Aspetti della lingua di nuovo dell’ideologia senecana, Testi di nuovo manuali per l’insegnamento accademico del romano 68, Bologna: Patron 2000

A. Setaioli, “Interpretazioni stoiche ed epicuree mediante Servio di nuovo la preparazione dell’esegesi filosofica del favola ancora dei poeti verso Roma (Cornuto, Seneca, Filodemo)”, I–II,International Journal of the Classical Tradition 10, 2003–2004, 335–376; 11, 2004–2005, 3–46.

A. Setaioli, “Le fragment II Soubiran duDe consulatu de Ciceron, leDe diuinatione et leur lecture par Virgile”, in:Signe et prediction dans l’Antiquite. Actes du Dialogue international interdisciplinaire de Creteil et de Paris (22–23–24 per niente 2003). Textes reunis par Jose Kany-Turpin, Saint-Etienne: Publications de l’Universite de Saint-Etienne 2005, 241–261.

Addirittura. Merli, “Epigrammzyklen und ‘serielle Lekture’ sopra den Buchern Martials: Uberlegungen und Beispiele,” mediante F

W. H. Stahl,Macrobius’ Commentary on the Dream of Scipio, Records of Civilization, Sources and Studies 48, New York: Columbia University Press 1952 (reprint: ibid. W. H. Stahl,Macrobius’ Commentary on the Dream of Scipio, Records of Civilization, Sources and Studies 48, New York: Columbia University Press 1990).

P. Steinmetz, “Allegorische Deutung und allegorische Dichtung per der alten Stoa”,Rheinisches Museum fur Philologie N.F. 129, 1986, 18–30 (ristampato durante: Idem, P. Steinmetz,Kleine Schriften, e. Severin Koster, Palingenesia 68, Stuttgart: Steiner 2000).

References

The ‘conferenceacta’ comprise seven papers that are meant sicuro document the direction(s) durante which the exploration of Roman literature is now moving, or (more accurately perhaps) mediante the opinion of most of the contributorsshould orshould not be moving; they were published durante the most recent volume of theTransactions of the American Philological Association (TAPA) 135 (2005): 1–162 (for Edmunds, see 1–13).

Edmunds (above, n. 2):Transactions of the American Philological Association (TAPA) 135 (2005): 8–9 (quotation at 8, the emphasis is mine); I leave it up esatto the reader puro discover which of the papers is excluded here. Note that Edmunds’ (and, of course, others’) elite notion of ‘interpretation’ is emphatically narrow and must not be put on verso par with its ‘traditional’ sense, “puro expound the meaning of [something]; to render (words, writings, an author, etc.) clear and explicit; preciso elucidate; to explain” (OED 2 , s.v., 1a).

Exceptions prove the rule. Whatever W.’s predisposition may have been, he surely made a wise decision when embarking onRoman Homosexuality for his Ph.D. first, andthen turning onesto verso commentary on per collection of poetry.

For verso theoretic back-up, cf. D. Fowler, “Criticism as commentary and commentary as criticism sopra the age of the electronic media,” in: G. W. Most (e.),Commentaries-Kommentare, Aporemata 4 (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999): 426–442 (esp. 429–430).

Other examples of modern scholars, all well-known and highly esteemed forboth their theoryoriented works and their commentaries, include Addirittura. Fantham (Seneca, Lucan, Ovid), D. Fowler (Lucretius), and R. F. Thomas (Virgil), sicuro name but a few.

W., at 283–284, gives verso list of the most important editions and commentaries, esatto which one might want preciso add A. Canobbio,La lex Roscia theatralis anche Soldatesco: il successione del libro V, Biblioteca di Athenaeum 49 (Como: New Press, 2002), because it is per valuable supplement onesto P. Howell’s edition of Book 5 (Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1995), for which seeAnzeiger fur die Altertums-wissenschafter 50 (1997): 17–21. The collection of essays on Book 10, edited by G. Damschen and Per. Heil,maton liber decimus: Text Ubersetzung, Interpretationen, Studien zur klassischen Philologie 148 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2004), appeared too late sicuro be https://datingranking.net/it/her-review/ included sopra W.’s bibliography.

The bibliography, as emphasized by W. (283), is of course not meant preciso be exhaustive; for aForschungsbericht, see S. Lorenz, “]): 167–227, and cf. the bibliography per Damschen-Heil (above, n.7):maton liber decimus: Text, Ubersetzung, Interpretationen, Studien zur klassischen Philologie 148 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2004), appeared too late preciso be included durante W.’s bibliography 401–490.

For verso useful assessment of this issue (initiated by K. Barwick), cf. Grewing (e.),Toto notus sopra orbe: Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, Palingenesia 65, (Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, 1998): 139–156.