This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles
We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have.
Cleanup.
To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates?
Standardize the Chronology.
A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563)
Stub sorting
Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . .
Data sorting.
This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our
project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our
talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rome, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the city of
Rome and
ancient Roman history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RomeWikipedia:WikiProject RomeTemplate:WikiProject RomeRome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Mark Antony is a
former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check
the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
Inconsistent authors
@
Editoronthewiki: Hello there. In your
recent edits, you added two references to – presumably? – the same book but credited two different authors, one Barry Strauss and one Ian Davidson. Could you clarify in the article as to which is which?
Also, if you're interested in further additions to the article, I'd highly recommend finding if possible a copy of CAH2 9 (1994), which provides a detailed narrative of this period in chapters 11–12. Morstein-Marx's Julius Caesar and the Roman people (2021) I think gives the best recent analysis of whether Caesar really wanted to be king and includes including the diadem incident and the differences between the five sources: Dio, Appian, Suetonius, Plutarch (wrong as usual), and Nicholaus.
Ifly6 (
talk)
00:54, 29 March 2023 (UTC)reply
There's a number of dubious claims that I've reworked rather quickly.
In the lede, the senate doesn't declare war: the people (in the centuries) do.
The
First Triumvirate isn't some kind of backroom coup. The allies were unpopular, knew it, and any domination was shortlived. See eg Gruen LGRR (1995) or our own article on the First Triumvirate.
Legate is not a rank. It is a position.
The death of Julia in 54 had little to do with the falling out between Pompey and Caesar; again see Gruen LGRR (1995).
Milo is not a Pompeian ally; he gets thrown under the bus immediately. Nor is he an "optimate". The "optimates" don't exist... Milo's activities are just as self-serving as Clodius'.
The pontifex maximus is not the head of the [sic] Roman religion. The pontifices, augurs, and quindecemviri are all separate priests; there is no "head".
Antony took over Curio's place in the tribunes; the idea of "both Pompey and Caesar lay down their commands" did not emerge from Antony. The idea that Caesar was afraid of prosecution is dubious. See Morstein-Marx Caesar (2021) App'x 4; also
Caesar's civil war and
Julius Caesar.
Antony was not expelled from Rome; Antony left after the senate said his safety could not be guaranteed.
Caesar wasn't declared a traitor, just hostis.
A propraetor need not previously be a praetor. Cato in 58 BC is pro quaestore pro praetore. Similarly, proconsuls many times by this point had been appointed without holding the consulship.
Lots of "Antony is Caesar's top general" fluff.
WP:PEACOCK.
Caesar was made dictator in absentia in 48 after Pharsalus. The 11-day dictatorship was in 49, when Caesar in Italy. These should not be confused. Caesar did not sail to Italy then hop back to Greece to pursue Pompey. He pursued him directly through Asia minor.
Meier Caesar (1995), Badian in OCD4, etc agree that Caesar had no knowable constitutional programme.
Octavian never called himself Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus.
Lepidus was elected pontifex maximus, albeit irregularly.
Octavian was elected consul in August 43, albeit irregularly.
There's no reason to set up the proscriptions then not talk about Antony's role in getting Cicero killed and then talk about Cicero minor getting to announce Antony's death.
When someone starves you to interdicting shipment, you don't shift your sympathies towards that person: The lack of food in Rome caused the public to blame the Triumvirate and shift its sympathies towards Pompey.
This is nonsense and I lack the time to figure it out:
To secure the peace, Octavian betrothed his three-year-old nephew and Antony's stepson
Marcus Claudius Marcellus to Sextus' daughter
Pompeia. (Appian, The Civil Wars, Book 5, 73.)
"Going native" as a casus belli should be cited directly with a quote since it's a rather extraordinary claim.
WP:EXTRAORDINARY.
Further work on this article is needed. The sourcing in many portions is just a paraphrase of Plutarch and Appian. It isn't as if there are not good sources on Antony and his times. CAH2 vols 9–10 might be a good start at least for the events. It's strange also that this article is much more a recounting of the events generally than specifically Antony's part in them. The perspective of the article definitely needs shifting.
Ifly6 (
talk)
04:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Sources
There are modern sources:
Tatum, W Jeffrey (December 2023). A noble ruin: Mark Antony, civil war, and the collapse of the Roman republic. Oxford University Press.
ISBN978-0-19-769490-9.
Note also re some of the older sources, in Welch's 2023 OCD Online article—
Modern scholars frequently characterize Antonius as a victim, first of Cicero’s rhetoric and then of young Caesar’s attacks on his character and ability. Even more problematic is the tendency of modern biographers to accept Plutarch’s moral agenda uncritically.
The note given at the end of uncritically is—
E.g. Eleanor Goltz Huzar, Mark Antony: A Biography (London: Croom Helm, 1978); Adrian Goldsworthy, Antony and Cleopatra (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2010); and Pat Southern, Mark Antony: A Life (Stroud, UK: Amberley Publishing, 2010).
If someone is wanting to take a stab on this article, I would definitely get Tatum (2023). Some interpretation and conclusions may differ from the more traditional biographies.
Ifly6 (
talk)
08:12, 15 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Mythology
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Wgronwald6 (
article contribs).