Stephen Hinds

2.7k citations
27 papers · 423 indexed · h-index 9

Impact in

    • Classical Antiquity Studies
    • Historical and Literary Studies
  • Classics top 2%
    • Medieval Literature and History
    • Byzantine Studies and History

Papers in

    • Classical Antiquity Studies 18
    • Historical and Literary Studies 2
    • Byzantine Studies and History 2

Stephen Hinds

23 papers receiving 259 citations

Peers

Stephen Hinds
Comparison fields: 5 of 31
  • Anthropology 349
  • Classics 82
  • Archeology 178
  • Philosophy 77
  • Literature and Literary Theory 54
Replace Frederick Ahl with:
Frederick Ahl United States
Raphael Lyne United Kingdom
Thomas Habinek United States
Alison Sharrock United Kingdom
Kathryn Gutzwiller United States
A. J. Woodman United Kingdom
Alessandro Barchiesi Italy
James E. G. Zetzel United States
Emily Gowers United Kingdom
R. G. M. Nisbet United States
Stephen Hinds relative to Frederick Ahl United States Frederick Ahl's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.5×
Frederick Ahl · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Stephen Hinds

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Stephen Hinds'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 Stephen Hinds with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Stephen Hinds more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Stephen Hinds

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stephen Hinds. 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 Stephen Hinds. The network helps show where Stephen Hinds may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 14 scholars most cited alongside Stephen Hinds, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Stephen Hinds Line = papers co-authored together Stephen Hinds links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
#Work
1 20117
2 20070
3 200715
4 20052
5 20042
6 20041
7 200219
8 199936
9 199981
10 19973
11 19977
12
Reflexive annotation in poetic allusion
19953
13 198962
14 19891
15 19881
16 198844
17 198742
18 19861
19 198546
20 19822

About Stephen Hinds

Stephen Hinds is a scholar working on Anthropology, Classics, Archeology, History and Religious studies, having authored 27 papers that have together received 423 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Classical Antiquity Studies (18 papers), Organic Chemistry Synthesis Methods (5 papers), Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies (3 papers), Byzantine Studies and History (2 papers), Renaissance and Early Modern Studies (2 papers), Linguistics and language evolution (2 papers), Historical and Literary Studies (2 papers) and Historical and Religious Studies of Rome (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Anthropology (349 citations), Classics (82 citations), Archeology (178 citations), Philosophy (77 citations) and Literature and Literary Theory (54 citations). Stephen Hinds has collaborated with scholars based in United States and United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Michèle Lowrie, Betty Rose Nagle, Michael von Albrecht, Philip Hardie, Alessandro Barchiesi, Denis Feeney, James E. G. Zetzel, Thomas Schmitz, C. Collard and Aymeric Vié. Their work appears in journals such as Materiali e discussioni per l’analisi dei testi classici, The Journal of Roman Studies, The Classical World, Phoenix and The Classical Quarterly.

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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026