克劳迪斯和大象为英国（卡西乌斯·迪奥60.21.2）

IF 0.3 4区历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY Britannia Pub Date : 2023-09-04 DOI:10.1017/s0068113x23000399

David Woods

{"title":"克劳迪斯和大象为英国（卡西乌斯·迪奥60.21.2）","authors":"David Woods","doi":"10.1017/s0068113x23000399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Charles and Singleton have explained why Cassius Dio's claim (60.21.2) that elephants were among the equipment prepared for use in Britain during the Claudian invasion of a.d. 43 is probably untrue, if one assumes that by ‘elephant’ he means the animal of that name. It is argued here that the best explanation of this apparent error is that Dio preserves a reference to a type of military machine, probably a siege-tower, rather than to the animal of this name.","PeriodicalId":44906,"journal":{"name":"Britannia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Claudius and the Elephants for Britain (Cassius Dio 60.21.2)\",\"authors\":\"David Woods\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0068113x23000399\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Charles and Singleton have explained why Cassius Dio's claim (60.21.2) that elephants were among the equipment prepared for use in Britain during the Claudian invasion of a.d. 43 is probably untrue, if one assumes that by ‘elephant’ he means the animal of that name. It is argued here that the best explanation of this apparent error is that Dio preserves a reference to a type of military machine, probably a siege-tower, rather than to the animal of this name.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44906,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Britannia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Britannia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0068113x23000399\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHAEOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Britannia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0068113x23000399","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

Charles和Singleton解释了为什么Cassius Dio声称（60.21.2）大象是公元43年克劳迪娅入侵英国期间准备在英国使用的设备之一，如果有人认为“大象”是指该名称的动物，那么这可能是不真实的。这里有人认为，对这一明显错误的最好解释是，迪奥保留了对一种军事机器的引用，可能是围攻塔，而不是这个名字的动物。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Claudius and the Elephants for Britain (Cassius Dio 60.21.2)

Charles and Singleton have explained why Cassius Dio's claim (60.21.2) that elephants were among the equipment prepared for use in Britain during the Claudian invasion of a.d. 43 is probably untrue, if one assumes that by ‘elephant’ he means the animal of that name. It is argued here that the best explanation of this apparent error is that Dio preserves a reference to a type of military machine, probably a siege-tower, rather than to the animal of this name.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Britannia Multiple-

CiteScore

0.70

自引率

50.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Information not localized