Monthly Archives: April 2014

Plutarch’s Women: The Persian Royal Family, Barbarian Women, the Amazonian Queen, General Ref. & Roxane (Chapts. 43, 44, 46 & 47)

For the other posts in this series, click here

The Persian Royal Family
We pick up the story of Plutarch’s women in Chapter 43 of his Life of Alexander. In July 330 BC Alexander finally caught up with Darius III. The Great King had been on the run since losing the Battle of Gaugamela the previous October.
.
Plutarch tells us that Alexander ‘burst into’ Darius’ camp. He met no opposition there, however, only ‘great heaps of gold and silver vessels’ and ‘wagons full of women and children that were moving aimlessly about’.
.
How empty these remnants of his riches must have seemed to Darius; how broken his people.
.
Today, however, the Great King wasn’t in the camp but further up the road. He was found by a Macedonian named Polystratus, lying in a wagon, ‘riddled with javelins’. At Darius’ request, Polystratus gave him some water to drink.
.
By-the-bye, could we compare this incident to the moment, during his pursuit of the Great King when Alexander refused water because there was not enough for his men? If so, perhaps Darius’ request could be said to demonstrate his weakness in comparison to Alexander.
.
Sipping the water, Darius regretted that he would not be able to repay Polystratus’ act of kindness. ‘[b]ut,’ he said to the Macedonian, ‘Alexander will reward you… and the gods will repay him for his courtesy towards my mother, and my wife and my children.’ Darius then placed his hand in Polystratus’ and died. Afterwards, Alexander sent his body to Sisygambis, Darius’ mother, ‘to be laid out in royal state’.
.
It might be stretching things to say that Darius died happy but it does seem to me that we can’t overestimate how important it was to him that his family were treated with ‘courtesy’. As to weather this was because of their political value or because he genuinely loved them, I cannot say. I imagine it was a combination of the two.
.
Barbarian Women
In Chapter 44, Plutarch tells how Hyrcanian tribesmen kidnapped Bucephalas. Could you imagine a worse thing for anyone to do? No wonder, then, that Alexander warned the tribe that if Bucephalas was not returned, ‘he would exterminate the whole tribe, together with their women and children.’ Naturally, Bucephalas was returned - unharmed.
.
This episode has an ending that is typical of Alexander. Once Bucephalas had been returned, the king gave a ransom (Plutarch calls it that) to his kidnappers. Perhaps the king was just relieved to have his beloved horse again, but when I think of people like Porus, Oxyartes and Artabazus, to name but three, I feel I could write a book titled

Resist Then Submit
A Guide to Surviving being Alexander the Great’s Enemy
.

Amazonians
The next reference to a woman comes in Chapter 46; and what a reference it is, for it is here that Plutarch tells us that, while in Parthia, Alexander met the queen of the legendary Amazons.
.
Well, kind of.
.
Firstly, Plutarch acknowledges that while several historians provide an account of this meeting, others - including Ptolemy - ‘maintain that [it] is a fiction’.
.
Secondly, he records a letter sent by Alexander to Antipater in which Alexander describes the occasion when he is supposed to have met the Amazonian queen. He does not mention her at all - only that a Scythian king had offered him his daughter in marriage.
.
Finally, he also relates how, years later, Lysimachus smiled at Onesicritus’ account of the incident and said, ‘I wonder where I was then.’

.
For Plutarch’s sake, it is probably just as well that Alexander never met the queen of the Amazons. He has already undermined his view that Alexander was chaste once (read here - Who was the father of Stateira’s baby?); goodness knows how he would deal with a woman who is supposed to have kept Alexander in bed for two weeks in order to make her pregnant.
.
General Reference
To tell another man that he is doing X ‘like a woman’ is an age old insult. In Chapter 47 we see that it goes back to at least 330 BC. In Hyrcania, Alexander became ‘anxious’ - for reasons not precisely explained - that his men would refuse to follow him any further. Standing before the Macedonian army, he explained to them that,

… up to now the barbarians had watched them as if they were in a dream, but that if they merely threw the whole country into disorder, and then retired, the Persians would fall upon them as if they were so many women.

Presumably, the Persians had never fought the Amazonians.
.
As for the toughness of women - Olympias was already showing that she was no feeble female, Thaïs had shown her credentials in Persepolis, and in a few years time, Adea Euridike would give an equally good account of herself.
.
Roxane
To end this post, we stay in a Chapter 47 for a quick reference to Roxane. Plutarch says the Alexander fell in love with her after seeing her dance. He admits, though, that the marriage was politically convenient. Despite Stateira I’s pregnancy, he persists with the idea that Alexander was wholly chaste. He records that,

… the barbarians were encouraged by the feeling of partnership which [the] marriage created, and they were completely won over by Alexander’s moderation and courtesy and by the fact that without the sanction of marriage he would not approach the only woman who had ever conquered him.

It is interesting that Plutarch speaks of the barbarians as seeing the marriage in terms of being a ‘partnership’ whereas for him it was a victory for Roxanne. It seems to suggest that the barbarians were reconciled to Alexander’s kingship. As for Plutarch, I suppose it is in the nature of those who have, or in Plutarch’s case, take the side of those in power, to always fear its loss.

Categories: Plutarch's Women | Tags: , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A Letter to Arrian (27) The 114th Olympiad, in the archonship of Hegesias at Athens

a_roman_writerMy dear Arrian,

Alexander the Great Administrator. Well, no-one will ever call him that but I must say I am impressed by the attention he paid to the construction of a sluice between the Euphrates river and Pallacopas canal.
.
As you note, the reason why the then current sluice needed to be replaced was that it was built into weak ground - ‘soft, wet clay’ which soaked up the Euphrates’ water thus defeating the purpose of having the sluice in the first place.
.
You also say that the reason for Alexander’s interest is that he wanted to ‘improve Assyria’s prospects’. Could I add that he probably wanted a free flowing river for his warships as well?
.
Even if that is also the case, Alexander could easily have left this work for one of his officers to do. That he took it on himself suggests a future area of study for me - ‘Alexander as administrator. Does the Euphrates-Pallacopas show he was better at it than I have hitherto given him credit for?’
.
Something else I shall surely be looking into is the authenticity of Alexander’s letter to Cleomenes. The king never acted upon sentimental desire in matters of government. It seems inconceivable to me, therefore, that he would be prepared to offer Cleomenes a pardon for any future criminal acts just as long as the latter carried out Alexander’s instructions in regards the shrines in Alexandria and on Pharos.
.
We now come to Alexander’s last days.
.
What strikes me most about Alexander’s dying is not so much the rapidity of it - though I suppose that is notable - but the way it happened - how shall I say it? - in a single, flowing movement: Alexander fell ill, the illness got worse, he became gravely ill, and then - without his decline having been arrested or reversed once along the way; without him suffering any sharp declines as he lay on his bed - he died.
.
Leaving aside the question of whether he was assassinated, Alexander died as gentle and straight forward a death as I can think of. It was almost tender. Given how he lived, I find this extraordinary.
.
Something that I find inspiring is the way that even though Alexander was dying - and must after a point have known he was dying - ‘he still refused to neglect his religious duties’ and his military ones. This is a measure of the man, both of his faith (is that the right word?) in the gods, and determination to see his will done. Alexander the Religious is perhaps another aspect of his character that I might look into.
.
With Alexander’ death, I come to the end of my last letter to you. I have enjoyed writing it, immensely. You will never read it, but I hope that one day I will meet you in those Elysian fields and that we may talk about Alexander together. And who knows who we might meet as we walk across that blessèd land in conversation - maybe the king himself? That would be good.

Until that day, dear Lucius, I remain

Your friend,

φιλέλλην

The above picture is from Ancient History

An index of all the letters can be found here

Categories: Letters to Arrian | Tags: , | Leave a comment

Plutarch’s women: Thaïs of Athens, Olympias and Telesippa (Chapts. 38, 39 and 41)

For previous posts in this series click here

This post continues directly on from the last one. I divided them as the number of women I wanted to talk about made the title too long! Anyway, here we are, so let’s proceed to -

Thaïs of Athens
In Chapter 38 Plutarch narrates one of the most memorable and infamous moments of Alexander’s career - the burning of the Royal Palace at Persepolis. According to him, a courtesan named Thaïs incited Alexander to set the palace ablaze, saying that, while it had been a joy to revel in the palace of the Persians, it would be an even ‘sweeter pleasure’ to set fire to ‘the palace of Xerxes, who had laid Athens to ashes’.
.
As Plutarch admits, there are differing views on how the palace came to be burnt down. Some say it was done on impulse, others that it was a matter of policy. Thaïs’ role, however, is almost uniformly agreed upon (see here for more on what the sources say). Almost. Arrian omits any mention of her. Given, however, that his main source is her lover, Ptolemy, perhaps that is not surprising. Going back to Plutarch, though, the fire seemed to have sobered Alexander up. For he ‘quickly repented and gave orders for the fire to be put out. Whether Thaïs ever repented is not recorded.
.
Olympias
We continue with a letter written by Olympias to her son. In Chapter 39 Plutarch tells us about Alexander’s generosity to his friends. We learn of Ariston, to whom he not only gave a gold cup but drank to his honour with it, and the mule driver who shouldered the king’s gold after his mule became too exhausted to carry it any further. Unfortunately, Alexander’s benefactions caused his friends and bodyguards to ‘put on airs’. This displeased Olympias. She wrote,

I wish you would find other ways of rewarding those you love and honour: as it is, you are making them all the equals of kings and enabling them to make plenty of friends, but leaving yourself without any.

I have to admit, I can see the sense in what Olympias wrote. Generosity is not bad but by giving away so much, Alexander was not only creating (metaphoric) equals but - more dangerously - giving potential usurpers the means to challenge his authority with their new friends.
.
Plutarch says that Alexander bore his mother’s scoldings ‘with great tolerance’ and when Antipater wrote to him complaining about her behaviour again he said that the vice-regent ‘did not understand that one tear shed by his mother would wipe out 10,000 letters’ from him.
.
Telesippa
I end this post with what I think is a rather lovely story, which is told in Chapter 41. On an unspecified occasion, Alexander was sending home ‘invalid and superannuated soldiers’ when it was discovered that one of those on the list did not qualify for retirement. His name was Eurylochus of Aegae. Under questioning, Eurylochus confessed to the truth. He said he was,

… in love with a with a girl named Telesippa and… planned to travel with her on her journey to the coast.

Alexander duly made enquiries regarding who Telesippa was and discovered that she was a ‘free-born Greek courtesan’ (much like Thaïs, mentioned above). This, it seems, was to Alexander’s satisfaction, for he agreed to help Eurylochus woo her. But not on any terms.

“… since she is a free woman [Alexander said] you must see whether we can win Telesippa either by presents or courtship, but not use other means.”

It seems to me that the implication of Alexander’s words are that had Telesippa been a servant or slave then it would have been alright for Eurylochus to force her to join him, which is an unpleasant thought, even if socially acceptable in those days (?). If we may gloss over that, however, I really do like the fact that Alexander insisted upon things being done properly. It is moments like this which (after all had no practical benefit for Alexander and every inconvenience) persuade me that he genuinely respected women rather than simply affected his respect in order to show how great he was.
.
Whatever the reason for Telesippa’s journey to the coast, I hope Eurylochus met her in time to walk with her on the way and that they had a long and happy life together.

Categories: Plutarch's Women | Tags: , , , , | Leave a comment

Plutarch’s Women: Stateira I, her daughters; Persian women and a wolf’s mother; the Pythia (Chapts. 30 and 37)

For previous posts in this series click here

Stateira I
Welcome back Plutarch’s Women. We begin this post at the start of Chapter 30. There, Plutarch records some sad news - the death of Stateira I, Darius III’s wife. Stateira’s death is all the more tragic because she died in child birth (although, see below). What would have become of the child had he or she lived? I suspect the eventual fate of Alexander IV, and indeed the baby’s siblings, answers that question. RIP.
.
Stateira I died in September 331. Alexander’s reaction to her death was to regret writing to Darius telling him to give himself up because it meant that he had lost the opportunity ‘to show… magnanimity’ towards him. What I find difficult about this passage is that Alexander did not think of Stateira herself first. But I have to remind myself that perhaps he did and Plutarch did not record it. He is not so much writing what happened as trying to make sense of it. There is a difference.

According to Plutarch, Alexander made up for this lost opportunity by giving ‘the queen a magnificent funeral’. The queen. Not, the queen and her unborn child. Plutarch does not mention him or her. Why? I am wondering if it is because up until a child was recognised by its father it had no status, but do not know for sure. If you have another idea do leave a comment below.
.
Going back to Stateira’s baby - who was his or her father? Stateira I was taken prisoner after the Battle of Issus, which took place in November 333. She died sometime in 331. The father, then, could not have been Darius. Did Alexander allow her to be taken by one of his officers? I would agree that this is most unlikely given her status. Perhaps Alexander himself slept with her? Plutarch’s protestations that Alexander had nothing to do with women notwithstanding, I suspect this is the case. If so, the child would be the first of Alexander’s children to die young (Roxane miscarried). However, we do not know for sure, either way. There is a great deal of uncertainty about Stateira’s death: the sources even disagree right down to the time and cause of it (See this article on Pothos for more information).
.
While Stateira was being laid to rest, one of her her attendants - a eunuch named Tireos - escaped from (or could he have been allowed to leave…?) the Macedonian camp and made his way to Darius’ where he told the Great King what had happened. Darius was, unsurprisingly, distraught.
.
Stateira I, Stateira II and Drypetis; also, Persian Women
And yet, Darius did not grieve because his wife was dead but because Alexander, he assumed, had denied her a royal funeral. He also feared that Alexander must have taken advantage of his wife. Tireos allayed all of Darius’ worries and then some. Not only had Stateira been given a royal funeral but, while alive, she - and his mother and children - were treated according to their station. And not only them but all the Persian women whom Alexander had captured. Upon hearing this, Darius made his great prayer to the gods, that ‘no other man but Alexander… sit upon the throne of Cyrus’.
.
A Wolf with a Persian Mother
We now jump forward, over the Battle of Gaugamela and Alexander’s arrival in Babylon, to Chapter 37 and his advance through Persis. The mountainous territory proved tough going for the Macedonians. Fortunately, a guide was on hand to help them on their way. This man, we are told, had ‘a Lycian father and a Persian mother’ and was the subject of a prophecy by no less than the Delphic oracle.
.
The Pythia’s Prophecy
As Plutarch relates it, when Alexander was a boy, the Pythia prophesied that he would one day be guided by a wolf (lycos - lycian) against the Persians. And so it happened. Plutarch doesn’t mention it but it appears that this wolf showed him the way round the Persian Gates, which Alexander proceeded to attack from behind and gain control of. If nothing else, it is a nice story.

Categories: Plutarch's Women | Tags: , , , , , | 2 Comments

A Letter to Arrian (26) The Loss of Friends

a_roman_writerMy dear Arrian,

It is ironic that after turning against Alexander because of his orientalising, the Macedonian soldiers came back to him upon hearing about the promotion of Persian officers, and creation of Persian units. It feels - even if not reads - like Alexander called their bluff on how his empire should be run, and won.
.
And - surprise, surprise - he kept on winning, for after the reconciliation banquet the Macedonians who were no longer fit for service were sent home just as Alexander had intended should happen in the first place-!
.
A confession: I felt no joy in reading about Alexander’s success at Opis. How could I? It was achieved completely at the expense of his men’s concerns and fears. That is not kingly behaviour.
.
All in all, reading these pages was a very difficult experience. There are no acts of heroism in them, no acts of derring-do; Achilles is wholly absent. In his place, we have only the unwise acts of a politician-king, the exposure of deep divisions and wounds within the Macedonian state, and death.
.
And not just the death of ‘minor’ figures but, as it were, of Alexander himself: Hephaestion. What a blow that was. Two months later, Alexander went on campaign against the Cossaeans. It should have helped. It should have restored the old Alexander to us but I must say that it - the campaign - felt a bit pathetic.
.
The reason for this is because I suspect that Alexander launched his attack against the Cosseans as much to take his mind off Hephaestion rather than because the Cossaeans were a worthwhile enemy. Well, alright, but I wish he could have found a different way to work through his grief than bloodshed. It just doesn’t seem fitting to Hephaestion’s memory, somehow.
.
We know very little about Amyntoros, but I think he was a cultured man. He should have been honoured through the arts not with the edge of a sword.
.
In my last letter I said that it felt like you were setting Alexander’s story up to reveal that he was murdered. For all the falsity of the aforementioned ‘reconciliation banquet’ I must admit I did not get the same feeling as I read these pages.
.
The Babylonian priests’ warning reminded us, however, that Alexander’s end was indeed close. I must say I really dislike the inclusion of these prophecies. If they are historical, nothing can be done about them, but are they? They really do seem much too neat, much too certain to be true.
.
In closing, I would like to go back to the discharged Macedonians. Alexander appointed an unwell Craterus to take them home. Nine months after leaving Opis (?), he had only gone as far as Cilicia. Why was he marching so slowly?
.
Perhaps ill health slowed him down? I don’t think Craterus could have been that unwell, though; he was not going home into retirement but had orders to relieve Antipater as Deputy Hegemon of the Corinthian League. Did he know something was about to happen to Alexander and was holding onto his ready made army? I do wonder.
.
Of course, we’ll never know. Moving on, I look forward to reading your thoughts on Alexander’s death, which I will cover in my next - and, dear friend, last! - letter. Your words will not be easy to read but only by staring down death can we make sense of life.

Your friend,

φιλέλλην

The above picture is from Ancient History

An index of all the letters can be found here

Categories: Letters to Arrian | Tags: , | 4 Comments

6. 4. 14

Rory Stewart
U.K. readers - were you able to see Rory Stewart’s documentary on northern England last Sunday? It was a first class effort. The programme had a much broader focus than I realised, covering not only Roman Britain and the period after the Romans left but also the Anglo-Saxon age of saints as well. As a result, we went from Hadrian to Bede and Cuthbert. It was great stuff.

I mentioned last week that Stewart is an admirer of T. E. Lawrence. I was delighted to find his two part documentary on Lawrence on You Tube this week. In this documentary, Stewart examines what Lawrence has to teach us about the Allied invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Part One

Part Two

The only bad thing I have to say about this documentary is that it was not accompanied by a book and is not (to the best of my knowledge) available on DVD.
.
The Best of Enemies
Who was Alexander’s most effective enemy? Darius III, Bessus or Spitamenes? That is the question on my mind at the moment as I read about Alexander in Bactria and Sogdia. It certainly wasn’t Bessus as he spent most of his opposition to Alexander running away from him. Come to think of it, so did Darius III. At least Spitamenes got stuck in a little.

One of the reasons I am reading about this stage of Alexander’s expedition is because in the past I have never fully got to grips with the idea that Afghanistan (in its ancient form) caused Alexander the most trouble. As far as I was concerned, he went to Arachosia, conquered it and moved on; Aria, did the same, and Bactria, did the same again before moving on to India. But, of course, he was two years back and forth (especially in Sogdia and Bactria) doing these things whereas he managed to pass through Asia Minor and Egypt much more quickly and easily. What I decided needed to do is read the text more carefully so that I got a better appreciation of the matter.

The Ultimate Joke
Well, wasn’t quite, but I hope you liked my April Fool’s post. I know it didn’t catch everyone out but whether it did or didn’t I had good fun writing it. My apologies go to Messers Leto and Stone for putting words into their mouth :-)

Categories: Of The Moment | Leave a comment

Alexander’s Injuries Part 3

Plutarch’s First List
Last year I wrote two posts about the injuries that Alexander sustained during his campaigns (you can read part 1 here and part 2 here). This week, I read Plutarch’s Of the Fortune or Virtue of Alexander the Great and was interested to see that (in Chapter 2 of the First Oration) not only does he mention Alexander’s injuries but adds to the eight that I knew about already. He lists eleven in all. i., ii, vi, and ix. are the ‘new’ ones. Here they are:

.i. 335 BC Struck on the head by a stone while fighting Illyrians
ii. 335 BC Struck on the neck by an iron mace while fighting the Illyrians
iii. 334 BC ‘… my head was… gashed with a barbarian scimitar’ at the Battle of the Granicus
iv. 333 BC ‘… run through the thigh with a sword’ at the Battle of Issus
v. 332 BC ‘… shot in the ankle with a dart’ during the siege of Gaza
vi. ?* Dislocated shoulder after falling from his horse
vii. ?** Shinbone split by a Maracadartean arrow
viii. 327 BC ‘… shot through the shoulder’ by a Assacanian arrow
ix. ? Wounded in the thigh by the Gandridae
x. 326 BC Shot in the breast by an arrow fired by ‘one of the Mallotes’ (i.e. Mallians)
xi. 325 BC Received a blow to the neck while fighting the Mallians

* Plutarch says this happened ‘not long after’ the Siege of Gaza
** I don’t know who the ‘Maracadartae’ are; I think, however, that Plutarch is describing the injury Alexander received after crossing the Tanais River in 329 BC (Arrian IV. 1 - 3). The translation of Plutarch’s text that I am using dates to 1870 so ‘Maracadartae’ may simply be an old name for a known tribe - as is the case with the Mallotes who appear to be the Mallians, and Assacanians, above, who are the Assacenians.
.
For the record, Plutarch misses out a couple of the wounds mentioned in my previous posts (source: Arrian). They are:

i. The blow to the head and neck that Alexander suffered during the Siege of Cyropolis (329 BC)
ii. The arrow wound in the ankle that he received during the Siege of the city of Massaga (327 BC).

Did Physical Perfection Matter to Alexander?
No. A little later on (First Oration, Chapter 9), Plutarch tells us that after being stabbed in the thigh while fighting the Triballians, Philip II was ‘troubled at the deformity of his limping’. Alexander, however, saw the matter quite differently.

Be of good cheer, father, said he, and show yourself in public, that you may be reminded of your bravery at every step.

Alexander’s view is a very noble one. And it did not change when he himself was similarly injured. According to Plutarch, we cannot but believe that Alexander,

… gloried in his own wounds, which every time he beheld them called to his remembrance the conquered nation and the victory, what cities he had taken, what kings had surrendered themselves; never striving to conceal or cover those indelible characters and scars of honor, which he always carried about him as the engraven testimonies of his virtue and fortitude.

Plutarch is giving us his opinion here but for me it chimes perfectly with Alexander’s view of war and glory.
.
Plutarch’s Second List
In his Second Oration (Chapter 9) Plutarch repeats his list, adding some details and changing others.

i. 334 BC At the Granicus ‘his helmet was cleft to his very scull (sic)’
ii. 333 BC ‘… run through the thigh with a sword by Darius’ at the Battle of Issus
ii. 332 BC Wounded in the shoulder by a dart at the Siege of Gaza
iii. ?* ‘Shot in the shin’ by the ‘Maragandi’
iv. 329 BC Struck on the neck by a stone in Hyrcania - which nearly blinded him
v. 329 BC Suffered from dysentry after crossing the Tanais River
v. 327 BC Wounded in the heel by the Assaracans (i.e. Assacenians)
vii. 325 BC ‘… wounded with an arrow two cubits in length’ by the Malli (i.e. Mallians). The arrow ‘went in at his breast and came out at his neck’

* As above, I don’t know know who the Maragandi but judging by the injury, Plutarch is describing the incident at the Tanais River in 329 BC
.
With all these wounds, no wonder Plutarch berates Fortune when he says,

… if nothing else, behold the body of Alexander wounded by the enemy, mangled, battered, bruised, from the crown of his head to the soles of his feet,

With spears, and swords, and mighty stones.
(Iliad XI. L. 265)

At this point, I am not sure if I am reading about Alexander or Jesus as the language that Plutarch uses is so redolent of that which Christians use to talk about Christ crucified.
.
In Chapter 13 of the Second Oration, Plutarch focuses on the siege of the Mallian fort, when Alexander climbed over the inner walls and faced the Indians by himself until Peucestas, Leonatus and Abeas came to his aid (Plutarch states that it was Ptolemy, Limnaeus and Leonnatus ‘and some others’ who climbed the wall after him. Arrian dismisses this, pointing out that Ptolemy states that he was elsewhere at the time).

i. ‘… a battle-axe cleft his helmet and entered his skull…’
ii. ‘… another [Mallian] shot him with an Indian arrow in the breast… the [arrow] head being four fingers broad and five in length…’
iii. ‘… a fellow… came behind [Alexander], and with a great iron pestle gave him such a bang upon the neck as deprived him… both of his senses and his sight…’

I have to say, I am not quite sure what to make of Of the Fortune or Virtue - it is a very adulatory text and a great contrast to the Life of Alexander. The latter is a very sober text; this one reads like Plutarch has necked a few glasses of wine and is now drunk-talking.

Categories: Of The Moment | Tags: | 1 Comment

Alexander: The Ultimate Cut. Jared Leto’s New Rôle

An interesting article that I spotted in today’s Daily Post.

Oliver Stone looks set to court controversy with Alexander: The Ultimate Cut, the fourth version of his biopic based on the life of Alexander the Great.

Alexander: The Ultimate Cut, which is being released on the tenth anniversary of the cinematic release of Alexander, will be 206 minutes long, seven minutes less than the 213 minute Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut (2007).

However, The Ultimate Cut will contain new scenes featuring Darius III, the Great King of Persia. According to sources close to Director Oliver Stone, though, actor Raz Degan, who played Darius in the original version of the film, has not reprised his role for the new scenes.

‘At first the plan was for Raz to play Darius again,’ a source close to Stone said, “But at the last minute he became unavailable due to scheduling conflicts. Fortunately, Jared Leto was able to step in.’

And he did so despite playing Alexander’s best friend, Hephaistion, in the original movie. So, what was Oliver Stone thinking?

According to our source, ‘The reason Oliver went for Jared is Jared’s beard. It makes him look like Raz’s brother. Of course, they aren’t related so to compensate for the lack of similarity, Oliver placed the camera at oblique angles and used darker lighting.’

It is this use of ‘darker lighting’ that threatens to derail Stone’s project. ‘It is true there was a lot of debate about it,’ a source told the Post, ‘Some people felt that using a ‘darker’ light to make it seem like Jared’s skin was a darker colour was just a different version of the old practice of blacking up. A lot of folks were not at all happy about it.

‘But Stone was like, “No, no; it isn’t at all the same. We’re creating our own kind of chiaroscuro effect.” To be honest, I’m still not sure what he meant by that.’ What did Jared think about the lighting? ‘When Oliver told him what he intended to do, Jared just rolled his eyes and said ‘Well, it can’t be any more f—— fake than a Macedonian speaking like an Irishman.’ We all had a laugh at that.’

Below are images of Raz Degan as Darius III and Jared Leto with a beard. Are they similar? Let us know what you think.

Report by April F. Atua (Hollywood Office)’

Raz Degan as Darius III in Oliver Stone’s “Alexander” (2004)

Jared Leto

Jared Leto

Categories: Of The Moment | 3 Comments

Blog at WordPress.com. The Adventure Journal Theme.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 121 other followers

%d bloggers like this: