Hollywood Depictions of Cleopatra
She is a timeless icon of femininity and feminism. She is the most famous woman in the history of the world–perhaps because she was, and remains, the most powerful woman in the history of the world. No subsequent queen or prime minister or secretary of state has ever had the geographic dominion, relative wealth, and unfettered authority that was enjoyed by Cleopatra VII of Egypt.
Almost everything we know about her has been filtered through the propaganda of her enemies. What remains are the scant facts and what we can deduce from them. She was a woman of extraordinary charm who shared a bed with not one, but two of the most powerful men in the ancient world–Julius Caesar and Marcus Antonius. She would become mortal enemies with a third–Octavian, otherwise known as Augustus Caesar–who did more to immortalize her than her lovers.
But she comes down to us through the ages without a face. Her coins–many of which depict her in quite severe and haggish ways–are stylized portraits, meant to impart terror rather than admiration. The few busts that we believe portray the Egyptian queen cannot be verified. There are no extant portraits nor textual descriptions of her. Because of this, artists have a blank canvass upon which they can imagine this cunning political queen in any way they like. That is a siren’s call to Hollywood who has made several attempts at bringing Cleopatra to life.
First, there was the silent film starring Theda Bara which was destroyed because it was too racy!
In 1934, Claudette Colbert starred in a Cecil B. DeMille production about the Queen of the Nile. The production is old-fashioned, in black and white, but the dialog is often fun. This is an Egyptianized version of the queen, which is not necessarily entirely inaccurate, but there is little visual reference to her cultural heritage as a Hellene. I especially like the invention of Herod making trouble between Cleopatra and Antony–which is unlikely to have happened the way it plays out on screen, but hints at the genuine trouble between the two client monarchs! There’s a certain jaded maturity that Claudette Colbert brings to the role, but the entire picture seems too small to incorporate such a big historical figure.
This is not to say that the film is all eye-candy and soap-opera. The costuming and set-decor is an interesting mix of Egyptian, Roman and Greek–all of this in keeping with accounts we have of Alexandria where cultural fusion was the norm. Though the film never mentions Cleopatra’s children by Antony–including the heroine of my own debut novel, Cleopatra Selene–it’s fairly historically accurate; viewers will learn from this film as well as be entertained. Not much better can be said for Hollywood than that!
Perhaps with an eye to how difficult it would be to top the 1963 Elizabeth Taylor version, Cleopatra has appeared primarily on the small screen ever since. The 1999 Television Mini-Series starring Billy Zane, Timothy Dalton and Leonor Varela was based on Margaret George’s excellent novel, Memoirs of Cleopatra. Unfortunately, the series bears little resemblance to the book. In this version, Cleopatra is a foot-stomping, whining, little brat who never brings any gravitas to the screen. Alexandria is rendered similarly unimpressive. While Varela’s looks may be more in line with the historical Cleopatra–her profile looks like the coins–her acting is fairly atrocious. It’s actually Billy Zane’s boyish rendition of Marcus Antonius that is the most convincing.
Which brings us to the latest incarnation of Cleopatra, Lyndsey Marshal’s version on HBO’s Rome. While I can find nothing bad to say about the series as a whole, which was masterfully written, funny, absorbing and dramatic–our Egyptian queen got the short end of the stick. Here she’s portrayed as a drug-addled slut who deceives Caesar about the parentage of her son. There’s nothing in the historical record to suggest this, other than Augustus’ accusations against her, but not every portrayal can resuscitate the queen’s image. Marshal brings a little bit of cunning to the role and never lets us forget that Cleopatra is without moral scruple–in that, she may be the closest portrayal to the historical woman.
It’s impossible to tire of Cleopatra and Hollywood seems poised to make another attempt. Given the run-away success of Stacy Schiff’s recent biography, a new movie is being planned starring Angelina Jolie. Reportedly, this film will focus more on Cleopatra as a mother and strategist. It remains to be seen what sort of images will leave their mark in popular culture this time!
Of What Importance Was King Herod in the Life of Cleopatra’s Daughter?
Though no ancient sources directly link the two monarchs, it’s difficult to write a novel about the life of Cleopatra’s daughter without referencing one of her mother’s bitterest enemies.
Herod the Great was Cleopatra VII’s rival even before her affair with the Roman Triumvir, Antony. As a Ptolemy, Cleopatra maintained a hereditary claim on Judea, but that wasn’t the only source of her conflict with King Herod.
To say that Herod’s personal life was a study in dysfunction is to put it lightly. When he entered on a campaign to rid himself of his wife’s relatives, of the Hasmonean Dynasty that preceded him, his mother-in-law found a sympathetic ally in Cleopatra VII. The Queen of Egypt tried to intercede on behalf of her friend, and apparently won Herod’s lifelong enmity as a result.
The feeling appears to have been mutual. Cleopatra would later demand from Antony that Herod’s whole kingdom be surrendered to her, but because Herod had been a loyal friend to Antony, he only stripped Herod of date and balsam plantations in Jericho and Ein Gedi.
The rivalry reached such a fever pitch that Herod is said to have considered assassinating Cleopatra, but was dissuaded by his advisors, who assured him that Antony would never forgive him. After Antony and Cleopatra’s defeat, King Herod went over to Octavian, asserting that he had given Antony the best possible advice: Kill Cleopatra.
Did the rivalry end there, or did Herod continue to fear the Ptolemies even after the famous queen took her own life?
Three of Cleopatra’s children survived the civil war: little Ptolemy Philadelphus, Cleopatra Selene, and her twin brother, Alexander Helios. As Ptolemies, all three could exert a claim over Judea, and because they were half-Roman, it might well have been feared that their claims might be supported against Herod if the political fortunes of Octavian should change. Even dead, Cleopatra and Antony still had their partisans, in Rome and elsewhere. Alexandrian cults like those surrounding the goddess Isis still held enormous political sway. If we credit the gospel of Matthew, then we also know that Herod was particularly threatened by children born under auspices and omens, which would have led him to be doubly wary of Cleopatra’s twins.
Given the portrait of Herod that has come down to us through the ages–namely that he was so power hungry and paranoid that he had his own sons put to death as rivals–it is difficult to believe that he ever viewed Cleopatra’s daughter with dispassion. Cleopatra Selene not only survived childhood, but went on to become Queen of Mauretania. Are we to believe that King Herod was not made uneasy to see his enemy’s daughter given more territory to rule than all the other client kingdoms in the empire put together?
Cleopatra Selene and her husband Juba appear to have had the implicit trust of Augustus, and did not need to make frequent visits back to the capitol to secure his good will, but Herod was less secure. Whereas Selene and Juba founded a port city and named it after Caesar, Herod commenced building two such cities, naming them both after Augustus. Whereas Cleopatra Selene and Juba appear to have worked in easy concert with their proconsular neighbors in Africa Novo, Herod was obliged to get permission for his military exploits, and overstepped on at least one occasion, prompting an angry letter from Augustus. Given these tensions, it is hard to imagine that Herod and Selene did not wish one another ill.
However, whether or not an active rivalry between Herod and Cleopatra Selene existed, the King of Judea was a pivotal contemporary figure in her life by which she must have measured most of her accomplishments as a client queen. That Herod comes down to us through history more well-known than Cleopatra Selene is partially a function of her gender, but also because her reign was one of relative peace and prosperity, lacking the big splashy family drama that marked Herod’s rule.




