BMCR 2001.09.14

Response: Brennan on Rowe on Brennan

Response to 2001.08.21

Response by

In his review of my Praetorship in the Roman Republic (BMCR 2001.08.21), Greg Rowe states that the name of C. Nicolet “does not figure in the bibliography.” Rowe continues: “Nor does Brennan use the work of Nicolet’s students [J.-L.] Ferrary (1988), who linked Roman expansionism and philhellenism, and [J.-M.] David (1992), who studied the praetorian courts as a quasi theatrum of politics….Brennan says nothing about Brunt’s critiques of Gelzer’s conceptions of nobilitas and clientela…or about Giovannini’s critique of Mommsen’s conceptions of imperium, promagistracy, and the Sullan reform (Giovannini 1983).”

For the record, reference to various contributions by David, Ferrary and Nicolet can be found in the endnotes to my book (see pp. 256-258, 261, 282, 289, 343, 822, 825, 831, 873, 898, 906, and cf. the text at 226). Ferrary’s 1988 Philhell√©nism et imp√©rialisme is cited in the Select Bibliography (p. 936), as is Giovannini’s 1983 Consulare imperium (p. 937). The notes to Chapter One contain multiple references to Giovannini’s work (see pp. 251, 254, 256-257), as well as a (prominent) rejection of Brunt’s views on nobilitas (p. 258).