Leah S. Marcus
- Literature and Literary Theory top 2%
- History top 1%
- Sociology and Political Science
- Classics top 5%
- Museology top 2%
- Co-authors
- Janel MuellerC. John SommervilleGabriel EganMary Beth RoseEdward PechterMichael D. BristolCedric C. BrownWilliam Shakespeare
- Topics
- Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (7 papers)Renaissance and Early Modern Studies (4 papers)Irish and British Studies (3 papers)
- Partner nations
- United States
In The Last Decade
Leah S. Marcus
27 papers receiving 150 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 40
- Literature and Literary Theory 148
- History 96
- Sociology and Political Science 47
- Classics 46
- Museology 37
Countries citing papers authored by Leah S. Marcus
This map shows the geographic impact of Leah S. Marcus's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Leah S. Marcus with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Leah S. Marcus more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Leah S. Marcus
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Leah S. Marcus. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Leah S. Marcus. The network helps show where Leah S. Marcus may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Leah S. Marcus
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Leah S. Marcus. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Leah S. Marcus based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Leah S. Marcus. Leah S. Marcus is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | |
| 2 | How Shakespeare Became Colonial: Editorial Tradition and the British Empire | 1 |
| 3 | 3 | |
| 4 | As you like it : authoritative text, sources and contexts criticism | 0 |
| 5 | The merchant of Venice : authoritative text, sources and contexts, criticism, rewritings and appropriations | 0 |
| 6 | 0 | |
| 7 | 23 | |
| 8 | 3 | |
| 9 | 44 | |
| 10 | 3 | |
| 11 | 11 | |
| 12 | 15 | |
| 13 | 3 | |
| 14 | 1 | |
| 15 | 11 | |
| 16 | Puzzling Shakespeare: Local Reading and Its Discontents (New Historicism: Studies in Cultural Poetics) | 7 |
| 17 | 5 | |
| 18 | The Milieu of Milton's Comus: Judicial Reform at Ludlow and the Problem of Sexual Assault | 11 |
| 19 | 24 | |
| 20 | 6 |
About Leah S. Marcus
Leah S. Marcus is a scholar working on Literature and Literary Theory, Classics and History, having authored 34 papers that have together received 289 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (7 papers), Renaissance and Early Modern Studies (4 papers) and Irish and British Studies (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Literature and Literary Theory (148 citations), Classics (46 citations) and Museology (37 citations). Leah S. Marcus has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Frequent co-authors include Janel Mueller, C. John Sommerville, Gabriel Egan, Mary Beth Rose, Edward Pechter, Michael D. Bristol, Cedric C. Brown, William Shakespeare and Michael Wilding. Their work appears in journals such as The American Historical Review, The Modern Language Review and Comparative Literature.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.