Author Stacy Schiff tells us right off the bat that an accurate, complete biography of Cleopatra is just about impossible because of the lack of contemporary documentary evidence. So, a lot of this book is a compare-and-contrast of other historians' viewpoints (many of which are in the vein of "let's undercut the woman, the powerful, wealthy ruler, and paint her as a sexual conniver" - a huge disservice to Caesar and Mark Antony). For too long, history has been controlled by and told by men, but Cleopatra forces us to see otherwise.

The kingdom of Egypt at the beginning of Cleopatra's reign was an wealthy, educated, and generally prosperous land. The city of Alexandria seemed to have surpassed Rome in terms of cultural development. Egypt's riches (spices, gemstones, gold, warships) naturally drew quarreling (and perpetually broke) Roman leaders.

As Schiff points out, Cleopatra must have realized it was in her -- and her kingdom's -- best interests to make strategic alliances, and achieve the backing rather than the enmity of Rome. The Ptolemy family history was full of fratricide (and sororicide), so Cleopatra had no illusions about the costs of maintaining power.

It's not an overstatement to say that her tragic death changed Roman history. Octavian (Augustus), who vanquished Mark Antony and Cleopatra to become the first emperor of the Roman Empire, could not have attained his many achievements without the riches he amassed from Egypt.

This book is a historical biography, and not biographical fiction. (For the latter, I recommend [b:The Memoirs of Cleopatra|8171985|The Memoirs of Cleopatra|Margaret George|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51MlCvfOdEL.SL75.jpg|12852].)