by Peter Watson
105. Wells, Op. cit., page 245.
106. Ibid.
107. Ibid., page 103.
108. Ibid., page 40. See Moynahan, Op. cit., page 16, for a clear account of the deposition.
109. Rowland, Op. cit., page 189.
110. Ibid.
111. Ibid., pages 191–192. See Moynahan, Op. cit., page 19, on the role of women.
112. Shorto, Op. cit., page 147.
113. Ibid., pages 160–161.
114. In October 2002 a limestone ossuary was found, allegedly south of the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem. The box had actually been looted but the Geological Survey of Israel confirmed that the limestone did come from the Jerusalem area. What was notable about the box was that it was inscribed, in Aramaic, with the words ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’. According to Professor André Lemaire, of the Sorbonne in Paris, the style of writing dated the ossuary to between AD 10 and AD 70. The names James, Joseph and Jesus were not uncommon at the time: 233 first-century ossuaries have been found and nineteen mention Joseph, ten Jesus and five James (Ya’aqov in Aramaic). Given a male population of Jerusalem of about 40,000, and assuming that each man had two brothers, Professor Lemaire has calculated that there would have been about twenty men at the time who were ‘James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus’. But, given that James (mentioned as Jesus’ brother in both Matthew and Mark), was the leader of the Jerusalem church until AD 62, when he was stoned to death as a heretic, and that Jesus would also have been well known, Professor Lemaire argues that the odds on the ossuary really referring to Jesus Christ would be shorter than twenty to one. It was very rare for brothers to be mentioned in ossuaries and, of the 233 known, only one other case mentions brothers. In fact, doubts have since emerged about the authenticity of the box, which is now regarded as a fake. Daily Mail (London), 24 October 2002, page 13.
115. Vermes, Op. cit., page 140.
116. Ibid., pages 154ff.
117. Ibid., page 26.
118. Frederiksen, Op. cit., page 39.
119. Ibid., page 135.
CHAPTER 8: ALEXANDRIA, OCCIDENT AND ORIENT IN THE YEAR 0
1. G. J. Whitrow, Time in History, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1988, page 70.
2. E. G. Richards, Mapping Time, Op. cit., page 7.
3. Whitrow, Op. cit., page 32.
4. Richards, Op. cit., pages 82–83. For the doubts on Babylonian influence in China, see: Endymion Wilkinson, Chinese History: A Manual (revised and enlarged edition), Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London Harvard University Asia Center, for the Harvard-Yenching Institute, distributed by Harvard University Press, 2000, page 177.
5. Whitrow, Op. cit., page 95. Wilkinson, Op. cit., page 171.
6. Whitrow, Op. cit., page 32.
7. Ibid., page 271. Moon lore is treated in twenty-three cuneiform tablets in the library of Ashurbanipal. See: A. Leo Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964, page 225.
8. Whitrow, Op. cit., page 26.
9. Ibid., page 39.
10. Richards, Op. cit., 95.
11. Ibid., page 106.
12. Ibid., page 222.
13. Whitrow, Op. cit., page 57.
14. Richards, Op. cit., page 207.
15. Whitrow, Op. cit., page 66.
16. Richards, Op. cit., page 215.
17. Whitrow, Op. cit., page 66.
18. Though it was also said that he wanted to commemorate Cleopatra, who had committed suicide in that month. Richards, Op. cit., page 215.
19. Whitrow, Op. cit., page 68.
20. Richards, Op. cit., pages 218–219.
21. Empereur, Op. cit., page 15. Peter Green, ‘Alexander’s Alexandria’, Kenneth Hamma (editor), Alexandria and Alexandrianism, Malibu, California: J. Paul Getty Museum, 1996, page 11.
22. Roy Macleod (editor), The Library of Alexandria, London: I. B. Tauris, 2000, page 36. Günter Grimm, ‘City planning?’, in Hamma (editor), Op. cit., page 66.
23. Empereur, Op. cit., page 3.
24. Ibid., page 4.
25. Theodore Vrettos, Alexandria: City of the Western Mind, New York and London: Free Press, 2001, pages 34–35. Lilly Kahil, ‘Cults in Hellenistic Alexandria’ in Hamma (editor), Op. cit., page 77.
26. Empereur, Op. cit., page 6.
27. Ibid., page 7. A brief overview of Alexandrian scholarship is given in E. M. Forster, Alexandria: A History and a Guide (editor, Miriam Allott), London: André Deutsch, 2004, pages 34–35.
28. Vrettos, Op. cit., pages 52–53.
29. Ibid., page 55.
30. Ibid., page 42.
31. Empereur, Op. cit. pages 6–7.
32. Carl Boyer, revised by Uta C. Merzbach, A History of Mathematics (second edition), New York: John Wiley, 1968/1991, pages 104f.
33. Vrettos, Op. cit., page 43. The originals of many of Euclid’s works have been lost and they survive only in Arabic translations, later rendered into Latin and modern languages. Among those completely lost is one which may consist of his most original idea, Porisms. It is not quite clear what a porism was to Euclid but from later commentators it appears to have been a conception intermediate between a theorem and a problem. Boyer, Op. cit., page 101.
34. Lindberg, Op. cit., page 87.
35. Vrettos, Op. cit., page 50.
36. Ettore Carruccio, Mathematics and Logic in History and Contemporary Thought, London: Faber, 1964, pages 80–83.
37. Lindberg, Op. cit., page 88. Archimedes also developed ‘the method’. This, which explained his way of working, came to light in the most colourful of fashions. It was recovered almost by accident in 1906 by the Danish historian of science, J. L. Heiberg. He had read that at Constantinople there was a palimpsest ‘of mathematical content’. Boyer, Op. cit., page 139. A palimpsest is a parchment from which the original writing has been washed away and written over with a new text. Heiberg found that on this occasion the original writing had been imperfectly removed and, with the aid of photographs, he could read the original. This turned out to be a letter written by Archimedes to Eratosthenes, mathematician and librarian at Alexandria, containing fifteen propositions outlining his way of working which included, in some cases, hanging threads as one balances weights in mechanisms, to test his calculations. In other words, The Method explains how Archimedes went from levers to more advanced maths using the same principles. Ibid., page 137.
38. Lindberg, Op. cit., page 89.
39. Vrettos, Op. cit., page 58.
40. Ibid., pages 60ff.
41. Boyer, Op. cit., pages 140ff.
42. Lindberg, Op. cit., page 97.
43. Vrettos, Op. cit., pages 163–168.
44. Ibid.
45. Ibid.
46. Ibid., page 177.
47. Ibid., page 185.
48. Ibid., page 195.
49. Lindberg, Op. cit., page 97.
50. Heinrich von Staden, ‘Body and machine: interactions between medicine, mechanics and philosophy in early Alexandria’, in: Hamma (editor), Op. cit., pages 85ff.
51. Von Staden, Op. cit., page 87.
52. Ibid., page 89.
53. Ibid., page 92.
54. Ibid., page 95.
55. Lindberg, Op. cit., page 105. In Alexandria, doctors could be divided into those using folklore remedies, practitioners who could not read and write, and literate doctors, who sought to gain experience by reading texts, and translations of texts, from all over the world, studying theories and practices that other doctors used, or said that they used, seeking authority in the past.
56. Ibid.
57. Empereur, Op. cit., page 7.
58. Ibid., page 8.
59. Richards, Op. cit., page 173.
60. Ibid., page 27.
61. John Keay, India: A History, London: HarperCollins, 2000, pages 130–133.
62. Jean S. Sedlar, India and the Greek World, Totowa, New Jersey: Rowman & Littlefield, 1980, page 65.
63. Sedlar, Op. cit., page 82.
64. Ib
id., page 84.
65. Ibid., page 92–93.
66. Radhakamal Mukerjee, The Culture and Art of India, London: Allen & Unwin, 1959, page 99.
67. Ibid., page 107.
68. Sedlar, Op. cit., page 109.
69. Ibid., page 111.
70. Ibid., page 112.
71. Ibid., page 122. H. G. Keene Cie, History of India, London: W. H. Allen, 1893, pages 28–29, dismisses this, arguing that Buddha emerged out of Brahmanism, which may also have given elements to early Judaism and thence to Christianity.
72. Sedlar, Op. cit., page 180.
73. Ibid., page 176.
74. Ibid., page 180.
75. Ibid., page 187.
76. Keay, Op. cit., page 78.
77. Ibid., page 85. Chandragupta was a Jain and retired to Karnataka, at Stravana Belgola, west of Bangalore. There, in a cave in a hill, the emperor is said to have starved himself to death, ‘the ultimate act of Jain self-denial’. Apparently, the emperor, so successful in many ways, abdicated after learning of an imminent famine from a famous monk, Bhadrabahu, said to be the last Jain monk to have known the founder of the faith, Mahavira Nataputta. Ibid., page 86.
78. A. L. Basham (editor), A Cultural History of India, Oxford and New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1975, page 42.
79. Ibid., page 88. For the Pali/Prakrit scripts, see Richard Lannoy, The Speaking Tree: A Study of Indian Culture and Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1971, page 328.
80. Keay, Op. cit., page 89.
81. Ibid., page 97. See Keene Cie, Op. cit., pages 34–35 for some of the alliances formed by Ashoka, and for the spread of Brahmanism.
82. Keay, Op. cit., page 80.
83. Mukerjee, Op. cit., page 91.
84. Keay, Op. cit., page 81.
85. Ralph Turner, The Great Cultural Traditions, volume II, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1941, pages 758–759.
86. Ibid., page 760.
87. Ibid., page 762.
88. Basham (editor), Op. cit., page 171.
89. Ibid., pages 170–171.
90. Keay, Op. cit., pages 44–47.
91. Ibid., page 101.
92. Ibid., page 103. See Keene Cie, Op. cit., pages 29ff, for the India known to the Greeks.
93. Basham (editor), Op. cit., page 116.
94. Ibid., page 122.
95. Keay, Op. cit., page 104.
96. D. P. Singhal, India and World Civilisation, volume 1, London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1972, page 272. Indian traders and missionaries extended their influence in south-east Asia. Excavations in the Mekong delta, in what is now Vietnam, have uncovered stone statues of Vishnu and other Hindu deities dating to the second century AD. Other finds support the idea that writing was introduced into south-east Asia from India.
97. Fairbanks, Op. cit., pages 72ff.
98. Richards, Op. cit., page 170. Wilkinson, Op. cit., pages 388ff, for the origins of Chinese script and the discovery of oracle bones; page 175 for the ganzhi system; pages 181 for the various words for year; page 202 for the 100 units; page 225 for approximate and authoritative numbers; page 241 for anti-falsification devices.
99. Richards, Op. cit., page 166. Wilkinson, Op. cit., page 206 for the meal drum and curfew.
100. Fairbanks, Op. cit., page 62.
101. Ibid., page 63.
102. Ibid., page 64.
103. Ibid., page 65. Charles O. Hucker, China’s Imperial Past, London: Duckworth, 1975, pages 194ff, says it was still being written in the second century BC.
104. Fairbanks, Op. cit., page 65.
105. Jacques Gernet, A History of Chinese Civilisation (second edition), Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1982, page 163. (French edition: Paris: Librairie Armand Colin, 1972; translated by J. R. Foster and Charles Hartman.)
106. Fairbanks, Op. cit., page 70. See also: Wilkinson, Op. cit., page 476, for the derivation of the word for ‘classic’.
107. Gernet, Op. cit., pages 163–164.
108. Ibid., page 167.
109. Fairbank, Op. cit., page 67 and Gernet, Op. cit., page 159. By the mid-second century AD, some 30,000 students were reported at the academy, though presumably not all were resident at the same time. (China then had a population of about 60 million.)
110. Fairbank, Op. cit., page 68.
111. Hucker, Op. cit., page 56.
112. Gernet, Op. cit., page 160.
113. Turner, Op. cit., page 776.
114. Ibid., page 777.
115. Ibid., page 778.
116. Ibid.
117. Hucker, Op. cit., page 213.
118. Gernet, Op. cit., page 124.
119. Fairbanks, Op. cit., page 63.
120. Gernet, Op. cit., page 140.
121. Ibid., pages 131–132.
122. Ibid., pages 134–135. See Werner Eichhorn, Chinese Civilisation, London: Faber & Faber, 1969, page 155, for a discussion of the economics of silk and the etymology of the words. (The Chinese word for silk is ssu.)
123. Gernet, Op. cit., page 141.
124. Eichhorn, Op. cit., page 114 for an example of his poetry. Gernet, Op. cit., page 162.
125. Hucker, Op. cit., page 200.
126. Jonathan Bloom, Paper Before Print: The History and Impact of Paper in the Islamic World, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001, page 32.
127. Ibid., page 33.
128. Ibid., page 34.
129. Ibid., page 36.
130. Gernet, Op. cit., pages 168–169.
CHAPTER 9: LAW, LATIN, LITERACY AND THE LIBERAL ARTS
1. Lionel Casson, Libraries in the Ancient World, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001, pages 26–28.
2. Ibid., page 68.
3. Ibid.
4. Joseph Farrell, Latin Language and Latin Culture, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2001, page 32.
5. Jones et al., The World of Rome, Op. cit., page 7.
6. Ibid., page 7.
7. Ibid., page 9.
8. Michael Grant, The World of Rome, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1960, page 26.
9. Jones et al., Op. cit., page 84.
10. Ibid.
11. Ibid., page 96.
12. Grant, Op. cit., page 13.
13. Jones et al., Op. cit., page 116.
14. Ibid., page 118.
15. Grant, Op. cit., page 27.
16. Jones et al., Op. cit., page 121.
17. J. D. Bernal, Science in History, volume 1, London: Penguin, 1954, page 230, gives a general perspective on Roman law.
18. Jones et al., Op. cit., page 275. For the jurists, see: O. F. Robinson, The Sources of Roman Law, London and New York: Routledge, 1997, pages 42ff.
19. Jones et al., Op. cit., page 257.
20. Beryl Rawson (editor), The Family in Ancient Rome, London and Sydney: Croom Helm, 1986, pages 5ff and the references mentioned.
21. Ibid., pages 16–17; and chapter 5, passim.
22. Bernal, Op. cit., page 230.
23. Jones et al., Op. cit., page 214.
24. Ibid.
25. Ibid., page 238.
26. C. W. Valentine, Latin: Its Place and Value in Education, London: University of London Press, 1935; see chapter headings, pages 41, 54 and 73.
27. Farrell, Op. cit., passim.
28. Mason Hammond, Latin: A Historical and Linguistic Handbook, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1976, pages 21–23.
29. Ibid., page 25.
30. Ibid., page 39.
31. Ibid., page 51.
32. J. Wight Duff, A Literary History of Rome, London: Ernest Benn, 1963, page 16.
33. Jones et al., Op. cit., page 200.
34. Ibid.
35. Oscar Weise, Language and Character of the Roman People, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., 1909, translated by H. Strong and A. Y. Campbell, page 4.
