.Google Scholar
Horne, A. (2018) ‘Making freedom in Cicero and Horace’, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Howarth, R. S. (2013) ‘War and warfare in ancient Rome’, in Campbell, B. and Tritle, L. A., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Warfare in the Classical World (Oxford), 29–45.Google Scholar
James, S. (1995) ‘Establishing Rome with the sword: condere in the Aeneid’, AJPh 116: 623–37.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. R. (1993) Horace and the Dialectic of Freedom: Readings in ‘Epistles’ 1, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Joshel, S. R. (2002) ‘The body female and the body politic: Livy’s Lucretia and Verginia’, in McClure, L. K., ed., Sexuality and Gender in the Classical World (Oxford), 163–87.Google Scholar
Kapust, D. J. (2011a) Republicanism, Rhetoric, and Roman Political Thought: Sallust, Livy, and Tacitus, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapust, D. J. (2011b) ‘Tacitus and political thought’, in Pagán, V. A., ed., A Companion to Tacitus (Malden, MA), 504–28.Google Scholar
Kapust, D. J. (2018a) Flattery and the History of Political Thought: That Glib and Oily Art, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapust, D. J. (2018b) ‘The founders hated excessive flattery. What would they think about the Trump administration?’, Washington Post, 22 January 2018.Google Scholar
Kaster, R. A. (2005) Emotion, Restraint and Community in Ancient Rome, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koschorke, A., Lüdemann, S., Frank, T. and Matala de Mazza, E. (2007) Der fiktive Staat: Konstruktionen des politischen Körpers in der Geschichte Europas, Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Koselleck, R. (2004) Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time (trans. K. Tribe), New York.Google Scholar
Kraus, C. S. (1991) ‘Initium turbandi omnia a femina ortum est: Fabia Minor and the election of 367 bc’, Phoenix 45: 314–25.Google Scholar
Kraus, C. S. (1999) ‘Jugurthine disorder’, in Kraus, C. S., ed., The Limits of Historiography: Genre and Narrative in Historical Texts (Leiden), 217–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraus, C. S. (2005) ‘From exempla to exemplar? Writing history around the emperor in imperial Rome’, in Edmondson, J., Mason, S. and Rives, J., eds., Flavius Josephus and Flavian Rome (Oxford), 181–200.Google Scholar
Kraus, C. S., Marincola, J. M. and Pelling, C. B. R., eds. (2010) Ancient Historiography and Its Contexts: Studies in Honor of A. J. Woodman, Oxford.Google Scholar
Krugman, P. (2017) ‘Trump makes Caligula look pretty good’, New York Times, 18 August 2017, page A25.Google Scholar
Lange, C. H. (2017) ‘Stasis and bellum civile: a difference in scale?’, Critical Analysis of Law 4: 129–40.Google Scholar
Lange, C. H. (2019) ‘Augustus, the Res gestae, and the end of civil war: unpleasant events?’, in Lange and Vervaet 2019, 185–209.Google Scholar
Lange, C. H. and Madsen, J. M., eds. (2016) Cassius Dio: Greek Intellectual and Roman Politician, Leiden.Google Scholar
Lange, C. H. and Vervaet, F., eds. (2019) The Historiography of Late Republican Civil War, Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlands, R. (2008) ‘“Reading for the moral” in Valerius Maximus: the case of severitas’, The Cambridge Classical Journal 54: 160–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlands, R. (2011) ‘Roman exempla and situation ethics: Valerius Maximus and Cicero De officiis’, JRS 101: 100–22.Google Scholar
Langlands, R. (2015) ‘Roman exemplarity: mediating between general and particular’, in Lowrie and Lüdemann 2015, 68–80.Google Scholar
Laurence, R., Cleary, S. E. and Sears, G. (2011) The City in the Roman West c. 250 bc–c. ad 250, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Levene, D. (2004) ‘Reading Cicero’s narratives’, in Powell, J. and Paterson, J., eds., Cicero the Advocate (Oxford), 117–46.Google Scholar
Liebeschuetz, W. (2013) ‘The theme of liberty in the Agricola of Tacitus’, in Ash 2012, 73–94.Google Scholar
Loraux, N. (1993) The Children of Athena: Athenian Ideas about Citizenship and the Division between the Sexes (trans. C. Levine), Princeton.Google Scholar
Loraux, N. (2002) The Divided City: On Memory and Forgetting in Ancient Athens (trans. C. Pache), New York.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2007a) ‘Making an exemplum of yourself: Cicero and Augustus’, in Heyworth, S. J., with Fowler, P. G. and Harrison, S. J., eds., Classical Constructions: Papers in Memory of Don Fowler, Classicist and Epicurean (Oxford), 91–112.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2007b) ‘Sovereignty before the law: Agamben and the Roman Republic’, Law and Humanities 1: 31–55.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2007c) ‘Horace and Augustus’, in Harrison, S. J., ed., Cambridge Companion to Horace (Cambridge), 77–89.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2009) Writing, Performance and Authority in Augustan Rome, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2010a) ‘Spurius Maelius: dictatorship and the homo sacer’, in Breed, Damon and Rossi 2010, 171–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2010b) ‘Rom immer wieder gegründet’, in Döring, T., Vinken, B. and Zöller, G., eds., Übertragene Anfänge: Imperiale Figurationen um 1800 (Munich), 23–49.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2011) ‘Divided voices and imperial identity in Propertius 4.1 and Derrida, Monolingualism of the Other and Politics of Friendship’, Dictynna 8, https://journals.openedition.org/dictynna/711.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2014) ‘Politics by other means: Horace’s Ars poetica’, in Ferenczi and Hardie 2014, 121–42.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2016a) ‘Le corps du chef: transformations dans la sphère publique à l’époque d’Horace’, in Delignon, B., Le Meur, N. and Thevenaz, O., eds., Le poète lyrique dans la cité antique: les Odes d’Horace au miroir de la lyrique grecque archaïque (Paris), 71–86.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2016b) ‘Roman law and Latin literature’, in du Plessis, Ando and Tuori 2016, 70–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2018) ‘Figures of discord and the Roman addressee in Horace, Odes 3.6’, in Harrison, S. J., Frangoulidis, S. and Papanghelis, T. D., eds., Intratextuality and Latin Literature (Berlin), 211–25.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. (forthcoming) Security and Its Metaphors in Roman Political Thought.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. and Lüdemann, S. (2015) Exemplarity and Singularity: Thinking through Particulars in Philosophy, Literature, and Law, London.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. and Vinken, B. (2019) ‘Married to civil war: a Roman trope in Lucan’s poetics of history’, in Lange and Vervaet 2019, 263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowrie, M. and Vinken, B. (2022) Civil War and the Collapse of the Social Bond: The Roman Tradition at the Heart of the Modern, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lüdemann, S. (2007) ‘Weibliche Gründungsopfer’, in Koschorke, Lüdemann, Frank and Matala de Mazza 2007, 36–46.Google Scholar
MacCormack, S. (1998) The Shadows of Poetry: Vergil in the Mind of Augustine, Berkeley.Google Scholar
MacCormack, S. (1999) ‘Classical authors’, in Fitzgerald, A. D., ed., Augustine through the Ages: An Encyclopedia (Grand Rapids), 202–6.Google Scholar
McCormick, J. (2015) ‘Machiavelli’s Agathocles: from criminal example to princely exemplum’, in Lowrie and Lüdemann 2015, 123–39.Google Scholar
McCormick, J. (forthcoming) The People’s Princes: Machiavelli, Leadership and Liberty.Google Scholar
McGowan, M. (2009) Ovid in Exile: Power and Poetic Redress in the Tristia and Epistulae ex Ponto, Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manuwald, G. (2011) ‘Ciceronian praise as a step towards Pliny’s Panegyricus’, in Roche 2011, 85–103.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. (2010) ‘Eros and empire: Virgil and the historians on civil war’, in Kraus, Marincola and Pelling 2010, 183–204.Google Scholar
Marx, K. (1960) ‘Der achtzehnte Brumaire des Louis Bonaparte’, in Marx, K. and Engels, F., Werke 8 (Berlin), 111–207.Google Scholar
Matthes, M. (2000) The Rape of Lucretia and the Founding of Republics, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
Mebane, J. (2017) ‘The body politic and Roman political languages’, dissertation, University of Chicago; forthcoming as The Body Politic in Roman Political Thought, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Meconi, D. V. and Stump, E., eds. (2014) The Cambridge Companion to Augustine, 2nd edn, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millar, F. (1984) ‘The political character of the classical Roman Republic, 200–151 bc’, JRS 76: 1–11.Google Scholar
Miller, J. F., Damon, C. and Myers, K. S., eds. (2002) Vertis in usum: Studies in Honor of Edward Courtney, Leipzig.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milnor, K. (2005) Gender, Domesticity, and the Age of Augustus: Inventing Private Life, Oxford.Google Scholar
Möller, M. (2004) Talis oratio – qualis vita: Zu Theorie und Praxis mimetischer Verfahrung in der griechisch-römischen Literaturkritik, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Momigliano, A. (1990) The Classical Foundations of Modern Historiography, Sather Classical Lectures 54, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Morstein-Marx, R. (2004) Mass Oratory and Political Power in the Late Roman Republic, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, G. M. and Zini, F. M., eds. (2018) Philosophie in Rom – Römische Philosophie?, Berlin.Google Scholar
Nelsestuen, G. A. (2015) Varro the Agronomist: Political Philosophy, Satire, and Agriculture in the Late Republic, Columbus.Google Scholar
Nichols, J. H., Jr. (1979) ‘On the proper use of ancient philosophy: a comment on Steven Taylor Holmes’ “Aristippus in and out of Athens”’, American Political Science Review 73.1: 129–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolet, G. (1991) Space, Geography and Politics in the Early Roman Empire, Ann Arbor, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. (2018) The Monarchy of Fear: A Philosopher Looks at Our Political Crisis, New York.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. (1975) The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Political Tradition, Princeton.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. (1981) ‘The reconstruction of discourse: towards the historiography of political thought’, Modern Language Notes 96: 959–80.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. (1987) ‘The concept of a language and the métier d’historien: some considerations on practice’, in Pagden, A., ed., The Languages of Political Theory in Early-Modern Europe (Cambridge), 21–5.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. (1989) Politics, Language and Time: Essays on Political Thought and History, Chicago.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. (2008) ‘Theory in history: problems of context and narrative’, in Dryzek, J., Honig, B. and Phillips, A., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Political Theory (Oxford), 163–74.Google Scholar
Potter, D. S. (1999) ‘Political theory in the senatus consultum Pisonianum’, AJPh 120: 65–88.Google Scholar
Potter, D. S., Damon, C. and Takács, S. A., eds. (1999) The ‘senatus consultum de Cn. Pisone patre’ (= AJPh 120.1), Baltimore.Google Scholar
O’Hara, J. (1990) Death and the Optimistic Prophecy in Vergil’s Aeneid, Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quint, D. (1993) Epic and Empire: Politics and Generic Form from Virgil to Milton, Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quint, D. (2018) Virgil’s Double Cross: Design and Meaning in the Aeneid, Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raaflaub, K., ed. (2005) Social Struggles in Archaic Rome: New Perspectives on the Conflict of the Orders, 2nd edn, Malden, MA.Google Scholar
Reydams-Schils, G. (2012) ‘Social ethics and politics’, in van Acheren, M., ed., A Companion to Marcus Aurelius (Malden, MA), 437–52.Google Scholar
Rich, J. (2017) ‘Fabius Pictor, Ennius and the origins of Roman annalistic historiography’, in Sandberg, K. and Smith, C., eds., Omnium annalium monumenta: Historical Writing and Historical Evidence in Republican Rome (Leiden), 17–65.Google Scholar
Richardson, J. (2008) The Language of Empire: Rome and the Idea of Empire from the Third Century bc to the Second Century ad, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, J. (2016) ‘Provincial administration’, in du Plessis, Ando and Tuori 2016, 111–23.Google Scholar
Roche, H. and Demetriou, K., eds. (2018) Brill’s Companion to the Classics, Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, Leiden.Google Scholar
Roche, P., ed. (2011) Pliny’s Praise: The Panegyricus in the Roman World, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roller, M. B. (2004) ‘Exemplarity in Roman culture: the cases of Horatius Cocles and Cloelia’, CPh 99: 1–56.Google Scholar
Roller, M. B. (2009) ‘The exemplary past in Roman historiography and culture’, in Feldherr 2009, 214–30.Google Scholar
Roller, M. B. (2018) Models from the Past in Roman Culture: A World of Exempla, Baltimore.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, C. and Schofield, M., eds. (2000) The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Schmitt, C. (1985) Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty (trans. G. Schwab), Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Simpson, C. J. (1977) ‘The date and dedication of the temple of Mars Ultor’, JRS 67: 91–4.Google Scholar
Skinner, Q. (1969) ‘Meaning and understanding in the history of ideas’, History and Theory 8: 3–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spence, S. (1991) ‘Cinching the text: the Danaids and the end of the Aeneid’, Vergilius 37: 11–19.Google Scholar
Straumann, B. (2016) Crisis and Constitutionalism: Roman Political Thought from the Fall of the Republic to the Age of Revolution, Oxford.Google Scholar
Syed, Y. (2005) Vergil’s Aeneid and the Roman Self: Subject and Nation in Literary Discourse, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. F. (1998) ‘The isolation of Turnus’, in Stahl, H.-P., ed., Vergil’s Aeneid, Augustan Epic and Political Context (London), 271–302.Google Scholar
Treggiari, S. (1991) Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian, Oxford.Google Scholar
Trout, D. (1994) ‘Re-textualizing Lucretia: cultural subversion in the City of God’, JECS 2: 53–70.Google Scholar
Wallace-Hadrill, A. (1982) ‘Civilis princeps: between citizen and king’, JRS 72: 32–48.Google Scholar
Weithman, P. (2014) ‘Augustine’s political philosophy’, in Meconi and Stump 2014, 231–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, K. E., ed. (2015) Appian’s Roman History: Empire and Civil War, Swansea.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiedemann, T. (2000) ‘Reflections of Roman political thought in Latin historical writing’, in Rowe and Schofield 2000, 517–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winterbottom, M. (2002) ‘Believing the Pro Marcello’, in Miller, Damon and Myers 2002, 24–38.Google Scholar
Whitby, M., ed. (1998) The Propaganda of Power: The Role of Panegyric in Late Antiquity, Mnemosyne Supplement 183, Leiden.Google Scholar
Whitton, C. L. (2010) ‘Pliny, Epistles 8.14: senate, slavery and the Agricola’, JRS 100: 118–39.Google Scholar
Winkler, J. J. and Zeitlin, F. I., eds. (1990) Nothing to Do with Dionysus? Athenian Drama in Its Social Context, Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wohl, V. (2010) Law’s Cosmos: Juridical Discourse in Athenian Forensic Oratory, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Zanker, P. (1988) The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus (trans. A. Shapiro), Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar