The Murder of Cleopatra (18 page)

This show was probably just some frosting for the cake, since both Antony and Cleopatra already knew that they needed each other, but they also needed to maintain a level of diplomatic dignity. This showy pretext allowed the necessary partnership to be sugarcoated and spiced up, thereby making the whole concept of cooperation much more palatable.

Why, then, at that particular time, did Antony send for Cleopatra? He certainly knew that Octavian would go to any extreme to attack his character and stir up as much animosity as he possibly could with
the Roman people, the ruling class, and the Senate. Octavian did not disappoint him. He went all out, trashing Cleopatra and Antony's liaison with her.

Cassius Dio writes his interpretation of how Octavian viewed his two enemies and how he might have presented them to the Roman people:

Who would not be dismayed to see the queen of the Egyptians with Roman bodyguards? Who would not lament to hear that Roman knights and Senators fawn over her like eunuchs? Who would not moan to hear and see Antony himself, twice a consul, many times a commander, to whom, along with me, leadership was entrusted and so many cities, so many legions—who would not weep to see that he has now left behind his ancestral customs, that he has imitated foreign and barbaric ones that he does not respect the laws or gods of his ancestors but bows before that woman like Isis or Selene, names her children Helios and Selene and finally calls himself Osiris and Dionysus, and, after all these things, he gives as gifts whole islands and parts of continents, as if he were the lord of the whole earth and sea? These things seem unbelievable and amazing to you soldiers, I know; and because of that, you should be even more outraged. Indeed, if what you do not believe when you hear it turns out to be true, and if that man commits crimes of luxury at which anyone would shudder to learn, then how is it not appropriate for your anger to know no bounds?

And yet, at first, I was so enthusiastic about him that I shared with him my command, married my sister to him, and gave him legions. After this, I was so sympathetic and kind to him that I did not wish to go to war with him because he insulted my sister, or because he did not care for the children he had with her, or because he honored an Egyptian woman instead of her, or because he gave that woman almost all the things that are rightfully yours, or because of anything else. I considered the first reason to be that the same approach should not be taken with both Cleopatra and Antony, for she was clearly an enemy because of what she did and also because she was a foreigner, but he as a citizen, might possibly
be reasoned with. Secondly, I hoped that, even if he did not want to, he might, under duress, change his mind because of the decrees passed against Cleopatra. Because of this, I did not declare war on him. But he, since he despises and disparages these favors he will not receive pardon even if we wish to grant it, and will not receive pity, even if we feel it. He is either irrational or insane (for I have heard this and believe that he is under that abominable woman's spell) and has no respect for our magnanimity and kindness, but, since he is enslaved to that woman he brings war and its dangers which he voluntarily incurs on her behalf, against us and against his fatherland. Therefore, what choice do we have but to defend ourselves against him and Cleopatra.

Therefore, let no one consider him a Roman but rather an Egyptian; let no one call him Antony but rather Serapion; let no one believe that he was one time a consul or commander but rather a gymnasiarch. He himself has chosen willingly the latter rather than the former titles; casting off all the respectable titles of his homeland, he has become a cymbal player of Canopus. Let no one fear that he will turn the tide of war, for previously he was nothing outstanding, as those of you who beat him at Mutina know well. But even if at one time he had some success in an expedition when he was on our side, be confident that now he has destroyed his abilities through his change in lifestyle: it is not possible for someone living in royal luxury and being treated like a woman to think or act like a man, because it is always true that one's behavior reflects one's way of life. As evidence I submit that he, having fought one battle in all this time and having engaged in one campaign, lost many citizens in the battle, shamefully retreated from Praaspa, and lost many more in the flight. As a result, if this were a contest of dancing ridiculously or comic buffoonery and one of us had to compete against him, our man would surely lose, for Antony is the expert at these skills; since, however, the contest is one of weapons and battle, what could anyone fear from him? The fitness of his body? He is over the hill and thoroughly effeminate. His mental powers? He has the mind of a woman and the physical desires of one too. His respect for our gods? He fights against them as he does against his homeland. His loyalty to his allies? Who does not know that he deceived the
Armenian and put him in chains? His fairness to his friends? Who has not seen those whom he has wickedly destroyed? His reputation among the soldiers? Who among them has not condemned him? This is evident because the crowds of them desert to our side on a daily basis. Indeed, I think that all of our citizens will follow suit, just as has happened previously, when he went from Brundisium to Gaul. As long as the men expected to enrich themselves without risk, some were very happy to be among his troops, but they will not wish to fight against us, their fellow citizens, on behalf of things that are not theirs, especially if it is possible for them to be safe and to get rich without danger if they join us.
2

I think Dio probably did a fine job channeling Octavian through his writing; was Octavian's harsh propaganda campaign denigrating Antony's character, his military prowess, and his commitment as a Roman leader to his people, even as a Roman citizen and husband and father, unfair and totally without merit? Actually, I tend to think someone is a good profiler, either Dio or Octavian; I think the description of Antony was rather spot-on at this the point in his life, right before he and Octavian butted heads at Actium.

The three players left in the game for Mediterranean dominance took their places. At Tarsus, Antony and Cleopatra would solidify their partnership and begin their relationship. Octavian, the odd man out, would ready himself to do battle against the couple. And why exactly did Cleopatra decide to hook up with Antony? Well, from the time of Julius Caesar's assassination until this point in time, Cleopatra had had her freedom and had ruled her kingdom with little interference. But all good things come to an end, and Cleopatra always knew that unless Antony and Octavian canceled each other out, one of them was going to show up in Alexandria someday as friend or foe. Thus when Antony sent word to Cleopatra that he wanted to meet with her, she had no choice but to go and become his best friend.

And what spurred Antony to partner with Cleopatra? Simply put, he wanted to look better than Octavian to the Romans. Italy in general, and Rome in particular, were suffering from a variety of ills:
starvation, homelessness, and rioting. Once Brutus and Cassius had been eliminated, fourteen thousand soldiers returned to Rome, and all of them needed to be paid and housed. Overtaxation and the stealing of freeholders' lands in Rome and other cities by both Octavian and Antony did not make the citizens very happy; nor were these men very popular in the eyes of the veterans who felt they weren't getting their due quickly enough. Meanwhile, Sextus (before his defeat and execution at the hands of Octavian) decided to blockade the city, starve everyone, and cripple the Roman army until he was given control of Sicily, Corsica, and Sardinia).

Octavian was struggling to keep things under control in Rome, but Antony, out in the east, came up with a better plan to deal with the mess: Cleopatra. The Lagide treasury of the Ptolemy Dynasty could afford to give up a bit of its riches to make Antony the savior of Rome for the moment and also fund his invasion of Parthia. In return, along with promises of future Roman goodwill, Antony was willing to kill off Cleopatra's sister Arsinoe IV (who was the only family threat left), and a few other problematic folk.

Antony went on to enjoy some time with Cleopatra (although in their near decade-long relationship, the actual number of hours they spent with one another was quite limited), and apparently he really appreciated the charms of Alexandria as well as the charms of the queen. Octavian naturally made much of this liaison, claiming Antony's desire for what Egypt had to offer was akin to being a traitor. On a personal level, Octavian was being rather a pill, insisting others adhere to a stricter, austere life simply because he felt this was what exemplified the proper Roman. Antony should not have had to ignore music, art, culture, fine food, festivities, and other activities that gave him pleasure, just because Octavian was such a repressed fellow. On the other hand, Octavian did point out a trait that may have been detrimental to Antony in the long run. Octavian was an extremely hardworking, forward-thinking leader, while Antony did what he thought was necessary at various times but preferred a bit more of a laid-back lifestyle. Antony would go for the gusto when certain
opportunities presented themselves but not necessarily spend every day running Rome with the obsessive management style of Octavian. While some in Rome liked Antony's less organized approach to life and leadership, feeling comfortable that this meant he was not going to become another Julius Caesar and end any semblance of Italy being a republic, others felt Octavian's methods were more appropriate: on the ball, attentive, and astute at taking care of business. Remember, Caesar banished Antony for failing to handle the economy of Rome properly while Caesar was off in battle. This was not likely to be a problem with the ever-working, micromanaging Octavian. It seems that Octavian might have had a bit of a chip on his shoulder, perhaps due to a long-held inferiority complex that would have developed in childhood, caused by being fatherless, being raised by controlling women, and having a less-than-gladiator body—and because of any number of other traits that damaged his ego and made being the next Caesar the one and only purpose in Octavian's life. He not only wanted to be emperor, but he wanted to be regarded as the
greatest
emperor. He did not have time to spend playing around, wasting his energies on lesser goals. Octavian probably resented Antony's more carefree attitude and found it to be a bad trait, one he thought should cost him the prize; how unfair it would be for Antony to charm his way to the top while Octavian was spending every waking hour planning strategies and putting them into action.

Octavian also promoted the idea that by enjoying life with Cleopatra in Alexandria, Antony had belittled the Romans and their culture. He labeled Antony a traitor over it. In a way, Octavian had a point. Immersion in a new location, in a different culture, and spending a great deal of time with a person from that culture can indeed cause a dramatic shift in perspective. “Out of sight, out of mind” can encourage a lessening of concern and association for the place and people one no longer experiences on a daily basis.

Conversely, by spending a great deal of time with someone from another culture, one's choices could be influenced; it is possible that Cleopatra would have had ideas and attitudes that could sway
Antony's actions. To some extent, one could say it is not impossible that Antony was “under Cleopatra's spell”—but then, she could have been “under Antony's spell” as well. However, the behaviors of both Cleopatra and Antony show that while they appreciated each other's worth and personalities, they still liked who they were and they were not intending on vacating their positions of power. Each would try to add to their own, but not trade them. It is possible that together, they became a dangerous and daring duo, living larger together than either would have on their own. Indeed, this seemed to be a possible explanation of Cleopatra's and Antony's behaviors with what has been called the Donations of Alexandria.

Plutarch describes this unprecedented event of 34 BCE as a major spectacle staged in Egypt by Cleopatra and Antony, in which Antony sat on a tall throne next to Cleopatra with all four children on lesser thrones, presenting a unified front to the Egyptians and proclaiming themselves the future rulers of a Roman/Egyptian empire, with their children sharing in the control of the world for decades to come.

He was hated, too, for the distribution which he made to his children in Alexandria; it was seen to be theatrical and arrogant, and to evince hatred of Rome. For after filling the gymnasium with a throng and placing on a tribunal of silver two thrones of gold, one for himself and the other for Cleopatra, and other lower thrones for his sons, in the first place he declared Cleopatra Queen of Egypt, Cyprus, Libya, and Coele Syria, and she was to share her throne with Caesarion. Caesarion was believed to be a son of the former Caesar, by whom Cleopatra was left pregnant. In the second place, he proclaimed his own sons by Cleopatra Kings of Kings, and to Alexander he allotted Armenia, Media and Parthia (when he should have subdued it), to Ptolemy, Phoenicia, Syria, and Cilicia. At the same time he also produced his sons, Alexander arrayed in Median garb, which included a tiara and upright head-dress, Ptolemy in boots, short cloak, and broad-brimmed hat surmounted by a diadem. For the latter was the dress of the kings who followed Alexander, the former that of Medes and Armenians. And when
the boys had embraced their parents, one was given a bodyguard of Armenians, the other of Macedonians. Cleopatra, indeed, both then and at other times when she appeared in public, assumed a robe sacred to Isis, and was addressed as the New Isis.

By reporting these things to the senate and by frequent denunciations before the people [Octavian] tried to inflame the multitude against Antony.
3

Essentially, Plutarch claimed that Antony through this spectacle honored the deceased Julius Caesar and then recognized Caesarion as his true son and heir, effectively saying Octavian, and Italy, should be cast aside. Cleopatra was officially titled, “Queen of Kings and Her Sons Who Are Kings,” and Caesarion was given the title of pharaoh of Egypt, and as son of Caesar, a pharaoh approved of by Rome. Cleopatra and Caesarion would rule Egypt together (and Libya and Cyprus and part of Syria), and the two sons and daughter she had with Antony would eventually rule Persia, Macedonia, Armenia, Parthia, Cyrenaica, Crete, and parts of Syria and Cilicia (even if neither Rome nor Egypt had control of all of them yet)—effectively, all the Roman lands. Antony would be ruler of the world over all of them; Cleopatra would be his queen and continue to rule Egypt; their children would rule with them; and, finally, the lands would be united in peace. It would be an eastern empire, Roman/Egyptian but with the Roman part of the empire diminished due to the addition of the Egyptian queen to the equation.