Alexander the Great - Arrian (Translated by Martin Hammond), 2013: Part One

Alexander the Great: The Anabasis and the Indica

I have decided to split this book into two parts. the Anabasis and the Indica will be looked at seperately and then I will write a little about how the two work together. The Anabasis is the largest part of Arrian’s history about Alexander and is an account of his reign as king.

This text appealed to me because I am interested in learning more about Alexander’s life, but it was much more interesting than I expected it to be. The Anabasis gives a lot of detail on every aspect of Alexander’s campaigns. The movements, the sieges, the battles and the commanders are all given in details without fail. The major battles, such as Gaugamela and Hydaspes, are given in great detail and every action is described by Arrian. The seemingly minor engagements are also described well even when it doesn’t seem entirely necessary; this all reinforces the fact that Arrian is drawing upon sources which witnessed the events.

Something I didn’t expect to get from the Anabasis was an insight into Alexander’s personality alongside the description of his achievements. I expected this would simply be a description of events, without any real characters coming through other than a typically perfect king. However, I was pleased to find that Arrian put effort into making Alexander a believable and powerful character. Certainly, Alexander comes across as a king without equal, at least in Arrian’s eyes, but he is also shown to have flaws. Most notably, Arrian displays Alexander’s affinity for wine and the consequences of his vices; the events with Black Cleitus are the best example of this. Alexander, at times, seems more like an epic hero than a real king. He is always leading his men and acts similarly to Achilles in the Iliad on more than one occasion. The episodes that Arrian gives us, such as the solving of the Gordian Knot, reinforce the mythology surrounding Alexander which makes him a particularly compelling character. Arrian’s narrative would certainly be less exciting if these vignettes of Alexander’s character were missing.

While Alexander’s character certainly is vivid, the same can’t be said for many of the other recurring figures in the Anabasis. The majority of Alexander’s companions are merely named as they carry out actions and there is very little told about their personality. Similarly, Alexander’s enemies are by and large names with very little development beyond that; there seems an almost constant stream of replaceable Persian satraps. There are some exceptions to this rule. Arrian gives space to learn more about Darius, the Persian King, and Porus is also painted as an especially honourable adversary for Alexander. These, as well as Alexander, are certainly the most memorable figures and that is likely due to Arrian’s descriptions. The other characters, such as Hephaestion and Ptolemy, are mostly described in relation to Alexander. Whether they are interacting with him positively or negatively, the interactions add more to the depiction of Alexander rather than anyone else.

The military aspects of Alexander’s life are very prominent in the Anabasis. Arrian seemingly knew every movement that was made in the major battles of Alexander’s lifetime. It is a wonderful insight into how the Macedonian war machine operated under Alexander’s command. The effectiveness of the army is something that is emphasised often and for anyone interested in ancient warfare this is certainly an essential read. It is hard to imagine that Arrian was able to create such a clear view of the chaotic battles that he describes, and so the reliability can be questioned to an extent. However, there is no doubt that the descriptions of battles such as Issus and Gaugamela, are so richly detailed that they are thoroughly entertaining to read in themselves. Personally, I began reading this text for the battle descriptions themselves and I was not disappointed in the slightest. Arrian gives every detail of the battles and creates remarkable and well formulated descriptions of every engagement.

The Alexander Mosaic (detail) - Click the image to find out more

It is important to remember that Arrian drew upon Ptolemy and Aristoboulos as his main sources; two individuals who were with Alexander. These are fairly reliable, however, Arrian outlines in his introduction that Ptolemy did not lie because he is a king, and so it could be that Arrian took information as truth which may have been questionable. There are multiple times when Arrian presents several accounts of an event, such as the Gordian Knot. These examples suggest that Alexander’s exact actions were somewhat disputed amongst Arrian’s sources and so it is good to be cautious when reading about Alexander’s more mythical actions.

The Anabasis is focused on Alexander specifically, which is both a blessing and a curse. We are told everything about Alexander’s reign in great detail, however, there is very little said about the world beyond Alexander. For example, the Romans are mentioned briefly, but only as something that Alexander may be concerned about. Arrian does well to focus on the pivotal moments in Alexander’s life while allowing enough space to sections which may seem mundane. For example, the descriptions of Alexander’s administration of Persia are less vivid than the battle descriptions, however, they are important for creating a complete account of Alexander's life. The Anabasis is surprisingly enjoyable and flows well from one event to the next; something that would be hard to do considering the continent spanning activities of its protagonist. It is essential reading for people interested in Alexander’s reign and has proven to be a fascinating start for my own studies into the life of Alexander the Great. If you only had time to read one book about Alexander the Great, this is the text that I would recommend. Not just because it seems to cover every day of his reign, but also because Arrian's description shows his distinctive interpretation of what a model king would be, as well as his flaws.