This philosopher, whose melancholy fate imparts a peculiar interest
to his name, was nephew of Aristotle, and had enjoyed through his
uncle an early acquaintance with Alexander during the boyhood of
the latter. At the recommendation of Aristotle, Kallisthenes had
accompanied Alexander in his Asiatic expedition. He was a man of
much literary and rhetorical talent, which he turned towards the
composition of history—and to the history of recent times.[515]
Alexander, full of ardor for conquest, was at the same time anxious
that his achievements should be commemorated by poets and men
of letters;[516] there were seasons also when he enjoyed their
conversation. On both these grounds, he invited several of them
to accompany the army. The more prudent among them declined, but
Kallisthenes obeyed, partly in hopes of procuring the reconstitution
of his native city Olynthus, as Aristotle had obtained the like
favor for Stageira.[517] Kallisthenes had composed a narrative (not
preserved) of Alexander’s exploits, which certainly reached to
the battle of Arbela, and may perhaps have gone down farther. The
few fragments of this narrative remaining seem to betoken extreme
admiration, not merely of the bravery and ability, but also of the
transcendent and unbroken good fortune, of Alexander—marking him
out as the chosen favorite of the gods. This feeling was perfectly
natural under the grandeur of the events. Insofar as we can judge
from one or two specimens, Kallisthenes was full of complimentary
tribute to the hero of his history. But the character of Alexander
himself had undergone a material change during the six years between
his first landing in Asia and his campaign in Sogdiana. All his worst
qualities had been developed by unparalleled success and by Asiatic
example. He required larger doses of flattery, and had now come to
thirst, not merely for the reputation of divine paternity, but for
the actual manifestations of worship as towards a god.
[515] Kallisthenes had composed three historical works—1.
Hellenica—from the year 387-357 B. C. 2. History of the
sacred war—from 357-346 B. C. 3. Τὰ κατ᾽ Ἀλέξανδρον.
His style is said by Cicero to have been rhetorical; but the
Alexandrine critics included him in their Canon of Historians.
See Didot, Fragm. Hist. Alex. Magn. p. 6-9.
[516] See the observation ascribed to him expressing envy towards
Achilles for having been immortalized by Homer (Arrian, i. 12, 2).
[517] It is said that Ephorus, Xenokrates, and Menedemus, all
declined the invitation of Alexander (Plutarch, De Stoicorum
Repugnantiis, p. 1043). Respecting Menedemus, the fact can hardly
be so: he must have been then too young to be invited.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account