The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.

THE
ANABASIS OF ALEXANDER.

THE
ANABASIS OF ALEXANDER;

OR,

LITERALLY TRANSLATED, WITH A COMMENTARY,
FROM THE GREEK OF ARRIAN THE NICOMEDIAN,

BY
E. J. CHINNOCK, M.A., LL.B., LONDON,
Rector of Dumfries Academy.

HODDER AND STOUGHTON,
27, PATERNOSTER ROW.
MDCCCLXXXIV.

Butler & Tanner,
The Selwood Printing Works,
Frome, and London.

PREFACE.

When I began this Translation, more than two years ago, I had no intention of publishing it; but as the work progressed, it occurred to me that Arrian is an Author deserving of more attention from the English-speaking races than he has yet received. No edition of his works has, so far as I am aware, ever appeared in England, though on the Continent many have been published. In the following Translation I have tried to give as literal a rendering of the Greek text as I could without transgressing the idioms of our own language. My theory of the duty of a Translator is, to give the ipsissima verba of his Author as nearly as possible, and not put into his mouth words which he never used, under the mistaken notion of improving his diction or his way of stating his case. It is a comparatively easy thing to give a paraphrase of a foreign work, presenting the general drift of the original; but no one, unless he has himself tried it, can understand the difficulty of translating a classical Author correctly without omission or mutilation.

In the Commentary which I have compiled, continual reference has been made to the other extant authorities on the history of Alexander, such as Diodorus, Plutarch, Curtius, Justin, and Aelian; so that I think I may safely assert that, taking the Translation and the Notes together, the book forms a complete history of Alexander’s reign. Much geographical and other material has also been gathered from Herodotus, Strabo, Pliny, and Ammianus; and the allusions to the places which are also mentioned in the Old Testament are given from the Hebrew.

As Arrian lived in the second century of the present era, and nearly five hundred years after Demosthenes, it is not to be expected that he wrote classical Greek. There are, however, at least a dozen valuable Greek authors of this century whose works are still extant, and of these it is a safe statement to make, that Arrian is the best of them all, with the single exception of Lucian. I have noticed as many of his deviations from Attic Greek constructions as I thought suitable to a work of this kind. A complete index of Proper Names has been added, and the quantities of the vowels marked for the aid of the English Reader. In the multiplicity of references which I have put into the Notes, I should be sanguine if I imagined that no errors will be found; but if such occur, I must plead as an excuse the pressure of work which a teacher in a large school experiences, leaving him very little energy for literary labour.

E. J. C.

DUMFRIES,
  December, 1883.

CONTENTS.

ERRATA.

LIFE AND WRITINGS OF ARRIAN.

All we know of Arrian is derived from the notice of him in the Bibliotheca of Photius, who was Patriarch of Constantinople in the ninth century, and from a few incidental references in his own writings. We learn from Suidas that Dion Cassius wrote a biography of Arrian; but this work is not extant. Flavius Arrianus was born near the end of the first century of the Christian era, at Nicomedia, the capital of Bithynia. He became a pupil of the famous Stoic philosopher Epictetus, and afterwards went to Athens, where he received the surname of the “younger Xenophon,” from the fact that he occupied the same relation to Epictetus as Xenophon did to Socrates.1 Not only was he called Xenophon by others, but he calls himself so in Cynegeticus (v. 6); and in Periplus (xii. 5; xxv. 1), he distinguishes Xenophon by the addition the elder. Lucian (Alexander, 56) calls Arrian simply Xenophon. During the stay of the emperor Hadrian at Athens, A.D. 126, Arrian gained his friendship. He accompanied his patron to Rome, where he received the Roman citizenship. In consequence of this, he assumed the name of Flavius.2 In the same way the Jewish historian, Josephus, had been allowed by Vespasian and Titus to bear the imperial name Flavius.3

Photius says, that Arrian had a distinguished career in Rome, being entrusted with various political offices, and at last reaching the supreme dignity of consul under Antoninus Pius.4 Previous to this he was appointed (A.D. 132) by Hadrian, Governor of Cappadocia, which province was soon after invaded by the Alani, or Massagetae, whom he defeated and expelled.5 When Marcus Aurelius came to the throne, Arrian withdrew into private life and returned to his native city, Nicomedia. Here, according to Photius, he was appointed priest to Demeter and Persephone. He died in the reign of Marcus Aurelius.

The earlier literary efforts of Arrian were philosophical. After the expulsion of the philosophers from Rome, by Domitian, Epictetus delivered his lectures at Nicopolis, in Epirus, where it is probable that Arrian was his pupil.

I. These lectures were published by Arrian, under the title of Discourses of Epictetus, in eight books, the first four only of which have come down to us. He tells us himself in the introduction to this work, that he strove as far as possible to preserve the very words of his teacher as mementoes of his method of reasoning and diction. Gellius (xix. 1) speaks of a fifth book of these Discourses.

II. He also compiled The Enchiridion of Epictetus, an abstract of the philosophy of Epictetus, which is still extant. This manual of the Stoic moral philosophy was very popular, both among Pagans and Christians, for many centuries.

III. Another work by Arrian, in twelve books, distinct from the above, is mentioned by Photius under the title of “Ὁμιλίαι Ἐπικτήτου”, or Friendly Conversations with Epictetus. Of this only a few fragments survive.

IV. Another lost work of Arrian on the life and death of Epictetus is mentioned by Simplicius in the beginning of his Commentary on the Enchiridion.

V. Besides editing these philosophical works, Arrian wrote many original books. By far the most important of these is the Anabasis of Alexander, or the History of Alexander the Great’s Campaigns. This is one of the most authentic and accurate of historical works. Though inspired with admiration for his hero, the author evinces impartiality and freedom from hero-worship. He exhibits great literary acuteness in the choice of his authorities and in sifting evidence. The two chief sources from which he drew his narrative were the histories written by Ptolemy, son of Lagus, and Aristobulus, son of Aristobulus, both of whom were officers in Alexander’s army. Other authorities quoted by Arrian himself were:—Eratosthenes, Megasthenes, Nearchus, Aristus, and Asclepiades. He also made use of Alexander’s letters, which he mentions five times;6 only once, however, quoting the exact words of the writer. The last authority which he mentions, is the Royal Diary kept by Eumenes, of Cardia, the private secretary of Philip as well as of Alexander, and by the historian Diodotus, of Erythrae. It is used by Arrian only once,7 as it is by Plutarch.8

VI. The work named Indica, is a description of India, and was usually united in manuscripts with the Anabasis, as an eighth book. Though it may be looked upon as a supplement to the Anabasis, Arrian often refers in the one work to the other.9 From this we may infer that the author wished the Indica to be considered a distinct book from the Anabasis; and from the remark in Anab. v. 1, it is clear that it was composed after the Anabasis. This book is written in the Ionic dialect, like the History of Herodotus and the Indica of Ctesias. The latter untrustworthy book Arrian wished to supplant by his own narrative, principally based on the works of Megasthenes and Nearchus.

VII. Photius mentions among Arrian’s historical works:—The Events after Alexander, in ten books, which gives the history of Alexander’s successors. Photius (cod. 92) has preserved many extracts from this work.

VIII. Bithynica in eight books, a work often quoted by Eustathius in his commentaries to the Iliad and to Dionysius Periegetes. In regard to the contents of this book, Photius (cod. 93) says:—“The Bithynica commences from the mythical events of history and comes down as far as the death of the last Nicomedes, who at his death bequeathed his kingdom to the Romans, who had never been ruled by a king after the expulsion of Tarquin.”

IX. Parthica, in seventeen books. See Photius (cod. 58).

X. History of the Alani. See Photius (cod. 93). Only fragments of this and the Parthica remain.

XI. Besides the large works, we learn from Photius (cod. 93) that Arrian wrote the biographies of the Corinthian Timoleon and of the Syracusan Dion. Lucian (Alex. 2), also states that he wrote the life of Tilliborus, the notorious robber of Asia Minor.

XII. A valuable geographical work by Arrian has come down to us, called “Περίπλους πόντου Εὐξείνου,” a description of a voyage round the coasts of the Euxine. This naval expedition was executed by him as Governor of Cappadocia. The Alani, or, Albani of the East, a tribe related to the Massagetae, were threatening to invade his province, and he made this voyage with a view of fortifying the most important strategic points on the coast. From section 26 of the Periplus we find that this voyage must have taken place about the year 131 or 132 A.D.; for the death of King Cotys II., noticed in that passage as just dead, is proved by Böckh’s investigations to have occurred in 131 A.D. Two other geographical works, The Periplus of the Red Sea and The Periplus of the Euxine, formerly ascribed to Arrian, are proved to belong to a later date.

XIII. A work on Tactics, composed 137 A.D. In many parts this book agrees nearly verbally with the larger work of Aelian on the same subject; but Leo Tacticus (vii. 85) expressly mentions the two works as distinct.

XIV. An Array of Battle against the Alani, is a fragment discovered in the seventeenth century in the Description of his Battles with the Alani, who invaded his province, probably 137 A.D., as Arrian had previously feared.10

XV. A small work by Arrian on the Chase, forms a supplement to Xenophon’s book on the same subject. It is entitled Cynegeticus of Arrian or the second Xenophon the Athenian.

The best editions of the Anabasis are the following:—The editio princeps by Trincavelli, Venice, 1535; Gerbel, Strassburg, 1539; Henri Estienne, 1575; N. Blancardus, Amsterdam, 1668; J. Gronovius, Leyden, 1704; G. Raphelius, Amsterdam, 1757; A. C. Borkeck, Lemgovia, 1792; F. Schmieder, Leipzig, 1798; Tauchnitz edition, Leipzig, 1818; J. O. Ellendt, Königsberg, 1832; C. W. Krüger, Berlin, 1835; F. Dübner, Paris, 1846; K. Abicht, Leipzig, 1871.

ARRIAN'S PREFACE.

I have admitted into my narrative as strictly authentic all the statements relating to Alexander and Philip which Ptolemy, son of Lagus,11 and Aristobulus, son of Aristobulus,12 agree in making; and from those statements which differ I have selected that which appears to me the7 more credible and at the same time the more deserving of record. Different authors have given different accounts of Alexander’s life; and there is no one about whom more have written, or more at variance with each other. But in my opinion the narratives of Ptolemy and Aristobulus are more worthy of credit than the rest; Aristobulus, because he served under king Alexander in his expedition, and Ptolemy, not only because he accompanied Alexander in his expedition, but also because he was himself a king afterwards, and falsification of facts would have been more disgraceful to him than to any other man. Moreover, they are both more worthy of credit, because they compiled their histories after Alexander’s death, when neither compulsion was used nor reward offered them to write anything different from what really occurred. Some statements made by other writers I have incorporated in my narrative, because they seemed to me worthy of mention and not altogether improbable; but I have given them merely as reports of Alexander’s proceedings. And if any man wonders why, after so many other men have written of Alexander, the compilation of this history came into my mind, after perusing13 the narratives of all the rest, let him read this of mine, and then wonder (if he can).

THE ANABASIS OF ALEXANDER.

BOOK I.

CHAPTER I.

Death of Philip and Accession of Alexander.—His Wars with the Thracians.

It is said that Philip died14 when Pythodemus was archon at Athens,15 and that his son Alexander,16 being then 9about twenty years of age, marched into Peloponnesus17 as soon as he had secured the regal power. There he assembled all the Greeks who were within the limits of Peloponnesus,18 and asked from them the supreme command of the expedition against the Persians, an office which they had already conferred upon Philip. He received the honour which he asked from all except the Lacedaemonians,19 who replied that it was an hereditary custom of theirs, not to follow others but to lead them. The Athenians also attempted to bring about some political change; but they were so alarmed at the very approach of Alexander, that they conceded to him even more ample public honours than those which had been bestowed upon Philip.20 He then returned into Macedonia and busied himself in preparing for the expedition into Asia.

However, at the approach of spring (B.C. 335), he marched towards Thrace, into the lands of the Triballians and Illyrians,21 because he ascertained that these nations were meditating a change of policy; and at the same time, as they were lying on his frontier, he thought it inexpedient, when he was about to start on a campaign so far away from his own land, to leave them behind him without being entirely subjugated. Setting out then from Amphipolis, he invaded the land of the people who were called independent Thracians,22 keeping the city of Philippi and mount Orbelus on the left. Crossing the river Nessus,23 they say he arrived at mount Haemus24 on the tenth day. Here, along the defiles up the ascent to the mountain, he was met by many of the traders equipped with arms, as well as by the independent Thracians, who had made preparations to check the further advance of his expedition by seizing the summit of the Haemus, along which was the route for the passage of his army. They had collected their waggons, and placed them in front of them, not only using them as a rampart from which they might defend themselves, in case they should be forced back, but also intending to let them loose upon the phalanx of the Macedonians, where the mountain was most precipitous, if they tried to ascend. They had come to the conclusion25 that the denser the phalanx was with which the waggons rushing down came into collision, the more easily would they scatter it by the violence of their fall upon it.

But Alexander formed a plan by which he might cross the mountain with the least danger possible; and since he was resolved to run all risks, knowing that there were no means of passing elsewhere, he ordered the heavy-armed soldiers, as soon as the waggons began to rush down the declivity, to open their ranks, and directed that those whom the road was sufficiently wide to permit to do so should stand apart, so that the waggons might roll through the gap; but that those who were hemmed in on all sides should either stoop down together or even fall flat on the ground, and lock their shields compactly together, so that the waggons rushing down upon them, and in all probability by their very impetus leaping over them, might pass on without injuring them. And it turned out just as Alexander had conjectured and exhorted. For some of the men made gaps in the phalanx, and others locked their shields together. The waggons rolled over the shields without doing much injury, not a single man being killed under them. Then the Macedonians regained their courage, inasmuch as the waggons, which they had excessively dreaded, had inflicted no damage upon them. With a loud cry they assaulted the Thracians. Alexander ordered his archers to march from the right wing in front of the rest of the phalanx, because there the passage was easier, and to shoot at the Thracians where they advanced. He himself took his own guard, the shield-bearing infantry and the Agrianians,26 and led them to the left. Then the archers shot at the Thracians who sallied forward, and repulsed them; and the phalanx, coming to close fighting, easily drove away from their position men who were light-armed and badly equipped barbarians. The consequence was, they no longer waited to receive Alexander marching against them from the left, but casting away their arms they fled down the mountain as each man best could. About 1,500 of them were killed; but only a few were taken prisoners on account of their swiftness of foot and acquaintance with the country. However, all the women who were accompanying them were captured, as were also their children and all their booty.