Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
The Wistman

The Death of Cleopatra

65 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Mellon Man
3 minutes ago, Alien Origins said:

Have you taken the time to read your own references? If so, do you still maintain she was the only 'non-Egyptian' to ever rule over Egypt? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Minimalists

My point being is that Cleopatra was Greek not Egyptian and thats all I have to say on the matter at this particular time......:wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
4 hours ago, Alien Origins said:

And from what I have read she was the only non-Egyptian to ever rule over Egypt so I think that speaks a lot of just how well a ruler she was.

That's not correct.

She's from the Ptolemaic Dynasty, which was started when one of Alexander the Great's generals (Ptolemy I) became ruler of Egypt.  Before Ptolemy I, Alexander the Great was acknowledged pharaoh.  

A brief rundown of foreign pharaohs of Egypt:

Hyksos pharaohs during the 2nd Intermediate period (1650-1550-ish)

Lybian pharaohs during the 3rd Intermediate period (950 BC) followed by the Kushites (around 750 BC) and that was followed by the Assyrians (all of these rulers were given the title and honors of pharaoh)  Egyptian pharaohs began ruling again with Psamtik I, but this didn't last; Egypt was conquered by Cambysis (who became pharaoh) and Persian rule continued until Alexander the Great took the reins: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt

There were 16 Ptolemies (and consorts) who ruled Egypt before Cleopatra came to the throne: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_dynasty#Ptolemaic_rulers_and_consorts

 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
9 hours ago, The Wistman said:

@Third Eye      Cleopatra was captured (by a ruse, says Plutarch) in her tomb sanctuary and taken by the Roman soldiers to the Palace, where she remained under house arrest.  Octavian was concerned that she would immolate herself along with the State treasure, which she had amassed around her.  When that was secured (Octavian used it to pay his troops, among other things), her death was not long to follow...on August 12 (she was thirty-nine.)

Caesarion was executed by Octavian's orders on August 23 (he was seventeen.)  He was in fact the last king (Pharaoh) of Egypt, since he co-ruled with his mother.

So when she died, she likely had hope that her son might survive.

Thanks @The Wistman that reference to Plutarch jostled my memory back to the present a little, the Romans using the threat of her kid's capture was what broke her resolve, she was still wheeling and dealing till the last I guess, which is more to her character.

I read many versions of the tale, the one that stuck to my memory was she totally lost it when she was brought news that her kid was captured / killed. Then she was informed that the kid was alive, that if she behave like a good little play Queen then the kid would be allowed to live, Ocatavian even offered to adopt the kid, if I remembered rightly (?) Then rumors that the kid was dead reached here and she too followed, its so long ago since I last looked at the pages, I don't even remember what was from which title much less where ....

~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman

Plutarch and Suetonius both write that Octavian allowed Cleopatra and Antony to be entombed together.  But the question is, were they being honest or writing to please the Imperium and the Roman men who were their primary readership by parroting the official propaganda?  These were two very important and politically charged individuals, after all.  Would not the tomb itself prove to be a place of interest and veneration, and wouldn't this work against Octavian's overall political strategy moving toward his goal of empire and unlimited personal power?  It should be remembered that Octavian was not the best of generals himself (those guys worked for him) but he was a virtuoso political strategist, probably having received much advice from Caesar himself.

As far as I know, we have no record of the Queen's funeral, nor reference to it. 

Octavian supposedly tricked Caesarion into surrendering himself in Alexandria by promising him mercy, but it was a lie.  Nobody knows if or where pharaoh Caesarion was buried.

Did any of them get buried?

For some years now and as recently as January 2019 Zahi Hawass has been trumpeting the excavations at Taposiris Magna and the possible recovery of Cleo and Marc Antony's supposed tomb there.  If it is found, much may be explained by forensic analysis and maybe some epigraphic material...if any of it exists.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6615657/Burial-site-Cleopatra-Mark-Antony-uncovered-soon.html

https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com/2011/07/search-for-tomb-of-antony-and-cleoptra.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_of_Antony_and_Cleopatra

Though, Zahi was disappointing with the Ankhesenamun dig, so maybe caution should be taken toward his declarations regarding Cleopatra's tomb.  ;)

 

Edited by The Wistman
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
30 minutes ago, The Wistman said:

Plutarch and Suetonius both write that Octavian allowed Cleopatra and Antony to be entombed together.  But the question is, were they being honest or writing to please the Imperium and the Roman men who were their primary readership by parroting the official propaganda?  These were two very important and politically charged individuals, after all.  Would not the tomb itself prove to be a place of interest and veneration, and wouldn't this work against Octavian's overall political strategy moving toward his goal of empire and unlimited personal power?  It should be remembered that Octavian was not the best of generals himself (those guys worked for him) but he was a virtuoso political strategist, probably having received much advice from Caesar himself.

Good ol' Julius was still the principle force behind the turmoil isn't it ? Anthony and Cleopatra still had their backers , albeit on the smaller numbers of the sides, the Military might was behind Octavian which makes little  Caesarion the trump card as Julius was still regarded as the divine god if no longer ruler across the empire, pity little Caesarion couldn't bear to be separated from mommy.

~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman
49 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Good ol' Julius was still the principle force behind the turmoil isn't it ? Anthony and Cleopatra still had their backers , albeit on the smaller numbers of the sides, the Military might was behind Octavian which makes little  Caesarion the trump card as Julius was still regarded as the divine god if no longer ruler across the empire, pity little Caesarion couldn't bear to be separated from mommy.

~

Yes, Caesarion was the closest living blood relation to Julius Caesar.  Much of Octavian's political and social legitimacy was due to his being Caesar's adopted heir...his 'son.'  But then there was Caesarion...the real son.  And reportedly as a young man the real son looked like and had some of the presence of the father.  And presumably with such pedigree as he had, he was also intelligent and well educated.  Caesarion was a rival and a threat to Octavian. 

The young pharaoh was either naive or desperate to have ever trusted in Octavian's generosity.

 

Edited by The Wistman
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
2 hours ago, The Wistman said:

Yes, Caesarion was the closest living blood relation to Julius Caesar.  Much of Octavian's political and social legitimacy was due to his being Caesar's adopted heir...his 'son.'  But then there was Caesarion...the real son.  And reportedly as a young man the real son looked like and had some of the presence of the father.  And presumably with such pedigree as he had, he was also intelligent and well educated.  Caesarion was a rival and a threat to Octavian. 

The young pharaoh was either naive or desperate to have ever trusted in Octavian's generosity.

 

Then there is that belief that Octavian would never dare try harming Caesarion and had nothing but honorable intentions of righting the wrongs to Caesar. I think Cleopatra was more the cause of her kid's fate, she was just too much danger to the Hierarchy of Power in Rome, she did herself no favors in favoring Anthony so openly but then, it is hard to tell the depths and widths of the time from the hearsay of later periods. One thing is for certain though, half of Rome and more would definitely cough up blood seeing Cleopatra, having such an influence on the Central grip of power over her old foes in Rome

~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman

@Third Eye  I see Octavian just as brutal as was Cleopatra in dispatching enemies, and they were both enemies to be sure.  But the cunning, canny Octavian, in my opinion, had no intention of leaving Caesarion alive.  It was too big a risk.  He'd crushed the triumvirate, dispatched the wayward and powerful Antony, and had military victories, but Rome was still riven by factions which he would have to herd and suppress in order to attain stability, something Republican Rome had for some time been increasingly unable to enact, to say the least.  Caesarion was a symbol of Egypt and also of Caesar, so he held a unique position of political and personal challenge to Octavian.  Caesarion, I'd say, was doomed, and I can't see how Cleopatra would not have perceived that.  I only wonder why she didn't get him out of harm's way sooner, except perhaps that, the speed of turning events overwhelmed her.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Minimalists
15 hours ago, Kenemet said:

That's not correct.

She's from the Ptolemaic Dynasty, which was started when one of Alexander the Great's generals (Ptolemy I) became ruler of Egypt.  Before Ptolemy I, Alexander the Great was acknowledged pharaoh.  

A brief rundown of foreign pharaohs of Egypt:

Hyksos pharaohs during the 2nd Intermediate period (1650-1550-ish)

Lybian pharaohs during the 3rd Intermediate period (950 BC) followed by the Kushites (around 750 BC) and that was followed by the Assyrians (all of these rulers were given the title and honors of pharaoh)  Egyptian pharaohs began ruling again with Psamtik I, but this didn't last; Egypt was conquered by Cambysis (who became pharaoh) and Persian rule continued until Alexander the Great took the reins: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt

There were 16 Ptolemies (and consorts) who ruled Egypt before Cleopatra came to the throne: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_dynasty#Ptolemaic_rulers_and_consorts

 

 

 

:rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
On 2/8/2019 at 8:02 PM, The Wistman said:

Plutarch and Suetonius both write that Octavian allowed Cleopatra and Antony to be entombed together.  But the question is, were they being honest or writing to please the Imperium and the Roman men who were their primary readership by parroting the official propaganda?  These were two very important and politically charged individuals, after all.  Would not the tomb itself prove to be a place of interest and veneration, and wouldn't this work against Octavian's overall political strategy moving toward his goal of empire and unlimited personal power?  It should be remembered that Octavian was not the best of generals himself (those guys worked for him) but he was a virtuoso political strategist, probably having received much advice from Caesar himself.

As far as I know, we have no record of the Queen's funeral, nor reference to it. 

Octavian supposedly tricked Caesarion into surrendering himself in Alexandria by promising him mercy, but it was a lie.  Nobody knows if or where pharaoh Caesarion was buried.

Did any of them get buried?

 

These are excellent questions, and not easy ones to answer.  They may have been given a Roman-style funeral -- Julius Caesar was cremated, and that would not be unlikely for Cleopatra and Anthony.  So there might have been a cenotaph but not an actual tomb.

It's my opinion that Cleopatra died by poison or strangulation via Octavian.  It was customary to allow nobles to drink poison "voluntarily" for their executions. The "snake" option doesn't fit -- it's no guarantee although it's a romantic idea.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mellon Man
2 hours ago, Kenemet said:

These are excellent questions, and not easy ones to answer.  They may have been given a Roman-style funeral -- Julius Caesar was cremated, and that would not be unlikely for Cleopatra and Anthony.  So there might have been a cenotaph but not an actual tomb.

It's my opinion that Cleopatra died by poison or strangulation via Octavian.  It was customary to allow nobles to drink poison "voluntarily" for their executions. The "snake" option doesn't fit -- it's no guarantee although it's a romantic idea.

Well we might soon be able to answer these questions. 

If I remember correctly, Zahi Hawass and others believe they have found the location. The next decade will be very interesting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman
9 hours ago, Kenemet said:

These are excellent questions, and not easy ones to answer.  They may have been given a Roman-style funeral -- Julius Caesar was cremated, and that would not be unlikely for Cleopatra and Anthony.  So there might have been a cenotaph but not an actual tomb.

It's my opinion that Cleopatra died by poison or strangulation via Octavian.  It was customary to allow nobles to drink poison "voluntarily" for their executions. The "snake" option doesn't fit -- it's no guarantee although it's a romantic idea.

I agree with you about the possible methods of her end.  The snake story seems to coincide with other writings (produced well after the fact) that denigrate her as an intellectual and feminine power (which she undoubtedly was) and focus on her sexual prowess and magical powers of enchantment instead.  The snake image is packed with sexual innuendo, which is probably why it was chosen as her 'suicide' method, not at the hands of Octavian no not at all.  ;)

Octavian would have respected Marc Antony's body I am fairly sure...Roman nobility to Roman nobility (he had Antony's children by Cleopatra brought back to Rome and raised as Roman citizens, so that would indicate that he respected the Roman aristocratic blood of Antony.)  He might even have been truthful and had buried the ashes of Cleopatra with Antony's in some hidden spot.  Maybe.  Her grand tomb which she had prepared was not likely to have been used even as a cinerary monument, due to its well-known location.  But that, as Mellon Man notes, is just what Zahi claims he's about to discover.

Personally I think Octavian probably just chucked Caesarion's body into Alexandria harbor, out of scorn and spite for his rival, but that we'll surely never know.
 

Edited by The Wistman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
7 hours ago, Mellon Man said:

Well we might soon be able to answer these questions. 

If I remember correctly, Zahi Hawass and others believe they have found the location. The next decade will be very interesting. 

I would expect that what was found would not be the true tomb, but a cenotaph; some monument they erected as a substitute tomb.  The bodies of criminals were tossed into a river, but they buried or cremated everyone else.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
18 minutes ago, The Wistman said:

I agree with you about the possible methods of her end.  The snake story seems to coincide with other writings (produced well after the fact) that denigrate her as an intellectual and feminine power (which she undoubtedly was) and focus on her sexual prowess and magical powers of enchantment instead.  The snake image is packed with sexual innuendo, which is probably why it was chosen as her 'suicide' method, not at the hands of Octavian no not at all. 

Octavian would have respected Marc Antony's body I am fairly sure...Roman nobility to Roman nobility.  He might even have kept to his bargain and buried the ashes of Cleopatra with Antony's in some hidden spot.  Maybe.  Her grand tomb which she had prepared was not likely to have been used even as a cinerary monument, due to its well-known location.  But that, as Mellon Man notes, is just what Zahi claims he's about to discover.

Personally I think Octavian probably just chucked Caesarion's body into Alexandria harbor, out of scorn and spite to his rival, but that we'll surely never know.
 

The snake might have been used since it (cobra) was the symbol of the deity of Lower Egypt (Wadjet), implying that she had lost the favor of the gods of Egypt.  I dunno.  I do think that Octavian had to carefully walk a line here -- the wrong message would stir up the people into open rebellion and they'd had to put down a number of attempted revolts during the time of the Ptolemys along with the lynching of one of the pharaohs.

If she was buried, I don't think it was in the Egyptian style, with full mummification.  Some of the Ptolemys are apparently (or were) buried in the royal necropolis at Alexandria.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman
4 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

The snake might have been used since it (cobra) was the symbol of the deity of Lower Egypt (Wadjet), implying that she had lost the favor of the gods of Egypt.  I dunno.  I do think that Octavian had to carefully walk a line here -- the wrong message would stir up the people into open rebellion and they'd had to put down a number of attempted revolts during the time of the Ptolemys along with the lynching of one of the pharaohs.

If she was buried, I don't think it was in the Egyptian style, with full mummification.  Some of the Ptolemys are apparently (or were) buried in the royal necropolis at Alexandria.

I wondered about the burials of the other Ptolemys.  Did they do it Egyptian style, or Macedonian?  Cleopatra is often referred to as being unique among the Ptolemys for embracing the traditional style, customs, and language of the Ancient Egyptians.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

Is this the same Cleopatra tomb everyone is talking about ?
 

Quote

 

~

Jan 26, 2019 - Uploaded by Reel Truth History Documentaries
Dr. Kathleen Martinez sets out on a maverick journey to search for Cleopatra's lost tomb. Using her detective ...

 

~

 

~

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew

She died the same way that JFK did. Eaten by a tiger.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman
28 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Is this the same Cleopatra tomb everyone is talking about ?

Unfortunately I'm not able to view that video, says it's not available [here].  But I can say that Zahi has been 'on' this for a number of years and recently (as of January 2019) been signalling that he believes he's close to finding her tomb at the Alexandrian suburb of Toposiris Magna... see above post at #30 for links

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
14 hours ago, The Wistman said:

Unfortunately I'm not able to view that video, says it's not available [here].  But I can say that Zahi has been 'on' this for a number of years and recently (as of January 2019) been signalling that he believes he's close to finding her tomb at the Alexandrian suburb of Toposiris Magna... see above post at #30 for links

Sorry about that ... here try these ...
 

Quote

 

~

Secrets of the Dead: Cleopatra's Lost Tomb followed Kathleen Martinez, criminal lawyer turned maverick archaeologist, as she searches for Cleopatra's lost ...
 
~
 
Oct 2, 2012 - If Cleopatra's final resting place were to be found by Kathleen Martinez Berry, it would be a true meeting of kindred spirits. A lawyer by training ...
 
~
 
The name Taposiris Magna denotes the name of a city as well as an Egyptian temple of the ... According to Dr Zahi Hawass the monumental sculpture, which is a ... in 2002 as a self-funded expedition by Dominican lawyer Kathleen Martinez, ...

 

~

 

Dr Martinez had to jump through a lot of hoops and stone smile her way to test out her hypothesis, she found some very interesting elements overlooked by previous excavating teams but I haven't really kept up to date lately on account of Hawass elbowing his way into the forefront regarding Dr Martinez's finds ...

~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman

Thanks @Third Eye for those links, what an impressive personage Dr. Martinez is.  She deserves the laurels here, even if their tomb isn't found in the temple, but it does seem it might be so.  I am attentive now. ;)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
1 hour ago, The Wistman said:

Thanks @Third Eye for those links, what an impressive personage Dr. Martinez is.  She deserves the laurels here, even if their tomb isn't found in the temple, but it does seem it might be so.  I am attentive now. ;)

 

Keep us up to date on any updates you can find please, I just auto tune out whenever I see the specter of Hawass show up on the screen ... I can't stand the sight and sound of him

:lol:

~

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
justin3651

Sadly in regard to the recent claims it seems zawass was misqouted.

https://www.livescience.com/64556-tomb-of-antony-and-cleopatra.html

"Over the past two weeks, numerous media reports have claimed that a team led by archaeologist Zahi Hawass is on the verge of discovering the tomb of Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII at a site in Egypt called "Taposiris Magna."

But alas, the "pair so famous" has yet to be discovered. Hawass, Egypt's former minister of antiquities, told Live Science that the news reports are false.

"This is completely false information; [there is] nothing found at all about the tomb," Hawass told Live Science."

Edited by justin3651
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman

Thanks @justin3651 for that information.   I'm not at all surprised that Hawass is walking this back, after his disappointing claims last year about Ankhesamun's tomb at the West Valley site.  It seems in this arena he was mostly piggybacking on Dr. Martinez's work anyway.  She said that the site is so large that work there will take years.  I don't think we'll be hearing anything more about the tomb in the near future, but you never know...she is apparently indefatigable. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman

Well, Hawass is certainly a slippery one.  In his latest article, Link, in which he walks back the many reports in the media from late January that he had indicated he was close to finding the tomb of Cleopatra, he now declares his statement was taken out of context and that it was never his idea that it would be found in some temple anywhere and he implies (I say) that the excavation at Taposiris Magna was his and that Martinez was working adjunct to him and his team.  Also, his term 'had' implies that she is not still working there.  The dig has of course been her idea and her realized work from the beginning.   From the article:

Quote

The story began when I gave a lecture to students and the public at the University of Palermo in Italy. My words were translated by Stefania Sofra, an Italian Egyptologist. I said we had long been excavating at the Temple of Taposiris Magna about 45km west of Alexandria, and added that the theory that Cleopatra could be buried there was not my theory, but the theory of Kathleen Martinez of the Dominican Republic who had been working at the site with myself and an Egyptian team.  

I never believed in the theory that Cleopatra could be buried there, because the ancient Egyptians never buried anyone inside a temple. Temples were built for worship, and this temple was used for the worship of the goddess Isis. It was therefore unlikely that Cleopatra would be buried there.

The rest of the article may be of interest to some, but it seems to be a lot of bloviating on his part, IMO.

Here, as contrast, is the Wikipedia entry for the Tomb of Antony and Cleopatra, the relevant section:

Quote

Reports in 2008 and 2009 focused on an announcement by the noted Egyptologist Zahi Hawass that he might find the tomb in Taposiris Magna, a temple to Osiris, located west of Alexandria, Egypt, in excavations with Kathleen Martinez that have yielded ten mummies in 27 tombs of Egyptian nobles, as well as coins bearing images of Cleopatra and carvings showing the two in an embrace. So far, the tomb remains elusive, but the temple excavations continue, with additional sites below the surface identified using ground-penetrating radar in 2011

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_of_Antony_and_Cleopatra

 

Edited by The Wistman
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.