Books about Alexander for schools

[catharine]

I would really welcome input from forum members on books about Alexander. I have just finished teaching an A-level course on Alexander for the first time and will be teaching it again next year. My problem is the lack of a suitable textbook for the course. The students have to read Plutarch and books 2, 3 and 7 of Arrian as sources; but they could really do with a coursebook which would give them a reasonably approachable, reasonably simple but fairly comprehensive account of Alexander's story by a (preferably) relatively unbiased modern historian. Ideally it would also cover important themes like Alexander's aims, Alexander as hero/god, Alexander as military commander and as administrator, relationship with officers and men Alexander and the Greeks, the Macedonian background etc. Added to that some nice maps and pictures would be good, and a decent index! I am tempted by Bosworth book which I think is very well-written - he is rather too anti-Alexander but this might provide a good counterbalance to Arrian/Plutarch. I'm also wondering about Worthington, Hammond, Cartledge. Any advice, views, recommendations gratefully received. Also, I'd like to thank all on this forum for the tremendous help it has provided to me all year as a source of information on all sorts of issues.

[spitamenes]

This might not be exactly what your looking for but, "in the footsteps of Alexander" by Michael Wood was always a good one just for basic knowledge and facts. Ok, its not at all what your looking for, but I still think its worth a look because of how passionate the man is about Alexander. He followed Alexanders campaign through every region and talks to the locals about how they veiw Alexander today, and also uses Arrian and Plutarch as his guides. Lots of nice images in the book as well. Nothing deep, but fun to read through and can easily grab someones imagination with its preface. Just a thought.
All the best
Spitamenes

[spitamenes]

You might be on the right track with Paul Cartledge. Peter Green is good too. I would check out Green and ill put in another good word for Michael Wood. There is also a four or five part PBS documentary that goes along with the book if you can find it. I used to have it but it was lost in a fire along with much of my Alexander collection. Please let us know what you decide on. I'm interested in hearing what you decide and why.
Happy huntiing,
Spitamenes

[Taphoi]

I would strongly recommend Mary Renault's Nature of Alexander for the purpose that you describe. It is just as accurate as any other modern work on Alexander, since they all have their flaws. However, it will score very highly with teenagers on readability and interest and it is fairly well-aligned with the source texts that you mention. If you want them to lap the subject up, this really is your best option.

Best wishes,

Andrew

[spitamenes]

I would say Peter Green might be a little much for what your asking, so ill go ahead and retract that book from the few I advised. Mary Renault is one that didn't even come to mind, but I agree, that's another worth checking into. And probably the winner so far.

[spitamenes]

Thanks Andrew, now I have to go re~buy the nature of Alexander since you successfully reminded me of it.

[marcus]

I would say Peter Green might be a little much for what your asking, so ill go ahead and retract that book from the few I advised. Mary Renault is one that didn't even come to mind, but I agree, that's another worth checking into. And probably the winner so far.

Yes, I would say that Peter Green is not suitable for exciting teenagers about Alexander. I endorse Andrew's suggestion of Renault.

ATB

[catharine]

Many thanks both, I shall enjoy checking out your suggestions! Another teacher has also recommended me Ruth Sheppard "Alexander and his Enemies" - do you know this one?

[marcus]

Many thanks both, I shall enjoy checking out your suggestions! Another teacher has also recommended me Ruth Sheppard "Alexander and his Enemies" - do you know this one?

I think this is the one meant. It's fine, although it is primarily about his military. But it's decently illustrated, and is as good as any to get students interested.

To be honest, I think it does rather depend on exactly what you want the book for. To use as a 'text book', I'm not sure I would recommend Renault. But it rather depends on what the A-Level syllabus expects you to cover. Which exam board is it? If I know that then I can look at the specification, and might be able to make a more suitable recommendation.

Another question would be - what else are you doing in their A-Level (in terms of other Greek units, and Roman units)? And what, if any, exposure have they previously had to Ancient History?

All the best

[Taphoi]

To use as a 'text book', I'm not sure I would recommend Renault.

It depends on which edition of Renault's book you get. The paperback editions I think cut a lot of things out. However, the original 1975 hardback edition, which is still widely and cheaply available, has a good index, a fairly good summary of ancient sources and a rather nice fold-out colour map, which is much larger and clearer than most. The whole book is copiously illustrated with ancient artefacts, views of ancient sites (including a particularly stunning 2-page photo of Ecbatana) and a few artist's impressions of things like the catafalque, which are based on descriptions in the ancient sources. It would be true to say that this is a romantic version of Alexander's career, but that is what's needed to capture the imagination. She is relatively good at presenting both sides on controversial points. For example, she says that Thebes became a massacre and points out that some people think that Alexander should have intervened, but she notes (insightfully I think) that in the particular circumstances this would have been difficult. Nevertheless, the best thing about this book is that as an acclaimed novelist she really knows how to write so as to hold the interest of the reader. Her writing has pace and colour and drama - not something that can be said of all Alexander books.

Best wishes,

Andrew

[marcus]

To use as a 'text book', I'm not sure I would recommend Renault.

It depends on which edition of Renault's book you get. The paperback editions I think cut a lot of things out. However, the original 1975 hardback edition, which is still widely and cheaply available, has a good index, a fairly good summary of ancient sources and a rather nice fold-out colour map, which is much larger and clearer than most. The whole book is copiously illustrated with ancient artefacts, views of ancient sites (including a particularly stunning 2-page photo of Ecbatana) and a few artist's impressions of things like the catafalque, which are based on descriptions in the ancient sources. It would be true to say that this is a romantic version of Alexander's career, but that is what's needed to capture the imagination. She is relatively good at presenting both sides on controversial points. For example, she says that Thebes became a massacre and points out that some people think that Alexander should have intervened, but she notes (insightfully I think) that in the particular circumstances this would have been difficult. Nevertheless, the best thing about this book is that as an acclaimed novelist she really knows how to write so as to hold the interest of the reader. Her writing has pace and colour and drama - not something that can be said of all Alexander books.

I agree with all you say about the book, Andrew; but it wouldn't do as an A-level text book. If it's just to capture the imagination, be easily read, and still give information, it's great.

ATB

[marcus]

Catharine,

Many thanks both, I shall enjoy checking out your suggestions! Another teacher has also recommended me Ruth Sheppard "Alexander and his Enemies" - do you know this one?

I think this is the one meant. It's fine, although it is primarily about his military. But it's decently illustrated, and is as good as any to get students interested.

To be honest, I think it does rather depend on exactly what you want the book for. To use as a 'text book', I'm not sure I would recommend Renault. But it rather depends on what the A-Level syllabus expects you to cover. Which exam board is it? If I know that then I can look at the specification, and might be able to make a more suitable recommendation.

Another question would be - what else are you doing in their A-Level (in terms of other Greek units, and Roman units)? And what, if any, exposure have they previously had to Ancient History?

All the best

Sorry about my governmental-style U-turns on the Renault book.

Catharine, I've looked at the first posts you made and I now recall that you're doing AQA, right? Well, I've just printed out the AQA specification, and will have a think about it over the weekend. I'll see if I can come up with more suggestions. I have to say that, considering the breadth of subject knowledge they specify, it's a bit strange that they specify only Arrian books 2, 3 and 7. Most odd!

One question: part of the specification talks about "the aims, methods, sources and judgements of Arrian and Plutarch and problems in their use as evidence". Have you got any past-paper questions that might indicate the sort of questions they might ask on this?

ATB

[Taphoi]

I agree with all you say about the book, Andrew; but it wouldn't do as an A-level text book. If it's just to capture the imagination, be easily read, and still give information, it's great.

Reluctantly and sorrowfully, I am compelled by my own recollections to concur, for it is certain in retrospect that the principal qualifying criteria for A-level textbooks are that they should be unimaginative, not very informative and definitely completely unreadable. Catherine: be kind to the educational environment and go Green

Best wishes,

Andrew

[marcus]

I agree with all you say about the book, Andrew; but it wouldn't do as an A-level text book. If it's just to capture the imagination, be easily read, and still give information, it's great.

Reluctantly and sorrowfully, I am compelled by my own recollections to concur, for it is certain in retrospect that the principal qualifying criteria for A-level textbooks is that they should be unimaginative, not very informative and definitely completely unreadable. Catherine: be kind to the educational environment and go Green

Best wishes,

Andrew

However, that isn't the point. You get a bonus point for the humorous interjection, but you obviously haven't read any A-Level text books for a while, Andrew!

To be honest, the biggest problem is that insufficient numbers of people are doing subjects such as Classical Civilisation, that it is not economically viable for the exam boards to produce text books, hence Catharine's need to ask for advice. If AQA (the board in question) were to produce a text book, then I have no doubt it would be informative and readable, as I have had good experience with their History text books. I cannot vouch for "imaginative", but that isn't a skill required at A-Level.

All the best

[spitamenes]

Marcus,
I believe the reason behind books 2,3 and 7 might be because 2 includes the battle of Issus, 3 includes the battle of Gaugamela, and 3... well, I would guess Alexanders death. Wouldn't it be best though to save Arrian foraftera basic introduction if they are to start with chapter 2? Or is that probably the plan? Because chapter 2 just jumps right into places and people whom the students haven't been introduced to yet.