Verso. Setaioli, “Interpretazioni stoiche di nuovo epicuree sopra Servio anche la tradizione dell’esegesi filosofica del leggenda ancora dei poeti per 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 Colloque international interdisciplinaire de Creteil et de Paris (22–23–24 no 2003). Textes reunis par http://www.datingranking.net/it/localmilfselfies-review/ Jose Kany-Turpin, Saint-Etienne: Publications de l’Universite de Saint-Etienne 2005, 241–261.
E. Merli, “Epigrammzyklen und ‘serielle Lekture’ mediante 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 durante der alten Stoa”,Rheinisches Museum fur Philologie N.F. 129, 1986, 18–30 (ristampato con: Allo stesso modo, P. Steinmetz,Kleine Schriften, ed. Severin Koster, Palingenesia 68, Stuttgart: Steiner 2000).
References
The ‘conferenceacta’ comprise seven papers that are meant puro document the direction(s) mediante which the exploration of Roman literature is now moving, or (more accurately perhaps) sopra the opinion of most of the contributorsshould orshould not be moving; they were published sopra the most recent tomo 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 preciso the reader preciso 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, “to expound the meaning of [something]; esatto render (words, writings, an author, etc.) clear and explicit; to elucidate; onesto 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 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 (ancora.),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 E. Fantham (Seneca, Lucan, Ovid), D. Fowler (Lucretius), and R. F. Thomas (Virgil), sicuro name but verso few.
W., at 283–284, gives a list of the most important editions and commentaries, esatto which one might want puro add Verso. Canobbio,La lex Roscia theatralis di nuovo Marziale: il successione del analisi V, Biblioteca di Athenaeum 49 (Como: New Press, 2002), because it is a valuable supplement esatto 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 Verso. Heil,maton liber decimus: Text Ubersetzung, Interpretationen, Studien zur klassischen Philologie 148 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2004), appeared too late preciso be included in 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 mediante Damschen-Heil (above, n.7):maton liber decimus: Text, Ubersetzung, Interpretationen, Studien zur klassischen Philologie 148 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2004), appeared too late sicuro be included con W.’s bibliography 401–490.
For verso useful assessment of this issue (initiated by K. Barwick), cf. Grewing (di nuovo.),Toto notus in orbe: Perspektiven der Martial-Interpretation, Palingenesia 65, (Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, 1998): 139–156.