tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18495377.post114711375040776358..comments2024-03-21T21:02:23.975+00:00Comments on Imprompto: O papiro de Artemidoro de ÉfesoBalsensehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05426612310757412096noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18495377.post-1164898106545762372006-11-30T14:48:00.000+00:002006-11-30T14:48:00.000+00:00Thank you for your interesting comment.It is beyon...Thank you for your interesting comment.<BR/><BR/>It is beyond me to give any opinion about the authenticity of the manuscript.<BR/><BR/>About the sources of Arthemidorus it must be noted that he was personally in Iberia by 105 b.C., joining undoubtly some Roman military mission.<BR/><BR/>I cannot presume which were his geographic sources in the Mediterranean coast, but in the Southwest they surely were Roman.<BR/><BR/>The old Gaditan harbours of Ipses and Salacia were having, for the first time, effective naval-military occupation, after the end of the great Lusitanian Wars. <BR/>They were essential for the Roman control of the Tagus stuary and access to mid-Lusitania from the naval headquarter in Gades.<BR/><BR/>So, he surely translated the naval distances from Latin to Greek, at least in this area. The mistake of line 31 might very well originate then, or even before, in a previous Latin copy. We cannot therefore relate the mistake with an eventual forgery.<BR/> <BR/>(About Ipses and these subjects you may see http://imprompto.blogspot.com/2005/11/ipses.html and the pdf poster about Ipses linked there, a resume of a study I still had no opportunity to publish).<BR/><BR/>GreetingsBalsensehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05426612310757412096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18495377.post-1164878688383849982006-11-30T09:24:00.000+00:002006-11-30T09:24:00.000+00:00Now that many scholars consider this papyrus a for...Now that many scholars consider this papyrus a forgery, what do you think of all these "strange mistakes" in giving the positions of the spanish cities and places and the distances that separate them? As for this, I think that the most interesting mistake is in line 31: perhaps who created this "thing" misunderstood a number written in arabic numerals, 240, trivializing it into 24. This is impossible to happen in ancient greek! 24 is written as kappa-delta, 240 as sigma-my! These two numbers are absolutely different in handwriting; it seems to be a "conceptual mistake", but in this case we should suppose that who wrote the papyrus translated into greek (a very bad greek) a text written in another language, where there were arabic numerals...<BR/>What do you think about it? Thank you of your answer!<BR/>A young scholar.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com