Delphi Complete Works of Quintus Curtius Rufus
Page 1
The Complete Works of
QUINTUS CURTIUS RUFUS
(fl.1st century AD)
Contents
The Translation
HISTORY OF ALEXANDER
The Latin Text
CONTENTS OF THE LATIN TEXT
The Dual Text
DUAL LATIN AND ENGLISH TEXT
The Biography
INTRODUCTION TO QUINTUS CURTIUS RUFUS by J. C. Rolfe
The Delphi Classics Catalogue
© Delphi Classics 2017
Version 1
The Complete Works of
QUINTUS CURTIUS RUFUS
By Delphi Classics, 2017
COPYRIGHT
Complete Works of Quintus Curtius Rufus
First published in the United Kingdom in 2017 by Delphi Classics.
© Delphi Classics, 2017.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of the publisher, nor be otherwise circulated in any form other than that in which it is published.
ISBN: 978 1 78656 382 8
Delphi Classics
is an imprint of
Delphi Publishing Ltd
Hastings, East Sussex
United Kingdom
Contact: sales@delphiclassics.com
www.delphiclassics.com
The Translation
The Roman Empire — apart from his name on the manuscripts, nothing else certain is known of Quintus Curtius Rufus than he flourished in the empire during the first century AD.
HISTORY OF ALEXANDER
Translated by J. C. Rolfe
Quintus Curtius Rufus was a first century Roman historian, whose only known work is the Historiae Alexandri Magni. Curtius’ history is uniquely isolated, as no other ancient text refers to it and no ancient author directly refers to him. By his name, Quintus Curtius Rufus was a member of the Curtii Rufi branch of the Curtii family, one of the original nobility of Rome. Due to the frequently used institution of adoption, people of the name Curtius (or female Curtia) might not be consanguineous. Moreover, the same name tended to be repeated, typically from grandfather to grandson. After centuries of Curtii, a Curtius might turn up in history at any location or in any period.
Curtius’ History of Alexander survives in 123 codices, or bound manuscripts, all deriving from an original of the ninth century. As it was a partial text, already missing large pieces, they are partial as well, varying in condition. The original text contained ten books, but the first two books are lost, along with any introduction, usually expected according to ancient custom. There are also large gaps in books V, VI and X. Many sections throughout are obscure, subject to interpretation or emendation in the name of restoration. The history opens in Book III with events from 333 BC, beginning with the famous story of Alexander and the Gordian knot. One of Curtius’ main sources is Cleitarchus, one of the historians of Alexander the Great, who was the son of the historian Dinon of Colophon and possibly a native of Egypt. His work, completely lost, has survived only in some thirty fragments preserved by ancient authors, especially by Aelian and Strabo. Writing in c. 300 BC, Cleitarchus made Alexander’s military career a matter of marvellous adventure.
Curtius’ book enjoyed popularity in the High Middle Ages. It is the main source for a genre of tales termed the Alexander Romance; for example, Walter of Chatillon’s epic poem Alexandreis, which was written in the style of Virgil’s Aeneid. These romances spilled over into the Renaissance, especially inspiring Italian poets, who idolised Curtius. Painters, such as Paolo Veronese and Charles Le Brun, painted scenes from Curtius’ history of Alexander.
The Editio Princeps was published in 1470 or 1471 at Venice by Vindelinus Spirensis. A slow but steady stream of editions appeared subsequently until more of a need for standardisation was perceived. In 1867 Edmund Hedicke instigated a convention that persists yet. He based his edition of that year on the five best manuscripts. In what remains of his work, Curtius chiefly does not identify sources. They were, perhaps, stated in the missing books. Speculations of what they were based on and thorough analysis of the content and style vary widely.
Curtius is not a critical historian; in his desire to entertain and to stress the personality of Alexander, he elaborates effective scenes, omits important historical detail and pays little attention to chronology. However, he does not invent things, except for speeches and letters inserted as traditional convention. Three features of his history are narrative features of exciting experiences, the development of a hero’s character and a tendency to moralise. Curtius’ History of Alexander is one of the five extant works on which we rely for the career of Alexander the Great, offering a rare opportunity of a Roman viewpoint on the exploits of the legendary figure.
Philip II of Macedon, Alexander’s father — first century Roman copy of a Hellenistic Greek original, Chiaramonti Museum of the Vatican Museums
Bust of a young Alexander the Great from the Hellenistic era, British Museum
‘Alexander fighting king Darius III of Persia’, a mosaic dating from c. 100 BC, originally from the House of the Faun in Pompeii, now housed in the Naples National Archaeological Museum.
CONTENTS
PREFACE
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
BOOK I
BOOK II
CONTENTS OF BOOK III
BOOK III
CONTENTS OF BOOK IV
BOOK IV
CONTENTS OF BOOK V
BOOK V
CONTENTS OF BOOK VI
BOOK VI
CONTENTS OF BOOK VII
BOOK VII
CONTENTS OF BOOK VIII
BOOK VIII
CONTENTS OF BOOK IX
BOOK IX
CONTENTS OF BOOK X
BOOK X
Map of Alexander’s Empire and his route
PREFACE
THE translation is based upon the text of Edmund Hedicke, Leipzig, Teubner, 1908, with a few changes. Numerous alterations have been made in the punctuation, especially in the use of the semi-colon for the colon in accordance with English usage, in not pointing off with commas all relative clauses, regardless of their nature and their connexion with the rest of the sentence, and in the omission (more rarely the addition) of other commas, the presence or absence of which tends to obscure the meaning.
The notes on the text are designed to show the condition and the relation of the manuscripts. They are probably still too numerous (some may say superfluous), but they have been considerably shortened by omitting obvious changes by early editors, especially in proper names, at the risk of robbing some such editor of the honour of a conjecture; also by not recording the most obvious readings of the I-class of codices (see Introd., p xi).
There are two systems of numbering and citing the text of Curtius, by book, chapter, and section (e.g. v. 13. 25 on p ix, note), and by book, shorter paragraph, and section (e.g. for this reference v. 38. 25). The earlier editors cite by the latter system, modem editors by the former; so Hedicke, who however retains the numbers of the shorter paragraphs. In this edition the shorter paragraphs have been omitted.
A map and a complete Index (prepared by J. R. Workman, Ph. D.) will be found at the end of Volume II.
JOHN C. ROLFE.
ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The edition princeps of Curtius was published at Venice in 1470 or 1471 by Vindelinus Spirensis. It was followed by that of Bartolomeo Merula (Venice, 1494); according to Zumpt (Braunschweig, 1849, praef., p xii), Merula merely corrected some cons
picuous errors in the editio princeps, but left many uncorrected. Of about the same date are the Romana of 1472 and the Mediolanensis of 1475. The Aldine edition of Franciscus Asulanus was printed in July 1518 and corrected many errors. Its text was based partly upon manuscripts and partly on conjectures, in which with regard to proper names Arrian was of great service.
The editions of Modius and Freinshem have been mentioned above (pp xiii, xiv). Other early editions are those of Snakenburg (Delft and Leyden, 1724); Cunze, vol i., Helmstadt, 1802, useful for Books IV and V, but unfortunately not completed; of Schmieder, Gottingen, 1803, whose text is followed in the Delphin Edition (Valpy, London, 1825); of N. E. Lemaire (Paris, 1822-1824), which does not justify his statement, “textum ad fidem codicum regiae Parisinae bibliothecae recensui, cum varietate lectionum.” The edition of Julius Mützell, Berlin, 1841, has a full introduction and commentary, and extensive quotations from early travellers in the countries visited by Alexander. That of Th. Vogel (Leipzig, 1889-1903) appeared in a second edition of two volumes in 1906.
Curtius from viii. 9 through ix. 10 is translated into English by J. W. McCrindle, The Invasion of India by Alexander the Great (A. Constable, Westminster, 1896). There is an English translation of the entire work by P. Pratt (1821); a German translation in three volumes by A. H. Christian, Stuttgart, 1855-1875; and one by K. Miiller and H. Schônefeld, Munich, 1954. The French translation of De Vogelas (Paris, 1653), on which he spent thirty years, has been pronounced to be as inimitable as Alexander was invincible. It indeed ranks high as literature, but it is not a close version of the Latin, and in places is a paraphrase rather than a translation, although even in such cases it often gives a valuable clue to the meaning.
Of many other works (besides those listed in Notes) may be mentioned: D. G. Hogarth, Philip and Alexander of Macedon, New York, 1897; Ulrich Wilcken, Alexander der Grosse, Leipzig, 1931; Otto Hoffman, Die Macedonen, Gottingen, 1906; Georges Radet, Alexander le Grand, Paris, 1931; E. Iliff Robson, Alexander the Great, London, 1929; Lewis V. Cummings, Alexander the Great, Boston, 1941; W. A. Heurtley, Prehistoric Macedonia, Cambridge, 1939; Sir Percy Sykes, History of Afghanistan, London, 1940; R. Novak, Spicilegium Curtianum, from Ceske Museumfilologike, vol v., Prague, 1899; W. W. Tarn, Cambridge Ancient History, vol vi., chapters xi and xiî. (with good bibliography and maps); J. J. Bernouilli, Die erhaltenen Darstellungen Alexanders des Grossen, 1905; Chicago Oriental Institute (with Univ of Pennsylvania and Boston Museum of Fine Arts). Aerial Survey Expeditions: The Persepolis Expedition, by Erich F. Schmidt, 1940. (A less costly work is The Pageant of Persepolis by Henry Filmer); The Johns Hopkins Studies in Archaeology, No. 13 (Biographies and Portraits of Statesmen, especially of Alexander the Great), Baltimore.
SIGLA
A = Codices B F LPS V, either all or as many as are preserved in each place.
B = Codex Bernensis 451, tenth century.
C = Codices B F L V, either all or as many as are preserved in each place.
D = Fragmentum Darmstadiense (cod. 3152), tenth century.
E = Fragmentum Einsidlense (cod. 476, folio 36), tenth century.
F = Codex Florentinus (plut, lxiii, cod. 35), eleventh century.
H = Fragmentum Herbipolitanum, tenth century.
I = Codices interpolati.
L = Codex Leidensis, 137, tenth century.
P = Codex Parisinus, 5716, ninth century.
R = Excerpta Rhenaugiensia (cod. 93, p. 184).
S = Schedae Vindobonenses, 492 (hist prof. 622), tenth century.
V = Codex Vossianus, Q. 20, tenth century.
BOOK I
Many Greeks have written of the life and deeds of Alexander, who took from the Persians their empire and transferred it to Greece. Some of these were witnesses of his exploits, some even his companions and officers (Arr i., praef.). Being eager for glory and for the perpetuation of his memory, he summoned some, for example Callisthenes of Olynthus, for the very purpose of transmitting his history to posterity ( Justin xii. 6. 7). Besides the greatness of his exploits, the innate love of the Greeks for fable led some of them to record marvels rather than sober history. Ptolemy, who was afterwards king of Egypt, and Aristobulus seem to be the most trustworthy. When they agree, I have preferred their account to that of the rest; when they differ, I have taken from the abundance of material those things which seemed nearest to the truth. This practice the Greeks who had some regard for the truth, after Alexander’s day, seem to have followed, and lately Diodorus of Sicily.
Those of the Romans who have given attention to history, content with the affairs of their own nation, have neglected those of others; for the deeds of a victorious people furnished an abundance of material, which seemed likely to be more useful to their fellow-citizens. Nevertheless, I believe that I shall be free from reproach if I shall make known to my country that king who in the shortest time conquered the greatest extent of territory, and if I shall show that, in general, success corresponds with character, and that no good fortune is lasting which lacks virtue.
I find that Alexander possessed in abundance all the gifts of character and fortune with which a man fated to have a power so great ought to be endowed. He was the son of Philip and Olympias, of whom the former in a continuous series of wars had made the hitherto obscure people of Macedonia formidable to all men, prepared the foundation for works done after his time, made ready for an invasion of Persia, and through Parmenion had already opened Asia (Curt vii. 1. 3). Alexander’s birth was preceded and attended by portents. Many even believed that he was the son of Jupiter, who had assumed the form of a serpent and lain with Olympias (Plut. Alex ii. 4; Justin xi. 11. 3). She, however, in a letter to her son (Cell xiii. 4. 2) begged him not to expose her to Juno’s hatred as her husband’s paramour. On the night when he was born the temple of the Ephesian Diana was destroyed by fire (Cic. Nat. Deor ii. 27. 69; Plut. Alex. Hi. 3), which the Magi interpreted as meaning that a firebrand had appeared somewhere, by which the whole Orient would be destroyed. It happened that at the same time Philip subdued Potidaea, a colony of the Athenians, and received news both of the victory of one of his chariots at Olympia and of the defeat of the Illyrians in a great battle.
Alexander was born at the beginning of the sixth Olympiad after the one hundredth (356 B.C.) when Elpines was Archon at Athens, on the 21st day of July, the month which the Macedonians of that time called Lous (Plut. Alex l c.; Cell xvii. 21. 28). Philip, having the highest hopes of his son because of so many omens, directed all his thoughts to his education and care; for, being a wise man and devoted to his country, he knew that all his toil would amount to nothing if he left an ignorant or slothful successor. There are among his letters, which are full of grace and of wisdom, one which he sent to Athens at that time addressed to Aristotle (Gell ix. 3), reading about as follows: “Philip greets Aristotle. Know that a son is born to me. I thank the gods, not so much that he is born, as that it is his good fortune to be born in your lifetime. I hope that as a result of your training he will prove worthy of us and of succeeding to so great a kingdom. For I think it is better to lack children than to have begotten them for the dishonour of their ancestors.”
And Philip was not mistaken; the boy for a long time had Aristotle for his teacher and thus received the greatest help for doing such great deeds at the proper time. But this happened later; meanwhile the child’s teachers and guardians were Leonidas, a relative of Olympias, and Lysimachus, an Acamanian. Philip, also an Acarnanian (Curt iii. 6. I), was joined with them, to look after his health; to Hellanicê, the daughter of Dropides, a member of one of the best families of the Macedonians, was given the duties of a nurse approved by a good person and morals (Curt viii. 1. 21; Arr iv. 9. 1, who calls her Lanice). From such care it resulted that within a few years he already gave promise of being the king which he afterwards became; for his boyish frame foretold invincible strength, and signs of an indomitable spirit were far in advance of his time of life. Excelling in native grace of person, he scorned adornment
, saying that anxious care for beauty was suitable for women, who were commended by no other endowment; that he would be sufficiently handsome if he should achieve virtue.
When he grew up, he was conspicuous for a well-proportioned body, strong and remarkably solid limbs, surpassing rather in strength than in beauty; for he was not tall (Curt iii. 12. G; v. 2. 13). His skin was white and fair, except for a handsome flush on his cheeks and also on his breast; his hair was golden and slightly curling; his nose was aquiline; his eyes did not match, for his left eye is said to have been grey and the other very black; and they had a kind of hidden power, so that those who looked at him felt veneration and sometimes dread. He was wonderfully swift of foot and his endurance of toil was beyond belief; by this he found safety in times of difficulty for himself and his army. He kept himself in such condition by frequent exercise that his breath and limbs had a pleasant odour, which even pervaded the garments which he wore (Plut. Alex iv. 2). He took pains that the attractiveness of his face should not be marred by the work of inferior artists; Apelles alone had permission to paint his portrait, Pyrgoteles to represent him in marble, Polyclitus and Lysippus in bronze (Hor. Epist ii. 1. 237 ffi.). They say that his preceptor Leonidas had the fault of walking too rapidly and that Alexander contracted the habit from him; but I am inclined to attribute this characteristic rather to the nature of the man than to habit; for in one of rapid thought it was inevitable that the motions of his body should follow those of his mind. This his successors were so far from regarding as a defect that they imitated it, as well as the inclining of his neck towards his left shoulder (Plut. Alex. 4. 1), his steady gaze, and his high-pitched voice, since they could not imitate his mental qualities.