[Probably a posthumously painted portrait of Cleopatra with red hair and her distinct facial features from Roman Herculaneum, Italy (1st century AD)] |
The first problem we encounter is that no contemporary accounts have survived. And, even now, after centuries of archeaology, there are no busts that can be reliably attributed to Cleopatra.
[An ancient Roman sculpture possibly depicting either Cleopatra or her daughter Cleopatra Selene II] |
[A denarius minted in 32 BC: a diademed portrait of Cleopatra, with the Latin inscription "CLEOPATRA[E REGINAE REGVM]FILIORVM REGVM"] |
As neither are contemporary accounts, there is no good reason to believe any of these writers, who might have had ulterior motives to glorify Roman history and its past Ceasars.
It is also important to keep in mind that ancient ideals of beauty were quite different to those of the modern Western world. Remember the use by Cleopatra of the poisonous atropine from the Egyptian henbane to dilate her pupils, hoping that she would appear more alluring. Or take the use of toxic kohl eye makeup in ancient Egypt. Recent scientific research suggests that galena, the lead-based mineral that formed its base, would have had anti-bacterial properties when mixed with moisture from the eyes.
So, we simply do not know how beautiful Cleopatra really was, but she was young and was a woman in a powerful position. That alone would make her attractive to both Caesar and Antony, who were known to be notorious womanisers and would surely not have fallen for Cleopatra on the basis of beauty alone.
No comments:
Post a Comment