The top-10, until now

[jona]

Because the original topic seems to "fall" from our forum's overview, I summarize the results of our new top-10. I gave five points to every book mentioned on the first place, and one point to a book mentioned on the fifth place.NICK: If you don't think this is a good counting system, feel free to remove this post.1. Bosworth, Conquest and Empire 15;2. Briant, Persian Empire 10;2. Lane Fox, Alexander the Great 10;4. Heckel, Marshals of Alexander's empire 9;5. Green, Alexander of Macedon 8;6. Holt, Elephant Medaillons 5;7. Donnelly-Carney, Women & Monarchy in Macedonia 4;8. Bosworth, Alexander in the East 3;8. Holt, Alexander the Great in Bactria 3;8. Bosworth & Baynham, Alexander in F&F 3;9. Stewart, Faces of Power 2;10. Engels, Logistics of the Macedonian Army 1;11. Renault, Nature of Alexander 1;12. Le Rider, Monnaie, finances et politique 1.

[Taphoi]

1. Alexander the Great and the Mystery of the Elephant Medallions, Frank Holt, because he manages to be engaging and scholarly and original all at once.
2. Three Historians of Alexander the Great, N. G. L. Hammond, because he was a great Alexander scholar and this should be considered a seminal work (although he does stick with old fashioned views, he is sometimes right as well as sometimes wrong).
3. Faces of Power, Andrew Stewart, because this has achieved the status of being the essential reference on the image evidence.
4. In the Footsteps of Alexander the Great, Michael Wood, because nothing else has done so much to bring Alexander's campaigns to life again.
5. The Nature of Alexander, Mary Renault, because no other author has brought more people to Alexander and because she doesn't actually make many more mistakes than anyone else.(If there were a sixth place, I would add "From Arrian to Alexander" by A. B. Bosworth, because I have to admire the breadth and depth of his Alexander scholarship, even if I sometimes disagree with his conclusions.)

[xxx]

The essay in Mask of Command, despite some small errors is better than a good number of books listed. It would definitely be one of the pieces I would recommend to someone who wanted to know about Alexander. Some of these books are rather too specialist to be considered as a general overview. So are you proposing two lists - one for novices and one for specialists?

[jona]

Specialist vs. general interest: the thought has occured to me too. Perhaps we must even think of three lists - one for the general reader, one for advanced study, and one for books that desperately need to be translated into English. But let's continue this vote and see what Nick decides.Jona

[nick]

Hi Jona, hi Tre ---I would argue that people who look at the list are very well capable of deciding for themselves if a certain book fits their needs. Like now, there will be short additional texts indicating if a book is 'general' or 'specialist'. Then we only need a Top-10 (or Top-12) of VERY good books.Even if I myself was new to Alexander, I would skip the 'beginners' list immediately. I would go right to the 'specialist' list, considering that the real information that really matters is there. Yes, we have a question whether some books in the list are suitable for a general audience. But then we have the book reviews pages as well. In this case I would say: Let the consumer decide.Regards ---Nick

[Heinrich M++ller]

1. As there is still no mention of the book by Sabine M++ller (no relative of mine), I mention her on the first place. It is simply a good book, one of the viewto appear this year.2. Bosworth, Conquest and Empire3. Holt, Alexander the Great in Bactria5. Briant, Histoire / History4. There's no number 4. Can my two points be taken away from Lane Fox (who has lost his credibility with this Eurocentric movie) and Cartledge (who wrote an unnecessary book).If points can not be taken away: give one to Chugg and one Lendering. Not because I read their books, but because of their contributions to this website.Kind regardsH.M.

[amyntoros]

Nick, you said,"Even if I myself was new to Alexander, I would skip the 'beginners' list immediately. I would go right to the 'specialist' list, considering that the real information that really matters is there."But if someone is new to Alexander, how on earth are they supposed to know that the *real* information is in the specialist list? You are only aware of that simply because you are *not* new to Alexander. Anyone who doesn't know much about him is logically going to look at books listed as for beginners. I understand your wish to revamp the top ten list but it ought to be made clear that this particular list is not meant for beginners. Let's face it, the first book that anyone would recommend to a beginner (and still the first book on the top of most peoples' real top ten) is Arrian, but you have excluded him in order to revise the page. Best regards,Linda Ann

[nick]

Hi Linda ---Correct. Point taken. So I will try to find a way around that... Any suggestions?Regards ---Nick

[jona]

Let's make four lists! one top-five of general introductions, one list of general books, one list of foreign books (M++ller, Battistini...), and a list of recommended sources.Jona

[nick]

Hi Jona ---I would like two more lists then:--- The pothos.org Top-10 of lousiest books about Alexander ever written;--- The pothos.org Top-10 of books that have absolutely nothing to do with Alexander at all.I am sorry, my dear friends. Just came back from the cinema. I feel terrible. Didn't even make it to the end of the movie. Left prematurely. Left for a short while when all the leaves turned purple at Hydaspes, regaining my senses, then tried once more for a few seconds during the Heph death scene. Then figured home is a far better a place to quietly admire Alexander (and Darius) than the cinema. What a waste of talent and electricity...Best regards, sorry to bother you with this...N.

[marcus]

OK, before this gets too difficult (and silly), how about:List 1: "these are the source texts that you need to read if you are interested in Alexander" List 2: "these are the top 10 books as recommended by Pothos" (and, using the scoring system that Nick proposed, this could include English or any other language books)List 3: "these are the books that we *beg* you to steer well clear of"And then, if people want to know more, they can look at the book reviews section. On which note, could I suggest that everyone makes an effort to submit more reviews, especially of non-English books?All the best (and, obviously having found Internet access since my last Christmas message - happy Christmas once again!)Marcus

[jona]

1. Bosworth, Conquest and Empire 19;2. Briant, Persian Empire 11;3. Lane Fox, Alexander the Great 10;3. Holt, Elephant Medaillons 10;5. Heckel, Marshals of Alexander's empire 9;6. Green, Alexander of Macedon 8;7. Holt, Alexander the Great in Bactria 6;8. M++ller, Massnahmen 5;8. Stewart, Faces of Power 5;10. Donnelly-Carney, Women & Monarchy in Macedonia 4;11. Hammond, Three historians 4;12. Bosworth, Alexander in the East 3;13. Bosworth & Baynham, Alexander in F&F 3;14. Wood, Footsteps 2;14. Renault, Nature of Alexander 2;16. Engels, Logistics of the Macedonian Army 1;16. Le Rider, Monnaie, finances et politique 1.16. Keegan, Mask of command 1.

[jona]

"Can my two points be taken away from Lane Fox (who has lost his credibility with this Eurocentric movie) and Cartledge (who wrote an unnecessary book)?"No. I agree with your judgment, but let's keep it simple.Jona

[nickw]

It is there. I hope I did the right thing (preferred Holt over Lane Fox for the # 3 chart). Comments appreciated. I do like Christmas now.Regards ---Nick

[jona]

Thanks Nick!Jona