An enquiry into the ancient routes between Italy and Gaul : with an examination of the theory of Hannibal's passage of the Alps by the Little St. Bernard
著者
書誌事項
An enquiry into the ancient routes between Italy and Gaul : with an examination of the theory of Hannibal's passage of the Alps by the Little St. Bernard
(Cambridge library collection)
Cambridge University Press, 2014
- : pbk
大学図書館所蔵 全1件
  青森
  岩手
  宮城
  秋田
  山形
  福島
  茨城
  栃木
  群馬
  埼玉
  千葉
  東京
  神奈川
  新潟
  富山
  石川
  福井
  山梨
  長野
  岐阜
  静岡
  愛知
  三重
  滋賀
  京都
  大阪
  兵庫
  奈良
  和歌山
  鳥取
  島根
  岡山
  広島
  山口
  徳島
  香川
  愛媛
  高知
  福岡
  佐賀
  長崎
  熊本
  大分
  宮崎
  鹿児島
  沖縄
  韓国
  中国
  タイ
  イギリス
  ドイツ
  スイス
  フランス
  ベルギー
  オランダ
  スウェーデン
  ノルウェー
  アメリカ
注記
Reprint. Originally published: Cambridge : Deighton, Bell, 1867
内容説明・目次
内容説明
The controversy over the route taken by Hannibal, the Carthaginian army and his famous elephants in their crossing of the Alps to attack Rome in 218 BCE began within fifty years of the event and has continued for many centuries. A particular scholarly dispute emerged in the 1850s between Robert Ellis (1819/20-85) and William John Law (1786-1869), and was fought in the pages of the Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology and in books. Ellis, a classical scholar, had surveyed the Alpine passes in 1852 and again in 1853, when he published his Treatise on Hannibal's Passage of the Alps (also reissued in this series), claiming that the Little Mount Cenis route was the one used. Law responded immediately in the Journal, and later published his own theory, to which Ellis riposted in 1867 with this work. Modern scholarship doubts, however, that either man was right.
目次
- Preface
- Note
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Further objections against the Little St Bernard
- 3. Extent of the Cottian land determined
- 4. The positions of Ocelum and Scingomagus determined
- 5. On the pass of Artemidorus
- 6. On the pass opened by Pompey
- 7. Decline of the Mont Cenis in importance
- 8. Two routes on the Peutingerian table
- Appendix.
「Nielsen BookData」 より