What do you think?
Rate this book
The Oxford Classical Dictionary [1961]
A comprehensive reference book to all fields of ancient Greek and Roman civilization up to the death of Constantine.
1176 pages, Hardcover
First published May 1, 2003
14 people are currently reading
568 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
November 6, 2009
Indispensable for the serious reader of classical (Greek and Roman) literature. Is and will remain on my currently reading list since I refer to it at least weekly and often daily.
May 29, 2007
If I was stranded on a desert island, and I could only choose one reference book, it would be this one. That of course begs the question: what am I doing on an island that would require knowledge or trivia about the ancient world?
...but whatever, its a hypothetical.
...but whatever, its a hypothetical.
June 23, 2012
The 2nd and 3rd editions are really quite different books; I'm always partial to the older, more traditional ones in all things. But both are valuable, handy reference books and well worth the effort of owning. The best shelf reference, of course, is the Kleine Pauly (5 paperback volumes in German).
November 25, 2021
This book disappointed me. It doesn't have categories. That's because it's a dictionary. It's just: here's our information, A–Z, like it or lump it.
Well, I don't like it.
You don't know if you need a piece of information that's in this book till some external stimulus tells you that you need a piece of information that's in this book. And since this book doesn't have much more than basic information, why not find it in other places?
There's a list of NEW entries in the front of the book. That's not exactly helpful if you're completely new to the book and/or haven't read previous editions from cover to cover. Also in the front are lists of current contributors, previous contributors, and abbreviations which has a books and authors section that may be useful to you.
This book's main uses are for browsing or seeing what information it has versus other sources.
Oh, it half-heartedly tried to have something that resembles a category or two. For example, if you look up gods, it sends you to an entry, that sends you to an entry which has the information in the middle of it somewhere.
Let's say you want to know about Roman emperors. Let's say you would like to see a list of all the Roman emperors. Look elsewhere. That list should've been in this book, if not part of a list of categories, then in an appendix. There are no appendices in this book.
(To be honest though, that list could be in there somewhere. But how would you know? It's 1640 pages of A–Z.)
In all it has a large amount of information, but in my opinion, it wasn't compiled well. After many decades these writers and doctors and editors never wanted to categorize this book or add an appendix or add a few lists outside of the dictionary? The classical world had lists galore. This should've had a few lists too, if for no other reason than just because.
Here's why there aren't any extras: it's a dictionary. It's not an encyclopedia. That's the main problem with this book: you get some A–Z information and nothing extra.
If you're looking for things like appendices or an index, look elsewhere.
I no longer think this is a bad book. However, I don't think it's The Ultimate Reference Work on the Classical World as it claims on its cover.
It's not the worst reference book I own either (and that's worth at least a few stars).
This book is more useful than I stated in my original review, so I changed it some: I removed some of my original vitriol, and changed my rating from a 1 to a 3.
However, I still think it's only useful in a few ways: dip into it randomly; or be prompted to search for a specific piece of information.
It needs categories. Period.
Here's an example of what I mean about categories. Scroll past the preface and acknowledgements till you see Topical List of Entries
(NOTE: I don't know how long this link will be usable. If the link is dead, and if you're interested, look for a preview of The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics: Fourth Edition; Roland Greene, Editor in Chief)
The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics
I understand it's much easier to categorize The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, because of the nature of the information it contains (and it's an encyclopedia, not a dictionary). Still though, it has 1680 pages and comes with a list of categories that helps you discover beforehand whether or not you're interested in a particular topic. This book should come with a similar list.
Well, I don't like it.
You don't know if you need a piece of information that's in this book till some external stimulus tells you that you need a piece of information that's in this book. And since this book doesn't have much more than basic information, why not find it in other places?
There's a list of NEW entries in the front of the book. That's not exactly helpful if you're completely new to the book and/or haven't read previous editions from cover to cover. Also in the front are lists of current contributors, previous contributors, and abbreviations which has a books and authors section that may be useful to you.
This book's main uses are for browsing or seeing what information it has versus other sources.
Oh, it half-heartedly tried to have something that resembles a category or two. For example, if you look up gods, it sends you to an entry, that sends you to an entry which has the information in the middle of it somewhere.
Let's say you want to know about Roman emperors. Let's say you would like to see a list of all the Roman emperors. Look elsewhere. That list should've been in this book, if not part of a list of categories, then in an appendix. There are no appendices in this book.
(To be honest though, that list could be in there somewhere. But how would you know? It's 1640 pages of A–Z.)
In all it has a large amount of information, but in my opinion, it wasn't compiled well. After many decades these writers and doctors and editors never wanted to categorize this book or add an appendix or add a few lists outside of the dictionary? The classical world had lists galore. This should've had a few lists too, if for no other reason than just because.
Here's why there aren't any extras: it's a dictionary. It's not an encyclopedia. That's the main problem with this book: you get some A–Z information and nothing extra.
If you're looking for things like appendices or an index, look elsewhere.
I no longer think this is a bad book. However, I don't think it's The Ultimate Reference Work on the Classical World as it claims on its cover.
It's not the worst reference book I own either (and that's worth at least a few stars).
This book is more useful than I stated in my original review, so I changed it some: I removed some of my original vitriol, and changed my rating from a 1 to a 3.
However, I still think it's only useful in a few ways: dip into it randomly; or be prompted to search for a specific piece of information.
It needs categories. Period.
Here's an example of what I mean about categories. Scroll past the preface and acknowledgements till you see Topical List of Entries
(NOTE: I don't know how long this link will be usable. If the link is dead, and if you're interested, look for a preview of The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics: Fourth Edition; Roland Greene, Editor in Chief)
The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics
I understand it's much easier to categorize The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, because of the nature of the information it contains (and it's an encyclopedia, not a dictionary). Still though, it has 1680 pages and comes with a list of categories that helps you discover beforehand whether or not you're interested in a particular topic. This book should come with a similar list.
November 3, 2018
Unparalleled
July 11, 2018
Haven't read it all, but I've referenced it extensively over my treatment of Classical history. It's like a mini encyclopedia in it's treatment
January 7, 2025
Every classicist worth their salt keeps a copy of this for its priceless value as a self-defense weapon. I heard tell it even has some information about the ancient world inside of it!
July 12, 2011
01/26/2007
All things considered, a superb reference work
This edition (the third edition, 1996) has over 6200 entries on 1640 pages! And no, I haven't read them all... This is really wonderful for those times when you come across a new term (whether a person, place or thing) and need some idea as to who (what or where) is being discussed, indicated or alluded to. This Edition, published in 1996, was put together between 1991-1994 and contains matters (such as the Near East) that were barely touched on in earlier editions. But never fear! - The centrality of Greece and Rome has been quite correctly retained. There is, however, a much broader (and self-consciouss) inter-disciplinary focus to this edition. Older readers will likely be annoyed by long bows to feminism, Marxism and postmodernism in some of the essays. Occasionally, the tone and 'politically correct' point of view of some entries can be a bit over the top. If you are either old-fashioned or easily annoyed (and you know who you are) it might be wise NOT to toss out the second edition... But even they might find some of the new 'thematic' entries - on disease, ecology, economy, imperialism, literacy, motherhood, and technology, e.g. - more than occasionally useful. There is even good news for the under-educated - most Greek and Latin terms are translated! But I would prefer that the Greek or Latin and its translation both appear; this compromise would likely satisfy both novices and experts. Unfortunately, the cost of including the original term and the translation would likely cause the publisher to balk. Now, Roman names will probably continue to annoy everyone. If, for example, one looks up Caesar one finds 'See Iulius Caesar'. Now, as I hope we all know, the Romans had three names (using Caesar as an example): Gaius (praenomen), Iulius (nomen), Caesar (cogomen). Pretty much no one, besides Emperors and writers, is listed under the cogomen in this edition - they are almost all listed by nomen. (No, Caesar is not the exception, he was never officially Emperor.) The change of 'Julius' into 'Iulius' is also annoying - especially after being assured (Preface, viii) that "the more familiar form [...] should be preferred." But with a work of this scope and length there will always be a multitude of quibbles and annoyances. One of mine is that I wish the tiny bibliographies that follow some entries were less brief. But all things considered this is a first-rate OCD that will inevitably, after a generation and a half has passed, need to be revised. But such is the fate of all academic reference works. - They are all such slaves to fashion! That said, the general editors, Hornblower and Spawforth, and the area advisers have much to be proud of; 4.5 stars, 5 if the 'politically correct' gestures are toned down and the bibliographical data following some of the separate entries increased.
All things considered, a superb reference work
This edition (the third edition, 1996) has over 6200 entries on 1640 pages! And no, I haven't read them all... This is really wonderful for those times when you come across a new term (whether a person, place or thing) and need some idea as to who (what or where) is being discussed, indicated or alluded to. This Edition, published in 1996, was put together between 1991-1994 and contains matters (such as the Near East) that were barely touched on in earlier editions. But never fear! - The centrality of Greece and Rome has been quite correctly retained. There is, however, a much broader (and self-consciouss) inter-disciplinary focus to this edition. Older readers will likely be annoyed by long bows to feminism, Marxism and postmodernism in some of the essays. Occasionally, the tone and 'politically correct' point of view of some entries can be a bit over the top. If you are either old-fashioned or easily annoyed (and you know who you are) it might be wise NOT to toss out the second edition... But even they might find some of the new 'thematic' entries - on disease, ecology, economy, imperialism, literacy, motherhood, and technology, e.g. - more than occasionally useful. There is even good news for the under-educated - most Greek and Latin terms are translated! But I would prefer that the Greek or Latin and its translation both appear; this compromise would likely satisfy both novices and experts. Unfortunately, the cost of including the original term and the translation would likely cause the publisher to balk. Now, Roman names will probably continue to annoy everyone. If, for example, one looks up Caesar one finds 'See Iulius Caesar'. Now, as I hope we all know, the Romans had three names (using Caesar as an example): Gaius (praenomen), Iulius (nomen), Caesar (cogomen). Pretty much no one, besides Emperors and writers, is listed under the cogomen in this edition - they are almost all listed by nomen. (No, Caesar is not the exception, he was never officially Emperor.) The change of 'Julius' into 'Iulius' is also annoying - especially after being assured (Preface, viii) that "the more familiar form [...] should be preferred." But with a work of this scope and length there will always be a multitude of quibbles and annoyances. One of mine is that I wish the tiny bibliographies that follow some entries were less brief. But all things considered this is a first-rate OCD that will inevitably, after a generation and a half has passed, need to be revised. But such is the fate of all academic reference works. - They are all such slaves to fashion! That said, the general editors, Hornblower and Spawforth, and the area advisers have much to be proud of; 4.5 stars, 5 if the 'politically correct' gestures are toned down and the bibliographical data following some of the separate entries increased.
April 18, 2013
This is an excellent book to browse; articles vary in length, but provide a good overview in most cases. They also provide further reading on each individual topic.
The price is hefty, but worth it - collecting a series a books covering the breadth of information covered here would be far more expensive. It is not limited to the 'Golden Age', but covers developments in late antiquity - most articles take a historical overview of their topic, not just a snapshot. As an example: the article on the mythical figure of Oedipus does not simply review the well-known story as given by Sophocles' "Oedipous Tyrannos", but earlier and later versions of the story too.
The fault lies less in the content than in the organisation. If you are looking up a historical or literary figure, then it is fine, but working out what heading a particular topic can be found is an extremely frustrating process. Trying to second-guess an editor seems a pointless exercise; it desperately needs a cross-referencing index!
The price is hefty, but worth it - collecting a series a books covering the breadth of information covered here would be far more expensive. It is not limited to the 'Golden Age', but covers developments in late antiquity - most articles take a historical overview of their topic, not just a snapshot. As an example: the article on the mythical figure of Oedipus does not simply review the well-known story as given by Sophocles' "Oedipous Tyrannos", but earlier and later versions of the story too.
The fault lies less in the content than in the organisation. If you are looking up a historical or literary figure, then it is fine, but working out what heading a particular topic can be found is an extremely frustrating process. Trying to second-guess an editor seems a pointless exercise; it desperately needs a cross-referencing index!
February 6, 2011
It is a very helpful resource for basic information on classical studies but "dictionary" maybe conveys too great an authority and the entries shouldn't be blithely accepted as established fact. For instance, while consulting the entry on Theopompus I noticed a somewhat controversial stance assumed on Theopompus' attitude toward Philip II of Macedon.
June 23, 2012
The 2nd and 3rd editions are really quite different books; I'm always partial to the older, more traditional ones in all things. But both are valuable, handy reference books and well worth the effort of owning. The best shelf reference, of course, is the Kleine Pauly (5 paperback volumes in German).
February 27, 2008
The ultimate scholarly reference for all things Classical . . .
April 12, 2008
Went through a whole case of post-its marking up this one. Indispensable!!
Read
July 27, 2009Have to turn to it from time to time...a professional and good sources for classics study
Currently reading
November 30, 2010I managed to find the Third edition new at a giveaway price so it will replace my much battered 2nd edition copy of 1970.
Want to read
June 26, 2013This an amazing reference work, it has articles on everything in the ancient world, I will use this source for years
April 19, 2014
One of, if not the, go to sources for primary source acquisition[s] regarding almost every social, political, military aspect of classical civilization. Helped me in college a time or two.
January 4, 2015
The absolute essential companion to anyone interested in the Classical World. Impossible to overstate!
June 9, 2015
My bible!
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews