Ptolemy and His Rivals in His History of Alexander

Classical Quarterly 34 (02):373- (1984)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Scholarly opinion about Ptolemy Soter's history of Alexander has been far from unanimous. Not long ago Ptolemy was held to stand in the first rank of ancient historians. His history was described as brilliant, rational, straightforward, and exhaustive, while he himself was proclaimed a ‘second Thucydides’. In recent years, however, Ptolemy's reputation has seriously declined. His shortcomings, acknowledged also by his admirers, have been stressed and extensively analysed. Fritz Schachermeyr clearly reflected current opinion when he equated a ‘version from the Hauptquartier's circles’ with a lie, a fraud, and an intentional omission. The purpose of this paper is to examine the recent reassessment of the nature and the aims of Ptolemy's work

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-09

Downloads
14 (#961,492)

6 months
4 (#818,853)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

On Historical Fragments and Epitomes.P. A. Brunt - 1980 - Classical Quarterly 30 (02):477-.
From Babylon to Triparadeisos: 323–320 B.C.R. Malcolm Errington - 1970 - Journal of Hellenic Studies 90:49-77.
Bias in Ptolemy's History of Alexander.R. M. Errington - 1969 - Classical Quarterly 19 (02):233-.
Bias in Ptolemy's History of Alexander.R. M. Errington - 1969 - Classical Quarterly 19 (2):233-242.

View all 9 references / Add more references