karen wrote:Tell you what -- if you can find one case in the entire book in which an action of Alexander's is imputed to love, genuine generosity, compassion, friendship, concern for his men, or anything altruistic at all, I'll take it back. I've read it but once -- and I appreciated the thoroughness of citations and other factual aspects -- but I remember the utter emotional one-sidedness of his Alexander was grating.
I don't think so. I'm not Green's publisher. You have every right to find Green's work "grating" or any other word you might choose. I, personally, do not. You might find, for instance, that Alexander’s treatment of the Royal women after Issus utterly chivalrous and indicative of Alexander’s – rather different for the times – treatment of females in general. I’ve no huge argument with that. I further have little argument with the fact that on another, more political and calculating level, he realised thoroughly what had fallen into his grasp and – more to the point – what it was worth.
One might also wonder at the “love” he inspired from his troops and how they would follow him (almost) anywhere. How he cared for those under his command. The material that comes down to us would suggest that is, in large part, correct. But, it should not be forgotten that victorious commanders – especially audacious ones – will naturally inspire this. It is easily forgotten that Philip, his father, was as much hero worshipped by many of those same troops. And, dare I say it, a good tradesman always cares for that which earns him a living: his tools. When those tools no longer serve the purpose as they once did they find themselves at Opis.
I too find things that “grate”. That which currently wears like a shirt of sandpaper is the – seemingly growing – view of Alexander as the “benevolent, civilising conqueror”. This once prevalent idea (particularly early last century) is about as factual as the “Mongol mass-murderer” Alexander who existed only to “hunt men”. Neither of these is correct. Between the two we will all find that which suits our take on the conqueror.
And never forget, conqueror he was, first second and third last. Before last came a good "Greek education". Which education, whilst including Homer and Euripides, significantly also included being raised in "the Macedonian manner". For which read: military training.
The conqueror for whom the betterment of mankind, the civilisation and bringing of culture to those outside his writ forms the basis of his imperial crusade is yet to stride the earth. The closest yet has been the Christian (Catholic) Church. It too has encountered the same human foibles as did Alexander.