by David Grant
28.The tradition behind the Li romans d’Alixandre discussed in Highet (1949) pp 56-57.
29.The medieval imagery pervades the whole Alexandreis poem but good examples of the military adornments can be found in the Alexandreis at 4.600-620 and for the envoys 10.265-280.
30.See chapter titled Hierarchic Historians and Alexandrian Alchemy for Tarn’s criticism of the Roman authors that invented contemporary embassies at Babylon.
31.Full discussion in R Silverberg The Realm of Prester John, Ohio University Press, 1996.
32.Eusebius Historia Ecclesiastica 3.34.4.
33.Josephus Jewish Wars 7.4
34.Josephus Against Apion 1.3, 1.11.
35.Josephus 20.8.3.
36.As ‘gate’ examples Seneca Epistle 119.7 ‘mundi claustra perrumpit’, Lucretius De Rerum Natura 1.70 ff ‘effringere portarum claustra’.
37.As related by Otto of Freising in his Chronicon, edited by GH Pertz, MGH SSRG, Hanover: Hahn, 1867, VII, 33, pp 334-35; translated by James Brundage in The Crusades: A Documentary History, Marquette University Press, Milwaukee 1962.
38.Quoting Stoneman (2012) Introduction p ix, and full discussion through pp xii-xxix. He Phyllada tou Megalexantrou is closest to the Middle Greek Romance recension.
39.Discussed in Townsend (1996) p 17.
40.Cited in Fortenbaugh-Schütrumpf (2000) p 315 drawing from I During Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition, Studia Graeca et Latina Gothoburgensia, Goteborg, 1957, p 215 and pp 233-234.
41.Quoting Harris (1999) p 78 and Chroust (1970) p 630 for Aristotle’s Will in Arabic.
42.R Kipling Barrack Room Ballads, 1892. Herodotus’ accounts of the Persian invasions illustrated the constant mistrust and friction between East and West. In Greek legend Helle drowned in the strait when fleeing her stepmother, Ino, to Colchis with her brother Phryxus on a golden-fleeced ram; referred to by Pindar, Herodotus, Aeschylus, amongst others.
43.Beowulf survives in a single anonymous manuscript residing in the British Library, known as the Nowell Codex; following Highet (1949) p 81 for the definition of the Dark Ages.
44.The Perceforest link following Roussineau (2001) and the parallels with Arthurian tales discussed in Spencer (2002) pp 207-208.
45.Thorpe (1966) p 17.
46.William of Newburgh Historia rerum Anglicarum, Book 1, Preface.
47.Polybius 34.5-7 (and confirmed by Strabo 2.4.1-2) ridiculed Pytheas’ journey having himself sailed out of the Pillars of Hercules and questioning sailors on their opinion; Scipio had likely given Polybius a ship to explore beyond the Pillars of Hercules (straits of Gibraltar) after the fall of Carthage; McGing (2010) p 144. Timaeus nevertheless believed Pytheas’ account according to Pliny 37.36. His hostility appears unfounded; discussed further in chapter titled Lifting the Shroud of Parrhasius. Plutarch Solon 31.3-32.1 recorded that Solon was embarking on a work about Atlantis using information he heard from the men of Sais, but this may be Plato’s own imagination at work, ‘eager to adopt and adorn the fable’… ‘as if it were the soil of a fair estate unoccupied’. Diodorus 3.54-55, 56.1 and 60-61 for one example of the legend of the Atlantians.
48.See discussion of Hittite finds in Wood (1985) chapter 6.
49.In a passage of the Quadriga tyrannorum the Historia Augusta accuses Marius Maximus of being a producer of a ‘mythical history’ or mythistoricis. See Syme (1971) p 76 for discussion.
50.See Momigliano (1966) p 40 for discussion of Gibbon and the Historia Augusta.
51.Following Syme (1971) p 279. The connection is that the tales in the vernacular languages derived from Latin were usually about chivalric adventure, hence ‘romance’.
52.Following the dates in Momigliano (1966) p 145 and Momigliano (1977) p 121 for the Origo gentis Romanae.
53.See Pitcher (2009) p 29 for discussion on the spurious sources used by the Historia Augusta; also Syme (1971) and Baynes (1926). Momigliano (1966) p 147 for the 130 documents cited and their breakdown and groupings. Quoting Momigliano (1966) p 145 and pp 143-166 for the authenticity of the Historia Augusta. His full dissection of the Historia Augusta can be read in Momigliano (1954) pp 22-46.
54.Gibbon (1776 to 1789) Volume 1 p xvii. Gibbon’s work was the first to give the reader detailed subtext, the precursor to the modern use of footnotes; for his use of the Historia Augusta see introduction by Leckie (1906). For Gibbon and source analysis see Momigliano (1966).
55.Gibbon’s own testimony in Preface to Volume 4, in Womersley (1994) p 520. The implausibilities within the Historia Augusta are also discussed in Pitcher (2009) p 153. The quote is from Momigliano (1954) p 23.
56.Quoting from Mallory (1989) p 9. The work was published broadly between 1736 and 1765. It was a multi-authored compendium of contributions.
57.Callisthenes, Ephorus, Damastes, Phylarchus and Duris agreed Ilium fell on the 24th of Thargelion (May-June). Full discussion in Lincoln (2002) pp 1-18. Apollodorus and the so-called Canon of Ptolemy also dated the fall of Troy. Fragments from ancient historians suggested the following dates BCE: Duris 1334, Life of Homer 1270, Herodotus ca. 1240, Cleitarchus 1234, Dicearchus 1212, Parian Chronicle 1209, Thrasyllus 1193, Timaeus 1193, Eratosthenes and his disciples (Apollodorus, Castor, Diodorus, Apollonius, Eusebius) 1184/3; Sosibius 1171, Phanias ca. 1129, Ephorus ca. 1135; detail taken from Mylonas (1964) p 353.
58.Full discussion in B Lincoln (1987) pp 1-18.
59.Whear’s methodology discussed in chapter titled Classicus Scriptor, Rhetoric and Rome.
60.Caspar (1993) pp 308-328 and for the sentencing of Kepler’s mother, pp 300-301.
61.Quoting Lincoln (2002) p 17.
62.Full discussion of Euhemerus’ whereabouts in Winiarczyk (2013) p 3.
63.Discussed in Thomas (1968) p 259. Euhemerus wrote his Sacred History and expounded his ‘rationalising method of interpretation’, known as Euhemerism, at the court of Cassander. He treated mythology as a reflection of real historical events, reshaped over time and according to the social mores of the day. See discussion in Brown (1946) pp 259-274 and chapter titled Mythoi, Muthodes and the Birth of Romance.
64.Most of what we know about Euhemerus’ work is preserved in references in Diodorus 5.41-46 and 6.1.
65.Rome’s use of Euhemerism discussed in Walbank (1981) p 219.
66.Quoting and following Highet (1949) p 520.
67.Green (1974) p 479.
68.Milton Paradise Lost 11.399-401. See Kings 1.9:28, 1.10.11, 1.22.48, Chronicles 1.29: Chronicles 2. 8:18; 9:10 for expeditions to Ophir and the recurring mention of gold. CEV Crawford Treasure of Ophir, Skeffington and Son Ltd, 1929 for the link to Dhofar.
69.Herodotus 2.29.1-2; following Burstein (1976) p 142; Job 28.19 as example of biblical references.
70.Herodotus 2.17-34 for digression on the mysteries of the Nile.
71.Burstein (1976) pp 135-136 for Aristotle’s lost work on the Nile floods. Aristotle’s Meteorologika touched on Ethiopian rains and p 137 ff for the expedition. Strabo 15.1.17-19 for Aristoboulos’ text on Nile floods. Arrian 7.15.4 for Ethiopian ambassadors. Seneca Naturales Quaestiones 4a, De Nilo 2.11. Diodorus 1.37 covered previous opinions which he attacked as inventions.
72.Diodorus 1.37 and 3.36 for Ptolemy II Philadelphos journeying to the Upper Nile and into Ethiopia. Bagnall-Derow (2004) p 250 for a papyrus detailing the elephant hunters. The length of the Attic cubit is not established for certain.
73.Diodorus 3.36.1 for 100-cubit-long snakes, 3.36 for the length of the live python at Alexandria, 3.39.9 for the ability of the pythons to devour bulls, oxen and bring down elephants. For Ptolemy’s hunting expeditions 3.36-39. The Attic cubit at 18.25 inches was longer than the Macedonian cubit of 14 inches. Arrian 3.2.7 for the deportation of pro-Persian tyrants from the Aegean islands to Elephantine.
74.See full discussion of the comparison between Solomon and Ptolemy II Philadelphos in Bevan (1927) pp 76-78.
75.This appeared as an epitaph by Theodore Roosevelt in the American Museum Journal, volume 18
, no. 5, 1918, pp 321-330, some months after Selous had been killed in January 1917.
76.The Greek Dark Age is deemed to have ended ca. 750 BCE when the first alphabetic inscriptions appeared.
77.See discussion of the Epic Cycle in Shelmerdine (1995) p 2. For the catalogue of ships that set sail for Troy see Homer Iliad 2.494-759. Thucydides 1.10.4 for his suspicions of Herodotus’ numbers and fidelity.
78.Discussion in Wood (1985) p 147 and fuller discussion of the Ahhiyawa in Bryce (1977) who links them to the Trojans but with Greek affiliations.
79.The Siege of Lachish wall relief in Sennacherib’s palace at Nineveh clearly shows different types of siege engines.
80.From the Planudean Appendix to the Greek Anthology 16.298; discussion in J Martinez (2011) p 15.
81.Quoting Borchardt (1986).
82.Quoting West (2008) Introduction xx.
83.By the 6th century BCE the Homeric epics and Homeric Hymns were recited at the festival of Panathenaia in Athens; Shelmerdine (1995) p 8.
84.Full discussion on the authenticity of the lives of Homer in Allen (1912) pp 250-260.
85.Author’s transmission of the anonymous Greek Anthology 16.293.
86.Horace Ars Poetica lines 358-359. Mistakes can be reviewed in Homer’s Iliad at book 5 lines 576-579 and book 13 lines 643-665. Fitzgerald (1998) p xii for the multiple-author theory behind the Odyssey.
87.Neoanalysis is the study of the relationship between the two Homeric epics and the extent to which Homer made use of earlier poetic material and vice versa.
88.So-called due to the innumerable battles fought in the Peloponnese, thus the ‘dancing floor of Ares’, the god of war.
89.Herodotus 1.82 for the battle of champions and 1.82.8 for the last survivor. The factual basis of myths is discussed in Wood (2005). Jason’s journey it is suggested is a tale of Greek colonisation of the Black Sea coast. For the battles at Thyrea see discussion in Lenden (2005) p 11. The remains of the Sacred Band are said to lie beneath the Lion of Chaeronea; excavation revealed 254 skeletons laid out in seven rows; Pausanias 9.40.10 reported that there was no inscription on the lion monument which represented a common grave for the Thebans. Strabo 9.2.37 also reported a ‘public tomb’ was erected near the battlefield; Hanson (1991) p 43 for discussion.
90.Hammond (1989) p 217 and (1994) p 217 for discussion of the tumulus excavations at Chaeronea and weapons found in the tumulus. A ‘trophy’ to the dead was confirmed at Diodorus 16.86.6. Plutarch Life of Pelopidas 18.5 for Philip’s words. Lenden (2005) p 109 for Theban emulation of Spartan lovers standing side by side.
91.Pausanias 9.40.10.
92.Herodotus 8.98 for the motto though here relating to the Persian messaging system.
93.A hemerodrome was literally a ‘day runner’, a messenger employed to bear news from one city to another. Pheidippides is mentioned in Herodotus 6.105-107 as the messenger sent to Sparta; in Lucian’s A Slip of the Tongue in Greeting 3 and Pliny 7.20.84 he is named Philippides. The poem of the same name by Robert Browning in 1879 suggested Pheidippides died upon delivering a victory speech at Athens. There is no historical basis for that. The tradition goes back through Lucian to Plutarch and before him to Heracleides of Pontus. Plutarch On the Fame of the Athenians 347c named him Thersippus or Eucles who expired on the spot in full armour. Euchidas is said to have died after running to Delphi; see Frost (1979) pp 159-163.
94.Quoting Plutarch Solon 32.1; he was actually referring to Plato’s (and Solon’s) Atlantis.
95.For a discussion of numbers see Flower (1998). Herodotus 7.202-203 mentioned 3,100 varied Peloponnesians and 1,100 from Thebes (400) and Thespiae (700), the largest contingent from a single Greek city. Herodotus 7.205.2 only mentions the 300 Spartans chosen by Leonidas but later quotes an epitaph at 7.228.1 suggesting 4,000 Peloponnesians fought in the battle, including 3,000 other Greeks, thus 1,000 Lacedaemonians were present but as 700 departed before the battle only 300 were ever mentioned; Diodorus 11.4.5 suggested 1,000 Lacedaemonians as did Isocrates Panegyrikos 90, Archidamas 99, so Herodotus may well have been at least 700 short on numbers (900 if his epitaph is accurate). Herodotus 7.224 for the battlefield inscription which may have provided names; Pausanias 3.14.1 claimed a pillar at Sparta listed the names. In addition 1,000 Phocians and the entire fighting force of the Opuntian Locrians were summoned; we do not know whether they arrived, though the five epitaphic stelae mentioned by Strabo included them. Diodorus 11.8.5-11.10.3 for the Spartan night attack that almost killed Xerxes; discussed in Flower (1998).
96.See Herodotus 7.56-137 for a summary of the Persian troops and Xerxes’ discussion with the exiled Spartan king, Demaratus. Plutarch Laconian Sayings 51.11 for molon labe. Herodotus 7.219.1-7.221 for Megistias and his son. Quoting Russell (1946) p 471 on Sparta.
97.The Suda stated that Tyrtaeus wrote a constitution for the Spartans (though probably not the Eunomia referred to in Aristotle Politics 5.6.1306b36) and encouraged them in war against the Messenians through his war songs. Jaeger (1939) pp 85-95 for discussion of Tyrtaeus and his influence. Plato The Law 629a for the hostile rumour that Tyrtaeus was a lame Athenian schoolmaster, likely Attic propaganda.
98.In contrast to the view we propose, Tarn (1939) p 128 was adamant that neither Alexander nor Aristotle were aware of the work of Herodotus.
99.For reference to Apple Bearers see Polyaenus 4.3.24. Scholars believe Alexander’s historians used this term for the crack regiment, due to the counter-weights on their spear butts. An explanation of ‘Apple Bearers’ also appeared in Athenaeus 12.514b-c drawing from Heracleides of Cyme’s Persika. Pausanias 10.19.9 ff gives one explanation of why they may have been known as ‘Immortals’ as casualty numbers were immediately replaced to keep the total number static.
100.Mark Twain (SL Clemens) A Horse’s Tale, 1907, Preface.
101.Quote from Kimball (2000) p 4 for ‘first slashing review’. Gibbon branded Herodotus a liar in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire suggesting he never visited Babylon. For Gibbon’s quote see Grant (1995) p 61.
102.Grant (1995) p 57. Plutarch became a Priest of Apollo. Herodotus showed bias against the Boeotians, Corinthians and other Greek states.
103.Momigliano (1966) p 133.
104.Flower (1994) p 28 for the possible motives behind Theopompus’ epitome of Herodotus.
105.Quoting Jaeger (1939) p 383 for Herodotus blending the scientist with the rhapsode. Herodotus 7.152 and echoed again at 2.123 and 4.5; compare to Curtius 9.1.34; see discussion in Baynham (1998) p 86.
106.Quoting Momigliano (1966) p 129 and p 134.
107.Plutarch 6-7. Chares, as recorded by Aulus Gellius 5.2.1, did record the sum paid for the horse (13 talents) and the derivation of the name (ox-head), due to the shape of its head, but nothing of its taming. Arrian 5.19.5 attributed the name to a brand mark or white mark on its head; the Romance 1.15 suggested its haunch. See full fragment in Robinson (1953) p 85. The Romance 3.33 made the comparisons of Alexander and Bucephalus to Bellerophon and Pegasus. See discussion of the taming of Bucephalus in Baynham Romance (1995). Plutarch 5.1-4 for Alexander’s quizzing of Persian envoys. Quoting Green (1974) p 43.
108.Quoting Powell (1939) p 230; Samuel (1986) pp 433-435 for discussion of the letters in Plutarch’s biography of Alexander.
109.Alexander spoke to Bucephalus at the point of his death and recognised that the horse had shared his fate, except in death, Romance 3.33. Whitmarsh (2002) p 180 draws the comparison to Plato’s Phaedra.
110.Quoting Plutarch 42.1, translation by I Scott-Kilvert, Penguin Classics edition, 1973. Plutarch cited many letters unique to accounts of Alexander. He may have been quoting from other historians rather than the letters themselves but an intimacy with them is suggested that points to the latter. In Plutarch Life of Alexander the historian referred to personal letters of Alexander he had read or knew the contents of at 7.6, 8.1, 17.8, 19.5-8, 20.9, 22.2, 22.5, 27.8, 39.4, 39.7, 39.13, 42.1, 46.3, 47.3, 55.6, 55.7, 60.1, 60.11, 68.4. No other historia
n seems to have had access to them, and how genuine they were remains open to speculation. Arrian 7.12.5, Justin 12.14.3 mentioned slanders from Olympias in letter form.
111.The Hamburg and Florence papyri discussed in Pearson (1960) p 258 and Pearson (1955) p 448 for the Oxyrhynchus papyri. Quoting Powell (1939) p 230 for the earliest sign of the epistolary corpus. Cicero De Officiis 2.14.48 for the epistolary corpus; Marasco (2011) p 45 for other references.
112.Cicero De Officiis, Book 2, Expediency. Arrian 6.1.4 and 7.12.4-7 for examples of a letter from Alexander to Olympias and Antipater that Arrian believed to be genuine.
113.‘Impostures’ is a term suggested by Rosenmayer in Ancient Epistolary Fictions, Cambridge University Press, 2001, and discussed in Ehrman (2014) p 44.
114.The epistolary collections are discussed in Gudeman Greeks (1894) pp 64-65.
115.Following the comments of Arthur-Montagne (2014) p 1 on the breadth of epistolary forms in the Romance; and p 3 for the reference to Pseudo-documentarism, a term emanating with William Hansen. For discussion of Mereklbach’s 1954 work p 20. For full discussion of the epistolary corpus in the Romance see Arthur-Montagne (2014) pp 1-31.
116.Riedweg (2002) p 27. Also Teresi (2002) and Dalley (2013) p 58 for attributions to Pythagoras and the sources of his knowledge.
117.Porphyry Life of Pythagoras.
118.Diogenes Laertius Plato 1.
119.Plutarch Symposiacs Book VIII and Cicero On the Nature of the Gods 3.88 for the Pythagorean notes.
120.Petrarch found a corpus of unknown correspondence by Cicero in Verona in 1345; Highet (1949) p 83. Nepos Atticus 16.3 for the widespread publication of Cicero’s work.
121.Gudeman Romans (1894) p 148 for a discussion on the Ciceronian forgeries, the Epistola Ciceronis ad Octavianum, for example.
122.Plutarch Caesar 2.3. Plutarch confirmed both men were pupils of the rhetorician. Highet (1949) p 84 for discussion of Petrarch’s letter to Cicero. Momigliano (1977) p 80 for Petrarch’s letter to Livy.
123.Discussed in Dalley-Oleson (2003). See Dalley (1994) pp 52-53 for references to the Alammitu palm that was used to depict a spiral screw device. Diodorus was ambiguous in his connecting the Egyptian screw with Archimedes; see Dalley (2013) pp 56-57 quoting Diodorus 1.34.2. Neither Strabo, Vitruvius nor Philo of Byzantium linked Archimedes to the screw device.