Jump to content

Commentarii (Ptolemaeus I)

Nexus addere
E Vicipaedia
Ptolemaei I protome Luparensis

Commentarii[1] sive De rebus Alexandri[2] fuit opus a rege Ptolemaeo scriptum in tres vel plures libros divisum, hodie deperditum, de rebus a se et ab Alexandro Macedoni gestis. Neque ratio neque tempus operis conscribendi cognoscuntur.

Multa ex hoc opere sumpsit Arrianus ad Anabasin Alexandri contextandam. Alii perpauci opus Ptolemaei aut legerunt aut citaverunt.

De natura operis

[recensere | fontem recensere]
Alexandri Magni imago ab eruditis Pyrgoteli, regis ipsius sculptori, adscripta, et fortasse circa annum 325 facta.

Sunt qui magnam partem narrationis Arriani in Anabase scriptae e Commentariis Ptolemaei demptam esse censentur; etiamsi haec res dubia sit, haud incertum est plurimas proeliorum descriptiones a Ptolemaeo scriptas, ab Arriano recitatas esse. Inter has enumerari debent pugna contra Triballos (cf. F 1 infra); proelium ad Granicum;[3] proelium Issicum (cf. F 6), ad Gaugamelam (cf. F 10), ad Hydaspen contra Porum gestum (cf. F 20); proelium ad Acesinem factum (cf. F 22). Proeliorum autem priora, Ptolemaeo non iam dux exercituum fungente, curis minoribus describuntur; obsidio urbis Mallorum (cf. F 25-26) et proelium ad Polytimetum flumen,[4] Ptolemaeo alibi militante, sine peritia narrantur; sed Ptolemaeo adeunte res minores, lectoribus gratas, Arrianus (Ptolemaeo certe utens) saepe inserere potuit.[5]

De indole Alexandri, de Cleito, Philota, Parmenione, Callisthene occisis, de convivio novissimo et regis ipsius morte, Ptolemaeum pauca dixisse constat et nihil quod non iam aliter publici iuris esset;[6] de talibus rebus "retentionem strictam praeceptive selectimque exercuit" (practis[ed] a highly selective and purposeful reserve).[7]

De conspiratione (si talis sit) Philotae, quam Ptolemaeus et Leonnatus Alexandro revelaverint,[8] Ptolemaeus de actis suis sed non Leonnati scripsisse videtur (F 13).[9] Hoc casu sicut aliis, in narrationibus de coaevis aemulisque suis recognoscitur mixtura suppressionis veri suggestionisque rerum falsarum ("the mixture of suppressio ueri and suggestio falsi").[10] Praesertim Perdiccam aut in historiam ratione mala et contra alium fontem introduxit, e.g. de Thebarum obsidione (F 3),[11] aut ex historia ratione mala et contra alium fontem exclusit: sed haec res e textu Anabasis Arriani derivantur, Ptolemaeo certe fonte usuali sed non nominatim citato.[12]

Eo tempore quo Alexander per "Pylas Susidas(en)" a Media in Persidem per proelium(en) intrabat, Ptolemaeum virtutes suas praeter aliorum in Commentariis iactavisse constat: Arrianus enim, qui opus Ptolemaei in rebus militaribus sequi solebat, incursionem a Ptolemaeo adiutam narrat (Anabasis Alexandri 3.18.9, sine citatione fontis), Curtio in Historiis (5.4.30) res aliter describente.[13]

Sunt qui Ptolemaeum senem et mox moriturum opus suum composuisse suadent.[14] Nonnulli autem eum annis circiter 310 scribisse censent,[15] quo tempore utile fuerit mythos de origine et virtute Ptolemaei regis futuri et de religione Aegyptia diffundere (e.g. F 8).[16][17] Eruditi olim censebantur Ptolemaeum res plurimas e documentis regiis et praesertim ex ephemeridibus aulicis sumpsisse,[18] sed haec opinio sustineri non potest.[19]

De fortuna operis

[recensere | fontem recensere]

An Aristobulus, qui iam senex post annum fere 295 vitam Alexandri scripserit, libros Ptolemaei cognovisset, incertum est: is Cleiti mors alio modo, quam Ptolemaeus, narraverit, Ptolemaeo heroë. Cleitarchus taliter obsidionem urbis Mallorum alio modo, quam Ptolemaeus (F 26), narravit, Ptolemaeo rursus heroë: an Ptolemaeum scienter contradixerit haud scimus. Curtius nihilominus, eandem rem describens, scripta Ptolemaei Cleitarchique comparavit; ille ergo opus Ptolemaei cognovit. Plutarchus bis et brevissime Ptolemaeum citavit (F 4, 28). Quibus exceptis geographi tantum legerunt et de rebus minimis citaverunt (Strabo [F 2], Stephanus Byzantinus [F 5]) nisi sit de urbe Alexandria Eschate ad flumen "Tanaim" (re vera ad Iaxartem) condita: de urbe et flumine idem Stephanus (F 31) et Anonymus Ravennas (F 32-33) Ptolemaeum citaverunt, Arrianusque descriptionem longam dedit sine nomine Ptolemaei (F 34-35).[20]

Arrianus solus in Anabase Alexandri Ptolemaeum crebriter citavit (vide enumerationem) atque res alias e Ptolemaeo dempsit: confitetur enim se Ptolemaeum et Aristobulum tamquam fontes principales et continuos adhibere.[21] Libro VII Anabasis Arrianus tris tantum Ptolemaeum citavit (F 28-30), unde censetur eum ultimos menses Alexandri describentem multo rarius Ptolemaeo usum esse;[22] eodem libro Aristobulum nonies citavit (videlicet FGrHist 139 F 52-56, 58, 60-62).

Eruditi olim Ptolemaeum rerum gestarum scriptorem praecellentem fuisse adseveraverunt,[23] qui librum suum praesertim ad honorem Alexandri destinaverit conquisitorem ducemque quem secutus erat.[24] Recentiores nonnulli commentarios Ptolemaei ad potestatem suam corroborandam virtutesque aemulorum deminuendas divulgatos esse proposuerunt.[25]

Fragmenta nobis servata

[recensere | fontem recensere]

Haec enumeratio fragmentorum ex editione Felici Jacoby demitur:

Dubia
Fragmentis 32-33 hi textus (sine nomine Ptolemaei servati) fortasse relevant

Editores papyrorum Oxyrhynchi suggesserunt papyrum 679, parvum et lacunosum, verba e commentariis Ptolemaei servare de bello in Cilicia gesto; editor papyri Cairensis inv. 49653, de bello ab Alexandro in India gesto disserentis, talem identificationem proponit. Abnuente autem Pearson, dubitante Denuzzo, res incertae manent.

Notae

[recensere | fontem recensere]
  1. ↑ "Commentariorum fragmenta": Geier (1844) p. 5: "Ptolemaei vita et commentarii": Hulleman (1844) p. 3. Cf. "Les Hypomnemata perdus de Ptolémée Lagou" apud Paul Goukowsky, "Clitarque seul? Remarques sur les sources du livre XVII de Diodore de Sicile" in Revue des études anciennes vol. 71 (1969) pp. 320-337: Hypomnemata quo fonte? Opus hoc titulo scripserit Ptolemaeus VIII.
  2. ↑ "De rebus Alexandri": Müller (1846) p. 87
  3. ↑ Arrianus, Anabasis Alexandri 1.13-14. Pearson (1960) p. 205 n. 69
  4. ↑ Arrianus, Anabasis Alexandri 4.6.1-2
  5. ↑ Pearson (1960) pp. 195-205 passim
  6. ↑ Pearson (1960) pp. 208-211
  7. ↑ Badian (1961) p. 258
  8. ↑ Curtius, Historiae Alexandri Magni 8.6.22
  9. ↑ Errington (1969) p. 234
  10. ↑ Badian (1961) p. 666, reimpr. p. 258
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Errington (1969) p. 237; Roisman (1984) p. 374; "There is no doubt that this whole chapter is extracted from Ptolemy. It was only the opening statement about Perdiccas that struck [Arrian] as controversial ... but it is an uncomfortable fact that his narrative differs from the other extant sources in almost every way": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 p. 80
  12. ↑ Errington (1969) pp. 236-238; de incertitudinibus Roisman (1984) pp. 374-378
  13. ↑ C. Bradford Welles in Miscellanea di studi alessandrini in memoria di Augusto Rostagni (Taurinis, 1963) pp. 101-116 ad p. 107; Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 pp. 328-329; Tim Howe, "Introducing Ptolemy: Alexander and the Persian Gates" in Waldemar Heckel et al., edd., The Many Faces of War in the Ancient World (Novi Castelli: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015) pp. 166-195
  14. ↑ Pearson (1960) p. 193 sqq.
  15. ↑ Errington (1969) pp. 241-242
  16. ↑ Badian (1961) reimpr. p. 258
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 "Ptolemy's snakes seem a deliberate variant of Callisthenes' story ... As the cult animals of Ammon ... they were more appropriate guides, and they may have been intended to recall the rumours of Olympias' impregnation ... Ptolemy has transformed an exaggeration into a deliberate falsehood": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 pp. 272-273
  18. ↑ Gustav Droysen, Geschichte des Hellenismus pars 1 (2a ed. Gothae, 1877-1878) fasc. 2 pp. 383-386; Ulrich Wilcken, "Ὑπομνηματισμοί" in Philologus vol. 53 (1894) pp. 80-126; N. G. L. Hammond, "The royal journal of Alexander" in Historia vol. 37 (1988) pp. 129-150 ad notam 7 JSTOR; alii multi
  19. ↑ Impossible to sustain: Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 p. 23
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Pearson (1960) pp. 202-204
  21. ↑ Arrianus, Anabasis Alexandri 1.1
  22. ↑ Roisman (1984) p. 379; "in the account of [Alexander’s] last days [Arrian’s] principal source is Aristobulus": K. Nawotka, "Arrian on the last days and the death of Alexander" in R. Rollinger, J. Degen, edd., The world of Alexander in perspective (Wiesbaden, 2022) pp. 13–24 ad p. 18
  23. ↑ Jacoby (1926-1930) "Kommentar" pp. 498-500; Kornemann (1935) pp. 170, 208 sqq., 260; Tarn (1948) pp. 1-2
  24. ↑ Roisman (1984) pp. 384-385
  25. ↑ Fritz Schachermeyr, Alexander in Babylon und die Reichsordnung nach seinem Tode (Vindobonae, 1970) p. 89 sqq. exemplar mutuabile; Errington (1969)
  26. ↑ Pearson (1960) pp. 205-206; "There is little doubt that the entire battle narrative is taken from Ptolemy": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 p. 60
  27. ↑ Pearson (1960) pp. 196-198; "The description ... seems an embellishment upon Callisthenes ... Ptolemy has added a touch of romantic fiction": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 p. 217
  28. ↑ Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 pp. 220-221
  29. ↑ Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 p. 274
  30. ↑ Pearson (1960) p. 189
  31. ↑ "Curtius' account is plausible [Curtius 5.3.12-15] ... The error is Ptolemy's": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 pp. 323-324
  32. ↑ Errington (1969) p. 234; "The execution of [Alexander] the Lyncestian is omitted by Ptolemy/Arrian, but it clearly lingered in Ptolemy's mind strongly enough for him to transfer the mode of execution to Philotas and his alleged associates": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 pp. 359-362
  33. ↑ "Ptolemy exaggerated his role in the capture of Bessus": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 1 pp. 375-377
  34. ↑ "If there is a bias, it is likely to be in Ptolemy, deliberately understating the resistance of the rebels": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 2 pp. 21-22
  35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 2 pp. 98-100
  36. ↑ Squillace (2018)
  37. ↑ "The numbers defy belief ... A gross exaggeration ... It was propaganda well suited to the contemporary world": Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 2 pp. 158-167
  38. ↑ Pearson (1960) pp. 198-201; Badian (1961) p. 257; Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 2 pp. 287-291; Timothy Howe, "Plutarch, Arrian and the Hydaspes: an historiographical approach" in Cinzia Bearzot, Franca Landucci Gattinoni, edd., Alexander's legacy: Atti del Convegno, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milano 2015 (Romae: L'Erma di Bretschneider, 2015) pp. 25-39
  39. ↑ Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 2 p. 318
  40. ↑ Pearson (1960) pp. 202-204; Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 2 p. 323
  41. ↑ Bosworth (1980-1995) vol. 2 pp. 355-356
  42. ↑ Hamilton (1969) pp. 123-127

Bibliographia

[recensere | fontem recensere]
Editiones fragmentorum
Eruditio
  • E. Badian, recensio operis Pearson (1960) in Gnomon vol. 33 (1961) pp. 660-667; reimpressa in E. Badian, Studies in Greek and Roman history (Oxoniae: Blackwell, 1964) pp. 250-261, praecipue pp. 256-258
  • Elizabeth Baynham, "The ancient evidence for Alexander the Great" in J. Roisman, ed., Brill's Companion to Alexander the Great (Lugduni Batavorum: Brill, 2003) pp. 3–29
  • A. B. Bosworth, A historical commentary on Arrian’s History of Alexander: voll. 1-2 (Oxonii: Clarendon Press, 1980-1995) vol. 1 pp. 16-27 et alibi
  • A. Brian Bosworth, "Aristotle, India and the Alexander Historians" in Topoi. Orient-Occident vol. 3 no. 2 (1993) pp. 407-424
  • A. B. Bosworth, E. J. Baynham, edd., Alexander the Great in fact and fiction (Oxonii: Oxford University Press, 2000)
  • Ivana Denuzzo, "Le storie di Alessandro Magno nei papiri" in Papyrologica Lupiensia no. 12 (2003)
  • R. M. Errington, "Bias in Ptolemy's History of Alexander" in Classical Quarterly vol. 19 (1969) pp. 233-242 JSTOR
  • Robertus Geier, De Ptolemaei Lagidae vita et commentariorum fragmentis commentatio. Halae Saxonum: formis Orphanotrophei, 1838 (Ad scholae Latinae in Orphanotropheo Halensi examen sollemne ... 5 Apr. 1838) (Latine) (Textus apud Google Books)
  • J. R. Hamilton, Plutarch: Alexander. A commentary (Oxonii: Clarendon Press, 1969) pp. liv-lv et alibi
  • N. G. L. Hammond, Sources for Alexander the Great: an analysis of Plutarch's Life and Arrian's Anabasis Alexandrou. Cantabrigiae: Cambridge University Press, 1993
  • Timothy Howe, "Kings Don't Lie: Truthtelling, Historiography and Ptolemy I Soter" in T. Howe, ed., Ptolemy I Soter: a self-made man (Oxoniae: Oxbow Books, 2018) pp. 155-184
  • E. Kornemann, Die Alexandergeschichte des Königs Ptolemaios' I. von Aegypten: Versuch einer Rekonstruktion. Lipsiae: Teubner, 1935
  • Lionel Pearson, The lost histories of Alexander the Great (Novi Eboraci, 1960) pp. 188-211 et alibi
  • Paul Pédech, Historiens compagnons d'Alexandre (Lutetiae: Les Belles Lettres, 1984) pp. 215-330
  • Frances Pownall, "Arrian’s Propinquity to Ptolemy and Aristobulus: A Reassessment" in Robert Rollinger, Julian Degen, edd., The world of Alexander in perspective: contextualizing Arrian (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2022)
  • Joseph Roisman, "Ptolemy and his rivals in his history of Alexander" in Classical quarterly vol. 34 (1984) pp. 373-385 JSTOR
  • Giuseppe Squillace, "Alexander after Alexander: Macedonian propaganda and historical memory in Ptolemy and Aristobulus' writings" in K. R. Moore, ed., Brill's companion to the reception of Alexander the Great (Lugduni Batavorum: Brill, 2018) pp. 119-139
  • H. Strasburger, Ptolemaios und Alexander. Lipsiae: Teubner, 1934
  • W. W. Tarn, Alexander the Great. Vol. 2: Sources and studies (Cantabrigiae, 1948) pp. 1-2, 268, 443 et alibi
  • C. Bradford Welles, "The reliability of Ptolemy as an historian" in Miscellanea di studi alessandrini in memoria di A. Rostagni (Augustae Taurinorum: Chiantore, 1963) pp. 101-116
  • Andrea Zambrini, "The historians of Alexander the Great" in John Marincola, ed., A companion to Greek and Roman historiography (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011) pp. 210-220

Nexus interni


De hac re nexus intervici usque adhuc absunt. Adde, si reppereris.
Receptum de "https://la.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commentarii_(Ptolemaeus_I)&oldid=3793618"