Alexander of Macedon 356-323 B. C.: A Historical Biography

Rating:
Summary: Conspiratorial Alexander
Review: Peter Green's biography paints a very dark and rather cynical view of Alexander. To read his book is to think that Alex carefully planned out all his actions. He carefully awaited opportunities to eliminate his former friends who were perceived as potential threats. Green must be more a follwer of Curtius and his views of Alex as opposed to Arrian who is more an outright admirer. Alexander's life is so complicated and comprises so many events that its hard to ascribe so many deliberate motives as are implied here. Green seems to point out all the evidence at Alexander for wanting to murder Philotas, Parmenion, Clietus etc., and then afterwards adds that such accusations may all be conjecture afterall! This reveals Green's bias toward this subject it would seem.

While I don't doubt that Alexander was certainly no saint, and his grand campaigns through Asia killed many thousands, to imply that he was such a schemer seems a bit unfair. If anything I think Alexander was prone to sudden and often violent mood changes, brought about by many factors. The combination of Philip II and Olympia as his parents was certain to create an individual that combined many extreme tendencies. We see this in him as he combines attributes of both in his character. He could be gracious one moment, violently angry the next. Was often mystical and reclusive, and prone perhaps toward mistrust. These characteristics became more pronounced after the death of Darius III and his assumption of the status of Great King. It is fair to say that up until this point Alexander's march had inspired all who followed him. As him came to assume more imperial trappings his character changed as he perceived threats from those who did not approve of this policy.

Alexander's character evolved and changed as circumstances developed. Did he cross the Hellespoint with the grand intent to assume control of the whole Persian empire immediately, or did the concept gradually evolve as the possibility increasingly presented itself? This remains one of the great unanswered questions about Alexander. There will always be those who see it either one way or the other. For Peter Green it seems Alexander more or less intended from the beginning to conquer all before him. We can either agree with this or not.

One of the more intriguing aspects about this book contained in the appendix is the discussion concerning the location of the battle of the Granicus. Green seems to think the battle was not fought directly on the River itself, but rather further downwards after Alexander crossed it. He implies that Alexander may have suffered a repulse at first, leading to his subsequent crossing further down to fight the Persians on more even ground. So much for the grand charge across the Granicus so often mentioned. But then did Cletius also save him in the same way if this happaned? Many questions exist. Green believes that Alexander's propaganda department neatly covered over this repulse and re-wrote the Granicus as an heroic epic. Anything is possible in dealing with history so long ago.

Green has done an interesting and impressive work. He raises many worthwhile questions about Alexander. There is a somewhat hostile stance toward his subject, but given this bias, this biography is still a worthwhile addition to all the others out there. Read, enjoy and think!

Rating:
Summary: Still the best
Review: Peter Green may be, as others have accused, a revisionist historian, but at least he has not accepted the picture painted of Alexander in Plutarch's lives without criticism. He also appears to understand the difference between the ancients and ourselves and is much more objective than the average. Those with an axe to grind will not like or appreciate that. Recently , on the History Channel, several British scholars were interviewed about the Roman emperor Augustus. They were so excited that Augustus had apparently replaced the republic with a monarchy that they were about to pee on themselves. Peter Green does not appear to have any such agendas in mind except to correct the blind admiration so prevalent in the poor scholarship that continues to surround Alexander to this day. As far as I can tell a little revisionism did the story of Alexander the Great a world of good. We appear to be entering an age of blind admiration of Alexamder the Great again. This does not bode well. I was recently in a major bookstore and an entire display was dedicated to works on Alexander demonstrating little or no scholarship. There is even a leadership book using him as a role model. I guess the consultants are running out of names and stories. Anyhow, for anybody looking for a tremendous entry point into the Alexander literature, this is by far and away the best book out there.

Rating:
Summary: A First Class Historical Biography
Review: I have, in the wake of Oliver Stone's Alexander, been reading Peter Green's biography of Alexander. I highly recommend this book for the wonderful writing of Mr. Green. He has a way of writing that is never dry and has a great turn of phrase that makes reading everything he has written of great interest. His outstanding writing ability is a reflection of Mr. Green's early literary writing in historical fiction. One wants to read each sentence in this biography. The book is simply divided into ten chapters and illustrated with several maps and diagrams.

This book is essentially the 1974 edition with updates that bring in current scholarship. Certainly, there is still a lot of speculation about Alexander, particularly concerning his death in Babylon. In his preface, Mr. Green states that he was wrong about some of his conclusions and had provided footnotes to make his new points. His revisions came after his monumental history of the Hellenistic period - Alexander to Actium - which gave him a greater perspective on Alexander himself. This biography has all that anyone would want when approaching ancient history. Mr. Green discusses the ancient sources and modern historians, such as Tarn, who have made significant contributions to what we know about Alexander. He has the critical eye necessary when examining critical events, such as the presumed plot against Alexander involving Parmenio's son Philotas.

One could not ask for a better written or more insightful book into the life and times of Alexander III of Macedon. This is a fascinating and probing book that remains fresh.


Rating:
Summary: Excellent Decadence
Review: Peter Green is such a wonderful presence in the stale world of academic history departments, that it's hard to believe so many people are so sour on this viable and cogent interpretation of Alexander. What I mean is, he could write that Alexander was Jesus and it would be interesting to hear it from Green. Fortunately, however, Green is a rigorous scholar, and I'm not sure where the animosity is justified toward his comprehensively nasty, skeptical reading of Alexander. It is an absolutely necessary viewpoint to have put forth on the mysterious boy wonder, and if you really want to think about Alexander, you need to hear this stuff. At the very least, it will make you re-think, very hard, your prior judgments perhaps garnered from Arrian and Plutarch (as mine were). Do not misunderstand me here, I was often dubious about a lot of what Green was saying, but the fact is, what he was saying is backed up by as much evidence as what I would prefer to believe, and studying history seriously is about swallowing those bitter pills that cure you of delusions, not bolster them. It is wrong to say that Green portrays himself as some martyr for brutal truth. The truth he is portraying is brutal indeed, but as he says in Alexander to Actium, every time he returns to Alexander, his tyrannical nature is re-confirmed for him. I.e., Green sees Alexander this way, he doesn't act like he sees Alexander this way to "shock" people. It's rather presumptuous, anyway, to attack a man's motives when you don't like the book he wrote.
But that by the way. This Alexander of Green's is the purest practitioner of Reelpolitik imaginable; no act of generosity, as reported by Arrian (e.g.), is left unquestioned; but please note that no act of barbarity either, as reported by Curtius (e.g.), is left without a searching for practical motivations. Green is especially good on the Philotas and Parmenion affair; and his explorations of the strange decisions of Alexander in the Gedrosian desert are all worth considering.
And on top of all this, this book is a smashing read from start to finish, almost impossible to put down. When you leave, you not only miss the old bastard Alexander, but good old Mr. Green as well.
See also his book on the Greco-Persian Wars (with his reading of Themistocles). It is just as masterful and far more optimistic.


Rating:
Summary: Read along with Alexander the Great's Art of Strategy
Review: This is one of the best books of the genre. It is immaculately detailed, richly portrayed, and densely packed with information that should serve any Alexander enthusiast. I found it insipiring reading when I supplemented it with Alexander the Great's Art of Strategy, which is a terrific book that helps the reader step back from Alexander's conquests and battles and makes us think about the implications of what we just read. I also rank Robin Lane-Fox's book in the small cluster of books that really help the reader comprehend the true nature of a very complex man - the greatest conqueror who ever lived. Skip all the rest of the books fast piling up.

Rating:
Summary: A Well-Written Tabloid.
Review: Few stories from antiquity have been exhausted like that of Alexander The Great. The guy at least deserves the title of "Great" for the fact that more than 3,000 years after his death we are still debating his life, legacy and character. Peter Green jumps into the argument with another book that attempts to give us a "new" look at Alexander's life, what his "Alexander Of Macedon" eventually is is another take on views shared by professors such as Harvard's Badian which try to judge Alexander with more "clear" views suited to our times. The problem here is that Alexander The Great lived in an era much different from our own, consider that the Greeks expressed the importance of philosophy, reading and knowledge in general as a society, today we express the importance of getting home on time for the Super Bowl. Unlike Robin Lane Fox, who's towering work "Alexander The Great" remains the best of the Alexander biographies, Green dismisses a lot of clear evidence and decides to give us something "new" by simply messing up the image of Alexander into that of some murderous conqueror or deranged dictator. It's as if Green, like Paul Cartledge, simply turns the positive into negative so it feels "fresh." He also feels appalled by tactics in ancient Macedon that today would seem barbaric but back then were the norm. The simple truth is you cannot judge a man like Alexander by the standards of our time, today we live in a world where idealism is being scorned or called "war-mongering" and heroism seems cartoonish or unrealistic, a guy like Alexander The Great would naturally feel out of place in today's world (I can just imagine Michael Moore walking around ancient Macedon, writing a rabid attack on Alexander and Philip). However, I cannot call Green some kind of unskilled writer, he actually has a very vivid, readable way of expressing his viewpoints and the book at least doesn't suffer from horrible craftsmanship. But I do not recommend it for those who are barely being introduced to Alexander, instead I recommend the more skillful works "Alexander The Great" by Robin Lane Fox and "The Nature Of Alexander" by Mary Renault.

Rating:
Summary: Surpasses All Other Available Alexander Biographies
Review: As if conquering the known world sources weren't enough to accomplish, Green's masterpiece dually succeeds in its ability to personify one of history's greatest conquerors with candor and exacting detail.

"Alexander of Macedon" is a fitting book for both aficionados of classic Greek antiquity and the layman alike, providing thorough detail that is eloquently written so armchair adventurers will take great delight in reading this work. Green complies multiple maps and used nearly 100 pages (that's right, a hundred PAGES) of sources to construct the rise, conquest, and fall of Alexander the Great.

Starting during the reign of Philip II, with anecdotes dating earlier still, this biography establishes the foundation on which Alexander solidified his empire, subdued mainland Greece prior to setting out for Asia, and recounts with great alacrity the battles Alexander won on the road to conquering Darius III's vast empire.

Brilliant--5 Stars!

Rating:
Summary: The Best on Alexander the Great
Review: Green does an excellent job of capturing the essence of Alexander the Great, the man, his life and times. Great read.
Good job of integrating as a base Phillip's life and times into what made Alexander "tick."
Especially liked the way he handled Alexander's psyche juxtaposed against key battles and people/land conquered. It's been several years since I've read any thing on Alexander. Green's narrative style made for a relative fast read, not too heavy, however a fair amount of rich detail regarding various characters and places. His style was engrossing, needed to frequently refer to maps of the area, not only provided by the book, but also modern day geography to get a better handle on relationships with present day nations/people. Though separate by 2300 years, there is still lots of relevancy between the Eastern Mediterranean to India geopolitical area of today with that of Alexander's time. Recommend the book to anyone looking to gain an understanding of Alexander and the times with which he lived.


Rating:
Summary: Beyond excellent
Review: I have read, perhaps 15 biographies for Alexander. This one is by far, the most lucid, detailed, well written, organized (ex:footnotes taking you forward and back to plot points)and explanatory. Explanatory in then sense that the author takes into account several behavioral models that the historical sources give us and paints the picture without negative bias or hero worship. He doesn't overload his points, he describes the behavior well as he stays in historical context keeping you infinitely interested in following Alexander and the Diadochi into to India and back. In addition, as a military historian I found his deft handling of the Issus issue well reasoned and informed, and no less than admirable for laying it all out without forcing us to the brook of his own conclusion. His explanation of the Macedonian royal house and its Fuedal environs was well done and welcome, as it is usually brushed over in other works........ Altogether a fresh and welcomed perspective for an enigmatic figure.