In the prologue of this book Alex Rowson quotes the old adage that ‘everybody has their own Alexander,’ such is the diversity of opinions about the fourth century BC king of Macedonia, who conquered much of Asia and reputedly wanted to conquer even more.
Part one of Rowson's book focuses on Alexander's childhood and the importance of Alexander's father to his subsequent military achievements, exploiting the archaeological evidence primarily. Based on this evidence, he provides intriguing insight into the Macedonian army culture under Alexander and Philip II, Alexander's father. For example, he refers to the arrow heads with the message ‘an unpleasant gift’ found in the remains of Olynthus, which was sacked by Philip; as Rowson remarks, such finds provide glimpses of the culture in the Macedonian army encouraged by Philip.
On the other hand, as well as primary sources, he acknowledges his debt to the novelist Mary Renault, even naming his first chapter after her first Alexander novel. This influence is used effectively to draw out the possible interpretations of the evidence, and Rowson is not uncritical of Renault's interpretation at times.
Furthermore, Rowson presents the relevant archaeological debates in a clear manner, such as evidence for the Nymphaion or supposed Asklepion at Mieza being the location for Alexander's lessons with Aristotle. In this section he uses questions about the lack of infrastructural remains to highlight the problems with the Nymphaion, then lays out Angeliki Kottaridi's argument about the Asklepion - and her comparison of the site to surviving Macedonian barracks - to convincing effect. This discussion of the archaeology, combined with references to Plutarch and epigraphy, is the foundation for Rowson's argument that Alexander's school curriculum combined military training with academic exercises.
Rowson's background as a journalist comes to the fore when he uses this archaeological evidence to provide vivid descriptions, such as what Pella might have been like. That is not to say he moves into the realm of fantasy, since the extensive footnotes show he has read widely from the literary sources. Nor is Rowson shy to use topographical descriptions in conjunction, as exemplified by the section on Alexander's childhood attendance at the religious centre of Dion.
Moreover, his narratives are clear and even arresting, most notably his chapter on the Battle of Chaeronea, combining Diodorus’ report with archaeological research and snippets from biographies. Rowson's account of the injuries on the excavated Theban bones reminds us about the human cost of Alexander's successes even this early in his career.
Furthermore, he looks ahead to the influences on Alexander's later actions. Most notably, he compares Plutarch's accounts of Philip's anger at Alexander with Alexander's murder of Cleitus the Black, demonstrating the similar temperaments of father and son. In this way, he helps us to understand the murder in the wider context of Alexander's character development from childhood.
In part two, Rowson investigates the evidence for Alexander's early reign. Again, he combines recent archaeology with literary sources to produce a gripping narrative about the events surrounding Philip's assassination, resulting in an atmosphere of threats and plots. Consequently, his argument is convincing, that Alexander was no more than necessarily violent on his ascension, considering the circumstances.
Building on this point, he devotes a chapter to the possible rediscovery of Philip's tomb at Vergina. Although on first reading this section feels like a tangent, he makes pertinent points, such as how the unfinished decoration shows Alexander's haste to move on from the funeral and tackle civil unrest. Therefore, the archaeological debates explored in that chapter are proved to be integral to his argument, at least when reread.
Likewise, Rowson effectively combines topographical descriptions of Thrace with Arrian's evidence (after a clear introduction to the provenance of this source) to illustrate the early signs of Alexander's military genius, displayed on his first independent campaign there; Rowson illustrates the daunting heights of the mountains, which emphasises all the more Arrian's portrayal of Alexander's clever tactics in defeating the tribes there. Moreover, the detail of the inscriptions there concerning the preservation of wood offer fascinating insight into Alexander's early preparations for his Persian campaign.
He has less physical evidence, as he admits, to compare to the literature about Alexander's siege of Thebes. Nevertheless, he matches precise examples in Arrian and Diodorus to what has been excavated at that location, analysing these matches to again convincingly argue that Alexander's eventual success was down to effective use of the efficient Macedonian military machine bequeathed by Philip.
Rowson finishes with a brief summary concerning Alexander's Asian conquests. Although this is compressed, Rowson still commendably lays out the relevant archaeological debates, such as whether Persepolis was burned accidentally or intentionally. The chapter thus proves a fitting climax to the book.
Aside from archaeology and novels, one might suggest Rowson could acknowledge, if not engage with, the leading modern scholars more explicitly. For example, he uses Miltiades Hatzopoulos’ argument that Philip organised Macedonian regional government; this is somewhat different to the view of Robin Lane Fox concerning the family clans in Macedonia, and comparison of the two perspectives would be interesting.
Furthermore, some may say Rowson should be more critical of evidence in primary literary sources. For example, he quotes Valerius Maximus as evidence that Philip II was generous with money, without acknowledging that the source is secondary and based on unverified evidence. Similarly, he uses Plutarch's memorable story of how Alexander tamed Bucephalus the horse, without questioning how an inexperienced teenager could accomplish such a deed.
The addenda to the book are very useful; Rowson includes maps which the reader finds oneself looking back at continually, whilst the images of wall paintings and archaeological remains help the reader to picture the scenes described by Rowson, contributing to the readability of the book. A glossary of key words also renders the book a useful reference point.
Since the book is so readable, it would be stimulating reading for sixth form students taking the Alexander module as part of the Ancient History A Level. Additionally, Rowson's (less-than-flattering) analysis of the evidence for Demosthenes could stimulate discussion in any sixth form class studying the Democracy and the Athenians option for Classical Civilisation A level. For teachers, the book is a timely and informative reminder of the enduring appeal of Alexander as a historical figure, well worth a read.
Open access
