;) During my year of intense Alexander studies, of COURSE I had to get The History Channel video on Alexander's life - and you've bullseyed what was wrong with it. I kept trying to tell myself "well, this is for those who don't yet know anything about Alexander" and it DID give an overview . . . but as you note, an overview that was all Cleitarchus, if you will, little Arrian. What particularly irked me was . . . they didn't do too badly until Alexander had entered Babylon, then WHOOSH! we get all the most Vulgate stories . . . drinking, carousing, temper tantrums, murder, conspiracy, sexual peculiarities, the lot. It is as if there is a need in human nature to get Alexander to the top of the human achievement, then tear him down as quickly as possible.

They gave, as I recall, 4/5ths of the program to getting Alexander to overcome Darius, 1/5 to the YEARS that followed, all with a slightly "Babylon Goes Hollywood Decadent" twist.

All in all, a disappointing effort! I must admit, though, I rather fell for the fact they had Arrian, Diodorus Sicululs, Plutarch, and Curtius - the major sources, played by actors who commented using the original source language. IF they had confined themselves to that, and not picked out the juiciest bits of scandal, it might have impressed me further ;)

I suppose Alexander's story has been telescoped into a sensational 'quick version' for so long, we shouldn't be surprised - but the actual story is so VERY much more interesting, touching, and fascinating, I always regret seeing the shorthand used.