Re: primary sources?

[marcus]

Hi Susan,Is that the Itinerary that was translated and printed in AHB a couple of years ago? (Trans. by Iolo Davies, I believe). I, too, got a copy of that, shortly before AHB realised that they weren't getting any money from people like me who were printing off all their articles! :-)I'd say your description as a 'bridge' is spot on - pretty accurate in many ways, but with quite a few 'Romance-y' bits thrown in for good measure!MarcusPS: Glad you found the English Justin!

[marcus]

Karl,You are quite right, of course. I suspect the teacher meant these sources, though. Without wanting to pour scorn on the teaching profession as a whole, I have come across *many* people who don't know the difference between primary and secondary sources - many think that if a source is 'ancient', or written in Latin or Greek, it is a primary source.All the bestMarcus

[susan]

Yes, it is the Iolo Davies version. I'm always surprised that so little account is taken of this version, because there's quite a lot of information in it - for instance a detailed personal description - Alexander with 'somewhat shrivelled' limbs, knotted muscles and a pointed beard. I don't know that it can necessarily be discounted because it's like the Romance - the argument seems rather circular : "It has different details from Arrian, Diodorus etc., therefore it must be the Romance and therefore it's not worth considering" seems rather weak.Susan

[gb]

Suzanne's daughter will have to enlighten them, then, won't she? That's the best thing a person can learn anyway: don't take anyone's word for it, find out for yourself and make up your own mind.
PS. I don't seem to be able to log on anymore.

[davej]

You are right of course, and I was going to mention that in my post but did not want to complicate matters. I pressumed the teacher who asked for 5 primary sources has no idea.

[Link]

Hello Susan,Here is a big thank you for posting that gold mine of a link on Justin's work. THANK YOU!Regards and best wishes to you.