| Project/Area Number |
16520453
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
History of Europe and America
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Teikyo University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
MORITANI Kimitoshi Teikyo University, Faculty of Liberal Arts, Assistant Professor, 文学部, 助教授 (60183662)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2004 – 2006
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2006)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,400,000)
Fiscal Year 2006: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
Fiscal Year 2005: ¥800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000)
Fiscal Year 2004: ¥900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥900,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | Alexander the Great / Macedon / Achaemenid Persia / Ancient Greece / Hellenism / Plutarch / フェニキア / 東方遠征 / シリア / エジプト / ファラオ / バビロン / マルドゥク神 / オリエント / 王権の正統性 / 古代マケドニア王国 / ゴルディオンの結び目 / 古代ギリシア史 / 歴史家カリステネス / フリュギア / ミダス王 |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
The research result is a new translation of Plutarch Biography of Alexander the Great.
The reasons of the selecting of this work are following
(1) This was written 4 centuries after the death of Alexander, so utilizes many works of the lost historians.
(2) It describes not only the important events but also abundantly the daily and personal behaviors and saying of Alexander.
(3) It records the different and even contradictory traditions on the same events with the names of authors on each side.
(4) Plutarch' own comments often reflect the values and Alexander's images among the Romans in the early Imperial Age.
In such a way Plutarch Alexander is an important source for tracing the making and development of Alexander's myth from his reign and through the Hellenistic age to the Imperia Rome.
The main features of this work are following.
(1) The works utilized by Plutarch widely range from history, geography, religion and the sensational stories. Above all on Orient, he appears to assemble all the knowledge which the Romans then had.
(2) He estimates Alexander as an excellent King and General, almost revival of a Hero. He tends to excessively idealize Alexander's personality as in the case of his attitude toward to the Persian royal women. While he tires to apologize the king's faults such as the murder of companion.
(3) He describes the expedition in religious context with oracles and divine protection, so he tries to justify the behaviors of Alexander under the name of Gods. On the other hand he takes a critical stance against Alexander's regarding himself as son of God, which reflects the cool mind of the Romans toward deification of the human being.
|
