Английская Википедия:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology

Материал из Онлайн справочника
Версия от 06:09, 27 февраля 2024; EducationBot (обсуждение | вклад) (Новая страница: «{{Английская Википедия/Панель перехода}} {{Short description|Encyclopedia and biographical dictionary ed. by William Smith (1849)}} {{Italic title|force=true}} {{Infobox book | name = Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology | image = Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology TITLE.jpg | caption = Title page of 1867 edition | author = William Smith | pub_date = 1849 |...»)
(разн.) ← Предыдущая версия | Текущая версия (разн.) | Следующая версия → (разн.)
Перейти к навигацииПерейти к поиску

Шаблон:Short description Шаблон:Italic title Шаблон:Infobox book

The Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1849, originally published 1844 under a slightly different title) is an encyclopedia and biographical dictionary of classical antiquity. Edited by William Smith, the dictionary spans three volumes and 3,700 pages. It is a classic work of 19th-century lexicography. The work is a companion to Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities and Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography.[1]

Authors and scope

Файл:Philolaus-and-Philomelus-Pythagorean-Book.jpg
Excerpt from Philolaus Pythagoras book (Charles Peter Mason, 1870)

The work lists thirty-five authors in addition to the editor, who was also the author of the unsigned articles. The other authors were classical scholars, primarily from Oxford, Cambridge, Rugby School, and the University of Bonn, but some were from other institutions. Many of the mythological entries were the work of the German expatriate Leonhard Schmitz, who helped to popularise German classical scholarship in Britain.[2]

With respect to biographies, Smith intended to be comprehensive. In the preface, he writes:

Шаблон:Quote

Much of the value of the Dictionary consists not only in the depth and detail of the individual articles, but in the copious and specific citations to individual Greek and Roman writers, as well as modern scholarship from the Renaissance to the mid-nineteenth century. The articles frequently note variant traditions, disagreements among the authorities, and the interpretations of modern scholars. However, due to the variable numbering systems used in different editions of classical works, and the difficulty of recognizing typographical errors in citations, the original sources should still be checked. Many of the Dictionary's articles have been referred to in more recent works; Robert Graves has been accused of cribbing his impressive-looking source references from it when writing The Greek Myths.[3]

Samuel Sharpe thought Edward Bunbury had plagiarised his work, as he wrote of in his diary entry on 3 September 1850:

I certainly felt mortified on reading the articles on the Ptolemies in Dr. Smith's "Dictionary of Classical Biography." They were all written by E. H. Bunbury with the help of my "History of Egypt," and with-out any acknowledgment, though he even borrowed the volume from my brother Dan for the purpose.[4]

Notable authors

Use and availability today

The work is now in the public domain, and is available in several places on the Internet. A 2013 review of the fourth edition of the Oxford Classical Dictionary – itself hailed in its first edition in 1949 as "the new Smith"Шаблон:Sfn – called it:

Шаблон:Quote

Smith's dictionary, however, does have substantial flaws. Troy and Knossos, for example, "the editors still regarded... as minstrels' fantasies".[5] Much is missing, especially more recent discoveries (such as Aristotle's Constitution of the Athenians or the decipherment of Linear B) and epigraphic material. More seriously, the context in which ancient evidence is viewed, analysed, reconciled, and understood has changed considerably in the intervening centuries. Modern theories and reconstructions of events are also not present, if only because they were published decades and centuries after Smith's Dictionary.

See also

References

Citations Шаблон:Reflist

Sources Шаблон:Refbegin

Шаблон:Refend

External links

Шаблон:Commons category Шаблон:Wikisource

Also the Internet Archive has a derivative work:

Шаблон:Authority control

  1. Шаблон:Cite EB1911
  2. Шаблон:Cite news
  3. Шаблон:Harvnb. "What Graves does not mention is that the sources used for his book were culled from Smith's dictionaries, as is clear from a comparison of his reference listings with Smith's own."
  4. Шаблон:Cite book
  5. Шаблон:Harvnb. Citing Шаблон:Cite book