Hello Dr. Reames, quick question, according to Wikipedia, it says that the traces of paint left on the Istanbul sarcophagus "indicates that he was depicted with brown eyes an chestnut brown hair" how true is that? I believe you mentioned here that that same polychromy's red base paint for golden hues suggests he was strawberry blonde? And what of his eye color then? Should the sarcophagus (but really Wikipedia) be trusted if it says he had brown eyes? Any helpful resources would be greatly appreciated.
What Color Were Alexanderâs Eyes and Hair?
Combining with another askâŠ
Hello Dr. Reames! Quick question, I got into an argument with someone online that accused me of trying to "Nordicize" Alexander when I posted my fanart of him from Dancing with the Lion (i.e. strawberry blond with blue eyes) but I'm just curious, how do we know that for certain? I mean, doesn't the hunt fresco from tomb II at Vergina in northern Greece portray Alexander with brown eyes and hair? And doesn't the Alexander sarcophagus portray him as having brown eyes along with his red-brown hair, or do you think the brown eyes is a base paint maybe? Anyway, I'd love to hear from you! You're just as great as Mary Beard!
For some reason, this is a wildly popular question. LOL
Iâm doing both these queries at once, as they came in almost back-to-back and are closely related.
And thanks for the compliment, re: Mary Beard. đ Thatâs high praise indeed.
So, I took a look at Wikipedia to see what the footnotes (if any) said, wondering where that information originally came from: an exhibit called Gods in Color. Fortunately for me, the person scanned the page from the exhibition catalogue and made it available. The Wikipedia author also notes the Akropolis Head (from Athens) had a yellow-y base coat for his hair. The newer reconstruction of the frieze on Tomb II does indeed show Alexander's hair as a medium brown, although itâs a reconstruction of a badly deteriorated painting. That said, the techniques they used to pull out the colors are really super-cool, so it could be entirely accurate.
I want to note four things before digging in.
First, thereâs been a shift lately in answers to this question. Once, Alexander was popularly considered blond/blue-eyed with arguments to the contrary dismissed. These days, perhaps in a deliberate kick back at âNordicism,â the reverse is true (as the second asker found). He had brown hair and eyes becauseâŠMediterranean! Iâve also increasingly heard it from Greeks who want him to look more like modern Greeks, ignoring the fact Greece has been a crossroads of cultures and peoples since the Bronze Age.
While without question modern Greeks are DNA-linked to ancient Greeks, there's also been an in-flow of various other ethnicities, depending on where. The islands [and which islands!] are different from the north (and northeast and northwest differ!). Cyprus is its own puzzle, as is Crete. Even the Peloponnese and the mainland are different.
So, in short, we canât necessarily expect Alexander to match the coloring of modern Greeks. The various pebble mosaics from Pella would suggest otherwise. Several of these figures, not just Alexander, are dirty-blond/redheads. This is not just digital or screen settings; Iâve seen these mosaics in person.
Is that reddish color simply the pebbles fading? Or the âcolor paletteâ of the artist? Possibly, as the hair color of the figures in each mosaic matches. Yet there are brown pebbles in the mosaics, so it would've been perfectly possible to give these figures matching brown hair instead of matching reddish-blond. We have paintings from Macedonian tombs where we find both lighter- and darker-haired people. Then there are the nicknames. Kleitos Melas (the Black) and a Kleitos Leukos (the White). With our modern obsession with skin-color, Iâve seen people occasionally mistake this to indicate Kleitos Melas was a Black man. No, he had dark hair (melas = dark). Kleitos Leukos (leukos = light) was blond/light-haired.
Second, we in the modern world have a bit of an obsession with eye and hair color. The ancients⊠didnât. This is why, for instance, Plutarchâs rather extensive description of Alexanderâs appearance (Alex. 4) doesnât give us anything about his hair or eye color. The most we get is that his complexion was âruddy-fair,â leaning more to ruddy on the chest.
Furthermore, ancient Greek had fewer words for colors. The term used for blue eyes can also indicate gray or green. And we have a translation problem. âGray-eyedâ Athena is modern. Greek says ÎłÎ»Î±Ï Îșáż¶ÏÎčÏ (glaukĆpis) which means BRIGHT, not gray. E.g., her eyes seem to catch the light and flash. Yes, pale gray eyes do that, but so do pale blue or pale green. Itâs really denoting her ability to perceive: a characteristic associated with, oh, I donât know, wisdom. đ
The Greeks seemed more concerned with levels of brightness than color. We find this frequently in their poetry. So, a âwine-darkâ sea doesnât mean the sea is red (or their wine was blue⊠yes, some have seriously tried to propose that). It means the sea is DARK, obscuring, like wine in a cup.
They just donât seem to care as much about the color of things, but with shade, brightness, and tint. So rather than have fine(r) distinctions for colors: baby blue, royal blue, navy blue, etc. They talk about darkness and lightness for an entire HUE, or color family. Thatâs really what their âcolorâ terms are. Interesting, no?
Third, we have two chief specialists on Alexanderâs image. First, Andrew Stewart, who wrote Faces of Power: Alexanderâs Image and Hellenistic Politics (1993), for the Anglophones, and who the Wiki article mentions. Then Paolo Moreno, who wrote Alessandro Magno: Immagini come Storia (2004), for the Italian-speakers. Both are simply MASSIVE books, with lots of plates. If you are serious about Alexanderâs image, read them. The two donât always agree, but both are just hugely respected art historians and archaeologists. Both books are pricey due to the image plates, so perhaps get friendly with this thing called âinterlibrary loan,â if youâre not already familiar.
Stewart describes Alexanderâs physical appearance in several places, but most notably p. 72ff, where he discusses three ancient traditions. He says, âmodern investigators habitually conflate these three traditions, or (worse) select only those elements from them that fit their own preconceptions.â These three are: 1) contemporary observations, 2) Aristotelian physiognomic analysis, and 3) later (imperial era) the idealizing âparadigm of the romantically handsome prince,â and he names Arrian, Appian, and Apuleius as the chief perpetuators (73). The Blenheim Alexander, originally from Herculaneum, shows it.
Stewart summarizes his appearance, and Iâll quote him at length, as itâs useful:
Taken together, the two early traditions are not particularly flattering. Alexander was neither tall nor tanned; his neck apparently drooped and was twisted slightly towards his left shoulder, and he held his head high, tending to look upwards; he was clean-shaven; he had a loud, harsh voice; his eyes were limpid and melting; his brow was fierce; his hair formed a cowlick (anastolÄ) above it; and there was something altogether scary in his countenance. This is very far from the romantic crusader of the Roman imperial writers, the nineteenth-century biographers, and their latter-day followers such as Mary Renault: closer to the aptly named Alex of A Clockwork Orange or even to Sid Vicious than to a Prince Valiant! Only Lysippos was able to render these quirks (voice excluded) without diminishing Alexanderâs kingly aretÄâhis virile and leonine nature. Lysipposâs task was not easy, for although a head held high and a loud voice were unmistakable signs of strutting masculinity, white skin, melting eyes, a smooth chin, and a drooping neck signaled exactly the opposite. Whatever this strange and somewhat uncanny fusion of masculine and feminine many have contributed to his electrifying charisma, it certainly fascinated and perplexed his contemporariesâhis court artists in particular. (73-74, I suggest finding and reading this entire section, as it tells a lot about ancient assumptions, as well as Alexanderâs possible goals with regard to his youthful appearance. Stewart adds, laterâŠ.) To Alexander, the sarcasms of the Greeks were of no great importance. It was Macedonian opinion that counted, and in Macedon, the ancient traditions of heroic kingship were thriving still. (75)
All this is also why, in the novels, I have Hephaistion observe that only a flatterer would call Alexandros handsome. LOL
But also notice, in all the ancient hoopla about Alexanderâs appearance⊠nary a mention of his hair or eye color.
Both Stewart and Moreno discuss the sarcophagus (Stewart, 294-306; Moreno, 227-32), but donât really discuss eye- or hair-color there. There's also a Wikipedia article on the sarcophagus itself, which delves into the dispute over who it was FOR (Abdalonymosâbulk of scholars, MazaeusâHeckel). And if I am not always a fan of Wikipedia, I thought this entry was better than average.
Fourth, when it comes to ancient statues, what weâre usually able to determine is the under- or base coat. (The second asker alludes to this, in fact.) When you see an ancient sculpture recolored, such as was done for the Alexander sarcophagus (images below), they tend to look a bit glaringâas if meant for a childrenâs display. I suspect this is (one) reason some fight so hard against the (absolutely proven) fact these statues werenât white. Yes, racism is some of it, but TBH, the first time I saw one of these re-colorings, my reaction was âEeew!â So, if one grew up on their beauty in white marble, seeing them painted can be a turn-off.
BUT thatâs not what they actually looked like, any more than pure white is.
If we consider ancient Greek painting (mostly preserved today in tomb frescos), we see the Greeks had a fine sense of shading and tint. (Below, the Rape of Persephone from Royal Tomb I at Vergina.) THAT is what their sculptures would have looked like! Not Adventures with a Color Wheel for Kindergartners. Itâs just that all we can really recover for sure is the base color that seeped into the marble/stone. Of course, the painter would then have finished it far more lifelike. (Note also that the figures here have reddish hair too, but as they're gods, I'm not taking it as indicative of Macedonians, and the paint has faded; the original was probably lighter brown.)
Now, finally getting to the question about the Alexander SarcophagusâŠ.
We have a blessing of a sort: descriptions of the sculptures when the tomb was first opened, before fresh air got in there and oxidized the paint. His hair was described as reddish. I donât recall that description specifying chestnut (which I think of as medium brown). Anyway, I found it quite plausible, as that matches Plutarchâs âruddy-fairâ complexion. (This recounting of the opening might come from Olga Palagia but I don't rightly remember.) Incidentally, while they had photography then (1887), it was still very much black-and-white. âč
With redheads, eye color varies, but brown eyes are, in fact, more common. So Alexander very well could have had brown eyes and still been a ginger (or auburn). I chose to make his eyes blue in the novels simply because I wanted to play with the (very late and almost certainly invented) heterochromic eye-color tradition, but in a new way, giving him one expanded pupil. That would be more dramatic if his eyes were blue. Yet I donât consider it at all implausible that his eyes were brown.
Now, hereâs another potential fly in the ointment. Is the (Greek) figure on horseback on the lion-hunt long side of the sarcophagus actually Alexander? Alternative identities have been proposed (depending on when this hunt supposedly took place).
Also, to muddle the waters even further, identification of whom the sarcophagus belonged to has been questionedâalthough tbh, I think the arguments for Abdalonymos are sounder than Heckelâs suggestion of Mardonius. But back to the hunt. If the tomb were Abdalonymosâs, the Greek man riding to his rescue could also have been Perdikkas, or even Demetrios Poliorketes (Antigonosâs son). Alternatively, people have proposed Hephaistion, as the face isnât particularly individuated in quite the same way as the lion-helmed rider on the battle side. If the figure on the pediment of one side, being executed by other Macedonian soldiers, is Perdikkasâwhich I find quite likelyâhis hair is also reddish.
So in short, if thatâs Demetrios or Perdikkas, and not Alexander, the hair color (and eye-color) is a red herring. Alas, we canât see (much of) Alexanderâs hair under the lion-head helmet. Also, red can sometimes be a base color for brown--as with those eyes. No, he's not a vampire. Several figures on the sarcophagus have "red" eyes, both Persians and Greeks.
That brings us back around to the Pella mosaics, where in at least one, Alexanderâs identity is about 98% certain: the Lion Hunt Mosaic from the House of Dionysosâa local copy of the famous bronze group commissioned by Kraterosâs son (also a Krateros) for Delphi. Such copies in other mediums werenât uncommon. The mosaic, however, has only the two chief figures: Alexander and Krateros. Both are what Iâd call reddish/dark blond/light brown haired.
The Stag Hunt Mosaic (from the House of the Rape of Persephone) also has sometimes been identified as Alexander (and Hephaistion), but thereâs not, imo, a good reason for that aside from the petasos flying off the head of the Alexander figure, linked by some to the petasos-sporting Alexander in the Lion Hunt Mosaic. Yet these mosaics are not from the same house, nor (probably) by the same artist. Look closely. The style doesnât appear the same to me, even if the colors are similar. And the petasos was a rather common sunhat typeâalthough not one as popular in Macedonia. (That was the kausia.)
Moreno wants to identify the stag-hunt figures as Alexander and Hephaistion, and then uses the axe wielded by a Page on the lion-hunt frieze from Royal Tomb II (above) to name that Page Hephaistion. But I am just not comfortable with that extrapolation. Back to my tendency to be rather conservative when it comes to identifying figures in artwork. If I donât have a pretty good reason to name a particular figure so-and-so, I'll be cagey about it. I do think the lion hunt depicts Alexander and Krateros. OtherwiseâŠnot so fast.
Also, using the double-headed axe (labrys) as some identifier for Hephaistion because it was sacred to Hephaistos (the god) raises two problems. First, it's not sacred to Hephaistos. The HAMMER (and tongs) are. Second, worship of Hephaistos was virtually absent from Macedonia (Samothrace excepted). The figures in the stag hunt and lion hunt are clearly carrying an axe, not a hammer. If you want a god with a labrys outside of Hittite areas or Minoan Creteâone closer to Macedoniaâthatâll be the Thracian-Getai-Dacian god Zalmoxis, who is usually conflated with Zeus, Hades, or even Pythagorosânot Hephaistos. Image below even shows him using it in a hunt! Given that logic, we might name the youth with the double axe a royal Thracian at the court! (Yes, they were there.)
But in any case, when you look at the coloring of these people in the mosaicsâŠtheyâre on the fairer side. Maybe thatâs to create a sense of artistic cohesion via color (as noted before), but compared to the hair color we see in polychromy on statues and art from, say, Athensâwhere a lot is brown/dark brownâI donât think theyâd pick reddish/dirty blond if it were something the people commissioning the art found atypical. In other tombs including Royal Tomb II, we do see brown and dark brown hair, but also fair. In the top frieze below from Agaios Athenasios tomb, most of the figures wear a kausia (Macedonian hat) or helmets, but the two at the end are bare-headed. The final figure has brown hair, but the figure just before him looks like a dark blond.
We are looking here at contemporary representations of actual Macedonians, not heroes or gods. And at least some of them are on the fairer side.
Yes, some folks like to point to the Pompeii mosaic, or the painting of Alexander from the House of the Golden Bracelet as proof that Alexander was dark. Problem: both date to the first century CE (or at most BCE, for the mosaic), and are Romanized in some ways (including the damn sideburns, which we donât find until the Hellenistic era or later). That includes coloring.
Plutarch even complains about Apellesâ paintings (in Alexander's own day!) for getting Alexanderâs coloring âtoo dark.â So while the mosaic may be remarkably accurate in the way of clothing and armor, I wouldnât use it for Alexanderâs coloring.
---------
(A final note: I once had somebody whoâd seen a photo of me accuse me of insisting Alexander had blond hair because Iâm blonde. Folks, that isnât blonde hair, thatâs GRAY. My hair in my youth was just one tick up from black; my mother had true (native) black hair. Iâm not arguing Alexander was a ginger or dark blond because thatâs my hair color. Iâm not that narcissistic.)












