What if Antony and Cleopatra had defeated Octavian?
In 30 BC, Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII committed suicide after being defeated by Octavian’s forces in a civil war.
What if Antony and Cleopatra had defeated Octavian, the man who became Rome’s first emperor? Would they have become the rulers of Rome? How would the story have been different?
Civil war
First, it helps to understand what led to the war. Following the assassination of Julius Caesar in 44 BC. BC, three major factions fought for power: Octavian, great-nephew, adopted son and heir of Caesar; Mark Antony, one of Caesar’s generals; and Brutus and Cassius, both senators. However, the senators were soon defeated and committed suicide.
Before his death, Caesar had a relationship with Cleopatra VII, the ruler of Egypt. Cleopatra had a son named Caesarion who she claimed was fathered by Caesar. But he never recognized the boy as his son. After Caesar’s death, Cleopatra and Antony became a couple and had three children, although they probably did not officially marry.
Meanwhile, there had been an uneasy power-sharing agreement between Octavian, based in Rome, and Antony, based in Alexandria. But then civil war for control of Rome and its territories broke out in 32 BC.
The turning point of the civil war was the Battle of Actium, which took place on September 2, 31 BC. During this battle, Antony and Cleopatra’s fleet was destroyed and Octavian took control of the Mediterranean Sea. While other battles took place on land, Antony and Cleopatra’s forces could not recover from the loss of their fleet.
Cleopatra and Antony died in 30 BC, and Egypt was incorporated into the Roman Empire as a province in 30 BC. Shortly after, in 27 BC, the Roman Senate gave Octavian the title “August“, and he became the first emperor of the Roman Empire.
But what would have happened if the lovers had triumphed over Octave?
Cleopatra restricted?
There is a wide range of possibilities in this “what if” scenario, the researchers believe.
One possibility is that Cleopatra’s power would have been limited to Egypt and parts of the Middle East. Some scholars have said that Cleopatra would have struggled to play a significant role in the Eternal City. “I don’t see a role for Cleopatra in Rome”, Jeffrey Tatumprofessor of classics at Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand, told Live Science in an email, noting that Octavian’s supporters had used propaganda to vilify Cleopatra.
Lee Fratantuonoprofessor of ancient classics at Maynooth University in Ireland, agrees, pointing out that Cleopatra, who was an Egyptian ruler of Macedonian descent, would not have been accepted by the people of Rome. “Her presence at his side sparked a patriotic feeling in Italy, and it is highly unlikely that Antony could have achieved long-term success in the central and western Mediterranean with her prominently in the picture,” he told Live Science in an email.
Antony had sons and sons-in-law from his previous marriages, and he could have tried to insert them into power in Rome in his place. Antony “had what Octavian did not: an abundance of children and step-children, especially males, whom he could use.” Jane Draycottlecturer in classical sciences at the University of Glasgow, told Live Science in an email.
Antony and Cleopatra, along with their children, may have focused more on Egypt and the Near East, where the Romans faced a formidable adversary in the Parthian Empire, in what is today largely Iran. Antony may have wanted to spend his time fighting them rather than trying to rule Rome itself, Draycott said.
Cleopatra as queen?
Another possibility is that, despite her opposition to Cleopatra, she could have risen to power in Rome, alongside Antony, who would have become emperor. Prudence Jonesprofessor of classics at Montclair State University in New Jersey, said in an email.
If they had succeeded, “we might expect a greater balance between the eastern and western parts of the Roman Empire”, Jones said, with Egypt being an important part of the eastern part of the empire.
“If power were more balanced between the eastern and western parts of the empire, rather than being centralized in Rome, European history might be very different,” Jones told Live Science. “Western Europe might have remained rural longer with a lesser degree of Romanization, particularly in Gaul and Britain, if more resources had been directed east. Greek culture might have had a greater influence across Europe, with perhaps fewer Romance languages and more modern languages related to Greek.”
Egypt could have “retained some degree of independence and functioned as a client kingdom,” Jones said. Perhaps Antony would have avoided centralizing the government of the Roman Empire as Octavian did.
We “cannot assume that Antony would have had Octavian’s desire and skills to develop the bureaucracy,” Jones said. “With less central control, the Roman Empire could have been more of a Greco-Roman-Egyptian confederation.”
Return it to the Senate?
Another possibility is that rather than trying to control Rome himself or through his sons and sons-in-law, Antony could have returned the city and some of its territories to the Senate and retained Rome as a republic, Tatum said.
It is possible that “he would have restored the republic to the Senate and the assemblies”, writes Tatum in his book “A noble ruin: Mark Antony, the civil war and the collapse of the Roman Republic» (Oxford University Press, 2023). “Enjoying his wealth and prestige from a distance, perhaps even from Alexandria, he could have exerted influence without dominating affairs and changing the fundamental nature of the republic.
It’s also possible that whatever decisions Antony and Cleopatra made sparked another civil war with other aristocrats fighting for control of Rome and its territories, Tatum said in an email.
Roman Emperor Quiz: Test your knowledge of the rulers of the ancient empire
