Este sitio utiliza cookies para ofrecer nuestros servicios, mejorar el rendimiento, análisis y (si no estás registrado) publicidad. Al usar LibraryThing reconoces que has leído y comprendido nuestros términos de servicio y política de privacidad. El uso del sitio y de los servicios está sujeto a estas políticas y términos.
The essays in this volume - written by twenty international scholars - are dedicated to Professor Brian Bosworth who has, in over forty-five years, produced arguably the most influential corpus of historical and historiographical research by one scholar. Professor Bosworth's name is often synonymous with scholarship on Alexander the Great, but his expertise also spreads far wider, as the scope of these essays demonstrates. The collection's coverage ranges from Egyptian and Homeric parallels, through Roman historiography, to Byzantine coinage. However, the life of Alexander provides the volume's central theme, and among the topics explored are the conqueror's resonance with mythological figures such as Achilles and Heracles, his divine pretensions and military display, and his motives for arresting his expedition at the River Hyphasis in India. Some of Alexander's political acts are also scrutinized, as are the identities of those supposedly present in the last symposium where, according to some sources, the fatal poison was administered to the king. Part of the collection focuses on Alexander's legacy, with seven essays examining the Successors, especially Craterus, and Ptolemy, and Alexander's ill-fated surviving dynasty, including Olympias, Eurydice, and Philip III Arrhidaeus. --Provided by publisher.… (más)
This collection of essays originated in a conference held in 2007 in honor of Brian Bosworth’s retirement from the University of Western Australia, Sydney. It is a rich and varied volume. To the original nine papers offered at the Sydney conference, six further contributions were added. Bosworth was one of the leading figures in Alexander scholarship of the past decades, perhaps the leading figure. His critical and sober work is hampered neither by the Alexander adoration nor the gratuitous Alexander bashing that pervades much academic writing on Alexander. His 1988 monograph Conquest and Empire stands out as the only comprehensive study of the Macedonian king’s reign that is not entitled Alexander the Great; it also stands out as perhaps the best of its kind. True to its title, Conquest and Empire is a work of History; it does not focus on Alexander’s person or perceived personality. It discusses conquest and empire. Sadly, Professor Bosworth passed away prior to the completion of the book under review.
Before turning to the individual papers, a few words about the volume in its entirety. The title, East and West in the World Empire of Alexander, beautifully evokes Conquest and Empire, and moreover suggests affinity with the Imperial Turn in recent historical research. The subject "East and West" (note the word order) suggests a strong focus on Babylonia, Iran and Central Asia. The title, however, is misleading. None of the essays is concerned with the theme of (universal) empire, and only a few offer non-Greek viewpoints or dare to challenge the unfortunate East-West dichotomy that underlies both the text-based "Classical" approach to the Macedonian expansion and the postcolonial "Orient"-centric reaction to that approach. In fact, only three contributions venture beyond the westernmost edge of Alexander’s Empire: Anson’s paper on Alexander in India (based however on western narrative sources only), Cohen's discussion of Hellenistic settlements in the Middle East, and Wheatley’s excellent discussion of Babylonian and Aramaic chronographic evidence. All others remain safely within viewing distance of the Mediterranean. Absent furthermore are contributions by scholars from continental Europe, and some papers are handicapped by lack of references to recent scholarship in French and German.
The essays in this volume - written by twenty international scholars - are dedicated to Professor Brian Bosworth who has, in over forty-five years, produced arguably the most influential corpus of historical and historiographical research by one scholar. Professor Bosworth's name is often synonymous with scholarship on Alexander the Great, but his expertise also spreads far wider, as the scope of these essays demonstrates. The collection's coverage ranges from Egyptian and Homeric parallels, through Roman historiography, to Byzantine coinage. However, the life of Alexander provides the volume's central theme, and among the topics explored are the conqueror's resonance with mythological figures such as Achilles and Heracles, his divine pretensions and military display, and his motives for arresting his expedition at the River Hyphasis in India. Some of Alexander's political acts are also scrutinized, as are the identities of those supposedly present in the last symposium where, according to some sources, the fatal poison was administered to the king. Part of the collection focuses on Alexander's legacy, with seven essays examining the Successors, especially Craterus, and Ptolemy, and Alexander's ill-fated surviving dynasty, including Olympias, Eurydice, and Philip III Arrhidaeus. --Provided by publisher.
Before turning to the individual papers, a few words about the volume in its entirety. The title, East and West in the World Empire of Alexander, beautifully evokes Conquest and Empire, and moreover suggests affinity with the Imperial Turn in recent historical research. The subject "East and West" (note the word order) suggests a strong focus on Babylonia, Iran and Central Asia. The title, however, is misleading. None of the essays is concerned with the theme of (universal) empire, and only a few offer non-Greek viewpoints or dare to challenge the unfortunate East-West dichotomy that underlies both the text-based "Classical" approach to the Macedonian expansion and the postcolonial "Orient"-centric reaction to that approach. In fact, only three contributions venture beyond the westernmost edge of Alexander’s Empire: Anson’s paper on Alexander in India (based however on western narrative sources only), Cohen's discussion of Hellenistic settlements in the Middle East, and Wheatley’s excellent discussion of Babylonian and Aramaic chronographic evidence. All others remain safely within viewing distance of the Mediterranean. Absent furthermore are contributions by scholars from continental Europe, and some papers are handicapped by lack of references to recent scholarship in French and German.