Alexander Virtues of War review
Molon Labe!! Behold Alexander: Virtues of War. In this Pressfield-written novel about the life of Alexander the Great, we are given vividly described battle scenes that made the man famous as well as an occasional touch of political intrigue. Not to mention that it’s a fine retelling from the great man himself, his journey from Greece to Asia and his war against Darius. Though despite its brilliance there were inevitably, parts left out as expected from a historical novel which I thought should have been left in.
Zeus demands that you click this cut
The novel is a 1st person epic recount by Alexander of his conquests told to Roxana’s brother. Alexander retells his journey from his glorious defeat of the ‘Sacred Band of Thebes’ to his conquest of the Persian Empire to avenge his Greek nation and his campaign in central Asia against guerilla forces. In present day, Alexander is preparing for the Battle of Hydrapes against Porus. However Alexander’s army as well as his commanders have become disillusioned by the war and have decided that it’s time to go home despite their King’s ambition to continue west.
Virtues of War doesn’t disappoint when it comes to bringing to life the life of the conqueror and his war of vengeance. Particularly enthralling is the page-turning and lengthy battle scenes done justice by Pressfield’s descriptiveness. The Battle of Charonea is a exciting mix of shield and sword imagery, fascinating tactical war banter and a riveting story about the downfall of the Sacred Band of Thebes.
If I do have one complain about these battle scenes is how much Pressfield enjoys throwing around names. Just when we’re about to get to the cavalry charge at Gaugamela, Alexander decides it’s time to name where the Persians, Greek Mercenaries etc etc and whose in the flanks, whose commanding the Infantry etc etc. Not only is it long-winded but it also drags down the pace as well as spoil a perfect and excellent moment in the book. But I guess I can forgive him for that since this is a 1st person recount and Alexander does need to sound like a commander with good knowledge of the opponent to justify the realism.
Of course, the tactical war banter would seem out of place had this novel not been a 1st person retelling by the militant king himself. Pressfield’s detailed and vivid writing is complemented by his characterization his Alexander’s storytelling abilities. As such, it gives the book a unique feel that helps the reader become further engrossed by the book’s atmosphere and makes them experience the closest they can get to meet the great conqueror himself.
Alexander is excellent as he interacts with the locals at Babylon babbling intriguing dialogue about agriculture and organization as well as attempting to understand his enemy’s mind (Darius III) whilst speaking to his captured mother. Not to mention the prep speeches he gives every now and then before another battle with Darius which helps get the blood pumping and admittedly made me want to pull out my own sword and rush at the nearest Persian. But they too did feel a bit exhausting and bland eventually and that can be blamed on how many times Pressfield enjoys writing military and eventually it got to a point where it failed to make the same impact on me.
Inevitably though there are parts of the Macedonian’s life that was left out of this historical novel. A part which I felt was important in summing up Alexander’s character. And as such I was disappointed that Pressfield decided to give up on a possibly touching scene (depending on how he writes it of course) when Alexander meets and tames his beloved horse Bucephalus. And I’m sure we know how important Bucephalus was to Alexander, right?
In terms of representing the real-life characters, Alexander does quite well. As expected from historical novels, the characters are as believable as their real-life counterpart. Pressfield’s Alexander is a tactical, war-driven man who eventually becomes consumed by his successes and continues to think about going further despite his undefeated successes. And his commanders eventually degenerate into people who doubt the conquering of Nations and like Hephaestion summed up ‘come to hate war’. The eventual distaste for battles is something that contemporary audiences will be able to enjoy but there are words which can be summed up as eyebrow-raising. The use of the word ‘chivalry’ just seems too out of place for a Hellenistic army (unless I’ve been mistaken and it’s actually King Arthur and the Knights of the Round table)
Still above all Alexander is a fiction and as such parts of his life have been editedn but despite that it is accurate enough. Whilst it presents an accurate look at the battles he fought in, they weren’t the best or the most entertaining I’ve seen so far but nonetheless somewhat satisfactory. Character-wise, the book is quite believable in taking real-life personas to their novel forms. Whilst not the best quality in terms of reading leisure it does present a quite accurate representation for a self-admitted history lover seeking a closer representation of historical events. Alexander: Virtue of War despite its letdowns in terms of entertainment quality is nonetheless something worth taking a look at. 7.5/10 stars
Edit: I just realised that today's date is 777.