Cleitarchus

Not only their wedded wives, but also their boden slaves and concubines are strictly guarded, so that they are seen by no outsiders, but live at home in complete seclusion, and even on their journeys are carried in tents closely hung round about with curtains and sat upon four wheeled wagons such a vehicle was made ready for Themistocles and safely ensconced in this he made his journey while his attendants replied in every case to those who met them with inquiries that they were conducting a hellenic woman fair but frail to one of the kings courtiers Now Thucydides and Charon of Lampsacus relate that Xerxes was dead, and that it was his son Artaxerxes with whom Themistocles had his interview.

But Ephorus and Dinen and Cleitarchus and Heraclitis, and yet more besides, have it that it was Xerxes to whom he came.

With the chronological data Thucydides seems to be more in accord; although these are by no means securely established.

Be that as it may, Themistocles thus at the threshold of the dreadful ordeal had audience first with Artabanus the chiliarch or grand-vizir, and said that he was a Hellen, and that he desired to have an audience with the king on matters which were of the highest importance, and for which the monarch entertained the most lively concern.

Um, but he's not just echoing them.

We're pretty sure one of the people he used other than Callisthenes, who I, I mentioned, explained to you what he was, was a guy named, uh, Cleitarchus, who wrote this super popular biography.

Um, and Cleitarchus might have known Alexander.

There's some debate about exactly when he lived and who he was.

Uh, and he's writing popular history, you know? He's writing People Magazine for the Hellenistic period and, um, tells all these wild stories in there.

Uh, so we know Diodorus is using Cleitarchus.

We're pretty sure.

Uh, and we know that he's using, um, again, Callisthenes, uh, Alexander's official historian.

How much more incongruous must it seem in sober prose.

Hence we laugh at those fine words of Gorgias, of Leontini, such as Xerxes the Persian Zeus, and vultures those living tombs, and at certain conceits of Callisthenes which are high-flown rather than sublime, and at some in Cleitarchus more ludicrous still, a writer whose frothy style tempts us to travesty Sophocles and say, he blows a little pipe and blows it ill.

The same faults may be observed in Amphicrates and Hegesias and Matris, who in their frequent moments, as they think, of inspiration, instead of playing the genius are simply playing the fool.

Speaking generally, it would seem that bombast is one of the hardest things to avoid in writing.

Polybius, however, classes him among the best historical writers.

His style is said by Cicero to approximate to the rhetorical.

Cleitarchus, a contemporary of Alexander, accompanied that monarch on his Asiatic expedition and wrote a history of the same in twelve books, which must have included at least a short retrospect on the early history of Asia.

His talents are spoken of in high terms, but his credit as an historian is held very light.