ALE 



dTfjft of their rffpe6\ive countries, as Q^Curtiu? call* tlicm) 

 were as hire of beiiij rccompcnfed as an Arillotle ora X-;no- 

 nhon, and were pretcrred by this famous hero, even to his 

 own relations and generah. He war. not lei's liberal to 

 fin;;ers, harpers, and pipers ; on whom he btftowtxl at one 

 caroufal, above 10,000 talents, as we may naturally fnp- 

 pofe, for chanting his bloody vidories and reloundinjj his 

 praife. 



If vrt examine his clmrafter as a wanior and a conque- 

 ror, and trace his niilitar)- exploits to their moving fpring ; 

 it is natviral to direOl our enquiry to the juilire of the war 

 in which he enga ^cs, without a regard to whicii he ii not 

 a conqueror and a hero, but an ufui-per and a robber. If 

 ■we allow that the Pcrlians were the ivowcd enemies of the 

 Greeks, what right had Alexander over the great number 

 of nations «ho did not even know the name of Greece, 

 and had never done or defigncd him the leall injury ? The 

 Sc)-thian ambadador fpoke julUy, when he faid : " What 

 have we to do with thee ? we never once fct our foot in thy 

 country. Are not thofe who live in woods allowed to be 

 ignorant of thee, and the place from whence thou comeft ? 

 Thou boalleft, that the only delign of thy marching is to 

 extirpate robbers ; and thou thyfelf art the greatell robber 

 in the world !" To the fame cffeCl was the anfwer of the 

 pirate, when Alexander quellioned him, what right he 

 had to infell the feas ? " The fame that thou haft' to iufeil 

 the univerfe ; but becaufe I do this in a fmall fhip, I am 

 called a robber ; and becaufe thou afteft the fame part with 

 a great fleet, thou art entitled a conqueror." Upon the 

 principle now ftated, what idea ought we to form of Alex- 

 ander's lall conquefts? Was ever ambition more extravagant, 

 or rather more furious, than that of this prince ? It is re- 

 lated that Alexandei-, when he was told by Anaxargus the 

 philofophcr, that there was an infinite number of worlds, 

 vcpt in thinking, that it would be impolTible for him to 

 conquer them all, fince he had not yet conquered one. 

 Val. Max. lib. viii. c. 14. Is it wrong in Seneca, (Nat. 

 Oiiell. lib. iii. in pref. ) to compare tliefe pretended heroes, 

 ^vho have gained renown no otlierwife than by the ruin 

 of nations, to a conflarjration and a flood, which lay wafte 

 and dcftroy, or to wild beads wl-.o fiibfill merely by blood 

 and (laughter ! Alexander, continues this writer, (Dc Benef. 

 lib. i. c. 13.) an unjull robber from his youth, a cruel ra- 

 vager of provinces, an infamous murderer of his friends, 

 makes his happinefs and glor)- to confift in rendering himfelf 

 formidable to all mortals ; forgetting that, not only tlie 

 fierceft animals, but even the viltft, make themftlves feared 

 by their poifons. If the conquefts of Alexander are exa- 

 mined in thcmfelves feparateiy from their moving fpring, 

 we fhall find that they are frequently effected bv a kind of 

 valour nearly allied to a boldncfs that is blind, rafh, and 

 impetuons ; that has no other guide befidcs a fenfelefs ar- 

 <lour for falfe glorj- and a wild defire of diftinguifhing itfelf 

 ty any methods, let them be ever fo unlawful. To form 

 an accomplilhed general, prudence nuift foften and dircft 

 the too fiery temper of valour ; as tl\is latter muft animate 

 and warm the coldnefs and llowncfs of prudence. Do 

 thefe chanideriftics belong to Alexander ? When we follow 

 him to fieges and battles, are we not perpetually alarmed 

 for his own fafety, and that of his army ? and do we not 

 •conclude, that they are every moment upon the point of 

 being deftroyed ? Plutarch, in pronouncing the eidogv of 

 Alexander, as au accomplifhed hero, gives a long detail of 

 the various wounds he received ; and intimates, that his 

 courage was thus rende^ed more confpicuous. But it has 

 htea obftrved ia praife of Hannibal, that ht was never 



ALE 



wounded in all his battles. It ought alio to be obfei-ved, 

 in eftimatiiig the characler of Alexander, as a conqueror 

 and warrior, what Livy has fuggefted (lib. ix. c. 17.), who 

 were the enemies with whom he combated. " Had he 

 marched," fays this writer, " againft the Romans, he would 

 foon have found, that he was no longer combating againft 

 a Darius, who, encumbered with gold and purple, the vain 

 equipage of his grandeur, and dragging after liim a multi- 

 tude of v.'omen and eunuolis, came as a prey rather than 

 as an e.ijiTiv ; and wiiom Alexander conquered without murli 

 blood, lud without wantln;^ any other merit, thsn that of 

 darinp to defpife what was really contemptible. He would 

 have round Italy very different from India, through which 

 he m.iiched in a riotous manner, his army quite ilupified 

 with v, ine ; particularly when he fliould have ieen the forefts 

 of Apulia, the mountains of I^ucania, and the itill receiit 

 foo- tops of the defeat of Alexander his uncle, king of 

 Eiurus, who there loft his life." Alexander, therelrvre, 

 p'.iily owed his conqueft to the weaknefs of his enemies. 

 After all it cannot be denied, that Alexander poffefl'ed veiy 

 great qualities : but they were thofe which were fitted to 

 infpire admiration rather than ifteem ; while the worft ren- 

 dered him a peft of mankind, and refcmbled him, as an ex- 

 cellent biographer obferves, " to one of thofe baleful me- 

 teors, which dazzle as they fly, but ruin where they fall." 

 He poffeffed talents, fays Dr. Robertfon, (Hift. America, 

 vol. i. p. 20.) which, notwithftanding the violent pafQonj 

 that incited him, at fome times, to the wildcft aftions and 

 the moll extravagant enterprizes, fitted him not only to 

 conquer, but to govern the world. If we throw into the 

 fcalc of his errors and vices, the prefumptuous idea he enter- 

 tained of his merit ; the high contempt he had for other 

 men, not excepting his own father ; his ardent thirft of 

 praife and flattery ; his ridiculous notion of fancving him- 

 felf the fon of Jupiter ; of afcribing divinity to himfelf ; of 

 requiring a free, vi£forious people to pay him a fervile ho- 

 mage, and to proftrate tiiemfelves ignomiuioufly before 

 him; his abandoning himfelf fo (hamcfully to wine; his 

 violent anger, whicli rifes to brutal ferocity ; the unjuft and 

 barbarous execution of his braveft and moil faithful officers, 

 and the murder of his moft worthy friends in the midil of 

 feafts and caroufals : Can any one, fays Livy, (hb. ix. c. 17.) 

 believe, that all thefe imperfetlions do not fully the repu- 

 tation of a conqueror ? But Alexanders frantic ambition, 

 which knew neither law nor limits ; the ralh intrepidity 

 with which he braves dangers, without the leaft reafon or 

 neceffity ; the weaknefs and ignorance of tiie nations, to- 

 tally unflvillcd in war, againil whom he fought ; do not 

 thcle enervate the reafons for which he is thought to have 

 merited the furname of Crcit, and the title of Hero ? Rol- 

 lin, in clofing the eftimate of Alexander's charafter, ob- 

 ferves, that we do not find that he polTeflcd the tirlt, the 

 moft effential and moft excellent virtues of a great prince, 

 fo as to be the father, the guardian, and fliepherd of his 

 people ; to govern them by good laws ; to make their trade, 

 botii by lea and land, to flouridi ; to encourage and protect 

 arts and fciences ; to eftablifli peace and plentv, and not 

 fuffer his fubjefls to be in any manner aggrieved or injured ; 

 to maintain an agreeable harmony between all orders of the 

 ftate, and make them confpire, in due proportion, to the 

 public welfare ; to employ himfelf in doing juftice to all his 

 fubjefts, to hear their difputes and reconcile them ; to con- 

 fider himfelf as the father of his people, tonfequently as 

 obliged to provide for all their ncccfTitics, and to procure 

 them the feveral enjoyments of life. He adds, Alexander 

 feems poffefl'ed of fuch qualities only as are of tile fecoiid 



rauk 



