Achard, G. 1981. Pratique rhétorique et idéologie politique dans les discours “optimates” de Cicéron. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Achard, G. 1987. “Pourquoi Cicéron a-t-il écrit le De oratore?” Latomus 46: 318–29.Google Scholar

Achard, G. ed., tr. 1989. Rhétorique à Herennius. Paris.Google Scholar

Achard, G. ed., tr. 1994. Cicéron: De L’Invention. Paris.Google Scholar

Achard, G. 1999. “Les Paradoxa Stoicorum de Cicéron: éloquence ou philosophie?” Revue des Études Latines 77: 72–86.Google Scholar

Achard, G. 2000. “L’influence des jeunes lecteurs sur la rédaction des discours cicéroniens.”In Achard, and Ledentu, : 75–88.Google Scholar

Achard, G. and Ledentu, M., eds. 2000. Orateur, auditeurs, lecteurs: à propos de l’éloquence romaine à la fin de la République et au début du Principat. Lyon.Google Scholar

Adamczyk, S. J. 1961. “Political Propaganda in Cicero’s Essays, 47–44 b.c.” Diss. Fordham.Google Scholar

Adamietz, J. 1960. “Ciceros de inventione und die Rhetorik ad Herennium.” Diss. Marburg.Google Scholar

Adamietz, J. 1986. “Ciceros Verfahren in den Ambitus-Prozessen gegen Murena und Plancius.” Gymnasium 93: 102–17.Google Scholar

Adamietz, J. ed., comm. 1989. Marcus Tullius Cicero: Pro Murena. Darmstadt.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. 1978. “Conventions of Naming in Cicero.” Classical Quarterly 28: 145–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adams, J. N. 2003. Bilingualism and the Latin Language. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ademollo, F. 2012. “The Platonic Origins of Stoic Theology.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 43: 217–43.Google Scholar

Adorno, F. 1959. “Sul significato del termine ΗΓΕΜΟΝΙΚΟΝ in Zenone stoico.” Parola del Passato 14: 26–41.Google Scholar

Afzelius, A. 1940. “Das Ackerverteilungsgesetz des P. Servilius Rullus.” Classica & Mediaevalia 3: 214–35.Google Scholar

Akinpelu, J. A. 1967. “The Stoic scala naturae.” Proceedings of the African Classical Association 10: 29–35.Google Scholar

Albrecht, M.. 1980. “Cicero und die Götter Siziliens (Verr. II, 5, 184–189).” Ciceroniana 4: 49–62.Google Scholar

Albrecht, M. 1989. Masters of Roman Prose from Cato to Apuleius. Tr. Adkin, N.. Leeds.Google Scholar

Albrecht, M. 2003. Cicero’s Style: A Synopsis Followed by Select Analytic Studies. Leiden–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Albrecht, M. 2010. “Cicero.” In Sorgner, S. L. and Schramm, M., eds., Musik in der antiken Philosophie, 205–16. Würzburg.Google Scholar

Alesse, F. 2017. “Filosofia stoica e classe dirigente romana nel II secolo a.C.” In Vesperini, : 77–88.Google Scholar

Alexander, M. C. 1976. “Hortensius’ Speech in Defense of Verres.” Phoenix 30: 46–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alexander, M. C. 1985. “Praemia in the quaestiones of the Late Republic.” Classical Philology 80: 20–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alexander, M. C. 1999. “The Role of Torquatus the Younger in the ambitus Prosecution of Sulla in 66 b.c., and Cicero De finibus 2.62.” Classical Philology 94: 65–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alexander, M. C. 2002. The Case for the Prosecution in the Ciceronian Era. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar

Alexander, M. C. 2009a. “The Commentariolum petitionis as an Attack on Election Campaigns.” Athenaeum 97: 31–57 and 369–95.Google Scholar

Alexander, M. C. 2009b. “Locating the Trial of Plancius between Rules and Persuasion.” In Santalucia, 2009a: 339–55.Google Scholar

Alexander, M. C. 2021. “The Ironic Interpretation of the Commentariolum Petitionis. A Response to Prost, Tatum, and Sillett.” Athenaeum 109: 64–113.Google Scholar

Alexander, W. H. 1962. “Cicero and C. Trebatius Testa.” Classical Bulletin 38.5: 65–76.Google Scholar

Alföldi, A. 1985. Caesar in 44 v.Chr., i: Studien zu Caesars Monarchie und ihren Wurzeln, ed. Wolff, H., Alföldi-Rosenbaum, E., and Stumpf, G.. Antiquitas 3.16. Bonn.Google Scholar

Alfonsi, L. 1950. “Su un tema del ‘Somnium Scipionis.’” Latomus 9: 149–56.Google Scholar

Alfonsi, L. 1964. “Studi sull’Hortensius di Cicerone.” Athenaeum 92: 121–30.Google Scholar

Algra, K. 1997. “Chrysippus, Carneades, Cicero: The Ethical divisiones in Cicero’s Lucullus.” In Inwood, and Mansfeld, : 107–39.Google Scholar

Algra, K. 2003. “Vitae philosophia dux. Zum Verhältnis von Philosophie und Politik bei Cicero.” In Düwell, M., van den Brink, B., Eßbach, W., and van Doorn, H., eds., Geschichte – Politik – Philosophie. Festschrift für Willem van Reijen zum 65. Geburtstag, 11–23. Munich.Google Scholar

Algra, K. 2009. “Stoic Philosophical Theology and Graeco-Roman Religion.” In Salles, : 224–51.Google Scholar

Allély, A. 2004. Lépide, le triumvir. Bordeaux.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allély, A. 2012. La déclaration d’hostis sous la République romaine. Bordeaux.Google Scholar

Allen, J. 1994. “Academic Probabilism and Stoic Epistemology.” Classical Quarterly 44: 85–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, J. 1997. “Carneadean Argument in Cicero’s Academic Books.” In Inwood, and Mansfeld, : 217–56.Google Scholar

Allen, J. 2014. “Why Are There Ends Both of Goods and Evils in Ancient Ethical Theory?” In Lee, : 231–54.Google Scholar

Allen, W., Jr. 1952. “Cicero’s Provincial Governorship in 63 b.c.” Transactions of the American Philological Association 83: 233–41.Google Scholar

Allen, W. 1954. “Cicero’s Conceit.” Transactions of the American Philological Association 85: 121–44.Google Scholar

Altman, W. H. F. 2008a. “How to Interpret Cicero’s Dialogue on Divination.” Interpretation 35: 105–21.Google Scholar

Altman, W. H. F. 2008b. “Tullia’s Secret Shrine: Birth and Death in Cicero’s De finibus.” Ancient Philosophy 28: 373–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altman, W. H. F. ed. 2015. Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Cicero. Leiden–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altman, W. H. F. 2016. The Revival of Platonism in Cicero’s Late Philosophy: Platonis aemulus and the Invention of Cicero. Lanham, Md.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ando, C. 2008. The Matter of the Gods: Religion and the Roman Empire. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Ando, C. 2009. Review of Scheid 2005. Journal of Roman Studies 99: 171–81.Google Scholar

Ando, C. 2010. “Empire and the Laws of War: A Roman Archaeology.” In Kingsbury, B. and Straumann, B., eds., The Roman Foundations of the Law of Nations: Alberico Gentili and the Justice of Empire, 30–52. New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

André, J.-M. 1966. L’otium dans la vie morale et intellectuelle romaine des origines à l’époque augustéenne. Paris.Google Scholar

Angel, N. 2008. “Clementia and beneficium in the Second Philippic.” In Stevenson, and Wilson, : 114–30.Google Scholar

Angelini, V. 1980. “Riflessioni sull’orazione Pro L. Cornelio Balbo.” Athenaeum 58: 360–70.Google Scholar

Annas, J. 1993. The Morality of Happiness. Oxford.Google Scholar

Annas, J. ed., comm. 2001. Cicero: On Moral Ends. Tr. Woolf, R.. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Annas, J. 2007. “Carneades’ Classification of Ethical Theories.” In Ioppolo, and Sedley, : 187–223.Google Scholar

Annas, J. 2013. “Plato’s Laws and Cicero’s de Legibus.” In Schofield, : 206–24.Google Scholar

Annas, J. 2017. Virtue and Law in Plato and Beyond. New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Annas, J. and Betegh, G., eds. 2016. Cicero’s De Finibus: Philosophical Approaches. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Arena, V. 2007. “Invocation to Liberty and Invective of dominatus at the End of the Roman Republic.” Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 50: 49–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arena, V. 2011. “The Consulship of 78 bc. Catulus versus Lepidus: An optimates versus populares Affair.” In Beck, , Duplá, , et al.: 299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arena, V. 2012. Libertas and the Practice of Politics in the Late Roman Republic. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Arena, V. 2020a. “Cicero, the augures, and the Commonwealth in De Legibus.” In Beltrão da Rosa, and Santangelo, : 23–43.Google Scholar

Arena, V. 2020b. “The Notion of bellum civile in the Last Century of the Republic.” In Polo, E. Pina, ed., The Triumviral Period: Civil War, Political Crisis and Socioeconomic Transformations, 101–26. Zaragosa.Google Scholar

Arena, V. and Prag, J., eds. 2022. A Companion to the Political Culture of the Roman Republic. Hoboken and Chichester.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arkenberg, J. S. 1993. “Licinii Murenae, Terentii Varrones, and Varrones Murenae: I. A Prosopographical Study of Three Roman Families.” Historia 42: 326–51.Google Scholar

Armstrong, D. 2011. “Epicurean Virtues, Epicurean Friendship: Cicero vs. the Herculaneum Papyri.” In Fish, and Sanders, : 105–28.Google Scholar

Arnott, G. 1971. “The praenomen of Archias.” Hermes 99: 254–55.Google Scholar

Arweiler, A. 2003. Cicero rhetor. Die Partitiones oratoriae und das Konzept des gelehrten Politikers. Berlin–New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arweiler, A. 2008. “Frauen vor Kultlandschaft: Kleinasiatische Geographie in den Reden Ciceros.” In Winter, E., ed., Vom Euphrat bis zum Bosporus: Kleinasien in der Antike. Festschrift für Elmar Schwertheim zum 65. Geburtstag, 19–38. Bonn.Google Scholar

Ashrafian, H. and Galassi, F. M.. 2016. Julius Caesar’s Disease. Barnsley.Google Scholar

Asmis, E. 1984. Epicurus’ Scientific Method. Ithaca–London.Google Scholar

Asmis, E. 1990. “Free Action and the Swerve: Review of Walter G. Englert, Epicurus on the Swerve and Voluntary Action.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 8: 275–91.Google Scholar

Asmis, E. 2004. “The State as Partnership: Cicero’s Definition of res publica in his Work On the State.” History of Political Thought 25: 569–99.Google Scholar

Asmis, E. 2005. “A New Kind of Model: Cicero’s Roman Constitution in De republica.” American Journal of Philology 126: 377–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Astin, A. E. 1967. Scipio Aemilianus. Oxford.Google Scholar

Astin, A. E. 1988. “Regimen morum.” Journal of Roman Studies 78: 14–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atherton, C. 1988. “Hand over Fist: The Failure of Stoic Rhetoric.” Classical Quarterly 38: 392–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atkins, J. W. 2013. Cicero on Politics and the Limits of Reason. The Republic and Laws. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atkins, J. W. 2018. Roman Political Thought. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atkins, J. W. 2021. “Empires, Just Wars, and Cosmopolitanism.” In Atkins, and Bénatouïl, : 231–51.Google Scholar

Atkins, J. W. 2023a. “Cicero on the Justice of War.” In Gilbert, , Graver, , and McConnell, : 170–204.Google Scholar

Atkins, J. W. 2023b. “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism in Cicero’s De Officiis.” In Woolf, 2023a: 203–23.Google Scholar

Atkins, J. and Bénatouïl, T., eds. 2021. The Cambridge Companion to Cicero’s Philosophy. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atkins, M. 1990. “‘Domina et regina virtutum’: Justice and societas in De officiis.” Phronesis 35: 258–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Atzert, C. 1908. “De Cicerone interprete Graecorum.” Diss. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Aubert, S. 2008. “Cicéron et la parole stoïcienne: polémique autour de la dialectique.” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 1: 61–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aubert, S. 2010. “La polémique cicéronienne contre Atticistes et Stoïciens autour de la sainté du style.” In Chiron, P. and Lévy, C., eds., Les noms du style dans l’Antiquité gréco-latine, 87–11. Louvain–Walpole, MA.Google Scholar

Aubert-Baillot, S. 2019. “Terminology and Practice of Dialectic in Cicero’s Letters.” In Bénatouïl, and Ierodiakonou, : 254–82.Google Scholar

Aubert-Baillot, S. 2021a. Le grec et la philosophie dans la correspondance de Cicéron. Turnhout.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aubert-Baillot, S. 2021b. “Philosophy in Cicero’s Letters.” In Atkins, and Bénatouïl, : 43–58.Google Scholar

Aubert-Baillot, S. and Guérin, C., eds. 2014. Le Brutus de Cicéron. Rhétorique, politique et histoire culturelle. Leiden–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Audano, S. 2016. “Nuova proposta di collocazione nella Consolatio ciceroniana del fr. 10* Vit. (= fr. 17 Mü.).” Bolletino di Studi Latini 46: 26–40.Google Scholar

Augier, B. 2016. “L’autorité ne va pas sans prestige, et le prestige sans éloignement? Le cas des officiers dans les légions tardo-republicaines.” In Baudry, and Hurlet, : 91–103.Google Scholar

Austin, N. J. E. and Rankov, N. B.. 1995. Exploratio: Military and Political Intelligence in the Roman World from the Second Punic War to the Battle of Adrianople. London.Google Scholar

Auvray-Assayas, C. 1991. “Le livre I du De natura deorum et le traité De signis de Philodème.” Revue des Études Latines 69: 51–62.Google Scholar

Auvray-Assayas, C. 2015. “Le dialogue cicéronien ou le livre éloquent.” In Dubel, S. and Gotteland, S., eds., Formes et genres du dialogue antique, 127–36. Paris.Google Scholar

Auvray-Assayas, C. 2016. “Diffusion et transmission du dialogue cicéronien De natura deorum: l’influence sous-estimée du néoplatonisme.” Comptes-rendus des séances de l’Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres 2016, 1: 363–77.Google Scholar

Auvray-Assayas, C. and Delattre, D., eds. 2001. Cicéron et Philodème: la polémique en philosophie. Paris.Google Scholar

Ax, W., ed. 1933. M. Tullius Cicero: De natura deorum. 2nd ed. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Axer, J., ed. 1976. M. Tullius Cicero: Fasc. 9, Oratio pro Q. Roscio comoedo. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Axer, J. 1980. The Style and Composition of Cicero’s Speech “Pro Q. Roscio comoedo.” Warsaw.Google Scholar

Axer, J. 1989. “Tribunal – Stage – Arena: Modelling of the Communication Situation in M. Tullius Cicero’s Judicial Speeches.” Rhetorica 7: 299–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ayers, D. M. 1954. “Cato’s Speech against Murena.” Classical Journal 49: 245–53.Google Scholar

Babcock, C. L. 1965. “The Early Career of Fulvia.” American Journal of Philology 86: 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bächli, A., Graeser, A., and Schäublin, C., ed., tr., comm. 1995. Marcus Tullius Cicero: Akademische Abhandlungen, Lucullus. Hamburg.Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1958. Foreign Clientelae (264–70 b.c.). Oxford (corr. rpt. 1984).Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1964. “Caesar’s cursus and the Intervals between Offices.” In Badian, E., Studies in Greek and Roman History, 140–56. New York.Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1965. “M. Porcius Cato and the Annexation and Early Administration of Cyprus.” Journal of Roman Studies 55: 110–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Badian, E. 1967. “The Testament of Ptolemy Alexander.” Rheinisches Museum 110: 178–92.Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1968. Roman Imperialism in the Late Republic. Oxford.Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1969. “Quaestiones Variae.” Historia 18: 447–91.Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1983. Publicans and Sinners. Rev. ed. Ithaca–London.Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1984a. “The Death of Saturninus: Studies in Chronology and Prosopography.” Chiron 14: 101–47.Google Scholar

Badian, E. 1984b. “Three Non-trials in Cicero: Notes on the Text, Prosopography and Chronology.” Klio 66: 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Badian, E. 1989. “The scribae of the Roman Republic.” Klio 71: 582–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baier, T. 1997. Werk und Wirkung Varros im Spiegel seiner Zeitgenossen von Cicero bis Ovid. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Baier, T. 2005. “Autobiographie in der späten römischen Republik.” In Reichel, M., ed., Antike Autobiographien. Werke – Epochen – Gattungen, 123–42. Vienna.Google Scholar

Bakhouche, B. 2002. “Quelques réflexions sur le De diuinatione de Cicéron, ou du text au contexte.” L’Information littéraire 54.4: 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bakker, F. A. 2016. Epicurean Meteorology: Sources, Method, Scope and Organization. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balbo, A. 2013. “Marcus Junius Brutus the Orator: Between Philosophy and Rhetoric.” In Steel, and van der Blom, : 315–28.Google Scholar

Balconi, C. 1993. “Rabirio Postumo dioiketes d’Egitto in P. Med. inv. 68.53?” Aegyptus 73: 3–20.Google Scholar

Baldo, G. 1999. “Enna: un paesaggio del mito tra storia e religione (Cicerone, Verr. 2, 4, 105–115).” In Avezzù, G. and Pianezzola, E., eds., Sicilia e Magna Grecia. Spazio reale e spazio immaginario nella letteratura greca e latina, 17–57. Padua.Google Scholar

Baldo, G. ed., comm. 2004. M. Tulli Ciceronis In C. Verrem actionis secundae liber quartus (de signis). Florence.Google Scholar

Baldry, H. C. 1965. The Unity of Mankind in Greek Thought. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balsdon, J. P. V. D. 1957. “Roman History, 58–56 b.c.: Three Ciceronian Problems.” Journal of Roman Studies 47: 15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balsdon, J. P. V. D. 1958. “The Ides of March.” Historia 7: 80–94.Google Scholar

Balsdon, J. P. V. D. 1960. “Auctoritas, dignitas, otium.” Classical Quarterly 10: 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balsdon, J. P. V. D. 1964. “Cicero the Man.” In Dorey, T. A., ed., Cicero, 171–214. London.Google Scholar

Balsdon, J. P. V. D. 1966. “Fabula Clodiana.” Historia 15: 65–73.Google Scholar

Baltussen, H. 2009. “A Grief Observed: Cicero on Remembering Tullia.” Mortality 14: 355–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baltussen, H. 2013. “Cicero’s Consolatio ad se: Character, Purpose and Impact of a Curious Treatise.” In Baltussen, H., ed., Greek and Roman Consolations: Eight Studies of a Tradition and Its Afterlife, 67–91. Swansea.Google Scholar

Balzarini, M. 1968. “Cicerone Pro Tullio e l’editto di Lucullo.” In Studi in onore di Giuseppe Grosso, i: 323–82. Turin.Google Scholar

Bane, R. W. 1971. “The Composition of the Roman Senate in 44 b.c.” Diss. University of Southern California. Los Angeles.Google Scholar

Bannon, C. J. 2000. “Self-Help and Social Status in Cicero’s Pro Quinctio.” Ancient Society 30: 71–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bannon, C. J. 2014. “C. Sergius Orata and the Rhetoric of Fishponds.” Classical Quarterly 64: 166–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baratin, M., Lévy, C., Utard, R., and Videau, A., eds. 2010. Stylus: la parole dans ses formes. Mélanges en l’honneur du professeur Jacqueline Dangel. Paris.Google Scholar

Baraz, Y. 2012. A Written Republic: Cicero’s Philosophical Politics. Princeton.Google Scholar

Barber, K. A. 2004. Rhetoric in Cicero’s Pro Balbo. New York–London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barchiesi, A. 2001. “The Crossing.” In Harrison, S. J., ed., Texts, Ideas, and the Classics: Scholarship, Theory, and Classical Literature, 142–63. Oxford.Google Scholar

Bardt, C. 1921. Römische Charakterköpfe in Briefen, vornehmlich aus caesarischer und traianischer Zeit. 2nd ed. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Barigazzi, A., ed., comm. 1966. Favorino di Arelate: Opere. Florence.Google Scholar

Barlow, C. T. 1980. “The Roman Government and the Roman Economy, 92–80 b.c.” American Journal of Philology 101: 202–19.Google Scholar

Barlow, J. J. 2012. “Cicero on Property and the State.” In Nicgorski, : 212–41.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 1985. “Cicero’s De fato and a Greek Source.” In Brunschwig, J., Imbert, C., and Roger, A., eds., Histoire et structure: à la mémoire de Victor Goldschmidt, 229–39. Paris.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 1997a. “Logic in Academica I and the Lucullus.” In Inwood, and Mansfeld, : 140–60.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 1997b. “Roman Aristotle.” In Barnes, and Griffin, : 1–69.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 2015. Mantissa: Essays in Ancient Philosophy iv, ed. Bonelli, M.. Oxford.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. and Griffin, M., eds. 1997. Philosophia togata ii: Plato and Aristotle. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baroin, C. 2005. “‘Les candélabres corinthiens n’existent pas.’” In Dupont, F. and Valette-Cagnac, E., eds., Façons de parler grec à Rome, 103–34. Paris.Google Scholar

Baroni, A. 2007. “La titolatura della dittatura di Sulla.” Athenaeum 95: 775–92.Google Scholar

Bats, M. 2016. “La publicatio bonorum dans le De Domo sua de Cicéron.” Mélanges de l’École Française de Rome, Antiquité 128.2 (https://doi.org/10.4000/mefra.3653), cited by marked paragraph no.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Baudry, R. and Hurlet, F., eds. 2016. Le prestige à Rome à la fin de la République et au début du Principat. Paris.Google Scholar

Bauman, R. A. 1967. The crimen maiestatis in the Roman Republic and Augustan Principate. Johannesburg.Google Scholar

Bauman, R. A. 1974. “Criminal Prosecutions by the Aediles.” Latomus 33: 245–64.Google Scholar

Bauman, R. A. 1985. Lawyers in Roman Transitional Politics: A Study of the Roman Jurists in Their Political Setting in the Late Republic and Triumvirate. Munich.Google Scholar

Beard, M. 1986. “Cicero and Divination: The Formation of a Latin Discourse.” Journal of Roman Studies 76: 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beard, M. 2002. “Ciceronian Correspondences: Making a Book out of Letters.” In Wiseman, T. P., ed., Classics in Progress: Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome, 103–44. Oxford.Google Scholar

Beard, M. 2007. The Roman Triumph. Cambridge, Mass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beard, M. 2012. “Cicero’s ‘Response of the haruspices’ and the Voice of the Gods.” Journal of Roman Studies 102: 20–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beard, M. 2014. Laughter in Ancient Rome: On Joking, Tickling, and Cracking Up. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Beard, M. and North, J., eds. 1990. Pagan Priests: Religion and Power in the Ancient World. London.Google Scholar

Beaujeu, J., ed., tr. 1980–96. Cicéron: Correspondance. Vols. vi–xi. Paris.Google Scholar

Beck, H. 2009. “From Poplicola to Augustus: Senatorial Houses in Roman Political Culture.” Phoenix 63: 361–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beck, H., Duplá, A., Jehne, M., and Polo, F. Pina, eds. 2011. Consuls and res publica: Holding High Office in the Roman Republic. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beck, H., Jehne, M., and Serrati, J., eds. 2016. Money and Power in the Roman Republic. Brussels.Google Scholar

Becker, A. 2013. “Therapie und Dialog. Ein Vergleich zwischen Platons Phaidon und Ciceros Tusculanae Disputationes I.” In Erler, M. and Hessler, J. E., eds., Argument und literarische Form in antiker Philosophie, 339–55. Berlin.Google Scholar

Becker, M. 2017. “Suntoque aediles curatores urbis …”: Die Entwicklung der stadtrömischen Aedilität in republikanischer Zeit. Stuttgart.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bees, R. 2004. Die Oikeiosislehre der Stoa, 1: Rekonstruktion ihres Inhalts.Würzburg.Google Scholar

Bees, R. 2008. “Rezeption der aristotelischen Scala naturae in der Stoa.” In Althoff, J., Föllinger, S., and Wöhrle, G., eds., Antike Naturwissenschaft und ihre Rezeption, xviii: 34–61. Trier.Google Scholar

Bees, R. 2010. “Die Einheit von Redekunst und Philosophie: Poseidonios bei Cicero, De oratore 3.19–24?” Hermes 138: 196–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Begemann, E. 2012. Schicksal als Argument. Ciceros Rede vom fatum in der späten Republik. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Begemann, E. 2014. “Cicero’s Theology and the Concept of Fate.” Archiv für Religionsgeschichte 15: 225–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Begemann, E. 2015. “Ista tua pulchra libertas: The Construction of a Private Cult of Liberty on the Palatine.” In Ando, C. and Rüpke, J., eds., Public and Private in Ancient Mediterranean Law and Religion, 75–98. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Begemann, E. 2021. “Determinism, Fate, and Responsibility.” In Atkins, and Bénatouïl, : 134–49.Google Scholar

Behrendt, A. 2013. Mit Zitaten kommunizieren. Untersuchungen zur Zitierweise in der Korrespondenz des Marcus Tullius Cicero. Rahden.Google Scholar

Bellemore, J. 2002. “The Date of Cicero’s Pro Archia.” Antichthon 36: 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bellemore, J. 2008. “Cicero’s Retreat from Rome in Early 58 bc.” Antichthon 42: 100–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bellen, H. 1985a. “Cicero und der Aufstieg Oktavians.” Gymnasium 92: 161–89.Google Scholar

Bellen, H. 1985b. Metus Gallicus – metus Punicus: Zum Furchtmotiv in der römischen Republik. Akademie der Wissenschaft und der Literatur, Mainz, Abhandlungen der geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse, 1985: 3. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Bellorio, F. 2021. “Nuove prospettive sul De fato di Cicerone.” Ciceroniana On Line 5: 81–120.Google Scholar

Beltrão da Rosa, C. 2020. “The God and the Consul in Cicero’s Third Catilinarian.” In Beltrão da Rosa, and Santangelo, : 45–58.Google Scholar

Beltrão da Rosa, C. and Santangelo, F., eds. 2020. Cicero and Roman Religion: Eight Studies. Stuttgart.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. 2002. “Logos et scala naturae dans le Stoïcisme de Zenon et Cleanthe.” Elenchos 23: 297–331.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. 2009. “How Industrious Can Zeus Be? The Extent and Objects of Divine Activity in Stoicism.” In Salles, : 23–45.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. 2016a. “Aristotle and the Stoa.” In Falcon, A., ed., Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity, 56–75. Leiden–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. 2016b. “Structure, Standards and Stoic Moral Progress in De finibus 4.” In Annas, and Betegh, : 198–220.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. 2019. “Entre sophistique, scepticisme et platonisme. Le discours de Philus et de Carnéade sur la justice dans le De re publica.” In Machuca, D. E. and Marchand, S., eds., Les raisons du doute: études sur le scepticisme antique, 181–212. Paris.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. and Ierodiakonou, K., eds. 2019. Dialectic after Plato and Aristotle. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Beness, J. L. 2005. “Scipio Aemilianus and the Crisis of 129 b.c.” Historia 54: 37–48.Google Scholar

Benferhat, Y. 2003–4. “Vita rustica: un idéal politique et moral? Réflexions sur le Pro Roscio Amerino.” In Bedon, R. and Dupré, N., eds., Rus amoenum. Les agréments de la vie rurale en Gaule romaine et dans les régions voisines, 259–87. Limoges.Google Scholar

Benferhat, Y. 2007. “L’Anti-Verrès: les devoirs d’un bon gouverneur de province d’après la composition de lettres de Cicéron proconsul en Cilicie.” Euphrosyne n.s. 35: 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Benferhat, Y. 2009a. “La clémence de … Pompée.” In Devillers, O. and Meyer, J., eds., Pouvoirs des hommes, pouvoirs des mots, des Gracques à Trajan, 121–32. Louvain.Google Scholar

Benferhat, Y. 2009b. Review of Narducci 2009. Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2009.09.22.Google Scholar

Benferhat, Y. 2016. “Cicero and the Small World of Roman Jurists.” In du Plessis, : 71–87.Google Scholar

Bengtson, H. 1954. “Q. Caecilius Metellus Celer (cos. 60) und die Inder.” Historia 3: 229–36.Google Scholar

Bengtson, H. 1972a. “Die letzten Monaten der römischen Senatsherrschaft.” Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt 1.1: 967–81.Google Scholar

Bengtson, H. 1972b. Zu den Proskriptionen der Triumvirn. Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse, 1972: 3. Munich.Google Scholar

Benner, H. 1987. Die Politik des P. Clodius Pulcher. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Bensi, C. 2009. “Su alcuni aspetti dell’In Vatinium di Cicerone.” In Santalucia, 2009a: 427–58.Google Scholar

Benson, J. M. 1986. “Catiline and the Date of the Consular Elections of 63 b.c.” Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History 4: 234–46.Google Scholar

Beretta, D. G. 1996. “Promoting the Public Image: Cicero and His Consulship.” Diss. Johns Hopkins University. Baltimore.Google Scholar

Berg, B. 1997. “Cicero’s Palatine Home and Clodius’ Shrine of Liberty: Alternative Emblems of the Republic in Cicero’s De domo sua.” Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History 8: 122–43.Google Scholar

Berger, A. 1953. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law. Philadelphia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bergson, H. 1969. Le rire: essai sur le signification du comique. 263rd ed. Paris.Google Scholar

Bernard, J.-E. 2007. “Du discours à l’épistolaire: les échos du Pro Plancio dans la lettre de Cicéron à Lentulus Spinther (Fam. 1, 9).” Rhetorica 25: 223–42.Google Scholar

Bernard, J.-E. 2012. “La narration dans les lettres proconsulaires de Cicéron.” Latomus 71: 24–39.Google Scholar

Bernard, J.-E. 2013. La sociabilité épistolaire chez Cicéron. Paris.Google Scholar

Bernard, J.-E. 2014. “Lettres et discours: la persona de Cicéron après l’exil.” Vita Latina 189–90: 40–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bernard, J.-E. 2016. “L’imitation de la persona oratoire de Cicéron dans les lettres de L. Munatius Plancus.” In Galand, and Malaspina, : 211–22.Google Scholar

Berno, F. R. 2005. “Fuoco e fiamma su Cicerone: il personaggio di Clodio nella De domo sua.” Pan: Studi del Dipartimento di Civiltà Euro-Mediterranee e di Studi Classici, Cristiani, Bisantini, Umanistici, Università degli Studi di Palermo 23: 113–29.Google Scholar

Berno, F. R. 2007. “La Furia di Clodio in Cicerone.” Bollettino di Studi Latini 37: 69–91.Google Scholar

Berno, F. R., Cucchiarelli, A., Degl’Innocenti Pierini, R., Baraz, Y., Fezzi, L., Petrucciani, S., Prost, F.. 2019. “Intorno al Commentariolum petitionis. Suggestioni interdisciplinari a partire dal commento di François Prost.” Bolletino di Studi Latini 49: 602–42.Google Scholar

Berno, F. R. and Bua, G. La, eds. 2022. Portraying Cicero in Literature, Culture, and Politics from Ancient to Modern Times. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berrendonner, C. 2007. “Verrès, les cités, les statues, et l’argent.” In Dubouloz, and Pittia, : 205–27.Google Scholar

Berry, D. H. 1993. “Pompey’s Legal Knowledge – or Lack of It: Cic. Mil. 70 and the Date of Pro Milone.” Historia 42: 502–4.Google Scholar

Berry, D. H. ed., comm. 1996a. Cicero: Pro P. Sulla oratio. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Berry, D. H. 1996b. “The Value of Prose Rhythm in Questions of Authenticity: The Case of De optimo genere oratorum Attributed to Cicero.” Papers of the Leeds International Latin Seminar 9: 47–74.Google Scholar

Berry, D. H. tr. 2000. Cicero: Defence Speeches. Oxford.Google Scholar

Berry, D. H. 2003. “Equester ordo tuus est: Did Cicero Win His Cases Because of His Support for the equites?” Classical Quarterly 53: 22–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berry, D. H. 2004. “The Publication of Cicero’s Pro Roscio Amerino.” Mnemosyne 57: 80–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berry, D. H. tr. 2006. Cicero: Political Speeches. Oxford.Google Scholar

Berry, D. H. 2020. Cicero’s Catilinarians. New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berry, D. H. and Erskine, A., eds. 2010. Form and Function in Roman Oratory. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Berthold, H. 1966. “Der jüngere Cato bei den Kirchenvätern.” In Cross, F. L., ed., Studia Patristica 9.3: 3–19. Berlin.Google Scholar

Besnier, B. 1996. “La nature dans le livre II du De natura deorum de Cicéron.” In Le concept de nature à Rome: la physique. Actes du seminaire de philosophie romaine de l’Université de Paris XII – Val de Marne, 127–75. Paris.Google Scholar

Bessone, L. 2004. Le congiure di Catilina. Padua.Google Scholar

Bethmann-Hollweg, M. A.. 1865. Der römische Civilprozeß, ii: Formulae. Bonn.Google Scholar

Bett, R. 1986. “Immortality and the Nature of the Soul in the Phaedrus.” Phronesis 31: 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bettini, M. 1986. Antropologia e cultura romana: parentela, tempo, immagini dell’anima. Rome.Google Scholar

Bhatt, S. 2018. “Exiled in Rome: The Writing of Other Spaces in Tacitus’ Annales.” In Fitzgerald, W. and Spentzou, E., eds., The Production of Space in Latin Literature, 215–33. Oxford.Google Scholar

Biava, A. 2004. “Le proscrizioni dei triumviri.” Studia et Documenta Historiae et Iuris 70: 301–43.Google Scholar

Biggs, T. 2019. “Cicero, quid in alieno saeculo tibi? The ‘Republican’ Rostra between Augustan Text and Monument.” In Loar, M. P., Murray, S., and Rebeggiani, S., eds., The Cultural History of Augustan Rome: Texts, Monuments, and Topography, 27–44. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bilinski, B. 1961. “Elogio della mano e la concezione ciceroniana della società.” In Atti del I Congresso Internazionale di Studi Ciceroniani, Roma, Aprile 1959, i, 195–212. Rome.Google Scholar

Birt, T. 1882. Das antike Buchwesen in seinem Verhältnis zur Litteratur. Berlin.Google Scholar

Bishop, C. 2015. “How to Make a Roman Demosthenes: Self-Fashioning in Cicero’s Brutus and Orator.” Classical Journal 111: 167–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bishop, C. 2018. “Pessimus omnium poeta: Canonization and the Ancient Reception of Cicero’s Poetry.” Illinois Classical Studies 43: 137–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bishop, C. 2019a. Cicero, Greek Learning and the Making of a Roman Classic. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bishop, C. 2019b. “Magnum opus: Atticus, Cicero, and Eratosthenes’ Geography.” Rheinisches Museum 162: 265–91.Google Scholar

Bishop, C. 2020. “The Thrill of Defeat: Classicism and the Ancient Reception of Cicero’s and Demosthenes’ Philippics.” In Pieper, and van der Velden, 2020b: 37–55.Google Scholar

Bishop, C. 2023. “Care of the (Written) Self: Literary and Ethical Decorum in De Officiis.” In Woolf, 2023a: 163–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bispham, E. 2007. From Asculum to Actium: The Municipalization of Italy from the Social War to Augustus. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bispham, E. 2016. “The Social War.” In Cooley, A. E., ed., A Companion to Roman Italy, 76–102. Malden, Mass.–Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bivar, A. D. H. 1983. “The Political History of Iran under the Arsacids.” In Yarshater, E., ed., The Cambridge History of Iran, iii, 1.21–99. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Blank, D. 2012. “Varro and Antiochus.” In Sedley, 2012b: 250–89.Google Scholar

Bleckmann, B. 2002. Die römische Nobilität im Ersten Punischen Krieg: Untersuchungen zur aristokratischen Konkurrenz in der Republik. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bleicken, J. 1962. Senatsgericht und Kaisergericht. Eine Studie zur Entwicklung des Prozessrechtes im frühen Prinzipat. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 3: 53. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Bleicken, J. 1975. Lex publica. Gesetz und Recht in der römischen Republik. Berlin–New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bleicken, J. 1995. Cicero und die Ritter. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 3: 213. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Bleicken, J. 2015. Augustus: The Biography. Tr. Bell, A.. London.Google Scholar

Bleistein, M. 2014. “Analyse und Synthese. Ein ciceronisches Denkmuster in den Tusculanenproömien.” Acta Antiqua Hungarica 54: 393–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bleistein, M. 2022. Alia ex alia nexa: Untersuchungen zur Struktur von Ciceros Philosophieren. Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blösel, W. 1998. “Die Anakyklosis-Theorie und die Verfassung Roms im Spiegel des sechsten Buches des Polybios und Ciceros de re publica Buch II.” Hermes 126: 31–57.Google Scholar

Blösel, W. 2011. “Die Demilitisierung der römischen Nobilität von Sulla bis Caesar.” In Blösel, W. and Hölkeskamp, K.-J., eds., Von der militia equestris zur militia urbana. Prominenzrollen und Karrierefelder im antiken Rom, 55–80. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Blösel, W. 2016. “Provincial Commands and Money in the Late Roman Republic.” In Beck, , Jehne, , and Serrati, : 68–81.Google Scholar

Blösel, W. 2019. “The imperia extraordinaria of the 70s to 50s b.c. and Public Opinion.” In Rosillo-López, 2019a: 135–49.Google Scholar

Blösel, W. 2020. “The Sortition of Consular and Praetorian Provinces in the Roman Republic.” In Lopez-Rabatel, L. and Sintomer, Y., eds., Sortition and Democracy: History, Tools, Theories, 169–81. Exeter.Google Scholar

Blössner, N. 2001. Cicero gegen die Philosophie. Eine Analyse von De re publica 1, 1–3. Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, philologisch-historische Klasse, 2001: 3. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Blum, H. 1969. Die antike Mnemotechnik. Hildesheim–New York.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. 1998. Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy. Oxford.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. 1999. “Chrysippus’ Theory of Causes.” In Ierodiakonou, : 196–242.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. 2000. “Did Epicurus Discover the Free Will Problem?” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 19: 287–337.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. 2002. “Chrysippus and the Epistemic Theory of Vagueness.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 102: 217–38.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. 2005. “The Stoics on Fallacies of Equivocation.” In Frede, and Inwood, : 239–73.Google Scholar

Bochet, I. and Madec, G.. 2012. “Augustin et l’Hortensius de Cicéron.” In Bochet, I., ed., Augustin philosophe et prédicateur: hommages à Goulven Madec, 195–294. Paris.Google Scholar

Bodel, J. 2008. “Cicero’s Minerva, Penates and the Mother of the Lares: An Outline of Roman Domestic Religion.” In Bodel, J. and Olyan, S. M., eds., Household and Family Religion in Antiquity, 248–75. Malden, Mass.–Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boll, F. 1926. Sternglaube und Sterndeutung. Die Geschichte und Wesen der Astrologie. 3rd ed., ed. Gundel, W.. Leipzig–Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boll, T. 2019. Ciceros Rede cum senatui gratias egit. Ein Kommentar. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bolonyai, G. 1993. “Iudicium docti indoctique.” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 34: 103–37.Google Scholar

Bömer, F. 1953. “Der Commentarius.” Hermes 81: 210–50.Google Scholar

Bona, F. 1980. “L’ideale retorico ciceroniano ed il ‘ius civile in artem redigere.’” Studia et Documenta Historiae et Iuris 46: 282–382.Google Scholar

Bond, S. E. 2016. Trade and Taboo: Disreputable Professions in the Roman Mediterranean. Ann Arbor.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonjour, M. 1975. Terre natale. Études sur une composante affective du patriotisme romain. Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonnefond-Coudry, M. 1989. Le sénat de la république romaine. Rome.Google Scholar

Bonnet, M. 1906. “Le dilemme de C. Gracchus.” Revue des Études Anciennes 8: 40–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonsangue, V. 2013. “L’irosa eloquenza delle strumae.” Rhetorica 31: 58–72.Google Scholar

Booth, J., ed. 2007. Cicero on the Attack: Invective and Subversion in the Orations and Beyond. Swansea.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Botermann, H. 1968. Die Soldaten und die römische Politik in der Zeit von Caesars Tod bis zur Begründung des Zweiten Triumvirats. Munich.Google Scholar

Botermann, H. 1992. “Generalabrechnung mit dem Tyrannen. Ciceros Rede für den König Deiotarus.” Gymnasium 99: 320–44.Google Scholar

Bouché-Leclercq, A. 1899. L’astrologie grecque. Paris.Google Scholar

Boulanger, A. 1940. “La publication du ‘Pro Murena.’” Revue des Études Anciennes 42: 382–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bounas, T. 2010. “Cicero und Verres: Die römische Provinzialverwaltung zwischen Fürsorge und Ausbeutung.” In Engels, D., Geis, L., and Kleu, M., eds., Zwischen Ideal und Wirklichkeit. Herrschaft auf Sizilien von der Antike bis zum Spätmittelalter, 137–57. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Tr. Nice, R.. London.Google Scholar

Boutin-Touboulic, I. 2021. “Cicero and Augustine.” In Atkins, and Bénatouïl, : 252–67.Google Scholar

Boyancé, P. 1936. Études sur le Songe de Scipio. Paris.Google Scholar

Bradley, K. R. 1991. Discovering the Roman Family. Oxford.Google Scholar

Braet, A. C. 1989. “Variationen zur Statuslehre von Hermagoras bei Cicero.” Rhetorica 7: 239–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Braund, D. 1989. “Function and Dysfunction: Personal Patronage in Roman Imperialism.” In Wallace-Hadrill, A., ed., Patronage in Ancient Society, 137–52. London–New York.Google Scholar

Braund, D. 1998. “Cohors: The Governor and His Entourage in the Self-Image of the Roman Republic.” In Laurence, R. and Berry, J., eds., Cultural Identity in the Roman Empire, 10–24. London–New York.Google Scholar

Braunert, H. 1966. “Verfassungsnorm und Verfassungswirklichkeit im spätrepublikanischen Rom.” Der altsprachliche Unterricht 9.1: 51–73.Google Scholar

Brennan, T. 1998. “The Old Stoic Theory of Emotions.” In Sihvola, J. and Engberg-Pedersen, T., The Emotions in Hellenistic Philosophy, 21–70. Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brennan, T. 2009. “Stoic Souls in Stoic Corpses.” In Frede, and Reis, : 389–407.Google Scholar

Brennan, T. 2014. “The kathekon: A Report on Some Recent Work at Cornell.” Philosophie Antique 14: 41–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brennan, T. C. 2000. The Praetorship in the Roman Republic. 2 vols. Oxford–New York.Google Scholar

Brennan, T. C. 2012. “Perceptions of Women’s Power in the Late Republic: Terentia, Fulvia, and the Generation of 63 bce.” In James, S. L. and Dillon, S., eds., A Companion to Women in the Ancient World, 354–66. Malden, Mass.–Oxford.Google Scholar

Brind’Amour, P. 1983. Le calendrier romain. Recherches chronologiques. Ottawa.Google Scholar

Bringmann, K. 1971. Untersuchungen zum späten Cicero. Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bringmann, K. 1986. “Der Diktator Caesar als Richter? Zu Ciceros Reden ‘Pro Ligario’ und ‘Pro Rege Deiotaro.’” Hermes 141: 72–88.Google Scholar

Bringmann, K. 2010. Cicero. Darmstadt.Google Scholar

Bringmann, K. 2012. “Cicero über seine Philosophica. Zu Überlieferung und Interpretation einer umstrittenen Selbstaussage in Att. 12,52,3.” Hermes 140: 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bringmann, K. 2014. “War Cicero Caesars Gläubiger? Zur Interpretation von Cic. Att. 12,3,2.” Hermes 142: 487–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Briot, P. 1966. “Deux remarques sur la psychologie de Cicéron.” Latomus 25: 743–55.Google Scholar

Briot, P. 1968. “Sur l’exil de Cicéron.” Latomus 27: 406–14.Google Scholar

Briot, P. 1969. “Cicéron: approches d’une psychanalyse.” Latomus 28: 1040–49.Google Scholar

Briot, P. 1973. “Traces névrotiques chez Cicéron.” Latomus 32: 595–605.Google Scholar

Briot, P. 1977. “Traces obsessionnelles chez Cicéron.” Latomus 36: 475–81.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. 1991. Review of Habicht 1990. Journal of Roman Studies 81: 195–96.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. ed., comm. 2019. Valerius Maximus: Facta et dicta memorabilia, Book 8. Berlin.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. 2001. Philo of Larissa: The Last of the Academic Sceptics. Oxford–New York.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. 2005. “Common Sense: Concepts, Definition and Meaning in and out of the Stoa.” In Frede, and Inwood, : 164–209.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. tr., comm. 2006. Cicero: On Academic Scepticism. Indianapolis.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. 2011. “Posidonius’ Theory of Predictive Dreams.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 40: 213–36.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. 2012. “Antiochus’ Epistemology.” In Sedley, 2012b: 104–30.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. 2016. “Cicero’s Sceptical Methods: The Example of the De Finibus.” In Annas, and Betegh, : 12–40.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. and Osorio, P.. 2021. “The Ciceronian Dialogue.” In Atkins, and Bénatouïl, : 25–42.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. and Palmer, J.. 2001. “The New Academy’s Appeals to the Presocratics.” Phronesis 46: 38–72.Google Scholar

Brook, A. 2016. “Cicero’s Use of Aeschylus’ Oresteia in the Pro Milone.” Ramus 45: 45–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brooke, E. 2011. “Causa ante mortua est quam tu natus es: Aspects of the Funeral in Cicero’s Pro Rabirio perduellionis reo.” In Hope, V. M. and Huskinson, J., eds., Memory and Mourning: Studies in Roman Death, 93–112. Oxford.Google Scholar

Brough, M. W., Lango, J. W., and Van der Linden, H., eds. 2007. Rethinking the Just War Tradition. Albany.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brouwer, H. H. J. 1989. Bona Dea: The Sources and Description of the Cult. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brouwer, R. 2014. The Stoic Sage: The Early Stoics on Wisdom, Sagehood and Socrates. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, C. G. 2009. “Caesar’s and Cicero’s Attitudes towards Divination and the Transformation of Political Ideology in the Crisis of the Republic.” In Berner, U. and Tanaseanu-Döbler, I., eds., Religion und Kritik in der Antike, 61–70. Berlin.Google Scholar

Brown, E. 2002. “Epicurus and the Value of Friendship (‘Sententia Vaticana’ 23).” Classical Philology 97: 68–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brüllmann, P. 2023. “Eine unvollkommene Pflichtenethik: Ambrosius von Mailand, Immanuel Kant und Ciceros De officiis.” In Brüllmann, and Müller, : 215–32.Google Scholar

Brüllmann, P. and Müller, J., eds. 2023. Cicero: De officiis. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunner, A. 2011. “Totas paginas commovere? Cicero’s Presentation of Stoic Ethics in De finibus Book iii.” Diss. Central European University. Budapest.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. 1986. “The Cradle Argument in Epicureanism and Stoicism.” In Schofield, and Striker, : 113–44.Google Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 1957. “Three Passages from Asconius.” Classical Review 7: 193–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 1965. “‘Amicitia’ in the Late Roman Republic.” Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 191: 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 1971. Italian Manpower, 225 b.c.–a.d. 14. Oxford.Google Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 1980. “Patronage and Politics in the ‘Verrines.’” Chiron 10: 273–89.Google Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 1982a. “The Legal Issue in Cicero, Pro Balbo.” Classical Quarterly 32: 136–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 1982b. “Nobilitas and novitas.” Journal of Roman Studies 72: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 1986. “Cicero’s officium in the Civil War.” Journal of Roman Studies 76: 12–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 1988. The Fall of the Roman Republic and Related Essays. Oxford.Google Scholar

Brunt, P. A. 2013. Studies in Stoicism, ed. Griffin, M. and Samuels, A.. Oxford.Google Scholar

Bücher, F. 2006. Verargumentierte Geschichte. Exempla Romana im politischen Diskurs der späten römischen Republik. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Bücher, F. 2009. “Die Erinnerung an Krisenjahre. Das Exemplum der Gracchen im politischen Diskurs der späten Republik.” In Hölkeskamp, K.-J., ed., Eine politische Kultur (in) der Krise. Die “letzte Generation” der römischen Republik, 99–114. Munich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bücher, F. and Walter, U.. 2006. “Mit Manuskript in den Senat? Zu Cic. Planc. 74.” Rheinisches Museum 149: 237–40.Google Scholar

Buchheit, V. 1969. “Ciceros Triumph des Geistes.” Gymnasium 76: 232–53.Google Scholar

Buchheit, V. 1975. “Chrysogonus als Tyrann in Ciceros Rede für Roscius aus Ameria.” Chiron 5: 193–211.Google Scholar

Büchner, K. 1952. “Der Laelius Ciceros.” Museum Helveticum 9: 88–106.Google Scholar

Büchner, K. 1969. “Cicero an den Imperator Lentulus de re publica.” In Politeia und res publica. Beiträge zum Verständnis von Politik, Recht und Staat in der Antike dem Andenken Rudolf Starks gewidmet. Palingenesia 4, 215–44. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar

Buongiorno, P. 2006. “Gaio Antonio (cos. 63) e l’appellativo Hybrida.” In Traina, G., ed., Studi sull’età di Marco Antonio, 297–309. Lecce.Google Scholar

Buongiorno, P. 2010. “Teukris. Alle radici di uno pseudonimo dell’epistolario ciceroniano.” Latomus 69: 29–37.Google Scholar

Buongiorno, P. 2012. “La ‘lex’ in Cicerone al tempo delle ‘Philippicae.’ Fra teoria e prassi politica.” In Ferrary, J.-L., ed., Leges publicae. La legge nell’ esperienza giuridica romana, 543–67. Pavia.Google Scholar

Buongiorno, P. ed. 2020. Senatus consultum ultimum e stato di eccezione: fenomeni in prospettiva. Stuttgart.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burchell, D. 1998. “Civic Personae: MacIntyre, Cicero and Moral Personality.” History of Political Thought 19: 101–18.Google Scholar

Burckhardt, J. 1918. Weltgeschichtliche Betrachtungen. 3rd ed., ed. Oeri, J.. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Burckhardt, L. A. 1988. Politische Strategien der Optimaten in der späten römischen Republik. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Burckhardt, L. A. 1990. “The Political Elite of the Roman Republic: Comments on Recent Discussion of the Concepts nobilitas and homo novus.” Historia 39: 77–99.Google Scholar

Burden-Strevens, C. 2018. “Reconstructing Republican Oratory in Cassius Dio’s Roman History.” In Gray, et al.: 111–34.Google Scholar

Bürge, A. 1974. Die Juristenkomik in Ciceros Rede Pro Murena. Übersetzung und Kommentar. Zurich.Google Scholar

Burgeon, C. 2017. “Le séjour d’étude de Cicéron le Jeune en Grèce d’après la correspondance de Cicéron père.” Folia Electronica Classica 33: 1–24.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. 1965. “Cicero als Platoniker und Skeptiker.” Gymnasium 72: 175–200.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. 1972. Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism. Tr. Minar, E. L. Jr. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar

Burnand, C. 2004. “The Advocate as Professional: The Role of patronus in Pro Cluentio.” In Powell, and Paterson, 2004a: 277–89.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. 1982. “Gods and Heaps.” In Schofield, M. and Nussbaum, M. C., eds., Language and Logos: Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy, 315–38. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. 1997. “Antipater and Self-Refutation: Elusive Arguments in Cicero’s Academica.” In Inwood, and Mansfeld, : 277–310.Google Scholar

Burton, P. 2007. “Genre and Fact in the Preface to Cicero’s De amicitia.” Antichthon 41: 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Busolt, G. and Swoboda, H.. 1920–26. Griechische Staatskunde. 3rd ed. 2 vols. Munich.Google Scholar

Butler, S. 2002. The Hand of Cicero. London–New York.Google Scholar

Butler, S. 2018. “Cicero’s Grief.” Arion 26: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Butterfield, D. J., ed. 2015. Varro varius: The Polymath of the Roman World. Oxford.Google Scholar

Cadoux, T. J. 2006. “The Absent Senator of 5 December 63 b.c.” Classical Quarterly 56: 612–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cadoux, T. J. 2008. “The Roman carcer and Its Adjuncts.” Greece & Rome 55: 202–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cafaro, A. 2021. Governare l’impero. La “praefectura fabrum” fra legami personali e azione politica (ii sec. a.C.–iii sec. d.C.). Stuttgart.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cairo, M. E. 2015. “La invocación de los antepasados en De diuinatione y De natura deorum de Cicerón.” Cuadernos di filologia classica: Estudios latinos 35: 217–34.Google Scholar

Cairo, M. E. 2020. “A Reading of Cicero’s De Haruspicum Responso. Some Reflections on Roman Identity.” In Beltrão da Rosa, and Santangelo, : 73–86.Google Scholar

Calanchini, P., ed., tr. 2015. Marcus Tullius Cicero: De fato/Über das Schicksal. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Calboli, G., ed., comm. 1969. Cornifici Rhetorica ad C. Herennium. Bologna.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. 1975. “Cicerone, Catone e i neoatticisti.” In Michel, and Verdière, : 51–103.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. 2011. “L’ultimo Cicerone, la retorica e l’oratoria.” In Oratoria, retorica, cultura: contributi alla figura di Cicerone: atti del ii Simposio ciceroniano in memoria di Emanuele Narducci, 43–73. Cassino.Google Scholar

Calboli Montefusco, L. 1986. La dottrina degli “status” nella retorica greca e romana. Hildesheim–Zurich–New York.Google Scholar

Calvelli, L. 2020. Il tesoro di Cipro: Clodio, Catone e la conquista dell’isola. Venice.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cambiano, G. 2002. “Cicerone e la necessità della filosofia.” In Narducci, E., ed., Interpretare Cicerone. Percorsi della critica contemporanea. Atti del Symposium Ciceronianum Arpinas, Arpino 18 maggio 2001, 66–83. Florence.Google Scholar

Campanile, D. 2001. “Provincialis molestia. Note su Cicerone proconsole.” In Virgilio, B., ed., Studi ellenistici 13: 243–74. Pisa–Rome.Google Scholar

Canas, M. 2016. “Le marriage dans l’aristocratie sénatoriale romaine à l’époque républicaine: instrument d’accroissement ou instrument de préservation du prestige d’un individu et de sa famille?” In Baudry, and Hurlet, : 135–47.Google Scholar

Candilio, D. and Bertinetti, M.. 2013. “Bona Dea: una statuetta ritrovata.” Bollettino di archeologia on line 4: 30–40.Google Scholar

Canevaro, M. 2016. Demostene: Contro Leptine. Introduzione, traduzione e commento storico. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Canfora, L. 1984. “Altri riferimenti ai poemi ciceroniani nell’Invectiva in Ciceronem.” Ciceroniana 5: 101–9.Google Scholar

Canfora, L. 1990. “Cicerone e l’amnistia.” Ciceroniana n.s. 7: 161–63.Google Scholar

Canfora, L. 1998. “Il corpus ad Brutum.” Ciceroniana n.s. 10: 191–208.Google Scholar

Canfora, L. 1999. Giulio Cesare: il dittatore democratico. Rome–Bari.Google Scholar

Canfora, L. 2007. Julius Caesar: The People’s Dictator. Tr. Hill, M. and Windle, K.. Edinburgh.Google Scholar

Cape, R. W., Jr. 2002. “Cicero’s Consular Speeches.” In May, : 113–58.Google Scholar

Caplan, H., ed., tr. 1954. [Cicero]. Ad Herennium. Cambridge, Mass.–London.Google Scholar

Caplan, H. 1970. On Eloquence: Studies in Ancient and Mediaeval Rhetoric. Ithaca–London.Google Scholar

Capogrossi Colognesi, L. 2014. Law and Power in the Making of the Roman Commonwealth. Tr. Kopp, L.. Cambridge (orig. 2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cappello, O. 2016. “Everything You Wanted to Know about Atticus (but Were Afraid to Ask Cicero): Looking for Atticus in Cicero’s ad Atticum.” Arethusa 49: 463–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cappello, O. 2019. The School of Doubt: Skepticism, History and Politics in Cicero’s Academica. Leiden–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carandini, A. and Carafa, P.. 2017. The Atlas of Ancient Rome. Tr. Halavais, A. C.. 2 vols. Princeton–Oxford.Google Scholar

Carcopino, J. 1919. La loi de Hiéron et les Romains. Paris.Google Scholar

Carcopino, J. 1950. “Observations sur le ‘De Suppliciis.’” Revue internationale des droits de l’Antiquité 3: 229–66.Google Scholar

Carilli, M. G. 1984. “L’orazione ‘Pro Ligario’ in Quintiliano.” Istituto di Civiltà Classica Cristiana Medievale: Studi e Ricerche 6: 15–33. Genoa.Google Scholar

Carlà-Uhink, F. 2017a. “Alteram loci patriam, alteram iuris: ‘Double Fatherlands’ and the Role of Italy in Cicero’s Political Discourse.” In Cecchet, L. and Busetto, A., eds., Citizens in the Graeco-Roman World: Aspects of Citizenship from the Archaic Period to ad 212, 259–82. Leiden–Boston.Google Scholar

Carlà-Uhink, F. 2017b. The “Birth” of Italy: The Institutionalization of Italy as a Region, 3rd-1st Century BCE. Berlin–Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carney, T. F. 1961. A Biography of C. Marius. Assen.Google Scholar

Carpino, T. P. 1979. “Dignitas in Cicerone. Tra semantica e semiologia.” Bolletino di Studi Latini 9: 253–67.Google Scholar

Carsana, C. 2020. “Senatus consulta servandae r.p. causa nel II sec. a.c.” In Buongiorno: 67–84.Google Scholar

Cary, M. 1923. “‘Asinus Germanus.’” Classical Quarterly 17: 103–7.Google Scholar

Casali, S. 2018. “Caesar’s Poetry in its Context.” In Grillo, and Krebs, : 206–14.Google Scholar

Casamento, A. 2004. “‘Parlare e lagrimar vedrai insieme.’ Le lacrime dell’ oratore.” In Petrone, : 41–62.Google Scholar

Casamento, A. 2010. “La pro Milone dopo la pro Milone.” In Calboli Montefusco, L., ed., Papers on Rhetoric, 10: 39–58. Rome.Google Scholar

Casamento, A. 2012. “Apparizioni, fantasmi e altre ‘ombre’ in morte e resurrezione dello stato: allegoria e strategie oratorie nella Pro Milone di Cicerone.” In Moretti, G. and Bonancini, A., eds., Persona ficta: la personificazione allegorica nella cultura antica fra letteratura, retorica e iconografia, 139–69. Trento.Google Scholar

Casamento, A. 2013. “Quando non c’è altro da dire: forza della parola e forza della legge nella pro Archia di Cicerone.” Bollettino di Studi Latini 43: 1–15.Google Scholar

Casanova-Robin, H. and Lévy, C., eds. 2013. Le tyran et sa postérité dans la littérature latine de l’Antiquité à la Renaissance. Paris.Google Scholar

Casavola, F. 1960. Lex Cincia. Contributo alla storia delle origini della donazione romana. Naples.Google Scholar

Casson, L. 1971. Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton.Google Scholar

Castner, C. 1988. Prosopography of Roman Epicureans from the Second Century b.c. to the Second Century a.d. Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar

Caston, R. R. 2015. “Pacuvius hoc melius quam Sophocles: Cicero’s Use of Drama in the Treatment of the Emotions.” In Cairns, D. and Fulkerson, L., eds., Emotions between Greece and Rome, 129–48. London.Google Scholar

Cavaggioni, F. 1998. L. Apuleio Saturnino tribunus plebis seditiosus. Venice.Google Scholar

Cavarzere, A. 1994. “Note alla ‘In Pisonem’ di Cicerone.” Materiali e discussioni per l’analisi dei testi classici 33: 157–76.Google Scholar

Cavarzere, A. 1998. “La funzione di Ortensio nel prologo del Brutus.” Lexis 16: 149–62.Google Scholar

Cavarzere, A. 2004. “La voce delle emozioni. Sincerità e simulazione nella teoria retorica dei Romani.” In Petrone, : 11–28.Google Scholar

Cavarzere, A. 2009. “La Pro Caelio: vent’anni dopo.” In Santalucia, 2009a: 383–426.Google Scholar

Cavarzere, A. 2012. “Coscienza del progresso e consapevolezza del presente: Cicerone, Brutus 22–23.” In Citroni, : 99–115.Google Scholar

Caven, B. 1990. Dionysius I, War-Lord of Sicily. New Haven–London.Google Scholar

Centola, D. A. 1999. Il crimen calumniae. Contributo allo studio del processo criminale romano. Naples.Google Scholar

Charrier, S. 2003. “Les Anneés 90-80 dans le Brutus de Cicéron (§§304–312): la formation d’un orateur au temps des guerres civiles.” Revue des Études Latines 81: 79–96.Google Scholar

Chinnici, V. 2000. Cicerone interprete di Omero. Naples.Google Scholar

Christes, J. 1988. “Cum dignitate otium (Cic. Sest. 98) – eine Nachbereitung.” Gymnasium 95: 303–15.Google Scholar

Christian, E. 2008. “A Philosophy of Legitimacy in Cicero’s Philippics.” In Stevenson, and Wilson, : 153–67.Google Scholar

Christopherson, A. J. 1989. “Invidia Ciceronis: Some Political Circumstances Involving Cicero’s Exile and Return.” In Curtis, R. I., ed., Studia Pompeiana and Classica in Honor of Wilhelmina F. Jashemski, ii: 33–57. New Rochelle, NY.Google Scholar

Ciccotti, E. 1895. “Nota cronologica sulla questura di C. Verre.” Rivista di Filologia e d’Istruzione Classica n.s. 1: 332–40.Google Scholar

Cioffi, R. L. 2011. “Fuzzy Math: The Place of Numerical Evidence in Cicero In Verrem 3.116.” Mnemosyne 64: 645–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Citroni, M. 2003. “I proemi delle Tusculanae e la costruzione di un’immagine della tradizione letteraria romana.” In Citroni, M., ed., Memoria e identità: la cultura romana costruisce la sua immagine, 149–84. Florence.Google Scholar

Citroni, M. ed. 2012. Letteratura e civitas. Transizioni dalla Repubblica all’Impero in ricordo di Emanuele Narducci. Pisa.Google Scholar

Citroni Marchetti, S. 1996. “Lo spazio straniato. Percorsi psicologici e percezione del tribunale nelle orazioni di Cicerone ‘pro Fonteio,’ ‘pro Q. Roscio comoedo,’ ‘pro Cluentio.’” Materiali e discussioni per l’analisi dei testi classici 36: 33–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Citroni Marchetti, S. 2000. Amicizia e potere nelle lettere di Cicerone e nelle elegie ovidiane dell’esilio. Florence.Google Scholar

Citroni Marchetti, S. 2001. “Amici e nemici nell’esilio di Cicerone.” In Narducci, E., ed., Cicerone, prospettiva 2000, 79–104. Florence.Google Scholar

Citroni Marchetti, S. 2009. “Words and Silence: Atticus as the Dedicatee of De amicitia.” Classical World 103.1 (2009): 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Citroni Marchetti, S. 2017. “Cicerone alla ricerca dell’amicizia: dalla domus alla res publica.” Ciceroniana On Line 1: 235–60.Google Scholar

Ciulei, G. 1972. L’équité chez Cicéron. Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Claassen, J.-M. 1992. “Cicero’s Banishment: ‘tempora et mores.’” Acta Classica 35: 19–47.Google Scholar

Claassen, J.-M. 1996. “Documents of a Crumbling Marriage: The Case of Cicero and Terentia.” Phoenix 50: 208–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Claassen, J.-M. 1999. Displaced Persons: The Literature of Exile from Cicero to Boethius. Madison, Wis.Google Scholar

Clark, A. C. 1918. The Descent of Manuscripts. Oxford.Google Scholar

Clark, A. J. 2007. Divine Qualities: Cult and Community in Republican Rome. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clark, G. and Rajak, T., eds. 2002. Philosophy and Power in the Graeco-Roman World: Essays in Honour of Miriam Griffin. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Clark, J. H. 2017. “Defeat in the Roman Republic: Stories from Spain.” In Clark, J. H. and Turner, B., eds., Brill’s Companion to Military Defeat in Ancient Mediterranean Society, 191–212. Leiden–Boston.Google Scholar

Clark, M. E. and Ruebel, J. S. 1985. “Philosophy and Rhetoric in Cicero’s Pro Milone.” Rheinisches Museum 128: 57–72.Google Scholar

Clark, P. A. 1991. “Tullia and Crassipes.” Phoenix 45: 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Classen, C. J. 1978. “Cicero, the Laws and the Law-Courts.” Latomus 37: 597–619.Google Scholar

Classen, C. J. 1979. “Bemerkungen zu Ciceros Äusserungen über die Gesetze.” Rheinisches Museum 122: 278–302.Google Scholar

Classen, C. J. 1982. “Ciceros Kunst der Überredung.” In Ludwig, : 149–84.Google Scholar

Classen, C. J. 1985. Recht, Rhetorik, Politik. Untersuchungen zu Ciceros rhetorischer Strategie. Darmstadt.Google Scholar

Classen, C. J. 1986. “Ciceros orator perfectus: Ein vir bonus dicendi peritus?” In Prete, S., ed., Commemoratio: Studi di filologia in ricordo di Riccardo Ribuoli, 43–55. Sassoferrato.Google Scholar

Classen, C. J. 2010. “Teaching Philosophy, a Form or Function of Roman Oratory: Velleius’ Speech in Cicero’s De natura deorum.” In Berry, and Erskine, : 195–207.Google Scholar

Clausen, W. 1984. “Cicero and the New Poetry.” Ciceroniana n.s. 5: 91–100.Google Scholar

Clemente, G. 2018. “When Senators Became ‘the Best.’” In van der Blom, , Gray, , and Steel, : 203–21.Google Scholar

Clinton, K. 1986. “The Eleusinian Mysteries: Roman Initiates and Benefactors, Second Century b.c. to a.d. 267.” Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt 2.18.2: 1499–1539.Google Scholar

Cloud, J. D. 1968. “How Did Sulla Style His Law de sicariis?” Classical Review 18: 140–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cloud, J. D. 2009. “Leges de sicariis: The First Chapter of Sulla’s lex de sicariis.” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, Romanistische Abteilung 126: 114–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cluett, R. 2009. “The Continuators: Soldiering On.” In Griffin, : 192–205.Google Scholar

Coarelli, F. 1981. Ditorni di Roma. Rome–Bari.Google Scholar

Coates, G. 2022. “Cicero’s Treatment of Sulla in the Pro Roscio Amerino.” Classical Quarterly 72: 595–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coffee, N. 2011. “Caesar chrematopoios.” Classical Journal 106: 397–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cohen, S. T. 2007. “Cicero’s Roman Exile.” In Gaertner, 2007a: 109–28.Google Scholar

Cole, S. 2013. Cicero and the Rise of Deification at Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Coleman-Norton, P. R. 1950. “Cicero and the Music of the Spheres.” Classical Journal 45: 237–41.Google Scholar

Coles, E. H. 1917. Gaius Verres: An Historical Study. New York.Google Scholar

Collins, A. and Walsh, J.. 2015. “Debt Deflationary Crisis in the Late Roman Republic.” Ancient Society 45: 125–70.Google Scholar

Combès, R. 1966. Imperator. Recherches sur l’emploi et la signification du titre d’imperator dans la Rome républicaine. Paris.Google Scholar

Connolly, J. 2007. The State of Speech: Rhetoric and Political Thought in Ancient Rome. Princeton.Google Scholar

Connolly, J. 2015. The Life of Roman Republicanism. Princeton.Google Scholar

Constans, L.-A. 1921. Un correspondant de Cicéron, Ap. Claudius Pulcher. Paris.Google Scholar

Constans, L.-A., Bayet, J., and Beaujeu, J., eds., tr. 1934–96. Correspondance de Cicéron, 11 vols. Paris.Google Scholar

Cooper, F. and Morris, S.. 1990. “Dining in Round Buildings.” In Murray, 1990a: 66–85.Google Scholar

Copeland, R. 1991. Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation in the Middle Ages: Academic Traditions and Vernacular Texts. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbeill, A. 1996. Controlling Laughter: Political Humor in the Late Roman Republic. Princeton.Google Scholar

Corbeill, A. 2002. “Rhetorical Education in Cicero’s Youth.” In May, : 23–48.Google Scholar

Corbeill, A. 2004. Nature Embodied: Gesture in Ancient Rome. Princeton–Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Corbeill, A. 2008. “O singulare prodigium! Ciceronian Invective as Religious Expiation.” In Stevenson, and Wilson, : 240–54.Google Scholar

Corbeill, A. 2012. “Cicero and the Etruscan haruspices.” Papers of the Langford Latin Seminar 15: 243–66.Google Scholar

Corbeill, A. 2018a. “Anticato.” In Grillo, and Krebs, : 215–22.Google Scholar

Corbeill, A. 2018b. “Clodius’ contio de haruspicum responsis.” In Gray, et al.: 171–90.Google Scholar

Corbeill, A. 2023. Cicero, De haruspicum responsis. Introduction, Text, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar

Cornell, T. J. 2001. “Cicero on the Origins of Rome.” In Powell, and North, : 41–56.Google Scholar

Cosi, R. 1998. “Le degenerazioni politiche tardorepubblicane: i divisores.” Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia, Università degli Studi di Bari 41: 335–49.Google Scholar

Coskun, A. 2005a. “Amicitiae und politische Ambitionen im Kontext der causa Deiotariana (45 v.Chr.).” In Coskun, 2005c: 127–54.Google Scholar

Coskun, A. 2005b. “Inklusion und Exklusion von Fremden in den Gerichtsreden Ciceros. Zugleich ein Einblick in die Arbeit des Projekts ‘Roms auswärtige Freunde.’” In Harwardt, S. and Schwind, J., eds., Corona coronaria. Festschrift für Hans-Otto Kröner zum 75. Geburtstag, 77–98. Hildesheim–Zurich–New York.Google Scholar

Coskun, A. ed. 2005c. Roms auswärtige Freunde in der späten Republik und im frühen Prinzipat. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Coskun, A. 2009. Bürgerrechtsentzug oder Fremdenausweisung? Studien zu den Rechten von Latinern und weiteren Fremden sowie zum Bürgerrechtswechsel in der Römischen Republik (5. bis frühes 1 Jh. v.Chr.). Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Coskun, A. 2010. Cicero und das römische Bürgerrecht. Die Verteidigung des Dichters Archias. Einleitung, Text, Übersetzung und historisch-philologische Kommentierungen. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Costa, E. 1906–7. “La pretura di Verre: contributo allo studio giuridico delle Verrine.” Memorie della R. Accademia delle Scienze dell’Istituto di Bologna, Classe di Scienze Morali, serie I, tomo I, Sezione di Scienze Giuridiche: 5–19.Google Scholar

Cotton, H. M. 1979. “Cicero Ad familiares XIII, 26 and 28: Evidence for revocatio or reiectio Romae/Romam?” Journal of Roman Studies 69: 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coudry, M. 2016. “Figures et récit dans les livres républicains (livres 36 à 44).” In Fromentin, V., Bertrand, E., Coltelloni-Trannoy, M., Molin, M., and Urso, G., eds., Cassius Dion: nouvelle lectures, 1: 287–301. Bordeaux.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Courrier, C. 2014. La plèbe de Rome et sa culture (fin du II^e siècle av. J.-C.–fin du I^er siècle ap. J.-C.). Rome.Google Scholar

Courtney, E. 1960. “Notes on Cicero.” Classical Review 10: 95–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Courtney, E. 1963. “The Date of the De haruspicum responso.” Philologus 107: 155–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Courtney, E. ed., comm. 2003. The Fragmentary Latin Poets, pb. ed. with addenda. Oxford (orig. 1993).Google Scholar

Cousin, J., ed., tr. 1962. Cicéron, Discours, XV: Pour Caelius, Sur les provinces consulaires, Pour Balbus. Paris.Google Scholar

Cowan, E. 2008. “Libertas in the Philippics.” In Stevenson, and Wilson, : 140–52.Google Scholar

Cowan, E. ed. 2011. Velleius Paterculus: Making History. Swansea.Google Scholar

Cox, V. and Ward, J. O., eds. 2006. The Rhetoric of Cicero in Its Medieval and Early Renaissance Commentary Tradition. Leiden and Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craig, C. P. 1981. “The accusator as amicus: An Original Roman Tactic of Ethical Argumentation.” Transactions of the American Philological Association 111: 31–37.Google Scholar

Craig, C. P. 1984. “The Central Argument of Cicero’s Speech for Ligarius.” Classical Journal 79: 193–99.Google Scholar

Craig, C. P. 1985a. “Dilemma in Cicero’s Divinatio in Caecilium.” American Journal of Philology 106: 442–46.Google Scholar

Craig, C. P. 1985b. “The Structural Pedigree of Cicero’s Speeches Pro Archia, Pro Milone, and Pro Quinctio.” Classical Philology 80: 136–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craig, C. P. 1986. “Cato’s Stoicism and the Understanding of Cicero’s Speech for Murena.” Transactions of the American Philological Association 116: 229–39.Google Scholar

Craig, C. P. 1990. “Cicero’s Strategy of Embarrassment in the Speech for Plancius.” American Journal of Philology 111: 75–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craig, C. P. 1993. Form as Argument in Cicero’s Speeches: A Study of Dilemma. Atlanta.Google Scholar

Craig, C. P. 2001. “Shifting Charge and Shifty Argument in Cicero’s Speech for Sestius.” In Wooten, C. W., ed., The Orator in Action and Theory in Greece and Rome (Studies in Honor of George A. Kennedy), 111–22. Leiden.Google Scholar

Craig, C. P. 2008. “Treating oratio figurata in Cicero’s Speeches: The Case of Pro Marcello.” Papers on Rhetoric 9: 91–106.Google Scholar