Noble Cretan Ghoul Inquisitor.

For communities Alexander and all-all-all and Alexander-art

The famous antique mosaic depicting the battle between Alexander and Darius III Codoman.
Dated around 200 BC. Original dimensions are 5.82m X 3.13m
It was discovered in 1831 during the excavations of Pompeii, on the floor of the so-called. "House of the Faun" IN this moment kept in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples. In the house of the Faun present moment published its exact copy.

The work is a copy of the masters of the Alexandrian school of mosaic from a picturesque ancient Greek canvas, executed in a different technique.
The mosaic is a copy of the work of either Apelesse or Philoxenus of Eretria. The last author was mentioned by the ancient Roman writer Pliny the Elder as having worked on the canvas commissioned by Cassander, the king of Macedonia.
The time reference of the creation of the picture, made from literary data, is confirmed by the manner of execution with a limited set of colors used and the way of drawing, characteristic of the early Hellenistic period. The mosaic is made up of about one and a half million pieces, assembled into a picture using a technique known as "opus vermiculatum", that is, the pieces were assembled one by one along winding lines.
The Mosaic depicts Alexander the Great attacking Darius III. Alexander without a helmet, in rich linen armor, on horseback strikes the bodyguard of Darius with a spear. The face of Alexander in the mosaic bears a marked resemblance to his well-known busts.

Gaugamela or Issus?
At the moment, there is no unequivocal opinion on this issue - which battle is depicted on the mosaic. A persistent opinion already prevails that the canvas depicts a symbolic battle, as an expression of the glorification of the exploits of Alexander in the Asian campaign.

In favor of Gaugamel/Arbel.
In the background is an inanimate tree. Gaugamela, as a variant, is translated as "lifeless tree". Therefore, the researchers immediately named the mosaic as the “Battle of Arbela / Gaugamela.” Also in favor of this battle, the researchers considered Alexander’s attire - a double linen shell, which was allegedly taken from the booty at Issus.
A sword made by Kitian craftsmen is depicted, and the Kitian emblem is supposedly distinguishable.
Under Gaugamela, the chariot could not move because of the mountain of corpses. The fallen Persian, seeing his reflection in the shield, can be recognized as evidence of a pile of corpses under the wheels.
At Gaugamela, Darius fled on a recently foaled mare. Behind the turning chariot is a Persian with a horse (?).

in favor of Issa.
Nearby, the explorers see Darius' brother, Oksatra, the head of the cavalry, who rescues his brother.
Perhaps the posture of Darius says that he threw the weapon towards the Sanya (during Issus, Alexander was allegedly wounded in the leg by Darius himself, either with a dagger or a sword).

It is believed that Issa was a very important turning point in the history of Alexander's conquests, and was the first battle where the Persians, under the direct leadership of the king, were defeated by the Greeks. The subject of Darius' escape was very well discussed during his flight from the Isles. Therefore, it is believed that this can also be interpreted in favor of the fact that the battle of Isca is depicted as the most important.

The most famous and best preserved of the dead cities ancient world stores many magnificent images of mosaic art, both in the form of realistic paintings, which were precisely a work of art, and in the form of large floor mosaics that served as a utilitarian floor covering. From point of view artistic style and plots, Pompeian mosaics represent not only the history of ancient art, but also anticipate the development of art over the next millennia. Symbolism and realism, primitivism and even surrealism - at various stages in the history of the city, mosaic masters in Pompeii created paintings for every taste and color. (Which, in general, confirms the common rule: everything new is well forgotten old.)

Many of the most interesting mosaics are now kept in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples. But even in Pompeii itself you can see extraordinary paintings made of colored stone. In many compositions, the careful selection of colors and the size of the mosaic elements are striking - just a few millimeters.

Alexander the Great and Darius at the Battle of Issus

The most famous Pompeii mosaic is the Battle of Issus from the House of the Faun. The mosaic was made famous not only by the image of Alexander the Great, but also by the artistic depth of the images, the dynamics of the whole picture, the emotionality and drama carried through the millennia.
The plot of the mosaic is one of the key moments of the story ancient civilization. The battle of the army of Alexander the Great with the army of the Persian king Darius opened the way for the great commander to the east, to India. And dealt a stunning blow to the Persian Empire. The authors of the mosaic managed to convey not only the experiences of the main actors but also the general intensity of passions.

It is assumed that the mosaic was made in the 1st century AD after a painting original by the Greek artist Philoxenus from Eritrea. Philoxenus was a contemporary of Alexander, so it is very likely that the sharp, intense, slightly angular features of Alexander's face are much closer to the original than the idealized portraits of later times. The face of Darius, although it reflects a complex range of feelings, most likely also has a portrait resemblance to the king of the Persians.

The picture as a whole is striking in its versatility and integrity. The complexity of the composition is formed by numerous figures of warriors, horsemen, who are in motion. At the same time, faces and details are written out with accuracy and realism. In the mosaic of the Battle of Issus, the color scheme is limited - black, white and yellow-red colors are used. This limitation is by no means due to the lack of materials of a different color, but is an artistic concept, probably subordinated to some general interior interests. It is difficult to judge, perhaps the pictorial original was originally made in such colors.

Currently, the original mosaic is in the Archaeological Museum of Naples, but it originally decorated the floor in the House of the Faun in Pompeii (now there is an exact copy of the mosaic, made by craftsmen from Ravenna). The size of the composition is 5.84 by 3.17 meters (the area is over 15 square meters), the number of mosaic elements - more than one and a half million.

Battle of Issus. Mosaic from the House of the Faun in Pompeii. 1 in. AD

Battle of Issus. Fragment. Alexander the Great.

Battle of Issus. Fragment. Darius.

pompeian cat

The second replicated mosaic from Pompeii is an image of a leopard (some, however, believe that this is a cat). The characteristic spotted coloring is conveyed quite accurately, leaving no doubt about the rapacity of the beast and pronounced clawed paws. But the grin on the face can hardly be considered aggressive - the cat is more likely to play, preparing to jump for a toy, than seriously going to attack.

One of the typical techniques of Roman mosaics is clearly visible on this mosaic - the silhouette of the picture is emphasized not only by colored cubes, but also by background white elements laid out along the line. The volume of the animal's body itself is well conveyed in the mosaic, and the shadows from the paws are designed to emphasize the realism of the image.
Good pussy, good...

Cave Canem - Be afraid of the dog

Another "hit" of the Pompeii mosaics is the guard dog. In Pompeii, the image of a dog at the entrance to the house served as a kind of security talisman and a warning to guests. The inscription Cave Canem (Fear the dog) on one of them has become a common noun for such images. Most watchdogs are made in black and white - the dog guarding the house is usually lined with small black cubes on a light background. The sizes and plots of mosaics with dogs are individual - there are large and very realistic dogs, as well as smaller ones, which are more marked than drawn in detail. Ferocious and wary dogs are more characteristic, but on some the guards peacefully curl up and sleep.

On the example of the above mosaics, differences in the style and shape of the images are noticeable. There are several periods in the art of Pompeii, because the city developed and grew over several centuries. Without going into subtleties of art history, we will simply draw the attention of visitors to a noticeable difference in the presentation of images and the form of execution of mosaics.

In ancient mythology, there is one very pronounced image of a guard dog - this is a Cerberus guarding the entrance to another world. Who knows, maybe, depicting a dog at the entrance, the inhabitants of Pompeii hoped that she would protect them from the troubles and hardships of the outside world and keep peace and tranquility in the house? It is a pity that the beautiful mosaics ultimately did not fulfill this purpose.

Cave Canum - Be afraid of the dog. Mosaic. Pompeii. V, 1, 26. Casa di Cecilio Giocondo

Sleeping dog. Mosaic. Pompeii. VI, 8, 3-5. Casa del Poeta Tragico

Guard dog. Mosaic. Pompeii. I, 7, 1. Casa di Paquio Proculo

Another dog. Mosaic. Pompeii.

Academy of Plato.

Plato's Academy is a famous philosophical school in which many of the foundations of modern civilization were laid. A mosaic in a villa in Pompeii is believed to depict a group of philosophers from the classical period. Second from the left - Lysias, third from the left - Plato. The picture itself is concise and almost schematic in depicting details. The antique temple, tree, capitals of the column are marked, but not traced, although the folds on the clothes are accurate and realistic. The composition and manner of execution suggest that the mosaic was made after a painting of the Greek school. But by the time the mosaic was made, a different style reigned in Pompeii - a chic frame with a magnificent decorative interlacing of fruits, ribbons, leaves and eight comic masks was added to the plot image of the mosaic master. Each mask is original, they are not repeated, and their funny grotesque grimaces seem to laugh at the pathos of the central plot.

Some historians believe that the mosaic depicts not Plato at all and not his Academy at all, but a meeting of scientists from the Alexandria Museum (which was not at all a museum in our understanding, but something like an academy of sciences and a university in one bottle). In the grand scheme of things, does it really matter? People are sitting, talking about important things, and masks are laughing around - how many times will world art repeat such a collision ...

The material for the mosaic was marble cubes with the addition of smalt. Now the mosaic is in Naples, in the National Archaeological Museum.

Academy of Plato. Mosaic. Pompeii (Villa T. Siminius Stefan). Beginning of the 1st century BC e.

people and destinies

In Pompeian painting and mosaics, mythological and genre scenes are often found. Sometimes to separate where the legend is depicted, and where - real life is simply impossible. For us the whole world ancient rome- a big legend, with its well-established images, clichés, delusions.

Battle with the Minotaur (Labyrinth). Mosaic. Pompeii

Comedians. Mosaic. Pompeii

A mosaic depicting a skeleton may seem like a gloomy prophecy, but in reality the inhabitants of Pompeii were not at all inclined to fall into melancholy and despondency. Most likely, such an image is a reminder to the healer of how a person works, or a signboard of a funeral home. If the Pompeian lupanaries are famous for their illustrations, which are understandable without any explanation, then why not assume a similar approach in other areas of service delivery?

Skeleton. Mosaic. Pompeii

Our polls educated world sometimes too obsessed with predestination. But the Pompeians, judging by this picture, great importance attached to Fortune, Chance, Luck. (Something like - do not renounce the bag). Wheel, skull, scales, measure - the symbolism is understandable even after a couple of millennia. Two dresses, two worlds - and sometimes it's so easy to be on the other side.

Fortune. Mosaic. Pompeii

Animals, birds, fish

The art of mosaic was so widespread that among the plots of mosaic paintings and panels there are a wide variety of animals, birds, fish - in their native habitat, in interaction or simply in the form of a still life (and before the famous hunting "collapses" of Snyders, there are still centuries and centuries .. .).

Hippopotamus. Mosaic. Pompeii

Crocodile. Mosaic. Pompeii

Fish and ducks. Mosaic. Pompeii.

Cat with quail, birds and fish. Mosaic. Pompeii.

underwater kingdom

Mosaic depicting the inhabitants of the deep sea is also known under the names "Fish", "Seabed" and - even - "Sea reptiles". On a black background, an encyclopedia of fish and animals that lived in the deep sea and is well known to the authors of the mosaic is presented, since most of the creatures (more than twenty different inhabitants of the sea) are not only recognizable, but also transmitted with amazing accuracy. With the help of color nuances, the artist reproduced the characteristic coloration of fish, including even small details - fins, gill lines, octopus suckers, etc.

The compositional center of the picture is an octopus wrapped around a lobster with tentacles. The close-set and accentuated eyes of the octopus seem to be directed directly at the viewer of the picture. The octopus seems to be conducting a dialogue with the viewer through the glass of a modern aquarium, while the rest of the fish are busy with their own business. However, there is no doubt that all the presented species of fish, mollusks, crustaceans made up a significant part of the diet of the Pompeians, so the mosaic is a kind of illustration of the culinary habits of two thousand years ago.

Underwater Kingdom (Seabed)

Mosaics in the interiors of Pompeii

It would be unfair not to pay attention to the surviving examples of the interior decoration of the courtyards and villas of Pompeii. Inhabitants ancient city knew a lot about not only fine arts, but also knew how to equip their homes with grace and luxury. Probably, most of the floors in the houses of the aristocracy and wealthy families were decorated with geometric and floral ornaments, lined with black and white elements. But huge colored floor compositions are not uncommon (like the already mentioned Battle of Issus).

mosaic floor

Some surviving examples of decorative and interior art amaze with an abundance of ideas and harmonious color combinations. Other "specialists" are ready to attribute the column lined with mosaics either to the Byzantine era (several centuries before it), or to the excesses of the Baroque (-eleven centuries). Meanwhile, the column combines an unbanal geometric pattern, a floral and floral carpet, as well as three border-belts with original drawings. The use of smalt suggests that the column was made in the late period, which does not prevent it from surpassing the achievements of design art by centuries.
The size of the mosaic elements in the facing of the column is sometimes only a few millimeters.

Mosaic column from Pompeii. (Now in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples)

The history of Roman mosaics is far from exhausted by the artistic paintings found in Pompeii. However, it was the city covered with ashes that gave an idea of how extensively mosaic was used in the art of exterior and interior decoration of public buildings and residential buildings in the ancient Roman world. After dying, Pompeii became a monument to itself and to an ancient civilization that paid so much attention to the beauty and aesthetics of its daily life.

Nadezhda Lastochkina, 2009.
Based on materials: pompeii.ru, vokrugsveta.ru, varvar.ru, foto.mail.ru/mail/juju777/ and other resources.

Alexander the Great

Plutarch's story and paintings by old masters

ARTICLE TWO

See the beginning of the cycle in No. 3, 7/2010

In whose heart Alexander is still not alive
for his royal favors?
Dante. Feast

VI. Battle of Alexander with Darius (at Issus or Gaugamela)

The famous antique mosaic depicting the battle between Alexander and Darius III Codomanus was discovered in 1831 during excavations in Pompeii on the floor of the so-called House of the Faun. It is currently kept in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples, and a copy of it is located in the House of the Faun. The mosaic itself, in turn, is a copy of a painting by Apelles or Philoxenus of Eritrea (it was not possible to attribute it unambiguously).

Battle of Alexander with Darius III Kodoman.mosaic panel.
OK. 100 BC e. National Archaeological Museum, Naples

The mosaic depicts Alexander the Great attacking Darius III Codomanus. Alexander on the left. If this is indeed an image of the battle at Gaugamela, then he “is not on Bukefal, for Bukefal,” explains Plutarch, “was no longer young and his strength had to be spared.” Alexander without a helmet, in a rich “double linen armor” (Plutarch specifies that he was taken “from the booty captured at Issus”; therefore, this could not have been the battle of Issus). He spears the bodyguard of the Persian king, although the impression is that Darius, facing Alexander, attacks. However, this impression is erroneous: the horses, on the contrary, carry away the chariot of Darius from the battlefield.

The mosaic captures an interesting moment. Behind Darius you can see the sarissa (long, up to six meters long spears used by the famous Macedonian phalanx). They are directed towards Alexander, so at first glance it seems that this is the army of Darius. But the Persians had no sarissa! Therefore, it can be assumed that Alexander is making a maneuver, and that his soldiers surrounded Darius. The mosaic is difficult to compare with written sources, but nevertheless it captures some of the tactical elements of the battle.

“Despite the fact that his(Alexandra. - A.M.) forces were significantly inferior in number to the forces of the barbarians, Alexander did not allow himself to be surrounded, on the contrary, bypassing the left wing of the enemy army with his right wing, he hit the Persians in the flank and turned the barbarians standing against him to flight. Fighting in the front ranks, Alexander was wounded in the thigh with a sword, according to Haret, by Darius himself, for it came to hand-to-hand combat between them. But Alexander, speaking about this battle in a letter to Antipater, does not name the one who inflicted the wound on him. He writes that he was wounded in the thigh with a dagger, but that the wound was not dangerous. Alexander won a brilliant victory, destroyed more than one hundred and ten thousand enemies, but could not capture Darius, who, fleeing, outstripped him by four or five stages. During the chase, Alexander managed to capture the king's chariot and bow.

(Plutarch. Alexander, 20)

The escape of Darius is especially widely covered by ancient authors precisely in connection with the Battle of Issus, which is why this fresco is more often called that way. But, perhaps, it depicts some kind of symbolic battle and glorifies the military genius of Alexander.

The face of Alexander in the mosaic bears a marked resemblance to his well-known busts. The whole drama of this battle is conveyed by the facial expressions of Alexander and Darius.

1529. Munich, Alte Pinakothek

Albrecht Altdorfer. Battle of Alexander the Great with Darius at Issus.
Detail: women participating in the battle

The plot of Altdorfer's painting was not in doubt. It was ordered by Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria precisely as the "Battle of Issus". The picture is wonderful in many ways.

First, the very fact of the artist's appeal to historical theme: this was the first attempt to depict such a plot in the art of the Northern Renaissance - the first and perhaps the most impressive! Secondly, the concept and grandeur of the artistic result: relatively small in size (158.4 x 120.3 cm), the picture makes a grandiose impression. A huge (in terms of the number of figures) battle scene is depicted against the background - one can safely say - a global landscape.

This thesis is confirmed by the fact that the point in space, to which the artist mentally raised himself, allowed him not only to survey the entire battlefield, but very accurately reproduce the vast area of the Mediterranean: in the center we see Cyprus, beyond the isthmus - the Red Sea, on the right - Egypt and the Nile Delta with seven arms, on the left - the Persian Gulf, below on a pointed mountain - the Tower of Babel. This is not just a bird's-eye height - this is a cosmic scale! In essence, this is the first picture depicting a segment of the earth's circumference from a great height and with a pronounced curvature of the earth's horizon.

With a large scale, the artist achieves fantastic detail: on the fragment of the picture we cite, you can see the finest details of the clothes and jewelry of women participating in the battle.

Some researchers argue that the depiction of women in this battle is an invention of Altdorfer and that there is no historical evidence for this. Meanwhile, Curtius Rufus, describing the marching order of the Persians, lists:

“The marching formation was like this. In front, on silver altars, they carried fire, which the Persians consider eternal and sacred. The magicians sang ancient hymns. They were followed by 365 young men dressed in purple cloaks, according to the number of days of the year, since the Persians also divided the year into the same number of days. Then the white horses drove the chariot dedicated to Jupiter, followed by a horse of great stature, called the horse of the Sun. Golden branches and white robes adorned the ruling horses. Not far from them were 10 chariots richly decorated with gold and silver. Behind them are horsemen of 12 tribes in various clothes and armed in different ways. Next came those whom the Persians call "immortals", numbering up to 10 thousand, no one else had such barbaric magnificent clothes: they had gold necklaces, cloaks embroidered with gold, and long-sleeved tunics decorated with precious stones. At a short distance there were the so-called relatives of the king, numbering up to 15 thousand. This crowd, with its almost feminine luxury in attire, stood out more for its pomp than for the beauty of its weapons. The courtiers who followed them, who usually kept the royal clothes, were called spearmen. They walked in front of the king's chariot, in which he towered over the rest. On both sides the chariot was decorated with gold and silver figures of the gods, precious stones sparkled on the pole, and above them towered two golden statues, each a cubit high: one - Nina, the other - Bela. Between them was a sacred golden image, similar to an eagle with outstretched wings. The clothes of the king himself surpassed everything else in luxury: a purple tunic with a white stripe woven in the middle; a cloak embroidered with gold, with golden hawks, converging beaks, girded like a woman with a sash. The king hung an akinak to him in a scabbard adorned with precious stones. The headdress of the king, called by the Persians “kidaris”, was decorated with purple and white strings. Behind the chariot were 10,000 spearmen with spears richly decorated with silver and arrows with gold tips. About 200 close nobles followed to the right and left of the king. Their detachment was closed by 30 thousand infantrymen, accompanied by 400 royal horses. Behind them, at a distance of one stage, the chariot was carried by the mother of the king Sisygambis, in another chariot was his wife. A crowd of women on horseback accompanied the queens. They were followed by 15 wagons, called harmaks: they contained the royal children, their educators and many eunuchs, who were not at all despised by these peoples. Then 360 royal concubines rode, also dressed in royal attire, then 600 mules and 300 camels carried the royal treasury: they were accompanied by a detachment of shooters. Behind them are the wives of relatives and friends of the king and crowds of merchants and convoy servants. Detachments of lightly armed warriors were the last to close the line, each with its own commander.

(K. Ruf. History of Alexander, III, 3: 9–25)

Maps compiled by modern historians, reconstructing the course of the battle based on historical documents, strikingly coincide with the depiction of the battle in Altdorfer's painting.

Map of the Battle of Issus

The artist captured the moment when the battle comes to an end; the army on the right wins. In the picture, we see the image of a griffin on the banners of the Macedonians - this is the legendary coat of arms of the Macedonian kingdom. The Macedonian cavalry in shining armor cuts into the enemy line with two wedges. In front - Alexander.

On the shields of his horse (they are in the form of two medallions) the words Alexander(front medallion) and Magnus(“Great”; back medallion).

In the camp of the Persians, the chariot of Darius is clearly visible; it stands out sharply in the ranks of the regiments of the Persians. Horses swiftly carry Darius' chariot from the battlefield. It was this moment that Altdorfer portrayed.

Plutarch, describing this battle, says:

“Alexander won a brilliant victory, destroyed more than one hundred and ten thousand enemies, but could not capture Darius, who, fleeing, outstripped him by four or five stages. During the chase, Alexander managed to capture the king's chariot and bow.

(Plutarch. Alexander, 20)

F. Schachermeier, the largest researcher of Alexander's life, writes: “Darius found himself in the thick of the battle, and then something unimaginable happened: the knight gave in to the knight. Instead of leading the army, leading the fighting foot soldiers and such successful coastal detachments, Darius, seized with panic fear, took to flight. His act can be called cowardly. But after all, even such an excellent warrior as Hector fell victim to the panic that seized him during the battle with Achilles. Darius left his camp, his army, and even his chariot to the conqueror. Alexander did not pursue him, but turned towards the shore to capture Nabarzan. He also took off running. Persian resistance was broken. Probably not much more than two hours have passed since the beginning of the battle, since Alexander pursued the enemy for quite a long time, until dusk.

It is strange that Rosa Maria and Rainer Hagen, talented researchers and authors of the wonderful book “What Great Pictures Say” (unfortunately not yet translated into Russian), claim that Altdorfer depicted the pursuit Alexander Darius, which is not mentioned in any historical source, and that the artist, in their opinion, followed the documents only in cases where these evidence fit into his own concept. But Altdorfer does not portray persecution Darius; he depicts exactly the moment that Plutarch speaks of: Alexander puts Darius to flight at the moment of the battle itself. So Altdorfer in this matter is quite historically reliable.

Altdorfer reproduces this decisive battle for Alexander as an event on a universal scale: the heavens also participate in this exciting drama - this battle seems to be repeated in them, it is between gloomy clouds and the shining gold of the setting sun. The cartouche, appearing in heaven like the finger of God, proclaims (in Latin):

“Alexander the Great defeated the last Darius, after 100,000 Persian foot soldiers and more than 10,000 horsemen were killed and the mother, wife and children of King Darius were taken prisoner, while Darius fled with 1,000 horsemen.”

Under the brush of Altdorfer, this battle takes on the scale of a kind of Armageddon - in the Christian eschatology of the place last battle good with evil (angels and demons) at the end of time at the end of the world, where “the kings of all the inhabited earth” will participate (Rev. 16:14–16).

Altdorfer apparently pursued several goals in creating this masterpiece of his. In particular, he wanted to capture Alexander's famous strategy, which allowed him to win victories over armies that outnumbered his legions many times over. And it is no coincidence that this picture of Altdorfer aroused admiration from another great commander - Napoleon. In 1800, the Alte Pinakothek in Munich, where the painting was located, was plundered by Napoleon's soldiers. For fourteen years it was kept by Napoleon in his Saint-Cloud Palace, until the Prussian troops discovered it and returned it to Munich.

So, we have no doubts about what exactly captivated Napoleon - certainly, it was Alexander's military genius, evidence of which was Altdorfer's masterpiece. Obviously, the customer of the painting, Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria, also experienced similar feelings. It is noteworthy that Altdorfer depicted Alexander as medieval knight at the tournament, exactly as Wilhelm IV himself is depicted in the engraving in his Tournament Book of Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria.

Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria at a tournament in 1512.
From the Tournament Book of Duke Wilhelm IV of Bavaria.
Bavarian State Library

In the same year, a medal with the image of William IV as a knight was minted.

Medal depicting William IV as a knight. 1512

Was this medal not a model for Altdorfer when creating the figure of Alexander in the “Battle of Issus”?

Altdorfer's painting had a significant impact on the interpretation of this plot by later masters. It is especially clearly felt in the painting by Jan Brueghel the Elder “The Battle of Issus” (or, again, a dilemma, “The Battle of Gaugamela” (1602).

Albrecht Altdorfer. Battle of Alexander the Great with Darius at Issus.Fragment

Jan Brueghel the Elder. Battle of Issus or Gaugamela. 1602. Paris. Louvre

VII. Darius' family appears before Alexander

next episode from Plutarch's story, which served as a theme for artists, occurred after the battle of Issus, in which Darius survived. Having fled, he left his family at the mercy of the conqueror. And now the family of Darius appears before Alexander.

“Alexander was about to dine when he was informed that the captured mother, wife and two unmarried daughters of Darius, seeing his chariot and bow, sobbed and began to beat their chests, believing that the king had died. For a long time Alexander was silent: the misfortunes of the family of Darius worried him more than his own fate. Finally, he sent Leonnatus, instructing him to inform the women that Darius was alive, and they had nothing to fear from Alexander, for he waged a war for supreme dominion only with Darius, and they would be given everything that they used before, when Darius still ruled. These words seemed merciful and benevolent to the women, but Alexander's actions were even more humane. He allowed them to bury the Persians who fell in battle - everyone they wished, taking clothes and jewelry from war booty for this purpose - did not deprive the Darius family of the honors that it had previously enjoyed, did not reduce the number of servants, and even increased the means for its maintenance. .

However, the most regal and beautiful beneficence of Alexander was that these noble and chaste women, who were in his captivity, did not have to hear, fear, or expect anything that could disgrace them. No one had access to them, did not see them, and they led such a life as if they were not in an enemy camp, but in a sacred and pure girl's peace. But, according to stories, the wife of Darius was the most beautiful of all the queens, just as Darius was the most handsome and tall among men; their daughters were like their parents. Alexander, who apparently believed that the ability to control oneself for the king was more important than even the ability to defeat enemies, did not touch the captives; in general, before his marriage, he did not know a single woman, except for Barsina. Barsina, the widow of Memnon, was taken prisoner near Damascus. She received a Greek upbringing [here the text is corrupted in the original] and was distinguished by a good character; her father was Artabazus, the son of the king's daughter. According to Aristobulus, Alexander followed the advice of Parmenion, who invited him to get close to this beautiful and noble woman. Looking at other beautiful and stately captives, Alexander said jokingly that the sight of Persian women was painful for the eyes. Wanting to oppose their attractiveness with the beauty of his self-control and chastity, the king did not pay any attention to them, as if they were not living women, but lifeless statues.

(Plutarch. Alexander, 21)

Paolo Veronese. Darius' family before Alexander. 1565–1567

It is noteworthy that there is nothing Persian in the appearance of Darius's relatives in P. Veronese's painting “The Family of Darius in front of Alexander”: the ladies are depicted in luxurious European outfits, contemporary to the artist. As for Alexander, his attire reveals a mixture of antique and medieval clothes. If not for the stockings and long sleeves of his clothes, he really could be imagined as an ancient commander. A stylistic hodgepodge is also found in the clothes accompanying him: short dresses worn in antiquity and medieval armor.

Veronese's painting had a strong influence on generations of subsequent artists. One of the clear evidence of this is a painting on the same subject by Gaspar Diziani.

Gaspard Diziani. Darius' family before Alexander the Great. 18th century

Often, Renaissance artists can be reproached for anachronism: the characters do not look appropriate for the era in which they lived. It even goes so far as to say that the Renaissance did not revive Antiquity at all. But the fact is that European masters by no means always - and rather rarely even - had the goal of achieving archaeological reliability. Knowledge of antiquity took place, but to achieve archaeological accuracy - such a task has not yet been set. Even today, when the task of authenticity (that is, the embodiment of a historical plot in full accordance with the true realities of the time) in various arts is being solved with impressive results, the issue of reliability is still very acute.

But back to the plot itself. Diodorus Siculus adds a curious detail to this story, which was embodied in pictorial interpretations:

“The king at dawn, together with his most beloved friend, Hephaestion, came to the women. Both of them were dressed in the same way, but Hephaestion was taller and more beautiful, and Sisigamba, mistaking him for a king, prostrated herself before him. Those present began to shake their heads and point at Alexander with their hands. Sisigamba, ashamed of her mistake, prostrated herself again before Alexander. But the king, lifting her up, said: “Don't worry, mother! He is also Alexander. Calling the old woman by the name of her mother, the most affectionate word on earth, he made it clear to the unfortunate how friendly he would treat them in the future. By confirming that she would become a second mother to him, he actually proved the veracity of his words.

(Diodorus Siculus.
Historical Library, 17:37)

Already the painting by Veronese gives grounds to believe that the artist captured exactly the moment when Sisigamba mistakenly addresses Hephaestion, mistaking him for Alexander. However, there are examples that even more clearly depict precisely this oversight of hers. Such is the drawing by an unknown master of the 17th century on this subject.

Unknown master.
Darius Sisigamba's mother mistakenly addresses
to Hephaestion instead of Alexander. 1696

VIII. Alexander at the body of Darius

The end of Darius was truly tragic. At the battle of Gaugamela, he again, as at Issus, fled from the battlefield. We cannot here detail the course further developments; the main thing in them is that a rebellion was ripening against Darius within his entourage. The courtiers left him in the hope of surrendering to Alexander. Under such circumstances, Darius' persistence in resisting Alexander led to a mutiny. As a result, Darius was mortally wounded by his own bodyguard. Subsequently, Alexander took revenge on the traitors of Darius and felt the moral right to punish his killers by acting as his protector. Thus, he, in essence, legitimized his right to the throne. “Never has the winner, - sums up F. Schachermeier, - inherited the vanquished under more favorable circumstances.”

And again, Plutarch (and the artists along with him) tells this story with the obvious intention of demonstrating the generosity of Alexander, and thereby, one might say, deifies him. (In fact, this was Plutarch's goal.)

“All showed the same zeal, but only sixty horsemen broke into the enemy camp along with the king. Ignoring the silver and gold scattered everywhere in abundance, galloping past numerous wagons that were crowded with children and women and rolled aimlessly and without direction, devoid of charioteers, the Macedonians rushed after those who ran ahead, believing that Darius was among them. Finally, they found Darius lying on a chariot, pierced by many spears and already dying. Darius asked for a drink, and Polystratus brought cold water; Darius, having quenched his thirst, said: “The fact that I cannot repay gratitude for the good deed done to me is the pinnacle of my misfortune, but Alexander will reward you, and the gods will reward Alexander for the kindness that he showed to my mother, my wife and my children. Give him my handshake." With these words, he took the hand of Polystratus and immediately died. Alexander went up to the corpse and, with undisguised grief, took off his cloak and covered the body of Darius.

(Plutarch. Alexander, 43)

Gustave Dore. Alexander at the body of Darius.Engraving

IX. Death of Alexander

Plutarch, relying on the "Diaries" that were kept by Alexander's entourage, describes in some detail the course of the emperor's illness. Read about his last days:

"On the twenty-fifth day(diseases. - A.M.), transferred to another part of the palace, he slept a little, but the fever did not subside. When the military leaders came to him, he could not utter a word, the same thing happened again on the twenty-sixth day. The Macedonians suspected that the king was already dead; shouting and threatening, they demanded from the royal comrades to be allowed into the palace. Finally, they achieved their goal: the doors of the palace were opened, and the Macedonians in some chitons, one at a time, passed by the bed of the king. On the same day, Python and Seleucus were sent to the temple of Serapis to ask God if it was necessary to transfer Alexander to his temple. God ordered to leave Alexander in place. On the twenty-eighth day in the evening, Alexander died.

(Plutarch. Alexander, 76)

Until now, the hypothesis of Alexander's poisoning has not been proven or refuted, although at the time of death "no one suspected that Alexander had been poisoned" ( Plutarch).

Engraving on a painting Carl von Piloty "Death of Alexander the Great". 1886

The biography of Plutarch contains stories about a number of episodes that were chosen by artists as themes for their paintings. We have only covered the most frequently illustrated stories. In addition, it should be borne in mind that a number of topics related to Alexander, the artists drew from other authors. So, for example, the plot “Apelles paints a portrait of Campaspa” was borrowed by artists from Pliny the Elder’s “Natural History”: Campaspa was Alexander’s favorite concubine. Apelles, his court painter, who painted her portrait, fell in love with her. Alexander, as a sign of admiration for his creation, gave him Campaspe.

Even this one is very short review paintings on scenes from the life of Alexander the Great convinces that his iconography is very extensive. It is also obvious that in order to understand these plots and pictures, knowledge of literary primary sources is necessary.

Philoxenus of Eretria [d] Battle of Issus. OK. 100 BC e. Mosaic. 313×582 cm National Archaeological Museum, Naples Media files at Wikimedia Commons

Discovery and preservation

The mosaic was discovered on October 24, 1831 during excavations of ancient Pompeii in Italy on the floor of one of the premises of the House of the Faun and transferred in 1843 to the National Archaeological Museum of Naples, where it is kept to the present. First, the mosaic was laid out on the floor, as in its original form; about the mosaic was placed on the wall for better view. A copy of the mosaic was laid out on the floor of the Faun's house. The dimensions of the grandiose painting are 313 × 582 cm, but some of the fragments have not been preserved.

Iconography

The mosaic depicts a battle between Alexander the Great and Persian king Darius III. In compositional terms, Darius dominates in the center of the picture. His gaze, wide with horror, is directed to the left, where Alexander's spear pierces one of the bodyguards of the Persian king. With his right hand, the dying man is still trying to grasp the deadly weapon, as if he wants to take it out of his body, but his legs are already giving way, and he sinks onto his bleeding black horse. Darius himself, with a bewildered face, unarmed, is trying to turn his chariot around. His outstretched sympathetic but vain right hand and desperate look are addressed to the mortally wounded warrior who threw himself between him and the attacking Alexander. However, both the look and the gesture of Darius equally apply to the approaching Alexander. The Persian king himself has already ceased to fight and therefore becomes a passive victim in an atmosphere of all-encompassing horror.

The portrait of Alexander corresponds to the so-called Lysippus type, to which, for example, the statue of the head of Alexander from the Louvre is also attributed. There is no traditional idealization of Alexander, who was often depicted with long locks and full, soft features as the embodiment of the image of Zeus, the sun god Helios, or Apollo.

Around Alexander, only a few Macedonians can be recognized by cap-like helmets - also due to the destruction of the mosaic. However, the predominant part of the picture - about three-quarters of the entire area - is given to the Persians. The Persians are wearing armor typical of Central Asia, similar to scales or shells made of plates. They cover the entire body and consist of rectangular iron or bronze sticks, tied together at the top, bottom or sides with cords. Depicted from a very bold angle, one of the Persians is trying to curb a frightened horse right in front of Darius; this horse probably belonged to one of the fallen warriors. The face of the dying man, who is just being run over by Darius' chariot, is reflected in his shield; this is the only face on the mosaic whose gaze is fixed on the viewer.

Graphic means in the mosaic reflected the turning point of the battle. On the one hand, the superiority of Alexander is shown. His regal posture and composure, which is reflected in his wide eye and in the spear that pierces the body of the enemy, has such a stunning and overwhelming effect on his opponents that they turn in panic. On the other hand, the position of the body of Darius, the three Persians fighting in front of him, numerous spears directed at an angle to the left and upwards, still reflect the original line of attack of the Persians, which does justice to the enemy of the Macedonians. At the same time, three spears at the right edge of the mosaic indicate movement in opposite side. The counter-movement of these enemy lines is repeated, by the way, in many respects in the trunk and branches of a bare tree.

The interpretation of the battle in the mosaic coincides with the historical information we have: in both general battles of the campaign in Asia (at Issus and at Gaugamela, Alexander decided the outcome of the battle through a decisive tactical maneuver. In each case, he rushed into the enemy offensive lines, surrounded by his horse hetairos, broke resistance to such a sudden attack and quite unexpectedly appeared before Darius, who then fled.

Evidence that the plot of the battle of Issus is depicted on the mosaic has not been found (except for similar descriptions of the battle at

The mosaic is made up of about one and a half million pieces, assembled into a picture using a technique known as "opus vermiculatum", that is, the pieces were assembled one by one along winding lines.

Discovery and preservation

The mosaic was discovered on October 24, 1831 during excavations of ancient Pompeii in Italy on the floor of one of the premises of the House of the Faun and transferred in 1843 to the National Archaeological Museum of Naples, where it is kept to the present. First, the mosaic was laid out on the floor, as in its original form; near the mosaic was placed on the wall for a better view. A copy of the mosaic was laid out on the floor of the Faun's house. The dimensions of the grandiose painting are 313 × 582 cm, but some of the fragments have not been preserved.

The royal armor of Alexander depicted on the mosaic was reconstructed in Oliver Stone's film "Alexander". The armor is decorated on the chest with a gorgonion, an image of the head of the Gorgon Medusa. Part of the mosaic depicting Alexander's bodyguards from the hetairoi has not survived, and only the Boeotian helmet of the hetaira with a gilded wreath conveys appearance famous ancient horsemen. A fragment depicting the standard of the Persian troops was also damaged.

Iconography

The mosaic depicts a battle between Alexander the Great and the Persian king Darius III. In compositional terms, Darius dominates in the center of the picture. His gaze, wide with horror, is directed to the left, where Alexander's spear pierces one of the bodyguards of the Persian king. With his right hand, the dying man is still trying to grasp the deadly weapon, as if he wants to take it out of his body, but his legs are already giving way, and he sinks onto his bleeding black horse. Darius himself, with a bewildered face, unarmed, is trying to turn his chariot around. His outstretched sympathetic but vain right hand and desperate look are addressed to the mortally wounded warrior who threw himself between him and the attacking Alexander. However, both the look and the gesture of Darius equally apply to the approaching Alexander. The Persian king himself has already ceased to fight and therefore becomes a passive victim in an atmosphere of all-encompassing horror.

The Macedonian king, on the contrary, most actively predetermines events on the battlefield. Alexander without a helmet, in luxurious linen armor, riding his Bucephalus, he pierces the body of the enemy with a spear, without even glancing at his victim. His wide eye is focused on Daria; even the Gorgon's gaze on his gorgoneion is directed towards the frightened enemy, as if trying to further strengthen this powerful hypnotic effect. The portrait of Alexander corresponds to the so-called Lysippus type, to which, for example, the statue of the head of Alexander from the Louvre is also attributed. There is no traditional idealization of Alexander, who was often depicted with long locks and full, soft features as the embodiment of the image of Zeus, the sun god Helios, or Apollo.

Graphic means in the mosaic reflected the turning point of the battle. On the one hand, the superiority of Alexander is shown. His regal posture and composure, which is reflected in his wide eye and in the spear that pierces the body of the enemy, has such a stunning and overwhelming effect on his opponents that they turn in panic. On the other hand, the position of the body of Darius, the three Persians fighting in front of him, numerous spears directed at an angle to the left and upwards, still reflect the original line of attack of the Persians, which does justice to the enemy of the Macedonians. At the same time, three spears at the right edge of the mosaic indicate movement in the opposite direction. The counter-movement of these enemy lines is repeated, by the way, in many respects in the trunk and branches of a bare tree.

Evidence that the plot of the battle of Issus is depicted on the mosaic has not been found (except for similar descriptions of the battle at Arrian and Curtius). Perhaps the symbolic battle is not tied to any particular battle, but is intended to glorify the exploits of Alexander in the Asian campaign, to present the typology of his victory.

prototype

In terms of iconography, the relief on the royal Sidon sarcophagus (4th century BC), which also depicts the battle of Alexander with the Persians, has a similarity with the mosaic; probably, both monuments go back to a common source. The Pompeian work is considered to be a copy of the masters of the Alexandrian school of mosaic from a picturesque ancient Greek canvas, executed in a different technique. The Greek original is apparently mentioned by the ancient Roman writer Pliny the Elder (Natural History, 35.110) as a work commissioned by the Macedonian king Cassander, made by Philoxenus of Eretria, a Greek artist of the late 4th century. BC e. The time reference of the creation of the picture, made from literary data, is confirmed by the manner of execution with a limited set of colors used and the method of drawing, characteristic of the early Hellenistic period.

Write a review on the article "Battle of Issus (mosaic)"

Literature

Kleiner, Fred S. Gardner's Art Through the Ages: A Global History. - Cengage Learning, 2008. - P. 142. - ISBN 0495115495.
Bernard Andrew: Das Alexandermosaik. Reclam, Stuttgart 1967.
Michael Pfrommer: Untersuchungen zur Chronologie und Komposition des Alexandermosaiks auf antiquarischer Grundlage. von Zabern, Mainz 1998 (Aegyptiaca Treverensia. Trierer Studien zum griechisch-römischen Ägypten 8), ISBN 3-8053-2028-0.
Klaus Stahler: Das Alexandermosaik. Über Machterringung und Machtverlust. Fischer-Taschenbuch-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1999, ISBN 3-596-13149-9.
Paolo Moreno, La Bataille d'Alexandre, Skira/Seuil, Paris, 2001.

An excerpt characterizing the Battle of Issus (mosaic)

“Where did he go? Where is he now?..”

When the dressed, washed body lay in a coffin on the table, everyone came up to him to say goodbye, and everyone wept.
Nikolushka wept from the pained bewilderment that tore at his heart. The Countess and Sonya wept with pity for Natasha and that he was no more. The old count wept that soon, he felt, he was about to take the same terrible step.
Natasha and Princess Mary were weeping now too, but they were not weeping from their own personal grief; they wept from the reverent tenderness that seized their souls before the consciousness of the simple and solemn mystery of death that took place before them.

The totality of the causes of phenomena is inaccessible to the human mind. But the need to find causes is embedded in the human soul. And the human mind, not delving into the innumerability and complexity of the conditions of phenomena, each of which separately can be represented as a cause, grabs at the first, most understandable approximation and says: here is the cause. In historical events (where the subject of observation is the actions of people), the most primitive rapprochement is the will of the gods, then the will of those people who stand in the most prominent historical place - historical heroes. But one has only to delve into the essence of each historical event, that is, in the activity of the entire mass of people who participated in the event, in order to make sure that the will of the historical hero not only does not direct the actions of the masses, but is itself constantly guided. It would seem that it is all the same to understand the meaning of a historical event one way or another. But between the man who says that the peoples of the West went to the East because Napoleon wanted it, and the man who says that it happened because it had to happen, there is the same difference that existed between people who said that the land stands firmly and the planets move around it, and those who said that they did not know what the earth was based on, but they knew that there were laws governing the movement of both her and other planets. There are no and cannot be causes of a historical event, except for the single cause of all causes. But there are laws that govern events, partly unknown, partly groping for us. The discovery of these laws is possible only when we completely renounce the search for causes in the will of one person, just as the discovery of the laws of the motion of the planets became possible only when people renounced the representation of the affirmation of the earth.

After the battle of Borodino, the occupation of Moscow by the enemy and burning it, historians recognize the movement of the Russian army from the Ryazan to the Kaluga road and to the Tarutino camp - the so-called flank march behind Krasnaya Pakhra as the most important episode of the war of 1812. Historians attribute the glory of this brilliant feat to various persons and argue about who, in fact, it belongs to. Even foreign, even French, historians recognize the genius of the Russian generals when they speak of this flank march. But why military writers, and after them all, believe that this flank march is a very thoughtful invention of some one person that saved Russia and ruined Napoleon is very difficult to understand. In the first place, it is difficult to understand what is the profoundness and genius of this movement; for in order to guess that the best position of the army (when it is not attacked) is where there is more food, no great mental effort is needed. And everyone, even a stupid thirteen-year-old boy, could easily guess that in 1812 the most advantageous position of the army, after retreating from Moscow, was on the Kaluga road. So, it is impossible to understand, firstly, by what conclusions historians reach the point of seeing something profound in this maneuver. Secondly, it is even more difficult to understand in what exactly historians see this maneuver as saving for the Russians and harmful for the French; for this flank march, under other, preceding, accompanying and subsequent circumstances, could be detrimental to the Russian and saving for the French army. If from the time this movement was made, the position of the Russian army began to improve, then it does not follow from this that this movement was the cause.
This flank march not only could not bring any benefits, but could ruin the Russian army, if other conditions did not coincide. What would have happened if Moscow had not burned down? If Murat had not lost sight of the Russians? If Napoleon had not been inactive? What if, on the advice of Bennigsen and Barclay, the Russian army had fought near Krasnaya Pakhra? What would happen if the French attacked the Russians when they were following Pakhra? What would have happened if later Napoleon, approaching Tarutin, attacked the Russians with at least one tenth of the energy with which he attacked in Smolensk? What would happen if the French went to St. Petersburg?.. With all these assumptions, the salvation of the flank march could turn into pernicious.
Thirdly, and most incomprehensibly, is that people who study history deliberately do not want to see that the flank march cannot be attributed to any one person, that no one ever foresaw it, that this maneuver, just like the retreat in Filiakh, in the present, was never presented to anyone in its integrity, but step by step, event after event, moment by moment, it followed from an innumerable number of the most diverse conditions, and only then presented itself in all its integrity when it was completed and became past.
At the council at Fili, the dominant thought of the Russian authorities was the self-evident retreat in a direct direction back, that is, along the Nizhny Novgorod road. Evidence of this is the fact that the majority of votes at the council were cast in this sense, and, most importantly, the well-known conversation after the council of the commander-in-chief with Lansky, who was in charge of the provisions department. Lanskoy reported to the commander-in-chief that food for the army was collected mainly along the Oka, in the Tula and Kaluga provinces, and that in the event of a retreat to Nizhny, the provisions would be separated from the army by the large river Oka, through which transportation in the first winter is impossible. This was the first sign of the need to deviate from the direct direction to the Lower, which had previously seemed the most natural. The army kept to the south, along the Ryazan road, and closer to the reserves. Subsequently, the inaction of the French, who even lost sight of the Russian army, concerns about the protection of the Tula plant and, most importantly, the benefits of approaching their reserves, forced the army to deviate even further south, to the Tula road. Having crossed in a desperate movement beyond Pakhra to the Tula road, the commanders of the Russian army thought to remain at Podolsk, and there was no thought of the Tarutino position; but countless circumstances and the reappearance of French troops, who had previously lost sight of the Russians, and the plans for the battle, and, most importantly, the abundance of provisions in Kaluga, forced our army to deviate even more to the south and move into the middle of their food routes, from the Tulskaya to the Kaluga road, to Tarutino. Just as it is impossible to answer the question when Moscow was abandoned, it is also impossible to answer when exactly and by whom it was decided to go over to Tarutin. Only when the troops had already arrived at Tarutino as a result of innumerable differential forces, only then did people begin to assure themselves that they wanted this and had long foreseen it.

The famous flank march consisted only in the fact that Russian army, retreating straight back in the opposite direction of the offensive, after the French offensive stopped, deviated from the direct direction taken at first and, not seeing persecution behind him, naturally leaned in the direction where the abundance of food attracted him.