Alexander the Great

I have always done my level best to avoid reading much about Alexander the Great. The issues I find with him are a few fold. First, I can’t really grasp military stuff. Battle formations and the like don’t do basically anything for me. The best way to get me to fall asleep at night is by talking in detail about battles. I just fundamentally do not care. And let’s be honest here. That’s basically what Alexander the Great is. A whooooooooooole lot of battles. So yeah, I’ve avoided him for this reason alone.Secondly, I find a lot of these dudes from antiquity have somehow transcended their humanity and the hero-worship kind of makes me really uncomfortable. I understand the desire and need to admire someone and all their strengths because, let’s be honest here, there’s a lot to admire. However, it seems like these people have been romanticized past the point of believability. Somewhere in all this mess since Alexander’s life, he has stopped being human.I can’t even really remember why I decided to read a biography of Alexander the Great, but the desire did fill me up last week and I did my level best to find a biography that was both succinct and well informed, and did away with a whole lot of this hero worship and battle details that so displeases me. I landed on this one by Philip Freeman. And… I really liked it.Alexander the Great is a figure who is larger than life. People throughout history have been praising this guy’s name. He accomplished things that just about anyone since then hasn’t been able to accomplish. People in Rome worshipped this guy. Alexander himself thought he was a direct descendent of Hercules. He seemed impossible to stand against. If you went along with him, he’d treat you well, but woe upon those who stood against him. They did not end well (example, Tyre).In all honesty, I found (which I expecting, knowing myself as well as I do) the parts of the biography that detailed his daily life, and his life before his battles against the Persian Empire to be the most interesting. These are the places where you find the man behind the myth. I’d also really, really love someone to write a biography of his father, Philip (maybe someone has?) because that guy seems really interesting. He truly paved the way for Alexander to become what he has become.Macedon was a country that was beset by strife. Philip, Alexander’s father, was taken as a hostage as a youth as a sort of “fair treatment” bribe by the Greeks. Essentially, you play nice over there in Macedon, and we won’t cut Philip’s head off. Philip, however, was taken as a hostage by one of the best soldier generals in the Greek world at the time, and he basically got the best military training in antiquity due to that. This allowed Philip, when he was released, to seize power (by exiling and/or killing his half-brothers), and then rebuild his army from the ground up, bringing all sorts of novel military inventions into the mix, like 18 foot spears and unique formations that made it almost impossible to stand against the soldiers. He took a broken, crumbling nation, and slowly expanded the borders until he had created an empire. Until even the Greeks feared him.Insert his son and seven wives into this mix, and you’ve got a real nice setup for empire building.There are mysteries, of course. No one knows, for example, if Alexander or his mother had any part in the assassination of Philip, though I personally think it might be one of the least surprising things that have ever happened if, in fact, they did (Philip had divorced Olympias, and claimed Alexander was not his son, so at the point of his death, there was really no love lost here). They had everything to gain by Philip’s death, and not much to lose. That being said, nothing has been proven or could really be concluded one way or the other.The other thing is, of course, Alexander’s death. Now, until this point, I’d always heard he had been assassinated. However, at the end of this book, Freeman talks a bit about Alexander’s death. He had a few spells of falling ill throughout his campaign. He’d also struggled with injuries, the most recent one was a collapsed lung in a battle somewhere in India. He had dodged a whole lot of death, but that right there is enough to weaken anyone’s immune system. Then, add to it the fact that he lived in an army camp, and dysentery and malaria were likely as common as blowing your nose, and you’ve got a nice stew for some illness to creep in and do a whole lot of damage. So, while I did at one point think he was likely assassinated, (and maybe he really was, who knows) I also see now that there were a WHOLE LOT of opportunities for an illness to sweep him away, and it’s kind of amazing he lived as long as he did, considering all the battles and risks.What was, perhaps, the most interesting for me was how cunning Alexander was. He was not really afraid to think outside of the box in any situation, and he seemed to have a grasp on psychology in a way that not many others did. He knew that to mint coins showing his various victories would be a great way to spread word about him around his expanding empire, with very little effort on his part. He was not afraid to deal swiftly and ferociously with those who stood against him, and he seemed to be pretty fair, considering everything. However, the farther out into the world he went, the more he seemed to need constant praise, the more he seemed to drink, the more he believed himself godlike and impenetrable. He seemed outgrow his own humanity.It is unfortunate that he left his empire with no true heir, and a book called Ghost on the Throne is going to be one of my next reads, which talks about what happened after Alexander died and everyone in his empire started fighting for a toehold on what he left behind.He was quite an amazing man, but I didn’t end up admiring him the way I expected to. He was an empire builder. He was cruel and he was merciful. He was a formidable man with a devious, cunning mind and an eye to expand his borders. He was, however, also stunningly, absolutely human and had plenty of flaws. Perhaps what I loved the most about this biography is how well Freeman told Alexander’s story without getting bogged down in battle formations and the like. The battles were presented, the facts given, no military glorification, which was what I’ve been probably most worried about regarding any read of Alexander the Great.Freeman wrote a fantastic biography here. A great starting point and fantastically accessible. Highly recommend.

You get the feeling that you were actually there, in every heated battle, fortified citadel, and treacherous mountain overpass, right along with the conquering hero of herculean strength and agility, while reading the immensely fascinating, intimately detailed account of "Alexander the Great," and his many conquests, according to facts gleaned from the historically-significant book, having the same title, and written by Philip Freeman in 2011. Yet, at the same time, you develop a deep sense of foreboding, uneasiness, and apprehension at the process of comprehending their far-reaching implications. You become wary of "Greeks bearing gifts." You discover that the people living before the time of Christ were just as profoundly affected by the two certainties in life: death and taxes, as we are today. You wonder about the quality of magnanimity, in general, and the fairness of it all. You harbor fundamental doubts about differing religious beliefs, particularly when they involve making supreme sacrifices to appease gods and other entities of whom you've never before heard mention, and to whom you could never particularly relate, if you had. What gives the wealthy and powerful the right to make poor, ordinary shepherds and fishermen tremble with fear and loathing? You feel as if they had somehow gotten themselves tacitly involved and entangled in an awfully messy, too terrible and tragic history through perhaps no real fault of their own. It was probably the result of the aristocracy commiserating with self-professed philosophers, prophets, oracles, and dubious religious leaders who provided them with questionable advice. They've become part of, or in the way of, an all-powerful military juggernaut, led by some stubborn Macedonian King, out to prove something, they know not what. He seeks to conquer every civilization in his path of destruction, until such and such a time when he becomes successfully uplifted upon the throne as the one reigning supremely Great Emperor. Until then, he doesn't know when to stop, and won't quit. As if assimilating menacing new information in his explorations hasn't already compounded his and their troubles, he does not appear to have the average soldier's welfare and best interests at heart in his costly endeavors. Clearly, he behaves more like a crazed military general, than the wisely reticent monarch of allied nations. The distant future looks bleak for him and the peoples he attempts to conquer, squashing and trampling them beneath the feet of his mighty, stampeding army as he sallies forth. It gets worse. He personally engages in hand-to-hand combat with his foes and enemies during military campaigns, to turn the tide of battle, as if he had somehow metaphysically and manifestly become the invincible reincarnation of "Hercules," himself. What sensible and benevolent King, in his right mind, behaves in this sort of manner? His "inner child" doesn't strike me as having been the superhero type. He was once as gentle as a lamb. What happened? When capturing a prosperous city, he appointed a "satrap," essentially, a puppet-ruler, to govern the city in his absence. City leaders either opened up to him, gave him the keys to the city, and immediately began forking over their tax debts; or an ensuing battle commenced. Delinquent defenders of the faith were forced to fight to the death. Hence, either imminent death resulted or taxes were guaranteed and certified. Adding to the misery which followed in his wake, nothing appeared quite as problematic as promoting corrupt, ineffective puppet-rulers, who were devious, as slippery as a greco-roman wrestler, into positions of government administration, over the long haul. Understandably, the populace began to be wary of those accepting bribes, because they knew that strings were attached. By 330 BC, readers learn, the leading citizens of Babylon begin paying tribute to the Great Alexander, as would other fabulously wealthy cities in Mesopotamia, Persia, Egypt, and India within a comparatively few, short years. It is amazing, how someone's wealth and distinction accumulates, when he is fully engaged in empire-building and has all the military might he needs to back him up. After years of living dangerously, finally realizing his lofty goals, beyond all the pomp and circumstances involved in a hero's welcoming home celebration, The Great Alexander knows he has achieved the ultimate in status symbols, when the local mint circulates gold and silver, of sufficient quantity, far and wide, throughout the empire, and has a surplus of monetary instruments remaining on hand that completely replenishes the nation's treasury, when the surface of each coin bears the likeness of his visage on the face, and the image of the almighty "Deity" on the obverse. "It obviously doesn't get any better than this." What's left for him to do? Get married, settle down, and live out his retiring years in relative domestic bliss and peaceful tranquility? If only he could have.

It is difficult I am sure to research information at this time in history. This book does a great job of providing a good picture of this powerful and intelligent person. It gives a great perspective on truth versus speculation of Alexander’s motivationsPp

This book catches you and keeps you going with the reading the more and more you make progress through the pages. I truly enjoyed it!

It’s easy to understand and keep track of what’s going on. The author also covers multiple accounts when there is more than one source, and also points out when an account is most likely propaganda. I enjoyed it thoroughly from front to back.

Fast paced but factual, occasionally I struggle with this type of historical read, but I found it easy to read and totally enjoyable.👍

紀元前の世界のことなので本書には英雄伝説にありがちな神格化や神話かと思うような非現実的な権威付けのための言い伝えも含まれる。これは洋の東西を問わずどの国の歴史書でもあることで古代史には神話や後世の作り話がつきもの。かいつまんで内容の一部を紹介するとアレキサンダー大王が生まれた時代のマケドニアなど多くの古代国家では、女性は家畜や家財道具と同じく家長の財産と看做され、王家や族長の子女と謂えども周辺国との争乱回避目的の融和策のため政略結婚で貢物として差し出されていた。アレキサンダーも政略結婚で嫁いだマケドニアの宿敵のエピロス王の娘オリュンピアスから生まれた。アレキサンダーの家庭教師でもあったかの有名なギリシャの賢人アリストテレスは、同時代のギリシャ人がそうであったように「男は生まれつき女よりも優れている。」また、「ギリシャ民族に比べて能力が劣る(周辺の)未開の民族は奴隷として扱われて然るべし。」という考えの持ち主だった。その時代のマケドニアは野蛮の民で、ギリシャやペルシャは当時の先進文明国だった。国家の盛衰は支配者の絶対権力と軍事力に委ねられ、敗者は富を収奪された挙句奴隷として使役されたり売り買いされた謂わば「勝者総取り」の時代だったので、統治者には武勇に優れた戦士であることが何より求められた。マケドニア王だった父親のピリッポス2世も勇猛果敢な戦士で、当時の文明国だったギリシャを破って同盟を結び次に大国ペルシャを征服すべく準備を進めるが同性愛の臣下に弑逆され、跡目を継いだアレキサンダーがその意志を受け継ぎ、幾多の困難を乗り越えてアジア、アフリカにまたがる一大王国を築き上げる。野蛮の民マケドニアの王が武力で先進文明国を征服するという歴史のアイロニー。世界制覇とまだ見ぬ国への憧れを抱くアレキサンダーはペルシャ征服後にインドに到達するが、そこは地の果てではなく更に東に国々があることを知り、兵士に進軍を促す檄を飛ばすが誰一人呼応せず８年に及ぶ遠征で心身ともに疲弊し望郷の念に駆られた全兵士が無言で'No!'の意思表示をしたことで東征は幕を下ろす。その後も帰郷せずペルシャ領に留まりアラビア遠征の直前にバビロンで病没します。馴染みのない国名が次々と出てくるので少し戸惑いますが、読者を飽きさせない文章運びで、我々が良く知る「ゴルディアスの結び目」(Gordian Knot)などのエピソードや「スフィンクス伝説」(オイディプスとの問答)、あるいは真偽不明のAmazon女戦士との邂逅などを織り交ぜながら、勇猛果敢なだけでなく知略に長けた大王の人物像を巧みに描き切っている。ありきたりな英雄伝ではなく史実を重んじる歴史書なので、英雄視される人物が同時に平和に暮らしていた国や部族の富を奪い無辜の民を殺戮するなどの残虐行為を働く加害者であったことも教えてくれる。

All the facts are there, but it reads like a children’s book. He’s no Tom Holland.

What makes this biography different –1. The writing style is very smooth.2. It talks about the tactics and wars fought by Alexander.3. It’s not boring at all.The long review -Alexander has always been an intriguing historical figure for me. Ever since I was a child, I've had a peculiar interest in knowing about alexander, but I couldn't find any books on him, which were either easy to read or aren't boring historical textbooks.This book by Philip Freeman is the one of the best accounts of Alexander ever written. The writing style is very balanced and intriguing. Most books on Alexander are boring to read and they have way too many author's opinions defining the character of Alexander as good or bad. But this book doesn't dwell on the niceness of Alexander, it doesn't state whether he's good or evil but just presents the facts and leaves it for us to decide the character of Alexander.The book presents the life of alexander in a very detailed manner, but the writing is not boring at all. The descriptions of the countries, the wars, the history, and the battle tactics of Alexander were explained in a seamless manner. Not even at one part did I find the text to be boring. The book chronicles the life of Alexander right from his birth till his mysterious death. It talks not only about all the wars he fought and all the regions he conquered but also talks about his administrative prowess and the ways he spread culture around Asia.Alexander is a man who deserves to be read and studied, because what he's accomplished, conquering most of Asia before celebrating his 30th birthday, is nothing short of astounding. And no other book captures the essence of Alexander than this book by Philip Freeman.

Excellent retelling of the life of Alexander, with references throughout and alternative views. Reads like a historical novel, and follows historical references throughout. An enjoyable read and insight into the life and times of Alexander.