If one bears these arguments in mind, Ammianus’ digressions can be taken primarily as literary subnarratives—just as his main historical narrative is a literary account. It would be wrong to judge the Res Gestae to modern historical standards. Likewise, studying the digressions should aim for their true value: rendering an image of ancient scientific knowledge.

Bibliography

- Barnes, T.D., Ammianus Marcellinus and the representation of historical reality (Ithaca/London 1998)
- Bekker-Nielsen, T., “Terra Incognita.The subjective geography of the Roman empire,” in: Studies in Ancient history and numismatics presented to Rudi Thomsen (Aarhus 1988), 148-161
- Brodersen, K., Terra cognita. Studiën zur römische Raumerfassung, Spudasmata 59 (Hildesheim/New York/Zürich 1995)
- Cichocka, H., “Die Konzeption des Exkursus im Geschichtswerk des Ammianus Marcellinus,” Eos 63 (1975) 329-340
- Drijvers, J.W., “Ammianus Marcellinus on the geography of the Pontus Euxinus,” Histos (1998); [Read it here]
- Matthews, J., The Roman empire of Ammianus Marcellinus (London 1989)
- Schanz, M., Geschichte der römische Literatur 4.12 (Munich 1914) 97
- Sundwall, G.A., “Ammianus geographicus,” American Journal of Philology 117 (1996), 619-643