Mark Antony

[Ludens]

It’s been a while since I read up on this, but at least part of it must be due to him being Caesar’s political proxy during the run up of the civil war. Caesar needed an elected official on his side - and M. Anthony was of the right age and ambition - and would be unlikely to win without Caesar’s support. This would have positioned him as a prominent member of Caesar’s entourage, more so than his later rival, the unknown and untested Octavian.

And we shouldn’t take Roman gossip at face value. Quite a few members of the Roman political elite had attracted nasty rumours during their early career, including Caesar himself.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

It’s been a while since I read up on this, but at least part of it must be due to him being Caesar’s political proxy during the run up of the civil war. Caesar needed an elected official on his side - and M. Anthony was of the right age and ambition - and would be unlikely to win without Caesar’s support. This would have positioned him as a prominent member of Caesar’s entourage, more so than his later rival, the unknown and untested Octavian.

And we shouldn’t take Roman gossip at face value. Quite a few members of the Roman political elite had attracted nasty rumours during their early career, including Caesar himself.

Nasty rumors were stock in trade for Roman elections. No libel or slander laws of substance back then. Attack ads are NOT a new invention.


I think Antony had been tapped as the "successor" in Caesar's faction -- he had served Caesar loyally and (at least on the battlefield) well. His mismanagement of Italy and Rome when Caesar departed for North Africa and his thwarting of Caesar's efforts clearly had him pushed to the side. I think Caesar had tapped Octavian to be his faction successor at that point -- but Caesar expected to conquer Parthia and points East and then return to Rome to live out his last decade or so. He figured he had 15 years or so to groom Octavian and could therefore afford to discard Antony.