This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ancient Egypt Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list: Needed articles. We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have. Cleanup. To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates? Standardize the Chronology. A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563) Stub sorting Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . . Data sorting. This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library. Greece Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Phoenicia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Phoenicia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Phoenicia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.PhoeniciaWikipedia:WikiProject PhoeniciaTemplate:WikiProject PhoeniciaPhoenicia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 September 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Micah6001. Peer reviewers: Eumulos, Mocseny3.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arrian wrote in Greek and the title of his work (in Greek) is "Anabasis Alexandru". This has been Latinized to the form "Anabasis Alexandri so often encountered but not correct in either Latin or Greek. Before invoking the "Google Test" for either form please consider note that Wikipedia sindrome kicks in for the second form; many hits for Anabasis ALexandru are from WIkipedia mirrors.

There isn't really a commonly used English title for the work. Loeb translates as "Anabasis of Alexander" [1], Oxford University Press calls it "History of Alexander" [2] and so on.

Per the old maxim "Latina Latine, Graeca Graece" this should be at its Greek title. 82.26.170.64 16:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. It is sanctioned by tradition to use Latin titles for ancient Greek works, and it's not up to us to change usage. Look around wikipedia: Greek works have either English or Latin titles. Aldux 16:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree still further. It's not only that we have a Latinized title; we actually have a mixed title, as anabasis is very clearly a Greek word and Alexandri is clearly the Latin version of Alexander's Greek name. For that reason, it should be in one language or the either (with my vote being cast for the Greek). A redirect link could be established for the "half-and-half" title and some of the English renderings (which are, in fact, quite different). In disagreement with the above rendering of that Greek form, the Greek genitive for the second declension masculine nouns (Alexandros in this case) ends in -ou, not just -u.

Actually "anabasis" is not only a Greek word, but also a Latin loan word from Greek. For this most editions have been comfortable with "Anabasis Alexandri". Also, keep in mind, the guideline WP:GREEK.--Aldux 17:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This. Anabasis is perfectly straightforward Latinized Greek, but doesn't matter what the Greek or Latin is. We follow the COMMON ENGLISH name, whatever that is. We certainly don't start making up titles and translations, as recent editors seem to have begun doing.

Ngram lists "Arrian's *" giving "account", "history", and "History" as the most common forms and that's probably where this page should be moved to. (Google Scholar agrees: 300-odd results for Arrian's History of Alexander versus 40-odd for Arrian's Anabasis of Alexander; Arrian's Anabasis tout suite is in the 250s, though, and might eventually be more popular. Anabasis didn't make the list overall but is almost as popular as History over the last 10 years or so.) In the meantime, per WP:LEAD, we start the first sentence with the article's name, not some random preference translation. — LlywelynII 04:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As per the research above and the sources listed on this page itself, "Anabasis of Alexander" is not remotely this thing's common name.

Right now, History of Alexander or The History of Alexander still is, but the scholarly consensus seems to be shifting to Arrian's Anabasis or Anabasis (Arrian). Any of those is preferable to wasting space in an already cluttered lead on a form of the name few people actually use. — LlywelynII 05:27, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Anabasis of Alexander. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070102085353/http://www.soa.org.uk:80/public/downloads/pdf/A%20Ridge%20Too%20Far.pdf to http://www.soa.org.uk/public/downloads/pdf/A%20Ridge%20Too%20Far.pdf#search=%22%22later%20achaemenid%22%20arsames%22

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:25, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]