The Young Alexander: The Making of Alexander the Great

by Alex Rowson

This is an astonishing new account of Alexander the Great – one of the most important figures of the ancient world, whose earlier years have until now been a mystery.

Alexander the Great’s story often reads like fiction: son to a snake-loving mother and a battle-scarred father; tutored by Aristotle; a youth from the periphery of the Greek world who took part in his first campaign aged sixteen, becoming king of Macedon at twenty and king of Asia by twenty-five; leading his armies into battle like a Homeric figure.

Each generation has peered through the frosted glass of history and come to their own conclusion about Alexander, be it enlightened ruler, military genius, megalomaniac, drunkard or despot. Yet the first two decades of his life have until now been a mystery – a matter of legend and myth. This extraordinary history draws on new discoveries in archaeology to tell the early story of Alexander and his rise – including detail on the tempestuous relationship between Alexander’s parents, Philip and the Molossian princess Olympias, his education by Aristotle and the strict military training which would serve him so well in later years. And more than ever, it emerges, the story of Alexander’s reign confronts us with difficult questions that are still relevant today – of the relationship between East and West, the legacy of colonialism and the impacts of authoritarian rule.

Drawing together startling modern archaeological discoveries, this book brings Alexander’s ancient world back into focus. With each fragment of this shattered past, excavated by shovel, pick and trowel, a new history is being written. The forgotten story of young Alexander is being unearthed.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Biography, Historical, Ancient History, Greece, Ancient

336 pages, Hardcover

First published April 14, 2022

Reviews

[Juliew. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Horrible time trying to rate this.While there isn't much new here I admit I was charmed by the lovely writing, organization and research that must have went into this work.However, I also admit I picked this up with a deep curiosity to know how the author would fill the gaps in Alexander's young life.Unfortunately the details of the lives of Philip,Olympias and the topography of Macedonia just don't fill them.The author was fair to the ancient sources on controversial topics as well as non controversial ones.His writing is very descriptive and vivid putting you in the palaces,battle fields and campaign tents of Alexander's life and reign.Highly recommend

[Faustibooks · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Love him or loathe him, there has never been anyone quite like Alexander."

This was a very good book about the early life of Alexander the Great. The story of Alexander's youth and upbringing is usually a part historians overlook or sometimes even avoid. This can be explained by the lack of clear and useful sources and that Alexander's later life is way more exciting to write about. Rowson however, does an amazing job at bringing light to this underappreciated part of Alexander's life. He mostly looks at the events before Alexander was born and the things that were going on while he was still a child. By looking at Alexander's surroundings, his relationship with his family members, and his education and upbringing, we can somehow see how the young Alexander became the brave, bold and ambitious Alexander the Great.

The book is filled with many entertaining and well-known anecdotes of his youth, such as his first meeting with his beloved horse Boukephalas or when he was educated by Aristotle. Aside from his other teachers and tutors such as Leonidas, we meet many other characters that play a huge part in Alexander's later life. From his secretary Eumenes to his many Companions and future generals. After his upbringing, his father gets murdered and Alexander becomes king at 20, which forms the second part of the book, going more in detail into the first acts and campaigns of his reign. The book ends with Alexander and his army setting foot in Asia in 334 BC when he was just 21 years old.

"As the ship ran onto shore, the hull grating against the sand of a new continent, Alexander stood on the prow fully armed, ready for battle. He launched his spear into Asian land, then, leaping from the ship and into the surf, waded forward to claim his prize: his spear-won territory."

Rowson is a talented writer and skillfully manages to fill many gaps while also clearly explaining things that are debated. I also really enjoyed his description of the archaeological discovery of the tombs at Vergina. Many times throughout the book, Rowson looks at archaeological finds, some of them even very recent, which is very exciting to me. This book, however, is not a full biography of Alexander the Great of course, so I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to someone who doesn't know much about him. To those who do, this book will be a great addition to your library!

[Siegrit · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alexander de Grote kende ik tot nu toe alleen van zijn grote veroveringen in Azië.
Alex Dawson laat in ‘De jonge Alexander’ zien hoe Alexander ‘de Grote’ werd. Zonder zijn vader koning Filippos II was Alexander nooit zo ver gekomen. ‘De jonge Alexander’ beschrijft tot in detail hoe de regeerperiode van Filippos II het fundament is van de zegetocht van Alexander. Daarnaast beschrijft het boek het onderwijs dat hij gehad heeft en de complexe familierelaties aan het hof. Alles bij elkaar een solide basis die Alexander voorbereidde voor zijn regeerperiode.

Dawson brengt de jeugd van Alexander tot leven door een mix van archeologische vondsten en landschapsbeschrijvingen.
De vele afbeeldingen en kaartjes in het boek zijn een fijne toevoeging om een voorstelling te maken van de omgeving en de cultuur van Macedonië in de 4e eeuw voor Christus.

De Nederlandse vertaling door Maarten van der Werf en Sjaak de Jong leest erg prettig weg.

[Duncan Swann · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating insight, not so much specifically about Alexander, but more the customs of the time and how that may have shaped the young King. Good mix of archaeological findings, battle recounts and sources of scandal.

[Saimi Korhonen · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Love him or loathe him, there has never been anyone quite like Alexander."

In The Young Alexander, Alex Rowson shines a light on Alexander the Great's young years - years when he was not yet the conquering king or known as "the Great", when he was just a baby, a toddler, a young boy and a promising prince. Utilising both literary and archeological evidence, Rowson charts his life and those of the people around him, the people who shaped him, until that moment in 334 BC when he crosses the Hellespont into Asia.

I loved this book. Alexander the Great is my favorite historical figure of all time and I have read quite a bit about him. But this is the first book I have ever come across that is focused solely on his life BEFORE his conquests in Persia. What Rowson manages is no easy feat – there are no surviving original sources from Macedonia about Alexander and the contemporary texts we know of, like his general and successor Ptolemy's book on his life, have not survived. The first literary sources we have of him were written around 300 years later. Rowson manages to create a compelling book and a believable, fact-based account of his life relying on the literary sources we do have but also on archeological evidence. I am not an archeologist but the field fascinates me. It is incredible to me how one little shard of pottery can reveal so much and make us rethink what we know of a time and a people. The significance of archeology was truly hammered home for me when I learned that Thrace was an illiterate culture – all we have left is material culture. Rowson, as an archeology expert, is able to explain to readers like me who are not familiar with the field, how Macedonian culture has been unearthed, the challenges people have faced when trying to, for example, time certain findings and just how much we can learn about ruins, shards, stones, armour and other remnants of this world long gone. I was excited to learn, for example, just how unique a find Philip's tomb in Vergina is – it was the Tutankhamun of Macedonian studies. Rowson also never pretends that his version is concrete truth. Writing about ancient history is, even at the best of times, making educated guesses.

It was fun learning about what Alexander's education and training might've been like, what kind of clothes he would've worn (the Kausia hat sure was fashionable) and what types of stories are told of him when he was a kid. Apparently he loved playing music and was asked, by his dad, once after he performed on the kithara, if he isn't embarrassed to play so well (I guess princes, while they should know how to play, shouldn't be too devoted to the arts). And then of course there is the famous story of how he tamed his legendary horse, the loyal and frankly iconic Boukephalas. The image Rowson paints us of Alexander is one of an ambitious, brave, determined, proud, egotistical man capable of immense cruelty and immense love. As Rowson put it: "–he was something of a human dynamo, a freak, bottled lightning." Rowson has to make guesses regarding what he thought and felt in certain moments, but he bases his guesses on what facts are available. When he says Alexander was plagues by a fear of remaining second to his father, he tells us how he, later in his life in Asia, killed his own general, Kleitos, when drunk at a party after Kleitos reminded him of his father's greatness and criticised Alexander's egotistic stories. Apparently, Alexander threw an apple at him and then ran him through, despite Ptolemy holding him by the waist, which says a lot about his pride and petulance. His pride resulted in another chaotic feast moment when he was a young man when he threw a goblet at Attalos who made a snide remark while toasting his daughter's marriage to Philip about Alexander being illegitimate. His capacity for brutality is already apparent when he is young – he leads his first campaign at the age of 16 when he is made regent, he excels in battle alongside his father and, when he becomes king, he orchestrates a cleanup of sorts of his rivals to secure his position, he campaigns against Thracians and Illyrians, burns a city to the ground and has Thebes decimated. Later in his life, he became even more violent. Rowson does a good job reminding the reader that while it is easy to get lost in this glorious, dramatic story of this larger-than-life man, it is important to remember the human cost of his conquests: tens of thousands of people dead or enslaved, whole cities and peoples destroyed. He wrote: "–killing, as the eminent historian Brian Bosworth once wrote, is arguably what Alexander did best." Rowson's Alexander is a complex man, a singular being but also someone utterly shaped by his home, culture and the people around him, especially his mother and father.

Philip is often overshadowed by his more famous son but he was a monumental figure in his own right. Before him, Macedonia was a land of separate clans and kingdoms who often quarrelled despite sharing cultural similarities. What first began as some conquests and ally ships became Philip taking over the whole region with the grand army he reformed utterly and him eventually making his way to the south, to conquer all of Hellas. He looted and destroyed cities, like his son would later do. But he was not just a brute conqueror. He could be lenient and kind when he wanted to, and he was a master of PR (something Alexander surely learned from him). He fought in three Sacred Wars over the site of Delphi, established the League of Corinth (a coalition of Greek city states with Philip as their leader – officially an organisation to ensure peace and in reality a way for Philip to establish himself as the uncontested leader of Greece), began planning a panhellenic expedition to Persia and decimated his enemies, the joint forces of Thebes and its allies, including Athens, at the battle of Chaironeia (in which the Sacred Band fell). When he was killed and Alexander took the throne (which he did with the crucial support of Philip's men), the stage was set for him to become great. Rowson claims, with ample proof to back his claim up: "In more than one way, if there had been no Philip there would have been no Alexander the Great." Yes, Alexander had to wrestle Hellas under his control after he became king and fought many a battle to do so, but without Philip, he wouldn't have had the best army in the world, a shitload of money, a bunch of significant allies and important forts and infrastructure. And Philip didn't teach him just warfare – it is clear Alexander paid attention to the way Philip led, the way he depicted himself and took in his stories of their divine ancestry (through him, Alexander was said to be related to Heracles and Zeus). Alexander is unlike anyone, and I'd say he is greater than his father, but he wouldn't have been able to do nearly as much as he did without Philip. Their relationship is fascinating because it seems to have been a fluctuating one: they were said to be quite close, and there are moments when we hear of Philip being super proud of him, but they also clashed severely. After one clash, Alexander and his mom went into self-imposed exile.

Alexander's mother is not to be forgotten when speaking of important influences on Alexander. Most of what we have left of Olympias in terms of sources is highly coloured by the writers' assumptions about her and she is mostly remembered as this violent, exotic, crazy snake lady. Rowson does a great job unpacking the layers of misogyny that have shaped our image of her. He, for example, explains that Olympias having snakes wouldn't have been all that strange. There is evidence of women, and even kids, at this time, keeping pet snakes, and snakes were crucial to the rites of Dionysos, whose priestess Olympias most likely was. Snakes also had a lot of symbolic significance: they were guides, connected to chtonic gods and sacred. While Philip taught Alexander how to be a king, Olympias seemed to have bolstered his confidence and belief in his own divinity. It is said she told him he was the son fo Zeus and, through her, he considered himself descended from his greatest hero, Achilles. Even though their relationship had its ups and downs – Rowson said that, for example, Alexander didn't like his mom killing his dad's other wife after Philip's death, which I can understand: it doesn't look good if a king cannot even control his own mama – but it seems they were always close. They kept in touch when he was in Asia and she was clearly someone he trusted and valued. Rowson even suggests that Alexander's era atypical respect for women might've been Olympias's influence – whether that is or isn't the case, growing up with her would've definitely taught him how women can wield power.

I loved learning more about ancient Macedonian culture. I knew they were considered barbarous by Athenians even though they shared lots of cultural stuff, like belief in the same gods but I didn't know exactly why. According to Athenians, Macedonians drank way too much (even UNDILUTED wine, the shock!), had strange customs, were way too violent, spoke in a crude dialect and blah blah blah. Macedonians did love their drink and theirs was a hyper masculine warrior culture that valued horsemanship and battle prowess, as well as gift-giving and lavish feasts. They didn't value "unnecessary" comforts like bathing in warm water or always reclining while eating. The image of macedonians as barbaric reminded me a lot of the image, propped up by the English, of Scotland – another "highlander" culture – as barbarous, odd and inherently less than compared to England. We shouldn't, because of the biases of our sources, trust them implicitly. Macedonia had a thriving art scene, they valued piety and while they were proud of their own heritage, they were open to new ideas, customs and fashions. Alexander would become infamous for his desire to mix Persian and Greek customs. What was fascinating to me was the Macedonian approach to kingship. There were no strict laws defining what a king was or could do, and there seems to have been councils to support him. Kings were expected to protect their people, fight for them, dispense justice and lead religious ceremonies, and if they failed to do so, the Macedonians were above overthrowing their leaders. Rowson said that it was said that more kings had been killed by their people than enemies in Macedonian history. The undefinedness of this role made it something you can make your own but also dangerous: if you were considered unworthy, you could be replaced. There was always some uncle or cousin carrying the same royal, divine blood, waiting to be given the throne. Alexander, and his father before him, made the kingship unlike anything it had ever been. After them, Macedonia dwindled and eventually fell to Rome.

I would happily recommend this book to anyone interested in Alexander the Great. His later years, his time in Asia and so on, is so often the focus of books, documentaries and podcasts, while his early life is summed up in a sentence or two. But to understand him, his personality, his goals and his seemingly unfailing belief in his talents and divinity, you must understand where he came from, who were his idols, who were his family, what kind of culture he grew up in and what happened right before him. No one is just one thing, and he was not just a conqueror. He was once a baby and a toddler, a kid playing with his friends, a teen on the cusp of battle, a son arguing with his dad and being comforted by his mom, and a young man who gained everything through the brutal murder of his father, which most likely happened in front of him (even if he lowkey did want to already be king and wasn't super close with Philip at that point, that must've fucked him up). I am so happy Rowson decided to take on this surely daunting and difficult project – he did it wonderfully.


Here are some interesting facts I learned:

- Alexander's tomb disappeared around 3rd or 4th century AD.

- Pella was destroyed in 1st century BC because of an earthquake. It remained lost and quite forgotten until 1957. The Pella that has been excavated is not exactly the Pella Alexander was born into: the ruins that are visible now were built later, during the Hellenistic period.

- Alexander's birthday is (most likely) the 20th of July, 356 BC.

- It is possible Euripides (whom Alexander greatly admired) wrote the Bacchae when visiting Macedonia's king Archealos's court.

- Women of northern Hellas were often more free than their counterparts in, say, Athens. Illyrian women fought in battles and taught their children warfare, Molossian women could act as regents and in some areas they could, for example, own property.

- The Argead clan, Alexander's family, began to take power in Macedonia mid 7th century BC. They were wiped out after Alexander's death in various power struggles.

- Macedonians were big drinkers and known to participate in competitive drinking during feasts. There are sources that claim some men died as a result of these competitions.

- Aigai (modern Vergina) was the ceremonial capital of Macedonia, while Pella was the political hub of the land.

- When Alexander was nine, an Athenian embassy visited Macedonia. One of the ambassadors, the orator Demosthenes, made lewd jokes about him while another, an older man, was accused of trying to seduce the prince. Yikes.

- None of Alexander's contemporary rivals accused him of being part of his dad's assassination, so it is safe to assume he was unaware of the plot.

- Alexander, as a young boy, liked to play kithara, perform and play ball games. His education was a mix of gruelling physical training (combat skills, riding, running etc.) and intellectual pursuits (politics, debate, oratory, literature, poetry, Homer, healing/medicine etc.) with Aristotle.

- It is possible Hephaestion and Olympias exchanged bitchy letters about Alexander – Olympias apparently didn't like how close Hephaestion was with her son.

- Alexander was known, as a leader, to visit his men, chat with them, help the injured, march when they marched and, above all, fight alongside them. He took risks with them. This earned him their undying loyalty (well, undying until India).

- Alexander famously named a city after his horse, but he also might've named a city after his dead hunting dog, Peritas. The first time he named a city after himself – Alexandropolis – was when he was 16 and claimed the city of the Thracian Maidoi.

- Alexander's half-brother Arrhidaios was disabled. He was left alive when Alexander and his allies got rid of his rivals after he became king: this showcases just how little people with disabilities were thought of. Arrhidaios was a prince, but because he was disabled, he wasn't a threat. Fun fact: he did become king, after his brother died, and ruled as co-kings with Alexander IV until both were killed.

- He visited Athens, as far as we know, only once. This was after the battle of Chaironeia where Athens and its allies were defeated (and Macedonia became the uncontested superpower of Hellas).

- Based on his bones, Philip II was max 170cm tall. Alexander was also short.

- It seems that in Macedonia, unlike in Athens, for example, homosexual relationships between men of the SAME age were relatively accepted. This means that if Alexander and Hephaestion were lovers, it wouldn't necessarily have been seen as too odd.

- Alexander's first campaign as king was to Thrace to conquer rebellions.

- Philip's untouched tomb was discovered in 1977, alongside a tomb that probably belonged to Alexander IV and another whose original owner is not known. This discovery was the Tutankhamun of Macedonian studies.

- Alexander's full sister, Kleopatra, was married to her maternal uncle, Alexander. Delightful.

- When in Asia, Alexander sent letters to Aristotle and apparently sent him information about local plants and animals to help him in his research.

- When Alexander ordered Thebes (officially after the League of Corinth decreed it) decimated, he declared the poet Pindar's home be left untouched because he admired his works. He also let priestesses and priests leave the city unharmed. The destruction of a city as mythically and historically significant as Thebes is a low point in his career. Later, he also destroyed Persepolis, an ancient grand city – another low point.

- At the final party before he died, Alexander apparently performed a scene from Euripides's Andromache.

- Demostheses, great Athenian orator and constant thorn in Philip and Alexander's sides, took his own life after he was forced on the run after Alexander's death (and after taking up his cause of Greek freedom again, hoping that the death of the "tyrant" would make it possible for Athens to free itself). He was a great figure and speaker but also catastrophically bad at predictions – "Surely Philip won't attack us, surely Alexander is just a useless boy, surely we should help Thebes revolt..."

[Lydia · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have read a great many books about Alexander and so, while I'm always up for reading another, I wasn't sure whether this one would actually have much to tell me that I didn't already know. While it's certainly true that it doesn't contain any miraculous revelations, its focus on Alexander's youth and its exploration specifically of geography and (relatively) new archaeological evidence offers a perspective that is genuinely refreshing and did make me feel like I had learnt something new. It's engagingly written, too, with as clear a love for the places it describes as its central enigmatic figure. A really interesting read.

[Maddy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am Alexandros

[Katie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting and enjoyable - focuses on the atmosphere and cultural context in which Alexander lived, with a clear delight in (and explanation of) archaeological sources and discoveries.

[Francis · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ik heb dit boek finaal moeten opgeven na 70 pagina's. Ongelooflijk saai taalgebruik, ellenlange beschrijvingen waar je niks aan hebt, en soms een twintigtal namen op één pagina! Ik kan niet blijven ploeteren. Lezen moet leuk blijven! Misschien dat iemand die de ganse Griekse mythologie uit zijn hoofd kent zich hiermee kan amuseren, maar ik alvast niet.

[Stephanie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Content mostly focuses on Philip II's reign and Macedonian culture, warfare, and history. Majority of it took place during Alexander III's youth but not enough references to him to justify the book title.

[Walker Greene · Rating 5 out of 5]

this was really great :)

[Carol Griffiths · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an excellent account of the early years of Alexender the Great. Since he died in his early thirties he was always young, but this book deals with his life and career up to the time he embarked on his conquest of Asia. The narrative is very readable and includes records of recent archaeological discoveries.

[Wilma Hartman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Een prachtig hardcover boek vertelt het verhaal van de jonge Alexander die later uitgroeide tot de beroemde Alexander de Grote. Over Alexander de Grote zijn al veel verhalen geschreven, films en documentaires gemaakt. Maar wie was de jonge Alexander. Hoe kan het dat deze jonge man die op zijn vijfentwintigste regeerde over half Azië en op tweeëndertig jarige leeftijd overleed zo groot is geworden. Toch is er bijna niets bekend over zijn jonge jaren. Toch heeft Alex Rowson juist over die periode een boek geschreven, opgebouwd aan de hand van archeologische vondsten van de laatste jaren in Macedonië en op die manier de puzzel gelegd.
De schrijfstijl is filmisch en meeslepend, ondanks dat je echt je aandacht erbij moet houden, wordt je meegenomen naar Macedonië en de Griekse mythologie. Ze geeft veel achtergrond informatie over het gebied waar het verhaal zich afspeelt, Macedonië. Je krijgt beelden voorgeschoteld die je nieuwsgierig maken en dan ga je op je telefoon de plaatjes erbij zoeken. Normaal gesproken vind ik het lastig om toch steeds wat op te zoeken maar hier irriteerde het me niet, het gaf me net wat extra’s. Heel bijzonder dat het verhaal en de schrijfstijl dit oproept, tenminste bij mij, zonder dat ik het gevoel had dat het verhaal niet compleet was. Ik ken een beetje de verhalen van de Griekse mythologie maar als je die verhalen al wat beter kent heb je hier echt een voordeel, soms duizelde de hoeveelheid aan Griekse namen mij.
Alex Rowson heeft wat mij betreft een heel knap geschreven boek afgeleverd dat ondanks de minimale puzzelstukjes toch een heel compleet beeld geeft van de jonge Alexander. Het boek is heel compleet opgebouwd met kaarten, foto’s, glossarium (lijst van belangrijke mensen, volkeren en plaatsen) en verwijzingen (voetnoten). Het is geen boek voor een breed publiek maar mensen die de moeite willen nemen om dit boek te lezen zullen een bijzondere schat ontdekken

[Greg Mcneilly · Rating 4 out of 5]

THE YOUNG ALEXANDER: The Making of Alexander the Great | Alex Rowson, William Collins, (2022) 6070p.

Most know the general arch of the life and campaigns of Alexander the Great, this book, as the title suggests, focuses on the pre-military experiences of the man who would never lose a battle, conquer the known world and die of a fever at 32.

Given the lack of source material, the author takes a deep dive into new archeological discoveries to create the context in which Alexander was reared - not necessarily his specific story. Although, where evidence is available, the collective biography of the young prince is retold in vivid detail.

At age 14, Alexander was sent to be tutored by Aristotle - clearly an unparalleled benefit. The Stagirite was no doubt a tough instructor, given his infamous dictum, “drive those in front hard and leave those who can’t keep up.” Nevertheless, Aristotle used a technique that would still serve students better today: the walking classroom. Instruction was delivered amidst a stroll.

But even before his teenage years, there was something different about Alexander -from the taming of Bucephalus to the questioning of Persian diplomats on the logistics of their armies to his early prowess with a sword and javelin. The author argues that his father - King Philip II - was the single largest influence in his life and not his mother, Olympias, who claimed lineage from Achilles. He argues that the Iliad - as a framework for an honor code - was Alexander’s sacred text.

He had a near Spartan upbringing - no hot baths, no lying on couches until he was capable of killing a boar, and days spent in tense physical conditioning - certainly helped shape his iron will.

Recent archeological discoveries have uncovered King Philip’s burial place and palace and confirmed that he and his son both had red hair. The latter reinforces previously known fragments that suggested there was a Celt lineage. After all, Philip was done in by the hand of his daughter as she thrust a Celtic dagger deep between his ribs.

Because Rowson pulls together discoveries on the generalities of Macedonian society at the time of Alexander’s birth and confers specifics upon the young Alexander, serious scholars will be rightly skeptical. But to the curious of the formative inputs on Alexander’s life, this new work is a welcome and substantial bridge.

[Marina Kozareva · Rating 4 out of 5]

4/5

Young Alexander: The Making of Alexander the Great by Alex Rowson was a fantastic read.

While there isn’t much new here in terms of discoveries, I was charmed by Rowson’s elegant writing, clear organization, and the depth of research that clearly went into this work. I picked it up with a curiosity about how the author would approach the many gaps in Alexander’s early life, and although some of those remain unfilled - the focus on Philip, Olympias, and the topography of Macedonia doesn’t always provide the answers I hoped for - the book still succeeds in painting a vivid portrait of the world that shaped Alexander.

Rowson is fair in his treatment of both controversial and uncontested topics, grounding the narrative carefully in the ancient sources. His prose is descriptive and immersive, transporting the reader into palaces, battlefields, and campaign tents. More importantly, he shines a spotlight on a part of Alexander’s life that is often overlooked or dismissed by historians - the story of his youth and upbringing.

The book explores the environment Alexander grew up in: his relationship with his parents, his education, and the influences of his tutors and companions. Through this lens, we can begin to understand how the young boy became the ambitious, fearless figure history remembers. Anecdotes such as his first encounter with his beloved horse Boukephalas, his lessons under Aristotle, and the guidance of tutors like Leonidas make the story especially engaging. Rowson also introduces us to figures who would later shape Alexander’s career, from his secretary Eumenes to his early companions and generals.

The second half of the book transitions to Alexander’s first years as king following Philip’s assassination, charting his early campaigns and consolidations of power. It concludes with Alexander and his army stepping into Asia in 334 BC, when he was just twenty one - a fitting place to leave the story, right at the threshold of his legendary conquests.

Overall, this is a well-written, engaging, and insightful book. It doesn’t revolutionize our understanding of Alexander, but it illuminates an often neglected chapter of his life with style and clarity. Highly recommended for anyone interested in Alexander the Great or ancient history more broadly.

[Kacie · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a great non-fiction read and a really nice introduction to the life of Alexander the Great. Despite being an avid reader of antiquity-based non-fiction, I haven't read too much about Macedonia or Alexander the Great himself, and had embarrassingly never heard of Philip II.

It's a fun book to pick up if you want to know more! I find it hard to rate non-fiction - because how do you rate learning? - so take the four starts as an arbitrary signal that I liked reading this, but it didn't change my life :)

It was a nice little interlude to the 15+ fantasy books I've read so far this month.

[Danielle · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really loved this book. It's engaging and well written, and I found it hard to put down a lot. It presents information in a very accessible way, which I always like. I also loved the focus on archaeology, and I liked how it told the story of Alexander through the story of Philip and the histories of Macedon and other nations. Really worth a read. However, it felt very un-edited to me, which is a little annoying but didn't ruin anything, and I felt a little deceived because it ended up being a lot more about Philip and other people, like Demosthenes, than I'd anticipated. That said, it's still a book I highly recommend. A must for any fan of Alexander the Great, in my opinion.

[May Phoenix · Rating 4 out of 5]

3,75⭐️

It was a good book, but a little wordy at times. I wasn't interested in what the trees look like or the birds singing near archaeological sites.

The book follows mostly Alexander's youth, the Macedonian lifestyle and Phillip's conquests. I wish there had been a greater focus on the mother, sister and half-sisters of Alexander.

All the information from the archaeological resources were occasionally confusing to read, as it read too much like an adventure than strict non-fiction, and I feel like more plans and diagrams could have been far more useful than photographs of the current landscapes.

Overall a good book but I feel like I haven't learned enough still.

[Amber · Rating 4 out of 5]

Slightly biased because this is part of my focus area in my field, but generally a good overview of Alexander as he goes through childhood and adolescence into becoming the leader he was. Chronological, some of the chapter titles aren’t very clear on what you can expect, but the chapters are not overly complicated, sometimes there’s a lot of information that isn’t entirely relevant but it can be overlooked with little to no issue. The initial part that went on about the historical fiction book could have been skipped for me, I understand what the point was of it but the message would have come across without the tangent.

[Seolhe · Rating 4 out of 5]

3,5 stars

A solid overview of the early life of Alexander the Great, with a great emphasis on his historical and cultural context. It's well structured and very readable, and objectively I don't have anything bad to say about it.

Really, the main problem here is that I didn't really get anything new out of this, and I grew increasingly bored as I read.
By no means would I consider this the fault of either the author or the book, so take this with a grain of salt. I would still recommend this for people interested in the topic.

[William Conboy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a really good read and I highly recommend it to those interested in ancient history and archaeology. It brings the personalities of Philip and Alexander to bear and shows their flaws and the flaws of Ancient Greek society in detail. It also of course presents the glory that Alexander spent his life seeking to achieve. If you want to know about a man who conquered the known world, claimed to be the son of an Egyptian version of Zeus, and died saying that the heir to his kingdom would be “the strongest,” then this is a read for you. Also north Macedonia is a fake country.

[Jeremiah Lorrig · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really solid history. Focuses on archaeological finds and does a good job of interpreting it and giving commentary on the seemingly distant finds.

While he does well with the limited knowledge that is available, it doesn’t come together in a compelling story. Like the most accurate history, it is fairly fragmented.

[Sophie Mulloy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I felt a little mislead from reading the back of the book. I was excited to learn about Alexander the Great, as I didn't really know anything before picking up this book. About 2/3 of the book is about his father, Philip II, though as there is not enough information about Alexander in his youth. It follows Philip with comments about what Alexander may have been doing at this time or what he may have thought. Some of the descriptions of the archaeological sites made my head spin a bit, as it was hard to fully understand and visualise without having to put the book down and get on google to look at it myself. I did find the history interesting, as I didn't have previous knowledge so it was beneficial. I just probably should have researched and found a different book for what I wanted to know.

[Maureen Ulrich · Rating 5 out of 5]

If I had not recently visited Greece and, notably the tomb of Philip II, I might not have enjoyed this book as much. I read it largely because of my experiences, and I was not disappointed. Rowson’s account of Alexander’s life is entertaining and edifying. Highly recommend for history enthusiasts.

[Matilda · Rating 4 out of 5]

rip bucephalus

[Rob Mead · Rating 3 out of 5]

Amazing subject, well researched, but surprisingly turgid - struggled to feel the excitement you’d expect

[Kathrin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed his non-fiction book and how it detailed the story of Alexander's life.

[Yeemay · Rating 3 out of 5]

More three and half stars. Fascinating but incredibly detailed. My geography needs to improve.

[Natalie · Rating 1 out of 5]

DNF not my thing

[Mike Hill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Last year I put this aside as I had burnout with ancient history. Now I'm back on it.
Extensive, fair and balanced. Some moments of modern day moralizing.