References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 December 2025
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Ennius Beyond Epic , pp. 315 - 345Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Acosta-Hughes, B. 2002. Polyeideia: The Iambi of Callimachus and the Archaic Iambic Tradition. Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Adams, J. N. 1994. Wackernagel’s Law and the Placement of the Copula esse in Classical Latin. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Adams, J. N. and Mayer, R. eds. 1999. Aspects of the Language of Latin Poetry. Oxford.Google Scholar
Adams, J. N., Chahoud, A., and Pezzini, G. eds. 2023. Early Latin: Construct, Diversity, Reception. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agnesini, A. 2022. “Il rapporto fra Catull. 64, 205 e Lucret. 3, 385.” Bollettino di Studi Latini 52: 548–56.Google Scholar
Agri, D. 2021. “Euhemerism in Virgil’s Aeneid and Ovid’s Metamorphoses.” In Pugh, : 54–77.Google Scholar
Ahl, F. M. 1985. Metaformations: Soundplay and Wordplay in Ovid and Other Classical Poets. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Allan, W. 2014. “The Body in Mind: Medical Imagery in Sophocles.” Hermes 142: 259–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, W. S. 1989. “Lycaon: Ovid’s Deceptive Paradigm in Metamorphoses 1.” ICS 14: 91–101.Google Scholar
Andrisano, A. M. 2006. Il corpo teatrale tra testi e messinscena: Dalla drammaturgia classica all’esperienza laboratoriale contemporanea. Rome.Google Scholar
Andrisano, A. M. 2010. “Le corps théâtral entre texte et mise en scène: l’exemple du Prométhée enchaîné.” In Garelli, : 221–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angelopoulou, A. 2021. “Gesture, Metaphor and the Body in Trojan Women.” AJP 142: 597–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arena, A. 1997. “Lo spondeo quarto nell’esametro latino e le deroghe alla regola di Marx.” Latomus 56: 784–89.Google Scholar
Aricò, G. 2010. “Punti di vista sull’Astyanax e su altri drammi “troiani” di Accio.” In Baratin, M. ed. “Stylus”: la parole dans ses formes – mélanges en l’honneur du professeur Jacqueline Dangel. Paris: 317–29.Google Scholar
Astbury, R. ed. 1985. M. Terentii Varronis Saturarum Menippearum fragmenta. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Augoustakis, A. and Fucecchi, M. 2022. “Introduction.” In Augoustakis, A. and Fucecchi, M. eds. Silius Italicus and the Tradition of the Roman Historical Epos. Leiden: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auhagen, U. 2000. “Ennius’ Andromacha im politischen Kontext der Zeit.” In Manuwald, : 199–210.Google Scholar
Bachvarova, M. R., Dutsch, D., and Suter, A. eds. 2016. The Fall of Cities in the Mediterranean: Commemoration in Literature, Folk-Song, and Liturgy. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldin, M. 2010. “Valenze della terminologia medica in autori non medici: Plauto, Sallustio, Giovenale.” In Langslow, D. R. and Maire, B. eds. Body, Disease and Treatment in a Changing World: Latin Texts and Contexts in Ancient and Medieval Medicine. Lausanne: 73–87.Google Scholar
Balsley, K. 2011. “Truthseeking and Truthmaking in Ovid’s Metamorphoses 1.163–245.” Law and Literature 23: 48–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bán, K. 2019. “Madness in Seneca’s Medea and Celsus’s De medicina.” Graeco-Latina Brunensia 24: 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bannon, C. 2014. “C. Sergius Orata and the Rhetoric of Fishponds.” CQ 64: 166–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barchiesi, A. 2005. “The Search for the Perfect Book: A PS to the New Posidippus.” In Gutzwiller, K. ed. The New Posidippus: A Hellenistic Poetry Book. Oxford: 320–41.Google Scholar
Barchiesi, A. and Cucchiarelli, A. 2005. “Satire and the Poet: The Body as Self-Referential Symbol.” In Freudenburg, : 207–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barchiesi, M. ed. 1962. Nevio epico: storia, interpretazione, edizione critica dei frammenti del primo epos latino. Padua.Google Scholar
Barney, S. A., Lewis, W. J., Beach, J. A., and Berghof, O. eds. 2006. The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumbach, L. 1983. “Quacks Then as Now? An Examination of Medical Practice, Theory and Superstition in Plautus’ Menaechmi.” AClass 26: 99–104.Google Scholar
Belloni, L., De Finis, L., and Moretti, G. eds. 2003. L’officina ellenistica: poesia dotta e popolare in Grecia e a Roma. Trento.Google Scholar
Berdowski, P. 2013. “In Search of the Lexical Meaning of the Latin Terms cetarius and cetaria.” Glotta 89: 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biggs, T. 2020b. “Allegory and Authority in Latin Verse-Historiography.” In Damon, and Farrell, : 91–106.Google Scholar
Biggs, T. and Blum, J. eds. 2019. The Epic Journey in Greek and Roman Literature. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bing, P. 1981. “The Voice of Those Who Live in the Sea: Empedocles and Callimachus.” ZPE 41: 33–36.Google Scholar
Bing, P. 1997. “Reconstructing Berenike’s Lock.” In Most, G. W. ed. Collecting Fragments = Fragmente sammeln. Göttingen: 78–94.Google Scholar
Biondi, , G. G. 1998. “Lutazio Catulo e I Preneoterici.” In Maltese, E. ed. Storia della civiltà letteraria greca e latina, vol. 2, Dall’ellenismo all’età di Traiano. Turin: 432–33.Google Scholar
Blair, S. 2017. “Like father, like son: Accius’ Aeneadae and the Latin past.” In Austa, L. ed. Frammenti sulla scena, vol. 1. Alessandria: 157–73.Google Scholar
Blanco, C. 2020. “Heracles’ Itch: An Analysis of the First Case of Male Uterine Displacement in Greek Literature.” CQ 70: 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blänsdorf, J. ed. 2011. Fragmenta poetarum Latinorum epicorum et lyricorum praeter Enni Annales et Ciceronis Germanicique Aratea. Berlin.Google Scholar
Bond, S. E. and Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. 2017. “Foul and Fair Bodies, Minds, and Poetry in Roman Satire.” In Laes, C. ed. Disability in Antiquity. London: 222–32.Google Scholar
Bowie, A. M. 1998. “Exuvias effigiemque: Dido, Aeneas and the Body as Sign.” In Montserrat, D. ed. Changing Bodies, Changing Meanings: Studies on the Human Body in Antiquity. London: 57–79.Google Scholar
Bradley, K. 1997. “Law, Magic, and Culture in the Apologia of Apuleius.” Phoenix 51: 203–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, M. and Stow, K. eds. 2012. Rome, Pollution and Propriety: Dirt, Disease and Hygiene in the Eternal City from Antiquity to Modernity. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braund, D. 2015. “Food among Greeks of the Black Sea: The Challenging Diet of Olbia.” In Wilkins, J. and Nadeau, R. eds. A Companion to Food in the Ancient World. Chichester: 296–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braund, D. and Wilkins, J. 2000. Athenaeus and His World: Reading Greek Culture in the Roman Empire. Exeter.Google Scholar
Braund, S. and Osgood, J. eds. 2012. A Companion to Persius and Juvenal. Malden, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breed, B. W. 2020. “Ennius and Lucilius: Good Companion/Bad Companion.” In Damon, and Farrell, : 243–61.Google Scholar
Breed, B. W. and Rossi, A. eds. 2006. Ennius and the Invention of Roman Epic = Arethusa 39.3.Google Scholar
Breed, B. W., Keitel, E., and Wallace, R. eds. 2018. Lucilius and Satire in Second-Century bc Rome. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bremer, J. M. 1971. “Euripides Hecuba 59–215: A Reconsideration.” Mnemosyne 24: 232–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P. G. M. 1995. “Aeschinus at the Door: Terence Adelphoe 632–43 and the Traditions of Greco-Roman Comedy.” Papers of the Leeds International Latin Seminar 8: 71–89.Google Scholar
Burgess, J. 2001. The Tradition of the Trojan War in Homer and the Epic Cycle. Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Butterfield, D. ed. 2015. Varro Varius: The Polymath of the Roman World = Cambridge Classical Journal supplementary volume 39.Google Scholar
Campbell, G. L. 2003. Lucretius on Creation and Evolution: A Commentary on De Rerum Natura, Book Five, Lines 772–1104. Oxford.Google Scholar
Canobbio, A. 2016. “Per il testo di Ennio, epigr. IV (= var. 21–24) Vahlen: l’autoelogio tetrastico di Scipione Africano.” SIFC 109: 180–99.Google Scholar
Casali, S. 2006. “The Poet at War: Ennius on the Field in Silius’ Punica.” Arethusa 39: 569–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casali, S. 2022. “Notes on the Text and Interpretation of Aeneid 11 (Apropos a Recent Commentary).” Exemplaria Classica 26: 169–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casevitz, M. 1995. “Personnes et corps (des) tragiques grecs.” Césure. Revue de la Convention psychanalytique 9: 13–23.Google Scholar
Castagna, L. and Riboldi, C. eds. 2008. Amicitiae templa serena: studi in onore di Giuseppe Aricò. 2 vols. Milan.Google Scholar
Caston, R. 2015. “Pacuvius Hoc Melius Quam Sophocles: Cicero’s Use of Drama in the Treatment of the Emotions.” BICS 125: 129–48.Google Scholar
Cavarzere, A., Aloni, A., and Barchiesi, A. eds. 2001. Iambic Ideas: Essays on a Poetic Tradition from Archaic Greece to the Late Roman Empire. Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
Ceschi, G. 2009. Il vocabolario medico di Sofocle: analisi dei contatti con il Corpus Hippocraticum nel lessico anatomo-fisiologico, patologico e terapeutico. Venice.Google Scholar
Chahoud, A. 2018. “Verbal Mosaics: Speech Patterns and Generic Stylization in Lucilius.” In Breed, Keitel, and Wallace: 132–61.Google Scholar
Chahoud, A. 2023. “How ‘Early Latin’ Is Lucilius?” In Adams, Chahoud, and Pezzini: 351–72.Google Scholar
Citroni, M. 2013. “Horace’s Epistle 2.1, Cicero, Varro, and the Ancient Debate about the Origins and the Development of Latin Poetry.” In Farrell and Nelis: 180–204.Google Scholar
Citroni Marchetti, S. 1997. “Maris ludicra. I giochi della natura e gli oggetti del lusso in Orazio, Epistole 1, 6, 5–8.” MD 38: 203–13.Google Scholar
Citti, F. 1994. “Una ‘mena’ per cena. Pompon. Atell. fr. 80 s. Ribb.3.” MD 33: 151–55.Google Scholar
Clackson, J. and Horrocks, G. 2007. The Blackwell History of the Latin Language. Malden, MA.Google Scholar
Coleman, R. G. G. 1974. “The Artful Moralist: A Study of Seneca’s Epistolary Style.” CQ 24: 276–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, R. G. G. 1999. “Poetic Diction, Poetic Discourse and the Poetic Register.” In Adams and Mayer: 21–93.Google Scholar
Collinge, N. E. 1962. “Medical Terms and Clinical Attitudes in the Tragedians.” BICS 9: 43–55.Google Scholar
Colonna, G. [Columna, H.] 1590. Q. Ennii poetae vetustissimi fragment aquae supersunt. Naples. Repr. Amsterdam, 1707.Google Scholar
Connors, C. 2004. “Monkey Business: Imitation, Authenticity, and Identity from Pithekoussai to Plautus.” Classical Antiquity 23: 179–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conte, G. B. 1986. The Rhetoric of Imitation: Genre and Poetic Memory in Virgil and Other Latin Poets. Trans. Segal, C.. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Corbeill, A. 1996. Controlling Laughter: Political Humor in the Late Roman Republic. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Costantini, L. 2019. Magic in Apuleius’ Apologia: Understanding the Charges and the Forensic Strategies in Apuleius’ Speech. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courtney, E. 1995. Musa Lapidaria: A Selection of Latin Verse Inscriptions. Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Cowan, R. 2010. “A Stranger in a Strange Land: Medea in Roman Republican Tragedy.” In Bartel, H. and Simon, A. eds. Unbinding Medea: Interdisciplinary Approaches to a Classical Myth. Oxford: 39–52.Google Scholar
Cowan, R. 2013a. “Haven’t I Seen You Before Somewhere? Optical Allusions in Republican Tragedy.” In Harrison, G. and Liapis, V. eds. Performance in Greek and Roman Theatre. Leiden: 311–42.Google Scholar
Cowan, R. 2013b. “Fear and Loathing in Lucretius: Latent Tragedy and Anti-Allusion in DRN 3.” In Papanghelis, Harrison, and Frangoulidis: 113–33.Google Scholar
Cowan, R. 2015. “240 bce and All That: The Romanness of Republican Tragedy.” In Harrison: 63–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, R. 2017. “Bloated Buskins: Seneca and the Satiric Idea of Tragedy.” Ramus 46: 75–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cozzoli, A.-T. 1995. “Poesia satirica e favola esopica (Ennio, Lucilio e Orazio).” RCCM 37: 187–204.Google Scholar
Craig, C. 2004. “Audience Expectations, Invective, and Proof.” In Powell, J. G. F. and Paterson, J. eds. Cicero the Advocate. Oxford: 187–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cucchiarelli, A. 2012. “Venusina lucerna: Horace, Callimachus, and Imperial Satire.” In Braund and Osgood: 165–89.Google Scholar
Cuccioli Melloni, R. 2001. “Una ripresa enniana in Giovenale?” Bollettino di Studi Latini 31: 68–72.Google Scholar
Culham, P. 2014. “Women in the Roman Republic.” In Flower, H. I. ed. The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Republic, 2nd ed. Cambridge: 127–48.Google Scholar
Čulík-Baird, H. 2020. “Staging Roman Slavery in the Second Century bce.” Ramus 48.2: 174–97.Google Scholar
Cuny, D. 2002. “Le corps souffrant chez Sophocle: Les Trachiniennes et Philoctète.” Kentron 18: 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Alessandro, P. 2016. “Frammenti in sotadei nella poesia latina di età repubblicana.” In Pieri and Pellacani: 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dainotti, P., Hasegawa, A. P., and Harrison, S. 2024. Style in Latin Poetry. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damon, C. 1997. The Mask of the Parasite: A Pathology of Roman Patronage. Ann Arbor, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damon, C. 2018. “Name Your Price! On the Assessments of Value and the Value of Assessments in Lucilius.” In Breed, Keitel, and Wallace: 236–54.Google Scholar
Damon, C. and Farrell, J. eds. 2020. Ennius’ Annals: Poetry and History. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dangel, J. 2016. “Lectures frontalières de Médée dans la tragédie romaine: réflexion sur l’essence du tragique à Rome.” In Berra, A., Cuny-Le Callet, B., and Guérin, C. eds. Médée: versions et interpretations d’un mythe. Besançon: 131–44.Google Scholar
David, I. 2010. “Incarnation et désincarnation: le modèle de la peinture et l’ambiguïté du corps chez Plaute.” In Garelli: 171–80.Google Scholar
Davidson, A. 1997. Courtesans and Fishcakes: The Consuming Passions of Classical Athens. New York.Google Scholar
De Jong, I. 1987. Narrators and Focalizers: The Presentation of the Story in the Iliad. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
De Melo, W. ed. 2019. Varro: De Lingua Latina. 2 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
De Nonno, M. 1990. “L’Auctor ad Caelestinum (GL IV 219–264 Keil): contributi al testo e alla caratterizzazione.” In Dicti studiosus. Scritti di filologia offerti a Scevola Mariotti dai suoi allievi. Urbino: 221–58.Google Scholar
De Nonno, M. 2021. “Osservazioni enniane.” In Paladini, M. ed. Templa serena: studi in onore di Enrico Flores. Naples: 77–86.Google Scholar
De Vaan, M. 2008. Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the Other Italic Languages. Leiden.Google Scholar
Degl’ Innocenti Pierini, R. 1987. “Il concilio degli dèi tra Lucilio e Ovidio.” A&R 32: 137–47.Google Scholar
Degl’ Innocenti Pierini, R. 2013. “Ennio, Scipione e la patria: interpretazione e fortuna (Virgilio, Orazio, Claudiano) di Ennio Var. 6–8 V.2 (= VI op. inc. Sk.).” Sileno 39: 115–32.Google Scholar
Deichgräber, K. 1930. Die Griechische Empirikerschule. Sammlung der Fragmente und Darstellung der Lehre. Berlin.Google Scholar
Dench, E. 2005. Romulus’ Asylum: Roman Identities from the Age of Alexander to the Age of Hadrian. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Depalma Digeser, E. and Barboza, A. 2021. “Lactanctius’ Euhemerism and Its Reception.” In Pugh: 78–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devecka, M. 2019. “From Rome to the Moon: Rutilius Namatianus and the Late Antique Game of Knowledge.” In Biggs and Blum: 243–62.Google Scholar
Diggle, J. 2008. “Did Euripides Plagiarise the Medea of Neophron?’ In Augey, D. and Peigney, J. eds. Phileuripidès. Mélanges offerts à François Jouan. Paris: 405–13.Google Scholar
Diggle, J., Hall, J. B., and Jocelyn, H. D. eds. 1989. Studies in Latin Literature and Its Tradition in Honour of C. O. Brink. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Diggle, J. and Goodyear, F. R. D. eds. 1972. The Classical Papers of A. E. Housman. 3 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dinter, M. T. 2012. Anatomizing Civil War: Studies in Lucan’s Epic Technique. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Donda, L. 2023. “Apoteosi di Enea negli Annales? Una possibile nuova acquisizione da Enn. Ann. 48–49 Sk. (con un’appendice su Aen. 6, 778–779).” GIF 75: 33–52.Google Scholar
Du Quesnay, I. M. le, M. and Woodman, T. eds. 2012. Catullus: Poems, Books, Readers. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du Quesnay, I. M. le, M. and Woodman, T. eds. 2021. The Cambridge Companion to Catullus. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dufallo, B. 2021. Disorienting Empire: Republican Latin Poetry’s Wanderers. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dumont, J. C. 2010. “Le corps féminin dans le théâtre de Plaute et de Térence.” In Garelli: 181–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutsch, D. 2014. “The Beginnings: Philosophy in Roman Literature Before 155 b.c.” In Garani, M. and Konstan, D. eds. The Philosophizing Muse: The Influence of Greek Philosophy on Roman Poetry. Newcastle: 1–25.Google Scholar
Dutsch, D., James, S. L., and Konstan, D. 2015. Women in Roman Republican Drama. Wisconsin, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Effe, B. 1977. Dichtung und Lehre. Untersuchungen zur Typologie des antiken Lehrgedichts. Munich.Google Scholar
Ehrman, R. K. 1997. “‘Glaucumam ob oculos obiciemus’: Forbidden Sight in Miles Gloriosus.” ICS 22: 75–85.Google Scholar
Elliott, J. 2007. “The Voice of Ennius’ Annales.” In Fitzgerald and Gowers: 38–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, J. 2008. “Ennian Epic and Ennian Tragedy in the Language of the Aeneid: Aeneas’ Generic Wandering and the Construction of the Latin Literary Past.” HSCP 104: 241–72.Google Scholar
Elliott, J. 2014. “Space and Geography in Ennius’ Annales.” In Skempis and Ziogas: 223–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, J. 2020. “Reading Ennius’ Annals and Cato’s Origins at Rome.” In Damon and Farrell: 107–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ernout, A. and Meillet, A. 1994. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine, Histoire des mots, 4th ed. Paris.Google Scholar
Fabrizi, V. 2012. Mores veteresque novosque: rappresentazioni del passato e del presente di Roma negli Annales di Ennio. Pisa.Google Scholar
Falcone, M. J. 2013. “Appunti sulla presenza del teatro tragico latino nelle Menippeae di Varrone.” RPL 16: 37–68.Google Scholar
Falcone, M. J. 2016. Medea sulla scena tragica repubblicana: commento a Ennio, Medea exul; Pacuvio, Medus; Accio, Medea sive Argonautae. Tübingen.Google Scholar
Faller, S. 2000. “Romanisierungstendenzen in der Iphigenia des Ennius.” In Manuwald: 211–29.Google Scholar
Faller, S. 2008. “Römisches in Ennius’ Hectoris Lytra.” In Castagna and Riboldi: 523–50.Google Scholar
Fantham, E. 2003. “Pacuvius: Melodrama, Reversals and Recognitions.” In Braund, D. and Gill, C. eds. Myth, History and Culture in Republican Rome: Studies in Honour of T. P. Wiseman. Exeter: 98–118.Google Scholar
Fantham, E. 2006. “‘Dic si quid potes de sexto annali’: The Literary Legacy if Ennius’ Pyrrhic War.” Arethusa 39: 549–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantham, E. 2011. “The Madman and the Doctor.” In Fantham, E. Roman Readings: Roman Response to Greek Literature from Plautus to Statius and Quintilian. Berlin: 23–45.Google Scholar
Fantuzzi, M. and Hunter, R. 2004. Tradition and Innovation in Hellenistic Poetry. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Faraone, C. A. 2013. “The Poetics of the Catalogue in the Hesiodic Theogony.” TAPA 143: 293–323.Google Scholar
Faraone, C. A. 2021. “A sphragis, a Prayer and a Pair of Elegaic Stanzas in Callimachus’ ‘Tomb of Simonides’.” Phoenix 75: 40–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farese, M. 2019. “Le Satire Menippee di Varrone e la Commedia.” Dissertation, La Sapienza.Google Scholar
Farese, M. 2024. “Quintipore Clodio e Pompilio: due casi di polemica letteraria nelle Satire Menippee di Varrone?” Bolletino di Studi Latini 54.2: 648–58.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. 1991. Vergil’s Georgics and the Traditions of Ancient Epic: The Art of Allusion in Literary History. New York.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. 2001. Latin Language and Latin Culture: From Ancient to Modern Times. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, J. 2009. “The Impermanent Text in Catullus and Other Roman Poets.” In Johnson, W. and Parker, H. eds. Ancient Literacies: The Culture of Reading in Greece and Rome. Oxford: 164–85.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. and Nelis, D. eds. 2013. Augustan Poetry and the Roman Republic. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fartzoff, M. 2010. “Le ‘corps’ dans la tragédie grecque classique.” In Garelli: 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feddern, S. 2023. “Ennius-Zitat (F 142 TrRF) oder-Imitation? Zu Terenz’ Eunuchus (Eu. 590) und zum Begriff parodia (in Donats Kommentar).” Mnemosyne 76: 95–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fedeli, P. and Ciccarelli, I. eds. 2008. Q. Horatii Flacci Carmina liber IV. Florence.Google Scholar
Fedeli, G. and Spelman, H. eds. 2024. Writing Literary History in the Greek and Roman World. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeney, D. 1991. The Gods in Epic: Poets and Critics of the Classical Tradition. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeney, D. 1999. “Mea tempora: Patterning of Time in Ovid’s Metamorphoses.” In Hardie, P., Barchiesi, A., and Hinds, S. eds. Ovidian Transformations: Essays on Ovid’s Metamorphoses and Its Reception. Cambridge: 13–30.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. 2007. Caesar’s Calendar: Ancient Time and the Beginnings of History. Berkeley, CA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeney, D. 2012. “Representation and the Materiality of the Book in the Polymetrics.” In Quesnay, Du and Woodman: 29–47.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. 2016. Beyond Greek: The Beginnings of Latin Literature. Cambridge, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrini, M. F. 1978. “Tragedia e patologia. Lessico ippocratico in Euripide.” QUCC 29: 49–62.Google Scholar
Fisher, J. 2014. The Annals of Quintus Ennius and the Italic Tradition. Baltimore, MD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. and Gowers, E. eds. 2007. Ennius Perennis: The Annals and Beyond. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. and Spentzou, E. eds. 2018. The Production of Space in Latin Literature. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flores, E. 1974. Letteratura latina e ideologia del III-II A. C. Disegno storico-sociologico da Appio Claudio Ceco a Pacuvio. Naples.Google Scholar
Flores, E. et al. 2000–9. Quinto Ennio: Annali. Introduzione, testo critico con apparato, traduzione. 5 vols. Naples.Google Scholar
Foley, H. P. 2000. “The Comic Body in Greek Art and Drama.” In Cohen, B. ed. Not the Classical Ideal: Athens and the Construction of the Other in Greek Art. Leiden: 275–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fontaine, M. 2014. “The Terentian Reformation: From Menander to Alexandria.” In Fontaine and Scafuro: 538–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fontaine, M. and Scafuro, A. C. eds. 2014. The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman Comedy. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 1989. “Lucretius and Politics.” In Barnes, J. and Griffin, M. eds. Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society. Oxford: 120–50.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 2000. Roman Constructions: Readings in Postmodern Latin. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frangoulidis, S., Harrison, S. J., and Manuwald, G., eds. 2016. Roman Drama and Its Contexts. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freudenburg, K. 2002. “Solus sapiens liber est: Recommissioning Lyric in Epistles 1.” In Woodman, T. and Feeney, D. eds. Traditions and Contexts in the Poetry of Horace. Cambridge: 124–40.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. 2013. “The Afterlife of Varro in Horace’s Sermones: Generic Issues in Roman Satire.” In Papanghelis, Harrison, and Frangoulidis: 297–336.Google Scholar
Fucarino, C. 1991. “Ennio Buongustaio. L’Arte Culinaria come Metafora del Mutamento Civile.” Annali del Liceo Classico “G. Garibaldi” di Palermo 28–30: 189–203.Google Scholar
Gale, M. 2013. “Piety, Labour, and Justice in Lucretius and Hesiod.” In Lehoux, Morrison, and Sharrock: 25–50.Google Scholar
Gale, M. 2024. “The Pleasure of the Text? Literacy, Orality and Programmatics in Lucretius.” In Fedeli and Spelman: 261–81.Google Scholar
Gantz, T. 1996. Early Greek Myth: A Guide to Literary and Artistic Sources. Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Garbarino, G. 1973. Roma e la filosofia greca dalle origini alla fine del II secolo a. C., vol. 2. Turin.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. H. 2019. Pestilence and the Body Politic in Latin Literature. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garelli, M.-H. ed. 2010. Corps en jeu: de l’Antiquité à nos jours: actes du colloque international Corps en jeu, Université de Toulouse II-Le Mirail, 9–11 octobre 2008. Rennes.Google Scholar
Garelli-François, M.-H. 1998. “À propos du Thyeste d’Ennius: tragédie et histoire.” Pallas 49: 159–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. 2018a. “Lucretius’ Personified Natura Rerum, Satire, and Ennius’ Saturae.” Phoenix 72: 143–60.Google Scholar
Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. 2018b. “Varro’s Bimarcus and Encounters with the Self in Plautus’s Epidicus and Amphitruo.” Arethusa 51: 117–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. 2020. Laughing Atoms, Laughing Matter: Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura and Satire. Ann Arbor, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gianvittorio-Ungar, L. 2021. “Dancing Io’s Life: Hurt Body, Tragic Suffering (Prometheus Bound 561–608).” In Gianvittorio-Ungar, L. and Schlapbach, K. eds. Choreonarratives: Dancing Stories in Greek and Roman Antiquity and Beyond. Leiden: 129–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gianvittorio-Ungar, L. 2022. “Envisioning and Reenacting the Chorus in Republican Tragedy.” In Schlapbach, K. ed. Aspects of Roman Dance Culture: Religious Cults, Theatrical Entertainments, Metaphorical Appropriations. Stuttgart: 137–58.Google Scholar
Gibson, R. 2009. “The Success and Failure of Roman Love Elegy as an Instrument of Subversion: The Case of Propertius.” In Urso, G. ed. Ordine e sovversione nel mondo greco e romano. Atti del convegno internazionale Cividale del Friuli, 25–27 settembre 2008. Pisa: 279–99.Google Scholar
Gildenhard, I. 2003. “The ‘Annalist’ before the ‘Annalists’: Ennius and His Annales.” In Eigler, U. et al. eds. Formen römischer Geschichtsschreibung von den Anfängen bis Livius. Gattungen – Autoren – Kontexte. Darmstadt: 93–114.Google Scholar
Gildenhard, I. 2007. “Virgil vs. Ennius or: The Undoing of the Annalist.” In Fitzgerald and Gowers: 73–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gildenhard, I. 2010. “Buskins and SPQR: Roman Receptions of Greek Tragedy.” In Gildenhard, I. and Revermann, M. eds. Beyond the Fifth Century: Interactions with Greek Tragedy from the Fourth Century bce to the Middle Ages. Berlin: 153–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsberg, L. D. 2015. “Tragic Rome? Roman Historical Drama and the Genre of Tragedy.” In Harrison: 216–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giordani, D. 2020. “A Metre for Madness: Note on Enn., Scen. 21 Joc. (Alcmeo).” RCCM 62: 109–11.Google Scholar
Glauthier, P. 2020. “Hybrid Ennius: Cultural and Poetic Multiplicity in the Annals.” In Damon and Farrell: 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glauthier, P. 2021. “Homer Redivivus? Rethinking the Transmigration of the Soul in Ennius’s Annals.” Arethusa 54: 185–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goh, I. 2016. “Of Cabbages and Kin: Traces of Lucilius in the First Half of Horace’s Epodes.” In Bather, P. and Stocks, C. eds. Horace’s Epodes: Contexts, Intertexts, Reception. Oxford: 63–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goh, I. 2018a. “Pikes, Peacocks, and Parasites: Lucilius and the Discourse of Luxury.” In Breed, Keitel, and Wallace: 255–78.Google Scholar
Goh, I. 2018b. “Scepticism at the Birth of Satire: Carneades in Lucilius’ Concilium Deorum.” CQ 68: 128–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goh, I. 2020. “Living among Wolves, Acting Like a Wolf: Lucilius’ Attacks on Lupus.” CP 115: 281–93.Google Scholar
Goldberg, S. 2005. Constructing Literature in the Roman Republic: Poetry and Its Reception. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, S. 2018. “Lucilius and the Poetae Seniores.” In Breed, Keitel, and Wallace: 39–56.Google Scholar
Goldberg, S. 2020. “Ennius and the Fata Librorum.” In Damon and Farrell: 169–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, S. 2023. “The Language of Early Latin Epic.” In Adams, Chahoud, and Pezzini: 275–91.Google Scholar
Goldberg, S. 2024. “The Losers’ Legacy: Placing Fragmentary Evidence in Literary History.” In Fedeli and Spelman: 305–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, S. and Manuwald, G. eds. 2018. Fragmentary Republican Latin. Ennius. 2 vols. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, N. 2013. Shaggy Crowns: Ennius’ Annales and Virgil’s Aeneid. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, N. 2019. Afterlives of the Roman Poets: Biofiction and the Reception of Latin Poetry. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, N. and Graziosi, B. eds. 2018. Tombs of the Ancient Poets: Between Literary Reception and Material Culture. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gow, A. S. F. and Page, D. L. 1965. The Greek Anthology: Hellenistic Epigram. 2 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gowers, E. 1993. The Loaded Table: Representations of Food in Roman Literature. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowers, E. 2019. “Knight’s Moves: The Son-in-Law in Cicero and Tacitus.” ClAnt 38: 2–35.Google Scholar
Gowers, E. 2021. “Pun-Fried Concoctions: Wor(l)d-Blending in the Roman Kitchen.” In Fantuzzi, M., Morales, H., and Whitmarsh, T. eds. Reception in the Greco-Roman World: Literary Studies in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: 241–65.Google Scholar
Goyette, M. 2015. “Roman Tragedy and Medicine: Language and Imagery of Illness in Seneca and Celsus.” Dissertation, City University of New York.Google Scholar
Goyette, M. 2021. “Seneca’s Corpus: A Sympathy of Fluids and Fluctuations.” In Bradley, M. Leonard, Totelin, V., L. eds. Bodily Fluids in Antiquity. London: 272–86.Google Scholar
Gratwick, A. 1982. “The Satires of Ennius and Lucilius.” In Kenney and Clausen: 156–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, C. 2023. “Repetition in the Fragmentary Orators: From Cato to C. Gracchus.” In Adams, Chahoud, and Pezzini: 328–50.Google Scholar
Greene, R. et al. eds. 2012. The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics. Princeton, NJ.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, R. 2017b. “Recollecting Histories: Herodotus and Thucydides in Callimachus’ Aetia.” Phoenix 71: 21–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, J. M. 2011. “The Abject Eidos: Trauma and the Body in Sophocles’ Electra.” In Parker, J. and Mathews, T. eds. Tradition, Translation, Trauma: The Classic and the Modern. Oxford: 229–44.Google Scholar
Gunderson, E. 2009. Nox Philologiae: Aulus Gellius and the Fantasy of the Roman Library. Madison, WI.Google Scholar
Hanses, M. 2020. “Men among Monuments: Roman Topography and Roman Memory in Plautus’ Curculio.” CP 115: 630–58.Google Scholar
Hanses, M. 2022. “Page, Stage, Image: Confronting Ennius with Lucretius’ On the Nature of Things.” In Yona, S. and Davis, G. eds. Epicurus in Republican Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge: 147–67.Google Scholar
Harder, A. 2012. Callimachus’ Aetia: Introduction, Text, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 1993. The Epic Successors of Virgil: A Study in the Dynamics of Tradition. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. 2007. “Poets, Patrons, Rulers: The Ennian Traditions.” In Fitzgerald and Gowers: 129–44.Google Scholar
Harris, E. M. 2018. “Pollution and Purification in Athenian Law and in Attic Tragedies: Parallels or Divergences?” In Lupi, F., Ugolini, G., and Bigliazzi, S. eds. Συναγωνίζεσθαι: Studies in Honour of Guido Avezzù. Verona: 419–54.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. 2018. “Linking Horace’s Lyric Finales: Odes 1.38, 2.20 and 3.30.” In Harrison, Frangoulidis, and Papanghelis: 227–42.Google Scholar
Harrison, S., Frangoulidis, S., and Papanghelis, T. D. eds. 2018. Intratextuality and Latin Literature. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawley, R. 1998. “The Male Body as Spectacle in Attic Drama.” In Foxhall, L. and Salmon, J. eds. Thinking Men: Masculinity and Its Self-Representation in the Classical Tradition. London: 83–99.Google Scholar
Hempfer, K. W. 2007. “Gattung.” In Braungart, G. et al. eds. Reallexikon der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft. Band I. A–G. Berlin: 651–55.Google Scholar
Heusch, C. 2011. Die Macht der memoria: Die Noctes Atticae des Aulus Gellius im Licht der Erinnerungskultur des 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, J. M. 2021a. “True Friendship: Ennius and Other Poets in Catullus 116.” TAPA 151: 155–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, J. M. 2021b. “The Latin Past and the Poetry of Catullus.” Dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Hill, J. M. Forthcoming. “Ennius pinxit, or What a Difference a Letter Makes (Epigr. I V.).” Mnemosyne.Google Scholar
Hinds, S. 1987. The Metamorphosis of Persephone: Ovid and the Self-Conscious Muse. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hinds, S. 1998. Allusion and Intertext: Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Holford-Strevens, L. 2003. Aulus Gellius: An Antonine Scholar and His Achievement. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hölkeskamp, K.-J. 2001. “Fact(ions) or Fiction? Friedrich Münzer and the Aristocracy of the Roman Republic: Then and Now.” IJCT 8: 92–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hölkeskamp, K.-J. 2018. “Memoria by Multiplication: The Cornelii Scipiones in Monumental Memory.” In Sandberg and Smith: 422–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, B. 2010. The Symptom and the Subject: The Emergence of the Physical Body in Ancient Greece. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Holmes, B. 2013. “The Poetic Logic of Negative Exceptionalism in Lucretius, Book Five.” In Lehoux, Morrison, and Sharrock: 153–91.Google Scholar
Honigman, S. 2009. “Euhemerus of Messene and Plato’s Atlantis.’ Historia 58: 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooley, D. 1997. The Knotted Thong: Structures of Mimesis in Persius. Ann Arbor, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horden, P. and Purcell, N. 2000. The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History. Oxford.Google Scholar
Horsfall, N. 1981. “Some Problems of Titolature in Roman Literary History.” BICS 28: 103–14.Google Scholar
Hose, M. 1998. “Anmerkungen zur Verwendung des Chores in der römischen Tragödie der Republik.” In Riemer, P. and Zimmermann, B. eds. Der Chor im antiken und modernen Drama. Stuttgart: 113–38.Google Scholar
Houghton, L. B. T. 2013. “Epitome and Eternity: Some Epitaphs and Votive Inscriptions in the Latin Love Elegists.” In Liddel, P. and Low., P. eds. Inscriptions and Their Uses in Greek and Latin Literature. Oxford: 349–64.Google Scholar
Housman, A. E. 1893. “The Manuscripts of Propertius [I].” JPh 21: 101–60 (= Diggle and Goodyear 1972: 1.232–76).Google Scholar
Hunink, V. 2001. “The Fish Catalogue in Ausonius’ Mosella: Literary Backgrounds of Mos. 75–149.” In Orbán, A. P. and van der Poel, M. G. M. eds. Latin Studies in Honour of J. H. Brouwers. Nijmegen: 163–76.Google Scholar
Hurka, F. 2008. “Entwicklungslinien in der Liedkomposition der republikanischen Tragödie.” In Castagna and Riboldi: 2.789–811.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, G. O. 2013. Greek to Latin: Frameworks and Contexts for Intertextuality. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iakovou, E. 2020. Ödipus auf der griechischen und römischen Bühne. Der Oedipus Tragicus und seine literarische Tradition. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, H. 2002. “Ennius Sat. 65 V: subulo quondam marinas propter astabat plagas.” Mnemosyne 55: 88–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janko, R. 2011. Philodemus On Poems Books 3–4 with the Fragments of Aristotle, On Poets. Oxford.Google Scholar
Jeppesen, S. A. 2016. “Lament for Fallen Cities in Early Roman Drama: Naevius, Ennius, and Plautus.” In Bachvarova, Dutsch, and Suter: 127–55.Google Scholar
Jewell, E. 2019. “(Re)moving the Masses: Colonisation as Domestic Displacement in the Roman Republic.” Humanities 6: 1–41.Google Scholar
Jocelyn, H. D. 1989. “Romulus and the Di Genitales (Ennius, Annales 110–111 Skutsch).” In Diggle, Hall, and Jocelyn: 39–65.Google Scholar
Jocelyn, H. D. 1998. “Les Géorgiques de Virgile et le tragique (Virgile, Géorg. III, 139–142 et Ennius, Sc., 76–77 Vahlen).” Pallas 49: 297–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, P. 1977. “Vergil’s Conception of Saturnus.” California Studies in Classical Antiquity 10: 57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, T. A. 2022. Thunder and Lament: Lucan on the Beginnings and Ends of Epic. New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jouanna, J. 1987. “Médecine hippocratique et tragédie grecque.” Cahiers du groupe interdisciplinaire du théâtre antique 3: 109–31.Google Scholar
Kannicht, R. 2004. Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 5: Euripides, Pars Prior. Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlsson, L., Carlsson, S., and Kullberg, J. B. eds. 2014. ΛΑΒΡΥΣ: Studies Presented to Pontus Hellström. Uppsala.Google Scholar
Keith, A. M. 2007. “Women in Ennius’ Annales.” In Fitzgerald and Gowers: 55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendeffy, G. 2015. “Lactantius as Christian Cicero, Cicero as Shadow-Like Instructor.” In Altman, W. H. F. ed. Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Cicero. Leiden: 56–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. 2006. “Afterward: The Uses of ‘Reception’.” In Martindale, C. and Thomas, R. eds. Classics and the Uses of Reception. Oxford: 288–93.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. 2018. “Dismemberment and the Critics: Seneca’s Phaedra.” In Gale, M. and Scourfield, J. H. D. eds. Texts and Violence in the Roman World. Cambridge: 215–45.Google Scholar
Kenney, E. 2012. “Satiric Textures: Style, Meter, and Rhetoric.” In Braund and Osgood: 113–36.Google Scholar
Kenney, E. J. and Clausen, W. V. 1982. The Cambridge History of Classical Literature. II. Latin Literature. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Keulen, W. H. 2009. Gellius the Satirist: Roman Cultural Authority in Attic Nights. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kissel, W. 1990. Satiren: Aules Persius Flaccus, herausgegeben, übersetzt und kommentiert. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Knox, P. 2007. “Catullus and Callimachus.” In Skinner, M. B. ed. A Companion to Catullus. Malden, MA: 151–72.Google Scholar
Kosak, J. C. 2004. Heroic Measures: Hippocratic Medicine in the Making of Euripidean Tragedy. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krahner, L. 1837. Grundlinien zur Geschichte des Verfalls der römischen Staatsreligion bis auf die Zeit des August. Halle.Google Scholar
Kranz, W. 1961. “Sphragis. Ichform und Namensiegel als Eingangs- und Schlussmotiv alter Dichtung.” RhM 104: 3–46, 97–124.Google Scholar
Krenkel, W. ed. 2002. Marcus Terentius Varro: Saturae Menippeae. 4 vols. St. Katharinen.Google Scholar
Krevans, N. 2011. “Callimachus’ Philology.” In Acosta-Hughes, B., Lehnus, L., and Stephens, S. eds. Brill’s Companion to Callimachus. Leiden: 118–33.Google Scholar
Krostenko, B. 2013. “The Poetics of Naevius’ ‘Epitaph’ and the History of Latin Poetry.” JRS 103: 46–64.Google Scholar
Krug, H. 1944. “Der Stil im Euhemerus des Ennius.” Dissertation, University of Wrocław.Google Scholar
Krug, H. 1948. “Zum Text von Ennius’ Euhemerus.” Forschungen und Fortschritte 24: 57–59.Google Scholar
Kruschwitz, P. 1998. “Überlegungen zum Text der Hedyphagetica des Ennius.” Philologus 142: 261–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kytzler, B. 1989. “Fidus Interpres: Theory and Practice of Translation in Classical Antiquity.” Antichthon 23: 42–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labate, M. 1992. “Le necessità del poeta satirico: fisiopatologia di una scelta letteraria.” In Mazzini: 55–66.Google Scholar
Langslow, D. R. 1999. “The Language of Poetry and the Language of Science: The Latin Poets and Medical Latin.” In Adams, J. N. and Mayer, R. G. eds. Aspects of the Language of Latin Poetry. Oxford: 183–226.Google Scholar
Leach, E. W. 1999. “Ciceronian ‘Bi-Marcus’: Correspondence with M. Terentius Varro and L. Papirius Paetus in 46 b.c.e.” TAPA 129: 139–79.Google Scholar
Lech, M. L. 2016. “The Hand of Oedipus: The Network of Body Imagery in OT.” Λογεῖον 6: 93–111.Google Scholar
Lehmann, A. 2002. Varon critique littéraire. Regard sur les poètes latins archaïques. Brussels.Google Scholar
Lehoux, D., Morrison, A. D., and Sharrock, A. 2013. Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennartz, K. 1994. Non verba sed vim. Kritisch-exegetische Untersuchungen zu den Fragmenten archaischer römischer Tragiker. Stuttgart.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennartz, K. 1995. “Zur ‘Wortabbildung’ in der archaischen römischen Tragödie.” Glotta 73: 168–207.Google Scholar
Leo, F. 1912. Plautinische Forschungen zur Kritik und Geschichte der Komödie, 2nd ed. Berlin.Google Scholar
Leo, F. 1913. Geschichte der römischen Literatur. Vol. 1: Die archaische Literatur. Berlin.Google Scholar
Leonardis, I. 2015. “Risvegliarsi in un’altra Roma. Crisi del presente e nostalgia del passato nelle Saturae Menippeae di Varrone.” In Angiolillo, R., Elia, E., and Nuti, E. eds. Crisi. Immagini, interpretazioni e reazioni nel mondo greco, latino e bizantino. Alessandria: 223–36.Google Scholar
Leumann, M. 1959. “La lingua poetica latina.” In Lunelli, A. ed. La lingua poetica latina. Bologna: 133–78.Google Scholar
Lindsay, W. ed. 1913. Sexti Pompei Festi De verborum significatu quae supersunt cum Pauli epitome. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Lloyd, G. E. R. 2003. In the Grip of Disease: Studies in the Greek Imagination. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, R. 1961. “Republican Authors in Servius and the Scholia Danielis.” HSCP 65: 291–341.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Jones, H. and Parsons, P. eds. 1983. Supplementum Hellenisticum. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowrie, M. 2009. Writing, Performance, and Authority in Augustan Rome. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacCormack, S. 2013. “Cicero in Late Antiquity.” In Steel, C. ed. The Cambridge Companion to Cicero. Cambridge: 251–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maggiali, G. 2008. “Ennio in Catullo 15: dall’apoteosi alla ῥαφανίδωσις.” Paideia 63: 157–61.Google Scholar
Malamud, M. 1998. “Gnawing at the End of the Rope: Poets on the Field in Two Vergilian Catalogues.” Ramus 27: 95–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maltby, R. 2023. “A Comparison of the Language of Tragedy and Comedy in Republican Drama.” In Adams, Chahoud, and Pezzini: 251–71.Google Scholar
Maltby, R. and Slater, N. W. eds. 2022. Fragmentary Republican Latin: Livius Andronicus, Naevius, Caecilius. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Manuwald, G. 2001a. “Accius’ Phoenissae: zur Arbeitsweise eines römischen Tragikers.” In Faller, S. ed. Studien zu antiken Identitäten. Würzburg: 59–80.Google Scholar
Manuwald, G. 2001b. Fabulae praetextae: Spuren einer literarischen Gattung der Römer. Munich.Google Scholar
Manuwald, G. 2003. Pacuvius: Summus Tragicus Poeta. Zum dramatischen Profil seiner Tragödien. Munich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manuwald, G. 2004. “Römische Tragödien und Praetexten republikanischer Zeit: 1964–2002.” Lustrum 43: 11–237.Google Scholar
Manuwald, G. 2013. “Medea: Transformations of a Greek Figure in Latin Literature.” G&R 60: 114–35.Google Scholar
Manuwald, G. 2014. “Tragedy, Paratragedy, and Roman Comedy.” In Fontaine and Scafuro: 580–98.Google Scholar
Manuwald, G. 2015. “Editing Roman (Republican) Tragedy: Challenges and Possible Solutions.” In Harrison: 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marasco, G. 1995. “L’introduction de la médecine grecque à Rome: une dissension politique et idéologique.” Clio Medica 27: 35–48.Google Scholar
Marincola, J. 1997. Authority and Tradition in Ancient Historiography. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mariotti, S. 1998. “L’inganno fallito (Ennio, Satire, vv. 59sgg. Vahlen2).” REA 100: 561–63 (= Mariotti, S. 2000. Scritti di filologia classica. Rome: 65–67).Google Scholar
Marmodoro, A. and Hill, J. eds. 2013. The Author’s Voice in Classical and Late Antiquity. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, R. M. A. 2022. “Saturae Mennipeae and Varro Mennipeus.” Paideia 77: 175–202.Google Scholar
Martelli, F. 2018. “Ennius’ Imago between Tomb and Text.” In Goldschmidt and Graziosi: 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, P. S. 2016. “‘A Display for the Whole of Greece’? The Narrator’s Relationship with His Audience in Archestratus of Gela.” In Pinheiro, J. and Soares, C. eds. Patrimónios alimentares de Aquém e Além-mar. Coimbra: 145–71.Google Scholar
Marx, F. 1903. “Ennianae poesis reliquiae. Iteratis curis recensuit Johannes Vahlen. Leipzig, B. G. Teubner, 1903.” DLZ 45: 2746–49.Google Scholar
Marzano, A. 2013. Harvesting the Sea: The Exploitation of Marine Resources in the Roman Mediterranean. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marzano, A. 2018. “Fish and Seafood.” In Erdkamp, P. and Holleran, C. eds. The Routledge Handbook of Diet and Nutrition in the Roman World. Abingdon: 163–73.Google Scholar
Mastandrea, P. 2007. “Gli Annales di Ennio: reliquie e relitti.” BStudLat 37: 497–503.Google Scholar
Mastandrea, P. 2008. “Mamurra ‘Ennianista’: Catullo 115 e Dintorni.” In Arduini, P. et al. eds. Studi offerti ad Alessandro Perutelli. Rome: 175–90.Google Scholar
Mastandrea, P. 2012. “Conoscenza dell’autore e circolazione del testo a Bisanzio in età giustinianea.” In Maraglino, V. ed. La Naturalis Historia di Plinio nella tradizione medievale e umanistica. Bari: 9–37.Google Scholar
Mastandrea, P. 2017. “Leggere gli Annales di Ennio a Costantinopoli.” In Masselli, G. M. and Sivo, F. eds. Il ruolo della scuola nella tradizione deiclassici latini. Tra Fortleben ed esegesi. Foggia: 29–62.Google Scholar
Mattiaci, S. 1986. “Apuleio e i poeti latini arcaici.” In Munus amicitiae: scritti in memoria di Alessandro Ronconi. Florence: 159–200.Google Scholar
Mazzini, I. 1992b. “La medicina nella letteratura latina. III. Plauto: conoscenze mediche, situazione e istituzioni sanitarie, proposte esegetiche.” In Mazzini: 67–113.Google Scholar
McAlhany, J. 2023. “One Head Is Worse Than Three: Varro’s Trikaranos and the So-Called First Triumvirate.” AJP 144: 559–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAlhany, J. 2024a. “Buried in Books: Varro’s Papia Papae in the Shade of Scholarship.” In Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. and Polt, C. B. eds. Didactic Literature in the Roman World. London: 137–47.Google Scholar
McAlhany, J. 2024b. “Varro and the Spirits of Rome’s Literary Past.” In Fedeli and Spelman: 261–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, K. 2019. I, the Poet: First Person Form in Horace, Catullus and Propertius. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
McElduff, S. 2013. Roman Theories of Translation: Surpassing the Source. New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNamara, K. R. 2014. “Introduction.” In McNamara, K. R. ed. The Cambridge Companion to the City in Literature. Cambridge: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melis, V. 2020. “La maladie d’Oreste: réalité et apparence entre sophistique et littérature médicale (Euripide, Oreste, 235 sqq.).” In Desclos, M.-L. ed. La poésie dramatique comme discours de savoir. Paris: 157–69.Google Scholar
Mercado, D. 2018. “Accent in Lucilius’ Hexameters.” In Breed, Keitel, and Wallace: 184–214.Google Scholar
Migliorini, P. 1997. Scienza e terminologia medica nella letteratura latina dell’età neroniana: Seneca, Lucano, Persio, Petronio. Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Mignone, L. M. 2016. The Republican Aventine and Rome’s Social Order. Ann Arbor, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell-Boyask, R. 2012. “Heroic Pharmacology: Sophocles and the Metaphors of Greek Medical Thought.” In Ormand, K. ed. A Companion to Sophocles. Oxford: 316–30.Google Scholar
Moore, T. 2008. “When Did the Tibicen Play? Meter and Musical Accompaniment in Roman Comedy.” TAPA 138: 3–46.Google Scholar
Moore, T. 2016. “Music in Roman Tragedy.” In Frangoulidis, Harrison, and Manuwald: 345–61.Google Scholar
Morelli, A. M. 2007. “Hellenistic Epigram in the Roman World from the Beginnings to the End of the Republican Age.” In Bing, P. and Bruss, J. eds. Brill’s Companion to Hellenistic Epigram Down to Philip. Leiden: 521–41.Google Scholar
Morelli, A. M. 2016. “Lo Scipio e la poesia celebrativa enniana per Scipione.” In Pieri and Pellacani: 53–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, Ll. 2019. “‘To Heaven on a Hook’ (Dio Cass. 60.35.4): Ennius, Lucilius and an Ineffectual Council of the Gods in Aeneid 10.” CQ 69: 636–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moro, C. 1995. La varietà e la norma: I frammenti giambo-trocaici di Lucilio tra versificazione drammatica e alessandrinismo. Padua.Google Scholar
Morrison, A. 2020. Apollonius Rhodius, Herodotus and Historiography. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mosca, B. 1937. “Satira filosofica e politica nelle Menippee di Varrone.” Annali della R. Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. Lettere, Storia e Filosofia 6.1/2: 41–77.Google Scholar
Most, G. W. 1992. “Disiecti membra poetae: The Rhetoric of Dismemberment in Neronian Poetry.” In Hexter, R. and Selden, D. eds. Innovations of Antiquity. New York: 391–419.Google Scholar
Muecke, F. 2005. “Rome’s First ‘Satirists’: Themes and Genre in Ennius and Lucilius.” In Freudenburg: 33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, L. ed. 1884. Q. Enni carminum reliquiae: accedunt Cn. Naevi Belli Poenici quae supersunt. St. Petersburg.Google Scholar
Müller, R. J. 1993. “Überlegungen zur Ἱερὰ Ἀναγραφή des Euhemeros von Messene.” Hermes 121: 276–300.Google Scholar
Musurillo, H. 1974. “A Formula for Happiness: Horace Epist. 1.6 to Numicius.” CW 67: 193–204.Google Scholar
Nagy, G. 2020. Plato’s Rhapsody and Homer’s Music: The Poetics of the Panathenaic Festival in Classical Athens, 2nd ed. Classical Inquiries. https://classical-inquiries.chs.harvard.edu/platos-rhapsody-and-homers-music-the-poetics-of-the-panathenaic-festival-in-classical-athens.Google Scholar
Nelis, D. 2013. “Past, Present, and Future in Virgil’s Georgics.” In Farrell and Nelis: 244–62.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. 2022. “Iphigenia in the Iliad and the Architecture of Homeric Allusion.” TAPA 152: 55–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nencioni, C. 2004. “Il termine vapor nell’Edipo di Seneca.” In Sconocchia, S. et al. eds. Lingue tecniche del greco e del latino. 4, Testi medici latini antichi: le parole della medicina: lessico e storia: atti del VII Convegno internazionale, Trieste, 11–13 ottobre 2001. Bologna, 117–22.Google Scholar
Nethercut, J. S. 2017. “Empedocles’ ‘Roots’ in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” AJP 138: 85–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nethercut, J. S. 2020. “How Ennian Was Latin Epic between the Annals and Lucretius?” In Damon and Farrell: 188–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nethercut, J. S. Forthcoming. “Were the Earliest Latin Poets Alexandrian?” In Harder, A. and Klooster, K. eds. Beyond Alexandria: Hellenistica Groningana 27. Leuven.Google Scholar
ní Mheallaigh, K. 2019. “Looking Back in Wonder: Contemplating Home from the Iliad to Pale Blue Dot.” In Biggs and Blum: 263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ní Mheallaigh, K. 2020. The Moon in the Greek and Roman Imagination: Myth, Literature, Science and Philosophy. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noller, E. M. 2019. Die Ordnung der Welt: Darstellungsformen von Dynamik, Statik und Emergenz in Lukrez’ De Rerum Natura. Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noonan, J. D. 1986. “Myth, Humor and the Sequence of Thought in Catullus 95.” CJ 81: 299–304.Google Scholar
North, H. 1952. “The Use of Poetry in the Training of the Ancient Orator.” Traditio 8: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nouilhan, M. 1969. “Adjectifs et adverbs dans les Tragédies d’Ennius.” Pallas 16: 25–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nutton, V 1993. “Roman Medicine: Tradition, Confrontation, Assimilation.” ANRW 2.37.1: 49–78.Google Scholar
Olson, S. D. and Sens, A. 2000. Archestratos of Gela: Greek Culture and Cuisine in the Fourth Century bce: Text, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar
Padilla Peralta, D. 2020. Divine Institutions: Religions and Community in the Middle Roman Republic. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Papachrysostomou, A. 2021. Ephippus: Introduction, Translation, Commentary. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Papaioannou, S. 2021. “Taking a Walk through Rome …: Comedic Itineraries and Early Republican Spatial Memory.” In Mawford, K. and Ntanou, E. eds. Ancient Memory: Remembrance and Commemoration in Graeco-Roman Literature. Berlin: 19–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papaioannou, S. and Demetriou, C. eds. 2020. Plautus’ Erudite Comedy: New Insights into the Work of a Doctus Poeta. Newcastle.Google Scholar
Papanghelis, T., Harrison, S., and Frangoulidis, S. eds. 2013. Generic Interfaces in Latin Literature: Encounters, Interactions and Transformations. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paretti, L. 2006. “Un frammento dimenticato dagli Hedyphagetica di Ennio?” RFIC 134: 140–49.Google Scholar
Parroni, P. ed. 2023. Sebastiano Timpanaro, Scevola Mariotti, Carteggio (1944–1999). Pisa.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasquali, G. 1909. “Per la delimitazione, di un frammento dell’Euemero di Ennio.” RFIC 37: 38–53.Google Scholar
Paul, G. M. 1982. “Urbs Capta: Sketch of an Ancient Literary Motif.” Phoenix 36.2: 144–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pausch, D. 2018. “Livy’s Battle in the Forum between Roman Monuments and Greek Literature.” In Sandberg and Smith: 277–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirano, I. 2012. The Rhetoric of the Roman Fake: Latin Pseudepigrapha in Context. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirano, I. 2013. “Ille ego qui quondam: On Authorial (An)onymity.” In Marmodoro and Hill: 251–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellegrin, P. 2019. “Les écoles empirique et méthodiste: une médecine positive?’ In Crignon, C. and Lefebvre, D. eds. Médecins et philosophes: une histoire. Paris: 85–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peritz, J. G. 2022. The Lyric Myth of Voice: Civilizing Song in Enlightenment Italy. Oakland, CA.Google Scholar
Perutelli, A. 1990. “Lutazio Catulo poeta.” RFIC 118: 275–77 (= Perutelli 2002: 31–58).Google Scholar
Perutelli, A. 1997. “Note al Bimarcus di Varrone.” RFIC 125: 411–30 (= Perutelli 2002: 89–109).Google Scholar
Perutelli, A. 2002. Frustula poetarum. Contributi ai poeti latini in frammenti. Bologna.Google Scholar
Petersmann, H. 1999. “The Language of Early Roman Satire: Its Function and Characteristics.” PBA 93: 289–310.Google Scholar
Petrone, G. 2017. “Il ‘luogo’ di Andromaca nelle Troiane di Seneca.” Dioniso 6: 35–55.Google Scholar
Pezzini, G. 2018. “The Early Lucilius and the Language of the Roman Palliata.” In Breed, Keitel, and Wallace: 162–83.Google Scholar
Pezzini, G. 2023. “Early Latin Lexicon in Terence (and Plautus).” In Adams, Chahoud, and Pezzini: 221–50.Google Scholar
Pezzini, G. 2024. “The Classical Style of Terence.” In Dainotti, Hasegawa, and Harrison: 37–53.Google Scholar
Pichon, R. 1901. Lactance. Étude sur le mouvement philosophique et religieux sous le règne de Constantin. Paris.Google Scholar
Pieri, B. and Pellacani, D. eds. 2016. “Si verba tenerem”: Studi sulla poesia latina in frammenti. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piqueux, A. 2022. The Comic Body in Ancient Greek Theatre and Art, 440–320 bce. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piras, G. 2015. “Cum poeticis multis uerbis magis delecter quam utar: Poetic Citations and Etymological Enquiry in Varro’s De Lingua Latina.” In Butterfield: 51–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pontani, F. and Sandri, M. G. 2021. “New Poetic Fragments from a Neglected Witness of Ps.Trypho’s De Tropis: Callimachus, Ps.-Hesiod, Ps.-Simonides.” CQ 71: 240–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, J. I. 2003. “Lucretius and the Poetics of Void.” In Moned, A. ed. Le jardin romain: Épicurisme et poésie à Rome. Mélanges offerts à Mayotte Bollack. Lille: 197–226.Google Scholar
Pulz, E. 2023. Laevius – ein altlateinischer Liebesdichter. Studien, Text und Interpretationskommentar. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purcell, N. 1995. “Eating Fish: The Paradoxes of Seafood.” In Wilkins, J., Harvey, D., and Dobson, M. eds. Food in Antiquity. Exeter: 131–49.Google Scholar
Rallo, G. E. 2024. Laughing at Domestica Facta: Identity Construction in Mid-Republican Rome through the Lens of the Togata. Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeve, M. D. 1979. “The Textual Tradition of Donatus’ Commentary on Terence.” CP 74: 310–26.Google Scholar
Reggiani, R. 1973. “Alcune considerazioni sul frammento 3 Vahlen degli ‘Annales’ di Ennio.” BStudLat 3: 269–80.Google Scholar
Reggiani, R. 1979. I proemi degli Annales di Ennio: programma letterario e polemica. Rome.Google Scholar
Relihan, J. 2005. “Late Arrivals: Julian and Boethius.” In Freudenberg: 109–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renberg, G. H. 2006. “Public and Private Places of Worship in the Cult of Asclepius at Rome.” MAAR 51/52: 87–172.Google Scholar
Richlin, A. 2017. Slave Theater in the Roman Republic: Plautus and Popular Comedy. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riggsby, A. M. 1997. “Did the Romans Believe in Their Verdicts?” Rhetorica 15: 235–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rives, J. B. 2008. “Legal Strategy and Learned Display in Apuleius’ Apology.” In Riess, W. ed. Paideia at Play: Learning and Wit in Apuleius. Groningen: 17–49.Google Scholar
Rochette, B. 1995. “Du Grec au Latin et du Latin au Grec: les problemes de la traduction dans l’antiquité greco-latine.” Latomus 54: 245–61.Google Scholar
Roller, M. 2013. “On the Intersignification of Monuments in Augustan Rome.” AJP 134: 119–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romano, E. 2008. “Oracoli divini e respondi di giuristi: note sulla ‘interpretatio’ enniana nell’ ‘Euhemerus’.” In Castagna and Riboldi: 1433–48.Google Scholar
Rosén, H. 1999. Latine Loqui: Trends and Directions in the Crystallization of Classical Latin. Munich.Google Scholar
Rossi, A. and Breed, B. eds. 2006. “Ennius and the Invention of Roman Epic.”Arethusa 39.3: 397–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roubekas, N. P. 2014. “What Is Euhemerism? A Brief History of Research and Some Persisting Questions.” Bulletin for the Study of Religion 43: 30–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roubekas, N. P. 2021. “Between Reception and Deception: The Perennial Problem with Euhemerism.” In Pugh: 249–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruffell, I. A. 2015. “The Grotesque Comic Body between the Real and the Unreal.” In Bastin-Hammou, M. and Orfanos, C. eds. Carnaval et comédie: actes du colloque international organisé par l’équipe PLH-CRATA, 9–10 décembre 2009, Université de Toulouse Le Mirail. Besançon: 37–73.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2001. “Iambic Presences in Ennius’ Saturae.” In Cavarzere, Aloni, and Barchiesi: 99–115.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2003. “Un verso dagli Hedyphagetica di Ennio?’ In Belloni, De Finis, and Moretti: 91–116.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2007. Quinto Ennio: Le opere minori. Introduzione, edizione critica dei frammenti e commento, vol. 1. Pisa.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2017a. “Ἱερὰ ἀναγραφή, ‘Sacra historia’, ‘sacra scriptio’, un frammento dell’ ‘Euhemerus’ di Ennio (54 Winiarczyk = Var. 65–82 V.2) e un passo di Lattanzio (Epit. 13, 3).” RFIC 145: 346–80.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2017b. “Appunti sulla sopravvivenza della letteratura latina arcaica in epoca tardoantica: il caso dell’Euhemerus di Ennio.” Pan 6: 5–21.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2017c. “Review of Pieri and Pellacani.” BMRC. http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2017/2017-09-07.html.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2021. “All’origine di una presunta fonte degli Hedyphagetica di Ennio: paternità e datazione del Glossarium Petronianum.” Latinitas 9: 9–18.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2022a. “Il dativo in ai in Ennio e nella tradizione grammaticale antica. A proposito di Carisio gramm. p. 16, 22–27 Barwick e Enn. Ann. 510 Sk.” MD 22: 211–35.Google Scholar
Russo, A. 2022b. “Un problema di attribuzione e l’apposizione parentetica in Ennio: a proposito di Enn. Ann. Dub. Fr. 5 (= Inc. 31 Blänsdorf, p. 343 Courtney) e Ann. 22 Skutsch.” Hermes 150: 170–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russo, A. 2024. “Nota a Enn. Ann. 12–13 Sk. (con un’appendice sull’Euhemerus).” In D’Alessandro, P. and Luceri, A. eds. Doctissimus antiquitatis perscrutator. Studi latini in onore di Mario De Nonno (= Res publica litterarum Quaderni 2). Rome: 16–26.Google Scholar
Russo, A. Forthcoming. “Versus Enni gravitate minores? Ennius’ ‘minor works’.” In Nethercut, J. and La Barbera, S. eds. The Oxford Handbook of Ennius. Oxford.Google Scholar
Salomies, O. 2015. “The Roman Republic.” In Bruun, C. and Edmondson, J. eds. The Oxford Handbook of Roman Epigraphy. Oxford: 153–77.Google Scholar
Sandberg, K. and Smith, C. eds. 2018. Omnium Annalium Monumenta: Historical Writing and Historical Evidence in Republican Rome. Leiden.Google Scholar
Sapsford, T. 2022. Performing the Kinaidos: Unmanly Men in Ancient Mediterranean Cultures. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Šašel Kos, M. 2015. “Corcyra in Strabo’s Geography.” In Antonetti, C. and Cavalli, E. eds. Prospettive Corciresi. Venice: 1–31.Google Scholar
Scafoglio, G., ed. 2006. L’Astyanax di Accio. Saggio sul background mitografico, testo critico e commento dei frammenti. Brussels.Google Scholar
Schierl, P. 2015. “Roman Tragedy – Ciceronian Tragedy? Cicero’s Influence on Our Perception of Republican Tragedy.” In Harrison: 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmieder, C. 2007. “Seneca clinicus und der Wahnsinn des Herkules: eine Beobachtung.” Latomus 66: 642–44.Google Scholar
Scholz, U. W. 2003. “Varros menippeische Satiren.” In Haltenhoff, A. et al. eds. O tempora o mores! Römische Werte und römische Literatur in den letzten Jahrzehnten der Republik. Munich: 165–85.Google Scholar
Schur, D. 2021. “The Dread Wayfarer: Philoctetes’ Foot.” In Hsu, K. L., Schur, D., and Sowers, B. P. eds. The Body Unbound: Literary Approaches to the Classical Corpus. Cham: 57–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sciarrino, E. 2006. “The Introduction of Epic in Rome: Cultural Thefts and Social Contests.” Arethusa 39: 449–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sciarrino, E. 2011. Cato the Censor and the Beginnings of Latin Prose: From Poetic Translation to Elite Transcription. Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
Sciarrino, E. 2019. “Traces of Philology in Mid-Republican Latin Poetry.” Ramus 48: 148–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. N. 1998. Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, C. 1986. “Boundary Violation and the Landscape of the Self in Senecan Tragedy.” In Interpreting Greek Tragedy: Myth, Poetry, Text. Ithaca, NY: 315–36.Google Scholar
Seider, A. 2018. “Grief, Distance and Death in A. 12.945–52: A sphragis for the Book of Vergil.” CJ 113: 303–33.Google Scholar
Serafim, A. 2020. “Sicking Bodies: Stasis as Disease in the Human Body and the Body Politic.” In Gasti, E. ed. Δόσις ἀμφιλαφής: τιμητικός τόμος για την ομότιμη καθηγήτρια Κατερίνα Συνοδινού. Ioannina: 749–74.Google Scholar
Serghidou, A. 1997. “Corps héroïque et expérience du moi servile dans la tragédie.” Échos du monde classique 16: 391–420.Google Scholar
Sidwell, K. 1996. “Purification and Pollution in Aeschylus’ Eumenides.” CQ 46: 44–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skempis, M. and Ziogas, I. eds. 2014. Geography, Topography, Landscape: Configurations of Space in Greek and Roman Epic. Berlin.Google Scholar
Slater, N. W. 2000. “Religion and Identity in Pacuvius’s Chryses.” In Manuwald: 315–23.Google Scholar
Sommerstein, A. 2011. “Hinc omnis pendet? Old Comedy and Roman Satire.” CW 105: 25–38.Google Scholar
Spielberg, L. 2020. “Ennius’ Annals as a Source and Model for Historical Speech.” In Damon and Farrell: 147–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stehle, E. M. 2002. “The Body and Its Representations in Aristophanes’ Thesmophoriazousai: Where Does the Costume End?” AJP 123: 369–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stok, F. 1993. “La scuola medica empirica a Roma. Problemi storici e prospettive di ricercar.” ANRW 2.37.1: 600–45.Google Scholar
Stok, F. 1996. “Follia e malattie mentali nella medicina dell’età romana.” ANRW 2.37.3: 2282–410.Google Scholar
Stok, F. 2018. “Medical Sects: Herophilus, Erasistratus, Empiricists.” In Keyser, P. T. and Scarborough, J. eds. The Oxford Handbook of Science and Medicine in the Classical World. Oxford: 359–80.Google Scholar
Suerbaum, W. 1968. Untersuchungen zur Selbstdarstellung älterer römischer Dichter: Livius Andronicus, Naevius, Ennius. Hildesheim.Google Scholar
Suerbaum, W. 1994. “Ennius als Dramatiker.” In Bierl, A. and von Möllendorff, P. eds. Orchestra. Drama—Mythos—Bühne. Festschrift für Hellmut Flashar anläßlich seines 65. Geburtstages. Stuttgart: 346–62.Google Scholar
Suerbaum, W. ed. 2002. Handbuch der lateinischen Literatur der Antike. Erster Band. Die archaische Literatur. Von den Anfängen bis Sullas Tod. Die vorliterarische Periode und die Zeit von 240–78 v. Chr. (HLL 1). Munich.Google Scholar
Swift, L. J. 1965. “Arnobius and Lactantius: Two Views of the Pagan Poets.” TAPA 96: 439–48.Google Scholar
Tamás, A. 2023. “Muses in the Sky: Lucretius’ Invocative Telestich and Its Multiple Revivals in Latin Poetry.” CJ 119: 1–43.Google Scholar
Tarigo, P. G. 2013. “Echi metapoetici callimachei nei Saturarum libri di Quinto Ennio?” Maia 65: 280–87.Google Scholar
Tarrant, R. 2016. Texts, Editors, and Readers: Methods and Problems in Latin Textual Criticism. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taysom, J. 2021 (Friday 12 March). “Trying to Identify the Opening Chord of the Beatles Song ‘A Hard Day’s Night’.” Far Out. https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/the-beatles-hard-days-night-george-harrison-opening-chord.Google Scholar
Temporini, H. ed. 1972. Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. 1.2. Berlin.Google Scholar
Ten Brink, B. 1855. M. Terentii Varronis locus de urbe Roma. Varronianis accedunt Q. Ennii apologus Aesopicus et reliquiae Euhemeri versibus quadratis. Utrecht.Google Scholar
“The ‘A Hard Day’s Night’ Opening Chord.” 2008 (7 April). Beatlesbible.com. www.beatlesbible.com/features/hard-days-night-chord.Google Scholar
Thilo, G. and Hagen, H. eds. 1902. Servii grammatici qui feruntur un Vergilii carmina commentarii. 3 vols. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Thomas, R. 2021. “Catullan Intertextuality.” In Du Quesnay and Woodman: 47–69.Google Scholar
Thomson, D. F. S. 1964. “Interpretations of Catullus—II. Catullus 95.8: ‘Et Laxas Scombris Saepe Dabunt Tunicas’.” Phoenix 18: 30–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, D. F. S. 1997. Catullus: Edited with a Textual and Interpretative Commentary. Toronto.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timpanaro, S. 1947. “Per una nuova edizione critica di Ennio.” II–III. SIFC 22: 33–77; 179–207.Google Scholar
Timpanaro, S. 1994. Nuovi contributi di filologia e di storia della lingua latina. Bologna.Google Scholar
Tondo, I. 2010. “Le corps du roi: esthétique de la tyrannie dans les tragédies de Sénèque.” In Garelli: 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traill, A. 2020. “Plautus and the Origins of Roman Satire.” In Papaioannou and Demetriou: 265–86.Google Scholar
Traina, A. 1970. Vortit barbare: le traduzioni poetiche da Livio Andronico a Cicerone. Rome.Google Scholar
Trimble, G. ed. 2025. Catullus: Poem 64. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Vahlen, J. 1858. In M. Terentii Varronis Saturarum Menippearum reliquias coniectanea. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Valakas, K. 2002. “The Use of the Body by Actors in Tragedy and Satyr-Play.” In Easterling, P. and Hall, E. eds. Greek and Roman Actors: Aspects of an Ancient Profession. Cambridge: 69–92.Google Scholar
Van den Hout, M. P. J. 1999. A Commentary on the Letters of M. Cornelius Fronto. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Gils, P. J. M. 1902. “Quaestiones Euhemereae.” Dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Vardi, A. D. 2000. “An Anthology of Early Latin Epigrams? A Ghost Reconsidered.” CQ 50: 147–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasseur-Legangneux, P. 2004. “Corps de héros, corps de femme, corps de monstre: le spectacle de la souffrance d’Héraklès dans les Trachiniennes.” In Lalies: actes des sessions de linguistique et de littérature 24. Paris: 175–89.Google Scholar
Volk, K. 2002. The Poetics of Latin Didactic: Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid, Manilius. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volk, K. 2021. The Roman Republic of Letters: Scholarship, Philosophy, and Politics in the Age of Cicero and Caesar. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Volk, K. 2023. “Varro the Conservative?” In Gitner, A. ed. Roman Perspectives on Linguistic Diversity. Oxford: 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volpe, R. 2014. “Sepolcri degli Scipioni. Indagini nell’area archeologica (2008, 2010–2011).” Bullettino della Commissione archeologica Comunale di Roma 115: 175–91.Google Scholar
Von Albrecht, M. 1997. A History of Roman Literature: From Livius Andronicus to Boethius with Special Regard to Its Influence on World Literature. 2 vols. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Staden, H. 1996. “Liminal Perils: Early Roman Receptions of Greek Medicine.” In Ragep, F. J. and Ragep, S. P. eds. Tradition, Transmission, Transformation. Leiden: 369–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walbank, F. W. 1943. “Alcaeus of Messene, Philip V, and Rome (Concluded).” CQ 37: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walde, A. and Hofmann, J. B. 1982. Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, 5th ed. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Webb, L. 2018. “Mihi es aemula: Elite Female Status Competition in Mid-Republican Rome and the Example of Tertia Aemilia.” In Damon, C. and Pieper, C. eds. Eris vs. Aemulatio: Valuing Competition in Classical Antiquity. Leiden: 251–80.Google Scholar
Webb, L. 2022. “Impoverished Senatorial Women in Mid-Republican Rome: Opima Gloria and Felix Paupertas?” In Carlà-Uhink, F., Cecchet, L., and Machado, C. eds. Poverty in Ancient Greece and Rome: Realities and Discourses. London: 117–43.Google Scholar
Weiss, M. 2020. Outline of the Historical and Comparative Grammar of Latin, 2nd ed. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Welsh, J. T. 2013. “The Text of Ennius’ Portrait of a Parasite.” Phoenix 67: 107–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitmarsh, T. 2013. “An I for an I: Reading Fictional Autobiography.” In Marmodoro and Hill: 233–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiater, N. 2022. “The Empire Becomes a Body: Power, Space and Movement in Polybius’ Histories.” In König, J. and Wiater, N. eds. Late Hellenistic Greek Literature in Dialogue. Cambridge: 36–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wifstrand Schiebe, M. 1986. “The Saturn of the Aeneid: Tradition or Innovation?” Vergilius 32: 43–60.Google Scholar
Wifstrand Schiebe, M. 1997. Vergil und die Tradition von den römischen Urkönigen. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Wifstrand Schiebe, M. 2014. “Why It Should Be Obvious That Euhemerus Did Not Write His Sacred History to Bolster Ruler Cult.” In Karlsson, Carlsson, and Kullberg: 341–50.Google Scholar
Wilkins, J. 2000a. The Boastful Chef: The Discourse of Food in Ancient Greek Comedy. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, J. 2000b. “Athenaeus and the Fishes of Archippus.” In Braund and Wilkins: 523–35.Google Scholar
Wilkins, J. 2003. “Land and Sea: Italy and the Mediterranean in the Roman Discourse of Dining.” AJP 124: 359–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkins, J. 2018. “Cooking and Processing Fish in Antiquity: Questions of Taste and Texture.” Journal of Maritime Archaeology 13: 225–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. D. 2012. The Cosmic Viewpoint: A Study of Seneca’s Natural Questions. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winiarczyk, M. 2013. The Sacred History of Euhemerus of Messene. Trans. Zbirohowski-Kościa, W.. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiseman, T. P. 2009. Remembering the Roman People: Essays on Late Republican Politics and Literature. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, J. 1974. Dancing in Chains: The Stylistic Unity of the Comoedia Palliata. Rome.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J. 2007. “The Influence of Cicero on Ennius.” In Fitzgerald and Gowers: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zetzel, J. 2015. “Philosophy is in the Streets.” In Williams, G. D. and Volk, K. eds. Roman Reflections: Studies in Latin Philosophy. Oxford: 50–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zetzel, J. 2018. Critics, Compilers, and Commentators: An Introduction to Roman Philology, 200 bce–800 ce. Oxford.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: Inaccessible, or known limited accessibility
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The PDF of this book is known to have missing or limited accessibility features.
We may be reviewing its accessibility for future improvement, but final compliance is
not yet assured and may be subject to legal exceptions. If you have any questions,
please contact
accessibility@cambridge.org.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.