The Anabasis of Alexander or, The history of the wars and conquests of Alexander the Great
the Thessalian river Peneius, which flows through Tempē and discharges
itself into the sea. The Polytimetus is much too large to be compared
with the river Peneius.[528]
CHAPTER VII.
TREATMENT OF BESSUS.
When he had accomplished this, he came to Zariaspa; where he remained
until the depth of winter arrived.[529] At this time came to him
Phrataphernes the viceroy of Parthia, and Stasanor, who had been sent
into the land of the Areians to arrest Arsames.[530] Him they brought
with them in chains, as also Barzanes, whom Bessus had appointed
viceroy of the land of the Parthians, and some others of those who at
that time had joined Bessus in revolt. At the same time arrived from
the sea, Epocillus,[531] Melamnidas and Ptolemy, the general of the
Thracians, who had convoyed down to the sea the Grecian allies and
the money sent with Menes.[532] At this time also arrived Asander
and Nearchus at the head of an army of Grecian mercenaries.[533]
Asclepiodorus, viceroy of Syria, and Menes the deputy also arrived
from the sea, at the head of another army. Then Alexander gathered a
conference of those who were then at hand, and led Bessus in before
them. Having accused him of the betrayal of Darius, he ordered his nose
and ears to be cut off, and that he should be taken to Ecbatana to be
put to death there in the council of the Medes and Persians.[534] I
do not commend this excessive punishment; on the contrary, I consider
that the mutilation of the prominent features of the body is a
barbaric[535] custom, and I agree with those who say that Alexander
was induced to indulge his desire of emulating the Median and Persian
wealth and to treat his subjects as inferior beings according to the
custom of the foreign kings. Nor do I by any means commend him for
changing the Macedonian style of dress which his fathers had adopted,
for the Median one,[536] being as he was a descendant of Heracles.[537]
Besides, he was not ashamed to exchange the head-dress which he
the conqueror had so long worn, for that of the conquered Persians.
None of these things do I commend; but I consider Alexander’s great
achievements prove, if anything can, that supposing a man to have a
vigorous bodily constitution, to be illustrious in descent, and to be
even more successful in war than Alexander himself; even supposing
he could sail right round Libya as well as Asia, and hold them both
in subjection as Alexander indeed designed; even if he could add the
possession of Europe to that of Asia and Libya; all these things would
be no furtherance to such a man’s happiness, unless at the same time he
possess the power of self-control, though he has performed the great
deeds which have been supposed.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE MURDER OF CLITUS.
Here also I shall give an account of the tragic fate of Clitus, son
of Dropidas, and of Alexander’s mishap in regard to it. Though it
occurred a little while after this, it will not be out of place here. The
Macedonians kept a day sacred to Dionysus, and on that day Alexander
used to offer sacrifice to him every year. But they say that on this
occasion he was neglectful of Dionysus,[538] and sacrificed to the
Dioscūri[539] instead; for he had resolved to offer sacrifice to those
deities for some reason or other. When the drinking-party on this
occasion had already gone on too long (for Alexander had now made
innovations even in regard to drinking, by imitating the custom of
foreigners), and in the midst of the carouse a discussion had arisen
about the Dioscuri, how their procreation had been taken away from
Tyndareus and ascribed to Zeus, some of those present, in order to
flatter Alexander, maintained that Polydeuces and Castor were in no way
worthy to compare with him who had performed so many exploits. Such men
have always corrupted the character of kings and will never cease to
ruin the interests of those who happen to be reigning.[540] In their
carousal they did not even abstain from (comparing him with) Heracles;
saying that envy prevented the living from receiving the honours due
to them from their associates. It was well known that Clitus had
long been vexed at Alexander for the change in his style of living
in imitation of foreign kings, and at those who flattered him with
their speech. At that time also, being heated with wine, he would not
permit them either to insult the deity or, by depreciating the deeds
of the ancient heroes, to confer upon Alexander a gratification which
deserved no thanks. He affirmed Alexander’s deeds were neither in fact
so great or marvellous as they represented in their laudation; nor had
he achieved them by himself, but for the most part they were the deeds
of the Macedonians. The delivery of this speech annoyed Alexander; and
I do not commend it, for I think, in such a drunken bout, it would
have been sufficient if, so far as he was personally concerned, he
had kept silence, and not committed the error of indulging in the
same flattery as the others. But when some even mentioned Philip’s
actions without exercising a just judgment, declaring that he had
performed nothing great or marvellous, they gratified Alexander; but
Clitus being then no longer able to contain himself, began to put
Philip’s achievements in the first rank, and to depreciate Alexander
and his performances.[541] Clitus being now quite intoxicated, made
other insolent remarks and even greatly reviled him, because forsooth
he had saved his life, when the cavalry battle had been fought with
the Persians at the Granicus. Then indeed, arrogantly stretching out
his right hand, he said:—“This hand, O Alexander, preserved thee
on that occasion.” Alexander could now no longer endure the drunken
insolence of Clitus; but jumped up against him in a great rage. He was
however restrained by his boon-companions. As Clitus did not desist
from his insulting remarks, Alexander shouted out a summons for his
shield-bearing guards to attend him; but when no one obeyed him, he
said that he was reduced to the same position as Darius, when he was
led about under arrest by Bessus and his adherents, and that he now
possessed the mere name of king. Then his companions were no longer
able to restrain him; for according to some he leaped up and snatched a
javelin from one of his confidential body-guards; according to others,
a long pike from one of his ordinary guards, with which he struck
Clitus and killed him.[542] Aristobulus does not say whence the drunken
quarrel originated, but asserts that the fault was entirely on the side
of Clitus, who, when Alexander had got so enraged with him as to jump
up against him with the intention of making an end of him, was led away
by Ptolemy, son of Lagus, the confidential body-guard, through the
gateway, beyond the wall and ditch of the citadel where the quarrel
occurred. He adds that Clitus could not control himself, but went back
again, and falling in with Alexander who was calling out for Clitus, he
exclaimed:—“Alexander, here is Clitus!” Thereupon he was struck with a
long pike and killed.
CHAPTER IX.
ALEXANDER’S GRIEF FOR CLITUS.
I think Clitus deserving of severe censure for his insolent behaviour
to his king, while at the same time I pity Alexander for his mishap,
because on that occasion he showed himself the slave of two vices,
anger and drunkenness, by neither of which is it seemly for a prudent
man to be enslaved. But then on the other hand I think his subsequent
behaviour worthy of praise, because directly after he had done the
deed he recognised that it was a horrible one. Some of his biographers
even say that he propped the pike against the wall with the intention
of falling upon it himself, thinking that it was not proper for him to
live who had killed his friend when under the influence of wine. Most
historians do not mention this, but say that he went off to bed and lay
there lamenting, calling Clitus himself by name, and his sister Lanice,
daughter of Dropidas, who had been his nurse. He exclaimed that having
reached man’s estate he had forsooth bestowed on her a noble reward for
her care in rearing him, as she lived to see her own sons die fighting
on his behalf, and the king slaying her brother with his own hand.[543]
He did not cease calling himself the murderer of his friends; and for
three days rigidly abstained from food and drink, and paid no attention
whatever to his personal appearance. Some of the soothsayers revealed
that the avenging wrath of Dionysus had been the cause of his conduct,
because he had omitted the sacrifice to that deity.[544] At last with
great difficulty he was induced by his companions to touch food and to
pay proper attention to His person.[545] He then paid to Dionysus the
sacrifice due to him, since he was not at all unwilling to attribute
the fatality rather to the avenging wrath of the deity than to his own
depravity. I think Alexander deserves great praise for this, that he
did not obstinately persevere in evil, or still worse become a defender
and advocate of the wrong which had been done, but confessed that he
had committed a crime, being a man and not a god. There are some who
say that Anaxarchus the Sophist[546] was summoned into Alexander’s
presence to give him consolation. Finding him lying down and groaning,
he laughed at him, and said that he did not know that the wise men of
old for this reason made Justice an assessor of Zeus, because whatever
was done by him was justly done[547]; and therefore also that which was
done by the Great King ought to be deemed just, in the first place by
the king himself, and then by the rest of men. They say that Alexander
was then greatly consoled by these remarks.[548] But I assert that
Anaxarchus did Alexander a great injury and one still greater than that
by which he was then oppressed, if he really thought this to be the
opinion of a wise man, that forsooth it is proper for a king to come to
hasty conclusions and act unjustly, and that whatever is done by a king
must be deemed just, no matter how it is done. There is also a current
report that Alexander wished men to prostrate themselves before him as
to a god, entertaining the notion that Ammon was his father, rather
than Philip; and that he now showed his admiration of the customs of
the Persians and Medes by changing the style of his dress, and by the
alteration he made in the general etiquette of his court. There were
not wanting those who in regard to these matters gave way to his wishes
with the design of flattering him; among others being Anaxarchus, one
of the philosophers attending his court, and Agis, an Argive who was an
epic poet.[549]
CHAPTER X.
DISPUTE BETWEEN CALLISTHENES AND ANAXARCHUS.
But it is said that Callisthenes the Olynthian, who had studied
philosophy under Aristotle, and was somewhat brusque in his manner, did
not approve of this conduct; and so far as this is concerned I quite
agree with him. But the following remark of his, if indeed it has been
correctly recorded, I do not think at all proper, when he declared that
Alexander and his exploits were dependent upon him and his history, and
that he had not come to him to acquire reputation from him, but to make
him renowned in the eyes of men;[550] consequently that Alexander’s
participation in divinity did not depend on the false assertion of
Olympias in regard to the author of his birth, but on what he might
report to mankind in his history of the king. There are some writers
also who have said that on one occasion Philotas forsooth asked him,
what man he thought to be held in especial honour by the people of
Athens; and that he replied:—“Harmodius and Aristogeiton; because they
slew one of the two despots, and put an end to the despotism.”[551]
Philotas again asked:—“If it happened now that a man should kill a