Analyzing The Subjective Nature Of Historical Interpretation Of Cleopatra

Cleopatra
The differing perspectives on Cleopatra’s image and death reveal much about the subjective nature of historical interpretation. The range of competing theories concerning Cleopatra in life and in death are a clear illustration that images in history change according to social context and each individuals perspective. The issue of Cleopatra’s image, particularly her beauty, has remained a popular obsession for two millennia, though the scarcity of reliable evidence prevents a truly objective rendering. Additionally, the mystery and tragedy of her death has captivated audiences throughout time, though again, the array of evidence offers little certainty.
The subjective nature of historical explanation accounts for how events in history
The lack of evidence on Cleopatra’s image has caused most interpretations of her to be influenced by the historian’s own personal views and context. The most common portrayal of Cleopatra was that she was a woman of extreme beauty. Dio Cassius, a member of the Roman senate and historian was born in 155AD around 185 years after the death of Cleopatra, writes that “For she was a woman of surpassing beauty” and the majority of Roman depictions of Cleopatra followed this trend. Much of Cleopatra’s’ image has been affected by the changing social views of the time, as exemplified by Hollywood depictions. The famous portrayal of Cleopatra by Elizabeth Taylor is what many people came to associate the image of Cleopatra with. Roman sources of Cleopatra, when compared to other sources argue, that Cleopatra was more beautiful than others suggest. The Roman depiction can be seen as a form of propaganda against Cleopatra; by writing that Cleopatra was an irresistible seductress, it shows that their leaders Caesar and Antony were not weak but instead were seduced by a woman able to “subjugate everyone, even a love sated man past his prime” (Dio Cassius). Modern and Hollywood depictions of Cleopatra are largely derived from the idea that she was one of the most beautiful women in the world. In modern films she is shown to be a beautiful woman covered in jewellery
This perspective is exemplified by Plutarch asserted “For her beauty, as we are told, was in itself not altogether incomparable”. The main evidence that suggests this are Roman coins printed during the rule of Mark Antony that show Cleopatra with a sloping forehead, thin lips, pointed chin and a large nose. These coins provide an image that is vastly different from the idea of Cleopatra being a beautiful seductress. However, coins printed around this time were used as a piece of political propaganda, and the altering of certain features to make them look more masculine and powerful could have resulted in this image of Cleopatra. Writings by Plutarch offer a different perspective on Cleopatra from the Romans. Plutarch argued that it wasn’t Cleopatra’s beauty that made her so powerful but rather it was her charisma and intelligence that made her so powerful describing her as having an “irresistible charm, and her presence, combined with the persuasiveness of her discourse” is what made her so attractive to Caesar and