I think that it is interesting how certain authors can a) extract a lot of detalis and insights from very flimsy information and b) can shift around the story according to their own needs/agenda.
In Valerios's narrative, we find Perdicas heading a drunken attack on the walls of Halicarnassus, not exactly spot on the mark,nor exactly amazing in its dramatic effect either.
I chose to look in Curtius, Plutarch and of course Arrian to check out the information we have on the siege of Halicarnassus. Arrian is the most richly detailed, dedicating a good page or two to the complicated and dificult siege.
yet neither does Arrian dedicate a major disection either of the seige.
Looking at Robin Lane Fox's book there is certainly a lot more words written- all presumably derived from Arrian's account- it is quite impressive how much info one can glean from the most basic of accounts- insights such as Perdiccas' boys making a drunken and disasterous attack- included ni Ptolemy's account as a slur on Perdicas for example. After the attack, Alexander requests that the Macedonian dead are returned, a sure sign of defeat-
In Valerio's account the image of the city you get is that of a city with several major walls around it and that within the walls , there are more walls behind them- quite a confusing image- this seems an unusual thing- of having a town protected behind several city walls.
also think that it is interesting how Alexander puts a woman in control of Caria after taking the city- proving that in the world of power in those days, it wasn't entirely a man's world...
Best regards,
Dean