Written in the first half of the 19th century, this biography obviously has a different perspective than modern works. On this basis alone, I find it worthwhile.

Unfortunately, the work is not insightful in any meaningful way. I was left with the impression that the author is less an academic, and more a writer of a history book who relied upon secondary sources. It's fair to say that this book covers all of the main points but none of them in any particular detail.

Inexplicably, the last two chapters have little to do with Alexander, and instead present an overview of the history of Greece, the origins of religion, philosophy, theater, etc. An unusual, and sometimes rather odd work. ( )

Þessi bók var fyrst gefin út 1959 og hefur því miður ekki elst vel. Agnes Savill horfir gagnrýnilaust á þær heimildir sem henni þóknast og þó að í inngangi segi að viðhorf annarra fræðimanna séu líka kynnt svo lesandi geti mótað sér skoðun er þær skoðanir settar fram undir nákvæmri gagnrýni Savill's.
Savill hefur Alexander upp til skýjanna og ekkert fær þar skyggt á. Mögulegar heimildir um t.a.m. drykkju hans fást ekki staðist því að hann var allt of önnum kafinn og þar að auki of skynsamur til að stunda sumbl og svínarí. Þar að auki eru efnistökin og uppsetning þeirra samhengislaus að mér finnst.
Þannig er grísk og makedónsk menning og saga sett í síðustu kafla bókarinnar þegar réttara hefði verið að hafa slíka umfjöllun fyrr svo að hægt væri að meta frásögn um líf Alexanders út frá hans menningu og staðháttum. ( )

I stole another reader's because he said it first and said it best:
"Manages to make one of the most exciting men of the world boring. The first half is a fairly interesting recounting of Alexander's campaign and the 20 years after his death. The next quarter is a recounting of the other authors who have written about Alexander. This part is boring and can be skipped/skimmed. The last part is an overview of the Greek city-states and general life in Greece. It's a bit better but still pretty dry." (plagerized from Brian Schultze's review)
( )

This book is one of those where you reach a conclusion, then read the comments about the book on Amazon (none of which are 5-star) and reach a different conclusion. Savill's book has not been well-received.

What I got from Savill's telling is that Alexander was unique in that he desired to create a "Brotherhood of Man," with intermixed races and cultures under a Greek/Macedonian umbrella. He respected women and the cultures he conquered, integrating locals into his army and keeping locals in positions of authority.

The primary example of Alexander's respect for women is given by his treatment of the Persian King Darius' family and mother upon their capture. Darius' mother is reputed to have adopted Alexander as her own son, and Alexander had many episodes of treating captured women well (although how well is disputed, see the commenters). Savill hardly mentions Alexander's harem, making it sound like he fell in love with Roxana the Bactrian, whom he married.

Alexander dies halfway through the Savill text, and the rest is spent to explaining his impact and the battle for succession which came afterward. Is is rival claims to the throne which Savill claims led to certain leaders publishing false accounts of Alexander-- portraying him as a drunken tyrant. Savill is eager to counter those claims (which critics knock her for).

I listened to this book so it was hard to follow the battle strategies and geography without the aid of maps.

Knowing what I now know about information Savill apparently omitted, I'll give this book 3 stars out of 5. ( )

Manages to make one of the most exciting men of the world boring. The first half is a fairly interesting, if dry, recounting of Alexander's campaign and the 20 years after his death. The next quarter is a recounting of the other authors who have written about Alexander. This part is terribly boring and can be skipped/skimmed. The last part is an overview of the Greek city-states and general life in Greece. It's a bit better but still pretty dry.Overall the author comes across as opinionated and pompous through out the book. The audio book also suffers from the fact that parts of it were re-recorded and don't fit in seamlessly with the rest. This was very annoying at first but got less distracting as I listened. ( )