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-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:25:21.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2021

Edited by
Tom Geue  and
Elena Giusti
Tom Geue
Affiliation:
University of St Andrews, Scotland
Elena Giusti
Affiliation:
University of Warwick
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
Unspoken Rome
Absence in Latin Literature and its Reception
 , pp. 334 - 363
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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

Adams, J. N. 1982. The Latin Sexual Vocabulary. London.Google Scholar
Adams, J. N. 1999. The Poets of Bu Njem: Language, Culture and the Centurionate, JRS 89: 109–34.Google Scholar
Adorno, T. 1990. Negative Dialectics, trans. by E. B. Ashton. London.Google Scholar
Ahl, F. 1984. ‘The Art of Safe Criticism in Greece and Rome’, AJP 105: 174–208.Google Scholar
Albrecht, M. von 1999. ‘The Art of Mirroring in Virgil’s Aeneid’, in Hardie, P. (ed.) Virgil. Critical Assessments of Classical Authors. London and New York, 1–12.Google Scholar
Allison, P. 2004. Pompeian Households. An Analysis of the Material Culture. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Altman, J. G. 1982. Epistolarity. Approaches to a Form. Columbus.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. G. C. 1938 Cornelii Taciti de origine et situ Germanorum. Oxford.Google Scholar
Ankersmit, F. R. 2005. Sublime Historical Experience. Stanford.Google Scholar
Aricò, G. 1987. ‘Analecta scaenica’, in Filologia e forme letterarie. Studi offerti a Francesco Della Corte, I, Urbino, 201–12.Google Scholar
Arnott, W. G. 2003. ‘Diphilus’ Κληρούμενοι and Plautus’ Casina’, in Raffaelli, R. and Tontini, A. (eds.) Lecturae Plautinae Sarsinates VI, Casina. Urbino, 23–44.Google Scholar
Ash, R. 2014. ‘Act Like a German! Tacitus Germania and National Characterisation in the Historical Works’, in Devillers, O. (ed.) Les opera minora et le développement de l’historiographie tacitéenne. Bordeaux, 185–200.Google Scholar
Ash, R. 2018. (ed.) Tacitus Annals XV. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Augoustakis, A. 2016. Statius, Thebaid 8. Oxford.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. 1975. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Austin, R. G. 1955. P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Quartus. Oxford.Google Scholar
Austin, R. G. 1971. P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Primus. Oxford.Google Scholar
Avallone, R. 1963. Mecenate, con edizione dei frammenti. Naples.Google Scholar
Baldwin, B. 2005. ‘Nero the Poet’ in Deroux, C. (ed.) Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History XII. Brussels, 307–18.Google Scholar
Baltussen, H. and Davis, P. J. 2015 (eds.) The Art of Veiled Speech: from Aristotle to Hobbes. Philadephia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltussen, H and Davis, P. J. 2015. ‘Parrhesia, Free Speech and Self-Censorship’, in Baltussen, and Davis, (eds.), 1–17.Google Scholar
Banville, J. 1990. ‘Survivors of Joyce’, in Martin, A. (ed.) The Artist and the Labyrinth. London, 73–81.Google Scholar
Baraz, Y. 2012. A Written Republic. Cicero’s Philosophical Politics. Princeton.Google Scholar
Baraz, Y. and Van den Berg, C. S. 2013. ‘Introduction,’ AJP 134.1: 1–8.Google Scholar
Barbiero, E. A. 2014. Reading Between the Lines: Letters in Plautus. PhD Diss. Toronto.Google Scholar
Barchiesi, A. 2001a. Speaking Volumes: Narrative and Intertext in Ovid and Other Latin Poets. London.Google Scholar
Barchiesi, A. 2001b. ‘Genealogie letterarie nell’epica imperiale. Fondamentalismo e ironia’, in L’histoire littéraire immanente dans la poésie latine, Fondation Hardt («Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique» 47), Vandoeuvres-Geneva, 315–47.Google Scholar
Barchiesi, A. 2005. Ovidio Metamorfosi, libri i-ii, vol. 1. Milan.Google Scholar
Barchiesi, A. and Rosati, G. 2007. Ovidio Metamorfosi, libri iii-iv, vol. 3. Milan.Google Scholar
Barchiesi, C. 2018. Donna Ferrante’s Library: Resonance of the Classics in the Neapolitan Novels. MA Thesis. Georgetown. https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/1050795 [Accessed 7 July 2018]Google Scholar
Bardon, H. 1936. ‘Les poésies de Néron’, Revue des Études Latines: 337–49.Google Scholar
Bardon, H. 1943. ‘Le silence, moyen d’expression’, REL 21:102–20.Google Scholar
Bartsch, S. 1994. Actors in the Audience. Theatricality and Doublespeak from Nero to Hadrian. Cambridge, MA and London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, S. 2015. ‘Senecan Selves’ in Bartsch, S. and Schiesaro, A. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to Seneca, Cambridge, 187–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, S. 2017. ‘Philosophers and the State under Nero’, in Bartsch, S., Freudenburg, K. and Littlewood, C. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero. Cambridge, 151–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, C. 2011. ‘Ruined Waking Thoughts: William Beckford as a Visitor to Pompeii’, in Hales, and Paul, (eds.), 34–47.Google Scholar
Bauman, R. 1970. The crimen maiestatis in the Roman Republic and Augustan Principate. Johannesburg.Google Scholar
Bauman, R. 1974. Impietas in Principem: A Study of Treason Against the Roman Emperor with Special Reference to the First Century A.D. Munich.Google Scholar
Beard, M. 2007. The Roman Triumph. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar
Beard, M. 2008. Pompeii: The Life of a Roman Town. London.Google Scholar
Beasom, P. T. 2013. ‘Forgetting the Ars Memoriae: Ovid, Remedia Amoris 579–84’, CQ 63.2: 903–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellandi, F. 2011. ‘Colpi di fulmine e patologie d’amore da Omero a Catullo: qualche considerazione’, BStudLat 41.1: 1–30.Google Scholar
Benjamin, W. 1997. ‘The Translator’s Task’, trans. by S. Rendall, Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 10.2: 151–65.Google Scholar
Benner, M. 1975. The Emperor Says: Studies in the Rhetorical Style in Edicts of the Early Empire. Göteborg.Google Scholar
Benz, L., Stärk, E. and Vogt-Spira, G. 1995 (eds.) Plautus und die Tradition des Stegreifspiels. Tübingen.Google Scholar
Bergren, A. 1983. ‘Language and the Female in Early Greek Thought.’ Arethusa 16.1: 69–95.Google Scholar
Berlincourt, V. 2013. Commenter la Thébaïde (16e-19e s.). Caspar von Barth et la tradition exégétique de Stace. Leiden-BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bessone, F. 1997. P. Ovidii Nasonis Heroidum Epistula XII. Medea Iasoni. Florence.Google Scholar
Bessone, F. 2011. La Tebaide di Stazio. Epica e potere. Pisa-Rome.Google Scholar
Bettini, M. 2012. Vertere. Un’antropologia della traduzione nella cultura antica. Turin.Google Scholar
Billings, J. 2010. ‘Hyperion’s Symposium: an Erotics of Reception’, CRJ 2.1: 4–24.Google Scholar
Billings, J. 2016. ‘The Sigh of Philhellenism’, in Butler, S. (ed.) Deep Classics: Rethinking Classical Reception. London, 49–65.Google Scholar
Biondi, G. G. 2007. ‘Poem 101’, in Gaisser, J. H. (ed.) Catullus. Oxford, 177–97.Google Scholar
Bishop, J. 1985. Seneca’s Daggered Stylus: Political Code in the Tragedies. Königstein.Google Scholar
Blake, S. 2012. ‘Now You See Them: Slaves and Other Objects as Elements of the Roman Master’, Helios 39.2: 193–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, S. 2016. ‘In Manus: Pliny’s Letters and the Art of Mastery’, in Keith, A. and Edmondson, J. (eds.) Roman Literary Cultures: Domestic Politics, Revolutionary Poetics, Civic Spectacle. Toronto, Buffalo and London, 89–107.Google Scholar
Blix, G. 2009. From Paris to Pompeii: French Romanticism and the Cultural Politics of Archaeology. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Bocciolini Palagi, L. 1990. ‘Enea come Orfeo’, Maia 42: 133–50.Google Scholar
Bodel, J. 1999. ‘Death on Display: Looking at Roman Funerals’, in Bergmann, B. and Kondoleon, C. (eds.) The Art of Ancient Spectacle. New Haven, 259–81.Google Scholar
Boeckh, A. 1877. Encyklopädie und Methodologie der philologischen Wissenschaften, Bratuscheck, E. (ed.) Leipzig.Google Scholar
Boeckh, A. 1968. Interpretation and Criticism, trans. by J. Pritchard. Norman, OK.Google Scholar
Boissier, R. 2011. Pompéi. Les doubles vies de la cité du Vésuve. Paris.Google Scholar
Bolonyai, G. 2007. ‘Fenség és nézőpont’, in Hajdu, P. and Odorics, F. (eds.) Retorika és narráció. Budapest, 205–27.Google Scholar
Bömer, F. 1969. P. Ovidius Naso, Metamorphosen: Kommentar. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Bonifazi, A. 2012. Homer’s Versicolored Fabric: the Evocative Power of Ancient Greek Epic Word-making. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bowersock, G. 2009. From Gibbon to Auden: Essays on the Classical Tradition. Oxford.Google Scholar
Boyle, A. J. (ed.) 2008. The Octavia: Attributed to Seneca. Oxford.Google Scholar
Bradley, K. 1978. Suetonius’ Life of Nero: An Historical Commentary. Brussels.Google Scholar
Bradley, K 2000. ‘Animalizing the Slave: the Truth of Fiction’, JRS 90: 110–25.Google Scholar
Braund, S. M. 2009. Seneca: De Clementia. Oxford, New York.Google Scholar
Brenk, F. 1999. Clothed in Purple Light: Studies in Vergil and in Latin Literature, Including Aspects of Philosophy, Religion, Magic, Judaism, and the New Testament Background. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Briguglio, S. 2017. Fraternas acies. Saggio di commento a Stazio, Tebaide, 1, 1–389. Alessandria.Google Scholar
Briguglio, S. 2019. ‘Ritratti di signora. Ipsipile tra Ovidio e l’epica flavia’, in Bessone, F., Stroppa, S. (eds.), Lettori latini e italiani di Ovidio. Atti del convegno – Università di Torino, 9-10 novembre 2017, Pisa-Rome, 41–9.Google Scholar
Brink, C. O. 1982. Horace on Poetry. Epistles Book II: The Letters to Augustus and Florus. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Brodsky, J. 1995. On Grief and Reason: Essays. London. (‘Homage to Marcus Aurelius’ pp. 267–98; ‘Letter to Horace’ pp. 428–58).Google Scholar
Brookner, A. 2009. Strangers, London.Google Scholar
Brooks, P. 1984. Reading for the Plot. Design and Intention in Narrative. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar
Brown, P. G. M. 2002. ‘Actors and Actor-managers at Rome’, in Easterling, P. E. and Hall, E. (eds.) Greek and Roman Actors: Aspects of an Ancient Profession. Cambridge, 225–37.Google Scholar
Brunelle, C. 2000–1. ‘Form vs. Function in Ovid’s Remedia Amoris’, CJ 96: 123–40.Google Scholar
Brunt, P. A. 1974. ‘Marcus Aurelius in his Meditations’, JRS 64: 1–20.Google Scholar
Büchner, K. 1984. M. Tullius Cicero. De Re Publica. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Buckley, E. 2013. ‘Nero Insitivus: Constructing Neronian Identity in the Pseudo-Senecan Octavia’, in Gibson, A. G. G. (ed.) The Julio-Claudian Succession: Reality and Perception of the Augustan Model. Leiden, 133–54.Google Scholar
Budick, S. and Iser, W. (eds.) 1989. Languages of the Unsayable: The Play on Negativity in Literature and Literary Theory. New York.Google Scholar
Butler, S. 2015. The Ancient Phonograph. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar
Butler, S. (ed.) 2016. Deep Classics: Rethinking Classical Reception. London.Google Scholar
Byrne, S. N. 2006. ‘Petronius and Maecenas. Seneca’s Calculated Criticism’, in Byrne, S. N., Cueva, E. P and Alvares, J. (eds.) Authors, Authority, and Interpreters in the Ancient Novel. Groningen, 83–111.Google Scholar
Byrne, S. N. 2007. ‘Maecenas and Petronius’ Trimalchio Maecenatianus’, Ancient Narrative 6: 31–49.Google Scholar
Calboli, G. 1969. Cornifici rhetorica ad Herennium. Bologna.Google Scholar
Canfora, L. 1993. Studi di storia della storiografia romana. Bari.Google Scholar
Carson, A. 2009. Nox. New York.Google Scholar
Casali, S. 1995. ‘Aeneas and the Doors of the Temple of Apollo’, CJ 91: 1–9.Google Scholar
Casali, S. 2003. ‘Impius Aeneas, impia Hypsipyle: narrazioni menzognere dall’Eneide alla Tebaide di Stazio’, Scholia 12: 60–8.Google Scholar
Cavarero, A. 1995. In Spite of Plato. Feminist Rewriting of Ancient Philosophy, trans. by S. Anderlini-D’Onofrio and A. O’Heely. London.Google Scholar
Cavarero, A. 2005. For More than One Voice: Toward a Philosophy of Vocal Expression, trans. P. A. Kottman. Palo Alto, CA.Google Scholar
Cave, T. 1988. Recognitions: a Study in Poetics. Oxford.Google Scholar
Cèbe, J. P. 1966. La caricature et la parodie dans le monde romain antique des origines a Juvénal. Paris.Google Scholar
Cederstrom, E. 1981. ‘Catullus’ Last Gift to his Brother (c. 101)’, CW 75: 117–18.Google Scholar
Cerami, P. 2015. ‘Tabernae librariae. Profili terminologici, economici e giuridici del commercio librario e dell’attività editoriale nel mondo romano’, AUPA 58: 9–36.Google Scholar
Champlin, E. 1991. Final Judgements. Duty and Emotion in Roman Wills, 200 BC – AD 250. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Champlin, E. 2003a. Nero. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Champlin, E. 2003b. ‘Agamemnon at Rome. Roman Dynasts and Greek Heroes’, in Braund, D. and Gill, C. (eds.) Myth, History and Culture in Republican Rome: Studies in Honour of T.P. Wiseman. Exeter, 295–319.Google Scholar
Chiarini, G. 1983. La recita: Plauto, la farsa, la festa, 2nd ed. Bologna.Google Scholar
Coarelli, F. 1993. ‘s.v. Apollo Sandalarius and Apollo Tortor’, in Steinby, E. M. (ed.) Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae, I. Roma, 57–8.Google Scholar
Coates, V., Lapatin, K. and Seydl, J. (eds.) 2012. The Last Days of Pompeii: Decadence, Apocalypse, Resurrection. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Coleman, K. 1988. Statius Silvae IV. Oxford.Google Scholar
Collard, C. 1975. ‘Medea and Dido’, Prometheus 1: 131–51.Google Scholar
Conte, G. B. 1984. Virgilio. Il genere e i suoi confini. Milan.Google Scholar
Conte, G. B. 1986. The Rhetoric of Imitation: Genre and Poetic Memory in Virgil and other Latin Poets, trans. by C. Segal. Ithaca, NY and London.Google Scholar
Conte, G. B. 1989. ‘Love Without Elegy: the Remedia Amoris and the Logic of a Genre’, Poetics Today 10: 441–69 (= Conte, G. B. 1994. Genres and Readers. Baltimore, 35–65).Google Scholar
Conte, G. B. 2016. ‘On the Text of the Aeneid: An Editor’s Experience’, in Hunter, R. and Oakley, S. P. (eds.) Latin Literature and Its Transmission. Papers in Honour of Michael Reeve. Cambridge, 54–67.Google Scholar
Cooley, A. 2003. Pompeii. London.Google Scholar
Copeland, R. and Melville, S. 1991. ‘Allegory and Allegoresis, Rhetoric and Hermeneutics’, Exemplaria 3.1: 159–87.Google Scholar
Corbeill, A. 1996. Controlling Laughter. Political Humor in the Late Roman Republic. Princeton.Google Scholar
Corbeill, A. 2004. Nature Embodied. Gesture in Ancient Rome. Princeton.Google Scholar
Corbier, M. 2006. Donner à voir, donner à lire. Mémoire et communication dans la Rome ancienne. Paris.Google Scholar
Corcoran, N. 2012. ‘A Brother Never Ends.’ Review of Carson 2009. The Cambridge Quarterly 41: 371–8.Google Scholar
Costa, S. (ed.) 2014. Maecenas: Frammenti e Testimonianze Latine. Milan.Google Scholar
Courtney, E. 1993. The Fragmentary Latin Poets. Oxford.Google Scholar
Cresci Marrone, G. 2002. ‘La cena dei dodici dèi’, RCCM 44.1: 25–33.Google Scholar
Cucchiarelli, A. 2012. Publio Virgilio Marone. Le Bucoliche (Intr. and Comm.; trans. by A. Traina). Rome.Google Scholar
Culler, J. 2015. Theory of the Lyric. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Culpepper Stroup, S. 2010. Catullus, Cicero, and a Society of Patrons. The Generation of the Text. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Cupaiuolo, G. 1993. Tra poesia e realtà. Le pasquinate nell’antica Roma. Naples.Google Scholar
Damon, C. 2003. Tacitus. Histories Book 1. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dangel, J. 1995. Accius. Oeuvres (fragments). Paris.Google Scholar
D’Anna, G. 1989. Virgilio, Saggi Critici, Rome.Google Scholar
Darley, G. 2011. Vesuvius: The Most Famous Volcano in the World. London.Google Scholar
Davis, P. 2008. Translation and the Poet’s Life: the Ethics of Translating in English Culture, 1646–1726. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, W. 1994. ‘Winckelmann Divided: Mourning the Death of Art History’, in Davis, W. (ed.) Gay and Lesbian Studies in Art History. New York, 141–59.Google Scholar
Davisson, M. H. T. 1996. ‘The Search for an “Alter Orbis” in Ovid’s “Remedia Amoris”’, Phoenix 50: 246–61.Google Scholar
Dawson, J. D. 2002. Christian Figural Reading and the Fashioning of Identity. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London.Google Scholar
De Divitiis, B. 2015. ‘Memories from the Subsoil: Discovering Antiquities in Fifteenth-Century Naples and Campania’, in Hughes, J. and Buongiovanni, C. (eds.) Remembering Parthenope: The Reception of Classical Naples from Antiquity to the Present. Oxford, 189–216.Google Scholar
De Divitiis, B., Lenzo, F. and Miletti, L. (eds.) 2018. Ambrogio Leone’s De Nola, Venice 1514: Humanism and Antiquarian Culture in Renaissance Southern Italy. Leiden and Boston.Google Scholar
Degani, E. 1993. ‘Aristofane e la tradizione dell’invettiva personale in Grecia’, in Bremer, I. M. and Handley, E. W. (eds.) Aristophane: Fondation Hardt Entretiens 38. Vandoeuvres–Geneva, 1–36.Google Scholar
Degl’Innocenti Pierini, R. 2008. Il parto dell’orsa. Florence.Google Scholar
Degl’Innocenti Pierini, R. 2013. ‘Seneca, Mecenate e il ritratto in movimento’, in Gasti, F. (ed.) Seneca e la letteratura greca e latina: per i settant’ anni di Giancarlo Mazzoli. Pavia, 45–66.Google Scholar
De Grummond, W. W. 1997. ‘The «Diana Experience»: A Study of the Victims of Diana in Virgil’s Aeneid’, Latomus 239: 144–57.Google Scholar
De Lacy, P. 1964. ‘Distant Views: the Imagery of Lucretius 2’, CJ 60: 49–55.Google Scholar
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1983. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. by R. Hurley, M. Seem and H. R. Lane, preface by M. Foucault. London.Google Scholar
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus. London.Google Scholar
Del Giovane, B. 2018. ‘Il consolato di Cesare e Bibulo e un epigramma anonimo tramandato da Svetonio: per un’analisi del retroterra ciceroniano’, in Audano, S. and Cipriani, G. (eds.) Aspetti della Fortuna dell’Antico nella Cultura Europea: Atti della Quattordicesima Giornata di Studi, Sestri Levante, 10 marzo 2017. Foggia, 323–38.Google Scholar
De Melo, W. D. C. 2011–12. Plautus, 5 vols. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar
De Pretis, A. 2002. ‘Epistolarity’ in the First Book of Horace’s Epistles. Piscataway, NJ.Google Scholar
Derrida, J. 1976. Of Grammatology, trans. by G. C. Spivak. Baltimore.Google Scholar
Derrida, J. 2016 [1972]. ‘Plato’s Pharmacy’, in Derrida, J. (ed.) Dissemination, trans. by B. Johnson. London, 65–181.Google Scholar
Descoeudres, J. 1992. ‘Did some Pompeians Return to Their City after the Eruption of Mt Vesuvius in AD 79? Observations in the House of the Coloured Capitals’, in Franchi dell’Orto, L. (ed.) Proceedings of the International Congress Ercolano 1738–1988: 250 anni di ricerca archeologica, held in Pompeii, Herculaneum, and Naples in October-November 1988. Rome, 165–78.Google Scholar
Detienne, M. and Vernant, J. P. 1978. Cunning Intelligence in Greek Culture and Society. Atlantic Highlands, NJ.Google Scholar
Devillers, O. 2014 ‘Les Opera Minora “Laboratoire” des Opera Maiora’, in Devillers, O. (ed.) Les opera minora et le développement de l’historiographie tacitéenne. Bordeaux, 13–30.Google Scholar
De Vries, G. 2016. Bruno Latour. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dewar, M. 1996. Claudian. Panegyricus de sexto consulatu Honorii Augusti. Oxford.Google Scholar
Dewar, M. 2016. ‘Lost Literature’, in Zissos, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Flavian Age of Imperial Rome. Malden, MA and Oxford, 469–83.Google Scholar
De Witt, N. W. 1907. The Dido Episode in the Aeneid of Virgil. Toronto.Google Scholar
Dickson, K. 2009. ‘Oneself as Others: Aurelius and Autobiography’, Arethusa 42: 99–125.Google Scholar
Dimock, W. C. 2006. Through Other Continents: American Literature Across Deep Time. Princeton.Google Scholar
Dolar, M. 2006. A Voice and Nothing More. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar
Dorfbauer, L. J. 2012. ‘Claudian und Prudentius: verbale Parallelen und Datierungsfragen’, Hermes 140: 45–70.Google Scholar
Douglas, A. E. 1966. M. Tullius Cicero, Brutus. Oxford.Google Scholar
Dressler, A. 2013. ‘Poetics of Conspiracy and Hermeneutics of Suspicion in Tacitus’s Dialogus de Oratoribus’, ClAnt 32: 1–34.Google Scholar
Duckworth, G. 1994. The Nature of Roman Comedy: A Study in Popular Entertainment, 2nd ed. Bristol [1st ed. Princeton 1952].Google Scholar
Duclos, G. S. 1969. ‘Dido as triformis Diana’, Vergilius 15: 33–41.Google Scholar
Dufallo, B. (ed.). 2018. Roman Error: Classical Reception and the Problem of Rome’s Flaws. Oxford.Google Scholar
Dugan, J. 2005. Making a New Man. Ciceronian Self-Fashioning in the Rhetorical Works. Oxford.Google Scholar
Dugan, J. 2013. ‘Cicero and the Politics of Ambiguity. Interpreting the Pro Marcello’, in Steele, C. and van der Blom, H. (eds.) Community and Communication. Oratory and Politics in Republican Rome. Oxford, 211–25.Google Scholar
Dupont, F. 1976. ‘Signification théâtrale du double dans l’Amphitryon de Plaute’, REL 54: 129–41.Google Scholar
Dwyer, E. 2010. Pompeii’s Living Statues: Ancient Roman Lives Stolen from Death. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. 1994. ‘Beware of Imitations: Theatre and the Subversion of Imperial Identity’, in Elsner, J. and Masters, J. (eds.) Reflections of Nero. London, 83–97.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. 1996. Writing Rome: Textual Approaches to the City. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. 1997. ‘Self-scrutiny and Self-transformation in Seneca’s Letters’, G&R 44.1: 23–8.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. 2007. Death in Ancient Rome, New Haven and London.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. 2008. Suetonius Lives of the Caesars. Oxford.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. 2017. ‘Seneca and the Quest for Glory in Nero’s Golden Age’ Bartsch, S., Freudenburg, K. and Littlewood, C. (eds.) Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero. Cambridge, 164–76.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. 2018. ‘On not Being in Rome: Exile and Displacement in Seneca’s Prose’, in Fitzgerald, W. and Spentzou, E. (eds.) The Production of Space in Latin Literature. Oxford, 169–94.Google Scholar
Elsner, J. 1994. ‘Constructing Decadence: the Representation of Nero as Imperial Builder’ in Elsner, J. and Masters, J. (eds.) Reflections of Nero. London, 112–27.Google Scholar
Ernst, W. 2001. ‘Absenz’, in Barck, K. et al. (eds.), Ästhetische Grundbegriffe, vol. I. Stuttgart/Weimar,1–16.Google Scholar
Fabre-Serris, J. 1999. ‘Néron et les traditions latines de l’âge d’or’, in Croisille, J.-M., Martin, R. and Perrin, Y. (eds.) Neronia V. Néron: histoire et legend. Brussels, 187–200.Google Scholar
Fantuzzi, M. and Hunter, R. 2004. Tradition and Innovation in Hellenistic Poetry. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. 1998. ‘Reading and Writing the Heroides’, HSCPh 98: 307–38.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. 2009. ‘The Impermanent Text in Catullus and Other Roman Poets’, in Johnson, W. A. and Parker, H. N. (eds.) Ancient Literacies. The Culture of Reading in Greece and Rome. Oxford,164–85.Google Scholar
Farron, S. 1980. ‘The Aeneas-Dido Episode as an Attack on Aeneas’ Mission and Rome’, G&R 27: 34–47.Google Scholar
Fedeli, P. 2005. Properzio Elegie Libro II. Introduzione, testo e commento. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. 1983. ‘The Taciturnity of Aeneas’, CQ 33: 204–19.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. 1986. ‘History and Revelation in Vergil’s Underworld’. PCPhS 32: 1–24.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. 1991. The Gods in Epic: Poets and Critics of the Classical Tradition. Oxford.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. 1992. ‘Si licet et fas est: Ovid’s Fasti and the Problem of Free Speech under the Principate’, in Powell, A. (ed.) Roman Poetry and Propaganda in the Age of Augustus. Bristol, 1–25.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. 2014. ‘First Similes in Epic’, TAPA 144: 189–228.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. 2016. Beyond Greek: The Beginnings of Latin Literature. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Feldherr, A. 1998. Spectacle and Society in Livy’s History. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Feldherr, A. 1999. ‘Putting Dido on the Map: Genre and Geography in Vergil’s Underworld’, Arethusa 32: 85–122.Google Scholar
Feldherr, A. 2000. ‘Non inter nota sepulcra: Catullus 101 and Roman Funerary Ritual’, ClAnt 19: 209–31.Google Scholar
Felgentreu, F. 1999. Claudians Praefationes: Bedingungen, Beschreibungen und Wirkungen einer poetischen Kleinform. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Felman, S. 1982. ‘Turning the Screw of Interpretation,’ in Felman, S. (ed.), Literature and Psychoanalysis: The Question of Reading: Otherwise, Baltimore: 94–207.Google Scholar
Felman, S. 2002. The Scandal of the Speaking Body. Don Juan with J. L. Austin, or Seduction in Two Languages. Stanford.Google Scholar
Felski, R. 2011. ‘Suspicious Minds’, Poetics Today 32.2: 215–34.Google Scholar
Felski, R. 2015. The Limits of Critique. Chicago and London.Google Scholar
Fernandelli, M. 1998. ‘Virgilio imitatore: quattro ipotesi a proposito di Eneide I’, Lexis 16: 163–99.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2011. L’amica geniale. Rome.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2012a. Storia del nuovo cognome. Rome.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2012b. My Brilliant Friend, trans. by A. Goldstein. New York.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2013a Storia di chi fugge e di chi resta. Rome.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2013b. The Story of a New Name, trans. by A. Goldstein. New York.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2014a. Storia della bambina perduta. Rome.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2014b. Those Who Leave and Those Who Stay, trans. by A. Goldstein. New York.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2015. The Story of the Lost Child, trans. by A. Goldstein. New York.Google Scholar
Ferrante, E. 2016. Frantumaglia: a Writer’s Journey, trans. by A. Goldstein. New York.Google Scholar
Ferri, R. 2003. Octavia. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Fetscher, J. 2001. ‘Fragment’, in Barck, K. et al. (eds.) Ästhetische Grundbegriffe vol. II. Stuttgart and Weimar, 551–88.Google Scholar
Finamore, J. F. 1984. ‘Catullus 50 and 51: Friendship, Love, and otium’, CW 78: 11–19.Google Scholar
Fish, J. 2004. ‘Physician, Heal Thyself: the Intertextuality of Ovid’s Exile Poetry and the “Remedia Amoris”’, Latomus 63: 864–72.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. 1995. Catullan Provocations: Lyric Poetry and the Drama of Position. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. 2000. Slavery and the Roman Literary Imagination. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. 2011. ‘The Slave as Minimal Addition in Latin Literature’, in Alston, R., Hall, E. and Profitt, L. (eds.) Reading Ancient Slavery. London and New York, 175–91.Google Scholar
Fleming, J. 2016. ‘“Talk (why?) with Mute Ash”: Anne Carson’s Nox as Therapeutic Biography’, Biography 39.1: 64–78.Google Scholar
Flower, H. 1996. Ancestor Masks and Aristocratic Power in Roman Culture. Oxford.Google Scholar
Fomenko, A. 2007. History: Fiction or Science? New Chronology: 1. Bend, Oregon.Google Scholar
Ford, A. 1992. Homer: the Poetry of the Past. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Fordyce, C. J. 1977. Aeneidos libri VII-VIII. Oxford.Google Scholar
Fordyce, C. J. 1990. Catullus: A Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1966. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 2005. The Hermeneutics of the Subject: Lectures at the Collège de France 1981–2 (ed.) Gros, F., trans. by G. Burchell. London.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. and Miskowiec, J. 1986. ‘Of Other Spaces,’ Diacritics 16: 22–7.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. 1990. ‘Deviant Focalisation in Virgil’s Aeneid’, PCPhS 36: 42–63.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. 1991. ‘Narrate and Describe: the Problem of Ekphrasis’, JRS 81: 25–35.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. 2000a. ‘Postmodernism, Romantic Irony, and Classical Closure’, in Fowler, D. Roman Constructions. Readings in Postmodern Latin. Oxford, 5–33.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. 2000b. ‘The Ruin of Time: Monuments and Survival at Rome’, in Roman Constructions. Readings in Postmodern Latin. Oxford, 193–217.Google Scholar
Fraenkel, E. 2007. Plautine Elements in Plautus, trans. by T. Drevikovsky and F. Muecke. Oxford [1st German ed. Berlin 1922; Italian ed. Florence 1960].Google Scholar
Fraenkel, H. 1950. ‘Problems of Text and Interpretation in Apollonius’ Argonautica’, AJPh 71: 113–33.Google Scholar
Freud, S. 1961. Beyond the Pleasure Principle, trans. by J. Strachey. New York and London.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. 2001. Satires of Rome: Threatening Poses from Lucilius to Juvenal, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. 2015. ‘Seneca’s Apocolocyntosis’, in Bartsch, A. and Schiesaro, A. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to Seneca. Cambridge, 93–105.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. 2017. ‘Petronius, Realism, Nero’ in Bartsch, S., Freudenburg, K. and Littlewood, C. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero. Cambridge, 107–20.Google Scholar
Frings, I. 1991. Gespräch und Handlung in der Thebais des Statius. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Fucecchi, M. 2015. ‘Passato da rimuovere e passato da rivivere: l’incubo della guerra civile (e la sua ‘metabolizzazione’) nell’epica flavia’, in Esposito, P. and Walde, C. (eds.) Letture e lettori di Lucano. Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Fisciano 27–29 marzo 2012. Pisa, 231–53.Google Scholar
Fulkerson, L. 2004. ‘Omnia Vincit Amor: Why the Remedia Fail’, CQ 54: 211–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulkerson, L. 2005. The Ovidian Heroine as Author: Reading, Writing, and Community in the Heroides. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Furneaux, H. 1894. De Germania Cornelii Taciti. Oxford.Google Scholar
Gabriel, M. 2015a. Why the World Does Not Exist. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gabriel, M. 2015b. Fields of Sense: A New Realist Ontology. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Gaisser, J. H. 2009. Catullus. Malden, MA, Oxford and Chichester.Google Scholar
Gale, M. 2003. ‘Poetry and the Backward Glance in Virgil’s Georgics and Aeneid’, TAPA 133.2: 323–52.Google Scholar
Galinsky, G. K. 1966. ‘The Hercules-Cacus Episode in Aeneid VIII’, AJP 87: 18–51.Google Scholar
Galinsky, G. K. 1996. Augustan Culture: an Interpretive Introduction. Princeton.Google Scholar
Galippi, F. 2016. ‘In Search of Parthenope and the “Founding” of a New City’, in Bullaro, G. and Love, S. V. (eds.) The Works of Elena Ferrante: Reconfiguring the Margins. New York, 101–27.Google Scholar
Ganiban, R. T. 2007. Statius and Virgil. The Thebaid and the Reinterpretation of the Aeneid. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Garcia y Garcia, L. 1998. Nova bibliotheca Pompeiana. 250 anni di bibliografia archeologica. Roma.Google Scholar
Gardini, N. 2014. Lacuna. Saggio sul non detto. Turin.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. H. 2008. ‘Women’s Time in the Remedia Amoris’, in Liveley, G. and Salzman-Mitchell, P. (eds.) 2008. Latin Elegy and Narratology. Columbus, OH, 68–85.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. H. 2013. Gendering Time in Augustan Love Elegy. Oxford.Google Scholar
Garton, C. 1972. Personal Aspects of the Roman Theatre. Toronto.Google Scholar
Gascou, J. 1984. Suétone Historien, Rome.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genette, G. 1997. Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Geue, T. 2016a. ‘Elena Ferrante has her Reasons for Anonymity – We Should Respect Them.’ The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/elena-ferrante-has-her-reasons-for-anonymity-we-should-respect-them-66436 [Accessed 30 May 2018]Google Scholar
Geue, T. 2016b. ‘Elena Ferrante as the Classics.’ Melbourne Historical Journal; The Amphora 44.2: 1–31.Google Scholar
Geue, T. 2018. ‘Soft Hands. Hard Power: Sponging Off the Empire of Leisure (Virgil, Georgics 4)’, JRS 108: 115–40.Google Scholar
Giavatto, G. 2008. Interlocutore di se stesso: la dialettica di Marco Aurelio. Hildesheim.Google Scholar
Gibson, B. J. 2004. ‘The Repetitions of Hypsipyle’, in Gale, M. (ed.) Latin Epic and Didactic Poetry: Genre, Tradition and Individuality. Swansea, 149–80.Google Scholar
Gibson, B. J 2006. Statius Silvae 5. Oxford.Google Scholar
Gibson, R. 2003. Ovid Ars Amatoria Book 3. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gibson, R., Green, S. and Sharrock, A. (eds.) 2006. The Art of Love. Bimillennial Essays on Ovid’s Ars Amatoria and Remedia Amoris. Oxford.Google Scholar
Giltaij, J. 2018. ‘The lex cornelia de iniuriis and “Hyperlinks” in Roman Law’, Fundamina (online) 24.2: 21–34.Google Scholar
Gilula, D. 1989. ‘The First Realistic Roles in European Theatre: Terence’s Prologues’, QUCC 33: 95–106.Google Scholar
Gingras, M. T. 1992. ‘Annalistic Format, Tacitean Themes, and the Obituaries of Annals 3’, CJ 87: 241–56.Google Scholar
Ginsberg, L. 2017. Staging Memory, Staging Strife: Empire and Civil War in the Octavia. Oxford.Google Scholar
Giusti, E. 2016. ‘My Enemy’s Enemy Is My Enemy: Virgil’s Illogical Use of Metus Hostilis’ in Hardie, P. (ed.) Augustan Poetry and the Irrational. Oxford, 37–58.Google Scholar
Giusti, E. 2017a. ‘Virgil’s Carthage: a Heterotopic Space of Empire’, in Asper, M. and Rimell, V. (eds.) Imagining Empire: Political Space in Hellenistic and Roman Literature. Heidelberg: 133–50.Google Scholar
Giusti, E. 2017b. ‘Cronaca del Convegno: Unspeaking Volumes: Absence in Latin Texts, University of St Andrews, 29 June–1 July 2017’, BSL 47.2: 808–13.Google Scholar
Giusti, E. 2018. Carthage in Virgil’s Aeneid: Staging the Enemy under Augustus. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Glenn, J. 1978. ‘The Polyphemus Myth: Its Origin and Interpretation’. G&R 25: 141–55.Google Scholar
Godfrey, D. 2016. New Pompeii. London.Google Scholar
Goldberg, S. M. 2005. Constructing Literature in the Roman Republic. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Goldberg, S. M. 2009. ‘The Faces of Eloquence: the Dialogus de Oratoribus’, in Woodman, T. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Tacitus. Cambridge, 73–84.Google Scholar
Goldberg, S. M. 2012. ‘Appreciating Aper: The Defence of Modernity in Tacitus’ Dialogus de Oratoribus’, in Ash, R. (ed.) Tacitus. Oxford, 155–79.Google Scholar
Goldhill, S. 1991. The Poet’s Voice. Essays on Poetics and Greek Literature. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, N. 2018. ‘Ovid’s Tombs: Afterlives of a Poetic Corpus’, in Goldschmidt, N. and Graziosi, B. (eds.) Tombs of the Ancient Poets: Between Literary Reception and Material Culture. Oxford, 101–20.Google Scholar
Goodyear, F. R. D. 1972. The Annals of Tacitus. I. 1–54. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Goodyear, F. R. D. 1981. The Annals of Tacitus. II. 1. 55–81 and Annals 2. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Goold, G. P. and Mozley, J. H. 1969. Ovid The Art of Love, and Other Poems. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Gowers, E. 1993. ‘Horace, Satires 1.5: an Inconsequential Journey”, PCPS 39: 48–66; reprinted in Freudenburg, K. (ed.) 2009. Oxford Readings in Horace II: Sermones and Epistles. Oxford, 156–80.Google Scholar
Gowers, E. 1994. ‘Persius and the Decoction of Nero’, in Elsner, J. and Masters, J. (eds.) Reflections of Nero. London, 131–50.Google Scholar
Gowers, E. 2012. Horace, Satires Book 1. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gowing, A. 2005. Empire and Memory. The Representation of the Roman Republic in Imperial Culture. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gratwick, A. S. 1993. Plautus Menaechmi. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Grau, D. 2017. ‘Nero: the Making of Historical Narrative’, in Bartsch, S., Freudenburg, K. and Littlewood, C. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero. Cambridge, 261–75.Google Scholar
Graver, M. 1998. ‘The Manhandling of Maecenas: Senecan Abstractions of Masculinity’, AJPh 119: 607–32.Google Scholar
Graver, M. 2016. ‘The Emotional Intelligence of Epicureans: Doctrinalism and Adaptation in Seneca’s Epistles’, in Williams, G. and Volk, K. (eds.) Roman Reflections: Studies in Latin Philosophy. Oxford, 192–210.Google Scholar
Graverini, L. 2016. ‘Il silenzio di Didone, le parole di Cornelia. Due note su Virgilio e Properzio’, in Setaioli, A. (ed.) Apis Matina. Studi in onore di Carlo Santini. Trieste, 343–5Google Scholar
Greene, E. 1995. ‘The Catullan Ego: Fragmentation and the Erotic Self’, AJPh 116: 77–93.Google Scholar
Greene, E. 1999. ‘Re-figuring the Feminine Voice: Catullus Translating Sappho’, Arethusa 32: 1–18.Google Scholar
Greene, E. 2007. ‘Catullus and Sappho’, in Skinner, M. B. (ed.) A Companion to Catullus. Malden, MA, Oxford and Carlton, 131–50.Google Scholar
Grethlein, J. 2017. Aesthetic Experiences and Classical Antiquity. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. 1984. Nero: the End of a Dynasty. London.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. 1992. Seneca: a Philosopher in Politics. 2nd ed. Oxford.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. 2013. Seneca on Society: A Guide to De Beneficiis. Oxford.Google Scholar
Gruen, E. S. 1974. The Last Generation of the Roman Republic. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Gruen, E. S. 1990. Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy. Leiden [repr. Berkeley 1996].Google Scholar
Gruen, E. S. 1992. Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Gumbrecht, H. U. 1997. ‘Eat Your Fragment! About Imagination and the Restitution of Texts’, in Most, G. W. (ed.) Collecting Fragments – Fragmente Sammeln. Göttingen, 315–27.Google Scholar
Gumbrecht, H. U. 2003. The Powers of Philology. Dynamics of Textual Scholarship. Urbana, IL.Google Scholar
Gumbrecht, H. U. 2004. Production of Presence. What Meaning Cannot Convey. Stanford.Google Scholar
Gumbrecht, H. U. 2012. Atmosphere, Mood, Stimmung. On a Hidden Potential of Literature, trans. by E. Butler. Stanford.Google Scholar
Gurd, S. 2010. ‘Introduction’, in Gurd, S. (ed.) Philology and Its Histories. Columbus, OH, 1–19.Google Scholar
Güthenke, C. 2010. ‘The Potter’s Daughter’s Sons: German Classical Scholarship and the Language of Love circa 1800’, Representations 109: 122–47.Google Scholar
Güthenke, C. 2016. ‘“Lives” as Parameter: The Privileging of Ancient Lives as a Category of Research’, in Fletcher, R. and Hanink, J. (eds.) Creative Lives in Classical Antiquity: Poets, Artists, and Biography. Cambridge, 29–48.Google Scholar
Gutzwiller, K. 2012. ‘Catullus and the Garland of Meleager’, in Du Quesnay, I. and Woodman, A. J. (eds.) 2012. Catullus: Poems, Books, Readers. Cambridge, 79–111.Google Scholar
Habinek, T. 2014. ‘Imago vitae suae: Seneca’s Life and Career’ in Damschen, G. and Heil, A. (eds.) Brill’s Companion to Seneca. Leiden, 3–31.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. 2002. Historical Ontology. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Hadot, P. 1998. The Inner Citadel: The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, trans. by J. M. Chase. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Hales, S. and Paul, J. (eds.) 2011. Pompeii in the Public Imagination from its Rediscovery to Today. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hallett, J. P. 2015. ‘Making Manhood Hard: Tiberius and Latin Literary Representations of Erectile Dysfunction’, in Masterson, M., Sorkin Rabinowitz, N. and Robson, J. (eds.) Sex in Antiquity. Exploring Gender and Sexuality in the Ancient World. New York, 408–21.Google Scholar
Halliwell, S. 2008. Greek Laughter. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Halporn, J. 1993. ‘Roman Comedy and Greek Models’, in Scodel, R. (ed.) Theatre and Society in the Classical World, Ann Arbor, 191–213.Google Scholar
Hamacher, W. 2009. ‘95 Theses on Philology’, Diacritics 39: 25–44.Google Scholar
Hammer, D. 2008. Roman Political Thought and the Modern Theoretical Imagination. Norman, OK.Google Scholar
Hanchey, D. 2014. ‘Days of Future Passed: Fiction Forming Fact in Cicero’s Dialogues’, CJ 110: 61–75.Google Scholar
Harder, A. 2004. ‘Catullus 63: A “Hellenistic Poem”?’, Mnemosyne 57.5: 574–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harder, A. 2012. Callimachus. Aetia, 2 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 1993. The Epic Successors of Virgil: A Study in the Dynamics of a Tradition. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 1994. Virgil. Aeneid Book IX. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 1998. Virgil. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2002. Ovid’s Poetics of Illusion. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2004a. ‘Don Fowler and Middles’, in Kyriakidis, S. and De Martino, F. (eds.) Middles in Latin Poetry. Bari, 25–6.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2004b. ‘Approximative Similes in Ovid. Incest and Doubling’, Dictynna 1: 1–16.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2006a. ‘Virgil’s Ptolemaic Relations’, JRS 96: 25–41.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2006b. ‘Lethaeus Amor: the Art of Forgetting’ in Gibson, Green and Sharrock, (eds.) 6–90.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2009. Lucretian Receptions. History, the Sublime, Knowledge. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2012. Rumour and Renown: Representations of Fama in Western Literature. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2014. ‘Dido and Lucretia’, PVS 28: 55–80.Google Scholar
Harloe, K. 2013. Winckelmann and the Invention of Antiquity: History and Aesthetics in the Age of Altertumswissenschaft. Oxford.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. J. 2007. ‘From Man to Book: the Close of Tacitus’ Agricola’, in Harrison, S. J., Fowler, P. G. and Heyworth, S. J. (eds.) Classical Constructions: Papers in Memory of Don Fowler, Classicist and Epicurean. Oxford, 310–19.Google Scholar
Haß-von Reitzenstein, U. 1970. Beiträge zur gattungsgeschichtlichen Interpretation des Dialogus ‘de oratoribus’. Cologne.Google Scholar
Heerink, M. 2014. ‘Valerius Flaccus, Virgil and the Poetics of Ekphrasis’, in Heerink, M. and Manuwald, G. (eds.) Brill’s Companion to Valerius Flaccus. Leiden and Boston, 72–96.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1962a [1927]. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen:Niemeyer = 1962b. Being and Time, trans. by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. Oxford.Google Scholar
Heinze, R. 1908 2. Vergils Epische Technik. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Hekster, O. 2015. Emperors and Ancestors: Roman Rulers and the Constraints of Tradition. Oxford.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. A. R. 1979. P. Ovidi Nasonis Remedia Amoris. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. 1993. ‘Be Alert, Your Country Needs Lerts’, PCPhS 39: 67–93.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. 1997. Figuring out Roman Nobility. Juvenal’s Eighth Satire. Exeter.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. 2004. Morals and Villas in Seneca’s Letters. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Henriksen, C. 2006. ‘Martial’s Modes of Mourning. Sepulchral Epitaphs in the Epigrams’, in Nauta, R., Van Dam, H. and Smolenaars, J. (eds.) Flavian Poetry. Leiden and Boston, 349–67.Google Scholar
Henry, J. 1878. Aeneidea: or Critical, Exegetical, and Aesthetical Remarks on the Aeneis; vol. 2: Books II, III, and IV. Repr. 2013.Google Scholar
Henry, R. M. 1930. Medea and Dido, CR 44: 97–108.Google Scholar
Hershkowitz, D. 1998. The Madness of Epic: Reading Insanity from Homer to Statius. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hertz, N. 1983. ‘A Reading of Longinus’, Critical Inquiry 9: 579–96.Google Scholar
Heslin, P. 2005. The Transvestite Achilles. Gender and Genre in Statius’ Achilleid. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Heslin, P. 2008. ‘Statius and the Greek Tragedians on Athens, Thebes, and Rome’, in Smolenaars, J. J. L., Van Dam, H.-J. and Nauta, R. R. (eds.) The Poetry of Statius. Leiden, 111–28.Google Scholar
Heslin, P. 2016. ‘A Perfect Murder: The Hypsipyle Epyllion’, in Manioti, , N. (ed.), Family in Flavian Epic. Leiden-Boston, 89–121.Google Scholar
Heyworth, S. J. 1992. ‘Ars Moratoria (Ovid, A.A. 1.681–704)’, LCM 17: 59–61.Google Scholar
Heyworth, S. and Morwood, J. 2017. A Commentary on Vergil Aeneid 3. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hickson Hahn, F. 2015. ‘Triumphal Ambivalence: The Obscene Songs’, in Dutsch, D. and Suter, A. (eds.) Ancient Obscenities: Their Nature and Use in the Ancient Greek and Roman Worlds. Ann Arbor, 153–74.Google Scholar
Hinds, S. 1993. ‘Medea in Ovid: Scenes from the Life of an Intertextual Heroine’, MD 30: 9–47.Google Scholar
Hinds, S. 1998. Allusion and Intertext: Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hinds, S. 2007. ‘Ovid Among the Conspiracy Theorists’ in Heyworth, S. J. (ed.) Classical Constructions. Papers in Memory of Don Fowler. Oxford, 194–220.Google Scholar
Hobden, F. 2009. ‘History Meets Fiction in Doctor Who, ‘The Fires of Pompeii’: A BBC Reception of Ancient Rome on Screen and Online’, G&R 56.2: 147–63.Google Scholar
Hodgson, L. 2017. Res Publica and the Roman Republic: ‘Without Body or Form’. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hofmann, J. B. 1965. Lateinische Umgangssprache, 3 Auflage. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Hofmann, J. B. and Szantyr, A. 1965. Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. Munich.Google Scholar
Holliday, P. J. 2002. The Origins of Roman Historical Commemoration in the Visual Arts. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hollis, A. S. 2007. Fragments of Roman Poetry. Oxford.Google Scholar
Holmes, B. 2017. Liquid Antiquity. Geneva.Google Scholar
Holzberg, N. 2006. ‘Staging the Reader Response: Ovid and his “Contemporary Audience” in Ars and Remedia’ in Gibson, Green and Sharrock, (eds.) 40–53.Google Scholar
Hornsby, R. A. 1970. Patterns of Action in the Aeneid. An Interpretation of Vergil’s Epic Similes. Iowa City.Google Scholar
Horsfall, N. M. 1995. A Companion to the Study of Virgil. Leiden.Google Scholar
Horsfall, N. M. 2006. Virgil, Aeneid 3: a Commentary. Leiden.Google Scholar
Horsfall, N. M. 2012. The Culture of the Roman Plebs. Bristol.Google Scholar
Houghton, L. B. T. 2009. ‘Sexual Puns in Ovid’s “Ars” and “Remedia”, CQ 59: 280–5.Google Scholar
Howe, N. P. 1974. ‘The “Terce Muse” of Catullus 101’, CPh 69: 274–6.Google Scholar
Howley, J. H. 2017. ‘Book-Burning and the Uses of Writing in Ancient Rome: Destructive Practice Between Literature and Document’, JRS 107: 213–36.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. 1985. The New Comedy of Greece and Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. 1989. Argonautica Book III. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. 2019. ‘Notes on the Ancient Reception of Sappho’, in Thorsen, T. S. and Harrison, S. (eds.) Roman Receptions of Sappho. Oxford, 45–59.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, G. O. 2001. Greek Lyric Poetry. A Commentary on Selected Larger Pieces. Oxford.Google Scholar
Inwood, B. 2005. Reading Seneca: Stoic Philosophy at Rome. Oxford, New York.Google Scholar
Iovino, S. 2016. Ecocriticism and Italy: Ecology, Resistance, and Liberation. London.Google Scholar
Iser, W. 1978. The Act of Reading; A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore, MD and London.Google Scholar
Iser, W 1989. ‘The Play of the Text’, in Budick, and Iser, (eds.) 325–39.Google Scholar
Jacotot, M. 2014. ‘De re publica esset silentium. Pensée politique et histoire de l’éloquence dans le Brutus’, in Aubert-Baillot, S. and Guérin, C. (eds.) Le ‘Brutus’ de Cicéron: rhétorique, politique et histoire culturelle. Leiden, 193–214.Google Scholar
James, P. D. 1992. The Children of Men. London.Google Scholar
Jameson, F. 1981. The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. London and New York.Google Scholar
Janan, M. 1994. ‘When the Lamp is Shattered’: Desire and Narrative in Catullus. Carbondale, IL.Google Scholar
Jenkins, T. E. 2005. ‘At Play with Writing: Letters and Readers in Plautus’, TAPA 135: 359–92.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. 2006. The Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets; With Critical Observations on Their Works (ed.) Lonsdale, R.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Jones, C. P. 2000. ‘Nero Speaking’, HSCP 100: 453–62.Google Scholar
Jones, M. 2014. ‘Seneca’s Letters to Lucilius: Hypocrisy as a Way of Life’ in Wildberger, J. and Colish, M. L. (eds) Seneca Philosophus. Berlin, Boston, MA, 393–429.Google Scholar
Kassel, R. 1991. Kleine Schriften. Berlin.Google Scholar
Keitel, E. 2014. ‘No Vivid Writing Please: Evidentia in the Agricola and the Annals’, in Devillers, O. (ed.) Les opera minora et le développement de l’historiographie tacitéenne. Bordeaux, 59–70.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. 2002. ‘Epistolarity: The Heroides’ in Hardie, P. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Ovid, Cambridge: 217–32.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. 2006. ‘vixisset Phyllis, si me foret usa magistro: Erotodidaxis and Intertextuality’ in Gibson, Green and Sharrock, (eds.) 54–74.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. 2013. Antiquity and the Meanings of Time: A Philosophy of Ancient and Modern Literature. London.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. 2014. ‘Crossing the Threshold: Genette, Catullus and the Psychodynamics of Paratextuality’, in Jansen, L. (ed.) The Roman Paratext. Frame, Texts, Readers. Cambridge, 19–32.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. Forthcoming. ‘Views from Here and There: Reflections on History and Metaphysics’, in Lianeri, A. and Cambiano, G. (eds.) The Edinburgh Critical History of Greek and Roman Philosophy. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Kenney, E. J. 2004. Ovidio Metamorfosi, libri vii-i, vol. 4. Milan.Google Scholar
Ker, J. 2009. The Deaths of Seneca. Oxford.Google Scholar
Kermode, F. 1979. The Genesis of Secrecy: On the Interpretation of Narrative. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Kidwell, C. 1993. Sannazaro and Arcadia. London.Google Scholar
Kittler, F. A. 1986. Grammophon – Film – Typewriter. Berlin.Google Scholar
König, A. and Whitton, C. (eds.) 2018. Roman Literature under Nerva, Trajan and Hadrian: Literary Interactions, AD 96–138. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Konstan, D. 2014. ‘Turns and Returns in Plautus’ Casina’, in Perysinakis, I. N. and Karakasis, E. (eds.) Plautine Trends, Berlin, Munich, Boston, 3–11.Google Scholar
Korenjak, M. 1996. Die Erichtoszene in Lukans Pharsalia, Einl. Text, Übersetz., Komm. Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Kőrizs, I. 2004. ‘Szerencsétlen-e Catullus, és ha igen, miért nem?’, in Horváth, L., Laczkó, K., Mayer, Gy. and Takács, L. (eds.) ΓΕΝΕΣΙΑ. Tanulmányok Bollók János emlékére. Budapest, 701–7.Google Scholar
Köves-Zulauf, T. 1992. ‘Reden und Schweigen im taciteischen Dialogus de Oratoribus’, RhM 135: 316–41.Google Scholar
Knauer, G. N. 1964. Die Aeneis und Homer. Studien zur poetischen Technik Vergils mit Listen der Homerzitate in der Aeneis. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Krämer, S. 2015. Medium, Messenger, Transmission. An Approach to Media Philosophy, trans. by A. Enns. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Krapf, L. 1979. Germanenmythus und Reichsideologie: Frühhumanistische Rezeptionsweisen der taciteischen Germania. Tübingen.Google Scholar
Kraus, C. S. 2009. ‘The Tiberian Hexad’, in Woodman, A. J. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Tacitus. Cambridge, 100–15.Google Scholar
Krebs, C. 2005. Negotiatio Germaniae: Tacitus’ Germania und Enea Silvio Piccolomini, Giannantonio Campano, Conrad Celtis und Heinrich Bebel. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Krebs, C. 2011. A Most Dangerous Book: Tacitus’s Germania from the Roman Empire to the Third Reich. London.Google Scholar
Kristeva, J. 1981. Powers of Horror. An Essay on Abjection, trans. by L. S. Roudiez. New York.Google Scholar
Kristeva, J. 1984. Revolution in Poetic Language, trans. by M. Waller. New York.Google Scholar
Krummen, E. 2004. ‘Dido als Mänade und tragische Heroine. Dionysische Thematik und Tragödientradition in Vergils Didoerzählung’, Poetica 36: 25–69.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. 2013. Le désir et son interprétation, 1958–1959 (ed.) Miller, Jacques-Alain. Paris.Google Scholar
Langlands, R. 2006. Sexual Morality in Ancient Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lanham, R. A. 1976. The Motives of Eloquence. Literary Rhetoric in the Renaissance. New Haven and London.Google Scholar
La Rocca, E. 2017. ‘Staging Nero: Public Imagery and the Domus Aurea’, in Bartsch, S., Freudenburg, K. and Littlewood, C. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero. Cambridge, 195–212.Google Scholar
Latour, B. 2013. An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns, trans. by C. Porter. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Lausberg, H. 1998. Handbook of Literary Rhetoric: A Foundation for Literary Study (eds.) Orton, D. E. and Anderson, R. D., trans. by M. T. Bliss, A. Jansen and D. E. Orton. Leiden.Google Scholar
Lavan, M. 2011. ‘Slavishness in Britain and Rome in Tacitus’ Agricola’, CQ 61: 294–305.Google Scholar
Lazzarini, C. 1986. Ovidio. Rimedi contro l’amore. Venice.Google Scholar
Lee, M. O. 1988. ‘Per nubila lunam: The Moon in Virgil’s Aeneid’, Vergilius 34: 9–14.Google Scholar
Lefèvre, E., Stärk, E. and Vogt-Spira, G. 1991. Plautus barbarus. Tübingen.Google Scholar
Lesueur, R. 1994. Stace. Thébaïde, Tome III, Livres IX-XII. Paris.Google Scholar
Levene, D. 2004. ‘Tacitus’ “Dialogus” as Literary History’, TAPA 134: 157–200.Google Scholar
Levick, B. 1976. ‘The Fall of Julia the Younger’, Latomus 35.2: 301–39.Google Scholar
Levick, B. 1999 2. Tiberius the Politician. London.Google Scholar
Levin, Y. 2005. ‘Conrad, Freud, and Derrida on Pompeii: A Paradigm of Disappearance’, Partial Answers: Journal of Literature and the History of Ideas 3.1: 81–99.Google Scholar
Ling, R. 2005. Pompeii: History, Life & Afterlife. Stroud.Google Scholar
Liveley, G. 2011. ‘Delusion and Dream in Theophile Gautier’s Arria Marcella: Souvenir de Pompéi’ in Hales, and Paul, (eds.) 105–17.Google Scholar
Lloyd, G. E. R. (ed.) 1978. Hippocratic Writings. London.Google Scholar
Lönnroth, H. 2017. ‘Introduction: Why Philology Matters’, in Lönnroth, H. (ed.) Philology Matters! Essays on the Art of Reading Slowly. Leiden, xiv–xxvi.Google Scholar
Lovatt, H. 1999. ‘Competing Endings: Re-Reading the End of the Thebaid through Lucan’, Ramus 28.2: 126–51.Google Scholar
Lowe, J. C. B. 2003. ‘The Lot-Drawing Scene of Plautus’ Casina’, CQ 53: 175–183.Google Scholar
Lowe, N. J. 2008. Comedy. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. 2006. ‘Hic and Absence in Catullus 68’, CPh 101: 115–32.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. 2008. ‘Cicero on Caesar or Exemplum and Inability in the Brutus’, in Arweiler, A. and Möller, M. (eds.) Vom Selbstverständnis in Antike und Neuzeit / Notions of the Self in Antiquity and Beyond. Berlin and New York, 131–50.Google Scholar
Lowrie, M. 2009. Writing, Performance, and Authority in Augustan Rome. Oxford.Google Scholar
Luce, T. J. 1993. ‘Reading and Response in the Dialogus’, in Luce, T. J. and Woodman, A. J. (eds.) Tacitus and the Tacitean Tradition. Princeton, 11–38.Google Scholar
Lund, A. A. 1988. Germania. P. Cornelius Tacitus. Interpretiert, Hrsg., Übertragen, Kommentiert und mit einer Bibliographie versehen. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Lund, A. A. 1991a. ‘Versuch einer Gesamtinterpretation der “Germania” des Tacitus, mit einem Anhang: Zu Entstehung und Geschichte des Namens und Begriffs “Germani”’, ANRW II.33.3: 1858–988.Google Scholar
Lund, A. A. 1991b. ‘Kritischer Forschungsbericht zur ‘Germania des Tacitus’, ANRW II.33.3: 1989–2222.Google Scholar
Lunderstedt, P. 1911. ‘de C. Maecenatis fragmentis’ Commentationes philologae Ienenses 9.1. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Lyne, R. O. A. M. 1987. Further Voices in Vergil’s Aeneid. Oxford.Google Scholar
Lyotard, J.-F. 2012. ‘The Sublime and the Avant-Garde’, trans. by G. Bennington and R. Bowlby, in Tanke, J. and McQuillan, C. (eds.) The Bloomsbury Anthology of Aesthetics. New York, London, New Delhi and Sydney, 531–42.Google Scholar
MacCary, W. T. and Willcock, M. M. 1976. Plautus: Casina. Cambridge.Google Scholar
MacCormack, S. 1981. Art and Ceremony in Late Antiquity. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London.Google Scholar
Mac Góráin, F. 2018. ‘The Poetics of Vision in Virgil’s Aeneid’, HSCP 109: 1–56.Google Scholar
Macherey, P. 1978. A Theory of Literary Production, trans. by G. Wall. London and Boston.Google Scholar
Mackie, C. J. 1988. The Characterization of Aeneas. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Madvig, J. N. 1871. Adversaria critica ad scriptores graecos et latinos. Hauniae (Copenhagen).Google Scholar
Maltby, R. 1991. A Lexicon of Ancient Etymologies. Leeds.Google Scholar
Manfredini, A. 1979. La diffamazione verbale nel diritto romano. I. Età Repubblicana, Milan.Google Scholar
Maniglier, P. 2014. ‘A Metaphysical Turn? Bruno Latour’s An Inquiry into Modes of Existence’, Radical Philosophy 187: 37–44.Google Scholar
Manioti, N. 2016. ‘Becoming Sisters: Antigone and Argia in Statius’ Thebaid’, in Manioti, N. (ed.) Family in Flavian Epic. Leiden-Boston, 122–42.Google Scholar
Marchese, R. R. 2014. ‘Speech and Silence in Cicero’s Final Days’, CJ 110: 77–98.Google Scholar
Marsden, J. 2013. ‘In Search of Lost Sense: The Aesthetics of Opacity in Anne Carson’s Nox’, Comparative and Continental Philosophy 5: 189–98.Google Scholar
Marshall, C. W. 2006. The Stagecraft and Performance of Roman Comedy. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Martelli, F. 2013. Ovid’s Revisions. The Author as Editor. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Martin, C. 1992. Catullus. New Haven.Google Scholar
Martindale, C. 1993. Redeeming the Text: Latin Poetry and the Hermeneutics of Reception. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Martínez, M. 2003. La palabra y el silencio en el episodio amoroso de la Eneida. Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Martindale, C. and Hopkins, D. (eds.) 1993. Horace Made New. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Massimilla, G. 2010. Callimaco. Aitia. Libro terzo e quarto, intr., testo critico, trad. e comm. Pisa-Rome.Google Scholar
Mattingly, H. B. 1960. ‘The First Period of Plautine Revival’, Latomus 19: 231–5.Google Scholar
Mau, A. 1902. Pompeii: Its Life and Art. New York.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. 1982. ‘Neronian Classicism’, AJPh 104: 305–18.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. 2001. Tacitus. Dialogus de Oratoribus. Cambridge.Google Scholar
McAuley, M. 2016. Reproducing Rome. Motherhood in Virgil, Ovid, Seneca, and Statius. Oxford.Google Scholar
McCarthy, K. 2000. Slaves, Masters, and the Art of Authority in Plautine Comedy. Princeton.Google Scholar
McKeown, N. 2007. The Invention of Ancient Slavery. London.Google Scholar
McNamara, J. 2014. Magna Eloquentia in Tacitus: Finding a Role for Oratory in the Principate. PhD Diss. Cambridge.Google Scholar
McNelis, C. 2007. Statius’ Thebaid and the Poetics of Civil War. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Melin, B. 1960. ‘Zum Eingangskapitel der Germania’, Eranos 58: 112–31.Google Scholar
Mellor, R. 1993. Tacitus. London.Google Scholar
Mezei, G. 2017. ‘The Text as Body: William Shakespeare and Lőrinc Szabó’, in Bengi, L., Kulcsár Szabó, E., Molnár, G. T. and Kelemen, P. (eds.) Hungarian Perspectives on the Western Canon. Post-Comparative Readings. Newcastle upon Tyne, 61–75.Google Scholar
Michelakis, P. 2002. Achilles in Greek Tragedy. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Micozzi, L. 2004. ‘Memoria diffusa di luoghi lucanei nella Tebaide di Stazio’, in Esposito, P. and Ariemma, E. M. (eds.) Lucano e la tradizione dell’epica latina. Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Fisciano-Salerno, 19-20 ottobre 2001. Naples, 137–51.Google Scholar
Micozzi, L. 2008. ‘Ille referre aliter saepe solebat idem. Ripetizione e sperimentalismo narrativo nella Tebaide di Stazio’, MD 61: 211–27.Google Scholar
Micozzi, L. 2015. ‘Statius’ Epic Poetry: a Challenge to the Literary Past’, in Dominik, W. J., Newlands, C. E. and Gervais, K. (eds.) Brill’s Companion to Statius. Leiden-Boston, 325–42.Google Scholar
Miller, D. L. 2003. Dreams of the Burning Child: Sacrificial Sons and the Father’s Witness. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Miller, J. F. 2009. Apollo, Augustus and the Poets. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Misch, G. 1950. A History of Autobiography in Antiquity Part 2, London.Google Scholar
Moles, J. 2007. ‘Philosophy and Ethics’ in Harrison, S. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Horace. Cambridge, 165–80.Google Scholar
Momigliano, A. D. 1960. Secondo Contributo alla Storia degli Studi Classici. Rome.Google Scholar
Mommsen, T. 1899. Römisches Strafrecht. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Moore, T. J. 1998. The Theater of Plautus: Playing to the Audience. Austin, TX.Google Scholar
Moormann, E. 2015. Pompeii’s Ashes: The Reception of the Cities Buried by Vesuvius in Literature, Music, and Drama. Boston.Google Scholar
Morelli, A. M. 2000. L’epigramma latino prima di Catullo. Cassino.Google Scholar
Morelli, A. M. 2001. ‘L’eternità di un istante. Presupposti ellenistico-romani della poesia leggera di Catullo tra cultura letteraria, epigrafica e “mondana”’, A&R 46: 59–79.Google Scholar
Morford, M. 1972–3. ‘The Neronian Literary Revolution’, CJ 68: 210–15.Google Scholar
Morgan, L. 1997. ‘Levi quidem de re … Julius Caesar as Tyrant and Pedant’, JRS 87: 23–40.Google Scholar
Morley, N. 2018. Classics: Why it Matters. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Muciaccia, G. 1984. ‘In tema di repressione delle opere infamanti (Dio 55, 27)’, in Studi in onore di Arnaldo Biscardi, vol. V, Milan, 61–78.Google Scholar
Muecke, F. 1983. ‘Foreshadowing and Dramatic Irony in the Story of Dido’, AJPh 104: 134–55.Google Scholar
Muecke, F. 1986. ‘Plautus and the Theater of Disguise’, ClAnt 5. 2, 216–29.Google Scholar
Müller, G. M. 2013. ‘Si mihi mea sententia proferenda ac non disertissimorum, ut nostris temporibus, hominum sermo repetendus esset. Zur Funktion der Gesprächshandlung in Tacitus’ Dialogus de oratoribus’, in Föllinger, S. and Müller, G. M. (eds.) Der Dialog in der Antike. Formen und Funktion einer literarischen Gattung zwischen Philosophie, Wissensvermittlung und dramatischer Inszenierung. Berlin and New York, 327–63.Google Scholar
Müller, W. 1972. ‘Sueton und seine Zitierweise in “Divus Iulus”’, SO 47: 96–9.Google Scholar
Mynors, R. A. B. (ed.) 1958. C. Valerii Catulli Carmina. Oxford.Google Scholar
Mynors, R. A. B. 1969. P. Vergili Maronis Opera recognovit brevique adnotatione critica instruxit R. A. B. Mynors. Oxford.Google Scholar
Nancy, J.-L., with Van Reeth, A. 2017. Coming, trans. by C. Mandell. New York.Google Scholar
Nelis, D. 2001. Vergil’s Aeneid and the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius. Leeds.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. G. A. 1990. Comedy: An Introduction to Comedy in Literature, Drama, and Cinema. Oxford.Google Scholar
Newlands, C. 2010. ‘The Eruption of Vesuvius in the Epistles of Statius and Pliny’, in Miller, J. and Woodman, A. (eds.) Latin Historiography and Poetry in the Early Empire: Generic Interactions. Leiden and Boston, 105–22.Google Scholar
Newlands, C 2012. Statius, Poet Between Rome and Naples. London.Google Scholar
Nisbet, G. 2015. Martial Epigrams. Oxford.Google Scholar
Nisbet, R. G. M. and Hubbard, M. 1970. A Commentary on Horace: Odes Book I. Oxford.Google Scholar
Nochlin, L. 1994. The Body in Pieces: The Fragment as a Metaphor of Modernity. London.Google Scholar
Norden, E. 1903. P. Vergilius Maro Aeneis Buch VI. Leipzig.Google Scholar
North, J. 2017. Literary Criticism: A Concise Political History. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Nothomb, A. 1996. Peplum. Paris.Google Scholar
Nugent, G. 1985. Allegory and Poetics. The Structure and Imagery of Prudentius’ Psychomachia. Frankfurt and New York.Google Scholar
Nugent, G. 1996. ‘Statius’ Hypsipyle: Following in the Footsteps of the Aeneid’, Scholia 5: 46–71.Google Scholar
O’Bryhim, S. 1989. ‘The Originality of Plautus’ Casina’, AJPh 110: 81–103.Google Scholar
O’Gorman, E. 1993. ‘No Place like Rome: Identity and Difference in the Germania of Tacitus’, Ramus 22.2: 135–54.Google Scholar
O’Gorman, E. 2000. Irony and Misreading in the Annals of Tacitus. Cambridge.Google Scholar
O’Gorman, E. 2011. ‘Repetition and Exemplarity in Historical Thought: Ancient Rome and the Ghosts of Modernity’, in Lianeri, A. (ed.) The Western Time of Ancient History: Historiographical Encounters with the Greek and Roman Pasts. Cambridge, 264–79.Google Scholar
O’Gorman, E. 2020. Tacitus’ History of Politically Effective Speech. Truth to Power. London.Google Scholar
O’Hara, J. J. 2010. ‘The Unfinished Aeneid?’, in Farrell, J. and Putnam, M. C. J. (eds.) A Companion to Vergil’s Aeneid and Its Tradition. Malden, MA, Oxford and Chichester, 96–106.Google Scholar
O’Higgins, D. 1990. ‘Sappho’s Splintered Tongue: Silence in Sappho 31 and Catullus 51’, AJPh 111: 156–67.Google Scholar
Oliensis, E. 1997. ‘Sons and Lovers: Sexuality and Gender in Virgil’s Poetry,’ in Martindale, C. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Virgil. Cambridge, 294–311.Google Scholar
Oliensis, E. 2004. ‘The Power of Image-Makers: Representation and Revenge in Ovid Metamorphoses 6 and Tristia 4’, ClAnt 23: 285–321.Google Scholar
Oliensis, E. 2009. Freud’s Rome. Psychoanalysis and Latin Poetry. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Oliver, K. 1993. ‘Julia Kristeva’s Feminist Revolutions’, Hypatia 8.3: 94–114.Google Scholar
O’Neill, P. 2003. ‘Triumph Songs, Reversal and Plautus’ Amphitruo’, Ramus 32: 1–38.Google Scholar
Oniga, R. 1992. Anfitrione. Venice.Google Scholar
Orlando, F. 1973. Per una teoria freudiana della letteratura. Turin.Google Scholar
Orrells, D. and Roynon, T. (eds.) 2019. ‘Ovid and Theory’, IJCT 26.Google Scholar
Osanna, M. 2017. ‘Pompei: la prossimità del passato’, in Osanna, M. and Villani, A. (eds.) Pompei@Madre. Materia archeologica. Milan, 91–101.Google Scholar
Osgood, J. 2019. ‘Family History in Augustan Rome’, in Gildenhard, I., Gotter, U., Havener, W. and Hodgson, L. (eds.) Augustus and the Destruction of History. The Politics of the Past in Early Imperial Rome. Oxford,135–56.Google Scholar
Pagán, V. E. 2017. Tacitus. London.Google Scholar
Panagia, D. 2009. The Political Life of Sensation. Durham, NC.Google Scholar
Panayotakis, C. 1995. Theatrum Arbitri: Theatrical Elements in the Satyrica of Petronius. Leiden.Google Scholar
Pani, M. 1979. Tendenze politiche della successione di Augusto. Bari.Google Scholar
Paratore, E. 1959. Casina. Florence.Google Scholar
Paratore, E. 1963. ‘Osservazioni sui rapporti fra Catullo e gli Epigrammisti dell’Antologia’, in Miscellanea di studi alessandrini in memoria di Augusto Rostagni. Turin, 562–87.Google Scholar
Paratore, E. 2003. Anatomie plautine. Urbino.Google Scholar
Parker, H. 1989. ‘Crucially Funny or Tranio on the Couch: The Servus Callidus and Jokes about Torture’, TAPA 119: 233–46.Google Scholar
Parkes, R. 2012. Statius. Thebaid 4, ed. with an intr., trans. and comm. Oxford.Google Scholar
Paschalis, M. 1997. Virgil’s Aeneid: Semantic Relations and Proper Names. Oxford.Google Scholar
Paul, J. 2009. ‘“I Fear It’s Potentially like Pompeii”: Disaster, Mass Media and the Ancient City’, in Lowe, D. and Shahabudin, K. (eds.) Classics for All: Reworking Antiquity in Mass Culture. Cambridge, 91–108.Google Scholar
Paul, J. 2019. ‘Drones Over Pompeii: Cinematic Perspectives on Antiquity in the Digital Era’, CRJ: 274–95.Google Scholar
Paxson, J. J. 1994. The Poetics of Personification. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Peachin, M. 2007. ‘Exemplary Government in the Early Roman Empire’, in Hekster, O., de Kleijn, G. and Slootjes, D. (eds.) Crises and the Roman Empire. Leiden, 75–95.Google Scholar
Peachin, M 2015. ‘Augustus’ Emergent Judicial Powers, the “Crimen Maiestatis”, and the Second Cyrene Edict’, in Ferrary, J. L. and Scheid, J. (eds.), Il princeps romano: autocrate o magistrato? Fattori giuridici e fattori sociali del potere imperiale da Augusto a Commodo. Pavia, 497–553.Google Scholar
Peirano, I. 2012. The Rhetoric of the Roman Fake: Latin Pseudepigrapha in Context. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Pelling, C. B. R. 2006. ‘Breaking the Bounds: Writing About Julius Caesar’, in McGing, B. C., Mossman, J. M. and Bowie, E. L. (eds.) The Limits of Ancient Biography. Swansea, 255–80.Google Scholar
Pelling, C. B. R. 2009. ‘Tacitus’ Personal Voice’, in Woodman, A. J. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Tacitus. Cambridge, 147–67.Google Scholar
Penwill, J. L. 2003. ‘What’s Hecuba to Him …? Reflections on Poetry and Politics in Tacitus’ Dialogue on Orators’, Ramus 32: 122–47.Google Scholar
Perl, G. 2005. ‘Tacitus, Germania 37, 2 und 4’, Philologus 149.1: 170–4.Google Scholar
Perysinakis, I. N. and Karakasis, E. (eds.) Plautine Trends. Berlin, Munich, Boston.Google Scholar
Peters, J. D. 1999. Speaking into the Air: A History of Communication. Chicago.Google Scholar
Petrides, A. K. 2014. ‘Plautus between Greek Comedy and Atellan Farce: Assessments and Reassessments’, in Fontaine, M. and Scafuro, A. C. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman Comedy. Oxford and New York, 424–46.Google Scholar
Petrone, G. 1983. Teatro antico e inganno. Palermo.Google Scholar
Pettinger, A. 2012. The Republic in Danger: Drusus Libo and the Succession of Tiberius. Oxford.Google Scholar
Pezzini, G. 2019. ‘Pontem interrumpere: Plautus’ Casina and absence in Roman comedy’, Pan 8: 185–208.Google Scholar
Pezzini, G. 2021. ‘Terence and the Speculum Vitae: Realism and (Roman) Comedy’, HSCP 111.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, R. 1949. Callimachus, 2 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Pillinger, E. 2012. ‘And the Gods Dread to Hear Another Poem: the Repetitive Poetics of Witchcraft from Virgil to Lucan’, MD 68: 103–43.Google Scholar
Pinotti, P. 1988. Remedia Amoris. Introduzione, testo e commento. Bologna.Google Scholar
Plate, L. 2015. ‘How to Do Things with Literature in the Digital Age: Anne Carson’s Nox, Multimodality, and the Ethics of Bookishness’, Contemporary Women’s Writing 9: 93–111.Google Scholar
Pollock, S. 2009. ‘Future Philology? The Fate of a Soft Science in a Hard World’, Critical Inquiry 35: 931–61.Google Scholar
Pollock, S. 2015. ‘Introduction’, in Pollock, S., Elman, B. A. and Chang, K. K. (eds.) World Philology. Cambridge, MA, 1–24.Google Scholar
Pollmann, K. 2004. Statius. Thebaid 12, intr., text and comm. Paderborn-Munich-Vienna-Zürich.Google Scholar
Porter, J. I. 2016. The Sublime in Antiquity. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Pöschl, V. 1950. Die Dichtkunst Virgils, Bild und Symbol in der Äneis. Innsbruck and Vienna.Google Scholar
Potter, D. 2014. ‘The Social life of the Senses: Feasts and Funerals’, in Toner, J. (ed.) A Cultural History of the Senses in Antiquity, 500 BCE – 500 CE. London, 23–44Google Scholar
Potts, A. 1994. Flesh and the Ideal: Winckelmann and the Origins of Art History. New Haven.Google Scholar
Powell, B. B. 2016. The Aeneid. Vergil. New York and Oxford.Google Scholar
Power, T. 2014. ‘Introduction: The Originality of Suetonius’, in Power, T. and Gibson, R. K. (eds.) Suetonius the Biographer: Studies on Roman Lives. Oxford, 1–18.Google Scholar
Prins, Y. 1999. Victorian Sappho. Princeton.Google Scholar
Priwitzer, S. 2017. ‘Marc Aurel und der Doppelprinzipat’, in Grieb, V. (ed.) Marc Aurel: Wege zu seiner Herrschaft. Gutenberg, 1–22.Google Scholar
Purcell, Henry. 1689. Dido and Aeneas, libretto by Nahum Tate. New York.Google Scholar
Putnam, M. C. J. 1998. Virgil’s Epic Designs. Ekphrasis in the Aeneid. New Haven and London.Google Scholar
Questa, C. 2003. ‘Pardalisca regista della Casina’, in Raffaelli, R. and Tontini, A. (eds.) Lecturae Plautinae Sarsinates VI, Casina, Urbino, 45–60.Google Scholar
Quinn, K. 1959. The Catullan Revolution. Melbourne.Google Scholar
Quinn, K. 1972. Catullus: An Interpretation. London.Google Scholar
Ramazani, J. 1994. Poetry of Mourning: The Modern Elegy from Hardy to Heaney. Chicago.Google Scholar
Rawson, E. 1986. ‘Cassius and Brutus: the Memory of the Liberators’, in Moxon, I. S., Smart, J. D. and Woodman, A. J. (eds.) Past Perspectives. Studies in Greek and Roman Historical Writing. Cambridge, 101–19.Google Scholar
Reay, B. 2003. ‘Some Addressees of Vergil’s Georgics and their Audience’, Vergilius 49: 17–41.Google Scholar
Reckford, K. 2009. Recognising Persius. Princeton.Google Scholar
Reed, J. D. 2007. Virgil’s Gaze. Nation and Poetry in the Aeneid. Princeton.Google Scholar
Reed, J. D. 2013. Ovidio Metamorfosi, libri x–xii, vol. 5. Milan.Google Scholar
Ribbeck, O. 1875. Die römische Tragödie im Zeitalter der Republik. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Richardson, E. 2016. ‘Ghostwritten Classics’, in Butler, S. (ed.) Deep Classics: Rethinking Classical Reception. London, 221–38.Google Scholar
Richlin, A. 1992. The Garden of Priapus. Oxford.Google Scholar
Richlin, A. 2014. ‘Talking to Slaves in the Plautine Audience’, ClAnt 33: 174–226.Google Scholar
Richlin, A. 2017. Slave Theatre in the Roman Republic. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, P. 1970. Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation. New Haven.Google Scholar
Ricottilli, L. 1984. La scelta del silenzio. Menandro e l’aposiopesi. Bologna.Google Scholar
Ricottilli, L. 1992. ‘Tum breviter Dido vultum demissa profatur (Aen. 1, 561): individuazione di un ‘cogitantis gestus’ e delle sue funzioni e modalità di rappresentazione nell’Eneide’, MD 28: 179–222.Google Scholar
Ricottilli, L. 2000. Gesto e parola nell’Eneide. Bologna.Google Scholar
Riggsby, A. 2006. Caesar in Gaul and Rome: War in Words. Austin, TX.Google Scholar
Rimell, V. 2006. Ovid’s Lovers. Desire, Difference and the Poetic Imagination. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rimell, V. 2015. ‘Seneca and Neronian Rome’, in Bartsch, S. and Schiesaro, A. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to Seneca. Cambridge, 122–34.Google Scholar
Rimell, V. 2015. The Closure of Space in Roman Poetics: Empire’s Inward Turn. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rimell, V. 2019. ‘After Ovid, After Theory’, in Orrells, and Roynon, (eds.) = IJCT 26: 446–69.Google Scholar
Rives, J. 1999. Tacitus. Germania. Translated with Introduction and Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar
Robbins, B. 1993. The Servant’s Hand: English Fiction from Below. Durham and London.Google Scholar
Rogers, B. and Stevens, B. (eds.) 2015. Classical Traditions in Science Fiction. Oxford.Google Scholar
Rohr Vio, F. 2000. Le voci del dissenso. Ottaviano Augusto e i suoi oppositori. Padua.Google Scholar
Roman, L. 2014. Poetic Autonomy in Ancient Rome, Oxford.Google Scholar
Rosati, G.-P. 2006. ‘The Art of Remedia Amoris: Unlearning to Love?’ in Gibson, Green and Sharrock, (eds.), 143–65.Google Scholar
Rose, F. C. K. 1971. The Date and Author of the Satyricon. Leiden.Google Scholar
Rosenbloom, D. S. 2006. Aeschylus: Persians. London.Google Scholar
Ross, D. O. 1975. Backgrounds to Augustan Poetry: Gallus, Elegy, and Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rowe, G. 2002. Princes and Political Cultures: The New Tiberian Senatorial Decrees. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Rowe, G. 2013. ‘Reconsidering the auctoritas of Augustus’, JRS 103: 1–15.Google Scholar
Rowland, I. 2014. From Pompeii: The Afterlife of a Roman Town. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar
Rudich, V. 1993. Political Dissidence under Nero: the Price of Dissimulation. London.Google Scholar
Rutherford, R. B. 1989. The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: A Study. Oxford.Google Scholar
Rutledge, S. H. 2007. ‘Oratory and Politics in the Empire’, in Dominik, W. and Hall, J. (eds.) A Companion to Roman Rhetoric. Malden, MA, 109–21.Google Scholar
Sacks, P. 1985. The English Elegy: Studies in the Genre from Spenser to Yeats. Baltimore.Google Scholar
Said, E. 1978. Orientalism. London.Google Scholar
Sailor, D. 2008. Writing and Empire in Tacitus. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Savage, R. 1998. ‘Dido Dies Again’ in Burden, M. (ed.) A Woman Scorn’d: Responses to the Dido Myth. London, 3–38.Google Scholar
Scharnowski, S. 2001. ‘“Es spricht nicht, es rauscht und toset nur!” Eine kurze Geschichte der Ästhetik des Erhabenen und des Rauschens’, in Hiepko, A. and Stopka, K. (eds.) Rauschen. Seine Phänomenologie und Semantik zwischen Sinn und Störung. Würzburg, 43–55.Google Scholar
Scheffler, S. 2013. Death and the Afterlife. New York and Oxford.Google Scholar
Scheid, J. 1996. The Craft of Zeus: Myths of Weaving and Fabric. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Schiesaro, A. 2008. ‘Furthest Voices in Virgil’s Dido’, SIFC 100: 60–109 and 94–245.Google Scholar
Schirren, T. 2000. ‘campus oratorum – vatum nemora. Apers und Maternus’ Kontroverse im Dialogus de oratoribus im Lichte einer Topographie der eloquentia’, in Neumeister, C. and Raeck, W. (eds.) Rede und Redner. Darstellung und Bewertung in den antiken Kulturen. Kolloquium Frankfurt a. M. 14.–16. Oktober 1998. Möhnesee, 227–48.Google Scholar
Schlegel, C. 2005. Satire and the Threat of Speech. Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Schliephake, C. (ed.) 2017. Ecocriticism, Ecology, and the Cultures of Antiquity. Lanham.Google Scholar
Schönberger, O. 1965. ‘Zum Weltbild der drei Epiker nach Lucan’, Helikon 5: 123–45.Google Scholar
Schubert, C. 2014. Studien zum Nerobild in der lateinischen Dichtung der Antike. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Schwindt, J. P. 2000. Prolegomena zu einer ‘Phänomenologie’ der römischen Literaturgeschichtsschreibung. Von den Anfängen bis Quintilian. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. 1990. Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. New Haven.Google Scholar
Scott, K. 1933. ‘The Political Propaganda of 44-30 B.C.’, MAAR 11: 7–49.Google Scholar
Segal, E. 1987. Roman Laughter: The Comedy of Plautus, 2nd ed. Oxford.Google Scholar
Segal, E. 1989. Orpheus: The Myth of the Poet. Baltimore and London.Google Scholar
Selden, D. L. 2007. ‘Caveat Lector: Catullus and the Rhetoric of Performance’, in Gaisser, J. H. (ed.) Catullus. Oxford, 491–559.Google Scholar
Shackleton Bailey, D. R. 2003. Statius. Thebaid, Books 8-12; Achilleid, vol. III, ed. and trans. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar
Sharrock, A. 1991. ‘Womanufacture’, JRS 81: 36–49.Google Scholar
Sharrock, A. 1994. Seduction and Repetition in Ovid’s Ars Amatoria II. Oxford.Google Scholar
Sharrock, A. 2006 ‘Love in Parentheses: Digression and Narrative Hierarchy in Ovid’s Erotodidactic Poems’ in Gibson, Green, Sharrock, (eds.), 23–39.Google Scholar
Sharrock, A. 2009. Reading Roman Comedy: Poetics and Playfulness in Plautus and Terence. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Shulman, J. 1981. ‘Te quoque falle tamen: Ovid’s Anti-Lucretian Didactics’, CJ 76: 242–53.Google Scholar
Sikelianos, E. 2015. ‘Sentences on Nox’, in Wilkinson, J. M. (ed.), Anne Carson: Ecstatic Lyre. Ann Arbor, 148–51.Google Scholar
Skinner, M. 2003. Catullus in Verona: A Reading of the Elegiac Libellus, Poems 65–116. Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
Slater, N. W. 2000. Plautus in Performance. Princeton.Google Scholar
Slater, N. W. 2014. ‘Speaking Verse to Power: Circulation of Oral and Written Critique in the Lives of Caesar’, in Scodel, R. (ed.) Between Orality and Literacy: Communication and Adaptation in Antiquity. Leiden, 289–308.Google Scholar
Sluiter, I. and Rosen, R. (eds.) 2004. Free Speech in Classical Antiquity. Leiden.Google Scholar
Smith, R. A. 2005. The Primacy of Vision in Virgil’s Aeneid. Austin, TX.Google Scholar
Smith, R. E. 1951. ‘The Law of Libel at Rome’, CQ 1 3.4: 169–79.Google Scholar
Smolenaars, J. J. L. 1994. Statius. Thebaid VII. A Commentary. Leiden.Google Scholar
Soerink, J. 2014. ‘Tragic / Epic: Statius’s Thebaid and Eurpides’ Hypsipyle’, in Augoustakis, A. (ed.) Flavian Literature and its Greek Past. Leiden, 171–91.Google Scholar
Soldo, J. 2018.Commentary on Seneca Letters Book 2. PhD diss. LMU. Munich.Google Scholar
Solodow, J. B. 1988. The World of Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Souriau, É. 2015. The Different Modes of Existence. Introduction by Stengers, I. and Latour, B., trans. by E. Beranek and T. Howles. Minneapolis.Google Scholar
Sparrow, J. 1931. Half-lines and Repetitions in Virgil. Oxford.Google Scholar
Spentzou, E. 2003. Readers and Writers in Ovid’s Heroides: Transgressions of Genre and Gender. Oxford.Google Scholar
Squire, M. 2015. ‘Corpus Imperii: Verbal and Visual Figurations of the Roman “Body Politic”’, Word & Image 31: 305–30.Google Scholar
Squire, M. 2016. ‘Introductory Reflections: Making Sense of Ancient Sight’, in Squire, M. (ed.) Sight and the Ancient Senses. London, 1–35.Google Scholar
Srinivasan, A. 2014. ‘Review of Scheffler 2013’, London Review of Books. 25 September.Google Scholar
Stahl, H.-P. 2015. Poetry Underpinning Power. Vergil’s Aeneid: The Epic for Emperor Augustus. Swansea.Google Scholar
Stanton, G. R. 1969. ‘Marcus Aurelius, Emperor and Philosopher’, Historia 18: 570–87.Google Scholar
Stärk, E. and Vogt-Spira, G. 2000. Dramatische Wäldchen. Hildesheim.Google Scholar
Starnone, V. 2020. Nessuno guarda Elissa: Due passi del primo libro dell’Eneide e il disagio degli interpreti, Pisa-Roma.Google Scholar
Sterne, L. 1759–67. The Life & Opinions of Tristram Shandy, London.Google Scholar
Stevens, B. E. 2013. Silence in Catullus. Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Stewart, R. 2012. Plautus and Roman Slavery. Malden, MA and Oxford.Google Scholar
Stover, T. 2003. ‘Confronting Medea: Genre, Gender, and Allusion in the Argonautica of Valerius Flaccus’, CP 98.2: 123–47.Google Scholar
Stover, T. 2012. Epic and Empire in Vespasianic Rome: A New Reading of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica. Oxford.Google Scholar
Stroup, S. C. 2010. Catullus, Cicero, and a Society of Patrons. The Generations of the Text. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Strunk, T. E. 2010. ‘Offending the Powerful. Tacitus’ Dialogus and Safe Criticism’, Mnemosyne 63: 241–67.Google Scholar
Strunk, T. E. 2016. History after Liberty. Tacitus on Tyrants, Sycophants, and Republicans. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Sullivan, J. P. 1985. Literature and Politics in the Age of Nero. Ithaca, NY and London.Google Scholar
Sumi, G. 2005. Ceremony and Power. Performing Politics in Rome between Republic and Empire. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Svenbro, J. 1993. Phrasikleia. An Anthropology of Reading in Ancient Greece, trans. by J. Lloyd. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Swan, P. M. 2004. The Augustan Succession. An Historical Commentary on Cassius Dio’s Roman History. Books 55–56 (9 BC–AD 14). Oxford.Google Scholar
Syme, Sir R. 1979. Roman Papers, Oxford =JRS 72 (1934): 127–37.Google Scholar
Syme, Sir R. 1980. The Augustan Aristocracy. Oxford.Google Scholar
Syndikus, H. P. 1987. Catull: Eine Interpretation. Dritter Teil, Die Epigramme (69–116). Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Tan, Z. 2014. ‘Subversive Geography in Tacitus’ Germania’, JRS 104: 181–204.Google Scholar
Tarrant, R. 1986. ‘Plautus’, in Reynolds, L. D. (ed.) Texts and Transmission: A Survey of the Latin Classics, 2nd ed. Oxford, 302–7.Google Scholar
Tarrant, R. 2005. ‘Roads Not Taken: Untold Stories in Ovid’s Metamorphoses’, MD 54: 65–89.Google Scholar
Tarrant, R. 2012. Virgil. Aeneid Book XII. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. 1995. The Decline of British Radicalism, 1847–1860. Oxford.Google Scholar
Theodorakopoulos, E. 2012. ‘Women’s Writing and the Classical Tradition’, CRJ 4: 149–62.Google Scholar
Thibault, J. C. 1964. The Mystery of Ovid’s Exile. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Thielscher, P. 1962. ‘Das Herauswachsen der “Germania” des Tacitus aus Cäsars “Bellum Gallicum”’, Das Altertum 8: 12–26.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. 2001. Virgil and the Augustan Reception. Cambridge and New York.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. 2009. ‘The Germania as Literary Text’ in Woodman, A. J. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Tacitus. Cambridge, 59–72.Google Scholar
Thomson, D. F. S. (ed.) 1997. Catullus. Toronto.Google Scholar
Thorsen, T. S. 2014. Ovid’s Early Poetry: From His Single Heroides to His Remedia Amoris. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Timpanaro, S. 1978. Contributi di filologia e di storia della lingua latina. Rome.Google Scholar
Timpe, D. 1992. ‘Die Landesnatur der Germania nach Tacitus’, in Neumann, G. and Seemann, H. (eds.) Beiträge zum Verständnis der Germania des Tacitus, II. Göttingen, 258–77.Google Scholar
Tissol, G. 1997. The Face of Nature. Wit, Narrative, and Cosmic Origins in Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Princeton.Google Scholar
Too, Y. L. 1994. ‘Educating Nero: a Reading of Seneca’s EM’, in Elsner, J. and Masters, J. (eds.) Reflections of Nero, 211–24.Google Scholar
Torre, C. 2017. ‘Senecan Drama and the Age of Nero’, in Bartsch, S., Freudenburg, K. and Littlewood, C. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero. Cambridge, 137–50.Google Scholar
Tranca, A. 2016. ‘From Pompeii to Paris: Ghostly Cityscapes and the Ruins of Modernity in Théophile Gautier and Eugène Atget’, Word & Image 32.3: 251–63.Google Scholar
Trapp, J. B. 1973. ‘Ovid’s Tomb: The Growth of a Legend from Eusebius to Laurence Sterne, Chateaubriand and George Richmond’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 36: 35–76.Google Scholar
Turner, S. 2016. ‘Sight and Death: Seeing the Dead through Ancient Eyes’, in Squire, M. (ed.) Sight and the Ancient Senses. London, 142–60.Google Scholar
Turpin, W. 2008. ‘Tacitus, Stoic Exempla, and the praecipuum munus annalium’, CA 27: 359–404.Google Scholar
Uccellini, R. 2012. L’arrivo di Achille a Sciro: Saggio di commento a Stazio Achilleide 1,1-396. Pisa.Google Scholar
Umbrico, A. 2009. ‘“Casinus” sotto il velo nuziale: ancora sul rapporto tra Casinaplautina e Κληρούμενοι difilei’, GIF 61: 15–45.Google Scholar
Umbrico, A. 2010. Terenzio e i suoi nobiles: invenzione e realtà di un controverso legame. Pisa.Google Scholar
Van den Berg, C. 2014. The World of Tacitus’ Dialogus de Oratoribus. Aesthetics and Empire in Ancient Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Varner, E. 2017. ‘Nero’s Memory in Flavian Rome’, in Bartsch, S., Freudenburg, K. and Littlewood, C. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero. Cambridge, 237–57.Google Scholar
Vásári, M. 2012. ‘Latency and Atmosphere: the Sensuous Dimension of Literary Texts’, in Bárdosi, V. (ed.) Tanulmányok. Irodalomtudományi Doktori Iskola. Budapest, 225–38.Google Scholar
Versnel, H. S. 1970. Triumphus: An Inquiry into the Origin, Development and Meaning of the Roman Triumph. Leiden.Google Scholar
Vesperini, P. 2016. Droiture et mélancholie. Sur les écrits de Marc Aurèle. Paris.Google Scholar
Veyne, P. 2003. Seneca: the Life of a Stoic, trans. by D. Sullivan. London.Google Scholar
Vian, F. 1961. Apollonios de Rhodes, Argonautiques chant III. Édition, introduction et commentaire. Paris.Google Scholar
Villedieu, F. 2011. ‘Une construction Néronienne mise au jour sur le site de la Vigna Barberini: la cenatio rotunda de la Domus Aurea?’, Neronia Electronica 1: 37–52.Google Scholar
Volk, K. 2001. ‘Pious and Impious Approaches to Cosmology in Manilius’, MD 47: 85–117.Google Scholar
Von Trier, L. (dir.). 2011. Melancholia.Google Scholar
Vout, C. 2009. ‘The Satyrica and Neronian Culture’ in Prag, J. R. W. and Repath, I. D. Petronius: A Handbook, Chichester; Malden, MA, 103–13.Google Scholar
Wallace, J. 2004. Digging the Dirt: The Archaeological Imagination. London.Google Scholar
Walsh, P. G. 1970. The Roman Novel: the Satyricon of Petronius and the Metamorphoses of Apuleius. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Walter, J. 2017. ‘Poseidon’s Wrath and the End of Helike: Notions about the Anthropogenic Character of Disasters in Antiquity’, in Schliephake, (ed.), 31–43.Google Scholar
Ware, C. 2004. ‘Claudian: The Epic Poet in the Prefaces’, in Gale, M. (ed.) Latin Epic and Didactic Poetry. Swansea, 181–201.Google Scholar
Warren, J. 2004. Facing Death: Epicurus and his Critics. Oxford.Google Scholar
Watson, L. and Watson, P. 2003. Martial: Select Epigrams. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Watson, P. A. 2002. ‘Praecepta amoris: Ovid’s Didactic Elegy’, in Boyd, B. W. (ed.) Brill’s Companion to Ovid. Leiden, 141–65.Google Scholar
Waxman, Z. 2008. Writing the Holocaust: Identity, Testimony, Representation. Oxford.Google Scholar
Westall, R. and Brenk, F. 2011. ‘The Second and Third Century’, in Marasco, G. (ed.) Political Autobiographies and Memoirs in Antiquity: A Brill Companion. Leiden, 363–416.Google Scholar
Whittington, L. Forthcoming. Supplementing the Classics: Ancient Texts and Renaissance Continuations.Google Scholar
Whitton, C. L. 2010. ‘Pliny, Epistles 8.14: Senate, Slavery and the Agricola’, JRS 100: 118–39.Google Scholar
Wijsman, H. J. W. 1996. Valerius Flaccus Argonautica, Book V. A Commentary. Leiden.Google Scholar
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von. 1908. Greek Historical Writing and Apollo: Two Lectures Delivered before the University of Oxford, June 8 and 4 1908, trans. by G. Murray. Oxford.Google Scholar
Wiles, D. 1988. ‘Greek Theater and the Legitimation of Slavery’ in Archer, L. (ed.) Slavery and Other Forms of Unfree Labor, London and New York, 53–67.Google Scholar
Williams, G. D. 2015. ‘Minding the Gap: Seneca, the Self and the Sublime’, in Williams, G. D. and Volk, K. (eds.) Roman Reflections: Studies in Latin Philosophy. Oxford, 172–91.Google Scholar
Williams, G. W. 1968. Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry. Oxford.Google Scholar
Williams, G. W. 1983. Techniques and Ideas in the Aeneid. New Haven and London.Google Scholar
Willis, I. 2017. Reception. Abingdon.Google Scholar
Wills, J. 1996. Repetition in Latin Poetry: Figures of Allusion. Oxford.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. 2015. ‘Quae quid fugit damnat: Outspoken Silence in Seneca’s Epistles’, in Baltussen, and Davis, (eds.), 137–56.Google Scholar
Wiltshire, S. F. 1999. ‘The Man Who Was Not There: Aeneas and Absence in Aeneid 9’, in Perkell, C. (ed.) Reading Vergil’s Aeneid. Norman, OK, 162–77.Google Scholar
Winckelmann, J. J. 2006. History of the Art of Antiquity, trans. by H. F. Mallgrave. Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Winsor Leach, E. 2016. ‘Flavian Pompeii: Restoration and Renewal’, in Zissos, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Flavian Age of Imperial Rome. Malden, MA and Oxford, 327–43.Google Scholar
Winterbottom, M. and Ogilvie, R. M. (eds.) 1975. Cornelii Taciti opera minora. Oxford.Google Scholar
Winterling, A. 2009. Politics and Society in Imperial Rome. London.Google Scholar
Wiseman, T. P. 1985. Catullus and His World: A Reappraisal, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Wiseman, T. P. 2016. ‘Maecenas and the Stage’, PBSR 84: 131–55.Google Scholar
Woodman, A. J. 2010. ‘Aliena facundia: Seneca in Tacitus’ in Berry, D. H. and Erskine, A. (eds.) Form and Function in Roman Oratory. Cambridge, 294–308.Google Scholar
Woodman, A. J. 2012. ‘A Covering Letter: Poem 65’ in Du Quesnay, I. and Woodman, A. J. (eds.) Catullus: Poems, Books, Readers. Cambridge, 130–52.Google Scholar
Woodman, A. J. and Martin, R. H. 1996. The Annals of Tacitus. Book 3. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kraus, C. S. and Woodman, A. J. 2014. Tacitus. Agricola. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Woolf, G. 2011. Tales of the Barbarians. Ethnography and Empire in the Roman West. Oxford.Google Scholar
Wray, D. 2001. Catullus and the Poetics of Roman Manhood. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Yavetz, Z. 1983. Caesar and his Public Image. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Young, E. M. 2015. Translation as Muse. Poetic Translation in Catullus’ Rome. Chicago.Google Scholar
Zadorojnyi, A. V. 2011. ‘Transcripts of Dissent? Political Graffiti and Elite Ideology Under the Principate’, in Baird, J. A. and Taylor, C. (eds.) Ancient Graffiti in Context. New York, 110–33.Google Scholar
Zago, G. 2012. Sapienza filosofica e cultura materiale: Posidonio e le altre fonti dell’Epistola 90 di Seneca. Bologna.Google Scholar
Zarker, J. W. 1967. ‘Aeneas and Theseus in Aeneid 6’, CJ 62: 220–6.Google Scholar
Zeitler, W. 1986. ‘Zum Germanenbegriff Caesars. Der Germanenexkurs im sechsten Buch von Caesars Bellum Gallicum’, in Beck, H. (ed.) Germanenprobleme in heutiger Sicht. Berlin, 41–52.Google Scholar
Ziogas, I. 2015. ‘The Poet as Prince: Author and Authority under Augustus’, in Baltussen, and Davis, (eds.), 115–36.Google Scholar
Zissos, A. 2016. ‘Vesuvius and Pompeii’, in Zissos, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Flavian Age of Imperial Rome. Malden, MA and Oxford, 515–34.Google Scholar
Zwierlein, O. 1990–1992. Zur Kritik und Exegese des Plautus, 4 vols. Mainz.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
  • Edited by Tom Geue, University of St Andrews, Scotland, Elena Giusti, University of Warwick
  • Book: Unspoken Rome
  • Online publication: 03 September 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108913843.020
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
  • Edited by Tom Geue, University of St Andrews, Scotland, Elena Giusti, University of Warwick
  • Book: Unspoken Rome
  • Online publication: 03 September 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108913843.020
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
  • Edited by Tom Geue, University of St Andrews, Scotland, Elena Giusti, University of Warwick
  • Book: Unspoken Rome
  • Online publication: 03 September 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108913843.020
Available formats
×