Alexander the Gerat by Philip Freeman

I enjoyed reading Freeman's book and I think that I would use a similar method if I were to write a book about Alexander. He wrote the book as a story describing what the figures may have been thinking and feeling giving the reader a look into the mind of a Macedonian far from home on campaign in asia. Describing battle scenes he make the reader feel the battle describing pain, fear, anger, and more. Rather than a dry and clinical text book approach to the history of Alexander he gives a more visceral approach similar to a fantasy novel. He also avoids using esoteric and foreign language making the book easy, as well as enjoyable, to read while still accurately conveying the facts and possibilities of Alexander's campaign across Asia.

Freeman also spends enough time describing the difficulties and contradictions in the sources of Alexander's story that the reader can gain a sense of what may have happened while also still having a firm grasp of the his opinion of what he thinks is the truth. Some of the other texts briefly touched on the difficulties with the sources and the contradictions between them, but did a poor job conveying the opinion of the author, or the reliability of the various sources. Freeman also spends some time describing the history of Alexander. He touched briefly on Alexander's father, mother, and mentors and how they shaped him and to give a sense of him as a person. Without an understanding of where Alexander came from it is more difficult to gauge the validity of the disparate sources. With an understanding of who Alexander was as a person researchers can better understand his personality and then make better determinations if something seems out of character or not.

From the perspective of a non-hist...

... middle of paper ...

... same time a weakness for an advanced reader who is wanting to expand their knowledge of the subject. While it may be a fun book to read I find it unlikely that any future historian would be likely to use it as a reliable source due to its subjectivity and conjecture and the interpreation of a third or fourth generation interpretation make its usefulness questionable.

Deciding the purpose for the book that I wish to write would heavily influence my overall decision on what style I would use. As a non-historian I appreciate the easy to read and flowing story narative that Freeman uses and I would most likely emulate his style for the same reason of wanting to write a book to introduce people to the topic. The only way to excite people about history is to grab their attention and create a desire for them to learn more which is difficult to do with a classic text book.