Some Book Reviews By Members

“The Genius Of Alexander The Great”, by N.G.L. Hammond

I read N.G.L. Hammond's The Genius of Alexander the Great after reading numerous other biographies including Fox, Green, Wilcken, and others, largely due to my appreciation of Hammond's status as an Oxford scholar with thirty years of solid publication on Alexander, Macedonia, and the Greek Hellenistic world. Although his credentials are impeccable, almost from the first chapter I realized that I was reading one of those scholars who felt they had to take a stand on the issue of Alexander-the-Good, Alexander-the-Bad. And Hammond definitely comes down on the side of Alexander the decent, good chappie, who was a military genius. To me, this kind of selective biography becomes increasingly irritating, although to the brand-new student of Alexander, his summary of the known facts about Alexander's life is meticulous and quite helpful - except for his bias.

From Chapter 1, Hammond feels authoritively able to simply discount sources he dislikes (i.e., ancient sources who brought up questions concerning Alexander's temper, violence, cruelty, drunkenness, and less-than-altruistic motiviations). So we regularly hear that such-and-such a source may be "dismissed" as a complete or partial fabrication. Apparently, Hammond particularly loathes Curtius, but Diodorus Siculus is also regularly dismissed out of hand. Instead, he quotes extensively from sources such as Ptolemy, Aristobulus, and their heir, Arrian, showing Alexander in the best possible light.

In any book, whether it's Tarn or Badian, I am deeply suspicious of selective source-hunting, and I'm afraid that Hammond's regular choice in this regard grew irksome to me. I would say this is a good, steady view of Alexander's life and works with the proviso that the reader must be aware of all that is being bowdlerized from the ancient sources. I, personally, believe in a decent Alexander who also could do awful things, but scholars who ignore contradictory sources to present him do his genius no good service.

That said, I mean no disrespect to Hammond's obvious expertise in the area and his long history of scholarship in this field. I simply wish he could have brought his expertise to bear in accepting both the good AND the bad about Alexander. If I were to read one book on Alexander - especially as a newcomer to his story - this book would, I fear, present a slanted and limited vision.

Reviewed by Heraklia Aelius

“Alexander, The Ambiguity Of Greatness." by, Guy MacLean Rogers

It's hard to find much fault with a man whose opinions are so close to my own. This is a sensible book by someone with a very thorough knowledge of the subject. There are no blockbuster new ideas, though there is a fresh point of view presented convincingly.

It is the opinion of Rogers that Alexander intentionally set out to spread a kind of meritocracy throughout his empire and that this intention was inspired by a belief that
Zeus favored, " the best ", without regard to race. I'm not ready to go that far, but I must agree that he always seemed to reward what he saw as the best men. I suspect that this was not so simple as religious belief but had more aspects to it than that. His treatment of Porus would seem a good example.

For some of us, it's too bad that you cannot just sell a good essay nowadays. It takes 279 pages to get past the retelling of the life of Alexander. Do you know how many times I have read that? It is told with some economy; I suspect he did not enjoy writing it anymore than I enjoyed reading it, but you can't have the book without it it seems. I dutifully read it and found nothing disagreeable in it. Indeed, I was happy to see many insights which I found most appealing as most of them have been my own for quite some time.

He is the first author to ask the question which I have asked for so many years, why are the homosexual exploits of Alexander so shocking when those of his father and grandfather are not? His explanations of alexander's sexuality seem to me to be spot on. Indeed, I have long agreed with all of the stances he takes on the major bones of scholarly contention.

By page 280 he begins his commentary on the life of Alexander and this is the reason for the book. Perhaps I would take the whole thing with a few little grains of salt, but altogether it all seems a clear minded and accurate analysis. Indeed, the man's thesis seems to be that we should look at the life of Alexander in it's entirety rather than looking at all the incidents and putting them back together.

To quote Arrian, " Whosoever speaks evil of Alexander, let him speak such evil not merely by producing what deserves evil-speaking, but gathering all that Alexander did into a single whole".

The point of the book is that all great men of history have done greatly bad things and greatly good things; they were human. We must look at the entire life and its influence upon the world before making a valid judgment.

I highly recommend this book. "Alexander, The Ambiguity Of Greatness."

Reviewed by, Kallistos Alexandros

“Faces of Power: Alexander's Image and Hellenistic Politics”, by Andrew Stewart.

After all my biographies, I chose this rather pricey book by Andrew Stewart - who is a prominent historian and art historian - because I really wanted to learn why there are so many images, so many different images, of Alexander that have survived from ancient history. I had read multiple biographies, but there is something about the face of any historical figure that teases and intrigues; yet Alexander's many faces are confusing rather than enlightening. I also wanted to understand why this world conqueror's image kept appearing on coins and many other artifacts for centuries after his death. I rather suspected, however, that I was getting an "art book" way over my head.

This book turned out to be one of the most percipient and fascinating books I've read on Alexander, precisely because Andrew Stewart brings not only the arcane expertise of a world-class art student to his task, but has the important facts of Alexander's life and the conflicting sources about it at his fingertips. My own personal way of making a note of perceptive comments I want to re-read, is to take that paragraph with a colored tab. The whole book is littered with tabs, and I now feel my perception of both Alexander the man, Alexander the man as he wished to appear to his world, and Alexander the man as he lived on in legend and accomplishment, is highly enhanced by Stewart's book.

This volume must contain every single image of Alexander in statuary, bust, painted pottery, rings, jewels, and coins that can be found; it has a description for each; it lists every source in ancient literature in which Alexander's image is discussed; it covers how he looked, how his image changed, how he controlled that image for political and social purposes, and much more. It is a treasure trove for those who want to learn more about this most fascinating mortal.

Highly recommended; I am most grateful for Stewart for sharing his expertise so well that even a learner can find multiple new impressions and a much clearer vision of both the face, and the man.

reviewed by Heraklia Aelius

4. “Alexander The Great”, by Paul Cartledge

I approached this book with some trepidation, afraid of being disappointed by a historian whom I have admired for a long time. I am always leery of any book with the word, “Alexander”, in the title; so many of them are no more than a scheme to cash in on his popularity. This is not one of those. It is a valuable contribution to Alexander Studies and the best book I have read on the subject in over ten years. It goes directly on to my reference library’s, “top shelf”.

Based upon a series of lectures given by Paul Cartledge at Cambridge over the last twenty five years, it is as up to date as today’s newspaper and far better conceived. The overall concept is as clear and logical as are the individual arguments presented. Professor Cartledge’s Alexander stands cogently between Tarn’s and Worthington’s. He is multidimensional and saliently real.

This book is, by no means, meant as an introduction to Alexander. These lectures were presented to undergraduates at Cambridge University and we would assume some degree of familiarity with the subject here. Cartledge provides a mercifully brief reiteration of the Alexander biography with an excellent time line, a useful glossary, and a fine bibliography. His discourse on the sources is, itself, worth the small price of the book and applicable to other Ancient History studies as well.

This exemplary book is quite inexpensive and readily available. I can’t imagine anyone with an interest in The Great Alexander not reading it.

Reviewed by, Kallistos Alexandros