With the queen as the protagonist, this film will definitely be beautified, but looking at the so-called "historical materials", especially the arrangement of the victor with ulterior motives, will it also fall into the other end of "ugly"?
If the victor was Antony, what kind of image would Octavian leave in history? Could it be the grandson of a moneylender from a small Roman town, a murderous and untrustworthy young man whose ambition outweighed his ability?
Waldzisi's biography of Augustus offers many powerful insights into this. Basically, the original black materials of the Queen and Anthony came from the propaganda of Octavian, which was quoted by later historians. For example, Anthony, the later generations know more about him actually from his old enemy Cicero's impeachment speech against him. How much of the enemy's propaganda is true and how much is deliberately blackened? Just like the image of Octavia, most of them came from Octavian's side. Although she was indeed a good wife and mother, her image was deliberately highlighted, including the shaping of Livia's image as a "traditional Roman housewife", which was part of wartime propaganda. . And the queen is undoubtedly the most blackened one.
First of all, Octavian took the initiative to fight against Anthony, not to crusade Anthony, but to crusade against Egypt, to turn the queen into a villain who confuses the Roman hero, and makes Rome fall into overthrow, so that he can justifiably share the enemy and unite the whole of Rome. "Especially under the leadership of Octavian". At the time the propaganda was a war between the gods of the West against the gods of Egypt, and Antony was deliberately ignored. Moreover, most of the emperors of the Julian-Claudian dynasty of later generations had the blood of Anthony, and it was even more impossible to smear their ancestors, and it was the most convenient to lead bad things to "foreign bad women". What's more, ancient Rome always had a prejudice against the Eastern countries, believing that the Easterners were corrupt and depraved. Although the status of women has risen, such as economic autonomy, participation in politics is definitely not allowed. During a chariot race or a beast fight, the noble women could only watch alongside the slaves in the row with the worst view. What, there was actually an Oriental (although the Ptolemaic royal family was Greek, but it was always considered to be an Eastern royal family), was it a woman, or was it a king, who directed the affairs of the state? He still wants to influence the noble Rome! ! !
Secondly, military experts in recent times have studied the naval battle of Akexion, which was originally a breakout battle. It was an unavoidable action after the Anthony army was cut off from supplies, and people kept mutiny. The battle plan was known to the enemy. Anthony can't win at all, he can only break through. That's why there are big sails on the ship (the sea battle sails were taken off at that time). In other words, the original intention of the Queen and Anthony was to leave the predicament of Akexing. To say that Anthony did not know that the Queen was leaving and was pulled down in the naval battle was the wishful thinking of writers who did not understand military affairs. It is also not ruled out that it was the deliberate rendering of Octavian's side after the naval battle. The Queen then planned to counterattack by transporting ships from the Isthmus of Corinth, but this plan failed. It can be seen that the queen is not timid.
Again, unlike the bloodline inheritance in the East, no matter how many children the queen gave birth to for Caesar, her children would not be recognized. It is impossible to inherit Caesar's property and status, and Octavian can only be cheap. It had nothing to do with Caesar, it had nothing to do with the queen, it was the law of Rome at that time. Not only does it not recognize the legal status of illegitimate children, but even legal marriages between Roman citizens and foreigners are not recognized. So Caesar couldn't talk about the queen and Caesar in his will at all, and it would be hundreds of years before the issue would be resolved by law when the emperor Constantine came. And Anthony's so-called marriage to the queen was not recognized in Rome at that time. Although he announced his separation from Octavia in his own way. Rome is so arrogant, no matter how noble foreigners are, they can't compare to a toe of their own citizens, and they are very big country chauvinism. There was no disregard for other children in Anthony's will. In the future, he and Octavia's daughter Antonia inherited his large inheritance in Rome. And those lands that were allocated to him and the children of the Queen of Egypt, some belonged to Egypt, some did not belong to Rome at all (such as Armenia), and only a small part was really Roman territory at that time, not that he took the land of Rome and gave it away arbitrarily. people.
Finally, unlike this drama, the American drama "Roma" simply beautifies Octavian and made him the leading male lead in domestic cool dramas, and the queen is truly blackened into charcoal. I was really influenced by that drama, but I really got along with Octavian's imperial literati after BC. You know, even Goebbels had to steal from Octavian's little fan, Mecenas.
View more about Cleopatra reviews
