Bosworth 1995

מתוך Amitay.haifa.ac.il
קפיצה אל:ניווט, חיפוש

מחקר מודרני ב / מחקר מודרני B

Bosworth, A. B. 1995. A Historical Commentary on Arrian's History of Alexander. Vol. 2, Commentary on books 4-5. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

סיכומים

(עמ' 142) 4.2.33 ברור שאלכסנדר עזב את בקטריא לאחר שהאביב הסתיים ולא פשוט בתום האביב, בתחילת הקיץ של שנת 327 לפנה"ס. עברו כנראה תשעה חודשים מאז שעזב את בקטריא (סביב יוני 327) ועד שהגיע לטקסילא (אביב 326).

The submission of Nysa

p. 197: Concerning the events at Nysa Arrian does not automatically accept Eratosthenes' criticism, but adopts a Herodotean neutrality.

p.198: "Arrian does not name his sources for the visit to Nysa." Bosworth suggests that material in oratio recta “comes from at least on of his principal authorities”, whereas material conveyed by accusativus cum infinitivo inmplised that Arrian has some reservations. “There is no suggestion that the story is in any way affected by the late secondary tradition (pace Tarn ii 45,  )…It is likely enough that all of Arrian’s major authorities gave some account of the indicident, so that he was able to select or combine their reports at will. Single sources cannot easily be detected…

The cavalry from Nysa in mentioned later in a factual narrative in 6.2.3, in a manner which suggests that the original story was told in detail by Ptolemy and Nearchos, who are mentioned as sources in that context. {one might add Onesikritos, who is also mentioned as a source in the same context. OA}

The Akouphis speech “is a reworking of material in the Indike (1.4-6, 5.9).” which once again “suggests Nearchus as the source”. “Nearchus could well be the major source for the first two chapters of book V (So Goukowsky ii 158 n.80), but his version of events was certainly supplemented from other autorities: Ptolemy, Aristobulus, or even both. c Kleitarchos (FGrH 137 F17) is also mentioned as a source, at least for the ivy.


p. 199: "The visit to Nysa was clearly a standard item in the history of Alexander and reported in variant forms throughout the tradition. It follows that the main lines of the story (the allegations that Nysa was founded by Dionysus, and the privileges accorded to the inhabitants) can hardly be fiction … . The visit must be historical, and Alexander did believe (or purported to believe) that the city was a foundation of Dionysus. This is the consensus of modern scholarship … and is surely correct.

The statement in Curtius and in Diodorus 2.38.4 cf. 1.19.6-8 that the Greeks derived their inspiration to invent the legend of the concealment in Zeus' thigh”may be a portion of Cleitharchus’ version of the legend, which Diodorus grafted on to the surrounding extract from Megasthenes (FGrH 715 F4). … In the first generation after Alexander, then, the tradition had Dionysus invade India and leave Nysa as a permanent memorial of his conquest.

Megasthenes had a different approach. He did not apparently mention Nysa itself but described the unique flora of the mountains (Strabo 15.1.58/711 = FGrH 715 F33), which like Alexander’s men he attributed to the passing of the god. … The myth was inevitably snowballing.

p. 200: Stories of Dionysos in the East had been commonplace, and “There was every reason for Alexander’s entourage to look for traces of the god’s passage … The initiative for the identification … probably came from the local inhabitabts, who emphasized the sanctity of their city and its connection with the local god. identification may even have been theirs (with loci for previous contact of Alexander with Indians, where they could have learned the useful myths to tell). … Afor the Macedonians, who required little convincing, the appearance of ivy … was sufficient proof of Dionysus’ fertilizing influence.

"There is little prospect of identifying the Indian deity of Nysa" (and consider also that we have no Indian written sources for the period and area OA).

p.201: ..."maybe there was no simple equation. The Macedonians were predisposed to look for evidence of Dionysus' presence, and different cults in different areas could have been subsumed under the general portmanteau of the Greek deity."

"Philadelphus seemed to have been most attracted by the legend of Dionysus in India, which he made a central theme of his grand procession; but Soter himself presumably encouraged the cult of Dionysus, and the genealogy linking the god with the dynasty will have originated in his reign, if not with Alexander. If so, it is likely enough that Ptolemy referred to the tradition of Dionysus in India when he wrote his history and in particular reported the colonization of Nysa."

p. 202: The Theban origin of Dionysos is of particular importance, as it is through Deianeira, wife of Herakles and mother of Hyllos, that the god becomes an ancestor of Alexander and the Ptolemies.

p. 203: Bosworth accepts that there was some sort of attack on Nysa by Alexander, and that the Nysaeans quickly came to their senses.

p. 204: suggests that the story of the interview with Alexander results from one source (because told in oratio obliqua) - possibly Aristoboulos or even Nearchos.

"The overwhelming probability is that Ind.1.4-5, which is marginally fuller in detail, provided the material for Acuphis' speech".

"At Ind.1.5 Arrian adds that the foundation probably included volunteers from neighbouring communities. That makes Dionysus’ practice correspond to Alexander’s own (cf. 4.4.1, 22.5, 24.7 with notes), but it does not wholly suit Acuphis’ case that Nysa was founded by Dionysus’ non-Indian followers and should be treated differently from its neighbours. The tradition of Indian colonists is an embarrassment in this context and tacitly omitted.” (i.e. – from Acuphis’ speech. This strengthens all the more the case that Dionysos’ myth was influenced by Alexander! OA)

p. 205: Usually Nysa was the name of the mountain, here it is of the city. "One must assume that the Indian toponyms precluded the simple naming of the mountain after the Nysa of myth. It was the city-name which recalled the Greek Nysa, whereas the local name of the mountain was more akin to Meros. That involved the god in some inconsistency. The city he founded commemorated the mountain where he was reared; the neighbouring mountain was named after the circumstances of his birth." The personification of Nysa as a nurse may have preceded Alexander.



p. 206: The myth of Dionysus' second birth from the thigh (or knee) of Zeus is early and apparently popular. {...} In Alexander's time it was common currency. {...} But other traditions claim that the myth itself was a fabrication: Meros was an Indian name, and it was the ingenuity of Greek rationalists which excogitated the story of the thigh of Zeus (Curt. 8.10.12; Pliny NH 6.79; Mela 3.66). This version was in circulation at an early date and was accepted by Theophrastus (HP 4.4.1 … ). Clearly there are two explanations. Both accepted that Nysa was a Dionysiac foundation and that the neighbouring mountain was locally called Meros. For one school of interpreters the names themselves give rise to the stories of Dionysus’ concealment and second birth, and for another the stories were true, and inspired the god to name his new foundation after the scenes of his childhood. If Nearchus is Arrian’s source here, the credulous explanation was the earlier. It was subsequently modified by skeptical rationalization in the style of Hecataeus (cf. 2.16.5-6). p. 207: a-propos ἤθελε πιστὰ εἶναι: “the note of scepticism is interesting. Arrian implies that Alexander’s eagerness to believe the myth overrode its intrinsic implausibility.”


At Ind.5.9 Arrian accepts the occurrence of ivy, along with the survival of the place names, as evidence of the god's influence, and rejects Erastothenes's criticism (See Strabo 15.1.8). The phenomenon was widely discussed, notably by Theophrastus (H.P. 4.4.1), who noted the dearth of ivy elsewhere in Asia. Cleitarchus also must have devoted some attention to the ivy of Nysa, for he recorded its local name (skindapsos) and implied that it differed from the European ivy (FgrH 137 F 17).

p. 208: "The report, in direct speech, could in theory derive from any (or a combination) of Arrian's major sources. Its general flavour, however, seems most characteristic of Nearchus".

Concernign morale problems among the troops, Bosworth suggests again Nearchos as a source, based on a comparison with Ind. 20.4,8.

p. 210: on Alexander's demand of 300 dignitaries: "For all his expressed admiration of the Nysaean polity Alexander had not forgotten their original intention to resist him". He keeps these hostages until his return from the Hyphasis (6.2.3).

(עמ' 211) 5.2.2. אריאן לא ציין שבהר מרוס הייתה גפן, אבל כן שפע של קיסוס, דפנה ומטעים. קורטיוס וג'סטין כן הזכירו גפנים (8.10.13,5; ג'סטין 12.7.7). גם מגסתנס ציין כרמים בין השאר (סטראבו 15.1.58). נוכחות הגפנים הייתה חלק מהותי מהמסורת בתקופת ארסטותנס, העדרה אצל אריאן מרמזת על שלב מוקדם יותר בהיווצרות המסורת.

p. 212 "According to Curtius (8.10.17) the celebrations in Dionysus' honour took place over ten days. If so, it was a very thorough-going affair, and it would be remarkable if there were not some Dionysiac excesses".

(עמ' 213) לאור המסורות אודות סגידה בככית במקדוניא (ראה בעיקר פלוטרך, אלכסנדר 2.9), דיבוק כזה הוא לא מפתיע, אך קרה לרוב לנשים יותר מאשר לגברים ובהחלט אין עדות לכך אצל המקור הראשוני של אריאנוס לאירועים על הר מרוס.

הערות

כ

נמצא בשימוש ב...

מקום הולדתו של דיוניסוס בהיסטוריות של אלכסנדר

מיתוס דיוניסוס בעקבות אלכסנדר הגדול

קישורים נוספים

נמצא בספריית אוניברסיטת חיפה ב: PA3935.Z5B6