Marc Antony

Roman general

• Born: c. 82 b.c.e.
• Birthplace: Unknown
• Died: 30 b.c.e.
• Place of death: Alexandria, Egypt

The military and political defeat of Antony by Octavian (later known as Augustus) resulted in the demise of the republican form of government in Rome and the creation of the Roman Empire, which would rule much of the known world for some five hundred years.

Early Life

Marcus Antonius, called Marc Antony (AN-tuh-nee) in English, was born into a distinguished Roman family around 82 b.c.e. His grandfather, also named Marcus Antonius, had attained the highest offices of Roman public life. Antony’s father, Marcus Antonius Creticus (d. c. 72 b.c.e.), however, did not equal his father’s distinction. More important for Antony’s future, on his mother’s side he was related to Julius Caesar. Until he was about twenty-five, Antony, not unlike many of his contemporaries, was a profligate: His moral failings and excesses were detailed by Cicero, his enemy, in a series of attacks known as Philippicae (44-43 b.c.e.; Philippics, 1926), and his energy was no doubt wasted, as Plutarch stated, “in drinking bouts, love-affairs, and excessive spending.” Antony studied rhetoric in Athens and from there turned his attention to a military career and public life. By that time, many of the characteristics (both good and bad) that constituted Antony’s personality had developed: his bawdy and often self-deprecating sense of humor, his familiarity with the men under his command, his liberality, and his attraction to the Greek way of life. Antony’s family claimed descent from the Greek hero Hercules, and his Roman nose and other features encouraged positive comparisons between Antony and images of Hercules. Antony also cultivated a forceful and powerful appearance in figure, dress, and demeanor at public functions.

Life’s Work

Antony lost the struggle against Octavian for control of the Roman world, but this fact should not negate the accomplishments of a truly remarkable Roman who had a long and successful military and political career. Antony’s failure was the result not of his character or tactics, as some of his critics believe, but of his opposition to Octavian, the most successful of all Roman politicians and one of the most astute and imposing political figures of all time. Antony’s early political career was bound closely to that of Julius Caesar. In 51 b.c.e., he served as a junior officer under Caesar’s command, and under Caesar’s patronage he rose very quickly to a position second in importance in the Caesarean forces. After this, there is some evidence of a rift between Caesar and Antony, who seems not to have participated in Caesar’s final victories over Pompey the Great. Nevertheless, Caesar and Antony were sufficiently close politically that Antony was a colleague in the consulship of 44 b.c.e., the year of Caesar’s assassination.

Antony’s intentions after Caesar’s death are impossible to determine. His inflammatory and dramatic reading of Caesar’s will may be seen as an attempt to seize control of Rome. On the other hand, such funerary demonstrations were well within the traditionally accepted bounds of political and familial behavior in the Roman Republic. Antony’s attitude toward Caesar’s assassins was at first ambivalent and conciliatory, but ultimately tensions between Antony and Marcus Junius Brutus, one of Caesar’s assassins, led to hostilities.

At this point, Octavian, Caesar’s adopted son, entered the political and military scene; he defeated Antony at Mutina in 43 b.c.e. This defeat did not destroy Antony’s position—his support was too strong. The Second Triumvirate, an arrangement lasting five years, was created; the three members, Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, Antony, and Octavian, were assigned with the task of establishing the form of republican government. The Roman world was split among the triumvirs, while at Rome a reign of terror resulted, and thousands of Romans perished as the triumvirs persecuted their enemies. The most notable casualty of this reign of terror was Antony’s particular adversary and critic, Cicero. Having accomplished his goals in Rome, Antony turned his attention to the East. For all of their significant differences, Antony and Octavian had a common purpose. It was to the advantage of both to move against the republican forces led by Caesar’s assassins; after the victory at the Battle of Philippi (42 b.c.e.), the only opposition to the triumvirate left was Pompey the Younger, the son of Pompey the Great.

After Philippi, Antony remained in the East to restore order to the provinces. His first step was to set up Herod and his brother, Phasael, over Judaea. Antony then met with Cleopatra VII at Tarsus in 41 b.c.e. (Cleopatra’s spectacular arrival in her golden barge was recorded by Plutarch and later portrayed by William Shakespeare in Antony and Cleopatra, c. 1606-1607.) The political significance of this meeting was underscored by the establishment of a personal relationship that would capture the imagination of subsequent generations. Antony visited Cleopatra in the winter of 41-40 b.c.e., and twins were born after his departure. The relationship continued until Antony’s death, and his connection with Cleopatra was in large measure responsible for his ultimate defeat.

Antony was separated from Cleopatra from 40 to 37 b.c.e. as a result of a serious threat from old Roman enemies from the east, the Parthians. In 53 b.c.e., a Roman army under Marcus Licinius Crassus had been defeated at Carrhae, and revenge was never far from the Romans’ minds. In 40 b.c.e., the Parthians moved as far west as Syria, and Antony was determined to repulse this attack. A crisis in the west intervened, and Antony was forced to return to Italy to mediate a struggle between Octavian and Antony’s wife and brother. Hostilities were averted when Octavian and Antony reached an agreement at Brundisium in 40 b.c.e. In the meantime, Antony’s wife, Fulvia, had died; Antony strengthened his ties to Octavian through the time-honored Roman tradition of an arranged marriage with Octavian’s sister, Octavia. Antony returned to Athens with Octavia, and a daughter, Antonia, was born to them. Soon after, Antony was again forced to return to Italy, and his arrangement with Octavian was formally renewed at Brundisium for another five years. During all of this, Octavia proved a loyal and helpful wife and on occasion supported Antony against her brother.

Antony and Octavia returned to Athens, but not long after the birth of a second daughter, Octavia was sent back to Italy. Once matters at Rome were settled, Antony once again turned his attention to the campaign against the Parthians. After initial Roman victories, he decided to launch a full-scale expedition into the Parthian homeland. In preparation for this very risky enterprise, Antony sought support from the rulers of Roman client-states in the Near East. Among these rulers was Cleopatra. Their personal relationship resumed, and a son, Ptolemy Philadelphus, was born in 36 b.c.e. There was now no retreating from their personal and political alliance: Politics and love became one.

Antony’s first full campaign in 36 b.c.e. against the Parthians was a disaster; it was only with great difficulty that the remaining members of the Roman force were able to escape destruction. A second campaign in 33 b.c.e. was more successful, but it fell short of complete victory. Nevertheless, Antony felt confident enough to assign dominion over much territory under Roman influence to Cleopatra and her children in a settlement known as the Alexandrian Donations. Thus, on three fronts Antony lost whatever support he may have had at Rome: military failure against the Parthians, individualistic settlement of territories under Roman influence, and rejection of Octavian’s sister as his Roman wife.

Antony’s independent actions in the East, together with Octavian’s aggressive behavior at Rome, led to a final confrontation. Octavian sensed the weakness of Antony’s position at Rome, and he made public the supposed conditions of Antony’s will. Its exact text remains unknown, but the effect of its publication is certain. War followed, and Antony and Cleopatra were defeated by Octavian in a naval battle at Actium in September of 31 b.c.e. They fled to Egypt, where, about a year later, Antony, under the mistaken impression that Cleopatra had already killed herself, committed suicide and died in her arms. Some time after this, Cleopatra did the same. According to tradition, she used the poison of an asp.

Significance

Literary sources present a very negative picture of Marc Antony’s personality and achievements. Antony’s youthful excesses made it easy for critics to claim that his failure was the result of a life devoted to pleasure and self-gratification; although there is some truth to this, it nevertheless offers a one-sided view. He was an excellent general whose soldiers responded with devotion and loyalty. His administration of the Greek East was efficient and without many of the failings of his predecessors. Antony was politically astute, but he failed to appreciate sufficiently the impact of his image at Rome as a Hellenistic potentate. His enduring relationship with Cleopatra did great harm to his standing, and some even began to believe that Antony’s devotion to her led to his considering moving the seat of Imperial power from Rome to Alexandria. Octavian, a master propagandist, took advantage of this situation by contrasting his traditional Roman values with Antony’s Eastern way of life.

Antony’s person and career highlight the tensions present in Roman society during the last century of the Republic, between conservative Roman values and the more attractive Hellenistic way of life. As Augustus, Octavian based his rule on a return to the old Roman values, but most of the autocrats who succeeded him followed Antony’s style more closely. Indeed, the division of the Roman Empire between East and West, which Antony may have seen as inevitable, eventually became reality. The history of the Roman Empire has shown that Antony’s vision and style would become the rule rather than the exception.

Bibliography

Charlesworth, M. P., and W. W. Tarn. Octavian, Antony, and Cleopatra. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1965. This is an abridged, but detailed and valuable, account of the relations among its three subjects in the years between 44 and 30 b.c.e. Originally published in volumes 9 and 10 of The Cambridge Ancient History (1934).

Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Philippics. Edited and translated by D. R. Shackleton Bailey. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986. These orations, composed in 44 or 43 b.c.e., provide graphically detailed and scathingly personal attacks on Antony’s character. Their tone is so hostile, however, that they cannot be taken at face value.

Huzar, Eleanor G. Mark Antony: A Biography. New York: Methuen, 1986. A readable account of Antony’s life. Well documented, it attempts to provide a balanced view of Antony’s career by separating negative propaganda from fact.

Kittredge, Mary, and Arthur M. Schlesinger. Marc Antony. New York: Chelsea House, 1988. A biography accessible to high school readers. Illustrations, maps, index.

Plutarch, Antonius. Life of Antony. Edited by C. B. R. Pelling. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Written early in the second century c.e., this biography provides a complete and engaging narrative account of Antony’s life. Much of it is overtly hostile to Antony, and Plutarch chose to emphasize his subject’s vices.

Syme, R. The Roman Revolution. 1939. Reprint. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. An eminent historian’s interpretive account of the reasons for the collapse of the Republic. Syme uses prosopographical analysis to explain the ways in which relations among aristocratic Romans led to Octavian’s victory.

Toynbee, Jocelyn Mary Catherine. Roman Historical Portraits. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1978. Effectively combines visual and literary evidence in an exploration of the historical tradition in which the portraits of Antony and Octavian must be understood.