“Roman religion” as used here is an abbreviation for “religious signs, practices,
and traditions in the city of Rome.” This is a local perspective. Stress is not given
to internal differences between different groups or traditions. Instead, the accent is
placed on their common history (part I) and range of media (part II), shared or
transferred practices (part III), and the social and institutional context (part IV)

/pdf/a-companion-to-roman-religion-2v3sh2sidg.pdf

A Companion to Roman Religion

Timaeus of Tauromenium (350–260 BC) wrote the authoritative work on the Greeks in the Western Mediterranean and was important through his research into chronology and his influence on Roman historiography. Like almost all the Hellenistic historians, however, his work survives only in fragments. This book provides an up-to-date study of his work and shows that both the nature of the evidence and modern assumptions about historical writing in the Hellenistic period have skewed our treatment and judgement of lost historians. For Timaeus, much of our evidence is preserved in the polemical context of Polybius' Book 12. When we move outside that framework and examine the fragments of Timaeus in their proper context, we gain a greater appreciation for his method and his achievement, including his use of polemical invective and his composition of speeches. This has important implications for our broader understanding of the major lines of Hellenistic historiography.

/pdf/timaeus-of-tauromenium-and-hellenistic-historiography-4itg5ldpl9.pdf

Timaeus of Tauromenium and Hellenistic Historiography

Ascanius is the most prominent child hero in Virgil's Aeneid. He accompanies his father from Troy to Italy and is present from the first book of the epic to the last; he is destined to found the city of Alba Longa and the Julian family to which Caesar and Augustus both belonged; and he hunts, fights, makes speeches, and even makes a joke. In this first book-length study of Virgil's Ascanius, Anne Rogerson demonstrates the importance of this character not just to the Augustan family tree but to the texture and the meaning of the Aeneid. As a figure of prophecy and a symbol both of hopes for the future and of present uncertainties, Ascanius is a fusion of epic and dynastic desires. Compelling close readings of the representation and reception of this understudied character throughout the Aeneid expose the unexpectedly childish qualities of Virgil's heroic epic.

Virgil's Ascanius: Imagining the Future in the Aeneid

1. Introduction 2. Gemini amores: approaching the two editions 3. The ends of the affair: desire and deferral in the Ars Amatoria 4. Reformatting time (revision and the Fasti) 5. Tristia: revision and the authorial name 6. Books of letters: revision and the letter collection in the Epistulae ex Ponto 7. Epilogue.

Ovid's Revisions: The Editor as Author

The first volume of Professor Woodman's edition of, and commentary on, Velleius Paterculus was published in the Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries series in 1977. This is the second volume to appear, covering Velleius' narrative of Julius Caesar and Augustus, down to 19 B.C. Velleius' history was first published in A. D. 30 and is being increasingly regarded as an important source for Roman history. Professor Woodman's aims have been the same as in his first volume: to establish the text, or at least to indicate where it is unreliable, and to explain the nature and meaning of the narrative. Thus his commentary is primarily textual, linguistic and stylistic, to be used by those who want to read Velleius, whether their interests are literary, historiographical or historical. It is the first commentary of its scale and scope since the beginning of the nineteenth century.

The Caesarian and Augustan narrative (2.41-93)

Few of the many treatments of this famous preface seem to recognise the need for close reading of the text. The present paper sets out to remedy this deficiency in the hope of achieving three main aims: (1) to demonstrate the coherence and power of Livy's argument, as well as the subtlety of its exposition and the richness of its language; (2) to resolve certain specific problems; (3) to further the continuing debate on important general questions in ancient historiography.Facturusne operae pretium sim si a primordio urbis res populi Romani perscripserim nee satis scio nec, si sciam, dicere ausim, (2) quippe qui cum ueterem turn uolgatam esse rem uideam, dum noui semper scriptores aut in rebus certius aliquid allaturos se aut scribendi arte rudem uetustatem superaturos credunt.

Livy's Preface

In his magisterial new commentary on the Amores J. C. McKeown alleges an ‘inconsistency’ or ‘flaw in the dramatic continuity’ between Amores 1.1 and 1.2: ‘whereas Ovid is fully aware in 1.1 that he is under Cupid's domination, he shows no such awareness in the opening lines of 1.2.’ Previously A. Cameron had used this ‘inconsistency’, together with the evident programmatic character of 1.2, as an indication that the second poem must in fact have been the first poem of one of the original five books of Amores ; then when Ovid decided to reduce the number of books from five to three, he wanted to keep Esse quid hoc dicam and had no choice but to put it as near as possible the front of the first book, immediately after that book's own introductory poem. This reconstruction McKeown rightly rejects on the ground that 1.2's emphasis on Ovid's newness to love makes it out of place in any book other than the first.

The Dramatic Coherence of Ovid, Amores 1.1 and 1.2

More generally, P. is unenthusiastic about the ' oral tradition' in Roman history, both as presented by Cato and as exploited by Cicero. It is dismissed (22) as a literary fiction. Most historians would do the same. Nor do I mean to claim as beyond reproach all the many references to orally transmitted evidence in the Cato (17.1,43.1, 44.12, cf. 55.8, 83.5), but anti-oralists need to face more candidly the difficulties which those ancient institutions tirocinium (p. 122) and contubernium (p. 190) create for them. The Roman youth of good family is thereby inescapably exposed, for years, to close contacts with a whole string of garrulous old men (ch. 55!); their reminiscences he repeats, more or less, in turn, if he survives. Inscriptions, imagines, monuments, funeral laudationes (cf. 128, 149) serve to stimulate and fuel the memory (even now, give the right old gentleman a battered Burke and some photographs... It works). P. recognises (above) the institutional bases for a proper evaluation of the 'oral tradition', but systematically underplays (cf. 184) its importance, I would suggest. P.'s English gives unnecessary difficulties: I regret cumbrous and unclear transitions, impenetrable litotes (151, middle!!) and a prepositional use on p. 160 sanctioned neither by Fowler nor by Partridge. He is also at times rather inconsistent in his methods of citation. It is also curious that on rhetorical terminology he still always cites Volkmann in preference to H. Lausberg (1960, 2 vols.) and on colloquialisms, Hofmann, LU in preference to the hugely expanded Italian version by L. Ricottilli (Bologna, 1980). Also Morel FPL in preference-to Buchner. For the many frr. of Enn. Ann. involved, Skutsch numbers are not always cited alongside Vahlen. For Pindar, Solon, Simonides, still Bergk (West only on 248)! Marrou's Hist, de VEducation (122) has been much altered since the 1950s. And I am very surprised that in the discussion of passive deponent participles (196) he does not cite P. Flobert's massive Les verbes deponents (1975), 343-8. P. does indeed have novel ways of frustrating the readers; proper names in the text surface in the index by page, not chapter numbers; for the TLL he gives normally just column, not line numbers (truly ungenerous!); for Nonius and Festus again, only page references (to Mercier and Miiller); few of his many patristic references contain volume and page numbers in PG/PL/CSEL/CC. It grieves me much to have to express such vexation and frustration; P. is a memorably good Latinist and there are truly excellent things in his commentary.

Nepos and Biography Joseph Geiger: Cornelius Nepos and Ancient Political Biography. (Historia Einzelschriften, 47.) Pp. 128. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1985. DM 44.

This volume together with Three Historians of Alexander the Great: the So-called Vulgate Authors, Diodorus, Justin and Curtius (Cambridge, 1983) proclaims itself the first systematic source analysis of the Alexander-historians; though H.'s findings underlay earlier writings such as Alexander the Great: King, Commander and Statesman* (Bristol, 1989), his positions are well-known and only occasionally modified, and many of the earlier volume's conclusions are assumed. H. undertakes to better rivals (notably Pearson, Badian, Brunt and Bosworth) through recognition of the necessity of rigorous source analysis, firm judgement of the quality of the original Alexander-historians, methodological consistency, superior Greek, literary expertise, concern for topography (pp. 199 n. 19, 201 n. 28) and respect for Arrian as author (p. 324). Tact has never inhibited H. and his insouciant imputations that Bosworth is not a 'critical historian' (p. 16 n. 27), that Bosworth, not Arrian, is 'absurd' (p. 290 n. 29), and that Arrian's methodology was superior to those of Badian, Bosworth and Brunt (pp. 318, 333) will give much innocent pleasure. The Plutarch analysis is followed by a detailed list of source attributions and deductions, reflections on P.'s choice and use of sources, and a chapter on P.'s 'reflective passages', which effectively becomes an analysis of the whole Life; this last, despite crudities, will be required reading even for 'literary' Plutarcheans. The Arrian analysis essentially reaffirms the traditional Wilcken-Kaerst-RobinsonJacoby-Tarn case: Arrian was right to base his narrative on Ptolemy and Aristobulus, best-informed and least prejudiced of the first Alexander-historians (Ptolemy largely relied on an authentic King's Journal necessarily, as he wrote at the end of his life, though neither this nor the fact that Aristobulus began writing at 83 perturbs the macrobiotic H.); there never was a unified 'vulgate' tradition (H. is right); elevation of Cleitarchus, given the ancient consensus about him, is simply perverse (H. is again right). H.'s scholarly rigour varies. His Greek is better than Perrin's, whom he convicts of error at (e.g.) Alex. 2.2, 11.3, 15.7, 17.8, 34.2, 49.10, 55.3, 75.6 (respectively pp. 7 n. 9, 24 n. 1, 168 n. 1, 46 n. 5, 66 n. 22, 182 n. 41, 308 n. 82) and (dare one say it?) better also than Brunt's, whom he convicts of error at (e.g.) Arr. 2.11.8, 3.15.6,4.8.1,4.14.4, 5.14.4, 6.1.2, 6.25.5, 7.1.6, 7.4.3, 7.6.1, 7.7.7, 7.16.5 (respectively pp. 228 n. 39, 230 n. 46, 242 n. 16, 247 n. 23, 112 n. 26, 262 n. 2, 275 n. 27, 282 n. 5, 284 n. 12, 286 n. 17, 287 n. 23, 300 n. 56). His 'reading' of texts also generally surpasses his rivals' and he is capable of literary insights which they cannot or do not make but which have historical consequences, e.g. that Arr. uses hiatus to emphasise and demarcate his own contributions (e.g. pp. 191 n. 1, 240) or that the Cleitus episode would have been understood by Alexander as conforming to Aristotle's model of tragedy and was so treated by Aristobulus (p. 94 and n. 13-14). In reconstructing Arr.'s sources H.'s rigorous adherence to Arr.'s methodological pronouncement scores many points over Brunt and Bosworth. But even on H.'s analyses, which are much more clear-cut than most, that pronouncement is less stable that it appears. E.g. while 6.11.3 6 TT&S Xoyos is correctly analysed by H. as excluding

Alexander the Great - N. G. L. Hammond: Sources for Alexander the Great : an Analysis of Plutarch's Life and Arrian's Anabasis Alexandrou . (Cambridge Classical Studies.) Pp. xvi+345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Cased, £37.50/$64.95.

from Sakalis to be the main families E and e, albeit only one (E2) out of three branches of the former. Smith's text and facing translation occupy the main part of his volume (pp. 45-125), being followed by a bibliography (pp. 127-30) and an index (pp. 131-3). Again, a superficial examination of the text is encouraging; Smith's main achievement, however, is the translation, which is accurate, lively and fluent. This is only the third translation of the Apocrypha into a modern language, and the first into English (French: Littre; German: Kapferer and Sticker).

Plutarch's Pericles - Philip A. Stadter: A Commentary on Plutarch's Pericles . Pp. lxxxvii + 419; frontispiece, 3 figs. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1989. $49.50 ($45 in USA).

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

John Moles

Author Tools

Chat about Author