Verso. Setaioli, “Interpretazioni stoiche anche epicuree in Servio e la tradizione dell’esegesi https://datingranking.net/it/321chat-review/ filosofica del leggenda addirittura dei poeti a Roma (Cornuto, Seneca, Filodemo)”, I–II,International Journal of the Classical Tradition 10, 2003–2004, 335–376; 11, 2004–2005, 3–46.
Verso. 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 Conciliabule international interdisciplinaire de Creteil et de Paris (22–23–24 in nessun caso 2003). Textes reunis par Jose Kany-Turpin, Saint-Etienne: Publications de l’Universite de Saint-Etienne 2005, 241–261.
Ed. Merli, “Epigrammzyklen und ‘serielle Lekture’ con den Buchern Martials: Uberlegungen und Beispiele,” durante 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 per: Pure, P. Steinmetz,Kleine Schriften, ed. Severin Koster, Palingenesia 68, Stuttgart: Steiner 2000).
References
The ‘conferenceacta’ comprise seven papers that are meant preciso document the direction(s) sopra 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 libro 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 puro the reader esatto 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 per 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 per wise decision when embarking onRoman Homosexuality for his Ph.D. first, andthen turning esatto per commentary on a collection of poetry.
For per theoretic back-up, cf. D. Fowler, “Criticism as commentary and commentary as criticism per the age of the electronic media,” in: G. W. Most (addirittura.),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 Ancora. Fantham (Seneca, Lucan, Ovid), D. Fowler (Lucretius), and R. F. Thomas (Virgil), sicuro name but per few.
W., at 283–284, gives verso list of the most important editions and commentaries, preciso which one might want esatto add Verso. Canobbio,La lex Roscia theatralis di nuovo Militare: il passo del lezione V, Scaffale di Athenaeum 49 (Como: New Press, 2002), because it is per valuable supplement preciso 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 A. Heil,maton liber decimus: Text Ubersetzung, Interpretationen, Studien zur klassischen Philologie 148 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2004), appeared too late onesto be included durante W.’s bibliography.
The bibliography, as emphasized by W. (283), is of course not meant sicuro be exhaustive; for aForschungsbericht, see S. Lorenz, “]): 167–227, and cf. the bibliography in 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 con W.’s bibliography 401–490.
For verso useful assessment of this issue (initiated by K. Barwick), cf. Grewing (anche.),Toto notus in orbe: Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, Palingenesia 65, (Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, 1998): 139–156.