Helena of Egypt - My Favourite Planet People

According to other translations, she "painted the Battle of Issus about the time of its occurrence" [6], which strengthens arguments that she lived in the 4th century BC and was a contemporary of Alexander the Great.

This is one of three paintings some modern scholars think may have been the model for the "Alexander Mosaic" (125-120 BC) found at Pompeii. The other two contenders are works attributed by Pliny the Elder to Philoxenos of Eretria and Aristeides of Thebes. However, since none of these paintings have survived, and information concerning their contents and compositions is negligible, theories remain purely conjectural.

The large floor mosaic shows a battle scene in which Alexander charges on horseback towards the chariot of the fear-stricken Darius III, who appears to be retreating in panic. According to ancient accounts, at both the Battle of Issos (or Issus) in 333 BC and the Battle of Gaugamela in 331 BC Alexander came close to the Persian king who fled the field, which led to the retreat of the Persian army. Despite various theories, it is not known which battle the mosaic depicts.

Pliny the Elder did not specify which battles with Persians were painted by Philoxenos or Aristeides, which may indicate that by his time this information was no longer available. That Ptolemy Hephaistion is said by Photios to have written that Helena painted the Battle of Issos is no proof of a connection to the mosaic. The battles of Alexander were evidently popular subjects in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, and there may well have been other pictures of this type about which we know nothing. [7]

Helena is not mentioned by Pliny the Elder, and she does not appear in his short list of female painters:

"There have been some female painters also. Timarete, the daughter of Micon, painted a Diana at Ephesus, one of the very oldest panel paintings known.

Irene, daughter and pupil of the artist Cratinus, painted a figure of a girl, now at Eleusis, a Calypso, an Aged Man, the juggler Theodorus, and Alcisthenes the dancer.

Aristarete, daughter and pupil of Nearchus, painted an Aesculapius [Asklepios].

Iaia of Cyzicus, who always remained single, painted at Rome, in the youth of M. Varro, both with the brush, and with the graver, upon ivory, her subjects being female portraits mostly. At Naples, there is a large picture by her, the portrait of an Old Woman; as also a portrait of herself, taken by the aid of a mirror. There was no painter superior to her for expedition; while at the same time her artistic skill was such, that her works sold at much higher prices than those of the most celebrated portrait painters of her day, Sopolis namely, and Dionysius, with whose pictures our galleries are filled.

One Olympias painted also, but nothing is known relative to her, except that she had Autobulus for a pupil."

Pliny the Elder, Natural history, Book 35, chapter 40. At Perseus Digital Library.

As with other ancient authors, Pliny's testimony on many subjects has been continually questioned by scholars, not the least his attribution of ancient Greek works to particular artists. Much of his information is considered to be second or third hand and questionable on a number of grounds.

In the case of Ptolemy Hephaistion we do not even have his own words, just the summary by Photios, who is thought to have written Bibliotheka in a short time. Photios made it clear that he considered the content of Ptolemy's New History to be full of "extraordinary and badly imagined information", absurdities and "trivial fables" (fabulous stories), and that "the majority of his stories ... are free of things impossible to believe". He describes Ptolemy himself as "a somewhat credulous spirit, inclined to boastfulness", who had critics even in his own time. "He attacks some of his detractors whom he accuses of having approached the subject in an unhealthy way", and, "In treating each of these subjects, he pretends that his detractors have committed errors when they learned them and passed them on". [note 3] Photios may have summarized the work in a way which substantiated his opinion; he was, after all, a Christian prelate reviewing the work of a pagan author on pagan subjects seven centuries after it was written.

If the New History was an epic poem rather than a prose treatise, it may be understandable that Ptolemy used the poetic conceit of freely mixing mythographical and historiographical references and allusions throughout the work. However, many of the items of information are not corroborated by other sources, and we do not know how much he took from other authors or invented himself. This treatment of the data, at least as presented by Photios, makes much of the supposedly historical information questionable. In this case, it seems reasonable to question his account of Helena and her Battle of Issos, and ask whether either ever existed.

There is no doubt that throughout history female artists have received little attention from authors and critics, and that many have had to struggle in order practise their art or gain any kind of reputation for their work. However, when considering the possibility that the "Alexander Mosaic" may be a copy of Helena's Battle of Issos, it seems a more than a little biased in the other direction to claim that "the attribution is disputed because of Helena's gender". There is simply no evidence that the mosaic is a reproduction of a painting, known or unknown, by any artist, even Helena, Philoxenos or Aristeides.