Evaluate the importance of the conflict between Mark Antony and Octavian
Following the assassination of Julius Caesar by the senators of the republic on the Ides of March in 44BC, Rome descended into a bloody civil war which lasted a decade. Although the senators had cunningly planned the murder of Caesar, it became apparent that they did not possess the foresight to consider who may fill the gaping power vacuum created by Caesar’s absence. In the intricate manoeuvrings that followed the death of Caesar, Caesarians Marcus Lepidus and Octavian, Caesar’s principle heir, along with Caesar’s fellow consul Mark Antony the seized the opportunity to establish the Second Triumvirate. All three members were somewhat linked by their allegiance to Caesar. However, stronger than any apparent bond between the members was their desire for individual power. Gradually, the Triumvirate dissipated and struggles between the men ensued. The eventual conflict between Mark Antony and Octavian effectively tore the Romans lands in two, with Cleopatra of Egypt, Antony’s lover, utilising her forces to assist him. The importance of the conflict between the men can be determined through the analysis of their failed alliance, the result of the Battle of Actium and Octavian’s victory and following governance of what then became the Roman Empire.
The conflict between Mark Antony and Octavian developed out of their battle for supremacy in their failed alliance, and the victory of either would undoubtedly have a profound effect on the Rome and its provinces, solidifying the importance of the conflict. Unlike the unscrupulous and initial union between Caesar, Crassus and Pompey, the Second Triumvirate was legally recognised and binding under Treaty of Brundisium, with each triumvir assigned sectors to preside over. Created from the anarchy following Caesar’s assassination, the Triumvirate’s allegiance appeared to lie fundamentally with the deceased Caesar. However, after the Second Triumvirate successfully hunted down and defeated the treacherous Brutus and Cassius at the Battle of Phillipi in 42BC, effectively avenging Caesar, there was little else Antony, Octavian and Lepidus had in common. Consequently the Triumvirate began to break down. With an embarrassing ease, Octavian had forced Lepidus to live out his days exiled in Africa, leaving only Mark Antony and Octavian to contest the rulership of Rome following the expiration of the treaty in 33BC.
Tensions grew between the men, as evident in Suetonius’ claims that Mark Antony taunted Octavian, saying of him that “’he could not even stand up to review his fleet when his ships were already at their fighting stations; but lay on his back and gazed up at the sky, never rising to show that he was alive until his admiral Marcus Agrippa had routed the enemy’”[1]. Octavian furthered his political alliances whilst Antony established and nurtured his relationship in the east with Cleopatra. In an attempt to generate propaganda and gain the allegiance of the senate, it was alleged that Octavian illegally broke into the sacred Temple of Vesta in order to obtain Mark Antony’s (supposed) will titled ‘The Donations of Alexandria’ and openly vilified its contents to the senators. They were concerned with Mark Antony’s wishes to proclaim Cleopatra Queen of Kings over the lands of Egypt and Cyprus, along with Caesar’s bastard Caesarion, who Antony recognised as legitimate and named King of Kings. He bequeathed many lands in the east to the children of Cleopatra as well as his own. However, what alarmed the senate enormously was his intent on being buried in Egypt as opposed to Rome. It disgusted much of the senatorial elite, Octavian had succeeded in “prov[ing] that his rival had failed to conduct himself as befitted a Roman citizen”[2].
Although Antony’s affiliation with Cleopatra may have been based on their love, it is probable that he initially and perhaps continually based the decision to be affiliated with her on her power and wealth in the east. Therefore, it is additionally arguable that Cleopatra aligned herself with Mark Antony in an attempt to safeguard her own control of Egypt. Regardless of their motives, Cleopatra’s involvement intensified the struggle between the two men as well as involving the fate of Egypt and the Ptolemaic dynasty in the conflict between Mark Antony and Octavian, heightening the conflicts’ importance.
Through the available evidence, it is obvious to deduce that regardless of his youth, Octavian excelled at the same talents which his adoptive father and great-uncle had; coercion, oratory and networking with a selfish purpose. Such qualities made Octavian a supremely talented statesman who served himself above all others. Octavian was willing to appear to support the republic to gain the support of the senate, and for that purpose alone. Although Octavian ultimately defeated Mark Antony, their failed alliance undoubtedly initiated the conflict and gave Octavian insight into the nature of his enemy, as well as acting as a precursor to their eventual conflict.
The Battle of Actium served as the culmination of the tensions between Mark Antony and Octavian, greatly influencing the importance of their conflict as it was at this naval battle that the victor was decided. After many years of defamatory political campaigning against Mark Antony, Octavian was delivered the opportunity to destroy what remained of his Roman image when Antony married Cleopatra before even divorcing Octavian’s sister, Octavia. Such an act was portrayed by Octavian as an insult to Rome as well as to the Caesarians and himself personally. In lieu of Antony’s previous transgressions, he was stripped of all his offices and labelled him an outlaw and enemy of Rome. Naturally, when Octavian declared war on Cleopatra, he did so with the hope and knowledge that Antony would come to her aid, initiating what has been named the Final War of the Roman Republic, with the Battle of Actium as the combat theatre (see appendix 1).
The battle itself was rather anticlimactic as Octavian with the assistance of his general and friend Agrippa dominated the battle. Of the battle, David Shotter stated that “the military victory at Actium in 31… was the only real hurdle remaining; the political victories had all been won [by Octavian] in the 30s. Thus, Octavian emerged as the victor of Actium”[3]. Pamela Bradley stated that ‘the engagement… was no real conflict’[4], and following Cleopatra and Mark Antony’s desertion of the battle, the remainder of their fleet either surrendered or were destroyed by Octavian. A similar situation occurred on land. Octavian had persuaded many kings of the surrounding harbours and land to shift their allegiance to him, annexing Antony and Cleopatra’s camp on land and cutting off their access by the sea. After Antony’s fleet was destroyed, his remaining troops surrendered to Octavian, as noted in Plutarch’s The Life of Antony:
“after Canidius their general had run away by night and forsaken the camp, being now destitute of all things and betrayed by their commanders, they went over to the conqueror.[5]”
The Battle of Actium can be viewed as the end of the republic and the beginning of the Augustan principate. However, it is doubtful if any Romans would have even been aware of this milestone, as Octavian, his faction and patronage represented such an enormous demonstration of continuity that details were of no concern to the populous. As a result of this, it was easy for slogans like respublica restituta (‘the restored republic’) became part of the political vocabulary.
This meant however, that Octavian’s victory at Actium was not the fall of the republic, but instead was merely a critical stage in the progression of Roman government. The Augustan principate that shadowed this evolution demonstrated a means of supervising the respublica which had previously been impossible to determine. It can be argued that this evolution, or collapse, of the republic had been amassing itself over an entire century prior to the Battle of Actium. Instead of disappearing, the traditional governmental devices of the republic eventually became indispensable portions of the Augustan principate. To this end, it can be argued strongly that the battle of Actium was the culmination of the conflict between Mark Antony and Octavian. This event severely impacted and influenced the eventual history of Rome, and with the conflict between the men and subsequent battle, history may have taken a dramatically different course. Evidently, this emphasizes the magnitude of importance of the conflict between Antony and Octavian, as the events and the result that unfolded at the battle of Actium had far reaching effects on the political and military structure of Rome, in addition to its history and consequently, that of the world.
Mark Antony’s death occurred as a result of his conflict with Octavian, leaving the control of the entire Roman Empire to Octavian, who significantly impacted the ancient world and displays the importance of their conflict. For the inhabitants of the ancient Roman Empire, the matter of utmost importance was not the identity of the victor but rather that the city and its surrounds would enter a peace that they had not seen for decades, the Pax Romana, otherwise known as ‘The Augustan Peace’ (see appendix 2). Octavian was bestowed the name Augustus, and termed himself as princeps to avoid the impression of royalty. Augustus’ power was unprecedented and his revolution avoided significant detection as the republic seemingly continued, yet now it is known that the senate’s ‘new powers’ in the high court were little more than a guise manufactured and manipulated by the princeps senatus.
Mark Antony’s suicide may be attributed to his belief that Cleopatra had already been killed, but also due to the irrefutable circumstances of his eventual fail, as all his remaining troops had deserted him as a result of his cowardice and allegiance to Cleopatra instead of to his soldiers. “Antony failed to display the courage and military skill – the virtus – expected of a Roman senator… he abandoned his fleet and army to escape. This alone would have been enough to doom him, discrediting him forever in the eyes of his peers. It seemed to confirm all that Octavian’s propaganda had been saying about him, a man so enslaved that he was emasculated in spirit as Cleopatra’s eunuchs were physically”[6]. The subsequent suicide of Cleopatra and execution of Ptolemy Caesar ended the three hundred year old Ptolemaic kingdom of Egypt. The wealth of Egypt was utilised by Augustus to further his successes in Rome.
Augustus now too controlled all the Roman legions throughout the Empire in addition to being granted tribucian sacrosanctity. Augustus had earned the power that he fought for and acted in a manner favourable to the populas romanus by undertaking public work programs, hosting gladiatorial contests, restoring public finances, cancelling unpaid taxes, halving the army and giving soldiers pensions and settlements and finally reducing the senatorial role to six hundred, to name a few of his actions. Perhaps most notably, Augustus established a loosely monarchic (see appendix 3) form of government that controlled Rome in a manner of relative peace. “His 45-year reign laid the foundations of a regime that lasted almost four centuries”[7].
Had the conflict between Mark Antony not taken place, it is difficult to ascertain the alternate path Rome may have taken. If Antony had succeeded, the Empire would become far more eastern-oriented, with unknown effects on the Roman government. Had Mark Antony not have been perceived as a threat, the senators and republicans may have not so heavily supported Octavian, possibly leaving Rome in a prolonged state of anarchy and lacking any governance with possibly devastating effects. The importance of the conflict between Mark Antony and Octavian is paramount as it played a decisive role in determining the success of Octavian, obviously impacting his ability to shape the future of Rome. Without the conflict, Augustus may not have been able to gain sufficient popularity after his victory over Mark Antony to eventually seize control of Rome.
The importance of the conflict between Mark Antony and Octavian is considerable. The magnitude of which has been ascertained through the analysis of their failed alliance, the result of the Battle of Actium and Octavian’s victory and following governance of what then became the Roman Empire. Beyond, however, the less significant fruitions of the conflict between the former allies, is the over-arching importance of the resulting time of peace which occurred as a direct result of Octavian’s triumph over Mark Antony. The “Augustan era [w]as a golden age in almost every sense – politically, economically and also culturally”[8], which allowed Rome to consolidate its lands and continually develop and flourish.
WORD COUNT (own words): 1841
WORD COUNT (inclusive of quotes): 2093
[1] Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin, 1957. Print. P59
[2] Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin, 1957. Print. P60.
[3] Shotter, D. C. A. Rome and Her Empire. London: Longman, 2003. Print. P 139
[4] Bradley, Pamela. Ancient Rome: Using Evidence. Melbourne: Edward Arnold, 1990. Print. pp410.
[5] “The Life of Antony.” Plutarch:Life of Antony. University of Chicago – Bill Thayer, n.d. Web. 28 July 2012. <http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Antony*.html>.
[6] Goldsworthy, Adrian. Anthony and Cleopatra. Great Britain: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 2010. Print. pp369
[7] Rodgers, Nigel, and Hazel Dodge. The History and Conquests of Ancient Rome. London: Hermes House, 2004. Print. P62
[8] Rodgers, Nigel, and Hazel Dodge. The History and Conquests of Ancient Rome. London: Hermes House, 2004. Print. P63
Save My ATAR 