Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T18:07:19.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Appendices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2025

M. S. Silk
Foreword by
Tim Whitmarsh
M. S. Silk
Affiliation:
King's College London
Tim Whitmarsh
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Interaction in Poetic Imagery
With Special Reference to Early Greek Poetry
 , pp. 207 - 208
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bibliography Texts and Abbreviations

Texts

Except where otherwise indicated, references and citations follow the numeration and text of the following editions:

Anonymous inscriptions are frequently cited from Peek or from Friedländer–Hoffleit (F-H), oracles from Parke-Wormell (P-W) (see the abbreviations below).

For other references and citations I normally follow LSJ.

Abbreviations

The following list contains only those works referred to in abbreviated form in text or notes. Standard commentaries (referred to by the commentator’s name) are not included except where confusion might otherwise result.

Der kleine Pauly, Stuttgart, 1964–.

H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, ed. 9, rev. H. S. Jones, Oxford, 1925–40. (LSJ, Supplement refers to A Supplement to the above, ed. E. A. Barber, Oxford, 1968.)

A New English Dictionary on Historical Principles, corrected and reissued as Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford, 1933.

N. G. L. Hammond and H. H. Scullard, The Oxford Classical Dictionary, ed. 2, Oxford, 1970.

Pauly–Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart, 1894–.

Lobel, E. and Page, D. L., Poetarum Lesbiorum Fragmenta, Oxford, 1955.Google Scholar
Snell, B. and Maehler, H., Leipzig, 1971.Google Scholar
Snell, B., ed. 3, Leipzig, 1964.Google Scholar
Snell, B. and Maehler, H., Leipzig, 1970.Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Poetae Melici Graeci, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Young, D., Leipzig, 1961.Google Scholar
Diehl, E., Anthologia Lyrica Graeca, ed. 3, Leipzig, vols, 1 (1949) and 3 (1952).*Google Scholar
Murray, G., ed. 2, Oxford, 1955.†Google Scholar
Mette, H. J., Die Fragmente der Tragödien des Aischylos, Berlin, 1959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merkelbach, R. and West, M. L., Fragmenta Hesiodea, Oxford, 1967.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Jones, H., Oxford, 1960.Google Scholar
Austin, C., Berlin, 1969.Google Scholar
Jaekel, S., Leipzig, 1964.Google Scholar
Koerte, A. and Thierfelder, A., Leipzig, 1955–9.Google Scholar
Abrams, M. H., The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition, New York, 1953.Google Scholar
Allen, W. S., ‘Ancient Ideas on the Origin and Development of Language’, Trans. Philol. Soc. 1948, 35ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, W. S., Vox Graeca, Cambridge, 1968.Google Scholar
The Homeric Hymns, ed. Allen, T. W. and Halliday, W. R. (with E. E. Sikes), ed. 2, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Bergk, T., Poetae Lyrici Graeci, ed. 4, Leipzig, 1882.Google Scholar
Blaise, A., Dictionnaire latin–français des auteurs chrétiens (rev. Chirat), Strasbourg, 1954.Google Scholar
Bolgar, R. R., The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries: from the Carolingian Age to the End of the Renaissance, Cambridge, 1954.Google Scholar
Bowra, C. M., Greek Lyric Poetry, ed. 2, Oxford, 1961.Google Scholar
Bowra, C. M., Pindar, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Brink, C. O., On Reading a Horatian Satire, Sydney, 1965.Google Scholar
Brooke-Rose, C., A Grammar of Metaphor, London, 1958.Google Scholar
Burton, R. W. B., Pindar’s Pythian Odes, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. A., Greek Lyric Poetry, London, 1967.Google Scholar
Cicero, Ad Herennium, ed. Caplan, H. (Loeb), 1954.Google Scholar
Casey, J., The Language of Criticism, London, 1966.Google Scholar
Chenu, M. D., Introduction à l’étude de saint Thomas d’Aquin, Montreal–Paris, 1950.Google Scholar
Clemen, W. H., The Development of Shakespeare’s Imagery, London, 1951.Google Scholar
Danielsson, O. A., ‘Erotianea’, Eranos 1919, 1ff.Google Scholar
Davison, J. A., ‘Quotations and Allusions in Early Greek Literature’, Eranos 1955, 125ff.Google Scholar
Defradas, J. E., ‘Le rôle de l’allitération dans la poésie grecque’, Rev.Ét.Anc. 1958, 36ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denniston, J. D., The Greek Particles, ed. 2, Oxford, 1959.Google Scholar
Denniston, J. D., Greek Prose Style, Oxford, 1952.Google Scholar
Diels, H., Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, ed. 6, rev. W. Kranz, Berlin, 1951–2.Google Scholar
Dieterich, A., Eine Mithrasliturgie, Leipzig, 1903.Google Scholar
Dornseiff, F., Pindars Stil, Berlin, 1921.Google Scholar
Dover, K. J., Greek Word Order, Cambridge, 1960.Google Scholar
Dumortier, J., Les images dans la poésie d’Eschyle, Paris, 1935.Google Scholar
Earp, F. R., The Style of Sophocles, Cambridge, 1944.Google Scholar
Ebeling, H., Lexicon Homericum, Leipzig, 1885.Google Scholar
Empson, W., The Structure of Complex Words, London, 1951.Google Scholar
Empson, W., Seven Types of Ambiguity, ed. 2, London, 1947.Google Scholar
Farnell, L. R., The Works of Pindar, vol. 11, London, 1932.Google Scholar
Farnell, G. S., Greek Lyric Poetry, London, 1891.Google Scholar
Fatouros, G., Index Verborum zur frühgriechischen Lyrik, Heidelberg, 1966.Google Scholar
Ed. , Fraenkel, Aeschylus: Agamemnon, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
, Fraenkel, Plautinisches im Plautus, Berlin, 1922.Google Scholar
Fränkel, H., Dichtung und Philosophie des frühen Griechentums, Munich, 1962.Google Scholar
Fränkel, H., Die homerischen Gleichnisse, Göttingen, 1921.Google Scholar
Friedländer, P. and Hoffleit, H. B., Epigrammata, Berkeley, 1948.Google Scholar
Frye, N., Anatomy of Criticism, Princeton, 1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gautier, L., La langue de Xénophon, Geneva, 1911.Google Scholar
Goethe: Sämtliche Werke, ed. von der Hellen, , 40 vols, Stuttgart, 1902–7.Google Scholar
Goheen, R. F., The Imagery of Sophocles’ Antigone, Princeton, 1951.Google Scholar
Gow, A. S. F. and Page, D. L., The Greek Anthology: Hellenistic Epigrams, Cambridge, 1965.Google Scholar
van Groningen, B. A., Théognis: le premier livre, Amsterdam, 1966.Google Scholar
van Groningen, B. A., La composition littéraire archaïque grecque, ed. 2, Amsterdam, 1960.Google Scholar
Grube, G. M. A., The Greek and Roman Critics, Toronto, 1965.Google Scholar
Guiraud, P., La sémantique, Paris, 1959.Google Scholar
Harvey, A. E., ‘Homeric Epithets in Greek Lyric Poetry’, CQ 1957, 206ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headlam, W., ‘Metaphor with a note on transference of epithets’, CR 1902, 434ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headlam, W., On Editing Aeschylus, London, 1891.Google Scholar
= Thomson.Google Scholar
Herescu, N. I., La poésie latine: étude des structures phoniques, Paris, 1960.Google Scholar
Hermann, G., Opuscula, Leipzig, 1827–77.Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F., A Course in Modern Linguistiss, New York, 1958.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, O. and Debrunner, A., Geschichte der griechischen Sprache 1, Berlin, 1953.Google Scholar
Housman, A. E., Juvenalis Saturae, Cambridge, 1905.Google Scholar
Hulme, H. M., Explorations in Shakespeare’s Language, Aberdeen, 1962.Google Scholar
Jaeger, W., Paideia: the Ideals of Greek Culture, trans. Highet, G., Oxford, 1939–45.Google Scholar
Jebb, R. C., The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus, London, 1876.Google Scholar
Johansen, H. F., General Reflection in Tragic Rhesis, Copenhagen, 1959.Google Scholar
Johansen, H. F., ‘Some Features of Sentence Structure in Aeschylus’ Suppliants’, Class. & Med. 1954, 1ff.Google Scholar
Samuel Johnson: Lives of the English Poets, ed. Hill, G. B., Oxford, 1905.Google Scholar
Keith, A. L., Simile and Metaphor in Greek Poetry from Homer to Aeschylus, Chicago, 1914.Google Scholar
Kirk, G. S., The Songs of Homer, Cambridge, 1962.Google Scholar
Knights, L. C. and Cottle, B. (edd.), Metaphor and Symbol, London, 1960.Google Scholar
Koestler, A., The Act of Creation, London, 1964.Google Scholar
Kranz, W., Stasimon, Berlin, 1933.Google Scholar
Kühner, R., Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache 11, ed. 3, rev. B. Gerth, Hanover, 1898–1904.Google Scholar
Lausberg, H., Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik, Munich, 1960.Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., Education and the University, new ed., London, 1948.Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., ‘Imagery and Movement’, in A Selection from Scrutiny, ed. Leavis, Cambridge, 1968, 1.231ff. (repr. from Scrutiny 1945).Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., Revaluation, London, 1936.Google Scholar
Lee, D. J. N., The Similes of the Iliad and the Odyssey Compared, Melbourne, 1964.Google Scholar
Lesky, A., A History of Greek Literature, ed. 2, trans. de Heer, C. and Willis, J. A., London, 1966.Google Scholar
Leumann, M., Homerische Wörter, Basel, 1950.Google Scholar
Leutsch, E. and Schneidewin, F. G., Corpus Paroemiographorum Graecorum, Göttingen, 1839–51.Google Scholar
Lloyd, G. E. R., Polarity and Analogy, Cambridge, 1966.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Jones, H., Appendix to vol. 2 of Aeschylus, ed. Weir Smyth, H. (Loeb), 1957, 523ff.Google Scholar
Lobel, E., ’Aλκαίουμέλη, Oxford, 1927.Google Scholar
Lorimer, H. L., ‘Gold and Ivory in Greek Mythology’, in Greek Poetry and Life (Essays Presented to Gilbert Murray), Oxford, 1936, 14ff.Google Scholar
McCall, M. H. Jr., Ancient Rhetorical Theories of Simile and Comparison, Harvard, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrou, H. I., Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique, ed. 2, Paris, 1949.Google Scholar
Masson, O., Les fragments du poète Hipponax, Paris, 1962.Google Scholar
Masson, D. I., ‘Sound in Poetry’, in Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, ed. Preminger, A., Princeton, 1965, 784ff.Google Scholar
Miller, E., Mélangϵs de littérature grecque, Paris, 1868.Google Scholar
Nilsson, M. P., Greek Popular Religion, New York, 1940.Google Scholar
Norwood, G., Pindar, Berkeley, 1945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowottny, W., The Language Poets Use, London, 1962.Google Scholar
Opelt, I., ‘Alliteration im Griechischen?’, Glotta 1958, 205ff.Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Alcman: the Partheneion, Oxford, 1951.Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Poetae Melici Graeci (see Texts above).Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Sappho and Alcaeus, Oxford, 1955.Google Scholar
Parke, H. W. and Wormell, D. E. W., The Delphic Oracle, vol. 2 (‘The Oracular Responses’), Oxford, 1956.Google Scholar
Pearson, A. C., The Fragments of Sophocles, Cambridge, 1917.Google Scholar
Peek, W., Griechische Vers-Inschriften, Berlin, 1955–.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, R., History of Classical Scholarship, Oxford, 1968.Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. W., ‘The Niobe of Aeschylus’, in Greek Poetry and Life (Essays presented to Gilbert Murray), Oxford, 1936, 106ff.Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. W., Dithyramb, Tragedy and Comedy, ed. 2, rev. T. B. L. Webster, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Porzig, W., Aischylos: die attische Tragödie, Leipzig, 1926.Google Scholar
Powell, J. E., A Lexicon to Herodotus, Cambridge, 1938.Google Scholar
Quain, E. A., ‘The Medieval Accessus ad Auctores’, Traditio 1945, 215ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, K., Latin Explorations, London, 1963.Google Scholar
Rabe, H., Hermogenis Opera, Leipzig, 1913.Google Scholar
Richards, I. A., The Philosophy of Rhetoric, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Ricks, C., Milton’s Grand Style, Oxford, 1963.Google Scholar
Rhys Roberts, W., Dionysius of Halicarnassus, The Three Literary Letters, Cambridge, 1901.Google Scholar
Ros, J. G. A., Die uεταβολή (Variatio) als Stilprinzip des Thukydides, Paderborn, 1938.Google Scholar
Rumpel, J., Lexicon Pindaricum, Leipzig, 1883.Google Scholar
Russell, D. A., Longinus, On the Sublime, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Rutherford, W. G., A Chapter in the History of Annotation, London, 1905.Google Scholar
Schenkeveld, D. M., Studies in Demetrius On Style, Amsterdam, 1964.Google Scholar
Schmid, W. and Stählin, O., Geschichte der griechischen Literatur 1.1–2, Munich, 1929–34.Google Scholar
Schroeder, O., Pindars Pythien, Leipzig, 1922.Google Scholar
Schwyzer, E., Griechische Grammatik, Munich, 1939–53.Google Scholar
Shelley’s Literary and Philosophical Criticism, ed. Shawcross, J., Oxford, 1909.Google Scholar
Slater, W. J., Lexicon to Pindar, Berlin, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory Smith, G., Elizabethan Critical Essays 1, Oxford, 1904.Google Scholar
Ole Smith, ‘Some Observations on the Structure of Imagery in Aeschylus’, Class. & Med. 1967, 10ff.Google Scholar
Spearing, A. C., Criticism and Medieval Poetry, London, 1964.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Ambiguity in Greek Literature, Oxford, 1939.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Aeschylus in his Style, Dublin, 1942.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Greek Metaphor, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., The Sound of Greek, Berkeley, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford, W. B., The Ulysses Theme, Oxford, 1954.Google Scholar
Stern, G., Meaning and Change of Meaning, Göteborg, 1931.Google Scholar
Strömberg, R., Greek Proverbs, Göteborg, 1954.Google Scholar
Svartengren, T. H., Intensifying Similes in English, Lund, 1918.Google Scholar
Taillardat, J., Les images d’Aristophane, Paris, 1965.Google Scholar
Thomson, G., The Oresteia of Aeschylus, Amsterdam-Prague, 1966.Google Scholar
Tuve, R., Elizabethan and Metaphysical Imagery, Chicago, 1947.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., Language and Style, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., The Principles of Semantics, ed. 2, Glasgow, 1957.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Volkmann, R., Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer, ed. 2, Leipzig, 1885.Google Scholar
Waldron, R. A., Sense and Sense Development, London, 1967.Google Scholar
Webster, T. B. L., Greek Art and Literature 700–530 BC, Otago, 1959.Google Scholar
Wellek, R., A History of Modern Criticism 1750–1950, London, 1955–.Google Scholar
Wellek, R. and Warren, A., Theory of Literature, ed. 3, Penguin, 1963.Google Scholar
Westermann, A., Vitarum Scriptores Graeci Minores, Brunswick, 1845.Google Scholar
Whitman, C. H., Homer and the Heroic Tradition, Harvard, 1958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., Sappho und Simonides, Berlin, 1913.Google Scholar
von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., Die Textgeschichte der griechischen Lyriker, Berlin, 1900.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, L. P., Golden Latin Artistry, Cambridge, 1963.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. K. Jr., The Verbal Icon, Kentucky, 1954.Google Scholar
Wordsworth and Coleridge, Lyrical Ballads: The text … and the Prefaces …, edd. Brett, R. L. and Jones, A. R., rev. ed., London, 1965.Google Scholar
Wyld, H. C., A History of Modern Colloquial English, ed. 3, London, 1936.Google Scholar
Young, D. C., Three Odes of Pindar, Leiden, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrams, M. H., The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition, New York, 1953.Google Scholar
Allen, W. S., ‘Ancient Ideas on the Origin and Development of Language’, Trans. Philol. Soc. 1948, 35ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, W. S., Vox Graeca, Cambridge, 1968.Google Scholar
The Homeric Hymns, ed. Allen, T. W. and Halliday, W. R. (with E. E. Sikes), ed. 2, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Bergk, T., Poetae Lyrici Graeci, ed. 4, Leipzig, 1882.Google Scholar
Blaise, A., Dictionnaire latin–français des auteurs chrétiens (rev. Chirat), Strasbourg, 1954.Google Scholar
Bolgar, R. R., The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries: from the Carolingian Age to the End of the Renaissance, Cambridge, 1954.Google Scholar
Bowra, C. M., Greek Lyric Poetry, ed. 2, Oxford, 1961.Google Scholar
Bowra, C. M., Pindar, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Brink, C. O., On Reading a Horatian Satire, Sydney, 1965.Google Scholar
Brooke-Rose, C., A Grammar of Metaphor, London, 1958.Google Scholar
Burton, R. W. B., Pindar’s Pythian Odes, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. A., Greek Lyric Poetry, London, 1967.Google Scholar
Cicero, Ad Herennium, ed. Caplan, H. (Loeb), 1954.Google Scholar
Casey, J., The Language of Criticism, London, 1966.Google Scholar
Chenu, M. D., Introduction à l’étude de saint Thomas d’Aquin, Montreal–Paris, 1950.Google Scholar
Clemen, W. H., The Development of Shakespeare’s Imagery, London, 1951.Google Scholar
Danielsson, O. A., ‘Erotianea’, Eranos 1919, 1ff.Google Scholar
Davison, J. A., ‘Quotations and Allusions in Early Greek Literature’, Eranos 1955, 125ff.Google Scholar
Defradas, J. E., ‘Le rôle de l’allitération dans la poésie grecque’, Rev.Ét.Anc. 1958, 36ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denniston, J. D., The Greek Particles, ed. 2, Oxford, 1959.Google Scholar
Denniston, J. D., Greek Prose Style, Oxford, 1952.Google Scholar
Diels, H., Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, ed. 6, rev. W. Kranz, Berlin, 1951–2.Google Scholar
Dieterich, A., Eine Mithrasliturgie, Leipzig, 1903.Google Scholar
Dornseiff, F., Pindars Stil, Berlin, 1921.Google Scholar
Dover, K. J., Greek Word Order, Cambridge, 1960.Google Scholar
Dumortier, J., Les images dans la poésie d’Eschyle, Paris, 1935.Google Scholar
Earp, F. R., The Style of Sophocles, Cambridge, 1944.Google Scholar
Ebeling, H., Lexicon Homericum, Leipzig, 1885.Google Scholar
Empson, W., The Structure of Complex Words, London, 1951.Google Scholar
Empson, W., Seven Types of Ambiguity, ed. 2, London, 1947.Google Scholar
Farnell, L. R., The Works of Pindar, vol. 11, London, 1932.Google Scholar
Farnell, G. S., Greek Lyric Poetry, London, 1891.Google Scholar
Fatouros, G., Index Verborum zur frühgriechischen Lyrik, Heidelberg, 1966.Google Scholar
Ed. , Fraenkel, Aeschylus: Agamemnon, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
, Fraenkel, Plautinisches im Plautus, Berlin, 1922.Google Scholar
Fränkel, H., Dichtung und Philosophie des frühen Griechentums, Munich, 1962.Google Scholar
Fränkel, H., Die homerischen Gleichnisse, Göttingen, 1921.Google Scholar
Friedländer, P. and Hoffleit, H. B., Epigrammata, Berkeley, 1948.Google Scholar
Frye, N., Anatomy of Criticism, Princeton, 1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gautier, L., La langue de Xénophon, Geneva, 1911.Google Scholar
Goethe: Sämtliche Werke, ed. von der Hellen, , 40 vols, Stuttgart, 1902–7.Google Scholar
Goheen, R. F., The Imagery of Sophocles’ Antigone, Princeton, 1951.Google Scholar
Gow, A. S. F. and Page, D. L., The Greek Anthology: Hellenistic Epigrams, Cambridge, 1965.Google Scholar
van Groningen, B. A., Théognis: le premier livre, Amsterdam, 1966.Google Scholar
van Groningen, B. A., La composition littéraire archaïque grecque, ed. 2, Amsterdam, 1960.Google Scholar
Grube, G. M. A., The Greek and Roman Critics, Toronto, 1965.Google Scholar
Guiraud, P., La sémantique, Paris, 1959.Google Scholar
Harvey, A. E., ‘Homeric Epithets in Greek Lyric Poetry’, CQ 1957, 206ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headlam, W., ‘Metaphor with a note on transference of epithets’, CR 1902, 434ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headlam, W., On Editing Aeschylus, London, 1891.Google Scholar
= Thomson.Google Scholar
Herescu, N. I., La poésie latine: étude des structures phoniques, Paris, 1960.Google Scholar
Hermann, G., Opuscula, Leipzig, 1827–77.Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F., A Course in Modern Linguistiss, New York, 1958.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, O. and Debrunner, A., Geschichte der griechischen Sprache 1, Berlin, 1953.Google Scholar
Housman, A. E., Juvenalis Saturae, Cambridge, 1905.Google Scholar
Hulme, H. M., Explorations in Shakespeare’s Language, Aberdeen, 1962.Google Scholar
Jaeger, W., Paideia: the Ideals of Greek Culture, trans. Highet, G., Oxford, 1939–45.Google Scholar
Jebb, R. C., The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus, London, 1876.Google Scholar
Johansen, H. F., General Reflection in Tragic Rhesis, Copenhagen, 1959.Google Scholar
Johansen, H. F., ‘Some Features of Sentence Structure in Aeschylus’ Suppliants’, Class. & Med. 1954, 1ff.Google Scholar
Samuel Johnson: Lives of the English Poets, ed. Hill, G. B., Oxford, 1905.Google Scholar
Keith, A. L., Simile and Metaphor in Greek Poetry from Homer to Aeschylus, Chicago, 1914.Google Scholar
Kirk, G. S., The Songs of Homer, Cambridge, 1962.Google Scholar
Knights, L. C. and Cottle, B. (edd.), Metaphor and Symbol, London, 1960.Google Scholar
Koestler, A., The Act of Creation, London, 1964.Google Scholar
Kranz, W., Stasimon, Berlin, 1933.Google Scholar
Kühner, R., Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache 11, ed. 3, rev. B. Gerth, Hanover, 1898–1904.Google Scholar
Lausberg, H., Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik, Munich, 1960.Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., Education and the University, new ed., London, 1948.Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., ‘Imagery and Movement’, in A Selection from Scrutiny, ed. Leavis, Cambridge, 1968, 1.231ff. (repr. from Scrutiny 1945).Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., Revaluation, London, 1936.Google Scholar
Lee, D. J. N., The Similes of the Iliad and the Odyssey Compared, Melbourne, 1964.Google Scholar
Lesky, A., A History of Greek Literature, ed. 2, trans. de Heer, C. and Willis, J. A., London, 1966.Google Scholar
Leumann, M., Homerische Wörter, Basel, 1950.Google Scholar
Leutsch, E. and Schneidewin, F. G., Corpus Paroemiographorum Graecorum, Göttingen, 1839–51.Google Scholar
Lloyd, G. E. R., Polarity and Analogy, Cambridge, 1966.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Jones, H., Appendix to vol. 2 of Aeschylus, ed. Weir Smyth, H. (Loeb), 1957, 523ff.Google Scholar
Lobel, E., ’Aλκαίουμέλη, Oxford, 1927.Google Scholar
Lorimer, H. L., ‘Gold and Ivory in Greek Mythology’, in Greek Poetry and Life (Essays Presented to Gilbert Murray), Oxford, 1936, 14ff.Google Scholar
McCall, M. H. Jr., Ancient Rhetorical Theories of Simile and Comparison, Harvard, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrou, H. I., Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique, ed. 2, Paris, 1949.Google Scholar
Masson, O., Les fragments du poète Hipponax, Paris, 1962.Google Scholar
Masson, D. I., ‘Sound in Poetry’, in Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, ed. Preminger, A., Princeton, 1965, 784ff.Google Scholar
Miller, E., Mélangϵs de littérature grecque, Paris, 1868.Google Scholar
Nilsson, M. P., Greek Popular Religion, New York, 1940.Google Scholar
Norwood, G., Pindar, Berkeley, 1945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowottny, W., The Language Poets Use, London, 1962.Google Scholar
Opelt, I., ‘Alliteration im Griechischen?’, Glotta 1958, 205ff.Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Alcman: the Partheneion, Oxford, 1951.Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Poetae Melici Graeci (see Texts above).Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Sappho and Alcaeus, Oxford, 1955.Google Scholar
Parke, H. W. and Wormell, D. E. W., The Delphic Oracle, vol. 2 (‘The Oracular Responses’), Oxford, 1956.Google Scholar
Pearson, A. C., The Fragments of Sophocles, Cambridge, 1917.Google Scholar
Peek, W., Griechische Vers-Inschriften, Berlin, 1955–.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, R., History of Classical Scholarship, Oxford, 1968.Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. W., ‘The Niobe of Aeschylus’, in Greek Poetry and Life (Essays presented to Gilbert Murray), Oxford, 1936, 106ff.Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. W., Dithyramb, Tragedy and Comedy, ed. 2, rev. T. B. L. Webster, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Porzig, W., Aischylos: die attische Tragödie, Leipzig, 1926.Google Scholar
Powell, J. E., A Lexicon to Herodotus, Cambridge, 1938.Google Scholar
Quain, E. A., ‘The Medieval Accessus ad Auctores’, Traditio 1945, 215ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, K., Latin Explorations, London, 1963.Google Scholar
Rabe, H., Hermogenis Opera, Leipzig, 1913.Google Scholar
Richards, I. A., The Philosophy of Rhetoric, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Ricks, C., Milton’s Grand Style, Oxford, 1963.Google Scholar
Rhys Roberts, W., Dionysius of Halicarnassus, The Three Literary Letters, Cambridge, 1901.Google Scholar
Ros, J. G. A., Die uεταβολή (Variatio) als Stilprinzip des Thukydides, Paderborn, 1938.Google Scholar
Rumpel, J., Lexicon Pindaricum, Leipzig, 1883.Google Scholar
Russell, D. A., Longinus, On the Sublime, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Rutherford, W. G., A Chapter in the History of Annotation, London, 1905.Google Scholar
Schenkeveld, D. M., Studies in Demetrius On Style, Amsterdam, 1964.Google Scholar
Schmid, W. and Stählin, O., Geschichte der griechischen Literatur 1.1–2, Munich, 1929–34.Google Scholar
Schroeder, O., Pindars Pythien, Leipzig, 1922.Google Scholar
Schwyzer, E., Griechische Grammatik, Munich, 1939–53.Google Scholar
Shelley’s Literary and Philosophical Criticism, ed. Shawcross, J., Oxford, 1909.Google Scholar
Slater, W. J., Lexicon to Pindar, Berlin, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory Smith, G., Elizabethan Critical Essays 1, Oxford, 1904.Google Scholar
Ole Smith, ‘Some Observations on the Structure of Imagery in Aeschylus’, Class. & Med. 1967, 10ff.Google Scholar
Spearing, A. C., Criticism and Medieval Poetry, London, 1964.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Ambiguity in Greek Literature, Oxford, 1939.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Aeschylus in his Style, Dublin, 1942.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Greek Metaphor, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., The Sound of Greek, Berkeley, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford, W. B., The Ulysses Theme, Oxford, 1954.Google Scholar
Stern, G., Meaning and Change of Meaning, Göteborg, 1931.Google Scholar
Strömberg, R., Greek Proverbs, Göteborg, 1954.Google Scholar
Svartengren, T. H., Intensifying Similes in English, Lund, 1918.Google Scholar
Taillardat, J., Les images d’Aristophane, Paris, 1965.Google Scholar
Thomson, G., The Oresteia of Aeschylus, Amsterdam-Prague, 1966.Google Scholar
Tuve, R., Elizabethan and Metaphysical Imagery, Chicago, 1947.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., Language and Style, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., The Principles of Semantics, ed. 2, Glasgow, 1957.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Volkmann, R., Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer, ed. 2, Leipzig, 1885.Google Scholar
Waldron, R. A., Sense and Sense Development, London, 1967.Google Scholar
Webster, T. B. L., Greek Art and Literature 700–530 BC, Otago, 1959.Google Scholar
Wellek, R., A History of Modern Criticism 1750–1950, London, 1955–.Google Scholar
Wellek, R. and Warren, A., Theory of Literature, ed. 3, Penguin, 1963.Google Scholar
Westermann, A., Vitarum Scriptores Graeci Minores, Brunswick, 1845.Google Scholar
Whitman, C. H., Homer and the Heroic Tradition, Harvard, 1958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., Sappho und Simonides, Berlin, 1913.Google Scholar
von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., Die Textgeschichte der griechischen Lyriker, Berlin, 1900.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, L. P., Golden Latin Artistry, Cambridge, 1963.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. K. Jr., The Verbal Icon, Kentucky, 1954.Google Scholar
Wordsworth and Coleridge, Lyrical Ballads: The text … and the Prefaces …, edd. Brett, R. L. and Jones, A. R., rev. ed., London, 1965.Google Scholar
Wyld, H. C., A History of Modern Colloquial English, ed. 3, London, 1936.Google Scholar
Young, D. C., Three Odes of Pindar, Leiden, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrams, M. H., The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition, New York, 1953.Google Scholar
Allen, W. S., ‘Ancient Ideas on the Origin and Development of Language’, Trans. Philol. Soc. 1948, 35ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, W. S., Vox Graeca, Cambridge, 1968.Google Scholar
The Homeric Hymns, ed. Allen, T. W. and Halliday, W. R. (with E. E. Sikes), ed. 2, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Bergk, T., Poetae Lyrici Graeci, ed. 4, Leipzig, 1882.Google Scholar
Blaise, A., Dictionnaire latin–français des auteurs chrétiens (rev. Chirat), Strasbourg, 1954.Google Scholar
Bolgar, R. R., The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries: from the Carolingian Age to the End of the Renaissance, Cambridge, 1954.Google Scholar
Bowra, C. M., Greek Lyric Poetry, ed. 2, Oxford, 1961.Google Scholar
Bowra, C. M., Pindar, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Brink, C. O., On Reading a Horatian Satire, Sydney, 1965.Google Scholar
Brooke-Rose, C., A Grammar of Metaphor, London, 1958.Google Scholar
Burton, R. W. B., Pindar’s Pythian Odes, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. A., Greek Lyric Poetry, London, 1967.Google Scholar
Cicero, Ad Herennium, ed. Caplan, H. (Loeb), 1954.Google Scholar
Casey, J., The Language of Criticism, London, 1966.Google Scholar
Chenu, M. D., Introduction à l’étude de saint Thomas d’Aquin, Montreal–Paris, 1950.Google Scholar
Clemen, W. H., The Development of Shakespeare’s Imagery, London, 1951.Google Scholar
Danielsson, O. A., ‘Erotianea’, Eranos 1919, 1ff.Google Scholar
Davison, J. A., ‘Quotations and Allusions in Early Greek Literature’, Eranos 1955, 125ff.Google Scholar
Defradas, J. E., ‘Le rôle de l’allitération dans la poésie grecque’, Rev.Ét.Anc. 1958, 36ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denniston, J. D., The Greek Particles, ed. 2, Oxford, 1959.Google Scholar
Denniston, J. D., Greek Prose Style, Oxford, 1952.Google Scholar
Diels, H., Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, ed. 6, rev. W. Kranz, Berlin, 1951–2.Google Scholar
Dieterich, A., Eine Mithrasliturgie, Leipzig, 1903.Google Scholar
Dornseiff, F., Pindars Stil, Berlin, 1921.Google Scholar
Dover, K. J., Greek Word Order, Cambridge, 1960.Google Scholar
Dumortier, J., Les images dans la poésie d’Eschyle, Paris, 1935.Google Scholar
Earp, F. R., The Style of Sophocles, Cambridge, 1944.Google Scholar
Ebeling, H., Lexicon Homericum, Leipzig, 1885.Google Scholar
Empson, W., The Structure of Complex Words, London, 1951.Google Scholar
Empson, W., Seven Types of Ambiguity, ed. 2, London, 1947.Google Scholar
Farnell, L. R., The Works of Pindar, vol. 11, London, 1932.Google Scholar
Farnell, G. S., Greek Lyric Poetry, London, 1891.Google Scholar
Fatouros, G., Index Verborum zur frühgriechischen Lyrik, Heidelberg, 1966.Google Scholar
Ed. , Fraenkel, Aeschylus: Agamemnon, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
, Fraenkel, Plautinisches im Plautus, Berlin, 1922.Google Scholar
Fränkel, H., Dichtung und Philosophie des frühen Griechentums, Munich, 1962.Google Scholar
Fränkel, H., Die homerischen Gleichnisse, Göttingen, 1921.Google Scholar
Friedländer, P. and Hoffleit, H. B., Epigrammata, Berkeley, 1948.Google Scholar
Frye, N., Anatomy of Criticism, Princeton, 1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gautier, L., La langue de Xénophon, Geneva, 1911.Google Scholar
Goethe: Sämtliche Werke, ed. von der Hellen, , 40 vols, Stuttgart, 1902–7.Google Scholar
Goheen, R. F., The Imagery of Sophocles’ Antigone, Princeton, 1951.Google Scholar
Gow, A. S. F. and Page, D. L., The Greek Anthology: Hellenistic Epigrams, Cambridge, 1965.Google Scholar
van Groningen, B. A., Théognis: le premier livre, Amsterdam, 1966.Google Scholar
van Groningen, B. A., La composition littéraire archaïque grecque, ed. 2, Amsterdam, 1960.Google Scholar
Grube, G. M. A., The Greek and Roman Critics, Toronto, 1965.Google Scholar
Guiraud, P., La sémantique, Paris, 1959.Google Scholar
Harvey, A. E., ‘Homeric Epithets in Greek Lyric Poetry’, CQ 1957, 206ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headlam, W., ‘Metaphor with a note on transference of epithets’, CR 1902, 434ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headlam, W., On Editing Aeschylus, London, 1891.Google Scholar
= Thomson.Google Scholar
Herescu, N. I., La poésie latine: étude des structures phoniques, Paris, 1960.Google Scholar
Hermann, G., Opuscula, Leipzig, 1827–77.Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F., A Course in Modern Linguistiss, New York, 1958.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, O. and Debrunner, A., Geschichte der griechischen Sprache 1, Berlin, 1953.Google Scholar
Housman, A. E., Juvenalis Saturae, Cambridge, 1905.Google Scholar
Hulme, H. M., Explorations in Shakespeare’s Language, Aberdeen, 1962.Google Scholar
Jaeger, W., Paideia: the Ideals of Greek Culture, trans. Highet, G., Oxford, 1939–45.Google Scholar
Jebb, R. C., The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus, London, 1876.Google Scholar
Johansen, H. F., General Reflection in Tragic Rhesis, Copenhagen, 1959.Google Scholar
Johansen, H. F., ‘Some Features of Sentence Structure in Aeschylus’ Suppliants’, Class. & Med. 1954, 1ff.Google Scholar
Samuel Johnson: Lives of the English Poets, ed. Hill, G. B., Oxford, 1905.Google Scholar
Keith, A. L., Simile and Metaphor in Greek Poetry from Homer to Aeschylus, Chicago, 1914.Google Scholar
Kirk, G. S., The Songs of Homer, Cambridge, 1962.Google Scholar
Knights, L. C. and Cottle, B. (edd.), Metaphor and Symbol, London, 1960.Google Scholar
Koestler, A., The Act of Creation, London, 1964.Google Scholar
Kranz, W., Stasimon, Berlin, 1933.Google Scholar
Kühner, R., Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache 11, ed. 3, rev. B. Gerth, Hanover, 1898–1904.Google Scholar
Lausberg, H., Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik, Munich, 1960.Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., Education and the University, new ed., London, 1948.Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., ‘Imagery and Movement’, in A Selection from Scrutiny, ed. Leavis, Cambridge, 1968, 1.231ff. (repr. from Scrutiny 1945).Google Scholar
Leavis, F. R., Revaluation, London, 1936.Google Scholar
Lee, D. J. N., The Similes of the Iliad and the Odyssey Compared, Melbourne, 1964.Google Scholar
Lesky, A., A History of Greek Literature, ed. 2, trans. de Heer, C. and Willis, J. A., London, 1966.Google Scholar
Leumann, M., Homerische Wörter, Basel, 1950.Google Scholar
Leutsch, E. and Schneidewin, F. G., Corpus Paroemiographorum Graecorum, Göttingen, 1839–51.Google Scholar
Lloyd, G. E. R., Polarity and Analogy, Cambridge, 1966.Google Scholar
Lloyd-Jones, H., Appendix to vol. 2 of Aeschylus, ed. Weir Smyth, H. (Loeb), 1957, 523ff.Google Scholar
Lobel, E., ’Aλκαίουμέλη, Oxford, 1927.Google Scholar
Lorimer, H. L., ‘Gold and Ivory in Greek Mythology’, in Greek Poetry and Life (Essays Presented to Gilbert Murray), Oxford, 1936, 14ff.Google Scholar
McCall, M. H. Jr., Ancient Rhetorical Theories of Simile and Comparison, Harvard, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrou, H. I., Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique, ed. 2, Paris, 1949.Google Scholar
Masson, O., Les fragments du poète Hipponax, Paris, 1962.Google Scholar
Masson, D. I., ‘Sound in Poetry’, in Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, ed. Preminger, A., Princeton, 1965, 784ff.Google Scholar
Miller, E., Mélangϵs de littérature grecque, Paris, 1868.Google Scholar
Nilsson, M. P., Greek Popular Religion, New York, 1940.Google Scholar
Norwood, G., Pindar, Berkeley, 1945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowottny, W., The Language Poets Use, London, 1962.Google Scholar
Opelt, I., ‘Alliteration im Griechischen?’, Glotta 1958, 205ff.Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Alcman: the Partheneion, Oxford, 1951.Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Poetae Melici Graeci (see Texts above).Google Scholar
Page, D. L., Sappho and Alcaeus, Oxford, 1955.Google Scholar
Parke, H. W. and Wormell, D. E. W., The Delphic Oracle, vol. 2 (‘The Oracular Responses’), Oxford, 1956.Google Scholar
Pearson, A. C., The Fragments of Sophocles, Cambridge, 1917.Google Scholar
Peek, W., Griechische Vers-Inschriften, Berlin, 1955–.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, R., History of Classical Scholarship, Oxford, 1968.Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. W., ‘The Niobe of Aeschylus’, in Greek Poetry and Life (Essays presented to Gilbert Murray), Oxford, 1936, 106ff.Google Scholar
Pickard-Cambridge, A. W., Dithyramb, Tragedy and Comedy, ed. 2, rev. T. B. L. Webster, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Porzig, W., Aischylos: die attische Tragödie, Leipzig, 1926.Google Scholar
Powell, J. E., A Lexicon to Herodotus, Cambridge, 1938.Google Scholar
Quain, E. A., ‘The Medieval Accessus ad Auctores’, Traditio 1945, 215ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinn, K., Latin Explorations, London, 1963.Google Scholar
Rabe, H., Hermogenis Opera, Leipzig, 1913.Google Scholar
Richards, I. A., The Philosophy of Rhetoric, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Ricks, C., Milton’s Grand Style, Oxford, 1963.Google Scholar
Rhys Roberts, W., Dionysius of Halicarnassus, The Three Literary Letters, Cambridge, 1901.Google Scholar
Ros, J. G. A., Die uεταβολή (Variatio) als Stilprinzip des Thukydides, Paderborn, 1938.Google Scholar
Rumpel, J., Lexicon Pindaricum, Leipzig, 1883.Google Scholar
Russell, D. A., Longinus, On the Sublime, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Rutherford, W. G., A Chapter in the History of Annotation, London, 1905.Google Scholar
Schenkeveld, D. M., Studies in Demetrius On Style, Amsterdam, 1964.Google Scholar
Schmid, W. and Stählin, O., Geschichte der griechischen Literatur 1.1–2, Munich, 1929–34.Google Scholar
Schroeder, O., Pindars Pythien, Leipzig, 1922.Google Scholar
Schwyzer, E., Griechische Grammatik, Munich, 1939–53.Google Scholar
Shelley’s Literary and Philosophical Criticism, ed. Shawcross, J., Oxford, 1909.Google Scholar
Slater, W. J., Lexicon to Pindar, Berlin, 1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory Smith, G., Elizabethan Critical Essays 1, Oxford, 1904.Google Scholar
Ole Smith, ‘Some Observations on the Structure of Imagery in Aeschylus’, Class. & Med. 1967, 10ff.Google Scholar
Spearing, A. C., Criticism and Medieval Poetry, London, 1964.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Ambiguity in Greek Literature, Oxford, 1939.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Aeschylus in his Style, Dublin, 1942.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., Greek Metaphor, Oxford, 1936.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B., The Sound of Greek, Berkeley, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanford, W. B., The Ulysses Theme, Oxford, 1954.Google Scholar
Stern, G., Meaning and Change of Meaning, Göteborg, 1931.Google Scholar
Strömberg, R., Greek Proverbs, Göteborg, 1954.Google Scholar
Svartengren, T. H., Intensifying Similes in English, Lund, 1918.Google Scholar
Taillardat, J., Les images d’Aristophane, Paris, 1965.Google Scholar
Thomson, G., The Oresteia of Aeschylus, Amsterdam-Prague, 1966.Google Scholar
Tuve, R., Elizabethan and Metaphysical Imagery, Chicago, 1947.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., Language and Style, Oxford, 1964.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., The Principles of Semantics, ed. 2, Glasgow, 1957.Google Scholar
Ullmann, S., Semantics: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning, Oxford, 1962.Google Scholar
Volkmann, R., Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer, ed. 2, Leipzig, 1885.Google Scholar
Waldron, R. A., Sense and Sense Development, London, 1967.Google Scholar
Webster, T. B. L., Greek Art and Literature 700–530 BC, Otago, 1959.Google Scholar
Wellek, R., A History of Modern Criticism 1750–1950, London, 1955–.Google Scholar
Wellek, R. and Warren, A., Theory of Literature, ed. 3, Penguin, 1963.Google Scholar
Westermann, A., Vitarum Scriptores Graeci Minores, Brunswick, 1845.Google Scholar
Whitman, C. H., Homer and the Heroic Tradition, Harvard, 1958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., Sappho und Simonides, Berlin, 1913.Google Scholar
von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., Die Textgeschichte der griechischen Lyriker, Berlin, 1900.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, L. P., Golden Latin Artistry, Cambridge, 1963.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. K. Jr., The Verbal Icon, Kentucky, 1954.Google Scholar
Wordsworth and Coleridge, Lyrical Ballads: The text … and the Prefaces …, edd. Brett, R. L. and Jones, A. R., rev. ed., London, 1965.Google Scholar
Wyld, H. C., A History of Modern Colloquial English, ed. 3, London, 1936.Google Scholar
Young, D. C., Three Odes of Pindar, Leiden, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org 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 saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ 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.

  • Appendices
  • M. S. Silk, King's College London
  • Foreword by Tim Whitmarsh, University of Cambridge
  • Book: Interaction in Poetic Imagery
  • Online publication: 31 January 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009469623.014
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please 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 account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Appendices
  • M. S. Silk, King's College London
  • Foreword by Tim Whitmarsh, University of Cambridge
  • Book: Interaction in Poetic Imagery
  • Online publication: 31 January 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009469623.014
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please 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 account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Appendices
  • M. S. Silk, King's College London
  • Foreword by Tim Whitmarsh, University of Cambridge
  • Book: Interaction in Poetic Imagery
  • Online publication: 31 January 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009469623.014
Available formats
×