Humanitext Reader

Polybius · The Histories §12.22.1-12.22.7

Callisthenes' Tactical Incompetence in Battle Narratives

Passage 762 of 1311 · Greek

Summary

Polybius criticizes the tactical and topographical inconsistencies in Callisthenes' account, concluding that these errors must be attributed to the historian's own lack of experience rather than to Alexander.

§12.22.1τὰ μὲν γὰρ ἅμα τούτοις ἀλογήματα μακρὸν ἂν εἴη λέγειν πάντα πλὴν τελέως ὀλίγων.
For it would be a long story to tell all the other inconsistencies along with these, except for a very few.
§12.22.2φησὶ γὰρ τὸν Ἀλέξανδρον σπουδάζειν κατὰ τὴν τάξιν, ἵνα κατὰ τὸν Δαρεῖον αὐτὸν ποιήσηται τὴν μάχην· ὁμοίως δὲ κατὰ μὲν ἀρχὰς καὶ τὸν Δαρεῖον αὐτὸν βούλεσθαι κατὰ τὸν Ἀλέξανδρον, ὕστερον δὲ μετανοῆσαι.
For he says that Alexander was anxious about his arrangement of the line, in order to engage in battle against Darius himself; and likewise that at first Darius himself also wished to be opposite Alexander, but later changed his mind.
§12.22.3πῶς δʼ ἐπέγνωσαν ἀλλήλους οὗτοι ποῦ τῆς ἰδίας δυνάμεως ἔχουσι τὴν τάξιν, ἢ ποῦ μετέβη πάλιν ὁ Δαρεῖος, ἁπλῶς οὐδὲν λέγεται.
But how they recognized where in their own forces each held his station, or where Darius moved again, absolutely nothing is said.
§12.22.4πῶς δὲ προσανέβη πρὸς τὴν ὀφρὺν τοῦ ποταμοῦ φαλαγγιτῶν τάξις, ἀπότομον οὖσαν καὶ βατώδη;
And how did a division of phalangites march up to the bank of the river, which was steep and overgrown with brambles?
καὶ γὰρ τοῦτο παρὰ λόγον.
For this too is contrary to reason.
§12.22.5Ἀλεξάνδρῳ μὲν οὖν οὐκ ἐποιστέον τὴν τοιαύτην ἀτοπίαν διὰ τὸ πᾶσιν ὁμολογουμένην παραλαμβάνεσθαι περὶ αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐν τοῖς πολεμικοῖς ἐμπειρίαν καὶ τριβὴν ἐκ παιδός,
Therefore, we must not attribute such absurdity to Alexander, because his experience and training in military matters from childhood are received as universally admitted.
§12.22.6τῷ δὲ συγγραφεῖ μᾶλλον, ὃς διὰ τὴν ἀπειρίαν οὐδὲ τὸ δυνατὸν καὶ τὸ μὴ δυνατὸν ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις δύναται διευκρινεῖν.
But rather to the historian, who, through his inexperience, is not even able to distinguish between what is possible and what is impossible in such matters.
§12.22.7περὶ μὲν οὖν Ἐφόρου καὶ Καλλισθένους ταῦθʼ ἡμῖν εἰρήσθω.
Now, concerning Ephorus and Callisthenes, let this suffice to have been said by us.

Notes

  1. §12.22.1μακρὸν ἂν εἴη — A potential optative construction (optative + ἄν) expressing a mild or polite assertion in the present ('it would be'). It is distinct from a past counterfactual condition using an indicative past tense + ἄν.
  2. §12.22.3ποῦ τῆς ἰδίας δυνάμεως — The interrogative adverb of place ποῦ is accompanied by the partitive genitive τῆς ἰδίας δυνάμεως, meaning 'where in their own forces.'
  3. §12.22.5Ἀλεξάνδρῳ ... οὐκ ἐποιστέον — The impersonal construction of the verbal adjective ἐποιστέον (from ἐπιφέρω, 'to attribute'). The dative Ἀλεξάνδρῳ acts as the agent ('by Alexander') and the accusative τὴν τοιαύτην ἀτοπίαν is the direct object, meaning 'such absurdity must not be attributed to Alexander.'

Cite this passage

Polybius, The Histories §12.22.1-12.22.7. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0543.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:12.22.1-12.22.7

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.