- Editor's Note
As a reader of TAPA for many years, I was puzzled by the slight but persistent predominance of papers relating to Greek topics. After four years as editor I am still puzzled, although I have learned that the numerical imbalance starts at the submission stage. The only year I was able to balance Greek and Roman in the contents of TAPA was my first (five papers on Greek topics, five on Roman topics). In my second year as editor I wrote to graduate departments saying that I would welcome submissions (from faculty and students) on Roman topics. Without noticeable effect in the relative number of submissions. So when I got wind of a conference on the state of Roman literary studies I was eager to attend.
The papers presented at Rutgers (in reverse alphabetical order, as they appear in this issue) are ably introduced by Lowell Edmunds, so here I will simply express my hope that this sampler of scholarly metamorphoses will prompt us all to think about the current state and future direction(s) of the study of Roman literature. Among the crucial questions touched upon in these papers are the following: What impact will (or could, or should) the trends discussed at Rutgers have on graduate programs in Classics? How much of what has proven fruitful to these scholars—new methodologies, new media, new ideas, new centuries—can be institutionalized? How can classicists foster the lively interest in the reception of Roman literature so evident in this collection? Can we expand the inherent interdisciplinarity of our study [End Page v] of Greco-Roman antiquity in the direction of modernity? How far? I hope you agree with me that these questions and others stimulated by the Rutgers papers—including, of course, "What is missing here?"—deserve our collective thought.
For readers disappointed to see so much of the Roman side of things in this issue, I hope that the papers by Gwendolyn Compton-Engle on the Ecclesiazusae and David Johnson on the Cyropaedia will provide intellectual sustenance enough to last until the next issue, my last, in which there will again be more papers on Greek topics than Roman.
Thanks are due, as always, to the referees, some 70 of them again this year, whose efforts ensure that TAPA is a journal worth reading and, beyond that, provide crucial assistance to authors developing their ideas for publication in TAPA or elsewhere. I would also like to thank the Dean of the Faculty at Amherst College, Gregory Call, who provided funding for editorial assistance for TAPA, and the students who provided the assistance in this issue and its predecessor: Randall Souza, Gabriel Ravel, and Rachel Lesser.