Alexander 'Rex', 'Dux' and 'Tyrannus': a Historiographical Study of Quintus Curtius

Abstract

Both Quintus Curtius Rufus, as the author of a work commonly known as the Historiae Alexandri Magni, as well as the date of its composition remain a mystery. Although neither of these problems can be definitely solved, probable conclusions of an approximate date can be drawn from the work itself. This thesis attempts to place Curtius in his historiographical context. It has been necessary to examine not only the problem of the author's date and identity, which is by far the most discussed aspect of Curtius, but his likely sources, as well as his historical and literary methods, especially in comparison to Arrian. However, the dissertation is primarily concerned with a literary evaluation of Curtius as an author, particularly his skill in structuring his narrative, his development of his major themes, 'Fortuna' and 'Regnum' and his characterization of Alexander. The thesis concludes that, owing to his literary skill, political insight, particularly in the contemporary overtones inherent in the work, and moral didacticism, Curtius should be accorded recognition as a main-stream Roman historian, even though the Historiae is not Roman history. In order to appreciate the historian's continuity, it seemed appropriate to approach Curtius' treatment of 'regnum' through a book by book analysis of the entire Historiae, examining episode and theme. Chapters 4 and 5 have thus been sub-divided into discussions on each book. For some of these analyses, where structural and thematic linkages are particularly prominent, a diagram has been provided, which outlines the balances and contrasts between episodes. 'Fortuna' has been accorded a separate chapter in itself, since it necessitated a discussion on its historiographical concept as a whole, and what it meant to Curtius in particular. Also, as a theme, although all-pervading, 'Fortuna' is easier to isolate than 'regnum'. Finally, although Curtius' treatment of Alexander is constantly compared to his fellow Alexander historians, in order to highlight his different, interests and approach, his worth as a historical source, for the most part, is not assessed.