The implications of Arrian’s source choice in his Anabasis
At the start of his history of Alexander, Arrian explains his choice of sources for his account. He claims to have chosen the accounts of Ptolemy and Aristobulus because they were eyewitnesses and participated in Alexander’s campaigns. Arrian also states that Ptolemy would not lie because he was a king, and it is more disgraceful for kings to lie than it is for others. This has massive implications on Arrian’s account as he chose the two most positive accounts of Alexander’s life and shows some bias concerning the character of kings.
Arrian’s main reason for choosing these two accounts is that they were eyewitnesses. However, Cleitarchus was also an eyewitness and was Alexander’s chosen court historian, but his account was more critical of Alexander, and he was murdered by Alexander before the end of the campaigns for allegedly plotting the king’s assassination. Arrian probably ignored this account because it was more critical and he came to a rather dishonourable end after an alleged assassination attempt. This demonstrates that the decision was not only based on whether the writer was an eyewitness.
The decision to primarily use Ptolemy and Aristobulus is problematic because they both are very flattering accounts. Aristobulus was known in antiquity as a flatterer because of his uncritical account of Alexander. This lack of criticism does not provide a proper picture of Alexander’s actions and character.
Ptolemy’s account was also flattering to Alexander. Despite Arrian’s claim that kings could not lie, Ptolemy had more cause than others to present a flattering tale of Alexander’s life. His legitimacy as a king rested upon his relationship with Alexander. Ptolemy also uses his history to corrupt the memory of his enemies. For example, Arrian tells us that according to Ptolemy at the siege of Thebes, it was Perdiccas who engaged without permission from Alexander (who was waiting patiently), forcing the king to act to prevent Perdiccas and his men from being slaughtered. Ptolemy by suggesting this presents Alexander as a patient and calm man (compared to other accounts that present him as being fuelled by rage during this siege), he also besmirches the memory of Perdiccas, whom Pltoemy defeated in battle and stole the body of Alexander from.
This means that Arrian’s account may be over-flattering to Alexander. It also calls into question Arrian’s naivety concerning the character of kings. It suggests that he will also be overly flattering to Alexander as he sees kings as superior people. This demonstrates a kind of bias that would preferably be avoided in any detailed history.
