Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Arrian and his reliability as a source - Coggle Diagram
Arrian and his reliability as a source
Background information
Timeline. Lived 86-160CE (4 Centuries after Alexander). Wrote after Alexander's life on second-hand knowledge
Served the Romans, before retiring to Athens as a military historian. Felt his writing was worthy of recording the life of 'a great man like Alexander'
Unreliable
Single minded - believed in Alexander's greatness and criticised the writers who prioritised writing about his faults
Picks his sources to fulfill his criteria (positive of Alexander, believed in honesty of regal figures). Unfortunately, his combination of multiple sources like Diodorus Sicilus, Ptolemy and Curtius Rufus has led to Arrian's work as providing the most evidence for Alexander's qualities
Highly arrogant and obsessed with his skills
May not have had any military experience
Writing 4 centuries after Alexander's life so overly reliant on other sources.
Plutarch is viewed as a highly unreliable source by modern historians
Furthermore, historian AB Bosworth has assessed Arrian's interpretation of sources as incorrect
Featured emotions and personal judgement, as opposed to pure facts
Reliable
Took advantage of first-hand (contemporary) sources for Alexander
SUPPOSEDLY Had experience in military (as writer and maybe general)
Had experience in politics (was a senator of Rome)
Wrote in Athens, while surrounded by Greek Heritage
Attempted
an objective view
Highly motivated in pursuit of this work