Alexander The Great

[ewx]

Alexander Of Macedon, 356-323BC: A Historical Biography, Peter Green, ISBN 0-520-07166-2.

Son of Philip II of Macedonia, himself a successful conqueror, taught by Aristotle, Alexander III distinguished himself in combat in Greece. Crossing to Asia after becoming King he fought a series successful battles and seized control of the classical Persian empire. Armed with tremendous resources his campaign extended to India; but his return to Mesopotamia was followed by his untimely demise before he could prosecute further conquests in Arabia or western Europe.

Alexander was regarded as a barbarian conqueror by the Greeks and especially the Persians: more Attila than Augustus. But with many of Darius's best troops being Greek mercenaries, it is tempting to see the Greeks as Germans to Persia as Rome, making Alexander's nearest parallel Odoacer. Perhaps Hellenization was an inevitable process, merely accelerated by his conquests?

To his troops, he was a supremely effective leader, somehow managing to persuade them to travel ever further from home despite having long since achieved all they had signed up for and more; and delivering victory after victory along the way. For all that he seems to have counted the sulk among his persuasive techniques he does appear to have quite incredible charisma.

To himself, he seems to have simply been the best, and driven to prove it by every opportunity that presented itself. If he did not in fact believe his own divine propaganda then he hid this well enough.

The charge of destructive barbarianism has merit to it; the torching of Persepolis would be first on the sheet but his habit was to wreak complete destruction on those that frustrated him. Green argues that Alexander and Olympias were the prime movers behind the murder of Philip, something that would hardly be inconsistent with his treatment of everyone else who got in his way.

The breakup of the Empire after his death, in which natural causes cannot be ruled out, often leads to Alexander being charged with caring more for victory than rule: to see the transience of his conquests as a flaw. But who can say how he might have ruled had he finally taken his armies everywhere he had planned? He died at the age of 32 - marginally younger than I am now; it was the man who was transient.

Green's book is a detailed and engaging read. The character of its subject comes alive in its pages; if his lieutenants do not always enjoy the same treatment, Alexander far outshone even the best of them. The Battle of Jhelum is particularly vividly depicted.

It is a shame, really, that it comes to a halt with the end of Alexander: half a chapter sketching the careers of the successor states to his empire would not have been out of place.

Comments

[zbtron.livejournal.com]

how can you have no opinion on port and pancakes? its ridiculous.

[ewx.livejournal.com]

I don't see what that's got to do with Alexander.