δόσις ἀμφιλαφής.

Τιμητικός τόμος για την Ομότιμη Καθηγήτρια Κατερίνα Συνοδινού,

Ιωάννινα 2020.

Michael Paschalis
Emeritus Professor of Classics
University of Crete – Dept. of Philology
michael.paschalis@gmail.com

PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN

CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE
ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ: Η κυρίαρχη άποψη ότι ο Καβάφης εμπνεύ-
στηκε το αδημοσίευτο ποίημα “Το τέλος του Αντωνίου”
(2007) από ένα χωρίο της σαιξπηρικής τραγωδίας Αντώνιος
και Κλεοπάτρα (4,16,53-61) είναι εσφαλμένη και οφείλεται
στο γεγονός ότι αυτοί που την ασπάζονται έλαβαν υπόψιν
τους όχι ολόκληρο το ποίημα αλλά μόνο το τελευταίο τμήμα
του (στ. 10-15). Ο Πλούταρχος υπήρξε σημαντική πηγή και
για τον Καβάφη και για τον Σαίξπηρ, με τη διαφορά ότι ο
Καβάφης συμβουλευόταν το αρχαίο κείμενο χωρίς διαμε-
σολαβήσεις, ενώ ο Σαίξπηρ διάβαζε την αγγλική μετάφραση
του Sir Thomas North, η οποία με τη σειρά της βασίστηκε
στην περίφημη γαλλική μετάφραση του Jacques Amyot.
Επιπλέον ο Καβάφης και ο Σαίξπηρ δεξιώθηκαν τους πλου-
ταρχικούς Βίους με διαφορετικό τρόπο. Έτσι η ομοιότητα
δύο χωρίων δεν αποτελεί στοιχείο εξάρτησης του πρώτου
από τον δεύτερο αλλά είναι συγκυριακή και εξόχως παρα-
πλανητική. Στην προκείμενη περίπτωση ο Καβάφης άντλη-
σε έμπνευση για “Τὸ τέλος τοῦ Άντωνίου” απευθείας από
τον Αντώνιο του Πλουτάρχου (77,5-77), πράγμα που προ-
κύπτει ολοκάθαρα, αν ο αναγνώστης αντιπαραβάλει ολό-
κληρο το ποίημα με το χωρίο 4,16,42-61 της σαιξπηρικής
τραγωδίας. Έμμεση αλλά σημαντική μαρτυρία για την αλη-
θινή πηγή του Καβάφη εισφέρει και το ποίημα “Ἀπολείπειν
ὁ θεὸς Ἀντώνιον” (1911), το οποίο αποτελεί “παλινωδία”
του πρώτου, όσον αφορά τον ήρωα (Μάρκο Αντώνιο) αλλά
και τον ποιητή. Για να το συνθέσει, ο Καβάφης παρέμεινε
στον Βίο του Αντωνίου και ειδικότερα στον χώρο της πλου-
ταρχικής Αλεξάνδρειας, αλλά απλώς μετακινήθηκε δύο κε-
φάλαια πιο πίσω, από το χωρίο 77,5-7 στο χωρίο 75,4-6,
όπου περιγράφεται ο μουσικός θίασος που διασχίζει την
 MICHAEL PASCHALIS

πόλη τα μεσάνυχτα κινούμενος προς την εξωτερική πύλη. Ο

Σαίξπηρ δραματοποίησε την περιγραφή με πολύ διαφορετι-
κό τρόπο, καθώς την ενσωμάτωσε στη συνομιλία δύο φρου-
ρών του ανακτόρου και ταύτισε τον θεό που “εγκαταλείπει
τον Αντώνιο” με τον Ηρακλή, ενώ πρόκειται ολοφάνερα για
τον Διόνυσο
Keywords: Filippo Maria Pontani, Cavafy, Plutarch: Life
of Antony, Shakespeare: Antony and Cleopatra, Sir Thomas
North, Jacques Amyot, liminality in Cavafy, “The God For-
sakes Antony” as a palinode of “Antony’s Ending”.

n his study “Le fonti della poesia di Cavafis”, published

I in 1940, Filippo Maria Pontani listed eleven of Cavafy’s

acknowledged poems as having a Plutarchan source:
“King Dimitrios” (1906), “The Ides of March” (1911), “The
God forsakes Antony” (1911), “Alexandrian Kings” (1912),
“Theodotos” (1915), “In the Month of Athyr” (1917), “Cae-
sarion” (1918), “In Sparta” (1928), “On the March to Si-
nope” (1928), “Come, O King of the Lacedaimonians”
(1929), and “In the Year 200 B. C.” (1931). In two other
studies that appeared some thirty years later and were enti-
tled respectively “Motivi classici e bizantini negli inediti di
Kavafis” (1969-70) and “Kavafis e Keats” (1972) Pontani
argued that in the unpublished poem of 1907 “Antony’s
Ending” (“Τὸ τέλος τοῦ Ἀντωνίου”) Kavafy reworked a
passage from Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra (Act
4.16.53-61).1 This view was adopted by George Savidis in
the 2nd edition of Cavafy’s acknowledged poems2 as well as
by other editors of Cavafy’s poems, including Dimitris
Dimiroulis who has produced the most recent edition
(2015).3

1
. See Pontani (1991: 51-70, 189, 235), a collected Greek edition
of his essays on Cavafy.
2
. Savidis (1991: 130), vol. 1, with Paschalis (1997).
3
. Dimiroulis (2015: 533), with Paschalis (2016: 283).

~ 640 ~
PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE

The case in question is a classic example in which the

critic or the reader finds himself literally at the crossroads of
intertextuality, in the sense that both Shakespeare and Cava-
fy draw on a passage of Plutarch’s Life of Antony and the
two imitations are so close that he / she can be easily de-
ceived into believing that Cavafy’s actual source was
Shakespeare instead of Plutarch.
Plutarch’s Life of Antony is the main source-text of
Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra (written in 1606-7 but
first printed in the First Folio of 1623). The same work in-
spired Timon of Athens (1605-1606; through the digression
of chapters 69-70 comparing Antony’s gloomy mood after
the naval defeat at Actium to the misanthropic character of
Timon) as well as events in Julius Caesar (1599). Shake-
speare did not work directly with Plutarch’s text but used Sir
Thomas North’s (c. 1535 - c. 1601) translation entitled Plu-
tarch’s Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romanes, which in
turn rendered into English the famous French translation of
Plutarch’s Lives by Jacques Amyot.4 The English playwright
probably had access not to the first edition of North’s Lives
(1579) but to the 1595 reprint.5
As regards Cavafy, scenes of the Life of Antony inspired,
in addition to “Antony’s Ending”, the following three
acknowledged poems: “The God Forsakes Antony” (1911),
“Alexandrian Kings” (1912), and “Caesarion” (1918). The
reason why Pontani ascribed the source of “Antony’s End-
ing” to Shakespeare is because he took into consideration
only its last part, which bears a close similarity to the re-
spective passage of Antony and Cleopatra. I quote Shake-
speare’s Antony and Cleopatra 4.16.53-61 and Cavafy’s

4
. Les vies des hommes illustres, Grecs et Romains, comparées
l’une avec l’autre par Plutarque de Chaeronée, Paris 1559-1565.
5
. On Shakespeare and Plutarch see Gillespie (2001: 425-36), Mar-
tindale & Taylor (2004: 173-205), Burrow (2013: 202-39); on the
sources of Antony and Cleopatra see in great detail Bullough
(1977: 215-449).

~ 641 ~
 MICHAEL PASCHALIS

“Antony’s Ending” (10-15), the latter followed by an Eng-

lish translation:6
The miserable change now at my end
Lament nor sorrow at, but please your thoughts
In feeding them with those my former fortunes,
Wherein I lived the greatest prince o’th’world,
The noblest; and do now not basely die,
Not cowardly put off my helmet to
My countryman; a Roman by a Roman
Valiantly vanquished. Now my spirit is going;
I can no more.

κ’ εἶπε “Νὰ μὴν τὸν κλαῖνε. Δὲν ταιριάζουν τέτοια.

Μὰ νὰ τὸν ἐξυμνοῦνε πρέπει μᾶλλον,
ποὺ ἐστάθηκε μεγάλος ἐξουσιαστής,
κι ἀπέκτησε τόσ’ ἀγαθὰ καὶ τόσα.
Και τώρα ἂν ἔπεσε, δὲν πέφτει ταπεινά,
ἀλλά Pωμαῖος ἀπὸ Pωμαῖο νικημένο[ς]”.

And he told them “to stop weeping for him,

that kind of thing was all wrong.
They ought to be singing his praises
for having been a great ruler,
so rich in worldly goods.
And if he’d fallen now, he hadn’t fallen humbly,
but as a Roman vanquished by a Roman.”

It is easy to understand why the two passages have creat-

ed in all critics the false impression of an intertextual rela-
tion between them. In order to comprehend the exact nature
of this relation, however, one has to go back to the common
source-passage in Plutarch’s Life of Antony. We are at the
point of the narrative where Cleopatra, with the aid of her

6
. The text of Antony and Cleopatra is quoted from Jowett, J. et al.
(2005) and the text of Cavafy’s poem from Savidis (1977). The
English translation is by Keeley & Sherrard (1992).

~ 642 ~
PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE

two servants and the use of ropes, has hoisted self-wounded

Antony up into her funeral monument (the queen feared cap-
ture by Caesar and would not descend from it). When she
laid him on the bed she began to rent her garments over him
and beat and tear her breasts with her hands; then she wiped
off some of his blood upon her face, called him lord, hus-
band, and commander, and almost forgot her own ills in her
pity for Antony’s. Antony stopped Cleopatra’s lamentations
and asked for a drink of wine. He next advised her to see to
her own safety, if she could do it without disgrace, and
among all the companions of Caesar to put greatest confi-
dence in Proculeius. I quote Plutarch’s passage (77.5-7) fol-
lowed by Sir Thomas North’s English translation:7
δεξαμένη δ’ αὐτὸν οὕτως καὶ κατακλίνασα, περιερρήξατό
τε τοὺς πέπλους ἐπ’ αὐτῶι, καὶ τὰ στέρνα τυπτομένη καὶ
σπαράττουσα ταῖς χερσί, καὶ τῶι προσώπωι τοῦ αἵματος
ἀναματτομένη, δεσπότην ἐκάλει καὶ ἄνδρα καὶ αὐτοκράτο-
ρα· καὶ μικροῦ δεῖν ἐπιλέληστο τῶν αὑτῆς κακῶν οἴκτωι
τῶν ἐκείνου. καταπαύσας δὲ τὸν θρῆνον αὐτῆς Ἀντώνιος
ἤιτησε πιεῖν οἶνον, εἴτε διψῶν εἴτε συντομώτερον ἐλπίζων
ἀπολυθήσεσθαι. πιὼν δὲ παρήινεσεν αὐτῆι, τὰ μὲν ἑαυτῆς
ἂν ἦι μὴ μετ’ αἰσχύνης σωτήρια τίθεσθαι, μάλιστα τῶν
Καίσαρος ἑταίρων Προκληίωι πιστεύουσαν, αὐτὸν δὲ μὴ
θρηνεῖν ἐπὶ ταῖς ὑστάταις μεταβολαῖς, ἀλλὰ μακαρίζειν ὧν
ἔτυχε καλῶν, ἐπιφανέστατος ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος καὶ
πλεῖστον ἰσχύσας, καὶ νῦν οὐκ ἀγεννῶς Ῥωμαῖος ὑπὸ Ῥω-
μαίου κρατηθείς.

So when she had gotten him in after that sorte, and layed
him on a bed: [elle desrompit] she rent her garments upon
him, clapping her brest, and scratching her face and
stomake. Then she dried up his blood that had berayed his
face, and called him her Lord, her husband, and Emperour,

7
. Plutarch’s text is quoted from Pelling (1988) and the translation
from North (1895). The translation of Cavafy’s poem is by Keeley
& Sherrard (1992).

~ 643 ~
 MICHAEL PASCHALIS

forgetting her owne miserie and calamity, for the pitie and
compassion she tooke of him. Antonius made her ceasse her
lamenting, and called for wine, either bicause he was a
thirst, or else for that he thought thereby to hasten his death.
When he had dronke, he earnestly prayed her, and
perswaded her, that she would seeke to save her life, if she
could possible, without reproache and dishonor: and that
chiefly she should trust Proculeius above any man else about
Caesar. And as for him selfe, that she should not lament nor
sorowe for the miserable chaunge of his fortune at the end of
his dayes: but rather that she should thinke him the more
fortunate, for the former triumphes and honors he had re-
ceived, considering that while he lived he was the noblest
and greatest Prince of the world, and that now he was over-
come, not cowardly, but valiantly, a Romane by an other
Romane.

In reworking what went on before Antony pronounced

his last words, Shakespeare omitted Cleopatra’s gestures and
other manifestations of extreme grief: tearing her dress and
spreading it over Antony, beating and lacerating her breast,
smearing her face with his blood,8 and calling Antony lord,
husband, and commander. He retained Antony’s advice to
Cleopatra about seeking safety with honor and trusting no
one but Proculeius among Caesar’s companions but added
Cleopatra’s proud reply to both requests: to the former that
honor and safety do not go together; and to the latter that she
would trust only her resolution and her own hands (implying

8
. North’s “scratching her face and stomake” does not correspond
to anything in Plutarch but renders accurately Amyot’s French
translation “s’esgrattignant le visage & l’estomac”. Redundancy of
language is a characteristic feature of Amyot’s translation and
hence of North’s. In the passage quoted above there are eight more
“additions” to Plutarch’s text, all deriving from Amyot. The only
exception is “elle desrompit et deschira” which North renders with
a single verb (“she rent”). For a discussion of the passage in com-
parison with Amyot see Tilley (1904: 284-6).

~ 644 ~
PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE

that she would commit suicide). Here is the passage in ques-

tion, Antony and Cleopatra 4.16.42-61:
ANTONY. I am dying, Egypt, dying.
Give me some wine, and let me speak a little.
CLEOPATRA.
No, let me speak, and let me rail so high
That the false hussy Fortune break her wheel,
Provoked by my offence.
ANTONY.
One word, sweet queen.
Of Caesar seek your honour, with your safety. O!
CLEOPATRA.
They do not go together.
ANTONY. Gentle, hear me.
None about Caesar trust but Proculeius.
CLEOPATRA. My resolution and my hands I’ll trust,
None about Caesar.
ANTONY.
The miserable change now at my end
Lament nor sorrow at, but please your thoughts
In feeding them with those my former fortunes,
Wherein I lived the greatest prince o’th’world,
The noblest; and do now not basely die,
Not cowardly put off my helmet to
My countryman; a Roman by a Roman
Valiantly vanquished. Now my spirit is going;
I can no more.

Shakespeare’s portrait of Cleopatra, composed in her

grief and proud in her reaction, is different from Plutarch’s
and Cavafy’s which emphasize the extreme manifestations
of grief on her part. I quote “Antony’s Ending” in full:

ΤΟ ΤΕΛΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΑΝΤΩΝΙΟΥ

Ἀλλὰ σὰν ἄκουσε ποὺ ἐκλαῖγαν οἱ γυναῖκες
καὶ γιὰ τὸ χάλι του ποὺ τὸν θρηνοῦσαν,
μὲ ἀνατολίτικες χειρονομίες ἡ κερά,

~ 645 ~
 MICHAEL PASCHALIS

κ’ ἡ δοῦλες μὲ τὰ ἑλληνικὰ τὰ βαρβαρίζοντα,

ἡ υπερηφάνεια μὲς στὴν ψυχή του
σηκώθηκεν, ἀηδίασε τὸ ἰταλικό του αἷμα,
καὶ τὸν ἐφάνηκαν ξένα κι ἀδιάφορα
αὐτά ποὺ ὣς τότε λάτρευε τυφλὰ —
ὅλ’ ἡ παράφορη Ἀλεξανδρεινὴ ζωή του —
κ’ είπε “Να μην τον κλαίνε. Δεν ταιριάζουν τέτοια.
Μὰ νὰ τὸν ἐξυμνοῦνε πρέπει μᾶλλον,
ποὺ ἐστάθηκε μεγάλος ἐξουσιαστής,
κι ἀπέκτησε τόσ’ ἀγαθὰ καὶ τόσα.
Και τώρα ἂν ἔπεσε, δὲν πέφτει ταπεινά,
ἀλλά Pωμαῖος ἀπὸ Pωμαῖο νικημένο[ς]”.

ANTONY’S ENDING
But when he heard the women weeping,
lamenting his sorry state—
madam with her oriental gestures
and her slaves with their barbarized Greek—
the pride in his soul rose up,
his Italian blood sickened with disgust
and all he had worshipped blindly till then—
his passionate Alexandrian life—
now seemed dull and alien.
And he told them “to stop weeping for him,
that kind of thing was all wrong.
They ought to be singing his praises
for having been a great ruler,
so rich in worldly goods.
And if he’d fallen now, he hadn’t fallen humbly,
but as a Roman vanquished by a Roman.”

Cavafy retains and colors what he found in Plutarch con-

cerning Cleopatra’s gestures of grief: he calls them “ori-
ental”, refers disparagingly to the queen of Egypt as “ἡ
κερά”, and adds the “barbarized Greek” of her two female
slaves. The whole spectacle provokes Antony’s disgust and
awakens in him the consciousness of his Italian (Roman)

~ 646 ~
PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE

identity. He ends up renouncing his former “passionate Al-

exandrian life”, which suddenly becomes “dull and alien” to
him.
Antony’s last words in Cavafy therefore acquire a com-
pletely different meaning from the one they have in Shake-
speare, where the Roman general with his final breaths begs
the queen not to mourn his recent troubles but to think of all
the good fortune he had enjoyed in his life and count him
happy, and furthermore to consider that he has fallen in a
noble and valiant manner. Critics have expressed diametri-
cally opposite views as regards the Shakespearean Antony’s
dying moments9 but this issue goes beyond the scope of my
paper.
The question of Antony’s identity became crucial for
Cavafy. Apparently he was not at all content with his “Ro-
man” palinode in the unpublished “Antony’s Ending” and so
four years later he proceeded to compose an entirely differ-

9
. Scott (1983: 25): “Thus Antony dies unsure and deluded, con-
juring up only the glory of his past in the face of present misery:
[…] Such a change was brought about by the incompatibility of
the protagonists' allegiances to their varying deities, love and war.
Thus his death seals a complex theatrical image. In her distress,
Cleopatra hardly allows Antony a word, crying out her love for
him; but it is a shout of impotence.” Wine (1987: 51): “Antony
has always been generous, but never more so than here: his final
thoughts are about Cleopatra’s ‘honour’ and ‘safety’ (45-6). His
‘former fortunes’ are recalled as much to comfort Cleopatra as to
set the record straight. To the end, Antony loves without regret,
and yet in death he achieves greatness as a Roman. Dying in Cle-
opatra's arms, he reconciles the two worlds, Rome and Egypt, as in
life he could not.” Bloom & Heims (2008: 193): “Because Cleo-
patra is too frightened to leave her monument, Antony must be
hauled up to her, slowly and unceremoniously, with ropes. He
finds it almost impossible to make the queen listen to his dying
words, so obsessed is she with her tirade against fortune and Octa-
vius. The advice he gives her to trust Proculeius is, characteristi-
cally, misguided. With a last attempt which, under the circum-
stances, seems pathetic rather than convincing, to reestablish his
heroic identity as “the greatest prince o’ the world...a Roman, by a
Roman valiantly vanquish’d,” he expires in his destroyer’s arms.”

~ 647 ~
 MICHAEL PASCHALIS

ent version of his death, the poem entitled “The God For-
sakes Antony” (“Ἀπολείπειν ὁ θεὸς Αντώνιον”). This is also
a palinode but an inverse one, and that in a twofold sense: as
regards Antony whose rejected “Alexandrian” identity and
“passionate Alexandrian life” are now reaffirmed; and as
regards the poet who retracts Antony’s earlier “Roman”
ending. In “The God Forsakes Antony” Cavafy distances
himself from both Plutarch, who is highly critical of Anto-
ny’s relationship with Cleopatra, his way of life and his
manner of death, as well as from Shakespeare who in Anto-
ny and Cleopatra paints the portrait of his decline.
For the later Marc Antony portrait Cavafy turned again
to Plutarch for inspiration by simply moving two chapters
back in his biography (from 77.5-7 to 75.4-6). We are still in
Alexandria on the eve of Antony’s final clash with the
forces of Octavian. Antony has decided to seek a glorious
death in battle and is giving his grieving friends a farewell
consolation dinner. Plutarch adds the following striking pas-
sage:
ἐν ταύτηι τῆι νυκτὶ λέγεται μεσούσηι σχεδόν, ἐν ἡσυχίαι καὶ
κατηφείαι τῆς πόλεως διὰ φόβον καὶ προσδοκίαν τοῦ μέλ-
λοντος οὔσης, αἰφνίδιον ὀργάνων τε παντοδαπῶν ἐμμελεῖς
φωνὰς ἀκουσθῆναι καὶ βοὴν ὄχλου μετ’ εὐασμῶν καὶ πη-
δήσεων σατυρικῶν, ὥσπερ θιάσου τινὸς οὐκ ἀθορύβως
ἐξελαύνοντος· εἶναι δὲ τὴν ὁρμὴν ὁμοῦ τι διὰ τῆς πόλεως
μέσης ἐπὶ τὴν πύλην ἔξω τὴν τετραμμένην πρὸς τοὺς πολε-
μίους, καὶ ταύτηι τὸν θόρυβον ἐκπεσεῖν πλεῖστον γενόμε-
νον. ἐδόκει δὲ τοῖς ἀναλογιζομένοις τὸ σημεῖον ἀπολείπειν
ὁ θεὸς Ἀντώνιον, ὧι μάλιστα συνεξομοιῶν καὶ συνοικειῶν
ἑαυτὸν διετέλεσεν.

That evening, so the story goes, about the hour of mid-

night, when all was hushed and a mood of dejection and fear
of its impending fate brooded over the whole city, suddenly
a marvelous sound of music was heard, which seemed to
come from a consort of instruments of every kind, and
voices chanting in harmony, and at the same time the shout-

~ 648 ~
PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE

ing of a crowd in which the cry of Bacchanals and the ec-

static leaping of satyrs were mingled, as if a troop of revel-
lers were leaving the city, shouting and singing as they
went. The procession seemed to follow a course through the
middle of the city towards the outer gate, which led to the
enemy’s camp, and at this point the sounds reached their
climax and then died away. Those who tried to discover a
meaning for this prodigy concluded that the god Dionysus,
with whom Antony had associated and whom he had sought
above all to imitate, was now abandoning him.10

Liminal situations are a key feature of Cavafy’s poetics

and in the event reported by Plutarch the poet must have
detected an almost ideal spatiotemporal and thematic transi-
tion: the middle of night; the last dinner in which the uncer-
tain outcome of the next day and Antony’s survival are
dominant topics; Alexandria in a state of anxious expecta-
tion; and Dionysus with his thiasos abandoning the city (an
event in progress which became also the title of the poem,
something frequent in Cavafy).
Alexandria or Rome? East or West? Dionysus, the god “to
whom Antony always most likened and attached himself”,
was pointing to a way of life that was now coming to end;
and Antony’s realization, in the farewell speech to his
friends, that “there was no better death for him than that by
battle” (75.1 τοῦ διὰ μάχης οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτῶι βελτίων
θάνατος) was pointing in the opposite direction. Cavafy was
obsessed with historical accuracy and therefore he could not
have made Antony choose the “East” in spite of Plutarch’s
account. So he simply ignored Antony’s farewell speech;
and while he built his poem exclusively on the Plutarchan
scene with the dionysiac thiasos departing from the city, he
did not directly involve Antony with it but constructed a set-

10
. Translated by Scott-Kilvert & Pelling (2010).

~ 649 ~
 MICHAEL PASCHALIS

ting in which he invited Antony to remain faithful to the end

to “Alexandria” and his former way of life:11

ΑΠΟΛΕΙΠΕΙΝ Ο ΘΕΟΣ ΑΝΤΩΝΙΟΝ

Σὰν ἔξαφνα ὥρα μεσάνυχτ’ ἀκουσθεῖ
ἀόρατος θίασος νὰ περνᾶ
μὲ μουσικὲς ἐξαίσιες, μὲ φωνὲς —
τὴν τύχη σου ποῦ ἐνδίδει πιά, τὰ ἔργα σου
ποῦ ἀπέτυχαν, τὰ σχέδια τῆς ζωῆς σου
ποῦ βγῆκαν ὅλα πλάνες μὴ ἀνοφέλετα θρηνήσεις.
Σὰν ἕτοιμος ἀπὸ καιρό, σὰ θαρραλέος,
ἀποχαιρέτα την, τὴν Ἀλεξάνδρεια ποῦ φεύγει.
Πρὸ πάντων νὰ μὴ γελασθεῖς, μὴν πεῖς πῶς ἦταν
ἕνα ὄνειρο, πῶς ἀπατήθηκεν ἡ ἀκοή σου∙
μάταιες ἐλπίδες τέτοιες μὴν καταδεχθεῖς.
Σὰν ἕτοιμος ἀπὸ καιρὸ, σὰ θαρραλέος,
σὰν ποῦ ταιριάζει σε ποῦ ἀξιώθηκες μιὰ τέτοια πόλι,
πλησίασε σταθερά πρὸς τὸ παράθυρο,
κι ἄκουσε μὲ συγκίνησιν, ἀλλ’ ὄχι
μὲ τῶν δειλῶν τὰ παρακάλια καὶ παράπονα,
ὡς τελευταία ἀπόλαυσι τοὺς ἤχους,
τὰ ἐξαίσια ὄργανα τοῦ μυστικοῦ θιάσου,
κι ἀποχαιρέτα την, τὴν Ἀλεξάνδρεια ποῦ χάνεις.

ΤΗΕ GOD FORSAKES ΑΝΤΟΝΥ

When suddenly, at the midnight hour
an invisible company is heard going past,
with exquisite music, with voices —
your fate that’s giving in now, your deeds
that failed, your life’s plans that proved to be
all illusions, do not needlessly lament.
As one long since prepared, as one courageous,
bid farewell to the Alexandria that’s leaving.

11
. On all of the above see Paschalis (2015) in general and 72-74
on the poems concerning Antony. The text and translation are
from Hirst & Sachperoglou (2007).

~ 650 ~
PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE

Above all, don’t be misled, don’t say it was

a dream, that your ears deceived you;
don’t deign to foster such vain hopes.
As one long since prepared, as one courageous,
as befits you who were deemed worthy of such a city,
move with steady steps toward the window
and listen with deepest feeling, yet not
with a coward’s entreaties and complaints,
listen as an ultimate delight to the sounds,
to the exquisite instruments of the mystical company,
and bid farewell to the Alexandria you are losing.

The liminal circumstances of Plutarch’s passage, with the

thiasos moving at midnight across the city and the sounds
dying down as they are coming to the gates, are enriched in
Cavafy’s poem. Antony is depicted inside the palace listen-
ing to the sounds of the thiasos and is invited to approach
the window; and is caught in a situation when he savors the
last moments of his “Alexandrian way of life”.12
It is universally agreed that Cavafy transformed a mere
report based on the ancient belief that a defeated city is
abandoned by its gods into a memorable poetic composition.
Shakespeare chose to dilute Plutarch’s passage into a con-
versation among soldiers on watch outside the royal palace,
dismissed all other features of the thiasos retaining only the
(oboe) music heard from under the stage, and most im-
portantly substituted Hercules for Dionysus (4.3.10-20):
Music of the hautboys is under the stage
SECOND SOLDIER. Peace! What noise?
FIRST SOLDIER. List, list!
SECOND SOLDIER.
Hark!
FIRST SOLDIER. Music i’th’air.
THIRD SOLDIER. Under the earth.
FOURTH SOLDIER.

12
. See Paschalis (2015: 72-74).

~ 651 ~
 MICHAEL PASCHALIS

It signs well, does it not?

THIRD SOLDIER. No.
FIRST SOLDIER. Peace, I say!
What should this mean?
SECOND SOLDIER.
’Tis the god Hercules, whom Antony loved,
Now leaves him.
FIRST SOLDIER. Walk, let’s see if other watchmen
Do hear what we do.
SECOND SOLDIER. How now, masters!
ALL (speaking together) How, now!
How now! Do you hear this?
FIRST SOLDIER. Ay. Is’t not strange?
THIRD SOLDIER.
Do you hear, masters? Do you hear?
FIRST SOLDIER.
Follow the noise so far as we have quarter.
Let’s see how it will give off.
ALL. Content. ’Tis strange.
Exeunt

Antony’s association with Hercules is mentioned already

in Plutarch (4.1-4) and in Shakespeare he is referred to as a
“Herculean Roman” (1.3.84). Furthermore the play includes
an allusion to the story of Hercules and Omphale (4.5.21-3)
and another one to the story of Deianira’s poisoned shirt
(4.12.42-7). A lot has been written about the association
with Hercules, some unfavorable and other favorable to An-
tony. Eugene Waith has argued that, like Hercules, Antony
is a paradoxical figure: he is unmanned by a powerful wom-
an, he is bigger than life and is one who loses and recovers
his honor.13 The important thing for my topic is that Cavafy
did not turn for inspiration to Shakespeare, who had trans-
ferred to Hercules the scene with the musical thiasos cross-

13
. Waith (1962: 112–43); further on Antony and Hercules see
Scott (1983: 22-4) and Deats (2004: 29-30).

~ 652 ~
PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE

ing Alexandria at midnight and forsaking Antony (even the

association of Hercules with oboe music has been deemed
incongruous) but reconfigured the Plutarchan passage in a
way that retains the allusion to Dionysus.14
In conclusion, comparing isolated passages (Cavafy,
“Antony’s Ending” 10-15 with Shakespeare, Antony and
Cleopatra 4.16.53-61) instead of contexts has led to the mis-
taken impression that Cavafy’s source-text is Shakespeare
while in fact it is Plutarch’s Life of Antony 77.7. There is
nothing particularly Shakespearean in Cavafy’s passage,
which on the contrary has retained a verbal reminiscence
from the Greek text.15 Cavafy’s dependence on Plutarch be-
comes clear if one compares the whole poem with Life of
Antony 77.5-7 in contrast with Antony and Cleopatra
4.16.42-61; and furthermore if one examines “God Forsakes
Antony” –a companion piece to “Antony’s Ending” and in-
deed a palinode retracting it– where Cavafy was clearly and
unequivocally inspired by an earlier chapter of the Life of
Antony adapted by Shakespeare in an entirely different
manner. In all instances where Cavafy reworks passages
from Plutarch he deals directly with the Greek text and even
quotes from it, and he may even “correct” the information
the Greek author provides;16 by contrast Shakespeare deals
with North’s translation and as a rule he reproduces its er-
rors. Regardless of Cavafy’s and Shakespeare’s independent
reworking of Plutarch, knowledgeable readers may pause to
reflect on Cavafy’s adaptations of scenes from Plutarch’s
Life of Antony and Life of Caesar when coming across

14
. See Pelling (1988: 303-4).
15
. The line “ποὺ ἐστάθηκε μεγάλος ἐξουσιαστής” renders Plu-
tarch’s πλεῖστον ἰσχύσας.
16
. For instance in the “Alexandrian Kings” he attributes the title
“King of Kings” not to Alexander and Ptolemy, Antony’s younger
sons by Cleopatra, as Plutarch does (Life of Antony 54.7), but to
Caesarion, the presumed son of Julius Caesar, as Dio Cassius
does. The poet’s preference for Caesarion was conditioned by the
latter’s adolescence and tragic fate.

~ 653 ~
 MICHAEL PASCHALIS

Shakespeare’s adaptations of the same in Antony and Cleo-

patra and Julius Caesar, and vice versa.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bloom, H. & N. Heims (2008), Antony and Cleopatra, New
York.
Bullough, G. (1977), Narrative and Dramatic Sources of
Shakespeare, vol. 5, London and New York.
Burrow, C. (2013), Shakespeare and Classical Antiquity,
Oxford.
Deats, S. M. (2004), “Shakespeare’s Anamorphic Drama: A
Survey of Antony and Cleopatra in Criticism, on Stage,
and on Screen”, in S. M. Deats (ed.), Antony and Cleo-
patra: New Critical Essays, New York and London, 1-
93.
Dimiroulis, D. (2015), Κ. Π. Καβάφης, Τα ποιήματα. Δη-
μοσιευμένα και Αδημοσίευτα, Athens.
Hirst, A. & E. Sachperoglou (2007), C. P. Cavafy: The Col-
lected Poems, Oxford.
Jowett, J. et al. (2005), The Oxford Shakespeare: The Com-
plete Works, 2nd edition, Oxford.
Gillespie, S. (2001), Shakespeare’s Books: A Dictionary of
Shakespeare Sources, London.
Keeley, E. & P. Sherrard (1992), C. P. Cavafy: Collected
Poems, edited by George Savidis, revised edition, Prince-
ton.
Martindale, C. & A. B. Taylor (2004), Shakespeare and the
Classics, Cambridge and New York.
North, T. Sir, (1895), Plutarch’s Lives of the Noble Gre-
cians and Romanes Englished by Sir Thomas North anno
1579, with an Introduction by George Wyndham, 6 vols.,
London.
Paschalis, M. (1997), “Οι πηγές δύο καβαφικών ποιημάτων:
‘Ο Θεόδοτος’ και ‘Το τέλος του Αντωνίου’”, Ελληνικά
47, 131-3
Paschalis, M. (2015), “Κ. Π. Καβάφης, Η ποιητική του με-
ταιχμίου, Ποιητική 15, 63-84.

~ 654 ~
PLUTARCH’S LIFE OF ANTONY BETWEEN CAVAFY AND SHAKESPEARE

Paschalis, Μ. (2016), “‘Hunc deorum templis’. Μια έκδοση

του Καβάφη στη βάσανο της φιλολογικής κριτικής”,
Ποιητική 18, 277-90.
Pelling, C. B. R. (1988), Plutarch: Life of Antony, Cam-
bridge.
Pontani, F. M. (1991), Επτά δοκίμια και μελετήματα για τον
Καβάφη (1936-1974), Athens.
Savidis, G. P. (1977), Κ. Π. Καβάφη ανέκδοτα ποιήματα
(1882-1923), Athens.
Savidis, G. P. (1991), Κ. Π. Καβάφη. Τα ποιήματα, 2 vols.,
Athens.
Scott, M. (1983), Antony and Cleopatra: Text and Perfor-
mance, Houndmills, Basingstoke and London.
Scott-Kilvert, I. & C. Pelling (2010), Rome in Crisis: Nine
Lives by Plutarch, London and New York.
Tilley, A. (1904), The Literature of the French Renaissance,
vol. 1, Cambridge.
Waith, E. M. (1962), The Herculean Hero in Marlowe,
Chapman, Shakespeare, and Dryden, New York.
Wine, M. (1987), Antony and Cleopatra by William Shake-
speare, Houndmills, Basingstoke and London.

~ 655 ~