ISSN 0320-961X (Print)
ISSN 0320-961X (Online)

Full text:
(downloads: 3)
Article type: 

Птолемей Цезарь в пропаганде триумвиров


Modern works on history, devoted to propaganda war of 34—32 B. C., tend to oppose the dictator’s son (Caesarion) to his adopted son (Octavian). The theory is that Antony connected Caesarion’s origin to his right to be a political successor of the dictator. However, acknowledgement of consanguinity did not entitle Caesarion to inherit his father’s property and clientele, that does not allow to talk about Caesarion’s (and Antony behind him) «political» claims. Antony’s public speeches regarding Caesarion’s status, can be explained by events of 34 B. C. in Alexandria. «The Donations of Alexandria» was, actually, Antony’s external policy, aimed at realization Ceasars’ plan on invading the East. Simultaneously, a new Egypt and Middle East internal managing structure was stated.

That is where the name of Caesarion appears. He was given a role of a co-ruler with Cleopatra in Egypt, and the status of a superior ruler, «the king of kings», upon Cleopatra’s death. It’s clear that the supreme ruler of East had to be of divine origin. While in the East there were no problems with Caesarion’s legitimacy, for the Romans he remained a bastard. This problem was solved by proclaiming Caesar, deified by the Roman Senate, as his farther. Thus it was aimed not at derogating Octavian’s status, but at acknowledging Caesarion’s official status as a superior ruler of Egypt and the countries of East.

Key words: 

Ахиев С.Н. Образ Клеопатры в пропаганде Октавиана // Актуальные вопросы истории. Саратов, 2001.

Грант М. Клеопатра. Последняя из Птолемеев. М., 2003.

Смыков Е.В. Антоний и Дионис (из истории религиозной политики триумвира М. Антония) // АМА. 2002. Вып. 11.

Чернышов Ю.Г. Социально-утопические идеи и миф о «Золотом веке» в древнем Риме. Новосибирск, 1994. Ч. 1.

Alföldi A. Octavians Aufstieg zur Macht // AA. 1975. Bd. 21. H. 1.

Balsdon J.P.V.D. Rec. in: H. Volkmann. Cleopatra: A Study in Politics and Propaganda. L., 1958 // CR. 1960. Vol. 10.

Braund D. Rome and the Friendly King. The Character of the Client Kingship. N. Y., 1984.

Carcopino J. Passion et Politique chez les César. P., 1958.

Charlesworth M.P. Some Fragments of the Propaganda of Mark Antony // CQ. 1933. Vol. 27.

Crook J.A Legal Point about Mark Antony's Will // JRS. 1957. Vol. 47.

Heinen H. Cäsar und Kaisarion // Historia. 1969. Bd. 18. Hf. 2.

Heinen H. Kleopatra und die Caesaren // Die Rom und Caesarfreundschaft der Kleopatra: Gebrauch und Missbrauch eines politischen Instruments. München, 2007.

Huzar E. Mark Antony. A Biography. Minneapolis, 1978.

Jimenez R.L. Caesar against Rome: The Great Roman Civil War. Westport, 2000.

Kienast D. Augustus. Prinzeps und Monarch. Darmstadt, 1992.

Lindsay J. Cleopatra. N. Y., 1971.

Meikljohn K.W. Alexander Helios and Caesarion // JRS. 1934. Vol. 24.

Reinhold M. Studies in Classical History and Society. N. Y., 2002.

Scott K. Octavian's Propaganda and Antony's De Sua Ebrietate // CPh. 1929. Vol. 24. № 2.

Scott K. The Political Propaganda of 44-30 BC // MAAR. 1933. Vol. 11.

Scullard H.H. From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 B. C. to A. D. 68. L., 1963.

Southern P. Augustus. L., 1998.

Tarn W.W. Alexander Helios and the Golden Age // JRS. 1932. Vol. 32.

Tarn W.W., Charlesworth M.P. The War of the East against the West // CAH. 1989. Vol. 10.

Townend G.B.C. Oppius on Julius Caesar // AJPh. 1987. Vol. 108. № 2.

Volkmann H. Politik und Propaganda. München, 1953.