Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Content Type
      Content Type
      Clear All
      Content Type
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Country Of Publication
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Target Audience
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
12,257 result(s) for "Stevenson, Tom"
Sort by:
The Succession Planning of Augustus
Erich Gruen has questioned the notion of ‘succession planning’ under Augustus, arguing that the princeps was careful to avoid giving the impression that he wanted to create a heritable dynasty, for it was not in his interest to emphasise autocracy and there was no office of state to pass on. This view seems incomplete, since the prerogatives and resources of the Julian family were of such magnitude that Augustus’ heir could hardly fail to occupy a position of dominance in the state, as everyone surely knew. Moreover, it seems likely that Gruen overestimates the level of opposition to autocracy, that the cause of state stability was aided overall by clear lines of succession, that relevant attitudes were dynamic rather than static, and that there was a higher public profile (and more practical, substantial importance) for the imperial family than Gruen describes.
Polemic in Herodotus and Thucydides
Although neither Herodotus nor Thucydides is known for ad hominem attacks, it should not be concluded that they avoid polemic or aim for uncontroversial expression or somehow precede an age of polemic. They certainly reflect polemical debates on a variety of issues and hold sharp views of their own on numerous matters, including the particular topic of how to write history (Thucydides often seems to tilt at Herodotus). Polemic, then, is a fundamental and complex feature of their work, with a range of literary, political, and historiographical factors underpinning its operation.
Polemic in Livy
Livy is not generally described as a polemicist, and the annalistic tradition tends to be described in terms of continuity rather than innovation. This paper aims to show, however, that there is significant polemic in Livy, including ad hominem polemic. Even if the latter falls short of Hellenistic levels, it is worth making the point that Livy wrote a highly competitive narrative, so that the degree to which he deliberately took on and surpassed rival authorities has probably been underestimated. Despite his obvious respect for some basic traditions and interpretations, he was indeed trying to surge past his rivals in innovative ways that would leave him as the pre-eminent authority. Polemic was one of the competitive strategies employed for this purpose.
Acceptance of the Title Pater Patriae in 2 BC
Some recent treatments of the Augustan Principate have discussed the title Pater Patriae (= PP) as the expression of a relatively detached and uncontroversial idea. In earlier papers on the significance of this title, however, I have tried to describe its political volatility for both Cicero and Caesar. Cicero's title was applied to him in the wake of his execution of the Catilinarian conspirators; it was meant to characterise him as Rome's saviour, rather than as a murderous tyrant and oppressor. Caesar's title was equally a counter to accusations of murderous tyranny; he did not take Roman lives through civil war, he saved them through the exercise of dementia. Caesar's honour, furthermore, was clearly decreed to him in the form Parens Patriae – parens being a widely used, positive term for a benefactor; Cicero is referred to as both pater and parens in the fractious discourse which followed his consulship. Given the ever-present dichotomy between the father and the tyrant, and the general environment of élite competition, it appears that the form of Caesar's honour implies a deliberate contrast with the claims of Cicero, viz. Caesar's paternal role was certainly about giving or enhancing life, rather than taking it.
On interpreting the eclectic nature of Roman sculpture
Flexible combinations of 'old' and 'new' methodologies are probably the best way to interpret the eclectic nature of Roman sculpture. An analysis of three pieces of Roman sculpture - the 'Pseudo-Athlete' from Delos, the Prima Porta Augustus and the fourthcentury donatio relief from the Arch of Constantine - demonstrates the value of older methods in the face of commanding theories produced by more recent methodology.
The statue of Zeus at Olympia : new approaches
This book began to take shape following a conference on the Statue of Zeus at Olympia held at the University of Queensland in July 2008. In line with the main themes of the conference, the book has two fundamental aims: the first is to recognise the unsu.