pothos.org

Anyone came across his book entitled Alexander the Great - A Reader ?I can see only one review on Amazon that isnt too
complimentary

Ah, that review was written by our very own Nick Welman.I have to say that, to some extent I agree with him.Worthington says in his preface that he hasn't included many recent articles because of the cost of re-printing. This means that a lot of the content is very old, without the benefit of being compared with modern scholarship. While it is a worthwhile book in some respects, this penny-pinching attitude has made the book only 25% as good as it could have been.All the bestMarcus

Out of interest ..If you were to start a thorough investigation
into ATG would you go straight to the sources
or would a Fox, Hammond etc be the place to start?In short ..Would you consider a real understanding of ATG be gained without reading the ancient sources ?

Regards.

We just discussed this a few weeks ago. I hve since bought the book as I found it quite useful and interesting. Another book was suggested but my friend who works at the university library photo-copied things out of it for me and she in her opinion she didn't think I'd find it so useful as Worthington. I guess it's a matter of taste, but I find it a good book to have in my research library.

Hi Ruthaki,I also picked it up,and found it interesting. But, I've spent most of my time with the Hunt book on the medallions. That is, when I'm not busy writing my own book. later Nicator

Hi Companions -Yes, in retrospect I think my mood was really below freezing point when I wrote that Amazon review. At that time I was just annoyed: I bought "A Reader" during our Christmas shopping spree, especially because the back of the book talked about "This exciting new volume". At home, when I started reading, I discovered most of the material wasn't that "new" at all (nor "exciting" for that matter). So - I felt a bit 'fooled'.I suppose I could have been milder. But I figured that someone, someday would post a second Amazon review that would balance my harsh comments. Still, I think that a collection of mainly older articles shouldn't be promoted as "exciting and new". (As I recall, "exciting and new" is a line in the "Love Boat" tv-series tune, isn't it?)Above that, I still think that Worthington's own article (the one that has received so much bad comments) downgrades the entire "feeling" of the reader. It is not up to proper academic standards and it should have been omitted...Best regards -Nick

For me, personally, I would start reading both an ancient source AND a new work at the same time. (I don't know about you, but I'm always reading four of five books simultaneously...)For the ancient sources I suppose Arrian is your best bet, just because it is so very readable. Next I suppose Curtius is a good alternative if you like to dig deeper in the darker vaults of Alexander's History (instead of Arrian's more flattering picture). I find Curtius very readable too. (If you like something shorter, try Plutarch.)For the new books, my list would be: 1. Renault's Nature of Alexander; 2. Robin Lane Fox; 3. Bosworth's Conquest and Empire.Renault - because she is most likely to inspire a lasting interest in Alxander. Lane Fox - because his study reads like an adventure in its own right. Bosworth - because of his accuracy. Pick anything you like.Yes, with some reasonable room for doubt, I suppose you can get a deeper understanding of Alexander by reading the ancient sources. But under two conditions: 1. read them all (the Big Five). Though Diodorus may not be very entertaining, you need to read him to balance the other sources. (He presents a very different picture on some details.) 2. use a publication with nice commentaries. Heckel's edition of Justin is very valuable. Bosworth's commentary on Arrian is too.Best regards -Nick

I agree very much with Nick - even to the point of why he chooses Renault, Lane Fox and Bosworth.It was Renault's "Nature" which got me enthusiastic about Al in the first place.
Lane Fox was the first academic biography I read and it got me even more enthused.
Bosworth's "Conquest" had just been published when I was studying Al at university and so was a key text; so I'll always have a special relationship with that book.If you can't read all five ancient sources, then one must read Arrian first, then Curtius... but having read the introductions to the editions very carefully first!All the bestMarcus

Hi Pat,
Stick to the 'Big Five', LOL, (Nick you making fun of me?) Honestly though, Arrian, Curtius, Plutarch, Diodorus and Justin are the be all and end all to this subject matter, with a number of fringe writers of old, you can get to at a later stage.Modern scholarship will only confuse the issue, quite often presenting opinion which some how in their own minds becomes a matter of fact.Some moderns, and I hate this, make statements without evidence, use some earlier works of theirs as a footnote on the statement, then after chasing the original quote you relaise it was all fiction, but presented several books/journals later as fact. Sorry, I think I got confused with that last paragraph LOL anyhow, regardless, of which way you choose to pursue this subject matter, make sure to enjoy and I'm sure you will.
cheers!

Thank you kindly for those reading tipsI couldnt find anything by DiodorusI assume his commentary on Aleaxander is contained in one of his volumes but which one?

Regards

For Diodorus Siculus on Philip II: book 16 For Diodorus Siculus on Alexander: book 17You can find them online at: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/Go to classics and scroll down...