<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: unbalanced
Review: This volume contains some interesting articles. Some submissions (Brunt pages 45-51; Narain pages 161-167) are truly rewarding and interesting. But others (Worthington pages 303-316) are just a waste of paper and ink. In general, the editor of this compilation of academic articles seems to lack empathy with the Ancient world to truly understand what he is dealing with. So the whole collection is unbalanced - in quality, perspective, scientific approach. Only readers who are already very familiar with academic studies about Alexander should be able to make a sharp distinction between the worthwile articles and the rubbish.What annoys me is that of all the published articles, no single one is has a proper date. There is a long article by J.F.C. Fuller, who died in 1966. Fuller was born in 1878 (!), took up interest in Alexander in 1917 (!) and wrote his major works about Alexander around 1957. But Fuller's article in Worthington's reader is published without any proper dating, confusing readers to expect that it might be especially written for Worthington's 2003 edition of "A Reader". That can't be true. Mister Fuller would have been 125 years old! So Worthington's edition - to me - seems like a hoax. That doesn't mean that 'some' of the articles aren't truly worthwile. That's why there are still 2 stars in my rating. But in general: I fear that books like this tend to downgrade the overall reputation of a scientist / editor in the long run.
<< 1 >>
| 
