UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Cleopatra I, the first female Ptolemaic regent: her predecessors, policies, and precedents Wong, Julia K.W. 1998

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1998-0664.pdf [ 9.84MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0088494.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0088494-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0088494-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0088494-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0088494-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0088494-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0088494-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0088494-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0088494.ris

Full Text

CLEOPATRA I. THE FIRST FEMALE PTOLEMAIC REGENT: HER PREDECESSORS. POLICIES. AND PRECEDENTS by JULIA K.W. WONG B.A. (HON.), University of Calgary, 1995 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Classics We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1998 © Julia K.W. Wong, 1998  In  presenting  degree freely  at  the  available  copying  of  department publication  this  of  in  partial  fulfilment  University  of  British  Columbia,  for  this or  thesis  reference  thesis by  this  for  his thesis  and  scholarly  or for  her  of  The University of British Vancouver, Canada  DE-6 (2/88)  Columbia  I  I further  purposes  gain  the  shall  requirements  agree  that  agree  may  representatives.  financial  permission.  Department  study.  of  be  It not  is  that  the  Library  an  granted  by  allowed  advanced  shall  permission for  understood be  for  the that  without  make  it  extensive  head  of  my  copying  or  my  written  11  ABSTRACT  The concept of woman-power existing in the highest circles of society in the Mediterranean world is proven, through a detailed study of the career of Cleopatra I. Cleopatra I, daughter of the Seleucid king, Antiochus III, wife of the Ptolemaic king, Ptolemy V, and mother of the Ptolemaic king, Ptolemy VI, became thefirstfemale regent in the Hellenistic period.  Her regency was a crucial precedent for her female  descendants, who all became joint co-rulers with their husbands and enjoyed much greater powers than any other queens before them. The difficulty of this study was in the lack of sources. Virtually nothing is known about Cleopatra I's career and queenship, which, as a result, required a thorough discussion of not only her predecessors and their precedents, but also her own policies and precedents. The thesis is divided into five chapters and fifteen appendices, the last six appendices serving as a sourcebook.  Chapter One describes in detail the immense  influence of the Ptolemaic ministers and their oligarchic faction at the court, especially during the reigns of the weaker Ptolemaic kings before Cleopatra I's time, and. However, as influential as these powerful Ptolemaic ministers were, a strong monarch, such as Cleopatra I, was able to suppress their large influence on the monarchy. Having suppressed the influential ministers at the court, Cleopatra I utilised another group of courtiers. These courtiers, eunuchs, came from her own retinue and are the focus of Chapter Two.  This chapter documents the introduction and institutionalisation of  eunuchs into the Ptolemaic court by Cleopatra I. Much as Cleopatra I's descendants had to rely on her precedents to gain influence and power at the Ptolemaic court, Chapter Three looks at Cleopatra I's three most influential and important predecessors, Arsinoe II,  Ill  Arsinoe III, and Hatshepsut.  These three queens were vital to Cleopatra Fs future  success, since each contributed greatly to Cleopatra Fs acceptance and appointment as thefirstfemale Ptolemaic regent. The last two chapters of the thesis focus on Cleopatra I.  Chapter Four discusses extensively the greater rights and privileges Cleopatra I  enjoyed when viewed as the Pharaoh's Wife. However, even with these increased rights, Cleopatra I failed to be recognised and acknowledged any differently than her predecessors had. It is in the last chapter, Chapter Five, that Cleopatra Fs power and influence at the court become manifest.  This chapter discusses in what areas of the  queenship Cleopatra I, during her regency, established new precedents and how her precedents and policies affected royal women not only in her own Ptolemaic kingdom, but also all over the Mediterranean.  T A B L E OF C O N T E N T S  Abstract Abbreviations List of Tables List of Maps and Illustrations List of Appendices  11  Introduction  1  Chapter One. Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families 1.1 Family Connections 1.1.1 Sosibius 1.1.2 Agathocles 1.2 Other Prominent Families 1.2.1 Tlepolemus 1.2.2 Aristomenes 1.2.3 Poly crates 1.2.4 Philammon 1.3 Cleopatra Fs Relationship with These Significant Families 1.4 Summary  11 12 14 20 24 26 27 29 33 34 35  Chapter Two. Ptolemaic Eunuchs 2.1 Aristonicus 2.2 Eulaeus 2.3 Archias 2.4 The Regency of Eulaeus and Lenaeus 2.5 Summary  37 39 44 49 52 54  Chapter Three. Past Queens 3.1 Arsinoe II 3.2 Arsinoe III 3.3 Hatshepsut 3.4 Summary  55 57 63 66 70  Chapter Four. Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes 4.1 Titulary Evidence 4.2 Literary Evidence 4.3 Cleopatra I as the Pharaoh's Wife 4.4 Cleopatra Fs Position at the Court 4.5 Summary and Cleopatra Fs Influences  72 73 78 80 84 87  vi xi xii xiii  V  Chapter Five. Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor 5.1 Titulary Evidence 5.2 Cleopatra I and Her Portraiture 5.3 Cleopatra I's Political Position 5.4 Cleopatra I's Policies 5.5 Summary  89 90 96 100 101 104  Conclusion Bibliography Appendices  106 109 119  vi  ABBREVIATIONS ANCIENT WRITERS  Amm. Marc.  Rolfe, John C.  Appian, Syrian Wars  Broderson, Kai. Maris.  Athenaeus  Gulick, Charles Burton. Athenaeus. Classics.  Diodorus Siculus  Walton, Francis R. Classics.  Herodotus  Hude, Carolus. Herodotus. University Press.  Josephus, AJ.  Marcus, Ralph. Josephus. (1961) Loeb Classics.  Ammianus Marcellinus. Vol.1. Appians Antiochike  (1991) Munchen: Editio Vols. I-VII.  Diodorus of Sicily. Vol. XI.  Vols. I-II.  (1927) Loeb  (1946) Loeb  (1991) Great Britain: Oxford  Jewish Antiquities. Books XII-XIV.  Seel, Otto. M. Juniani Justini:  Justin  (1956) Loeb Classics.  Epitoma Historiarum Philippicarum  Pompei Trogi. (1972) Stuttgart.  Lactantius  Creed, J. L. Classics.  Livy  Moore, Frank G. Loeb Classics.  Lactantius: De mortibuspersecutorum.  Sage, Evan T. Classics.  Livy. Vol. VI (1966); VII  Livy. Vol. IX (1953); X  Sage, Evan T. and Schlesinger, A. C. Classics. Schlesinger, A. C.  Livy. Vol. XIII  Pliny, HN  Rackham,H.  Plutarch, Moralia  Babbitt, Frank.  Plutarch  Perrin, Bcrnadotte.  Polybius  Paton, W.R. Classics.  Seneca, Ep.  Gummcrc, Richard M. Seneca: Vol.111. (1917) Loeb Classics.  Strabo,  Jones, Horace L. Loeb Classics.  Geog.  (1950);  (1984) Loeb  VIII.  (1955)  (1949); XI. (1949) Loeb  Livy. Vol. XII. (1948)  Loeb  (1961); XIV. (1948) Loeb Classics.  Pliny. Natural History. Vol. IX. (1938) Plutarch. Moralia. Vol.1.  Loeb Classics.  (1960) Loeb Classics.  Plutarch's Lives. Vol.X.  (1959) Loeb Classics.  Polybius: The Histories. Vols. III-V1.  (1922) Loeb  Epistulae morales adLucilium.  The Geography ofStrabo. Vols. I-VIII.  (1959)  VI1  SECONDARY SOURCES  Alberro  Alberro, Charles A. The Alexandrian Jews During the Ptolemaic Period. Ph.D. Dissertation. (1976) Michigan State University.  Bagnall  Bagnall, Roger S. "The Adniinistration of the Ptolemaic Possessions  Bevan, Egypt  Bevan, Edwyn. A History of Egypt Under the Ptolemaic Dynasty.  Outside Egypt." Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition, Vol. IV. (1976).  (1968) Chicago: Ares Publishers, Inc.  Sevan, Seleucus  Bevan, Edwyn Robert. The House of Seleucus Vols. I-II. (1902) London: Edward Arnold.  B.G.U.  Bouche-Leclercq, Lagides  Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Koniglichen (Staatlichen Museen) zu Berlin. Vol. I-XIV. Eds. W. Schubart et al. (1895-) Berlin.  Bouche-Leclercq, A. Histoire des Lagides. Tomes 1-1V. (1903-1907) Paris.  Bouche-Leclercq, Seleucides  Bouche-Leclercq, A. Histoire des Seleucides. Tomes I-II. (19031907) Paris.  Burstein  Burstein, Stanley M. ed. The Hellenistic Age from the Battle oflpsos to the Death of Kleopatra VII. (1985) Cambridge: University Press.  CAH  Cambridge  Rostovtzeff, M. "Syria and the East." Cambridge Ancient History Vol. K//(1928), 155-196.  Carney  Carney, Elizabeth D. "The Reappearance of Royal Sibling Marriage in Ptolemaic Egypt." Parola del Passato 237 (1987), 420-439.  Cary  Cary, M. A History of the Greek World From 323 to 146 B.C. (1959) London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.  Clarysse, W. & Van Der Veken G. Clarysse, W. and Van Der Veken, G. "The Eponymous Priests of Ptolemaic Egypt." Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 24 (1983).  Davis & Kraay  Davis, Norman and Kraay, P. Frank. The Hellenistic Kingdoms: Portrait Coins and History. (1980) London: Thames and Hudson.  Fraser  Fraser, P.M. Ptolemaic Alexandria Vols.I-III. (1972) Oxford: Clarendon Press.  Grant  Grant, Michael. Cleopatra. (1972) Great Britain: Richard Clay.  Green  Green, Peter. Alexander toActium: The Historical Evolution of the Hellenistic Age. (1990) Berkeley: University of California Press.  Gruen, HW  Grucn, Erich S. The Hellenistic World and the Coming ofRome Vols.I-II. (1984) Berkeley: University of California Press.  Vlll  Guyot  Guyot, Peter. Eunuchen als Sklaven und Freigelassene in der griechisch-rdmischen Antike. (1980) Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.  Hitti  Hitti, Philip K. History of Syria. (1957) London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd.  Holbl  Holbl, Gunter. Geschichte des Ptolemderreiches. (1994) Germany: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt.  Hollcaux  Hollcaux, Maurice. Etudes D Epigraphie et d 'histoire grecques. TomesI-VI. (1968) Paris: Editions E. De Boccard.  Ijsewijn Koenen  Ijsewijn, J. De sacerdotibus sacerdotiisque Alexandri magni et Lagidarum eponymis. (1961) Brussels. Koenen, Ludwig. "The Ptolemaic King as a Religious Figure." in Images and Ideologies: Self-definition in the Hellenistic World. (1992) Berkeley, 25-115.  Liddell and Scott  Liddell, H. G. and Scott, J. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. Seventh Edition. (1992) Oxford: Clarendon Press.  Macurdy  Macurdy, Grace Harriet. Hellenistic Queens: A Study of WomanPower in Macedonia, Seleucid Syria, and Ptolemaic Egypt. (1932) Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press.  Mahaffy  Mahaffy, J. P. History ofEgypt: Ptolemaic Dynasty. Vol.IV. (1898) London: Methuen & Co.  Mflrkholm, Coinage  Mflrkholm, Otto. Early Hellenistic Coinage: From the Accession of Alexander to the Peace ofApamea (336-188 B.C.). (1991) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Mflrkholm, Eulaios andLenaios Mflrkholm, Otto. "Eulaios and Lenaios." Classica et Mediaevalia 22 (1961), 32-43.  Mflrkholm, Antiochus  Mflrkholm, Otto. "Antiochus IV of Syria." Classica et Mediaevalia Dissertationes 8 (1966) Copenhagen.  Mooren, Titulature  Mooren, Leon. TheAulic Titulature in Ptolemaic Egypt Introduction and Prosopography. (1975) Brussels: Paleis der Academien.  Mooren, Hierarchie  Mooren, Leon. "La Hierarchie de Cour Ptolemai'que." Studia Hellenistica 23 (1977) Louvain.  Mooren, Families  Mooren, Leon. "Ptolemaic Families." Scholars Press (1981) Atlanta, 289-301.  OCD  Hornblowcr, Simon and Spawforth, Antony. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Third Edition. (1996) Oxford: Oxford University Press.  OGIS  Dittenbcrger, W. Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae. (1960)  3  Germany: Georg Olms.  ix  Otto  Otto, Walter. Zur Geschichte der Zeit des 6. Ptolemaers: Ein Beitrag zur Politik undzum Staatsrecht des Hellenismus. (1934) Miinchen: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.  P. dent. BM  Catalogue of Demotic Papyri in the British Museum. Ed. S.R.K. Glanville. (1939) Oxford: Oxford University Press.  P. dem. Louvre  Papyrus demotiques du Louvre. Ed. E. Revillout. (1885) Paris.  Pestman  Pestman, P.W. Recueil de Textes Demotiques et Bilingues Vols. I-III. (1977) Belgium: E.J. Brill.  P. Lond  Greek Papyri in the British Museum. Eds. F.G. Kenyon and H.I. Bell. (1893-) London.  Pomeroy  Pomeroy, Sarah B. Women in Hellenistic Egypt: From Alexander to Cleopatra. (1984) New York: Schocken Books.  Poole  Poole, R. S. Catalogue of Greek Coins. The Ptolemies, Kings of Egypt. (1963) Bologna: Arnaldo Forni.  PP  Peremans-Van't Dack. Prosopographia Ptolemaica I-VII. (1950, 1952, 1956) Louvain.  P. Petr.  The Flinders Petrie Papyri. Vols. I-III. Eds. J.P. Mahaffy and J . G Smyly. (1891, 1893 and 1905) Dublin.  Preaux  Preaux, Claire. Le Monde Hellenistique. Tomes I-II. (1978) Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.  Quaegebeur  Quaegebeur, Jan. "Reines ptolemaiques et traditions egyptiennes." Eds. Maehler, H. and Strocka, V. M . Das ptolemaische dgypten. (1978) Mainz, 245-62.  RE  Pauly-Wissowa. Real-Encyclopadie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. (1893-1978) Stuttgart.  Robins  Robins, Gay. Women in Ancient Egypt. (1993) Cambridge: Harvard University Press.  Rostovtzeff,S£7///W  /  Rostovtzcff, M . Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World. Vols. I-III. (1941) Oxford: Clarendon Press.  Samuel  Samuel, Alan Edouard. Ptolemaic Chronology. (1962) Munich: C H . Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.  SB  Sammelbuch griechischer Urkunden aus Aegypten. Vols. 1-XV1. Eds. F. Preisigke, F. Bilabel, E . Kiessling and H.-A. Rupprecht. (1915-) Leipzig and Weisbaden.  Skcat  Skcat, T.C. "The Reigns of the Ptolemies." Munchner Beitrage zur Papyrusforschung undAntiken Rechtsgeschichte 39 (1969).  Strack  Strack, Max L. Die Dynastie der Ptolemaer. (1897) Berlin: Verlag von Wilheim Hertz.  X  SyU.  Dittcnbergcr, W. Sylloge inscriptionum Graecarum Third Edition.  Tarn  Tarn,W. W. The Greeks in Bactria and India. (1951) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Taubenschlag  Taubenschlag, Raphael. The Law of Greco-Roman Egypt in the Light  Thompson  Thompson, Dorothy Burr. Ptolemaic Oinochoai and Portraits in Faience: Aspects of the Ruler-Cult. (1973) Oxford: Clarendon Press.  Troy  Troy, Lana. "Patterns of Queenship." Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis 14  Tyldesley  Tyldesley, Joyce. Daughters of Isis. Women of Ancient Egypt. (1994) England: Penguin Books Ltd.  Walbank  Walbank, F. W. A Historical Commentary on Polybius. Vols. II-III.  Watterson  Watterson, Barbara. Women in Ancient Egypt. (1991) New York:  Wells  Wells, Evelyn. Hatshepsut. (1969) N.Y.: Doubleday & Company,  Whitehorne  Whitehorne, John. Cleopatras. (1994) London: Routledge.  Will  Will, Edouard. Histoire Politique du Monde Hellenistique. Tomes I-II. (1967) Nancy: University of Nancy.  3  (1977) New York: George Olms.  of the Papyri, 332 B.C. -640 A.D. (1955) Warsaw: Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.  (1986).  (1984, 1979) Oxford: Clarendon Press.  St. Martin's Press.  Inc.  xi LIST OF T A B L E S  1. Family of Sosibius, son of Dioscurides  15  2. Family of Agathocles*  21  3. Tleopolemus, son of Artapates UI  26  4. Aristomenes, son of Menneas  28  5. Family of Mnasiadas, son of Polycrates  32  6. Philammon*  33  7. Aristonicus*, First Palace Eunuch  41  8. Eulaeus*  45  9. Archias*  49  10. Eunuchs in the Service of the Ptolemies  51  11. Titulary Titles of Cleopatra I During the Reign of Ptolemy V  74  12. Titulature During the Rule of Cleopatra I and Ptolemy VI  92  13. Titulature After Cleopatra I's Death  96  A.  Family of Ptolemy, son of Agesarchos  129  B.  Family of Pelops, son of Alexander  131  C.  Family of Hippalos, son of Hippalos  132  D.  Family of Noumenios, son of Herakleodoros  134  E.  Ptolemy*  134  F.  Family of Cineas*  135  G.  Family of Comanus, son of Drimylos  136  ,  * Patronymic unclear or unknown.  xii LIST OF MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS  1. Coins of Arsinoe II, Cleopatra I, and Cleopatra III  99  A. Map of Egypt  124  B. Map of Alexander the Great's Empire  125  C. Map of the Successor States  126  D. Map of Alexandria  127  xiii LIST OF APPENDICES  A. Genealogical Tree of the Early Ptolemies and the Early Seleucidsto 176 B.C.  119  B. The King Lists  120  C. Events  122  D. Maps  124  E. Important Ministers and Court Figures at the Ptolemaic Court  128  F. Other Prominent Families  129  G. Members of Prominent Families During the Reign of Eulaeus andLenaeus  132  H. Livy, xxxviii.9-11  138  I.  139  Farnese Cup  AA. Ptolemy IV Philopator  141  BB. Ptolemy V Epiphanes  146  CC. Cleopatra I  151  DD. Ptolemy VI Philometor  154  EE. Sosibius  157  FF. Agathocles  160  Introduction  1  The Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt was one legacy of Alexander the Great's vast conquests , although Alexander had never intended that it be divided up like booty 1  between his successors. Ptolemy I, one of Alexander's SidSoxoi, established one of the most successful and wealthy absolute monarchies of the Hellenistic period, and founded a dynasty lasting close to three hundred years.  One factor contributing greatly to the  kingdom's longevity was Ptolemy I's successes in establishing a modus vivendi between the monarchy and its varied subjects . On the one hand, he had easily won the loyalty of 2  his Greco-Macedonian subjects through his connection to Alexander the Great and his Macedonian lineage. On the other hand, he had gained the support of the indigenous people through his patronage of their native religion and institutions , which led to his 3  acceptance by the Egyptian priesthood and his recognition as Pharaoh . The necessity of 4  maintaining this balanced relationship between monarch and subjects, Greco-Macedonian and Egyptian, remained a serious concern for each Ptolemaic ruler and determined their success or failure as a ruler. The inability of a Ptolemaic ruler to control, assimilate, and appease his subjects resulted in civil unrest and revolt within the kingdom. Rebellion  At tlie time of Alexander the Great's death in 323 B.C. his empire stretched eastward from Macedonia encompassing the entire Achaemenid Empire to the Indus and southward into Egypt (cf. Appendix D , Map B "Alexander the Great's Empire" and Map C "Map of the Successor States"). In the Hellenistic period, the subjects of the Ptolemies consisted of an indigenous Egyptian population, emigrant Greeks, Jews, and other minorities: "6 yovv LJoXvBiog yeyovcog ev rfj KOXEI BSeXvrrsrai rr\v rors xardaraaiv, Kcci q>i]ui rpia yevn rf\v noXiv OIKEIV, ro TE Aiyv/rnov Kai imxcbpiov ipvXov, 6q"v Kai dnoXiriKov, Kai ro pio8o<popiKov, Bapb Kai KOXV Kai dvdycoyov el; eOovg yap naXaiov Igevovg irpe<pov rovg ra onXa ixovtag, dpxeivpaXXov t'j dpxeoQai SeSiSaypevovg Sid n)v rav BaaiXecov ovdeveiav rpirov 5' TJV yevog ro rwv 'AXe^avSpecov, ovd' avrd evKpivwg noXiriKov Sid rag avrdg airiag, Kpeirrov 8' EKEIVCOV opcog- Kai yap ei piydSsg, "EXXnvsg opcog dvsKaffev fjoav Kai dpepvTjvTo rov KOIVOV rav 'EXXXi\vcov edovg" (Strabo, Geog., 17.1.12). Cf. Bevan, Egypt, Fraser passim, and Appendix D, Map D "Map of Alexandria". 1  2  Bevan, Egypt, 188. Essentially, the native Egyptians were bound to work for the Ptolemaic king whether as royal peasants or as 'tax-payers'. The priesthood formed the only privileged class of the natives enjoying freedom from compulsory labour, allowance of retaining certain privileges of self-government, and independence in their professional businesses (cf. Rostovlzeff, SEHIilV, 317ff). Cf. also Rostovtzeff, SEHHW, 267ff. 3  4  Introduction  2  largely originated in the Thebaid where native Egyptians tried to reclaim the Egyptian 5  throne from the "foreign" Ptolemies and return the monarchy back to the "rightful kings": the last line of Egyptian kings who resided in the Thebaid region . An even greater cause 6  of concern for the Ptolemaic monarchy was the constant civil unrest within its new capital, Alexandria, where the Alexandrian populace acted much like the Praetorian Guard of Imperial Rome, making and breaking rulers .  One such serious incident  resulted in the Bacchante-like slaughter of Ptolemy V ' s ministers, Sosibius and Agathocles in 202 B.C., by the Alexandrian mob .  Satisfying the interests of the  Egyptian, Greco-Macedonian subjects, and the mixed Alexandrian populace was a difficult problem, but was eventually achieved not by a Ptolemaic king, but by a Ptolemaic queen, Cleopatra I.  I believe that her unprecedented regency was a  combination of not only her own forethought but also the existence of "ideal 9  conditions". "A woman's power has heretofore in the history of these houses always come from overpowering strength of character, combined with weakness in her husband's personality" or from the position of regent for a minor son. The queenship of Cleopatra Ifrom her prestige as a Seleucid princess, with a claim of some sort on Coele-Syria, her wealth and the vigour of her nature, together 10  Cf. Appendix D, Map A "Map of Egypt". The last Egyptian Pharaohs, Harmachis and Anchmachis, ruled the Thebaid from 199-186 B . C . On the native revolts in the Thebaid region, cf. Peremans, W. "Die Amtsmilibrauche im ptolemaischen Agypten." in Korruption im Altertum Konstanzer Symposium Oktober 1979. Ed. W. Schuller. (1982) Miinchen, 103117. The Praetorian Guard of the Roman Empire from A.D. 41 onwards, in Claudius' reign, were crucial to the political intrigues of the emperor and only supported Claudius after he bribed them with a large donative. After murdering the Empire's successor, Pertinax, in A.D. 193, the Praetorian Guard became so powerful that it determined which leader would become their next emperor (cf. CAH VII, OCD ). This upheaval was the first instance of open hostility towards a palace group, in this case, the ministers: "Its importance lies in the fact that now for the first time, so far as we know, the lower element of the population, in this case no doubt largely Egyptian, was able to express its own strength" (Fraser, 118). Cleopatra I realised a compromise was needed to be made between her Greek and Egyptian subjects. This compromise saw the continuation of some Greco-Macedonian customs, but also the institutionalisation of Egyptian traditions as well. Macurdy is referring to the Hellenistic royal houses of the Macedonians, Syrians, and Ptolemies. Macurdy has placed Ptolemy II and Ptolemy IV into this category5  6  7  3  8  1 0  11  Introduction  3  with the fact that she was regent, does mark an epoch in the history of women's power in Ptolemaic Egypt. " n  Cleopatra I was the daughter of Antiochus (III) the Great; a Seleucid king , and 13  14  Laodice , daughter of Mithridates II of Cappadocia. 15  She became the first "foreign"  Ptolemaic queen when she was given to Ptolemy V in marriage (193 B.C.) . 16  As a  foreign queen in the Ptolemaic kingdom she had many social and political obstacles to overcome. For instance, her Syrian background may have posed the greatest danger to her and also to the legitimacy of her offspring, since relations between the Seleucids and the Ptolemies were never truly amicable . 17  Furthermore, she also had to deal with  various elements of the Ptolemaic court: the ministers, who came from the most prominent aristocratic families, the royal bodyguard, the avvrpocpoi of the king, and her varied subjects (Greco-Macedonians, Egyptians, and Jews). Each of these groups posed a potential threat to her position. Despite this opposition, her exploitation of the strengths and weaknesses of the Ptolemaic monarchic structure, I believe, was one of the main reasons for her later success, her prototypical and unprecedented regency. However, for Cleopatra I, the first Ptolemaic queen to become the regent of Egypt, simply gaining the support of the largest faction, the native Egyptians, does not justify and explain her  Macurdy, 47. P P VI.\45\5; RE 11 (1922), coll. 738-740, no. 14; and Macurdy, 141-147. Cf. Appendix B, "Seleucid King List". A powerful Seleucid queen in her own right. One indication of her political power is found in an inscription (SEG 26.1226), which shows her communicating to her cities by letter, much like the governors of satrapies would. There is also mention in this inscription of her funding subsidies during times of crisis either from her own resources or from the crown resources (cf. OCD , "Laodice [3]"). Cleopatra I was not connected in any way to the Ptolemaic house. Cf. Appendix A, "Genealogical Tree". The hostility of Ptolemaic Egypt towards the Seleucid Empire was part of the traditional Ptolemaic foreign policy and the policy of virtually all of the Ptolemaic ministers (like Polycrates, one of Ptolemy V Epiphanes' last ministers, before the influx of pro-Seleucid sympathies accompanying Cleopatra Fs regency. (Cf. Will, 1.133-186.) 1 2  1 3  14  1 5  3  1 6  17  Introduction  4  success, her new institutions, and the power she possessed and passed onto her progeny. Thus, every element of the court and of the kingdom must be considered. The aim of this study is, therefore, twofold. The first three chapters will examine the different institutions and individuals that influenced and made possible Cleopatra I becoming the first independent queen to rule Ptolemaic Egypt. The second aim of this study is to show what lasting impact Cleopatra I's regency had on the different aspects of the Hellenistic world, but mainly on future Ptolemaic institutions and policies.  In  particular, the most evident and lasting impact of Cleopatra I's prototypical reign is reflected in the changed political position, power, and potential of the Ptolemaic queens after her reign. Although her most famous successor was Cleopatra VII, the effects of Cleopatra I's reign were already apparent in the case of her immediate successor, Cleopatra II , and in respect to Cleopatra III , whose recognised independent power 18  19  lasted longer than any other Ptolemaic queen before her. Although the influence of Cleopatra I's regency radically changed the Ptolemaic power structure, the effect of her reign on other Hellenistic dynasties was also very noteworthy, including that on her own native Seleucid kingdom. During the second century B.C., Cleopatra Thea, daughter of  Cleopatra II ruled together with a Ptolemaic king, Ptolemy VI, from 180-145 B.C. (cf. Appendix B , "Ptolemaic K i n g List"). She was the first of the Hellenistic queens to achieve a recognised political equality with die king (cf. Appendix H ; OCD , 346-347; Macurdy, 1501T.; and Strack, 32ff. and 75). Cleopatra III ruled jointly in Alexandria from 116-101 B.C. (cf. Appendix B , "Ptolemaic K i n g List"). Although her reign was shorter than Cleopatra II's, she had a greater impact on Ptolemaic matters. Macurdy (161) calls her "the most dominating of the Macedonian-Hellenistic Queens". Some of the most significant lasting impressions of her reign was that, like Cleopatra I, her name preceded Ptolemy IX's in the dating formula (OGIS 167, 738, 739) and in 105/4 B.C. she, instead of the king, served as priest in the royal cult (OCD , 347). Her dominance and control of matters is perhaps best summarised by Justin (xxxix.4.6): "She richly deserved her infamous death - she had driven her own mother from her marriage bed, made two daughters husbandless by marrying them to their brothers in turn, made war on one son after driving him into exile and treacherously plotted the death of the other after robbing him of his throne" (Yardley, J.C. Justin: Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus. [1994] Atlanta, 251. Cf. Justin, xxxiv.4). 3  1 9  3  Introduction  5  Ptolemy VI and Cleopatra II, sat on the Seleucid throne uncontested as regent (126 B.C.) . Cleopatra Fs impact on the Hellenistic world is undeniable. 20  The greatest difficulty of this study lies in the lack of sources. With the loss of virtually the whole of Hellenistic historiography, one must rely on brief references in late epitomes and occasional allusions in often fragmentary and 'insecurely dated literary and epigraphical texts' . 21  Despite her association with so many famous rulers such as  Antiochus III, Ptolemy V Epiphanes, and Ptolemy VI Philometor, Cleopatra I remains a curiously anonymous figure in ancient history, an anonymity extending into modern scholarship. Ancient evidence dealing with the Ptolemaic dynasty is fourfold: literary, papyrological, inscriptional, and numismatic. Unfortunately, for one reason or other, none of these sources yield much in the way of confirming Cleopatra I's achievements. Furthermore, virtually nothing is known about Cleopatra I's involvement in Seleucid and Ptolemaic affairs, foreign and domestic, at anytime during her life.  There is no  contemporary Ptolemaic literary evidence and no direct reference to Cleopatra Fs position in the literary works of other ancient writers . 22  Thus, Cleopatra I's entire  existence, as little documented as it is in the extant literary evidence, is very obscure. This documentary problem, however, is not restricted to Cleopatra I but represents a  Cleopatra Thea possessed a great deal of power and influence not only as regent in 126 B.C., but also during her joint rule with her son, Antiochus VIII Grypus (125-121 B.C.) (cf. Appendix B, "Seleucid King List"). Her power and influence, even during her joint rule, are clearly seen in her ability to coin her own image on the Seleucid currency. Most noteworthy, one issue portrays the jugate heads of Cleopatra Thea and Antiochus VIII, but with the unprecedented place of honour in the foreground occupied by the queen and not, as customarily, by the king (Morkholm, Coinage, 28 and plate xliii.635 [tetradrachm from Sidon]). Burstein, 197. The only direct reference to Cleopatra I's political position is from a passage from Livy. Cf. Appendices H and CC. 21  2 2  Introduction  6  major problem with respect to Hellenistic queenship, and history . 23  Unfortunately,  Cleopatra Fs case represents the extreme of this problem. There are no studies devoted to Cleopatra I alone. Only slowly, but still inadequately, have papyri collections from the reigns of Ptolemy V and Ptolemy VI begun to reveal that this rarely mentioned queen was of immense importance to the position and power of all Ptolemaic queens succeeding her. The papyrological evidence constitutes the main source of information for the Ptolemaic dynasty; unfortunately, the vast majority of papyri comes from the Chora and thus does not refer directly to Alexandria and its affairs . 24  The greatest proof and  undeniable evidence of Cleopatra I's political position and power is seen in her titulature - found in royal inscriptions and papyri - during the period of her regency. The importance of Cleopatra I's reign and her influence on subsequent Ptolemaic queens is also ignored and overlooked by modern scholarship. This is perhaps a direct reflection of the limitations of ancient scholarship, which saw no use for commenting on the political activities of women, although antiquity was rampant in gossip . Modern 25  scholarship has also avoided the entire question of how much political authority Cleopatra I actually wielded.  Her virtual absence from these sources is especially  appalling considering the pioneering and only work to date on the inner politics and intrigues of the Hellenistic Queens was by Macurdy . Her work, while considerably out26  of-date, still remains the single most important authority for its treatment of the  "Few important periods of history...are so unsatisfactorily documented as the Hellenistic Age. The evidence is jejune, fragmentary, and often ambiguous..." (Bell, H . I. and Skeat, T.C. Book Review on Walter Otto. Zur Geschichte der Zeit des 6. Ptolemaers. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 21 [1935], 262). Rostovtzeff, SEHHW, 255. Cf. Green, 191. This is none more clearly seen than in the Polybian tradition. Cf. Polybian excerpts in the Appendices. Macurdy, Grace. Hellenistic Queens: A Study of Woman-Power in Macedonia, Seleucid Syria, and Ptolemaic Egypt. (1932) Baltimore. 2 3  2 4  2 5  2 6  Introduction  7  importance and powers of Hellenistic queens - specifically the royal women of the Macedonian, Syrian, and Ptolemaic houses.  It remains an invaluable study for its  completeness. The only individual studies on queens in Ancient Egypt are by Robins, Troy, and Tyldesley, but they only examine the queenship in Pharaonic times . Nevertheless, all 27  three scholars are helpful in determining native Egyptian attitudes towards Cleopatra I's position as queen and regent, since their discussions deal with native attitudes towards female pharaohs . The works of Robins and Troy are also useful for their insight.on the 28  status of queens at the Ptolemaic court when viewed as the Pharaoh's wife . 29  Carney also discusses the advantages gained by Ptolemaic queens with their 30  association and status as Pharaoh's wife. This is particularly important in light of the Ptolemies' gradual assimilation of a larger indigenous population. Although Carney does not specifically comment on Cleopatra I's regency, her work is important in supporting my argument that Cleopatra I's regency was instrumental in changing the entire future of the political position and power of later Ptolemaic queens. She does this in three ways, by discussing: i) the precedents set by earlier Ptolemaic queens, such as Arsinoe II, ii) the higher status Ptolemaic queens possessed as a result of being associated with Pharaonic queens, since Egyptian women enjoyed high status in general, and iii) the advantages the revival of Pharaonic sibling marriage brought to the queenship . 31  Robins, Gay. Women in Ancient Egypt. (1993) Cambridge; Troy, Lana. "Patterns of Queenship." Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis 14 (1986) passim; and Tyldesley, Joyce. Daughters of Isis. Women of Ancient Egypt. (1994) England. Cf. chapter three, section 3.3. Cf. cliapters three and four. Carney, Elizabeth D. "The Reappearance of Royal Sibling Marriage in Ptolemaic Egypt." Parola del Passato 237 (1987), 420-439. Carney, 436 and n. 38. 2 7  28  2 9  3 0  31  Introduction  8  Next in importance are the works on the Ptolemaic royal house by Mahaffy, Bevan, and Bouche-Leclercq, inasmuch as they survey the entire dynasty . However, 32  even with their focus on each Ptolemaic ruler from Ptolemy I Soter.to Cleopatra VII, not more than a few pages are devoted to Cleopatra I. They give no credit to Cleopatra I for maintaining friendly relations with Rome and Syria, instead, they explain her reign as a time when there was peace and tranquillity only because the Romans, and likewise the Seleucids, chose to leave Egypt alone . 33  This explanation appears very unlikely, in  particular, considering the decades of dissension between Egypt and Syria. Their works also reflected the way in which Cleopatra I would continue to be viewed throughout time - as an insignificant Ptolemaic queen. However, this premature dismissal of Cleopatra I's reign raises many questions. For instance, although each scholar acknowledges the fact that Cleopatra I became regent, the significance of this is passed over despite the fact that this was thefirstsuch occurrence in Ptolemaic, and indeed in Hellenistic, history. This hesitation to discuss Cleopatra I further is obviously quite deliberate. Next, the work of Otto focused on those critical years and events during 34  Ptolemy VI Philometor's lifetime and Antiochus IV Epiphanes' expeditions that "gave a decisive turn to the destinies of the Mediterranean world" . Otto makes some important 35  conclusions when dating the birth of Cleopatra I's and Epiphanes' three children, but like debates surrounding Cleopatra Fs dowry, such discussions donot focus on the details of (  Cleopatra I's regency and her creation of new institutions . 36  Nevertheless, Otto's work  Bevan, Edwyn. A History of Egypt Under the Ptolemaic Dynasty. (1968) Chicago; Bouche-Leclercq, A. Histoire des Lagides. Tomes I-IV. (1903-1907) Paris; and Mahaffy, J. P. History of Egypt: Ptolemaic Dynasty. Vol. IV. (1898) London passim. Cf. chapter five. Otto, Walter. Zur Geschichte der Zeit des 6. Ptolemaers. (1934) Miinchen. Bell and Skeat, 262. Cf chapters four and five. 3 2  3 3  3 4  3 5  3 6  Introduction  9  remains an important source for its documentation and interpretation of events in the second century B.C. In very recent years greater attention and some credit has been given to Cleopatra I's unprecedented political position and influence. For instance, she is now praised for the maintenance of good relations with the Romans and Syrians . 37  Alberro is a  representative of this new attitude: "while Cleopatra I lived, Egypt was quiet...but after the death of Cleopatra [I]...matters changed drastically" . The importance also of the 38  Alexandrian populace to the Ptolemaic rulers has also been discussed in detail. Fraser provided an excellent examination of this group, and through this discussion it became clear that their approval and support were crucial to the Ptolemies . Their adoration also 39  of their queens - becoming manifest during the queenships of Arsinoe II and Arsinoe III was an important advantage to Cleopatra I . 40  Despite the lack of recognition of Cleopatra I's brief regency, it was not as quiet and uneventful as the modern scholarly tradition leads us to believe.  Nor did Rome  dominate Ptolemaic affairs until the reign of Cleopatra I's children despite Livy's description of Ptolemaic matters . 41  Cleopatra I's foreign policy reflects a strong and  stable Ptolemaic government, which was clearly pro-Seleucid and anti-Roman and, 42  clearly from the titulature during Cleopatra I's regency, there is proof of her political  "During the lifetime of this able queen, Egypt remained prosperous and at peace, but upon her death the inevitable dispute arose again over the rule of Coele-Syria" (Davis, Harold T. Alexandria, The Golden City Vol. I-II. [1957] Illinois: The Principia Press of Illinois, Inc., 151). Alberro, 58. Fraser, P . M . Ptolemaic Alexandria. Vol. I-III. (1972) Oxford: Clarendon Press. Cf. footnote 8, above. Cf. chapter three. Cf. Appendix H and Justin, xxx.2.8. Cf chapters four and five on Cleopatra I's foreign policy, which was pro-Seleucid. This is briefly acknowledged by scholars such as Davis and Kraay: "in silly opposition to the policy of the late queen [Cleopatra I]... [Eulaeus and Lenaeus] began a war against Antiochus [IV] Epiphanes of Syria" (167). 3 8  3 9  4 0  41  4 2  Introduction  10  power and control. But before looking at Cleopatra I's regency, let us first turn to a discussion of the powerful and influential aristocratic families of the late third and early second centuries; the first important step in understanding how Cleopatra I became the first female regent.  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  11  CHAPTER O N E  A monarchy rules through an oligarchy...for the reconstruction of history it is equally important to know the oligarchs or aristocrats as the monarch himself, whatever this title may be.'  Cleopatra I's need to utilise courtiers and ministers to achieve her ambitious goals is indicative of the increasing power of such individuals in the Ptolemaic court. This historical trend reveals the necessity of either co-operating with or suppressing this powerful group. It is not a coincidence that such a group is found in the heart of virtually every court cabal and coup in antiquity . 2  Their internal, and sometimes external, connections with other prominent and  important families were extremely complex and very often extremely secretive. Two of the most intricate internal networks can be found in the Achaemenid family of the Persian Empire and 3  the Alcmaeonidae family of Athens . 4  In both cultures, members of these most prominent  families were always present in their governments' framework whether publicly or covertly. Ptolemaic history and politics was no exception. Thus, a discussion of the most prominent families in Ptolemaic history during the reigns of Ptolemies IV to VI is important to understanding Cleopatra I's influence and actions during her regency.  Two observations will become apparent . First, with the accession of a weak 5  monarch, the aristocrats at the court formed a powerful oligarchic faction and dominated  Syme, Ronald. The Roman Revolution. (1939) Oxford: Clarendon Press, 8. For works on court politics in history, passim Syme, The Roman Revolution; and Sealey, Raphael. The History of the Greek City-States, 700-338 B.C. (1976) Berkeley: University of California Press. Passim Olmstead, A.T. History of the Persian Empire. (1948) Chicago: University of Chicago Press; and Cook, J . M . The Persian Empire. (1983) New York: Barnes and Noble. Passim Arnheim, M . T . W . Aristocracy in Greek Society. (1977) London: Thames and Hudson; Baldwin and Cradock. History of Greece from the Earliest Times to its Final Subjection to Rome. (1892) London: PaternosterRow; Davies, J.K. Athenian Propertied Families 600-300 B.C. (1971) Oxford: Clarendon Press; Hignett, C. A History of the Athenian Constitution to the End of the 5' Century B.C. (1952) Oxford: Clarendon Press; and Scullard, H . H . From the Gracchi to Nero. A History of Rome from 133 B.C. to A.D. 68. (1959) London: Methuen. Cf. Appendix E for a list of important ministers and court-figures at the Ptolemaic court during this period. 1  2  3  4  h  5  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  12  Ptolemaic affairs through their many contacts and connections. Second, Cleopatra I was able to control these aristocrats during her regency, and thus directly decide upon Ptolemaic matters. Cleopatra I's control is proof that the influence of prominent families and ministers on the monarchy was confined to individual reigns, and that an able ruler could suppress these aristocratic courtiers. The role of aristocratic families in court politics during the reigns of the first three Ptolemies has been little documented. Even when important members of the court ministry have been singled out, the importance and close relationship of the Ptolemaic king's 'friends' to the king did not lead one to suspect any forthcoming conspiracies or court cabals, since these "friends" were intensely loyal to their king. Ministers began to gain power independent of the king in the reign of Ptolemy III and already by Ptolemy IV s reign their interests contrasted those of the king's. Extant evidence from Ptolemy IVs court onwards is a little exaggerated, but problematic and greatly debated because much of it derives from Polybius.  1.1 Family Connections Our best and earliest evidence of ministerial control is from Ptolemy IV Philopator's reign . Ministerial control, according to Polybius, began with the family of Sosibius. There is a 6  discussion amongst modern scholars concerning whether Philopator was weak and powerless or whether he was a stronger individual than Polybius suggests, one who took great pains to install his foreign policies. The former has been argued by a number of scholars who believe that 7  PP VI. 14545; RE 23 (1959) coll. 1678-91, no. 22; Samuel, 106-14; and Abel, K . , Hermes 95 (1967), 72-90. Cf. Appendix A A . This is the opinion of such scholars as Green, 290, 291; Bevan, Egypt, 222; Errington, JHS 99 (1979), 196-97 based on Polybius: " T c a v n y v p i K c b z e p o v Sifjye -cd /card TJJV dpxi)v... " (v.34). Cf. Polybius, 62.7-8 and Walbank, 1.564, who believes, from Polybius onwards, the literary tradition is hostile towards Philopator. Cf. Appendix A A 6  7  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  13  Ptolemy IV was completely dominated by the women and advisors around him, while the latter idea is supported by Hufi who tries to credit Philopator with initiating ambitious overseas 8  policies. Polybius, a contemporary of Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I, oftentimes is openly biased and hostile towards Ptolemaic rulers mainly because of his good relationship with Rome and 9  specifically because of the Ptolemies' dealings with the Achaean League . 10  Although biased  against Rome's opponents, Polybius is nonetheless a contemporary to important events in Ptolemaic history and thus must be regarded as an important source. For instance, in Polybius' accounts of Sosibius' tactics and political decisions, one must be cautious but also open, since some truth may lie behind Polybius' accounts.  It is necessary now to observe more closely the  individual aristocratic ministers (and their families) from the reign of Ptolemy IV onwards, when these Ptolemaic ministers attained much influence over the monarchy and monarchic decisions. Through the discussion of these most influential ministers and their families, one will understand how completely these courtiers and their associates controlled Ptolemaic affairs and thus gain a greater appreciation for Cleopatra I, who was able to suppress this court oligarchy from the very beginning of her regency.  for other references to Ptolemy IV by other ancient writers. H u f i , W. Untersuchungen zu Aussenpolitik Ptolemaios'IV. (1976) Munich,passim. Sent to Rome as a political exile (in 169 B.C.), Polybius became a close friend and mentor to Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus. I believe that it is no coincidence that those Ptolemies who had good dealings widi the Achaean League were portrayed favourably by Polybius (i.e. Ptolemy VI). Likewise, those who had bad dealings with the Achaean League were condemned (i.e. Ptolemy IV and V). Polybius from a very young age was groomed and educated for a future position in the Achaean League, as his father (Lycortas) before him, who had been general of the league several times (for more on Lycortas, cf. Syll. 686; Polybius, xxii.3.6; Pausanias, 8.9.1, 30.8, 37.2, 48.8; and Walbank, 11.483). 8  9  1 0  3  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  14  1.1.1 Sosibius  11  Sosibius' career had begun under Ptolemy (III) Euergetes , under whom he had reached 12  a high position at the Ptolemaic court. Sosibius' career represents the first evidence of the dominating influence courtiers could have on a weak ruler (i.e. Ptolemy IV). However, one must not forget that Sosibius had to attain a prestigious position at the courtfirstwhereby he could be promoted further when the opportunity came. Relatively little is known about Sosibius' early career under Ptolemy III. The extant evidence only mentions his very important appointment to the eponymous priesthood of Alexander at Alexandria. Already, this appointment anticipated the control he would soon have over the Ptolemaic court . 13  The extant details of Sosibius' career have been compiled in the table below. It reveals a successful and important political, religious, and military career.  PP 1.48; 77.2179; 777.5272; 7F.10100; K7.17239; RE 3 A (1929), col. 1151, no. 3; Bevan, Egypt, 220; Mooren, Titulature, 63-66, no. 18; Holleaux, 111.47-54; Huli, 242-251; Green, 304; and Preaux, 155. Cf. Appendix E E . PP VI. 14543, 16297, 16943; RE 23 (1959), coll. 1667-78, no. 21; Samuel, 106-108; and Will, 1.133-186,216-364, passim. Cf. below, 18. 11  12  13  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  15  Table # 1: Family of Sosibius , son of Dioscurides Prominent Families (First Important Member)  Related Family Member in a High Position  Positions  Comments  (relation in brackets)  SOSIBIUS, son of Dioscurides  (under Ptolemy III): • reached a high position at the royal court 22 July 235 to 10 July 234 B.C.: • eponymous priest at Alexandria (under Ptolemy IV): became Philopator's "prime . . , "16 minister • soon had to share control of the government with Agathocles (under Ptolemy V): • through a false decree became the guardian of young Ptolemy V (under Ptolemy V): (after the death of his father) 204-202 B.C.: • dispatched by Agathocles to King Philip V of Macedon as an ambassador (under Ptolemy V): (some time before the death of Agathocles ) • a member of the acopatocp-OkaKeg "Gentleman of the Bodyguard" (under the new regent, Tlepolemus): 202-201 B.C.: • entrusted with the royal seal 15  PTOLEMY  17  (son)  SOSIBIUS (son) 18  - As the eponymous priest his name appears in the dating formulae of that year.  - Ptolemy immediately returned to Egypt after Agathocles' death.  19  ARSINOE  20  (daughter)  - Lost the royal seal in 201 B.C. after an unsuccessful attempt with his brother to depose Tlepolemus.  14 Sept. 215 to 3 Sept. 214 B.C.: • icavEfpoprjin Alexandria  21  Information on the family histories of the ministers at the Ptolemaic court is gathered from Bevan, Egypt unless otherwise specified. For information on his family, cf. Appendix EE. P. Petrie III.55a; IV.22. A n excellent clironological compilation of Ptolemaic Egypt's "Eponymous Priests and Priestesses" is found in Clarysse, W. & Van Der Veken, passim. There is really no such position in the Ptolemaic dynasty. In the Ptolemaic dynasty the monarch is at the head of the state followed by his ministers, some of whom, if the king desires, may be designated with greater importance and rank. This "prime minister" position appears to be more an aspect of the Seleucid dynasty where the highest office at the court - next to the monarch - was that of "minister of affairs", which Hitti (clip, xix) connects to the continuation of the Persian office of vizier. PP VI. 14779 and RE 23 (1959), col. 1763, no. 47. PPI.U; 77.2947; 777.5273; andRE3A (1927), col. 1152, no. 4. For the condemning of Agathocles and his family cf. Polybius, xv.32.6-8. PP III. 5027. P. dem. Louvre ined. 2328 (cf. Pestman, Chronologie, 39 and 128 n. 21); P. dem. Louvre E 9416; P. dem. BM 10377; m&B.G.U. VL1264 11.5-6, 1275 11. 5-6, 1276 11. 2-3, and 1277 11. 3-4. 1 4  15  1 6  17  18  1 9  2 0  21  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  16  Ptolemy IV Philopator was the weakest Ptolemaic king to ascend the throne since its establishment by Ptolemy I Soter and Sosibius took full advantage of him.  Sosibius had gained  such prestige and such respect at the court by the time of Ptolemy I V s accession that he was unquestionably appointed Philopator's "prime minister" . There is no doubt from the literary 22  sources that during the early part of Philopator's reign Sosibius controlled and governed the political affairs in Egypt: "Zwoipiov Se rod nkeiaxov iv rotg cpiXoig Svvapievov (prjaavTogf and 23  "06-rog yap paXiora  tore npoEararei r&v npaypdzco^\  It was from this position that he,  according to Polybius, governed with "quasi-dictatorial powers" (6 ij/evSenirponog) with Ptolemy filling the part of roi faineant . 25  Furthermore, Philopator did not mind this subsidiary role as he  was "indifferent to the character of the people whom he allowed to direct the affairs of the kingdom...as long as they provided him the means for a life of literary and aesthetic sensuality and saved him the trouble of governing" . It was Sosibius' versatile roles and positions which served 26  all of Philopator's interests. In Sosibius, Philopator had found an advisor, military officer, and priest. Using his immense political power and influence, Sosibius also quickly rid the court of his enemies, most of whom were members of the Ptolemaic royal family . The death of each of these 27  individuals clearly revealed his control over Ptolemy IV since, after making these suggestions,  Accepting the use of this term by Hitti (cf. footnote 16 above). Cf. Hufi, 242-251; Mooren, Titulature, 63-66, no. 18; and Mooren, Families, 289-301. Plutarch, Life of Cleomenes, xxxiii.4. Cf. Bevan, Egypt, 220ff. Polybius, v.35.7 and Walbank, 1.567. Polybius, xv.25.1. Cf. Cary, 90. Bevan, Egypt, 220ff. Cf. Appendix AA for selections of the literary evidence on Ptolemy IV. Sosibius'rivalswithin the royal family were: Euergeles' brother and Philopator's uncle, Lysimachus; Philopator's mother, Berenice II; and Philopator's younger brother, Magas. Otherrivalsincluded: Cleomenes, the Spartan King (Polybius, v.34.1, 36.1; xv.25.1-2), who Bevan, Egypt, 221 tells us had great influence and prestige with the mercenary soldiers stationed in Alexandria. Cf. Walbank, 1.567, 564. 23 24 25  26 27  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families Philopator still had to authorise their death sentences.  17  Holbl summarises Sosibius' absolute  authority and influence at the Ptolemaic court: Der Konig stand seit seinem Regierungsantritt unter dem EinfluB des machtigsten Marines am Hofe, des Alexandriners Sosibios. Dieser gehorte zu den intelligentesten und skrupellosesten Persbnlichkeiten der hellenistischen Geschichte; iiber Jahrzehnte hinweg zeigte er sich alien 28  hofischen Intrigen gewachsen. From this point onwards, Sosibius would use his cunning to remain influential at the court throughout Ptolemy IV's reign and even into the early reign of Ptolemy V: "crre-Dog ayxivovv icai 7roAvxp6nov '. ,,2s  Sosibius also had a very successful priestly career as well. From 22 July 235 to 10 July 234 B.C. he occupied the very prestigious post of the "priesthood of Alexander, of the Brotherand-Sister Gods, and of the Benefactor Gods" at Alexandria . 30  He was the first identifiable  prominent courtier to gain this position without past family members having attained it first. It is as a result of this post during that same year that his name appeared in the dating of documents all over the realm. The importance and prestige of the eponymous priesthood is revealed by the fact that the name of the eponymous priest even preceded that of the name of the deified kings and their consorts . It is also significant that the eponymous priesthood from the mid-third century B.C., 31  beginning with Alexander, father of Pelops, would be attained by courtiers out of whose families a member would play the chief role as the head of the aristocratic families at the Ptolemaic court at different times throughout Ptolemaic history. Thus, the eponymous priesthood was an indicator of power within a certain aristocratic family since individuals who held this distinguishing honour 28 29 30 31  Holbl, 111. Polybius, xv.25.1 and Walbank, 11.481. Cf. Bevan, Egypt, 220ff. Tarn, 51.  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  18  either had sons in influential positions or themselves became influential at the court later in their career. The list of prominent family members appointed eponymous priests at Alexandria (below) confirms this observation, since some of the most prominent ministers at the Ptolemaic court, or at 32  least their fathers, had been eponymous priests : 33  264/263 B.C. Alexander (father of Pelops, who became prominent under Ptolemy II) 235/234 B.C. Sosibius ('PrimeMinister'to PtolemyIVin 222 B.C.) 223/222 B.C. Dositheos (his son, Cineas, becomes chief advisor to Ptolemy VI) 35  218/217 B.C. Mnasiadas-" (his son, Polycrates, a supporter of Agathocles) 36  216/215 B.C. Agathocles (becomesyoung Ptolemy Vs guardian in 203 B.C.) 204/203 B.C. Aristomenes (becomes regent ofEgypt in 201 B.C.) 37  '  '  38  187/186 B.C. Anstonicus (a eunuch is appointed an eponymous priest!) The list of individuals who became eponymous priests also reveals some of the most powerful courtiers at the court who did not have to rely on ancestors to gain access into and have influence in the inner circle of ministers (i.e. Sosibius, Agathocles , Aristomenes, and Aristonicus). 39  Last of all, there is a brief reference to Sosibius' military career as well, " T O Se TSV Aiyvnriayv tthfjOog rjv pev eig Stcrpvpiovg cpaXayyixag, v^erdttero Se Icocnpico^ . There are no 0  specific dates for this military command, however, Egyptian troops were not used by the Ptolemies  The seven ministers listed here (or their sons) were the only courtiers able to use the eponymous priesthood to gain immense influence at the court because the monarchy was at its weakest during this period from the mid-third century B . C . to the mid-second century B . C . Although there were numerous other annual magistrates at the Ptolemaic court before and after this period, the strong monarchy was able to control its courtiers regardless of their offices and posts. PPII. 1829. If the son of Dositheos, then PP VI. 15854. Cf. section 1.2.3 below. Cf. section 1.1.2 below. Cf. section 1.2.2 below. Cf. chapter two, section 2.1. Cf. Walbank, 11.492 specifically refers lo "Agathocles and his circle". Polybius, v.65.9. 3 3  3 4  35  3 6  37  38  3 9  4 0  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  19  until the Battle at Raphia (217 B.C.). The number of individuals from one family appointed to important offices and positions directly reflected the amount of influence and power that family had within the court. Because of the number of generations a family could remain within the court, the future of that family was guaranteed to a certain degree by its progeny. Sosibius' family exemplified such a strong family with each of his children having being appointed into very prestigious posts (above, table #1). Political influence and power originated from these powerful families, such as Sosibius'. Soon, political influence was found among the supporters of this central family, who eventually formed a powerful and interconnected oligarchic faction at the court. Aristocratic court families, however, had much to lose with the accession of a new king. Usually, certain family members were immediately exiled or murdered by an opposing court family. For instance, the exile of an individual was proof that (s)he posed a threat to that minister. This was the fate of Sosibius' son, Ptolemy. Nothing is known about Ptolemy except that in 204 B.C. he was 'dispatched' to Macedon as an ambassador immediately after the death of his father, which also coincided with the accession of Ptolemy V . Although nothing is known about 41  Ptolemy's career and importance at the court, the possible threat he posed to Agathocles is clearly revealed by his exile. Sosibius, Sosibius' son, however, reveals the power and longevity of his family even though it required him to publicly condemn his father. Even more significant is his ready acceptance by the Alexandrians . Sosibius, son of Sosibius, then continued to serve as a 42  very able minister and was widely trusted and admired by the Alexandrians so much so that he was  Polybius, xvi.22.3ff and Walbank, 11.527 believe he was sent to Philip of Macedon in 204 or 203 B.C. This episode is mentioned by Polybius, xv.32.4-6. Cf. Walbank, 11.492, 526-527.  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  20  even given the prestigious role as the holder of the royal seal in 202 B.C.: yap ofirog rod re fiaoiXecog npoeaxavai (fpovipcbxepov fj Kara xrjv rjXiKiav, xrjv re xovg EKxdg anavxricnv aq'iav noieicBai xfjg EyKexEipiopevrjg avx<p maxecog- ai5xrj 8' ijv  idoKEi npdg  f\ o<ppayig Kai ro tov pacnXecog ocopa^  The last mention of either brothers was their collaboration in opposing Tlepolemus, the regent (202-201 B.C.), immediately after the death of Agathocles . Whatever Agathocles had feared 44  about Ptolemy, Sosibius' son, revealed itself through this struggle of power within the court. Later in the reign of Philopator, Sosibius was assisted in the running of the Ptolemaic dynastic affairs by Agathocles and his family: "Xoutov Se ovveSpevaavxeg oi nepi TOV 'AyaOoKXea Kai Zcooifiiov, oi rote npoeax&xeg trig PaaiXeiag '. Ai  It is not known precisely when Agathocles  and Sosibius began to control Ptolemaic affairs together. Although Sosibius had acquired a partner in Agathocles, it is clear that by the time of his death he had still not firmly established an oligarchic network at the Ptolemaic court. Agathocles, on the other hand, did accomplish this task.  1.1.2 Agathocles  46  One of the most debilitating "accessions" in the Ptolemies' history, which further weakened the dynasty's core, was that of the young Ptolemy V Epiphanes in 204 B.C.; only six years old at the time . Ptolemy Vs accession revealed to all the existence of another authority behind the 47  king's power. For thefirsttime in Ptolemaic history, all affairs of the Ptolemaic kingdom were unabashedly run by its courtiers.  Although this type of control was already familiar to the  Polybius, xvi.22. Iff. (cf. Appendix EE) and Polybius, xv. 12ff. (cf Appendix FF). Cf. footnotes 65-66. Polybius, v.63.1. PP I.14; 7/7.4986; IV. 10061, 10078; V. 14047; VI. 14576; RE I (1893), coll. 757-758, no. 19; Abel, K . Hermes 95 (1967), 86-90; Green, 304; Ijsewijn, 84-85; Mooren, Titulature, 67ff, no. 20; Mooren, Families, 289; and Preaux, 155. Mahaffy (128) had originally given him tire more general classification as a Greek. Cf. Appendix FF. The Rosetta Stone, dated to March 27, 196 B.C., was decreed in Ptolemy V s ninth year to mark his accession (Mahaffy, 151). Cf. Will, 1.93 and Walbank, 11.283 on the guardianship of Hellenistic kings who were minors.  4 3  44  4 5  4 6  4 7  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  21  Ptolemaic subjects with Arsinoe II's influence over her husband and brother, Ptolemy II, and Sosibius' control over Philopator, Agathocles and his family completely controlled every aspect of the government: politically, economically, and religiously. Agathocles' career is outlined in the table below: Table # 2: Family of Agathocles Prominent Families (First Important Member)  Related Family Member in a High Position (relation in brackets)  Positions  (under Ptolemy IV): • shared control of the government with Sosibius 27 Aug. 216 to 13 Sept. 215 B.C.:  AGATHOCLES  48 • eponymous priest at Alexandria (under Ptolemy V) 221-203 B.C.: • through a false decree became the guardian of the young Ptolemy V, butPtolemy he had IV): the leading role (under  49  AGATHOCLEIA (sister)  - He reached a very high position at the Ptolemaic court soon after his arrival into Egypt (his family had migrated to Egypt shortly before Ptolemy IV's accession). - Possibly because of Sosibius' decease, soon after Ptolemy V s accession, Agathocles played the leading role in the government.  •  OENANTHE (mother)  50  nursed Philopator while he was still an infant 203 B.C.: • sent to her death . (under Ptolemy IV): • mistress of Philopator 203 B.C.: • sent to her death  Comments  - Agathocleia and her mother, Oenanthe, dominated court life during Ptolemy IV's reign and the earlier part of Ptolemy V s reign.  Agathocles' first appearance and quick promotion to important political and religious positions within the Ptolemaic dynasty are as mysterious as that of Sosibius.  However,  Agathocles' career and Sosibius' choosing him essentially to act as his successor would be more justified if Holbl's suggestion that Agathocles was "ein Jugendfreund des Philopator" was correct . As already observed in the case of Sosibius, Agathocles held the position of eponymous 51  priest to Alexander during Ptolemy IV's reign - no doubt under Sosibius' instruction. At the  B.G.U. VI. 1262 11. 2-3, 1283 11. 2-4; P. dem. Louvre 3263; and SB III.6303 11.2-3. PP VI, 14714; RE I (1894), coll.747-48, no. 2; JEA 31 (1945), 74; and Ijsewijn, 84-85 sub. no. 71. PP VI, 14731; RE 17 (1937), col. 2189, no. 6; JEA 31 (1945), 74; and Ijsewijn, 84-85 sub. no. 71. Holbl, 112.  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  22  accession of the young Epiphanes in 204 B.C., Agathocles did not appear to have as much political influence and authority as Sosibius had when he was appointed Philopator's "prime minister", although Agathocles had certainly by this time attained a very high position at the court: npoaycoyfjg piv yap £TV%e napaSog'ov Sid tr)v tov <PiXondtopog dSvvapiav tov PacnXeveiv TV%COV SE tavtrjg Kai KapaXa/3cav Exxpviatatov xraipov p£td tov EKEIVOV ddvatov npdg to avvtrjpfjaai trjv i^ovoiav.  52  Unlike Sosibius' appointment to his important post as "prime minister" to Ptolemy IV, Agathocles used more unconventional means to gain power and control under Epiphanes. According to Polybius, Agathocles forged a false decree, which made himself and Sosibius the rightful regents and guardians of Epiphanes: pstd SE tavta SidSrjpa t(f> naiSi KEpiQivtsg dviSsitgav /3amXea, Kai SiaOrJKTjv tivd napaviyvcoaav nEnXaopEvqv, iv fj ysypappivov fjv oti KataXsinEi tov naiSdg imtponovg c  \  6 PaoiXsvg  >  /  \  53  'AyaOoKXia Kai Zcooifiwv  Agathocles also resorted to bribery to retain the loyalty of his subjects and the Ptolemaic army: ...np&tov piv Siptfvov tag SvvdpEig cby/coviaoE, nsnEiapivog to napa toig noXXoiq piooq dpPXvvEiv Sid tfjg npdg to XvoitsXig  oppfjg avtSv...  54  There is another important difference between Sosibius' control of the Ptolemaic kingdom and that of Agathocles. Unlike Sosibius, who dominated the king and his affairs, the trio of Agathocles, his sister, Agathocleia, and his mother, Oenanthe, were jointly involved in the control of the government, that is, of the royal family. Agathocleia and Oenanthe, with one serving as the king's wet-nurse and the other as his mistress, played the largest roles during Philopator's reign: 6 piv yap fiacnXevg avtog ovtco SiicpOapto tr)v y/v%?jv vno yvvaiKcov Kai notcov oaotE, onoxE vr\(poi pdXiata Kai onovSawtatog avtoO yivoito, tsXstdg tsXeiv Kai tvpnavov excov iv toig PaaiXeioig dysipsiv, td Si piyiata tfjg dpxfjg npdypata SIOIKETV Polybius, xv.34. Walbank, 11.494 comments on ministerial control: "BaoiXeig Polybius, xv.25.3ff and Walbank 11.482. Polybius, xv.25.11.  EKBamXecovp,etaxeipi£6nevoi"  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  23  'AyaOoKXeiav xr\v epojpevrjv tov PaaiXecog Kai T7jv ravrrjg prjTepa Kai nopvoPocKdv Oivdvdijv.  55  The extent to which these two women influenced Philopator varies in the sources. Plutarch, for example, believed that these two women controlled the dynasty.  Plutarch's source was  Cleomenes, King of Sparta, who was in Egypt at this time and therefore a reliable source. Other sources also acknowledge the influence of Agathocleia and Oenanthe: roO Se 0iXonaTopog PaaiXecog TlxoXepaiov dvarpey/aaa TTJV PamXeiav.  naaav  OVK 'AyaBoKXeia rj  etaipa eKpdrei, i] Kai  56  That Agathocleia and Oenanthe had dominating roles at the Ptolemaic court is argued by Bouche-Leclercq: "Non contents de dominer le roi, ils possedaient maintenant le royaume; ils se montraient en public, on les saluait, ils avaient leur cortege. Agathocle, toujours a cote du roi, gouvernait l'Etat; les femmes distribuaient les places de tribuns, de prefets, de generaux, et nul n'avait moins d'autorite dans le royaume que le roi lui-meme" . 57  In turn, these two women dominated the young Epiphanes . Understandably, the rage of 58  the Alexandrian mob was also directed at them, since they shared equally with Agathocles in the corruption of the kingdom. In summary, an examination of Sosibius' and Agathocles' careers at the Ptolemaic court reveals that their attaining power for themselves and for their family members were not accidental occurrences. Indeed, several factors had to be present. First, the monarchy had to be weak, thus allowing the courtiers to take control. Second, once in control it was very hard to suppress their  Plutarch, Life of Cleomenes, xxxiii.2. Cf. Plutarch, Moralia, 753d and Walbank, 11.438. Athenaeus, xiii.577.a. Bouche-Leclercq, Lagides, 1.332. Polybius, xv.25.12 mentions Agathocles placing the young Epiphanes into the care of Agathocleia and Oenanthe: " T O Se naiSiov evexeipiae ratg nepi n)v Oivavdtjv Kai 'AyaOoKXeiav." Cf. Mooren, Families, 289.  5 6  5 7  5 8  \ i  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  24  power not only because of the strength of the central family, but also the many connections this central family had with other aristocratic families. Agathocles' household is the best example of such a family because together with Agathocleia and Oenanthe, these three dominated and influenced all Ptolemaic affairs. Furthermore, Agathocles established an oligarchic faction at the court with his connections to various other prominent aristocratic families.  With these factors  present, eventual control by such individuals at the accession of each new monarch would be more easily accepted and more natural. However, it was these very networks of courtiers that Cleopatra I successfully controlled and used to promote her own power . It is to those other prominent 59  courtiers that I now turn.  1.2 Other Prominent Families It is not enough to acknowledge Sosibius' and Agathocles' possession of a certain amount of influence within the Ptolemaic government without recognising their deeper internal court connections - the oligarchic faction - that were essential to help "influence" and control the monarch. The cover up of Ptolemy IV and Arsinoe Ill's deaths is the best attestation of Sosibius and Agathocles' strong political connections , suggesting that they received formidable support 60  from other prominent Greek families.  In turn, Agathocles' connections with several other  prominent families is revealed by the promotions these families received because of their association with him:  Although this oligarchic faction was gaining influence on the weak monarchy beginning in Ptolemy I V ' s reign, Cleopatra I's regency not only diminished their influence over the monarchy, but also curbed their power. Cf. Polybius, xv.25 and Appendix F.  6 0  25  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  'O S' AyaGoKXfjg enei rovg eni(paveatdrovg TCOV dvSpcov EKnoScbv EnoirjoE, Kai TO noXv tfjg TOV nXtjOovg dpyfjg napaKaxeoxe rfj TCOV oy/covicov dnoSoosi, napd noSag eig TTJV eg" dp%f}g avvtjOeiav enavfjXBe. Kai ragpev TCOV cpiXcov x&pag dvenXfjpcocE, napeiaayaymv BK Tfjg SiaKoviag Kai rfjg aXXrjg vnrjpEoiag rovg EiKaiordrovg Kai Bpacrvrdtovg^  1  Likewise^' families considered a threat were quickly eradicated, exiled, or murdered. Agathocles rid the Ptolemaic court of his rivals by sending some away to serve as ambassadors to the other Hellenistic kings. Most prominent of these "exiled" individuals was Ptolemy, a son of Sosibius, although numerous other sons from other prominent families were also sent out of Egypt . 62  Agathocles then replaced those vacant positions with his own adherents : 63  etganecrTEiXe SE Kai <PiXdppcova TOV emaTavra T& rfjg Apaivorjg cpovcp, noirjaag avrdv AiPvdpxnv TCOV Kara Kvpfjvrjv Toncov...peTa Se ravTa heXona psv e^enepy/e TOV TleXonog eig TT)V Aaiav npdg Avnoxov TOVfiacnXea,napaKaXecovra avvTijpEiv TTJV <piXiav Kai pi) napapaiveiv rag npdg TOV TOV naiSdg naTepa ovv8fjKag, riToXepaiov Se TOV Zcocnpiov npdg <PiXinnov rd TE nepi Tfjg dniyapiag avvQrjGopEvov Kai napaKaXeoovra POIJGETV, edv oXoaxepeoTepov amovg Avrioxog £ni/3dXrjTai napaanovSeiv. npoEXEipiaaro Se Kai TJToXepatov TOV Ayrjodpxov npsapEVTfjv npdg'Pcopaiovg,oi>x cog inionevaovTa TT)V npecrfieiav, dXX' cog, av ay/rjTai Tfjg 'EXXdSog Kai ovppUgrj Toig EKEI cpiXoig Kai avyyEVEaiv, avmO KarapsvovvTa. npoEKEiTO yap avrcp ndvrag Tovg inicpavEig dvSpag s  ,  EKKOSCOV  64  noifjaai.  Despite Agathocles' scheming and bribing aimed at winning support for himself among the aristocracy, the Alexandrian populace did not accept his regency and guardianship very willingly. In fact, the literary evidence reveals that Epiphanes' subjects were simply waiting for another powerful individual to depose Agathocles and to give back rightful power to the monarch and his family. This new leader of the people was Tlepolemus . 65  Polybius, xv.25.20-21. Cf. Walbank, II. 486-487 comments on Agathocles' methods of strengthening his position at the court. Cf. above, 15, 19 and Polybian passage (xv. 12ff.) below. Cf. Mooren, Families, 290. In replacement of these other courtly figures, Agathocles "Kai Tag psv TCOV cpiXcov 6 2  63  Xcbpag dvenXrpooae, napsicayaywv EK Tfjg SiaKoviag Kai Tfjg aXXrjg vxr/pEcriag tovg EiKaiOTatovg K dpaovrdTovg" (Polybius, xv.25.20-21). It is liard to believe that others ministers at the court would have gone so far as to accept diese servants and attendants into their circle. Polybius, xv. 12ff. SEPIJSEV ixeiv npocamov d^wxpEcov TO npoarrjoopevov, Kai Si' 06 TT)V opyijv Eig TOV AyadoKXia Kai 6 4  6 5  Ttjv'AyaOoKXeiavcxTtepeiaovTai, TI)V fjovx'iav fjyov, in piav eXmSa KapaSoKovvteg TTJV Katd TOV  TXrjaoXepov Kai Tavtrj npoaavExovTEg-" (Polybius, xv.25.25.) for the growing conflict between Agathocles and Tlepolemus.  Cf. Polybius, xv.25.35-36 and Walbank, 11.487  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  26  1.2.1 Tlepolemus  66  Tlepolemus had been initially promoted through the ministerial ranks by Agathocles. Tlepolemus' early career is obscure, although from the literary evidence it is known he had acquired the very prestigious post of oxpaxriydq at Pelusium as a result of his support for Agathocles. Unfortunately, aside from a brief mention of Tlepolemus as the axparriyog, nothing else is known about him (below, table #3) . 67  Table # 3: Tlepolemus, son of Artapates I[I Prominent Families  Related Family  (First Important  M e m b e r in a H i g h  Member)  Position  Positions  Comments  (relation in brackets)  TLEPOLEMUS, son of Artapates III  (during Agathocles' regency): • oxpavqyog at Pelusium 202-201 B.C.:  •  regent of Egypt  68  - He was appointed axpaxnyog by Agathocles to organise the defence of the , .. 69 frontier  With the growing discontent against Agathocles and his family, Tlepolemus soon realised his immense support both from the army and from the populace. It was not long before he schemed to rid Agathocles and his family and to acquire the regency for himself:  6 SE TXr\n6Xepoq, k'cogpev 6 PacnXsvg E£T], xd KaO' avxdv enpaxxev apa Se rep pexaX. 'KEIVOV xaxscog e^opaXiaag xd nXr\dr] oxpaxtiyog ndXiv eyevpOT] x&v KCXXCX IJrjZo xoncov. Kai xdg pev dpxag enoieixo xrjv dvatpopdv x&v npaxxopevcov eni xd xov p avpipepov, nenEiopevog vndp^eiv xi avveSpwv 8 XTJV xe xov naiSdg imxponEiav eg'ei Ka x&v oXcov npooxacriav. cog S' ecbpa xovg pev dc'iovg inixponfjg avSpag EKUOSCOV ysyo xfjg SE XCOV oXcov dpxrjg KaxaxoXp&vxa xov 'AyaOoKXsa, xaxecog E(p exepag eyevexo ixpopcbpevog xov nposcx&xa KIVSVVOV Sid XTJV vnoKEipEvijv avxoig E^Opav, Kai xdg SvvdpEig TiEpi avxdv rfOpoi^E Kai nepi nopov iyivexo xpvpdxcov, iva prjSEvi x&v E evxeipcoxog if. apa SE Kai xtjv xov naiSdg Enixponsiav Kai xi)v x&v oXcov npooxaoia eavxdv rj^Eiv OVK dnTjXni^E, vopi^cov Kai Kara XTJV iSiav psv Kpicnv avxdg d^wxpecbxEp vndpx AyadoKXeovg npdg nav, EXI pdXXov SE nvvBavopsvog Kai xdg vcp' iavxov xaxxopivag SvvdpEig Kai xdg Kara xfjv 'AXe^avSpstav En EKEIVCO xdg iXniSag EXEIV XOV KaxaXvEiv XTJV 'AyaOoKXeovg vPpiv. ovarjg SE nspi avxdv oiag EiptjKa SiaXtjy/Ecog, x eiv  PP 1.50, 337; 7/2180; Z77.5288; VI. 14634, 14787; VIII, 50; and RE 6 A (1937), col. 1618-1619, no. 6. Cf. Walbank, 11.487, who comments on the possibility of Tlepolemus being of Persian descent. Cf. Bevan, Egypt, 255-257. Polybius, xvi.21.1, 22.6-11; and Walbank, 11.525-526. Polybius, xv.25.25ff, 26.5ff, 27. Iff., 29.6. Cf. Walbank, 11.487, who believes that Tlepolemus was appointed to this post by Sosibius. 6 6  67  6 8  6 9  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  27  xd xfjg Siacpopdg av^rjcnv eZa/3e avvspyovvxcov dpcpoxspcov npdg xrjv xoiavxrjv vnodecnv.  Tlepolemus appears to have been a popular soldier and commander, but he was not successful as a regent . 71  The Alexandrian populace soon tired of him and sought another  individual to replace him. They soon turned to Sosibius, son of Sosibius : 72  i<p' oig 01 nspi xrjv avXrjv aoxdXXovxEg ndvxa napEorjpaivovxo Kai Papecog avrov /TA,ri7t6A.£uot>] xrjv avGdSsiav vneqtepov, xdv SE Zcooifiiov EK napaGeoecog iOavpa^ov. ESOKEI yap ovxog rod TE PaaiXecog npoeoxdvai <ppovipcbrepov rj Kara xrjv rjXiKiav, tfjv re npdg rovg EKtdg dnavrrjaiv d^iav noisioQai rf}g EyKsxsipiopEvrig avroj niaxEcog- avxrj 8' fjv rj acppayig Kai TO XOV PaoiXetog ocopa?^ With the death of Agathocles, the struggle at the court became one between Agathocles' supporters and his returning rivals. Importantly, these courtiers became regents or close advisors to the monarchy through the support of the Alexandrian populace. After the death of Agathocles and his family, the Alexandrian populace became a large factor in determining the king's advisors and regents. This is also the case with Aristomenes, regent after Tlepolemus.  1.2.2 Aristomenes The next important figure at the Ptolemaic court was Aristomenes, a forgotten figure amidst the turmoil surrounding the dominating figures of Sosibius and Agathocles.  An  Acarnanian, he came to Egypt some time after 216 B.C. and quickly and quietly rose through the ranks, no doubt as a result of his good relations with and support of Agathocles early in his career . When next we hear of Aristomenes he had already been appointed one of Ptolemy V s 75  Polybius, xv.25.26ff. For more on his supporters cf. Polybius, xv.25.26ff., 29.3-4 and footnote 65. Cf. Mooren, Families, 255ff. Cf. above, footnotes 18, 42, 43. Polybius, xvi.22.1ff. Cf. Walbank, 11.526. PPL 19; 7/7.5020; K7.14592; RE 2 (1895), col. 948, no. 2; Ijsewijn, 86-87, no. 83; Diodorus Siculus, xxviii.14; and Polybius, xv.31.6-12. Cf. Walbank, 11.492. Cf. Polybius, xv.31.4ff.: "oi Se nepi xov 'AyaGoKXea, BXenovxeg fjSr; xd KaG' avxotig, eSeovxo x&v ocopaToepvXaKOJv npeoBevaai nepi avxwv npdg rovg MaKeSovag, SrjXovvxag oxi xfjg enixponeiag eKXcopovai 71  72  7 3  74  75  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  28  bodyguards, followed by an eponymous priesthood, and before long he was appointed as the guardian and regent of Ptolemy V. The career of Aristomenes is outlined below: Table # 4: Aristomenes, son of Menneas Prominent Families  Related Family  (First Important  M e m b e r in a  Member)  H i g h Position  Positions  Comments  (relation in brackets)  ARISTOMENES, son of Menneas  after 216 B.C.: 76 • an Acarnanian who came to Egypt (under Ptolemy V): • appointed by Agathocles crcopaxop6Xa^, {"Gentleman of the Bodyguard" ) • perhaps commanded the Macedonian troops at Alexandria .204/203 B.C.: • eponymous priest at Alexandria 201-? B.C.: • regent of Egypt 196-192 B.C.: • fell into disgrace and was replaced as regent 77  Aristomenes is highly praised in the literary tradition as "an admirable and virtuous administrator" serving the king's needs no less than he had catered to the needs of Agathocles : 78  6 8' dvi)p oSxog TO pev yivog fjv 'Afccxpvdv, tcccd' ocrov Si npofiaivcov KOCTCX XTJV fjXiKiav, yevopevog Kvpiog xcov oXcov npaypdxcov, KaXXiaxa Kai ospvoxaxa SOKEI npoaxfjvai xoO TE PaoiXecog Kai xfjg/JaoiXeiag, Kara xoaovxov KEKoXaKEVKEvai XTJV 'AyadoKXiovg EVKaipiav. npcdxogpiv yap cog Eavxdv ini Ssinvov KaXeaag xov 'AyadoKXiaxpvaodv oxicpavov dviScoKE povcp xcov napovxcov, 6 xoig fiaoiXEVotv avxoig sOog ioxi povoig ovyxcopEioQai, npcdxog Si XT)V EtKOva xod npoEipijpivov cpipEiv ixoXpijoEV iv x& SaKxvXicp- yEvopsvTjg Si Ovyaxpdg avxcp / » / / 79  xavxtjv 'AyaQoKXEiav npoorjyopEVOEV.  Kai xfjg aXXtjg itgovciag Kai xcov xipcov, ixi Si xcov xopnyicov cov ixovai ndvTCov, avxd Si Siovxai avyxcopnOfjvai ccpim pexd xfjg dvayKaiag Tpocpfjg, iva xcoprjaavxeg eig TTJV eg dpxfjg SovXn8evx£g in Sbvcovxai Xvneiv pijSiva. xcov piv ovv dXXcov ocopaxocpvXaKcov ovSeig V Apwxopevng Sipovog imecTn TT)V xpeiav xavxi]v 6perd rivaxpovov iiti TCOV npaypdTcov yevopevog Polybius, xv.31.7ff. Cf. Polybius, xv. 31.6-12. The most famous episode of Aristomenes and his amiable relationship to Agathocles is mentioned by Polybius, xv.31.4ff. when only Aristomenes offered to help Agathocles when his favour with the people had ended: " O J Si 7 6  77  7 8  nepi TOV 'AyaOoKXia, BXinovTeg rjSn Td Ka9' amovg, iSeovTO TCOV acoparcxpoXaKcov npeaBev npdg rovg MaKeSovag, SnXovvrag oxi xfjg imxponeiag EKXcopovai Kai Tfjg dXXng iigovoiag K in Si xcov xopnyicov cov ix° ~ ndvxcov, avxd Si xd nvevpdriov Siovxai avyxcopnOfjvai acpi dvayKaiag Tpocpfjg, iva xcoptjcravTeg eig TTJV el; dpxfjg SidGeaiv pnSi BovXndevTeg in S6v ptiSiva. TCOV piv o6v dXXcov ocopaTocpvXaKcov ovSeig vnf\Koooev, ApioTopivng Si povog vniaTt TaVTr\v 6psTa xiva xpovov ini xcov npaypdxcov yevopevog " Cf. Cary, 217. Polybius, xv.31.7ff. Cf. Bevan, Egypt, 257. vo  7 9  l  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  29  Although Aristomenes was regarded highly, it was his unique anti-Roman and proSeleucid views which contributed to the great dislike of him at the Alexandrian court, probably mirroring Ptolemy V s growing displeasure towards him. Aristomenes' political views were, perhaps, enough reason for his rivals to hate or fear him. The fear felt among the courtiers may be reflected in Epiphanes' changed attitude towards him. Epiphanes had revered Aristomenes like a father, but now suddenly sentenced him to death. Aristomenes' falling out of favour with Epiphanes was thus a combination of his foreign policies and the scheming of his enemies at the court: "Oxi 6 riroXe/iaiog 6 tfjg AiyvnxovPaaiXevgp£XP p£v xivog inrjVEixo- Apiaxopivr] Se xdv inixponov avxov yeyevripevov Kai ndvxa KaX&g SicoKTjKoxa xrjvpev dpxvv fjydna KaOanepei naxepa Kai ndvxa enpaxxev and xfjg EKEIVOV yvcbprjg- piExd SE xaGxa vnd xcov KolaKEVovxcov SiacpOapEig xfjv y/vxfjv xdv xe 'Apicrxopevrj napprjcnaC'dpEvov spicrr/crs Kai xiXog ovvrjvdyKaoEv avxdv nidvxa KCOVEIOV X£A£vxf}crai. l  S0  Aristomenes had similar views to Cleopatra I concerning Ptolemaic foreign policy. Cleopatra Fs policies are reflected in the years of peace between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kingdoms when she became regent (180-176 B.C.). This may suggest that Aristomenes was also loyal to Cleopatra I, and possibly another reason for his enemies to plot against him. Unfortunately, there is no extant evidence to prove this theory.  Thus, unsatisfied with  Aristomenes, the Alexandrian populace soon turned to another courtier who had more familiar views in terms of foreign policy. We turn next to Polycrates.  1.2.3 Polycrates  81  After Aristomenes' demise, Polycrates and members of his family reached prominent posts  Diodorus Siculus, xxviii.14. PP77.2172; VI. 15065; 21 (1952), coll. 1735-1736, no. 4; Holleaux, 111.75-76; and Ijsewijn, 103-105, no. 117.  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  30  within the Ptolemaic kingdom. We hear of him for the first time with his appointment to numerous distinguished military posts in the early part of the third century B.C.  Polycrates owed his  promotions mainly to Sosibius and Agathocles and became a very influential and important 82  minister to both Ptolemy IV and Ptolemy V . Typical of the prominent aristocratic court families, 83  Polycrates' family had also been powerful at the height of his ministerial influence. Polycrates' early career had relied on the support of Sosibius and Agathocles, however, Mnasiadas, his father, had been the distinguished eponymous priest the year (218/217 B.C.) forecasting the future importance of his family members.  84  before Agathocles thus  Although, Polycrates required  Agathocles for his early appointments, Polycrates' career continued to thrive after Agathocles had died therefore revealing the extent of influence this powerful aristocratic family enjoyed at the Ptolemaic court. Polycrates' career began with several important military posts and in 203 B.C. he became 85  arparriyog of Cyprus. He acquired this post after Agathocles' death, receiving this appointment independent of the powerful ministers, Sosibius and Agathocles, but with the support of the Alexandrian populace . Cyprus, along with Cyrenaica, Syria, and Phoenicia, formed the four vital 86  87  areas of Egypt's frontiers that protected the Ptolemaic dynasty from both land and naval attack . The arpaziiyoi of each of these areas, especially Cyprus, were the most trusted and influential ministers of the Ptolemies and "were always among the highest-ranking administrators in the  PP77.2172. Cf. Polybius, v.64.4-7, 65.5, 82.3, 84.8. Cf. Walbank, 1.589; 11.490. PP F7.14546, 17232; RE 23 (1959), coll. 1691-1702, no. 33; Samuel, 108-114, Gnomon 38 (1966), 714-715; Abel, K . Hermes 95 (1967), 72-90; Mooren, Hierarchie, 42; and Polybius, xviii.55.5. Cf. above, 18 and below, footnote 91. Polybius, v.64.4-7, 65.5, 82.3, 84.8. Cf. Bevan, Egypt, 227 and Bouche-Leclercq, Lagides, 1.291. Bouche-Leclercq, Lagides, 1.291 and Bagnall, 219. Bagnall, 240.  8 2  8 3  84  8 5  8 6  8 7  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  31  service of the Ptolemies, and in the second century B.C. they were the most exalted Ptolemaic officials outside Egypt" . Although clearly an advocate of Agathocles and Sosibius, through 88  whom he had been promoted to his various military posts, Polycrates' career did not suffer as he was not incriminated along with Agathocles' and his supporters by the Alexandrian mob as a traitor against the monarchy. Polycrates' died in 185 B.C. while trying to suppress the Egyptian revolts.  He had  become one of Ptolemy V s most influential ministers. Indicative of the longevity of prominent aristocratic families in Egypt, Polycrates' family continued to thrive and to obtain positions of importance at the Ptolemaic court . 89  Polycrates' family history thus reveals the depth of an aristocratic family. With the death of an influential minister, there was always another to take his place.  Polycrates replaced  Aristomenes as regent in 192 B.C. amidst much Egyptian support. It is perhaps not coincidental that his past association with the Egyptian people - when he was given the task of training the new native recruits in 217 B.C. - was one of the factors that gained him popular support and led to his 90  promotion to regent in 192 B.C. The successful careers of each of Polycrates and his distinguished family members have been compiled in the table below:  Pomeroy, 42. Cf. Bagnall, 219. Walbank (11.627) comments on Polycrates' rough period at this important post "owing to the threat from Antiochus and perhaps Philip". Cf. Mooren, Families, 292. The introduction of this new policy to the army resulted in a greater influence of the native element on Egyptian life (Walbank, 1.592). 8 9  9 0  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  32  Table # 5: Family of Mnasiadas, son of Polycrates Related Family Member in a High Position (relation in brackets)  Prominent Families (First Important Member) M N A S I A D A S of Argos, son of Polycrates 9 1  95 PTOLEMY (son) POLYCRATES (son)  POLYCRATES (II, son of Polycrates]  100  HERMIONE (daughter of Polycrates II) 102 POLYCRATES (son of Polycrates II)  Positions  Comments  218/217 B.C.: • eponymous priest in Alexandria (?): , , „ • bore the title apxicrcopatocpvXag 98 soon after 220 B.C.: - Mooren ranks the titulary honours in the • entrusted with a high military command (by Sosibius and following order by their importance: Agathocles) /. 6 avyyevrig pre-217 B.C. (pre-Battle of Raphia): 2. T&V itpanmv (piXcov • enrolled and trained the 100's of 3. 6 apxioa>paTO<pi>\afy native Egyptians in the native TCOV apxioconamqivXaKtov phalanx 4. TCOV (piXxov 217 B.C. (Battle at Raphia): 5. rcov SiaSoxtov 93 • commanded cavalry 6. TCOV atofiatcxpvXaKxov 203(?)-197 B.C.: - Despite the gap in our sources between (around Agathocles' death): 217 to 203 B.C., Bagnall believes that • otpaTTiyoc of Cyprus, succeeding Polycrates continued to rise in his position 94 based on the high position of his female Pelops relatives around the period of Philopator's (?): 99 • bore the title x&v Kpdaxcov (piXrov and Arsinoe Ill's deaths. 197 B.C.: • at Ptolemy Vs Anakleteria, he played the most prominent role in the 95 ceremony 192(?) B.C.- end of Epiphanes' reign: replaced Aristomenes as - His foreign policy was for Egypt to alienate 96 the Seleucid Dynasty and to support the regent/prime minister Romans. 185/4 B.C.: 97 fought against rebellious Egyptians • bore the title npdkog cpiXog 170/69 B.C.:  •  d6Xo<popfj in Alexandria  (?): • bore the title  dpxioo)pcxtcHp6Xa^  Cf. Polybius, xviii.55.5. PP VI. 15233, 15770. Cf. Polybius, v.64.4-6, 65.5, 82.3, 84.8. OGIS 1.90 n. 20; SEG xx. 194; SB VIII. 10108; and Polybius, xviii.55.6. Cf. Polybius, xviii.54.1, 55.4. Diodorus Siculus, xxviii. 14 and Plutarch, Moralia, 71c-d. For length of this post, cf. Polybius, xxii. 17. Cf. Polybius, xxii. 17.3, 17.7. Mooren, Hierarchie, 36. Cf. Bagnall, 253. Bagnall bases his argument on Polybius' account (xv.29.10) of how Polycrates' relatives tried to console Oenanthe, but being rebuffed cursed her heartily. PP VI. 15233. 101 p . 17209; and/ . Lond. dem ined. 10513. 102 p yji ioi 12 1. 2. Cf. Walbank, 11.483, 488.  9 1  9 2  9 3  9 4  9 5  9 6  9 7  9 8  9 9  1 0 0  5  p I J I 5 l  p  5110  1 9  VI  m  d  S  B  v  m  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  33  Last of all, I turn briefly to a discussion of Philammon, representing those other ministers whose careers changed drastically with a change in the monarch.  1.2.4 Philammon  103  Unlike Polycrates, Philammon was the prime example of the fate of weaker aristocrats, who not only lacked family solidarity and security (as seen with Polycrates' family), but also lost their influence, and their lives, when a change occurred in the Ptolemaic court structure. Philammon did not have a strong family and thus his career heavily relied on the career of those who had promoted him, in his case, Agathocles.  A brief outline of Philammon's career is  displayed in the table below: Table # 6. Philammon Prominent Families (First Important Member)  PHILAMMON  Related Family Member in a High Position (relation in brackets)  Positions  Comments  (?): • blamed as the person who murdered Arsinoe III (?):  •  Aipvapxngm Cyrene  Philammon's career and demise is typical of the fate of aristocratic families with a change of monarch. A new monarch might have his own retinue, which consisted of an entirely different group of attendants and courtiers than that utilised by the last monarch . However, as 106  already seen with the reigns of Ptolemy IV and Ptolemy V, the most influential and powerful  PP VI. 15082; RE 19 (1938), coll. 21-23, no. 2; and Polybius, xv.25.12, 26a. 1. Mooren, Families, 290. Polybius, xv.25.12. Cf. Walbank, 11.483-484, who does not believe that this financial post was even an official title. This is none more clearly seen than with Cleopatra I's usage of her personal attendants (cf. chapters two and five). 1UJ  1 0 4  1 0 5  1 0 6  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  34  aristocratic families could also control several successive monarchs  107  With Cleopatra I's  succession as regent, though, there was a cessation of ministerial manipulation and influence on the monarchy.  1.3 Cleopatra I's Relationship with These Significant Families As much as there is evidence for careers of the courtiers so too is evidence for Cleopatra I's involvement and association with these families lacking.  Although any suggestion of her  association with the ministers serving her husband is unprovable, several things can be conjectured. First of all, whether or not Aristomenes had any contact with Cleopatra I throughout his service at the Ptolemaic court, he was one of the only ministers who favoured a pro-Seleucid policy.  Aristomenes favoured a policy of peace with the Seleucids and hostility towards the  Romans. This fact alone suggests, at the very least, a possibility that there was some connection between Cleopatra I and him. His murder at the insistence of his court enemies may further show that a connection between himself and Cleopatra I existed since they shared the same "dangerous" views. Secondly, if anything, history has revealed the necessity for "internal" support when any significant change to a ruling structure was planned . 108  With the accession of a monarch,  supportive courtiers, who must already be in important posts and offices, are immediately promoted to the most prominent positions. Thirdly, this chapter has revealed that the ministers not only grew in power but also in corruptibility. However, after the death of Agathocles, the Alexandrian populace became a large factor in determining the king's chief advisors. It is unknown which ministers supported Cleopatra I. However, she must have received  1 0 7  1 0 8  Such as the families and connections to Sosibius and Agathocles. Cf. chapter two, footnote 51.  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  35  some aid, since lack of sufficient support would have seen her suffer the same fate as her predecessor Arsinoe UI. One can only surmise that with the successes of Cleopatra I both before and during her regency, even if grudgingly, she would have received the support of several of these prominent families. That descendants of these prominent families continued to hold important court posts after Cleopatra I's time proves this possibility. Full-scale support, then, came from her own adherents and attendants, whom she immediately appointed to important posts and offices at the Ptolemaic court.  1.4 Summary The dominance of influential aristocratic families in Ptolemaic politics is very apparent not only in the case of Sosibius' and Agathocles' own families, but also of the aristocratic families associated and connected to them. These courtiers were thefirstgroup to benefit and grow more influential at the court as a direct result of the erosion of the king's power beginning with Ptolemy IV. The weakening of the king's power gave an opportunity for this institution, and others, to gain more influence and control of dynastic affairs and politics. These prominent aristocratic families quickly formed a formidable oligarchic faction to control and influence the monarch whereby, even with a change in the monarchy, one member from these aristocratic families was already in a close position to the successor. dominance.  Cleopatra I's regency would, however, put an end to this  Cleopatra I represents the next institution, the Ptolemaic queenship, that gained  greater influence at the court as a direct result of the erosion of the king's power.  Just as  Agathocles' supporters were promoted to high court positions through Alexandrian popular support, so too did Cleopatra I rely on the same support for her own promotion. Thus, through a  Ptolemaic Aristocratic Families  36  study of the Ptolemaic courtiers, we have taken the first step to understanding how Cleopatra I became regent. First and foremost, Cleopatra I took advantage of the same opportunity which enabled the courtiers to become so powerful at the court; through the successive accession of weak kings beginning with Ptolemy IV. Second of all, Cleopatra I proved how only a strong monarch, even if it was a queen, and one with widespread popular support, could suppress the influence of these courtiers and their circle of supporters. A queen was, after all, at the pinnacle of power in a monarchic government.  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  37  CHAPTER T W O  History knows of some persons of this unfortunate class, whose spirit triumphed over their physical disabilities.' Eunuchs played very prominent roles at the ancient courts where they were employed and tolerated. Eunuchs were prominent in the Achaemenid Empire, serving not only as guardians of the king's harem , but also as loyal protectors and supporters of the throne . The earliest known 2  3  eunuchs were found at Cambyses' court and continued to hold different posts and offices in the 4  service of successive Persian kings after Cambyses : "bereits im Achaimenidenreich gab es nicht 5  nur am Hof des Grofikonigs, sondern auch in den Hausern der Hocharistokratie Eunuchen" . 6  When the Persian kingdom was conquered by Alexander the Great in the late fourth century B.C., Alexander adopted Persian methods and customs to the dismay of his generals and Greek subjects. As a result of this, it is not surprising to hear of eunuchs in those Hellenistic kingdoms formed from the Persian Empire. The earliest mention of eunuchs is in the Seleucid court . 7  After eunuchs became institutionalized in the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms , they appeared 8  in the other Hellenistic kingdoms of Pontus, Bosporus, Cappadocia, Judaea, Cilicia, Parthia, and Armenia and then in the Roman Empire . 9  Bevan, Egypt, 185. This function remaining true to their Greek name, evvovzog, which means "keeping the bed" (Liddell and Scott, 329). Herodotus, 3.92. Cambyses (530-522 B.C.) was the second Persian king after Cyrus the Great (560-530 B.C.). Aspadates (cf. Ktesias, FGrHist 688, F. 13) and Izabatas (ibid.) were extremely influential and important court-eunuchs to Cambyses. Cf. Guyot, "Prosopographie der Hofeunuchen". Guyot, "Prosopographie der Hofeunuchen" passim. Guyot, 52. For more on this, cf Hitti, chp. xixff. Eunuchs were introduced permanently into the Ptolemaic kingdom by Cleopatra I as ministers and attendants (cf. section 2.2ff. and chapter five). Guyot, passim. 1  2  3 4  5  6  7  8  9  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  38  Throughout antiquity eunuchs have been scornfully referred to as a treacherous, unintelligent, and licentious group, epitomizing the ancients' characterization of a 'barbarian' . 10  Eunuchs were deeply despised by Classical authors mainly because of their "oriental" classification: "the disgust expressed by Classical scholars at the alien customs of Persia was tempered by an acknowledgement of the trustworthiness which the eunuchs displayed to their royal masters" . This hateful characterization of eunuchs has even extended down to modern 11  times. Bevan vividly represents this position. For example, he explained Antiochus IV's great success thus: "instead of growing up in a palace among eunuchs and courtiers, he had grown up in Rome" . Charged as effeminate because of their castration and deemed 'pleasure-boys' 12  13  because of their favoured positions and service to queens and princesses, the condemnation of eunuchs has been an unfortunate course of scholarship . However, a closer investigation of 14  their importance shows how unfounded and unjust this view is. Eunuchs were, in fact, a highly intelligent and loyal group of slaves and advisors . 15  Cleopatra I's retinue included eunuchs and they may have been quite important in her bid for the regency. Institutionalised in the Ptolemaic court by Cleopatra I, eunuchs continued to appear sporadically at important positions at the Ptolemaic court as personal advisors and attendants . 16  Their worth to their royal masters seemed well-founded, even statesmen of the Roman Empire  Castration was viewed in antiquity as "barbaric" {cf. Herodotus: "... dvrjp Xiog, 6g xr)v £6r]v KaxEcrxTjcraxo an' avocncoTaxcov OKcvg yap Kxtjaaixo naiSag eiSeog enappevovg, EKxdpvcov dyivecov encvXee eg ZapSig xe Kai "E(peaov xpwdxcov peyaXcov. napd yap xoiai Bappdpoiai xipicoxepoi eicri oi evvovxoi nic EivsKa xfjg ndarig xwv dvopxEcvv." [8.105]). OCD , 569. Cf Herodotus, 8.105 and Xenophon, Cyrenaica, 7.5.58ff. Bevan, Seleucus, 11.128. Guyot, section 3.3. For more on this negative opinion of eunuchs, cf. Guyot, section 2.2. A point also argued by Callisthenes of Olynthus, the nephew of Aristotle. Cf. Table #10.  1 0  ipycvv  11  1 2  1 3  1 4 1 5 16  3  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  39  employed them in their households as early as Augustus and as late as Septimius Severus . 17  18  Augustus, Gaius Maecenas , and Tiberius' advisor, Lucius Aelius Seianus 19  20  all employed  eunuchs in their households. They were soon found in the entourage of Roman emperors such as Claudius , Nero , and Septimius Severus . By Diocletian's time (A.D. 285), imperial court 21  22  23  eunuchs were courtiers "on whom the whole palace and the emperor himself depended" . And 24  by the fourth century A.D., it became common for Roman senators to possess "throngs of eunuchs" . Although classical authors do them no justice, their institutionalization in the most 25  prominent and powerful empires of Persia, Syria, Egypt, and Rome as slaves, tutors, guardians, commanders, and advisors leaves no doubt about their abilities and worth to their masters.  2.1 Aristonicus It is very surprising to find Aristonicus, the first known eunuch, in the Ptolemaic kingdom, among the most honoured individuals at Ptolemy V s court. Not unexpectedly, there is much mystery surrounding Aristonicus' appearance. First, we do not know when Aristonicus arrived in Egypt or who was behind his promotion. Presumably, he was from the Near East where eunuchs were most prominent and numerous. Second, it is very odd that Polybius did not criticize and  Emperor of Rome from 27 B.C. to A.D. 14. Emperor of Rome from A.D. 193 to 211. Seneca, Ep., 114.6. Pliny, HN; 7.129. Suetonius, Claudius, 28. Suetonius, Nero, 28. CassiusDio, 75.14. Lactantius, 15. Amm. Marc. 14.6.17. PP 77.2152, 2194; 777.5022; 7K.8079, 10147; VI. 14895, 15187; RE 2 (1896) col. 961, no. 8; and Mooren, Titulature, 146-149. This Aristonicus is not to be confused with Aristonicus, the illegitimate half-brother of Attalus III of Pergamum (cf. Green and OCD ), nor with Aristonicus, son of Perilaos, the Priest of Alexander during Ptolemy II's reign (PP III.5021; VI. 14897; and Clarysse & Van Der Veken, 6-7). 17  18  19  20 21  22 23  24 25 26  3  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  40  condemn Aristonicus as he did in the case of Eulaeus later . 27  Significantly, Aristonicus was  seldom referred to in antiquity as a eunuch, but as an Alexandrian and the son of another Aristonicus ; that is, a Greek. Although his origins are unclear, it is certain that he was a eunuch 28  in the service of a Ptolemy: ""On 'ApiaroviKog 6 tov IJtoAepaiov tov BaaiXecog Aiyvmov evvovxog pev  TJ^  2 9  .  Aristonicus' pre-eminence at the court is undisguiseable. Ascending through the ranks of ministers and courtiers like any other noble, he attained very distinguished positions under Ptolemy V. In the words of Holbl: 185 finden wir Aristonikos, Eunuch und Freund des Epiphanes seit dem Kleinkindesalter in Griechenland bei der Anwerbung von Soldnern. Dieser erste Palasteunuch, der uns in der Ptolemaergeschichte als historische Personlichkeit entgegentritt, hatte schon eine Karriere als Diplomat, Alexanderpriester und Retierkommandant hinter sich. Noch vor Mitte 182 leitete er eine Flottenexpedition nach Syrien, und zwar in die Gegend von Apameia und zur Insel Arados, von wo er mit reicher Beute heimgekehrt sein soil. Diese Aktion stellte den faktischen Auftakt zu einem von Epiphanes geplanten, syrischen Krieg dar. 30  Aristonicus' career and life - acquired from both classical and modern sources - have been compiled in the following table:  Cf section 2.2 below. Polybius is ruthless in portraying Eulaeus and blames all the faults and downfalls of the dynasty on him. Cf Syll 585,1. 140 (the Second Decree ofPhilai) and Guyot, 103,183. Polybius, xxii.22. Cf Walbank, III.205, 213. Holbl, 127. 28  2 9  3 0  3  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  41  Table #7: Aristonicus, First Palace Eunuch Masters Served Under  Eunuch ARISTONICUS,  •  Ptolemy V  son of Aristonicus  Comments  Positions  •  31  cr6vrpo<pog of the king  188/7 B.C.: an active envoy for Ptolemy  v  32  187/6 B.C.: • priest of Alexander and the I  - Eunuchs were sometimes brought up with the young princes and sometimes were even 36 admitted into the prince's presence  -A  3  3  Lagides 185 (?)B.C: • sent to recruit mercenaries abroad for the upcoming battle(s) against Antiochus III Other ranks and titles: bore the Hellenistic court rank of 34  - As the priest of Alexander, Aristonicus was in charge of the various ceremonies that 37 were to be held for the royal couple  tcov cpiXcov  182 (?)B.C: • bore the title „0berst der Hipparchen" • supreme commander of a fleet and 35  As was the case with the prominent ministers and courtiers , Aristonicus also appeared very suddenly in the innermost positions of the Ptolemaic court.  His first position as a  ovvrpcxpoc; (that is, a childhood companion ) to Ptolemy V was a very distinguished post: 39  PP77.2152. Cf. Polybius, xxii.22.1; die Second Decree of Philai (Syll. 585,1. 140); and Walbank, 1.547; III.213. Aristonicus' outstanding diplomatic skills are commented on by Polybius (xxii.22.4). Cf. Walbank, 1.213. Second Decree of Philai (5y//. 585,1. 140). Cf. Ijsewijn, 94, no. 100 and Clarysse & Van Der Veken, 22. Aristonicus was only one of two eunuchs at die Ptolemaic court to bear a Hellenistic court rank; die other was Archias (cf. section 2.3). Guyot (115) believes that tiiese two appointments were made mainly on the strength of personal merit. Both eunuchs were mentioned as close personal attendants to their kings. Guyot, 115 and AEZ 53 (1917), 48. Guyot (109): "Eunuchen waren Sklaven, aber gewohnlich wurden nur Kinder vornehmer Familien zusammen mit der Prinzen erzogen. Es wird hier deutlich, dafi gelegentlich auch Sklaven in die Umgebung des Konigs aufgenommen wurden". Holbl (147) has listed several of such ceremonies: "Die in Alexandria anwesenden Priester beschliefien daher Ehrungen fur das Konigspaar, die denjenigen der Dekrete von 217 und 196 sehr ahrdich sind: Zusdtzliche Statuen des Konigspaares zusammen mit dem jeweiligen Stadtgott sollen in den Heiligtiimern des Landes aufgestelltwerden und einen Kult erhalten; der Tag der Schlacht und der Tag der Siegesmeldung (= Tag des Synodalbeschlusses) sollen kunflig in den Tempeln alsFesttage begangen werden". Cf. chapter one. A crbvTpocpoq was normally a Greek boy from a prominent family who was around the same age as the young prince and who would go on to be a life-long advisor and loyal friend to die king. 31  3  3 2  3 3  3 4  3 5  3 6  3 7  38  3 9  3  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  42  "On ApiaroviKog 6 rod rJroXepaiov rod PaaiXecog Aiyvmov evvov%ogpev fjv, EK naiSiov 8' iyeyovEi crvvrpocpog rep PaoiXsT. tfjg 8' fjXiKiag npofiai vovarjg avSpcoSccrrEpav EIXEV ,  ,  KCCT EVVOVXOV  ,i  40  roApav Kai npoaipsoiv.  Most of the ministers serving under Ptolemies IV and V had been promoted to their positions through their association with either Sosibius or Agathocles . However, the individual at the court 41  responsible for installing Aristonicus as a crvvrpocpog of Ptolemy V is not known. Considering the general hostility toward eunuchs, one can surmise that the individual who installed thisfirsteunuch into the Ptolemaic court and to a position so close to the heir apparent kept his identity anonymous to prevent any repercussions on himself and his career . This post was always given to young 42  members of powerful aristocratic families who would bring prestige and influence to their families when the heir apparent became king and his cvvrpocpoi, his chief advisors . 43  It was not an  insignificant appointment. However, Aristonicus was neither a member of a prominent family nor was he an aristocrat, which makes his supporter difficult to determine.  Polybius, xxii.22. Cf. footnote 31. Cf. chapter one. This assumption is based on the fact that the Ptolemaic court was still following traditional Greek customs and thus a similar anti-'oriental' reaction like the one Alexander the Great faced when he tried to mix Greek with 'barbarian' customs would be expected. Thus, based on Macedonian protocols and attitudes, it is very unlikely that Sosibius, an Alexandrian (and so Greco-Macedonian), would have supported and promoted Aristonicus since he probably despised this group as much as any other Greco-Macedonian. However, the fact remains that the individual who supported Aristonicus had to be a member of some prominent family during Ptolemy IV's reign, not Greco-Macedonian, and thus one who migrated to Egypt. Therefore, Agathocles could have possibly been the one who promoted Aristonicus. Not only had Agathocles' family migrated to Egypt, but upon the accession of Ptolemy V , Agathocles did not have as much political influence at the court as Sosibius and so it is very plausible that Agathocles promoted Aristonicus to secure important future connections at the Ptolemaic court (for further, cf. chapter one, section 1.1.2). Aristomenes could also have installed Aristonicus into the Ptolemaic court because he was also an emigrant to Egypt, but more importantly, ltis foreign policies were very different from those of any other aristocrat. Aristomenes had pro-Seleucid views which would explain his neutrality toward eunuchs (who were prominent in the Persian Empire and then in the Seleucid kingdom) and his understanding of their usefulness and loyalty. B y promoting Aristonicus, Aristomenes was strengthening his position at the court and establishing important, and necessary, internal court connections for his future endeavours (for further, cf. chapter one). This "institution of the Old Macedonian Kingdom was kept up by the Ptolemies of Egypt, as it had in other Hellenistic courts of those days and gave social prestige to a certain number of families" (Bevan, Egypt, 123). 41  4 2  4 3  TJ  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  43  Aristonicus appears to have escaped much of the slander normally directed at eunuchs. Polybius not only mentioned Aristonicus' background as a eunuch, but also openly praised his abilities both as a military advisor and as an able diplomat to Ptolemy V: Kai yap cpvaei axpaxicoxiKog fjv Kai xfjv nXeiaxr]v enoieixo Siaxpifirfv iv xovxoig Kai nepi  xaOxa. napanXr]cncog Si Kai Kaxd xdg ivxevq'eig iKavdg vnfjpxe Kai xov KOIVOV vovv eixev, o andviov iaxi. npdg Si xovxoig npdg evepyeaiav dvdpcbncov necpVKei KaXcog. 44  Kai napayevopevog eig xr)v NavKpaxiv pexd xfjg axpaxiag, Kai napaoxijoavxog avxcp x etgevoXoyryxevovg dvSpag EK xfjg 'EXXdSog 'ApiaxoviKov, npoaSe^dpevog xovxovg anenXevoev eig 'AXe^dvSpeiav, xcov piv xov noXepov npd^ecov ovSepidg KeKoivcovrjK Sid XTJV IJoXvKpdxovg dSiKoSo^iav, Kainep exoiv exr\ nevxe Kai eiKoaiv.  45  Regardless of how esteemed Aristonicus' role at the Ptolemaic court appeared, he has still been unanimously regarded by scholars as a slave. The message was clear, Greek antiquity did not wholly trust eunuchs, still termed 'barbarians' at this time, nor accept them into the inner circles of society normally reserved for more 'noble' individuals. However, he was a slave who had far exceeded the positions normally attained by eunuchs and this was what distinguished Aristonicus from the other ovvxpocpoi and ministers at the court: "...viele von ihnen haben im Auftrag des Herrschers Funktionen erfullt,  die weit iiber die Aufgaben und Moglichkeiten der  Hofdienerschaft hinausgingen.. " . 46  Contrary to how ancient sources normally portrayed 'his kind', the fact that Aristonicus had a very successful career at the Ptolemaic court before eunuchs were formally introduced to the Ptolemaic court by Cleopatra I - most notably Eulaeus - makes him one of the most 47  intriguing figures in Ptolemaic history. It is no coincidence that eunuchs after him reached even more prestigious and respected positions in Egypt. Aristonicus no doubt paved the way for the 44 45 46 47  Polybius, xxii.22. Cf. footnotes 29, 31, and 32. Polybius, xxii. 17. Cf. Walbank, III.205. Guyot, 103. The eunuch who served Cleopatra I and, who later himself, became the regent of the Egyptian kingdom (cf.  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  44  eventual rise in power and rank of Eulaeus, and afterwards of Archias. However, as in the case of other ministers and courtiers, Aristonicus soon disappeared from the Ptolemaic scene around the same time as Epiphanes' death (180 B.C.).  2.2 Eulaeus  48  After Aristonicus, Eulaeus became the next prominent eunuch at the Ptolemaic court. It is likely that Eulaeus was part of Cleopatra Fs retinue when she came to Egypt, since eunuchs had already been used at the Seleucid court. A famous episode that involved eunuchs at the Seleucid court in the reign of Cleopatra I's father, Antiochus III, was when Antiochus III utilised a eunuch to murder his own son, Magnus luctus in regia fuit magnumque eius iuvenis desiderium; id enim iam specimen sui dederat ut, si vita longior contigisset, magni iustique regis in eo indolem fuisse appareret. Quo carior acceptiorque omnibus erat, eo mors eius suspectior fuit, gravem successorem eum instare senectuti suae patrem credentem per spadones quosdam, talium ministeriis facinorum acceptos regibus, veneno sustulisse. Earn quoque causam clandestino facinori adiciebant... 49  Cleopatra I's importation of new supporters (i.e. eunuchs from her personal retinue) to Egypt provided the strong foundation on which she might rely instead of the manipulative and unreliable support of the prominent courtiers at the Ptolemaic court . Earlier precedents in 50  Pharaonic history also show powerful queens utilising their personal retinue to achieve goals . 51  footnote 48). PP VI, 14602; RE 6 (1909), col. 1063, no. 2; Otto, Iff.; Morkholm, Eulaios and Lenaios, 32-43; Bikerman, E. "Sur la chronolgie de la sixieme guerre de Syrie". Chronique d'egypte 54 (1952), 396-403; and Gnomon 35 (1963), 71-75. Livy, xxxv. xv. 3-5. Cf Hitti, clip, xixff. Cf. chapter three (on the abusive treatment of Arsinoe III at the hands of the ministers). For example, in the Twentieth Pharaonic Dynasty, there was a royal woman named Tiy who wanted to assassinate Ramses III and to put her own son on the throne. It lias been recorded that among her supporters of this crime were other palace women and a small group of palace officials, most likely officials in her own retinue. This is a practice not confined to royal women in Egypt alone, but is a practice for any court cabal or conspiracy (Robins, 38). Cf. Tyldesley, 200-202 and De Buck, A. "The Judicial Papyrus of Turin." JEA 23 (1937), 152-64. 48  49 50  51  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  45 52  Furthermore, the loyalty of, specifically, eunuchs was well known in antiquity . Cleopatra I, however, went one step further and took steps to install her own supporters as a permanent fixture of the Ptolemaic court. Eulaeus and Ptolemaic court eunuchs after him reveal her success at doing just that. Eulaeus, although initially still in the role of a slave, acted as a powerful court figure under several successive rulers. This longevity in remaining in the service of the Ptolemies was a privilege of members of the most prominent families at the Ptolemaic court, since only they had enough support and internal connections to maintain such a position at the court. The following chart outlines what is known of Eulaeus' career: Table # 8: Eulaeus Masters Served Under  Eunuch  EULAEUS  Positions  •  Ptolemy V  •  in the service of the women  •  Cleopatra 1  •  Ptolemy VI  180-176 B.C.: • advisor to the regent • o6vcpo<pog ("tutor") for Ptolemy V I 176 B.C.: 54 • appointed guardian and regent for the young king 170/69 B.C.: • commanded the campaign against Antiochus IV 5 3  Comments  - "Eulaios war Kammerer der koniglichen ••55 Frauen am Ptolemaerhof. - Nutritius/Ti8ev6g/cr6vTpo<pog became the 56 official term for an attendant of a child .  Eulaeus' career, atfirst,was neither significant nor distinguished. Wefirsthear of him as an attendant of the royal women - the most typical post, from Persian times, for eunuchs. At this  Cf. footnote 10 for Herodotus' passage on the loyalty of eunuchs to their masters. Porphyrius, FgrHist. 260, F. 49 "nutritius" (cf Appendix CC). Cf. Morkholm, Eulaios and Lenaios, 32. For Eulaeus as guardian, cf. Diodorus Siculus, xxx.15, 16 "eitizpoKoq" and Livy, xlii.29 "tutor regis". Duties of the guardian (Guyot, 112): i) die Personenfursorge, ii) die Vennogensfursorge, iii) Vertretung des Mundels. Guyot, 105. Cf. Diodorus Siculus, xxx.15. Guyot also believes that the eunuchs of Cleopatra III and Cleopatra VII also occupied these initial positions. This classification was first developed by Otto, 3. 5 3  5 4  5 5  5 6  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  46  post, Eulaeus was considered a slave and nothing more, "Am Ptolemaerhof war Eulaios ehemals ein Sklave gewesen.. ," . 57  Thereafter, he became a personal advisor to the regent, Cleopatra I.  One can only  surmise from this promotion from an insignificant position to that of a powerful advisor that Eulaeus, from the beginning, was a close personal attendant and advisor of Cleopatra I. Thus, Eulaeus is important because his career is a reflection of Cleopatra I's own career at the court. It is no coincidence that he became powerful and influential at the court when Cleopatra I became regent in 180 B.C. Likewise, his exclusion from Ptolemaic politics prior to this time reflected Cleopatra I's own lack of power. Shortly after his promotion to 'the regent's advisor', he was soon further promoted by Cleopatra I to the prestigious position as the young Ptolemy VPs avvrpocpog (i.e. personal tutor). Finally, with the very sudden death of Cleopatra I in 176 B.C. , Eulaeus became the 58  guardian and regent for the young Ptolemy VI, "Ptolemaeus propter aetatem alieni turn arbitrii erat; tutores..." . Eulaeus' prominence at the Ptolemaic court from the moment he became 59  advisor to Cleopatra I to the time of his own regency raises many questions. Most suspicious is the mystery behind Cleopatra I's premature death which, I believe, Eulaeus very possibly had some part in. Unfortunately, no extant evidence survives to resolve these and many other problems. The extant evidence that does survive on Eulaeus is misleading and is very biased against the class of eunuchs as a whole . 60  Guyot, 102-103. Cf. introductory chapter. Livy, xlii.xxix.7. Eulaeus did manage to have coins with mint marks bearing Ins initials which suggests his attempts at justifying his political position and influence (cf. Jouguet, Pierre. "Eulaeos et Lenaeos. Observations sur la sixieme guerre syrienne." Bulletin de I'institut d'egypte 19 [1936-37], 157-174 describes how they made many preparations before 5 7  58  5 9  6 0  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  47  The literary tradition treating Eulaeus' career is even more limited than many other ministers. Although Eulaeus' direction of Ptolemaic affairs matched the dominance of Sosibius and Agathocles, he has been subject to the abuse and hostility of the ancient sources. Everything that went wrong during Ptolemy VI's reign has been blamed on Eulaeus and his co-regent, Lenaeus . Such negative opinions are no doubt a result of his background and origin. The most 61  damaging misconception results from a misinterpretation of the ancient texts themselves with regard to Eulaeus' and Lenaeus' regency. Eulaeus and Lenaeus are portrayed as being lazy and idle when, in fact, a more correct description was that of inexperience. As Lewis points out, one important word, inertia, from a Livian passage has continuously been incorrectly translated as "lazy" or "idle" due to scholars' biases, "...est-il dans le sens de paresse qu'inertia s'est etablie 62  dans la traduction anglaise du texte livien sous nos yeux" . The other translation for inertia is "inexperience", but this translation is not used. It is evident from the ancient sources  that this  latter meaning was meant to describe Eulaeus and Lenaeus : "Les historiens - de nos jours 64  comme dans l'antiquite - ont manifeste bien peu de sympathie envers les parvenus Eulaeus et Lenaeus. Mais l'inactivite est assurement une fautc.tout au contraire, de leur activite intense, de leurs preparatifs de guerre..." . Our extant knowledge concerning Eulaeus, both with regard 65  fighting Antiochus IV). Cf. Polybius, xxvii.19.1; xxviii.21.1ff. and Diodorus Siculus, xxx.17.1. Cf. Walbank, III.319. Lewis, " A d Livium 42.29.5: Appendicule A „Eulaeos et Lenaeos." Journal of Juristic Papyrology. IV (1950), 265. This negative opinion of Eulaeus and Lenaeus stems from the Polybian tradition, which unfortunately is still accepted without question. For examples cf. Livy, xlii.xxix.7. The bias opinion of Eulaeus' and Lenaeus' rule, because of the Polybian tradition, is evident in the following translations of Livy's line: "The inactive disposition of his guardians" (Baker, George. The History of Rome by Titus Livius. Vol. VI. [1823] Philadelphia, 83; Vol. II. [1830 and 1855] London and New York, 425: "his unenterprising guardians", "the sluggishness of his guardians"). Lewis, " A d Livium 42.29.5: Appendicule A „Eulaeos et Lenaeos", 266. 61  6 2  6 3  6 4  6 5  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  48  to his rise to power and his ability, dispels this negative image of eunuchs as useless, idle, and lazy individuals. There have been several comments on Cleopatra I's aims with regard to her use of eunuchs, but the most damaging speculation was made by Macurdy who said: "Whether by design of the queen-regent [Cleopatra] or by accident, the control of her three children and the management of the government passed into the hands of a eunuch Eulaeus and a man from Coele-Syria, Lenaeus, who had been a slave" . Surely Cleopatra I did not intend to hand over 66  ruling power to her ministers especially when she was always acting in the best interests of the kingdom and her son! Even if Cleopatra I had not wanted to hand power to her son when he came of age, both Pharaonic and Greek custom demanded patrilineal descent and the country, its inhabitants, and Egyptian religion would have forced her to do so. It is certain that Cleopatra I worked hard to establish and legitimise her progeny into the Ptolemaic framework and had no intentions of allowing ministers or attendants to deny her children their right to the throne . 67  Indeed it was her sudden death that spelt ruin for the kingdom since it became temporarily controlled by her attendants . 68  Eulaeus represented a new breed of ministers at the Ptolemaic court, since, although Aristonicus was the first palace eunuch, his origin was not portrayed as such in the ancient sources. Eulaeus' importance, like Cleopatra I's regency, however, lies mainly in the precedent his powerful position provided for future eunuchs; their permanent installation at the court and a marked increase in power when compared to earlier eunuchs. Likewise, Cleopatra I's regency  6 6  6 7  6 8  Macurdy, 148. The danger to the kingdom under the control of powerful ministers lias already been stressed in the last chapter. Cf. chapters five (and four) below. The kingdom during Cleopatra I's regency enjoyed several years of peaceful  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  49  saw a marked increase and equality in power for future Ptolemaic queens.  Many of these  unprecedented events, such as Cleopatra I's regency and the installment of eunuchs in the Ptolemaic court, continued after their deaths . 69  2.3 Archias  70  Archias' historical significance is not so much his relationship with Ptolemy VI as it was his appearance at the court immediately following Eulaeus' demise. Archias and all subsequent eunuchs mentioned in the extant literary tradition confirm Cleopatra I's success at instituting eunuchs into the Ptolemaic court. Archias served Ptolemy VI Philometor in the mid-second century B.C. after the deaths of Eulaeus and Lenaeus {cf. below, Table #9). His position was more like that of Aristonicus than the much more powerful Eulaeus, not only in significance, but also in the length of time he remained prominent at the court. The following table outlines Archias' career: Table # 9: Archias Master Served Under  Eunuch ARCHIAS  •  Ptolemy VI  Positions  Comments  164 B.C.: • accompanied Philometor to Rome 164/3 B.C.: •  '  1  atpaxeyog  of Cyprus  •  bore the highest Hellenistic court rank of ovyyevrjg 158/7 (?) B.C.: • involved in some sort of conspiracy involving his strategia in Cyprus; he committed suicide after being exposed 12  and quiet foreign politics. Immediately before and after her regency, the Ptolemaic kingdom was at war. It should be noted that although eunuchs' political power declined after the death of Eulaeus, they continued to be employed at the court (cf. below, Table #10). Their presence at the court after Cleopatra I and Eulaeus proves Cleopatra I's accomplishment at successfully installing them as a Ptolemaic institution. PP, VI. 15037; RE 2 (1896), col. 463, no. 18; 23 (1959), col. 1714; Bagnall, 257; Otto, 92, 112 n. 4; and Mooren, Titulature, 188-9, no. 351. Cf. Diodorus Siculus, xxxi.18.1-2 and Polybius, xxxiii.5. Cf. Walbank, III.547. 6 9  7 0  71  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  50  We first hear of Archias accompanying Philometor to Rome (in 164 B.C.): ""On 6 IJroAEpaiog  6 Paoikevg Aiyvntov,  EKTIECWV zfjg  oxrtpari oiKrptp fcarfjvTTjcTEV Eig rrjv 'Pcbp/r/v pEtd  PaaiXeiag napd tov iSiov dSsAtpoG, iv idicbrov crndScovog ivdg ['Apxiocv] Kai rpitov nai8co\)' '. ,1A  As a confidant of Ptolemy VI Philometor, he accompanied the king on embassies and most likely as a result of his loyalty and service was promoted. He then received the exalted governorship of Cyprus upon his return from Rome . As 75  arparnydg of Cyprus, he had one of the highest ranks at the Ptolemaic court since starting with Archias' predecessor, Ptolemy Makron, the crtparnyoi began to bear the highest aulic titles, that of "kinsman" (ejvyyevjjg) . 76  Thus, it is without a doubt that Ptolemy VI regarded Archias'  service quite highly with this important appointment. Diodorus Siculus , gives the impression 77  that Ptolemy VI found Archias a loyal and useful attendant.  A few years later, Archias was  mentioned in the sources for the last time. While still the axpaxr\ydg of Cyprus, he was involved in a conspiracy that forced him eventually to commit suicide . 78  Little else is known about  Archias' career and nothing is known about his relationship with Ptolemy VI. No comparison can be made between the amount of influence Eulaeus and Archias had at the Ptolemaic court. Eulaeus was one of the most powerful eunuchs during the Hellenistic period. However, Archias' more limited role at the Ptolemaic court was a direct result of a  Guyot (182) suggests that Archias bore this title uninterrupted from 163-158/7 B.C. For more on this cf. Guyot, 182 and Polybius, xxxiii.5. Diodorus Siculus, xxxi.18.2. Cf. Diodorus Siculus, xxxi.18.1; Polybius, xxxiii.5; Bagnall, 257; and Walbank, III.547. " ' 0 cvyyevr/g Kai cxpatr]yog Kai dpxiepevg rfjg vfjaov" (Mitford, T. B. Annual British School ofAthens 56 [1961], 20): Cf. Table #5 on Mooren's ranking of the titulary honours. Cf. Diodorus Siculus, xxxi.18.1-2. While aTparrjyog of Cyprus, Archias tried to give this province over to Demetrius I Soter, the Seleucid, for 500 talents. His treason was discovered and he committed suicide (cf. Polybius, xxxiii.5.1-3; Guyot, 182; and Walbank, III.547). 7 2  7 3  7 4  75  7 6  77  7 8  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  51  policy of Comanus and Cineas , chief advisors to Ptolemy VIII, which limited the amount of 79  80  political influence eunuchs after Eulaeus could possess: "campaigns were no longer to be conducted after the notions of eunuchs" . Their policy succeeded in suppressing the political 81  influence of eunuchs at the Ptolemaic court.  Despite this limitation eunuchs' worth and  importance to their masters were still apparent with their continued service to the Ptolemies as a result of their successful institutionalisation into the Ptolemaic structure by Cleopatra I. The following table demonstrates this: Table #10: Eunuchs in the Service of the Ptolemies PTOLEMAIC RULER  Ptolemy V Epiphanes (Cleopatra 1) Ptolemy VI Philometor  POSITION of THE EUNUCHS AT THE COURT  IMPORTANT FIGURE AT THE COURT (Aristonicus)  - (180's B.C.) o6vrpo<pog of the king - probably also bore the title TCOV cpiXcov  Eulaeus Eulaeus  - (180-176 B.C.) Advisor to the regent - Philometor's tutor (i.e. cvvTpocpoq) - (176-169 B.C.) Guardian and Regent  Archias  - (164/3 B.C.) crrpaTnyog of Cyprus - (163-158/7 B.C.) held court rank of avyyevijg  COMMENTS  "...die ihr Vertrauen 82 genossen."  Cleopatra III Ptolemy XII Auletes  Potheinos  - "gehbrte wahrsheinlich zur Hofdienerschaft" - Guardian of Auletes' son, Ptolemy XIII (51-48 B.C.) Regent  56 Mardion and — - "Hofeunuchen der Kleopatra VII, sind fur das Jahr 48" Anonymous 87 85  Cleopatra VII  88  Ganymedes  specialB.C.) mention of a eunuch in theoflast year ofVII, her reign - (48/7 was Arsinoe's, Sister Cleopatra Guardian  F / . 1 4 6 1 1 , 16865; RE 11 (1922), col. 1128, no. 2; RE Suppl. 7 (1940), coll. 332-334; Polybius, xxviii.19.1; Solmsen, Classical Philology 40 (1945), 115-116; Peremans-Van't Dack, Studio Hellenistica 9 (1953), 22-33; and Walbank, III. 3 53. PP II. 1926; 7/7.5169; VI. 14610; RE 11 (1922), col. 477, no. 22; Polybius, xxviii.19.1; Ijsewijn, 100-101, nos. 110117; and Walbank, III.253-4.  ' PP y  8 0  81 8 2 8 3  84  8 5  86 87  8 8  Bevan, Egypt, 138. Guyot, 97. Cf. Porphyrius, FGrHist. 260, F. 2, 8 and Justin, xxxix.4.1. PP  K7.14620  Guyot, 97.  andRE 22 (1953),  coll.  1776-77,  no.  1.  col.  no.  3;  PP VI. 14615.  Guyot, 97. Cf. Lucan, 10.133ff. Cf. Cassius Dio, 50.5.2; 50.25.1. PP 77.2156; VI. 14643; RE 7 (1912),  749,  andHeinen, H.  Rom undAgypten,  106-30.  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  52  Thus, Archias is important proof of Cleopatra I's successful insertion of eunuchs into the Ptolemaic political structure. Unlike ministers from prominent families who obtained offices and posts hereditarily and through internal connections and promotions, Ptolemaic eunuchs, early on, were present at the court only because of their presence in a royal retinue; Cleopatra I's royal retinue. However, it was this important connection to the monarchy and to their masters that made eunuchs more reliable and loyal attendants than the courtiers who worked independently from the monarch. After the assassination of Arsinoe III by the aristocratic circle, the loyalty and support of eunuchs became a necessity to Cleopatra I if she had any intentions of becoming guardian for her son and not suffering the same fate as her predecessor.  2.4 The Regency of Eulaeus and Lenaeus After the sudden death of Cleopatra I, mother of Ptolemy VI, Eulaeus and Lenaeus became guardians over the young king's remaining years as a minor . Their extraordinary 89  appointment as the new regents amidst the more highly qualified Alexandrian families in and around Alexandria has not been considered or discussed adequately. The first instance of real power resting not in members of the royal family, but in courtiers and ministers was in the reign of Ptolemy IV with Sosibius . 90  However, with the  custom that the king's most important ministers were also his most loyal and trusted confidants, their influence and control over the weak monarch was not inconceivable nor condemned as long as they shared the same interests as the king. Eulaeus' and Lenaeus' appointment was something altogether different. Not only were they not members of important aristocratic families, but they  Otto (3-7) tells us that Ptolemy VI was only seven to ten years old at the time of his mother's death (in 76 B.C.).  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  53  altogether different. Not only were they not members of important aristocratic families, but they were also the basest individuals in society; one a eunuch, the other a slave. Even though it is very likely that they were both part of Cleopatra Fs retinue, this does not explain their promotion.  Thus, it seems impossible that they did not receive some support from the  aristocracy, since the importance of popular and courtly support of the regency has already been established in these first two chapters. In the first chapter, it was revealed how behind every conspiracy, a good foundation of support and political control was needed . Thus, I believe that 91  Eulaeus and Lenaeus received more support from the high Greek court circles of the Alexandrian court than is generally believed.  Proof of this support is revealed by the careers of the  aristocratic ministers and their families as the same aristocratic families who were prominent during Ptolemy IV's reign were the same ones serving Ptolemy VI and his sister, Cleopatra II, after the deaths of Eulaeus and Lenaeus. A brief look at the prominent families during Eulaeus' and Lenaeus' regency demonstrates to a certain degree that Eulaeus and Lenaeus were supported by the aristocratic families . Clearly an understanding must have been reached between Eulaeus 92  and Lenaeus and these prominent families.  Eulaeus and Lenaeus were given the regency in  exchange for the prominent families remaining in their high positions. Presumably, both parties co-existed and appeared to understand their roles at the court. By allowing Eulaeus and Lenaeus to become regents for the young Ptolemy VI, everything that went wrong during this period could be blamed on them and they alone would be the scapegoats to society. In this way, the  Cf. chapter one. This explanation possibly explains why the most prominent Greek families in the second century B . C . remained in their respective offices and positions both before and after the rule of Eulaeus and Lenaeus. Cf. Appendix G reveals this. 9 2  Ptolemaic Court Eunuchs  54  prominent families would not suffer the same fate as Agathocles and his circle when the blame fell upon them. Thus, the regency of Eulaeus and Lenaeus is important in showing how the regency was obtained largely with the support of a courtly group such as the courtiers for Eulaeus and Lenaeus and eunuchs for Cleopatra I. Although I do not believe that Eulaeus and Lenaeus were incompetent in running the kingdom, they lacked experience and foresight in realising that everything that went wrong during their regency would be blamed upon them. It appears that the prominent courtiers were once again dictating Ptolemaic affairs.  2.5 Summary The presence and rise of eunuchs at the Ptolemaic court during Cleopatra Fs queenship and then her regency raise several important issues. First of all, it was apparent from the last chapter that Cleopatra I did not want to rely on the aristocratic families in Alexandria, but still needed support at the court to become regent.  Thus, she introduced another courtly faction  drawn from her own kingdom, Syria, to counter the power of these families, namely eunuchs. Second, Cleopatra I's unprecedented regency without the aid of the usual aristocratic faction and the success of Eulaeus and Archias at the Ptolemaic court are proof of the regular employment of eunuchs as important and powerful courtiers and attendants. The establishment of eunuchs into the Ptolemaic court and their importance as an institution help further understand how Cleopatra I became regent, since it is obvious who became her advisors instead of the usual prominent aristocrats.  Past Queens  55  CHAPTER THREE She would owe her dynamic personality to... three ancestresses who were outstanding in a line of powerful queens.'  Cleopatra I's predecessors set entirely new standards for the position and power of Ptolemaic queens. Before describing Cleopatra I's own career, it is necessary to discuss these important predecessors, since their influences and precedents were as much a factor in Cleopatra I's success as her own accomplishments.  In turn, Cleopatra I influenced her successors and  namesakes; especially Cleopatras II, III, and VII. The following discussion is also crucial since the involvement of these queens in Hellenistic politics is little documented in both our primary and secondary sources. For instance, in Claire Preaux's Le monde hellenistique, which remains one of the most insightful and complete compilations of the Hellenistic period, the role of the Hellenistic king is discussed in detail in chapter one . However, within this entire chapter, passages totaling only a single page relate to the role played by Hellenistic queens . Nor is this 3  an isolated case. Macurdy discusses most of the Hellenistic queens and speculates about the rule of each. However, she provides little proof to back up her claims. Of our primary sources, Plutarch, in his Life of Cleomenes, is the only one writer who provides a glimpse into the history of influence the royal women of Egypt had over their husbands. Plutarch comments on the ease 4  with which a queen could gain influence in the state through her husband early in the reign of Ptolemy IV (222-205 B.C.). He stresses, as I strongly believe, that the combination of a weak sovereign and a strong queen makes this episode very feasible. This brief acknowledgement of  1 2 3 4  Wells, 28. Preaux, Claire. Le monde hellenistique. Tome I. (1978) Paris, clip. 1. Preaux, 192,219, 285, 286. Cf. Appendix AA, especially Plutarch, Life of Cleomenes passages.  Past Queens  56  womanly influence in the period immediately preceding Cleopatra I's time is important in revealing the true extent of political control queens before Cleopatra I possessed. This passage is one of the only surviving descriptions which unabashedly condemns the weak Ptolemaic kings and acknowledges the strength of the queens: ...COOXE...XOV  KAeo/ievT] Sioc(p£pEo6ai Kai nXavaadai Kaxa xfjv noXiv, ovSsvdg avxcp  npoo%copovvxog, dXXd (psvyovxcov Kai cpoPovpEvcov andvxcov. ovxcog o6v dnooxdg Kai npdg xovg cpiXovg einSv,  'OVSEV  fjv dpa Oavpaaxdv apxEiv yvvaiKag avOpcbncov  (pEvyovxcov xi)v iXEvOEpiav...  5  Cleomenes made other such remarks during his stay in Egypt under the reign of Philopator, Epiphanes' predecessor.  Cleomenes' comments reflect his disgust at the weakness of the  sovereign, his effeminacy and pursuit of licentiousness, but above all, the power and influence of the women. I believe that these are fairly accurate observations of the Ptolemaic government under Ptolemy IV especially since Cleomenes was also present and was witness to the strong rule and government of Ptolemy III. Furthermore, Cleomenes' remarks are also supported by other ancient authors, who comment on the inner-strength and popularity of these earlier Ptolemaic royal women . The prime example of an influential Ptolemaic queen before Cleopatra 6  I who greatly influenced the kingdom's affairs was Arsinoe II . Arsinoe II's influence over her 7  brother, Ptolemy II, was considerable.  Following Arsinoe II, Arsinoe III became the first 8  Ptolemaic and Hellenistic queen to be offered a regency despite the ill-will of the courtiers and ministers against this unprecedented notion. Thus, because of this lack in sources, one must understand the importance, influence, and contributions of Cleopatra I's predecessors in order to  5 6 7 8  Plutarch, Life of Cleomenes, xxxvii.5: "It is no wonder that women rule over men who run away from freedom!". Cf. sections 3.1 and 3.2. Cf. section 3.1. Cf. section 3.2.  Past Queens  57  better understand how she herself was able to establish a new type of queenship. Of Cleopatra I's predecessors, I believe that Arsinoe II, Arsinoe III, and Hatshepsut had the greatest influence upon her, since each queen established a new precedent during her queenship; precedents that enabled and allowed Cleopatra I to become thefirstfemale regent.  3.1 Arsinoe II  9  The internal structure of the Ptolemaic monarchy was most affected by Arsinoe II's policies . Arsinoe II, the daughter of Ptolemy I Soter and Berenice I, and the second queen of 10  Ptolemy II, her full brother, was responsible for establishing a more defined role and position for the Ptolemaic queen. Her accomplishments greatly influenced all subsequent Ptolemaic queens and, in particular, the example she set at the Ptolemaic court was crucial for Cleopatra I's success. Having skillfully and successfully combined both Greek and Egyptian elements into her queenship, she influenced the future position of .Ptolemaic queens socially, religiously, economically, and politically. One of Arsinoe IPs most important social policies was her revival of the Pharaonic tradition of sibling marriage, which immediately became a permanentfixtureof the Ptolemaic dynasty . 11  The greatest impact of this revival of royal sibling marriage was noticed in the  improved relationship between the monarchy and its subjects, but specifically that between the  PP VI. 14491; RE 2 (1896), coll. 1282-87, no. 26; Bevan, Egypt, passim; Macurdy, iii-30; and Robert, L . Essays in Honor ofC. Bradford Welles. (1966) New Haven: American Society of Papyrologists, 192-210. Bevan, Egypt, 61. It is widely believed that the revival of sibling marriage can be accredited to Arsinoe II, who fully understood the advantages this connection to the much older Pharaonic tradition would have on her and her royal status. Macurdy (118) is also an advocate of this view and says: "it seems likely that it was the scheming brain of Arsinoe [II], not that of the invalidish and slothful Philadelphus, that saw the point of the value of the brother-and-sister marriage in this respect and the enormous popularity it would bring them with the Egyptian priests". Cf. Diodorus Siculus, 1.27.1; Pausanias, 1.7.1; Bevan, Egypt, 59ff.; Pomeroy, 16ff; Carney, passim; and Pestman, P.W. Marriage and Matrimonial Property in Ancient Egypt. (1961) Leiden, 3, n. 7. 9  1 0  11  Past Queens  58  queenship and the dynasty's subjects . Sibling marriage, if we look at Pharaonic instances and 12  precedents, benefited the queenship since it called for equality between the king and queen as corulers and thus conferred greater power on the queen; although manifest political power was not seen until Cleopatra I . Arsinoe II and, consequently, her successors were deeply revered and 13  loved not only by Greeks, but also by Egyptian subjects as well . The royal titulature and 14  designation of the Ptolemaic queen as both "wife and sister" also originated from this new brother-sister relationship, borrowed from Pharaonic tradition, between the king and queen. Significantly, after Arsinoe II, Ptolemaic queens adapted these two designations whether they were sisters of the king or not . This designation was especially important to Cleopatra I since, 15  being a foreigner, she was not related to the Ptolemaic house in any way. Furthermore, one of the greatest privileges Arsinoe II acquired from this type of marriage was the bestowal and her usage of the very rare Pharaonic title of "Queen of Upper and Lower Egypt" (nsw-bitj) - a title which, before this time, had been used only rarely by Pharaonic queens - throughout her  Cf. Theocritus, xiv.w. 59ff. 1 believe that sibling marriage is one of the quintessential factors tliat determined whether a queen, or princess, could ever become regent or ruler in one of the Hellenistic kingdoms in which it was institutionalised. For instance, both the Ptolemies and the Seleucids practised sibling marriage. It is by no coincidence that these two kingdoms at certain points in their history had a female ruler (Cleopatra I and Cleopatra Thea respectively). However, the Hellenistic kingdoms that never established nor accepted this custom, the Antigonids in Macedonia and the Attalids of Pergamum, were never subjected to a female ruler. Cf. Green, 198ff; Macurdy, 8ff; Whitehorne, 57ff, 72; and Carney, 42Iff., 436ff: "Clearly the growing prevalence of brother-sister marriage in the Ptolemaic dynasty is in some ways linked to the general status of royal women in the Hellenistic period... Whereas in the other dynasties, the role of royal women tended to shrink once the family was well-established on the throne, Ptolemaic royal women continued to have great political power and prestige Jan Quaegebeur's numerous works: "Reines ptolemaiques et traditions egyptiennes". Eds. Maehler, H. and Strocka, V. M. Das ptolemaische agypten. (1978) Mainz, 245-62; "Ptolemee II en adoration devant Arsinoe II divinisee." BIFAO 69 (1970), 191-217; and "Documents Concerning a Cult of Arsinoe Philadelphos at Memphis." JNES30 (1971), 239-70. Carney, 435. Cf. Beloch, K. J. Griechische Geschichte. (1925) Berlin and Leipzig, 1.292; IV, 375 and Vatin, C. Recherches sur le manage et la condition de la femme mariee a I'epoque hellenistique. (1970) Paris, 75. 12  13  14  15  Past Queens  59  lifetime . Arsinoe II also received great homage both during and after her life . For instance, 16  17  there were many towns named after her throughout the kingdom and it was because of Arsinoe 18  II that a new dynastic cult and new priestesses were instituted. Therefore, by reviving sibling marriage Arsinoe II improved the relationship between subject and ruler and also brought about a change in the political status of the queen. Although sibling marriage did not necessarily grant the queen political power and control, it offered the potential for power by placing the queen in a favourable position to assume greater responsibilities if the opportunity arose . 19  Some scholars in general have disputed Arsinoe II's political importance and power, especially since her Egyptian title of "Queen of Upper and Lower Egypt" lacked a Greek equivalent .  However, proof of her political involvement and activities is recorded on the  20  Pithom Stele and in the Decree of Chremonides . The Pithom Stele tells of Arsinoe II's direct 21  22  involvement in military affairs: In January of 273 B.C. she accompanied her husband, Ptolemy II, to Heroonpolis on the Isthmus of Suez to inspect the defences of Egypt in the event of foreign attack. Her accompaniment of her brother and husband, Ptolemy II, may suggest political power. However, it may also simply be a reflection of the amount of influence she had with her husband, where she was allowed to accompany him on such military matters and inspections of  Quaegebeur, 262. Cf. section 3.3 below; Pomeroy, 17-20; Hauben, H. "Arsinoe II et la politique exterieure de l'egypte." Eds. Van't Dack, E, Van Dessel, P, and Van Gucht, W. Egypt and the Hellenistic World. (1983) Leuven, 99ff.; Quaegebeur, "Ptolemee II en adoration devant Arsinoe II", B1FAO 69 (1970), 191-217. Cf. below, 61 and footnote 32. For instance, the towns of Arsinoe in Cyprus, Arsinoe Ephesos, Arsinoe in Cilicia, Arsinoe on Crete, Arsinoite Nome and so forth. Cf. Carney, 438. Pomeroy, 19. There is certain amount of truth to this, but cf. chapter four where the Greek subjects recognise Cleopatra I's manifest political power and control. Cf. Burstein, Stanley M. "Arsinoe II Philadelphos: A Revisionist View." In Adams and Borza, eds., 197ff; and Will, I.40ff. For an English translation of the Pithom Stele, cf. Bevan, Egypt, 388-392. Cf. Spiegelberg, W. in 16  17  18  19  20  21  Sitzungsberichte der bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophische philologische und historische Klasse. (1925) Miinchen. I.G. II332, 333 and OGIS 434. 22  Past Queens  60  the Ptolemies' military defenses. Better proof of Arsinoe II's political influence is found on the Decree of Chremonides of 266 B.C.: "o xe PaoiXevg Tlxokepaiog oiKoXovdcog xfj xfcovj npoyovcov Kai xfj xfjg dSeXcpfjg npofajipecei cpavepog eaxiv cmovSdfav vnep xfjg Koivfjg xcov 'EXXfjvcov eXevOepia^ '. 17  This is the first instance in Ptolemaic history where a queen's policy is  mentioned in a public document . Four years after her death, as recorded on the Decree of 24  Chremonides, Ptolemy II continued this policy. As a result of such proof of Arsinoe II's political involvement, modern scholarship is slowly acknowledging the influence Arsinoe II had on the political affairs of Ptolemaic Egypt . Tarn attributes Egypt's victory over Syria to Arsinoe II, 25  "Ptolemy married her after his defeat in Syria, because things were going badly for him and he needed her strength and brains to manage the war, which he was going to lose, as he lost the Second Syrian War, when she was not there to help him" . Although Tarn's comment may be 26  slightly exaggerated, it points out Arsinoe IFs political prowess and with proof of her direct military involvement it is even more believable.  With this knowledge of Arsinoe IFs  accomplishments, it is no wonder that Macurdy considered Arsinoe II the greatest politically minded Hellenistic queen, in her eyes, even more so than Olympias and Cleopatra VII . 27  Arsinoe II became the most honoured Greco-Macedonian woman during her lifetime with her deification as a goddess . She received an abundance of cults, statues, priestesses, and 28  dedications from her subjects and from her husband, Ptolemy II . 29  Her cults continued to  Cf. I.G. II332, 333 and OGIS434. The policy is also mentioned as being one of his npoyovcov (i.e. ancestors) referring to the age-old Macedonian and Hellenic tradition of promoting Greek freedom. Ptolemy I had earlier adopted it as one of his policies. Cf. Macurdy, 119ff. Cf. Hauben, Hans. "Arsinoe II et la politique exterieure de l'egypte," in Van't Dack et al., 99-127. Tarn, JHSXLVI (1926), 161. Macurdy, 112. Macurdy, 116. Cf Bevan, Egypt, 129, 386 and Fraser, clip. 5. Cf. Holbl, 87ff, 94ff 2 3  2 4  25  2 6  2 7  2 8  2 9  61  Past Queens  flourish throughout Ptolemaic history and neither lessened in importance nor abundance. In fact, Arsinoe II's chief priestess (tcavncpopog) continued to be appointed from the most prominent and powerful families at the Ptolemaic court at that time . As well, Pharaonic religious customs still 30  thrived in Ptolemaic Egypt. For instance, many of the traditional rituals were still carried on in the same manner as in centuries before. In Ptolemaic times, the Egyptian priesthood with its prestigious offices, sacred wisdom, and teaching was still looked upon by the common people as their national guides and leaders. However, the Pharaoh was still regarded as the head of the priesthood and the queen was held in the same high regard . Bevan best summarises Arsinoe II 31  in the Ptolemaic religious sphere with these remarks: Of no other queen do we find so many memorials in various parts of the Greek world. She was honoured with statues at Athens and Olympia.The honours done to her in Samothrace and Boeotia, where a town Arsinoe is named, may have been during her early life, when she was queen of Thrace. But beside these, we have votive inscriptions in her honour from Delos, Amorgos, Thera, Lesbos, Cyrene, Cyprus, Oropus, and doubtless yet more will be found. The dedications to her in Egypt are numerous, and are only the formal part of the many exceptional honours heaped upon her by her husband. There seems to have been a statue of her, seated upon an ostrich, at Thespiae in Greece. Though not a coregent in the sense that some later queens were, she was associated in every titular honour with the king. It is noted by Wilcken (PaulyWissowa) from Naville's transcription of the Pithom stele, that the Egyptian priests had even assigned her a throne-name in addition to her ordinary cartouche, an honour quite exceptional for a queen. We have many coins issued with her effigy only, as well as those with the king her brother, as Gods Adelphi. She was deified together with him, and gradually declared co-templar (synnaos) with the gods of the great shrines throughout Egypt. 32  Arsinoe II's influence was also felt in the economic sphere. Although it is unknown how much wealth Ptolemaic queens possessed, Arsinoe II was known to have possessed enough wealth to allow her to enlist an army of mercenaries and to engage in military campaigns . Her 33  Cf. Fraser, 217 and n. 225. For further, cf. Bevan, Egypt, 80 and Robins, 17ff., 2 Iff. Bevan, Egypt, 64. Macurdy, 114 and Pomeroy, 16. Cf. Burstein, Stanley M . "Arsinoe II Philadelphos: A Revisionist View.", 197212; Longega, Gabriella. Arsinoe II. Universita degli Studi di Padova Pubblicazioni dellTstituto di Storia Antica. V o l . 6 . (1968) Rome; and Will, E. "Histoire Grecque." RH 246 (1971), 129-31.  3 0  31  3 2  3 3  Past Queens  62  wealth was very unique among Ptolemaic queens, wealth accrued as a result of ties to Macedonia, Thrace, Heracleia, Amastrios, Tios, Ephesus and Cassandreia before she married Ptolemy II . It is very likely that she continued to receive revenues from these cities and regions 34  even after her marriage to her brother, Ptolemy II . Most noteworthy of her economic policies 35  was her transferring of the control of the sacred revenues to the Ptolemaic government . 36  Ptolemy II also reaped great revenues from the areas and "in every temple in Egypt" where Arsinoe II was worshipped as a goddess . 37  Thus, Arsinoe II expanded the political, economic, and social roles of Ptolemaic queens to such a degree that it became much easier for subsequent queens to gain greater authority and control vis-a-vis the king. The only reason, it seems, why Arsinoe II was not recognised and accepted openly as a co-ruler with Ptolemy II was Ptolemaic Egypt's unreadiness to accept the concept of a female as their monarch. Greek paternalistic attitudes were still a strong part of Ptolemaic Egypt at this early point in its history.  Furthermore, Arsinoe IFs unprecedented  influence might have been a little frightful to the Ptolemaic Greeks as well, since their society I  accepted nothing less than subservient females. Tarn is an advocate of this theory: "The flaw in Arsinoe [II] was not perhaps her immortality but ambition, an overmastering ambition to which she was ready to sacrifice most things; and it is not necessary to suppose her a bad woman  Cf. Macurdy, 118 and Pomeroy, 14. Cf. above, footnotes 17, 32; Macurdy, 117ff; and Memnon, F.H.G. III.530. Cleopatra I was the next queen after Arsinoe II to have any sort of claim to land outside of the Ptolemaic dynasty (i.e. Coele Syria) because of her foreign status (cf. chapter four). Arsinoe II is accredited with implementing the policy that brought a great deal of money for the monarchy (Macurdy, 128). Arsinoe II diverted the apomoira (i.e. the tax on wines and fruits) from the Egyptian priests to the cult of Arsinoe Philadelphus in 262 B.C. thereby giving the Ptolemaic government instead of the Egyptian priesthood control over these sacred revenues (cf. Mahaffy, The Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus, coll. 2327). Macurdy, 128. 35  36  37  Past Queens  63  merely because she became a great ruler" . Fear to appoint the queen as guardian and regent 38  39  with the monarch was not overcome until Arsinoe III, the wife of Ptolemy IV .  3.2 Arsinoe III  40  The impact of Arsinoe III, daughter of Ptolemy III Euergetes and Berenice II , wife of 41  42  Ptolemy IV, on Cleopatra I was altogether different from that of Arsinoe II. Unlike Arsinoe II, who strove to influence the Ptolemaic court, Arsinoe III never appeared to desire such control and authority . The literary tradition generally portrays her as a very lonely and melancholy 43  individual, whose queenship was one of continuous humiliation and misery . 44  Indeed, she  appears to have led an extremely uneventful life during the reign of her husband. Scholars even refer to her as an individual who was "kept more or less a prisoner in the palace" . With the 45  premature death of her husband (205 B.C.) and the ascendancy of a child heir, her son, Ptolemy V, her position and situation immediately became threatening to her enemies at the Ptolemaic court . The adulation of her subjects and the fact that her son was so young led the people (the 46  Greek and Egyptian subjects of Alexandria) to demand that she become regent and guardian until i  Tarn, Antigonus, 292.  Although Berenice II, the wife of Ptolemy III Euergetes, became regent of Cyrene in the mid-third century B.C. she will not be mentioned here amongst these other influential queens. This is because I believe Arsinoe II and Arsinoe III had the greatest impact on Cleopatra I, whose precedents were set at the Ptolemaic court. This is not to say Berenice II's regency may not have influenced Cleopatra I, however, by Ptolemy Vs time, Cyrene was Egypt's dependency and "long-term imperial holding" and functioned quite apart from Ptolemaic Alexandria (cf. Green, 262). PP VI. 14492; RE 2 (1896), coll. 1287-88, no. 27; Macurdy, 136-41; and Abel, K. Hermes 95 (1967), 72-90. PP W.14543, 16297, 16943; RE 23 (1959), coll. 1667-78, no. 21; Samuel, 106-108; and Will, 1.133-86, 216-364 39  4 0  41  passim.  PP VI. 14499; RE 3 (1899), coll. 284-86, no. 11; Macurdy, 130-136; Polybius, xv.25.2; and Walbank, 11.482. 1 say, "appeared" since what we know of Arsinoe Ill's life is extremely scarce. My speculation here, I believe, is well supported by the evidence which we do possess on Arsinoe III. Bouche-Leclercq, Lagides, I.338ff. and Bevan, Egypt, 236ff. Bevan, Egypt, 236ff. Cf. Bevan, Egypt, 252ff. 42  43  44 45 46  Past Queens  64  her son had reached the suitable age to rule on his own . It was this precedent which most 47  affected and influenced Cleopatra I. It would have been quite easy to accept this portrait of Arsinoe Ill's private life and isolation, if it were not for references in the ancient sources referring to her rallying troops at the Battle of Raphia (217 B.C.) . 48  Despite her subdued and quiet nature, as portrayed by both  ancient and modern sources, there are hints of her active political participation in military matters. This venture by Arsinoe III either reflects a custom and duty which Ptolemaic queens were obliged to fulfill during their queenship, or a side of Arsinoe III which has been entirely neglected in scholarship. However, unlike Arsinoe II who was mentioned only as accompanying Ptolemy II on his military rounds, Arsinoe III went one step further and was present before the battle. In the case of Arsinoe III, the military position of the queen was much more significant and appears to suggest something more than simply fulfilling a queen's obligation. Unfortunately, neither our main primary source (i.e. Polybius) nor our main secondary source (i.e. Macurdy) elaborate on this incident, a direct result, perhaps, of Polybius' biased and selective opinions. If the literary tradition was not so dependent on Polybius' opinions, it seems likely that Arsinoe III may have been portrayed as more able than we have been led to believe. Arsinoe Ill's support in 205 B.C. from her subjects was clearly a shock to her enemies at the court, since they managed, throughout her husband's reign, to keep her in the background as much as possible . Bouche-Leclercq summarizes her situation most effectively: "Lui vivant, 49  Arsinoe etait inoffensive; elle ne devint dangereuse, par consequent, ne fut sequestree et  Polybius, xv.25.2, 26a. 1; Justin, xxx.1.7; and Walbank, 11.481-482. Polybius, v.83.3, 84.1 and Maccabees III 1, 4. Cf. Holbl, 115ff. and Walbank, 1.611-613. Cf. Bevan, Egypt, 242ff.  Past Queens  65  assassinee, que quand elle fut en passe de devenir regente" . With the queen appointed guardian 50  and regent to her young son, Ptolemy V, Arsinoe III was associated with Isis and Ptolemy V, with Isis' child, Horus. Therefore, to the Egyptian subjects, the land (i.e. the kingdom) was being rightfully governed by Arsinoe III (i.e. Isis) until Ptolemy V reached the age to rule on his own . Furthermore, Arsinoe III was the full sister of Ptolemy IV and by marrying her brother 51  once more reinforced the institution of sibling marriage.  Such was the opportunity of the  position of Pharaoh's wife and sister combined with the strength of the respect of her subjects that Arsinoe III would have been the first queen to become regent, instead of Cleopatra I, had she not been murdered by Agathocles and Sosibius . The amiable relationship between Arsinoe III 52  and her subjects is further reflected with the immediate death of her assassins, when word of their murderous plot was made public (202 B.C.) . 53  Arsinoe III also did not thrive in the religious and economic realms as had Arsinoe II. The economic and religious influence of Arsinoe III during her lifetime, that is, aside from the customary honours and titles that each Ptolemaic queen in turn received from Arsinoe II's time onwards, was minor. These religious protocols became the norm for all Ptolemaic queens after their establishment under Arsinoe II. As already noted, Arsinoe II's economic situation was unique, since she acquired various personal ties to other cities through previous marriages; a situation never to occur again among the Ptolemaic queens because of the revival and institution of sibling marriage . There is no information regarding Arsinoe Ill's economic status, although 54  5 0  Bouche-Leclercq, Lagides, 7.339.  Cf. Koenen, 64. Cf. chapter one. Polybius, xv. 25. Arsinoe II's situation was very unique since her two marriages to Lysimachus, King of Thrace, and to Ptolemy Ceraunus before her last marriage to Ptolemy II gave her ownership of many pieces of land and cities throughout the 51 52  53 54  Past Queens  66  it would be safe to surmise that she did not possess much personal wealth, since she was not a foreigner to the Ptolemaic dynasty, nor did she marry anyone else other than Ptolemy IV and therefore followed Ptolemaic standards. Arsinoe III may never have aimed at power (in the same manner Arsinoe II, and later, Cleopatra I, did), nevertheless, it was handed to her when the people demanded that she become co-ruler and guardian to her young son, Ptolemy V. Thus, the greatest impact Arsinoe III had upon Cleopatra I was revealing the advantages of associating the Ptolemaic queenship with the traditions of Pharaonic queenship. The Ptolemaic queen had, by this time, gained a great deal of support and loyalty from her subjects, both Greek and Egyptian. And now, since she was viewed by her Egyptian subjects as a Pharaonic queen, she might become their divine and political leader as well. As a result, the opportunity arose for the queen to become regent over even the most prominent and important courtiers.  3.3 Hatshepsut It is very unlikely that Cleopatra I knew anything about the historical precedents set by past female Pharaohs . However, considering the Ptolemies' establishment of a kingdom which 55  embraced both new and ancient customs, it would be a mistake to exclude reference to one of the most important Pharaonic queens, Queen Hatshepsut of the Eighteenth Pharaonic Dynasty (c. 1473-c. 1458 B.C.) . Yet despite Cleopatra I's unfamiliarity with this queen, Hatshepsut's 56  Mediterranean region. Cleopatra I is the lone exception to a queen having a claim to land after Arsinoe II (cf. chapter four, footnote 30). It is generally believed that there were four female Pharaohs: Nitocris (c. 2180 B.C.-?) (cf. Herodotus, 2.100; Robins [50] calls her Nitiquet; Tyldesley, 213-214, 216-218; and Watterson, 138); Sobeknofru (c. 1763-c. 1759 B.C.) (cf. Robins [50] calls her Nefrusobk and believes that she ruled c. 1789-c. 1786 B.C.; Tyldesley, 213-214, 218-220; and Watterson, 138); Hatshepsut (c. 1473-c. 1458 B.C.) (cf. Robins, 45-52, 152-153; Tyldesley, 213-214, 220-230; and Watterson, 138-140); and Twosret (c. 1188-c. 1186 B.C.) (cf. Herodotus, 2.100; Robins [50] calls her Tausret; Tyldesley, 213-214, 237-241; and Watterson, 140-141). Robins and Wells passim. The Ptolemies became the Thirty-Second Pharaonic Dynasty. 55  56  Past Queens  67  achievements and precedents may have affected how the Ptolemies' Egyptian subjects reacted towards Cleopatra I, their queen. Hatshepsut was important to Cleopatra I because of her great achievements in the social and political realms - since Cleopatra I like her ruled at a time when the kingdom was flourishing - but most importantly as representative of what a queen could achieve and aspire to under the Pharaonic model. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that out of the four female Egyptian Pharaohs , Hatshepsut's death did not bring about simultaneously the end 57  of a Pharaonic dynasty followed by several years of anarchy and civil disruption, for "on past experience queens regnant had heralded a period of instability" . Instead, Hatshepsut had been 58  a living example of how "theology and ideology made no difference between a male and a female pharaoh; the queen played the male role" . 59  Hatshepsut ruled Pharaonic Egypt as pharaoh from c. 1473-c. 1458 B.C. with her son, Thutmose III, as co-ruler . For thefirstfew years of Thutmose Ill's reign, Hatshepsut played 60  the role of regent, but by the seventh year of his reign she had discarded this position and publicly announced herself as co-ruler . Hatshepsut then remained co-ruler of Pharaonic Egypt 61  until her death in 1458 B.C. This queen's unprecedented authority was perhaps as shocking to the paternalistic Pharaonic court as Arsinoe II's authority and control was to the Ptolemaic Greek court.  Similar to the situation that would face Cleopatra I, Hatshepsut did not come into  prominence until there were no suitably aged male heirs to rule the kingdom. Hateshepsut's chief importance to Cleopatra I lies in setting a precedent in Pharaonic  Cf. footnote 55. Watterson, 138ff. Watterson uses the tenn 'regnant' to refer to any one of the four female pharaohs. Koenen, 64. Cf. Sethe, K. Urkunden der 18. Dynastie. Second Edition. (1927), 59-60. Cf. Tyldesley, 223 and Watterson, 139.  Past Queens  68  tradition for co-rulership: "Originally, it was instituted so that an ageing king might associate his heir with him on the throne in order to accomplish a smooth transfer of power from one ruler to the next" . Hatshepsut was able to take advantage of this custom and was crowned king with 62  the complete male titulary honours along with her young son, Thutmose III, including the title of "Mistress/Queen of the Two Lands" . Officials then used the names of both rulers, Hatshepsut 63  and Thutmose III, in their inscriptions . Similarly, Cleopatra I was able to assume the male 64  position in the dating-formula by appearing first. However, the regnal years continued to be dated according to the king, Ptolemy VI  65  - a direct reflection of the fact that she was not able to  establish herself as an official co-ruler in the brief years before her death. This precedent might have directly influenced Cleopatra I, since she first laid the foundations for her daughter, Cleopatra II, by assuming equivalent queenly titulary honours to the king, fully expecting the crowning of both king and queen as joint rulers to follow. Indeed, this was certainly the case when Cleopatra II, was named joint ruler with her husband, Ptolemy VIII. Furthermore, from these rulers onwards, the regnal years began to be dated according to both the king and queen . 66  Hatshepsut was also instrumental in changing the way a queen might be portrayed by her titulature. From the outset of her reign, Hatshepsut began to change epigraphic protocols by adopting titles normally reserved, up to that time, for kings and also appearing in paintings with kingly iconography and dress . 67  However, it is the way in which she was received by her  subjects, which might have affected Cleopatra I's own acceptance. It is one thing to adopt titles  Robins, 46, 152. ibid. Hatshepsut modelled this tide on the king'stitularyhonour as die "Lord of die Two Lands". Thistidewas first adopted by Arsinoe II of the Ptolemaic Dynasty. 62 6 3  64  65 66 67  ibid.  Robins, 47. Cf. Appendix B, "The Ptolemaic King List". Robins, 46 and Tyldesley, 223, 224.  Past Queens  69  and roles, and quite another to be accepted in these roles and with these titles. Hatshepsut's reign was unique and important because she was officially accepted with her Pharaonic titles "where officials used titles or phrases that would usually have contained a reference to the king, they substituted a reference to Hatshepsut" . Cleopatra I also steered away from Greek protocol 68  and was officially acknowledged as the dominant ruler by being named first in the order in the dating formula. Although many centuries separated these two queens, Hatshepsut would have a lasting impact on the Egyptian subjects of the Ptolemies simply because they would remember that in their long history a female ruler existed. Despite all Hatshepsut's efforts to legitimise her right to rule, she would not have been officially recognised as a co-ruler without the approval of the Amon priesthood. Throughout her reign, Hatshepsut was supported by the native Egyptian priesthood and commoners. "Her position was strong because of her birth and she had, it seems, the support of the rich temple of Amon" including the high priest himself . This support is also evident in her priestly title as 69  70  "divine adoratrice" (duat netjer) and the inscriptions and reliefs in the Deir el-Bahri temple which emphasised her divine birth . 71  Through other propagandistic texts, Hatshepsut displayed her  acceptance by the gods as a legitimate pharaoh of Egypt. Thus, by the time of the Ptolemies, native support and the Egyptian priesthood's support of the queenship were important factors for Arsinoe Ill's and Cleopatra I's appointments as guardians and regents of the kingdom.  69 70 71  Wells, 141. Watterson, 139. Robins, 149; Tyldesley, 227; and Watterson, 140.  Past Queens  70  Finally, Senenmut , Hatshepsut's most important and able administrator, who was also 72  the tutor to Hatshepsut's daughter, may have also positively influenced Cleopatra Fs situation. Senenmut's immense power within the kingdom was second only to Hatshepsut's. Overshadowed by his great achievements and worth, one is almost surprised to discover that he was originally a man of low birth . That a man of such low social rank could reach the most 73  prestigious posts in the kingdom and be accepted by the court, priesthood, and populace may explain to a certain extent how Eulaeus' simultaneous appointment as advisor to the regent (i.e. Cleopatra I) and tutor to the heir (i.e. Ptolemy VI) was accepted . 74  In a comparison between Hatshepsut and Cleopatra I, we can see the parallelism in their influence and power since both became very powerful and were very popular among their subjects and with the Egyptian priesthood. Both used their influence to achieve their own goals . Thus, even if Cleopatra I was not aware of Hatshepsut and her great accomplishments, 75  this Pharaonic queen was familiar to the native people and thus of great benefit to Cleopatra I, since the idea of a female ruler was not unknown to them.  3.4 Summary Each of these queens mentioned, Arsinoe II, Arsinoe III, and Hatshepsut was important to Cleopatra I's success and appointment as regent.  First of all, Arsinoe II legitimised the  queenship in the eyes of the native Egyptians by associating the Ptolemies with the Pharaohs through divine worship (that is, the revival of sibling marriage) of the rulers. As a result of this association, the native Egyptians were more endeared to the queenship than to the kingship. Robins, 47; Tyldesley, 227ff.; and Wells, 187ff Tyldesley, 228. Cf. chapter two. Caaning, John. 100 Great Kings, Queens and Rulers of the World. (1967) New York: Taplinger Publishing Co., 27. 72  73  74  75  Past Queens  71  Next, Arsinoe III was crucial to Cleopatra I's own appointment as co-ruler since her precedent revealed how popular opinion could determine a regent in the face of aristocratic opposition. Cleopatra I may also have learned from her how the Egyptianisation of some institutions further strengthened the queenship. Last of all, Hatshepsut was a model for Cleopatra I because of her bravery to steer away from ancient protocols and customs. Hatshepsut wanted to be viewed and regarded as pharaoh, and not as Pharaoh's wife, and not only took kingly iconography but titulary titles as well. I believe that without these influences and precedents that Cleopatra I would not have had the opportunity to become regent.  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  72  CHAPTER FOUR  "...she had influence, but he had sole power."  1  By the late third and early second centuries B.C., Egypt was in desperate need of stronger leadership.  The same problems continued to plague the dynasty from its  beginning. Foremost among these problems was the failure of the Ptolemies to assimilate quietly the indigenous people of Egypt. The exigency which required the participation of native Egyptian soldiers (the Machimoi) at the battle of Raphia (217 B.C.) placed an even greater strain on the relationship between the Ptolemaic rulers and their Egyptian subjects than had previously existed. As well, there remained the perennial threat to Egypt from her sister kingdom, that of the Seleucids. Last of all, Rome was quickly emerging as the most powerful force in the Mediterranean and the unquestioned arbiter for the rival Hellenistic kingdoms. It was amidst these very troubled times that a Ptolemaic queen of extraordinary foresight and influence emerged. The fact that Cleopatra I became regent during these tumultuous times prompts one to wonder at the conditions and successive events that eventually established her in such an unprecedented position. The first three chapters discussed these pre-conditions: i) the strength of the ministers and courtiers at the court, but their subservience to a powerful and able monarch; ii) Cleopatra Fs support of her personal eunuchs and also her successful institutionalisation of them into the Ptolemaic court; and lastly, iii) the precedents established by past queens that influenced not only her, but also her subjects to accept and tolerate a female ruler. This chapter will first discuss how, from the moment she set foot into Egypt, Cleopatra I gained immense Egyptian support and with it influence; even despite the fact that she was a foreigner.  1  Carney, 428.  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  73  Secondly, this chapter will look at all of the areas of the Ptolemaic queenship that Cleopatra I strengthened. This strengthening of the queenship was a crucial precursor to Cleopatra I becoming the first female regent and to her successors becoming the first Ptolemaic queens to become joint co-rulers.  4.1  Titulary Evidence There are several extant inscriptions mentioning Cleopatra I (below, Table #11),  but there are problems with her titulature. Cleopatra I's titulary inscriptions are rare and oftentimes it is hard to determine whether an inscription is referring to her or to one of her descendants . Thus, when a Cleopatra is mentioned in any inscription, exactly which Cleopatra is meant must be very carefully determined. Most of the early dedications made to Cleopatra I, during the reign of her husband Ptolemy V, are not official, but do show the opinion of the Ptolemaic people towards her . Cleopatra I's earliest titulature reveals an uncanny attraction to her and a wide 3  popularity and adoration among her subjects - noteworthy not simply because she was the first foreign Ptolemaic queen, but because she was a Seleucid.  In particular, the  Antiquity did not designate Roman numerals to their dynastic names as we do today (i.e. Cleopatra I, Cleopatra II, etc.) and patronymics were oftentimes too ambiguous to rely on (for example, Ptolemy, the son of Ptolemy can refer to any one of die fourteen Ptolemaic kings). 3 The type of dedication was very important in revealing what was officially used and acknowledged by the 'government' as dynastic inscriptions and what dedications merely reflected the opinions of the monarchs' subjects. First party, or official, dedications were die standard inscriptions such as die dating-formula reflecting Greek, Macedonian, and Egyptian protocols. Subsequent in importance to official first party inscriptions was the second party dedications best exemplified with die vnep ("on behalf of) inscriptions. Second party inscriptions were especially important in revealing die attitude of the Alexandrians and Greeks towards their rulers outside of the official sphere since such dedications: "if they did not originate in family dedications and dedications of slaves, freedmen, and so on, for the health of relatives, the prosperity of employers and masters, and so on, are closely akin to them" (Fraser, 116). This type of dedication constituted the common "loyalty formula", which both Alberro (162) and Fraser (116) believed the Greek population employed to expresstiieirrespects to different members of die royal family and which "revealed that the Greeks had a personal relationship witii, and were therefore under the protection of, the sovereign" (Fraser, 116). Although these types of dedications existed wherever Hellenistic monarchies did,tiiisgenre was especially popular in Ptolemaic Egypt andtiiusespecially useful in determining the relationship between die Ptolemaic rulers and their subjectstiiroughouthistory. Cf. Fraser, chp. 5. 2  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  74  bestowal of all of the titulary honours previously granted her Ptolemaic predecessors, such as sister and "Eucharistos", and the new title "Syra" clearly show her subjects' 4  acceptance of her as their queen. Table #11: Titulary Titles for Cleopatra I during the Reign of Ptolemy V Date B.C. 193 +?  Title •  Title  Type of Dedication  "The Syrian" or "Syra" "Thea Epiphanes" ("Goddess Made Manifest")  Alexandrian  6  193 +  •  • 194/3 +  •  191/0  .  204-180  "Eucharistos" ("The Beneficent God") "King Ptolemy and Queen Cleopatra, the Manifest and Beneficent Gods" "Sister" (Full Form:) "Pharaoh Ptolemy, son of Ptolemy and Arsinoe, the FatherLoving Gods, with his sister, his wife Queen Cleopatra, the Manifest Gods" 9  "In the reign of Ptolemy, son of Ptolemy and Arsinoe, the FatherLoving Gods"  Royal Titulature (First Party Inscription)  BaoiXevg IJmXepaiog Kai BaaiXiaaa KXeonaipa 0eoi EmcpaveTg  Royal Titulature Royal Titulature (Second Party Inscription)  BamXevg IJroXepaTog Kai BaaiXicaa KXeondzpa Qeoi EmqxxveTg Kai Evxapiaroi  Royal Titulature (Second Party Inscription)  BaaiXebg TlzoXepaiog, BaoiXeag FlroXepaiov Kai BaciXiccrtg 'Apcivdtjg Qecov 0iXon:ar6pcvv, Kai BaaiXiaaa KXeonaxpa, r] dSeXqyfi Kai yvvfj, Qeoi Em<paveig Kai Evxapioroi, Kai 6 vidg avrmvTltoXepawg^  BacnXevm riwXcpaiog 6 f7wXrpainv Kai Apcnvotfe. Oecov <Pikonav6ptov 1  DATING FORMULA  Whitehorne believes that the Alexandrians gave Cleopatra I the nickname, "Syra" or "Syrian", out of their deep affection for her . He believes that from the start there 11  This title is the strongest proof of her acceptance by her varied subjects - a direct reference to her Seleucid origin in spite of the people's anti-Seleucid feelings (cf. section 4.1 and footnotes). All bold-faced titles will be discussed following the tables. Cf. Appian, Syrian Wars, 1.5 and Strack, 245 no. 70. This type of inscription has been found at Philai as a temple dedication. This type of inscription has been found at Philai (cf. SEG 28, 1480), Egypt (cf. OGIS 95 and SEG 15, 874), and Mandarah (OGIS 97). Cf. PP F/. 14515; RE II (1922), coll. 738-740, no. 14; Bevan, Egypt, 399; and Macurdy, 141-47. 4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11  Cf. Strack, 245 no. 71 and OGIS 99, 733.  This inscription was found at Alexandria (cf. SB 8927). Whitehorne, 84.  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  75  existed a strong mutual affection between Cleopatra I and her new subjects. Unfortunately, he has no proof to support this view. This title might have been no more than an indication of her foreign birth and origin . For instance, if a Ptolemaic princess 12  wed into the Seleucid house, she might have been nicknamed "the Egyptian" or "the Ptolemy" because of her foreign background . The most recent scholarship on this topic 13  also appears to favour this title simply indicating origin and background. Holbl explains this title by saying: "Der sechzehnjahrige Konig hatte jetzt eine etwa zehnjahrige Frau, Kleopatra  I.,  die  man  wegen  ihrer  Abstammung  und  ihrer naturgemaG  seleukidenfreundlichen Einstellung die Syrerin nannte" . 14  The title, "Theos Epiphanes" - granted to Ptolemy V in 199/8 B.C. which designated him as a living god - was given to Cleopatra I after their marriage (193 B.C.) . 15  Although a foreigner this title, as well as other titles such as "Eucharistos",  which had been granted to her predecessors, was not denied to her.  This is very  significant since the bestowal of these titles shows not only a good relationship between the Egyptian priesthood and Cleopatra I, but also her acceptance and support by her subjects; a quintessential ingredient for her later success.  I believe that it was her  acceptance by the Egyptian priesthood through which she gained access to certain religious functions . 16  Thus, Cleopatra I at this early point of her queenship may have  It is safe to say that this title was not meant in a derogatory sense, since all of her other titles at this time (193 B.C.) and during the rest of her queenship were bestowed upon her largely with her subjects' acceptance. Greatest proof of this fact can be seen in her title "sister". 12  13  Cf. P.S.I. 541.  Holbl, 125-126. As concerns die notion of deep affection, die title appears to suggest that Cleopatra I's varied subjects, at the very least, viewed her in a good light and not a hostile one since this open admittance of her foreign background and dieir acceptance and use of the tide is unusually sentimental. (Cf. below, footnote 19). Whitehorne, 85. The dynastic cult of the Ptolemies, based on Pharaonic practice and custom, gave more influence and recognition to the Ptolemies in the religious realm. 14  15  16  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  76  already realised the amount of influence she could possess in the kingdom with the support of her subjects. Her title, "sister" (1) dSeAcp?]), also deserves special mention because she was not connected in any way to the Lagid family. The title is good proof of her subjects', both Greco-Macedonian and Egyptian, acceptance. This title does not contradict but, instead, casts out all doubt of her connection to past Ptolemaic queens; solidifying her position. Many of her Greco-Macedonian subjects considered the Seleucids their bitter enemies, 17  having already fought them in five Syrian Wars (in 343 B.C.) . Her Egyptian subjects felt even stronger against the Seleucids since they scornfully associated the Seleucids with the Persians, who had ruled the Egyptian dynasty twice before - before Alexander the Great finally defeated them . The bitterness of the Egyptians towards their former 18  masters had already been capitalised on by the Ptolemaic government, who used this hatred to rally these subjects in the Second Syrian War against the Seleucids . 19  Fortunately for Cleopatra I, increased concessions and appeals to the native population began with Ptolemy V, whose very coronation was performed in Egyptian fashion . 20  First Syrian War (274-271 B.C.) (cf. Whitehorne, 75 and Bevan, Egypt, 61-63); Second Syrian War (260ca. 253 B.C.) (cf. Whitehorne, 75 and Bevan, Egypt, 69-71); Third Syrian War/Laodicean War (cf. Whitehorne, 75-76 and Bevan, Egypt, 189-204); Fourth Syrian War (221-217 B.C.) (cf. Whitehorne, 76-77 and Bevan, Egypt, 226-231); and Fifth Syrian War (cf. Whitehorne, 77-78 and Bevan, Egypt, 254ff). "Thereafter, for twenty years [343 - 323 B.C.] Egypt, and Kyrene also, were reduced to the status of a satrapy, and the humiliation wrought by this second era of Persian rule would later be remembered with bitterness as an abuse of all that was humane and decent" (Manley, Bill. The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Egypt, 126ff). The Persians ruled Egypt as the Twenty-Seventh and Thirty-First Pharaonic Dynasties. To the Egyptians, the Seleucids were Persians. An Egyptian demotic text (which was a translation of a Greek original) mentions Antiochus II as a 'Philopersian king'. Bresciani (Das ptolemaische agypten, 3137) mentions how this reference to the Seleucids as Persians was "an attempt to capitalise on the hostility of the Egyptians to their former Persian rulers... the purpose of the survey documented by this text was to provide the basis for raising revenues needed tofightthe Second Syrian War". This need for the Ptolemaic kings to strengthen the kingdom from 'within' by making concessions to the native population was a last effort to stabilise their crumbling kingdom. For more discussion on this, cf. 17  18  19  20  Bevan, Egypt, 260.  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  77  Furthermore, the adoration towards the queenship thus far displayed towards earlier queens suggested that she would also receive their support. As regards political power 21  that may have accompanied this title, the attitudes of her varied subjects were also mixed. To the Greeks, unless the queen was referred to specifically in their documents as possessing power (as was the case with Cleopatra I during the early years of Ptolemy VFs reign), they did not consider her a co-ruler of Egypt. To the Egyptians, though, their queen, the sister of the king, was considered a co-ruler who played an active part in public life, policies, and in court ceremonies . According to Egyptian law and custom, 22  the 'sister of the king' shared in the administration of the kingdom . Because of the 23  higher status and roles of royal women according to Egyptian law and custom, I believe that the Egyptianisation of certain institutions during Cleopatra Fs lifetime was not a coincidence, but a deliberate attempt to bring herself more influence and, possibly one day, power. The dating-formula before Cleopatra Fs regency still followed traditional Greek protocol whereby the king's name was mentioned first and foremost . 24  The dating-  formula at this time in Ptolemaic history did not necessarily reveal where true power resided. For example, the throne was manipulated, controlled and run by the king's ministers in the reign of Ptolemy IV, since Sosibius held control at the Ptolemaic court . 25  Despite Sosibius' control, it was still the norm for the king's name to be found on the dating formula as the reigning monarch. The king was merely a figurehead.  Cf. chapter three. CAH VII, 164. Cf. Sage's note on Livy, xxvii.iii.9-11. Change in the dating-formula occurs immediately after the death of Ptolemy V and in the reign of his son, Ptolemy VI. Cf. section 5.1 below. Cf. chapter one.  21  2 2  23  24  25  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  78  Cleopatra I's titulary evidence during the reign of her husband, Ptolemy V, suggests that her position was very unique in light of Ptolemaic queenship to date. The most significant difference of her position was her foreign descent. Contrary to expected reaction of the Ptolemaic subjects, both Greek and Egyptian, to this foreigner, Cleopatra I was accepted - the bestowal of titles and honours on her proves this fact. These honours should not be taken lightly, especially from the Egyptian point of view, since these titles, albeit superficial to a Greek, suggested certain responsibilities whether religious or ceremonial . Thus, Cleopatra I's honours, while the wife of Ptolemy V, clearly reveal 26  her support by her Egyptian subjects and by the Egyptian priesthood. To her Egyptian subjects, the fact that she and her husband, the king, represented religious leadership was unquestioned; a constant of Egyptian worship and loyalty . Furthermore, this earliest 27  support from her Egyptian subjects, I believe, influenced her to further Egyptianise the Ptolemaic dynasty in the ultimate hope of gaining real power.  4.2 Literary Evidence Cleopatra I is not mentioned in the ancient sources until her betrothal to Ptolemy V Epiphanes . Appian is the only ancient source to report this incident and to mention 28  29  Cleopatra I by name: "HSri Se TOV npdg'PcopaiovgndXepov eyvcoKcbg dnoKaXvnreiv, eniyapiag rovg eyyvgfiacnXeagnpoKareXdppave, Kai IJroXepaicp pev eg Aiyvnmv eoxeXXe KXeondrpav  TTJV  Zvpav iniKXrjaiv, npoiKa Zvpiav xrjv KoiXrjv eniSiSovg, rjv avxdg  Cf. chapter three for previous titles held by Arsinoe II. Cf. section 4.3, below. Cf. Appendix BB (for literary evidence for Ptolemy V) and Appendix CC (for literary evidence for Cleopatra I). Appian, Syrian Wars, 1.5. Cf. Polybius, xviii.51.10; Livy, xxxiii.40.3; and Walbank, 11.623.  26 27 28  29  79  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  dtpjjprjTO tov IJToAe/uaiov, Oepanevcov rfSr] TO peipocKiov, iVev TS noXiptp ted npdg 'Pcopaiovg dtpepfy^  There are only a few other direct references to Cleopatra I mentioned by Livy , although 31  none of these passages give any hints to the degree of influence Cleopatra I had with her husband. However, the amount of influence already displayed by previous Ptolemaic queens - mentioned by Plutarch - is an important fact to keep in mind. 32  Plutarch  stressed, as I strongly believe, that the combination of a weak sovereign and a strong queen made the possibility of an influential queen very feasible. We can also apply this scenario to Cleopatra I and Ptolemy V. Ptolemy V, like Ptolemy IV, was controlled and dominated by his powerful courtiers and was known as a weak king. There are many references to Epiphanes' weak political and administrative position and to the constant threat he faced from the Seleucids, Romans, and his native Egyptian subjects throughout his lifetime . Cleopatra I's strong character, on the other hand, is revealed immediately 3 3  upon her husband's death when she becomes the first female regent. Even before the death of her husband, Cleopatra I reveals herself as an exceptional queen through the many refinements she makes to the queenship to which I now turn.  Also important from Appian's passage is the mention of Cleopatra I's dowry. I will not discuss all of the different views concerning what Antiochus Ill's intentions were in giving Coele-Syria as part of his daughter's dowry or who had rights to the area after her death. However, as regards her dowry, Mahaffy provides the best comments on its consequences: "Her dowry of the revenues of Coele-Syria was very great, but gave rise to political complications in the sequel" (160). It must also be made clear that despite how scholarship has treated her dowry it did not empower her in any way nor give her any sort of elevated political position at the Ptolemaic court (Macurdy, 6). Cf. RE 11 (1922), col. 748 for the Egyptian, Seleucid, ancient, modern, and Jewish views on her dowry; Polybius, v.67.6-10; xxviii.l.2ff, 20.9; Josephus, A.J., xii.l54ff; Eusebius, II.124ff; Daniel, 11.17; Bouche-Leclercq, Lagides, I.385ff; III. 190; Green, 305; Walbank, 1.592-593; 111.356; and Will, 11.162-163, 190-192. Cf. Appendix CC. Cf. Chapter three, footnotes 4 and 5. Mahaffy notes the decline of the Ptolemaic Empire under Epiphanes (162ff); Bevan also mentions Epiphanes' suppression of military control by Polycrates, Epiphanes' chief counsellor (Egypt, 276). Plutarch mentions time and again the weakness of Epiphanes and his constant desire for hunting. Cf. Appendix C for other references to the character of Epiphanes. 31  32  33  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  80  4.3 Cleopatra I as the Pharaoh's Wife The Ptolemaic  rulers possessed a very unique  advantage  over their  contemporaries in the other Hellenistic kingdoms. Respect for the Egyptian priesthood and the adoption of Pharaonic customs won them recognition and designation as a legitimate Pharaonic dynasty. Alexander the Great had begun the policy where each ruler of Egypt was consecrated as pharaoh on his accession . 34  This policy was regularised  among the Ptolemaic rulers under Ptolemy V . The implementation of this policy to 3 5  gain the support of the indigenous Egyptian population and the powerful priesthood with the building and restoration of temples throughout the empire had very different results. 36  Far from receiving uniform acceptance from their Egyptian subjects, the Ptolemaic kings had to constantly suppress revolts and uprisings from the Thebaid region; where the majority of the native Egyptian population resided. Furthermore, the native subjects, instead, adored and revered their queens . These royal women benefited the most from 37  their designations as Pharaonic queens despite the turmoil that surrounded the monarchy and the Ptolemaic rulers. Pharaonic royal women were revered and held respectable roles in many spheres of Egyptian life . Cleopatra I took full advantage of this association 38  and took steps to establish permanently the same privileges for her descendants by capitalising on Pharaonic women's rights to ownership of land and guardianship, roles in the Pharaonic dynastic religion, and the privileges gained from permanently instituting sibling marriage into the Ptolemaic monarchy.  Alexander was enthroned as Pharaoh at Mempliis (cf. Ps-Callisth. 1.34.1-2.). Ptolemy III as Pharaoh. See OGIS 561-20. (Cf. Preaux, 1.259-260.) Cf. OGIS 56.8-12 for temple building under Ptolemy IV; Bevan, Egypt, 238; and Green, 348, 355-358. Cf. chapter three. Cf. chapter three (especially "Arsinoe II" and "Arsinoe III").  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  81  Egyptian women, in Pharaonic and Hellenistic times, had greater roles, status, and a wider range of rights, in general, than their Greek contemporaries . 39  This is in stark  contrast with the restrictions placed on ancient Greek and Mediterranean women. In Egypt, the higher the woman's position in society the more she was considered the equal to her husband in every role. One of the most unique rights Egyptian women enjoyed was their right to own land . The fact that Egyptian women had a right of ownership is a 40  commonality, but rare among the Ptolemaic queens. Egyptian women owned their own land, and like the men, managed it in any way they saw fit: "It is a well-established fact that in the Greco-Egyptian law there was no limitation on the capacity of women to take part in any sort of private commercial transaction" . The profits and revenue from their 41  lands was also their own; thus a very economically-minded manager - even if female could accumulate great personal wealth. Both Arsinoe II and Cleopatra I had personal wealth not as a direct result of the use of this Pharaonic law, but as a result of their status and holdings before they became Ptolemaic queens . This Pharaonic law was, however, 42  significant because it allowed them to keep the revenue, which they had already accrued. The adoption of this Pharaonic law, thus, allowed other queens, like Arsinoe II and Cleopatra I, to gain greater prominence and influence at the court and greatly strengthened the queen's position at the court.  Carney, 436 and n. 38. C/Pomeroy, 157ff. Taubenschlag, 175. Arsinoe II, wife of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, had accumulated so much money from her two previous marriages that she could easily support her own mercenary army (cf. chapter three, section 3.1) and Cleopatra I's dowry of Coele-Syria was also a source of wealth, which the Ptolemies and Seleucids immediately fought for the rights of after her death. Greek rule in Ptolemaic Egypt entitled a woman rights to her dowry: "The dowry is always the property of the wife, but the husband has therightof use" (Taubenschlag, 16, 127). 39 40 41  42  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  82  Apart from land, though, Pharaonic women also had matrimonial, inheritance , 43  and guardianship rights. The one which most affected Cleopatra I was the guardianship rights. In the event of a deceased husband, the mother had the right to appoint a guardian for her child and then to act on behalf of her child in financial transactions. The woman, in this case, had a great deal of authority: "Les droits de la mere dans la famille en vertu de l'autorite paternelle, si Ton peut s'exprimer ainsi, n'etaient done en rien inferieurs a ceux du pere" . In the cases of Arsinoe III and Cleopatra I, the guardianship of the child, 44  the heir, was placed on the mother. Normally, under Greek law the guardianship would fall on the next male of paternal relation. The Ptolemaic queenship's association to a Pharaonic custom, however, allowed the queen to act as guardian.  By the time of  Cleopatra II, Cleopatra I's daughter, this guardianship had gained strength and importance where the throne could legally belong to a widowed queen, as long as a male ruler from her family was associated with her on the throne . Thus, I believe, the legal 45  status of Egyptian women allowed the Ptolemaic royal women to gain greater influence and that eventually allowed Cleopatra I to become the first female guardian and regent of the Ptolemaic dynasty. Cleopatra I's attempts to Egyptianise certain Greek institutions are very clearly seen in her attempts to capitalise on this Pharaonic law. Pharaonic royal women were also exalted and greatly honoured in the divine and religious realm. In this realm, the female members of the royal family represented family continuity and renewal, since they produced the male heirs to the throne . It is because 46  47  Taubenschlag, 6, 16, 22, passim. Taubenschlag, 52. Taubenschlag, 563ff. Cf. Macurdy, 153 and Strack, 75. Carney (437) believes this to be one of the main functions and responsibilities of the royal women. Robins saw this as a vital function of the royal women, which can be traced back to the creation of their gods in Egyptian mythology. 43 44 45  46 47  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  83  of these two roles and responsibilities that Egyptian royal women in some respects were considered even more important than their male counterparts. In fact, it is because of their importance towards the continuance of the royal line that the Pharaonic monarchy is considered by some scholars to have been matrilineal . 48  Cleopatra I could not follow the normal tradition of sibling marriage her predecessors, Arsinoe II and Arsinoe III , had followed. However, recognising the need 49  and importance to continue this custom for her children, she betrothed her first two children, Ptolemy VI and Cleopatra II, at a very early age. The advantages of continuing the tradition of sibling marriage among her descendants are threefold. Firstly, sibling marriage was essential for maintaining and unifying the royal family's past, present, and future . This association with past and present Ptolemaic rulers was more important to 50  Cleopatra I than to, say, Arsinoe II, since Cleopatra I's, and especially her children's, legitimacy needed to be solidified and verified. With her own legitimacy reinforced, the legitimacy of her own children was also guaranteed. Secondly, through sibling marriage, Cleopatra I strengthened the queenship for her female successors and did not need to worry whether or not their daughters would be supplanted by rival relatives - as Arsinoe II had done to Arsinoe I when she returned to Egypt - but knew that each in turn would 51  become the Ptolemaic queen alongside her brother and king . Cleopatra I made further 52  For more on this, cf. Robins and Troy passim. Caaning (27) was one who believed that the "purity of descent was reckoned through the female, rather than the male line". Cf. Appendix A. Carney, 429. Arsinoe I was the step-daughter of Arsinoe II. Having been accused of plotting against her husband, Ptolemy II, Arsinoe I was banished to the Thebaid. Ptolemy II then married Arsinoe II c. 275 B.C. (Macurdy, 116). Cf. Appendix A. Yet ironically, it was the lack of real sibling marriage with Ptolemy V that gave Cleopatra I the throne. Had Ptolemy V married a real sister, matters might have been different. Cf. Appendix A. 49  50 51  52  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  84  attempts to guarantee her children rights to the throne ensuring that her dynastic name be continued by her descendants much as Ptolemy I Soter had for his progeny. The result of Cleopatra Fs successful assumption of important roles and functions created an uncharacteristic "polarity between the sexes" for her successors . With the 53  greater respect and reverence towards the queen, as Pharaoh's wife, and greater influence and roles that accompanied this stature, it is not surprising to find Ptolemaic queens in the "traditionally male spheres of government and warfare" immediately following the death of Ptolemy V Epiphanes, Cleopatra I's husband . Cleopatra I's success at associating 54  herself with the Pharaonic queens gave her queenship greater influence and also legitimised her children in their subjects' eyes.  4.4 Cleopatra I's Position at the Court The change in the political position and power of Ptolemaic queens and the way the queenship would be viewed occurred immediately after Ptolemy V Epiphanes' premature death (in 180 B.C.). After Ptolemy V s death, as was the case with Ptolemy IV, the throne was inherited by a child. However, unlike the defenceless Ptolemy V, Ptolemy VI was protected by his mother, Cleopatra I, who immediately became more influential and powerful at the court. The literary tradition supports the changed status of Cleopatra I after her husband's death. There is a keen sense of not only Cleopatra I's superior position over her son, Ptolemy VI, but also Cleopatra I's internationally recognised status as Ptolemy V s equal by Rome and the other Hellenistic kingdoms.  Pomeroy, xviii and 23ff. Pomeroy, xviii.  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  85  According to Polybius and Livy, Cleopatra I acquired equal status with her deceased husband . This can be inferred from their passages which mention the sending 55  of envoys from the various surrounding kingdoms to renew friendships and treaties with Egypt during Philometor's Anakleteria ("coming of age") festival; an event which occurred nearly eight years after the death of Epiphanes. The passages are as follows: Kai Kara TOV avrov Kaipov Kai nepi rod /3acnXecog IJroXepaiov npocneaovtog roig  'Axawig Swxi yeyovev am& td vopi^opeva yiveoGai toig PamXevcnv, orav eig ijXiKiav  eXOcooiv, dvaKXrjTijpia, vopicavreg ccpioi KadrJKeiv enicrnprjvacrdai TO  yeyovog, eynjcpiaavro nepneiv npea/3evzdg dvavecoaopevovg td npovndp%ovTa rep edvei <piXdv8pcona npdg TT)VfiaoiXeiav,Kai napavriKa KareoTijaav AXKI&OV Kai IJaoidSav.  56  and Per idem tempus quinque legati ad regem missi, qui res in Macedonia aspicerent. 57  Alexandriam iidem ad Ptolemaeum renovandae amicitiae causa proflcisci iussi.  The general delay of Egypt's neighbours to send envoys to renew the treaties between themselves and Egypt immediately after Ptolemy V Epiphanes' death suggests Cleopatra I's recognised and acknowledged role as the continued ruler of Egypt. Treaties as a rule, during this period in history, lasted only as long as the monarch and had to be renewed with his successor, or with his heir's guardians, immediately after his death. However, after Epiphanes' death and for the next decade until Ptolemy VI reached the 58  "age of majority" when he became old enough to rule on his own, no envoys appeared in Egypt. Instead, Cleopatra I was recognised as the ruler of Egypt, in her husband's place.  There is another passage by Livy which mentions the kingdom ruled by a Ptolemy and Cleopatra equally as co-rulers, although Livy has accidentally mistaken Cleopatra II for Cleopatra I (xxxviii.9-11). Cf. Appendix H. Polybius, xxviii. 12.8-9 (170-169 B.C.) and Walbank, III.345. Livy, xlii.vi.4. Livy's passage is placed in the year 173 B.C., Polybius' passage in 170/169 B.C. Although there is a difference between the dates, this merely reflects the controversy concerning the time of Cleopatra I's death. The renewal of the treaty in 173 B.C. is generally agreed by scholars such as Macurdy, Stahelin, Strack, and Otto to have coincided with die year of Cleopatra I's deatii (cf. chapterfive,footnote 7). 33  56 57  58  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  86  This appears to be one of the only possible explanations to explain the ten-year gap of foreign embassies between Epiphanes' death and PhUometof sAnakleteria festival. The extremely smooth transition from Ptolemy V Epiphanes to Cleopatra I is the other main argument which appears to suggest that Cleopatra I was viewed as Ptolemy V s equal. Cleopatra I's acceptance as the ruler of Egypt not only by her subjects, but also by Rome and the Hellenistic kingdoms was unprecedented in Ptolemaic history. It is certain from these two references that she possessed a great deal of respect from the surrounding kingdoms after his death. Furthermore, being the sister of Seleucus IV who was ruler of the Seleucid dynasty , Cleopatra I was the only Ptolemaic ruler to date who 59  did not have to worry about clashes between Egypt and Syria; no doubt a relief both to the Seleucid population and to Egypt's subjects. Lastly, this transition of power from Ptolemy V Epiphanes to Cleopatra I and her universal acceptance as a co-ruler of Egypt with her son, Ptolemy VI, hint at her involvement in her husband's death.  However, the best evidence of Cleopatra I's  involvement in the premature death of Ptolemy V comes from the literary evidence, which mentions Epiphanes preparing his forces to reacquire Coele-Syria from the Seleucid kingdom just prior to his death in 181/0 B.C.  60  At this time, the king of Syria,  Seleucus IV, was the full brother of Cleopatra I. We know that Cleopatra I and Seleucus IV had no ill-will against each other because during Cleopatra I's regency, there existed peace between these two kingdoms, a peace not yet seen before this time. Even with evidence of Epiphanes' war preparations against Seleucus IV, there are two further pieces of evidence, which indicate that his death was a timely one; and therefore not at all  Cf Appendix B, "Seleucid King List". Cf. Diodorus Siculus, xxix.29; Porphyrius, FGrHist. no.260, F. 48; and Morkholm, Antiochus, 180.  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes coincidental.  87  First of all, Ptolemy V had just put down the very last of the native  insurgents in the Delta region (184-3 B.C.). This native unrest had plagued the dynasty since his father's, Ptolemy IV's, rule.  Second of all, upon the death of his father,  Ptolemy VI was not old enough to rule on his own.  According to the Pharaonic  guardianship law, his mother was entitled to this appointment. Cleopatra I was also as extremely popular with her subjects, both Greek and Egyptian, as Arsinoe III, who had set the earliest precedent of being appointed guardian by her subjects. With the relief of not having to deal with the major revolts and battles which had plagued the kingdom for several years both at home and abroad, and her certain appointment as her son's guardian, Cleopatra I was in an ideal situation after the death of her husband.  4 . 5 Summary & Cleopatra Fs Influences To the time of her husband's death, Cleopatra I's political position was no more, but no less than the position held by Arsinoe III. However, her status and the status of successive Ptolemaic queens changed with the very premature death of Ptolemy V Epiphanes. Cleopatra I's achievements became the starting block and model for her female successors. Cleopatra I strengthened the position and role of the queen to such an extent that her female successors had the luxury of a well-established foundation from which they could draw their power. The greatest impact Cleopatra I had on the Ptolemaic dynasty was her refinements to the role and position of Ptolemaic queens in the hierarchic structure of the court. Cleopatra I achieved this principally by exploiting, first, the extent of power and control - political and religious, and private and public - she could possess through her association as "Pharaoh's wife".  This connection to the Greco-Egyptian  Cleopatra I, Wife of Ptolemy V Epiphanes  88  dynastic cult exalted the position of the queen to a godly status in the eyes of her subjects, especially the Egyptians, and guaranteed their loyalty to the queenship. Fortunately, even before reaping the benefits and honours that came with her role as the Pharaoh's wife, Cleopatra I already enjoyed a much higher status as an "Egyptian" royal woman. Her esteemed position greatly contrasted the much inferior position of women - even aristocratic women - in the majority of the other Mediterranean societies. Furthermore, through her exploitation of sibling marriage, Cleopatra I established continuity for her female successors as each in turn attained the status of Pharaoh's wife and also all of the honours and roles she herself possessed and established. Especially noteworthy was the adoption and use of the Pharaonic law of guardianship by Cleopatra I. Through this law, queens now had a right to become guardians for their underage sons. Last of all, from sibling marriage, the foundation was established for future queens, from which they could draw support and influence, if the situation required them to be stronger and if the chance was open to them.  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  89  C H A P T E R FIVE ...She was also the first Ptolemaic Queen to serve as regent and co-ruler with her son.'  The death of Ptolemy V and the accession of his heir, Ptolemy VI, brought a whole new era to Ptolemaic queenship. This was the result of the policy of Cleopatra I, who brought about several unprecedented events : i) Cleopatra I ended the manipulation 2  and influence of the powerful court aristocrats on the monarchy, ii) and instead, relied on her own personal attendants to serve as her chief advisors; iii) the titulary was also affected by Cleopatra I's regency, since she was able to have her name placed even before the king's name in the dating formula; and iv) beginning with Cleopatra I, portraiture began to depict the Ptolemaic queens more realistically and accurately . All 3  these innovations in the queenship suggest Cleopatra I's control over Ptolemaic affairs during her regency, and the continuation of these innovations by later queens is the most obvious indication that the queenship's increased influence and power was established. Cleopatra I was thefirstofficial female regent of Ptolemaic Egypt and along with this regency came great changes to Ptolemaic institutions and Greek-based protocols . 4  Unfortunately, the exact period during which she ruled is unknown; ranging from a fouryear reign (180-176 B.C.) to a seven-year reign (180-173 B.C.).  However, these  specifics although important are not critical since they do not change our view of the impact her regency had on Ptolemaic Egypt. According to the epigraphic evidence, by  1 2 3  Whitehorne, 88. These points will be discussed in detail in this chapter. Op. cit. 145. Cf. Svoronos, "Ptolemaeos V. Epiphanes" and "Plolemaeos VI. Philometor", and Poole, 59-  60. 4  Macurdy, 147.  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  90  175 B.C., her son, Ptolemy VI , and her daughter, Cleopatra II , had already replaced her 5  6  in the dating formula. This, therefore, supports the theories of Pestman, Samuel, and Whitehorne that Cleopatra I must have died sometime between April and July of 176 B.C.  7  5.1 Titulary Evidence Before Cleopatra I's unprecedented regency, each new ruler and his consort were regularly added into the dating formula, a formula which gave the name of the reigning king followed by the name of the priest of Alexander and then each dynastic pair who preceded the king. For example, during the reign of Ptolemy III the dating formula was: In the reign of Ptolemy, son of Ptolemy and Arsinoe , Brother-and Sister Gods, year 9, Apollonides son of Moschion being priest of Alexander and the Brother-and Sister Gods and the Benefactor Gods, Menecrateia daughter of Philammon being Kanephoros of Arsinoe Philadelphos... 9  By Ptolemy V s reign, the dating formula had a standardised formula wherein the king was mentioned first, followed by: the king's many titles, the priest of Alexander, a complete list of the dynastic pairs beginning with Ptolemy I and Berenice I, the 'Gods Soteres', andfinallya list of the priestesses:  PP VI. 14548, 17233; RE 23 (1959), coll. 1702-19, no. 24; Otto, passim; and Morkholm, Antiochus, 64101. Cf. Appendix DD. PP VI. 14516; RE7/(1922), coll. 740-44, no. 15; Bevan, Egypt, index; Macurdy, 147-61; and Otto, 1-23. Cf. Pestman, no.9, note a; Samuel, 140; Whitehorne, 87; Koenen, 64; and Skeat, 33. The other dates proposed for her year of death are: before 173 B.C. - Otto, 1; in 173 B.C. - Livy, xlii.6.4 (i.e. based on the Roman embassy that came to Egypt to renew their treaty of friendship); RE II (1922), col. 740; BoucheLeclercq, Lagides, II; Mahaffy, 166, Strack 183, 196ff; before 171 B.C. - Livy, xlii.xxix.5. Ptolemy II and Arsinoe II. Canopus Decree (239 B.C.) (for the translation of this, cf. Bevan, Egypt, 208ff). The dating formula, at this time, was still not entirely complete. For instance, thefirstdynastic pair of Ptolemy I Soter and his wife, Berenice I, were excluded from the dating formula. However, what is obvious in this early dating formula is the importance of including Arsinoe IPs priestess in the formula; attestation to the popularity and adoration of the people (Greco-Macedonian and Egyptian) towards the queenship. 5  6  7  8 9  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  91  In the reign of the young one... a king, like the Sun, the great king of the upper and lower regions; offspring of the Gods Philopatores...son of the Sun, Ptolemy Living-For-Ever Beloved of Ptah, in the 9 year, when Aetus, son of Aetus, was priest of Alexander, and the Gods Soteres, and the Gods Adelphoi , and the Gods Euergetai ' and the Gods th  10  12  11  13  Philopatores , and the God Epiphanes Eucharistos ; Pyrrha daughter of Philinus being Athlophoros of Berenice Euergetis, Areia daughter of Diogenes being Kanephoros of Arsinoe Philadelphus, Irene daughter of Ptolemy being Priestess of Arsinoe Philopator, the 4 of the month Xandikos, according to the Egyptians the 18 of Mechir. th  th  14  This standard formula was utilised by each successive ruler and was one propagandistic method revealing how royal power resided in the king (and not the queen). However, this dating protocol did not always accurately indicate where real political authority and power within the dynasty actually resided. Two of the weaker monarchs, Ptolemy IV and Ptolemy V, were controlled by the leading ministers and aristocrats at the court, although the dating formula shows no sign of this weakness in the monarchic rule . Instead, the 15  systematic use of the king's name first in all royal inscriptions instilled an important propagandistic image of the kingdom being ruled successively by powerful Ptolemaic kings. This was essential to maintain the image of a strong and united dynasty at a time when the Ptolemies had to battle constant civil uprisings and revolts both at home and abroad. Cleopatra I's regency saw a deviation from this patriarchal norm and for the first time in Ptolemaic history the king's name was not mentioned first, but followed the queen's name (below, Table #12 "Dating-Formula"). It was a remarkable feat for this Seleucid princess.  10 11 12 13 14 15  Ptolemy II and Arsinoe II. Ptolemy III and Berenice II. Ptolemy IV and Arsinoe III. Another title for Ptolemy V. From the Rosetta Stone (ca. 196 B.C.) (cf. Bevan, Egypt, 263ff. for the full translation). Ptolemy IV and the early years of Ptolemy V. Cf chapter one (especially, "Sosibius" and "Agathocles").  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  92  Table #12: Titulature during the Rule of Cleopatra I and Ptolemy VI Date B.C.  Title  186180  Type of Dedication  "Ptolemy the Son"  Royal Titulature  after 180  "Ptolemy VI Philometor" "King Ptolemy Philometor"  Royal Titulature  179/8+ 177  180 176  Cleopatra I's eldest son was known only by this title from the time he was born up to the 16 time of his father's death in 180 Ptolemy VI has become co-ruler of Egypt with his mother, Cleopatra I  Royal Titulature  17  BaaiAevg ITroAepaTog 0iAopritcop  "Queen Cleopatra and King Ptolemy"  in Greek texts  "Queen Cleopatra Manifest Goddess and King Ptolemy, and her other children and to themselves"  Second Party i • .• 18 Inscription  "In the reigns of Cleopatra the Mother, the Manifest Goddess, and Ptolemy, son of Ptolemy, the Manifest G o d " "In the reigns of the Female King, Cleopatra, and the King, Ptolemy the Son, Manifest Gods."  Titles/Comments  found in lines 14-15 of P.Coll.Youtie 12 • •  OATINGFORMULA  found on the base of a broken statue base in Cyprus this expression was made by a dignitary (from among the senior officers at the Ptolemaic garrison on Cyprus) who must have served during Cleopatra I's and 19 Ptolemy Vl's joint rule  rcg K/.coxaxpa ij pfjrrip Gcd icai IlzoArpaiog 6 fJw/.tfiaiov Qeov 'Liniuyxvovg^  BU<JI/.FVO\  2 0  BacriAruovzrg BaoiAiaaa KAroirdzptx BaaiAevg [JzoAepaiog 6 vidg. &eoi ExwcxvFig  Cleopatra Fs titulary innovation reflected and would continue to represent the amount of political influence and power Ptolemaic queens would have. From Cleopatra I's regency onward, the titulature more accurately revealed who had political influence and power within the dynasty. In Cleopatra I's case, the years she appeared first in the  16 17  Cf. Whitehorne, 86 and OGIS 98. Cf. RE, s.v. 14 "Kleopatra", col.740 and P. Freib. 12-33.  The acceptance of the court and her subjects of her position and the lesser role of her son are clearly revealed in the second-party inscriptions from the period during Cleopatra I's regency. Cf. SEG xvi.788 and Whitehorne, 87 for the inscription. Burstein (202ff.) believes that Cleopatra I received praise from her Greco-Macedonian subjects because her intentions towards the dynasty and everything and everyone within it were good. Cf.RE, s.v. 14 "Kleopatra", col.740. For further comments on this cf. Whitehorne, 86. 18  19  20  21  Kcti  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor titulature were accurate representations that royal power resided in the queen.  93 This  innovation continued after Cleopatra I's death. Already by Cleopatra II, the titulature in the dating formula indicated royal power being equally shared by both king and queen. The most obvious indication of this is seen in the Greek inscription where the participle used in Cleopatra I and Ptolemy VPs time {BamXevovteg, translated as "in the reigns of) continued to be used in the plural by Cleopatra I's descendents: "BaaiXevovreg TJroXe/uaTog Kai KXeondrpa oi ffroXepaiov Kai KXeondxpag Oecov 'Eni(pavcov" . Aside from Cleopatra I's dominance at the court as revealed by her position in the dating formula , the manner in which her son, Ptolemy VI, was portrayed throughout his 23  mother's regency in the titulature (180-ca. 176 B.C.) is equally noteworthy. Immediately after the death of his father, Ptolemy V (in 180 B.C.), Ptolemy VI acquired a new title - "Philometor" ("Mother-Loving") - a title acknowledging his 24  mother as the more dominant figure at the court . A similar occurrence already occurred 25  in Ptolemaic history where the king took a title to form closer ties to a queen both more influential and more beloved by the people.  Ptolemy II took the title, "Adelphus"  ("Brother-Sister Gods") as part of his inclusion into the dynastic cult revealing his high regard for his sister, Arsinoe II. Whereas Ptolemy IPs title revealed equality between  Ptolemy VI and Cleopatra II (SEG xvii.700). When the royal power was represented only by the king, the participle was only found in the singular. "Wir konnen jetzt durch die Datierungsformel einiger Papyri aus dem 2. und 3. Jalire Ptolemaios' VI. nachweisen, daI5 Kleopatra I. nicht nur Vonnund ihres Sohnes gewesen ist, sondern auch als Regentin offiziell anerkannt war" (Otto, 1). Cf. Whitehorne, 86. 1 do not believe that this title, "Philometor", was given to Ptolemy VI to emphasise his mother's Syrian connections and to emphasise his territorial expeclations in that area (Coele-Syria) since this title was given to him when he became co-ruler with his mother. (Cf. This is the theory of Green, 840; Grant, 21; and Gruen, HIV, 687.) The claims to Coele-Syria are premature for this title since this title clearly reveals diat Cleopatra I was the dominant co-ruler. The former could have been argued if Ptolemy VI acquired this title long after his mother's death and when he was much older and ruled on his own. zz  23  24  25  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  94  king and queen in rank, Philometor's title clearly proved his subordination to his mother, who was his co-ruler, but clearly, he was not her equal: At this point the name [Philometor] was clear in its meaning for the Greeks: it put the son and male partner of the joint rule in the second place and appealed to his obligation 26  toward his mother, who continued to be called Theos Epiphanes. Cleopatra I's dominating influence is also confirmed by the fact that neither Ptolemy VPs name nor the title of his dynastic priest ("and of King Ptolemy Philometor") appeared first in the dating formulae until after her death . Last of all, the dedication found in 27  SEG XVI.788 is very important in showing Ptolemy VPs subordinate position to his mother, who, in this inscription, is deified while Ptolemy VI is not . Although both were 28  rulers (Cleopatra I, the regent, and Ptolemy VI, the king), the titulature clearly reveals that Cleopatra I was the more influential and recognised ruler. The royal titulature of the kingdom also reveals the acceptance of the majority of her subjects - the royal officials, ministers, and her varied subjects - by her authoritative position as the "senior partner" in this relationship . The acceptance by the court of this 29  arrangement was unprecedented in Ptolemaic history , although already witnessed in 30  31  Pharaonic history . The demotic form of the dating formula, which mentions Cleopatra I first, clearly reveals the Egyptian people's recognition of Cleopatra I's reign as a joint  Koenen, 64 and Holbl, 128. In the subsequent dating-formula when Ptolemy VI Philometor's name precedes a Cleopatra, the Cleopatra named is his sister and the daughter of Cleopatra I, Cleopatra II. Cf. Koenen, 64 and Koenen, L. "Die demotische Zivilprozessordnung," APF17 (1960), 11-16. Cf. Strack, 3 Iff.; Bouche-Leclercq, Lagides, 111.97; Macurdy, 145ff; and Otto, 1. Otto (1): "Wir konnen jetzt durch die Datierungsformel einiger Papyri aus dem 2. und 3. Jahre Ptolemaios' VI. nachweisen, daft Kleopatra I. nicht nur Vormund ilires Sohnes gewesen ist, sondern auch als Regenun offiziell anerkannt war". Cf. Whitehorne, 86, 87. Although Ptolemy V also had guardians (Sosibius and Agathocles), these individuals were male and were members of important aristocratic families. Cleopatra I, however, was a woman and a foreigner making her acceptance by all levels of the dynasty tliat much more remarkable. Cf chapter three, section 3.3. 26 27  28  29  30  31  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  95  rule . The constraints of Greek tradition and bureaucracy visibly weakened by Cleopatra 32  I's time. Most notable is a Greek dedication made by a commoner who acknowledged 33  and addressed Cleopatra I first before mentioning the king, Ptolemy VI. Furthermore, another inscription made by a senior officer from among one of the Ptolemaic garrisons on Cyprus addressed the Ptolemaic rulers by also naming Cleopatra I first . Not only did 34  Cleopatra I break with normal dating protocols by placing her name first in the dating formula, but her subjects through their dedications did so as well and openly accepted her authority. The nature and origin of Cleopatra I's support, thus, becomes much less of a surprise based on the extant evidence. The titulature during the reign of Ptolemy VI, after his mother's death, once again returned to the more customary Greek protocol where the king was mentioned first. However, Cleopatra I "like her predecessors Arsinoe II (sister-wife of Ptolemy II), Berenice II (the wife of Ptolemy III) and her own mother-in-law, Arsinoe III, who all had their own cults and priestesses in Alexandria, [she] was rewarded with one in the 35  Thebaid ". This honour once more attests to the amount of influence Cleopatra I exerted on her subjects and on the Egyptian priesthood . 36  Pestman, P.W. Chronologie egyptienne d'apres les textes demoliques (332 av. J.-C. - 453 ap. J.-C). (1967) Leiden, 46. Referring to the inscription: "Queen Cleopatra and King Ptolemy" (P.Coll. You tie 12). Referring to the next inscription: "Queen Cleopatra Manifest Goddess and King Ptolemy..." (SEG xvi.788). Cf. Whitehorne, 87. Cf. Whitehorne, 87 and Pestman, op. cil, 142-143. 3 2  3 3  3 4  35  3 6  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  96  Table #13: Titulature During the Reign of Ptolemy VI After Cleopatra Fs Death Title  Date B.C. after her death  •  from 165/4 onwards  • •  "of Ptolemy and Cleopatra his mother" "of Cleopatra, the Mother, the Manifest Goddess" (Rewarded with the Posthumous Honour of an Individual Cult)  Type of Dedication  Titles  in Upper Egypt ?  Both Whitehorne and Pestman believe that she was honoured with this Eponymous priesthood after her death.  in the Thebaid  iepeia KAeoTtcczpag xfjg prizpog Qedg 'Emcpavovg  37  This was the first time that a queen assumed full political control and was acknowledged as possessing this power. Such rare occurrences, I believe, foreshadow the political vicissitudes that would continue to plague the kingdom in the reigns of the later Ptolemies.  From Cleopatra Fs time onwards, the addition or omission of later  sovereigns or queens from this list were key indicators to such shifts of political power between the later strife-stricken dynastic family . The presence and order of a ruler's 38  name in the dating formula became a direct reflection of the amount of control that individual had in the Ptolemaic government. Cleopatra I is thus important because she was responsible for this important change to the dating formula, but more importantly because her ability to change this reflected the influence or authority she possessed while regent.  5.2 Cleopatra I and her Portraiture Cleopatra I utilised coinage as a means to win the support of her many subjects at a time when the monarchy was still unstable . This specific propagandistic function of 39  Cf.RE, s.v. 14 "Kleopatra", col.740. For further readings on this, cf. Fraser, 1.214ff. Thompson, 91. Cf. Whitehorne, 84.  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  97  coinage varied greatly from that of Ptolemy I Soter. Ptolemy I Soter coined on a large scale mainly to pay for the extensive economic, military, and civil expenses that were incurred from constant political and military disputes .  Aside from the financial  40  stipulations, Ptolemy I inaugurated his (dynastic) image on the obverse side of all Ptolemaic coinage to ensure dynastic continuity within his new kingdom as its founder, intending for each of his successors to mint his image on their coins . Other repetitious 41  standards to maintain a link to himself was the adoption of his name by each successive ruler. On the reverse side of coinage, Ptolemy I and his successors minted images such as eagles and thunderbolts to reflect the dynasty and monarch's power . 42  Cleopatra I  made similar attempts to institute her own set of standards for her female successors by Egyptianising the queen's portraiture to portray the queen more realistically. Similar to Ptolemy I, Cleopatra I also tried to establish that each of her successors bear her name. Indeed, little credit has been given to Cleopatra I, who was thefirstPtolemaic queen and first female regent to coin money in her own image . 43  Her coinage attests to the  unprecedented amount of influence she wielded, since it was generally felt that coinage in that monarch's name was one of the distinguishing marks of a true ruler . 44  The  portraiture of queens from the early second century onwards, thus, reveal the impact of Cleopatra I's regency and the queen's unprecedented amount of political control and  Morkholm, Coinage, 23, 27. Ptolemies II to IV coined their dynasty's founder on the obverse side of their coins. Although beginning with Ptolemy Vs reign, the king's own image was minted (Davis and Kraay, 272ff). Ptolemaic rulers continued to coin Ptolemy I's image on the obverse side of their coins, but sporadically included coins in their own images (Kyrieleis passim). Cf Newell, E.T. Royal Greek Portrait Coins. (1937) Racine, Wisconsin. Eagles and thunderbolts were especially popular since these symbols were associated to Zeus, the King of the Greek gods, and so the kingship was also seen as a divine kingship. (Cf. Morkholm, Coinage, 27.) Berenice II of Cyrene of the Ptolemaic kingdom was the first female princess to coin money. Morkholm, Coinage, 24. Cf. Kahrstedt, U. "Frauen auf antiken Miinzen", 274. 40 41  42  43 44  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  98  influence with the more accurate portrayal of the Ptolemaic queens from Cleopatra I's time onwards. There exists only two or three images of the queen . 45  These portrayals of  Cleopatra I survive in the form of coins, busts, and oinochoai portraits. However, despite the scarcity of examples, several innovations and changes to the queen's portraiture are seen, namely an Egyptianising of the queen's portraiture. We can attribute these changes to Cleopatra I's reign since before her reign the style was more Greek, but beginning with her, Egyptian styles dominated and after her reign, the depictions of the queens became more and more accurate . The contrast between Cleopatra I's Egyptianising features and 46  the Greek features of Arsinoe III serve to illustrate this difference best. The portraits of Arsinoe III and Cleopatra I differ significantly, most obviously, in the manner the face, hair, and diadem were rendered. Arsinoe Ill's portrait reveals a long oval face, puffy protruding eyes, a stephane, and a melon coiffure (that is, several waves of hair over each ear), all of which are identified as Greek features (below, figures). Cleopatra I's portrait is quite different with a rounder more girlish face, puffy cheeks, ringed eyes, an Egyptianising smile, hair brushed into a tier of curls on each side of the face with a long set falling on the shoulders , and a diadem sitting loosely on the hair, 47  48  "just as it lies on contemporary Egyptian statues" (below, figures). 49  Cf. Thompson, plates xliii, xliv, lxv, lxxiii. Thompson, 9Iff. A feature seen also on the coins of Cleopatra I. Pomeroy (29) explains how the diadem is clear evidence of the queen's deification, since the diadem was only worn by divinities and by royally who represented themselves as divinities. Thompson, 92. 46 47  48  49  99  C l e o p a t r a I, M o t h e r o f P t o l e m y V I P h i l o m e t o r  Arsinoe III50  Cleopatra I51  Cleopatra III  T h e d e p i c t i o n o f queens as weak, thin, and nervous before C l e o p a t r a I's time m i r r o r e d the 53  queens' weaker influences, positions, and roles within the m a l e - d o m i n a t e d dynasty  . By  the time o f P t o l e m y V I , because o f C l e o p a t r a I's influence o n the queenly portraiture, the trend o f the Ptolemies before P t o l e m y V I o f p o r t r a y i n g the k i n g as p o w e r f u l and the queens as w e a k had reversed itself.  N o t only had queens'  portraiture b e c o m e  more  i n d i v i d u a l i s e d , but the k i n g n o w was the one w h o appeared weak, thin, and nervous.  It  was m a i n l y the later hairstyle, the E g y p t i a n i s i n g smile and features that led T h o m p s o n to confidently c l a i m this portrait as that o f C l e o p a t r a I . 54  C l e o p a t r a I's successors,  F u r t h e r m o r e , b y the time  of  the coiffure and the style o f the face had already c h a n g e d to  depict the queens m o r e accurately, p r o o f o f the queen's increased influence.  In s o m e  instances, such as w i t h the portrait o f C l e o p a t r a III, her d e p i c t i o n r e s e m b l e d the portrait o f a P t o l e m y , a reflection o f her d o m i n a n c e d u r i n g her and her husband's, P t o l e m y I X ,  Thompson, plate lxxiii.c. Thompson, plate xliii no. 123. Thompson, plate lxxiv.i Green (348) comments on the representation of queens with: "the air of nuns suffering simultaneously from indigestion and anorexia". Cf. Appendix I where Green lias identified Cleopatra I as the queen depicted on the Farnese Cup. If indeed the figure portrayed is Cleopatra I, Cleopatra I has successfully associated herself as the Pharaoh's wife and as the God's wife. Thus, ultimately strengthening the queenship even further. 5 0  51  5 2  5 3  5 4  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  100  reign (see above, figure). Cleopatra I's success at instituting a standard style and image of future coinage for the Ptolemaic kingdom is even more noteworthy when one realises that it is virtually only within the Ptolemaic dynasty that such distinction and honour were bestowed on the queens. The portrayal of queens on coinage in the other Hellenistic kingdoms was extremely uncommon. There existed, however, one very rare occurrence of a queen in the Seleucid kingdom who coined her image on her own set of currency . Perhaps this 55  occurrence is not so surprising when one realises that this queen, Cleopatra Thea, of the Seleucid Kingdom was actually a descendant of the Ptolemaic house . 56  5.3 Cleopatra I's Political Position Even though it is clear that Cleopatra I gained the regency through her own efforts, little is known about her regency. Several things, though, can be ascertained and stated confidently: first, the titulature and her name and order within the dating formula during her regency years reveal a certain amount of unprecedented authority, political control, and influence. Second, her assumption of the title as "Ruler of Upper and Lower Egypt" - an esteemed title of the old Pharaonic rulers - during her regency reveals her success at integrating the Ptolemaic queenship with the Pharaonic queenship . 57  Furthermore, this title indicates a certain affinity between Cleopatra I and her Egyptian subjects since such propagandistic methods were aimed mainly to please her subjects, but also to grant her more authority in the Egyptian queen's spheres of power.  For these coins cf. Davis & Kraay, 273. Cleopatra Thea was the daughter of Ptolemy VI and the grand-daughter of Cleopatra I. Cf. above, 4 and 5, and footnote 20 Pomeroy, 91.  56  57  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  101  5.4 Cleopatra Fs Policies The astuteness of Cleopatra Fs decision not to alienate the priesthood speaks for itself, when one looks at the results she achieved with their support. Her policy was a complete reversal from Ptolemy I's policy. After Ptolemy I had successfully established himself as king, he suppressed the Egyptian priesthood and relied on the friendship and loyalty of his "Friends" and Greco-Macedonian army for support . Cleopatra I, on the 58  other hand, made an alliance with the first group, the Memphite priesthood, and suppressed the actions of the second group and in doing so secured the support of her Egyptian subjects. To counter the actions and movements of the Ptolemaic ministers, a group she could not rely on, Cleopatra I successfully instituted eunuchs into the Ptolemaic court. The presence of Aristonicus, thefirstcourt eunuch, but particularly his views and policies are early indications of this new group's importance. Although the amount of influence eunuchs enjoyed at the Ptolemaic court varied with each ruler and master, their presence and employment by future monarchs attest to Cleopatra I's success at introducing another faction at the court. The Ptolemaic eunuchs proved to be formidable attendants and courtiers, becoming so powerful that their power had to be curbed by a specific policy aimed at them . 59  Last of all, Cleopatra I's titulature and portraiture reveal her policy of equating the queen with that of the king by Egyptianising some Ptolemaic institutions - the success of which is clearly seen in the titulature and portraiture of her successors.  Green, 191. Cf. Appendix G ("Comanus" and "Cineas").  For instance,  102  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  among her successors like Cleopatra III, the queen's name once again preceded the king's in the dating formula. Furthermore, the queen's portraiture was depicted with more detail and with more accuracy.  Cleopatra I implemented this Egyptianising policy to the  queenship's titulature and portraiture so that Ptolemaic queens would become more powerful and important due to their association to Pharaonic queens, who enjoyed greater rights, powers, and roles . 60  Thus, I believe that Cleopatra I's Egyptianising of the Ptolemaic queenship allowed her to successfully utilise her own retinue, become thefirstfemale regent, and in the process, equate the queenship with the kingship. Her attempts at Egyptianising the queenship are clearly seen in her adoption and exploitation of sibling marriage (by betrothing her son, Ptolemy VI, to her daughter, Cleopatra II) , her successful 61  association as Pharaoh's and god's wife, and her changes to the queen's titulature and portraiture. However, the most significant of the Egyptianising circumstances that led to her regency, I believe, was her successful implementation of the Egyptian guardian law that allowed women to fulfil the guardianship role. Although most scholars have adopted the ancient viewpoint that Cleopatra I's reign was a period of tranquillity both abroad and within Egypt itself, both Bevan and Mahaffy give no credit to Cleopatra I for maintaining friendly relations with the two kingdoms of Rome and Syria.  Instead they explain her reign as a time when there was  peace and tranquillity because the Romans and likewise the Seleucids chose to leave  Cf. chapter four. The re-revival of sibling marriage into Ptolemaic Egypt by Cleopatra I was one of die most crucial sources for die existence of shared political power among die later Ptolemaic Queens. In diis respect, I agree with Carney (437)tiiatdie growing prevalence of thistypeof marriage was linked to the general status of royal women in die Hellenistic period. 60  61  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  103  Egypt alone . I believe, however, that the peace in Egypt was a result of Cleopatra I's 62  diplomacy. There are a number of very important factors. On the one hand, her peaceful co-existence with the Seleucids during her regency (mainly over possession of CoeleSyria) and her pro-Seleucid policy are direct results of her good relationship with her 63  brother, Seleucus IV, the Seleucid king: Dieser Erfolg von Kleopatra I. steht somit im starken Gegensatz zum MiBgeschick der Arsinoe III., die beim Regierungswechsel vom vierten zumfiinftenPtolemaer ermordet worden war. Die seleukidenfreundliche Regentin stellte die Kriegsvorbereitungen gegen ihren Bruder Seleukos IV. sofort ein. 64  On the other hand, while she was alive, she continued to collect the revenue from CoeleSyria that was part of her dowry; territory that belonged to the Seleucid kingdom . Thus 65  there was neither any reason for Cleopatra I to claim a territory which she already partially owned, nor was there any reason for her brother to invade Coele-Syria since his sister represented no threat to him. According to Whitehorne: "As long as she was regent, we should hear nothing more of these plans to attack Syria, ruled now by Cleopatra's brother, Seleucus IV" . 66  Furthermore, following her husband's death, Cleopatra I must have maintained a strong government to keep the Romans out of Egypt. This is important and shows that the Romans regarded Cleopatra I the ruler of Egypt as much as her husband because the Romans did not send an envoy to renew their ties of friendship when Ptolemy V died.  Cf introductory chapter. Holbl (125-126) believes this pro-Seleucid policy was the reason why she was nicknamed the "Syrian" although this cannot be the case since she had acquired this title when she married Ptolemy V. Her policies do not become apparent until her regency. Holbl, 128. Cf. chapter four, footnote 30. Cf. Whitehorne, 87.  62  63  64 65 66  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  104  5.5 Summary Cleopatra I's importance in developing a strong queenship, by creating not only family solidarity (most notably seen in Ptolemy VTs epithet "Philometor" and the use of Cleopatra I's name for future Ptolemaic queens), but also a greater equality between king and queen, is sadly ignored. Cleopatra I was the first queen to assume full political control, but even more importantly was the widespread recognition of her control and greater status, thereby guaranteeing the same rights to her successors.  The immediate  consequences of Cleopatra I's success are already apparent in the case of her daughter, Cleopatra II, who enjoyed an equality to her husband which no queen before her had ever experienced.  Cleopatra II was a recognised co-ruler in every way; an equal to her  husband. Nor does Cleopatra I's influence falter after that but, indeed, become stronger. Immediately after Cleopatra II, an even more powerful queen comes to the forefront, Cleopatra III. Cleopatra III epitomises those very aspects of queenship which Cleopatra I had established earlier - the queen was equal, if not more, powerful than her husband. The strength of the Ptolemaic queenship eventually ended with another namesake, Cleopatra VII, who ruled Egypt virtually alone from her adolescent years until her death. With such powerful progeny succeeding her, it is impossible to deny the monumental effect Cleopatra I's career had on the political position and influence of future Ptolemaic queens. Without Cleopatra I's achievements, precedents, and policies, I believe that the careers of Cleopatra II, Cleopatra III, Cleopatra Thea, and Cleopatra VII would not have been possible since these queens would not have been accepted and viewed, at home and abroad, as equals to their kings.  Furthermore, Cleopatra I began a new era for the  queenship in the areas of queenly titulature and portraiture. However, as well established  Cleopatra I, Mother of Ptolemy VI Philometor  105  as this foundation was, the succeeding queens had to possess exceptional qualities themselves, since only their own competence would enable them access to this cauldron of power and intrigue.  Conclusion  106  The career of Cleopatra I has been little documented in our sources, both ancient and modern, and as a result not given due credit for not only suppressing the political influence of the powerful aristocratic families at the Ptolemaic court, but also for placing Ptolemaic queens on an equal status with the king. These were Cleopatra Fs greatest accomplishments and contribution to Ptolemaic queenship. Up to the time of Cleopatra Fs husband, Ptolemy V, Ptolemaic aristocrats and ministers were extremely influential on the monarchy; the dominance of Sosibius and Agathocles in Ptolemaic affairs is well known. As well, before Cleopatra I, the Ptolemaic queenship as an institution was not recognised as possessing manifest influence and authority in any sphere - economic, political, or religious . 1  It is, thus, disappointing that such an important figure, who  contributed so much to the power and position of future Ptolemaic queens, is so neglected in the literary tradition. For instance, one can not deny the fact that Cleopatra I was the first 'Greek' queen to gain the position of regent; an inconceivable concept in Greek society. There are two things that prove that Cleopatra I gained the regency on her own merits and not under the sway and control of the aristocrat families who had controlled Ptolemy IV and Ptolemy V. During her regency, Cleopatra I solidified the greater status of the queen.  This innovation to the queenship was immediately apparent with the  equality between queen and king in her daughter's, Cleopatra II, time. It is clear that no courtier would have wanted a strengthened queenship, since this would mean a decrease in their own influence on the now strengthened monarchy. Also, considering the appearance of eunuchs at the court, which coincided with Cleopatra I's appointment as regent and guardian, and their continued presence thereafter, I believe that it is hard to deny the fact  1  Although Arsinoe II dominated the economic, political, and religious spheres during the reign of her  Conclusion  107  that Cleopatra I was responsible for institutionalising them in the Ptolemaic court. We know that she must have been responsible for these innovations since these things appeared during her regency and continued after her death. Many factors also had to be in place long before this first female regent came to power, as well as some important precedents that she could capitalise on and utilise for her own purposes. For instance, her success can be attributed to the timely accession of her child heir, her son, Ptolemy VI. At the age of five, Ptolemy VI was too young to rule the kingdom on his own and so required a guardian and regent. This was the second time in two successions that a queen had the chance to become both guardian and regent . 2  However, Cleopatra I was successful, having adopted the Egyptian guardianship law, which allowed a female to become guardian. Secondly, the fact that Cleopatra I was the first Ptolemaic queen who was a foreigner and not related directly to the Ptolemaic royal house gave her several advantages. First and foremost, Cleopatra I had direct ties to the Seleucid kings. This allowed the two kingdoms, which had up to this point been at constant war, to coexist peacefully while she was regent of Egypt. Furthermore, the fact that Cleopatra I came to Egypt with a dowry and with her own retinue explains how she could act so independently from the Ptolemaic court. Her dowry provided her with revenue and her retinue, her advisors and attendants. Thus, it is very hard to imagine a queen of Ptolemaic lineage being able to achieve what Cleopatra I had, simply because that queen would not have owned a substantial piece of personal property nor would she  husband, Ptolemy II, her position and power were not official. The first queen to have this chance was Arsinoe III, the mother of the young heir, Ptolemy V. 2  Conclusion  108  have a strong enough retinue since the aristocratic families were so powerful and interconnected . 3  Looking back at the events surrounding one of the most important Ptolemaic queens, I think that Cleopatra I was at the right place at the right time in history. She brought with her a new retinue of supporters totally detached from the Alexandrian court and she adopted only those qualities of the Pharaonic kingdom that would serve her best seen best through the adoption of some Egyptian customs, such as her association as the Pharaoh's wife, to endear herself to her Egyptian subjects. Furthermore, we know that Cleopatra I wielded influence and power during her regency, with the presence and position of her name in the dating-formula and titulature. Faced with a literary tradition determined to keep her in the past, this study provides some of the only clues that specifically show how much influence and authority she may have possessed.  Arsinoe II was the only other Ptolemaic queen who owned property (cf. chapter three), but again, her queenship was not recognised as an equal to the kingship. 3  Bibliography  109  GENERAL HISTORY  BOOKS  Adams, W. L . and Borza, Eugene N. eds. Philip II, Alexander the Great and the Macedonian Heritage. (1982) Washington: University Press of America. Austin, M . M . ed.  The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman  Conquest. (1981) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bagnall, Roger S. and Derow, Peter, eds. Greek Historical Documents: The Hellenistic Period. (1981) California: Scholars Press. Burstein, Stanley M . ed. The Hellenistic Age from the Battle of Ipsos to the Death of Kleopatra VII. (1985) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The Hellenistic Period in World History. (1996) Washington:  American Historical Association.  Cary, M.  A History of the Greek World From 323 to 146 BC. (1959) London:  Methuen & Co. Ltd. Davis, Norman and Kraay, P. Frank. The Hellenistic Kingdoms: Portrait Coins and History. (1980) London: Thames and Hudson. Green, Peter. Alexander to Actium: The Historical Evolution of the Hellenistic  Age. (1990) Berkeley: University of California Press. Griffith, G. T. The Mercenaries of the Hellenistic World. (1935) Chicago: Ares Publishers Inc. Gruen, Erich S.  The Hellenistic World and the Coming of Rome. Vols. I-II.  (1984) Berkeley: University of California Press. Heckel, Waldemar. Routledge.  The Marshals of Alexander's Empire. (1992) London:  Holleaux, Maurice. Rome, La Grece et les monarchies hellenistiques au III  e  siecle avant J.-C. (273-205). (1935) Heildesheim: Verlag Georg Olms. Etudes d'epigraphie et d'histoire grecques. Tomes I-VI. (1968)  Paris: Editions E. De Boccard. Hornblower, Simon and Spawforth, Antony. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Third Edition. (1996) Oxford: Oxford University Press. Liddell, H . G. and Scott, J. An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. Seventh  Edition. (1992) Oxford: Clarendon Press.  110  Bibliography Le monde hellenistique. Tomes I-II. Universitaires de France. Preaux, Claire.  (1978) Paris: Presses  Rostovtzeff, M . Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World. Vols. IIII (1941) Oxford: Clarendon Press. Sealey, Raphael. The History of the Greek City-States, 700-338 B.C. Berkeley: University of California Press. Syme, R o n a l d .  (1976)  The Roman Revolution. (1939) Oxford: Clarendon Press.  T a r n , W . W . The Greeks in Bactria and India. (1951) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. T a r n , W . W . and Griffith,  G. T . Hellenistic Civilizations. (1952) London.  Walbank, F . W . A Historical Commentary on Polybius. Vols. II-III. 1979) Oxford: Clarendon Press. Histoire politique du monde hellenistique. Nancy: University of Nancy. Will, Edouard.  (1984,  Tomes I-II. (1967)  PTOLEMAIC EGYPT  BOOKS  The Alexandrian Jews During the Ptolemaic Period. Ph.D. Dissertation. (1976) Michigan State University. A l b e r r o , Charles A .  Bagnall, Roger S.  Egypt in Late Antiquity. (1993)  Princeton:  Princeton  University Press. A History of Egypt Under the Ptolemaic Dynasty. (1968) Chicago: Ares Publishers, Inc.  Bevan, Edwyn.  Bianchi, Robert S. and Fazzini, Richard A eds. Cleopatra's Egypt: Age of the Ptolemies. (1989) The Brooklyn Museum. Germany: Verlag Philipp von Zabern.  Histoire des Lagides. Tomes I-IV. Bruxelles Culture et Civilisation. Bouche-Leclercq, A .  (1903-1907) Paris:  Davis, H a r o l d T . Alexandria, The Golden City. Vols. I-II. (1957) Illinois: The Principia Press of Illinois, Inc.  Race-Relations in Ancient Egypt: Greek, Egyptian, Hebrew, Roman. (1953) London: Methuen & Co. Ltd. Davis, S.  Bibliography  1  Dittenberger, W. Orientis Graeci Imcriptiones Selectae. (1960) Georg Olms.  *  1  Germany:  Dittenberger, W. Sylloge inscriptionum Graecarum. Third Edition. (1977) New York: George Olms. Ellis, Walter M . Ptolemy of Egypt. (1994) London: Routledge. Forster, E.M. Alexandria: A History and a Guide. (1968) Gloucester: Peter Smith. Fraser, P.M. Ptolemaic Alexandria. Vols. I-III. Press.  (1972) Oxford: Clarendon  Goudriaan, Koen. Ethnicity in Ptolemaic Egypt. (1988) Gieben, Publisher.  Amsterdam: J.C.  Grant, Michael. Cleopatra. (1972) Great Britain: Richard Clay. Guyot, Peter. Eunuchen als Sklaven und Freigelassene in der griechischromischenAntike. (1980) Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. Holbl, Gunter. Geschichte des Ptolemderreiches. (1994) Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt.  Germany:  Hull, W. Untersuchungen zu Aussenpolitik Ptolemaios' IV. (1976) Munich. Ijsewijn, J. De sacerdotibus sacerdotiisque Alexandri magni et Lagidarum eponymis. (1961) Brussels. Kyrieleis, H . Bildnisse der Ptolemder. (1975) Berlin. Letronne, Jean Antoine. Recueil des inscriptions grecques et latines de I'egypte. (1974) Germany: Scientia Verlag Aalen Lewis, Naphtali. Greeks in Ptolemaic Egypt: Case Studies in the Social History of the Hellenistic World. (1986) Oxford: Clarendon Press. Macurdy, Grace Harriet. Hellenistic Queens: A Study of Woman-Power in Macedonia, Seleucid Syria, and Ptolemaic Egypt. (1932) Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press. Mahaffy, J. P. History of Egypt: Ptolemaic Dynasty. Vol. IV. (1898) London: Methuen & Co.  Bibliography  112  Manley, Bill. The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Egypt. (1996) London: Penguin Books Ltd.  Mooren, Leon. The Aulic Titulature in Ptolemaic Egypt Introduction and Prosopography. (1975) Brussels: Paleis der Academien. Morkholm, Otto. Early Hellenistic Coinage: From the Accession of Alexander to the Peace of Apamea (336-188 B.C.). University Press.  (1991)  Cambridge:  Cambridge  Morkot, Robert. The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Greece. (1996) London: Penguin Books Ltd.  Otto, Walter. Zur Geschichte der Zeit des 6. Ptolemders: Ein Beitrag zur Politik und zum Staatsrecht des Hellenismus. (1934) Miinchen: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Pestman, P.W. Chronologie egyptienne d'apres les textes demotiques (332 av. J.C.-453 ap. J.-C). (1967) Leiden. Recueil de textes demotiques et biUngues. Vols. I-III. (1977) Belgium: E.J. Brill.  Pomeroy, Sarah B. Women in Hellenistic Egypt: From Alexander to Cleopatra. (1984) New York: Schocken Books.  Poole, R. S. Catalogue of Greek Coins. The Ptolemies, Kings of Egypt. (1963) Bologna: Arnaldo Forni.  Robins, Gay. Women in Ancient Egypt. (1993) Cambridge: Harvard University Press.  Samuel, Alan Edouard. Ptolemaic Chronology. (1962) Munich: C H . Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. Steen, Gareth L. Alexandria: The Site and the History. (1993) New York: New York University Press. Strack, Max L. Inscriptiones graecae Ptolemaicae. Publishers Inc. —. Hertz.  (1897) Chicago: Ares  Die Dynastie der Ptolemder. (1897) Berlin: Verlag von Wilheim  Sullivan, Richard D. Near Eastern Royalty and Rome, 100-30 B.C. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.  (1990)  113  Bibliography  Taubenschlag, Raphael. The Law of Greco-Roman Egypt in the Light of the Papyri 332 B.C. - 640 A.D. (1955) Warsaw. Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. Thompson, Dorothy Burr. Ptolemaic Oinochoai and Portraits in Faience: Aspects of the Ruler-Cult. (1973) Oxford: Clarendon Press. Memphis Under the Ptolemies. (1988) University Press.  Princeton: Princeton  Tyldesley, Joyce. Daughters ofIsis. Women ofAncient Egypt. (1994) England: Penguin Books Ltd. Volkmann, Hans. Cleopatra: A Study in Politics and Propaganda. (1958) London: Elek Books Limited. Watterson, Barbara. Women in Ancient Egypt. (1991) New York: St. Martin's Press. Wells, Evelyn. Hatshepsut. (1969) NY.: Doubleday & Company, Inc. Whitehorne, John. Cleopatras. (1994) London: Routledge.  ARTICLES Abel, Karlhans. "Der Tod Des Ptolemaios IV. Philopator Bei Polybios." Hermes 95 (1967), 72-90. Bagnall, Roger S. "The Administration of the Ptolemaic Possessions Outside Egypt." Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition, Vol. IV(\916). Besques-Mollard, Simone. "Un portrait de Cleopatre I dans les terres cuites de Smyrne." Revue Archeologique (1968), 241-250. Burstein, Stanley M. "Arsinoe II Philadelphos: A Revisionist View." In Adams andBorza, eds., 197-212. Carney, Elizabeth D. "The Reappearance of Royal Sibling Marriage in Ptolemaic Egypt." Parola delPassato 237 (1987), 420-439. Clarysse, W. and Van Der Veken, G. "The Eponymous Priests of Ptolemaic Egypt." Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 24 (1983). Dack, E. Van. "Ptolemaica Selecta " Studia Hellenistica 29 (1988). Jouguet, Pierre. "Eulaeos et Lenaeos. Observations sur la sixieme guerre syrienne." Bulletin de Vinstitut d'egypte 79(1936-37), 157-174.  114  Bibliography  "Les debuts du regne de Ptolemee Philometor et la sixieme guerre syrienne." Revue de Philologie 11 (1937), 193-238. Karhstedt, Ulrich. "Frauen auf antiken Munzen." Klio 10 (1910), 261-314. Koenen, Ludwig. "The Ptolemaic King as a Religious Figure." in Images and Ideologies: Self-definition in the Hellenistic World. (1992) Berkeley, 25-115. Kornemann, E . "Zur Geschichte der antiken Herrscherkulte." Klio 1 (1901), 59-95. "Die Ehe der eeoi oaopfpiopec,." Klio 9 (1966), 138. Lanciers, E. "The Cult of the Theoi Soteres and the Date of Some Papyri From The Reign of Ptolemy V Epiphanes." ZPE 66 (1986), 61-63. Lewis, Naphtali. "Ad Livium 42.29.5: Appendicule A „Eulaeos et Lenaeos." Journal of Juristic Papyrology IV (1950), 265-266. Longega, Gabriella. "Arsinoe II." Universitd degli Studi di Padova Pubblicazioni dell'Istituto di Storia Antica Vol. 6 (1968) Rome, 197-212. Mooren, Leon. "La hierarchie de cour ptolemaique." Studia Hellenistica 23 (1977), Louvain. "Ptolemaic Families." Scholars Press (1981), Atlanta, 289-301. "The Wives and Children of Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II." Papyrological Society (1988), 43 5-444. Moreau, Jacques. "Le troisieme livre des Maccabees." Chronique d'egypte 16 (1941), 111-122. Morkholm, Otto. "Eulaios and Lenaios." Classica et Mediaevalia 22 (1961), 32-43. Murray, Oswyn. "Aristeas and Ptolemaic Kingship." Journal of Theological Studies N.S. 18 (1967), 337-371. Nock, A.D. "Notes on Ruler-Cult, I-IV." JHS 48 (1928), 38-43. Peremans, Willy. "Egyptiens et etrangers en egypte au III siecle avant J.-C." Chronique d'Egypte 11 (1936), 151-162. 6  Preaux, Claire. "Polybe et Ptolemee Philopator." Chronique d'egypte 40 (1965), 364-375.  Bibliography  115  Quaegebeur, Jan. "Reines ptolemaiques et traditions egyptiennes." in Maehler, H. and Strocka, V. M. Das ptolemdische dgypten (1978), Mainz, 245-62. Skeat, T . C . (Ed. Reich, Nathaniel Julius.) "The Reigns of the Ptolemies."  Mizraim VI (1937), 7-40. Robert, L . "Samothrace 2, 1: Fraser, The Inscriptions on Stone." Gnomon 35 (1963), 50-76. Rostovtzeff, M . "The Foundations of Social and Economic Life in Egypt in Hellenistic Times." Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 6(1918), 161-178. Schur, Werner. 270-302.  "Zur Vorgeschichte des Ptolemaerreiches." Klio 20 (1926),  Skeat, T . C . "The Reigns of the Ptolemies." Miinchner Beitrdge zur Papyrusforschung und Antiken Rechtsgeschichte 39 (1969). Swiderek, Anna. "La societe grecque en egypte au Hie siecle av. n.e. d'apres les achives de Zenon." Journal of Juristic Papyrology 9-10 (1955-6), 365-400. Tondriau, Julien L . "Rois lagides compares ou identifiees a des divinites." Chronique d'egypte 23 (1947), 127-146. "Notes ptolemaiques." Aegyptus 28 (1948), 148-177. "Princesses ptolemaiques comparees ou identifiees a des deesses." Bulletin de la Societe Royale dArcheologie d'Alexandrie 37 (1948), 12-33. Troy, Lana. "Patterns of Queenship." Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis 14 (1986). Weber, Gregor. "Dichtung und hofische Gesellschaft." Hermes 62 (1993) Welles, C . Bradford. "Ptolemaic Administration in Egypt." Journal of Juristic Papyrology 3 (1949), 21-47.  S E L E U C I D SYRIA B O O K S  Bevan, Edwyn Robert. Edward Arnold.  The House of Seleucus Vols. I-II. (1902) London:  Bouche-Leclercq, A. Histoire des Seleucides. Tomes I-II. (1903-1907) Paris. Downey, Glanville. A History of Antioch in Syria From Seleucus to the Arab Conquest. (1961) Princeton: Princeton University Press.  Bibliography  11°  Ancient Antioch. (1963) Princeton: Princeton University Press. Grainger, John D. Seleukos Nikator: (1990) London: Routledge.  Constructing a Hellenistic Kingdom.  The Cities of Seleukid Syria. (1990) Oxford: Clarendon Press. Hitti, Philip K. History of Syria. (1957) London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd. Kuhrt, Amelie and Sherwin-White, Susan. Hellenism in the East: The Interaction of Greek and Non-Greek Civilizations from Syria to Central Asia After Alexander. (1987) London: Duckworth & Co. Ltd. Mehl, Andreas. Seleukos Nikator und Sein Reich. (1986) Lovanii. M o r k h o l m , Otto. Antiochus IV of Syria. Classica et Mediaevalia Dissertationes 8. (1966) Copenhagen. Newell, Edward T. The Seleucid Mint of Antioch. International.  (1978) Chicago:  Obol  ARTICLES  Abel, O. P. "Antiochus Epiphane." Vivre et Penser 7(1941), 231-254. Aymard, Andre. "Tutelle et usurpation dans les monarchies hellenistiques." Aegyptus xxxii (1952), 85-96. "Autour de l'avenement d'Antiochus IV." Historia 2 (1953), 4973. Bellinger, A.R. "The End of the Seleucids." Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences 38 (I949), 51 -102. Bikerman, E. "Heliodore au temple de Jerusalem." Annuaire de I'lnstitut de Philologieet d'histoire Orientales et Slaves 7(1939-1944), 5-40. "Sur la Chronologie de la Sixieme Guerre de Syrie." Chronique d'egypte 27(1952), 396-403. Cohen, Getzel M . "The Seleucid Colonies." Historia Supplement 30 (1978). Edson, Charles. "Imperium Macedonicum: The Seleucid Empire and the Literary Evidence." Classical Philology 53 (1958), 153-170. Forgas, Joan. "Historia del Malvat Rei Antiochus." Textos Medievals Breun (1981).  Biblioteca Escriny de  117  Bibliography  Hampl, Franz. "Review of Otto's Sur Geschichte..." Gnomon xii (1936), 30-43. "Review of Reuter's Beitrage zur Zeurteilung..." (1939), 619-623.  Gnomon xv  Reuss, Friedrich. "Das makedonische Konigtum des Seleukos Nikator." Klio 9 (1966), 76-79. Rostovtzeff, M . "Syria and the East." Cambridge Ancient History. Vol. VII (1928), 155-196. Swain, Joseph Ward. "Antiochus Epiphanes and Egypt." Classical Philology 39 (1944), 73-94. Tondriau, Julien L . "Souverains et souveraines seleucides en divinites." Le Museon 67 (1948), 171-182.  ANCIENT SOURCES Appian Broderson, Kai. Appians Antiochike (1991) Miinchen: Editio Maris. Athenaeus Gulick, Charles Burton. Athenaeus. Vols. I-VII. (1927) Loeb Classics. Cassius Dio Cary, Earnest. Cassius Dio Cocceianus. (1970) Loeb Classics. Diodorus Siculus Walton, Francis R. Diodorus of Sicily. Vol. XI. (1946) Loeb Classics. Herodotus Hude, Carolus. Herodotus. Vols. I-II. (1991) Great Britain: Oxford University Press. Josephus Marcus, Ralph. Josephus. Jewish Antiquities. Books XII-XIV. (1961) Loeb Classics. Justin Seel, Otto. M. Juniani Justini: Epitoma Historiarum Philippicarum Pompei Yardley, J.C. Justin: Trogi. (1972) Stuttgart.Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus. (1994) Atlanta.  118  Bibliography Lactantius  Creed, J. L. Lactantius: De mortibuspersecutorum.  Livy  (1984)  Loeb Classics.  Moore, Frank G. Livy. Vol. F7(1966); F7/(1950); VIII (1955) Loeb Classics. Sage, Evan T. Livy. Vol. 7X(1953);X(1949);^7(1949) Loeb Classics. Sage, Evan T. and Schlesinger, A. C. Livy. Vol. .¥7/(1948) Loeb Classics. Schlesinger, A. C. Livy. Vol. XIII (1961); (1948) Loeb Classics.  Ammianus Marcellinus. Rolfe, John C. Ammianus Marcellinus. Vol.1. (1956) Loeb Classics. Pliny  Rackham, H. Pliny. Natural History. Vol. IX.  (1938)  Loeb Classics.  Plutarch  Babbitt, Frank. Plutarch. Moralia. Vol.1. (1960) Loeb Classics. Perrin, Bernadotte. Plutarch's Lives. Vol. X. (1959) Loeb Classics. Polybius  Paton, W.R. Polybius: The Histories. Vols. III-VI.  Seneca  Loeb Classics.  Gummere, Richard M. Seneca: Epistulae morales ad Lucilium. Vol. III. (1917)  Strabo  (1922)  Loeb Classics.  Jones, Horace L. The Geography of Strabo. Vols. I-VIII  (1959)  Loeb Classics.  PAPYRI AND INSCRIPTIONS Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Koniglichen (Staatlichen Museen) zu Berlin. Vols. I-XIV. eds. W. Schubart et al. (1895-) Berlin. Catalogue of Demotic Papyri in the British Museum, ed. S.R.K. Glanville. (1939) Oxford: Oxford University Press. The Flinders Petrie Papyri. Vols. I-III. eds. J.P. Mahaffy and J.G. Smyly, (1891, 1893, and 1905) Dublin. Greek Papyri in the British Museum, eds. F.G. Kenyon and H.I. Bell. London.  (1893-)  Papyrus demotiques du Louvre, ed. E . Revillout. (1885) Paris. Sammelbuch eriechischer Urkunden aus Aegypten. Vols. I-XVI. eds. F. Preisigke, F. Bilabel, E . Kiessling, and H.-A. Rupprecht. (1915-) Leipzig and Weisbaden.  I  r > O  -  o> ui ^ O) ro  c  05  3  g  •5- 5  3  S JP S  D  f § I § §•  > z o  m  °o QL  om  ™ O  TJ  S>  °  O  55  O >  >  -a  n 3  II S  CD m z m >  7)  m m  a. o'  O  -n  S3 7]  03  b 8.  S w 9-  m m >  fD U ^ TJ  m TJ c -J mO 73 r-  tu  m  3 CO  3.9.  <  >  0) 73  o fl>CO CL Z oO fl)'  Tl H  O  m  m  7T  m co  "0 fl)  > a  fl>  H X  >  m m >  TJ >  ion O A  -n  3  —\  2. ^ >  m  O O I c  73  CO  CO  m m c  73  -a  >  CD  —  o  0) 3  D  o g o m  o > TJ  TJ n: > 73  aD o >H om  > cn  ^3  >  >  o m  m  CO  TJ >  -vj  CD  •a O  <s£>  Appendices APPENDIX B : T H E KING LISTS  P T O L E M A I C K I N G LIST  Ptolemy I Soter Ptolemy II Philadelphus Ptolemy III Euergetes Ptolemy IV Philopator Ptolemy V Epiphanes Cleopatra I Ptolemy VI Philometor and Cleopatra II (Ptolemy VI, Ptolemy VIII, Cleopatra II (Ptolemy VI and Cleopatra II Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II Cleopatra II, Cleopatra III, Ptolemy IX Cleopatra III and Ptolemy IX Soter II Cleopatra III and Ptolemy X Alexander I Ptolemy X Alexander I and Cleopatra Berenice Ptolemy IX Soter II Cleopatra Berenice and Ptolemy XI Alexander II Ptolemy XII Auletes Berenice IV Ptolemy XII Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XIII Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XIV Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV (Caesarion) 2  1 2  305-282 B.C. 282-246 246-222 222-205 204-180 180-176 180-145 170-164) 163-145) 145 145-116 116 116-107 107-101 101-88 88-81 80 80-58 58-55 55-51 51-47 47-44 44-30  All dates are B.C. Also known as: Theos Philopator Philadelphus Neos Dionysus.  1  Appendices SELEUCID KING LIST Seleucus I Nicator Antiochus I Soter Antiochus II Theos Seleucus II Callinikos Seleucus III Soter Antiochus III The Great Seleucus IV Philopator Antiochus IV Epiphanes Antiochus V Eupator Demetrius I Soter Alexander Balas Demetrius II Nicator Antiochus VI Epiphanes Antiochus VII Sidetes Demetrius II Nicator Cleopatra Thea Cleopatra Thea and Antiochus VIII Grypus Seleucus V Antiochus VIII Antiochus IX Kyzikenos Seleucus VI Epiphanes Nicator Demetrius III Philopator Antiochus X Eusebes Antiochus XI Philadelphus Philip I Philadelphus Antiochus XII Dionysus Tigranes I of Armenia Antiochus XIII Asiatikos Philip II  311-281 B.C. 281-261 261-246 246-225 225-223 223-187 187-175 175-164 163-162 162-150 150-145 145-140 145-142 138-129 129-125 126 125-121 125 125-96 115-95 96-95 95-88 95-83 94 94-83 87-84 83-69 69-64 65-64  122  Appendices APPENDIX C: EVENTS DURING THE PERIOD 202 - 169  B.C.  (Events are derived from Green, Morkholm)  DATE B.C.  PTOLEMIES  SELEUCIDS  202  - Announcement of Ptolemy IV Philopator's death in Alexandria - Fifth Syrian War (Antiochus IH invades Coele-Syria) - Antiochus HI in Coele-Syria  201 200  - Antiochus III defeats Ptolemy V at Panion  199  - Antiochus UJ in Asia Minor  198  - Antiochus HI completes subjugation of Coele-Syria  196  - Consecration of Ptolemy V in Memphis  • Roman envoys warn Antiochus • Roman envoys warn Philip  - Antiochus UJ crosses Hellespont  195  - Peace between Antiochus HI and Ptolemy V  194/3  - Marriage of Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I at Raphia  192  • Rome declares war on Antiochus HI  191 190  ROME  - Antiochus EI defeated at Thermopylae • Ptolemy V s offer of support rejected by Rome - Antiochus' fleet defeated at Side and Myonnesos  • Antiochus HI defeated at Magnesia - Romans occupy Sardis - (Spring) Antiochus IV becomes a hostage in Rome (ca. 176) - (Autumn) Seleucus IV appointed co-regent  189  • Eumenes H (of Pergamum) and Rhodians share Seleucid spoils  • Treaty of Apamea  • (June-July) Death of Antiochus HI  187  • Seleucus IV becomes sole ruler  186  • Roman envoys at Philip's court  182  - Ptolemy V revives alliance with Achaean League?  181/0  - Death of Ptolemy V Epiphanes - Accession of Ptolemy VI - Cleopatra I becomes Regent  179  • Roman intervention in Asia Minor  178  - Marriage of Laodice, Seleucus IV's daughter to Perseus of Macedonia  123  Appendices  177 176  • Death of High Priest Simon in Judaea, succeeded by Onias HI • Death of Cleopatra I  176/5  - Demetrius I replaces Antiochus IV as hostage in Rome (162/1) • Antiochus IV resides in Athens  175  • (Sept.3) Seleucus IV assassinated by Heliodorus • (Nov.) Antiochus IV becomes co-regent with Seleucus I V s son, Antiochus  173  - Envoys from everywhere come to Ptolemy WsAnakleteria to renew friendship  - Antiochus IV renews alliance with Rome - Syrian embassy in Rome  172  - Addition of titles "Theos Epiphanes" on silver coins from Antioch  171  - Antiochus IV in Tyre, prepares for war against Egypt  171/0 170  • Roman embassy to Antioch • (Spring) War Between Rome and Perseus (Third Macedonian War)  - Sixth Syrian War (Antiochus IV vs. 'Ptolemy VT/Eulaeus and Lenaeus) • Ptolemy VPs anakleteria - Murder of the boy king, Antiochus, • Joint reign of Ptolemy VI, Ptolemy VIII co-ruler of the Seleucid kingsom and Cleopatra TJ in Egypt - Antiochus IV becomes sole ruler - Battle near Pelusium: Antiochus totally defeats Eulaeus and Lenaeus  169  - (March-April) Antiochus IV occupies Pelusium • (Summer) Antiochus IV and Ptolemy Philometor reconciled. - Antiochus IV lays siege to Alexandria  - Egyptian and Syrian embassies arrive at Rome  - (Jan.-Feb.) Negotiations in Rome about Syro-Egyptian crisis  Appendices APPENDIX D : MAPS  Map A : Map of Egypt (332 B.C. - A . D . 642) (Bowman, Fig. 1)  124  128  Appendices APPENDIX E : IMPORTANT MINISTERS AND COURT-FIGURES AT THE PTOLEMAIC COURT (DURING THE REIGNS OF PTOLEMY III TO PTOLEMY V I )  PTOLEMAIC RULER  BACKGROUND IMPORTANT FIGURE AT THE OF THE INDIVIDUAL COURT  Ptolemy III Epiphanes Ptolemy IV Philopator  •  Sosibius  •  Sosibius  Ptolemy V Epiphanes  (Cleopatra I) Ptolemy VI Philometor  POSITION  1  COMMENTS  (Alexandrian)  - Priesthood of Alexander, of the Brother-and-Sister Gods, and of the Benefactor Gods at Alexandria (235-234 B.C.) •  Agathocles  •  Agathocles  •  Sosibius  •  Tlepolemus  (Greek soldier)  -Regent (202-201 B.C.)  •  Aristomenes  (Acarnanian)  -Regent(201-ca. 192 B.C.) - Chief Counselor  •  Polycrates  (Argive)  - Chief Counselor - Commander of the Army -Regent (192-185 B.C.)  •  Aristonicus  (Eunuch)  - "avvrpcxpog ofThe King"  •  Eulaeus  (Eunuch)  •  Lenaeus  •  Eulaeus  - name was used in the dating formula for the year (235-234 B.C.) - innovation in the army: inclusion and training of an Egyptian Phalanx  (Samian) - First minister to become co-regent and co-guardian to the Ptolemaic king - First minister to become co-regent and co-guardian to the Ptolemaic king  - Chief Advisor to the Regent (180-176 B.C.) (former Syrian slave) - Chief Advisor to the Regent (180-176 B.C.) - Philometor's tutor (i.e. ovvrpoipog) (180-176 B:C.) -Regent (176-170 B.C.)  Policy: 1) hostility towards the Romans 2) pro-Seleucid Policy: 1) extreme subservience towards Rome 2) hostility towards the Seleucids  - First eunuch to reach the highest position of regent in the Ptolemaic kingdom Policy: "in silly opposition to the policy of the late queen.. .(Eulaeus and Lenaeus) began a war against Antiochus [IV] Epiphanes of Syria." - First Syrian andfirstslave to reach the highest position of regent in the Ptolemaic kingdom 2  •  Lenaeus  - SioiKrftrp;  -Regent (176-170 B.C.) •  Comanus  •  Cineas  •  Archias  - Advisor (169-? B.C.) - Advisor (169-? B.C.) (Eunuch)  - (TTpccnjyog  157 B.C.) .  1  2  Cf. appropriate chapters for each individual listed. Davis and Kraay, 167.  of Cyprus (164-  129  Appendices APPENDIX F : O T H E R PROMINENT FAMILIES  The following is a brief discussion of two other prominent aristocratic families in Ptolemaic Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy V. Both families are very significant, as is evident from the number of family members also found in important posts. Family of Ptolemy, Son of Agesarchos Table A: Family of Ptolemy, son of Agesarchos Prominent  Related Family  F a m i l i e s (First  M e m b e r in a H i g h  Important Member)  Position  Comments  Positions  (relation in brackets)  PTOLEMY , Megalopolitan, son of Agesarchos  (between 203-202 B.C.):  1  2 • sent to Rome (by Agathocles) 197-180: • arpatrfyog of Cyprus (followed AGESARCHOS (father)  EIRENE (daughter of Ptolemy) 6  ANDROMACHOS (son of Eirene)  underPolycrates Ptolemy III: at this post) • eponymous military commander 199/8-172/1 B.C.: • eponymous priestess to Arsinoe Philopator at Alexandria 3  4  8  - "The eponymous offices of priesthood at Alexandria and Ptolemais were on the whole held by the most influential members of the administration and their relatives."  190's B.C.: • with the court rank TWV SiaSox&v 155/4 B.C.: 9 • Philometor's ambassador to Rome • rpo(pe6g f'tutor") for Philometor's son Ptolemy Neos Eupator • azpavqyog of Cyprus (until 145 B.C.) 10  PP VI. 15068, 16944; RE 23 (1959), coll. 1762-63, no. 43; and Ijsewijn, 89-90, no. 88. Polybius, xv.25.14 and Schmitt, H. H. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte Antiochos' des Grossen und seiner Zeit. (1967) Wiesbaden, 233, n. 2, 236. Polybius, xviii.55.6-9and.SB VII. 10013 11. 1-4. PP II. 1825. For this cf. Bagnall, 255. 1  2  3 4  5 6  PP III.5104.  Morkholm, Antiochus, 37. The length of time Eirene held this post, Bagnall (255) believes that she must have held this post for life. PP VI. 14637. Bevan, Egypt, 295 calls Andromachos Ptolemy's grandson. Polybius, xxxiii. 11.4. Otto, 9, n. 9 and Ijsewijn, 89-90, no. 88. 7  8  9  10  130  Appendices The career of Ptolemy, son of Agesarchos, was uneventful. However, we know that he was an important aristocrat because of the threat he posed to Agathocles upon the accession of Ptolemy V (204 B.C.), a result of which he was sent to Rome to act as an ambassador. Soon after the death of Agathocles, Ptolemy returned to Egypt and immediately was promoted to the very prestigious post of oxpavnyoq of Cyprus. The a-uparnyoi, as Bagnall states, were men of the highest rank who either were eponymous dynastic priests themselves or had children or other relatives who served in these posts . Ptolemy's father, Agesarchos, was neither an eponymous 11  priest nor appeared extremely prominent during Ptolemy Ill's reign. Nevertheless, Ptolemy is appointed to his position upon this return to Egypt. Ptolemy's family continued to remain prominent at the Ptolemaic court.  Most  noteworthy was his daughter, Eirene, who not only became the priestess of Arsinoe Philopator, but also retained this post uninterrupted for twenty-seven years.  Furthermore, her son,  Andromachos, also became very prominent at the Ptolemaic court during Ptolemy VPs reign.  11  Bagnall, 46.  131  Appendices Family of Pelops. son of Alexander Table B: Family of Pelops, son of Alexanc er Prominent  Related Family  F a m i l i e s (First  M e m b e r in a H i g h  Important Member)  Position  Positions  Comments  (relation in brackets)  PELOPS , son of Alexander 12  ALEXANDER (father of Pelops) 15  IAMNEIA (sister-inlaw of Pelops (I)) 17  PELOPS (son of Pelops) 19  (under Ptolemy II): • served on Samos • eponymous priest of Alexander (under Ptolemy III): • served in Cyrenaica (under Ptolemy II): • (pikoi of Ptolemy II 281-259 B.C.: • commanded Ptolemaic troops on Samos 264/263 B.C.: • eponymous priest in Alexandria 243/242 B.C.: • Kavntpopoq in Alexandria (under Ptolemy V): • crxpaxnyog of Cyprus (before  16  18  •  Polycrates) (sent by Agathocles) as an ambassadorto King Antiochus III of Syria  The family of Pelops also held important posts. Most noteworthy is Pelops' son, Pelops, who was also banished from Egypt upon Ptolemy V s accession under Agathocles' guardianship. Unlike Ptolemy, son of Agesarchos, whose promotion to the oxpaxnyog of Cyprus was mysterious because of the lack of influence his ancestors enjoyed, Pelops' ancestors had held the distinguished office of eponymous priest.  12 1 3  14  PP 7/7.5227; VI. 14618; RE 19 (1937), coll. 392-93; and Ijsewijn, 67-68, no. 22. P. Philad: Reich 14.  PPV1.15064.  1829. PP III.5227; VI. 14618. PP III. 5151. P. Lond. dem. ined. 10389. PP VI. 15064. Cf. Polybius, xv.25.13. Cf. Bagnall, 252-3 no.l and Ino Michaeldou-Nicolaou, Prosopography of Ptolemaic Cyprus (1976) Goteborg, 96-97, no. 18. 15  16 17  18  19  2 0  PP II.  Appendices  u  z  APPENDIX G: MEMBERS OF PROMINENT FAMILIES DURING THE REGENCY OF EULAEUS AND LENAEUS  A brief look at the prominent families during Eulaeus' and Lenaeus' regency will show the influence and control prominent families continued to retain in Ptolemaic Egypt. This strongly suggests an agreement made between Eulaeus and Lenaeus and the prominent families at the Ptolemaic court. Family ofHippalos, son of Sos Table C : Family ofHippalos, son of Sos 1  Prominent  Related Family  F a m i l i e s (First  M e m b e r in a H i g h  Important Member)  Position  Positions  Comments  (relation in brackets) (updateable - pre-176 B.C.):  HIPPALOS , son of Sos 2  •  dpxiocopatocpvXa^ (a lower rank) 186/5-169 (Mar.) B.C.: • eponymous priest to Ptolemy Soter & 4  Ptolemy Epiphanes in Ptolemais 176 (May/Jun. or Nov./Dec.) B.C., 173 (Aug.) & 172 (May_) B.C.: • EKiaxpaTqyog with civil and military authority over all the Egyptian chora  - The post of emaxpaTnyog is one of the most important ones of the kingdom with almost complete independence from the central government.  • BATRA (daughter) THEOMNESTOS (son) 6  in the sources, he now bears the high court title TCOV npdncov cpikcov 191/0 B.C.: • priestess at Alexandria 173-69 B.C.: • o-rparnyog 172/1 B.C.: • priest to the reigning kino; Ptolemy VI Philometor in Ptolemais 7  8  All of the information obtained for the tables in this Appendix was compiled from Morkholm's article "Eulaios and Lenaios". PP 7.193; 777.5155. For his career cf. Peremans-Van't Dack, Historia 3 (1955), 343-345. 1  2  3  P. Lond. 610. P. Lond. dem.  10226 II11. 2-3. For more on this position cf. Bengtson, 121-127. PP III. 5051.  4  5  Die Strategic in der hellenistischen Zeit III  1952 (Miinchener),  6  7  8 9  P. Lond. dem. 10560.  PP 7.260; 111.5147. P. Lond. dem. 10517 and Skeat, T. C. "The Epistrategus Hippalus." Archiv  12  (1936), 40-43.  Appendices  1 J 3  Hippalos' appointment to the office of eponymous priest to Ptolemy I Soter and Ptolemy III Epiphanes in 186/5 B.C. (during Ptolemy V s reign) down to 169 B.C. (during Ptolemy VI's reign) is the best indication of his internal connections, since this period saw several changes in rulers, regents, and ministers . Apart from holding this 10  position uninterrupted from Ptolemy V s reign until the first invasion of Egypt by Antiochus IV, Hippalos was appointed to an even more powerful position as emarparnydg.  Although Hippalos is not mentioned in the papyri as eniaTparnyog  until  176 B.C., Morkholm believes that he may have possibly already obtained this high position before that time . A hint to the amount of support he offered to Eulaeus' and 11  Lenaeus' government may be reflected in his coincidental demise when Antiochus IV invaded Egypt for thefirsttime in 169 B.C. - the year in which Eulaeus and Lenaeus also perished. Although Hippalos died, his son, Theomnestos, continued to be appointed to important posts. This situation is indicative of the fate of families after the deaths of Eulaeus and Lenaeus. Family of Noumenios, son of Herakleodoros Noumenios' career is also very important in supporting the argument that families supporting Eulaeus and Lenaeus retained their positions even after the deaths of Eulaeus and Lenaeus.  Noumenios' situation is different from Hippalos' because, although  Hippalos perished at the same time as Eulaeus and Lenaeus, Noumenios and members of his family continued to hold important posts. Regardless of this difference, the fate of these families was the same, that is, remaining prominent at the court.  Morkholm believes that Hippalos only lost this post because it coincided with the time of his death (38). 11  ibid.  Appendices  134  Table D: Family of Noumenios, son of Herakleodoros Prominent Families (First Important Member)  Related Family Member in a High Position (relation in brackets)  N O U M E N I O S 12  son of Herakleodoros  (two of his daughters) KLEAINETE & ? 17  Comments  Positions  171/0 B.C.: • first appears as erxpaxTjyog of the important district of Thebais with the rank of dpxiocopaxo(pi>Xa^ 168 B.C.: s 13 - Noumenios' post as npotgevoq'xs believed • 7Cp6q~EVoq of the city of Gortyn to signify that he was a "person sufficiently • sent as an ambassador to Rome to influential to be able to safeguard the convey the thanks of the two 16 Egyptian kings for the intervention of interests of strangers at Alexandria" Rome against Antiochus IV during 14 the second attack on Egypt 165/4 B.C.: • priest to Ptolemy Soter and Ptolemy 166/5Epiphanes B.C.: in Ptolemais • appears on the list of eponymous priests and priestesses at Alexandria 15  Noumenios' first recorded post was the frrparnydg during the time of Eulaeus and Lenaeus' regency.  His future political career, though, was not affected by his  obvious amenable relationship to the two regents who had initially promoted him, since his career continued to thrive even after their deaths. Ptolemy  Prominent Families (First Important Member)  PTOLEMY  1 9  Related Family Member in a High Position (relation in brackets)  Positions  Comments  183-164 B.C.:  •  axpaxrjyog and ttpxio(opaxo(p6ka!; 'from li  the important nome of Arsinoitis  PP 7.196; 77.1966; 777.5213; VI. 14617. For further information on his career cf. Peremans-Van't Dack, Historia 93 (1953), 46-51. lnscriptiones Creticae7F(1950) no. 208A 11. 4-5. Polybius, xxx, 16. Cf. Peremans-Van't Dack, Historia 3 (1954-55), 341-343 and Ijsewijn, 105-107, nos. 121-22. P. Lond. dem. ined. 10515 and Peremans-Van't Dack, Historia 3 (1955), 338-345. Morkholm, Antiochus, 38-39. P P 777.5172; P. Tebt. 777.811 11. 8-9 as Priestess of Arsinoe Philopator. PP 777.5336; P. Tebt. 777.811 11. 6-7 as aOXocpopog. PP 7:312. P. Tebt. 777.895 1. 5. 12  13  14  15  16  1 7  18  19  2 0  Appendices Similar to Eirene's eponymous priesthood (from 199/8-172/1 B.C.) and Hippalos' eponymous priesthood (from 186/5-169 B.C.), Ptolemy remained at the office of arparnyog in Cyprus (197-180 B.C.) for a very extensive period. Such examples of longevity during such drastic changes in the Ptolemaic dynasty suggest important internal aristocratic connections in place in Egypt. Family of Cineas, son of Drimylos Table F: Family of Cineas, son of Drimylos Prominent Families  Related Family  (First Important Member)  M e m b e r in a High  Positions  Comments  Position  (relation in brackets)  DOSITHEOS son of Drimylos  21  CINEAS  23  (son)  BERENICE (Cineas' daughter^  222/1 B.C.: • eponymous priest to Alexander and the Lagides 22 at Alexandria 217 B.C.: • the rescuer of Ptolemy IV on the eve of the battle of Raphia * 177/6-170/69 B.C.: • priest to Ptolemy VI Philopator and his mother 24 Cleopatra I at Ptolemais 173 B.C.: • eponymous cavalry officer 169 B.C.: 25 170/69 B.C.: • chief advisor to Ptolemy VI Philometor 27 • priestess to Arsinoe Philopator at Alexandria  - Famous for being mentioned in the Third Book of the Maccabees who saved the king's life.  PP 7/7.5100. P. Hib.-I.9Q 11. 2-3; P. Tebt. IIIM5.  PP 77.1926; 7//.5169; K7.14610; RE 11 (1922), col. 477, no. 22; and Ijsewijn, 100-101, nos. 110-117. P. Lond. dem. 10230 III 11. 1-2, 10518. Polybius, xxviii.19.1. PP 7/7.5060. P. Lond. dem. ined. 10513.  Appendices Comanos Table G: Comanos (patronymic unknown) Prominent Families (First Important Member)  COMANOS  Related Family Member in a High Position (relation in brackets)  Positions  Comments  188/7 B.C.: • appears for the first time in a list 29  28  •  of npolgevoi at Delphi  sent as a member of an embassy to Greece by Ptolemy V 187 B.C.: • bears the high court title zcov  npdncov (piXcov  ARSINOE (daughter of Ptolemy, brother of Comanos)  186 B.C.: • entrusted with duty to suppress 30 the rebellion in the Thebais 169 B.C.: • chief advisor to Ptolemy VI 31 173/2 B.C.: Philometor > • 33 adXo<popog at Alexandria 172/1 B.C.: x 34 172/1 (?) B.C.: •• Kavn(popog at Alexandria priestess to Queen Cleopatra II at Ptolemais  PTOLEMAIS (niece of Comanos)  172/1 (?) B.C • 6c9Xo<p6pogaX Alexandria  KLEAINETE (daughter) 32  BERENICE (daughter of Aratomenes, niece of Comanos) 35  ;  172/1 (?) B.C.:^  •  Kavn<p6pog aX Alexandria  Cineas' and Comanus' importance at the deaths of Eulaeus and Lenaeus is not as surprising and unusual as the literary tradition leads us to believe. For instance, as the tables have shown {cf. Tables F and G), both Cineas and Comanus were not in opposition to other prominent family members already mentioned. The evidence instead reveals that these two individuals held very prominent positions throughout the first half of the  PP 7.270; 77.1833; 7F. 10087a; F/.14611, 16865; RE Suppl. 7 (1940), coll.332-34, coll.1625-26; Peremans-Van't Dack, Studia Hellenistica 9 (1953), 22-33; and Ijsewijn, 102-103, no. 114. a  29  30 31 32 33 3 4  SIG II585,11. 141-44. 3  7.270. Polybius, xxviii.19.1. PP 777.5171. P. Mich. 777.19011.7-8. P. Lond. dem. ined. 10517 and P. Tebt. 777.819 1. 3.  Appendices  . '  second century B.C. and, in fact, their designation as Ptolemy VI Philometor's chief advisors in 169 B.C. was not surprising. Furthermore, contrary to one opinion stressing "the difference between the 'oriental' rulers and their Greek successors...those gentlemen of quite a different cast..." , recent investigation into the backgrounds of some of these 36  prominent members have revealed that individuals such as Cineas were very possibly of Jewish descent . 37  This survey of some of the most prominent aristocratic families at the Ptolemaic court in the second century B.C. reveals one important similarity between them, members of these prominent families retained their positions before and after Eulaeus' and Lenaeus' co-regency. This possibly suggests that the co-regency of Eulaeus and Lenaeus was not entirely shunned by the aristocratic families, but in return for allowing Eulaeus and Lenaeus to control Ptolemaic affairs, members of these families kept their posts.  PP 7/7.5059 and P. Lond. dem. ined. 10513. Morkholm, 39ff. The Jews in Alexandria represented the second largest population in Alexandria. Their support of the monarchy was important for this very reason. 36  37  Appendices APPENDIX H : LIVY,  138  xxxviii.9-11  The only direct literary work, which refers to Cleopatra Fs political position during her husband's reign, Ptolemy V, is found in Livy: Legati ab Ptolomaeo et Cleopatra regibus Aegypti gratulantes, quod M'. Acilius consul Antiochum regem Graecia expulisset..reges Aegypti ad ea, quae censuisset senatus, paratos fore. Gratiae regibus actae; legatis munera dari iussa in singulos quaternum  milium aeris.  1  Although Livy has placed this embassy from Ptolemy (V) and Cleopatra (I) in 190 B.C., he is actually referring to the reign of Cleopatra Fs children, Ptolemy VI and Cleopatra II.  The Ptolemaic queens had not become co-rulers of Egypt until after  Cleopatra I, beginning with her daughter, Cleopatra II. Another clue in this passage which reveals that Livy had been too hasty to place future events into the reign of Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I can also be seen in his mentioning here of Egypt's subservience to Rome.  Egypt's submission to Rome did not occur until the crucial  moment when Egypt pleaded with Rome to intervene against the attempts of Antiochus IV, who sought to conquer the Ptolemaic dynasty. Egypt's subservience began only at this time . 2  Unfortunately, then, although this is the only direct literary reference to  Cleopatra I's political position during her husband's reign, this evidence must be discounted. Livy whether due to embellishment for Roman propagandistic purposes or from pure error incorrectly incorporated the reign of Ptolemy VI and Cleopatra II into the reign of Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I.  Livy, xxvii.iii.9-11 mentions an embassy from the Ptolemaic Kingdom in 190 B.C. to Rome. Cf. Walbank, 11.137. The literary evidence from the reigns of Ptolemy V and Ptolemy VI show a different attitude and reliance upon the Romans. The literary evidence is provided in Appendices BB and DD. 1  2  Appendices  139  A P P E N D I X I: F A R N E S E C U P  One last depiction o f Cleopatra I clearly showing her during her co-regency is seen in her portrait on the Farnese Cup (The Tazza Farnese).  The Farnese Cup (The Tazza Farnese) ca. 180-170 B . C .  1  Cf. Green, figure 118  1  Appendices  ^  Cleopatra I had herself represented as the deified wife of the Nile River, Euthenia, on this sardonyx cameo bowl. This was an attempt to justify her position as the more powerful and dominant ruler, since her acceptance as the Nile's wife grants her this distinction. Furthermore, as wife of the god, Cleopatra I was legitimising her son in the eyes of the Egyptian subjects, since her divine status proved the divine parentage of the king . This cameo was sculpted to show the period soon after the death of Ptolemy V, 2  since after the death of a monarch the Nile was believed to ensure a flood . The image of 3  Cleopatra I, here, in the centre of the bowl clearly bears her features - the chubby cheeks, the ringed eyes, the coiffure and so forth.  She rests one elbow on the head of the  deceased Ptolemy V and is reverently at the feet of the Nile god, her divine husband, who is seated to the left of her bearing a cornucopia, which represents the fertility of the fruits of the earth and of the monarch. To the right of the Nile god and standing over his 4  mother is Ptolemy VI Philometor, who is representing fertility of the land and of the monarchy, since he grasps a plowshare in his hand and has a seed bag slung over his shoulder . To the right of Ptolemy VI are two seated women representing the Egyptian 5  seasons of harvest and flood and flying above these figures are the Etesian winds, who are vital to the flood since "it is they who ultimately cause the flood and are thus ultimately responsible for fertility" . It is in such rare depictions of Cleopatra I that one 6  realises the power of this queen to have herself portrayed in any setting she wanted, to legitimise her power, her position, and her son's position in the Ptolemaic dynasty.  2 3 4 5 6  Troy, 97. Green, 348. Thompson, "More Ptolemaic Queens", AK12 (1980), 181-84. Green, 348. Green, 348.  Appendices APPENDIX AA:  141  P T O L E M Y IV PHILOPATOR  ATHENAEUS vi.246.c (Ptolemy, son of Agesarchus, comments on the reign of Ptolemy IV) nxoA-epatoq 5' 6 TOO 'Aynadpxou Meya>,07ioX.iTriq yevoq ev xfj 5ei>Tepa TCOV nepi xov <PiA.07idT0pa iaxopicbv cupTioTac; cpnai TO) paciX.ei auvdycrGai ecj ccTtdanq tfiq TtoX-ecoc,, ouq TipooayoperjeaGai ye^oiaaTaq.  xiii.577.a (Agathocleia controls Ptolemy IV Philopator) TOO 8e OiA-OTtdTopoc, PaoiX-ecoc, n.TOA.Euaioo OOK 'AyaGoKA.eia f\ ETcdpa EKpotTei, r\ K a i n a o a v dvaTpe\|/aca Tfjv PaaiA.eiav;  PLUTARCH, LIFE OF CLEOMENES xxxiii. 1 (Situation of the court after Ptolemy Ill's death) 'O pev oov Tipeo-prjTepoq riToXepatoq Ttpiv eKTeA.eaai TO) KA.eop.evei TTJV e K n e p y i v eTeXeoTnae- Tfjq 8e (3aaiX.eia<; euGbc, ei<; noXXi]v daeA/yeiav K a i jiapoiviav K a i yovaiKOKpaTiav epTteoovjanc, TJUEA-ETTO K a i TOC TOO KX.eopevor»Cj.  xxxiii.3 (Ptolemy IV s feelings towards his brother, Magas; Ptolemy IV employs Cleomenes into his privy council) 8e8icbg ydp Mdyav TOV d8eX.(pov riToX.epatoq, cbq i a x ^ o v T a 8id Tfjq pTiTpoc, ev TO) OTpaTitoTiKo), TOV KA-eopevn 7ipoaeA.dp.pave K a i peTe8i8orj TCOV aTtoppfiTcov at>ve8picov, PovjA-euopevoc, dvEA.etv TOV dSeAxpov.  xxxiii.5 (Ptolemy IV begins to fear and distrust everyone) ttoTepov 8e, TOO riToX.epaiorj ir\q dcGeveiaq eTUTeivouanc, TTJV 8eiX.iav, K a i KaGdnep eicoGev ev TO) pnSev cppoveTv, TOO 7idvTa 5e8oiKevai K a i n d a i v dniaTetv dacpaX.eaTaTou SOKOVVTOC, etvai...  xxxiv.2 (The interests of Ptolemy IV) TOO pev PaaiX.ecoq OOK eicaKouovToq, aXX ev yovai^t K a i Gidaoiq K a i Kcbpoic, aovexovToq eaoTov  1  F.H.G.i\i.61.  Her influence was so dominant that Strabo, 795 calls her his mother. Cf. Polybius, xv.31ff; Plutarch, Cleomenes, 33. Her death at the hands of the mob, cf. Polybius, xv.33.  2  Appendices  142  xxxv. 2 (Cleomenes condemns the character of Ptolemy IV) "Epot>A.6pr|v dv, ' etpr), 'ae \ial\ov f|K£iv dyovTa aappUKtOTpiac, KivaiSotw;- T a m a yap vuv \idXicia KaTETteiyet TOV PaatAia. '  Kai  STRABO, GEOGRAPHY 16.2.31 (Battle at Raphia in 217 B.C.) Mexd 8e Td^av 'Pacpia, ev fj udxT| auvePn nxoA-epaico te TO) TETapTco K a i 'AVTIO^CO TO) MeydA-cp.  17.1.11 (Disposition of Ptolemy IV) dnavTeq pev ovv oi UETd TOV TptTov IlTO?iepaiov bnb Tptxpf|<; 8iecp8appevoi Xetpov e7ioA,iTe\)aavTo, x£ipio"ta 8 TETapToq K a l ep5opoq Kai 6 vcxaioc,... 0  JUSTIN 29.1.5 (Ptolemy IV Philopator hastened both his father's and mother's deaths) Aegyptum patre ac matre interfectis occupaverat Ptolomeus, cui ex facinoris crimine cognomentum Philopator fuit.  29.1.8-9 (Ptolemy IV Philopator lives a luxurious and lazy life) His regibus pueris tametsi nulli senioris aetatis rectores erant, tamen in suorum quisque maiorum vestigia intentis magna indoles virtutis enituit. Solus Ptolomeus, sicut scelestus in occupando, ita et segnis in administrando regno fuit.  30.1.2 (The corrupt character of Ptolemy IV) quippe regno parricidio parto et ad necem utriusque parentis caede etiam fratris adstructa, veluti rebus feliciter gestis luxuriae se tradiderat...  3  Earlier in the passage Justin mentioned Philip V, Antiochus III, Ariarathes, Hannibal, and Ptolemy IV.  Appendices  143  30.1.2-3 (Ptolemy IV Philopator's luxurious and lazy lifestyle affects everyone) ...Regisque mores omnis secuta regia erat. Itaque non amici tantum praefectique, verum etiam omnis exercitus depositis militiae studiis otio ac desidia corrupti marcebant.  30.2.6 (Death of Ptolemy IV Philopator and the plundering of the Royal Treasury by Agathocleia and Oenanthe) ...cum interim relicto quinquenni ex Eurydice sorore filio moritur. Sed mors eius, dum pecuniam regiam mulieres rapiunt et imperium inita cum perditissimis societate occupare conantur, diu occultata fuit.  31.1.1 (Death of Ptolemy IV and accession of his young son, Ptolemy V) Mortuo Ptolomeo Philopatore, rege Aegypti, contemptaque parvuli filii eius aetate, qui in spem regni relictus praeda etiam domesticis erat...  30.2.7-8 (Rioting of the Alexandrians and death of Agathocles and family) Re tamen cognita concursu multitudinis et Agathocles occiditur et mulieres in ultionem Eurydices patibulis suffiguntur. Morte regis, supplicio meretricum velut expiata regni infamia...  30.2.8 (Justin writes that it was the Alexandrians who asked for Rome's aid) ...legatos Alexandrini ad Romanos misere, orantes ut tutelam pupilli susciperent tuerenturque regnum Aegypti, quod iam Philippum et Antiochum facta inter se pactione divisisse dicebant.  POMPEIUS TROGUS, PROLOGUES TO THE PHILIPPIC HISTORY 30.2 (Death of Ptolemy IV Philopator) ...ipse amore Agathocleae corruptus decessit relicto filio pupillo, in quern cum Philippo rege Macedonum consensit Antiochus.  4  Justin is referring to Agathocles, Agathocleia, and Oenanthe.  Appendices  144  LIVY xxiii.x. 1 Iff. (The Capuan Decius Magius takes asylum at Cyrene and then at Alexandria) Navem Cyrenas detulit tempestas, quae turn in dicione regum erant. Ibi cum Magius ad statuam Ptolomaei regis confugisset, deportatus a custodibus Alexandream ad Ptolomaeum, cum eum docuisset contra ius foederis vinctum se ab Hannibale esse, vinclis liberatur, permissumque ut rediret, seu Romam seu Capuam mallet. Nec Magius Capuam sibi tutam dicere et Romam eo tempore quo inter Romanos Campanosque bellum sit transfugae magis quam hospitis fore domicilium; nusquam malle quam in regno eius vivere quern vindicem atque auctorem habeat libertatis.  xxvii.iv. 10 (Arsinoe III, daughter of Ptolemy III, sister and wife of Ptolemy IV) Et Alexandream ad Ptolomaeum et Cleopatram reges M. Atilius et M'. Acilius legati, ad commemorandam renovandamque amicitiam missi, dona tulere, regi togam et tunicam purpuream cum sella eburnea, reginae pallam pictam cum amiculo purpureo.  xxvii.xxx.4 (Ptolemy IV tries to bring peace between Philip and the Aetolians in 208 B.C.) Eo legati ab rege Aegypti Ptolomaeo Rhodiisque et Atheniensibus et Chiis venerunt ad dirimendum inter Philippum atque Aetolos bellum.  xxxi.xiv.4-5 (Pact between Philip V and Antiochus III at the accession of Ptolemy IV in 200 B.C.) Neque enim ipse rex Athenas obsidebat; eo maxime tempore Abydum oppugnabat, iam cum Rhodiis et Attalo navalibus certaminibus, neutro feliciter proelio, vires expertus; sed animos ei faciebat praeter ferociam insitam foedus ictum cum Antiocho, Syriae rege, divisaeque iam cum eo Aegypti opes, cui morte audita Ptolomaei regis ambo imminebant.  At this time, Cyrene belonged to Egypt. Egypt was currently under the reign of Ptolemy IV Philopator. Sage tells us, Livy here summarises the activities of Philip during the campaign of 200 B.C. before the arrival of Sulpicius in the summer or early autumn of that year. He resumes the narrative dealing with Sulpicius in xxii.4 below. Sage tells us, Philip's attack upon this famous city on the Hellespont was part of the aggressive campaign against the Greek cities on the islands and in Asia Minor, some of which were free, while others belonged to the Ptolemies, whose empire he had agreed with Antiochus III to dismember. His policy threatened both Pergamum and Rhodes and bought them into the war. 5 6  7  Appendices  145  xxxii.xxxiii.3-4 (Philip V is asked by the Romans to give back possessions he had seized) Deducenda ex omnibus Graeciae civitatibus regi praesidia esse, captivos et transfugas sociis populi Romani reddendos, restitudenda Romanis ea Illyrici loca, quae post pacem in Epiro factam occupasset, Ptolomaeo Aegypti regi reddendas urbes, quas post Philopatoris Ptolomaei mortem occupavisset "  146  Appendices APPENDIX B B : PTOLEMY V EPIPHANES APPIAN,  SYRIAN WARS  1.5 (Betrothal o f Cleopatra I to Ptolemy V by Antiochus III)  "HSn 8e TOV rcpog 'Pcopaioog 7i6A,euov eyvcoKcbg dTtoKaX.OTcxeiv, E 7 u y a u . i a g xcbg eyyog P a o i X e a g 7 i p o K a x £ A , d u P a v e , K a i nxoXEuaicp |iev £g Aiyojcxov ecxeXXe K X e o n d x p a v XTJV Etipav £TUKA.T|CI.V, rcpouca Et>piav xfiv KoiXriv E7a8i,8o'6g, f|v awog d(pf|pr|xo xou n.xoA.Euaio'o, eepancocov f|8r| TO ueipaKiov, iv' ev TO) noA.e|icp TO) npdg 'Pcouaioug dTpEuf)'  DIODORUS SICULUS xxviii.14 (Ptolemy V s good disposition under the tutelage of Aristomenes and then his later tyrannical disposition, which alienates the native Egyptians)  "Oxi 6 nxoA.EU.atog 6 xfjg AiyoTcxou PacuAEog \ie%pi UEV xtvog ennveixo- 'ApiaxopEvri SE xov e7tixponov a\)xot> YEYEVTPEVOV K a i rcdvxa KaXcog SicpKriKOxa xf)v uev dp%fiv f|yd7ia Ka0a7tepei naxepa K a i ndvxa ercpaxxev and xfjg EKEIVOVI Yvcbp:r|g• uexd 8E xatixa OTCO , xcov KoX,aKEt)6vxo3v SiacpGapeic, xfjv \|/ u x'nv ApioxojiEvri 7tappr|oia£6p,£vov epiorioe K a i xeAog oovnvdyKacEV aoxov rciovxa KCOVEIOV XEA-Emfjaai. dei Se paAAov Gripio-ouEvog K a i x o p a v v i K T i v rcapavouiav aXX' ov PaaiA.iKT|v E c j o u a i a v £r|A.cboag, epiOT)0r| pev vito xcov Aiytmxicov, EKIVSWEUCE 8E drcoPaAEiv xf|v PaaiAEiav. t  o  v  t  e  xxix.29 (The corrupt nature of Ptolemy V )  "Oxi xcov (pitaov xivdg ei7i6vxog nxoA-Euaicp xa) PaaiA,Ei 8 i d xi xfjg KoiA/rig Zupiag oiSortg a o x o f t SiKaicog d c p p o v x i a x e i , noXXa nepi xouxcov Ecprjaev auxo) UEXEIV. •b7C£i7t6vxog 8E xoo jcpoooua^owcog TCOBEV eunopfioEt xP"np.dxcov £ig xov 7C6A,EUOV 6 paaiXfiog OEicjag xcbg cpi^oog EITCEV, 'Opdg xobg euobg Gnaa'Dpo'bg rcepircaxoovxag.  POLYBIUS xxiv.6 (Ptolemy V Epiphanes and the Achaeans)  "Oxi JiEpi xoog amobg Kaipoog rixoX.Ep.aiog 6 PaoiAeug, PouAouEvog Ep,7r.A.eKeo0ai x6) xcov 'Axaieov EGVEI, 8iETC£p\|/axo TtpEcPeuxfiv, E7tayY£A,A.6p.£vog SEKava'iav SCOOEIV EVXEA-TJ 7ievxr|KovxripiKcov nXoicov. oi 8' 'A^aioi K a i 8id xo SOKETV xf|v SoopEdv dcjiav Elvat xdpixog dauEvcog dTC£8£cjavxo xf|v ErtayyEXiav. SOKEI yap f| SaTcdvr) ox> no\x> XEITCEIV xcov 8eKa xaAdvxcov. xaoxa 8e PouXeDodpEVOi TtpoEXEipioavxo npeaPEDxag AuKOpxav K a i n.oA/6Piov K a i cov xooxoig "Apaxov, oiov 'Apdxoo xox> EIKIXOVIOO, xobg apa piv et>xocpioxf)oovxag xo) PaoiXet 7tEpi XE xcov onicov cov 7cp6xcpov dicEoxEiXE K a i xoo vop.topaxog, apa 8e icapaXrixi/opEvo-og xd TtXota K a ircpovoiavTcoinaop-Evoog nspi xfjg d7toKop,i8fjg avi&v. K a x E o x n o a v 8E xov uev Aw6pxav Sid xo Kaxd xov mipov, KaG' 6v ETCOIEIXO xf)v dvavEcooiv xfig ooppaxiag 6 rixoXEpatog, oxpaxriyoovxa XOXE o w E p y f j o a t cpiXoxipcog awcp, xov 8e rioX,'oPi.ov...o'6 p f i v OOVEPT) ye xriv TtpeoPEiav xavxriv ECJEXGEIV 8id xo pexaXXdcjai xov rixoXepatov 7iEpi xobg Kaipoug xooxoog.  147  Appendices  xxii. 17 (Ptolemy V tries to quell the native revolt at Lycopolis in 186-185 B.C. and mistreats the native chieftains) "Oxt nxoA.£|j,atog 6 P a o i X . e t x ; Aiyonxou oxe xfiv AUKCOV noAav E7toAa6pKr|C£, KaxaTtXayevxeq xo yEyovog oi Swdaxat x f i v Alyonxicov ESancav ocpdg a u x o b g Eig xfiv xoft PaoaAECog rclaxiv. o i g KaKcog exprioaxo K a i eig KivStivoug JtoAAobg EVETCECEV. 7tapanA,Tioiov 8E XI CTDVEPTI K a i K a x d x o u g Kaipoug, f ) v i K a rioA'OKpdxTig xobg drcooxdxag EXEtpcboaxo. oi yap 7t£pi xdv 'A6hav K a i natxripav K a i Xsoovxpov K a i x6v 'Ip6Paaxov, oircEp fjaav kzi 8iaocp£6u.£voi xcov Suvaoxcov, EicjavTEC, xotg rtpdyuaai rcapfjoav £ t g xf|v Ediv, ocpdg awo'og £ i g xf)v xot> Paoa^Ecog £YX£tpi£ovxEg <nioxtv>- 6 8E rixoAEuatog d0£xf|cag xdg nioxEig K a i 8f)aag xobg dv0pcb7toog yopvotig x a i g d u d ^ a i g EIAXE K a i pxxd x a m a xiucopriaduEvog ,  dnEKXEtVEV.  xxii. 17.6-7 (Polycrates does not allow Ptolemy V to take any part in the fighting; Aristonicus is in a high position at the court) Kai  7tapayEv6u.Evog eiq x f ) v Nai)Kpaxi.v U E x d xflg a x p a x t a g , K a i n a p a a x T i a a v x o g xoix; E^EVoAoynuEvo'Dg avSpag EK xfjg 'EAAdSog 'AptoxoviKot), rcpoaSEcjduEvog xo\>xot>g d7r.£7iA,£t>OEV E i g 'AA.Ecjdv8pEi.av, xcov pxv xox> noXe\iox> rcpd^Ecov c o S E p a d g KEKOivcovriKcbg 8id XTJV noA/OKpdxo'og dSucoSoqlav, K a i n E p &xcov £xr) TtEVXE K a i EIKOOIV.  aw©  JUSTIN 30.2.6 (Death of Ptolemy IV Philopator and accession of the young Ptolemy V Epiphanes) ...cum interim relicto quinquenni ex Eurydice sorore filio moritur. 31.1.1 (The child-heir, Ptolemy V, is controlled by the courtiers) Mortuo Ptolomeo Philopatore, rege Aegypti, contemptaque parvuli filii eius aetate, qui in spem regni relictus praeda etiam domesticis erat , Antiochus, rex Syriae, occupare Aegyptum statuit. 1  POMPEIUS TROGUS, PROLOGUES 30.2 (Death of Ptolemy IV Philopator)  TO THE PHILIPPIC HISTORY  ...ipse amore Agathocleae corruptus decessit relicto filio pupillo, in quern cum Philippo rege Macedonum consensit Antiochus.  34.6 (Mention of Ptolemy V Epiphanes' two sons) Ut mortuo Ptolomaeo relicti ab eo filii duo Philometor et Euergetes primum cum Antiocho habuere bellum... 1  Justin is referring to Agathocles, Agathocleia, and Oenanthe.  Appendices  148  LIVY xxxi.ii.1-4 (Roman envoy to Ptolemy V after Romans defeat o f Hannibal in 201 B . C . ) 2  Sub idem fere tempus et ab Attalo rege et Rhodiis legati venerunt nuntiantes Asiae quoque civitates sollicitari...Interim ad Ptolomaeum Aegypti regem legati tres missi, C . Claudius Nero, M . Aemilius Lepidus , P. Sempronius Tuditanus, ut nuntiarent victum Hannibalem 3  Poenosque et gratias agerent regi, quod in rebus dubiis, cum finitimi etiam socii Romanos desererent, in fide mansisset, et peterent ut, si coacti iniuriis bellum adversus Philippum suscepissent, pristinum animum erga populum Romanum conservaret.  xxxi. ix. 1 (Egypt acts like a vassal state to Rome - not acting unless Rome gives her approval. 200 B . C . ) ...legati a rege Ptolomaeo venerunt, qui nuntiarent Athenienses adversus Philippum petisse ab rege auxilium; ceterum, etsi communes socii sint, tamen nisi ex auctoritate populi Romani neque classem neque exercitum defendendi aut oppugnandi cuiusquam causa regem in Graeciam missurum esse; vel quieturum eum in regno, si populo Romano socios defendere libeat, vel Romanos quiescere, si malint, passurum atque ipsum auxilia quae facile adversus Philippum tueri Athenas possent missurum. Gratiae regi ab senatu actae responsumque tutari socios populo Romano in animo esse; si qua re ad id bellum opus sit, indicaturos regi...  xxxii. xxxiii.3-4 (Philip V is asked by the Romans/Flaminius to give back seized possessions to their respective parties 197 B . C . ) Deducenda  ex omnibus Graeciae civitatibus regi praesidia esse, captivos et transfugas  sociis populi Romani reddendos, restitudenda Romanis ea Illyrici loca, quae post pacem in Epiro factam occupasset, Ptolomaeo Aegypti regi reddendas urbes, quas post Philopatoris Ptolomaei mortem occupavisset."  xxxiii. xix.8-11 (Antiochus III takes possession o f Ptolemy V s possessions/cities in A s i a - first Coele Syria and then Cilicia, Lycia, and Caria 196 B . C . ) Antiochus cum priore aestate omnibus quae in Coele Syria sunt civitatibus ex Ptolomaei dicione in suam potestatem...principio veris...ipse cum classe centum tectarum navium, ad hoc levioribus navigiis cercurisque ac lembis ducentis proficiscitur, simul per omnem oram Ciliciae Lyciaque et Cariae temptaturus urbes quae in dicione Ptolomaei essent, simul Philippum - necdum enim debellatum erat - exercitu navibusque adiuturus.  2 3  Cf. Livy, xxxi.xviii.l. Livy later tells us that he is the youngest of the three ambassadors who went to Alexandria (xxxi.xviii. 1).  149  Appendices xxxiii.xxxiv.3 (Romans warn Antiochus III to withdraw from Ptolemy V s cities 196 B.C.) 4  ...sed aperte denuntiatum, ut excederet Asiae urbibus, quae Philippi aut Ptolomaei regum fuissent, abstineret liberis civitatibus, neu quam lacesseret armis...  xxxiii.xxxix.lff. (Romans side with Ptolemy V against Antiochus III) Sub hoc tempore et L. Cornelius, missus ab senatu ad dirimenda inter Antiochum Ptolomaeumque reges certamina, Selymbriae substitit, et decern legatorum...Romani omnia acta eius, ex quo tempore ab Syria classem solvisset, displicere senatui non dissimulabant restituique et Ptolomaeo omnes civitates quae dicionis eius fuissent aequum censebant;  xxxiii.xl.3 (Antiochus III tells the Romans he had already concluded a peace with Ptolemy V in 196 B.C.) Quod ad Ptolomaeum attineat, cui ademptas civitates querantur, sibi cum Ptolomaeo et amicitiam esse, et id agere ut brevi etiam adfinitas iungatur. 5  xxxiii.xli.1-3 (Rumours are circulated that Ptolemy V is dead; both Rome and Antiochus III try to win Egypt for themselves 196 B.C.) His disceptationibus per dies aliquot habitis rumor sine ullo satis certo auctore allatus de morte Ptolomaei regis, ut nullus exitus imponeretur sermonibus eflfecit. Nam et dissimulabat pars utraque se audisse, et L. Cornelius, cui legatio ad duos reges, Antiochum Ptolomaeumque, mandata erat, spatium modici temporis ad conveniendum Ptolomaeum petebat, ut, priusquam moveretur aliquid in nova possessione regi, praeveniret in Aegyptum, et Antiochus suam fore Aegyptum, si turn occupasset, censebat. xxxv.xiii.4 (Wedding between Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I in 193 B.C.)  6  Antiochus rex , ea hieme Raphiae in Phoenice Ptolomaeo regi Aegypti filia in matrimonium data... 7  8  Cf. Polybius, xviii.49-50. Referring to Ptolemy Vs marriage at Raphia in 194/3 B.C. to the daughter of Antiochus III, Cleopatra I. Cf. Appian, Syrian Wars, 1.5. Sage tells us (Livy, x.38 n. 1) that: "Livy makes no effort to report on the recent activities of Antiochus, the last mention of whom, save for the reference in the preceding chapter, was in xxxiv.lix.8." This is in the winter of 194-3 B.C. Raphia lay to the south-west of Gaza, on the coast between Cilicia and Egypt, but not, strictly speaking, in Phoenicia. 4  5  6  7  8  Appendices  150  xxxvi. iv. 1 (Ptolemaic offers of supplies against Antiochus III are declined by the Romans 191 B.C.) Sub idem tempus legati ab duobus regibus, Philippo et Ptolomaeo, Aegypti rege, Romam venerunt, Philippo pollicente ad bellum auxilia et pecuniam et frumentum; ab Ptolomaeo etiam mille pondo auri, viginti milia pondo argenti adlata. Nihil eius acceptum; gratiae regibus actae; et cum uterque se cum omnibus copiis in Aetoliam venturum belloque interfuturum polliceretur, Ptolomaeo id remissum;  xxxvii. iii.9-11 (Rulers of Egypt - Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I - congratulate Rome on defeat of Antiochus III 190 B.C.) Legati ab Ptolomaeo et Cleopatra regibus Aegypti gratulantes, quod M'. Acilius consul Antiochum regem Graecia ... reges Aegypti ad ea, quae censuisset senatus, paratos fore. Gratiae regibus actae; legatis munera dari iussa in singulos quaternum milium aeris." 9  xxxvii.iii.9-10 (Situation in Syria during Cleopatra I's and Ptolemy Vs reign) ...venerunt adhortantesque, ut in Asiam exercitum traiecerent: omnia perculsa metu non in Asia modo sed etiam in Syria esse...  Sage tells us, "the sister of the king, here Cleopatra, by Egyptian custom and law, shared in the administration: hence reges". It is quite amazing that the Romans regarded Cleopatra I as thefoilcoruler with her husband, Ptolemy V. 9  151  Appendices APPENDIX CC: CLEOPATRA I  PORPHYRY FgrHist. 260 F. 49a (The period around the time of Cleopatra I's death) 1  Up to this point (i.e. Daniel 11.21) historical order has been followed and between Porphyry and us (i.e. Jewish and Christian commentators) there is no dispute. What follows to the end of the book (i.e. of Daniel) he interprets as referring to Antiochus, whose cognomen is Epiphanes, the brother of Seleucus (IV), the son of Antiochus (III) the Great, who ruled after Seleucus for 11 years in Syria and seized Judaea...They say that Antiochus Epiphanes, his brother, stood in the place of Seleucus. At first, those in Syria who favoured Ptolemaeus did not give him royal honours. Afterwards, however, by the pretence of clemency he gained the kingdom of Syria...Not only, he (i.e. Porphyry) says, did he (i.e. Antiochus) conquer Ptolemaeus (VI) by guile, he also overcame Judas Maccabaeus by stratagems. By Ptolemaeus, however, he does not mean Epiphanes, who was the fifth to reign in Egypt, but Ptolemaeus Philometor, the son of Cleopatra , the sister of Antiochus (IV), who was his uncle. When after the death of Cleopatra, Eulaeus, the eunuch (and) tutor of Philometor and Leneus, governed Egypt and sought to regain Syria which Antiochus had occupied by fraud, a war broke out between the uncle and the boy Ptolemaeus; and when they joined battle between Pelusium and Mount Casius, the generals of Ptolemaeus were defeated. Antiochus, sparing the boy and feigning friendship, went up to Memphis, and, there, taking possession of the kingdom according to Egyptian tradition and declaring that he would watch out for the boy's affairs, he subjugated with a small force all Egypt to himself. He entered rich and prosperous cities and did what neither his fathers nor his father's fathers had done, for no king of Syria had thus ravaged Egypt. And all their riches he dispersed. 2  3  Appian, SYRIAN WARS 1.5 (Betrothal of Cleopatra I to Ptolemy V by Antiochus III) "H5r| 8e xov rcpog ' P c o u a i o o g Tu.6A.euov eyvcoKcbg drcoKaA/uTcxeiv, e r a y a u i a g eyy-bg P a a i A e a g  xobg u e v e g A i y t m x o v eaxeXXe Xupiav xf|v KoiXr|v eniSiSoug, fjv a m o g  TcpoKaxeA-duPave, K a i l l x o A . e u a i c p  KXeondxpav xrrv Eupav eTUKAriaiv, T c p o u c a d9f)pr|xo xot> rixoXeuaiou, 6epa7ce\)cov fiSr| xo ueipaKiov, tv' ev xcp 7u.oA.eucp xcp npog ' P c o u a i o u g dxpeufj-  Translated here by Burstein (#39B). Burstein believes that Cleopatra I married Ptolemy V in 195/4 B.C. and died in the spring of 176 B.C. This reference is to Coele-Syria. Burstein says of this (40, #39, n. 3): "The reference to fraud probably refers to the Ptolemaic claim (cf. Polybius, 28.20.9 and Appian, Syrian Wars, 1.5) that Coele Syria was included in Cleopatra I's dowry when she married Ptolemy V. Josephus (J.A., 12.154-5), however, says that she received only the revenues of the region." 1  2  3  152  Appendices POLYBIUS  xv.25.8-10 (Alexandrians show more love towards their queens than towards their kings)  iv cp  Koapcp 7tacn xd K a x d xfiv 'Apoivoriv yEVEoGai SfjAa. xox> yap Gavaxou cpcoxiaGEVxog 6 xponog xfjq d7tcoA£iag• OVK o t > O T | g Se 7r.pocpdo£cog aAA,T)g ouSEpidg, xfjg dAr|6ivfjg cpfiprig 7tpoo7r.£7r.xcoKuiag, dicu.f|v 8' dpcpiof3r|XO'ou£V'r|g, xo Kax' dAfiGEiav ysyovog e v xaig EKaoxcov yvcbuaig ErcEocppayiaGr]. 816 K a i covePr) U£ydAr|v yEavEoGai xf|v atiyxuaiv xcov oxAcov. xot) uev y a p PaaiA&cog cuGeig oviGeva Aoyov enotetxo, n e p i 8e xfjg 'Apaiv6rig, d v a v e c o u E v o t xiv&g uev xfiv opcpaviav a w f i g , 8e xfiv e£, dpxfig e v xcp £nv uPpiv, f | V •bnepetve, K a i xf)v a i K t a v , a b v 8e xoinoig xo nepi xf)v X E A E U X T I V a x u x n u a , eig xooawriv rcapdoxacuv EVE7tt7txov K a i SuaGuutav cooxe 7tAfipri yeveoGai xfiv 7t6Aiv oxEvaypou, 8aKpt)cov, otpcoyfig d K a x a n a u o x o t ) . x a w a 8' fjv xotg opGcog Aoyi£ou£voig ox>x ottxco T T J 9 rcpog 'Apoivoriv E v j v o i a g X E K p f i p i a , noXx> 8 E pdAAov xou npog xobg rapi xov 'AyaGoKA&a O D V E P T I  E T I E ^ T I X E I X O  E V I O I  pioo-Dg-  xviii.51.10 (Cleopatra I's father, Antiochus III, arranges a political marriage)  xd  8 E n p d g nxoA.EU.atov axVrog Ecpn SiecjdtJEiv EuSoKODUEvcog EKEivcpKpivEiv y a p ox) cptAiav u.6vov, d A A d K a i psxd xfig cpiAiag dvayKaioxr|xa crovxiGeoGai rtpog a\)xov.  LIVY xxxiii.xl.3 (Antiochus III tells the Romans he has already concluded a peace with Ptolemy V in  196 B . C . ) Quod ad Ptolomaeum attineat, cui ademptas civitates querantur, sibi cum Ptolomaeo et amicitiam esse, et id agere ut brevi etiam adfinitas iungatur . 4  xxxv.xiii.4 (Wedding between Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I in 193 B . C . ) Antiochus  rex, ea hieme  Raphiae  5  in Phoenice  Ptolomaeo  regi  Aegypti  filia  in  matrimonium data...  xxxvii.iii.9-11 (Foreign policy o f Ptolemy V and Cleopatra I in 190 B . C . ) Legati ab Ptolomaeo et Cleopatra regibus Aegypti gratulantes, quod M ' . Acilius consul 6  Antiochum regem Graecia expulisset...reges Aegypti ad ea, quae censuisset senatus, paratos fore.  Gratiae regibus actae; legatis munera dari iussa in singulos quaternum  milium aeris."  Referring to Ptolemy Vs marriage at Raphia in 194/3 B.C. to the daughter of Antiochus III, Cleopatra I. This is in the winter of 194-3 B.C. Raphia lay to the south-west of Gaza, on the coast between Cilicia and Egypt, but not, strictly speaking, in Phoenicia. Sage tells us, "the sister of the king, here Cleopatra, by Egyptian custom and law, shared in the administration: hence reges". It is quite amazing that the Romans regarded Cleopatra I as the lull coruler with her husband, Ptolemy V. 4 5  6  153  Appendices xxxvii.iii.9-10 (Foreign policy in dealing with Syria)  ...venerunt adhortantesque, ut in Asiam exercitum traiecerent: omnia perculsa metu non in Asia modo sed etiam in Syria esse...  xlii.vi.4 (Rome sends ambassadors to Egypt to renew friendship eight years after Ptolemy VI Philometor ascended the throne in 173 B.C.) Per idem tempus quinque legati ad regem missi, qui res in Macedonia aspicerent. Alexandriam iidem ad Ptolemaeum renovandae amicitiae causa proficisci iussi . 7  (Alexandrians possible support of the royalty [cf. Strabo, Geog., 17.1.11 and Plutarch, Cleomenes, xxxvii.5ff] and the Alexandrians' refusal to help Cleomenes and remain loyal to the crown) STRABO, GEOGRAPHY 17.1.11 (Alexandrians come to trust the royal queens - a direct result of the just and fair reigns of Cleopatras I to III; example: Ptolemy XII Auletes is banished by the Alexandrians) xowov pev oov oi 'AA.ec;av8petc, ecjepaAov, xptcov 5' aoxcp Guyaxepcov ooocov, cov uia Yvnaia f| TcpeaPwdxr), xaoxnv dveSetcjav paoiAiooav oi oioi 8' at>xot> 8oo vf)7Cioi xfjc, x6xe XP *- 3 e^eninxov xe^ecoq. xfj 8e Kaxaaxa0eiar) uexeTceu\|/avxo avSpa eK xfjc; EDpiac,... 8  9  E  A<  PLUTARCH, LIFE OF CLEOMENES xxxvii.5 (Alexandrians do not help Cleomenes) ...cooxe...xov KA-eopevn 8ux(pepeo9ca K a i 7tA,avao0ai K a x d xf|v TC6A,IV, ot>8evoc, aoxcp  rcpooxcopoovxog, aXXa (peuyovxcov K a i cpoPotiuevcov arcavxcov. OOTCOC, o^v a r c o o x a c , Kai rcpoc, xobq cpiAoog eirccbv, 'OuSev fjv apa Gaopaoxov apxetv y o v a i K a c , dv0pci)Ttcov (pe-oyovxcov xfiv eA,e-D9epiav,'...  Ptolemy V Epiphanes had been succeeded in 181 B.C. by his son, Ptolemy VI (Philometor), but Livy has not previously mentioned the fact. According to Dio Cassius (39.13), this was Berenice IV. She reigned with her mother Cleopatra Tryphaena for one year (58-57 B.C.) and then alone for one year. Ptolemies XII and XIII. 7  8  9  154  Appendices APPENDIX D D : PTOLEMY V I PHILOMETOR ATHENAEUS v. 195ff. (Ptolemy V I perfidiously treated by Antiochus Epiphanes) x a m a 8e n d v x a ax>vExeXeoQr\ cov x d uev EK xfjc; Aiybnxo'D 7tapao7tov8T)oag xov OtAoufixopa P a o i A e a n a i S i o K o v ovxa... 1  evoocpioaxo  xiv.654d (Reference to Ptolemy V I Philometor's appeals to Rome for aid) KaxaicEcpEuyet  av em xf|v iepdv o-6yKA,r|xov, cog "brco  xox>  dSEAcpoi) 7idX.iv xfjg  pacuAEiag E^EAnAapEvog . 2  POLYBIUS xxvii.13 (The young age o f Ptolemy V I 171 B . C . ) "Oxt rixoAepatog 6 o x p a x n y o g 6 K a x d Kimpov ot)Sapcog A i y o n x i a K o g y&yovEv, aXXa v o w E x f i g K a i icpaKxtKog. 7tapaA.aPcbv yap xf|v v f j a o v ext v n T c i o u xot) PaoaA.£cog ovxog E y i v E x o p £ v ETtipE^cog TtEpi cx)vaycoyf)v xptipdxcov, E8I8O\) 8' dnAcog coSev ovSevi, K a i n e p aixouuevog rcoAAdKig "brto xcov PaoaAaKcov 8ioiKr)xcov K a i KaxaAaX,ovjpevog rciKpcog eni xcp pr|8ev 7tpo'ieo0at. xotj 8e PacnAecog eig fiAtKtav rcapayeyovoxog, crov0eig nA,fj0og t K a v o v xptipdxcov ecjaTr.eo-xeiA.ev, cbaxe K a i xov IIxoAepaiov a w o v K a i xobg nepi XT|V avjAf|v et>8oKfjaai xfj 7tp6xEpov amou croaxoAfj K a i xa) U T | 8 E V rtpo'iEoOai.  xxviii. Iff. (War between Antiochus I V and Ptolemy V I over Coele-Syria in 170-169 B.C.) "Oxt xoft noXe\iov <xo§> i t e p i KotArjg E u p i a g fj8r| Kaxapxyiv AaPovxog 'Avxioxcp Kai LTxoAepaicp xotg PaatAeOaiv, T|KOV TtpeoPeig eig xf)v 'P6pr|v rcapd pev 'Avxt6xot) MeAeaypog K a i Ecoaicpdvrig K a i 'HpaKAeiSrig, n a p d 8E nxoAEpaico Tip60Eog K a i Adpcov. a o v E p a i v E 8E KpaxEtv xov 'Avxioxov xcov K a x d KoiAryv Etjpiav K a i OOIVIKTIV rcpaypdxcov. oh yap 'Avxioxog 6 naxfip xou vw Aeyopevot) PaoaAecog e v i K n o e xfj rcepi xo I l d v i o v p d x n tobg nxoAEpaiot) axpaxryyo'vjg, a n ' EKEIVCOV xcov X P ETtEiOovxo TtdvxEg o i 7tpo£ipr|U£voi xojtoi x o t g EV Xupicx paoaA-EXJaiv. 8I6TCEP 6 p e v 'Avxioxog fiyoupevog xf)v Kaxd rcoAEpov iax"opoxdxTiv Kai KaAAiaxT|v e l v a t Kxfjotv, cog hnep iSicov ETCOIEIXO xf|v O7to\)8f|v 6 8E r i x o A , £ p a i o g dSiKcog imoAapPdvcov xovrcpoxEpov'Avxioxov O-OVETCIGEPEVOV xfj xou Ttaxpog opcpavia Tcapr|pf|c0ai xdg Kaxd K o i X n v E u p i a v TtoAfitg auxcov, ov% o t o g x fjv E K E i v c p T t a p a x c o p E t v xcov XOTCCOV xowcov. O V C O V  Athenaeus, v.l93dff. Ptolemy VI Philometor, who had insisted on a division of territory and had obtained from the Roman Senate all but Cyrene and Libya (Gulick Vol.7 p. 11, note a). In 163 B.C., he went to Rome to obtain the grant of Cyprus (Polybius, xxxi.18; xxxiii.5). 1  2  155  Appendices xxviii. 12.8-9 (The Achaean League, upon hearing of Ptolemy V I Philometor's  Anakleteria  ["Coming o f Age"] Festival, sends envoys in 170-169 B . C . ) Kaxd xov amov Kaipov K a i nepi zox> PacuAecog IlxoA.euaio'O rcpooneoovxog xotg 'A%aiotg 8i6xi yeyovev awo) x d v o | . u £ 6 u e v a y i v e c 0 a i xotg Pacnieftcav, oxav eig f|A.iKiav eA.0axnv, dvaKA,T|xfipi.a, vouiaavxeg acpioi Ka0f|Keiv eiuor|ufivacJ0at xo yeyovog, e\|/r|(pioavxo TceuTceiv.npeaPe'oxdg dvavecooouevoog x d Jtpowtdpxovxa xo) &0vei 9iX,dv0pco7ca rcpog xnv PacuAeiav, Kai napa-oxiKa KaxeoxncTav 'AX,Ki0ov Kai Kai  riaoidSav.  JUSTIN,  EPITOME OFTROGUS  34.2.7 (Antiochus I V attacks Ptolemy VI) D u m haec aguntur, rex Syriae Antiochus Ptolomeo, maiori sororis suae filio, regi Aegypti, bellum infert...  35.1.6 (Ptolemy V I helps the Syrians at Antioch against Demetrius) Itaque adiuvantibus et Ptolomeo, rege Aegypti...  LIVY xlii.vi.4 (Rome sends ambassadors to Egypt to renew friendship in 173 B . C . ) Per  idem tempus quinque legati ad regem missi, qui res in Macedonia aspicerent.  Alexandriam iidem ad Ptolemaeum renovandae amicitiae causa proficisci iussi. 3  xlii.xxvi.8 (Egypt pledges its loyalty to the Romans in 172 B . C . ) E x A s i a qui circa socios reges missi erant redierunt legati, qui rettulerent Eumenen Aeginae Antiochum in Syria, Ptolemaeum Alexandriae sese convenisse. egregie  in  fide  permanere pollicitosque  omnia quae  populus  Romanus  Omnes...sed imperasset  praestaturos.  xlii.xxix.5-6 (Livy's reason why Antiochus IV was again threatening the kingdom o f Egypt in 171 B.C.) Antiochus imminebat quidem Aegypti regno, et pueritiam regis spernens;  et  ambigendo  de  Coele  Syria  5  causam  belli  se  4  et inertiam tutorum  habiturum  existimabat  gesturumque id nullo impedimento occupatis Romanis in Macedonico bello;  Ptolemy V Epiphanes was succeeded in 181 B.C. by his son, Ptolemy VI Philometor, but Livy had not previously mentioned the fact. 3  156  Appendices  xlii.xxix.7 (Because of Ptolemy VI's young age, the kingdom is run by his ministers 171 B.C.) Ptolemaeus propter aetatem alieni turn arbitrii erat; tutores et bellum adversus Antiochum parabant, quo vindicarent Coelen Syriam, et Romanis omnia pollicebantur ad Macedonicum bellum.  xliv.xix.6-7 (Egyptian envoys go to Rome in 168 B.C. to beg Rome's aid against Antiochus IV) Primi Alexandrini legati ab Ptolemaeo et Cleopatra regibus vocati sunt. Sordidati , barba et capillo promisso, cum ramis oleae ingressi curiam procubuerunt, et oratio quam habitus fuit miserabilior. 6  7  xliv.xix.8 (Antiochus IV is waging war against Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II 168 B.C.) Antiochus Syriae rex...per honestam speciem maiori Ptolemaei reducendi in regnum, bellum cum minore fratre eius , qui turn Alexandriam tenebat... 8  Cf. Polybius, xxvh\19. Ptolemy VI Philometor was about 16 at this time, having succeeded to the throne in 181 B.C. His tutors at this time were Eulaeus and Lenaeus. History of the possession of Coele Syria (the district of Damascus, and extending to the north, between Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon) up to this time: First belonged to Seleucus I; was conquered by Ptolemy II Philadelphus in 280 B.C. and held by Egypt until 218 B.C.; was retaken by Antiochus III the Great in 201-198 B.C.; and given by him as a dowry for his daughter Cleopatra I, mother of the reigning king, Ptolemy VI. Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II and Cleopatra II. Schlesinger (151 n. 2) says that this was part of the envoys' costume to appear like suppliants. The "elder Ptolemy" is Ptolemy VI Philometor; the "young" is Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II. 4  5  6  7  8  Appendices  157  APPENDIX EE: SOSIBIUS P L U T A R C H , LIFE OF CLEOMENES  xxxiii.4 (Sosibius' influence over Ptolemy I V ) Ecocn.pio'D 8e iox> nXeiaxov ev xotg (piAoic, 8wauevoi3 9f|oavxog  xxxiv.2 (Sosibius fears Cleomenes and his influence in Egypt)  6 8e xcov oA.covrcpoeoxr|KcbgK a i 7ipoPooA,e'6cov Zcootpiog uevovxa pev x6v KAeopevn 7tapd YVCOU.T|V f]yetxo Suapexaxeipiaxov etvai Kai cpoPepov, dcpeBevxa 8e xoAuripov, avSpa Kai peyaAoTcpdypova Kai xfjg PaaiAeiag voaooarig Geaxnv yeyevripevov. ,  POLYBIUS v.35.7 (Sosibius at the head of the government during the reign of Ptolemy I V )  oi 8e icepi xov Ecooipiov (ooxog ydp udAioxa xoxe rcpoeaxaxei xcov rcpaypdxcov) aoveSpetioavxeg xoiaoxag xivdg eTcoifiaavxo nepi aoxoo 8iaA,f|\|/eig.  v.63.1 (Sosibius and Agathocles control Ptolemaic affairs together)  A.out6v 8e ouveSpe'oaavxeg rcpoeoxcoxeg xfjg PaaiAeiag  oi rcepi xov 'AyaGoK^ea K a i EcooiPiov, oi xoxe  v.65.9 (Sosibius as a military commander)  xo 8e xcov Aiyonxicov JiX,f|8og fjv pev eig Siopupioog 9aA,ayyixag, imexdxxexo 8e Ecooipicp.  xv.25 (As the guardian o f Ptolemy I V , Sosibius causes the deaths of many o f his rivals)  "Oxi Ecootpiog 6 v|/eu8eTcixpo7iog nxoteuaiou eSoKei yeyovevai OKeOog dyxivouv TcoA/oxp6viov, exi 8e K a K o r c o i o v ev PaoiX^ig, K a i 7 t p c b x c p pev d p x o o a i cpovov Aooipdxcp, 6g fjv mog 'Apoivong xfjg ADcupaxoo K a i n.xotepaio'D, Seuxepcp 8e Maya xcp rixoA£uaiorj K a i BepeviKtig xfjg Maya, xpixn 8e BepeviKn xfj nxoA.epaico unxpi xou <t>iX,ondxopog, xexdpxcp KA.eou.evei xcp £napxidxr|, 7tep7ixr| Goyaxpi BepeviKrig 'Apoworj. Kai  158  Appendices  xv.25.3ff. (Accession of Ptolemy V; false proclamation of Agathocles and Sosibius as his guardians in 203 B.C.) Mexd 8' fjpepag xpetg fj xexxapag ev xo) peyiaxcp nepiaxfjAcp xfjg auAfjg oiKoSopfiaavxeg Pf]pa ouveKdAeaav xobg imaanioxdg K a i xf]v Gepaneiav, a p a 8e xomoig xobg ne£cov K a i xobg innecov fjyepovag. dGpoioGevxcov 8e xofjxcov dvapdg 'AyaGoKAfjg K a i EcoaiPiog eni xo Pfipa npcoxov pev xov xot> PaoiAecog K a i xov xfjq PaaiAioarig Gdvaxov dv6copoAoyf|aavxo Kai xo nevGog dvecpr|vav xotg noAAotg Kaxd xo nap' auxotg eGog. pexd Se xafJxa StdSripa xo) natSi nepiGevxeg dveSeicjav PaoaAea, K a i SiaGfiKtiv xivd napaveyvcooavrtenAaapevnv,ev fj yeypappevov fjv oxt KaxaAeinei xovj naiSog enixponoug 6 PaaiAebg 'AyaGoKAea K a i Ecoaipiov K a i napeKdAouv xobg fiyep6vag euvoetv Kai SiacpuAdxxeiv Tip TcatSi xfiv dpxfiv  SONS OF SOSIBIUS SOSIBIUS POLYBIUS xv.32.4-6 (When the Alexandrian mob demand Ptolemy V as their king, Sosibius, son of Sosibius, at this time is already a member of the bodyguard) nepi 8e xobg oxAoug eyevexo TIC, apa xapa K a i Atmry xd pev yap f j o a v nepixapetg eni xcp KeKopioGai xov natSa, xd Se ndAiv 8uo-npeoxoDV xcp pf| croveiAfjcpGai xobg aixio'og pnSe xuyxdveiv xfjg dppo£obar|g xipcopiag...fi8ri Se xfjg fjpepag npoPaivovjcrig, K a i xot> nAfiGcog en' ouSeva Suvapevot) nepag dnepeioaaGai xf)v 6ppf|v, Zcoaipiog, og fjv pev moc, EcociPiou, xoxe 8£ acopaxocptiAacj imapxeov pdAicxa xov vofjv npooetxe xcp xe PaoaAet K a i xotg npdypaai, Gecopcov xfiv xe xovj nAfiGoug 6ppf|V dpexdGexov oSaav K a i xo naiSiov 8t)CTXPTioxo'6pevov Sid xe xf]v xcov napeaxcbxcov dcwnGeiav K a i Std xf|v nepi xov oxAov xapaxfiv, envjGexo xou PaoiAecog ei napaScboet xotg noAAotg xobg eig a\Vxov f) xf|v p-nxepa xi nenA-nppeATiKOxag. xox> Se Kaxavefjoavxog, xcov pev ocopaxocp-oAaKcov xioiv eine SriAcooai xfjv xorj PaoiAecog yvcbpr|v, xo 8e naiSiov dvaaxf)oag dnfjye npog xf)v Gepaneiav eig xfjv iSiav o i K i a v , crbveyyog oSaav. -  xvi.22.lff. (Sosibius [the son] becomes the guardian of Ptolemy V) ecp' oig^ o i nepi xf|v ai)Af]v doxdAAovxeg ndvxa napecrnpaivovxo K a i Papecog afjxovj xfjv auGdSeiav bnecpepov, xov 8e Ecoaipiov EK napaGeoecog eGatjpa^ov. eSoKei yap oftxog xot> xe PaoiAecog npoeoxdvai cppovipcbxepov fj K a x d xf|v fiAiKiav, xf)v xe npog xobg eKxog dndvxrioiv dglav noietoGai xfjg eyKexeipicpevrig aincp ntoxecog- amr| 8' fjv f| ocppayig K a i xo xou PaoiAecog acopa.  xvi.22.11 (Tlepolemus takes control of Ptolemaic matters from Sosibius, son of Sosibius) "Oxi pexd xfiv 8T)priyopiav eAaPe K a i xfiv acppaytSa napd Zcoaipiou, Kai xafjxrjv napeiAr|cpcbg 6 TA/nnoAepog Aomov fjSri ndvxa xd npdypaxa Kaxd xf|v abxoil npoaipeoiv enpaxxev.  Appendices PTOLEMY POLYBIUS xvi.22.3ff. (Ptolemy, s o n of Sosibius, returns from exile to challenge Tlepolemus) Kaxd 8e xov K c a p d v xouxov dvaKopi£6uevog fJKei napd xot> OiAiicTcot) IlxoA.epaiog 6 Ecooipiou. K a i rcpiv p e v ow xfjg 'AA.ecjav8peiag EKJiA-Euaav TcA/rprig fjv xocpot) 8id xf]v i8iav cpixnv K a i 8id xf)v npoaY£Y£vr|UEvr|V xoo rcaxpog E U K a t p i a v cbg 8 E Kaxa7iA.E\)cag £ i g xnv MaKE8oviav a t t v E p i c J E xotg TCEpi xfjv ai>Xr\v v E a v t c K o i g , {)TcoX,aPcbv Eivai xnv MaKeSovcov dvSpeiav ev xfj xfjg t>Tco8eoecog K a i xfj Tfjg eoGfjxog Siacpopd, napfjv xauxa rcdvx' e£TiA.coKcbg K a i T c e T c e t o p e v o q ainov p e v dvSpa yeyovEvai 8id x f ) v EKSnpiav K a i 8id xo MaKeSooiv cbpiA,T|Kevai, xoi>g 8e K a x d xnv 'AX,ei;dv8peiav dv8pdno8a K a i PAaKag Siapevetv. Sionep EuG&cog e£r|A.ox'V)Ttei K a i napexpipexorcpogxov TA,r|Tc6A,epov. Jtdvxcov 8' auxcp ooyKaxaxiGepevcov xcov rcepi XT)V aoA.r|v 8id xo xov TAr|7:6X,epov K a i xd npaypaxa K a i xd %pr\yLan;a pr) cog enixponov, aXX' cog KAr]pov6pov ^Et-pi^eiv, xaxecog Trucjf|6T| x d xfjg Siacpopdg. E  X  E  K  E  K  160  Appendices APPENDIX FF:  AGATHOCLES  ATHENAEUS vi.251.e (Philon, an associate of Agathocles, has become a close friend of Ptolemy IV) ev Se xfj xeaoapeoKaiSeKdxri 'AyaGoKAcoug xot> OivdvGrig oio\), exaipoo Se OiAondxopog PaavAecog <J>iA,cova.  xov  POLYBIUS v.63.1 (Sosibius and Agathocles at the head of the government during the reign o f Ptolemy I V Philopator) X-OITCOV 8e ooveSpeooavxeg npoeoxcoxeg xfjg P a a i A e i a g  xv.25.3ff.  o i nepi  xov  'AyaGoKA.ea K a i Ecootpiov,  o i xoxe  (Accession o f Ptolemy V ; false proclamation of Agathocles and Sosibius as his  guardians in 203 B . C . ) M e x d 8' fipepag xpetg fj xexxapag e v xcp peyioxcp nepiax'bA.cp xfjg aoA,fjg otKoSopfjaavxeg Pfjpa oweKa^eoav xoog •bnaanioxdg K a i xnv Gepaneiav, a p a 5k xcoxoig xobg ne£cov K a i xobg innecov f)yep6vag. dGpoioGevxcov 8e xowcov d v a p d g 'AyaGoKA/fjg K a i ZcooiPiog e n i xo Pfjpa npcoxov pev xov xov PaoiXecog K a i xov xfjg PaoiA,ioorig Gdvaxov dvGcouoAoyfiaavxo K a i xo nevGog dve<pr|vav xotg noA,A,otg K a x d xd reap' aoxotg eGog. pexd Se x a f i x a SidSripa xcp n a i S i nepiGevxeg dveSeicjav P a o i X e a , K a i SiaGfiKtiv x i v d napaveyvcooav nenA.aopevr|v, ev fj yeypappevov fjv o x i KaxaXetnet xov naiSog enixponcog 6 PaoiX.e'bg 'AyaGoKA-ea K a i E c o a i P i o v K a i n a p e K d A o w xobg fiyepovag e w o e t v K a i SiacprjAaxxeiv xcp n a i S i xnv dp%f)v  xv.25.11 (Realising that his office alone will not gain him the loyalty and support he needs to control the Ptolemaic kingdom successfully, Agathocles resorts to bribery among other things) 6 Se npoeipnpevog, eneiSfj xdg •bSpiag eig xobg P a a i A i K o b g oiKot>g e6r|Ke, n a p a y y e t ^ a g dnoGeaGai x d 9 a i d , npcoxov pev Sipfivou xdg S o v d p e i g cb\)/coviaoe, neneiopevog xo Tcapd xotg noA.A,otg ptoog dpPX,oveiv S i d xfjg npog x o A,-DoixeA,eg oppfjg aoxcov, etx' enecjcbpKiae xov opKOv 6v fjoav o p v o e i v eiGiapevoi. K a x d xdg dvaSeicjeig xcov PaaiAecov.  xv.l2ff. (Agathocles rids the kingdom of his rivals and opponents; his internal policy and politics) e£;aneoxeiA.e Se K a i <J>iA.dppcova xov enioxdvxa xcp xfjg 'Apoivong epovep, novf|oag avxbv AiPuapxriv xcov K a x d Kx>pf|vr|v xoncov...pexd 8e xaoxa TleAona pev e£;enep\|/e xov rieXoTcog eig xfiv ' A a i a v npog 'Avxtoxov xov PacaA,ea, napaKaleoovxa c o v x i p e t v xf|v (piAiav K a i pf| n a p a P a i v e i v xdg npog xov xov n a i S o g n a x e p a orjvGfiKag, TIxoA-epatov 8e xov EcooiPiorj npog OiAmnov x d xe nepi xfjg eniyapiag oovGr|o6pevov K a i napaKaAeoovxa Por]8etv, edv oAooxepeaxepov a'oxobg 'Avxioxog eniPdXrixai napaonovSetv. npoexeipioaxo Se Kai l l x o X e p a t o v xov 'Aynodpxot) npeoPet)xf)v npog 'Pcopaioug, obx cog e n i o n e u o o v x a xf)v npeoPeiav, d A X cbg, d v ayrixai xfjg 'EA.A,dSog K a i coppi^ri xotg eKet (piAoig K a i ouyyeveoiv, aoxoo K a x a p e v o o v x a . n p o e K e i x o yap auxcp ndvxag xorjg enicpavetg dvSpag eKTtoScbv noifjoai....Soo yap ea%e npoGeoeig onep xauxrig xfjg enipoX,fjg, piav pev  161  Appendices  dnoxpfjo-Qai xotg cjevoA,oyr|0etoiv eig xov npog 'Avxioxov noA-epov, aAA/nv Se xobg apxaicog K a i npoimdpxovxag cjevoDg eni xd K a x d xf|v %dopa\ cppovjpia K a i xdg KaxoiKiag dnoaxetAai, xotg 8e napayevopevoig dvaniripfio-ai K a i Kaivonoifjaai xf|v Gepaneiav K a i xd nepi XTJV a-bA,f|v cpuAaKeta, napanA/naicog 8e K a i K a x d xf|v dAA.r|v noAiv, vopi^cov xobg 81 amoO cjevoAoynGevxag K a i pioGoSoxo'opevo'og xcov pev npoyeyovoxcov pT]8evi oDpnaGfioovxag 8id xo pT]8ev yivcboKeiv, ev at>xfi Se xdg eAniSag exovxag K a i xfjg acoxipiag K a i xfjg enavopGcbaecog, exoipoug e^eiv covaycovio-xdg K a i covepyobg npog xo napayyeAAopevov.  xv.25.20-21 (Agathocles fills up the important governmental posts with his own supporters) 'O 8' 'AyaGoKX/fjg enei xobg enicpaveo-xdxoug xcov dvSpfiv EKnoScbv enoitioe, K a i xo noA/b xfjg xot> nA/nGo'Dg opyfjg napaKaxeoxe xfj xcov 6\|/covicov dnoSoaei, napd n68ag eig xfiv ecj dpxfjg o"ovf|6eiav enavfjAGe. K a i xdg pev xcov cpiAcov x " P 3 dvenXfipcooe, napeioayaycbv e K xfjg SiaKoviag K a i xfjg aAA/ng "bnTipeaiag xobg eiKaioxdxoug Kai Gpacruxdxougc  )  A(  xv.34 (Summary of Agathocles career) npoaycoyfjg pev yap exx>xe napaSo^ou 8id xfjv xox> <t>iA,ondxopog dSuvapiav xot> (3aoiX,evjeiv xux<bv Se xauxrig K a i napaA,a(3cbv evjcpueoxaxov K a i p o v pexd xov eKeivou Gdvaxov npog xo o-ovxTpfjaai xf)v ecjouaiav, apa xd npdypaxa K a i xo t^fjv dne(3aA,e Sid xfiv iSiav dvavSpiav K a i paGupiav, ev ndvo Ppaxet XP^ P KaxayvcooGeig. VC  xv.25.25 (Agathocles and his family are never accepted by the Alexandrian people) xcp Se priSev exeiv npooconov dc;ioxpecov xo npoox-noopevov, Kai 8i' oS xfjv opyfyv eig xov 'AyaGoKAea K a i xf|v 'AyaGoK^eiav dnepeioovxai, xfjv ficmxiav fjyov, ext piav eAniSa KapaSoKoOvxeg xfjv Kaxd xov TA/nnoAepov K a i xafjxri npooavexovxeg.  xv.25.35-36 (Agathocles tries to turn the people against Tlepolemus) K a i noAAdg eig xorixo xo pepog eimopei niGavoxrrtag, xdg pev EK xfiv o"opPaiv6vxcov napeKSexopevog K a i Siaoxpecpcov, xdg 8' EK KaxaPoA/fjg nAdxxcov K a i SiaoKevdc^cov. xawa 8' enoiei PouAopevog xd nAf|6r| napocj-oveiv K a x d xov TA/nnoAepo-D- crovePaive Se xofjvavxiov. ndAai yap eni xfi npoetp-npevcp xdg eAniSag exovxeg oi noAAoi -Kai Aiav fiSecog ecbpcov eKKaiopevnv xfiv Siacpopdv.  xv.31.4ff . (Agathocles realises the threat to him by the Macedonian people) oi Se nepi xov 'AyaGoKAea, pAenovxeg fj8r| xd KaG' abxorjg, eSeovxo xfiv acopaxocp'oAdKcov npeoPeuoai nepi awfiv npog xobg MaKeSovag, 8r|Aov>vxag oxi xfjg enixponeiag EKXcopoocn. K a i xfjg aAArig e^ODoiag K a i xfiv xipfiv, exi Se xfiv Xopriyicov cov exotica ndvxcov, awo Se xo nveupdxiov Seovxai oDYXcopriGfjvai acpioa pexd xfjg dvayKaiag xpocpfjg, i v a x ^ f ) ^ ^ i<; n ^ dpxfjg SidGeorv pr|8e PcoAriGevxeg exi Svjvcovxai Aunetv pnSeva. xfiv pev oSv dAAcov acopaxocpuAdKcov ovjSeig bnf|Kouoev, 'Apiaxopevrig Se povog bneoxr) xfiv xpetav xat)xr|v 6 pexd xiva Xpovov eni xcov npaypdxcov yevopevog. 0 0  e  T ,  ve  162  Appendices AGATHOCLEIA & OENANTHE PLUTARCH, LIFE OF CLEOMENES xxxiii.2 (Plutarch gives the credit of running Ptolemy IV's government to Oenanthe)  6 uev yap PamA.et>g awog owco SiecpGapxo xf|v \j/ux"H vno yovaiKcov K a i noxcov cooxe, onoxe vf|(poi ud^ioxa K a i arcouSaioxaxog amou yevoixo, xeA.exdg xe^etv K a i xtiprcavov e^cov ev xotg PaaiAeioig dyeipeiv, xd 8e peyioxa xfjg dpxrjg rcpaYpaxa SioiKetv 'AyaGoK^eiav xf|v epcouevriv xoo PaaiAecog K a i xfiv xaoxrig prixepa K a i rcopvoPooKov OivavGnv. v  POLYBIUS xv.25.12 (The child-king, Ptolemy V, is placed into the care of Agathocleia and Oenanthe) ... xo 8e rtaiSiov evexeipioe xatg nepi xf|V OivavGnv K a i 'AyaGoK^eiav.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0088494/manifest

Comment

Related Items