History of Classical Scholarship https://www.hcsjournal.org/ojs/index.php/hcs <p><em>History of Classical Scholarship</em> (<em>HCS</em>) is an academic journal that sets out to be the first periodical exclusively devoted to the history of the studies on the Greek and Roman world, in a broad and interdisciplinary sense.</p> History of Classical Scholarship en-US History of Classical Scholarship 2632-4091 <p><a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" rel="license"><img style="border-width: 0;" src="https://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/80x15.png" alt="Creative Commons License"></a><br>This work is licensed under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" rel="license">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence</a>.</p> Who Wrote Kromayer’s Survey of Greek Warfare? https://www.hcsjournal.org/ojs/index.php/hcs/article/view/40 <p><em>Johannes Kromayer and Georg Veith’s handbook on Greek and Roman war­fare (1928) has long been regarded as the epitome of older German scholarship on ancient military history. However, Kromayer’s contribution on Greek war­fare borrows extensively from Adolf Bauer’s earlier edition, written for the same series (1893). Modern scholars still cite and praise Kromayer’s text, un­aware that nearly half of it is not his. This article offers a guide to Kromayer’s handbook, showing which parts can be considered contemporary original work, and which reflect scholarship that was already 35 years old at the time.</em></p> Roel Konijnendijk Copyright (c) 2020-04-15 2020-04-15 2 1 17 Tra attualizzazione e ‘pentitismo’: Sallustio secondo Concetto Marchesi https://www.hcsjournal.org/ojs/index.php/hcs/article/view/41 <p><em>Concetto Marchesi ha discusso in pagine molto partecipate della sua </em>Lette­ratura Latina<em> dei Gracchi e della loro azione riformatrice. Esse risentono in modo originale dell’attualizzazione con cui le loro figure erano state trattate nella </em>Storia romana<em> di Mommsen. In particolare, Gaio Gracco torna per analo­gia in scritti successivi di Marchesi su Togliatti. Da considerare, inoltre, la categoria di ‘pentitismo’, che il latinista applica alla scelta di Sallustio di de­dicarsi alla storiografia, anche a fronte di una sua valutazione, non priva di elementi contraddittori, della figura di Catone.</em></p> <p><em>Concetto Marchesi discussed the Gracchi and their reform agenda in some deeply engaged pages of his </em>Letteratura latina<em>, which clearly betray the in­fluence of Mommsen’s </em>History of Rome<em> and its modernising approach to those great figures. The analogy with Gaius Gracchus also features in several pieces that Marchesi later wrote about Palmiro Togliatti. The category of </em>pentitismo<em> (a neologism that may roughly be translated as ‘repentitism’) is worthy of esp­ecially close consideration: Marchesi deployed it in his discussion of Sallust’s choice to devote himself to historiography, not least in light of his — partly contradictory — assessment of Cato the Younger and his character.</em></p> Arnaldo Marcone Copyright (c) 2020-04-15 2020-04-15 2 19 29 The Discovery of Aelian’s Tactica Theoria in Italian Humanism https://www.hcsjournal.org/ojs/index.php/hcs/article/view/42 <p><em>Aelian’s </em>Tactica theoria<em> was the most highly regarded Greek military manual in Italian Humanism. This paper aims to investigate the reasons for its success, comparing it to other writings on the same topics, and the key elements and figures that ensured the work’s survival: Theodorus Gaza and his Latin translation, the vernacular translation by Ludovico Carbone, the diagrams in Niccolò Machiavelli’s </em>Arte della guerra<em>, the editions by Lelio Carani and Francesco Ferrosi, and the studies of Andrea Palladio.</em></p> Immacolata Eramo Copyright (c) 2020-04-15 2020-04-15 2 31 54 Una lettera inedita di Augusto Campana. Per la tradizione di Cic. Scaur. 4 ed Epigr. Bob. 63 https://www.hcsjournal.org/ojs/index.php/hcs/article/view/43 <p><em>The papers of Augusto Campana at the Biblioteca Civica Gambalunga in Rimini include a thus far unpublished correspondence with Scevola Mariotti on </em>Epigr. Bob. <em>63. In 1963, Campana published a major study on that poem, in which he did not develop some of the insights that he had privately shared with Mariotti. This paper includes an edition of the earliest letter by Campana (Rome, 1 July 1958), in which he made some important remarks on the transmission of Cic. </em>Scaur<em>. </em><em>4 and its relationship with </em>Epigr. Bob<em>. </em><em>63, with a special focus on the name of its protagonist, Theombrotus. These comments are of special signifi­cance to the reconstruction of the </em>codex deperditus <em>that contained the Bobbio collection.</em></p> <p><em>Tra le carte di Augusto Campana custodite presso la Biblioteca Civica Gam­balunga di Rimini si conserva un inedito scambio epistolare con Scevola Mariotti riguardante </em>Epigr. Bob<em>.</em><em> 63. Su questo carme Campana pubblicò, nel 1958, un contributo decisivo, nel quale non confluirono tuttavia alcune delle felici intuizioni condivise privatamente con Mariotti. Dell’ignoto epistolario si pubblica qui la prima lettera di Campana (Roma, 1 luglio 1958), ove sono formulate significative considerazioni sulla tradizione di Cic. </em>Scaur<em>. 4 in rapporto ad </em>Epigr. Bob<em>.</em><em> 63 per l’identificazione del protagonista </em>Theombrotus<em>, che sono di estremo interesse per la ricostruzione del </em>codex deperditus<em> conte­nente la silloge bobbiese.</em></p> Orazio Portuese Copyright (c) 2020 Orazio Portuese 2020-05-18 2020-05-18 2 55 67