C L A SSIC A L L I T E R A RY

CA R EERS A ND THEIR
R ECE P T ION

E DI T E D B Y
PH I L I P H A R DI E
Trinity College, Cambridge

and
H E L E N MO OR E
Corpus Christi College, Oxford
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore,
São Paulo, Delhi, Dubai, Tokyo

Cambridge University Press

The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK

Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York

www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521762977

© Cambridge University Press 2010

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the

provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part
may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published in print format 2010

ISBN-13 978-0-511-90974-0 eBook (NetLibrary)

ISBN-13 978-0-521-76297-7 Hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy

of urls for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication,
and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.
 CH APTER 7

Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel: the poet and

his work from Dante to Petrarch*
Andrew Laird

The Italian word for ‘career’, carriera, had become associated with a
working life or employment from the mid-1600s, long before its English
equivalent acquired the same sense in the early nineteenth century.1 In
fact the first attested use of carriera in this way was in association with
the profession of literature. In the preface to his Trattato dell’arte e dello
stile del dialogo (1662), the historian and poet Pietro Sforza Pallavicino
expressed his thanks to the Bishop of Fermo for encouraging his ‘child-
hood in the career of letters’ (la mia puerizia nella carriera delle lettere).2
Carriera, like the Latin via carraria from which it derives, originally
denoted a ‘carriage road’ or track for a wheeled vehicle (carrus).3 The
meaning turns out to have a felicitous bearing on the idea of the literary
career which is unlikely to be coincidence: in the middle ages, the most
influential literary career of all was visualized as a wheel – the rota Vergilii
or rota Vergiliana (‘the Wheel of Virgil’.)4 An arrangement of the poet’s
works and their respective themes and styles in a circular diagram seems
to have developed from the use of rota as synecdoche for the Classical
image of the Muses’ chariot, an image mediated by the schoolmasters of
late antiquity.5 And when Virgil conceives his poetic cursus as a military

* I am very grateful to Carlo Caruso, Philip Hardie and Antonio Ziosi for their comments on this
chapter. Translations are my own unless otherwise stated.
1
Battaglia 1961–2003, vol. II, sv. carriera, § 8. (‘fig. indirizzo dato alla propria vita, studio, profes-
sione’) citing Pallavicino 1662 and Frugoni 1960. Battisti and Alessio 1950–7, vol. I, 781 concurs
with the seventeenth-century origin of the figurative use, as does Cortelazzo and Zolli 1979,
which also cites the first use by Pallavicino.
2
Pallavicino 1662: 3. Cardinal Pietro Sforza Pallavicino (1607–67) published an apologetical his-
tory of the Council of Trent. His literary works include a poem in octaves, I Fasti cristiani (1636),
and a tragedy, Ermenegildo (1644).
3
Compare Cheney 2002a: 8 and Hardie and Moore’s Introduction to this volume, on uses of the
word ‘career’.
4
On the rota, see Laugesen 1962; Hardie and Moore, Introduction, and Putnam above, Ch. 1, in
this volume.
5
Bajoni 1997 is an ingenious demonstration of this, adducing testimonia from Sidonius Apollinaris
and Ausonius, with a range of earlier Classical sources.

138
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 139
triumph at the opening of Georgics Book 3, he envisages himself as a vic-
tor, crowned with palms, who will set a hundred chariots in motion.6
That passage has been taken to hint at a future epic, but Virgil gives no
more explicit indication of his poetic programme from one work to the
next.7 Taken as a whole his compositions really only indicate a de facto
progression from the bucolic to didactic poetry, and then from didactic
to epic. However, the four hexameter verses which were long transmit-
ted as the poet’s own introduction to the Aeneid place the epic as the last
in a planned sequence of his compositions.8 On the basis of those verses
alone, medieval readers might readily assume, as had Virgil’s ancient biog-
raphers, that the high poetic genre of epic represented the culmination of
his achievement.
What follows can only provide a very selective account of the emulation
of Virgil’s ascending course in Dante and Petrarch.9 The focus will be on
their works in Latin, so that most attention will be devoted to Petrarch, as
his Latin writings – especially those in verse – engage far more frequently
and intensively with the Roman poet than those of Dante. However,
the first part of this discussion (I) will summarize the significance that
Virgil acquires in Dante’s work, with some reference to the vernacular
Commedia. That short treatment will put into relief the rather different
character of Petrarch’s reception.10 A brief account of the way Petrarch’s
Latin poetic works accumulate to display a trajectory which is explicitly
Virgilian (II) will be followed by a more extensive examination (III) of
passages from the Africa and two epistles from Familiares Book 24. A
complex and competitive interaction with the poet of the Aeneid is exhib-
ited in Petrarch’s epic, whilst imitation is directly explored through the
persona he adopts in his letters to Homer and Virgil. As well as recogni-
tion of the notion of persona, a distinction between the rationalized author
and the historical author will be important for the conclusion (IV).11
6
Virg. Geo. 3.17–18; see Hardie 1993b: 100–1.
7
Passages commonly viewed as connecting Virgil’s works are Georgics 3.1–48, Georgics 4.559–66
(in relation to Eclogue 1.1), Aeneid 1.742–6 (in relation to Eclogue 6.64 and Georgics 1.1–6).
8
See Putnam above, Ch. 1 in this volume, and Horsfall 2000a: 24 and 300 on these verses. Laird
2003 considers their significance for later performance and reception of the Aeneid.
9
Good orientations on Virgil and Dante are Comparetti 1997, Consoli 1984, C. Hardie 1984,
Highet 1976: 70–80, Villa 2009, Whitfield 1969, Zabughin 1921: i.3–21; for Virgil in Petrarch see
Billanovich 1947, Feo 1988, Highet 1949a: 81–8, Nolhac 1907, Zabughin 1921: i.21–38.
10
Petrarch’s handling of Virgil can prompt some conclusions about his relation to Dante, even
though Dante’s role as a model or foil for Petrarch’s career cannot be pursued directly here: see
e.g. Feo 1973, Baranski and McLaughlin 2007.
11
The rationalized author is constructed by the reader from the text (whether the reader imagi-
nes him as present in the text, or as the mastermind behind it) and cannot possess any of the
attributes of an historical author – except, conventionally, his or her name. Any details of the
140 Andrew Laird
In trecento Italy, an environment in which the Roman practices of the
triumph and of crowning poets with laurel were being enthusiastically
revived, the attempt to re-enact Virgil’s role took literary homage into
broader social and political domains. Petrarch’s coronation in Rome in
1341 represents at once acclaim for his individual success and the confirm-
ation of continuity with Italy’s Roman past.12 Thus the appropriations of
Virgil in both Dante and Petrarch are normally approached from a his-
torical and biographical perspective.13 However, the aim of the following
discussion is to show how author-oriented criticism can advance specific-
ally literary interpretation of Dante and Petrarch in relation to Virgil –
without appeals to intentionalist models of poetic communication and
without giving centre stage to biographical questions.14

I
The greatest writer of the middle ages was far more of an originator than an
imitator. Dante’s works in Latin and Italian, in prose and verse, combine
Christian thought with the influence of writers from Classical antiquity.
Given the thematic and disciplinary range of his oeuvre, it is unsurpris-
ing that the author whom Dante invokes most in his works is Aristotle.
But Virgil’s prominence is striking: leaving aside his role as companion to
the dramatized figure of Dante in the Commedia, the number of citations
or echoes of his work (mostly, though not entirely, from the Aeneid) is
almost equal to that of all the references to Ovid, Lucan, Statius, Cicero
and Boethius put together.15 Although the popular myths of Virgil as a

historical author, including his other works, are usually discounted for the purposes of categoric-
ally literary interpretation because they will be extraneous to the text from which the rationalized
author derives. Thus the text of The Catcher in the Rye has a named narrator (persona), Holden
Caulfield, and an author (the rationalized author) whom the reader perceives to be ultimately
responsible for generating Holden, for concocting the fictional events Holden experiences and
for staging the manner in which Holden relates them. For convenience, this author who is con-
structed from the text is referred to as ‘J. D. Salinger’. The reclusive writer of that name who
lived in New Hampshire is quite different (the historical author). For further discussion of issues
raised by these distinctions, see Laird 1999: 71–4, 211–13.
12
Dante refused the honour of coronation because he was in exile (n. 20 below). The significance
of the laurel crown for Petrarch is explored in Usher 2009. A text of the Collatio laureationis or
‘Coronation Oration’ is in Godi 1988; English translation in Wilkins 1955: 300–13.
13
Holmes 1980: 1 remarks: ‘Dante’s ideas evolved in response to important experiences … His
thought was in a constant state of evolution which is why a biographical approach to it is essen-
tial.’ Similar approaches are naturally applied to Petrarch, e.g. Dotti 1987.
14
This is not, of course, to deny that biographical information is important for an historical under-
standing of the thought of Dante and Petrarch and no pretence is made that it can be ignored
insofar as the historical authors are involved in what follows (n. 11 above).
15
Highet 1976: 79 summarizes the statistics collected in Moore 1896 for the main Classical sources
in all of Dante’s works.
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 141
sorcerer still current in Dante’s time are disregarded, the presentation of
the poet in his work is still very different from that provided by Petrarch
and other later Italian humanists.16 In particular Dante lays emphasis on
Eclogue 4 as a prophecy of the birth of Christ and on the allegorical or
‘polysemous’ quality of Virgil’s expression.17
Two passages in his Latin writings in which Dante claims for him-
self something like his ancient predecessor’s ability and achievement will
be reviewed here. First, in a chapter (2.4) of the De Vulgari Eloquentia
(written between 1302 and 1305) which warns amateurs against casually
attempting vernacular poetry on the weighty subjects of salvation, love
and virtue, Dante moves towards what appears to be a coy characteriza-
tion of his own accomplishment:
Caveat ergo quilibet et discernat ea que dicimus et quando hec tria pure cantare
intendit, vel que ad ea directe ac pure secuntur, prius Elicone potatus, tensis fidi-
bus ad supremum, secure plectrum tum movere incipiat. Sed cautionem atque
discretionem hanc accipere, sicut decet, hic opus et labor est, quoniam nunquam
sine strenuitate ingenii et artis assiduitate scientiarumque habitu fieri potest. Et
hii sunt quos Poeta Eneidorum sexto Dei dilectos et ab ardente virtute sublimatos
ad ethera deorumque filios vocat, quanquam figurate loquatur. Et ideo confutetur
illorum stultitia qui, arte scientiaque immunes, de solo ingenio confidentes, ad
summa summe canenda prorumpunt; et a tanta presumptuositate desistant, et si
anseres natura vel desidia sunt, nolint astripetam aquilam imitari.
Caution and discrimination in what I am talking about are required and let
anyone who intends to sing of the three great subjects [salus, amor, virtus] purely
and simply, or things which directly and purely bear on them, let him first drink
of Helicon and then, after finely tuning the strings, confidently begin to use
the plectrum. But exercizing proper caution and discernment, this is the work
and toil, since it cannot be done without strenuous exercise of talent (ingenium),
constant practice of the art, and habitual mastery of the sciences. It is those [so
inclined] whom the poet of the sixth book of the Aeneid calls ‘beloved of God’
and ‘exalted by fiery virtue to the heavens’ and ‘the sons of the gods’, although
he is speaking figuratively. And so for those untouched by art and science rely-
ing on their native talent alone who burst forth to sing of high subjects in a
high manner, let their stupidity stand confuted and let them cease from such

16
Whitfield 1969: 94–5 remarks ‘Boccaccio, so often hailed as the initiator of the Renaissance, is
more medieval than Dante. For Dante … gives no heed at any point to the childish legend which
had grown up around Virgil the Magician’ (the story told by Boccaccio that Virgil freed Naples
of a plague of flies and mosquitoes).
17
This observation does not solely rely on Dante’s Latin letter to Can Grande (edited in Toynbee
1920: 166–211), the authenticity of which is much debated: see e.g. Cecchini 1995. Fulgentius’
mediation of an allegorizing Virgil is crucial to the Commedia: Maresca 1981, Laird 2001. Virgil
first appears in Convivio 4.4–5 where he is praised in the context of a celebration of Rome’s
imperial mission.
142 Andrew Laird
presumption: if they are geese by nature or by indolence, they should not wish to
imitate the starwards flight of the eagle.
Echoes of Virgil perfuse this part of the treatise on the Italian vernacular.18
The phrase hic opus et labor est (‘this is the work and toil’) recalls the
Sibyl’s warning to Aeneas about the difficulty of ascending from Avernus
to the world above (Aeneid 6.129); through her very next words (6.129–31),
Dante tells us, Virgil is ‘speaking figuratively’ about poets. The contrast
between the goose and eagle which closes this chapter of the De Vulgari
Eloquentia also has its source in Virgil: in Eclogue 9.35–7, Lycidas consid-
ered his poetry inferior to that of Varius and Cinna and described himself
as a goose honking among shrill swans. Dante’s proud deprecation of the
geese, his substitution of the eagle for the swans, and his supposition that
he, like Virgil, can make these discriminations suggest that he regards his
own status as comparable.
The second passage is from the first of the two Latin Eclogues which
Dante composed in response to a letter in Latin hexameters he received
in 1319 from Giovanni del Virgilio, a professor at Bologna. Giovanni
praised the Commedia (which he has read as far as the Purgatorio) but
gently reproached its author for writing in Italian, urging him to com-
pose an epic in Latin on a martial theme. As a follower of Virgil (vocalis
verna Maronis), Giovanni would be happy to crown Dante with garlands
before the cheering students of Bologna.19 Dante’s reply took the form
of a bucolic poem in which the persona of Tityrus, often identified with
Virgil, turned down this request.20 But to placate Giovanni who was cast
as the absent Mopsus, Tityrus pledged to send him ten vessels of milk
from his favourite ewe. This is widely agreed to stand for ten cantos of the
recently finished Paradiso but in such a pastoral context the ten Eclogues
are doubtless in play as well. A likely implication is that the vernacular
Commedia represented a bold fusion of Virgil’s bucolic and heroic modes.
Dante’s experiments in pastoral are a form of recusatio – to refrain from
composing a Virgilian epic, but they ended up contributing to a major
trend. Petrarch and Boccaccio both produced pastoral poetry in Latin,
and later Renaissance authors followed suit. If writing Latin bucolic came
to be a benchmark for those aspiring to a Virgilian curriculum, Dante
had a part in this.
18
For the conjunction of Helicon with movere compare Aeneid 7.641, 9.163 (also Dante, Purgatorio
29.40).
19
The texts of this correspondence are in Bolisani and Valgimigli 1963.
20
Tityrus indicates (41–9) that he would prefer to be crowned by the river Arno in Florence – from
where Dante was exiled. Compare Paradiso 25.1–9.
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 143
Among many other things, Virgil’s role in the Commedia as a guide
through Hell and Purgatory indicates that his poetry in Latin contrib-
uted to Dante’s capacity to describe and present in Italian a vision of eter-
nity. What the Commedia reveals about Dante’s actual perception of his
creative course in relation to that of his ancient Roman predecessor has
to be a matter of conjecture. Too much can be made of the dramatized
Dante’s courteous declaration to Virgil in Inferno 1.86–7: ‘You are alone
the one from whom I took the fine style [lo bello stile] that has brought me
honour’ – this is odd given that he writes in a different style, a different
metre and a different language. Conversely in Purgatorio, it is the charac-
ter of Virgil who says when taking his leave:
‘Tratto t’ho qui con ingegno e con arte;
lo tuo piacere omai prendi per duce
…
Non aspettar mio dir più né mio cenno;
libero, dritto e sano è tuo arbitrio,
e fallo fora non fare a suo senno:
per ch’io te sovra te corono e mitrio.’
Purg. 27.130–1, 139–42
‘I have brought you here with poetic talent and with skill. Take henceforth
your pleasure as your guide … No longer expect word or sign from me. Free,
upright and whole is your will, and it would be an error not to act on its bidding;
therefore over yourself I crown and mitre you.’
The poet is thus staged as formally disowning any status he may have had
as a model.
But another important association between Dante and Virgil rests on
the latter’s reputation as a Christian avant la lettre or at least as an uncon-
scious witness to the faith.21 The significance of the apparent prediction of
the birth of Christ by the Sibyl in Eclogue 4 was reinforced by her function
as seer in the underworld of Aeneid Book 6 – and the whole of the Aeneid
is concerned with the fulfilment of the great prophecy of the establish-
ment of Rome which would have so much consequence for the Christian
era. Consequently, throughout the Commedia Dante draws connections
between pagan antiquity and the Weltanschauung of his own epoch and
his own self-portrayal: thus the imperial Roman poet Statius is portrayed
as a Christian converted by his reading of Virgil in Purgatorio, and in
Dante’s celebrated account of his encounter with Homer, Horace, Ovid
and Lucan in Inferno 4, those Classical poets, along with Virgil, welcome

21
Augustine, Epistula ad Volusianum 137.12: see further Comparetti 1997: 96–103.
144 Andrew Laird
the Tuscan vernacular author as a sixth member of their ‘fair school’, la
bella scola.22 The Commedia also contains a number of prophecies of its
own, notably of the birth of a saviour of Italy in the first canto of Inferno
(1.100–11) which resonates with Jupiter’s foretelling of the foundation of a
Roman imperium ‘without end’ in the first book of the Aeneid.23
Dante’s De Monarchia had affirmed that an empire uniting human-
ity was God’s will, and this idea of empire is endorsed in many parts of
the Commedia: in Inferno 34.61–7 Dante and Virgil witness Satan as he
devours Caesar’s assassins Brutus and Cassius, along with Judas Iscariot.24
Finally the choice of title for the Commedia indicates that the work’s con-
ception is designed to match the Aeneid rather than merely imitate it. At
Inferno 20.113, Virgil refers to his epic as l’alta mia tragedia. By calling his
own work a ‘comedy’ Dante is aligning it with Virgil’s tragedy, a comple-
ment to it, if not an actual rival.25
The author of the Commedia (far more than in other texts such as the
De Monarchia and the De Vulgari Eloquentia) emulates the position of
Virgil in history and eschatology, and not merely in poetry. This form
of appropriation goes beyond purely literary competition: any attempt to
construct a ‘literary life’ for Dante through his works has to accommo-
date apprehension of political, religious and scientific sources as well as
poetic models.26 And those poetic models – Virgil is very much a case in
point – cannot be conceived as exclusively literary either.27
22
Statius appears in Purgatorio 21; in Purgatorio 22.64–73 he explains how the fourth Eclogue led
him towards Christianity. Highet 1976: 70–80 provides an excellent accounts of Dante’s relation
to pagan antiquity, and Curtius 1953: 17–30 of its context and origins in the ‘Latin Middle Ages’.
23
Hollander and Russo 2003 discover significant numerological connections between Dantean and
Virgilian prophecies. Purgatorio 33 is connected to the momentous historical prediction that an
unidentified figure will come to bring peace and unity to a troubled Italy: Holmes 1980: 93–4.
24
See Convivio 4.4–5 (n. 17 above).
25
See Highet 1949a: 70–1. Although medieval comicus and tragicus did not correspond respect-
ively to our own idea of comedy and tragedy, comedy was a lower genre than tragedy, as Dante
recognizes in De Vulgari Eloquentia. Horace, Ars Poetica 93–4 tamen et uocem comoedia tollit ‘yet
comedy elevates its tone’, provided some authorization for regarding comedy as on a par with tra-
gedy: the passage, quoted at the beginning of the Epistle to Can Grande, was known to Dante,
whether or not he was author of the letter (n. 17 above). Villa 2009: 143–7 examines Dante’s
understanding of comedy in connection with other ancient sources including Virgil. The rela-
tion between Virgil and tragedy in antiquity, with ramifications for later periods, is addressed in
Pöschl 1978 and Hardie 1997b.
26
Cheney 2002a: 6 bears on this: ‘Such holistic commentary [sc. ‘on the total oeuvre of an author from
beginning to end’] differs from other overview accounts by emphasizing the category of the literary
(rather than, say, the biographical, which often includes the non-literary) … we can define career
criticism as a form of commentary that looks holistically at the literary dimension of a writer’s life,
especially as that life is grounded in his or her works.’ The formalist response to this would be that
the category of the literary naturally excludes the biographical anyway; but the ‘literary dimension of
a writer’s life grounded in his works’ can be nothing other than a form of biography.
27
Curtius 1953: 207–8, 221–7.
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 145

II
Petrarch, like Dante, is more celebrated for his poetry in Italian than for
his prose and verse in Latin, though he set far greater store by the latter.
His work too conjoins pagan and Christian influences, but draws from
a wider range of Classical texts – and in more detail. In a Latin letter he
wrote at the end his life (Seniles 16.1), Petrarch recounts that his father
burned all his books, except those by Virgil and Cicero, in order to pun-
ish him for reading Classical literature instead of law. The pervasiveness
of both Classical authors in his work does justice to that story.28 But while
the Dante of the Commedia could portray himself being welcomed into
the scola of the Classical poets, Petrarch tends to emphasize his sense of
distance or even exclusion from their company.29
As well as being the object of Petrarch’s scholarly attention (demon-
strated by his extensive annotations on the Ambrosian manuscript from
1338 onwards), Virgil was also involved with his self-presentation.30 The
Bucolicum Carmen and Africa are conceived along the lines of the Eclogues
and the Aeneid respectively, but Petrarch’s own place in literary history
is a concern in both those texts.31 In the tenth eclogue of the Bucolicum
Carmen, after the death of the laurel at 376–7 (representing both Laura,
the mistress of the Canzoniere, and Classical poetry), the future of
Classical learning and literature is entrusted to Silvanus (who stands for
Petrarch himself); the ninth book of the Africa has Franciscus – that is
Francesco Petrarch – hailed as Ennius’ long-awaited successor by none
other than Homer.32
In the last letter of the Seniles, known as Epistola Posteritati (‘Letter to
Posterity’) probably written in the year before his death in 1374, Petrarch
28
An earlier letter (Familiares 22.10) had affirmed that Cicero and Virgil meant more to him than
any living man. As well as the influence of the Tusculan Disputations on the De Remediis utriusque
Fortunae, Cicero’s correspondence is the obvious inspiration for Petrarch’s 477 prose letters col-
lected in the Familiares and the Seniles. The burning of the books is a literary conceit with many
obvious precedents in Classical literature: compare Familiares 24.11.62–3 quoted below. For later
variants of the conceit see Krevans below, Ch. 10 in this volume.
29
Greene 1982: 28–32, cited in an essential chapter on imitatio in Petrarch: McLaughlin
1995: 22–48.
30
Petrarch’s postille on the Ambrosian Virgil are edited in Baglio, Nebuloni Testa and Petoletti
2006. W. J. Kennedy 2002 treats Petrarch’s self-presentation in relation to Virgil; a chapter enti-
tled ‘The life as work of art’ in Mann 1984: 87–104 is a good general account.
31
Fielding 2006 is a recent exploration of Virgil’s influence on the Bucolicum Carmen. Fraenkel
1927: 487: ‘in grossen Stücken ein erstaunliches Denkmal für die Zeugungskraft des virgilischen
Epos’ (my emphasis). Virgil’s pervasive influence on the Africa is now well established after
Nolhac 1907: Hardie 1993a: 295–302, Kallendorf 1989, Seagraves 1976 and Foster 1979.
32
Freccero 1986 examines the role of laurel in Petrarch’s self-creation in the Canzoniere and other
texts.
146 Andrew Laird
offers a narrative of his life which follows a Virgilian path.33 Dates and fac-
tual details are effaced in favour of a more idealistic ‘autobiography’: the
writer’s visit to Rome recalls Aeneas’ movement from Carthage to Italy,
but most significantly mention of the Bucolicum Carmen in this text pre-
cedes that of the Africa in order to give the impression that the latter, like
Virgil’s Aeneid, represents the culmination of a life’s work – when in fact
Petrarch had embarked upon his unfinished epic in 1338–1342, some four
or five years before his endeavour in pastoral.
This sustained and systematic emulation, fashioned over the course of
some decades, should not be summarized as crudely as it has been here.34
But what makes Petrarch’s appropriation of Virgil distinct from Dante’s
is clear enough. Apart from the imitation (or parody) of Virgil in his
Eclogues, Dante uses the Aeneid as an impetus for the independent experi-
ment of the Commedia. On the other hand Petrarch’s detailed know-
ledge of Virgil’s entire oeuvre facilitates far more direct imitation of him
in Latin. The latter form of reception has something in common with
the aspirations of Virgil’s successors in imperial Rome: the bucolic poet
Calpurnius Siculus, the didactic poet of the Aetna and epic poets such as
Lucan, Statius and Silius, as well as those who masqueraded as Virgil him-
self by producing poems like the Culex which rapidly acquired the status
of juvenilia in narratives of the poet’s creative development.35 For ancient
imitators trained in prosôpopoeia, the impersonation of their model relied
on close study or proficient memorization of the authentic Virgilian cor-
pus.36 A testimony from Propertius shows that Romans in Virgil’s lifetime
could perceive a progression in his works – or at least an increase in their
importance – from the Eclogues and Georgics to the Aeneid.37 But perhaps
post-Classical vernacular poets such as Cervantes and Spenser discerned,
and responded to, a progression because the pattern of the Virgilian
career was made so evident in Petrarch’s Latin works.

33
Kennedy 2002 discusses Epistola Posteritati, noting at 146: ‘The poet’s programmatic statements
in the Africa, Bucolicum carmen, the “Coronation oration”, and the “Letter to Posterity” project
an idealized course conformable generally with the Virgilian rota.’
34
Kennedy 2002 treats the complexities, ambivalences and contradictions. Kallendorf 1989: ch. 2
and R. F. Thomas 2001: 157–8, 164 treat Petrarch from the perspective of Virgilian reception.
35
Suetonius, Vita Lucani; Statius, Silvae 1, praefatio.
36
Quintilian explains prosôpopoeia in Institutio Oratoria 3.49–54, saying it is invaluable for future
poets and historians. Cicero’s posturing as both Appius Claudius Caecus and Clodius, respect-
ively rebuking and encouraging Clodia’s vices in the Pro Caelio 33, is specified as an example.
37
Prop. 2.34.61–80. The responses of other Roman poets, including Ovid, to Virgil’s career are
considered elsewhere in this volume but there is not one Latin poet from antiquity who sought
faithfully to re-enact it.
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 147
For that reason alone it is worth looking at the manner of Petrarch’s
appropriation of Virgil in some specific texts.38 Consideration of the Africa
itself is especially important: this ambitious undertaking epitomizes the
intersection between the climax of Virgil’s career and his own. But all the
texts reviewed below – from the Familiares as well as the Africa – throw
some important light on Petrarch’s poetic practices and authorial identity
in relation to his model.

III
Themes and structures from the Aeneid abound in the Africa.39 There is
an obvious debt to Virgil’s narrative of Aeneas and Dido, for example, in
the fifth book in which Massinissa, the Numidian chief allied to Scipio,
decides against his better judgement to marry the beautiful Sophonisba,
the captive wife of Syphax, an ally of the Carthaginians.40 Other parts
of the Aeneid are also recalled in the same book of the Africa: 5.59–63,
part of the long description (5.18–78) of Sophonisba’s beauty, compares
her to Venus asking Jupiter to help Aeneas: an episode narrated in Aeneid
1.227–96. Massinissa’s enumeration of women in the underworld at Africa
5.657–63 is informed by Virgil’s katabasis, as are the details of the dead
Turnus who is aggrieved that Lavinia had been snatched away from him
(Africa 6.64), and of Lilybaeum as the location of the tomb of Anchises
(Africa 6.694–5).41
But wherever one might expect references to the story of the Aeneid to
prompt an overt or positive acknowledgement of its poet, that expectation
is confounded. An episode in Africa Book 3 shows how its epic narrator
can even disparage Virgil. The embassy of Laelius to forge an alliance
38
The other reason is to avoid replicating the important discussion of Petrarch’s career in relation
to Virgil provided by Kennedy 2002.
39
Virgil’s influence in the Africa is less discernible in terms of lexical echoing, although Foster
1979: 295 observes that ‘key words from Vergilian passages in the same metrical sedes … form a
substructure’. In addition to the nineteen instances Foster collects, see Africa 5.746–58 as a recol-
lection of Dido’s curse in Aen. 4.612–29; Africa 8.45–6 and Georgics 4.184–5 (with Aen. 8.184);
Africa 7.362–4 and Aen. 1.286–8; Africa 7.489–99 and Aen. 7.632–40. Kallendorf 1989: 54 (com-
pare 181 n. 5) remarks on the recreation of Virgilian verse in Petrarch’s Africa: ‘Petrarca’s hexam-
eters are surprisingly free of postclassical words and constructions when we consider how little
serious work had been done before in those areas; indeed the notes to his Ambrosian Virgil and
the body of annotations to the Africa identified by Fera [1980] show how hard Petrarca worked
at purifying his diction and metrics.’ Compare Petrarch, Fam. 23.19.3. The most comprehensive
study of the Petrarchan hexameter runs to 515 pages: Ruiz Arzalluz 1991.
40
Africa 5.240–76: cf. Aeneid 4.169–73, 189–94; Africa 5.257–73: cf. Aeneid 4.460–70; Africa
5.242–4: cf. Aeneid 4.288–91; Africa 5.245: cf. Aeneid 8.526.
41
The grouping of underworld heroines is in Aen. 6.445–61; the burial place of Anchises is given in
Aen. 3.705–15.
148 Andrew Laird
with Syphax against Carthage involves a feast in which Laelius’ com-
pany is entertained by a Numidian bard who sings of the accomplish-
ments of Hercules, Dido and Hannibal.42 The bard’s portrayal of Dido in
this embedded poem culminates in an aside which is implicitly directed
against Virgil:
Post regina Tyro fugiens his finibus ampla
Menia construxit magnam Carthaginis urbem.
Ex re nomen ei est. Mox aspernata propinqui 420
Coniugium regis, cum publica vota suorum
Urgerent, veteris non immemor illa mariti,
Morte pudicitiam redimit. Sic urbis origo
Oppetiit regina ferox. Iniuria quanta
Huic fiat, si forte aliquis – quod credere non est – 425
Ingenio confisus erit, qui carmine sacrum
Nomen ad illicitos ludens traducat amores!
Africa 3.418–27
Later a queen fleeing from Tyre constructed huge walls in this territory, the great
city of Carthage: from this fact it derived its name.43 Soon after, she spurned
marriage with a neighbouring king, although her people’s wishes pressed
for this, but she, never forgetting her former husband, redeemed her chastity
through death. And so the fierce queen, the founder of the city, met her end.
How much wrong would be done to her, if someone by chance – impossible to
believe – relying on his talent for poetry were to play at sullying her sacred name
with illicit passions!
The name of the queen is not given, although ‘Dido’ is later mentioned by
Syphax in 4.5. Virgil is not named either: the bard performing in 206 BC
could not know of him. In his other writings, Petrarch drew from ancient
sources to highlight Dido’s chastity and the fact that she lived three cen-
turies after Aeneas.44 Here in the Africa, Dido is a moral exemplum to be
42
The embedded poem is obviously based on Iopas’ recitation in Aeneid 1.740–7, just as the situ-
ation in which it is recited follows the precedent of the Trojans’ encounter with Dido in Aeneid 1.
The introduction of Dido into this reported poem is also significant. The bard’s account of
Hercules which immediately preceded the passage quoted here ended at 3.417 with Sic nocuit
mundo vivens moriensque Medusa ‘So, alive and dead, Medusa did harm to the world.’ In Aeneid
1.496–7 Dido’s first entrance, where (as here) she is described as regina, directly follows the retro-
spective representation of Penthesilea’s death in the temple pictures of Aeneid 1.490–3 discussed
in Conte 1986: 194–5.
43
The derivation of Carthage from the Phoenician ‘Kereth-Hadeshoth’, ‘new city’ was known to
Roman authors and hence to Petrarch: the third-century AD grammarian C. Julius Solinus notes
(40): istam urbem Cathardam Elissa dixit, quod Phoenicum ore exprimit Civitatem Novam ‘Dido
called this city Catharda which means ‘New City’ in the tongue of the Phoenicians’. Compare
Servius on Aen. 1.12 and 4.683.
44
Petrarch’s best-known defence of the historical Dido is the invective against the ignorant popu-
lace (’ l vulgo ignorante) in the vernacular Trionfi: Triumphus Cupidinis 153–9. According to
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 149
complemented by the account of Lucretia’s suicide in Laelius’ survey of
Roman achievements that follows. The implicit charge against Virgil in
verses 425–7 (that he traduced Dido’s reputation) is complemented and
supported by Laelius who is asked by Syphax to tell of the origins and
leaders of his own people. Like Aeneas in Dido’s court, Laelius prefaces
his words by saying this is too much to recount late at night:45
Nunc quantum nocturna patet sermonibus hora,
Principia expediam. Teucrorum a sanguine longe
Gentis origo venit, victrix quem Grecia bello
Dicitur ad patrios muros sparsisse bilustri:
Et fortasse aliquis iam tanti criminis ultor 495
Natus in Italia est. Sed nunc ad cepta revertor.
Naufragio ex tanto vixque et tot milibus unus
Integer enavit sine crimine. Namque ubi Troiae
Matris adhuc Frigio fumabat litore bustum
Iamque cinis facilem incipiens glomerare favillam, 500
Inclitus et claris multum spectatus in armis
Dux Anchisiades, cui non via prona salutis
Viribus aut propriis aut urbibus esset amicis,
Destituit patriam lacrimans caramque cubilis
Consortem, et passus terra casusque tremendos 505
Erroresque vagos et mille pericula ponti,
Impiger Ausonias tandem tamen attigit oras:
Isque, ubi belligerum Latii sensere coloni
Troiugenam, externoque viro Lavinia pactos
Reddidit amplexus, sacro pia flumine membra 510
Deseruit moriens. Puer hunc excepit Iulus
Succedens illumque alii.
Africa 3.491–512

Now I will set forth the major points for as long as the hour of the night has
room for talk. The root of our people comes from far away, from Trojan blood,
which conquering Greece is said to have shed by our ancestral walls, in a ten-
year war. And perhaps someone to avenge so great a crime has already been born
in Italy. But now I return to the subject I began. From such a great shipwreck

Servius on Aen. 4.682 and 5.4, Varro had recorded it was Dido’s sister Anna who killed herself
for love of Aeneas. The only full account of Dido–Elissa prior to Virgil is in Justinus’ epitome of
Trogus, 18.4–6. Warner 2005 observes that Petrarch actually presents Massinissa in the mould
of Dido, as he nurtures ‘the wound burning through all his marrow’ (vulnus inardescens totis
errare medullis: Africa 5.70; compare Aeneid 4.66–7: est mollis flamma medullas / interea et tacitum
vivit sub pectore vulnus). However in Seniles 4.5 Aeneas’ meeting with Dido is incorporated into
Petrarch’s allegorical reading of the Aeneid as a triumph over lust. Warner 2005: 20–51 considers
the significance of this for an interpretation of the Africa as a poem of spiritual struggle.
45
Africa 3.475–90.
150 Andrew Laird
involving so many thousands, scarcely one emerged intact and without harm.
For when the pyre of Mother Troy was still smoking on the Phrygian shore and
ash was already beginning to form over the embers, a glorious leader, the son
of Anchises, much tested in famous deeds of war, once he saw no ready route
to safety in his own resources or in friendly cities, tearfully left his native land
and the dear woman who shared his bed. He underwent fearful trials on land,
long wanderings and a thousand perils at sea. Undaunted he at last reached the
shores of Ausonia. Once the Latian tribes experienced for themselves this war
hero born in Troy, and once Lavinia had bestowed the embraces contracted with
a foreign husband, he died leaving his pious limbs in the sacred river. His child
Iulus took his place, and others succeeded him.
The constraints of chronology which prevent Laelius from knowing
of Virgil facilitate a strategic occlusion of Petrarch’s clear model. This
has become increasingly evident as Laelius’ narration gets underway.46
Aeneas, who was completely absent from the Numidian poet’s account
of Dido, is the central figure here, but he is identified only by his pat-
ronym – Anchisiades. It is as if the actual name of Aeneas (never men-
tioned in the Africa) would draw too much attention to the fact that this
embedded narrative is effectively an epitome of the Aeneid. But closer
examination shows that these verses, even though their organization
owes much to Virgil’s poem, do not yield a particularly precise summary
of it. Dido is absent. Aeneas’ Trojan wife and his Latin wife Lavinia are
given an emphasis which is disproportionate in comparison with the
Virgilian version of events. No gods are involved, there are no proph-
ecies, and there is no katabasis. What Laelius relates has a naturalistic,
historical quality.
Only at the end of the story is there a supernatural element: the death
of the Trojan hero is presented as a kind of transmigration, as he leaves
his membra (limbs, physical body) in the ‘sacred river’. This particular
suggestion of Aeneas’ divinity comes not from Virgil, but draws from
Livy’s mention of the event as it is amplified by Ovid, in Metamorphoses

46
There is multiple reference to Virgil in this passage. At 3.495–6 Fortasse aliquis iam tanti crim-
inis ultor / Natus in Italia est ‘And perhaps someone avenging so great an atrocity has already
been born in Italy’ alludes to the Virgilian Dido’s hope that someone will avenge her, similarly
expressed in Aeneid 4.625 (exoriare aliquis nostris ex ossibus ultor). But on the historical plane,
Laelius appears to be hinting at Mummius Achaicus, whose career he presents as revenge for
the fall of Troy. Laelius’ Fortasse aliquis also recalls the forte aliquis used by the Numidian per-
former for the ‘someone’ who might one day use poetry to link Dido with ‘illicit passions’ earl-
ier at 3.425. The connection between Mummius and Virgil might involve a kind of romantic
irony: Petrarch after all identifies his own epic endeavour with the achievements of Scipio him-
self in Africa 1.53–5: Ipse ego non nostri referam modo temporis acta, / Marte sed Ausonio sceleratos
funditus Afro / Eruere est animus nimiasque retundere vires; compare Africa 9.233–6.
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 151
14.598–604 where Venus intervenes to achieve her son’s deification.47
Petrarch’s use of this episode as the conclusion to the ‘Aeneid ’ of Laelius
significantly prefigures – and may well have determined – the complex-
ion of Maffeo Vegio’s close to his thirteenth book of the Aeneid (1428) in
which Venus secures her son’s immortality with the help of Numicius,
after her supplication to Jupiter and the assent of Juno.48
In Book 2, the shade of the Elder Scipio outlines to his son the course
of events in future times, assuring him that he will be celebrated by
Petrarch who, though he is not named, is identified as a ‘second Ennius’
(Ennius alter 2.443). There is no place for Virgil in this sketch of future
literary history: the original Ennius is to be honoured for bringing the
rough Muses to Latium in the first place; his successor, who is Petrarch,
for delaying them as they flee. Again in Book 9, on the return voyage
to Rome Ennius recounts to Scipio how he conversed with Homer in a
dream. In the vision which followed, Ennius saw a young man sitting in
a secluded valley (clausa valle = Vaucluse, Petrarch’s retreat near Avignon),
pondering something of great importance. Homer explains to Ennius
who this person will become:
Hic ego – nam longe clausa sub valle sedentem
Aspexi iuvenem – : ‘Dux, o carissime, quisnam est,
Quem video teneras inter consistere lauros
et viridante comas meditantem incingere ramo?
Nescio quid, nisi fallor, enim sub pectore versat
Egregiumque altumque nimis.’ Non falleris’ inquit:
‘Agnosco iuvenem sera de gente nepotum,
Quem regio Italie, quemve ultima proferet etas …
Ille diu profugas revocabit carmine Musas
Tempus in extremum, veteresque Elicone Sorores
Restituet, vario quamvis agitante tumultu;
Francisco cui nomen erit; qui grandia facta,
Vidisti que cunta oculis, ceu corpus in unum
Colliget: Hispanas acies Libieque labores
Scipiadamque tuum: titulus poematis illi
AFRICA.’
Africa 9.216–23, 229–36
Then, catching sight of a young man sitting far off in a secluded valley, I said
‘O dearest guide, who is it I see resting among the tender laurels and planning

47
Livy 1.2.6 situs est, quemcumque eum dici ius fasque est, super Numicum flumen: Iovem indigetem
appellant ‘he is buried, whatever it is right and authorised for him to be called, by the river
Numicus: they call him Jupiter Indiges’.
48
Vegio, Supplementum 593–630; text and translation in Putnam and Hankins 2004.
152 Andrew Laird
to bind his hair with green shoots? Unless I am mistaken he is pondering in his
heart something remarkably special and noble.’ ‘You are not mistaken,’ he said.
‘I recognise the young man from a late line of your descendants whom the king-
dom of Italy and its last age will bring forth … With his poetry he will call back
the long-exiled Muses to his late age, and he will restore the ancient Sisters from
Helicon, though disturbed by all kinds of uproar. His name will be Francesco
and he will collect all the great deeds you have seen with your own eyes as if into
one body: the battles in Spain, the trials of Libya and your very own Scipio. The
title of his poem will be Africa.’
Petrarch, through Homer’s words, embedded in Ennius’ account of his
vision to Scipio, goes so far as to mention himself and his poem by name.49
There is no mention of Virgil even here, when the debt to him could not
be more obvious. The scenario however recalls Virgil’s role in inducting
Dante into the bella scola of ancient poets in Inferno 4.88 as well as Virgil’s
own work: Ennius’ questions, Homer’s responses, and the apparition of a
youth still unborn are reminiscent of the exchange between Aeneas and
Anchises presenting the Marcelli at the close of Aeneid Book 6.50 And what
is more, the very opening of Ennius’ dream in the Africa has an obvious
precedent in Virgil’s account of Aeneas’ dream of Hector (Aeneid 2.268).
Thus the poet of the Africa draws extensively from Virgil, but avoids
referring to him at all costs – and even disparages him by innuendo. That
curious stance cannot be reconciled with the importance the historical
Petrarch attached to his renowned predecessor’s life and work without
this fundamental realization: the speaker or narratorial persona of the
Africa (who strives to eliminate all thematic reference to Virgil) is the
creation, not the porte-parole or mouthpiece, of its rationalized author,
whose presence is betrayed by the imitation of Virgil.
A distinction between Petrarch as rationalized author and his constructed
persona is just as important for making sense of Petrarch’s epistle to Homer
(Familiares 24.12). Virgil is characterized in this letter as some who ‘was in
very many respects [Homer’s] imitator’: in pluribus imitator tuus fuit.51 That
observation leads to the elaboration of a conception of imitation:
Iam vero de imitatione quid dicam? Debuisti praesagire, dum tam alte alis
animi te sublatum cerneres, numquam tibi defuturos imitatores. Gaudendum

49
Ennius’ dream of Homer is in the Annales 1 ii–x Skutsch 2005. Usher 2005 examines the implica-
tion of Petrarch’s avowed succession to Homer and Ennius for Boccaccio.
50
The sense and diction of Africa 9.229–31 here recall Aen. 6.855–9: aspice, ut insignis spoliis Marcellus
opimis / ingreditur uictorque uiros supereminet omnis. / hic rem Romanam magno turbante tumultu /
sistet eques.
51
Ancient accusations against Virgil of theft from Homer inform Petrarch’s discussions here.
Donatus’ life of Virgil (45) mentions an eight-volume collection of these thefts compiled by
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 153
vero talem te cui multi similes fieri velint, sed non multi possint. Quid ni autem
gaudeas tu primi semper certus loci, cum ego ultimus hominum gaudeam, nec
gaudere sat est, glorier quoque tanti me nunc fieri, ut sit aliquis, si tamen est
aliquis, qui imitari optet ac fingere, illud magis gavisurus tales imitatores fore
qui me superent? (Ad Familiares 24.12)
Now indeed what am I to say about imitation? You, Homer, must have foreseen,
as long as you beheld yourself raised so high on the wings of your talent, that
you would never lack imitators. It is really a matter for rejoicing that you are
such as many wish to resemble, but not many are able. So why should you not
rejoice, always assured of first place, when even I, the last of men rejoice, and,
more than rejoice, I also glory in the fact that I am now held in such account,
that there is someone – if indeed there is someone – who wishes to imitate and
model himself on me, with all the more cause for joy in that my imitators will be
such as to surpass me.
The writer compliments Homer for inspiring so many literary imitators
and imagines he may be able to do the same, expressing the hope that
his imitators’ work might surpass his own. Petrarch’s lack of reference
here to his recurrent imitation of Virgil is one reason to be wary of tak-
ing these comments at face value. The entertaining implication is clear
enough: Virgil may not outdo Homer who can always be sure of his
supremacy, but, if imitators can surpass their models, there is room for
Petrarch to outperform the poet of the Aeneid.
Familiares Book 24 also contains epistles to Cicero, Seneca, Varro,
Quintilian, Livy, Pollio, Horace and Virgil.52 Although these letters exhibit
considerable erudition, such a correspondence with long-dead luminaries
is evidently playful: the letter to Homer should not be read as a veridical
source for the way Petrarch regards his own work and its legacy. But by
again exhibiting a distinction between Petrarch’s constructed persona (here
the dramatized figure who addresses Homer) and Petrarch the author
(who is responsible for the ironies in that address), this text can enhance
our understanding of his imitation of Virgil from another perspective. If
Petrarch created an evidently distinctive persona for his own epic and for
his other Latin poems, then it is likely that he discerned – or simply presup-
posed – that Virgil had engaged in a similar practice. Such an understand-
ing of Virgil would naturally entail a disinclination to regard first-person

Quintus Octavius Avitus. The nature of Virgil’s plagiarism is debated at length by the inter-
locutors of Macrobius’ Saturnalia. Laird 2002 reads Petrarch’s cameo in Africa 9 as following a
metapoetic tradition in Classical epic.
52
Hinds 2004 considers the significance of the presentations of Cicero and Virgil in Ad Familiares
24 for Petrarch’s literary activity.
154 Andrew Laird
affirmations or programmatic statements made in his poetry (such as the
proem of the third book of the Georgics or the coda to the fourth) as literal
forms of autobiographical testimony – Petrarch’s propensity for allegoriz-
ing Virgil would certainly be consistent with that position.53 That position
would actually render the course of imitation more viable for Petrarch and
his successors: no one could be Virgil himself, but it was possible to fash-
ion a comparable persona as a stylistic vehicle. That in turn would render
it feasible to embark on a programme of emulating Virgil through a suc-
cession of works. The Latin bucolic and epic of Iacopo Sannazaro and the
didactic and heroic poetry of Girolamo Vida from the sixteenth century
illustrate some ways in which this could be achieved.
Even though Petrarch may not overtly discriminate between author
and persona, an equally important distinction – between the figure of an
author on the one hand and his work on the other – is made directly in
relation to Virgil in Familiares 24.11.54 The letter lays emphasis on the fact
that its addressee, the historical author, is dead. This is accented from the
very beginning which recalls the epitaph Virgil reputedly composed for
himself:
Eloquii splendor, latine spes altera lingue,
Clare Maro, tanta quem felix Mantua prole
Romanum genuisse decus per secula gaudet.
Fam. 24.11.3–5
Luminary of eloquence and [with Cicero] another hope of the Latin tongue,
famous Maro, fortunate Mantua rejoices in bringing forth so great a son as you,
a glory of Rome through the ages.
The last three words of Virgil’s lapidary distich had encapsulated the
three stages of his poetic career:
Mantua me genuit, Calabri rapuere, tenet nunc
Parthenope; cecini pascua rura duces.55
Mantua brought me forth, Calabria snatched me away, now Parthenope holds
me: I sang of pastures, farms, leaders.
Petrarch’s verse epistle goes so far as to envisage Virgil in the underworld
that he himself described in Aeneid 6 and Georgics 4.56 The engagement
53
In addition to the allegorical interpretations on the Ambrosian manuscript Petrarch explicates
the hidden meaning of the Aeneid in Senilis 4.5.
54
The title (constituting verses 1–2) is Ad Publium Virgilium Maronem heroycum poetam et latino-
rum principem poetam ‘To Publius Virgilius Maro, heroic poet and principal poet of the Latins’.
55
See Horsfall 2000a: 21 for bibliography on the transmission and early circulation of this epitaph.
56
This is not the first time that a Christian writer has inserted Virgil in the hell he Virgil himself
created: see Laird 2001 on Fulgentius and Ermenrich of Ellwangen. The ‘circle’ (circulus) is a
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 155
with Aeneid 6 is developed in detail: Petrarch asks Virgil whether Aeneas,
‘sent out through the ivory gate’, the exit of false visions from the world
below in Aeneid 6, is now there to receive him. While the purpose of
Aeneas’ jouney to the realm of the dead had been to seek wisdom about
future historical events, Virgil will now need to rely upon a messen-
ger from the world of the living to discover what has occurred since his
demise (30–4):
Tu, mundo siqua silenti
Umbra recens nostra veniet tibi forsan ab ora,
Quis tria cara tibi loca nunc totidemque libellos
Exitus excipiat, nostris simul accipe verbis.
And for your part, if any shade fresh from our own shore should by chance come
to you in your silent world, learn from my words what has become of the three
places dear to you and of your little books, the same number.
There could be more particular correspondences between the three
opera or ‘little books’ (libelli) that constitute the life’s work of Virgil and
the locations whose fortunes Petrarch goes on to explain: Virgil hints that
he composed the Eclogues in Parthenope (Georgics 4.564); he envisages
wearing a poet’s palms to honour Mantua (Georgics 3), and he fanfares
the foundation of Rome as the programme of his epic (Aeneid 1.5–7, 33).
Petrarch’s news of these locations affirms his own personal association
with all of them. The possibility that this association might bear on the
relation of his literary production to Virgil’s is confirmed by what he says
about Mantua (42–50):
Hic tibi composui que perlegis, otia nactus
Ruris amica tui, quonam vagus avia calle
Fusca sequi, quibus in pratis errare soleres,
Assidue mecum volvens, quam fluminis oram,
Que curvi secreta lacus, quas arboris umbras,
Quas nemorum latebras collisque sedilia parvi
Ambieris, cuius fessus seu cespitis herbam
Presseris accubitu, seu ripam fontis ameni;
Atque ea presentem michi te spectacula reddunt.
Here I have composed for you what you are reading, and have found the friendly
repose of your own countryside, the path on which you used to roam the unfre-
quented shades, the meadows in which you used to wander. Continuously I
wonder which shore of the river, which recesses of the curving lake, which shady
trees, which hidden parts of woods, which banks on a small hill you frequented,

clear evocation of Dante’s Inferno – as Usher 2000 has remarked – but thereafter Virgil’s own
imagery is used to ring some funereal changes on the Classical apparatus of poetic inspiration.
156 Andrew Laird
what grassy lawn you rested on when tired, or what bank of a pleasant stream.
These sights make you present to me.
The meadows, groves, hills, and banks are at the same time poetic topoi.
Petrarch’s speculations about Virgil’s haunts as a location for his own
composition suggests that following in Virgil’s footsteps is a precondition
for his own literary endeavours.
The distinction between Virgil’s poetic corpus and Virgil the historical
author is most clearly expressed at the end of the letter (53–67):
melioribus aurem
Ergo adhibe et rerum successus disce tuarum:
Tityrus ut tenuem senior iam perflat avenam, 55
Quadrifido cultu tuus ut resplendet agellus,
Ut tuus Eneas vivit totumque per orbem
Et placet et canitur, tanto quem ad sidera nisu
Tollere conanti mors obstitit invida magnis
Principiis; miserum Eneam iam summa premebant 60
Fata manu iamque ore tuo damnatus abibat,
Arsurumque iterum pietas Augusta secundis
Eripuit flammis, quem non morientis amici
Deiecti movere animi, meritoque supremas
Contempsisse preces evo laudabitur omni. 65
Eternum, dilecte, vale nostrosque rogatus
Meonium Ascreumque senes salvere iubeto.
So turn your ear to better tidings and learn of the success of your endeav-
ours: how old Tityrus still blows on a slender oaten pipe, how your small farm is
resplendent through fourfold cultivation, how your Aeneas lives, gives pleasure
and is sung all over the world, he whom you were attempting so strenuously
to elevate to the stars when envious death obstructed your great undertaking.
Already the last fate weighed on poor Aeneas, and he was already on his way out,
condemned by your mouth, when the piety of Augustus snatched him from a
second conflagration, when he was on the point of burning again. The dejected
thoughts of a dying friend did not move Augustus and he will be rightly praised
by every age for having defied your last request. Farewell for ever, beloved one,
and, at my request, greet our elders, Homer and Hesiod.
The final farewell comes very abruptly after a rebuke to Virgil for asking
the Aeneid to be burnt when he was dying and depressed: in Christian
teaching a ‘dejected soul’ commanded reproach more than sympathy –
something encountered by any reader of Dante’s Inferno.57 And the praise
lavished upon Augustus for preserving the work seems almost to match
57
Compare e.g. Thomas Aquinas, In Psalmos, Ps.36, num. 23: Iste ergo sciens se separatum a Deo per
peccatum, reputat se miserum; et ex hoc dicitur animus ejus dejectus.
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 157
the credit due to the poet for composing it. Whilst immortality is attrib-
uted to the characters Aeneas and Tityrus, and even to Virgil’s smallhold-
ing, the mortality of the poet who created these entities continues to be
heavily emphasized: Petrarch’s other letters to other ancient authors do
not draw such attention to the fact that their recipients are dead.
The imitation of Virgil accomplished in this epistle is of vital meta-
literary significance in that it provides a practical demonstration of the
categorical division between the dead poet on the one hand, forever con-
fined to remote antiquity or Avernus, and the Virgil ‘present’ to Petrarch
through his work on the other. Virgil’s poetry is now the property of
Petrarch’s epoch, subject to reinterpretation in the light of insights from
Christian theology, the passage of time, contemporary events, and liter-
ary history. And it is again through a crafted persona of his own that
Petrarch clarifies the distinction between Virgil the historical author and
the Virgilian corpus that is now prone to appropriation, imitation and
recreation – in the manner of this very epistle.

IV
Biographical approaches to both Dante and Petrarch in relation to their
work continue to be fruitful. However, the selection of texts surveyed
above shows that heavy emphasis on biography is not an absolutely neces-
sary prerequisite to appreciate the significance of the Virgilian career for
either Dante or Petrarch. And the intricacies of their engagement with
Virgil highlight the problems – identified in antiquity – that the postula-
tion of an author’s personal will can raise for literary interpretation.58 Signs
of human intention and agency can of course be seen in the responses
to Virgil provided by Dante and Petrarch, but those human touches are
in the end only discernible in texts. To confuse a persona or rational-
ized author with the historical author, or to read a literary programme

58
The problem of authorial control is raised in Plato, Phaedrus 275, and, with varying degrees
of explicitness in Roman poetry (e.g. Catullus 42, Horace, Satires 1.10.92, Ovid, Tristia 1.7,
Propertius 3.23). The ‘intentional fallacy’ was addressed by Wimsatt and Beardsley 1946 long
before Barthes 1977 (1967), which preceded and provoked Foucault 1998 (1969); compare Cheney
2002: 21. Aristotelian criticism, mostly mediated to Dante and Petrarch by Horace, and medieval
literary theory are rarely given to intentionalism: Servius’ intentio Virgilii refers to the meaning
of Virgil as a rationalized author. Petrarch’s actual practice in appropriating Virgil nicely illus-
trates Barthes’s observation that ‘the text is a tissue of citations … [its writer’s] only power is to
combine the different kinds of writing, to oppose some by others’, while the words Dante has
Virgil speak in Inferno 26.73–4 could have a metapoetic implication bearing on authorial con-
trol: Lascia parlare a me, ch’ i’ ho concetto / ciò che tu vuoi ‘Allow me to speak, for I have conceived
what you want.’
158 Andrew Laird
in a literary work as autobiographical testimony is rather like mistaking a
fictional character for a real individual.
The respect in which ‘career criticism’ makes an important contribu-
tion to literary interpretation is in relaxing the formalist tenet that only a
single text (and not a collection of texts) can be subjected to literary ana-
lysis. That tenet has always been justified on the basis that ‘if we amend
the rationalized author’s image with the help of the historical author we
destroy the text’: the perceived threat is that interpretation of a literary
text will be distorted or constricted by the consideration of an historical
author or of his other works.59 But it can be countered that an explicit
reference to the Eclogues in Virgil’s Georgics (4.565–6) is as demonstrably
attributable to Virgil the rationalized author of the Georgics as it is to Virgil
the historical author. Thus bringing the Eclogues to bear on interpretation,
even stylistic interpretation of the Georgics, is perfectly justified.
To ascribe all the compositions by Virgil to the same rationalized
author is audacious in that it is tantamount to regarding his entire oeuvre
as a single text.60 But this may not be unwarranted where Virgil’s medi-
eval reception is concerned: generic boundaries and texts were config-
ured differently in a time before printing became widespread and Virgil’s
poems were presented together in the manuscripts.61 Moreover, Virgilian
‘paratexts’, like the spurious introduction to the Aeneid or the apocryphal
epitaph quoted above, along with other material, notably Fulgentius’
Virgilianae Continentiae (which was frequently copied and later printed
in the form of a preface to the poet’s corpus), might all contribute to a
sense that Virgil’s Eclogues, Georgics and Aeneid constitute a unity. The
depiction on the rota Virgiliana, for mnemotechnical purposes, of each
of Virgil’s poems as a third part of a whole circle, three in one, could be a
reflection of this.62
However, Dante and Petrarch show ample recognition of the generic
distinctions between Virgil’s works: as we have seen, Dante hints that his
Commedia offers an adventurous fusion of them, whilst Petrarch imitates

59
Riffaterre 1983: 5. The argument against explaining one work in the light of others by the same
historical author, from a formalist point of view, is that to do so presupposes stylistic identity
between different works – an impossibility if style is taken to be the unique quality of a work,
tantamount to the text itself.
60
Theodorakopoulos 1997 offers a reading of the ‘book of Virgil’ as a single text.
61
Reynolds 1983: 433–6.
62
Carruthers 2008: 251–2: ‘Virgil’s Wheel was clearly a mnemonic diagram that his [John of
Garland’s] students held; it is likely that it could be physically manipulated, as its concentric
circles suggest. The figure of the rhetorical “rota Virgili” may provide the connection between
the Latin word rota, “wheel,” and the English phrase “by rote”.’
 Re-inventing Virgil’s Wheel 159
bucolic and epic in separate projects. But both authors can present their
own individual compositions as parts of a whole: Dante’s La vita nuova
(which shows no Virgilian influence) embedded thirty-one of his Italian
poems in a prose narrative, in order to recount his relationship with
Beatrice; Petrarch organized his vernacular sonnets into the series of the
Canzoniere which became as influential as the sonnets themselves.63 The
rota Virgiliana served as a tool for rhetoricians and poets who sought to
remember and replicate the three Virgilian styles, at the same time as it
conveyed a consistent identity underlying the poet’s works. But the circu-
lar form of the wheel could not linearise the Eclogues, Georgics and Aeneid
into a temporal sequence. And it is certainly the case that Petrarch did
not follow the diachronic trajectory of his Roman precursor, as he only
started composing his own pastoral poetry after he had embarked on his
heroic epic. However, the hints, such as we find in the Epistola Posteritati,
that the Africa succeeded the Bucolicum Carmen – compounded with the
disciplined memorization of Virgil’s corpus – may have helped to spin the
Virgilian literary career into motion as a vehicle for Petrarch’s successors.

63
Carrai 2009.
 List of works cited

Abrams, M. H. (1953) The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical
Tradition. New York.
Adams, J. E. (1990) ‘The Economies of Authorship: Imagination and Trade in
Johnson’s Dryden’, Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900 30: 467–86.
Addison, J. (1854–6) Works, ed. H. G. Bohn (6 vols). London.
Aicher, P. (1989) ‘Ennius’ Dream of Homer’, American Journal of Philology
110: 227–32.
Allen, D. C. (1952) ‘The Double Journey of John Donne’, in A Tribute to George
Coffin Taylor: Studies and Essays, ed. A. Williams. Chapel Hill, NC. 83–99.
Althaus, T. (1994) ‘Lyrik der Klassik: Goethes Römische Elegien’, in Inter-
pretationen zur neueren deutschen Literaturgeschichte, ed. T. Althaus and
S. Matuschek. Münster. 43–70.
Ammer, A. (1990) ‘Verzeichnung der Begierden: Zur Semantik von Körper,
Raum und Schrift in Goethes Römischen Elegien’, in Proceedings of the XIIth
Congress of the International Comparative Literature Association Munich
1988, ed. R. Bauer, D. Fokkema et al. Munich. Vol. III, 43–9.
Anderson, B. (1991) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread
of Nationalism. London.
Anderson, R. D., P. J. Parsons and R. G. M. Nisbet (1979) ‘Elegiacs by Gallus
from Qasr Ibrim’, Journal of Roman Studies 69: 125–55.
Anderson, W. S. (1963) Pompey, His Friends, and the Literature of the First Century
B.C. Berkeley.
(1968) ‘Pastor Aeneas: On Pastoral Themes in the Aeneid ’, Transactions of the
American Philological Association 99: 1–17.
(1982) Essays on Roman Satire. Princeton.
Appel, S. (1998) ‘Erotica Romana’, in Im Feengarten: Goethe und die Frauen.
Stuttgart. 290–5.
Ascoli, A. R. (2008) Dante and the Making of a Modern Author. Cambridge.
Austin, R. G. (1968) ‘Ille ego qui quondam…’, Classical Quarterly n.s. 18: 107–15.
Avery, W. T. (1957) ‘Augustus and the Aeneid ’, Classical Journal 52: 225–9.
Ayuso, M. G. (2004) ‘The Unlike(ly) Other: Borges and Woolf’, Woolf Studies
Annual 10: 241–51.
Báez, F. (2004) Historia Universal de la Destrucción de los Libros. Caracas.

300
 Works cited 301
Baglio, M., A. Nebuloni Testa and M. Petoletti (eds) (2006) Francesco Petrarca: le
postille del Virgilio Ambrosiano (2 vols). Rome and Padua.
Bajoni, M. G. (1997) ‘Da Ausonio a Giovanni di Garlandia: un possibile percorso
della Rota Vergilii’, Emérita 65.2: 281–5.
Baldo, J. (2008) ‘“Into a thousand parts”: Representing the Nation in Henry V ’,
English Literary Renaissance 38: 55–82.
Bandini, M. (1986) ‘Il modello della metamorfosi ovidiana nel romanzo di
Apuleio’, Maia 38: 33–9.
Baranski, Z. and M. McLaughlin (eds) (2007) Italy’s Three Crowns: Reading
Dante, Petrarch and Boccaccio. Chicago.
Baratto, M. (1982) ‘Struttura narrativa e messaggio ideologico’, in Il testo mol-
tiplicato. Lettura di una novella del Decameron, ed. M. Lavagetto. Parma.
29–47.
Barchiesi, A. (1981) ‘Notizie sul “nuovo Gallo”’, Atene e Roma 26: 154–66.
(2001) Speaking Volumes: Narrative and Intertext in Ovid and Other Latin
Poets. London.
(2002) ‘The Uniqueness of the Carmen saeculare and Its Tradition’, in
Traditions and Contexts in the Poetry of Horace, ed. A. J. Woodman and
D. Feeney. Cambridge. 107–23.
(2005) ‘Introduzione’, in Ovidio Metamorfosi, vol. I, ed. A. Barchiesi and G.
Rosati. Milan. cxlviii–cxlix.
Barkan, L. (1986) The Gods Made Flesh. New Haven and London.
Barker, A. (1973) ‘Calm Regained through Passion Spent’, in The Prison and the
Pinnacle, ed. Balachandra Rajan. Toronto. 3–48.
Barnes, J. (1982) The Presocratic Philosophers. London.
Barstow, M. L. (1917) Wordsworth’s Theory of Poetic Diction: A Study of the
Historical and Personal Background of the Lyrical Ballads. New Haven.
Barthes, R. (1971) ‘Criticism as Language’, in Modern Literary Criticism 1900–
1970, ed. L. Lipking and A. W. Litz. New York. 432–5.
(1977) ‘The Death of the Author’ (1967), in Image, Music, Text. New York.
Bate, J. (1993) Shakespeare and Ovid. Oxford.
(1997) The Genius of Shakespeare. London.
Bate, W. J. (1946) From Classic to Romantic. Cambridge, MA.
(1963) John Keats. Cambridge, MA.
(1970) The Burden of the Past and the English Poet. Cambridge, MA.
Batstone, W. (1990) ‘Introduction: On How Virgil’s Pastoral Makes a Difference’,
Arethusa 23: 5–17.
Battaglia, S. (ed.) (1961–2003) Grande dizionario della lingua italiana. Turin.
Battisti, C. and G. Alessio (1950–7) Dizionario etimologico italiano. Florence.
Beagon, M. (1992) Roman Nature: The Thought of the Elder Pliny. Oxford.
(2005) The Elder Pliny on the Human Animal: Natural History Book 7. Oxford.
Bednarz, J. P. (2001) Shakespeare and the Poets’ War. New York.
Bellandi, F. (1980) Etica diatribica e protesta sociale nelle Satire di Giovenale.
Bologna.
302 Works cited
Belsey, C. (2006) Review of Patrick Cheney, Shakespeare, National Poet-
Playwright (Cambridge, 2004), in Shakespeare Studies 34: 170–6.
Bentley, G. E. (1971) The Profession of Dramatist in Shakespeare’s Time 1590–1642.
Princeton.
Berger, H. (1989) Imaginary Audition: Shakespeare on Stage and Page.
Berkeley.
Bernays, M. (1899) ‘Die Triumvirn in Goethes römischen Elegien’, in Zur neu-
eren und neußten Literaturgeschichte. Leipzig. 234–40.
Billanovich, G. (1947) Petrarca letterato, vol. I: Lo scrittoio del Petrarca. Rome.
Binns, J. W. (1980) ‘The Title-Page Epigraph of the Lyrical Ballads, 1800’, Library
6.2: 222–4.
Birley, A. (2000) Onomasticon to the Younger Pliny. Munich.
Block, R. (2006) The Spell of Italy: Vacation, Magic, and the Attraction of Goethe.
Detroit.
Bloom, H. (1970) ‘The Internalisation of Quest Romance’, in Romanticism and
Consciousness: Essays in Criticism, ed. H. Bloom. New York. 3–24.
(1973) The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry. New York.
(1998) Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human. New York.
Boccaccio, G. (1993). The Decameron, trans. G. Waldman. Oxford.
Bolisani, E. and M. Valgimigli (eds) (1963) La corrispondenza poetica di Dante
Alighieri e Giovanni del Virgilio. Florence.
Booth, W. C. (1979) Critical Understanding: The Powers and Limits of Pluralism.
Chicago.
Borges, J. L. (1970) Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings, ed. D. A. Yates
and J. E. Irby. Harmondsworth.
(1999) The Total Library: Non-Fiction 1922–1986, ed. E. Weinberger. London.
Bosmajian, H. (2006) Burning Books. Jefferson, NC.
Bowra, M. (1945) From Virgil to Milton. London.
Boyle, N. (1991) Goethe: The Poet and the Age, vol. I: The Poetry of Desire.
Oxford.
Bradley, A. C. (1909, reprinted 1955) Oxford Lectures on Poetry, 2nd edn. London.
Bradshaw, A. (1970) ‘Horace, Odes 4.1’, Classical Quarterly 20: 142–53.
Brady, J. (1993) ‘Dryden and Negotiations of Literary Succession and Precession’,
in Literary Transmission and Authority, ed. J. Brady, G. Clingham, D.
Kramer and E. Miner. Cambridge. 27–54.
Braudy, L. (1986) The Frenzy of Renown: Fame and Its History. New York.
Braund, S. (1988) Beyond Anger: A Study of Juvenal’s Third Book of Satires.
Cambridge.
(1996a) The Roman Satirists and Their Masks. London.
(1996b) Juvenal: Satires Book I. Cambridge.
(1997) ‘A Passion Unconsoled? Grief and Anger in Juvenal “Satire” 13’, in
The Passions in Roman Thought and Literature, ed. S. Braund and C. Gill.
Cambridge. 68–88.
Bristol, M. (1996) Big-Time Shakespeare. New York.
Broch, H. (1983) The Death of Virgil, trans. J. S. Untermayer. Oxford.
 Works cited 303
Bronner, F. (1898) ‘Goethes Römische Elegien und ihre Quellen’, Neue Jahrbücher
für Philologie und Pädigogik 148: 38–50, 102–12, 145–50, 247–65, 305–16,
367–71, 440–69, 525–41, 572–88.
Brooks, P. (1984) Reading for the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative. Oxford.
Browne, Sir Thomas (1642) Religio Medici. London.
Brownlee, K. (2005) ‘Power Plays: Petrarch’s Genealogical Strategies’, Journal of
Medieval and Early Modern Studies 35: 467–88.
Bruère, R. T. (1956) ‘Pliny the Elder and Virgil’, Classical Philology 51: 228–46.
Brugnoli, G. and F. Stok (eds) (1997) Vitae Vergilianae Antiquae. Rome.
Brummer, J. (ed.) (1912) Vitae Vergilianae. Leipzig.
Buck, T. (2008) ‘Der Poet, der sich vollendet’: Goethes Lehr- und Wanderjahre.
Cologne.
Burkert, W. (1972) Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism, trans. E. L. Minar,
Jr. Cambridge, MA.
Burnett, M. T. (ed.) (1999) Christopher Marlowe: The Complete Plays. London
and Rutland, VT.
Burrow, C. (1999) ‘Poems 1645: The Future Poet’, in The Cambridge Companion to
Milton, ed. D. Danielson. Cambridge. 54–69.
(2008) ‘The Appendix Vergiliana in the Renaissance’, Proceedings of the Vergil
Society 26: 1–16.
Butler, S. (2002) The Hand of Cicero. London.
Butrica, J. L. (1984) The Manuscript Tradition of Propertius, Phoenix suppl. 17.
Toronto.
(1996) ‘The Amores of Propertius: Unity and Structure in Books 2–4’, Illinois
Classical Studies 21: 87–158.
Buxton, J. (1963) Elizabethan Taste. London.
Bywaters, D. (1992) ‘The Problem of Dryden’s Fables’, Eighteenth-Century Studies
26: 29–55.
Campbell, G. (1984) ‘Milton and the Lives of the Ancients’, Journal of the
Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 47: 234–8.
Carey, J. (1967) ‘Sea, Snake, Flower and Flame in Samson Agonistes’, Modern
Language Review 62: 395–9.
(ed.) (1968) Samson Agonistes, in Milton: Complete Shorter Poems. London:
337–41.
(1969) Milton. New York.
(2002) ‘A Work in Praise of Terrorism’, Times Literary Supplement, 6
September: 15–16.
Carey, S. (2003) Pliny’s Catalogue of Culture: Art and Empire in the Natural
History. Oxford.
Carrai, S. (2009) ‘Putting Italian Renaissance Lyric in Order: Petrarch’s
Canzoniere and the Augustan Liber carminum’, in Italy and the Classical
Tradition: Language, Thought and Poetry 1300–1600, ed. C. Caruso and
A. Laird. London. 193–203.
Carruthers, M. (2008) The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval
Culture. Cambridge.
304 Works cited
Caruso, C. and Laird, A. (eds.) (2009a) Italy and the Classical Tradition: Language,
Thought and Poetry 1300–1600. London.
Caruso, C. and Laird, A. (2009b) ‘The Italian Classical Tradition, Language
and Literary History’ in Italy and the Classical Tradition: Language, Thought
and Poetry 1300–1600, ed. C. Caruso and A. Laird London. 1–25.
Caughie, P. L. (1985) ‘Sir Thomas Browne and Orlando’, Virginia Woolf Miscellany
25: 4.
Cecchini, E. (ed.) (1995) Dante Alighieri: Epistola a Cangrande. Florence.
Chandler, D. (2002) ‘Who Was Papinian?: The Meaning(s) of the Lyrical Ballads
Epigraph’, English Language Notes 39: 31–41.
Chapman, G. (1609) Euthymiae Raptus; or The Teares of Peace with Interlocutions.
London.
Charles, A. (1977) A Life of George Herbert. Ithaca, NY.
Cheney, P. (1993) Spenser’s Famous Flight: A Renaissance Idea of a Literary Career.
Toronto.
(1997) Marlowe’s Counterfeit Profession: Ovid, Spenser, Counter-Nationhood.
Toronto, Buffalo, London.
(2001) ‘Spenser’s Pastorals’, in The Cambridge Companion to Spenser, ed.
A. Hadfield. Cambridge. 79–80.
(2002a) ‘Introduction: “Jog On, Jog On”, European Career Paths’, in European
Literary Careers: The Author from Antiquity to the Renaissance, ed. P. Cheney
and F. A. de Armas. Toronto. 3–23.
(2002b) ‘“Novells of His Devise”: Chaucerian and Virgilian Career Paths in
Spenser’s Februarie Eclogue’, in European Literary Careers: The Author from
Antiquity to the Renaissance, ed. P. Cheney and F. A. de Armas. Toronto:
231–67.
(2004) Shakespeare, National Poet-Playwright. Cambridge.
(2008a) Shakespeare’s Literary Authorship. Cambridge.
(2008b) Marlowe’s Republican Authorship: Lucan, Liberty, and the Sublime.
Basingstoke.
(2009) ‘The Voice of the Author in “The Phoenix and the Turtle”: Chaucer,
Spenser, Shakespeare’, in Shakespeare and the Middle Ages, ed. C. Perry and
J. Watkins. Oxford. 103–25.
Cheney, P. and P. de Armas (eds) (2002) European Literary Careers: The Author
from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Toronto.
Cheney, P. and B. J. Striar (eds) (2006) The Collected Poems of Christopher
Marlowe, New York.
Cicero (1975) De Officiis, ed. and trans. W. Miller. Cambridge, MA.
Clausen, W. (ed.) (1994) A Commentary on Virgil: Eclogues. Oxford.
Clay, D. (1998) ‘The Theory of the Literary Persona in Antiquity’, Materiali e
discussioni 40: 9–40.
Clingham, G. (1993) ‘Another and the Same: Johnson’s Dryden’, in Literary
Transmission and Authority, ed. J. Brady, G. Clingham, D. Kramer and
E. Miner. Cambridge. 121–59.
 Works cited 305
Coiro, A. B. (1998) ‘Fable and Old Song: Samson Agonistes and the Idea of a
Poetic Career’, Milton Studies 36: 123–52.
Coleman, R. (ed.) (1977) Vergil: Eclogues. Cambridge.
Coleridge, S. T. (1997) Biographia Literaria, ed. N. Leask. London.
Comparetti, D. (1997) Vergil in the Middle Ages, trans. E. F. M. Benecke.
Princeton. (First English edn 1895.)
Consoli D. (1984) ‘Virgilio Marone, Publio’, in Enciclopedia dantesca. Rome. V:
1030–44.
Conte, G. B. (1986) The Rhetoric of Imitation. Ithaca, NY and London.
(1992) ‘Proems in the Middle’, Yale Classical Studies 29: 147–59.
Cook, E. (ed.) (1990) John Keats. Oxford.
Coolidge, J. S. (1965) ‘Great Things and Small: The Virgilian Progression’,
Comparative Literature 17: 1–23.
Cortelazzo, M. and P. Zolli (1979) [Zanichelli] Dizionario Etimologico della
Lingua Italiana. Bologna.
Courtney, E. (1980) A Commentary on the Satires of Juvenal. London.
(1993) The Fragmentary Latin Poets. Oxford.
(1999) Archaic Latin Prose. Atlanta.
Cox, F. (1997) ‘Envoi: The Death of Virgil’, in The Cambridge Companion to
Virgil, ed. C. Martindale. Cambridge. 327–36.
Craik, T. W. (ed.) (1995) William Shakespeare. Henry V (Arden 3). London.
Crawford, J. W. (1984) M. Tullius Cicero: The Lost and Unpublished Orations.
Göttingen.
Cucchiarelli, A. (2001) La satira e il poeta: Orazio tra Epodi e Sermones. Pisa.
(2005) ‘Speaking from Silence: The Stoic Paradoxes of Persius’, in The Cambridge
Companion to Roman Satire, ed. K. Freudenburg. Cambridge. 62–80.
Cugusi, P. (1983) Evoluzione e forme dell’ epistolografia latina. Rome.
Curran, S. (1986) ‘Multum in Parvo: Wordsworth’s Poems, in Two Volumes
of 1807’, in Poems in Their Place: The Intertextuality and Order of Poetic
Collections, ed. N. Freistat. Chapel Hill. 234–53.
Curtius, E. R. (1953) European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans.
W. R. Trask. London.
Damm, S. (1998) Christiane und Goethe: eine Recherche. Frankfurt.
De Decker, J. (1913) Juvenalis declamans: Étude sur la rhétorique declamatoire dans
les Satires de Juvénal. Ghent.
De Grazia, M. and P. Stallybrass (1993) ‘The Materiality of the Shakespearean
Text’, Shakespeare Quarterly 44: 255–83.
Denham, Sir J. (1969) Poetical Works, ed. T. H. Banks. Hamden, CT.
Dickinson, R. J. (1973) ‘The Tristia: Poetry in Exile’, in Ovid, ed. J. W. Binns.
London. 154–90.
Dimmick, J. (2002) ‘Ovid in the Middle Ages: Authority and Poetry’, in The
Cambridge Companion to Ovid, ed. P. Hardie. Cambridge. 264–87.
Dobranksi, S. (2002) ‘Text and Context for Paradise Regain’ d and Samson
Agonistes’, in Altering Eyes: New Perspectives on ‘Samson Agonistes’, ed.
M. R. Kelley and J. Wittreich. Newark, DE. 30–53.
306 Works cited
Dotti, U. (1987) Vita di Petrarca. Rome.
Douglas, W. W. (1948) ‘Wordsworth as Business Man’, PMLA 63: 625–41.
Dryden, J. (1971) The Works of John Dryden, ed. H.T Swedenberg, vol. XVII, ed.
S. H. Monk. Berkeley and Los Angeles.
(1976) The Works of John Dryden, general editor H. T. Swedenberg, vol. XV,
ed. E. Miner. Berkeley and Los Angeles.
(1987) The Works of John Dryden, general editor H. T. Swedenberg, vols. V–VI,
ed. W. Frost. Berkeley and Los Angeles.
(1992) The Works of John Dryden, general editor H. T. Swedenberg, vol. XIV,
ed. V. A. Dearing and A. Roper. Berkeley and Los Angeles.
(1994) The Works of John Dryden, general editor H. T. Swedenberg, vol. XII,
ed. V. A. Dearing. Berkeley and Los Angeles.
(1995–2005) The Poems of John Dryden, ed. P. Hammond and D. Hopkins
(6 vols). Harlow.
Du Bellay, J. (1919) Poésies françaises et latines, ed. E. Courbet (2 vols). Paris.
Dümmler, E. (ed.) (1881) Poetae Latinae aevi Carolini. Vol. I. Berlin.
Duncan-Jones, E. E. (1975) ‘Marvell: A Great Master of Words’, Proceedings of
the British Academy 61: 267–90.
Duncan-Jones, K. (1986) ‘Sidney, Stella, and Lady Rich’, in Sir Philip Sidney: 1586
and the Creation of a Legend, ed. J. Van Dorsten, D. Baker-Smith and
A. Kinney. Leiden. 170–92.
(1991) Sir Philip Sidney: Courtier Poet. New Haven.
(2001) Ungentle Shakespeare: Scenes from His Life. London.
Duncan-Jones, K. and J. Van Dorsten (eds) (1973) Miscellaneous Prose of Sir
Philip Sidney. Oxford.
Du Quesnay, I. M. Le M. (1995) ‘Horace, Odes 4.5: Pro Reditu Imperatoris Caesaris
Divi Filii Augusti’, in Homage to Horace, ed. S. J. Harrison. Oxford. 128–87.
Dzelzainis, M. (2008) ‘L’Estrange, Marvell and The Directions to a Painter: The
Evidence of Bodleian Library, MS Gough London 14’, in Roger L’Estrange
and the Making of Restoration Culture, ed. A. Dunan-Page and B. Lynch
Aldershot. 53–66.
Edwards, R. R. (2002) ‘Medieval Literary Careers: The Theban Track’, in
European Literary Careers: The Author from Antiquity to the Renaissance, ed.
P. Cheney and P. de Arnas. Toronto. 104–28.
Eissler, K. R. (1963) Goethe: A Psychoanalytic Study, 1775–1786 (2 vols). Detroit.
Eliot, T. S. (1932a) John Dryden, The Poet, the Dramatist, the Critic. New York.
(1932b) Selected Essays. London.
Erikson, E. H. (1959) Identity and the Life Cycle. New York.
Erikson, L. (1990) ‘The Egoism of Authorship: Wordsworth’s Poetic Career’,
Journal of English and Germanic Philology 89: 37–50.
Erkkila, B. (2002) ‘The Emily Dickinson Wars’, in The Cambridge Companion to
Emily Dickinson, ed. W. Martin. Cambridge. 11–29.
Erne, L. (2003) Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist. Cambridge.
(2006) ‘Print and Manuscript’, in The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare’s
Poetry, ed. P. Cheney. Cambridge. 54–71.
 Works cited 307
(2007) ‘Shakespeare for Readers’, in Alternative Shakespeares 3, ed. D. E.
Henderson. London. 78–94.
(2008) ‘Afterword’, in Shakespeare’s Book: Essays in Reading, Writing and
Reception, ed. R. Meek, J. Rickard and R. Wilson. Manchester. 255–65.
Evans, G. B. and J. M. M. Tobin (eds) (1997) The Riverside Shakespeare, 2nd edn.
Boston. (First publ. 1974.)
Evans, H. (1983) ‘Publica carmina’: Ovid’s Books from Exile. Lincoln, NE and
London.
Evans, M. (1984) ‘Intertextual Labyrinth: “El Inmortal” by Borges’, Forum for
Modern Language Studies 20: 275–81.
Fairclough, H. R. (1916–18) Virgil (2 vols). Cambridge, MA and London.
Fallon, S. (2007) Milton’s Peculiar Grace: Self-Representation and Authority.
Ithaca, NY and London.
Fantham, E. (1996) Roman Literary Culture: From Cicero to Apuleius. Baltimore
and London.
Fantuzzi, M. and R. Hunter (2004) Tradition and Innovation in Hellenistic
Poetry. Cambridge.
Faral, E. (1924) Les Arts poétiques du XIIe et du XIIIe siècle. Paris.
Farrell, J. (2002) ‘Greek Lives and Roman Careers in the Classical Vita Tradition’,
in European Literary Careers: The Author from Antiquity to the Renaissance,
ed. P. Cheney and P. de Arnas. Toronto. 24–46.
(2003) ‘Classical Genre in Theory and Practice’, New Literary History 34:
383–408.
(2004) ‘Ovid’s Virgilian Career’, Materiali e discussioni 52: 41–55.
Feeney, D. C. (1991) The Gods in Epic: Poets and Critics of the Classical Tradition.
Oxford.
(1998). Literature and Religion at Rome. Cambridge.
Feo, M. (1973) ‘Petrarca, Francesco’, in Enciclopedia dantesca. Rome. IV: 50–8.
(1988) ‘Petrarca, Francesco’, in Enciclopedia virgiliana. Rome. IV: 53–78.
Fera V. (1980) ‘Annotazioni inedite del Petrarca al testo dell’ “Africa”’, Italia
medioaevale e umanistica 23: 1–25.
Ferry, A. (1968) Milton and the Miltonic Dryden. Cambridge, MA.
Fielding, I. (2006) ‘In the Guise of Tityrus: The Pastoral Tendency of Dante,
Petrarch and Boccaccio’, MA dissertation, Warwick University.
Fish, S. (2001) How Milton Works. Cambridge, MA.
Fitzgerald, W. (2007) ‘The Letter’s the Thing (in Pliny, Book 7)’, in Ancient
Letters, ed. R. Morello and A. Morrison. Oxford: 191–210.
Flannagan, R. (ed.) (1998) The Riverside Milton. Boston, MA.
Focardi, G. (1978) ‘Lo stile oratorio nei prologhi terenziani’, Studi italiani di
filologia classica 50: 70–89.
Ford, S. (1667) Conflagratio Londinensis poetice depicta. The Conflagration of
London: Poetically Described, Both in Latin and English, 2nd edn. London.
Forni, P. M. (1992) Forme complesse nel Decameron. Florence.
Foster J. (1979) ‘Petrarch’s Africa: Ennian and Virgilian influences’, Papers of the
Liverpool Latin Seminar 2: 277–98.
308 Works cited
Foucault, M. (1998) ‘What Is an Author?’, in The Art of Art History: A Critical
Anthology, ed. D. Preziosi. Oxford. 299–314. (First published in French 1969.)
Fowler, D. (1989) ‘First Thoughts on Closure: Problems and Prospects’, Materiali
e discussioni 22: 75–122.
(1997) ‘Second Thoughts on Closure’, in Classical Closure: Reading the End
in Greek and Latin Literature, ed. D. Roberts, F. Dunn and D. Fowler.
Princeton. 3–22.
Fraenkel E. (1927) ‘Anzeige von Petrarca, Africa ed. Festa 1926’, Gnomon
3: 485–94. Reprinted in Kleine Beiträge zur Klassischen Philologie II (1964),
527–38.
Freccero, J. (1986) ‘The Fig-Tree and the Laurel: Petrarch’s Poetics’, in Literary
Theory/Renaissance Texts, ed. P. Parker and D. Quint. Baltimore. 20–32.
Freudenburg, K. (1993) The Walking Muse: Horace on the Theory of Satire.
Princeton.
(2001) Satires of Rome: Threatening Poses from Lucilius to Juvenal. Cambridge.
(ed.) (2005) The Cambridge Companion to Roman Satire. Cambridge.
Frings, I. (2005) Das Spiel mit den eigenen Texten. Wiederholung und Selbstzitat
bei Ovid. Munich.
Frugoni, F. (1960) Il cane di Diogene (1689), in Trattatisti e narratori del Seicento,
ed. E. Raimondi. Milan and Naples. 991.
Frühwald, W. (2007) Goethes Hochzeit. Frankfurt.
Fujimura, T. H. (1993) The Temper of John Dryden, ed. R. W. McHenry, Jr. East
Lansing, MI.
Gadamer, H.-G. (1994) Truth and Method, trans. W. Glen-Doepel,
J. Weinsheimer and D. G. Marshall. New York.
Gale, M. R. (1997) ‘Propertius 2.7: Militia Amoris and the Ironies of Elegy’,
Journal of Roman Studies 87: 77–91.
Galperin, W. H. (1989) Revision and Authority in Wordsworth: The Interpretation
of a Career. Philadelphia.
Gamberini, F. (1983) Stylistic Theory and Practice in The Younger Pliny.
Hildesheim, Zurich, New York.
Garland, John of (1974) The Parisiana Poetria of John of Garland, ed. and trans.
T. Lawler. New Haven.
Garrison, J. D. (1981) ‘The Universe of Dryden’s Fables’, Studies in English
Literature, 1500–1900 21: 409–23.
Garrod, H. W. (1923) Wordsworth: Lectures and Essays, 2nd edn. Oxford.
Gelber, M. W. (1999) The Just and the Lively: The Literary Criticism of John
Dryden. Manchester.
Ghibellino, E. (2007) Goethe and Anna Amalia: A Forbidden Love? trans.
D. Farrelly. Dublin.
Gibson, R. K. (2002) Ovid Ars Amatoria Book III. Cambridge.
(2007) Excess and Restraint. Propertius, Horace, and Ovid’s Ars Amatoria. London.
(forthcoming) ‘Elder and Better: The Natural History and the Letters of Pliny
the Younger’, in Pliny the Elder: Themes and Contexts, ed. R. Gibson and
R. Morello. Leiden.
 Works cited 309
Gildenhard, I. (2007) Paideia Romana: Cicero’s Tusculan Disputations.
Cambridge.
Gill, S. (ed.) (2000) William Wordsworth: The Major Works. Oxford.
Ginsberg, D. (1995) ‘Wordsworth’s Poems, in Two Volumes (1807) and the
Epideictic Tradition’, in Rhetorical Traditions and British Romantic Literature,
ed. D. H. Bialostosky and L. D. Needham. Bloomington. 108–21.
Godi C. (ed.) (1988) ‘La Collatio laureationis del Petrarca nelle due redazioni’,
Studi petrarchesi 5: 1–56.
Goethe, J. W. (1985–) Sämtliche Werke: Briefe, Tagebücher, und Gespräche (40
vols), ed. D. Borchmeyer. Frankfurt.
(1989) Italian Journey, trans. R. R. Heitner, ed. T. P. Saine and
J. L. Sammons, in Goethe’s Collected Works, ed. V. Lange, E. A. Blackhall
and C. Hamlin, vol. VI. New York.
Gold, B. (1998) ‘“The House I Live in Is Not My Own”: Women’s Bodies in
Juvenal’s Satires’, Arethusa 31.3: 369–86.
Goldberg, S. (2005) Constructing Literature in the Roman Republic: Poetry and Its
Reception. Cambridge.
Gouws, J. (ed.) (1986a) The Prose Works of Fulke Greville, Lord Brooke. Oxford.
(1986b) ‘Fact and Anecdote in Fulke Greville’s Account of Sidney’s Last Days’,
in Sir Philip Sidney: 1586 and the Creation of a Legend, ed. J. Van Dorsten,
D. Baker-Smith and A. Kinney. Leiden. 62–82.
Gowers, E. (1993) The Loaded Table: Representations of Food in Roman Literature.
Oxford.
(2003) ‘Fragments of Autobiography in Horace Satires 1’, Classical Antiquity
22: 55–92.
(2005) ‘The Restless Companion: Horace, Satires 1 and 2’, in The Cambridge
Companion to Roman Satire, ed. K. Freudenburg. Cambridge. 57–61.
Grafton, A. (1983) Joseph Scaliger: A Study in the History of Classical Scholarship,
I: Textual Criticism and Exegesis. Oxford.
Green, P. (1998) Juvenal: The Sixteen Satires. London and New York.
Greenblatt, S. (2004) Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare.
New York.
Greenblatt, S., W. Cohen, J. E. Howard and K. E. Maus (eds) (1997) Norton
Shakespeare. New York.
Greene, T. (1982) The Light in Troy: Imitation and Discovery in Renaissance Poetry.
New Haven.
Griffin, D. (1996) Literary Patronage in England, 1650–1800. Cambridge.
Griffin, J. (2002) ‘Look Your Last on Lyric: Horace Odes 4.15’, in Classics in
Progress: Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome, ed. T. P. Wiseman. Oxford.
311–32.
Griffin, M. T. (1992) Seneca: A Philosopher in Politics, rev. edn. Oxford.
Griggs, E. L. (ed.) (1956–71) Collected Letters of Samuel Taylor Coleridge (6 vols).
Oxford.
Guillory, J. (1986) ‘Dalila’s House: Samson Agonistes and the Sexual Division of
Labour’, in Rewriting the Renaissance: The Discourses of Sexual Difference in
310 Works cited
Early Modern Europe, ed. M. W. Ferguson, M. Quilligan and N. J. Vickers.
Chicago and London. 106–22.
Gunderson, E. (2005) ‘The Libidinal Rhetoric of Satire’, in The Cambridge
Companion to Roman Satire, ed. K. Freudenburg. Cambridge. 224–40.
Günther, H.-C. (1997) Quaestiones Propertianae (Mnemosyne suppl. 169). Leiden.
Gurr, A. (ed.) (1992a) William Shakespeare. Henry V. Cambridge.
(1992b) The Shakespearean Stage 1574–1642, 3rd edn. Cambridge.
Habinek, T. (2005) ‘Satire as aristocratic play’, in The Cambridge Companion to
Roman Satire, ed. K. Freudenburg. Cambridge. 177–91.
Hale White, W. (1897) A Description of the Wordsworth & Coleridge Manuscripts
in the Possession of Mr T. Norton Longman. London.
Hall, J., (1998) ‘Cicero to Lucceius (Fam 5.12) in Its Social Context: valde bella?’,
Classical Philology 93.4: 308–21.
Hallo, W. W. and J. J. A. van Dijk (trans.) (1968) The Exaltation of Inanna. New
Haven.
Hamilton, D. B. (1990) Virgil and The Tempest: The Politics of Imitation.
Columbus, OH.
Hamm, H. (1997) Goethes ‘Faust’: Werkgeschichte und Textanalyse, 6th edn.
Berlin.
Hammond, B. S. (1997) Professional Imaginative Writing in England, 1670–1740.
Oxford.
Hammond, P. (1991) John Dryden: A Literary Life. Basingstoke.
(1992) ‘The Circulation of Dryden’s Poetry’, Papers of the Bibliographical
Society of America 86: 379–409.
(1996) ‘Marvell’s Sexuality’, The Seventeenth Century 11: 87–123.
(1999) Dryden and the Traces of Classical Rome. Oxford.
(2002) Figuring Sex between Men from Shakespeare to Rochester. Oxford.
Hardie, A. (1990) ‘Juvenal and the Condition of Letters: The Seventh Satire’,
in Papers of the Leeds International Latin Seminar VI, ed. F. Cairns and
M. Heath. Leeds. 145–209.
Hardie, C. (1984) ‘Virgil in Dante’, in Virgil and His Influence: Bimillenial
Studies, ed. C. Martindale. Bristol. 37–70.
Hardie, P. (1993a) ‘After Rome: Renaissance Epic’, in Roman Epic, ed. A. J. Boyle.
London. 294–313.
(1993b) The Epic Successors of Virgil: A Study in the Dynamics of a Tradition.
Cambridge.
(1997a) ‘Closure in Latin Epic’, in Classical Closure: Reading the End in Greek
and Latin Literature, ed. D. Roberts, F. Dunn and D. Fowler. Princeton.
139–62.
(1997b) ‘Virgil and Tragedy’, in The Cambridge Companion to Virgil, ed.
C. Martindale. Cambridge. 312–26.
(2002a) Ovid’s Poetics of Illusion. Cambridge.
(ed.) (2002b) The Cambridge Companion to Ovid. Cambridge.
(2007a) ‘Contrasts’, in Classical Constructions: Papers in Memory of Don Fowler,
ed. S. J. Heyworth with P. G. Fowler and S. J. Harrison. Oxford. 141–73.
 Works cited 311
(2007b) ‘Poets, Patrons, Rulers: The Ennian Tradition’, in Ennius Perennis: The
Annals and Beyond, ed. W. Fitzgerald and E. Gowers. Cambridge. 129–44.
Hardie, W. R. (1913) ‘The Dream of Ennius’, Classical Quarterly 7: 188–95.
Harding, A. J. (1995) The Reception of Myth in English Romanticism. Columbia,
MO.
Harris, W. (2002) Restraining Rage: The Ideology of Anger in Classical Antiquity.
Cambridge, MA.
Harrison, G. (1987) ‘The Confessions of Lucilius (Horace Sat. 2.1.30–34): A
Defense of Autobiographical Satire?’, Classical Antiquity 6: 38–52.
Harrison, S. J. (1990) ‘The Praise Singer: Horace, Censorinus and Odes 4.8’,
Journal of Roman Studies 80: 31–43.
(ed.) (1995a) Homage to Horace. Oxford.
(1995b) ‘Horace, Pindar, Iullus Antonius and Augustus: Odes 4.2’, in Homage
to Horace, ed. S. J. Harrison. Oxford. 108–27.
(2002) ‘Ovid and Genre: Evolutions of an Elegist’, in The Cambridge
Companion to Ovid, ed. P. Hardie. Cambridge. 79–94.
(2005) ‘Hercules and Augustus in Propertius 4.9’, Papers of the Langford Latin
Seminar 12: 117–32.
(2007a) Generic Enrichment in Vergil and Horace. Oxford.
(2007b) (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Horace. Cambridge.
(2007c) ‘Horatian Self-Representations’ in The Cambridge Companion to
Horace, ed. S. J. Harrison. Cambridge. 22–35.
(2008) ‘Horace Epistles 2: the last Horatian book of sermones?’, Papers of the
Langford Latin Seminar 13: 173–86.
Hartman, G. H. (1987) The Unremarkable Wordsworth. Minneapolis.
Hartwig, J. (1996) ‘Marvell’s Metamorphic “Fleckno”’, Studies in English
Literature 1500–1900 36: 171–212.
Hazlitt, W. (1930) ‘On Posthumous Fame – Whether Shakespeare Was
Influenced by a Love of It?’, in The Complete Works of William Hazlitt, ed.
P. P. Howe (4 vols). London. 21–4.
Healy, J. F. (1999) Pliny the Elder on Science and Technology. Oxford.
Heaney, S. (1988) The Government of the Tongue: The 1986 T. S. Eliot Memorial
Lectures and Other Critical Writings. London.
Heath, J. (1992) Actaeon, the Unmannerly Intruder: The Myth and Its Meaning in
Classical Literature. New York.
Heidegger, M. (1971) On the Way to Language, trans. P. Hertz. New York.
Helgerson, R. (1983) Self-Crowned Laureates: Spenser, Jonson, Milton, and the
Literary System. Berkeley.
(1992) Forms of Nationhood: The Elizabethan Writing of England. Chicago.
(2007) A Sonnet from Carthage: Garcilaso de la Vega and the New Poetry of
Sixteenth-Century Europe. Philadelphia.
Heltzel, V. and H. Hudson (ed. and trans.) (1940) Nobilis, or a View of the Life and
Death of a Sidney and Lessus Lugubris. By Thomas Moffet. San Marino, CA.
Henderson, J. (1999) Writing Down Rome: Satire, Comedy, and Other Offences in
Latin Poetry. Oxford.
312 Works cited
(2002) Pliny’s Statue. Exeter.
Herman, P. C. (2005) Destabilizing Milton: Paradise Lost and the Poetics of
Incertitude. New York and Basingstoke.
Hershkowitz, D. (1995) ‘Pliny the Poet’, Greece & Rome 42: 168–81.
Herwig, W. (ed.) (1965–87) Goethes Gespräch: eine Sammlung zeitgenössischer
Berichte aus seinem Umgang (5 vols). Zurich and Munich.
Heyworth, S. J. (1992) ‘Propertius 2.13’, Mnemosyne 45: 45–59.
(1994) ‘Some Allusions to Callimachus in Latin Poetry’, Materiali e discussioni
33: 51–79.
(1995) ‘Propertius: Division, Transmission, and the Editor’s Task’, Papers of the
Leeds International Latin Seminar 8: 165–85.
(2007a) Sexti Properti Elegi. Oxford.
(2007b) Cynthia: A Companion to the Text of Propertius. Oxford.
Highet, G. (1949a) The Classical Tradition: Greek and Roman Influences on
Western Literature. London.
(1949b) ‘The Philosophy of Juvenal’, TAPA 80: 254–70.
(1954) Juvenal the Satirist. Oxford.
Highley, C. (1997) Shakespeare, Spenser and the Crisis in Ireland. Cambridge.
Hinds, S. (1985) ‘Booking the Return Trip: Ovid and Tristia 1’, Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philological Society 31: 13–32.
(1988) ‘Generalizing about Ovid’, Ramus 16: 4–31.
(1998) Allusion and Intertext: Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry.
Cambridge.
(1999) ‘After Exile: Time and Teleology from Metamorphoses to Ibis’, in
Ovidian Transformations: Essays on Ovid’s Metamorphoses and Its Reception,
ed. P. Hardie, A. Barchiesi and S. Hinds. Cambridge. 48–67.
(2002) ‘Landscape with Figures’, in The Cambridge Companion to Ovid, ed.
P. Hardie. Cambridge. 122–49.
(2004) ‘Petrarch, Cicero, Virgil: Virtual Community in Familiares 24,4’,
Materiali e discussioni 52: 157–76.
(2007) ‘Martial’s Ovid/Ovid’s Martial’, Journal of Roman Studies 97: 113–54.
(forthcoming) ‘Seneca’s Ovidian Loci’, Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica.
Hoffer, S. (1999) The Anxieties of Pliny the Younger. Atlanta.
Hoffmeister, G. (ed.) (1988) Goethe in Italy, 1786–1986. Amsterdam.
Holberton, E. (2005) ‘The Textual Transmission of Marvell’s “A Letter to
Doctor Ingelo”: The Longleat Manuscript’, English Manuscript Studies 12:
233–53.
Hollander, R. (1997) Boccaccio’s Dante and the Shaping Force of Satire. Ann
Arbor.
(unpublished) ‘The Substance of Shadow: A Darkening Trope in Poetic
History’, Clark Lectures 1999, Trinity College, Cambridge.
Hollander, R. and H. Russo (2003) ‘Purgatorio 33.43: Dante’s 515 and Virgil’s 333’,
Electronic Bulletin of the Dante Society of America.
Hollis, A. S. (1977) Ovid Ars Amatoria Book I. Oxford.
(2007) Fragments of Roman Poetry c.60 BC– AD 20. Oxford.
 Works cited 313
Holmes, G. (1980) Dante. Oxford.
Holzberg, N. (2002) Ovid: The Poet and His Work, trans. G. M. Goshgarian.
Ithaca, NY.
Honigmann, E. A. J. (1998) Shakespeare: The Lost Years, 2nd edn. Manchester.
Hooley, D. (2007) Roman Satire. Malden, MA.
Hopkins, D. (1986) John Dryden. Cambridge.
(2001) ‘Translation, Metempsychosis, and the Flux of Nature: “Of the
Pythagorean Philosophy”’, in Dryden and the World of Neoclassicism, ed.
W. Görtschacher and H. Klein. Tübingen. 145–54.
Horsfall, N. (1995) ‘Virgil: His Life and Times’, in A Companion to the Study of
Virgil, ed. N. Horsfall. Leiden. 1–26.
(2000a) A Companion to the Study of Virgil. Leiden.
(ed.) (2000b) Virgil: Aeneid 7: A Commentary. Leiden.
Houghton, L. B. T. (2007) ‘A Letter from Petrarch’, in Ennius Perennis: The
Annals and Beyond, ed. W. Fitzgerald and E. Gowers. Cambridge.
145–58.
Howe, N. P. (1985) ‘In Defense of the Encyclopedic Mode: On Pliny’s Preface to
the Natural History’, Latomus 46: 561–76.
Humbert, J. (1925) Plaidoyers écrits et les plaidoiries réelles de Cicéron. Paris.
Hume, R. D. (1970) Dryden’s Criticism. Ithaca, NY.
Hurst, I. (2006) Victorian Women Writers and the Classics: The Feminine of
Homer. Oxford.
Huskey, S. J. (2002) ‘Ovid and the Fall of Troy in Tristia 1.3’, Vergilius 48:
88–104.
Hutchinson, G. O. (2008) ‘The Publication and Individuality of Horace’s Odes
Books 1–3’, in Talking Books. Oxford. 131–61.
Ingleheart, J. (forthcoming), A Commentary on Ovid, Tristia 2. Oxford.
Ioppolo, G. (2006) Dramatists and Their Manuscripts in the Age of Shakespeare,
Jonson, Middleton and Heywood: Authorship, Authority and the Playhouse.
London.
Jackson, M. P. (2006) ‘Francis Meres and the Cultural Contexts of Shakespeare’s
Rival Poet Sonnets’, Review of English Studies 56: 225–46.
James, H. (1997) Shakespeare’s Troy: Drama, Politics, and the Translation of
Empire. Cambridge.
James, S. L. (2003) Learned Girls and Male Persuasion: Gender and Reading in
Roman Love Elegy. Berkeley.
Jarrell, R. (1953) Poetry and the Age. New York.
Jaspers, K. (1955) Reason and Existenz: Five Lectures, trans. W. Earle. New York.
Jeffrey, F. (1807) Review of Wordsworth, Poems, in Two Volumes (1807),
Edinburgh Review 11: 214–31.
Johnson, C. (2002) ‘Intertextuality and Translation: Borges, Browne, and
Quevedo’, Translation and Literature, 11: 174–94.
Johnson, S. (1975) Lives of the English Poets. London.
Jonson, B. (1975) Complete Poems, ed. G. Parfitt. Harmondsworth.
Joyce, J. (1993) Ulysses, ed. J. Johnson. Oxford.
314 Works cited
Jullien, D. (1995) ‘Biography of an Immortal’, Comparative Literature 47:
136–59.
Kahn, C. (1997) Roman Shakespeare: Warriors, Wounds, and Women. London
and New York.
Kallendorf, C. (1989) In Praise of Aeneas: Virgil and Epideictic Rhetoric in the
Early Italian Renaissance. Hanover.
(2007) The Other Virgil: ‘Pessimistic’ Readings of the Aeneid in Early Modern
Culture. Oxford.
Kastan, D. S. (2001) Shakespeare and the Book. Cambridge.
Keane, C. (2006) Figuring Genre in Roman Satire. Oxford and New York.
(2007) ‘Philosophy into Satire: The Program of Juvenal’s Fifth Book’, American
Journal of Philology 128.1: 27–57.
Kennedy, D. (1983) ‘Shades of Meaning: Virgil, Eclogue 10. 75–7’, Liverpool
Classical Monthly 8.8: 124.
Kennedy, W. J. (1984) ‘The Virgilian Legacies of Petrarch’s Bucolicum Carmen
and Spenser’s Shepheardes Calender’, in The Early Renaissance: Virgil and the
Classical Tradition, ed. A. L. Pellegrini (Acta IX). Binghamton. 79–106.
(2002) ‘Versions of a Career: Petrarch and his Renaissance Commentators’, in
European Literary Careers: The Author from Antiquity to the Renaissance, ed.
P. Cheney and P. de Armas. Toronto. 146–64.
Kenney, E. J. (1965) ‘The Poetry of Ovid’s Exile’, Proceedings of the Cambridge
Philological Society 11: 37–49.
Kermode, F. (1967) The Sense of an Ending: Studies in the Theory of Fiction.
London.
Kernan, A. (1959) The Cankered Muse: Satire of the English Renaissance. New
Haven.
(1995) Shakespeare, the King’s Playwright: Theater in the Stuart Court, 1603–1613.
New Haven.
Kerrigan, W. (1974) The Prophetic Milton. Charlottesville.
Ketchian, S. (1981) ‘Metempsychosis in the Verse of Anna Axmatova’, Slavonic
and East European Journal 25: 44–60.
Keuthen, M. (1999) ‘Und trotzdem bin ich glücklich’: Christiane Vulpius.
Munich.
Kezar, D. (2001) Guilty Creatures: Renaissance Poetry and the Ethics of Authorship.
Oxford.
Kilgour, M. (1990) From Communion to Cannibalism: An Anatomy of Metaphors
of Incorporation. Princeton.
(2008) ‘Heroic Contradictions: Samson and the Death of Turnus’, Texas
Studies in Literature and Language 50.2: 201–34.
King, J. K. (1980) ‘Propertius 2.1–12: His Callimachean Second Libellus’,
Würzburger Jahrbücher für die Altertumswissenschaft 6: 61–84.
King, R. J. (1998) ‘Ritual and Autobiography: The Cult of Reading in Ovid’s
Tristia 4.10’, Helios 25: 99–119.
Kinsley, J. and H. Kinsley (eds) (1971) John Dryden: The Critical Heritage.
London.
 Works cited 315
Klessmann, E. (1993) Christiane, Goethes Geliebte und Gefährtin, 2nd edn. Zurich
and Munich.
Klingner, F. (1956) ‘Liebeselegien, Goethes römische Vorbilder’, in Römische
Geisteswelt. Munich. 401–11.
Kneale, J. D. (1999) Romantic Aversions: Aftermaths of Classicism in Wordsworth
and Coleridge. Montreal.
Knellwolf, C. and C. Norris (eds.) (2001) The Cambridge History of Literary
Criticism, vol. IX: Twentieth-Century Historical, Philosophical and
Psychological Aspects. Cambridge.
Knox, B. (1966) ‘The Serpent and the Flame: The Imagery of the Second Book
of the Aeneid ’, in Virgil: A Collection of Critical Essays, ed. S. Commager.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 124–42.
Kramer, D. B. (1994) The Imperial Dryden: The Poetics of Appropriation in
Seventeenth-Century England. Athens, GA.
Krevans, N. (1992) ‘Print and the Tudor Poets’, in Reconsidering the Renaissance,
ed. M. Di Cesare. Binghamton. 301–13.
Kristeller, P. O. (1990) A Life of Learning. New York.
Laird, A. (1993) ‘Fiction, Bewitchment, and Story Worlds: The Implications of
Claims to Truth in Apuleius’, in Lies and Fiction in the Ancient World, ed.
C. Gill and T. Wiseman. Exeter. 147–74.
(1999) Powers of Expression, Expressions of Power. Oxford.
(2001) ‘The Poetics and Afterlife of Virgil’s Descent to the Underworld: Servius,
Dante, Fulgentius and the Culex’, Proceedings of the Virgil Society 24:
49–80.
(2002) ‘Authority and Ontology of the Muses in Epic Reception’, in Cultivating
the Muse: Struggles for Power and Inspiration in Classical Literature, ed.
E. Spentzou and D. P. Fowler. Oxford. 117–40.
(2003) ‘Roman Epic Theatre? The Poet in Virgil’s Aeneid ’, Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philological Society 49: 19–39.
Laugesen, A. T. (1962) ‘La roue de Virgile: une page de la théorie littéraire du
Moyen Âge’, Classica et Medievalia 23: 248–73.
Lavater-Sloman, M. (1960) Wer sich der Liebe vertraut: drei Abschnitte aus Goethes
Leben. Zurich and Munich.
Leishman, J. B. (1961) Themes and Variations in Shakespeare’s Sonnets. London.
Lethbridge, J. B. (ed.) (2008) Shakespeare and Spenser. Manchester.
Levin, H. (1986) ‘Critical Approaches to Shakespeare from 1660–1904’, in The
Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare Studies, ed. S. Wells. Cambridge. 213–29.
Levy, E. P. (2002) ‘The Mimesis of Metempsychosis in Ulysses’, Philological
Quarterly 81: 359–77.
Lewalski, B. K. (1988) ‘Milton’s Samson and the “New Acquist of True [Political]
Experience”’, Milton Studies 24: 233–51.
Lewis, J. (2001) ‘The Type of a Kind: or, the Lives of Dryden’, Eighteenth-Century
Life 25: 3–18.
Lieb, M. (1994) Milton and the Culture of Violence. Ithaca, NY and London.
Lilja, S. (1965) The Roman Elegists’ Attitude to Women. Helsinki.
316 Works cited
Lindo, L. (1974) ‘The Evolution of Juvenal’s Later Satires’, Classical Philology 69:
17–27.
Lipking, L. (1970) The Ordering of the Arts in Eighteenth-Century England.
Princeton.
(1981) The Life of the Poet: Beginning and Ending Poetic Careers. Chicago and
London.
(1985) ‘Life, Death, and Other Theories’, in Historical Studies and Literary
Criticism, ed. J. J. McGann. Madison. 180–98.
(1988) Abandoned Women and Poetic Tradition. Chicago.
(1998) Samuel Johnson: The Life of an Author. Cambridge, MA.
(2000) ‘Poet-Critics’, in The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism,
vol. VII: Modernism and the New Criticism, ed. A. W. Litz, L. Menand and
L. Rainey. Cambridge. 439–67.
(2005) ‘Literary Criticism and the Rise of National Literary History’, in The
New Cambridge History of English Literature, 1660–1780, ed. J. Richetti.
Cambridge. 471–97.
Little, G. (ed.) (1975) Barron Field’s Memoirs of Wordsworth. Sydney.
Logan, R. A. (2007) Shakespeare’s Marlowe: The Influence of Christopher Marlowe
on Shakespeare’s Artistry. Aldershot.
Loutsch, C. (1994) L’Exorde dans les discours de Cicéron. Brussels.
Love, H. (1993) Scribal Publication in Seventeenth-Century England. Oxford.
Low, A. (1974) The Blaze of Noon: A Reading of ‘Samson Agonistes’. New York.
Lowrie, M. (1995) ‘A Parade of Lyric Predecessors: Horace C. 1.12–1.18’, Phoenix
49: 33–48.
(1997) Horace’s Narrative Odes. Oxford.
Luck, G. (1967) ‘Goethe’s Römische Elegien und die augusteische Liebeselegie’,
Arcadia 2: 173–95.
(ed.) (1977) P. Ovidius Naso. Tristia. (2 vols). Heidelberg.
Lyne, R. (2000) ‘Ovid, Golding, and the “Rough Magic” of The Tempest’, in
Shakespeare’s Ovid: The Metamorphoses in the Plays and Poems, ed. A. B.
Taylor. Cambridge. 150–64.
(2002) ‘Love and Exile after Ovid’, in The Cambridge Companion to Ovid, ed.
P. Hardie. Cambridge. 288–300.
Lyne, R.O.A.M. (1998) ‘Introductory Poems in Propertius: 1.1 and 2.12’,
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 44: 158–81.
(2007) Collected Papers on Latin Poetry. Oxford.
Mailloux, P. (1989) A Hesitation before Birth: The Life of Franz Kafka.
Cranbury, NJ.
Malamud, M. (1996) ‘Out of Circulation? An Essay on Exchange in Persius’
Satires’, Ramus 25: 39–64.
Malcolmson, C. (2004) George Herbert: A Literary Life. New York.
Mallarmé, S. (1945) Œuvres complètes, ed. H. Mondor and G. Jean-Aubry.
Paris.
Maltzahn, N. von (2005) An Andrew Marvell Chronology. Basingstoke.
Mann, N. (1984) Petrarch. Oxford.
 Works cited 317
Manning, P. (1983) ‘Wordsworth’s Intimations Ode and Its Epigraphs’, Journal
of English and Germanic Philology 82: 526–40.
Marchesi, I. (2008) The Art of Pliny’s Letters. Cambridge.
Marchesi, S. (2001) ‘“Sic me formabat puerum”: Horace’s Satire I 4 and
Boccaccio’s Defense of the Decameron’, Modern Language Notes 116: 3–29.
(2004) Stratigrafie decameroniane. Florence.
Maresca T. (1981) ‘Dante’s Virgil: An Antecedent’, Neophilologus 65: 548–51.
Marshall, B. A. (1985) A Historical Commentary on Asconius. Columbia, MO.
Martin, B. (1949) Schiller und Goethe: Ihre geistige Begegnung. Kassel.
Martindale, C. (ed.) (1997a) The Cambridge Companion to Virgil. Cambridge.
(1997b) ‘Green Politics: The Eclogues’, in The Cambridge Companion to Virgil,
ed. C. Martindale. Cambridge. 107–24.
(2004a) ‘Shakespeare and Virgil’, in Shakespeare and the Classics, ed.
C. Martindale and A. B. Taylor. Cambridge. 89–106.
(2004b) ‘Shakespeare’s Ovid, Ovid’s Shakespeare: A Methodological
Postscript’, in Shakespeare’s Ovid: The Metamorphoses in the Plays and Poems,
ed. A. B. Taylor. Cambridge. 198–215.
Martindale, C. and M. Martindale (1990) Shakespeare and the Uses of Antiquity:
An Introductory Essay. London.
Martindale, C. and A. B. Taylor (eds.) (2004) Shakespeare and the Classics.
Cambridge.
Martz, L. (1980) Poet of Exile: A Study of Milton’s Poetry. New Haven and London.
Marvell, A. (1971) Poems and Letters (2 vols), ed. P. Legouis. Oxford.
(2003) Prose Works, ed. A. Patterson, M. Dzelzainis, N. von Maltzahn and
N. H. Keeble (2 vols). New Haven.
Masten, J. B. (1997) Textual Intercourse: Collaboration, Authorship, and Sexualities
in Renaissance Drama. Cambridge.
Mayer, R. (1994) Horace: Epistles 1. Cambridge.
(2003a) ‘Persona (I) problems’, Materiali e discussioni 50: 55–80.
(2003b) ‘Pliny and gloria dicendi’, Arethusa 36.2: 227–34.
Mazzotta, G. (1986) The World at Play in Boccaccio’s Decameron. Princeton.
McDowell, N. (2005) ‘Urquhart’s Rabelais: Translation, Patronage, and Cultural
Politics’, English Literary Renaissance 35: 273–303.
(2008) Poetry and Allegiance in the English Civil Wars: Marvell and the Cause
of Wit. Oxford.
McKeown, J. C. (1987) Ovid: Amores vol. I: Text and Prolegomena. Liverpool.
McLaughlin, M. L. (1995) Literary Imitation in the Italian Renaissance: The Theory
and Practice of Literary Imitation in Italy from Dante to Bembo. Oxford.
McMullan, G. (2007) Shakespeare and the Idea of Late Writing. Cambridge.
McWilliams, J. (2003) ‘“A Storm of Lamentations Writ”: “Lachrymae Musarum”
and Royalist Culture after the Civil War’, Yearbook of English Studies
33: 273–89.
M[eres], F. (1634) Wits Common-wealth. The Second Part. London.
Milgate, W. (ed.) (1967) John Donne: The Satires, Epigrams and Verse Letters.
Oxford.
318 Works cited
Miller, J. F. (1982) ‘Callimachus and the Augustan Aetiological Elegy’, 11 Aufstieg
und Niedergang der römische Welt 30.1: 371–417.
Miller, N. (2002) Der Wanderer Goethe in Italien. Munich and Vienna.
Miller, P. A. (2003) Subjecting Verses: Latin Love Elegy and the Emergence of the
Real. Princeton and Oxford.
Miner, E. (1961) ‘Dryden and the Issue of Human Progress’, Philological
Quarterly, 40: 120–9.
(1967) Dryden’s Poetry. Bloomington.
(1986) ‘Some Issues for the Study of Integrated Collections’, in Poems in Their
Place: The Intertextuality and Order of Poetic Collections, ed. N. Fraistat.
Chapel Hill: 18–43.
Mohamed, F. G. (2005) ‘Confronting Religious Violence: Milton’s Samson
Agonistes’, PMLA 120: 327–40.
Montrose, L. (1996) ‘Spenser’s Domestic Domain: Poetry, Property, and the
Early Modern Subject’, in Subject and Object in Renaissance Culture, ed.
M. de Grazia, M. Quilligan and P. Stallybrass. Cambridge. 83–130.
Moore, E. (1896) Studies in Dante (1st series). Oxford.
Moseley, C. W. R. D. (1991) Poetic Birth: Milton’s Poems of 1645. Aldershot.
Muecke, F. (2005) ‘Rome’s First “Satirists”: Themes and Genre in Ennius and
Lucilius’, in The Cambridge Companion to Roman Satire, ed. K. Freudenburg.
Cambridge. 33–47.
Murgatroyd, P. (1980) Tibullus I. A Commentary on the First Book of the Elegies of
Albius Tibullus. Pietermaritzburg.
Murphy, S. (1991) ‘Ronsard, Petrarca, Ennius, and Poetic Metempsychosis’,
Romance Notes 32: 93–9.
(1997) The Gift of Immortality: Myths of Power and Humanist Poetics.
Madison, NJ.
Nagle, B. R. (1980) The Poetics of Exile: Program and Polemic in the ‘Tristia’ and
‘Epistulae Ex Ponto’ of Ovid. Brussels.
Nelson, A. (2005) ‘Shakespeare and the Bibliophiles’, in Owners, Annotators, and
the Signs of Reading, ed. R. Myers, M. Harris and G. Mandelbrote. New
Castle, DE and London. 49–73.
Neumeister, C. (1985) ‘Goethe und die römische Liebeselegie,’ in Allerhand
Goethe: Seine wissenschaftliche Sendung aus Anlaß des 150. Todestages und des
50. Namens-tages der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt am
Main, ed. D. Kimpel and J. Pompetzki. Frankfurt. 273–301.
Neuse, R. (1978) ‘Milton and Spenser: The Virgilian Triad Revisited’, English
Literary History 45: 606–39.
Nisbet, R. G. M. (1984) ‘Horace’s Epodes and History’, in Poetry and Politics in
the Age of Augustus, ed. A. J. Woodman and D. West. Cambridge. 1–18.
(2007) ‘Horace: Life and Chronology’ in The Cambridge Companion to Horace,
ed. S. J. Harrison. Cambridge. 7–21.
Nisbet, R. G. M. and M. Hubbard (1970) A Commentary on Horace, Odes I.
Oxford.
Nitchie, E. (1919) Vergil and the English Poets. New York.
 Works cited 319
Nolhac, P. de (1907) Pétrarque et l’ humanisme. Paris.
Norbrook, D. (1999) Writing the English Republic: Poetry, Rhetoric and Politics,
1627–1660. Cambridge.
Nuttall, A. D. (2001) ‘Everything Is Over before It Begins’, London Review of
Books 21: 19.
(2007) Shakespeare the Thinker. New Haven.
Nyquist, M. and M. W. Ferguson (eds) (1987) Re-membering Milton. Essays on
the Texts and Traditions. New York and London.
Oberlin, G. (2007) Goethe, Schiller und das Unbewusste: eine literaturpsycholo-
gische Studie. Giessen.
Oliensis, E. (1998) Horace and the Rhetoric of Authority. Cambridge.
Oosterhuis, D. K. (2007) ‘The Catalepton: Myths of Virgil’. Dissertation,
University of Minnesota.
Orgel, S. (1991) ‘What Is a Text?’, in Staging the Renaissance: Reinterpretations
of Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama, ed. D. S. Kastan and P. Stallybrass.
New York. 83–7.
Pallavicino, P. Sforza (1662) Trattato dello stile e del dialogo. Rome.
Parker, W. R. (1949) ‘The Date of Samson Agonistes’, Philological Quarterly
28: 145–66.
Pask, K. (1996) The Emergence of the English Author: Scripting the Life of the Poet
in Early Modern England. Cambridge.
Patrides, C. A. (ed.) (1978) Approaches to Marvell: The York Tercentenary Lectures.
London.
Patterson, A. (1989) Shakespeare and the Popular Voice. Oxford.
Pechter, E. (1975) Dryden’s Classical Theory of Literature. Cambridge.
Penwill, J. L. (1990) ‘Ambages reciprocae: Reviewing Apuleius’ Metamorphoses’,
Ramus 19: 1–25.
Peters, J. S. (2000) The Theatre of the Book, 1480–1880: Print, Text, and
Performance in Europe. Oxford.
Peterson, L. H. (2009) Becoming a Woman of Letters: Myths of Authorship and
Facts of the Victorian Market. Princeton.
Pfau, T. (1997) Wordsworth’s Profession: Form, Class, and the Logic of Early
Romantic Cultural Production. Stanford.
Piccone, M. (2003) ‘Ovid and the Exul Inmeritus’, in Dante for the New
Millennium, ed. T. Barolini and H. Wayne Storey. New York. 389–407.
Porter, D. H. (1987) Horace’s Poetic Journey. Princeton.
Pöschl, V. (1978) ‘Virgile et la tragédie’, in Présence de Virgile, ed. R. Chevallier.
Paris. 73–9.
Price, H. T. (1940) ‘Like Himself’, Review of English Studies 16: 178–81.
Proust, M. (1988) Against Sainte-Beuve and Other Essays, trans. J. Sturrock.
Harmondsworth.
(2002) The Way by Swann’s, trans. L. Davis. London.
Puelma, M. (1982) ‘Die Aitien des Kallimachos als Vorbild der römischen
Amores-Elegie’, Museum Helveticum 39: 221–46, 285–304.
Pugh, S. (2005) Spenser and Ovid. Aldershot.
320 Works cited
Putnam, M. C. J. (1995) Virgil’s Aeneid: Interpretation and Influence. Chapel
Hill.
(1998) Virgil’s Epic Designs. New Haven.
(2000) Horace’s Carmen saeculare. New Haven.
(2001) ‘The Loom of Latin’, TAPA 131: 329–39.
(2010) ‘Vergil, Ovid, and the Poetry of Exile’, in A Companion to Vergil’s
Aeneid and Its Tradition, ed. J. Farrell and M. C. J. Putnam. Chichester.
80–95.
Putnam, M. C. J. with J. Hankins (2004) Maffeo Vegio: Short Epics. Cambridge,
MA.
Quint, D. (1993) Epic and Empire: Politics and Generic Form from Virgil to
Milton. Princeton.
Radzinowicz, M. A. (1978) Toward Samson Agonistes: The Growth of Milton’s
Mind. Princeton.
Rajan, B. (1973) ‘To Which Is Added Samson Agonistes’, in The Prison and the
Pinnacle, ed. B. Rajan. Toronto. 82–110.
Rambuss, R. (1993) Spenser’s Secret Career. Cambridge.
Rand, E. K. (1922) ‘Milton in Rustication’, Studies in Philology 19.2: 109–35.
(1925) Ovid and His Influence. London.
Rawnsley, H. D. (1903) Lake Country Sketches. Glasgow.
Rawson, E. (1985) Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic. London.
Ray, R. H. (1998) An Andrew Marvell Companion. New York.
Raylor, T. (2002) ‘Reading Machiavelli; Writing Cromwell’, Turnbull Library
Record 35: 9–32.
Revard, S. (1997) Milton and the Tangles of Neaera’s Hair: The Making of the 1645
Poems. Columbia, MO and London.
Reverand, C. D. (1988) Dryden’s Final Poetic Mode: The Fables. Philadelphia.
Reynolds, L. D. (1983) ‘Virgil’, in Texts and Transmission, ed. L. Reynolds. Oxford.
Richards, I. A. (1929) Practical Criticism: A Study of Literary Judgment.
London.
Richards, J. and J. Knowles (eds) (1999) Shakespeare’s Late Plays: New Readings.
Edinburgh.
Riffaterre, M. (1983) Text Production. New York. (First published in French
1979.)
Rimell, V. (2005) ‘The Poor Man’s Feast: Juvenal’, in The Cambridge Companion
to Roman Satire, ed. K. Freudenburg. Cambridge. 81–94.
Robathan, D. M. (1973) ‘Ovid in the Middle Ages’, in Ovid, ed. J. W. Binns.
London. 191–209.
Roberts, D., F. Dunn and D. Fowler (eds) (1997) Classical Closure: Reading the
End in Greek and Latin Literature. Princeton.
Rogers, R. S. (1966) ‘The Emperor’s Displeasure and Ovid’, TAPA 97: 373–8.
Roller, M. (1998) ‘Pliny’s Catullus: The Politics of Literary Appropriation’, TAPA
128: 265–304.
Ronsard, P. de (1993–4) Œuvres complètes, ed. J. Céard, D. Ménager and
M. Simonin (2 vols). Paris.
 Works cited 321
Ross, D. O. (1976) Backgrounds to Augustan Poetry. Cambridge.
Rossi, A. (2004) Contexts of War: Manipulation of Genre in Virgilian Battle
Narrative. Ann Arbor.
Rossi, A. and B. W. Breed (2006) ‘Introduction: Ennius and Traditions of Epic’,
Arethusa 39: 397–425.
Rossi, L. (1993) ‘Presenze ovidiane nel Decamerone’, Studi sul Boccaccio 21: 125–37.
Rudd, N. (1979) Horace, Satires and Epistles: Persius, Satires. Harmondsworth.
Rüdiger, H. (1978) ‘Goethe’s Römische Elegien und die antike Tradition’, Goethe
Jahrbuch 95: 174–98.
(1984) ‘Von den “Erotica Romana” zu den Römischen Elegien’, afterword to
Goethe: ‘Römische Elegien’: Faksimile der Handschrift. Frankfurt. 123–45.
Ruiz Arzalluz, I. (1991) El hexámetro de Petrarca. Florence.
Rushdy, A. H. A. (1988) ‘Of Paradise Regain’ d: The Interpretation of Career’,
Milton Studies 24: 253–75.
Sage, L. (1973) ‘Milton’s Early Poems: A General Introduction’, in John
Milton: Introductions, ed. J. Broadbent. Cambridge. 258–340.
Salvaggio, R. (1983) Dryden’s Dualities. Victoria, BC.
Sanguineti, F. (1982) ‘La novelletta delle papere nel “Decameron”’, Belfagor 37:
137–46.
Santirocco, M. (1986) Unity and Design in Horace’s Odes. Chapel Hill.
Sarefield, D. (2006) ‘Bookburning in the Christian Roman Empire: Transforming
a Pagan Rite of Purification’, in Violence in Late Antiquity: Perceptions and
Practices, ed. H. A. Drake et al. Aldershot. 287–96.
Sauer, E. (2001) ‘Engendering Metamorphoses: Milton and the Ovidian Corpus’,
in Ovid and the Renaissance Body, ed. G. V. Stanivukovic. Toronto. 207–23.
Saunders, J. W. (1951) ‘The Stigma of Print: A Note on the Social Bases of Tudor
poetry’, Essays in Criticism 1: 139–64.
Scaglione, A. (1963) Nature and Love in the Late Middle Ages. Berkeley and Los
Angeles.
Schiller, F. von (1962) Schillers Werke: Nationalausgabe, ed. J. Petersen et al.
vol. XX, ed. B. von Wiese: Philosophische Schriften. Weimar.
(1969) Schillers Werke, Nationalausgabe, vol. XXVIII, ed. N. Oellers. Briefwechsel:
Schillers Briefe 1.7.1795 – 31.10.1796. Weimar.
Schlam, C. (1984) ‘Diana and Actaeon: Metamorphoses of a Myth’, Classical
Antiquity 3: 82–109.
Schlegel, C. (2000) ‘Horace and His Fathers: Satires 1.4 and 1.6’, American
Journal of Philology 121: 93–119.
Schmitz, C. (2000) Das Satirische in Juvenals Satiren. Berlin and New York.
Schoenfield, M. (1996) The Professional Wordsworth: Law, Labor and the Poet’s
Contract. Athens, GA.
Schweling, O. P. (1964) Faust und Faustine; eine psychographische Studie um
Goethes Eros. Cologne.
Scodel, J. (1999) ‘Seventeenth-Century English Literary Criticism: Classical
Values, English Texts and Contexts’, in The Cambridge History of Literary
Criticism, vol. III: The Renaissance, ed. G. P. Norton. Cambridge. 543–54.
322 Works cited
Scott, C. (2007) Shakespeare and the Idea of the Book. Oxford.
Seagraves, R. W. A. (1976) ‘The Influence of Vergil on Petrarch’s Africa’. PhD
dissertation, Columbia.
Shapiro, J. (1991) Rival Playwrights: Marlowe, Jonson, Shakespeare. New York.
Shawcross, J. (1961) ‘The Chronology of Milton’s Major Poems’, PMLA
76: 345–58.
(1983) ‘The Genres of Paradise Regain’ d and Samson Agonistes: The Wisdom of
Their Joint Publication’, Milton Studies 17: 225–48.
(2001) The Uncertain World of Samson Agonistes. Cambridge.
Shelley, P. B. (1880) Prose Works, ed. H. B. Forman (4 vols). London.
(1954) Shelley’s Prose, or The Trumpet of a Prophecy, ed. D. L. Clark.
Albuquerque, NM.
Shepherd, R. H. (ed.) (1911–24) The Works of George Chapman: Plays (3 vols).
London.
Sherwin-White, A. (1966) The Letters of Pliny: A Historical and Social Commentary.
Oxford.
Shifflett, A. (1996) ‘“By Lucan driv’n about”: A Jonsonian Marvell’s Lucanic
Milton’, Renaissance Quarterly 49: 803–23.
Shoaf, R. A. (1985) Milton: Poet of Duality. New Haven and London.
Shore, E. M. (1979) ‘Virginia Woolf, Proust, and Orlando’, Comparative
Literature 31: 232–45.
Shumate, N. (1996) Crisis and Conversion in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses. Ann
Arbor.
Sidney, Sir P. (1593) The Countesse of Pembrokes Arcadia. London.
Simpson, D. (1993) Romanticism, Nationalism, and the Revolt against Theory.
Chicago.
Siskin, C. (2006) ‘William Wordsworth’, in The Encyclopedia of British Literature,
ed. D. S. Kastan (5 vols). Oxford. Vol. V: 326–34.
Skutsch, O. (1944) ‘Enniana, 1’, Classical Quarterly 38: 79–86.
(1956) ‘Zu Vergils Eklogen’, Rheinisches Museum 99: 193–201.
(ed.) (1985) The Annals of Quintus Ennius. Oxford.
Sloman, J. (1970–1) ‘An Interpretation of Dryden’s Fables’, Eighteenth-Century
Studies 4: 199–211.
Smarr, J. L. (1987) ‘Ovid and Boccaccio’, Medievalia 13: 247–55.
(1991) ‘Poets of Love and Exile’, in Dante and Ovid. Essays in Intertextuality,
ed. M. U. Sowell. Binghamton. 139–51.
Smith, B. H. (1968) Poetic Closure: A Study of How Poems End. Chicago.
Smith, E. (1932) An Estimate of William Wordsworth by His Contemporaries
1793–1822. Oxford.
Smith, N. (2001) ‘The Boomerang Theology of Andrew Marvell’, Renaissance
and Reformation 25: 139–55.
(2007a) ‘Marvell Made New’, in New Perspectives on Andrew Marvell, ed.
G. Sambras. Rheims. 195–209.
(2007b) The Poems of Andrew Marvell, rev. edn. Harlow.
(2008) Andrew Marvell: A Biography. New Haven and London.
 Works cited 323
Solodow, J. B. (1988) The World of Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Chapel Hill.
Spence, J. (1966) Observations, Anecdotes, and Characters of Books and Men, ed.
J. M. Osborn (2 vols). Oxford.
Spenser, E. (1909–10) The Poetical Works of Edmund Spenser, ed. J. C. Smith and
E. de Selincourt (3 vols). Oxford.
Spenser, E. (2007) The Faerie Queene, ed. A. C. Hamilton, rev. edn. Harlow.
Sperry, W. L. (1935) Wordsworth’s Anti-Climax. Cambridge, MA.
Steel, C. (2001) Cicero, Rhetoric, and Empire. Oxford.
(2005). Reading Cicero: Genre and Performance in Late Republican Rome.
London.
Steiger, R. (1982–96) Goethes Leben von Tag zu Tag: eine dokumentarische Chronik
(8 vols). Zurich and Munich.
Stephens, C. (1992) ‘Borges, Sir Thomas Browne and the Theme of Metem-
psychosis’, Forum for Modern Language Studies 28: 268–79.
Stevens, W. (1955) Collected Poems. London.
Stewart, A. (2000) Philip Sidney: A Double Life. London.
Striedter, J. (1989) Literary Structure, Evolution, and Value: Russian Formalism
and Czech Structuralism Reconsidered. Cambridge, MA.
Strong, R. (1987) Gloriana: The Portraits of Queen Elizabeth 1. London. 82–3.
Suerbaum, W. (1972) ‘Ennius bei Petrarca. Betrachtungen zu literarischen
Ennius-Bildern’, in Ennius, ed. O. Skutsch. Vandœuvres. 293–352.
Syme, R. (1958) Tacitus. Oxford.
Tarrant, R. J. (1978) ‘The Addressee of Virgil’s Eighth Eclogue’, Harvard Studies
in Classical Philology 82: 187–99.
(1982) ‘Editing Ovid’s Metamorphoses: Problems and Possibilities’, Classical
Philology 77: 342–60.
(ed.) (2004) P. Ovidi Nasonis Metamorphoses. Oxford.
Tatum, J. (1972) ‘Apuleius and Metamorphosis’, American Journal of Philology
93: 306–12.
Taylor, G. (ed.) (1982) William Shakespeare, Henry V. Oxford.
Terence (1912) Works, ed. and trans. John Sargeaunt (2 vols). London.
Terry, R. (1996) ‘“Metempsychosis”: A Metaphor for Tradition in Dryden and
His Contemporaries’, Bunyan Studies 6: 56–69.
(2001) Poetry and the Making of the English Literary Past 1660–1781. Oxford.
Teskey, G. (2006) Delirious Milton: The Fate of the Poet in Modernity.
Cambridge, MA.
Theodorakopoulos E. (1997) ‘The Book of Virgil’, in The Cambridge Companion
to Virgil, ed. C. Martindale. Cambridge. 155–65.
Thilo, G. and H. Hagen (eds) (1881) Servii grammatici qui feruntur in Vergilii
carmina commentarii. Leipzig.
Thomas, C. G. (2005) Finding People in Early Greece. Columbia, MO.
Thomas, R. F. (2001) Virgil and the Augustan Reception. Cambridge.
Thomson, J. A. K. (1948) The Classical Background of English Literature.
London.
Thomson, P. (1992) Shakespeare’s Professional Career. Cambridge.
324 Works cited
Tomlinson, C. (1983) Poetry and Metamorphosis. Cambridge.
Toohey, P. (2004) Melancholy, Love and Time. Boundaries of the Self in Ancient
Literature. Ann Arbor.
Toynbee P. (ed.) (1920) Dantis Alagherii Epistolae. Oxford.
Tracy, S. (2003) ‘Palaemon’s Indecision’, in Being There Together: Essays in Honor
of Michael C. J. Putnam on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday, ed.
P. Thibodeau and H. Haskell. Afton, MN. 66–77.
Traina, A. (1968) ‘La chiusa della prima egloga virgiliana (vv. 82–3)’, Lingua e
stile 3: 45–53.
Trott, N. (2003) ‘Wordsworth: The Shape of the Poetic Career’, in The Cambridge
Companion to Wordsworth, ed. S. Gill. Cambridge. 5–21.
Turner, C. (1992) Living by the Pen: Women Writers in the Eighteenth Century.
London and New York.
Unseld, S. (1996) Goethe and His Publishers, trans. K. J. Northcott. Chicago.
Usher, J. (2000) ‘Petrarch Reads Inferno 4’. http://www.princeton.edu/~dante/
ebdsa/usher2.htm.
(2005) ‘Metempsychosis and “Renaissance” between Petrarch and Boccaccio’,
Italian Studies 60.2: 121–33.
(2009) ‘Petrarch’s Diploma of Crowning: The Privilegium Laureationis’, in
Italy and the Classical Tradition: Language, Thought and Poetry 1300–1600,
ed. C. Caruso and A. Laird. London. 161–92.
Van den Broek, R. (1972) The Myth of the Phoenix According to Classical and Early
Christian Traditions, trans. I. Seeger. Leiden.
Van Doren, M. (1920) The Poetry of John Dryden. New York.
Van Mal-Maeder, D. K. (1998) Apulée. Les Métamorphoses. Livre II, 1–20.
Groningen.
Van Sickle, J. (1984) ‘Dawn and Dusk as Motifs of Opening or Closure in
Heroic and Bucolic Epos (Homer, Apollonius, Theocritus, Virgil)’, in Atti
del Convegno mondiale scientifico di Studi su Virgilio 1: 124–47.
(2000) ‘Virgil vs. Cicero, Lucretius, Theocritus, Plato and Homer: Two
Programmatic Plots in the First Bucolic’, Vergilius 46: 21–58.
Vickers, B. (ed.) (1974–81) Shakespeare: The Critical Heritage (6 vols). London.
Vickers, B. (ed.) (2002) Shakespeare, Co-Author. Oxford.
Villa, C. (2009) ‘“Unicuique suum”: notes on Dante as a reader of classical
authors’, in Italy and the Classical Tradition: Language, Thought and Poetry
1300–1600, ed. C. Caruso and A. Laird. London. 143–60.
Virgil (1973) The Aeneid of Virgil: Books 7–12, ed. R. D. Williams. London.
(1999) Eclogues, rev. G. P. Goold, trans. H. R. Fairclough. Cambridge, MA.
Voltaire (1943) Lettres philosophiques, ed. F. A. Taylor. Oxford.
Wall, W. (2000) ‘Authorship and the Material Conditions of Writing’, in The
Cambridge Companion to English Literature 1500–1600, ed. A. F. Kinney.
Cambridge. 64–89.
(2006) ‘Dramatic Authorship and Print’, in Early Modern English Drama:
A Critical Companion, ed. G. Sullivan, P. Cheney and A. Hadfield.
New York. 1–11.
 Works cited 325
Walter, J. H. (ed.) (1954) William Shakespeare, King Henry V (Arden 2).
London.
Walters, J. (1998) ‘Making a Spectacle: Deviant Men, Invective, and Pleasure’,
Arethusa 31.3: 355–67.
Walton, I. (1927) The Lives of John Donne, Sir Henry Wotton, Richard Hooker,
George Herbert and Robert Sanderson. Oxford.
Warner, J. C. (2005) The Augustinian Epic, Petrarch to Milton. Ann Arbor.
Watson, L. C. (1995) ‘Horace’s Epodes: The Impotence of Iambos?’, in Homage to
Horace, ed. S. J. Harrison. Oxford. 188–202.
(2003) A Commentary on Horace’s Epodes. Oxford.
Webb, C. (1994) ‘Listing to the Right: Authority and Inheritance in Orlando
and Ulysses’, Twentieth-Century Literature 40: 190–204.
Webb, W. S. (1937) ‘Vergil in Spenser’s Epic Theory’, English Literary History
4: 62–84.
Weimann, R. (1988) ‘Bifold Authority in Shakespeare’s Theatre’, Shakespeare
Quarterly 39: 401–17.
Wellek, R. (1967) ‘The Poet as Critic, the Critic as Poet, the Poet-Critic’, in The
Poet as Critic, ed. F. P. W. McDowell. Evanston, IL. 92–107.
Wells, S. (2008) ‘A New Early Reader of Shakespeare’, in Shakespeare’s Book: Essays
in Reading, Writing and Reception, ed. R. Meek, J. Rickard and R. Wilson.
Manchester. 233–40.
Wells, S., G. Taylor, J. Jowett and W. Montgomery (eds.) (1986) William
Shakespeare: The Complete Works. Oxford.
West, D. (1997) Horace: The Complete Odes and Epodes. Oxford.
Whitfield, J. (1969) ‘Virgil into Dante’, in Studies in Latin Literature and Its
Influence, ed. D. R. Dudley. London. 94–118.
Wilkins, E. H. (1955) Studies in the Life and Works of Petrarch. Cambridge, MA.
Wilkinson, L. P. (1966) ‘The Continuity of Propertius 2.13’, Classical Review
16: 141–4.
Williams, G. D. (1994) Banished Voices: Readings in Ovid’s Exile Poetry.
Cambridge.
Wimmel, W. (1958) ‘Rom in Goethes Römischen Elegien und im letzten Buch des
Properz’, Antike und Abendland 7: 121–38.
Wimsatt, W. K. and M. C. Beardsley (1946) ‘The Intentional Fallacy’, Sewanee
Review 54: 468–88. Rev. in The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry
(1954): 3–18.
Winkler, M. (1983) The Persona in Three Satires of Juvenal. Hildesheim.
Winn, J. A. (2000) ‘Past and Present in Dryden’s Fables’, in John Dryden: A
Tercentenary Miscellany, ed. S. N. Zwicker and S. Green, Huntington
Library Quarterly 63: 157–74.
Wiseman, T. P. (1979) Clio’s Cosmetics. Leicester.
(ed.) (2002), Classics in Progress: Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford.
Wittreich, J. (1986a) ‘“Strange Text!” “Paradise Regain’d … To which is added
Samson Agonistes”’, in Poems in Their Place: The Intertextuality and Order of
Poetic Collections, ed. N. Fraistat. Chapel Hill and London. 164–94.
326 Works cited
(1986b) Interpreting Samson Agonistes. Princeton.
(2002) Shifting Contexts: Reinterpreting Samson Agonistes. Pittsburgh.
(2005) ‘Letter to the Editor’, PMLA 120: 1641.
Wittreich, J. and M. R. Kelly (eds) (2002) Altering Eyes: New Perspectives on
Samson Agonistes. Newark, DE.
Wood, D. (2001) Exiled from Light: Divine Law, Morality, and Violence in
Milton’s Samson Agonistes. Toronto.
Woodman, A. J. and D. Feeney (eds) (2002) Traditions and Contexts in the Poetry
of Horace. Cambridge.
Woodman, A. J. and D. West (eds) (1984) Poetry and Politics in the Age of
Augustus. Cambridge.
Woods, S. and M. P. Hannay (2002) ‘Renaissance Englishwomen and the
Literary Career’, in European Literary Careers: The Author from Antiquity to
the Renaissance, ed. P. Cheney and F. A. de Armas. Toronto. 302–23.
Worden, B. (1984) ‘The Politics of Marvell’s “Horatian Ode”’, The Historical
Journal 27: 525–47.
Wordsworth, W. (1987) Wordsworth’s Poems of 1807, ed. A. R. Jones. Atlantic
Highlands, NJ.
Wordsworth, W. and D. (1967) The Letters of William and Dorothy Wordsworth:
The Early Years 1787–1805, ed. E. de Selincourt, rev. C. L. Shaver 2nd edn.
Oxford.
(1969) The Letters of William and Dorothy Wordsworth: The Middle Years, Part
I, 1806–1811, ed. E. de Selincourt, rev. M. Moorman, 2nd edn. Oxford.
(1970) The Letters of William and Dorothy Wordsworth: The Middle Years, Part
II, 1812–1820, ed. E. de Selincourt, rev. M. Moorman, 2nd edn. Oxford.
Wordsworth, W. and S. T. Coleridge (1898) Lyrical Ballads, ed. T. Hutchinson.
London.
(1992) Lyrical Ballads, ed. M. Mason. London.
Wray, D. (2001) Catullus and the Poetics of Roman Manhood. Cambridge and
New York.
Wyke, M. (2002) The Roman Mistress. Oxford.
Zabughin, V. (1921) Virgilio nel Rinascimento (2 vols). Rome.
Zapperi, R. (1999) Das Incognito: Goethes ganz andere Existenz in Rom. Munich.
Zetzel J. E. G. (1980) ‘Horace’s Liber Sermonum: The Structure of Ambiguity’,
Arethusa 13: 59–77.
Zholkovsky, A. (1992) ‘Rereading Gogol’s Miswritten Book: Notes on Selected
Passages from Correspondence with Friends’, in Essays on Gogol: Logos and the
Russian Word, ed. S. Fusso and P. Meyer. Evanston, IL. 172–84.
Ziolkowski, J. M. and M. C. J. Putnam (eds) (2008) The Virgilian Tradition: The
First Fifteen Hundred Years. New Haven and London.
Zwicker, S. N. (ed.) (2004) The Cambridge Companion to John Dryden.
Cambridge.
(2005) ‘Dryden and the Poetic Career’, in The Cambridge History of English
Literature, 1660–1780, ed. J. J. Richetti. Cambridge. 132–59.