Aulus Gellius and Roman Reading Culture Text, Presence, and Imperial Knowledge in the<I> Noctes Atticae</I>
Book contents
- Aulus Gellius and Roman Reading Culture
- Aulus Gellius and Roman Reading Culture
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Introduction
- Chapter 1 How to Read the Noctes Atticae
- Chapter 2 Gellius in the History of Writing about Reading
- Chapter 3 Gellius on Pliny
- Chapter 4 Encounters with Tradition in Gellian Research
- Chapter 5 Favorinus, Fiction, and Dialogue at the Limits of Expertise
- Conclusion
- References
- Index Locorum
- General Index
- References
References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 March 2018
Book contents
- Aulus Gellius and Roman Reading Culture
- Aulus Gellius and Roman Reading Culture
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Introduction
- Chapter 1 How to Read the Noctes Atticae
- Chapter 2 Gellius in the History of Writing about Reading
- Chapter 3 Gellius on Pliny
- Chapter 4 Encounters with Tradition in Gellian Research
- Chapter 5 Favorinus, Fiction, and Dialogue at the Limits of Expertise
- Conclusion
- References
- Index Locorum
- General Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Aulus Gellius and Roman Reading CultureText, Presence, and Imperial Knowledge in the<I> Noctes Atticae</I>, pp. 265 - 274Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
References
Allen, J.S. 1991. In the Public Eye: A History of Reading in Modern France, 1800–1940. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, G. 1994. “Aulus Gellius: A Miscellanist and his World,” ANRW ii. 34.2: 1834–1862.Google Scholar
Anderson, G. 2004. “Aulus Gellius as a Storyteller,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 106–117.Google Scholar
Astarita, M.L. 1993. La Cultura nelle “Noctes Atticae.” Centro di Studi sull’Antico Christianesimo Università di Catania.Google Scholar
Beagon, M. 1992. Roman Nature: The Thought of Pliny the Elder. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beagon, M. 2011. “The Curious Eye of the Elder Pliny,” in Gibson, and Morello, (eds.), Pliny the Elder: Themes and Contexts, Brill, pp. 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beall, S.M. 1999. “Aulus Gellius 17.8: Composition and the Gentleman Scholar,” CP, 94(1): 55–64.Google Scholar
Beall, S.M. 2001. “Homo Fandi Dulcissimus: The Role of Favorinus in the ‘Attic Nights’ of Aulus Gellius,” The American Journal of Philology, 122(1): 87–106.Google Scholar
Beall, S.M. 2004. “Gellian Humanism Revisited,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 206–222.Google Scholar
Beard, M. 2002. “Ciceronian Correspondences: Making a Book out of Letters,” in Wiseman, (ed.), Classics in Progress, Oxford University Press, pp. 103–144.Google Scholar
Bodel, J. 2015.“The Publication of Pliny’s Letters,” in Marchesi, (ed.), Pliny the Book-maker, Oxford University Press, pp. 13–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boemer, F. 1953. “Der Commentarius: Zur Vorgeschichte und literarischen Form der Schriften Caesars,” Hermes, 81(2): 210–250.Google Scholar
Branham, R.B. 1989. Unruly Eloquence: Lucian and the Comedy of Traditions. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, J.K. 2006. “Just a Busybody? A Look at the Greco-Roman Topos of Meddling for Defining ἀλλοτριεπίσκοπος in 1 Peter 4:15,” Journal of Biblical Literature, 125(3): 549–568.Google Scholar
Buckingham, D. 2003. Media Education: Literacy, Learning and Contemporary Culture. Polity Press.Google Scholar
Budelmann, F. 2002. “Classical Commentary in Byzantium: John Tzetzes on Ancient Greek Literature,” in Gibson, and Kraus, (eds.), The Classical Commentary: Histories, Practices, Theory, Brill, pp. 141–169.Google Scholar
Burkert, W. 1972. Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Burn, A. and Durran, J. 2007. Media Literacy in Schools: Practice, Production and Progression. Paul Chapman.Google Scholar
Butler, S. 2014. “Cicero’s Capita,” in Jansen, (ed.), The Roman Paratext, Cambridge University Press, pp. 73–111.Google Scholar
Carey, S. 2003. Pliny’s Catalogue of Culture: Art and Empire in the Natural History. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavallo, G. and Chartier, R. (eds.) 1999. A History of Reading in the West. Polity Press.Google Scholar
Cavazza, F. 2004. “Gellius the Etymologist: Gellius’s Etymologies and Modern Etymology,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 65–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Celentano, M.S. 2003. “Book VI of Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria: The Transmission of Knowledge, Historical and Cultural Topicalities, and Autobiographic Experience,” in Tellegen-Couperius, (ed.), Quintilian and the Law, Leuven University Press, pp. 119–128.Google Scholar
Chartier, R. 1999. “Reading Matter and ‘Popular’ Reading: From the Renaissance to the Seventeenth Century,” in Chartier, and Cavallo, (eds.), A History of Reading in the West, Polity Press, pp. 269–283.Google Scholar
DeFilippo, J.G. 1990. “Curiositas and the Platonism of Apuleius’ Golden Ass,” The American Journal of Philology, 111(4): 471–492.Google Scholar
DiGiulio, S.J. 2015. Aulus Gellius, the Noctes Atticae, and the Literary Logic of Miscellany Under the High Roman Empire. Dissertation, Brown University.Google Scholar
Dominik, W.J. 1997. “The Style is the Man: Seneca, Tacitus and Quintilian’s Canon,” in Dominik, (ed.), Roman Eloquence, Routledge, pp. 42–56.Google Scholar
Doody, A. 2001. “Finding Facts in Pliny’s Encyclopaedia: The Summarium of the Natural History,” Ramus, 30: 1–22.Google Scholar
Doody, A. 2009. “Pliny’s Natural History: Enkuklios Paideia and the Ancient Encyclopedia,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 70: 1–21.Google Scholar
Doody, A. 2010. Pliny’s Encyclopedia: The Reception of the Natural History. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dorandi, T. 1991. “Den Autoren über die Schulter geschaut: Arbeitsweise und Autographie bei den antiken Schriftstellern,” ZPE, 87: 11–33.Google Scholar
Dupont, F. 2009. “The Corrupted Boy and The Crowned Poet, or, The Material Reality and the Symbolic Status of the Literary Book at Rome,” in Johnson, and Parker, (eds.), Ancient Literacies, Oxford University Press, pp. 143–163.Google Scholar
Ehrenberg, V. 1947, “Polypragmosyne: A Study in Greek Politics,” The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 67: 46–67.Google Scholar
Findlen, P. 1994. Possessing Nature: Museums, Collecting, and Scientific Culture in Early Modern Italy. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. 1995. Catullan Provocations: Lyric Poetry and the Drama of Position. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. 2000. Slavery and the Roman Literary Imagination. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. 2016. Variety: The Life of a Roman Concept. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1973. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 1992. “Plato’s Arguments and the Dialogue Form,” in Smith, and Klagge, (eds.), Methods of Interpreting Plato and his Dialogues, Oxford University Press, pp. 201–219.Google Scholar
Frier, B.W. 1979. Libri Annales Pontificum Maximorum: The Origins of the Annalistic Tradition. American Academy in Rome.Google Scholar
Giannopoulou, Z. 2010. “Enacting the Other, Being Oneself: The Drama of Rhetoric and Philosophy in Plato’s Phaedrus,” Classical Philology, 105(2): 146–161.Google Scholar
Gibson, M. 2011. “Elder and Better: The Naturalis Historia and the Letters of the Younger Pliny,” in Gibson, and Morello, (eds.), Pliny the Elder: Themes and Contexts, Brill, pp. 187–205.Google Scholar
Gibson, R. 2014. “Starting with the Index in Pliny,” in Jansen, (ed.), The Roman Paratext, Cambridge University Press, pp. 33–55.Google Scholar
Gibson, R.K. and Morello, R. 2012. Reading the Letters of Pliny the Younger. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gill, C. 2002. “Dialectic and the Dialogue Form,” in Annas, and Rowe, (eds.), New Perspectives on Plato, Modern and Ancient, Center for Hellenic Studies, pp. 145–170.Google Scholar
Gleason, M. 1995. Making Men: Sophists and Self-presentation in Ancient Rome. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goldhill, S. 1999. “Body/Politic: Is There a History of Reading?” in Falkner, , Nelson, and Konstan, (eds.), Contextualizing Classics, Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 89–120.Google Scholar
Goldhill, S. 2009. “The Anecdote: Exploring the Boundaries between Oral and Literate Performance in the Second Sophistic,” in Johnson, and Parker, (eds.) Ancient Literacies, Oxford University Press, pp. 96–113.Google Scholar
Gowers, E. 2003. “Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1,” Classical Antiquity, 22(1): 55–91.Google Scholar
Grafton, A. 2004. “Conflict and Harmony in the Collegium Gellianum,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 318–342.Google Scholar
Green, C.M.C. 1997. “Free as a Bird: Varro de re Rustica 3,” The American Journal of Philology, 118(3): 427–448.Google Scholar
Gunderson, E. 2009. Nox Philologiae: Aulus Gellius and the Fantasy of the Roman Library. Wisconsin University Press.Google Scholar
Hanson, A.E. 1987. “The Eight Months’ Child and the Etiquette of Birth: Obsit Omen!” Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 61(4): 589–602.Google Scholar
Harries, J. 2006. Cicero and the Jurists: From Citizens’ Law to the Lawful State. Duckworth.Google Scholar
Heath, M. 2004. “Gellius in the French Renaissance,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 282–317.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. 2002. “Knowing Someone Through Their Books: Pliny on Uncle Pliny (‘Epistles’ 3.5),” CP, 97(3): 256–284.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. 2011. “The Nature of Man: Pliny, Historia Naturalis as Cosmogram,” MD, 66: 139–171.Google Scholar
Henry, M.M. 1994. “On the Aims and Purposes of Aulus Gellius’ Noctes Atticae,” ANRW ii.34.2: 1918–1941.Google Scholar
Heusch, C. 2011. Die Macht der Memoria. Die ‘Noctes Atticae’ des Aulus Gellius im Licht der Erinnerungskultur des 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Holford-Strevens, L. 1982. “Fact and Fiction in Aulus Gellius,” Liverpool Classical Monthly, 7(5): 65–68.Google Scholar
Holford-Strevens, L. 1983. “Five Notes on Aulus Gellius,” Liverpool Classical Monthly, 8: 143–144.Google Scholar
Holford-Strevens, L. 2003. Aulus Gellius: An Antonine Scholar and his Achievement. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holford-Strevens, L. and Vardi, A. (eds.) 2004. The Worlds of Aulus Gellius. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horster, M. 2008. “Some Notes on Grammarians in Plutarch,” in Nikolaidis, (ed.), The Unity of Plutarch’s Work, De Gruyter, pp. 611–624.Google Scholar
Howley, J.A. 2013. “Why Read the Jurists? Aulus Gellius on Reading Across Disciplines,” in du Plessis, (ed.), New Frontiers. Law and Society in the Roman World, Edinburgh University Press, pp. 9–30.Google Scholar
Howley, J.A. 2014a. “‘Heus tu, rhetorisce’: Gellius, Cicero, Plutarch, and Roman Study Abroad,” in Rees, and Madsen, (eds.), Roman Rule in Greek and Latin Writing, Brill, pp. 163–192.Google Scholar
Howley, J.A. 2014b. “Valuing the Mediators of Antiquity in the Noctes Atticae,” in Ker, and Pieper, (eds.), Valuing the Past in the Greco-Roman World, Brill, pp. 465–484.Google Scholar
Huffman, C.A. 1999. “The Pythagorean Tradition,” in Long, (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, pp. 66–87.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. 2009. “The Curious Incident: Polypragmosyne in the Ancient Novel,” Ancient Narrative Supplementum, 12: 51–63.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. and Russell, D. 2011. Plutarch: How to Study Poetry. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jacob, C. 2005. “‘La Table et le Cercle’ Sociabilités Savantes sous l’Empire Romain,” Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales, 60(3): 507–530.Google Scholar
Janan, M. 1994. “When the Lamp is Shattered”: Desire and Narrative in Catullus. Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, W.A. 2000. “Toward a Sociology of Reading in Classical Antiquity,” AJP, 121: 593–627.Google Scholar
Johnson, W.A. 2009. “Constructing Elite Reading Communities in the High Empire,” in Johnson, and Parker, (eds.) Ancient Literacies, Oxford University Press, pp. 320–330.Google Scholar
Johnson, W.A. 2010. Readers and Reading Culture in the High Roman Empire: a Study of Elite Communities. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, J. 1987. “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding in Graeco-Roman Antiquity,” Journal of Roman Studies, 77: 139–155.Google Scholar
Kaster, R.A. 1995. C. Suetonius Tranquillus De Grammaticis et Rhetoribus. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kaster, R.A. 1997. Guardians of Language: The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ker, J. 2004. “Nocturnal Writers in Imperial Rome: The Culture of Lucubratio,” CP, 99: 209–242.Google Scholar
Keulen, W. 2004. “Gellius, Apuleius, and Satire on the Intellectual,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 223–245.Google Scholar
King, A. and Plunkett, J. (eds.) 2005. Victorian Print Media: A Reader. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kirichenko, A. 2008. “Satire, Propaganda, and the Pleasure of Reading: Apuleius’ Stories of Curiosity in Context,” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 104: 339–371.Google Scholar
Klotz, F. 2007. “Portraits of the Philosopher: Plutarch’s Self-Presentation in the Quaestiones Conviviales,” CQ, 57(2): 650–667.Google Scholar
Klotz, F. and Oikonomopoulou, K. (eds.) 2011. The Philosopher’s Banquet: Plutarch’s Table Talk in the Intellectual Culture of the Roman Empire. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Konstan, D. 2009. “The Active Reader and the Ancient Novel,” Ancient Narrative Supplementum, 12: 1–17.Google Scholar
König, J. 2007. “Fragmentation and Coherence in Plutarch’s Sympotic Questions,” in König, and Whitmarsh, (eds.), Ordering Knowledge in the Roman Empire, Cambridge University Press, pp. 43–68.Google Scholar
König, J. 2008. “Sympotic Dialogue in the First to Fifth Centuries ce,” in Goldhill, (ed.), The End of Dialogue in Antiquity, Cambridge University Press, pp. 85–113.Google Scholar
König, J. 2012. Saints and Symposiasts: The Literature of Food and the Symposium in Greco-Roman and Early Christian Culture. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kurke, L. 2006. “Plato, Aesop, and the Beginnings of Mimetic Prose,” Representations, 94(1): 6–52.Google Scholar
Lakmann, M.-L. 1995. Der Platoniker Tauros in der Darstellung des Aulus Gellius. Brill.Google Scholar
Lao, E. 2008. Restoring the Treasury of Mind: The Practical Knowledge of the “Natural History.” Dissertation, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Lao, E. 2011. “Luxury and the Creation of a Good Consumer,” in Gibson, and Morello, (eds.), Pliny the Elder: Themes and Contexts, Brill, pp. 35–56.Google Scholar
Leigh, M. 2013. From Polypragmon to Curiosus: Ancient Concepts of Curious and Meddlesome Behaviour. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Leighton, A.C. 1969. “Secret Communication among the Greeks and Romans,” Technology and Culture, 10(2): 139–154.Google Scholar
Lindermann, J.-O. 2006. Aulus Gellius Noctes Atticae, Buch 9: Kommentar. Weißensee Verlag.Google Scholar
Long, A. 2008. “Plato’s Dialogues and a Common Rationale for Dialogue Form,” in Goldhill, (ed.), The End of Dialogue in Antiquity, Cambridge University Press, pp. 45–59.Google Scholar
Lyons, M. 1999. “New Readers in the Nineteenth Century: Women, Children, Workers,” in Cavallo, and Chartier, (eds.), A History of Reading in the West, Polity Press, pp. 313–345.Google Scholar
Marchesi, I. 2008. The Art of Pliny’s Letters: A Poetics of Allusion in the Private Correspondence. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCabe, M.M. 2006. “Form and the Platonic Dialogues,” in Benson, (ed.), A Companion to Plato, Blackwell, pp. 39–54.Google Scholar
McCutcheon, R. 2015. “Silent Reading in Antiquity and the Future History of the Book,” Book History, 18: 1–32.Google Scholar
McDonnell, M. 1996. “Writing, Copying, and Autograph Manuscripts in Ancient Rome,” CQ, 46(2): 469–491.Google Scholar
ní Mheallaigh, K. 2005. “‘Plato Alone Was Not There …’: Platonic Presences in Lucian,” Hermathena, 179: 89–103.Google Scholar
ní Mheallaigh, K. 2009. “Ec[h]oing the Ass-Novel: Reading and Desire in the Onos, Metamorphoses and The Name of the Rose,” in Penwill, (ed.), Apuleian Reflections. Ramus, Critical Studies in Greek and Roman Literature, 38(1) pp. 109–122.Google Scholar
Milnor, K. 2005. Gender, Domesticity, and the Age of Augustus. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Momigliano, A. 1950. “Ancient History and the Antiquarian,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 13(3/4): 285–315.Google Scholar
de Montaigne, M. 1993. The Complete Essays. Translated by M. Screech. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Morello, R. 2011. “Pliny and the Encyclopedic Addressee,” in Gibson, and Morello, (eds.), Pliny the Elder: Themes and Contexts, Brill, pp. 147–166.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. 1995. Frames of Mind: Literate Education in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. 1998. Literate Education in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. 2004. “Educational Values,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 187–205.Google Scholar
Muckelbauer, J. 2003. “Imitation and Invention in Antiquity,” Rhetorica, 121(2): 61–88.Google Scholar
Murphy, J.J. 2003. “Quintilian’s Advice on the Continuing Self-Education of the Adult Orator: Book X of his Institutio Oratoria,” in Tellegen-Couperus, (ed.), Quintilian and the Law, Leuven University Press, pp. 247–252.Google Scholar
Murphy, T. 2003. “Pliny’s Naturalis historia: The Prodigal Text,” in Boyle, and Dominik, (eds.), Flavian Rome: Culture, Image, Text, Brill, pp. 301–22.Google Scholar
Murphy, T. 2004. Pliny the Elder’s Natural History: The Empire in the Encyclopedia. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nettleship, H. 1881. P. Vergili Maronis Opera with a Commentary by Jon Conington. Whitaker and Co.Google Scholar
Pade, M. 2014. “The Reception of Plutarch from Antiquity to the Italian Renaissance,” in Beck, (ed.), A Companion to Plutarch, Blackwell, pp. 531–543.Google Scholar
Parker, H.N. 2009. “Books and Reading Latin Poetry,” in Johnson, and Parker, (eds.), Ancient Literacies, Oxford University Press, pp. 186–229.Google Scholar
Piper, A. 2012. Book Was There: Reading in Electronic Times. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Purcell, N. 1995. “Literate Games: Roman Urban Society and the Game of Alea,” Past & Present, 147: 3–37.Google Scholar
Reay, B. 2005. “Agriculture, Writing, and Cato’s Aristocratic Self-Fashioning,” Classical Antiquity, 24(2): 331–361.Google Scholar
Reeve, M. 2011. “The Vita Plinii,” in Gibson, and Morello, (eds.), Pliny the Elder: Themes and Contexts, Brill, pp. 207–222.Google Scholar
Riggsby, A. 2007. “Guides to the Wor(l)d,” in König, and Whitmarsh, (eds.), Ordering Knowledge in the Roman Empire, Cambridge University Press, pp. 88–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roman, L. 2001. “The Representation of Literary Materiality in Martial’s ‘Epigrams’,” The Journal of Roman Studies, 91: 113–145.Google Scholar
Runia, D.T. 1999. “What is Doxography?” in van der Eijk, (ed.), Ancient Histories of Medicine: Essays in Doxography and Historiography in Classical Antiquity, Brill, pp. 33–55.Google Scholar
Russell, D.A. 2002. Quintilian, The Orator’s Education: Books 9–10, LCL. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rust, E.M. 2009. Ex Angulis Secretisque Librorum: Reading, Writing and Using Miscellaneous Knowledge in the Noctes Atticae. Dissertation, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Saenger, P. 1999. “Reading in the Later Middle Ages,” in Chartier, and Cavallo, (eds.), A History of Reading in the West, Polity Press, pp. 120–148.Google Scholar
Schröder, B. 1999. Titel und Text: zur Entwicklung lateinischer Gedichtüberschriften. De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sconocchia, S. 1983. “Praefatio,” in Scribonii Largi Compositiones, Teubner, pp. v–xix.Google Scholar
Sinclair, P. 2002. “Rhetoric of Writing and Reading in the Preface to Pliny’s Naturalis historia,” in Boyle, and Dominik, (eds.), Flavian Rome, Brill, pp. 277–300.Google Scholar
Sluiter, I. 2000. “The Dialectics of Genre: Some Aspects of Secondary Literature and Genre in Antiquity,” in Depew, and Obbink, (eds.), Matrices of Genre: Authors, Canons, and Society, Harvard University Press, pp. 183–204.Google Scholar
Springer, L.A. 1958. “Aulus Gellius: On Historical and Descriptive Linguistics,” The Classical Journal, 54(3): 121–128.Google Scholar
Staden, H. von. 1999. “Hellenistic Reflections on the History of Medicine,” in van der Eijk, (ed.), Ancient Histories of Medicine: Essays in Doxography and Historiography in Classical Antiquity, Brill, pp. 143–188.Google Scholar
Staden, H. von. 2002. “‘A Woman Does Not Become Ambidextrous’: Galen and the Culture of Scientific Commentary,” in Gibson, and Kraus, (eds.), The Classical Commentary, Histories, Practices, Theory, Brill, pp. 109–139.Google Scholar
Staden, H. von. 2009. “Staging the Past, Staging Oneself: Galen on Hellenistic Exegetical traditions,” in Gill, , Whitmarsh, and Wilkins, (eds.), Galen and the World of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 132–156.Google Scholar
Starr, R.J. 1991. “Reading Aloud: Lectores and Roman Reading,” The Classical Journal, 86(4): 337–343.Google Scholar
Starr, R.J. 2001. “The Flexibility of Literary Meaning and the Role of the Reader in Roman Antiquity,” Latomus, 60(2): 433–445.Google Scholar
Starr, R.J. 2007. “Roman Literary Chronology: A Teacher in His Classroom,” Latomus, 4: 959–964.Google Scholar
Stevenson, A.J. 2004. “Gellius and the Roman Antiqurian Tradition,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 118–155.Google Scholar
Stock, B. 2001. After Augustine: The Meditative Reader and the Text. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Suarez, M.F. and Woudhuysen, H. 2013. “Introduction,” in Suarez, and Woudhuysen, (eds.), The Book: A Global History, Oxford University Press, pp. xi–xii.Google Scholar
Swain, S. 2004. “Bilingualism and Biculturalism in Antonine Rome,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 3–40.Google Scholar
Taekema, H.S. 2003. “Reasons for Reading: Quintilian’s Advice on ‘What to Read’ in Book X,” in Tellegen-Couperus, (ed.), Quintilian and the Law, Leuven University Press, pp. 253–264.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. 1961. The Didascalicon of Hugh of St. Victor: A Medieval Guide to the Arts. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Treggiari, S. 1991. Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vallance, J.T. 1999. “Galen, Proclus and the Non-Submissive Commentary,” in Most, (ed.), Commentaries = Kommentare. Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, pp. 223–244.Google Scholar
van der Eijk, P. 1999. “Historical Awareness, Historiography, and Doxography in Greek and Roman Medicine,” in van der Eijk, (ed.), Ancient Histories of Medicine: Essays in Doxography and Historiography in Classical Antiquity, Brill, pp. 1–31.Google Scholar
Van der Stockt, L. 2012. “Plutarch and Apuleius,” in Keulen, and Egelhaaf-Gaiser, (eds.), Aspects of Apuleius’ Golden Ass, Brill, pp. 168–181.Google Scholar
Van Hoof, L. 2010. Plutarch’s Practical Ethics: The Social Dynamics of Philosophy. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vardi, A. 1996. “Diiudicatio Locorum: Gellius and the History of a Mode in Ancient Comparative Criticism,” CQ, 46(2): 492–514.Google Scholar
Vardi, A. 2004. “Genre, Conventions, and Cultural Programme in Gellius’ Noctes Atticae,” in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (eds.), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford University Press, pp. 161–186.Google Scholar
Vessey, D.W.T. 1994. “Aulus Gellius and the Cult of the Past,” ANRW ii.34.2: 1863–1917.Google Scholar
White, P. 2009. “Bookshops in the Literary Culture of Rome,” in Johnson, and Parker, (eds.), Ancient Literacies, Oxford University Press, pp. 268–287.Google Scholar
Whiteley, S. 1978. “Fossicking Through Aulus Gellius’ Noctes Atticae,” Acta Classica, 21: 99–114.Google Scholar
Whitmarsh, T. 2001. Greek Literature and the Roman Empire: The Politics of Imitation. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, G.D. 1992. “Representations of the Book-Roll in Latin Poetry: Ovid, Tr. 1, 1,3–14 and Related Texts,” Mnemosyne, 45(2): 178–189.Google Scholar
Winkler, J.J. 1985. Auctor & Actor: A Narratological Reading of Apuleius’ Golden Ass. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Woolf, G. 2003. “The City of Letters,” in Edwards, and Woolf, (eds.), Rome the Cosmopolis, Cambridge University Press, pp. 203–221.Google Scholar
Woolf, G. 2012. “Reading and Religion in Rome,” in Spickermann, and Rüpke, (eds.), Reflections on Religious Individuality: Greco-Roman and Judaeo-Christian Texts and Practices, de Gruyter, pp. 193–208.Google Scholar
Zadorojnyi, A., Stadter, P.A. and Van der Stockt, L. 2002. “Safe Drugs for the Good Boys,” in Stadter, and van der Stockt, (eds.), Sage and Emperor, Leuven University Press, pp. 297–314.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J.E.G. 1973. “Emendavi ad Tironem: Some Notes on Scholarship in the Second Century A.D,” HSCPh, 77: 225–243.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J.E.G. 1980. “Horace’s Liber Sermonum: The Structure of Ambiguity,” Arethusa, 13(1): 59–78.Google Scholar