Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

The real Cleopatra?

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Champollion (U2688478) on Wednesday, 25th January 2006

  Every portrayal we ever see of Cleopatra makes her out to be a traditionally beautiful woman but surely the historical/archeological evidence suggests something rather different. On the relief at Dendera (the only one in Egypt?) for example Cleopatra looks distinctly ordinary and on the Phoenician coins that many believe to be the most accurate resemblance, she has a nose you could open tins with! My own belief is that Cleopatra's charm and her intelligence far outweighed her looks and that the myth of the beautiful seductress was pro-Roman propaganda designed to explain how and why their sober leaders were led astray by a mere woman (at a time when women were not supposed to have such overt power and influence). Any thoughts out there?

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Wednesday, 25th January 2006

  I agree. Her picture on coins is nne too flattering as I recall. The fact that she ruled the richest kingdom in the Mediterrainean world may have had some attraction, of course.

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Artorious (U1941655) on Friday, 27th January 2006

  Yea, no one really knows what she was like, but as for modern portrayals, I vote for whoever it was who played her in Carry On Cleo...
  
  

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Champollion (U2688478) on Friday, 27th January 2006

  In "Carry On Cleo", Cleopatra was played by the wonderful Amanda Barrie, later to appear (for years) as Alma in Coronation Street - the answer to a trivia question, if ever I heard one! She was probably no less inaccurate in her portrayal than Liz Taylor or Vivien Leigh.

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Friday, 27th January 2006

  Technically there are several traditions of representing Cleopatra, the coin evidence is based on Hellenistic traditions of attempting to create a winning face by employing features to depict strength, some of Cleopatra's coinage goes as far as depicting her as a man. Cleopatra is represented as having a strong chin on coinage as was every other Macedonian dynast since Alexander the Great. The hooked nose was as much a result of Roman intervention in the Eastern Mediteranean and was based on Pompey the Great's nose after he reorganised the Eastern Mediteranean and had to fend off claims he was the Saviour.
  
  Mind you much of the negative publicity is Octavian's creation after he fell out with Mark Anthony.

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Champollion (U2688478) on Saturday, 28th January 2006

  Thank you for that, lolbeeble. I hadn't properly understood the importance of the almost symbolic elements incorporated in those representations of Cleopatra. However, I'm still puzzled by the relief at Dendera which, one assumes (having been commissioned by Cleopatra herself), might be flattering - but it's strikingly unremarkable. While I'm on the subject, why are we so lacking in representations of Cleopatra?

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Saturday, 28th January 2006

  While I'm on the subject, why are we so lacking in representations of Cleopatra?Β 
  
  Probably because the Romans detested her so much and removed the depictions of her.

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by Champollion (U2688478) on Sunday, 29th January 2006

  That's a very interesting idea. Is there any evidence for this?

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Monday, 30th January 2006

  There is, I believe, evidence that Cleopatra wass not popular among the Romans. I believe they were scandalised when Caesar took her to Rome. Struggling to find my source books for that, but I am sure I read it somewhere a long time ago. According to the Oxford History of the Classical World, which I have just looked up, Octavian was able to denounce Antony for his alliance with the "she-devil" Cleopatra. Hardly complimentary.
  
  As for evidence of depictions of her being destroyed, that is supposition on my part, based on my understanding that this was fairly common practice in Egypt. Images of unpopular pharaohs wree often destroyed by their successors.

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Monday, 30th January 2006

  Well, that was primarily amongst the Optimates. Personally what I think struck most fear into them was that all that Egyptian grain coming into Ostia would further enhance Caesar's reputation at their expense.
  

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message10

• Message 11

  , in reply to message 10.

  Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Tuesday, 31st January 2006

  In the few moderate descriptions we have about Cleopatra (sorry to forget now the author) we read that Cleopatra both at younger and older ages was no less beautiful and no more beautiful than the average Greek girl.
  
  However, it happened to be from the Ptolemeyan royal family and had the best education not only for a woman of that time but even among men of that time - not to mention that she seems to had posssesed natural intelligence (i.e. not only due to her education). They way she took the throne from her also "conspiracious" younger brother as well as the fact that she took Egypt from a bankrupt kingdom and in a few years she made it again rich, more rich than the Roman empire itself (that already had expanded a lot) is a sign of her capabilities and it is a pity that this incredible woman is remembered mostly for her nose or for her sexual life (which was not so "rich" as people might think...it was of course highly distorted by her political enemies like it happened for so many political figures in history)
  
  So you might not consider her as ugly, then not as beautiful but all that wit she had - e.g. the way she enterred secretly from her enemy brother in the palace and presented herself to Ceasar as a gift... rolled in a carpet... well.. that was sensational and would be enough to conquer a lot of men let alone Ceasar who loved smart things... then her education and intelligence that could not be found in women even of that social class around the world was another factor why she attracted men . For her, attraction was a means of politics also her two marriages (Ceasar and Octavianus) were the means of maintaining her position as well as the liberty and prosperity of her kingdom that she loved so much (and the opposite of course).

  Link to this forum: The real Cleopatra?

  Report message11

Back to top