So, my little act of rebellion against the awkwardness of peer-review. I wrote my review as a letter to the author (anonymous, of course) explaining my concerns and advising changes.

Headline: Trump kept FIFA Club World Cup trophy for himself -

The good: Hermes has accepted my article on «The Letters of Agrippa II and the Sourcing & Early Dissemination of Josephus' Bellum (Jos. Vita 365–7)». The bad: both reviewers raised reasonable concerns about part IV. The ugly: addressing R1's concerns will make R2's worse and vice versa.

Happy Canada Day for those who celebrate! (And those who don't)

Hi, academic blueskiers. I recently received this from an editor of a top journal in Classics: «Unfortunately, Reader A stated that they did not want to make their report available to the author, and only agreed to share a summary of the bulk of their objection.» Has anyone ever met this before?

How come that 25 page article that I submitted is now onlly 14.5 pages?

Proofs day!

Never eat yellow snow.

Inching towards publication!

Some will get a smile from Reviewer A's bet about an article submitted by a grad student and me about Butera and Sear's identification of the location of the Battle of Philippi.

Another favourite index entry (from Cohen’s Josephus in Galilee and Rome)

I enjoyed stumbling across this index in Fraenkel’s Horace:

Anyone in the neighbourhood who might want to join us are welcome to come to Debra Nousek’s talk next week on "History Starts with a C:The Caesarian Corpus and Latin Literary Historiography" @debranousek.bsky.social

Generative AI, '70s style

Lexicographically inclined Latinists will welcome knews of the release to open access of the 4th fascicle of vol. 9.1 of the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae (nemo to netura) publikationen.badw.de/de/039602104

My new article on "Hyrcanus’ ninth† year" is now out with Historia. I'm happy to send a pdf to anyone who bumps into a paywall.

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

hoose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Choose 20 books that have stayed with you or influenced you. One book per day for 20 days, in no particular order. No explanations, no reviews, just covers. #BookChallenge

Happy National Ding-a-Ling Day to those who celebrate.

Why must publishers mock authors—or Brill, me—with royalties statements like this:

Is there a prize for the worst title? My entry: «A Letter of M. Antonius on the Battle of Philippi and a Volcano (Jos. AJ 14.306–313), and Appian on a Goldmine (B Civ. 4.443)» (Conditionally accepted by Hesperia.)

Victory is mine! Victory is mine! I drink from the keg of glory! Bring me the finest muffins and bagels in all the land! (The Journal of Hellenic Studies has accepted my article)

Well, this was nice. The author of an article that I'd refereed praised my report to the editor as ‘highly benevolent, accurate and constructive, as is not always the case’.

This something that I didn't know before. Pliny the Elder lists poets and gem stones in alphabetic order.

Momigliano on Pearson: “History of history is almost a superhuman task. It requires good philology, good history and good philosophy joined together. Non ignarus mali, I can sympathise with Mr. Pearson; yet I would that his next book contained more mistakes~~and more truth.”

So sad to hear that my supervisor and friend, Barbara Levick has passed. She was a model of productivity, creativity, and humanity and my own life was so enriched by her part of it. What I owe to her cannot be expressed. She will be missed.

Proofs here.

Latin thought for the day. Cic. Off. 2. 16: Est Dicaearchī liber dē exitiō hominum, quī collectīs ceterīs causīs ēluviōnis, pestilentiae, vāstitātis repentīnae, quōrum impetū docet quaedam hominum genera esse consumpta,

A modest proposal. Daylight savings time should be changed so that we only "fall back", never "spring forward".

Another circumstantial participle for those interested. Demosthenes, Phil. 1. 25: τί οὖν κελεύω; τὰς προφάσεις ἀφελεῖν καὶ τοῦ στρατηγοῦ καὶ τῶν στρατιωτῶν, μισθὸν πορίσαντας. (“What then do I recommend? Deprive both general and men of all excuse by providing pay.”)

So, I'm peer-reviewing an article and am genuinely torn. For the first half of the article, I'm very much "Reviewer 2". But at almost exactly the halfway point, I become "Reviewer 1". Is this merely the academic's way to do Hyde/Jekyll?

So, if one 'tweets' on twitter, does one 'bs' on bluesky?

One of the wonders of Classical Greek is the complexity of its grammar and the nuance that comes with it. One is always discovering new things. (Or, perhaps, rediscovering. The synapses don't fire like they used to.) Take the participle, which is the most wonderous part of 1/x

Just submitted an article to JHS. Wish me luck!

In case some have missed my music video. youtu.be/x20lC0pmSH8?... via @YouTube