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

Timeline of Main Arabic/Persian Sources writing about Alexander

Complementary to my previous blog post: Persia's Historical Memory of Alexander, a new Chapter in Robbert Bosschart's Updated Version 2025 to his book All Alexander's Women, it is helpful to consult the following Table. 

It contains a list of the foremost Persian and Arabic authors who, in their works, referred to Alexander the Great. They were far away from the historical figure we know, but it remains impressive how, so many centuries later, the king's name still lived on in their tales and imagination.

TIMELINE OF MAIN ARABIC/PERSIAN SOURCES
(in order of publication date)
 

—622-750 AD: Ibn-al Muqaffa (720-756), a Persian intellectual in Fars, translates the last version of the Khoday-Nama (compiled by Zoroastrian clerics on orders of the Sassanid king Khosrow II, and published in 622 AD) into Arabic in 750 AD.

 

—670-800 AD: Ibn Abbas, governor of Basora c. 670 AD, and other authorities after him, order Arabic translations to be made of (parts of) the Alexander Romance written by the pseudo-Kallisthenes in the 3rd century BC, and later edited in Syriac; these are the texts that allow

—c 800 AD: Abu Zayd Umara (c 750-815) to compile his book Qissat al-Iskandar Dhu’l Qarnayn. He has also used oral sources, but at least half of his text contains the material from these earliest Arabic versions of the Alexander Romance. Afterwards, more Arabic translations of Greek or Syriac texts on Alexander became available in the Abbasid caliphate, especially under al-Mamun (813-833).

 

—820-850 AD: Ashmaí (Basora, 740-828 AD), the first lexicographer in Arabic Mesopotamia, composes a text titled Nihaya. One generation later, this text is revised by a so-called pseudo-Ashmaí, who says he has also used Muqaffa's work. The resulting 'extended Nihaya' contains a 46-page chapter on Alexander with 1336 verses, making it by far the most complete Alexander tale of those times. The Persian influence shows through in the fact that this Nihaya already endows Alexander with a Persian pedigree (kinship with the royal dynasty) – but at the same time warns: "Not all Arabic authors are agreed on this".

 

—870-920 AD: Abu Hanifah Dinawarí, (815-896 AD), prolific Persian writer on many different themes including History, states that the opinions of his various sources remain divided: "Some of them make him a descendant of the Persian dynasty, but others say he was the son of Philip of Makedon". Most negative on Alexander is Abu Jafar Muhammad al-Tabarí (839-923 AD), a famous Muslim Persian savant who publishes a History of the Prophets and the Kings that copies the condemnation of 'Alexander of Rum' from the Sassanid Khoday-Nama translated by Muqaffa.

 

—c 930 AD: Abu al-Hasan al-Masudí (Baghdad, 896 - Cairo, 951) geographer and historian who, on a long journey in 915 through Persia has also found -in Estakhr- some books with historic content about bygone eras of the country, publishes the first Arabic manuscript that correctly places Alexander's rule in Persia within the framework of a World History.

 

—957 AD: Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Razzaq, governor in the Persian city of Tus, orders a committee of 'book-owners' (including both Muslim and Zoroastrian savants) to compile a history book out of all their material. By its varied provenance, their end product inevitably contains texts that contradict each other, like pre-Islamic ánd Arabic translations of the Alexander Romance on one hand, and the Sassanid Khoday-Nama on the other. Some of their material even has roots in the tradition of Parthian minstrels. They complete their work in 957. Their text in Persian, known as 'the Prose Shah-Nama', is no longer extant.

 

—1010 AD: Hakim Abu-l-Qasem Ferdowsi from Tus (935-1020 AD), the poet who is still today revered as a national celebrity in Persia, publishes his 'national epic' Shah-Nama. As he states in the Preface, he has versified the 'Prose Shah-Nama' but also added other material. His saga counts over 100,000 verses, of which only 2458 refer to Alexander. They first ascribe a legitimate Persian pedigree to him, but later (following the Khoday-Nama tradition) turn Alexander into a bloodthirsty foreign conqueror.

 

—c. 1015 AD: in times of sultan Mahmud in Ghazna, an erudite at his Court writes out a compilation of local storytellers' stock tales about Alexander, now known as the Eskandar-Nama. This popular text keeps close to Arabic/Persian translations of pseudo-Kallisthenes' Alexander Romance, but adds some episodes from other sources: it includes tales that are not found in any other work. It has Alexander in the sole starring role, and calls him by the much-respected Islamic name of "Dhu’l Qarnayn". But to entertain the audience, it humanizes him by turning him into the comical figure of the man with multiple wives and all the ensuing (sex) problems. The author of this Eskandar-nama remains unknown, as the initial part of the manuscript has been lost. The oldest copy, dated to the 14/15th century, is held in the private collection of Sa'id Nafisi in Tehran. It was edited by Professor Iraj Afshar in 1964, and translated into English by E. Venetis in 2017.

 

—1030-1100 AD: Abu Taher bin Musa al-Tarsusí publishes, at some yet unknown point in this period, a written version of the Persian storytellers' rendition of a popular folk tale known as the Darab-Nama. His text leaves the negative Sassanid/Zoroastrian propaganda aside. It gives Alexander a 'co-star' role in a Persian national epic in which a fictional "princess Buran-dokht" shines forth as the main character. She is gradually revealed as a stand-in for the ancient Persian goddess Anahita, 'She who grants the monarchy'.

Most episodes in the text are stock tales of local storytellers, but the Darab-Nama also preserves some ancient material inherited from Parthian minstrels and reminisces factual deeds of the historic Alexander in Persia. Various extant manuscripts were collated by Professor Zabihollah Safa to produce his definitive edition of the Darab-Nama in 1965-68. 

—1203 AD: Abu Muhammad bin Yusuf, «Nizami Ganjavi» (1141-1209 AD), still a much-admired Persian author, publishes his Sikandar-Nama, the 'canonic' version of Persia's literary sagas on Alexander. He embellishes the well-known Arabic/Persian versions of the Romance, but also includes details from Greek-sourced historical writings about Alexander.

The second part of Nizami's saga, usually called the Iqbal-Nama, situates the Alexander' Dhu’l Qarnayn' of Koranic fame clearly within the Oriental' Wisdom Literature' tradition. 

—1466 AD: as researched by Professor Faustina Doufikar-Aerts, the manuscripts (dated to Hegira 871=1466 AD) numbered 3003 and 3004 of the Aya Sofya collection in Istanbul, confirmed the existence of a popular Arabic Sirat Al-Iskandar tradition. Its manuscript texts are attributed to many different storytellers. In the case of the Aya Sofya manuscripts, the narrator is an Ibrahim ibn Mufarij as-Shuri from Tyre. His version does include the theme of Alexander's 'legitimate' Persian pedigree, but for the rest basically represents the latest Arabic evolution of a Wisdom Literature concerning Iskandar "Dhul’l Qarnayn". These texts do not contribute any new data to the known biography of the historical Alexander. 

Historical truth and legends surrounding Alexander

In his lifetime, Alexander was a living legend. As he marched ever further eastward, his impact was told and retold over the centuries to the extent that nobody, in the end, knew where reality stopped and legend started. Today’s travelers will easily meet locals ready to share their tales or direct them toward the routes the conqueror followed more than two thousand years ago.

It is quite remarkable that the most prominent figure in history left us with almost no contemporary documents. As a comparison, Julius Caesar, who lived some three hundred years after Alexander, managed to put down detailed accounts of his campaigns. His best-known books are The Conquest of Gaul and The Civil Wars, whereas The African Wars, The Alexandrian Wars, and the Hispanic Wars are also attributed to him.

The results for Alexander are very meager. Among his historians, we count his royal secretary, Eumenes of Cardia, and the keeper of his official diary, Callisthenes of Olynthus. As contemporary authors of Alexander, we may also include Ptolemy, Aristobulus, Nearchus, and Onesicritus, who participated in his campaigns and lived the events firsthand. Despite these apparent sources, only a few fragments have survived, no matter how deep we dig.

Callisthenes inspired Onesicritus as well as Cleitarchus. Cleitarchus turned out to be the key figure for many historians to rely on. He, in fact, had access to earlier accounts by Nearchus, Ephippus, Polycleitus, Megasthenes, and Aristobulus (who also drew from Onesicritus himself).

Under these circumstances, it becomes obvious that we have sources that are very much truncated over the centuries. In the 1^st century BC, Diodorus of Sicily wrote his history of Alexander based directly on Cleitarchus. Curtius Rufus, in the 1^st century AD, composed his version of the events, leaning heavily on Cleitarchus and to a lesser extent on Trogus and Ptolemy. Shortly afterward, Plutarch made headlines with his Lives using, besides Cleitarchus, Aristobulus, Chares (who was in charge of Alexander’s journal), and remaining bits of the official Ephemerides that were kept by Eumenes. Arrian, in the 2nd century AD, seems to be our most reliable source. For his Anabasis, he mainly trusted Ptolemy. However, he also consulted other historians like Aristobulus, Megasthenes, Nearchus (who himself wrote Indica to recount his sea voyage from India back to Persia), and the surviving  texts of the Ephemerides as well. It should be noted that Trogus’ book is almost entirely lost, but his story has been summarized, not all too well, by Justin two hundred years later.

This is quite a cocktail of information, and it becomes very hard to sift through so many versions and interpretations of the facts and figures.

In my quest to find the sources, I came across an extensive list of lost works on Wikipedia that I insert hereafter. I added the appropriate dates as far as I could find them.

Life of Alexander by Aesopus (no dates found)

Works of Anaximenes of Lampsacus (ca. 380-320 BC)

Works of Aristobulus of Cassandreia (ca. 375-301 BC)

Geographical work of Androsthenes of Thasos (one of Alexander’s admirals who sailed with Nearchus)

Deeds of Alexander by Callisthenes (the official historian)

Personal Notebooks, or Hypomnemata, by Alexander himself (possibly inauthentic)

History of Alexander by Cleitarchus (4^th century BC)

On the Empire of the Macedonians by Criton of Pieria (2^nd century AD)

Histories (also listed as Macedonica and Hellenica) by Duris of Samos (350-after 281 BC)

Ephemerides (royal journal) of the royal secretary Eumenes (existence or authenticity disputed)

Work of Ephippus of Olynthus

Work of Hagnothemis upon which Plutarch rested the belief that Antipater poisoned Alexander.

Work of Hieronymus of Cardia (354?-250 BC)

On the education of Alexander and Macedonian history by Marsyas of Pella (ca. 356-ca. 294 BC)

Work of Medius of Larissa (general under Alexander and senior commander under Antigonus Monophthalmus)

Work of Nearchus, the primary source of Arrian's Indica

How Alexander was Educated and geographical works by Onesicritus (ca. 360-ca. 290 BC)

Work of Ptolemy I Soter (ca. 367-282 BC)

History of Alexander by Timagenes (1^st century BC)

Historiae Philippicae by Gnaeus Pompeius Trogus (1^st century BC)

This list cannot be exhaustive. There must have been many more documents. Nobody mentions, for instance, Alexander’s correspondence with his mother and his sister, with Aristotle, with Antipater in Macedonia, with Queen Ada, and Queen Sisygambis. Letters were exchanged with the many embassies that contacted him or came to visit him. The entire world evolved around Alexander, and strangely enough, there is not a single document left to prove it. The famous  Library of Alexandria must have held scores of such precious testimonies. Besides, the later Graeco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek Empires most certainly produced literature of their own. 

We do have, of course, the Alexander Romance (see: Le Roman d’Alexandre, traduit du grec par A Tallet-Bonvalot). The oldest known version dates probably from the 3rd century AD, and its author is unknown, although it has been attributed to Pseudo-Callisthenes. This document is generally called version α and served for all subsequent accounts that were published on a more or less regular basis until the 16^th century. They were written in Latin, Greek, Armenian, Georgian, Persian, Hebrew, Arabic, Islamic, French, English, Italian, Spanish, Hungarian, Romanian, German, Ethiopic, Mongolian, and several medieval patois. Useless to say that each translation or interpretation contributed to embellishing the legendary person of Alexander.

Historians generally agree that Pseudo-Callisthenes based his tales on the writings of Onesicritus, who used Callisthenes.

The legends about Alexander are endless, and a great many of them have not been put in writing. They are part of the oral tradition of many peoples. They were told and retold by traveling bards over the centuries, and we can still find those tales today in the countries crossed by Alexander.

From the top of my head, I remember the story about the Prison of Alexander in Yazd, Iran (see: Alexander’s Prison?), and that of his general Farhangi-Sarhang in Nur, Uzbekistan (see: Sogdian Forts and Alexander Fort in Nurata).

There is also the later tale of Alexander Rex, which is part of the mosaic in the church of Otranto in southern Italy (see: Alexander's presence in Magna Graecia). Or Saint Alexander depicted in Byzantine and Orthodox art, appearing in the 12th-century Church of S. Demetrius in Vladimir, Ukrainian Kiev. Around the 15^th and 16^th centuries, Alexander became a symbol of vanity. Several churches in Greece display frescoes of monks who meditate on vanity while gazing down on Alexander’s body at their feet. For instance, at the church of St John the Baptist in the Peloponnese and at the Monastery of the Holy Trinity at the Meteora (see: Alexander, from hero to saint).

The references to Alexander are endless, and I am talking mainly about written documentation here. His legacy in architecture, paintings, statues, coins, jewelry, and other decorative elements constitutes another fascinating testimony of Alexander to the world

Updated 24 May 2025

Le Roman d’Alexandre, traduit du grec par A Tallet-Bonvalot

Just as there is not one Silk Road, there certainly is not one Alexander Romance. 

The oldest known version dates probably from the 3rd century AD, and its author is unknown, although it has been attributed to Pseudo-Callisthenes - not known otherwise. This version is generally called version α and served for all subsequent versions, which appeared on a more or less regular basis until the 16^th century and were written in Latin, Greek, Armenian, Georgian, Persian, Hebrew, Arabic, Islamic, French, English, Italian, Spanish, Hungarian, Romanian, German, Ethiopic, Mongolian and many Medieval patois. Useless to say that each version added tales of its own fantasy and embellished the legend that Alexander became over the centuries.

Le Roman d'Alexandre (ISBN 9-782080-707888), which I read is the Codex Parisinus Graecus 1711, discovered at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris in the 18^th century. This Greek text is entitled The Life of Alexander the Macedonian, poorly copied, with spelling mistakes and others, and composed in the 11^th century. It is labeled version A since it closely relates to the original Romance.

The book has little to do with the historical Alexander, and the chronology of his conquests is entirely inconsistent and/or invented. To give it a credible resonance, we find familiar names in a utopian setting, for instance, Craterus of Olynthus as an architect in Alexandria or Parmenion lending his name to the Serapeum, while Roxane is presented as the daughter of the king of Persia. Interestingly, Parmenion is accused of planning the murder of Alexander by bribing the king's doctor Philip, at Tarsus. At the same time, he historically sent a letter to Alexander to warn him of Philip.

Alexander marches with a vast army to face enormous enemies without giving any details on the battles or hardly a location, but encountering one mythical or fabulous being after another. The book contains an amazing number of letters exchanged with the Athenians, Darius, Olympias, Aristotle, Porus, Kandaké, king of Meroe, and even with the Amazons and the gymnosophists. This is not a heroic Alexander but a wise man who always does the right thing, much to the awe and admiration of his audience. 

Le Roman d'Alexandre concludes with Alexander's will, which is made to fit the book's tale but can in no way be connected to historical reality.