August / September 2025 BoTM - Cleopatra: A Life > Likes and Comments

Welcome to the August/September 2025 BotM discussion for Cleopatra: A Life by Stacy Schiff. Laura, Lauren, tjbirdman, MiuMaO, Caitlin, Dea, JasonReads, Courtney, Claudie, Colleen, Jakub, Julie, E.M., Ron, Claudia, Bea, Franklin, Dea꧂, Faye, Jeppu, Michele, Marie, Marju, Mandy, Nona, Bernadette, Ashley, Irene, Elena, Christopher, Cyndi, Katy, and Anita voted for this title.

From the GR summary:

The Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer brings to life the most intriguing woman in the history of the world: Cleopatra, the last queen of Egypt.

Her palace shimmered with onyx, garnets, and gold, but was richer still in political and sexual intrigue. Above all else, Cleopatra was a shrewd strategist and an ingenious negotiator.

Though her life spanned fewer than forty years, it reshaped the contours of the ancient world. She was married twice, each time to a brother. She waged a brutal civil war against the first when both were teenagers. She poisoned the second. Ultimately she dispensed with an ambitious sister as well; incest and assassination were family specialties. Cleopatra appears to have had sex with only two men. They happen, however, to have been Julius Caesar and Mark Antony, among the most prominent Romans of the day. Both were married to other women. Cleopatra had a child with Caesar and–after his murder–three more with his protégé. Already she was the wealthiest ruler in the Mediterranean; the relationship with Antony confirmed her status as the most influential woman of the age. The two would together attempt to forge a new empire, in an alliance that spelled their ends. Cleopatra has lodged herself in our imaginations ever since.

Famous long before she was notorious, Cleopatra has gone down in history for all the wrong reasons. Shakespeare and Shaw put words in her mouth. Michelangelo, Tiepolo, and Elizabeth Taylor put a face to her name. Along the way, Cleopatra’s supple personality and the drama of her circumstances have been lost. In a masterly return to the classical sources, Stacy Schiff here boldly separates fact from fiction to rescue the magnetic queen whose death ushered in a new world order. Rich in detail, epic in scope, Schiff’s is a luminous, deeply original reconstruction of a dazzling life.

What a phenomenal pick! I absolutely loved Stacy Schiff's Cleopatra. This book isn't just a biography; it's an engaging and meticulous exploration of the historical record and evidence surrounding one of history's most fascinating figures. I found it to be extremely thought-provoking

Well said K C.!

I read this book earlier this year, so I am not ready to reread. Here is my review:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

I read this book a few years back and really liked it, which is why I voted for it. I still have it on a shelf. I might try to skim through it or give it a re-read. I'm excited to see what others think.

I read this book when it first came out and really liked it. I found it propulsive and well-written.

I just finished the book last week. Really like it.

I haven't read this, but I have it on hold from the library, so I will when it comes in... but one of my GR friends referred to this book as "revisionist history" and... I have thoughts.

I have recently read several biographies of historical women that could be called "revisionist", and I'm not sure that is a bad thing. We SHOULD revise our knowledge and understanding based on new information or context or historical vs modern perspective. History isn't written in stone (even when it is) because someone had to write it (or chisel it) and the person with the pen (or chisel) had the power to shape it. And when I think about the role of patriarchy in history, it often relegates women to very narrow and specific roles and motivations, I wonder how much of that is true about Cleopatra.

Anyway - I'm very much looking forward to this!

Great book already-am on page 60 & ready to discuss.

Exactly Becky. Every generation revises their understanding of themselves, their world, and of the past.

I read this several years ago and thought it was very interesting. I don't have the background to evaluate the scholarship. But I found the book engaging and the information fascinating.

Starting the audiobook tonight! Robin Miles isn’t my favorite audiobook reader but I’m hoping the book is good enough for that to not matter.

Finished Cleopatra last night. I found it interesting, but I didn’t really like the book as much as I could have and hopef to. The narrative was really dense, and seemed to rely heavily on the reader being more historically knowledgeable than I think I am, particularly in the beginning, when Cleo smuggles herself into Alexandria. I think setting the stage for the reader a bit more would have made a difference, but instead it seemed like “Cleopatra did this… you know why.”

The rest of the book was much better in that aspect and gave a lot more context for the surrounding political scene.

One thing I noticed at the end was the exact same language and misogynistic rhetoric was used against Cleo as was used against Messalina a few decades later, and the same as leveled against Anne Boleyn centuries later, and still leveled against women today. Women who have agency and intelligence have been demonized by men in power as long as the historical record exists, and the arguments haven’t changed a bit.

This thread has been a joy to read—especially the comments about revisionism and how narratives get shaped. One thing that struck me while researching ancient women (including Cleopatra) is just how deeply our perceptions are filtered through Roman lenses. The Roman authors who “documented” Cleopatra often did so with a very clear agenda—political, patriarchal, and often propagandistic.

It’s amazing how those same tropes have echoed through time—Becky’s point about Messalina and Anne Boleyn really resonated. It feels like women who wield agency are instantly recast as dangerous, seductive, or untrustworthy. Different century, same story.

I’ve been exploring how these patterns repeat across history and how our present-day understanding is still shaped by who held the pen centuries ago. (And... occasionally wonder if anyone else has noticed the same! 😄)

Exactly, Darren. You don't even have to look a full year back to see it STILL repeating. Any woman who is in a position of authority or power, or who is trying to attain it, is accused of "sleeping her way to the top", of being "untrustworthy" and "weak". Men never seem to have to jump the same hurdles. When a man raises his voice, he's forceful and assertive. When a woman does it, she's hysterical and emotional and shrill. The qualities that make a "bad woman" are the same qualities that make a "powerful man".

This is evident even in Cleopatra's own story. Both Caesar and Antony were well-known for being hugely promiscuous, seducing women, and often married women, whenever they felt like it, and this was not only accepted, but praised as it proved their "manliness", and their own wives were expected to loyally submit without question. But Cleo entering into two committed relationships of her own accord made her a whore, seductress, bewitching and ensnaring "weak" men to put them under her thumb. Because obviously, Caesar and Mark Antony were just so easily manipulated, and couldn't have ANY possible reason to actually want a relationship with her other than what was between her legs.

The standard is laughably skewed. But he who holds the pen writes the history, and so, this becomes the accepted framing.

Brilliantly said again, Becky. It reminds me of something I wrote recently on my blog—The Storm and the Stone—comparing Grace Darling and Mary Anning, two women from the same era whose recognition could not have been more different. Grace’s story fit the narrative: dramatic rescue, public heroism, easily painted into a national myth. Mary’s work reshaped science, but without a wealthy or male institution behind her, she was ignored in her lifetime.

It’s the same pattern we see with Cleopatra, Messalina, Anne Boleyn... even women today. If a woman’s power fits a comfortable script, she might be remembered—often with embellishments. But if it challenges the status quo? Her voice is usually drowned out, her name footnoted—if remembered at all.

Even the way we phrase things today says a lot. How often is it still “Mr. So-and-So and his wife”? That one tiny word—his—carries centuries of habit. Our cultural framing still hasn’t caught up with the idea that women can exist as individuals first, not attachments or exceptions.

That’s one of the reasons I started writing about these forgotten voices—and launched a group around it. Because history doesn’t just need to be remembered. It needs to be re-examined.

Finished was impressed with Cleopatra's political savvy. Just like the modern women who have successfully navigated in mainly a male political role such as Margaret Thatcher (read her autobiography, The Downing Street years), Angela Merkel, German Chancellor & Golda Meier, the Prime Minster of Israel.
Was also amazed at the amount of backstabbing (pun intended on Caesar) that was so prevalent especially among family members.

Those who want to know more about other Egyptian queens, I recommend a book our group previously read When Women Ruled the World: Six Queens of Egypt by Kara Cooney. Cleopatra is among these queens.