Well-known, but excessively biased in favor of Alexander. I doubt he was either as idealistic or as moral as Tarn claims.
My views are closer to Badian's ( )

Tarn is, of course, great. But he's only for experienced Alexander-explorers. Many of his facts and virtually all of his interpretation is now either overturned or in serious doubt. At this point, he's more useful as an example of what can go wrong in the study of Alexander--and history generally--and for his writing than for the content itself. ( )

Edition: // Descr: xix, 161 p. : map (1) 20.5 cm. // Series: Call No. { } Contains Index. // //