Skip to main content Accessibility help

Roman Studies and Digital Resources

  • Roger S. Bagnall (a1) and Sebastian Heath (a1)


There is hardly any aspect of scholarly work and teaching in Roman Studies today not marked by digital technology. We assume that readers regularly access digital images of Roman material culture, use digitised corpora of primary sources in the original language or translation or consult online books and articles. The availability of digital resources on the internet is also a welcome enabler of ongoing public interest and even participation in the field. This overall state of affairs is generally a positive development, but both general trends and specific digital resources deserve a critical appraisal.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Roman Studies and Digital Resources
      Available formats

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Roman Studies and Digital Resources
      Available formats

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Roman Studies and Digital Resources
      Available formats


Corresponding author


Hide All
Ariadne 2014: Ariadne: The Way Forward to Digital Archaeology in Europe,
Bagnall, R. 2016: ‘Materializing ancient documents’, Daedalus 145(2), 7987.
Birnbaum, D., Bonde, S., and Kestemont, M. 2017: ‘The digital Middle Ages: an introduction’, Speculum 92(S1), 138.
Bizer, C., Heath, T., and Berners-Lee, T. 2009: ‘Linked data – the story so far’, International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems 5(3), 122.
Blackwell, C., Roughan, C., and Smith, N. 2017: ‘Citation and alignment: scholarship outside and inside the Codex’, Manuscript Studies 1.1.
Bodard, G., Cayless, H., Depauw, M., Isaksen, L., Lawrence, K., and Rahtz, S. 2017: ‘Standards for networking ancient person data: digital approaches to problems in prosopographical space’, Digital Classics Online 3(2).
Bond, S. 2017: ‘Dear scholars, delete your account at Academia.Edu’,
Bond, S., Long, H., and Underwood, T. 2017: ‘“Digital” is not the opposite of “Humanities”’, Chronicle of Higher Education Nov. 1, 2017.
Bransbourg, G. 2012: ‘Rome and the economic integration of Empire’, ISAW Papers 3.
Campana, S. 2017: ‘Opitz, Rachel, Mogetta, Marcello & Terrenato, Nicola (ed.). A mid-Republican house from Gabii. Ann Arbor.’, Antiquity 91(359), 1396–7.
Coleman, K. M. (ed.) 2015: Images for Classicists, Cambridge, MA.
Concanon, C. 2017: Assembling Early Christianity: Trade, Networks, and the Letters of Dionysios of Corinth, Cambridge.
Crane, G. 2010: ‘Give us editors! Re-inventing the edition and re-thinking the Humanities’, in McGann, J. (ed.), Online Humanities Scholarship: The Shape of Things to Come, Houston, 8197.
Dunn, S. 2012: ‘Review of ORBIS’, Journal of Digital Humanities 1(3).
Elliott, T. 2014: ‘Epigraphy and digital resources’, in Bruun, C. and Edmondson, J. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Roman Epigraphy, Oxford, 7885.
Elliott, T., and Gillies, S. 2009: ‘Digital geography and classics’, Digital Humanities Quarterly 3.1
Elliott, T., Heath, S., and Muccigrosso, J. 2014: ‘Current practice in linked open data for the ancient world’, ISAW Papers 7.
Gezer, G. 2016: Towards a Web of Archaeological Linked Open Data.
Gibbs, F. 2011: ‘Critical discourse in the Humanities’, Journal of Digital Humanities 12, online.
Graham, S., Milligan, I., and Weingart, S. 2015: Exploring Big Historical Data: The Historian's Macroscope, London.
Heath, S. 2010: ‘Diversity and reuse of digital resources for ancient Mediterranean material culture’, in Mahony, S. and Bodard, G. (eds), Digital Research in the Study of Classical Antiquity, Farnham, 3552.
Kansa, E. 2012: ‘Openness and archaeology's information ecosystem’, World Archaeology 44(4), 498520.
Kennedy, M. 2015: ‘UK treasures endangered by museum cuts’, The Guardian Feb. 2, 2015.
Kilgrove, K., and Montgomery, J. 2016: ‘All roads lead to Rome: exploring human migration to the eternal city through biochemistry of skeletons from two imperial-era cemeteries (1st–3rd c AD)’, PLOS One.
Lang, S. 2018: ‘Review of Perseus Digital Library’, RIDE: Review Journal for Digital Editions and Resources 8.
Mansfield, E. C. 2014: ‘Google Art Project and digital scholarship in the visual arts—’, Visual Resources 30, 110–17.
Marwick, B. 2016: ‘Computational reproducibility in archaeological research: basic principles and a case study of their implementation’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 24(1), 424–50.
Mattern, S. 2013: The Prince of Medicine: Galen in the Roman Empire, Oxford.
Meadows, A., and Gruber, E. 2014: ‘Coinage and numismatic methods. A case study of linking a discipline’, ISAW Papers 7.15.
Meeks, E. 2015: ‘The design and implementation of ORBIS: The Stanford geospatial network model of the Roman world’, Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology 41.2, 1721.
O'Donnell, D. 2013: ‘Disciplinary impact and technological obsolescence in digital medieval studies’, in Siemens, R. and Shreibman, S. (eds), A Companion to Digital Literary Studies, Oxford, 6581.
Olson, B., Placchetti, R., Quartermaine, J., and Killebrew, A. 2013: ‘The Tel Akko Total Archaeology Project (Akko, Israel): assessing the suitability of multi-scale 3D field recording in archaeology’, Journal of Field Archaeology 38, 244–62.
Opitz, R., Mogetta, M., and Terranato, M. (eds) 2016: A Mid-Republican House from Gabii, Ann Arbor.
O'Riordan, E. 2017: ‘A review of “Mid Republican House from Gabii” [digital publication]’, Internet Archaeology 45.
Orlandi, S. 2016: ‘Ancient inscriptions between citizens and scholars’, in Bodard, G. and Romanello, M. (eds), Digital Classics Outside the Echo Chamber, London, 205–21.
Poehler, E. 2018: ‘Review of Opitz, R. , Mogetta, M. and Terrenato, N. (eds), A Mid-Republican House from Gabii. University of Michigan, 2016. Online resource. DOI: 10.3998/mpub.9231782. isbn 9780472999002. US$150.00’, Journal of Roman Studies 108. doi:10.1017/S0075435818000205.
Posner, M. 2016: ‘Here and there: creating DH community’, in Gold, M. and Klein, L. (eds), Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016, London, 265–73.
Rabinowitz, A., Shaw, R., Buchanan, S., Golden, P., and Kansa, E. 2016: ‘Making sense of the ways we make sense of the past: The PeriodO Project’, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 59 (2), 4255.
Reinhard, A. 2018: Archaeogaming: An Introduction to Archaeology in and of Video Games, New York.
Romanello, M. 2016: ‘Exploring citation networks to study intertextuality in Classics’, Digital Humanities Quarterly 10(2).
Roosevelt, C., Cobb, P., Moss, E., Olson, B., and Ünlüsoy, S. 2015: ‘Excavation is destruction digitization: advances in archaeological practice’, Journal of Field Archaeology 40(3), 325–46.
Russell, B. 2014: The Economics of the Roman Stone Trade, Oxford.
Sapirstein, P. 2017: ‘Review: A Mid-Republican House at Gabii’, SCS Blog.
Sapirstein, P., and Murray, S. 2017: ‘Establishing best practices for photogrammetric recording during archaeological fieldwork’, Journal of Field Archaeology 42(4), 337–50.
Scheidel, W. 2013: ‘Explaining the maritime freight charges in Diocletian's Prices Edict’, Journal of Roman Archaeology 26, 464–8.
Scheidel, W. 2014: ‘The shape of the Roman world: modelling imperial connectivity’, Journal of Roman Archaeology 27, 732.
Sheehan, B. 2015: ‘Comparing digital archaeological repositories: tDAR versus OpenContext’, Behavioral and Social Sciences Librarian 4, 173213.
Simon, R., Isaksen, L., Barker, E., and de Soto, P. 2016: ‘Peripleo: a tool for exploring heterogeneous data through the dimensions of space and time’, Code4Lib Journal 31.
Stewart, P. 2008: The Social History of Roman Art, Cambridge.
Thomas, W. 2016: ‘The promise of the digital humanities and the contested nature of digital scholarship’, in Schreibman, S., Siemens, R. and Unsworth, J. (eds), A New Companion to Digital Humanities, Chichester, 524–37.
Tyers, P. 1996: ‘Roman amphoras in Britain’, Internet Archaeology 1.
Wigg-Wolf, D., and Duyrat, F. 2017: ‘La révolution des Linked Open Data en numismatique: les exemples de et Online Greek Coinage’, Archéologies numériques 1.1

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Roman Studies and Digital Resources

  • Roger S. Bagnall (a1) and Sebastian Heath (a1)


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.