RomanArmyTalk

Full Version: Help me cite ancient sources quickly!
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I am finishing my assignment and need to know how to cite ancient sources in the Oxford referencing style. PLEASE HELP!

EDIT: I found these online so perhaps the reference is different for that?

EDIT2: How about Gibbons the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire?
Quote:I am finishing my assignment and need to know how to cite ancient sources in the Oxford referencing style
I think it is not very important to follow a particular system; what matters is that things are referenced and that the system is consistent. I get the impression that most writers refer to ancient sources in the text itself, e.g. "(Hdt. Hist. 7.112)" or "(Ulp. D. 15.3.8.pr)". The trick is to know the abbreviations, which are often based on the Latin titles of the works. There's a list in the Oxford Classical Dictionary, which is almost identical to the list of abbreviations in the Neue Pauly; an overview can be found here.
Quote:How about Gibbons the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire?
Ignore it. It's a splendid book, but it predates the invention of critical scholarship, which is a nineteenth-century development in Germany. His notes are, usually, to seventeenth- and eighteenth-century French editions of classical texts, which have a different counting.
Thanks for the info, helped with my footnotes

I understand the intext referencing now but I still need references for Gibbon's work for my actual bibliography as well as Jordanes Getica and Zosimus' Historia Nova
Quote:I still need references for Gibbon's work for my actual bibliography as well as Jordanes Getica and Zosimus' Historia Nova
Gibbon is usually quoted by volume and edition; so "Gibbon (1776-17xx) IV 245 (ed. Everyman)". AFAIK, Jordanes and Zosimus are usually quoted by chapter and sentence: "Zos., HN 2.3.1".

BTW, let this not be your most important concern. The substance of your piece is what matters; a nice way to explain where information can be found is helpful, of course, but not the real issue.
I'm still not sure you get my use... This is for a bibliography (at the moment) so it needs the full info like publisher, location etc.
I know its wrong but I currently just have Gibbon referenced as a book (new publisher but kept the year of the old text) like so

Gibbon, E, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, New York, Random House Inc, New York, 1776
Quote:I know its wrong but I currently just have Gibbon referenced as a book (new publisher but kept the year of the old text) like so

Gibbon, E, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, New York, Random House Inc, New York, 1776
I would formulate it like:

Gibbon, E, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1776-17xx; reprint New York, Random House Inc, New York, 20xx

In that way, the reader won't think that Random House was the 1776 publisher.
Quote:In that way, the reader won't think that Random House was the 1776 publisher.

That would be interesting considering the year! :lol: :wink:
That looks excellent and Oxford-like. Thanks a heap :mrgreen:

Now I just have the issue of the ancient sources... Any help on that one? They are online and not in book form. I was thinking some kind of amalgamation of a web article and document reference
Quote:ancient sources... Any help on that one?
Only quote them by author, Latin title, chapter, line; preferrably in abbreviation, more or less like a line in the Bible (although it is uncommon to quote the Bible with author + title). So, "Hom. Il. 2.117"; "Hdt. Hist. 7.205"; "Caes. BG 2.17"; "August. Conf. 4.9"; "Pap. Dig. 47.19.5.2".
Thanks, I have added my sources to the bibliography similar to a translation.

Now to footnote though what you have provided will make that much easier Big Grin
Quote:
frostee:302fkv3v Wrote:How about Gibbons the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire?
Ignore it. It's a splendid book, but it predates the invention of critical scholarship, which is a nineteenth-century development in Germany. His notes are, usually, to seventeenth- and eighteenth-century French editions of classical texts, which have a different counting.

Well, I’m a huge fan of Gibbon. I think he is still relevant today, not only as a work of genius in literature but also for some of his ideas. But his scholarship methods are not only shaky by today’s standards, but they were also questioned in his day.

Quote:The remarkable mode of quotation which Mr. Gibbon adopts must immediately strike every one who turns to his notes. He sometimes only mentions the author, perhaps the book; and often leaves the reader the toil of finding out, or rather guessing at the passage. The policy, however, is not without its design and use. By endeavouring to deprive us of the means of comparing him with the authorities he cites, he flattered himself, no doubt, that he might safely have recourse to misrepresentation.

Mr. Davis

Quote: Such is the style of Mr. Davis; who in another place mentions this mode of quotation ‘as a good artifice to escape detection’… I may have accidentally recollected the sense of a passage which I had formerly read, without being able to find the place, or even to transcribe from memory the precise words.

Edward Gibbon, A Vindication

That cracks me up, that Gibbon admits that sometimes he simply couldn’t remember where he read something. You don’t see that today.
Ahhh classic Gibbsy :mrgreen:
Quote:Gibbon admits that sometimes he simply couldn’t remember where he read something. You don’t see that today.
You're right; the only exception I know is Braudel, who often admits "reference lost" - for obvious reasons: he wrote La Méditerranée et le Monde Méditerranéen as a POW.
At Leidenuniv we have a rigid annotating system for the history department, which i sometimes find very annoying because reading so many English history books with a lot of different forms of annotating you get confused.

BTW if i read a translated classical author i am not going to try and find the exact latin spot in the latin work where he or she (lol) wrote something.

M.VIB.M.