<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:N.nearchus_4</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:N.nearchus_4</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="N"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="nearchus-bio-4" n="nearchus_4"><head><persName xml:lang="la" xml:id="tlg-1942"><surname full="yes">Nearchus</surname></persName></head><p>(<persName xml:lang="grc"><surname full="yes">Νέαρχος</surname></persName>), son of Androtimus, one
      of the most distinguished of the friends and officers of <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>. He was a native of Crete, but settled at
      Amphipolis. (<bibl n="Arr. Ind. 18">Arrian Ind. 18</bibl>; <bibl n="Diod. 19.19">Diod.
       19.19</bibl>. Stephanus Byzantinus, <hi rend="ital">s. v.</hi>
      <foreign xml:lang="grc">Λητή</foreign>, calls him a native of Lete in Macedonia, but this
      is certainly a mistake.) Of his family or parentage we know nothing, but he appears to have
      occupied a prominent position at the court of Philip, where he attached himself to the party
      of <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>, and was banished, together with
      Ptolemy, Harpalus, and others, for participating in the intrigues of the young prince. After
      the death of Philip, he was recalled, and, in common with all those who had suffered on the
      same account, treated with the utmost distinction by <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>. (<bibl n="Plut. Alex. 10">Plut. Alex. 10</bibl>; <bibl n="Arr. An. 3.6">Arr. Anab. 3.6</bibl>.) After the conquest of the maritime provinces of Asia, Nearchus was
      appointed to the government of Lycia, together with the adjoining provinces south of the
      Taurus (Arr. <hi rend="ital">l.c.</hi>), a post which he continued to fill without
      interruption for five years. In <date when-custom="-329">B. C. 329</date> he joined <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref> at Zariaspa in Bactria with a force of
      Greek mercenaries; and from this time, instead of returning to his government, he accompanied
      the king in his subsequent campaigns. He appears to have held at first the rank of chiliarch
      of the hypaspists, a somewhat subordinate situation; but his acquaintance with naval matters,
      as well as the personal favour he enjoyed with <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>, induced the latter during his Indian expedition to confide to Nearchus the
      chief command of the fleet which he had caused to be constructed on the Hydaspes. (<bibl n="Arr. An. 4.7.4">Arr. Anab. 4.7.4</bibl>, <bibl n="Arr. An. 4.30.11">30.11</bibl>, <bibl n="Arr. An. 6.2.6">6.2.6</bibl>, <hi rend="ital">Ind.</hi> 18.) During the descent of that
      river and the Indus to the sea, his duties were comparatively easy, and he is only mentioned
      as commanding the fleet whenever the king himself was not with it; but it is evident that he
      had given sufficient proof of his skill and capacity, so that when <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>, after having reached the mouth of the
      Indus, meditated the sending round his ships by sea from thence to the Persian gulf, he gladly
      accepted the offer of Nearchus to undertake the command of the fleet during this long and
      perilous navigation. When we consider the total ignorance of the Greeks at this time
      concerning the Indian seas, and the imperfect character of their navigation, it is impossible
      not to admire the noble confidence with which Nearchus ventured to promise that he would bring
      the ships in safety to the shores of Persia, "if the sea were navigable, and the thing
      feasible for mortal man." (<bibl n="Arr. Ind. 19">Arrian Ind. 19, 20</bibl>. <hi rend="ital">Anab.</hi> 6.5, 19; <bibl n="Curt. 9.38">Curt. 9.38</bibl>; <bibl n="Diod. 17.104">Diod.
       17.104</bibl>; <bibl n="Plut. Alex. 66">Plut. Alex. 66</bibl>.) Nor did his conduct
      throughout the expedition fall short of his promises; and Arrian expressly attributes the safe
      result of the enterprise on more than one occasion to the prudence and judgment, as well as
      courage, of the commander. (<hi rend="ital">Ind.</hi> 32.)</p><p>Nearchus was compelled to remain in the Indus for some sime after <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref> had set out on his return, waiting for the
      cessation of the etesian winds, or south-western monsoon. Meanwhile, the Indians had gathered
      again, after the king's departure, in considerable force, and began to annoy him with their
      attacks, which caused him to hasten his departure, and he set out on the 21st of September
       <date when-custom="-325">B. C. 325</date>, before the winds had become altogether favourable. The
      consequence was, that after sailing out of the Indus, and a short distance along the coast, he
      was compelled to remain twenty-four days in a harbour near the confines of the Indians and
      Oreitae, to which he gave the name of the port of <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>. Leaving this on the 23d of October, he continued his voyage along the coast
      of the Oreitae, and after encountering many dangers from rocks and shoals, and losing three of
      his ships in a storm, he arrived at a place called Cocala, where he halted ten days to repair
      his vessels. During this interval he entered into communication with Leonnatus, who had been
      left behind in charge of the province of the Oreitae, and from whom he received supplies of
      provisions, and reinforcements of men to replace those whom he had found the least efficient
      of his crews. From this time, until he reached the coast of Carmania, Nearchus was entirely
      dependent upon his own resources, and had to contend not only with the perils of an unknown
      navigation, but with the greatest distress from want of provisions, as they coasted along the
      sandy and barren shores of the Ichthyophagi, and with the discontent of his own followers, to
      which that scarcity gave rise. Throughout this period he displayed the utmost firmness as well
      as energy; and the courage with which he confronted alike the novel dangers which threatened
      them from whales (<bibl n="Arr. Ind. 30">Arr. Ind. 30</bibl>), and the mysterious perils of
      the island reputed to be enchanted (<hi rend="ital">Ib.</hi> 31), proves him to have been a
      man altogether above the level of his age and country. At a fishing village called Mosarna, he
      for the first time <pb n="1147"/> obtained a pilot acquainted with the coast, which greatly
      facilitated his farther progress, and at length on the eightieth day of his voyage (Dec. 9.)
      he anchored at the mouth of the river Anamis, in the fertile district of Harmozia, and had the
      happiness of learning that <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref> himself was
      encamped at a short distance in the interior. Nearchus himself hastened to the king, who
      received him with every demonstration of joy, and celebrated sacrifices and festivals for the
      safety of his fleet, in which the admiral was distinguished by every kind of honour. He was,
      however, unwilling to expose his friend to any farther dangers, and was desirous to transfer
      to some one else the task of conducting the fleet up the Persian gulf, but Nearchus insisted
      on being allowed to complete what he had so successfully begun, and returned to his camp on
      the Anamis, from whence he continued his voyage with comparatively little of difficulty or
      danger along the north shore of the Persian gulf to the mouth of the Pasitigris, and up that
      river to Susa. Here he arrived in February 324, shortly after <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref> himself; and in the brilliant festivities
      with which the king here celebrated the conquest of Asia as well as his own nuptials with
      Stateira, Nearchus bore an important part, being one of those rewarded with crowns of gold for
      their distinguished services, at the same time that he obtained in marriage a daughter of the
      Rhodian Mentor and of Barsine, to whom <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>
      himself had been previously married. (<bibl n="Arr. Ind. 21">Arrian Ind. 21 - 42</bibl>, <hi rend="ital">Anab.</hi> 6.28, 7.4.9, 5.9; Strab. xv. pp. 721, 725, 726; Curt. x. 1.10; <bibl n="Diod. 17.106">Diod. 17.106</bibl>; <bibl n="Plut. Alex. 68">Plut. Alex. 68</bibl>.
      Concerning the chronology of the voyage, see Vincent, vol. i., and Droysen, <hi rend="ital">Gesch. Alex.</hi> pp. 478, 481.)</p><p>From this time Nearchus appears to have continued in close attendance upon <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref> till his death, as we find him mentioned
      as dissuading the king from entering Babylon on account of the predictions of the Chaldaeans,
      and again during <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander's</ref> last illness
      holding a conversation with him upon naval matters. It appears, indeed, that he had been
      already designated for the chief command of the fleet with which the king was at this time
      meditating the conquest of Arabia, <date when-custom="-323">B. C. 323</date>; and the latter had
      just given him a sumptuous feast previous to his departure, when the illness of <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref> himself put an end to the expedition.
       (<bibl n="Plut. Alex. 73">Plut. Alex. 73</bibl>, <bibl n="Plut. Alex. 75">75</bibl>, <bibl n="Plut. Alex. 76">76</bibl>; <bibl n="Diod. 17.112">Diod. 17.112</bibl>; <bibl n="Arr. An. 7.25">Arr. Anab. 7.25</bibl>.) It was natural that one who had held so high a
      place in the confidence of the king should take a prominent part in the discussions that
      ensued after his death: yet it is remarkable that Curtius is the only writer who mentions his
      name at all upon that occasion. But the statement of that author (10.20), that it was Nearchus
      who put forward the claims of Heracles, the son of Barsine, to the throne, is rendered so
      probable by his near connexion with the latter, that there can be little doubt of its
      correctness. But it is probable that his not being a Macedonian by birth operated against
      Nearchus, and it would seem that his tranquil and unambitious character did not qualify him to
      take a leading part in the stormy dissensions that followed: he not only acquiesced in the
      adoption of arrangements opposed to his advice, but seems to have been contented, in the
      division of the provinces, to obtain his former government of Lycia and Painphylia, and to
      hold even these as subordinate to Antigonus. (<bibl n="Just. 13.4">Just. 13.4</bibl>; comp.
      Droysen, <hi rend="ital">Hellenism,</hi> vol. i. p. 42.) To the fortunes of the latter,
      whether from motives of private friendship or policy, we find him henceforth closely attached:
      in <date when-custom="-317">B. C. 317</date> he accompanied Antigonus in his march against Eumenes;
      and generously interceded with him in favour of the latter, when he had fallen into his hands
      as a prisoner. (<bibl n="Diod. 19.19">Diod. 19.19</bibl>; <bibl n="Plut. Eum. 18">Plut. Eum.
       18</bibl>.) Again, in 314, he was one of the generals who were selected by Antigonus, on
      account of their mature age and experience in war, to assist with their counsels his son
      Demetrius, left for the first time in command of an army. (<bibl n="Diod. 19.69">Diod.
       19.69</bibl>.) This is the last occasion on which his name appears in history.</p><div><head>Works</head><div><head>The <foreign xml:lang="grc">Παράπλους</foreign></head><p>We learn from many ancient authors that Nearchus left a history or narrative of the voyage
        by which he had earned such great celebrity; and the substance of this interesting work has
        been fortunately preserved to us by Arrian, who has derived from it the whole of the latter
        part of his " Indica." The strange paradox put forward by Dodwell (<hi rend="ital">Dissert.
         de Arriani Nearcho,</hi> ap. Geogr. Gr. Minores, tom. i., reprinted, together with a Latin
        translation of Vincent's refutation by Schmieder, in his edition of the
         <title>Indica</title> of Arrian, p. 232, &amp;c.), that the work made use of by Arrian was
        not really the production of Nearchus, but the forgery of a later age, though adopted by
        Bohlen (<hi rend="ital">das alte Indien,</hi> vol. i. p. 68), has been generally rejected by
        later writers, and is sufficiently refuted by Vincent in his elaborate work on "The Commerce
        and Navigation of the Ancients in the Indian Seas (vol. i. p. 68-77):" but he justly adds: "
        The internal evidence of the work speaks more forcibly for itself than all the arguments
        which can be adduced in its favour." The accuracy of the geographical details contained in
        it has been fully demonstrated by the same author, as well as by the eminent geographers
        d'Anville, Gosselin, and Ritter, who have also shown that many of the statements regarded by
        the ancients as marvellous or incredible have been confirmed by the researches of modern
        travellers. In other instances, although we cannot defend the accuracy of his assertions, it
        is at least possible to show how the error has originated. (See particularly Schmieder, <hi rend="ital">ad Arr. Ind.</hi> 25.) Indeed Strabo himself, while he censures Nearchus,
        together with Megasthenes and Onesicritus, for his fabulous tales (ii. p. 70), has, in
        numerous instances, made use of his authority without scruple (xv. pp. 689, 691, 696, 701,
        705, 706, 716, 717, &amp;c.). On the other hand, it seems probable that Pliny, on whose
        authority Dodwell mainly relied, had not consulted the original work of Nearchus, but had
        contented himself with the abridgment of that of Onesicritus, as published by Juba. (<bibl n="Plin. Nat. 6.23">Plin. Nat. 6.23</bibl>; comp. Vincent, <hi rend="ital">l.c.,</hi> and
        Geier, <hi rend="ital">Alex. Magni Hist. Script.</hi> p. 80, &amp;c.) Suidas, who accuses
        Nearchus of having falsely pretended to be commander of the whole fleet, when he was in fact
        only a pilot or captain (<foreign xml:lang="grc">κυβερνήτης</foreign>), has by a strange
        error transferred to him what Arrian, whose very words he copies, rays of Onesicritus.
        (Suid. <hi rend="ital">s. v.</hi>
        <foreign xml:lang="grc">Νέαρχος</foreign>; <bibl n="Arr. An. 6.2">Arr. Anab.
        6.2</bibl>.)</p></div><div><head>A Separate History of <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>?</head><p>Schmieder and some other writers, relying partly upon a passage of Suidas (<hi rend="ital">s. v.</hi>
        <foreign xml:lang="grc">Νέαρχος</foreign>), partly upon some statements quoted by
        Strabo, which have no immediate reference to the voyage, have maintained that, besides the
         <foreign xml:lang="grc">Παράπλους</foreign>, or narrative of his <pb n="1148"/> voyage,
        Nearchus had written a separate history of the wars of <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander</ref>: but there is certainly no occasion for
        such a supposition. If, as appears probable, he began his narrative from the first
        construction of the fleet on the Hydaspes, it would naturally include an account of <ref target="alexander-the-great-bio-1">Alexander's</ref> wars against the Malli, as well as his
        subsequent march through Gedrosia and it is evident that he prefixed to his work a general
        account of India, its inhabitants and their customs, from which both Strabo and Arrian have
        borrowed largely. Geier (<hi rend="ital">l.c.</hi> p. 113-115) has justly pointed out that
        all the facts cited frem Nearchus are such as would naturally be comprised in a work thus
        limited, or might readily have been introduced in digressions.</p></div><div><head>Editions</head><p><bibl>All the questions, both literary and geographical, connected with the Paraplus of
         Nearchus, are fully discussed in the work of Dr. Vincent above cited (4to. London.
         1807)</bibl>; <bibl>in the preface, notes, and dissertations appended by Schmieder to his
         edition of Arrian's " Indica" (8vo. Hal. 1798)</bibl>; and <bibl>in Geier's <hi rend="ital">Alexandri Magni Historiarum Scriptores,</hi> pp. 108-150.</bibl> The last author has
        brought together all the fragments of Nearchus, that is to say, all the passages where he is
        cited <hi rend="ital">by name</hi> either by Strabo or Arrian; but there is no doubt that
        besides these his work is the sole authority followed by the latter writer throughout the
        narrative of his voyage. </p></div></div><byline>[<ref target="author.E.H.B">E.H.B</ref>]</byline></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>