p​osted with permission:​

Virgil: Aeneid Book XII. Edited by Richard Tarrant. Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Pp. ix + 362. Hardcover, £50.00/$90.00. ISBN 978-0-521-30881-6. Paper, £19.99/$36.99. ISBN 978-0-521-31363-6.

The Humanness of Heroes: Studies in the Conclusion of Virgil’s Aeneid. By Michael Putnam. The Amsterdam Vergil Lectures, Volume 1. Amsterdam University Press, 2011. Distributed by the University of Chicago Press. Pp. 183. Paper, $25.00. ISBN 978-90-8964-3476.

Reviewed by †David West, Corbridge.

At last a modern commentary on Book 12 and it is excellent. The Introduction includes a timely study of Virgil’s meter which shows that lines with four spondees often describe what is slow, heavy, or solemn (add “sacral”), while lines which begin with five dactyls tend to depict rapid action. I count eleven of these, two of which are lists of the Greek names of casualties, and speed is mentioned in six of the remaining nine. The case is made when the mighty 4S line 649 ends a paragraph and Saces rushes into 5D action in 650, descendam, maiorum haud umquam indignus avorum. Vix ea fatus erat: medios volat ecce per hostes. Another such leap from 4S to 5D occurs in 80–1. The average in the book is one 4S every 14 lines. In 896–9 there are three in four lines, as Turnus eyes a great rock. In 906 he drops it with a 5D, tum lapis ipse viri vacuum per inane volutus. Virgil’s sweet and marvellously effective voice will not sound again but Tarrant enables us to hear it a little better.

The commentary excels for its thoroughness and sound judgment. It seems to deal with every detail of the language and offer judicious solutions amply supported by modern scholars, particularly Anglophones. There are also masses of parallel passages, making it a much larger book than previous commentaries in this series.

The Introduction includes sections on Turnus and Aeneas, the Final Scene, and Augustan Ramifications. Here Tarrant is too kind to Turnus. When the Book opens the Latins have been smashed, infractos, and their commander has been absent. Turnus realizes that the time has come for him to keep his promises, and that he is being looked at meaningfully, se signari oculis. In 11–17 he consents to a treaty (he will later violate it). He insults his Latin comrades (who have been doing the fighting), and consents to meet Aeneas in single combat, “refuting the charge of cowardice to which the Latins had rendered themselves liable,” he says. It is Turnus who is the coward.

The aged king Latinus has to deal with this. He begins by praising Turnus’ fierce courage so unlike his own fear, metuentem. Tarrant takes this to hint at his lack of resolve. But Latinus is not afraid, he is deploying conciliatio benevolentiae to flatter Turnus for his courage by declaring his own lack of it. His speech is a masterpiece of rhetoric, and it ends with an appeal to Turnus’ aged father, the card played by Sinon in 2.87 and 138, and the fifth locus in the twelve under misericordia in Ad Herennium 2.47.

Turnus’ reply is rude and arrogant, and he is soon rushing into the house, asking for his horses and glorying in them, quicker than winds and white as snow. He then dons his armor, breastplate with scales of gold and aurichalc, sword, shield, and helmet with red crests in horned sockets. (There were two fire-breathing chimeras on top of it in 7.785–6.) Next he takes the sword Vulcan had made for his father Daunus, tempering the steel in water of the Styx. He then snatches a spear leaning against a column, addresses it passionately, and utters dire prophecies of what is in store for the effeminate Phrygian. Sparks fly from his face and his eyes flash fire. He is pawing the ground and goring the winds before his first (note) battle. This is a boy, not a warrior. And he has armed on the wrong day and taken the wrong sword.

Aeneas also put on his armor, given to him by his divine mother (Venus trumps Daunus), and was just as fierce, delighted to know that the truce he offered Latinus would end the war. He comforted his men and then his son (after all the boy might be about to lose his father), and told him about the great future the Fates had in store for him (“It’s not the end for you if I die”). He then ordered a deputation to take a reply to Latinus and agree the terms of the truce. This is a soldier speaking, dealing with half a dozen things in three lines. He speaks in the same military manner in 190–4 (this briskness in line 192 might raise the speedy 5D score to 7 out of 9) as Virgil sounds the contrast between bluster and efficiency. Tarrant gives a full and fair account of these points, but his summary on p. 112 does not do justice to Aeneas—“Turnus is full of bustling activity and fierce emotion, while Aeneas exhibits an almost eerie calm and seeks to comfort his companions rather than to stir them up … This is A. at his noblest, and arguably his least interesting.” Aeneas was about to negotiate a truce and fight a duel. This was no time to stir up troops.

Tarrant is also a little unfair to Aeneas when he calls his siege of the Latin city “barbaric,” “a vindictive attack on non-combatants.” Virgil tried to protect Aeneas from such a judgment. He made it clear that Venus put the idea into her son’s mind to go to the city walls (554–5), and he immediately caught sight of the city secure and calm in the 5D, immunem tanti belli atque impune quietem. Then the instant he heard the name of Turnus he left the city walls. Aeneas was not vindictive but desperate to end the war.

Tarrant devotes a dozen pages to the final scene, but neither there nor in his commentary does he do justice to lines 932–4, where Turnus begs Aeneas to take pity on his old father (fuit et tibi talis Anchises genitor). In 10.441–3 Turnus had hunted down a young man and sent the corpse back to his father with sarcastic taunts in 10.491–4. His conduct, as detailed in Harrison’s commentary, “presents a clear contrast with that of Aeneas over Lausus … the greatest point of contrast between the two commanders and essential for their characterization” but Tarrant does not use it. Throughout this Book Virgil sets up many contrasts between Turnus and Aeneas. Surely we need to remember that after Aeneas killed Lausus in 10.808–28, he looked at the young man’s face and thought of his own father, pitied Lausus, praised his valor, and respected his armor and his corpse.

The Aeneid, inter multa alia, praises Augustus by praising his ancestor. If Virgil had favored Turnus above Aeneas, Augustus would have seen it, and we would not be reading the Aeneid today. Tarrant lays stress on Aeneas’ failure to observe his father’s precept, parcere subiectis, in 6.853, but Anchises has just spoken 97 lines praising Roman victories (more than half of them won by his own descendants).

Julius Caesar and Augustus were both ruthless in war, but Virgil shows Aeneas being tempted to be merciful in 12.940. He is the only hero in Homer or the Aeneid who thinks of such a thing, but Tarrant undermines even that by suggesting that his intense anger at the sight of Pallas’ belt “is to some degree directed at himself for having let Pallas fade from his mind … his over-identification with Pallas is a form of compensation.”

Many men beg for mercy in the Iliad and the Aeneid. None receives it. Why should Aeneas break the rule? War is part of epic, and in war men blaze with anger and kill.

*

In Catullus 64.354 when Achilles hears that Patroclus has been killed, he mows down Trojans, demetit. In Aeneid 10.513 when Aeneas hears that Pallas has been killed, he mows down everything before him, metit, and Michael Putnam deduces that the savagery of Achilles is absorbed by the brutality of Aeneas. By similar lexical arguments Aeneas then becomes Achilles, and later will be Pyrrhus and Juno. The cloud of connections is at its thickest on p. 109 when “Aeneas both becomes Dido and kills her as he slays Turnus.” He has already been Turnus several times. This is no way to read.

The thrust of this book is that Aeneid 12 plots the descent of a man who was famous for his pietas, and becomes a sacker of cities, a killer of women and of a wounded man begging for mercy at his feet. (This is Aeneas’ humanness.) The premise for this is Aeneas’ failure to observe the instruction of his father Anchises in 6.853 to spare the defeated, parcere subiectis. Tarrant calls it a precept, and Putnam invokes it a score of times in his 133 pages. But it is not a precept without the end of the line, et debellare superbos. In 6.756–853 Anchises has delivered a panegyric on the victories which have made Rome ruler of the world. He was more jingoist than pacifist. In 12.324–5, when the Latins violate the truce conference and Aeneas is wounded, Turnus roars into action the moment he sees him leaving the field, ut Aeneam cedentem ex agmine vidit … subita spe fervidus ardet. Anchises would have questioned his son’s sanity if he had spared such a man. Why then recommend clemency here?

At the beginning of his Res Gestae Augustus records that a crown was put over his door recording his Virtus, Clementia, Iustitia, Pietas. But Julius Caesar had massacred Germans as a pacification policy, and there is no conspicuous mercy from Augustus till 28 bc, after his opponents are defeated. For him too, clemency was an instrument of policy, an amnesty offered to those who had fought against him. Parcere subiectis was not an injunction to Roman soldiers to spare enemies wounded in battle, but part of the Augustan settlement, and Augustus’ poet is unobtrusively supporting it.

​

Joshua Arthurs.  Excavating Modernity: The Roman Past in Fascist
Italy.  Ithaca  Cornell University Press, 2012.  Illustrations. 232
pp.  $45.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-8014-4998-7.

Reviewed by Eleanor Chiari (University College London)
Published on H-SAE (June, 2013)
Commissioned by Michael B. Munnik

Excavating a Fascist Future: A New Study of the Fascist Idea of
“Romanità”

Joshua Arthurs presents an ambitious argument on the tensions between
Rome’s burdensome past and Fascism’s modernist take on the idea of
“_romanità_” (literally: roman-ness)_ _as played out on the Roman
landscape, in classicist institutions and in Fascist exhibitions. The
main argument of the book is that the idea of _romanità _was central
to the political culture of Fascism, that_ romanità_ was a modernist
rather than conservative concept, and that it was also a model for
solving anxieties about modernity. Although the originality of these
claims is sometimes overstressed, _Excavating Modernity _explores the
theme of _romanità_ more comprehensively than has been done before
while elegantly outlining the tensions between ideas of Rome and
their physical as well as symbolic incarnations over time.[1]

Through in-depth micro-historical analyses, Arthurs successfully
describes the ways in which the Fascist idea of _romanità _was
produced from below as the product of complex negotiations between
different social agents working against Rome’s other powerful
symbolic meanings. During Fascism, an idealized Rome was to be
“liberated,” either from the physical presence of centuries of papal
rule embodied in architecture or from the very corruption of its
people. Rome was to be “excavated” to reveal the “new Rome” of the
Fascist future, which, Arthurs shows, had to contend as much with the
“old Rome” still existing in the present as with shifts in the
political present of the regime, most notably, with the Racial Laws
of 1938.

The book is divided into five chapters, which partially follow a
chronological order. Chapter 1 looks at the “pre-history” of the
Fascist idea of Rome. It presents a fascinating description of
nineteenth-century ideas of Rome as a utopian site for projecting
hopes for the new Italian nation as well as a vehicle for expressing
disappointment around the failures of the Risorgimento. In clear and
sophisticated language, Arthurs shows how the Fascists negotiated the
complex dynamics between modernist condemnations of the capital and
its antiquities and the need to connect to visions of the capital as
the moral heart of the nation. Arthurs focuses particularly on the
March on Rome as a key symbolic moment in which Fascism at once
embodied revolutionary usurpation alongside a restoration of the true
Roman spirit. He shows how Benito Mussolini’s march _against_ the
capital but also_ for_ the capital managed at once to contain and to
give voice to the remnants of Risorgimento patriotism, futurist
anti-_passatismo _(a complex concept, roughly summarized as a
rejection of ‘pastism,’ i.e., an excessive dwelling on the past, or
antiquated thinking); elitist modernism; and expansionist
imperialism.

Chapter 2 focuses in depth on the Istituto di Studi Romani (Institute
for Roman Studies) and its work during the 1920s and 1930s. It
discusses the role that the institute played in attempting to create
a coherent Fascist discourse on Rome, both in the academy and in
relation to the public at large. The institute aimed to bring Roman
studies to the forefront of modern Italian culture by encouraging the
use of Latin among schoolchildren, organizing large-scale
exhibitions, and developing bibliographic projects on Rome, and
promoting such activities as creating a colossal photographic archive
of Roman monuments. Arthurs brings examples of the institute’s
conception of an engaged and “virile” scholarship: he describes an
“epigraphic census” of northern Italian gravestones, aimed at showing
that the Po Valley was Roman; the production of a thirty-volume
history of Rome; courses and field trips for the upper bourgeoisie;
and radio transmissions and popular booklets distributed through the
Opera Nazionale Dopolavoro (p. 36)_. _One of the institute’s most
challenging tasks consisted of reconciling the Fascist vision of
_romanità _with the history of Roma Sacra_ _(Christian Rome). Rather
than privileging Rome’s ancient history over the history of the
Catholic Church, or arguing for the church’s role as heir to the
ancient empire, the institute focused on establishing the concept of
_romanità_ as central to both ancient and Christian Rome. By
insisting on the link between _romanità _and faith, the institute
satisfied sections of Catholic opinion threatened by Fascism’s
anticlerical and antipapal historical revisionism while still
asserting a clear supremacy of the new regime over its predecessors.

Chapter 3 looks at Fascist archaeological interventions in the 1920s
and 1930s, and considers how the regime used archaeology as a tool
for urban modernization. It highlights the imagined construction of a
“Roma Nuova”_ _(the new Rome designed by Fascism) set against a “Roma
Antica” (Rome of classical antiquity) to be extricated and liberated
from the corrupt clutches of an unsanitary “Roma Vecchia”_ _(from the
fall of the Roman Empire to 1922). The chapter shows how the
transformations of the Roma Nuova were integrated into the cult of
Mussolini, in which the city was shown to bend to the will of the
Duce, who was renewing the soul of the nation alongside its capital.
It convincingly demonstrates how the remains of the Roman past came
to challenge the regime’s desire to build a monumental city and
highlights how much easier it was for the regime to destroy rather
than to build. In its effort at linking the present directly to the
Roman past, the regime presented an anti-temporal and ahistorical
conception of time and history which was played out aggressively in
the surgical “regeneration” of the modern city.

Chapter 4 focuses on the Mostra Augustea della Romanità (Augustan
Exhibition of “Roman-ness”), which celebrated the bi-millennium of
emperor Augustus in 1937, and relates it both to the successful
Fascist Mostra della Rivoluzione Fascista (Exhibition of the Fascist
Revolution) of 1932 and to the Mostra Archeologica (archaeological
exhibition) set up during the liberal period in 1911. The chapter
highlights some of the continuities with earlier exhibitions set to
link the Roman present with the past. It discusses the predictable
symbolic links drawn between Augustus and Mussolini and describes the
Fascist efforts at producing a modernist version of Rome’s triumphal
past. Arthurs describes the content of the themes and presentations
of the exhibition as “totalitarian” and notes how the replicas and
reconstructions of Roman objects that visitors were allowed to handle
reflected a modernist curatorial approach (pp. 103-104). Much like in
Marla Stone’s discussion of the Mostra della Rivoluzione Fascista,_
_Arthurs confronts the ambiguities in the general public’s reception
of the exhibition and the methodological difficulties linked to
assessing visitor numbers and reception given the mandatory group
visits; the visits by military personnel; and the use of _treni
popolari _(popular trains), which encouraged visits to such
exhibitions in exchange for significant train fare discounts.[2]_ _

Chapter 5 focuses on the crisis that shifts in Fascist foreign policy
bring to the idea of _romanità_, particularly relating to racial
questions. It highlights the problems involved in reconciling the
image of a universal, inclusive, and imperial Rome with ideas of
ethnic exclusivism. It also dissects some of the academic debates
relating to Germanic tribes, to relations between Rome and Judea, and
to the problem of _romanità _as a legal rather than biological
concept. As _romanità _comes to be seen as a form of “civilization”
in opposition to the supposedly superior Nazi notion of “_Kultur_,”
it also takes a secondary role in the Fascist propaganda project. The
second part of the chapter focuses on the ambivalent relationship
that the Republic of Salò had with _romanità _and with Rome itself,
and it looks specifically at anti-Allied racist imagery and at the
view of the fall of Fascism as symptomatic of the innate failures of
the Italian race. From this theme of crisis, Arthurs concludes by
focusing on the reassertion of Rome’s Catholic character after the
war and the reemergence of the dominance of the idea of Roma Sacra_
_over the Fascist reimagined Roma Antica. By looking into the careers
of the scholars involved in the Istituto di Studi Romani, Arthurs
argues that most of them turned from Fascism to conservative
Catholicism and that the institute continued its work, shifting its
attention, however, to the importance of Rome during the papal era.
Continuity is also found in museum practices, as the new Museo della
Civiltà Romana, inaugurated in 1952, maintained many of the features
and displays of its Fascist predecessor. The continued presence of
the Fascist intervention on the Roman landscape is also discussed,
particularly the completion of some of the major urban projects begun
during the Fascist era, such as the neighborhood around the EUR
(Esposizione Universale Roma, the 1942 world fair, which never took
place due to Italy’s involvement in the Second World War).

Arthurs ends his work with the claim that “arguably the most enduring
legacy of _romanità _stems from the failure of the Fascist project”
and that “Fascism’s revolutionary attempt to excavate Roman modernity
represents not so much the culmination of this trajectory as its
bankrupting” since classicism after the Second World War came to be
equated with the “excesses of totalitarianism, militarism and
imperialism” (p. 155). A whole new chapter of this book could be
written examining the renewed construction of a glorious idea of
_romanità _by the ultra-right in Silvio Berlusconi’s governments
over the past decade and particularly on the uses of Roman spaces in
state commemorations organized by the current mayor of Rome, Gianni
Alemanno (such as the celebration of the anniversary of the Roman
Republic at the Gianicolo in 2013 or the attempted uses of the
Colosseum in Christmas festivities). Some of the most interesting
sections of _Excavating Modernity_ are those dedicated to the ways in
which the city of Rome resisted the efforts of various regimes to
transform it into the idealized city they wished it to be. Rome as a
symbol of the failures of the Italian state and its political class,
as well as of its very people, remains a theme prevalent today in
both the discourses of the Northern League and of antipolitical
movements, such as Beppe Grillo’s Movimento a Cinque Stelle (Five
Star Movement). A serious study of the continuities in the images and
the rhetoric around Rome’s failures would be an important addition to
Arthurs’s work.

_Excavating Modernity_ is a useful addition to a large academic body
of works focused on Fascism and the Roman past. The book’s main focus
on _romanità_ gives it breadth of analysis and depth of focus,
although Rome itself often takes Arthurs on tangents that are much
more exciting than this primary concern. Although the book is clear
and beautifully written, and covers a wide range of topics, it feels
at times conspicuously like a PhD dissertation converted into a book
(particularly chapters 3 and 4), and it feels constrained by its own
methodological confines. That said, it undoubtedly presents a good
summary of the highly complex and fascinating transformations of the
concept of _romanità _and of shifts and continuities in the social
imaginary of Rome over time, making it both an interesting read and a
good place to direct students wishing to gain a greater understanding
of the construction and invention of the Roman past in Fascist Italy.

Notes

[1]. See, for example, Marla Stone, “A Flexible Rome: Fascism and the
Cult of Romanità,” in _Roman Presences: Receptions of Rome in
European Culture 1789-1945_, ed. Catherine Edwards (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1999), 205-220; and Flavia Marcello,
“Mussolini and the Idealisation of Empire: The Augustan Exhibition of
Romanità,” _Modern Italy _16, no. 3 (2011): 223-247.

[2]. Marla Stone, “Staging Fascism: The Exhibition of the Fascist
Revolution,” _Journal of Contemporary History_ 28, no. 2 (1993):
215-243.

Citation: Eleanor Chiari. Review of Arthurs, Joshua, _Excavating
Modernity: The Roman Past in Fascist Italy_. H-SAE, H-Net Reviews.
June, 2013.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=37077

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States
License.

Catching up with almost a month’s worth:

• 2013.06.13:  Branka Migotti, The Archaeology of Roman Southern Pannonia: The State of Research and Selected Problems in the Croatian Part of the Roman Province of Pannonia. BAR International Series, S2393, 2012.
• 2013.06.14:  Trevor Bryce, The World of the Neo-Hittite Kingdoms: A Political and Military History.
• 2013.06.15:  Helmut Kyrieleis, Olympia: Archäologie eines Heiligtums. Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie.
• 2013.06.16:  David Sansone, Greek Drama and the Invention of Rhetoric.
• 2013.06.17:  M. H. Crawford, Imagines Italicae: A Corpus of Italic Inscriptions (3 vols.). Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies supplement 110.
• 2013.06.18:  Marina Belozerskaya, Medusa’s Gaze: The Extraordinary Journey of the Tazza Farnese. Emblems of antiquity.
• 2013.06.19:  Uwe Ellerbrock, Sylvia Winkelmann, Die Parther: die vergessene Großmacht​.
• 2013.06.20:  Ellen D. Finkelpearl, An Apuleius Reader: Selections from the Metamorphoses. BC Latin readers.
• 2013.06.21:  Henri Etcheto, Les Scipions: Famille et pouvoir à Rome à l’époque républicaine. Scripta antiqua, 45.
• 2013.06.22:  Daniel S. Werner, Myth and Philosophy in Plato’s Phaedrus.
• 2013.06.23:  Aldo Schiavone, Spartacus (first published 2011). Revealing antiquity, 19.
• 2013.06.24:  Matthieu Cassin, L’écriture de la controverse chez Grégoire de Nysse: polémique littéraire et exégèse dans le Contre Eunome. Collection des études augustiniennes. Série Antiquité, 193.
• 2013.06.25:  Maria Vittoria Cerutti, Auctoritas. Mondo tardoantico e riflessi contemporanei.
• 2013.06.26:  Radek Chlup, Proclus: An Introduction.
• 2013.06.27:  Sergei A. Kovalenko, Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum: State Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts. Coins of the Black Sea Region, Part I: Ancient Coins from the Northern Black Sea Littoral. Colloquia antiqua, 3.
• 2013.06.28:  Timothy Luckritz Marquis, Transient Apostle: Paul, Travel, and the Rhetoric of Empire. Synkrisis: Comparative approaches to early Christianity in Greco-Roman culture.
• 2013.06.29:  Giacomo Manganaro, Pace e guerra nella Sicilia tardo-ellenistica e romana (215 a.C.-14 d.C.): ricerche storiche e numismatiche. Nomismata, 7.
• 2013.06.30:  Stefano U. Baldassarri, Benedetta Aldi, William J. Connell, Giannozzo Manetti. Historia Pistoriensis. Il ritorno dei classici nell’Umanesimo, IV: Edizione nazionale dei testi della storiografia umanistica, 7.
• 2013.06.31:  Can Bilsel, Antiquity on Display: Regimes of the Authentic in Berlin’s Pergamon Museum. Classical Presences.
• 2013.06.32:  Silvia Fazzo, Il libro Lambda della Metafisica di Aristotele. Elenchos, 61.
• 2013.06.33:  Barbara Cavaliere, Jennifer Udell, Ancient Mediterranean Art: The William D. and Jane Walsh Collection at Fordham University.
• 2013.06.34:  Paul Schubert, Actes du 26e Congrès international de papyrologie, Genève, 16-21 août 2010. Recherches et rencontres, 30​.
• 2013.06.35:  Gary Forsythe, Time in Roman Religion: One Thousand Years of Religious History. Routledge studies in ancient history, 4.
• 2013.06.36:  Manfred Clauss, Mithras: Kult und Mysterium.
• 2013.06.37:  John A. Pinto, Speaking Ruins: Piranesi, Architects and Antiquity in Eighteenth-Century Rome. Thomas Spencer Jerome lectures.
• 2013.06.38:  Foteini Kolovou, Byzanzrezeption in Europa. Spurensuche über das Mittelalter und die Renaissance bis in die Gegenwart. Byzantinisches Archiv Band 24.
• 2013.06.39:  Wiebke Friese, Die Kunst vom Wahn- und Wahrsagen. Orakelheiligtümer in der antiken Welt.
• 2013.06.40:  Ioanna Patera, Offrir en Grèce ancienne: gestes et contextes. Potsdamer Altertumswissenschaftliche Beiträge, Bd 41.
• 2013.06.41:  Andreas Markantonatos, Brill’s Companion to Sophocles.
• 2013.06.42:  Danuta Okoń, Septimius Severus et senatores: Septimius Severus’ Personal Policy towards Senators in the Light of Prosopographic Research (193-211 A.D.) Uniwersytet Szczeciński. Rozprawy i studia, 828.
• 2013.06.43:  Aurélie Damet, La septième porte : les conflits familiaux dans l’Athènes classique. Histoire ancienne et médiévale, 115.
• 2013.06.44:  Robin Osborne, Athens and Athenian Democracy.
• 2013.06.45:  Marine Bretin-Chabrol, L’arbre et la lignée: métaphores végétales de la filiation et de l’alliance en latin classique. Horos.
• 2013.06.46:  John Briscoe, A Commentary on Livy, Books 41-45.
• 2013.07.02:  Bernd Steinmann, Die Waffengräber der ägäischen Bronzezeit: Waffenbeigaben, soziale Selbstdarstellung und Adelsethos in der minoisch-mykenischen Kultur. Philippika, 52​.
• 2013.07.03:  Stella Georgoudi, Renée Koch Piettre, Francis Schmidt, La raison des signes: présages, rites, destin dans les sociétés de la méditerranée ancienne. Religions in the Graeco-Roman world, 174.

Did the ancient Greeks worship stones as gods?

• via The Marginalia Review of Books

• 2013.06.12:  Gianfranco Nuzzo, Publio Papinio Stazio, Achilleide.
• 2013.06.11:  Pierre Sauzeau, André​ Sauzeau, La quatrième fonction: altérité et marginalité dans l’idéologie des Indo-Européens. Vérité des mythes​.
• 2013.06.10:  Benjamin W. Millis, S. Douglas Olson, Inscriptional Records for the Dramatic Festivals in Athens: IG II2 2318-2325 and Related Texts. Brill studies in Greek and Roman epigraphy.
• 2013.06.09:  Simon Goldhill, Sophocles and the Language of Tragedy. Onassis series in Hellenic culture.
  2013.06.08:  Gregson Davis, The Interplay of Ideas in Vergilian Bucolic. Mnemosyne supplements. Monographs on Greek and Latin language and literature, 346.
  2013.06.07:  Danielle Gourevitch, Pour une archéologie de la médecine romaine. Collection Pathographie, 8.
• 2013.06.06:  Rachel Barney, Tad Brennan, Charles Brittain, Plato and the Divided Self.
• 2013.06.05:  Sherry Lou Macgregor, Beyond Hearth and Home: Women in the Public Sphere in Neo-Assyrian Society. Publications of the Foundation for Finnish Assyriological Research, 5; State Archives of Assyria studies, 21.
• 2013.06.04:  W. R. Paton, F. W. Walbank, Christian Habicht, S. Douglas Olson, Polybius: The Histories. Volume VI, Books 28-39 (revised edition), Unattributed fragments. Loeb Classical Library, 161.
• 2013.06.03:  Andrew Monson, From the Ptolemies to the Romans: Political and Economic Change in Egypt.
• 2013.06.02:  Anthony Kaldellis, Dimitris Krallis, Michael Attaleiates: The History. Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library, 16.