Antony and Cleopatra

by Adrian Goldsworthy

  In this case, the harvests seem to be have been bad for several years in succession as the annual inundations were low. At the same time the royal bureaucracy pressed hard to levy taxation on what was produced. Other documents from this period hint at widespread hardship and shortages. In some cases the peasants took the traditional route of protest by fleeing from the lands they were supposed to work.

  Alexandria was large and had a volatile population. Food shortages there were likely to cause rioting, which could quickly destabilise any regime. Therefore the royal decree may simply have been intended to make sure that however bad the situation was, the inhabitants of the great city were adequately fed. Yet there may be more to it than this. Some scholars have suggested that Cleopatra had already left the city and gone to Upper Egypt to rally support against her brother. If so, then the law was designed to deny her the food supplies she would need to feed any army she raised.10

  More probably, the relations between brother and sister had not yet broken down into actual conflict. The measure could just as easily have been intended to keep all resources under the close supervision of Ptolemy’s supporters and so deter Cleopatra from resorting to open resistance. It is more than possible that for a year or so there was the same sort of uneasy truce that had at times operated between Ptolemy Physcon and his two queens.

  By the end of 50 BC the official dating system spoke of‘Year One, which is also Year Three’, and the former clearly referred to the reign of Ptolemy XIII. Cleopatra may still have been in Alexandria when Pompey sent his elder son Cnaeus Pompey to the royal court in 49 BC. Having evacuated Italy, Pompey and his allies were busy organising the great army that was intended to smash Caesar, either in Macedonia or by returning to Italy itself. Therefore envoys were sent to gather men and resources from all the provinces and allied kingdoms of the eastern Mediterranean. Pompey’s past connection with Auletes may well have encouraged him to send his son to the Ptolemaic court, although it is more than likely that he also visited other regions. Cnaeus got at least some of what he requested. Five hundred Gallic and German cavalry drawn from amongst the Gabinians were despatched to join Pompey’s army, which included many contingents of allied troops to support the legions. In addition, he received sixty oared warships, apparently fully equipped and crewed. Egypt also sent wheat to feed the Pompeian forces.11

  Plutarch claims that Cleopatra – now about twenty – seduced Cnaeus Pompey, but none of our other sources mentions this and it is highly unlikely that Octavian and his propagandists would not have thrown such a charge at the queen. She may or may not have met the Roman envoy, but he clearly was left in no doubt that Ptolemy XIII’s advisers were in charge of the kingdom. The senators who were with Pompey’s army considered themselves the legitimate governing council of the Republic even though they were far from Rome. When Cnaeus Pompey returned they met and formally recognised the rule of the young Ptolemy XIII. Absolutely no mention was made of his sister. There is also no hint that Ptolemy’s aid to the Romans made him in any way unpopular with his subjects, highlighting the fact that it is wrong to see this as a simple struggle between pro- and anti-Roman factions.12

  At some point in late 49 or early 48 BC, Cleopatra left Alexandria and went to raise an army. Arsinoe went with her. A much later source claims that they went first to Upper Egypt, seeking support in the Thebaid. Perhaps not enough men rallied to the queen’s cause or her brother’s control of the food supply was simply too tight. For whatever reason, Cleopatra and her sister fled to Syria. In just a few years she had gone from queen to exile.13

  Her father was only the most recent of the Ptolemies to be driven from their kingdom, only to regain power at a later date. Cleopatra was not resigned to her fate, but determined to build up her strength until she could either defeat, or at least negotiate with, her brother and his advisers. She received an enthusiastic welcome from the city of Ascalon on the coast of Palestine. Originally one of the five main Philistine cities from the Old Testament period, it was now a bustling port. Alliance with the Ptolemies had allowed the city to break away from the kingdom of Judaea and become independent. In gratitude they had on several occasions minted coins bearing the Ptolemies’ eagle symbol. Now a series was produced carrying Cleopatra’s head. These are the images emphasising family traits such as the large eyes and prominent hooked nose to prove the legitimacy of her claim to power.14

  Why Ascalon’s leaders chose to support Cleopatra against her brother is unclear. Assistance may also have come from other quarters, and she may have hired or been given troops by the Nabataean kingdom, the capital of which was at the famous city of Petra. By the summer of 48 BC Cleopatra had an army and was ready to return.

  Ptolemy XIII and his ministers knew that his sisters were coming back. The royal army was mustered under the command of a general named Achillas, who now joined Pothinus and Theodotus as part of the inner circle controlling the young king. Julius Caesar says that:

  Achillas … had twenty thousand armed troops. These consisted of the old soldiers of Gabinius.… To these he had added recruits drawn from the ruffians and bandits of Syria and the province of Cilicia and the neighbouring regions. Meanwhile many condemned criminals and exiles had joined them; also our runaway slaves were sure of a welcome in Alexandria if they enlisted in the army. If any one of them was apprehended by his owner, he would be saved by the common support of the other soldiers.15

  It was a strong force, better trained and more experienced than the army Cleopatra had managed to assemble. It was always important in a civil war to show supreme confidence, since caution would readily be interpreted as weakness and so might make people wonder whether to change sides. Ptolemy XIII was still in his early teens, but was dressed in splendid armour and the royal cloak to lead his soldiers in person. The faction surrounding him were unlikely to have wanted to let the boy out of their sight and close control; they are also unlikely to have trusted each other.16

  Achillas did not wait at Pelusium to meet the invaders, but marched the army another 30 miles or so to the east to wait at Mount Casius. It was a strong position and the forward move was another expression of confidence. Cleopatra’s army arrived and took up a position facing them. For days the two armies stared at each other. Such stand-offs were common in ancient warfare; battle usually required the consent of both sides. If an army remained in a strong position, then its opponents were rarely willing to attack it at such a disadvantage. Probably Ptolemy’s army was much stronger than that of his sister. Her invasion of Egypt had bogged down before it had really begun.

  Then Pompey the Great arrived in Egypt for the first time in his long career.

  [XII]

  CIVIL WAR

  Pompey ought to have won the civil war, for he had far greater resources at his disposal and appeared to have much wider political support. He had lost Italy, but that was principally a blow to prestige and did not seriously reduce his capacity to fight. By the summer of 49 BC Caesar had outmanoeuvred the Pompeian armies in Spain and forced them to surrender. The leaders were permitted to go and duly returned to Pompey. The junior officers and soldiers switched sides or were demobilised. The legions in Spain had been the most experienced under Pompey’s command, but they were trapped in a strategic backwater and the campaign decided nothing. If Caesar had been beaten, then the civil war would have been over, for the rebel could not afford to lose even once. To Pompey the defeat was of only minor significance and, more importantly, the campaign had given him time to prepare for the real confrontation. Organisation had always been Pompey’s forte and the fifty-eight-year-old seemed rejuvenated as he gathered and trained his army in Greece.1

  There was also encouraging news from other theatres, as Caesar’s subordinates failed to match his successes. Caius Antonius led one and a half legions into Illyricum, but was overwhelmed and captured. Curio at first did well against weak opposition and had enjoyed a bloodless victory in Sicily – a minor reverse for Pompey’s cause. The Pompeian commander of
the island was Cato, but he had no significant forces and decided not to waste citizens’ lives in a futile defence, so left and went to Greece. Curio then took two of his four legions over to North Africa. Lack of transport ships severely restricted the Caesareans, just as it had prevented Caesar from following Pompey across the Adriatic, and the invasion was a gamble. At first the risk paid off and his legions of recently captured Pompeians proved remarkably loyal, with only a handful of desertions. One enemy army was routed at the cost of only a single fatality. Curio had very little military experience, but was bold and charismatic. He was also fighting against an opponent with hastily raised soldiers and inexperienced officers. In the early campaigns of the civil war, both sides contained a high proportion of unskilled amateurs.

  Then things started to go wrong. King Juba of Numidia was a staunch ally of Pompey – not least because while on an embassy to Rome he had been insulted by both Caesar and Curio. Acting on false intelligence, Curio force-marched his men in the hope of ambushing the king’s vanguard. He won a minor victory, but then realised that the entire Numidian army was closing on his position. Impulsively, Curio chose to fight. He was killed and only a handful of his men escaped. There was panic and chaos when these survivors reached the troops left back at the Caesarean base camp on the coast, a horde of fugitives swamping the boats trying to take them off. The historian Asinius Pollio was one of the few who managed to get away by ship to Sicily. Juba executed all those who surrendered, in spite of the protests of his Roman allies.2

  By the end of 49 BC one of Antony’s brothers was a captive of the enemy, and the severed head of his old friend Curio had been triumphantly presented to King Juba. His cousin, the younger Lucius Julius Caesar, was with the Pompeian forces in Africa and would lose his life during the course of the war. The boy’s father remained a Caesarean. The Roman aristocracy was close knit and everyone had some connections in the opposing camp.

  The split in the senatorial class was not even and its more distinguished members – including nearly half of the former consuls – actively supported Pompey. This gave him a deep political strength and an impression of legitimacy, which Caesar could not match. In spite of his victories in Italy and Spain, Caesar was a rebel and the Pompeians could still make a better claim to be defending the Republic. Only a handful of ex-consuls actively supported Caesar and these included three discredited men recalled from exile. One was Gabinius, and another was Antony’s uncle, Caius Antonius, although the nephew was later accused of having done little to encourage Caesar to recall him. Cicero was contemptuous of the Caesareans, dubbing the ones he saw accompanying their commander in March 49 BC as a ‘rabble’.3

  Like Antony and Curio, quite a few Caesareans came from noble families, but they were generally young, had reputations for wild living and radical politics, both of which had drained away their inheritances. The older men who followed Caesar were the failures and the desperate, descendants of the men who had backed Marius and paid the price, survivors of Catiline’s rebellion or those who had fallen foul of the courts. Caesar had a well-proven record for generosity, saying that he would reward even bandits if they served him well. Some had simply taken a pragmatic judgement of who was likely to win the conflict. Cicero’s correspondent Caelius believed that Pompey had the better cause, but Caesar the better army, and so became a Caesarean.4

  The Pompeians had little to offer men like Antony. Not only did Caesar promise lavish reward once victory was won, but also there was the chance of important commands and responsibilities in the meantime. There were plenty of Pompeians who had been consul or praetor, and who had governed provinces and led armies. Such men expected to receive tasks in keeping with their status. Had he been a Pompeian, there were no imaginable circumstances where the thirty-four-year-old Antony would have been given such an important task as the supervision of Italy.

  Caesar had far fewer distinguished men to call upon. Antony was an elected magistrate, and was also an Antonius, both of which made him more qualified for this task than most of the other Caesareans. It is also clear that Caesar had confidence in his ability to do the job, although interesting that for the moment he did not choose to employ him in a more overtly military role. As we have seen, Antony’s military experience was still relatively modest and it is quite possible that he had been as much or more an administrator as a soldier during his years in Gaul. Caesar did take his fellow tribune Cassius Longinus with him on the Spanish campaign, and left him behind as provincial governor. Cassius had both a brother and a cousin fighting for Pompey, but the appointment was to prove a bad one for other reasons.

  Antony did a better job as tribune with propraetorian power in Italy. The peace was kept, with no upsurge of Pompeian resistance. In the meantime, progress was made in preparing the army and fleet for crossing to Macedonia. How much either of these things was a direct result of Antony’s personal involvement is impossible to know, as we have very little information about these months. Plutarch claims that he was energetic in organising and training the troops, and popular with the soldiers for his generosity. In contrast, he was supposed to have shown little energy when it came to receiving petitions from civilians. He does seem to have travelled widely, visiting many of the towns of Italy. People noticed Antony, and this was not always a good thing for the Caesarean cause, because he paraded his power. Cicero claimed that:

  A tribune of the people was driven in a British chariot, preceded by lictors crowned in laurel [the symbol of victory], and in the middle a mime actress carried in an open litter; respectable men from the towns were obliged to greet her, and address her as Volumnia, rather than her stage name. Following behind were his shameful companions — a whole band of pimps — and at the back his mother, attending her wicked son’s mistress just as if she was a daughter-in-law.5

  This description comes from a speech made years later, but although the orator may have exaggerated a little, there is evidence from the time that he was not inventing the whole story. In May of 49 BC he mentioned in a letter that Antony carried his mistress ‘about with him in an open litter just like a second wife, and had seven other litters with male and female friends’.6

  At some point in the last few years Antony had married for the second time. We do not know what happened to his first wife, but he may have divorced her because of her undistinguished family. Instead, he married his first cousin, the daughter of Caius Antonius. This connection made it seem all the more strange that he did little to encourage Caesar to recall Antonius, but the marriage seems not to have been a happy one. A year later he would divorce Antonia amidst rumours that she had taken a lover. Gossip claimed that Antony had affairs with the wives of several other men, but Roman society did not grant the same licence to a wife as it did to a husband.7

  Antony himself reserved his passion for his mistress in a relationship that lasted several years. She was a freed slave, and the name Volumnia was the feminine form of her old master’s name. Professionally she was known as Cytheris. Taking a mistress was common for Roman aristocrats and there existed a distinct class of courtesans, some of whom became famous. These women were usually foreign, and often freed slaves, but were educated and witty, stylish and in many cases able to sing, dance and play musical instruments. Quite a few, like Cytheris, had first won fame on the stage in the mimes — stories told through dance and music in which women took part, unlike drama where female parts were generally performed by male actors.8

  Such a mistress could not be taken for granted. Suitors competed to win her favour, offering gifts and ultimately providing a house or apartment for the lover to live in. Both parties knew that the affair would not be permanent, and a mistress could end the relationship if she found a more appealing protector. Able to flatter and flirt in a way that would have been socially unacceptable for a wife, expensive mistresses offered exciting and glamorous company in affairs that were spicy, but without long-term commitment. Cytheris had already had an affair with Servilia’s son Brutus, a man wh
ose philosophical leanings and sober nature seem so opposite to Antony’s character. Considerable licence was allowed to senators’sons during their adolescence — a period that the Romans felt lasted into the late thirties. Yet they were expected to show at least some discretion, and this was something Antony seems never to have mastered or even thought necessary. A story circulated that he had a chariot pulled by a team of lions rather than horses. Whether or not such an absurdly impractical and dangerous experiment was actually made, it gives an idea of what people were willing to believe about him.9

  He paraded his power in a way that was both blatant and vulgar, giving the impression of enjoying himself in luxurious debauchery instead of labouring diligently. For Cicero, this confirmed his worst fears that Caesar would eventually throw off the facade of clemency and preside over a bloodbath. The orator believed the war to be unnecessary and had tried to encourage a negotiated settlement. He had been shocked by the militancy of many leading senators, then dismayed by the evacuation first of Rome and then of Italy itself. Yet he was still drawn to Pompey and more comfortable siding with him and his allies than Caesar and his ‘rabble’. For a while he stayed in Italy, avoiding taking part in the meetings of the Senate at Rome or committing himself in any way to Caesar. His protege Caelius Rufus and several friends who were with Caesar repeatedly encouraged him to take this step, or at the very least maintain his neutrality. Another voice came from his son-in-law Dolabella, but Cicero despised the man. The marriage to his daughter had been arranged by his wife while he was away in Cilicia and without his approval.10

  Antony kept an eye on Cicero, for it was obvious that the famous orator was tempted to leave the country and join the Pompeians. In early May, Cicero mentioned that he had repeatedly written to the tribune, assuring him that he planned nothing rash, but expressing a desire to go abroad, perhaps to Malta, and avoid all involvement in the war. Antony had replied: