Isn’t that a great title? I totally want to nab it as the title of any follow-up novel I write to my forthcoming book, which we’re tentatively calling CARNAL CREATURES. It’s about a modern day sphinx and a modern day minotaur caught in a desperate struggle for survival, but enough about that…let’s talk about the sphinx in Egypt. Thanks to Michelle Moran’s tip, I found this article in the Smithsonian and it’s fascinating.

Amongst the many interesting tidbits contained in the article is this bit of evidence that the Egyptians may not have been using a slave labor force to construct their great wonders:

Near the cemetery, nine years later, Lehner discovered his Lost City. He and Hawass had been aware since the mid-1980s that there were buildings at that site. But it wasn’t until they excavated and mapped the area that they realized it was a settlement bigger than ten football fields and dating to Khafre’s reign. At its heart were four clusters of eight long mud-brick barracks. Each structure had the elements of an ordinary house—a pillared porch, sleeping platforms and a kitchen—that was enlarged to accommodate around 50 people sleeping side by side. The barracks, Lehner says, could have accommodated between 1,600 to 2,000 workers—or more, if the sleeping quarters were on two levels. The workers’ diet indicates they weren’t slaves. Lehner’s team found remains of mostly male cattle under 2 years old—in other words, prime beef. Lehner thinks ordinary Egyptians may have rotated in and out of the work crew under some sort of national service or feudal obligation to their superiors.

A massive pharaoh’s statue was discovered in the Sudan. The article reads in part:

About a week back Heritage Key published a story about the discovery of a massive, one ton, statue of Taharqa that was found deep in Sudan.

Taharqa was a pharaoh of the 25th dynasty of Egypt and came to power ca. 690 BC. The pharaohs of this dynasty were from Nubia – a territory located in modern day Sudan and southern Egypt. When Taharqa came to power, he controlled an empire stretching from Sudan to the Levant.

The Nubian pharaohs tried to incorporate Egyptian culture into their own. They built pyramids in Sudan – even though pyramid building in Egypt hadn’t been practiced in nearly 800 years.

Taharqa’s rule was a high water mark for the 25th dynasty. By the end of his reign a conflict with the Assyrians had forced him to retreat south, back into Nubia – where he died in 664 BC.

Egypt became an Assyrian vassal – eventually gaining independence during the 26th dynasty. Taharqa’s successors were never able to retake Egypt.

Anyone who has ever been inside my front door knows that I’m obsessed with Ancient Egypt and Late Republic Rome. I spent part of my honeymoon reading Margaret George’s “The Memoirs of Cleopatra” and much of the next decade researching the fate of Cleopatra’s children for my own novel, Lily of the Nile, which will release in January, 2011.

Now, historical fiction writer Michelle Moran, the best-selling author of NEFERTITI and THE HERETIC QUEEN, brings us the fascinating story of CLEOPATRA’S DAUGHTER. I’ll be telling you more about this stunning book in a separate review, but for now I give its gracious and talented author the floor!

Question: Though we’re given tantalizing hints about Cleopatra Selene’s life, the historical record of her is on the scant side which means that any historical fiction author writing about her life has to make some important editorial choices. I was particularly impressed with the ones you made, and I’d like to start by asking you about them. We know that Selene’s brothers disappear from the historical record, but we don’t know how. What made you choose the fates for them that you did?

Conjecture. We know that Octavian leaves Egypt with three of Cleopatra’s children. When he arrived in Rome, there were most likely only two. It’s highly unlikely he would have killed the youngest child, so what could have happened to him? Probably he died onboard the ship. As for Alexander, he disappears from the record at exactly the same time as his coming of age ceremony. I don’t think that this was a coincidence, given that he was the son of Marc Antony (a man who was beloved by many Senators and much of the army) and Queen Cleopatra. We may not understand this today, but two thousand years ago, blood relationships were everything. To be a male child – an adult male child – of these two incredibly powerful rulers would have meant that the men who served your father (and your mother) might also serve you. This is a very dangerous position to be in. Could Octavian really let such a child live? We know he had his own family members banished or killed. Would he have flinched to kill the adult child of his greatest enemy once the boy came of age?

Question: It seems to me that a student of history could view Octavian as a cruel and ruthless dictator. Conversely, a student of history could think of him as the benevolent Augustus who saved Rome. I tend to think of him as a little bit of both. How did writing Selene’s life story influence your view of the first Roman emperor?

From Selene’s perspective, Octavian would have been the enemy. He was responsible for the loss of her kingdom, the loss of her parents, and the loss of one (if not more) of her brothers. In reality, however, Octavian was an extremely complicated man. The best biography on him that I have read is by Anthony Everitt called Augustus: The Life of Rome’s First Emperor. Here was a leader who could be both tender and cruel, forgiving and merciless. He killed his enemies swiftly and probably without remorse. Those he valued, however, he rewarded with kingships and his deepest friendship and trust.

Question: Roman writers–often misogynistic in the extreme–have passed down to us a pretty despicable picture of Octavian’s wife, Livia. I’m often conscious of the prejudices that must have shaped her reputation, but find that she makes for too wickedly delicious an archetype to resist. How did writing Selene’s story influence your perspective on Livia and why did you choose to portray her the way you did?

Before writing about any historical character – even minor ones – I try to read as many biographies on them as time will allow. It is certainly true that many Roman writers were misogynistic. In this case, however, there may be some truth to Livia’s bad reputation, particularly where her relationship with her sister-in-law, Octavia, was concerned.

The tension between the two women stemmed from the fact that they had such different personalities. Whereas Octavian’s sister, Octavia, was compassionate, Livia seems to have been rather mercurial. And whereas Octavia was deeply interested in the arts – theatre, poetry, sculpture – Livia only pursued these things to keep her husband interested.

Livia was interested in one thing really: Livia. She probably would have viewed the twins as threats to the stability of her husband’s reign. As the children of Marc Antony and Cleopatra, Selene and Alexander could easily have found a large following of disaffected people who would have loved to see Alexander ruling Rome in Octavian’s stead. But because the twins were so young, Octavian was loathe to have them murdered the way he had their older male siblings killed. In the novel, Livia’s animosity toward them came from the knowledge that someday, they could challenge her own son for the right to rule over Rome.

Question: Another important editorial choice you made was in the portrayal of Cleopatra’s death. Recent Cleopatra scholars, including Michel Chauveau have argued that Cleopatra would not have had the means, the motive, nor even the courage to kill herself. Can you tell us about the choice you made for Cleopatra’s death in your book, and why you chose it?

This is a rather large debate among Egyptian and Roman scholars. What happened when Octavian arrived in Rome? We know there was a meeting with Cleopatra. And we know that soon after, Cleopatra was dead. Was it murder? Suicide? Enforced suicide (effectively – murder). No one knows if she had the time or the means because there are no eyewitness accounts. The only thing that’s certain is that when Octavian entered Rome she was alive, and by the time he left she was dead.

If I had to make a choice between the three, I would say it was enforced suicide. Governing Rome with Cleopatra still alive would have been impossible. She was the mother to Julius Caesar’s child and the mother to three of Marc Antony’s children. She was a queen – a powerful and respected one, despite Octavian’s smear campaign – and if she had remained alive she would always have been a rallying point for rebellion. Octavian knew this. He was a man who had no qualms with dispatching his rivals and he did so regularly, even if those rivals were family members. My guess is that he gave her a choice. To die with dignity (which at the time was suicide), or to die by someone’s hand.

Question: Your book ends well before Selene’s journey back to Africa. Can you tell us why you stopped at her betrothal to Juba?

Certainly! I wanted to keep the door open for a sequel (which is unlikely…but just in case).

Question: I just want to finish by saying how remarkably well-researched your book is, and I found myself longing for a bibliography. Is there a place you direct readers who want to learn more about Cleopatra Selene?

Yes! I have a short bibliography on my website at: http://www.michellemoran.com/cleo_QA.htm

OMG, how did I miss this rumor? Apparently, Ray Stevenson (aka Pullo from HBO’s Rome) has confirmed that a movie is in the works to bring the awesome show to the big screen.

Oh, writers of Rome, I will overlook the travesty you made of Cleopatra. I will pretend you did not get many things wrong about Egypt. And I will even forgive you for presenting the Battle of Actium as a plume of smoke in the background of Mark Antony’s rowboat. Come back to me, my love. I have missed you so…