Michel Gareau's book on Charles LeBrun

[jan]

Amazement! I have found a great book which contains the most wonderful illustrations of Charles LeBrun's paintings of Alexander the Great. The copy that the editor and author include is just magnificent. The four major paintings that LeBrun accomplished are in vibrant color but along with those paintings include other black and white sketches well worth studying. I was impressed with how diligent LeBrun is in making certain that he uses historical accuracy for his detailed study, even though done early in his career. This is a great book. All lovers of Alexander should own it.

It is called The First Painter of King Louis XIV: Charles Le Brun by Michel Gareau.:

[marcus]

I have found a great book which contains the most wonderful illustrations of Charles LeBrun's paintings of Alexander the Great. The copy that the editor and author include is just magnificent. The four major paintings that LeBrun accomplished are in vibrant color but along with those paintings include other black and white sketches well worth studying. I was impressed with how diligent LeBrun is in making certain that he uses historical accuracy for his detailed study, even though done early in his career. This is a great book. All lovers of Alexander should own it.

It is called The First Painter of King Louis XIV: Charles Le Brun by Michel Gareau.:

Hi Jan,

Sounds great - thanks for the info. I've always liked the Le Brun paintings, although I haven't seen many of the sketches. The big canvasses are fantastic, though.

ATB

[amyntoros]

Yes, thanks for the referral, Jan. There are a considerable number of books of varying expense on Charles Le Brun and itGÇÖs difficult to know which one to choose.

Like most people, IGÇÖm partial to Le BrunGÇÖs paintings and prints of Alexander, but IGÇÖm also very fond of the work of Le BrunGÇÖs teacher, Francois Perrier. It was Perrier who, when in Italy, did an etching of a life-size statue of Alexander which is the only representation IGÇÖve ever seen of Alexander as Achilles. IGÇÖve yet to find either a photograph or the location of this statue and suspect it was either destroyed in one of the many wars since the 17th century or is hidden away in a private collection. Such a shame . . .

Best regards,

[jan]

Yes, Amyntoros, I just bought a copy that the bookseller told me is considered a collectible, so he gave me some advice on how to wrap it. I appreciated knowing that.

And at a used book store, I just purchased a paperback version of Peter Green's book.

There are several books on ATG now sitting on the shelf at our half-price bookstore. One by Graham Philips on the death of Alexander. A very fascinating book about the possible suspects who were present at the banquet if Alexander had been poisoned.

That book shows a picture of a tomb in Persepolis which is also considered the place where Alexander's body may be buried.

Another book had an illustration of Julius Caesar visiting the mummified version of Alexander's body. That particular picture fascinates me. Also a picture of Alexander in Persian dress sporting a beard is especially intriguing.

I could not afford to buy all the books yet. Decided that Green's would be the most worthwhile.

Jan

[marcus]

There are several books on ATG now sitting on the shelf at our half-price bookstore. One by Graham Philips on the death of Alexander. A very fascinating book about the possible suspects who were present at the banquet if Alexander had been poisoned.

Hi Jan,

Do not waste your money on the Graham Phillips book. It isn't fascinating, it's a load of nonsense. Believe me, I read it from start to finish and the whole thing is a clever fabrication of evidence.

I really cannot stress this enough. It is rubbish, without a shred of proper history in it.

All the best

[jan]

for telling me about its being rubbish. I wondered about the tomb of Alexander being at the burial site of the Persian Kings and why this is the only place that ever mentions it.

Maybe that explains also why a post I just wrote suddenly vanished from the air...it is o.k. The people I used in it are too controversial maybe...

Strange things happen all the while in electronic land around me, but that post just plainly disappeared.

And I won't repeat it anyway. I was just metioning a book by Nicholas Saunders again on the search for Alexander's tomb. It is chock full of information about the reasons itis so important to find the tomb. I am hoping now that it will never be found at all, as would the body be found in it if it has been moved about so often. I read somewhere that Octavius Caesar had broken Alexander's nose when he touched it.

Not funny to me! But if it had been that accessible, why should such a body ever survive? Worse than that was the idea that Napoleon might even have considered the idea of being buried in that tomb himself! No wonder they keep Alexander well hidden!

[marcus]

Maybe that explains also why a post I just wrote suddenly vanished from the air...it is o.k. The people I used in it are too controversial maybe...

Strange things happen all the while in electronic land around me, but that post just plainly disappeared.

A post on Pothos? Nuffink to do wiv me, yer H-onner. Maybe another moderator ... so you must have been very libellous!

Worse than that was the idea that Napoleon might even have considered the idea of being buried in that tomb himself! No wonder they keep Alexander well hidden!

Good point!

ATB

[sikander]

Greetings All,

Just to reassure everyone: when posts disappear without explanation,, it is usually either operator error or an internet fluke, not a moderator. In most cases, the posts never make it to the forum.

Unless a post personally attacks another poster, uses inappropriate language or addresses banned topics as stated in the preamble, moderators do not remove posts *unless* they are a repeat by error and the moderators are asked by the poster to edit one of the repeated posts out.

Regards,
Sikander

[jan]

Well, since all the people I named are presumably dead, they would have a tough time! But maybe I did use a live one whose name is unmentionable! We live in strange times.

My point is that Saunders seems to think that men who have believed themselves to be an Alexander have committed such terrible atrocities, especially Julian the Apostate, that it would be better that such slaughters never happen again. B oth Caligula and Caracalla appear to be madmen as well. All claimed ties to Alexander in one way or the other, usually, I guess through the belief that they were all Alexander reborn.

I am quite concerned that both the Christian faith and the Muslim faith have worked either for or against the legend of Alexander in ways that have changed his true story over the ages. Saunders devoted a full chapter to those who followed after him and it was quite fascinating to read.

The Muslim world seems to accept him as a holy man of God. The Christian world seems to simply want to ignore him altogether as a symbol of preChristian culture and faith.

But when I read that Napoleon wanted to use his sarcophagus for his own burial I thought that a bit much. That is empathy above and beyond simply flattery and imitation. It is bad enough to know that Julius Caesar cried in Spain simply because he had not attained so much glory as Alexander at his old age. Very amusing to me for Alexander to be used as a measuring stick for achievement and glory in the military arts.

Yet, the real monument to him today is in the number of cities that bear his name. As he was the supreme architect of cities!