2018
DOI: 10.1017/rmu.2018.6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Bed Canopy in Xenophon of Ephesus and the Iconography of Mars and Venus Under the Empire

Abstract: This paper discusses how Roman visual culture might be useful for deciphering the ecphrastic passages of the ancient Greek novel. Whereas ecphrasis has been one of the blossoming topics in the field, the examination of novelistic ecphrasis alongside particular works of art is still a desideratum. As a test case I will use Xenophon of Ephesus’ ecphrasis of the bed canopy depicting Ares’ and Aphrodite's embrace, in the Ephesiaca, a novel that might have been written as early as AD 65. In what follows I will argu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 66 publications
(52 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Chariton’s date: Ruiz-Montero (1994a) 1008–12; O’Sullivan (1995); Bowie (2002) 54–58; Tilg (2010) 36–78. Xenophon’s date: O’Sullivan (1995) 145–70 and (2014) 48, 51–53, famously arguing for Xenophon’s priority; Kytzler (1996) 346–48; Rife (2002); Bowie (2002) 56–57; Henderson (2009) 207–10; Tilg (2010) 85–92; Coleman (2011); Lefteratou (2018b); Morgan (2017) 398–99; Tagliabue (2017) 213–15. Whitmarsh (2013) 41–48 addresses the methodological difficulties attending discussions of relative chronology.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Chariton’s date: Ruiz-Montero (1994a) 1008–12; O’Sullivan (1995); Bowie (2002) 54–58; Tilg (2010) 36–78. Xenophon’s date: O’Sullivan (1995) 145–70 and (2014) 48, 51–53, famously arguing for Xenophon’s priority; Kytzler (1996) 346–48; Rife (2002); Bowie (2002) 56–57; Henderson (2009) 207–10; Tilg (2010) 85–92; Coleman (2011); Lefteratou (2018b); Morgan (2017) 398–99; Tagliabue (2017) 213–15. Whitmarsh (2013) 41–48 addresses the methodological difficulties attending discussions of relative chronology.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%