//
Disclaimer: These are just thoughts on the module about Cleopatra. Written mostly from memory so dates and events may not be fully correct.
//
For the best part of two thousand years Cleopatra has been depicted as a seductress, a woman with magical allure, the original femme fatale. She was said to be beautiful and wicked in equal measure; that her sorcery was so powerful that even the mighty Caesar was bewitched. And once he was gone, assassinated by his own men, she weaved her magic yet again, this time snaring Mark Anthony in her trap. This was a woman who would do anything and everything to get what she wanted.
Great story, isn’t it? Even Shakespeare thought so. And he would know. In 1600 he wrote a play about the doomed love affair of Anthony and Cleopatra. The plot was right up his street, full of betrayal and scheming, with the two main characters committing suicide at the end. In it, Cleopatra, fueled by jealous rage devised a wicked plan to lure Mark Anthony away from his wife and into her bed.
Audiences lapped it up. What’s more, they thought it was true. Other adaptations followed suit. In the 20th century Cleopatra hit the big screens on three separate occasions. 1917, 1932 and most notably 1963 with Elizabeth Taylor. None of the movies strayed far from the preconceived premise that Cleopatra was a man-eater so her reputation remained firmly intact.
But is this the real Cleopatra? In recent times many historians are skeptical. For one, Shakespeare’s play and subsequent movies rely on one source. The Romans. There are now new sources that have come to light that suggest we might have been duped by Roman style propaganda all along. A sort of prehistoric fake news campaign that is playing out today.
How did this happen? And why did this happen?
Before tackling these questions, we need to go back set a little context.
During the reign of Cleopatra, in and around 50BC, Egypt was technically part of the Rome Empire, having been gifted to Rome by a deathbed pharaoh. This left the queen in a bit of bind. Roman troops marching into Egypt and staking their claim was a real possibility. Action was needed.
Cleopatra became close to Caesar, and not longer after they became lovers and she bore him a child. In modern politics this would be a real thorny situation, however, back then this was regarded as win-win Roman - Egyptian alliance, an ancient style bilateral agreement.
But after Caesar’s death Rome descended into chaos and the Roman - Egyptian alliance was lost. Cleopatra was back to square one.
The empire also had a problem. A power vacuum opened and two contenders came to the forefront. Octavian and Mark Anthony. Both men occupied vast areas of the Roman Empire. Octavian controlled the west, and was based in capital, Rome. Mark Anthony was in the Eastern Mediterranean, his strongholds included present day Syria, Turkey, Israel, right up to the border of Egypt.
Again, with Rome at her front door Cleopatra sought an alliance. She knew a battle was coming and so she struck up a friendship with Mark Anthony and, wouldn’t you know it, they became lovers.
As the battle grew closer Octavian and Mark Anthony first engaged in a war of words, a propaganda war. Addressing large crowds these two warriors would proclaim themselves the chosen ruler of Rome. They also weren’t shy about criticizing and denouncing the other.
Octavian, in one of his most famous speeches, dubbed Marc Anthony a weak man bewitched by a foreign queen. He declared, “[Mark Anthony] has abandoned his life and embraced alien and barbaric customs.” Towards Cleopatra he was equally harsh. He accused her of using witchcraft to enslave the men of Rome and she would do so again if she got the chance.
The speech had a purpose: to rile up his troops and convince listeners that he was indeed the only worthy leader of Rome. He was also belittling and tarnishing his enemy’s name, trying to make him look weak.
Mark Anthony probably made a similar speech, but his words have been lost in the winds of time. We all know that history is written by the victors and it was Octavian who was triumphed in the battle. As a result it is his version of events that were remembered. More importantly it is his version of Cleopatra and Anthony that was written down, recorded and still lingers to this day.
But the problem is this is only one side of the story. And the story came from a warrior addressing his men in the heat of the moment. Hardly a reliable source.
Historians for many years have been trying to set the record straight. They have referenced Arabic texts which claim Cleopatra was a very knowledgeable woman: she wrote books, she spoke several languages, knew could converse on complex military strategies. In other words, she was much more complex and interesting than the Roman sources give her credit for.
While this doesn’t contradict what Octavian claimed about Anthony and Cleopatra it’s a reminder that we should look at this story from many different angles before making a judgement.
It might be a long time before we see a movie version of the knowledgeable and book writing Cleopatra. I guess the old saying true. Never let the truth get into the way of a good story.