Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:18:51.586Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 November 2023

Giovanni Parmeggiani
Giovanni Parmeggiani
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Trieste
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Ephorus of Cyme and Greek Historiography , pp. 366 - 394
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Africa, T.W. 1962. ‘Ephorus and Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1610’, AJPh 83: 86–9.Google Scholar
Alcalde Martín, C. and Morfakidis Filactos, M.. 1983. ‘Pretensión de veracidad en las historias de Éforo’, in Unidad y pluralidad en el mundo antiguo. Actas del VI Congreso Español de Estudios Clásicos. Sevilla 6–11 de abril de 1981. 2 vols. Madrid: II, 311–16.Google Scholar
Alonso-Núñez, J.M. 1990. ‘The Emergence of Universal Historiography from the 4th to the 2nd Centuries B.C.’, in Verdin, Schepens and De Keyser 1990: 173–92.Google Scholar
Alonso-Núñez, J.M. 2002. The Idea of Universal History in Greece from Herodotus to the Age of Augustus. Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ambaglio, D. 1980. L’opera storiografica di Ellanico di Lesbo. Pisa.Google Scholar
Ambaglio, D. 1995. La Biblioteca storica di Diodoro siculo: problemi e metodo. Como.Google Scholar
Ambaglio, D. 2001. ‘Ἐπιχώριος: un termine tecnico storiografico?’, in Ambaglio, Bearzot and Vattuone 2001: 7–21.Google Scholar
Ambaglio, D. (ed.) 2005. Epitomati ed epitomatori: il crocevia di Diodoro Siculo. Atti del Convegno di Pavia, 21–22 aprile 2004. Como.Google Scholar
Ambaglio, D., Bearzot, C. and Vattuone, R. (eds.) 2001. Storiografia locale e storiografia universale. Forme di acquisizione del sapere storico nella cultura antica. Bologna, 16–18 dicembre 1999. Como.Google Scholar
Andrewes, A. 1951. ‘Ephoros Book I and the Kings of Argos’, CQ 45: 39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrewes, A. 1985. ‘Diodoros and Ephoros: One Source of Misunderstanding’, in The Craft of the Ancient Historian. Essays in Honor of Chester G. Starr, ed. Eadie, J.W. and Ober, J.. Lanham: 189–97.Google Scholar
Angeli Bernardini, P. 2004. ‘Etnografia e storia nell’epos di Cherilo di Samo’, in Samo. Storia, letteratura, scienza. Atti delle giornate di studio (Ravenna, 14–16 novembre 2002), ed. Cavallini, E.. Roma: 31–50.Google Scholar
Antonetti, C. 1990. Les Étoliens. Image et religion. Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antonetti, C. 2013. ‘Aitolos and Aitolia: ethnic identities per imagines’, in Identitätsbildung und Identitätsstiftung in griechischen Gesellschaften. Vorträge gehalten im Rahmen eines Symposiums von 28 to 29 Jänner 2010, ed. Offenmüller, M.. Graz: 183–200.Google Scholar
Aperghis, G. 2013. ‘Athenian Mines, Coins and Triremes’, Historia 62: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asheri, D. 1992 2. ‘La colonizzazione greca’, in La Sicilia antica, vol. I 1, ed. Gabba, E. and Vallet, G.. Napoli: 89–142. [19801]Google Scholar
Avenarius, G. 1956. Lukians Schrift zur Geschichtsschreibung. Meisenheim am Glan.Google Scholar
Azoulay, V. 2014. Pericles of Athens. English translation. Princeton–Oxford. [Périclès. La démocratie athénienne à l’épreuve du grand homme. Paris 2010]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azoulay, V. 2017. The Tyrant-Slayers of Ancient Athens. English translation. Oxford. [Les tyrannicides d’Athènes. Vie et mort de deux statues. Paris 2014]Google Scholar
Badian, E. 1993. From Plataea to Potidaea. Studies in the History and Historiography of the Pentecontaetia. Baltimore–London.Google Scholar
Bagordo, A. 2013. Telekleides. Einleitung, Übersetzung, Kommentar. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Bakker, E.J.,de Jong, , I.J.F. and van Wees, H. (eds.) 2002. Brill’s Companion to Herodotus. Leiden–Boston–Köln.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakola, E. 2010. Cratinus and the Art of Comedy. Oxford.Google Scholar
Baladié, R. (ed.) 1996. Strabon, Géographie, vol. VI: Livre IX. Paris.Google Scholar
Banfi, A. 2003. Il governo della città. Pericle nel pensiero antico. Napoli.Google Scholar
Baragwanath, E. 2008. Motivation and Narrative in Herodotus. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baragwanath, E. and de Bakker, M. (eds.) 2012. Myth, Truth, and Narrative in Herodotus. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baragwanath, E. and Foster, E. (eds.) 2017. Clio and Thalia. Attic Comedy and Historiography. Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Barber, G.L. 1935. The Historian Ephorus. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Barns, J. 1953–1954. ‘Cimon and the First Athenian Expedition to Cyprus’, Historia 2: 163–76.Google Scholar
Baron, C.A. 2006. ‘The Aristoteles Decree and the Expansion of the Second Athenian League’, Hesperia 75: 379–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, C.A. 2013. Timaeus of Tauromenium and Hellenistic Historiography. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Bauer, A. 1879. ‘Die Benutzung Herodots durch Ephoros bei Diodor’, JKPh Suppl. 10. Leipzig: 281–342.Google Scholar
Bayle, P. 1740 5. ‘Ephore’, in Dictionnaire historique et critique, ed. Mr. Des Maizeaux. Amsterdam–Leiden–La Haye–Utrecht: 361–4.Google Scholar
Bearzot, C. 1981. Platone e i «moderati» ateniesi. Milano.Google Scholar
Bearzot, C. 2001. ‘Il «Papiro di Teramene» e le Elleniche di Ossirinco’, Sileno 27: 9–32.Google Scholar
Bearzot, C. 2002a. ‘Ancora sul giudizio di Eforo a proposito di Filisto (Plut. Dion XXXVI, 3 = FGrHist 70 F 220)’, in συγγραφή. Materiali e appunti per lo studio della storia e della letteratura antica, vol. 4, ed. Ambaglio., D. Como: 125–34.Google Scholar
Bearzot, C. 2002b. ‘Filisto di Siracusa’, in Storici greci d’Occidente, ed. Vattuone., R. Bologna: 91–136.Google Scholar
Bearzot, C. 2004. ‘Lisandro tra due modelli: Pausania l’aspirante tiranno, Brasida il generale’, in Contro le ‘leggi immutabili’. Gli Spartani fra tradizione e innovazione, ed. Bearzot, C. and Landucci, F.. Milano: 127–60.Google Scholar
Bearzot, C. and Landucci, F. (eds.) 2005. Diodoro e l’altra Grecia. Macedonia, Occidente, Ellenismo nella Biblioteca storica. Atti del Convegno (Milano 15–16 gennaio 2004). Milano.Google Scholar
Bearzot, C. 2014. ‘Eforo e Teramene’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 569–90.Google Scholar
Beloch, K.J. 1914. Griechische Geschichte, vol. II 1. Strassburg.Google Scholar
Bengtson, H. 1975 2. Die Staatsverträge des Altertums, vol. II. München. [19621]Google Scholar
Bérard, J. 1963. La Magna Grecia. Storia delle colonie greche dell’Italia meridionale. Italian translation. Torino. [La colonisation grecque de l’Italie méridionale et de la Sicile dans l’antiquité: l’histoire et la légende. Paris 1957]Google Scholar
Bertelli, L. 2004. ‘La Sparta di Aristotele: un ambiguo paradigma o la crisi di un modello?’, RSA 34: 9–71.Google Scholar
Bertelli, L. 2014. ‘Aristotle and History’, in Parmeggiani 2014a: 289–303.Google Scholar
Berti, M. 2013. ‘Collecting Quotations by Topic: Degrees of Preservation and Transtextual Relations Among Genres’, AncSoc 43: 269–88.Google Scholar
Bettalli, L. 2007. ‘ἀρχαῖος’, in Lexicon Historiographicum Graecum et Latinum, 2, ed. Ampolo, C., Fantasia, U. and Porciani, L.. Pisa: 81–8.Google Scholar
Bianchetti, S. 1990. Πλωτὰ καὶ πορευτά. Sulle tracce di una periegesi anonima. Firenze.Google Scholar
Bianchetti, S. 2005. ‘Il V libro della Biblioteca storica di Diodoro e l’«isolario» dei Greci’, in Ambaglio 2005: 13–31.Google Scholar
Bianchetti, S. 2014. ‘Aspetti di geografia eforea nei Giambi a Nicomede’, in Fidio, De and Talamo, 2013–2014: II, 751–80.Google Scholar
Bianco, E. 1994. Atene “come il sole”. L’imperialismo ateniese del V sec. a.C. nella storia e oratoria politica attica. Alessandria.Google Scholar
Bianco, E. 2005. ‘E questo è quanto su Timoteo (Diod. XV 36, 6)’, in Ambaglio 2005: 151–63.Google Scholar
Bianco, E. 2014. Eforo e le tradizioni sugli strateghi ateniesi del IV secolo a.C., in Fidio, De and Talamo, 2013–2014: II, 591–608.Google Scholar
Biffi, N. 1988. L’Italia di Strabone. Testo, traduzione e commento dei libri V e VI della Geografia di Strabone. Genova.Google Scholar
Bilabel, F. 1922. Die kleineren Historikerfragmente auf Papyrus. Bonn.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilik, R. 1998–1999. ‘Hippias von Elis als Quelle von Diodors Bericht über den elisch-spartanischen Krieg?’, AncSoc 29: 21–47.Google Scholar
Billerbeck, M. 2006–2017. Stephani Byzantii Ethnica, 5 vols., Berolini et Novi Eboraci.Google Scholar
Billow, R.A. 2016. ‘Hellenika Oxyrhynchia (66)’, in Brill’s New Jacoby, ed. Worthington, I.. Brill Online.Google Scholar
Biraschi, A.M. 1996. ‘Teopompo e l’uso del mito. A proposito di FGrHist 115 F 381’, Hermes 124: 160–9.Google Scholar
Biraschi, A.M. 2000. ‘Eforo e l’οὐδένεια dei Ciclopi. A proposito di Strab. VI 2.2’, in συγγραφή. Materiali e appunti per lo studio della storia e della letteratura antica, vol. 2, ed. Ambaglio., D. Como: 73–81.Google Scholar
Biraschi, A.M. 2003. ‘Le tradizioni sulla storia elea: Strabone e Pausania’, Geographia Antiqua 12: 81–93.Google Scholar
Biraschi, A.M. 2010. ‘Eforo e la storia κατὰ γένος’, PP 65: 81–97.Google Scholar
Biraschi, A.M. 2013. ‘Eforo e Omero’, in Fidio, De and Talamo, 2013–2014: I, 303–30.Google Scholar
Blank, T. and Maier, F.K. (eds.) 2018. Die symphonischen Schwestern. Narrative Konstruktion von ‘Wahrheiten’ in der nachklassischen Geschichtsschreibung. Stuttgart.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blass, F. 1882. ‘Neue Papyrusfragmente im Ägyptischen Museum zu Berlin’, Hermes 17: 148–63.Google Scholar
Blass, F. 1892 2. Die attische Beredsamkeit, vol. II: Isokrates und Isaios. Leipzig. [18741]Google Scholar
Bleckmann, B. 2006. Fiktion als Geschichte. Neue Studien zum Autor der Hellenika Oxyrhynchia und zur Historiographie des vierten vorchristlichen Jahrhunderts. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Bloch, H. 1940. ‘Studies in Historical Literature of the Fourth Century B.C.’, in Athenian Studies presented to W.S. Ferguson, HSPh Suppl. 1. Cambridge Massachusetts–London–Oxford: 303–76.Google Scholar
Blösel, W. 2004. Themistokles bei Herodot: Spiegel Athens im fünften Jahrhundert. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Boardman, J. 1982. ‘Herakles, Theseus and Amazons’, in The Eye of Greece. Studies in the Art of Athens, ed. Kurtz, D. and Sparks, B.. Cambridge: 1–28.Google Scholar
Bogino, L. 1994. ‘In margine alla versione eforea della fondazione di Taranto’, MGR 18: 1–13.Google Scholar
Bollansée, J. 1998. ‘Andron of Ephesos (1005)’, in Felix Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker Continued, Part IV: Biography and Antiquarian Literature, part IV A: Biography, fasc. 1, ed. Schepens, G.. Leiden–Boston–Köln: 122–167.Google Scholar
Bollansée, J. 1999a. ‘Hermippos of Smyrna (1026)’, in Felix Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker Continued, Part IV: Biography and Antiquarian Literature, part IV A: Biography, fasc. 3, ed. Schepens., G. Leiden-Boston-Köln.Google Scholar
Bollansée, J. 1999b. Hermippos of Smyrna and His Biographical Writings. A Reappraisal. Leuven.Google Scholar
Bonnet, M. and Bennett, E.R. (eds.) 1997. Diodore de Sicile, Bibliothèque historique, Livre XIV. Paris.Google Scholar
Bowie, E. (ed.) 2018. Herodotus – Narrator, Scientist, Historian. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bravi, L. 2006. Gli epigrammi di Simonide e le vie della tradizione. Roma.Google Scholar
Bravo, B. 1993. ‘Rappresentazioni di vicende di Sicilia e di Grecia degli anni 481–480 a.C. presso storici antichi. Studio di racconti e discorsi storiografici’, Athenaeum 81: 39–99, 441–81.Google Scholar
Breebaart, A.B. 1991. ‘Weltgeschichte als Thema der antiken Geschichtsschreibung’, in Geschichtsbild und Geschichtsdenken im Altertum, ed. Alonso-Núñez, J.M.. Darmstadt: 39–62 [AHN 1 (1966): 1–21].Google Scholar
Breglia, L. 1989. ‘Eforo e le tradizioni sugli Egeidi’, AION 11: 9–29.Google Scholar
Breglia, L. 1996a. Studi su Eforo. Napoli.Google Scholar
Breglia, L. 1996b. ‘Eforo: l’ottica cumana di uno storico “universale”’, in Le IVe siècle av. J.-C. Approches historiographiques, ed. P. Carlier. Nancy: 41–55.Google Scholar
Breglia, L. 1998. ‘I Cimmeri a Cuma’, in Euboica. L’Eubea e la presenza euboica in Calcidica e in Occidente. Atti del Convegno internazionale di Napoli (13–16 novembre 1996), ed. Bats, M. and d’Agostino, B.. Napoli: 323–35.Google Scholar
Breglia, L. 2001. ‘Storia Universale e Geografia in Eforo di Cuma’, in Ambaglio, Bearzot and Vattuone 2001: 139–64.Google Scholar
Breglia, L. 2005. ‘Eforo e il modello erodoteo’, in Ambaglio, Bearzot and Vattuone Erodoto e il modello erodoteo. Formazione e trasmissione delle tradizioni storiche in Grecia, ed. Giangiulio, M.. Trento: 277–314.Google Scholar
Breglia, L. 2009. ‘Citazioni e «frammenti»: Aelio Theone ed Eforo di Cuma’, in Lanzillotta, Costa and Ottone 2009: 91–119.Google Scholar
Breglia, L. 2013. ‘L’Atene arcaica di Eforo’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: I, 373–412.Google Scholar
Breitenbach, H.R. 1989. ‘Der Michigan-Papyrus 5982 über Theramenes. Historische Probleme und Autorschaft’, in Labor omnibus unus. Festschrift für G. Walser, ed. Herzog, H.E. and Frei-Stolba, R.. Stuttgart: 121–35.Google Scholar
Briant, P. 2002. From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire. English translation. Winona Lake. [Histoire de l’Empire Perse de Cyrus à Alexandre. Paris 1996]Google Scholar
Brown, T.S. 1952. ‘Timaeus, and Diodorus’ Eleventh Book’, AJPh 73: 337–55.Google Scholar
Bruce, I.A.F. 1967. An Historical Commentary on the ‘Hellenica Oxyrhynchia’. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Bruchmann, C.F.H. 1890–1893. Beiträge zur Ephoros-Kritik. I-II (Programm des Königl. König-Wilhelms-Gymnasiums zu Breslau). Breslau.Google Scholar
Bruno Sunseri, G. 1997. ‘Poesia e storiografia in Eforo di Cuma’, QS 46: 143–67.Google Scholar
Brunt, P.A. 2011. ‘Cicero and Historiography’, in Marincola 2011: 207–40. [ΦΙΛΙΑΣ ΧΑΡΙΝ: Miscellanea di studi classici in onore di Eugenio Manni. 2 vols. Roma 1980: I, 311–40]Google Scholar
Brusuelas, J.H. and Funderburk, K.F.. 2019. ‘Anonymous, on Isokrates (1123)’, in Felix Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker Continued, Part IV: Biography and Antiquarian Literature, part IV A: Biography, fasc. 8, ed. Brusuelas, J.H., Obbink, D. and Schorn, S.. Leiden–Boston: 102–119.Google Scholar
Buck, R.J. 1979. A History of Boeotia. Edmonton.Google Scholar
Buckler, J. 1980. The Theban Hegemony 371–362 BC. Cambridge Massachusetts–London.Google Scholar
Bultrighini, U. 2005. ‘Diodoro e la morte di Alcibiade’, in Ambaglio 2005: 99–114.Google Scholar
Burde, P. 1974. Untersuchungen zur antiken Universalgeschichtsschreibung. Diss. München.Google Scholar
Burn, A.R. 1962. Persia and the Greeks. The Defence of the West, c. 546–478 B.C. London.Google Scholar
Busolt, G. 1893–1904. Griechische Geschichte bis zur Schlacht bei Chaeroneia, 3 vols. Gotha.Google Scholar
Busolt, G. 1908. ‘Der neue Historiker und Xenophon’, Hermes 43: 255–85.Google Scholar
Busolt, G. 1910. ‘Zur Glaubwürdigkeit Theopomps’, Hermes 45: 220–49.Google Scholar
Butts, J.R. 1986. The “Progymnasmata” of Theon: a New Text with Translation and Commentary. Diss. Claremont.Google Scholar
Caballero López, J.A. 2015. ‘De la rhétorica a la historia: la prosa historiográfica de Éforo’, Veleia 32: 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camassa, G. 2014. ‘Eforo e l’invenzione della legge’, QS 80: 71–93.Google Scholar
Candau Morón, J.M. 1983. ‘El concepto de Historia Universal en Éforo y en Polibio’, in Unidad y Pluralidad en el mundo antiguo. Actos del VI Congreso español de estudios clásicos. Sevilla 6–11 de abril de 1981, ed. J.M. Candau Morón, F.J. González Ponce and G. Cruz Andreotti. 2 vols. Madrid: II, 325–9.Google Scholar
Candau Morón, J.M. 2018. ‘Estrabón, transmisor de Éforo’, in De nuevo sobre Estrabón. Geografía, cartografía, historiografía y tradición, ed. Castro-Páez, E.. Sevilla: 21–36.Google Scholar
Canfora, L. 1967. ‘Plutarco su Eforo (Una nuova testimonianza)’, AFLB 12: 73–5.Google Scholar
Canfora, L. 1972. Totalità e selezione nella storiografia classica. Bari.Google Scholar
Canfora, L. 1974. Teorie e tecnica della storiografia classica. Luciano, Plutarco, Dionigi, Anonimo su Tucidide. Bari.Google Scholar
Canfora, L. 1990. ‘Le but de l’historiographie selon Diodore’, in Verdin, Schepens and De Keyser 1990: 313–22.Google Scholar
Canfora, L. 1991. ‘L’inizio della storia secondo i Greci’, QS 33: 5–19.Google Scholar
Carrata, F. 1949. ‘Sulla composizione delle Storie di Eforo’, AAST 81–83: 147–160.Google Scholar
Carrata Thomes, F. 1952. Egemonia beotica e potenza marittima nella politica di Epaminonda. Torino.Google Scholar
Cartledge, P. 1987. Agesilaos and the Crisis of Sparta. Baltimore.Google Scholar
Cartledge, P. 2002 2. Sparta and Lakonia: A Regional History 1300 to 362 BC. London-New York. [19791].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carusi, C. 2007. ‘ἀφορμή’, in Lexicon Historiographicum Graecum et Latinum, vol. 2, ed. Ampolo, C., Fantasia, U. and Porciani, L.. Pisa: 152–5.Google Scholar
Casevitz, M. and Babut, D. (eds.) 2004. Plutarque. Oeuvres morales. XV. Paris.Google Scholar
Cataldi, S. 1996. ‘Le thème de l’hégémonie et la constitution spartiate au IVe siècle av. J.-C.’, in Le IVe siècle av. J.-C. Approches historiographiques, ed. P. Carlier. Nancy: 63–83.Google Scholar
Cauer, E. 1847. Quaestionum de fontibus ad Agesilai historiam pertinentibus pars prior. Vratislaviae.Google Scholar
Cavaignac, E. 1932. ‘Réflexions sur Éphore’, in Mélanges G. Glotz, 2 vols. Paris: I, 143–61.Google Scholar
Cawkwell, G.L. 2005. The Greek Wars: The Failure of Persia. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J.T. 1973. Studies of the Fourth-Century Athenians’ View of Their Past. Diss. Urbana Champaign (Illinois).Google Scholar
Chambers, M. 1993. Hellenica Oxyrhynchia. Stutgardiae-Lipsiae.Google Scholar
Chamoux, F. and Bertrac, P.. 1993. ‘Introduction générale’, in Diodore de Sicile, Bibliothèque historique, Livre I, ed. Bertrac, P. and Vernière, Y.. Paris: vii–lxxvi.Google Scholar
Chaniotis, A. 1988. Historie und Historiker in den griechischen Inschriften. Epigraphische Beiträge zur griechischen Historiographie. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Chávez Reino, A.L. 2005. ‘Los claroscuros del Éforo de Polibio’, in Schepens andBollansée 2005: 19–54.Google Scholar
Chávez Reino, A.L. 2007. ‘αὐτόπτης’, in Lexicon Historiographicum Graecum et Latinum, vol. 2, ed. Ampolo, C., Fantasia, U. and Porciani, L.. Pisa: 123–46.Google Scholar
Chávez Reino, A.L. 2009. ‘Una noticia olvidada sopre el principio de las Historias de Éforo (Tauro ap. Juan Filópono, Aet. VI 8, p. 147, 17–18 Rabe)’, in Faces of Hellenism: Studies in the History of Eastern Mediterranean (4th Century B.C. – 5th Century A.D.), ed. Van Nuffelen, P.. Leuven: 49–62.Google Scholar
Chávez Reino, A.L. 2010. ‘Ecos de Teopompo en la Suda’, in Il lessico Suda e gli storici greci in frammenti. Atti dell’Incontro Internazionale, Vercelli, 6–7 novembre 2008, ed. Vanotti., G. Tivoli: 207–66.Google Scholar
Chávez Reino, A.L. 2013. ‘La ‘’idealización’ de los escitas en Éforo: un replantamiento general (En torno a FGrHist 70 F 42 = Estrabón VII 3, 9)’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: I, 331–72.Google Scholar
Chávez Reino, A.L. 2017. ‘ἐπίμετρον’, in Lexicon Historiographicum Graecum et Latinum, vol. 3, ed. Ampolo, C., Fantasia, U., and Porciani., L. Pisa: 191–200.Google Scholar
Chávez Reino, A.L. 2018. ‘Introduction and critical edition of Phot. Bibl. cod. 176’, in Ottone 2018: 1–78.Google Scholar
Christ, M.R. 1993. ‘Theopompus and Herodotus: A Reassessment’, CQ 43: 47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christesen, P. 2007. Olympic Victor Lists and Ancient Greek History. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christesen, P. 2010. ‘Spartans and Scythians, a Meeting of Mirages: The Portrayal of the Lycurgan Politeia in Ephorus’ Histories’, in Sparta: The Body Politic, ed. Powell, A. and Hodkinson, S.. Swansea: 211–63.Google Scholar
Ciaceri, E. 1903. ‘Sulla reintegrazione dell’antichissima storia greca in Eforo di Cuma’, Rivista di Storia dell’Antichità 7: 17–24.Google Scholar
Clarke, K. 2008. Making Time for the Past: Local History and the Polis. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collmann, G. 1869. De Diodori Siculi fontibus commentationis criticae capita quattuor. Lipsiae.Google Scholar
Connor, W.R. 1961. Studies in Ephoros and Other Sources for the Cause of the Peloponnesian War. Diss. Princeton.Google Scholar
Connor, W.R. 1962. ‘Vim Quandam Incredibilem. A Tradition concerning the Oratory of Pericles’, C&M 23: 23–33.Google Scholar
Cordano, F. 2003. ‘Egemonie in Grecia. Tebe in Senofonte ed Eforo’, in La successione degli imperi e delle egemonie nelle relazioni internazionali, ed. Foraboschi, D. and Pizzetti, S.M.. Milano: 53–60.Google Scholar
Corsaro, M. 1998. ‘Ripensando Diodoro. Il problema della storia universale nel mondo antico I’, MedAnt 1: 405–36.Google Scholar
Cracco Ruggini, L. 1966. ‘Eforo nello Pseudo-Aristotele, Oec. II?, I’, Athenaeum 44: 199–237.Google Scholar
Cracco Ruggini, L. 1967. ‘Eforo nello Pseudo-Aristotele, Oec. II?, II’, Athenaeum 45: 3–88.Google Scholar
Creuzer, F. 1803. Die historische Kunst der Griechen in ihrer Entstehung und Fortbildung. Leipzig.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creuzer, F. 1815. ‘De Ephori et Theopompi vestigiis’, in Marx 1815: iii–xxxii.Google Scholar
Creuzer, F. 1845. Die historische Kunst der Griechen in ihrer Entstehung und Fortbildung, zweite verbesserte und vermehrte Aufgabe, besorgt von J. Kayser. Leipzig-Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Cunningham, I.C. 2011. ‘Not a New Fragment of Ephorus’, CQ 61: 312–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuscunà, C. 2003. I frammenti di Antioco di Siracusa. Introduzione, traduzione e commento. Alessandria.Google Scholar
Cusumano, N. 1994. Una terra splendida e facile da possedere. I Greci e la Sicilia. Roma.Google Scholar
Daverio Rocchi, G. 2014. ‘Eforo, Senofonte e la storia del loro tempo’, in Fidio, De and Talamo, 2013–2014: II, 609–42.Google Scholar
David, E. 1979–1980. ‘The Influx of Money into Sparta at the End of the Fifth Century B.C.’, SCI 5: 30–45.Google Scholar
Davies, J.K. 2013. ‘The Historical and Cultural World of Ephoros’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: I, 55–70.Google Scholar
Davies, P.J.V. 2018. ‘Plutarch, Lysander, and a Disappearing Heraclid Reform’, GRBS 58: 523–41.Google Scholar
De Angelis, F. 2003. Megara Hyblaia and Selinous. The Development of Two Greek City-States in Archaic Sicily. Oxford.Google Scholar
De Fidio, P. 2013. ‘Eforo e le tradizioni sulla Messenia arcaica’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: I, 413–506.Google Scholar
De Fidio, P. and Talamo, C. (eds.) 2013–2014. Eforo di Cuma nella storia della storiografia greca. Atti dell’Incontro Internazionale di Studi (Fisciano-Salerno, 10–12 dicembre 2008), 2 vols. Napoli. [PP 68 (2013) and 69 (2014)]Google Scholar
De Jong, I., Nünlist, R. and A. Bowie, (eds.) 2004. Narrators, Narratees, and Narratives in Ancient Greek Literature. Leiden–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Romilly, J. 1975. Magic and Rhetoric in Ancient Greece. Cambridge Massachusetts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desideri, P. 1992. ‘Eforo e Strabone sui “popoli misti” (Str. XIV, 5, 23–26)’, in Contributi dell’Istituto di Storia Antica dell’Università Cattolica, vol. XVIII: Autocoscienza e rappresentazione dei popoli nell’antichità, ed. Sordi, M.. Milano: 19–31.Google Scholar
Desideri, P. 1996. ‘Scrivere gli eventi storici’, in I Greci. Storia Cultura Arte Società, part 1: Noi e i Greci, ed. Settis., S. Torino: 955–1013.Google Scholar
Desideri, P. 2001. ‘Nascita e rinascite della storia universale antica’, in Ambaglio, Bearzot and Vattuone 2001: 199–209.Google Scholar
De, Ste. Croix, G.E.M. 1972. The Origins of the Peloponnesian War. Ithaca.Google Scholar
Develin, R. 1977. ‘Miltiades and the Parians Expedition’, AC 46: 571–7.Google Scholar
Dewald, C. and Marincola, J. (eds.) 2006. The Cambridge Companion to Herodotus. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillery, J. 1995. Xenophon and the History of His Times. London–New York.Google Scholar
Dindorf, W. (ed.) 1853. Arpocrationis Lexicon in Decem Oratores Atticos, 2 vols. Oxonii.Google Scholar
Donelli, G. 2016. ‘Herodotus and Greek Lyric Poetry’, in The Art of History, ed. Liotsakis, V. and Farrington, S.. Berlin-Boston: 11–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dopp, E. 1890. ‘Die Geburtsolympiade des Ephorus und Theopomp bei Suidas’, Hermes 25: 308–11.Google Scholar
Dopp, E. 1900–1909. Die geographischen Studien des Ephorus, 3 vols. Rostock.Google Scholar
Dover, K.J. 1988. ‘Anecdotes, Gossip and Scandal’, in The Greeks and Their Legacy. Collected Papers, 2 vols. Oxford: II, 15–52.Google Scholar
Drachmann, A.B. (ed.) 1903–1927. Scholia vetera in Pindari Carmina, 3 vols. Lipsiae.Google Scholar
Dressler, R. 1873. Das Geschichtswerk des Ephoros nach seinen Fragmenten und seiner Benutzung durch Diodor (Programm des Gymnasiums zu Bautzen). Bautzen.Google Scholar
Drews, R. 1962. ‘Diodorus and His Sources’, AJPh 83: 383–92.Google Scholar
Drews, R. 1963. ‘Ephorus and History written κατὰ γένος’, AJPh 84: 244–55.Google Scholar
Drews, R. 1976. ‘Ephorus κατὰ γένος History revisited’, Hermes 104: 497–8.Google Scholar
Dunbabin, T.J. 1948. The Western Greeks. The History of Sicily and South Italy from the Foundation of the Greek Colonies to 480 B.C. Oxford.Google Scholar
Edwards, M.J. 2013. ‘Dionysius and Isaeus’, in Hellenistic Oratory: Continuity and Change, ed. Kremmydas, C. and Tempest, K.. Oxford: 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, W.M. 1989. Alcibiades. London–New York.Google Scholar
Endemann, K. 1881. Beiträge zur Kritik des Ephorus. Diss. Marburg.Google Scholar
Engels, J. 2003. ‘Antike Überlieferungen über die Schüler des Isokrates’, in Isokrates. Neue Ansätze zur Bewertung eines politischen Schriftstellers, ed. Orth., W. Trier: 175–94.Google Scholar
Enmann, A. 1880. Untersuchungen über die Quellen des Pompeius Trogus für die griechische und sicilische Geschichte. Dorpat.Google Scholar
Fabiani, R. 1999. ‘La questione delle monete ΣΥΝ: per una nuova interpretazione’, AIISS 16: 87–123.Google Scholar
Fabiani, R. 2003. ‘Epigrafi in Erodoto’, in L’uso dei documenti nella storiografia antica (Gubbio, 22–24 maggio 2001), ed. Biraschi, A.M. et alii. Napoli: 161–85.Google Scholar
Fabrice, R. 2014. ‘Aristide citateur, eségete, commentateur et critique dans le discours égyptien (or. 36)’, Kentron 30: 33–54.Google Scholar
Fantasia, U. 2004. ‘ἀκριβής’, in Lexicon Historiographicum Graecum et Latinum, vol. 1, ed. Ampolo, C., Fantasia, U. and Porciani, L.. Pisa: 36–66.Google Scholar
Fantasia, U. 2015. ‘Le Elleniche di Ossirinco, Diodoro e il problema storiografico’, RSA 45: 127–51.Google Scholar
Farrington, S. 2015. ‘A Likely Story: Rhetoric and the Determination of Truth in Polybius’ Histories’, Histos 9: 29–66.Google Scholar
Favuzzi, A. and Paradiso, A.. 2018. ‘Nikolaos of Damaskos (90)’, in Brill’s New Jacoby, ed. Worthington., I. Brill Online.Google Scholar
Fehling, D. 1989. Herodotus and His ‘Sources’: Citation, Invention, and Narrative Art. English translation. Leeds. [Die Quellenangaben bei Herodot. Berlin–New York 1971]Google Scholar
Ferjaouni, A. 1993. Recherches sur les relations entre l’Orient phénicien et Carthage. Freiburg–Göttingen.Google Scholar
Figueira, T.J. 2003. ‘Xenelasia and Social Control in Classical Sparta’, CQ 53: 44–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flower, M.A. 1991. ‘Revolutionary Agitation and Social Change in Classical Sparta’, in Georgica: Greek Studies in Honour of G. Cawkwell, ed. Flower, M.A. and Tower, M.. BICS Suppl. 58. London: 78–97.Google Scholar
Flower, M.A. 1994. Theopompus of Chios: History and Rhetoric in the Fourth Century BC. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flower, M.A. 1998. ‘Simonides, Ephorus and Herodotus on the Battle of Thermopylae’, CQ 48: 365–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flower, M.A. (ed.) 2017. The Cambridge Companion to Xenophon. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Forderer, J. 1913. Ephoros und Strabon. Diss. Tübingen.Google Scholar
Fornara, C.W. 1971. ‘Evidence for the Date of Herodotus’ Publication’, JHS 91: 25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fornara, C.W. 1983. The Nature of History in Ancient Greece and Rome. Berkeley–Los Angeles–London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fossey, J.M. 2014. Epigraphica Boeotica II: Further Studies on Boeotian Inscriptions, Leiden–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, R.L. 2000–2013. Early Greek Mythography, 2 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Fowler, R.L. 2011. ‘Mythos and Logos’, JHS 131: 47–66.Google Scholar
Franco, C, 1993. ‘Isocrate e la Sicilia’, RFIC 121: 37–52.Google Scholar
Freeman, E.A. 1891. The History of Sicily from the Earliest Times, 2 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Funke, P. 1991. ‘Strabone, la geografia storica e la struttura etnica della Grecia nord-occidentale’, in Geografia storica della Grecia antica, ed. Prontera, F.. Roma–Bari: 174–93.Google Scholar
Gardiner-Garden, J.R. 1987. Greek Conceptions on Inner Asian Geography and Ethnography from Ephoros to Eratosthenes. Bloomington.Google Scholar
Gärtner, H. 1967. ‘Ephoros’, in Der Kleine Pauly, vol. II, ed. K. Ziegler and W. Sontheimer. Stuttgart: 299–301.Google Scholar
Gauger, B. and J.-D. (eds.) 2015. Die Fragmente der Historiker: Ephoros von Kyme (FGrHist 70) und Timaios von Tauromenion (FGrHist 566). Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Gauthier, P. 1966. ‘Le parallele Himère-Salamine au Ve et au IVe siècle av. J.-C.’, REA 68: 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gazzano, F. 2009. ‘Giudizi antichi e (s)valutazioni moderne a proposito di Xanto di Lidia’, in Ingenia Asiatica. Fortuna e tradizione di storici d’Asia Minore, ed. Gazzano, F., Ottone, G. and Santi Amantini, L.. Tivoli: 35–59.Google Scholar
Gazzano, F. 2013. ‘L’immagine di Creso nella tradizione post-classica. In margine al “silenzio” di Xanto’, in Tradizioni e Testimonianze degli storici greci frammentari II. Atti del III Workshop internazionale (Roma 24–26 febbraio 2011), ed. Costa, V.. Tivoli: 73–105.Google Scholar
Gehrke, H.-J. 2003. ‘Sull’etnicità elea’, Geographia Antiqua 12: 5–22.Google Scholar
Gehrke, H.-J. 2014. Geschichte als Element antiker Kultur. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentili, B. 1968. ‘Epigramma ed elegia’, in Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique, vol. XIV: L’épigramme grecque, ed. O. Reverdin. Vandoeuvres–Genève: 39–81.Google Scholar
Giacometti, D. 2003. ‘Erodoto: la festa fra storia e rito’, in L’uso dei documenti nella storiografia antica (Gubbio, 22–24 maggio 2001), ed. Biraschi, A.M. et alii. Napoli: 187–204.Google Scholar
Gibson, B. 2018. ‘Praise in Polybius’, in Miltsios and Tamiolaki 2018: 75–102.Google Scholar
Gibson, C.A. 2002. Interpreting a Classic. Demosthenes and His Ancient Commentators. Berkeley–Los Angeles–London.Google Scholar
Gigante, M. 1949. ‘Un nuovissimo frammento di Eforo (PRyl. 492)’, Aegyptus 29: 45–50.Google Scholar
Giovannini, A. 1990. ‘Le Parthénon, le trésor d’Athéna et le tribut des alliés’, Historia 39: 129–48.Google Scholar
Giovannini, A. 1997. ‘La partecipation des alliés au financement du Parthénon: “Aparché” ou tribut?’, Historia 46: 145–57.Google Scholar
Giuffrida, M. 1978. ‘La «pirateria etrusca» fino alla battaglia di Cuma’, Kokalos 24: 175–200.Google Scholar
Giuliani, A. 1999. ‘Riflessi storiografici dell’opposizione a Pericle allo scoppio della guerra del Peloponneso’, in Contributi dell’Istituto di Storia Antica dell’Università Cattolica, vol. XXV: Fazioni e congiure nel mondo antico, ed. Sordi., M. Milano: 23–40.Google Scholar
Gomme, A.W. 1956. A Historical Commentary on Thucydides, 3 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Gonis, N. 1997. ‘P.Oxy. II 302 reconsidered’, in Aktes des 21. Internationalen Papyrologenkongresses in Berlin 1995, ed. Kramer, B., Luppe, W., Maehler, H. and Poethke, G., 2 vols. Stuttgart–Leipzig: I, 312–19.Google Scholar
Grant, M. 1995. Greek & Roman Historians. Information and Misinformation. London–New York.Google Scholar
Gray, V.J. 1989. The Character of Xenophon’s Hellenica. London.Google Scholar
Green, P. 1970. The Year of Salamis. 480–479 BC. London.Google Scholar
Green, P. (ed.) 2006. Diodorus Siculus, Books 11–12.37.1. Greek History 480–431 B.C. – the Alternative Version. Austin.Google Scholar
Grenfell, B.P. and Hunt, A.S. (eds.) 1908. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, vol. V. London.Google Scholar
Grenfell, B.P. and Hunt, A.S. (eds.) 1919. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, vol. XIII. London.Google Scholar
Gudeman, A. 1928. ‘Lysimachos (20)’, RE 14.1. Stuttgart: 32–9.Google Scholar
Haillet, J. (ed.) 2001. Diodore de Sicile, Bibliothèque historique, Livre XI. Paris.Google Scholar
Hamilton, C.D. 1991. Agesilaus and the Failure of Spartan Hegemony. Ithaca–London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammerstaedt, J. and Parmeggiani, G.. 2010. ‘Un passo della Poetica di Filodemo (PHerc. 994 col. 36, 11–37, 13) alla prova del carteggio di Christian Jensen e delle immagini multispettrali’, in Miscellanea Papyrologica Herculanensia, ed. Antoni, A., Arrighetti, G., Bertagna, M.I. and Delattre, D., 2 vols. Pisa: I, 101–14.Google Scholar
Hammond, N.G.L. 1937. ‘The Sources of Diodorus Siculus XVI. I. The Macedonian, Greek, and Persian Narrative’, CQ 31: 79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, N.G.L. 1938. ‘The Sources of Diodorus Siculus XVI. II. The Sicilian Narrative’, CQ 32: 137–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, N.G.L. and Griffith, G.T.. 1979. A History of Macedonia, vol. II: 550–336. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hartog, F. 1988. The Mirror of Herodotus: The Representation of the Other in the Writing of History. English translation. Berkeley–Los Angeles–London. [Le miroir d’Herodote: essai sur la répresentation de l’autre. Paris 1980]Google Scholar
Hartog, F. 1997. ‘La storiografia fra passato e presente’, in I Greci. Storia Cultura Arte Società, part 2: Una storia greca, vol. II: Definizione, ed. Settis., S. Torino: 959–81.Google Scholar
Haslam, M. 1983. ‘Life of Isocrates’, in The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, vol. L, ed. A.K. Bowman, et alii. London: 88–93.Google Scholar
Hatzfeld, J. 1937. ‘Le début des Helléniques’, in Mélanges Desrousseax. Paris: 211–17.Google Scholar
Hatzfeld, J. 1940. Alcibiade. Étude sur l’histoire d’Athènes à la fin du Ve siècle. Paris.Google Scholar
Hau, L.I. 2016. Moral History from Herodotus to Diodorus Siculus. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Hau, L.I., Meeus, A. and B. Sheridan, (eds.) 2018. Diodoros of Sicily: Historiographical Theory and Practice in the Bibliotheke. Leuven–Paris–Bristol.Google Scholar
Haywood, J. 2021. ‘The Use(s) of Inscriptions in Herodotus’ Histories’, AJPhil 142: 117–57.Google Scholar
Heyne, C.G. 1828. ‘De fontibus et auctoribus historiarum Diodori et eius auctoritate ex auctorum, quos sequitur, fide aestimanda’, in Diodori Bibliotheca historica, vol. V: Adnotationes interpretum ad Diodori Bibliothecam historicam, II Append., ed. Dindorf., L. Lipsiae: lix–cxxxi. [Gottingae 1786]Google Scholar
Hignett, C. 1963. Xerxes’ Invasion of Greece. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hobden, F. and Tuplin, C. (eds.) 2012. Xenophon: Ethical Principles and Historical Enquiry. Leiden–Boston.Google Scholar
Hodkinson, S. 1994. ‘Blind Ploutos? Contemporary Images of the Role of Wealth in Classical Sparta’, in The Shadow of Sparta, ed. Powell, A. and Hodkinson, S.. London–New York: 183–222.Google Scholar
Hodkinson, S. 1996. ‘Spartan Society in the Fourth Century: Crisis and Continuity’, in Le IVe siècle av. J.-C. Approches historiographique, ed. P. Carlier. Nancy: 85–101.Google Scholar
Hodkinson, S. 2005. ‘The Imaginary Spartan Politeia’, in The Imaginary Polis (Symposium, January 7–10, 2004), ed. Hansen., M.H. Copenhagen: 222–81.Google Scholar
Holzapfel, L. 1879. Untersuchungen über die Darstellung der griechischen Geschichte von 489 bis 413 v. Chr. bei Ephoros, Theopomp und anderen Autoren. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Hornblower, S. 1994. Greek Historiography. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornblower, S. 2002. ‘Herodotus and His Sources of Information’, in Bakker, de Jong and van Wees 2002: 373–86.Google Scholar
Hornblower, S. 2003–2008. A Commentary on Thucydides, 3 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hornblower, S. 2004. Thucydides and Pindar: Historical Narrative and the World of Epinikian Poetry. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornblower, S. 2011. ‘Thucydides’ Awareness of Herodotus, or Herodotus’ Awareness of Thucydides?’, in Thucydidean Themes. Oxford: 277–85.Google Scholar
Hornblower, S. and Pelling, C. (eds.) 2017. Herodotus, Histories: Book 6. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hose, M. 2006. ‘Peloponnesian War: Sources Other Than Thucydides’, in Rengakos and Tsakmakis 2006: 669–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huxley, G. 1973. ‘Ephoros on Pelops (F.Gr.Hist. 70 F 118)’, Philologus 117: 133–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, J.O. 2018. Persian Interventions: The Achaemenid Empire, Athens, and Sparta, 450–386 BCE. Baltimore.Google Scholar
Iglesias Zoido, J.C. 2007. ‘The Battle Exhortation in Ancient Rhetoric’, Rhetorica 25: 141–58.Google Scholar
Inglebert, H. 2014. Le monde, l’histoire. Essai sur les histoires universelles. Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Intrieri, M. 2015. ‘Atene, Corcira e le isole dello Ionio (415–344 a.C.)’, in Prospettive corciresi, ed. Antonetti, C. and Cavalli, E.. Pisa: 53–117.Google Scholar
Ionsius, I. 1716. De Scriptoribus Historiae Philosophicae Libri IV. Ienae. [Francofurti 1659]Google Scholar
Ivančik, A. 1996. ‘Die hellenistischen Kommentare zu Homer Il. 13, 3–6. Zur Idealisierung des Barbarenbildes. Ephoros und die Philologen der alexandrinischen Schule’, in Hellenismus. Beiträge zur Erforschung von Akkulturation und politischer Ordnung in den Staaten des hellenistischen Zeitalters (Akten des Internationalen Hellenismus-Kolloquiums, 9 to 14 März 1994 in Berlin), ed. Funck, B.. Tübingen: 671–92.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. 1902. Apollodors Chronik. Eine Sammlung der Fragmente. Berlin.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. 1904. Das Marmor Parium. Berlin.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. 1909. ‘Über die Entwicklung der griechischen Historiographie und den Plan einer neuen Sammlung der griechischen Historikerfragmente’, Klio 9: 80–123 [Abhandlungen zur griechischen Geschichtschreibung von Felix Jacoby zu seinem achtzigsten Geburtstag am 19. März 1956, ed. Bloch., H. Leiden 1956: 16–64]Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. 1912. ‘Hellanikos (7)’, RE 8.1. Stuttgart: 104–53.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. (ed.) 1926a. ‘Ephoros von Kyme (70)’, in Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, part II: Zeitgeschichte, vol. A: Universalgeschichte und Hellenika (Nr. 64–105). Berlin: 37–109.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. (ed.) 1926b. ‘Ephoros von Kyme (70)’, in Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, part II: Zeitgeschichte, vol. C: Kommentar zu Nr. 64–105. Berlin: 22–103.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. 1926c. ‘Griechische Geschichtschreibung’, Die Antike 2: 1–29. [Abhandlungen zur griechischen Geschichtschreibung von Felix Jacoby zu seinem achtzigsten Geburtstag am 19 März 1956, ed. Bloch., H. Leiden 1956: 73–99]Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. 1949. Atthis. The Local Chronicles of Ancient Athens. Oxford.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. (ed.) 1950. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, part III: Geschichte von Städten und Völkern (Horographie und Ethnographie), vol. B: Autoren über einzelne Städte (Länder) (Nr. 297–607). Leiden.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. (ed.) 1954. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, part III b Supplement: A Commentary on the Ancient Historians of Athens (323a–334), vol. 1: Text. Leiden.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. (ed.) 1955. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, part III: Geschichte von Städten und Völkern (Horographie und Ethnographie), vol. b: Kommentar zu 297–607, Text. Leiden.Google Scholar
Jacoby, F. (ed.) 1962. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, part II: Zeitgeschichte, vol. B: Spezialgeschichten, Autobiographien und Memoiren, Zeittafeln (Nr. 106–261). Leiden. [Berlin 1927–1929]Google Scholar
Jaffe, S.N. 2017. Thucydides on the Outbreak of War. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janko, R. (ed.) 2020. Philodemus, On Poems, Book 2, with the Fragments of Heracleodorus and Pausimachus. Oxford.Google Scholar
Judeich, W. 1911. ‘Theopomps Hellenika’, RhM 66: 94–139.Google Scholar
Kagan, D. 1969. The Outbreak of the Peloponnesian War. Ithaca–London.Google Scholar
Kaibel, G. 1893. Stil und Text der ΠΟΛΙΤΕΙΑ ΑΘΗΝΑΙΩΝ des Aristoteles. Berlin.Google Scholar
Kalischek, A.E. 1913. De Ephoro et Theopompo Isocratis discipulis. Diss. Monasterii Guestfalorum.Google Scholar
Kallet, L. 2006. ‘Thucydides’ Workshop of History and Utility outside the Text’, in Rengakos and Tsakmakis 2006: 335–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karwiese, S. 1980. ‘Lysander as Herakliskos Drakonopnigon (‘Herakles the Snake-Strangler’)’, NC 140: 1–27.Google Scholar
Keaney, J.J. (ed.) 1991. Harpocration: Lexeis of the Ten Orators. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Kebric, R.B. 2015. ‘Caesar, Duris of Samos and the Death of “Tragic History”’, in De Samos à Rome: personnalité et influence de Douris, ed. Naas, V. and Simon, M.. Paris: 341–59.Google Scholar
Kelly, T. 1976. A History of Argos to 500 B.C. Minneapolis.Google Scholar
Kindstrand, J.F. 1981. Anacharsis. The Legend and the Apophthegmata. Uppsala.Google Scholar
Kinzl, K.H. 1976. ‘Miltiades’ Parosexpedition in der Geschichtsschreibung’, Hermes 104: 280–307.Google Scholar
Klügmann, J.A. 1860. De Ephoro historico graeco, Diss. Gottingae.Google Scholar
Kõiv, M. 2001. ‘The Dating of Pheidon in Antiquity’, Klio 83: 327–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kõiv, M. 2003. Ancient Tradition and Early Greek History. The Origins of States in Early-Archaic Sparta, Argos and Corinth. Tallinn.Google Scholar
Kõiv, M. 2013. ‘Early History of Elis and Pisa: Invented or Evolving Traditions?’, Klio 95: 315–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koller, H. 1954. Die Mimesis in der Antike. Bern.Google Scholar
Kowalzig, B. 2004. ‘Changing Choral Worlds: Song-Dance and Society in Athens and Beyond’, in Music and the Muses. The Culture of ‘Mousikē’ in the Classical Athenian City, ed. Murray, P. and Wilson, P.. Oxford: 39–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kowalzig, B. 2007. Singing for the Gods. Performances of Myth and Ritual in Archaic and Classical Greece. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krentz, P. 2009. ‘The Athenian Treaty in Theopompos F 153’, Phoenix 63: 231–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krings, V. 1998. Carthage et les Grecs c. 580–480 av. J.-C. Textes et histoire. Leiden–Boston–Köln.Google Scholar
Kunz, M. 1935. Zur Beurteilung der Prooemien in Diodors historischer Bibliothek. Zürich.Google Scholar
Lana, I. 1960. ‘Eforo Fr. 65 Jacoby’, in Studi in onore di L. Castiglioni, 2 vols. Firenze: I, 520–3.Google Scholar
Landucci, F. 2013. ‘Sulle tracce di Eforo di Cuma: appunti biografici’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: I, 71–94.Google Scholar
Lanzillotta, E., Costa, V. and G. Ottone, (eds.) 2009. Tradizione e trasmissione degli storici greci frammentari. In ricordo di Silvio Accame. Atti del II Workshop internazionale (Roma, 16–18 febbraio 2006). Tivoli.Google Scholar
Laqueur, R. 1911a. ‘Ephoros. 1. Die Proömien’, Hermes 46: 161–206.Google Scholar
Laqueur, R. 1911b. ‘Ephoros. 2. Die Disposition’, Hermes 46: 321–54.Google Scholar
Laqueur, R. 1958. ‘Diodorea’, Hermes 86: 257–90.Google Scholar
Lasserre, F. (ed.) 1967. Strabon, Géographie, vol. III: Livres V–VI. Paris.Google Scholar
Lasserre, F. (ed.) 1971. Strabon, Géographie, vol. VII: Livre X. Paris.Google Scholar
Lazenby, J.F. 1993. The Defence of Greece 490–479 B.C. Warminster.Google Scholar
Lefèvre, F. 2002. ‘Le livre XVI de Diodore de Sicile: observations sur la composition et sur le traitement des grands personnages’, REG 115: 518–37.Google Scholar
Lefèvre, F. 2005. ‘Diodore XVI–XVII et la documentation épigraphique: notes de style et d’histoire’, in Bearzot and Landucci 2005: 105–26.Google Scholar
Lenfant, D. (ed.) 2004. Ctésias de Cnide, La Perse. L’Inde. Autres fragments. Paris.Google Scholar
Lenfant, D. (ed.) 2007. Athénée et les fragments d’historiens, Actes du colloque de Strasbourg (16–18 juin 2005). Paris.Google Scholar
Lenfant, D. (ed.) 2009. Les Histoires perses de Dinon et d’ Héraclide. Paris.Google Scholar
Lenfant, D. 2013. ‘The Study of Intermediate Authors and Its Role in the Interpretation of Historical Fragments’, AncSoc 43: 289–305.Google Scholar
Lens, J. 1991. ‘The Ephorus Papyrus’, in Estudios actuales sobre textos griegos (Uned, 25–28 octubre 1989), ed. López Fèrez, J.A.. Madrid: 289–309.Google Scholar
Lenz, F.W. 1964. ‘Ephoros und zwei Scholien zu Aristeides’, Mnemosyne 17: 281–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lévy, E. 1981. ‘Les origines du mirage scythe’, Ktèma 6: 57–68.Google Scholar
Lewis, D.M. 1977. Sparta and Persia. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liddel, P. 2018. ‘Inscriptions and Writing in Diodoros’ Bibliotheke’, in Hau, Meeus and Sheridan 2018: 447–72.Google Scholar
Liddel, P. and Fear, A. (eds.) 2010. Historiae Mundi: Study in Universal History. London–New Delhi–New York–Sydney.Google Scholar
Liddel, P. and Low, P. (eds.) 2013. Inscriptions and Their Uses in Greek and Latin Literature. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieberich, H. 1899. Studien zu den Proömien in der griechischen und byzantinischen Geschichtschreibung, vol. I. München.Google Scholar
Link, S. 1994. Das griechische Kreta. Untersuchungen zu seiner staatlichen und gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung vom 6. bis zum 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Link, S. 2000. ‘Das Paros-Abenteuer des Miltiades (Hdt. 6.132–136)’, Klio 82: 40–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loftus, A. 2000. ‘A New Fragment of the Theramenes Papyrus’, ZPE 133: 11–20.Google Scholar
Lombardo, M. 2002. ‘La colonizzazione adriatica in età dionigiana’, in La Sicilia dei due Dionisî. Atti della settimana di studio (Agrigento, 24–28 febbraio 1999), ed. Bonacasa, N., Braccesi, L. and De Miro, E.. Roma: 427–42.Google Scholar
Luce, T.J. 1997. The Greek Historians. London–New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luraghi, N. 2001a. The Historian’s Craft in the Age of Herodotus. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luraghi, N. 2001b. ‘Local Knowledge in Herodotus’ Histories’, in Luraghi 2001a: 138–60.Google Scholar
Luraghi, N. 2002. ‘Antioco di Siracusa’, in Storici greci d’Occidente, ed. Vattuone., R. Bologna: 55–89.Google Scholar
Luraghi, N. 2008. The Ancient Messenians: Constructions of Ethnicity and Memory. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luraghi, N. 2014. ‘Ephorus in Context: The Return of the Heraclidae and Fourth-century Peloponnesian Politics’, in Parmeggiani 2014a: 132–51.Google Scholar
Mackil, E. 2014. ‘Creating a Common Polity in Boeotia’, in The Epigraphy and History of Boeotia: New Finds, New Perspects, ed. Papazarkadas, N.. Leiden–Boston: 45–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malkin, M. 1994. Myth and Territory in the Spartan Mediterranean. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Manfredini, M. 1991. ‘Gli epigrammi del De Herodoti malignitate’, ASNP 21: 559–90.Google Scholar
Männlein-Robert, I. 2001. Longin, Philologe und Philosoph. Eine Interpretation der erhaltenen Zeugnisse. München–Leipzig.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcotte, D. (ed.) 2000. Géographes grecs, vol. I: Introduction générale, Ps.-Scymnos: Circuit de la terre. Paris.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. 1997. Authority and Tradition in Ancient Historiography. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marincola, J. 2003. ‘Beyond Pity and Fear: The Emotions of History’, AncSoc 33: 285–315.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. (ed.) 2007a. A Companion to Greek and Roman Historiography, 2 vols. Malden–Oxford–Carlton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marincola, J. 2007b. ‘Speeches in Classical Historiography’, in Marincola 2007a: I, 118–32.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. 2007c. ‘Universal History from Ephorus to Diodorus’, in Marincola 2007a: I, 171–9.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. 2007d. ‘ἀλήθεια’, in Lexicon Historiographicum Graecum et Latinum, vol. 2, ed. Ampolo, C., Fantasia, U. and Porciani, L.. Pisa: 7–38.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. 2007e. ‘Odysseus and the Historians’, SyllClass 18: 1–79.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. 2007f. ‘The Persian Wars in Fourth-Century Oratory and Historiography’, in Cultural Responses to the Persian Wars: Antiquity to the Third Millennium, ed. Bridges, E., Hall, E. and Rhodes, P.J.. Oxford: 105–26.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. (ed.) 2011. Greek and Roman Historiography. Oxford.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. 2013. ‘Polybius, Philarchus, and ‘Tragic History’’, in Polybius and His World, ed. Gibson, B. and Harrison, T.. Oxford: 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marincola, J. 2014. ‘Rethinking Isocrates and Historiography’, in Parmeggiani 2014a: 39–61.Google Scholar
Mariotta, G. 2013. ‘Frammenti papiracei riferibili alle Elleniche di Ossirinco: il problema delle copie nella prospettiva della paternità’, in Tradizione e trasmissione degli storici frammentari. Atti del III Workshop internazionale (Roma 24–26 febbraio 2011), ed. Costa., V. Tivoli: 139–54.Google Scholar
Marx, M. (ed.) 1815. Ephori Cumaei Fragmenta. Caroliruhae.Google Scholar
Marx, M. 1823. ‘Additamenta ad Ephori reliquias’, in Miscellanea maximam partem critica, ed. Friedmann, F.T. and Seebode, J.D.G., 2 vols. Wittenbergae–Londini–Parisiis–Argentorati: II, 754–756, no. LVI.Google Scholar
Masaracchia, A. 2003. ‘Isocrate e il mito’, in Isokrates. Neue Ansätze zur Bewertung eines politischen Schriftstellers, ed. Orth., W. Trier: 150–68.Google Scholar
Master, J. 2015. ‘The Shade of Sallust: History Writing in the Natural Questions of Seneca’, CPh 110: 333–52.Google Scholar
Mathieu, G. and Brémond, É (eds.) 1942. Isocrate, Discours, vol. II. Paris.Google Scholar
Matijašić, I. 2018. Shaping the Canons of Ancient Greek Historiography: Imitation, Classicism, and Literary Criticism. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matijašić, I. 2022. Herodotus – The most Homeric Historian? Oxford–Edmonton–Tallahassee.Google Scholar
Matthiessen, C. 1857–1860. ‘Ein Beitrag zur Würdigung des Ephoros’, JKPh Suppl. III. Leipzig: 875–94.Google Scholar
Mazzarino, S. 1947. Fra oriente e occidente. Ricerche di storia greca arcaica. Firenze.Google Scholar
Mazzarino, S. 1966. Il pensiero storico classico, 2 vols. Bari.Google Scholar
Meeus, A. 2018a. Narrative in Hellenistic Historiography. Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Meeus, A. 2018b. ‘History’s Aims and Audience in the Proem to Diodoros’ Bibliotheke’, in Hau, Meeus and Sheridan 2018: 149–74.Google Scholar
Meiggs, R. 1972. The Athenian Empire. Oxford.Google Scholar
Meiggs, R. and Lewis, D. (eds.) 1988. A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth Century B.C., revised edition. Oxford.Google Scholar
Meineke, M. (ed.) 1849. Stephani Byzantini Ethnicorum quae supersunt. Berlin.Google Scholar
Meissner, B. 1992. Historiker zwischen Polis und Königshof. Studien zur Stellung der Geschichtsschreiber in der griechischen Gesellschaft in spätklassischer und frühhellenistischer Zeit. Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meister, K. 1970. ‘Das persisch-karthagische Bündnis von 481 v. Chr. (Bengtson, Staatsverträge, II n. 129)’, Historia 19: 607–12.Google Scholar
Meister, K. 1971. ‘Die synchronistische Darstellung des Polybios im Gegensatz zur Disposition des Ephoros und Theopomp’, Hermes 99: 506–8.Google Scholar
Meister, K. 1975. Historische Kritik bei Polybios. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Meister, K. 1982. Die Ungeschichtlichkeit des Kalliasfriedens und deren historische Folgen. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Meister, K. 1992. La storiografia greca. Dalle origini alla fine dell’Ellenismo. Italian translation. Roma–Bari. [Die griechische Geschichtsschreibung: von den Anfängen bis zum Ende des Hellenismus. Stuttgart–Berlin–Köln 1990]Google Scholar
Meister, K. 1997. ‘Ephoros’, in Der Neue Pauly, vol. 3, ed. H. Cancik, H. Schneider and M. Landfester. Stuttgart–Weimar: 1089–90.Google Scholar
Mele, A. 2015. ‘Eforo e le colonie greche d’Occidente I’, Incidenza dell’antico 13: 9–51.Google Scholar
Mele, A. 2016. ‘Eforo e le colonie greche d’Occidente II’, Incidenza dell’antico 14: 9–70.Google Scholar
Mesturini, A.M. 1983. ‘Aristofane-Eupoli e Diodoro. A proposito di una citazione ciceroniana’, Maia 35: 195–204.Google Scholar
Mette, H.J. 1978. ‘Die ‘Kleinen’ griechischen Historiker heute’, Lustrum 21: 5–43.Google Scholar
Meyer, E. 1892–1899. Forschungen zur alten Geschichte, 2 vols. Halle.Google Scholar
Meyer, E. 1939 3. Geschichte des Altertums, vol. IV 1. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Migeotte, L. 2014. Les finances des cités grecques aux périodes classique et hellénistique. Paris.Google Scholar
Milns, R. 1980. ‘Some Critical Observations on Ephorus. Fragments 119, 111 and Testimony 23 (Jacoby)’, in Vindex Humanitatis. Essays in Honour of J. Huntly Bishop, ed. Marshall, B.. Armidale: 46–57.Google Scholar
Miltsios, N. and Tamiolaki, M. (eds.) 2018. Polybius and his Legacy: Tradition, Historical Representation, Reception. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moggi, M. 1976. I sinecismi interstatali greci, vol. I: Dalle origini al 338 a.C. Pisa.Google Scholar
Moggi, M. 2002. ‘Taranto fino al V sec. a.C.’, in Taranto e il Mediterraneo. Atti del quarantunesimo convegno di studi in Magna Grecia (Taranto 12–16 ottobre 2001). Taranto: 45–78.Google Scholar
Moggi, M. 2014. ‘Eforo e Aristotele’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 705–22.Google Scholar
Molitor, M.V. 1989. ‘A Possible New Fragment of Ephorus in the Scholia on Pax 363’, Hermes 117: 125–7.Google Scholar
Momigliano, A. 1966. ‘L’egemonia tebana in Senofonte e in Eforo’, in Terzo Contributo alla storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico, vol. I. Roma: 347–65. [Atene e Roma 3 (1935): 101–17]Google Scholar
Momigliano, A. 1975a. ‘La Storia di Eforo e le Elleniche di Teopompo’, in Quinto Contributo alla storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico, vol. II. Roma: 683–706. [RFIC 13 (1935): 180–204]Google Scholar
Momigliano, A. 1975b. ‘Le fonti della storia greca e macedone del libro XVI di Diodoro’, in Quinto Contributo alla storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico, vol. II. Roma: 707–27. [RIL 65 (1932), 523–43]Google Scholar
Momigliano, A. 1982. La storiografia greca. Torino.Google Scholar
Moscati Castelnuovo, L. 1983. ‘Eforo e la tradizione di Antioco di Siracusa sugli Enotri’, AC 52: 141–9.Google Scholar
Muccioli, F. 1999. Dionisio II. Storia e tradizione letteraria. Bologna.Google Scholar
Muccioli, F. 2005. ‘Gli onori divini per Lisandro a Samo. A proposito di Plutarchus, Lysander 18’, in The Statesman in Plutarch’s Works. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Intenational Plutarch Society (Nijmegen/ Castle Hernen, May 1–5 2002), ed. De Blois, L. et alii, 2 vols. Leiden–Boston: II, 199–213.Google Scholar
Muccioli, F. 2012. La storia attraverso gli esempi. Protagonisti e interpretazioni del mondo greco in Plutarco. Milano–Udine.Google Scholar
Mühl, M. 1917. Die politischen Ideen des Isokrates und die Geschichtsschreibung, vol. I. Diss. Würzburg.Google Scholar
Mühl, M. 1936. ‘Zur Entstehungszeit der Historien des Ephoros’, Klio 29: 111–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, C. and T. (eds.) 1841. Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, vol. I. Parisiis.Google Scholar
Müller, C. (ed.) 1848. Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, vol. II. Parisiis.Google Scholar
Müller, C. (ed.) 1851. ‘Addenda et corrigenda in volumine I’, in Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, vol. IV. Parisiis: 623–50.Google Scholar
Müller, O. 1844 2. Die Dorier. 2 vols. Breslau. [18241]Google Scholar
Muntz, C.E. 2017. Diodorus Siculus and the World of the Late Roman Republic. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musti, D. (ed.) 1979. La storiografia greca. Guida storica e critica. Roma–Bari.Google Scholar
Nafissi, M. 1983–1984. ‘La controversia sulla priorità fra le politeíai di Sparta e Creta: Eforo e Pausania’, AFLPer 21: 343–66.Google Scholar
Nafissi, M. 1991. Il Kosmos di Sparta. Studi sulla storia e la società di Sparta. Napoli.Google Scholar
Nafissi, M. 1999. ‘From Sparta to Taras. Nomima, Ktiseis and Relationships between Colony and Mother City’, in Sparta: New Perspectives, ed. Hodkinson, S. and Powell, A.. London: 245–72.Google Scholar
Nafissi, M. 2003. ‘Elei e Pisati. Geografia, storia e istituzioni politiche della regione di Olimpia’, Geographia antiqua 12: 23–55.Google Scholar
Natoli, A.F. (ed.) 2004. The Letter of Speusippus to Philip II. Introduction, Text, Translation and Commentary. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Nenci, G. 1955. ‘Il motivo dell’autopsia nella storiografia greca’, SCO 3: 14–46.Google Scholar
Nickel, D. 1991. ‘Isokrates und die Geschichtsschreibung des 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.’, Philologus 135: 233–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolai, R. 1992. La storiografia nell’educazione antica. Pisa.Google Scholar
Nicolai, R. 1996. ‘L’eloquenza perduta. Tradizioni antiche sulle orazioni di Pericle’, QS 44: 95–113.Google Scholar
Nicolai, R. 2003. ‘La poesia epica come documento. L’esegesi di Omero da Ecateo a Tucidide’, in L’uso dei documenti nella storiografia antica (Gubbio, 22–24 maggio 2001), ed. Biraschi, A.M. et alii. Napoli: 79–109.Google Scholar
Nicolai, R. 2004. Studi su Isocrate. La comunicazione letteraria nel IV sec. a.C. e i nuovi generi della prosa. Roma.Google Scholar
Nicolai, R. 2005. ‘Omero, Tucidide e Platone sulla preistoria dell’umanità e sulla fondazione di città’, SemRom 8: 237–61.Google Scholar
Nicolai, R. 2006. Thucydides Continued, in Rengakos and Tsakmakis 2006: 693–720.Google Scholar
Nicolai, R. 2013. ‘La storiografia di Eforo tra paideia retorica e identità greca’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: I, 217–40.Google Scholar
Niebuhr, B.G. 1847–1848. Vorträge über alte Geschichte, an der Universität zu Bonn gehalten, 2 vols. Berlin.Google Scholar
Niese, B. 1909. ‘Wann hat Ephoros sein Geschichtswerk geschrieben?’, Hermes 44: 170–8.Google Scholar
Norden, E. 1986. ‘La prosa d’arte greca’, in La prosa d’arte antica. Dal VI sec. a.C. all’età della Rinascenza, Italian edition by Heinemann Campana, B., 2 vols. Roma: I, 25–167.Google Scholar
Nouhaud, M. 1982. L’utilisation de l’histoire par les orateurs attiques. Paris.Google Scholar
Nouhaud, M. 1997. ‘Maratona, le Termopili, Salamina’, in I Greci. Storia Cultura Arte Società, part 2: Una storia greca, vol. II: Definizione, ed. Settis., S. Torino: 1227–34.Google Scholar
Occhipinti, E. 2016. The Hellenica Oxyrhynchia and Historiography: New Research Perspectives. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osborne, R. 2002. ‘Archaic Greek History’, in Bakker, de Jong and van Wees 2002: 497–520.Google Scholar
Ottone, G. 2010. ‘Scrivere la storia dopo Tucidide: Teopompo di fronte all’Ateniese nella prospettiva di Polibio e Dionigi di Alicarnasso’, in Ombres de Thucydide. La réception de l’historien depuis l’Antiquité jusqu’ au début du XXe siècle. Actes des Colloques de Bordeaux, les 16–17 mars 2007, ed. Fromentin, V., Gotteland, S. and Payen, P.. Bordeaux: 307–23.Google Scholar
Ottone, G. 2013. ‘‘In corsa nello stadio della storia’. Eforo e Teopompo secondo Fozio’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: I, 241–88.Google Scholar
Ottone, G. 2015. ‘La critica a Eforo e Teopompo. Nuove prospettive ermeneutiche a proposito del F 1 di Duride di Samo’, in De Samos à Rome: personnalité et influence de Douris, ed. Naas, V. and Simon, M.. Paris: 209–42.Google Scholar
Ottone, G. (ed.) 2018. Teopompo di Chio, Filippiche (Fozio, Biblioteca, cod. 176). Tivoli.Google Scholar
Page, D.L. 1981. Further Greek Epigrams. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Palm, J. 1955. Über Sprache und Stil des Diodoros von Sizilien. Ein Beitrag zur Beleuchtung der hellenistischen Prosa. Lund.Google Scholar
Pareti, L. 1914. Studi siciliani ed italioti. Firenze.Google Scholar
Parke, H.W. 1967. The Oracles of Zeus. Dodona, Olympia, Ammon. Cambridge Massachusetts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parke, H.W. 1977. Festivals of the Athenians. London.Google Scholar
Parke, H.W. and Wormell, D.E.W. 1956. The Delphic Oracle, 2 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Parker, V. 2004. ‘The Historian Ephorus: His Selection of Sources’, Antichthon 38: 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, V. 2011. ‘Ephoros of Kyme (70)’, in Brill’s New Jacoby, ed. Worthington., I. Brill Online.Google Scholar
Parker, V. 2018. ‘Errors and Doublets: Reconstructing Ephoros and Appreciating Diodoros’, in Hau, Meeus and Sheridan 2018: 189–206.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 1999. ‘Mito e Spatium historicum nelle Storie di Eforo di Cuma (Note a Eph. FGrHist 70 T 8)’, RSA 29: 107–25.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2000. ‘Dalla ktisis alla tryphe: una lettura di storia milesia in Eforo di Cuma (note a Eph. FGrHist 70 FF 127, 183)’, in συγγραφή. Materiali e appunti per lo studio della storia e della letteratura antica, vol. 2, ed. Ambaglio, D.. Como: 83–92.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2001. ‘Eforo F 31 b. L’indagine locale e l’autopsia archeologica’, in Ambaglio, Bearzot and Vattuone 2001: 165–97.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2002. ‘Egina e il Fidone re/tiranno (note a Ephor. FGrHist 70 F 176)’, RSA 32: 59–72.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2002–2003. Eforo di Cuma. Una lettura dei frammenti. Diss. Bologna.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2003a. ‘L’εὑρεῖν senza σαφές. Tucidide e la conoscenza del passato’, AncSoc 33: 253–83.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2003b. ‘Ancora sul Fidone di Eforo. Note sulla cronografia arcaica delle Storie’, RSA 33: 201–15.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2004. ‘Isotimia. Considerazioni sulla storia e sulla storiografia su Sparta in età arcaica e classica’, RSA 34: 73–127.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2005. ‘Diodoro e la crisi delle egemonie nel IV secolo a.C.’, in Bearzot and Landucci 2005: 67–103.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2007. ‘I frammenti di Eforo nei Deipnosophistai di Ateneo’, in Lenfant 2007: 117–37.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2009. ‘Anassimene ritrovato da Pausania (FGrHist 72 T 6)’, in Lanzillotta, Costa and Ottone 2009: 213–34.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2011. Eforo di Cuma. Studi di storiografia greca. Bologna.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2012a. ‘Plutarco sulle arringhe dei generali nelle opere storiche di Eforo, Teopompo e Anassimene (Plut. Praec. ger. reip. 6, Mor. 803b = Ephor. FGrHist 70 T 21 = Theopomp. FGrHist 115 T 33 = Anaxim. FGrHist 72 T 15)’, RSA 42: 27–40.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2012b. ‘Sui fondamenti della tesi antica della paternità anassimenea del Tricarano: mimesi stilistica e analogie tra i proemi storiografici di Anassimene di Lampsaco e di Teopompo di Chio (ad Anaximenes, FGrHist 72 TT 6, 13; F 1)’, Histos 6: 214–27.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. (ed.) 2014a. Between Thucydides and Polybius: The Golden Age of Greek Historiography. Washington DC.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2014b. ‘The Causes of the Peloponnesian War: Ephorus, Thucydides and Their Critics’, in Parmeggiani 2014a: 115–32.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2014c. ‘Diodoro lettore di Eforo’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 781–806.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2014d. ‘L’assedio di Perinto (341/0 a.C.) nella percezione dei politici e degli storici contemporanei e la conclusione delle Storie di Eforo’, Ktèma 39: 303–14.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, , G. 2016a. ‘Sulle critiche di Duride di Samo ad Omero (FGrHist 76 F 89) e a Eforo e Teopompo (FGrHist 76 F 1)’, Eikasmos 27: 105–19.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2016b. ‘Homeric Overtones and Comic Devices in Theopompus’ Criticism of Philip’s Companions’, Ktèma 41: 393–406.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2018a. ‘Thucydides on Aetiology and Methodology and Some Links with the Philosophy of Heraclitus’, Mnemosyne 71: 229–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2018b. ‘Polybius and the Legacy of Fourth-century Historiography’, in Miltsios and Tamiolaki 2018: 277–97.Google Scholar
Parmeggiani, G. 2020. ‘Notes on the Tradition of the Peace of Callias’, Erga/Logoi 8: 7–23.Google Scholar
Parmentier, É. 2014. ‘Échos d’Éphore dans l’Œuvre de Nicolas de Damas: Histoires et Recueil de Coutums’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 827–46.Google Scholar
Pavan, M. 1961. ‘La teoresi storica di Diodoro Siculo’, RAL 16: 19–52, 117–151.Google Scholar
Pédech, P. (ed.) 1961. Polybe, Histoires, Livre XII. Paris.Google Scholar
Pédech, P. 1964. La méthode historique de Polybe. Paris.Google Scholar
Pelling, C. 2000. Literary Text and the Greek Historians. London–New York.Google Scholar
Perlman, P. 2005. ‘Imagining Crete’, in The Imaginary Polis (Symposium, January 7–10, 2004), ed. Hansen., M.H. Copenhagen: 282–334.Google Scholar
Peter, H. 1911. Wahrheit und Kunst. Geschichtschreibung und Plagiat im klassischen Altertum. Leipzig–Berlin.Google Scholar
Piccinini, J. 2017. The Shrine of Dodona in the Archaic and Classical Ages. A History. Macerata.Google Scholar
Podlecki, A.J. 1998. Perikles and His Circle. London–New York.Google Scholar
Polito, M. 2014. ‘Eforo e la scuola di Aristotele sulla τρυφή dei Milesi’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 723–50.Google Scholar
Porciani, L. 1997. La forma proemiale. Storiografia e pubblico nel mondo antico. Pisa.Google Scholar
Porciani, L. 2001. Prime forme della storiografia greca. Prospettiva locale e generale nella narrazione storica. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Porciani, L. 2013. ‘Eforo e i proemi di Diodoro. Per una ridefinizione del modello storiografico’, ASNP 5: 197–216.Google Scholar
Porciani, L. 2016. ‘Il dialogo di Solone e Creso nell’opera di Erodoto: temi e problemi’, in Solone e Creso. Variazioni letterarie, filolofiche e iconografiche su un tema erodoteo (Atti della giornata di studi di Macerata, 10 marzo 2015), ed. Moscati Castelnuovo, L.. Macerata: 15–28.Google Scholar
Powell, A. (ed.) 2018. A Companion to Sparta, 2 vols. Hoboken, New Jersey–Chichester.Google Scholar
Pownall, F. 2004. Lessons from the Past. The Moral Use of History in Fourth-Century Prose. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Pownall, F. 2016. ‘Hellanikos of Lesbos (4)’, in Brill’s New Jacoby, ed. Worthington., I. Brill Online.Google Scholar
Prakken, D.W. 1943. Studies in Greek Genealogical Chronology. Lancaster.Google Scholar
Prandi, L. 1985. Callistene. Uno storico tra Aristotele e i re macedoni. Milano.Google Scholar
Prandi, L. 2014. ‘L’ultimo Eforo’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 683–704.Google Scholar
Preger, T. 1891. Inscriptiones graecae metricae ex scriptoribus praeter anthologiam collectae. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Prinz, F. 1979. Gründungsmythen und Sagenchronologie. München.Google Scholar
Pritchett, K.W. 1969. ‘The Transfer of the Delian Treasury’, Historia 18: 17–21.Google Scholar
Psoma, S.E. 2022. Corcyra: A City at the Edge of Two Greek Worlds. Part A. Athens 2022.Google Scholar
Radermacher, L. 1951. Artium scriptores. Reste der voraristotelischen Rhetorik. Wien.Google Scholar
Radt, S. (ed.) 2002–2011. Strabons Geographika, 10 vols., Göttingen.Google Scholar
Ragone, G. 2013. ‘Eforo ‘campanilista’. Lo spazio storico di Cuma eolica nei frammenti dell’Epichorios e delle Storie’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: I, 95–216.Google Scholar
Rathmann, M.R. 2016. Diodor und seine Bibliotheke. Weltgeschichte aus der Provinz. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, C.I. 1969. Diodorus and His Sources. Diss. Harvard.Google Scholar
Reid, C.I. 1974. ‘Ephoros Fragment 76 and Diodoros on the Cypriote War’, Phoenix 28: 123–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, C.I. 1976. ‘A Note on Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1610’, Phoenix 30: 357–66.Google Scholar
Rengakos, A. and Tsakmakis, A. (eds.) 2006. Brill’s Companion to Thucydides. Leiden–Boston.Google Scholar
Reuss, F. 1909. ‘Bericht über die griechischen Historiker mit Ausschluß des Herodot, Thukydides und Xenophon, 1905–1908’, JAW 142: 1–225.Google Scholar
Rhodes, P.J. 2011. Alcibiades. Barnsley.Google Scholar
Rhodes, P.J. and Osborne, R. (eds.) 2003. Greek Historical Inscriptions 404–323 BC. Oxford.Google Scholar
Rhodes, P.J. and Osborne, R. (eds.) 2017. Greek Historical Inscriptions 478–404 BC. Oxford.Google Scholar
Richer, N. 1998. Les Éphores. Études sur l’histoire et sur l’image de Sparte (VIIIe–IIIe siècle avant Jésus-Christ). Paris.Google Scholar
Riese, A. 1875. Die Idealisirung der Naturvölker des Nordens in der griechischen und römischen Literatur. Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Robert, L. 1980. A travers l’Asie Mineure. Poètes et prosateurs, monnaies grecques, voyageurs et géographie. Paris: 257–307.Google Scholar
Roberts, C.H. 1938. Catalogue of the Greek and Latin Library in the John Rylands Library Manchester. III, Theological and Literary Texts. Manchester.Google Scholar
Robertson, N.D. 1980. ‘The True Nature of the “Delian League”. 478–461 B.C.’, AJAH 5: 64–96, 110–33.Google Scholar
Robinson, E.W. 2017. ‘Thucydides on the Causes and Outbreak of the Peloponnesian War’, in The Oxford Handbook of Thucydides, ed. Balot, R.K., Forsdyke, S., and Foster., E. Oxford: 115–24.Google Scholar
Robu, A. 2014. Mégara et les établissements mégariens de Sicile, de la Propontide et du Pont-Euxin. Histoire et institutions. Berne.Google Scholar
Roesch, P. 1984. ‘Un décret inédit de la lingue thébaine et la flotte d’Épaminondas’, REG 97: 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rood, T. 1998. Thucydides. Narrative and Explanation. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rood, T. 2004. ‘Xenophon and Diodorus: Continuing Thucydides’, in Xenophon and His World. Papers from a Conference held in Liverpool in July 1999, ed. Tuplin, C.. Stuttgart: 341–95.Google Scholar
Rood, T. 2018. ‘Geographical and Historical Patterning in Diodorus Siculus’, in Meeus 2018a: 23–68.Google Scholar
Roth, P. 2003. Der Panathenaikos des Isokrates: Übersetzung und Kommentar. München–Leipzig.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roveri, A. 1964. Studi su Polibio. Bologna.Google Scholar
Roy, J. 2002. ‘The Synoikism of Elis’, in Even More Studies in the Ancient Greek Studies, ed. Nielsen, T.H.. Stuttgart: 249–64.Google Scholar
Russell, T. 2016. ‘Diodoros 15.78.4–79.1 and Theban Relations with the Bosporus in the Fourth Century’, in Boiotia in the Fourth Century B.C., ed. Gartland, S.D.. Philadelphia: 65–79.Google Scholar
Rutherford, R. 2018. ‘Herodotean Ironies’, Histos 12: 1–48.Google Scholar
Sacks, K.S. 1982. ‘The Lesser Prooemia of Diodorus Siculus’, Hermes 110: 434–43.Google Scholar
Sacks, K.S. 1990. Diodorus Siculus and the First Century. Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakellariou, M.B. 1990. Between Memory and Oblivion. The Transmission of Early Greek Historical Traditions. Athens.Google Scholar
Salmon, J.B. 1996. ‘Sparta, Argo e il Peloponneso’, in I Greci. Storia Cultura Arte Società, part 2: Una storia greca, vol. I: Formazione, ed. Settis, S.. Torino: 847–67.Google Scholar
Samons II, L.J. 1998. ‘Kimon, Kallias and Peace with Persia’, Historia 47: 129–40.Google Scholar
Samons II, L.J. 2000. The Empire of the Owl: Athenian Imperial Finance. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Samuel, D.H. 1968. ‘Cyme and the Veracity of Ephorus’, TAPhA 99: 375–88.Google Scholar
Sanders, L.J. 1987. Dionysius of Syracuse and Greek Tyranny. London–New York–Sydney.Google Scholar
Sanneg, P. 1867. De schola isocratea. Diss. Halae Saxonum.Google Scholar
Scanlon, T.F. 2015. Greek Historiography. Malden–Oxford–Chichester.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardino, C. 2018. ‘Polybius and Fifth-Century Historiography: Continuity and Diversity in the Presentation of Historical Deeds’, in Miltsios and Tamiolaki 2018: 299–324.Google Scholar
Schachter, A. 1981. Cults of Boiotia, 1. Acheloos to Hera. London.Google Scholar
Scheller, P. 1911. De hellenistica historiae conscribendae arte. Diss. Lipsiae.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 1970. ‘Éphore sur la valeur de l’autopsie (FGrHist 70 F 110 = Polybe XII 27.7)’, AncSoc 1: 163–82.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 1977a. ‘Historiographical Problems in Ephorus’, in Historiographia antiqua. Commentationes Lovanienses in honorem W. Peremans septuagenarii editae, ed. Reekmans, T. et alii. Leuven: 95–118.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 1977b. ‘Ephoros, Niebuhr und die Geschichte der historischen Kritik’, Historia 26: 503–6.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 1980. L’‘autopsie’ dans la méthode des historiens grecs du Ve siècle avant J.-C. Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 1987. ‘The Phoenicians in Ephorus’ Universal History’, in Studia Phoenicia, V: Phoenicia and the East Mediterranean in the First Millennium B.C. (Proceedings Conference of Leuven, 14 to 16 November 1985), ed. Lipińsky, E.. Leuven: 315–30.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 1993. ‘L’apogée de l’archè spartiate comme époque historique dans l’historiographie grecque du début du IVe S. AV. J.-C.’, AncSoc 24: 169–203.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 1997. ‘Jacoby’s FGrHist: Problems, Methods, Prospects’, in Collecting Fragments – Fragmente sammeln, ed. Most., G.W. Göttingen: 144–72.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 2001. ‘Ἀρετή versus ἡγεμονία. Theopompus on Problems of the Spartan Empire (405–394 B.C.)’, in Ambaglio, Bearzot and Vattuone 2001: 529–65.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 2003. ‘L’apport des documents dans la méthode historique d’ Éphore’, in L’uso dei documenti nella storiografia antica (Gubbio, 22–24 maggio 2001), ed. Biraschi, A.M. et alii. Napoli: 331–65.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 2005a. ‘Polybius’ Criticism of Phylarchus’, in Schepens and Bollansée 2005: 141–64.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 2005b. ‘À la recherche d’Agésilas. Le roi de Sparte dans le jugement des historiens du IVe siècle av. J.-C.’, REG 118: 31–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schepens, G. 2006a. ‘Travelling Greek Historians’, in Le vie della storia. Migrazioni di popoli, viaggi di individui, circolazione di idee nel Mediterraneo antico (Genova, 6–8 ottobre 2004), ed. Angeli Bertinelli, M.G. and Donati, A.. Roma: 81–102.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 2006b. ‘Storiografia e letteratura antiquaria. Le scelte di Felix Jacoby’, in Aspetti dell’opera di Felix Jacoby (Pisa, 18–19 dicembre 2002), ed. Ampolo., C. Pisa: 149–71.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 2007a. ‘Tucidide ‘in controluce’. La guerra del Peloponneso nella storiografia greca del quarto secolo a.C.’, in Il dopoguerra nel mondo greco. Politica propaganda storiografia, ed. Santi Amantini, L.. Roma: 59–99.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 2007b. ‘History and Historia: Inquiry in the Greek Historians’, in Marincola 2007a: I, 39–55.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. 2007c. ‘Les fragments de Phylarque chez Athénée’, in Lenfant 2007: 239–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schepens, G. and Bollansée, J. 2004. ‘Myths on the Origins of Peoples and the Birth of Universal History’, in Historia y Mito. El pasado legendario como fuente de autoridad. Actas del Simposio International (Sevilla, 22–25 de abril de 2003), ed. Candau Morón, J.M., González Ponce, F.J. and Andreotti, G.C.. Málaga: 57–75.Google Scholar
Schepens, G. and Bollansée, J. (eds.) 2005. The Shadow of Polybius. Intertextuality as a Research Tool in Greek Historiography. Proceedings of the International Colloquium (Leuven, 21–22 September 2001). Leuven–Paris–Dudley.Google Scholar
Schneider, W.J. 2001. ‘Ein der Heimat verwiesener Autor. Anaximenes von Lampsakos bei Lukian, Herod. 3’, Arctos 35: 175–87.Google Scholar
Schorn, S. 2014. ‘Historiographie, Biographie und Enkomion. Theorie der Biographie und Historiographie bei Diodor und Polybius’, RSA 44: 137–64.Google Scholar
Schubert, C. 2010. Anacharsis der Weise: Nomade, Skythe, Grieche. Tübingen.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. 1899. ‘Timaeos Geschichtswerk’, Hermes 34: 481–93.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. 1900. ‘Kallisthenes Hellenika’, Hermes 35: 106–30.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. 1903a. ‘Demophilos (9)’, RE 5.1. Stuttgart: 146–7.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. 1903b. ‘Diodoros (38)’, RE 5.1. Stuttgart: 663–704.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. 1907. ‘Ephoros (1)’, RE 6.1. Stuttgart: 1–16.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. 1909. ‘Die Zeit des Ephoros’, Hermes 44: 481–502.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. 1919. Das Geschichtswerk des Thukydides. Bonn.Google Scholar
Schwartz, E. 1937. ‘Die messenische Geschichte bei Pausanias’, Philologus 92: 19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, L. 2005. Historical Commentary on Herodotus Book 6. Leiden–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seager, R. and Tuplin, C. 1980. ‘The Freedom of the Greeks of Asia: On the Origins of a Concept and the Creation of a Slogan’, JHS 100: 141–54.Google Scholar
Sheppard, A. 2018. ‘From Autopsy to Anthology: Inscribed Epigrams and Epigraphic Evidence in Classical Historiography’, in Sources et modèles des historiens anciens, ed. Devillers, O. and Battistin Sebastiani, B.. Bordeaux: 23–35.Google Scholar
Sheridan, B. 2010. ‘Diodorus’ Reading of Polybius’ Universalism’, in Liddel and Fear 2010: 41–55.Google Scholar
Shrimpton, G.S. 1970. The Epaminondas Tradition. Diss. Stanford.Google Scholar
Shrimpton, G.S. 1991. Theopompus the Historian. Montreal & Kingston–London–Buffalo.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smarczyk, B. 2006. ‘Thucydides and Epigraphy’, in Rengakos and Tsakmakis 2006: 495–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sordi, M. 1958. La Lega Tessala fino ad Alessandro Magno. Roma.Google Scholar
Sordi, M. (ed.) 1969. Diodori Siculi Bibliothecae liber sextus decimus. Firenze.Google Scholar
Sordi, M. 1971. ‘La vittoria dell’Eurimedonte e le due spedizioni di Cimone a Cipro’, RSA 1: 33–48.Google Scholar
Squillace, G. 2004. Βασιλεῖς ἢ τύραννοι. Filippo II e Alessandro Magno tra opposizione e consenso. Soveria Mannelli.Google Scholar
Stadter, P.A. 1965. Plutarch’s Historical Methods. An Analysis of the Mulierum Virtutes. Cambridge Massachusetts.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stadter, P.A. 1989. A Commentary on Plutarch’s Pericles. Chapel Hill–London.Google Scholar
Stelkens, A. 1857. De Ephori Cumaei fide et auctoritate. Diss. Monasterii.Google Scholar
Stemplinger, E. 1912. Das Plagiat in der griechischen Literatur. Leipzig–Berlin.Google Scholar
Stiehle, R. 1853. ‘Zu den Fragmenten der griechischen Historiker’, Philologus 8: 590–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strasburger, H. 1975 3. Die Wesensbestimmung der Geschichte durch die antike Geschichtsschreibung. Wiesbaden 19753. [19661]Google Scholar
Strauss, B.S. 1997. ‘The Problem of Periodization: The Case of the Peloponnesian War’, in Inventing Ancient Culture: Historicism, Periodization, and the Ancient World, ed. Golden, M. and Toohey, P.. London–New York: 165–75.Google Scholar
Stroheker, K.F. 1958. Dionysios I. Gestalt und Geschichte des Tyrannen von Syrakus. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Stylianou, P.J. 1992a. ‘The Untenability of Peace with Persia in the 460s B.C.’, in Μελέται καὶ Ὑπομνήματα, vol. II. Leucosia: 339–71.Google Scholar
Stylianou, P.J. 1992b. ‘The Age of the Kingdoms’, in Μελέται καὶ Ὑπομνήματα, vol. II. Leucosia: 375–530.Google Scholar
Stylianou, P.J. 1998. A Historical Commentary on Diodorus Siculus Book 15. Oxford.Google Scholar
Takhtajan, S. 2003. ‘Ephoros F 42 und Platon’, Hyperboreus 9: 78–82.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. 2000. Herodotus in Context: Ethnography, Science, and the Art of Persuasion. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. 2019. Polis Histories, Collective Memories and the Greek World. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thommen, L. 2000. ‘Spartas Umgang mit der Vergangenheit’, Historia 49: 40–53.Google Scholar
Thommen, L. 2017. Sparta. Verfassungs- und Sozialgeschichte einer griechischen Polis, 2. erweiterte Auflage. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Thompson, W.E. 1983. ‘Chares at Phlius’, Philologus 127: 303–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tigerstedt, E.N. 1965. The Legend of Sparta in Classical Antiquity, vol. I. Stockholm–Göteborg–Uppsala.Google Scholar
Tod, M.N. 1948. A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions, vol. II. Oxford.Google Scholar
Torraca, L. 1988. Duride di Samo. La maschera scenica nella storiografia ellenistica. Salerno.Google Scholar
Tosi, R. 2017. Dizionario delle sentenze greche e latine. Milano. [19911]Google Scholar
Tosi, R. 2018. ‘Per una rilettura di Thuc. I 22, 1’, Eikasmos 29: 165–82.Google Scholar
Treves, P. 1937. ‘Review of Barber 1935’, Athenaeum 15: 125–7.Google Scholar
Tufano, S. 2019. Boeotia from Within: The Beginnings of Boiotian Historiography. Münster.Google Scholar
Tully, J. 2014. ‘Ephorus, Polybius, and τὰ καθόλου γράφειν: Why and How to Read Ephorus and his Role in Greek Historiography without Reference to “Universal History”’, in Parmeggiani 2014a: 153–95.Google Scholar
Tuplin, C. 1993. The Failings of Empire. A Reading of Xenophon Hellenica 2.3.11–7.5.27. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Tuplin, C. 2007. ‘Continuous Histories (Hellenica)’, in Marincola 2007a: I, 159–70.Google Scholar
Tuplin, C. 2014. ‘Ephorus on post-Herodotean Persian History’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 643–82.Google Scholar
Tuplin, C. 2018. ‘Xenophon, Isocrates and the Achaemenid Empire: History, Pedagogy and the Persian Solution to Greek Problems’, Trends in Classics 10: 13–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, E.G. et alii. 1962. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, vol. XXVII. London.Google Scholar
Ulrici, H. 1833. Charakteristik der antiken Historiographie. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unger, G.F. 1881. ‘Diodors Quellen im XI. Buch’, Philologus 40: 48–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Usher, S. 1969. The Historians of Greece and Rome. London.Google Scholar
Vallet, G. 1996. ‘Les cités chalcidiennes du Détroit et de Sicile’, in Le monde grec colonial d’Italie du sud et de Sicile. Roma: 115–62. [Gli Eubei in Occidente. Atti del diciottesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia (Taranto, 8–12 ottobre 1978). Taranto 1979: 83–143]Google Scholar
van Compernolle, R. 1959. Étude de chronologie et d’historiographie siciliotes. Bruxelles–Rome.Google Scholar
Vannicelli, P. 1987. ‘L’economia delle Storie di Eforo’, RFIC 115: 165–91.Google Scholar
Vannicelli, P. 2014. ‘Eforo e le guerre persiane’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 529–44.Google Scholar
Vannini, L. (ed.) 2018. Corpus dei papiri storici greci e latini, part A: Storici greci, vol. 1: Autori noti, fasc. 3.1: Eforo: Frammenti e Testimonianze. Pisa–Roma.Google Scholar
Vanotti, G. 1991a. ‘L’immagine di Milziade nell’elaborazione propagandistica del V e del IV secolo a.C.’, in Contributi dell’Istituto di Storia Antica dell’Università Cattolica, vol. XVII: L’immagine dell’uomo politico: vita pubblica e morale nell’antichità, ed. Sordi., M. Milano: 15–31.Google Scholar
Vanotti, G. 1991b. ‘Sulla cronologia della colonizzazione siracusana in Adriatico’, in Hesperìa, vol. 2, ed. Braccesi., L. Roma: 107–10.Google Scholar
van Wijk, R. 2020. ‘Contested Hegemonies: Thebes, Athens and Persia in the Aegean in the 360s’, in Empires of the Sea: Maritime Power Networks in World History, ed. Strootman, R., van den Eijnde, F. and van Wijk, R.. Leiden–Boston: 81–112.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 1991. Sapienza d’Occidente. Il pensiero storico di Timeo di Tauromenio. Bologna.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 1997. ‘Una testimonianza dimenticata di Teopompo (Phot., Bibl., 176, P. 121 A, 30–34). Note sul proemio dei Philippika’, in Simblos, vol. 2, ed. Criscuolo, L., Geraci, G. and Salvaterra, C.. Bologna: 85–106.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 1998a. ‘Sul proemio delle Storie di Eforo di Cuma (Note a FGrHist 70 F 9)’, RSA 28: 183–98.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 1998b. ‘Koinai Praxeis. Le dimensioni «universali» della storiografia greca fra Erodoto e Teopompo’, in L’ecumenismo politico nella coscienza dell’Occidente (Bergamo, 18–21 settembre 1995), ed. Aigner Foresti, L. et alii. Roma: 57–96.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 1998c. ‘Eros cretese (ad Ephor. FGrHist 70 F 149)’, RSA 28: 7–50.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2000. ‘Eforo e Filisto (apud Plut. Dio 36.3)’, in συγγραφή. Materiali e appunti per lo studio della storia e della letteratura antica, vol. 2, ed. Ambaglio., D. Como: 65–71.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2002. ‘La necessità del tiranno. Tendenze della storiografia greca di IV sec. a.C. sulla dinastia dionigiana’, in La Sicilia dei due Dionisî. Atti della settimana di studio (Agrigento, 24–28 febbraio 1999), ed. Bonacasa, N., Braccesi, L. and De Miro, E.. Roma: 533–53.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2005. ‘Timeo, Polibio e la storiografia greca d’Occidente’, in Schepens and Bollansée 2005: 89–122.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2007. ‘ἀφανής’, in Lexicon Historiographicum Graecum et Latinum, vol. 2, ed. Ampolo, C., Fantasia, U. and Porciani, L.. Pisa: 146–52.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2014a. ‘Looking for the Invisible: Theopompus and the Roots of Historiography’, in Parmeggiani 2014a: 7–37.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2014b. ‘Eforo in Diodoro XI’, in De Fidio and Talamo 2013–2014: II, 508–28.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2015a. ‘εἰδωλοποιεῖν: l’immagine degli eventi nella storiografia greca’, in Gli amici per Dino. Omaggio a Delfino Ambaglio, ed. Bultrighini, U. and Dimauro, E.. Lanciano: 11–30.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2015b. ‘L’Archeologia del libro I delle Storie di Tucidide e la storiografia greca di IV sec. a.C.’, RSA 45: 103–26.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2017. ‘Morire per Megara: Pericle, Giuliano, Libanio e la maledizione di polemos’, in La storiografia tardoantica: bilanci e prospettive. In memoria di Antonio Baldini, ed. Neri, V. and Girotti, B.. Milano: 201–12.Google Scholar
Vattuone, R. 2018. Pericle. Storia, tradizione, mito. Bologna.Google Scholar
Verdegem, S. 2010. Plutarch’s Life of Alcibiades: Story, Text and Moralism. Leuven.Google Scholar
Verdin, H. 1970. ‘Notes sur l’attitude des historiens grecs à l’égard de la tradition locale’, AncSoc 1: 183–200.Google Scholar
Verdin, H. 1977. ‘Les remarques critiques d’Hérodote et de Thucydide sur la poésie en tant que source historique’, in Historiographia antiqua, Commentationes Lovanienses in honorem W. Peremans septuagenarii editae, ed. Reekmans, T. et alii. Leuven: 53–67.Google Scholar
Verdin, H., Schepens, G. and de Keyser, E. (eds.) 1990. Purposes of History. Studies in Greek Historiography from the 4th to the 2nd Centuries B.C. Proceedings of the International Colloquium (Leuven, 24–26 May 1988). Lovanii.Google Scholar
Vogel, F. (ed.) 1888–1893. Diodori Bibliotheca historica, 3 vols. Lipsiae.Google Scholar
Vogel, F. 1889. ‘Ephorus und Diodor über den Ausbruch des peloponnesischen Krieges’, RhM 44: 532–9.Google Scholar
Volquardsen, C.A. 1868. Untersuchungen über die Quellen der griechischen und sicilischen Geschichten bei Diodor, Buch XI bis XVI. Kiel.Google Scholar
von der Mühll, P. 1954. ‘Direkte Benützung des Ephoros und des Theopomp bei Plutarch’, MH 11: 243–4.Google Scholar
von Mess, A. 1906a. ‘Untersuchungen über die Arbeitsweise Diodors’, RhM 61: 244–66.Google Scholar
von Mess, A. 1906b. ‘Untersuchungen über Ephoros’, RhM 61: 360–407.Google Scholar
Vossius, G.I. 1699. De Historicis graecis libri IV, in Ars historica. Amstelodami. [Lugduni Batavorum 1624].Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. 1895. Einleitung in das Studium der alten Geschichte. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Wade-Gery, T.H. 1933. ‘Classical Epigrams and Epitaphs’, JHS 53: 81–104.Google Scholar
Waire, G. 2021. ‘Revisiting TA KAΘOΛOY and KATA MEPOΣ in Polybius’, CPh 115: 26–44.Google Scholar
Walbank, F.W. 1955. ‘Tragic History: A Reconsideration’, BICS 2: 4–14.Google Scholar
Walbank, F.W. 1957–1979. A Historical Commentary on Polybius, 3 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Walbank, F.W. 1960. ‘History and Tragedy’, Historia 9: 216–34.Google Scholar
Walbank, F.W. 1985. Review of Fornara 1983, JHS 105: 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, E.M. 1913. The Hellenica Oxyrhynchia. Its Authorship and Authority. Oxford.Google Scholar
Walker, E.M. 1919. ‘The Newly Discovered Fragments of Ephorus, and Their Bearing on the Authorship of the Hellenica Oxyrhynchia and on the Style of Ephorus’, in The Rice Institute Pamphlet, vol. 6: 240–61.Google Scholar
Wallace, P.W. 1979. Strabo’s Description of Boiotia. A Commentary. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Wallace, R.W. 2015. Reconstructing Damon: Music, Wisdom Teaching, and Politics in Perikles’ Athens. Oxford–New York.Google Scholar
Wardman, A.E. 1960. ‘Myth in Greek Historiography’, Historia 9: 403–13.Google Scholar
Wehrli, F. 1972. ‘Die Geschichtsschreibung im Lichte der antiken Theorie’, in Theoria und Humanitas. Gesammelte Schriften zur antiken Gedankenwelt. Zürich-München: 132–44. [Eumasia. Festgabe für E. Howald. Zürich 1947: 54–71]Google Scholar
Weißenberger, M. 2003. ‘Isokrates und der Plan eines panhellenischen Perserkrieges’, in Isokrates –Neue Ansätze zur Bewertung eines politischen Schriftstellers, ed. Orth, W.. Trier: 95–110.Google Scholar
West, M. 1992 2. Iambi et elegi graeci. II. Oxonii.Google Scholar
West, S. 1985. ‘Herodotus Epigraphical Interests’, CQ 35: 278–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westermann, A. 1844. ‘Ephorus’, in Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Alterthumswissenschaft in alfabetischer Ordnung, vol. III, ed. Pauly, A.. Stuttgart: 169–71.Google Scholar
Westlake, H.D. 1986. ‘Spartan Intervention in Asia, 400–397 B.C.’, Historia 35: 405–26.Google Scholar
Wheeler, E.L. 1987. ‘Ephorus and the Prohibition of Missiles’, TAPhA 117: 157–82.Google Scholar
Whitehead, D. 2005. ‘Ephorus(?) on the Spartan Constitution’, CQ 55: 299–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiater, N. 2011. The Ideology of Classicism: Language, History, and Identity in Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Berlin–New York.Google Scholar
Wickersham, J. 1994. Hegemony and Greek Historians. Lanham.Google Scholar
Wilamowitz-Möllendorff, U. von 1893. Aristoteles und Athen, 2 vols. Berlin.Google Scholar
Wilamowitz-Möllendorff, U. von 1908. Greek Historical Writing and Apollo. Oxford.Google Scholar
Wilamowitz-Möllendorff, U. von 1912 2. Die griechische Literatur des Altertums. Leipzig–Berlin. [19051]Google Scholar
Will, W. 1991. ‘Die griechische Geschichtsschreibung des 4. Jahrhunderts. Eine Zusammenfassung’, in Geschichtsbild und Geschichtsdenken im Altertum, ed. Alonso-Núñez, J.M.. Darmstadt: 113–35.Google Scholar
Will, W. 2003. Thukydides und Perikles. Der Historiker und sein Held. Bonn.Google Scholar
Willetts, R.F. 1962. Cretan Cults and Festivals. London.Google Scholar
Williams, G.D. 2012. The Cosmic Viewpoint: A Study of Seneca’s Natural Questions. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, J. (ed.) 1970. A.T. Macrobii Saturnalia. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Wiseman, T.P. 2011. ‘Lying Historians: Seven Types of Mendacity’, in Marincola 2011: 314–36. [Gill, G. and Wiseman, T.P. (eds.), Lies and Fiction in the Ancient World. Exeter–Austin 1993: 122–46]Google Scholar
Woodman, A.J. 2011. ‘Cicero and the Writing of History’, in Marincola 2011, 241–90. [Rhetoric in Classical Historiography: Four Studies. London–New York 1988: 70–116]Google Scholar
Yates, D.C. 2022. ‘Ephorus and Alexander the Great (FGrHist 70 F 223)’, Histos 16: 109–44.Google Scholar
Zaccarini, M. 2017. The Lame Hegemony: Cimon of Athens and the Failure of Panhellenism, ca. 478–450 BC. Bologna.Google Scholar
Ziegler, K. 1950. ‘Plagiat’, RE 20.2. Stuttgart: 1956 –97.Google Scholar
Zingg, E. 2016. Die Schöpfung der pseudohistorischen westpeloponnesischen Frühgeschichte. Ein Rekonstruktionsversuch. München.Google Scholar
Zorat, M. 1994. ‘Dionisio II, Dione e Sparta’, in Hesperìa, vol. 4, ed. Braccesi, L.. Roma: 165–75.Google Scholar
Zunino, M.L. 2003. ‘Realtà storica e utopia politica. Eforo, la fondazione di Taranto e la Repubblica di Platone’, Sileno 29: 1–31.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Bibliography
  • Giovanni Parmeggiani, Università degli Studi di Trieste
  • Book: Ephorus of Cyme and Greek Historiography
  • Online publication: 30 November 2023
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108923484.008
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Bibliography
  • Giovanni Parmeggiani, Università degli Studi di Trieste
  • Book: Ephorus of Cyme and Greek Historiography
  • Online publication: 30 November 2023
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108923484.008
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Bibliography
  • Giovanni Parmeggiani, Università degli Studi di Trieste
  • Book: Ephorus of Cyme and Greek Historiography
  • Online publication: 30 November 2023
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108923484.008
Available formats
×