Cleopatra: A Life by Stacy Schiff

Cleopatra is probably one name of which no one would ever claim he never hears. It has never occurred to me before that a woman has ever made that distinction in the world where men's domination is strong. After 2000 years—Cleopatra died only one generation before Christ—her name is still many times repeated by poets, historians; in literature, in movies, and I think in many other aspects. She is the Queen of Egypt. But after her, many queens have also reigned. What made her so enigmatic? When she died, Cleopatra ruled over so many lands and nations—the widest a queen has ever ruled. That made her so powerful. But I believe, the fact that we never know much about her, has also raised her values. Cleopatra is a myth, legend. At this point, Stacy Schiff tries to break the myths, and bring us the real person in this book.

                                             

I have put high expectation on this book when I bought it. I wanted to know the real character and qualities of Cleopatra, other than what was depicting by Elisabeth Taylor in the movie or in Shakespeare's plays. But somehow, I was quite disappointed. It's not entirely Ms. Schiff's fault, maybe. Apparently, there were not much facts about Cleopatra's deeds on which one could base upon. Many historians have written about her, of course. She was the mother of Julius Caesar's and Marc Antony's children! No foreigners have ever set so important role in Ancient Rome when it was a dominant ruling nation like Cleopatra. We are talking about the Western world! However, most of what Plutarch or Livy or Dellius wrote were either bias or only suggestions. I believe the misogynistic culture of Rome was the culprit here. Hence, there was almost not accurate account of Cleopatra's real .... in her world.

From what I read, I could gather that Cleopatra:

• was the last Ptolemaic clan, which was full of incest and mayhem.

  

  Cleopatra in coin (the most accurate
  picture of her)

• was really a Greek-Macedonian, not originally an Egyptian.
• loved pearls, used to wear it abundantly, even also on her hair.
• was not very pretty woman (far from Elizabeth Taylor!), but she possessed a charisma; she was attractive in her high intelligence, her ambition, her enthusiastic speech, and self-possessing manner.
• was great in politics and governing a nation. She brought Egypt to be a great nation before it was finally annexed to Rome after her defeat and death.
• took care of people's, and that's why was loved by them.
• ruled by herself (a woman at that era!) and played great role in Western world. She was more than capable in military stuffs, leading a great army, controlling currency, and was great in diplomacy. She was really Caesar's equal.

While people portray Julius Caesar as warrior or mighty King, we tend to see Cleopatra as an exotic woman who used her sexual appeal as weapon. While we take Caesar's conquest over Western world as great, people believe that Cleopatra became Queen of Egypt through cunning and seduction. This was how men--Octavian most of all, and the Roman historians—has misled us. Worst of all, those papyruses in the magnificent Alexandria—which might have kept facts about Cleopatra's deeds—had been destroyed. So, now all we have about her is just myths—most of all the wrong ones.

This book would have been interesting. However, Schiff seems to be drifting too much to Rome's histories and chief actors in it. I understand that it might be because there were poor materials to build the life of Cleopatra, but still… She also put suggestions in rather disproportionate amount (compared to facts) to my taste. Add that with rather bad Indonesian translation, which made my reading quite tedious. I was really glad when it's over!

My rating: 3/5

Cicero: The Life and Times of Rome’s Greatest Politician

“An eloquent man, my child, an eloquent man, and a patriot”, was Augustus Caesar’s remark to his grandson, on Marcus Tullius Cicero. And after I have finished this book, I couldn’t but agree with him. Cicero is not just a great—or the greatest—orator in the universe, but he is also a true statesman. Cicero is not as famous as Julius Caesar or Pompey the Great, but what he did, he has done for the sake of his beloved Republic, for the country; while Caesar and Pompey did their greatness merely for satisfying their own ambition. Thanks to Anthony Everitt through this biography, we can learn much about Cicero; both his contribution to Rome and his personal life.

Everitt has interestingly started this biography by relating the famous Ides of March—the brutal murder of Julius Caesar. After Caesar died, Brutus—the conspirator leader—shouted Cicero’s name and congratulated him for the Republic’s freedom form tyranny. Caesar’s murder became, later on, a culmination point for Cicero to return to Rome’s political arena after his first fall. Soon after this opening chapter, Everitt began by describing how Rome was already in crisis when Cicero was born; and what had caused it. This is the first simple analysis I have read about how the biggest empire in the world was on the verge of ruin.

Its fault governance systems must be the one to blame; these are several examples of its ineffectiveness:

• Republic of Rome was a state without institution; they had neither police force, nor public persecution office. These services were run by the current elected senators, which enabled them to lead the services to their own advantages. In short, they had no independent institution that could issue fair judgment for the state.
• The Senate, who should be the advisory committee for the Consuls, was a lifetime membership (permanent); while the Consuls (the officeholders) were not. So, the Senate was in fact the ruling instrument of the Republic.
• The complex bureaucracy was another obstacle, especially in the widespread use of veto (Consuls and Praetors could veto their colleagues or their junior’s proposals), and in too many checks and balances of a proposal. In order to restrain one’s power, Rome has created this complex bureaucracy. However, it also led to equal and individual political competition, where one could use his power to overthrow the other. In the end, they used it not for Rome’s but their own sake.

  

So, when Cicero was born in a countryside near Arpinum on January 3, 106 BC, the Roman Republic was already in the start of crisis. He was an intelligent child right from the beginning, and as a youngster preferred to lead intellectual than physical (military) achievements. Cicero persistently sought literary pursuits until his end of life, and he soon found that he has been born a distinguished orator. Cicero was very good in character’s assassination; his humours were often sharp and witty. Cicero was appointed Consul at 63 BC, and during his office he thwarted a conspiracy by Catilina, not with military force, but with the force of words. He was called “Father of His Country” for this, and it was his biggest achievement.

What I admire from Cicero—and made him distinguished from other famous Roman statesmen—is that he always works sincerely and consistently for the Republic. He is neither greedy nor ambitious; and his only weakness is his exaggerated boastfulness. But, I am ready to defend him by arguing that, born without traces of great ancestors, Cicero did not have any marks of family’s glory which was very important at that time. So, it makes sense that he pointed out his achievement over and over again, because it was a family pride. Moreover, Cicero reached the highest office (Consul) and became one of the most respectable Roman statesmen without money or aristocracy background. His success came merely from his own merit; his literary background and his oratory skill were on one side, while his integrity and his consistent loyalty to the Republic were on the other.

Because of his persistency in advocating Rome, he made quite a lot of opponents. The first sign of the Republic’s collapse was the rise of Julius Caesar—perhaps the most ambitious man in Rome. He has formed the first triumvirate: Caesar-Pompey-Crassus. Cicero has also been invited to join this power sharing, but he—loyal as he was to the Republic—reluctantly rejected. Later on he was banished from Rome, thanks to Clodius, and to the triumvirate who had let it pass. Cicero was desperate; during the exile he had a setback, and even suffered from mental breakdown. It is ironic that a man from outside Rome should have loved the city more than anyone else.

Cicero was finally recalled to Rome; and the city welcomed him almost like a Triumph. It was only a sign that Cicero was distinguished as an individual. He did not belong to any office, but as a personal, Cicero still had great influence. So when the established Rome was in the threat of being ruled by a dictator (either Pompey or Caesar), the Senate needed Cicero for his independence of mind. In the end, we all know what the outcome was. Nevertheless, Cicero has put his efforts to prevent it; later on he even betrayed his own principle in order to compromise with the enemy, although with a huge burden in his heart. But the Republic was finally collapsed. If only there were more conservative men in the Senate, Cicero must have had a bigger chance to succeed. But unfortunately, most of them have been slaughtered in the era of Sulla and Marius’ reign. Or if there were still some of them (like Brutus and Cassius), they were working without no method, no plan, and no thought.

It’s so pity that Cicero must fight alone for the existence of the Republic, because his enemies only thought about their own interests. Although Cicero did not succeed in maintaining the Republic, for me Cicero is still Roman’s hero; one of its best leaders. Cicero was good in administration, and so, was able to govern well. He was a great philosopher too, and the early Catholic Church even regarded him as a virtuous pagan. His thoughts about Republic were later used by American Founding Fathers.

Thanks to Anthony Everitt who has brought Cicero to us. This biography is quite an easy reading, and you would feel like reading a Roman historical tale instead of a biography. Moreover, I like how Everitt put a thorough analysis of Roman’s fault lines, in order to get a better understanding of the collapse of one of greatest empires in the universe.

A very thorough and entertaining work of history, four stars for Cicero!

~~~~~~~~~

I read Random House paperback edition

This book is counted as:

2^nd book for History Reading Challenge 2014

The Invisible Woman: The Story of Nelly Ternan and Charles Dickens

Charles Dickens. Who haven’t, at least, heard of his name? He is probably the second British writer, after Shakespeare, whose works are most well known in the world. But, like Shakespeare, we are more familiar with his stories and his famous characters than with himself as a person. It is common knowledge that we can get to know an author from his writings. But particularly in Dickens—although it happens in many other authors too—only half of his writings did reflect his true personalities. Only after reading The Invisible Woman, did I realize how hard it is to become a famous person. It becomes even harder when the famous person is a Charles Dickens, who, in his era, was perhaps only slightly less worshipped than the Queen (or even God?). The Invisible Woman is actually the story of Ellen Ternan, but it also reveals so many layers of the extravagant Charles Dickens!

The Ternans is a family of theater workers. Ellen—or Nelly, as the family used to call her—was the youngest of three sisters, and she was born and brought up in the influence of theater industry. Nelly was born in 3 March 1839, a time when women were divided into two distinguished categories: a woman and a lady. No matter how virtuously a woman has been brought up, if she worked in theater, she would automatically be labeled a bad woman; and in the same level as prostitute. In this condition had Nelly—now an eighteen years actress—found herself, when the most prominent writer at that time plunged himself in the theater world, got acquainted with her family, then was attracted to her: Charles Dickens.

Now Dickens has been consistently criticizing social hypocrisy in his contemporary society, and has been modeled as virtuous family man. So, when he found himself loathed his worn-off wife Catherine—who has born his ten children—and attracted by the fresh and innocent young actress Nelly, Dickens was torn between two passions; his passion for a woman who can understand him, and the passion of fame and public honor. Dickens knew he could never marry an actress, and so, was forced to take Nelly only as a mistress. These two ends would be pulling Dickens to each other’s side for years, leaving him restless and in interminable fear of creating scandal for the rest of his life.

First Dickens ruthlessly banished Catherine from Gad’s Hill by cooperating with Georgina Hogarth—Catherine’s sister who was more loyal to her brother-in-law—to accuse Catherine of neglecting their children and being a bad wife. Succeeded in doing that, and as a widower, Dickens started to lead a double live; one publicly, one secretly. At the same time Nelly Ternan’s theatrical career was suddenly terminated, and she disappeared from public life. Dickens installed her at a house, and so, Dickens often went to and fro two homes, as well as travelling a lot for his public readings. This happened in his entire life, until he died in 9 June 1870.

After Dickens’ death, Nelly was freed from threats of scandal and humiliation, which she must endure when she became Dickens’ mistress. She was believed to get pregnant from Dickens twice, but both ended in miscarriage. The seclusion, the fear of scandal, and the uncertain future (as it was impossible for Dickens to marry her) mush have shaped Nelly Ternan to a new stronger woman after Dickens death, when she was only 31 years old. As she has probably learned a lot from Dickens on how to manipulate things, she reappeared in the society by shedding ten years from her age (to prevent any questions about her missing years with Dickens), married a school master, had a happy family, and consistently hid her past from her children until her death in 25 April 1914.

About Dickens – After reading this biography, now I can see why Dickens’ novel characters are mostly comical, unbelievable, and—that’s why—memorable. It is because Dickens himself was a boyish man, both in appearance (his dandy style, even in his later years, his sudden outburst, his energy), as well as in his personalities. I pictured Dickens as a man with great fantasies (that’s where those great stories came from, anyway!), and he believed he must and could make it come true. All that he wanted to happen must happen! His marriage to Catherine prevented him from being with Nelly, so he ruthlessly arranged everything he could to banish her. He did not want to ruin his honor in public, but he also did not want to lose Nelly, so he created false names, false identity, arranged false schedules, produced codes and wrote letters here and there; in short, making every possible way to possess all he wanted. So, while he criticized the hypocrisy in his society, he doubly led a hypocrite life by leading a life he publicly disapproved.

I kept asking myself, why Dickens was determined to take Nelly Ternan as mistress while risking his honor; for sexual satisfaction only? I don’t think so. Apart from Nelly’s charming beauty, I believe he needed a partner who understood him, with whom he could discuss his working life and writings. Plus, Nelly was closely related to a world that was so fascinated Dickens: theater.

About Nelly – It is so ironic, that a woman, who once had a great influence towards a great man, must be kept hidden for centuries, scrapped from histories. Even until now, no one knows the exact life of Ellen Ternan. Historians and biographers could only do detective works and deductions, but could never (at least ‘till this day) reveal the whole mystery. Nobody was sure of Nelly’s feeling and aim when she decided to accept Dickens in her life. I think both Nelly and her mother were fascinated and flattered at first, that a man of such importance paid attention to her. They must have thought it’d be a better future for her, for she could never expect a better husband, not with her theatre background. But Nelly was used to adventurous life in theater, and so living secretly and anonymously might have distressed her. Poor Nelly, I only hope that whatever happened in her last years, she have had once happy moments with Dickens.

Claire Tomalin has done a good job in this biography. She must have been through tons of researches and even ‘detective’ works to reveal the life of Ellen Ternan. Her writing is engaging, and although this is the first time I have read biography, I could quite enjoy it. Four stars for The Invisible Woman! Now I only wish the movie would get to Indonesia very soon!

~~~~~~~~~

I read Penguin paperback

I read this for:

Reading Dickens Event