The Sources for Alexander the Great

Ancient readings:

Diodorus I.1-9
Arrian I.1-12.5
Plutarch Alexander 1
Justin's Preface to Pompeius Trogus
Testimonia and Fragments of Ptolemy (FGrH 138, pp. 183-205)
Fragments of the Royal Ephemerides (FGrH 117, pp. 30-34 of History of Alexander)

Modern Readings:

Bosworth, A. B. "Plus ça change: Ancient Historians and their Sources." Classical Antiquity 22 (2003): 167-198. 
Brunt, P. A. "On Historical Fragments and Epitomes." Classical Quarterly 30 (1980): 477-494.
Pearson, L. "The diary and letters of Alexander the Great." Historia 3 (1955): 429-455.
Hammond, N.G.L. "The Royal Diary of Alexander." Historia 37 (1988): 129-150.

Questions:

  1. What do Diodorus, Plutarch, Arrian, and Justin/Trogus reveal about the aims of their histories? How are they similar, and how are they different? How are the ancient historians similar to, or different from, modern historians?
  2. What aspects of their works do Diodorus, Arrian, Justin/Trogus, and Plutarch believe set them apart from other histories?
  3. What are Arrian’s reasons for relying primarily on the accounts of Ptolemy and Aristobulus? How convincing are they?
  4. What does Arrian reveal about his view of Alexander the Great? What might this explain about his choices of sources?
  5. What are the major problems with historical fragments according to Brunt? How well can fragments be used to understand a lost historian? What can we tell about the history of Ptolemy from the fragments?
  6. What are the problems with using ancient historians who are themselves reliant on earlier historians? How accurately do they represent their sources based on the analyses of Brunt and Bosworth?
  7. What kind of information do the so-called Royal Diaries/Ephemerides contain in the directly quoted excerpts given in Robinson?
  8. What is the evidence for a genuine Journal/Diary of Alexander's expedition? What would its characteristics have been, if it did exist? How convincing is this? Is there evidence that it was a major source for any of the Alexander historians? How would this affect our view of them and their value for reconstructing the reign of Alexander?