![]() ![]() ![]() Then I aim to examine how it was that his empire failed. This requires a consideration of the kingdom of Macedon, and Philip’s work there. So this book aims to discuss how Alexander’s empire originated. And this is spelled out in the Preface (p. The title certainly implies that the failure of the Macedonian conquest and of the empire is directly attributable to Alexander. As far as the latter is concerned, it is really an assertion, since no serious effort is made to argue the case. But the discussion of everything from the rise of Macedon to the death of Pyrrhos of Epeiros in 272 BC in the space of 188 pages (excluding the conclusion, notes, bibliography and index) involves certain economies that, as one might guess before even reading the book, will prove detrimental either to the reader’s understanding of events or to the author’s main argument. The idea of studying Alexander’s achievement in context, that is, with reference to what preceded and followed his reign, is certainly a good one. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |