The history of the scholarship of Philip, King of Macedon and his vastly more famous son, Alexander III or ‘The Great’ as he has been dubbed is almost as weighty as the history of the two figures themselves. Vast quantities of ink have been spilt examining the character, military brilliance, overall aims, diplomatic prowess, and world vision (among other things) of these two men. Yet this volume by Goldsworthy attempts to create a work different from any that has gone before. The majority of works on the two most recognisable Argead monarchs focus on either Philip or Alexander. Consider the fine volume by Hammond on the life and career of Philip, or Fox's biography of Alexander. In these works, both men play a ‘bit part’ in the story of the other, either son to father or father to son.

In this latest, highly readable account, Goldsworthy has created a dual biography. This is an ambitious project, but one that, on the whole, succeeds markedly well. The work takes a chronological path through the reigns of both father and son and is split into three sections. The first section of the book deals with Philip and chronicles his birth, rise and reign as King of Macedon. The second covers Alexander's ascension to the throne of Macedon and his lightning quick conquest of the Persian Empire. The third, final, and shortest section of the work deals with Alexander's campaigns in India, his subsequent return to the heart of the Persian Empire and his mysterious and untimely death just short of his 33rd birthday.

In his introduction the author claims that, ‘without Philip there can be no Alexander’(p.3). This is more than a statement of biology; Goldsworthy asserts that, without Philip, Alexander would not have been in a position to launch his invasion of the Persian Empire, an invasion which Philip had conceived and planned before his own assassination. Chapters 1–13 detail the startling successes, both diplomatic and military, which Philip achieved: assuming the throne of a fractured and weak kingdom of Macedon at the age of only 23, Philip transformed the fortunes of his ‘barbarian’ kingdom on the fringes of a civilised Greece.

A colourful character both in public and private, there is an entire chapter (chapter 4) devoted to Philip's marriages, all diplomatic and all delivering some sort of personal gain and alliance for the king. Philip's military abilities are also considered in detail, with the conclusion that he played a major role in transforming a large number of the ‘Companions’ of the King into near full-time soldiers. This, Goldsworthy notes, is integral to not just Philip's success but Alexander's too. Section one includes all the key moments of Philip's life: his campaigns of expansion in Thrace, his marriage to Alexander's mother Olympias and his victories over an alliance of Greek city states at the Battle of Chaeronea in 338 BC, a victory which left him in command of Greece as its hegemon. Goldsworthy then details Philip's plans for a campaign against the Persians at the head of an allied Greek force before his assassination (perhaps at the hands of a humiliated lover). Overall, Goldsworthy's approach is well considered; he accurately and carefully examines the challenges which faced Philip on his ascension to the throne and how, through a mixture of military conquest and well-judged diplomacy, he had forged Macedon into the dominant power of the Eastern Mediterranean.

Section two details Alexander's ascension to the throne in the aftermath of his father's murder. A small amount of time is given to Alexander's efforts to establish his power base at home before the narrative switches to his conquest of the Persian Empire. Goldsworthy's background in the scholarship of the Roman Army is clear: his account of the logistical challenges facing Alexander as he attempted to mount an invasion of Asia is crisp and convincing. Not only is Goldsworthy's analysis of the military situation during Alexander's conquest excellent, but his handling of the dubious numbers also presented by the sources detailing the vast armies of the Persian Great King are worthy of praise. While never dismissing the view that the number of troops available to Alexander's enemies were significantly larger than those of the Greek and Macedonian forces, Goldsworthy points out the logistical issues, and in some cases, the impossibility of feeding and moving so many men (some estimates suggest anything from 200,000–1,000,000 men). Section two details the famous battles fought between Alexander and the forces of the Great King. Granicus (334 BC), Issus (333 BC) and Darius III's eventual defeat at the battle of Gaugamela (331 BC) are all mentioned in some detail. Due to the nature of our sources, the details of the battles are not always clear, yet Goldsworthy provides the clearest possible accounts and there are accompanying maps of the conjectural formations of each side at the start of the battle. This is a welcome aid to the reader in gaining a sense of the action. The third and shortest section of the work deals with Alexander's invasion of India. It recounts the battle of the Hydaspes River in 326 BC, his establishment of alliances in India and the refusal of his men to go any further. In some ways, this section is the slowest, as the reader is aware that Alexander is approaching the end of his own account.

Goldsworthy does not, unlike others, attempt a definitive answer on the cause of the king's death. Goldsworthy is consistently even-handed, particularly in the account of Philip's loss of an eye; in describing the moralising nature of the sources who accuse Alexander of murderous paranoia and point to Parmenio and Cleitus the Black as examples; and Alexander's supposed tryst with the Queen of the Amazons; he takes his time, weighing all against probability and available evidence.

Overall, this is a fine addition to the works on Philip and Alexander and should be considered something new in its own right. It is well written and engaging, and both the scholar and general reader will take much from this work.