Hello Professor,
I’ve been reading Memnon by Scott Oden, and while I’m not entirely sure how much of the family background given to him (specifically the whole connection to pro‑Athenian factions in Rhodes) is historically grounded and how much is Oden’s invention, it did make me wonder: how much do we actually know about him, about his strategic abilities, and how much of his modern portrayal is shaped by that narrative of Greek superiority over the Persians?
On the one hand, he clearly had a solid, to a certain leven even an intimate understanding of the Macedonian army and its tactics, since he spent a bit of time in Macedonia. And he was obviously a trusted commander in Persian service, whether he was better, worse, or simply different from Mentor is another question. His plan to stir up trouble in Greece and Macedonia was perfectly sound, and honestly not surprising at all. If you can’t stop your enemy on your own ground, the next best thing is to cut them off from their base. You go for the roots if you can’t chop the trunk.
But if I’m remembering correctly, our sources also tend to present Greek mercenaries as Alexander’s toughest opponents in the early stages of the campaign. And Memnon always shows up as the lone voice of reason, the one arguing for the smart, possibly winning approach, while the Satraps insist on the decisions that end up losing them everything.
Gosh, it's been years since I read this. I'm actually a friend of Scott's, so I'm going to let him know about this question. I don't think he's on Tumblr, but he may want to come over and answer this himself. Scott does a lot of research for his novels, and I quite liked this one. But Scott is better positioned to give you an answer.
The book in question, for those unfamiliar... And a good REVIEW of the novel, as well.
