Saving documents and books in antiquity

Nowadays, saving our documents and information on our computers is very obvious. Before the digital era, we relied on typewriters and printers to distribute our pamphlets, advertisements, letters, and books. 

It is hard to imagine that in antiquity nothing of the kind existed, but then the needs were entirely different. Public information, laws, decrees, and other important notices were inscribed on stone slabs or posted on walls in conspicuous places throughout the city, and eventually shared with other cities.  

Exchanging documents and letters over longer distances, as during Alexander’s campaigns, required writing on papyrus, a lightweight material that could be easily transported. His correspondence with Antipater, Olympias, Aristotle, Sisygambis, governors, and generals all over his ever-growing empire required an active exchange of news and information.

Eumenes and Callisthenes, serving as Alexander’s secretaries, must have been very busy and very organized. We tend to forget that they also kept copies of Alexander’s correspondence, official documents, and perhaps private letters as well. This becomes apparent when Eumenes’ tent went up in flames after a conflict that arose as Nearchus was preparing the fleet to sail the Southern Sea. 

Alexander had exhausted his own treasury and had to borrow money from his friends, including Eumenes, to finance Nearchus’ expedition. His secretary was to contribute 300 talents, but being stingy, he gave only 100 talents. Alexander did not accept Eumenes’ excuse that it was not without difficulty and decided to set his friend’s tent on fire. He expected Eumenes to rush his money out, and thus admit he had been lying. The plan went wrong, and the tent burned down entirely, leaving a clump of smelted gold and silver worth one thousand talents. In the process, Alexander’s archives were reduced to ashes. It is Plutarch who tells us that Alexander asked several governors and generals to send Eumenes copies of the papers that had been destroyed. This proves that Alexander did indeed keep a record of his correspondence! 

We so often read of papers and books that have only partially survived or are only known second-hand or not at all, except for the title. This situation is inherent to the mindset of the time and to the degradation of the natural support used (papyrus). 

Papyrus is a vegetal product and a very practical writing support, but it is also fragile. It has been calculated that papyrus documents had a lifespan of a maximum of one hundred years. This may have suited the needs at the time, but the chances of having them still around two thousand years later are very slim. 

Chances of survival were greater if there were many copies of a text, like, for instance, for theater plays. Yet, professional writers were expensive, and the costs were borne by the author. In Roman times, wealthy citizens could afford to have certain scrolls copied for their own use, but they would hardly survive after the Fall of the Roman Empire. 

Under exceptional conditions, some scrolls or bits of papyrus, however, reached us. The most telling example is the scrolls that survived the fire in Herculaneum after the volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD. Only recently have we been able to decipher their content without having to unroll the brittle carbonized scrolls (see: Reading the papyrus scrolls from Herculaneum). 

Another situation developed in Egypt. The garbage dump in Oxyrhynchus that served as fuel to the local population in the 19^th century appeared to contain a huge amount of hitherto unknown papyrus texts ranging from the Ptolemaic era to the Muslim conquests in the 7^th century AD. The papyri consist of private letters and public documents such as a variety of official correspondence, theater plays, records, sales, wills, and inventories. The deciphering of the papyri is ongoing, as only a handful of scholars are capable of recognizing where the bit of papyrus text belongs. 

When parchment was introduced in the 2^nd century BC, documents stood a better chance of survival, although even animal skins had their limits. However, parchment was extremely expensive to make. 

With the passage of time, interest and taste evolved and changed. Treatises, studies, analyses, and even books and poems went out of fashion and vanished altogether. 

As the writing supports were decaying, it is not surprising that documenting Alexander’s life is a nearly impossible task, despite the second-hand recordings by Arrian, Diodorus, Curtius, and Plutarch, who could still access some original documents (see: Eyewitness accounts of Alexander’s life).

[Top picture Derveni papyrus 340 BC, Thessaloniki Museum.
Bottom picture from Archaeology News, Digs & Discoveries] 

More of What Alexander did for us

Approximately ten years ago, I posted a blog about citrus fruit as introduced by Alexander’s Macedonians from India (see: What Alexander did for us). 

This certainly was not an isolated case if we look at the work of Theophrastus, a contemporary of Aristotle and Alexander (see: Theophrastus, philosopher and botanist). He studied plants that came from Persia, Afghanistan, and the Indus Valley. He introduced the Greeks to mangos, cardoons (or artichoke thistle), jujubes (also called Chinese dates), pistachios, and tamarind. Newly imported plants were cinnamon, banyan (a fig typically from India), as well as frankincense and myrrh. 

One day during his invasion of India in 327 BC, Alexander had bananas for dessert and he enjoyed the fruit so much that he wanted to share it. Eventually, bananas traveled to the Middle East, where they earned their Arabic name of banan, meaning finger. 

Arrian revealed that in 325 BC, Nearchus had found sugarcane. He described it as “a reed that brings forth honey without the help of bees”. In antiquity, sugarcane was basically used as a medicine by Greek and Roman physicians, as documented by Pliny the Elder in the 1^st century AD. 

Rice was another food the king introduced into Macedonia after his campaign in Central Asia, and it appears that the well-known dish of Plov or Pilaf spread from Macedonia, throughout Greece and the Balkans (see: The origins of rice in ancient Macedonia). 

Alexander also introduced Europe to the cotton from India. It is said that the Macedonians started wearing cotton clothes which were more appropriate for the Indian climate. 

The colorful floor mosaic of a parakeet from Palace V in Pergamon now on display at the Museum of Pergamon in Berlin (see: The beauty of Alexandrine mosaics) is a rare example of the wide collection of animals and plants Alexander sent to Aristotle from the regions he conquered. The Alexandrine Parakeet was native to South Asia and Southeast Asia. 

As Alexander traveled to modern-day countries such as Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and India, he shared his serious interest in local cultures and habits with the rest of the world.

Eyewitness accounts of Alexander’s life

Alexander's life and exploits are best known to us from the leading ancient historians, Arrian of Nicomedia, Diodorus Siculus, Curtius Rufus, and Plutarch. Their works, however, were written several centuries after the king's death and based mainly on books that are now mostly lost. 

Since these authors used a different source or a combination of the available material, we ended up having different versions of the same story, which, in turn, can be interpreted individually. 

The oldest eyewitness account was written by Anaximenes of Lampsacus, who lived from c. 380 until 320 BC. It is highly probable that his On Alexander, which included the Battle of Issus and more, was published during Alexander's lifetime. After all, he accompanied the king to Persia. Except for some fragments, the book is lost. Upon the invitation of Philip II, Anaximenes lived at the Royal Court of Pella and wrote the king's history, Philippica.  

Callisthenes of Olynthus (c.360 – c.327 BC) was a nephew of Aristotle, upon whose recommendation he was appointed to become Alexander's Court historian. He accompanied the king to Asia, where he kept the official records of Alexander's expeditions. Around 330 BC, he wrote his Deeds of Alexander up to the Battle of Gaugamela or possibly the death of Darius in 330 BC. In 327 BC, Callisthenes was implicated in a conspiracy to assassinate Alexander. He was imprisoned and died seven months later. Except for a few fragments, the book is lost. 

Ptolemy, undoubtedly the best-known eyewitness, wrote his account between 320 and 283 BC. Ptolemy had grown up at Philip's court and became one of Alexander's generals to join him on his Asian campaign. As a result, his book covered the entire reign of Alexander, particularly from the military point of view. Arrian widely used Ptolemy's history, which he thought was very trustworthy. Unfortunately, this account is also lost, except for fragments. After Alexander's death, Ptolemy became king of Egypt and founded the Ptolemaic dynasty that ended with Cleopatra VII in 30 BC. 

Very shortly after Alexander's death, Nearchus of Crete wrote his Indike about his Indian campaigns. Nearchus had been with Alexander from the beginning. As the king's admiral, he would have led the fleet to the Gates of Heracles – a plan that never materialized. Only fragments of this book have reached us; it is otherwise lost (see: The Ephemerides of Alexander's Expedition by C.A. Robinson). 

Onesicritus, Alexander's helmsman sailing down the Indus, also wrote a now-lost book, How Alexander was educated, shortly after the king's death. A philosopher himself, he presented Alexander as such. Onesicritus was often in competition with Nearchus, and his book had a reputation for not being reliable. Few fragments survived (see: The Ephemerides of Alexander's Expedition by C.A. Robinson). 

After Alexander's death, his chamberlain Chares also wrote an eyewitness account, Histories of Alexander. He covered the later years of Alexander's reign. This book is lost, except for some fragments. 

Aristobulus of Cassandreia, in turn, covered the entire reign of Alexander in a kind of autobiography. The book, whose title is unknown, was written shortly after the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC. Except for some fragments, it is lost. Aristobulus was one of the king's engineers and was put in charge of restoring Cyrus' tomb in Pasargadae. 

The most essential account was the Ephemerides, the Royal Diaries, the 'official' daily report that Eumenes of Cardia supposedly kept. He was appointed Alexander's personal secretary after having served Philip previously. There are serious doubts about the authenticity of these Royal Diaries because rumors circulate that the original document was later rewritten. Instead of having a book from Alexander's lifetime, it may well have become a forgery of a later date. The original is lost, except for fragments. The Ephemerides led to the Alexander Romance. 

The oldest known version of the Alexander Romance dates probably from the 3rd century AD, and its author is unknown, although it has been attributed to Pseudo-Callisthenes. The name has nothing to do with the Callisthenes mentioned above, who died before Alexander. The earliest version of the Romance was composed in Alexandria shortly after Alexander's death and related the story of his life, spiced with many fantastic tales that never happened. Over the centuries, the Romance was translated, truncated, embellished, and circulated throughout Europe and Asia. 

This list is incomplete; we know many other authors only by name. Their work is all lost, except for fragments or quotes by other historians. 

It is hard to believe that so few would have written about Alexander's exploits among the thousands of rulers, philosophers, generals, artists, and even ordinary soldiers who met him. The Persians and the Indians certainly shared their encounter with Alexander, yet barely any such documents surfaced until recently.

The hard reality is that even fragments of writing from Alexander's lifetime have survived. The most famous man in history would have disappeared had it not been for men like Arrian, Diodorus, Curtius, and Plutarch.

Alexander's projects and future plans, including his conquest of the West, are also largely neglected. Yet every single one is worth mentioning, which I did in a separate post: Alexander’s missed voyage to conquer the West.

[Papyrus from Macedonian Archaeology Quota]

Latest update 30 January 2025

Preparations to sail down the Indus

The history of Alexander’s conquests in India usually relates the facts in a succession of events without paying much attention to the king’s thorough planning and preparation ahead. To sail down the Indus was an expedition by itself, which is generally ignored.

Alexander withdrew in style from the Hyphasis. After building twelve altars to thank the gods for having led him so far as conqueror and leaving an impressive memorial to his own accomplishments, he turned around to cross the Hyphasis, Hydraotes, and Acesines once again (see: Alexander erected twelve altars on the banks of the Hyphasis). 

Hence, the army marched to the Hydaspes, where Alexander had founded the cities of Alexandria Nicaea and Alexandria Bucephala (see: The edge of the world was not reached). According to his instructions, many ships had already been assembled, but he needed to build many more before sailing south. Within two months, the entire fleet was ready. It consisted of eighty thirty-oared galleys, troop carriers, flat-bottomed boats for horse transport, circular tubs, local river boats, and enormous grain-lighters for supplies. The latter is a forerunner of the modern LASH ship or Lighter Aboard Ship that loads and unloads barges, as still used on the Indus.  Known locally as zobruks, they have a shallow draught and huge sail, perfectly suitable in strong currents. Each vessel could hold more than two hundred tons of grain to feed the army on their voyage to the Ocean.

This was a massive operation that Alexander had planned meticulously. He selected the Phoenicians, Carians, Cyprians, and Egyptians who served in his army. From them, he chose men with nautical skills for crews and rowers. Other experts were selected from among the islanders (from the Aegean), Ionians from Asia Minor, and people from the Hellespont.

Imagine this armada of up to 2,000 vessels (half the flotilla that crossed the Channel on D-Day!), moving at the shouts of the coxswain (steersman) as his rhythmic call was echoed by the high riverbanks mingled with the noise of splashing oars. 

Another factor worth considering is the number of troops needed to be moved. Back on the Hydaspes, 35,000 fresh soldiers had swollen Alexander’s total manpower to a massive 120,000! His cavalry, at this point, has been estimated to be some 15,000. However, not all the men and horses boarded the ships; neither did the impressive baggage train.

Alexander organized the army in three divisions as he would personally lead the fleet from his Royal galley with the support of his shield-bearers guards, all the archers, and the Companion cavalry – totaling 8,000 men. Hephaistion would march along the east bank of the Hydaspes while Craterus would lead the west bank with part of the infantry and the cavalry. Hephaistion took with him the bulk of the fighting troops and 200 elephants. Their instructions were to march together in advance and wait for the fleet.

The king took command after having performed extensive sacrifices to his ancestral gods and the deities of the river and Ocean. With a golden goblet, he poured a libation into the river from the prow of his ship – entirely in style with the solemn occasion. 

As soon as the trumpets signaled the departure, the voyage started in regular order. It was a hazardous enterprise, but the king had instructed how many baggage vessels were to sail abreast and the place for the boats carrying the horses and the ships of war. All vessels were to keep their distance and stay in formation, adapting their speed accordingly. Given the different sizes of boats ranging from warships and baggage vessels to horse transports, they individually required accurate steering and high alertness of their pilots. The purpose was that the ships would not fall out of each other or sail down randomly. Nearchus of Crete was appointed admiral of the fleet, with Onesicritus of Cos as his second and helmsman of the Royal flagship. 

Even after the monsoon rains had stopped, the annual flow of the Hydaspes was two times faster than that of the Nile or three times that of the Euphrates and the Tigris combined. The current would increase notably as the river narrows, particularly at the confluence with the Acesines. The roaring of the water could be heard miles ahead as the surface roughened.  

At last, the fleet made it across the narrows where the two rivers met, and the banks receded. The stream slackened, and Alexander found a protected spot on the right bank to moor his ships safely. Here, the men could take a break and make the necessary repairs before moving onward. 

Alexander was about to enter the land of the warlike Malians, who had been preparing for the confrontation.

How important was Barsine?

The question is actually double: How important was Barsine for Alexander? And how important was Barsine in the geopolitical world of her time? 

Authors from antiquity have not spent much ink on her, and she is only mentioned when she comes to the foreground, which isn’t often.  

Barsine was the daughter of Artabazus II, satrap of Hellespontine Phrygia in northwestern Turkey. Artabazus’ first wife was from Rhodes and was the sister of two capable generals, Mentor and Memnon. 

Artabazus revolted against the newly appointed Persian king, Artaxerxes III Ochus. Artaxerxes had ordered the dismantling of his mercenary army, which the satrap did not accept. Artabazus and his family (including Memnon) went into exile and found refuge at the court of Philip II in Pella. Barsine, who was fluent in Greek, must have met the younger Alexander during their stay. We don’t know the nature of their encounters or conversations, but we may safely assume that Alexander inquired about life and customs in Persia. After all, he impressed the Persian envoys at a young age as he questioned them pending his father’s return to the Palace. 

Three years later, Artabazus reconciled with the Persian king, and he returned to Persia, taking Barsine and his family with him. That happened in 343 BC, about one year after Aristotle arrived on the scene to teach Prince Alexander. Over the years, the entire company probably met the philosopher along with other distinguished visitors to the Macedonian court. 

Barsine married her uncle Mentor, a Greek mercenary general in Persian service, while she still was young. Mentor died soon afterward, leaving her with a daughter. In those circumstances, Memnon took her as his wife that same year, 338 BC. He already had several sons from a previous marriage. We can safely assume that Barsine’s opinion in these matters didn’t count. What’s more, she became a second mother to her husband's (teenage?) sons. Just as Mentor, Memnon led an army of mercenaries for the Great King. Having a lovely wife familiar with the Greek language and culture, no doubt, added to his prestige. 

In 334 BC, when Alexander, now king of Macedonia, faced the Persian army at the Granicus River, Memnon fought on the enemy’s side. Although the battle was lost, the general’s capabilities were recognized by Darius, and he was appointed as commander of the Persian fleet in the Aegean. This honor may be a questionable trust because, in exchange, Barsine had to stay at King Darius’ court with her father, Artabazus. 

A year later, during the siege of Lesbos Memnon fell ill and died. Barsine was widowed for a second time. 

Around that time, Alexander had reached Issus where he defeated Darius in November 333 BC. When Parmenion rode to Damascus to take hold of the Persian treasury, the baggage train, and the women of the aristocrats, he met Barsine and brought her to Alexander. 

Her relationship with Alexander lasted five or six years. I wonder whether she traveled with Darius’ mother, wife, and children, who had been taken in Issus. Alexander was constantly on the move, conquering the eastern Mediterranean and Egypt and marching to Babylon and Susa, where he finally installed the Persian Royal Family. Barsine stayed at Alexander’s side, and we can only guess which quarters she occupied when the army was on the road. 

During that time, Artabazus remained faithful to Darius until the Great King was murdered by Bessus, who then proclaimed himself the new king of Persia. Artabazus refused to submit to Bessus and left, taking his mercenaries with him. He joined Alexander, who rewarded him with the satrapy of Bactria. Here he was reunited with Barsine. 

She is mentioned again by ancient historians about 327 BC at the end of Alexander’s campaign in Sogdia. However, it is unclear in which order the events unfolded precisely. 

The fact is that Barsine became pregnant and gave birth to Heracles. Alexander never recognized his son, his first-born, although he must have loved him, giving him the name of his ancestors. Is it possible that Alexander resented Barsine for having Heracles without his consent? She and little Heracles stood in his way for his bigger plans, meaning to marry Princess Stateira as – probably – agreed with Sisygambis. Barsine must have known of those plans, so she had no excuse. 

It is, in any case, a strange coincidence that Alexander almost immediately married Roxane, the daughter of a local chieftain. This was not love at first sight, as most authors claim. It was a purely political move to end the three-year wars through Bactria and Sogdia. 

Artabazus requested to be relieved of his duties in Bactria because of his old age. Alexander accepted his resignation and Artabazus left for Pergamon taking Barsine and the little boy with him. Artabazus seems to have produced an elegant way to retire, and, at the same time, he created the best solution for Barsine since there was no longer a place for her at Alexander’s court. She had to say goodbye to the snow-topped mountains of the Hindu Kush after sharing so many miles with the Macedonian troops and her great love.

Barsine met Alexander again in 324 BC when she attended the mass wedding at Susa. Her daughter from Mentor married Nearchus. Two of her sisters were also given in marriage to Alexander’s companions, but the sources (Plutarch and Arrian) are at odds with each other about the names. 

Hardly a year later, Alexander died in Babylon. I wonder whether Barsine was still in nearby Susa, close enough to say her goodbyes to the man she once loved? If she returned to Pergamon after the wedding, she could never make it to Babylon in time. 

She and Heracles quietly spent the next decade in Pergamon. In 310 BC, Cassander as king of Macedonia, summoned Alexander IV, Alexander’s 14-year-old legitimate son with Roxane, to Pella to be poisoned. 

The news traveled fast and eventually reached Pergamon, as poor Heracles was now at the center stage in the drama of the Succession War. Initially, general Polyperchon had been defending the cause of the now 17-year-old Heracles, but in 309 BC, he fell into Cassander’s vicious trap. Cassander made many great promises of money and power in exchange for eliminating Heracles. For one hundred talents, Polyperchon tricked Heracles into accepting an invitation for dinner and poisoned him. Barsine, who had traveled with her son, was murdered shortly afterward, although some sources pretend she was murdered simultaneously. Sadly, Heracles didn’t even receive a proper burial in the cemetery of his ancestors, and neither did Barsine. 

Now about my questions formulated at the beginning of my post. How important was Barsine for Alexander? Well, she was important enough to keep her at his side for about six years. All this time, she managed not to get pregnant. Barsine knew that Alexander dearly wanted and needed an heir during those years of intimacy. She also knew that his plan was to marry a Persian princess. Barsine spoiled this by wanting a child of her own. Alexander had his principles and stuck to them. Nobody, not even sweet and gentle Barsine, was allowed to interfere. His sudden marriage to Roxane may be seen as a statement toward Barsine. Historians say Alexander fell in love with Roxane because of her beauty. In my mind, her beauty may be a nice bonus, but it was not the main reason. 

How important was Barsine in the geopolitical world of her time? Barsine was a beneficial source of information about the Persian court, Persian habits, and culture. After all, she had lived at least three years at the court of King Darius. Speaking Greek was an important asset to avoid misunderstandings. Alexander was an excellent judge of character, and having met Artabazus at Pella, he knew that he was a man of his word and could be trusted. Artabazus was loyal to Alexander. Having his daughter at the king’s side was a warranty that worked both ways. Barsine and her father contributed to Alexander’s larger plan. The birth of Heracles disturbed this goal – something Alexander never could or would accept. Barsine no longer fit his purpose in the new world he was building.

What do we know about Arrian of Nicomedia?

Although Arrian is quoted repeatedly by many historians, ancient and modern alike, we don’t know precisely when he was born or died. He lived during the reign of two great emperors, Trajan and Hadrian when the Roman Empire experienced its most remarkable expansion.

He was a versatile man and prolific writer, but he was a historian most of all. How he found the time to pen down his many books besides pursuing a military career, holding public offices, and becoming a famous philosopher is commendable. 

Arrian, whose full name was Lucius Flavius Arrianus, was born in Nicomedia (modern Izmit, Turkey), a province of Bithynia ruled by Rome. Consequently, he probably was a Roman citizen. He grew up in an aristocratic family, was well-educated, and held the post of governor of Cappadocia from approximately 131 until 137 AD. Since the culture in Asia Minor was still very Greek, he grew up with this dual identity making him a true Graeco-Roman. 

Arrian was the perfect person to write about Alexander the Great having such a background. With his upbringing in Nicomedia, he realized that Alexander left behind so much Greek culture (he didn’t use the word Hellenistic!) He absorbed it all, even though he looked at it from a Roman perspective several centuries later. 

As a young man, c.108 AD, he moved to Nicopolis, Greece (earlier in Epirus), to stay with Epictetus. Epictetus considered philosophy a way of life, meaning that whatever happened was beyond our control, and we should accept events as they unfolded. His main philosophy was self-knowledge, similar to the Delphic maxim, know thyself. These wise words were visible in the pronaos of the Temple of Apollo in Delphi and were spread by Aeschylus, Socrates, and Plato. It is unknown whether Epictetus based his thoughts on this inscription, as no writings from his hand have survived. It was Arrian who wrote down Epictetus’ lectures in his Discourses of Epictetus and Enchiridion. 

The philosopher considerably influenced Arrian’s education and introduced him to important political people. The most notable figure probably was the later Emperor Hadrian – himself a pupil of Epictetus - whom he befriended in 126 AD. Hadrian appointed Arrian to the Roman Senate around 130 AD and promoted him to the governor of Cappadocia about a year later. During his governorate, he successfully stopped the invasion of the Alani in 135 AD. This was when Arrian documented his victory by writing his Ectaxis contra Alanos (Order of Battle against the Alans), which provides us with a unique insight into the Roman army in action that still bore “the stamp of Macedon.” Aware of the difference between the Macedonian and Roman phalanx, Arrian drew parallels between them. He underscored that the phalanx was not something of the past but still an active weapon in the contemporary military. His military career took him to many countries away from his native Bithynia, where he saw very different animals and plants from his familiar homeland. 

Arrian’s military career probably started earlier as he led an army to the Caspian Gates during Emperor Trajan's rule (98-117 AD). As governor of Cappadocia, Arrian commanded two Roman legions, which was when he wrote his Ars Tactica (The Tactical Arts). Experiencing the strategies and maneuvers firsthand, he described cavalry tactics and praised military innovations. In both Ectasis and Tactica, he mixed Greek and Roman military theories.

Arrian has a great interest in geography and a keen eye for details. Under Hadrian, he wrote the Periplus of the Euxine Sea (Sailing around the Black Sea) to inform the emperor about the region he considered exploring. Besides helpful information about ports, rivers, and cities, he included specific details about the viability and the landscapes. In his Cynegeticus, which is an addition to Xenophon’s work, he stated, for instance, that Mysia (northwest Turkey), Dacia (mainly all of present Romania), Scythia, and Illyricum (the greater Balkans) had plains that were “adapted for riding.” 

Clearly, our historian started writing at a very young age. However, many of his works are lost or only survived fragmentary, leaving us with titles alone. Besides the titles already mentioned above, he wrote:

- Biographies like Lives of Dion, Timoleon, and Tillorobus

- several volumes dedicated to his homeland, the Bithyniaca

- a history of the Parthians, the Parthica

- a history of the Alans, Historia Alanica

- an essay on maneuvers, On Infantry Exercises

- an essay about astronomy, On Nature, Composition, and Appearances of Comets

- And, most interestingly, a volume focusing on the events after the death of Alexander, The History of the Successors – sadly lost to humanity forever! Imagine the twists history could take if we had this book!

When or where exactly Arrian wrote his famous Anabasis or The History of the Wars and Conquests of Alexander the Great remains obscure. It is generally accepted as his most outstanding work, together with the Indica addendum about India. With these two books, Arrian is, to this day, our most precious and reliable source about Alexander. The historian could project his own military experiences and campaigns into his vision of Alexander. Arrian also had a profound fascination with Persia and Persian customs, which he lavishly shares in his Anabasis. 

Notably, he could rely on several sources, from first-rank witnesses to Alexander’s campaigns. These were generals and close Companions who had access to Alexander’s Royal Journal – men like Ptolemy, Nearchus, and Megasthenes. Another precious source was Eratosthenes, a librarian at the rich Library of Alexandria. Aristobulus also served under Alexander and later wrote a history of Alexander, including careful observations on geography, ethnography, and natural science. Aristobulus’ notes about which plants grew in specific regions of the lands Alexander conquered were vital because it gives us a glimpse of Alexander’s knowledge of plants and animals based on Aristotle’s lessons. 

It is still being determined what happened to Arrian at the end of his governorship in Cappadocia in 137 AD. Still enjoying the favors of Hadrian, he most probably became governor of Syria between 135 and 150 AD.

Towards the end of his life, he moved to Athens, where he became archon probably in 145 or 146 AD. Other sources, however, state that Arrian retired to Nicomedia, where he was appointed priest to Demeter and Persephone. 

Arrian died some time during the reign of Marcus Aurelius, 121-180 AD, who was the last of the so-called good emperors. 

Witnessing how meticulous and objective Arrian proceeds in his Anabasis to describe Alexander’s campaigns, not only the sieges and the battlefields but also the geography and the nature and habits of the people, it is easy to realize how much information is lost in his other works.