Mark Antony

At the offset it is worth noting the time spans which separate Plutarch (Approx 50 ce to 120 ce) and Cassius Dio (Approx c 164 to 229 ce). So they are both writing within their own historical context. Both Authors agree that Octavian set out to discredit Mark Anthony.
Plutarch writes how Mark Anthony’s will was read through in front of the senate, this was an act “which would serve best to discredit Anthony” (Plutarch, in AA100, Assignment Booklet, 2013, p.19).When two of Anthony’s friends, Titius and Plancus had been publicly humiliated by Cleopatra they gave Octavian information of Anthony’s will for him to use as he saw fit.   Cassius Dio states “who would not weep when he sees and hears what Anthony has become?”(Scott-Kilvert, 1987, in Resources, 2013, p.27).
Plutarch writes of how Anthony dishonoured Furnius one of Rome’s foremost orators by leaving the forum whilst he was pleading a case “Anthony leaped to his feet from his tribunal, walked out of the trial” (Plutarch, in AA100, Assignment Booklet, 2013, p.19).Cassius Dio states Anthony now has no status or reputation as a Roman “he showed some valour when he served with our army, you can rest assured that he has now lost it beyond recall” (Scott-Kilvert,1987, in Resources, 2013,p.27).
One of the key differences was the emphasis on the key issues that discredited Anthony. Plutarch emphasised how “Octavian singled out for especial emphasis the clause which dealt with Anthony’s burial ...” (Plutarch, in AA100, Assignment Booklet, 2013, p.19). However Cassius Dio emphasises Anthony’s behaviour for cavorting erotic capers which where contradictory to a Roman Politician and Generals standing, in his conclusion he states “when it comes to weapons and fighting what has anyone to fear from him?”(Scott-Kilvert, 1987, in Resources, 2013, p.27).
Was Anthony besotted by Cleopatra or bewitched by her, or did she just use her sexuality and prowess to control Anthony in a dangerous game to seek Rome’s favour. In...