by
What about Mark Antony?
as Marcus Antonius Felix.
With Julius Caesar
and his ally, Mark Antony, so brilliantly portrayed by Shakespeare, we are
moving in a world of fictitious composite characters – literary creations, but
based upon real historical notables.
The primary
historical matrix for this is the era of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ,
somewhat later than when Mark Antony is conventionally dated.
Aspects of Julius
Caesar (J.C.) are based upon that other J.C.
For, as I wrote in
my article:
Jesus Christ was the Model for some legends
surrounding Julius Caesar
(3)
Jesus Christ was the Model for some legends surrounding Julius Caesar
regarding
“the distinct parallels now to be discussed between
history’s most famous J.C’s – Jesus Christ and Julius Caesar – both referred to
as the greatest man the earth has ever produced [Grant, M., Julius Caesar (Weidenfield and
Nicholson, London, 1969), Foreword p. 15: “A hundred or even fifty years ago,
Gaius Julius Caesar (J.C.) was variously described as the greatest man of
action who ever lived, and even as ‘the entire and perfect man’.”].
Whilst in most aspects Jesus and Julius could not be any more different,
there are nevertheless certain incredibly close likenesses, especially in
regard to their violent deaths.
Both Jesus and Julius were born into poor circumstances; but their ancestry
was one of blue blood: Davidic in the case of Jesus, Patrician in the case of
Caesar. Their births were notable, a miraculous Virgin birth for Jesus, Julius’
birth giving rise to the term ‘Caesarian’.
Julius belonged to the populares, and Jesus was likewise for the common
people.
“The tax collectors”, said Cicero, “have never been loyal, and are now very
friendly with Caesar” [as cited ibid.,
p. 161]. Likewise, the Pharisees were critical of Jesus for eating with “tax
collectors and sinners” (Matthew 9:11).
Trial and Death
Both Jesus and Julius had spoken of an early death.
Both had entered their capital city (Jerusalem, Rome) in triumph, on an
ancient feast-day (Passover, Lupercalia), shortly before mid-March, and had
been hailed as “king”. This had caused anger and had the plotters conspiring.
But there was also an ambivalence about the kingship. Caesar, though a king in
deed, had rejected the diadem thrice.
And Pilate had tried to get to the bottom of Jesus’ kingship: ‘So you are a
king, then?’ (John 18:37); he eventually having written in three languages:
“Jesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews” (19:19).
The prime mover of Caesar’s fatal stabbing was the soldier, Gaius Cassius
Longinus, the last name (Longinus) being the very name that tradition has
associated with the Roman soldier who rent Christ’s side with a spear (19:34).
The zealot amongst the conspirators was the intense young Brutus, in whom
Dante at least had obviously discerned a similarity with Judas, having located
“Brutus and Cassius with Judas Iscariot in Hell” [as cited by Grant, op. cit., p. 257].
Even Christ’s words to Judas in Gethsemane, ‘So you would betray the Son of
Man with a kiss?’ (Luke 22:48), resemble what is alleged to be Caesar’s
anguished last cry: re-made by Shakespeare as ‘Et tu Brute?’.
There is the premonitory dream warning by the woman (cf. Matthew 27:19).
There may even be a confused reminiscence of Barabbas: “Caesar … staged an
elaborate legal charade against an old man called Rabirius [Barabbas?] … [who]
had been allegedly implicated in … murder … not interested in having the old
Rabirius actually executed” [ibid.,
p. 51]. (Cf. Matthew 27:15-23).
On the Ides of March Julius Caesar is supposed to have died, like Jesus,
riddled with wounds.
The ‘heretical’ question must now be asked: Did Julius Caesar really
exist?
Or was his ‘life’ merely a mixture of his nephew Augustus, who also bore
the name Julius Caesar, and aspects of the life of Jesus Christ according to
Virgil’s biblical borrowings?
And perhaps other composites as well?
“Portrait busts are not a safe guide to [Julius Caesar’s] appearance, since
they may or may not date from his life-time” [Grant, op. cit., p. 245].
….
And, in this
Christmas season of the Epiphany, I might add another element as well, the Magi
Star and the portents (at least in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar): “When beggars die, there are no comets seen; The
heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes”.
And, at the Death
of Jesus Christ (Luke 23:44-45): “It
was now about the sixth hour, and darkness came over the whole land until the
ninth hour, for the sun stopped shining. And the curtain of the temple was
torn in two”.
So, here we have
the main players in the tale of Julius Caesar:
-
the assassinated Julius Caesar, partly based upon Jesus Christ;
-
the conspiratorial Brutus, partly based upon Judas;
-
the “lean and hungry” Cassius, partly based up Cassius
Longinus;
-
the warnings of Calpurnia, partly based upon the wife of Pilate.
And other, lesser
players could also be pointed out.
What
about Mark Antony?
Well he, too, must
be a composite, fictitious character based partly upon the procurator Pontius
Pilate, whom I have identified, with the name Mark Antony, as: Marcus Antonius
Felix:
Procurator Pontius Pilate and Procurator Marcus
Ant. Felix
(4)
Procurator Pontius Pilate and Procurator Marcus Ant. Felix
Thus it is correct
to say that fortress Antonia was built in honour of Mark Antony, though not
Shakespeare’s hero of that name, but, rather, Marcus Antonius Felix (Pilate):
Antonia as the praetorium of the procurator Pontius
Pilate
(4)
Antonia as the praetorium of the procurator Pontius Pilate
Nor was this the
era of Caesar Augustus, nor Herod ‘the Great’, both long dead, but the era of the
emperor Tiberius and Herod Antipas.
As in the
fictitious version of Mark Antony, Ptolemy and Cleopatra also come into play,
at least in my reconstruction:
Alexander Balas and Tryphon Diodotus, Marcus Pallas
and Marcus Antonius Felix
(5)
Alexander Balas and Tryphon Diodotus, Marcus Pallas and Marcus Antonius Felix
with Felix’s
brother, Marcus Antonius Pallas, as Alexander Balas, marrying Ptolemy’s
daughter, Cleopatra.
This, again,
enables for a love link between a Cleopatra and a Marcus Antonius.
Marcus Antonius
Felix, who crucified his enemies, was not well regarded by some ancient
historians (e.g. Tacitus, Josephus).
FELIX (ANTONIUS FELIX) -
JewishEncyclopedia.com
“Procurator
of Judea. Felix, who was a freedman of the empress Antonia, was administrator
of Samaria, and probably of Judea proper also, as early as the time of the
procurator Cumanus (Tacitus, "Annales," xii. 54; Josephus,
"Ant." xx. 7, § 1). The two procurators almost went to war with each
other during the conflict that broke out between the Samaritans and the
Galileans; but Cumanus was recalled.
Felix was
thereupon appointed sole procurator of Judea by Claudius (52 C.E.) on the
suggestion of the high priest Jonathan, who had gone to Rome with other nobles
on account of the Samaritan disturbances (Josephus, "B. J." ii. 11, §
6; "Ant." xx. 8, § 5). Felix was also entrusted with the entire
military command, as Suetonius ("Claudius," § 28) and Victor
("Epit." § 4) distinctly point out. Felix exercised, as Tacitus says,
"the royal prerogative in a slavish sense, with all manner of cruelties
and excesses"; it was he who excited the bitter feelings of the Jewish
patriots to the highest pitch, and for this even his patron Jonathan reproached
him in the end.
….
He sent the
chief of the Zealots, Eleazar b. Dinai, in chains to Rome, while
taking relentless measures against his followers, whom he denounced as robbers,
crucifying them in countless numbers ("B. J." ii. 3, § 2;
"Ant." xx. 8, § 5).
On the other
hand, he tolerated the much more formidable Sicarii, and used them for his own
purposes, as, for instance, in the murder of Jonathan (ib.). He also
proceeded rigorously against the would be prophets that were disturbing the
peace with their fanaticism, especially against an Egyptian Jew who, with
several thousand followers, attempted to drive the Roman garrison from
Jerusalem, but who was defeated ("B. J." ii. 13, §§ 4-5;
"Ant." xx. 8, § 6; comp. Acts xxi. 38; Eusebius, "Hist.
Eccl."ii. 21). His term of office was practically a reign of anarchy; for
even the high-priestly families were at war with the lower priests
("Ant." xx. 8, § 8; "Vita," § 3)”.
Jonathan (High Priest)
Explained
“Felix
disliked Jonathan, because he often got criticized by the latter about
governing the Jewish affairs, and threatened to be reported to Caesar if not
doing well as the priest was the one who made the recommendation to Caesar to
send Felix to be the procurator of Judea. Felix persuaded one of Jonathan's
most trusted friends, Doras, a citizen of Jerusalem, to hire robbers to kill
Jonathan by promising to give a large sum of money. Doras arranged for some
hired men to mingle with the worshippers in the Temple in Jerusalem, while they
hid daggers under their garments.
These
assassins succeeded in killing Jonathan during a Jewish festival and were never
caught. …. The main source that mentions this high priest is the Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus”.
No comments:
Post a Comment