Peter Ure
Impact in
- Literature and Literary Theory top 10%
- Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
- Literature: history, themes, analysis
-
- Medieval Literature and History
Papers in
-
- Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism 3
- Joseph Conrad and Literature 2
-
- Historical and Literary Studies 2
- Co-authors
- John Butt (1 shared paper)John B. Vickery (1 shared paper)Claude Rawson (1 shared paper)Walter Nash (1 shared paper)Kenneth Ross Muir (1 shared paper)N. D. Shergold (1 shared paper)Kenneth W. Muir (1 shared paper)H. J. Rose (1 shared paper)
- Journals
- The Modern Language Review (10 papers)Notes and Queries (7 papers)English Studies (3 papers)The Review of English Studies (2 papers)Essays in Criticism (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- United KingdomUnited StatesAustralia
In The Last Decade
Peter Ure
17 papers receiving 59 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 27
- Literature and Literary Theory 40
- Classics 10
- Music 7
- History 21
- Philosophy 22
Countries citing papers authored by Peter Ure
This map shows the geographic impact of Peter Ure'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 Peter Ure with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Peter Ure more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Peter Ure
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Peter Ure. 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 Peter Ure. The network helps show where Peter Ure may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 9 scholars most cited alongside Peter Ure, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
Showing the 20 most-cited of 35 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1969 | 22 | |
| 2 | Mr. Hobb[s]'s state of nature considered : in a dialogue between Philautus and Timothy | 1958 | 17 |
| 3 | Seventeenth-century prose : 1620-1700 | 1956 | 16 |
| 4 | 1959 | 13 | |
| 5 | 1951 | 6 | |
| 6 | 1969 | 6 | |
| 7 | Justinian and his age | 1951 | 4 |
| 8 | 1964 | 4 | |
| 9 | 1952 | 3 | |
| 10 | 1951 | 3 | |
| 11 | 1976 | 3 | |
| 12 | 1966 | 3 | |
| 13 | 1969 | 2 | |
| 14 | 1959 | 2 | |
| 15 | 1953 | 2 | |
| 16 | 1958 | 1 | |
| 17 | 1962 | 1 | |
| 18 | 1953 | 1 | |
| 19 | 1969 | 1 | |
| 20 | 1958 | 1 |
About Peter Ure
Peter Ure is a scholar working on Literature and Literary Theory, Anthropology, Classics, Sociology and Political Science and Archeology, having authored 35 papers that have together received 116 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Irish and British Studies (7 papers), Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (3 papers), Joseph Conrad and Literature (2 papers), Historical and Literary Studies (2 papers), Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought (1 paper), Medieval Literature and History (1 paper), Byzantine Studies and History (1 paper) and Theatre and Performance Studies (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Literature and Literary Theory (40 citations), Classics (10 citations), Music (7 citations), History (21 citations) and Philosophy (22 citations). Peter Ure has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Australia. Frequent co-authors include John Butt, John B. Vickery, Claude Rawson, Walter Nash, Kenneth Ross Muir, N. D. Shergold, Kenneth W. Muir, H. J. Rose and Marvin L. Rosenberg. Their work appears in journals such as The Modern Language Review, Notes and Queries, English Studies, The Review of English Studies and Essays in Criticism.
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.