Was Caesarion the son of Julius Caesar and Cleopatra?

Progeny and propaganda in the first century BCE

The Egyptian prince Caesarion is known to history as the son of Cleopatra and the Roman statesman Julius Caesar. He was enough of a threat to Caesar’s heir Augustus, that the emperor had him executed. But was he really the son of Caesar or merely a pretender?

Arienne King

Caesarion was his mother’s co-regent in Egypt, though he held no real political power. His story came to an end when Caesar’s adopted son and heir Octavian conquered Egypt and executed him in 30 BCE. Despite his fame, the details of Caesarion’s life are vanishingly scarce. Even his murder is mentioned only as a footnote in accounts of Egypt’s fall.

Cleopatra’s royal propaganda presented Caesarion as heir to the legacy of both Egypt and Rome. Unofficially, doubts circulated about Caesarion’s paternity. The topic generated heated debate among contemporaries like Cicero, Augustus and Mark Antony. Many modern historians have tried to solve the mystery.

Relationship between Caesar and Cleopatra

Cleopatra met Caesar when he arrived in Egypt in pursuit of his vanquished rival Pompey the Great. At the time, Cleopatra was embroiled in a civil war against her brother Ptolemy XIII. Caesar took her side, defeating Ptolemy XIII’s forces and leaving Cleopatra in control of Egypt. To secure her claim to the throne, she married her surviving brother Ptolemy XIV according to Ptolemaic custom, although the marriage was considered no more than a legal formality.

Despite Caesar’s marriage to Calpurnia, he and Cleopatra became lovers during the war. The adulterous relationship between them reportedly caused scandal when Cleopatra and Ptolemy XIV visited Rome between 46 BCE and 44 BCE (Cassius Dio 43.27). During their visit, Caesar conferred various gifts and honors to the pair, and formally recognized them as “friends and allies” of the Roman Republic.

It is generally assumed that Caesar fathered Caesarion, but some ancient accounts cast doubt on this claim. After Caesar’s death, his friend and secretary Gaius Oppius disputed Caesarion’s paternity in a now-lost book. The historian Suetonius described this as Oppius’ attempt to clear his friend’s name of an uncomfortable allegation (Suetonius 1.52). However, more reliable Roman historians agree with Oppius that this was a lie fabricated by Cleopatra (Cassius Dio., 47.31; Nicolaus, Life of Augustus 68) On the other hand, Plutarch and Livy, by way of Lucan, assert that Caesarion really was Caesar’s son (Plutarch, Life of Caesar 49.10; Lucan 10.270-280).

Caesar’s infertility

J.P.V.D. Balsdon suggested that Caesar was infertile, a theory which has since been championed by many other scholars (Balsdon 1958, pp. 86-87). Caesar had only one acknowledged child: his daughter Julia. She was conceived when Caesar was about 17, during his marriage to Cornelia. Their 15 year marriage produced no other known children, and neither did Caesar’s subsequent marriages to Pompeia or Calpurnia.

Caesar had numerous affairs, primarily with married Roman women. Before and after his death, rumors circulated of him fathering illegitimate children with some of these women. Most of these rumors are easily disproved, like the claim that Marcus Junius Brutus was his son which can be dismissed on chronological grounds. In light of Caesar’s promiscuous reputation, it is surprising that he remained childless with the exception of Julia.

If Caesar struggled with fertility issues, it is extremely unlikely that he would finally conceive while in his early 50s. On the other hand, given the high rate of infant mortality in first-century-BCE Rome, it is plausible that he may have had other children who died during infancy and are absent from the historical record. (Tyldesley 2008, p. 138).

Caesarion’s birth date

The uncertainty surrounding Caesarion’s birth date makes it more difficult to speculate on his conception. Plutarch stated that Caesarion was born shortly after Caesar left Egypt in early June 47 BCE (Life of Caesar 49.10) A stele from Memphis seems to confirm the birthday of a “Pharaoh Caesar” on June 23, 47 BCE. However, it may instead refer to a later Roman emperor such as Augustus, as the emperors were also described as pharaohs in Roman Egyptian epigraphy.

A birth date in 47 BCE is somewhat incompatible with the claim that Caesarion was enrolled in the Alexandrian gymnasium as a coming-of-age ceremony in 30 BCE. Young men in Ptolemaic Egypt usually came of age at 14 years old, but Caesarion would have been 17 at this time. This could be a minor delay caused by his unusual life circumstances, or it could indicate that he was born much later than is commonly assumed.

This discrepancy between his birth date and coming-of-age has led some historians to speculate that Cleopatra was pregnant when Caesar was assassinated on March 15, 44 BCE. This would more closely align with Caesarion coming of age in 30 BCE. In the weeks immediately after Caesar’s death, the Roman orator Cicero related rumors that some misfortune had befallen Cleopatra and a “Caesar”, possibly hinting at difficulties in pregnancy or childbirth (Att. 14, 20). This would also explain why accounts of Cleopatra’s visits to Rome before Caesar’s assassination make no mention of Caesarion.

Alternate paternity theories

With the exception of Caesar, ancient accounts make no mention of any lovers linked to Cleopatra during the period between 48 and 44 BCE. For this reason, it is generally assumed that she had no other partners, but a relationship could theoretically escape scrutiny. Jerome Carcopino theorized that Caesarion was secretly the child of Mark Antony, Caesar’s close friend and Cleopatra’s future husband. Carcopino suggested that Antony and Cleopatra had an affair during one of the queen’s visits to Rome in 45 BCE, while Caesar was fighting in Spain. After Caesar’s death, they both lied about their son’s paternity so that he could be propped up as a rival to Caesar’s adopted son Octavian (Carcopino 1958, p. 44-45).

Carcopino’s theory is one of the more plausible alternative explanations for Caesarion’s parentage. The only drawback is a lack of evidence; no ancient accounts allude to a relationship between Antony and Cleopatra prior to 41 BCE. Antony viewed Octavian as a political rival, so he had a strong incentive to attack Octavian’s connection to Caesar’s legacy. His support for Caesarion can be explained through political expediency, and requires no personal connection.

Gaius C. Stern theorized that Cleopatra was a victim of wartime rape near the end of the Egyptian civil war, which resulted in Caesarion’s conception. His theory postulates that she was at some point captured by enemy forces and held prisoner before escaping to Caesar at the end of 48 BCE (Stern , pp. 62-63). A supporting piece of evidence for this theory is a line in the epic poem Pharsalia which states that she “bribed the guards at Pharos to loosen the chains” keeping her from reaching Caesar (Lucan 10.58).

However, the “chains” referenced by Lucan are more likely harbor chains used to block naval access to Alexandria. Most accounts indicate that she was actively directing the war effort and moving about freely at the time of Caesar’s arrival in Egypt. The fact that she exchanged letters with Caesar ahead of their meeting is further evidence against her hypothetical capture (Turner 2016, p. 201-203).

Status in Ptolemaic Egyptian society

The circumstances of Caesarion’s birth were unprecedented in the history of Ptolemaic Egypt. He was the first king to derive his legitimacy entirely from the maternal line, rather than paternal descent. Illegitimate sons had become kings before, including Cleopatra’s father Ptolemy XII, but they were all the offspring of kings. Women were more heavily stigmatized for extramarital relationships in the ancient Mediterranean. Ptolemaic queens were expected to remain chaste outside of marriage, while kings frequently had concubines and multiple wives. In the entirety of the Ptolemaic dynasty, Cleopatra VII was the first royal woman to even be accused of having an extramarital affair.

Cleopatra named her son Ptolemy Caesar to emphasize his connection to Julius Caesar, whose high status helped to mitigate the shame of illegitimacy. This connection was also highlighted by his royal epithet Theos Philopator Philometor (“the Father-Loving, Mother-Loving God”). This claim did not give Caesarion any enhanced political status, as Republican Rome had no hereditary offices. However, she probably hoped that it would give him a greater level of social prestige among Romans.

He was formally recognized as Cleopatra’s co-regent in 43 BCE but this was not enough to overcome the stigma of illegitimacy. In ancient sources, he is commonly referred to by the popular nickname Caesarion, Greek for “Little Caesar”. Caesarion was one of many derogatory nicknames given to Ptolemaic kings by the Alexandrians; Cleopatra’s father was nicknamed “the Flute-Player” and “the Bastard”, while her great-grandfather was called “Pot Belly”.

Status in Roman society

It is possible that Caesarion might have been a Roman citizen, since honorary citizenship was often given to formally recognized allies of Rome like the Ptolemaic dynasty. However, being born out of wedlock meant that he was not considered a part of the gens Julia, Caesar’s family. It was completely unheard of for aristocratic Roman families to acknowledge illegitimate children, and there was no means of legitimizing bastards under Roman law. Even the theoretical existence of illegitimate children was rarely addressed in Roman literature.

The idea that Caesar publicly recognized Caesarion as his son has been popularized by film and literature, but it has no basis in historical sources. In his will, Caesar posthumously adopted his grandnephew Octavian. The contemporary historian Nicolaus of Damascus claims that Caesar’s will specifically denied that Caesarion was his son, although this is not repeated by any other source (Life of Augustus, l. 68).

There are several reasons why Caesar might have ignored or even repudiated Caesarion. He may have wanted to distance himself from the public shame of his affair with Cleopatra, which broke Roman taboos against adultery, monarchy and relationships with foreigners. The 1st Century CE Latin epic Pharsalia attacks Caesar for bringing shame upon his family by fathering an illegitimate son with an “obscene” mother (Lucan, Pharsalia 10.76-77). It might also have seemed unreasonable to leave his estate and name to a foreign prince, instead of following the more common tradition of adopting a male relative like Octavian.

In order to legitimize Caesarion, Caesar would have needed to change the very legal framework of marriage and inheritance in ancient Rome. The historian Suetonius reports a rumor that Caesar had asked his praetor Lucius Cornelius Cinna to draft legislation permitting him to marry multiple women in the hopes of having a legitimate son. He also claims that Caesar permitted Cleopatra to give her son the cognomen “Caesar” (Suetonius, Life of Caesar 1.52). However, these reports are probably false, like most of the conspiratorial rumors surrounding Caesar at the time of his assassination in March 44 BCE.

Reception of Caesarion

The controversy over Caesarion’s paternity became more politically relevant as tensions between Antony and Octavian heightened. With Cleopatra’s support, Antony publicly promoted Caesarion as Caesar’s trueborn son and heir. Octavian fought back by crafting a public relations campaign that portrayed Cleopatra as a demonic tyrant who sought the total destruction of Rome. The conflict soon escalated into a civil war that ended in Antony and Cleopatra’s suicides, and a decisive victory for Octavian.

In the wake of this death and destruction, Caesarion’s fate was left uncertain. It was later reported that the philosopher Arieus Didymus told Octavian that “too many Caesars is not good”, reminding him of the threat posed by Caesarion (Plutarch, Life of Antony 81.2). Real or not, Caesarion’s alleged descent from Caesar could inspire others to follow him if he made a bid for power. Octavian promptly executed Caesarion, preventing future wars.

For generations after Caesarion’s death, his existence was a sensitive subject to Roman writers. Some described Caesarion’s paternity as a lie invented by Cleopatra, while others considered it another blemish on Julius Caesar’s mixed legacy. The primary sources that Roman historians relied upon – including memoirs, historical accounts, correspondences, and legal documents from those close to Caesar and Cleopatra – must have been hopelessly biased from the start.

Caesarion’s paternity has generated almost obsessive interest among modern historians, far in excess of its relevance. At first glance, the answer appears to hold the key to unravelling the political aspirations of Caesar and Cleopatra, and the nature of their relationship to one another. However, their core motivations would likely have remained the same regardless of Caesarion’s true parentage. Caesar had an imperative to protect himself and his extended family from scandal. Caesarion, as a foreigner and a king, was an unfit heir for a Roman statesman. Meanwhile, Cleopatra had to bolster her son’s political legitimacy by exaggerating his paternal heritage.

In fiction and nonfiction, Caesarion is often portrayed as the would-be unifier of Egypt and Rome. This had no basis in the political reality of the mid-first century BCE, but it may be partly attributed to the lingering impact of Cleopatra’s propaganda. She advertised her son as the inheritor of Ptolemaic and Roman greatness, a king capable of straddling the divide between east and west. In reality, Rome had no room for a figure like Caesarion, and there is no reason to believe that Caesar thought otherwise.