Duane W. Roller (born 1946) was a Professor of Classics at Ohio State University. Following retirement in 2007, he now lives in Santa Fe, New Mexico.
He is the author of several books about the history of
the ancient world, including The Building Program of Herod the Great (1998)
and The World of Juba II and Kleopatra Selene: Royal Scholarship on Rome’s
African Frontier (Hardcover 2003) (Paperback 2015).
His biography about Cleopatra was published in 2010 (hardcover) and in 2011
(paperback). It is a volume in the series called “Women in Antiquity” edited by
Ronnie Ancona and Sarah B. Pomeroy.
[A note about spelling: in this book, Roller follows convention and the name of the Egyptian queen is spelled with a C: Cleopatra. The author wants to stay as close to Latin as possible; this is why he uses Marcus Antonius and not Mark Antony. I applaud this decision.]
The biography begins with a brief introduction and ends with a short epilogue. The main story in between is divided into nine chapters, which follow a chronological line from 69 BC when Cleopatra was born until 30 BC when she died.
Here is the table of contents:
# 1. Cleopatra’s Ancestry and Background
# 2. The Ptolemaic Heritage and the Involvement with Rome
# 3. Cleopatra’s Youth and Education
# 4. Becoming Queen (51-47 BC)
# 5. Consolidating the Empire (47-40 BC)
# 6. The Peak Years (40-34 BC)
# 7. The Operation of the Kingdom
# 8. Scholarship and Culture at the Court of Cleopatra
# 9. Downfall (34-30 BC)
When a chapter is longer than ten pages, the text should be divided into shorter sections by means of subheadings. Roller is aware of this golden rule. It is followed in the introduction and in chapter 7, but in the remaining chapters it is ignored.
I think this is a shame. He should have followed this golden rule in every chapter that is longer than ten pages (only chapter 8 has less than ten pages). This would have made his book more reader-friendly than it is now.
At the end of the book, we have the following items:
** Appendix 1 – Outline of Cleopatra’s life and career
** Appendix 2 – Genealogy of the later Ptolemies
** Appendix 3 – Cleopatra’s mother
** Appendix 4 – Was Cleopatra a Roman citizen?
** Appendix 5 – Some ancient literary descriptions of Cleopatra
** Appendix 6 – The iconography of Cleopatra VII
** Abbreviations
** Notes
** Bibliography
** Index of passages cited
** Index
The bibliography covers eleven pages (219-229). The list includes books and articles in several languages, not only in English. Surprisingly, there are very few biographies of the Egyptian queen.
He has the following:
** Cleopatra by Michael Grant (1972)
** Cleopatra and Rome by Diana Kleiner (2005) (2009)
** Cleopatra of Egypt: From History to Myth edited by Susan Walker & Peter Higgs (2001)
** Cleopatra Reassessed edited by Susan Walker & Sally-Ann Ashton (2003)
That is about it. Some important works are missing here. On this issue, see more below.
What about illustrations? There are three maps and eleven figures. All illustrations are in black-and-white. Figure 11 shows the coins of Cleopatra. There are small pictures of five coins. Each coin appears two times (obverse and reverse).
Four of the eleven figures are photos taken by the author in different locations - Rome, Tarsos, Antioch, and Jericho - which shows that he has visited the region whose ancient history he is describing in the book.
This is quite impressive.
THE LAST QUEEN OF EGYPT
The literature about Cleopatra VII is extensive. The biggest problem facing an author who wants to write a biography of the last queen of Egypt is that the ancient evidence is so limited. As Roller states in his introduction, this biography is based solely on ancient evidence.
What modern authors think they know about Cleopatra may be interesting for some, but for him it is not relevant, because it is only speculation.
Indeed, most references in the notes of this book are to ancient sources, although there is an occasional reference to a modern study of a particular aspect.
Cleopatra suffers from a bad press. Many modern studies of her are critical; even some of the ancient sources are critical of her, because Augustus wanted them to follow this line.
Roller struggles hard to avoid following the negative line and to avoid accepting rumours as facts. When an ancient text assumes Cleopatra or Antonius did this or that for reasons of love, he often points out that this decision might also be explained by political and strategic considerations.
According to Ronnie Ancona and Sarah Pomeroy, the purpose of the series “Women in Antiquity” is to provide “compact and accessible introductions to the life and historical times of women from the ancient world.”
Roller’s book does just that. It is a biography of Cleopatra, not a general history of Rome or Egypt in the first century BC. It is short and to the point. Easy to read and understand.
Roller got some
good reviews. On the back cover of the paperback version there are excerpts
from nine positive reviews of the hardcover version. For reasons of space, I
will not quote them here. Instead I will mention another review:
Josiah Osgood (of Georgetown University) reviewed this book for the online magazine Bryn Mawr Classical Review (2010.09.40).
The general tone of the review is positive. The book is described as a “no-nonsense” biography of Cleopatra, but Osgood does have one critical remark:
“The main criticism one might make is that even--or perhaps especially--a general reader would benefit from more discussion of how exactly scholars go about reconstructing episodes or individual lives from ancient history, given the evidence on which they must rely.”
Osgood offers two examples:
** One missed opportunity is the so-called “Cleopatra papyrus” which is mentioned by Roller on page 134.
** Another is Cleopatra’s remark “I will not be led in a triumph” which is mentioned by Roller on page 147.
MINOR QUIBBLES
I agree with Osgood. It is easy to say something positive about this book. Like Osgood, I also have something to say on the negative side. I am going to make some points which are not mentioned by Osgood. I have some minor quibbles and a serious flaw. Let me begin with the minor quibbles:
# 1. On page 31 Roller talks about “Ptolemy I’s invasion of Cyrene in 332 BC.” The year is wrong. It should be 322 BC.
On page 32 (the very next page) we have the same mistake:
“He acquired the Cyrenaica in 332 BC.”
It is unfortunate that the same mistake appears two times in a row.
# 2. On page 154 Roller talks about Jugurtha, “who had given Rome such difficulty in the latter second century BC.” The word “latter” is wrong. It should be “later.”
On page 199 (note 63) we have the same mistake:
“Pytheas had traveled to the British Isles, [the] Arctic, and [the] Baltic in the latter fourth century BC.”
Roller seems to have a real problem distinguishing between “later” and “latter.”
This mistake is also found in his book The World of Juba II and
Kleopatra Selene (see my review of this book for examples of this). The
book-editor should have saved him from making this mistake. Sadly, this did not happen.
# 3. Roller uses a strange system when referring to Cicero’s letters to Atticus. The standard system is to give the number of the book, the number of the letter, and, if it is a long letter, the paragraph. But Roller merely gives a number. And his system is not explained anywhere in the book.
At first, I was puzzled, but then I realised that Roller is using the numbers from Shackleton Bailey’s edition of these letters. Now I understand what is going on, but I still think it is a bad idea.
Most readers do not have Shackleton Bailey’s huge and heavy volumes on the shelf. But most readers have access to the internet. If you have the standard reference, you can find Cicero’s letters online – in Latin and in English.
I do not know why Roller decided to use this system. As far as I know, he has not used it before, and when he mentions Cicero’s letters to family and friends (ad Familiares), he uses the traditional system (as he should).
Perhaps he thought it was a smart and easy way. But it is not. It was a poor decision. The book-editor should have told him to drop it and follow the standard system which is used by everybody else.
# 4. Parthia and the Parthians are mentioned several times in this book:
** In general - 8 times
** Antonius and the Parthians - 7 times
** Crassus and the Parthians - 4 times
On page 97, Roller says:
“… Roman expeditions into Parthian territory were doomed to fail.”
Later, on the same page, he adds:
“This disaster, although in many ways inevitable, was a turning point…”
Why were Roman expeditions into Parthian territory doomed to fail? If this was the case, why did Antonius not know this? Why did he try anyway? Why did other Roman generals before and after him try?
In my opinion, Roller could and should discuss this question, but he does not. He might respond that this is a book about Cleopatra, not a book about Antonius, but the actions of Antonius affected Cleopatra. This is why the Parthian expedition of Antonius is a relevant topic for this book.
Crassus suffered a terrible defeat against the Parthians. But it seems the Roman generals and politicians never learned the lesson:
Do not attack Parthia!
More than two hundred years later, Lucius Septimius Severus tried to do the same thing. His victories were minor and short-lived.
There was, in fact, a brief period when Rome and Parthia were at peace and used diplomatic means to solve their problems. This option was much better for both of them.
[For details, see Brian Campbell, “War and Diplomacy: Rome and Parthia, 31 BC-AD 235,” in War and Society in the Roman World edited by John Rich & Graham Shipley (1993) (1995) (chapter 9).]
While Parthia and the Parthians are mentioned frequently, Roller merely reports what happened. He never attempts to discuss the topic in depth. He never asks: why did they do this? The Romans are known to be rational; how come they were not so rational with regard to the Parthians?
# 5. On the front cover of the paperback version of the book, there is a painting which shows Cleopatra (in colour).
On the back cover the painting is identified (in very small letters):
“Cleopatra testing poisons on condemned prisoners by Alexandre Cabanel.”
The painting is from 1887. When I look at the cover and read the caption, I have to wonder: where are the prisoners on whom poisons are being tested?
They are not visible, because what we see is only 50 percent of the painting. Ca. 30 per cent of the left and ca. 20 per cent of the right have been cut out.
The dying prisoners are on the left. They have been cut out. A female servant is on the right. Most of this figure has been cut out as well, but we can still see her head and one arm.
I know the author is not always involved when the cover illustration is chosen. Sometimes this choice is made by the book-editor or the publisher. Perhaps Roller has no responsibility for this choice. But his name is on the cover of the book, so in some way he is responsible.
If the book-editor or the publisher wants to use a modern painting of Cleopatra on the cover, why not give us the whole picture? The left side and the right side of the painting are cut away.
Why?
What is the message of this painting? It shows the Cleopatra which the modern world loves to hate: a decadent and lazy person, who toys with other people’s lives, while relaxing on a sofa, while a servant is moving a fan above her head.
Is this the Cleopatra which Roller gives us in his book?
No, it is not.
His Cleopatra is, in fact, the very opposite of what we see in this painting: according to Roller, she was a talented, highly educated queen, who spoke several languages, and who made rational decisions in an attempt to keep her dynasty and her country safe.
In other words: this painting which is placed on the cover of this book is totally misplaced. How could Roller be a part of this choice?
Incidentally, the painting by Alexandre Cabanel is also used on the front cover of Cleopatra and Rome by Diana Kleiner (not the hardcover version from 2005, but the paperback version from 2009).
The cover of the book does not show the whole painting, but the cutting is slightly different. This time, the servant has been cut away and so has the fan above Cleopatra’s head.
One thing is certain: this painting really seems to appeal to modern publishers.
A SERIOUS FLAW
Now it is time to consider the serious flaw. This is not about something Roller has done, it is about something he has not done, an omission.
In recent years several biographies of Cleopatra have been published. Here are four examples:
** Cleopatra: A Life by Stacy Schiff (2010) (2011)
** Antony and Cleopatra by Adrian Goldsworthy (2010) (2011)
** Cleopatra: Last Queen of Egypt by Joyce Tyldesley (2008) (2009)
** Cleopatra the Great: The Woman behind the Legend by Joann Fletcher (2008) (2009)
None of them is listed in Roller’s bibliography. Perhaps the ones by Schiff and Goldsworthy appeared too late to be included, but the ones by Tyldesley and Fletcher did not. They could and should have been included. More importantly, they could and should have been discussed.
In appendix 6, Roller discusses the iconography of Cleopatra. If you ask me, this is one of the best parts of the book, but a chapter is missing from this book: a chapter about the historiography of Cleopatra.
Once Roller had formed his own impression of Cleopatra, he should have compared it with the impression found in other recent biographies. What do other volumes say which is right, according to him? What do other volumes say which is wrong, according to him?
Roller often talks about the negative line on Cleopatra and the malicious rumours that are circulating about her. But these remarks are always general. He never makes a serious attempt to confront other biographies about Cleopatra.
Film is a powerful media in the modern world. There are several films about Cleopatra; not only dramatized versions of her life, but also documentary films; they are partially responsible for the view the general public has of the Egyptian queen.
Roller could and should have mentioned some of these films, asking what is right and what is wrong in these films.
A chapter about the historiography of Cleopatra would have made this book more comprehensive than it is right now.
CONCLUSION
The minor quibbles listed above are just that: minor quibbles. I mention them, because they deserve to be mentioned, for the record, but they will not influence my overall rating of the book.
The missing chapter is another case. This is a serious flaw which cannot be ignored. I have to remove one star because of this flaw. This is why I think this product deserves a rating of four stars (80 percent).
*****
Cleopatra: A Biography
By Duane W. Roller
(Hardcover 2010)
(Paperback, 2011)
272 pages
*****
Cleopatra testing poison on condemned prisoners
Painted in 1887 by
Alexandre Cabanel
(1823-1889)
*****
Cleopatra & Rome
by Diana Kleiner
The cover of the paperback version
published in 2009
*****
No comments:
Post a Comment