Antony and Augustus
The Foundation of Empire

( )

The manic-depressive relationship between Marcus Antonius and Gaius Octavius during the Triumviral period (44-31 BCE) of ancient Roman history is one many classical historians possess contesting interpretations over. Some paint Gaius Octavius, known to us now as Octavian, as a young bloodthirsty upstart craving for power and domination, regardless of whom he had to trample to achieve such ends. Others portray Marcus Antonius, modernly acknowledged as Mark Antony, as bitterly opposed to the quickly ascending youthful prodigy Octavian, or simply as inadequate for a true leadership role. Most historians are quick to harshly and definitively judge Marcus Antonius and Gaius Octavius as they would one-dimensional characters in a movie, failing to understand or acknowledge the emotions of the time or to experience any amount of compassion for these men, men who were called upon to lead the people of Rome. Many are unable to comprehend why, in light of the raw animosity between Antonius and Octavian, why they would, for instance, periodically honor each other on their respective coinage. Life then, just as life now, is not so uncomplicated.

Following the death of Julius Caesar in 44 BCE, Caesar's general and consul in Rome, Antonius, likely expected to be voiced in his will as an heir to his fortune, estate, or political reputation. However, Octavian, a boy of eighteen and grandnephew to Caesar, was declared to be his adopted son, inheriting his name and some of his fortune, with the rest being bequeathed to the people of Rome. It is not difficult to imagine the shock experienced not only by Caesar's senior right hand, Antonius, but of the nation at large, at information such as this. Octavian was a mere boy of fragile health, and possessed none of the experience the general and consul Antonius had obtained over the course of his years directly assisting Caesar.

Antonius, however, was not the incompetent and frivolous soldier some historians are inclined to believe him to be. The great Cicero himself, figurehead of the Republic and those who had stood against Julius Caesar, infamously despised Antonius for his leadership abilities and efforts to promote the deceased dictator's cause. Shotter (18-21) claims that Antonius' failure lies not in his personal ineptitude, but in his underestimation of Octavian. Snubbed by Antonius, who had already been using Caesar's fortune for his own purposes as Calpurnia, Caesar's widow, had entrusted him with it as well as Caesar's personal papers (Plutarch, 283), Octavian proceeded to maturely take on the task that lay before him and pay off Julius Caesar's legacies from his own funds (Scullard, 161). Already the relationship between the two 'sons of Caesar' was infused with bitterness.

Cicero and the Senate, too, underestimated the youth. Singling out Antonius as an enemy of the Republic, Cicero recruited Octavian and his forces by granting the eighteen-year-old senator- and propraetorships; positions which, ordinarily, would have taken him more than twenty more years to realize. The Senate shipped Octavian and the two consuls of the year to relieve Decimus Brutus, a murderer of Caesar, at Mutina, where public enemy Marcus Antonius was laying siege. The mission was successful, but the two consuls died in battle, leaving Octavian with sole charge of their entire armies. The Senate then acted to remove Octavian from this power, but encountered opposition. Octavian refused to be robbed of his post and, with the threat of his army beneath him, demanded consulship (Scullard, 159-163). Antonius quickly was reinforced by Marcus Lepidus and other declared public enemies. Octavian and Antonius were finally on the same side, and as they commanded much of the military might Romans had to offer, the Republic could do nothing to stop them. On November 27th, 43 BCE, Antonius, Octavian, and the Pontifex Maximus, Lepidus, formulated what is known as the Second Triumvirate to rule over the former Republic. Their rule was articulated in part by the minting of coins depicting each of their portraits (Scullard, 162).

Here, the connection between Antonius and Octavian really begins to grow beyond the ties created by their associations with Julius Caesar. Chronicled by this series of coins in the Vassar College collection, we see the fluctuating relationship between Antonius and Octavian as demonstrated publicly with coin types and legends. Initially, both Antonius and Octavian stuck coins to publicize their ties to the deceased dictator, moving to gain support of the Roman people for their own political advancement and stability. As the concept of Julius Caesar faded and became more of a memory, these two prominent men relied on more contemporary references in coinage to boost their images, including associations between themselves. Eventually, unable to overcome their mutual bitter animosity towards each other, the relationship between these two rivals climaxed in the form of second civil war and ultimately the Battle of Actium, resulting in the emergence of the man known as Augustus and of the Empire in Rome.

Works Cited

Plutarch. Makers of Rome. Clays Ltd.: England, 1965.

Scullard, H. H. From The Gracchi To Nero: A History Of Rome From 133 BC to AD 68. Methuen & Co. Ltd.: London, 1959.

Shotter, David. Augustus Caesar. Routledge: New York, 1991.