Why do you think that happened?

It's hard to understand. At the time that he would normally have married, 25, 26, he was in the thick of it, moving from Central Asia, in Iran, Iraq, he was fighting major battles, winning, so in a way, he didn't have time.

What do you think of the casting for the Stone and the Luhrmann films?

There's one absurdity, which is to have Angelina Jolie playing Olympias and she's [nearly the same age ] as the actor who's playing her son, Colin Farrell [Jolie is 29; Farrell, 28]. She should be at least 15 and maybe 18 years older. Nicole Kidman, who was cast in the Baz Luhrmann movie as Olympias to Leonardo DiCaprio, is at least older [37 to 29] than Leonardo DiCaprio. But, I mean, that's a nonsense, frankly.

Otherwise, Colin Farrell is a quite interesting choice because Ireland as compared to Britain is sort of the wild Celtic fringe. Macedonia in relation to Greece to the south, it was thought of something like the wild and woolly fringe to the Greek world. And he has a reputation, which he cultivates, as sort of a hell raiser, and there is a bit of Alexander that is extremely hell raising and excessive. You know, he drank too much and he did probably kill too much. He was excessively cruel on certain occasions. He killed one of his best comrades when he was blind drunk in one notorious instance.

Farrell has said that the role was tremendously emotionally challenging for him ("It drove me a bit crazy. I just felt very lonely and very sad, that [Alexander] never got to a place of comfort, a place of joy, a place where he ever felt like he was achieving enough"), and DiCaprio said, "his legend is one of the most compelling stories in human history." What makes Alexander so appealing for actors?

In a way, he's a sort of an action man incarnate, and he was good-looking and had this amazing charisma. But what Farrell says is actually, I think, very perceptive, that in order to be a great king, you have to be somewhat lonely. You might confide in one person, and he did indeed confide in his best mate Hephaestion, with whom he probably had had a sexual relationship in their earlier days, and he promoted Hephaestion to his No. 2, therefore he could talk to him. But the problem was that Hephaestion seems to have been a sort of yes man. He doesn't seem to have ever resisted anything that Alexander wanted to do, never told him, "No, you mustn't do that." And what Alexander needed really was a sort of reality check, which I think is what powerful, especially autocratic leaders tend not to have. They lose touch a bit, and they get lonely. And the loneliness of power is indeed a phrase that applies very much to Alexander.

What about Alexander's relationship with Aristotle, his tutor?

That's rather hard to pin down. On the one hand, he never lost touch with him after he was taught by him, from the age of 13. Alexander certainly was interested in botany and in medicine, and Aristotle was the son of a doctor and was particularly interested in medicine and zoology and botany. I think Alexander picked those up from him.

On the other hand, if Aristotle had been asked was Alexander his ideal monarch, I think he would have had to say no, because he contravened the most fundamental of all Aristotle's rules, which is the golden mean: nothing in excess. I think Alexander was too ambitious. He did not control his temper adequately. His ambitions were too big, too total. And I think Aristotle if he'd had the chance to have a quiet word with him, he'd have said, come on, rein yourself in.

Recent Stories