DOCSLIB.ORG

Exnt03-Foreign

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Foreign Rule Persian Greek Egyptian Syrian Persian Period Foreign Rule: The Persian Period Persian Period Persian Jewish Events Daniel 1st Return Cyrus (559–529) Isaiah 40–66 Aramaic Cambyses Expansion Haggai 2nd Return Darius I (522–486) Zechariah 2nd Temple Zerubbabel Xerxes Greeks win Malachi Reforms Esther City walls Artaxerzxes (465–435) Ezra 3rd Return Nehemiah 4th Return Foreign Rule: The Persian Period Persian Period Persian Jewish Events Darius II Artaxerxes II Samaritan schism (404–358) Artaxerxes III Darius III (336–330) Alexander the Great Foreign Rule: The Persian Period Persian Period Contributions: 1. Jewish nationality 2. Jewish reforms 3. Jewish diaspora 4. Jewish thought 5. Samaritan schism 6. Empire infrastructure 7. Empire reorganization Foreign Rule: The Persian Period Foreign Rule Persian Greek Egyptian Syrian Greek Period Foreign Rule: Greek Period Greek Period 1. Philip II of Macedon (359–336 B.C.) A. Macedonian city states B. Murdered in theater 336 B.C. 2. Alexander the Great (336–323 B.C.) A. World conquest 1. Macedonian hegemony 2. Persian conquest Foreign Rule: Greek Period Greek Period 1. Philip II of Macedon (359–336 B.C.) A. Macedonian city states B. Murdered in theater 336 B.C. 2. Alexander the Great (336–323 B.C.) A. World conquest 1. Macedonian hegemony 2. Persian conquest Foreign Rule: Greek Period Greek Period 2. Alexander the Great (336–323 B.C.) B. World vision 1. Conceptualizing Hellenization promoting a Greek world promoting citizenship, not birth promoting thinking and education promoting cosmopolitan perspectives Foreign Rule: Greek Period Greek Period 2. Alexander the Great (336–323 B.C.) B. World vision 1. Conceptualizing Hellenization 2. Components of Hellenization Greek culture (mythology, religion, philoso- phy, architecture, Olympian games, etc.) Greek city pattern (planning, geometry, downtown, public buildings, market) Greek language Divine monarchy (Near-Eastern) Foreign Rule: Greek Period Greek Period Philip II (359–336 B.C.) Alexander (336–323 B.C.) Antigonids Seleucids Ptolemies (Macedonia) (Syria/Persia) (Egypt/Libya) Control of Palestine (320–200 B.C.) Foreign Rule: Greek Period Greek Period Contributions: 1. Hellenization process 2. Alexandria, Egypt 3. Greek language Foreign Rule: The Persian Period Foreign Rule Persian Greek Egyptian Syrian Egyptian Period 1. Ptolemy I A. One of Alexander’s generals 1. Received satrapy of Egypt 2. Judea surrendered voluntarily (312) 3. Jews migrated to Egypt 4. Catalyst for growing Jewish disapora B. Progressive environment of growth 1. Commercial prosperity 2. Extended Hellenistic policies 3. Alexandria premier example Foreign Rule: Egyptian Period Egyptian Period 2. Ptolemy II A. Septuagint translation 1. Hebrew into Greek 2. Legend: 70 scholars like 70 elders of Moses 3. Content: OT, OT additions, other works 4. Catalyst for growing Jewish disapora Foreign Rule: Egyptian Period Egyptian Period 2. Ptolemy II B. Septuagint significance 1. Explains canonical process contains books of Apocrypha basis of Catholic OT Reformers rejected, favoring Masoretic OT 2. Scripture for Jews, hence early Christians most NT quotations of OT are from LXX helped spread of Gospel in Greek Foreign Rule: Egyptian Period Egyptian Period 2. Ptolemy II B. Septuagint significance 3. Valuable historical source Bible of early church distinctive religious vocabulary Hebrew thought into Greek importance of Alexandrian Jewry (e.g., Philo of Alexandria) Foreign Rule: Egyptian Period Egyptian Period 3. Ptolemy III, IV, V A. Decline of Egypt C. Struggle with Syria 1. Battle of Panneas (200 B.C.) 2. NT Caesarea Philippi 3. Antiochus III defeats Ptolemy V 4. Palestine incorporated into Syria Foreign Rule: Egyptian Period Egyptian Period Contributions: 1. Hellenization advance 2. Alexandrian diaspora 3. Septuagint translation Foreign Rule: Egyptian Period Foreign Rule Persian Greek Egyptian Syrian Syrian Period Philip II (359–336 B.C.) Alexander (336–323 B.C.) Antigonids Seleucids Ptolemies (Macedonia) (Syria/Persia) (Egypt/Libya) Syrian Wars (274–200 B.C.) Foreign Rule: Syrian Period Syrian Period 1. Seleucid Power A. Seleucus I (312 B.C.) 1. Syrian chronology 2. Antioch founded (300 B.C.) strong Hellenistic center large Jewish community center of early Christianity 3. Syrian Wars (274–200 B.C.) Foreign Rule: Syrian Period Syrian Period 1. Seleucid Power A.AntiochSeleucus I (312 B.C.) 1. Syrian chronology 2. Antioch founded (300 B.C.) strong Hellenistic center large Jewish community center of early Christianity 3. Syrian Wars (274–200 B.C.) Foreign Rule: Syrian Period Syrian Period 1. Seleucid Power (Persia, Mesopotamia, Syria) B. Antiochus III 1. Battle of Panneas (200 B.C.) Antiochus III defeats Ptolemy V Palestine shifts to Syrian control 2. Battle of Magnesia (190 B.C.) Rome defeats Antiochus III disasterous war reparations son Antiochus IV sent to Rome as hostage Antiochus III killed while raiding temples Foreign Rule: Syrian Period Syrian Period 2. Seleucid Problems A. Seleucus IV 1. Inherits father’s war debts 2. Murdered in internal struggle for Syrian throne B. Antiochus IV Epiphanes 1. Hostage released to secure Syrian throne (175) 2. Embarks on Egyptian campaign attempts to dominate Egypt requires securing Palestine Foreign Rule: Syrian Period Syrian Period Jewish High Priests Jason 174–171 Menelaus 171–161 Alchimus 161–159 [vacant] 159–152 Jonathan 152–143 Simon 142–134 John Hyrcanus I 134–104 Aristobulus I 104–103 Alexander Jannaeus 103–76 John Hyrcanus II 76–67 Aristobulus II 66–63 John Hyrcanus II 63–40 Foreign Rule: Syrian Period Syrian Period 2. Seleucid Problems B. Antiochus IV Epiphanes 3. Moves to enforce Hellenization 4. Sets up dramas in the high priesthood Jason’s bribery, brother Onias replaced Menelaus’s bribery, non-Zadokite breaks Zadokite tradition, perverts priests 5. Confronted by Rome in Egypt forced to abandon Egyptian campaign commits sacrilege in Jerusalem (167 B.C.) Foreign Rule: Syrian Period Syrian Period Antioch Contributions: 1. Antioch of Syria founded 2. High priesthood perverted 3. Hellenization now forced 4. Catalyst of Jewish revolt Foreign Rule: Syrian Period.
Recommended publications
  • The Seleucid Empire – My Brother’S Keeper

    The Seleucid Empire – My Brother’S Keeper

    057: The Seleucid Empire – My Brother’s Keeper It is July in the year 246 BC, and King Antiochus II of the Seleucid Empire has suddenly died at the age of 40 in the city of Ephesus in Asia Minor, having ruled since 261.1 His death was sudden and unexpected, and rumors of poison swirled about. Some ancient writers like Appian, Pliny the Elder and Porphyrius lay the blame directly on the feet of Antiochus’ first wife, Laodice I, whom he was visiting at the time.2 She is said to have been driven to act by jealousy and insecurity after being divorced by Antiochus so he could take the hand of Ptolemy II’s daughter Berenice as his new wife following the end of the 2nd Syrian War in 253/252. As much as a “scorned lover” trope makes for excellent storytelling, it is more than likely just that, a trope. While a couple of ancient historians and writers accuse Laodice of killing Antiochus, no contemporary writings found in the Babylonian Chronicles or Astronomical Diaries make mention of foul play, and some like Eusebius merely states that he fell ill and died.3 Death by disease in the ancient world could come swiftly and unexpectedly, even in the prime of one’s life and with access to the best doctors. As I also explained in the last episode, too much importance might be placed upon the Seleucid-Ptolemaic marriage alliance following the 2nd Syrian War, and Laodice probably did not undergo any loss of status given the polygamous nature of Hellenistic monarchies.4 Much of the blame seems to be unwarranted, and a similar comparison could be drawn between Laodice and Livia Augusta, the wife of the Emperor Augustus and alleged poisoner in the eyes of Roman historians like Tacitus and Cassius Dio.
  • The Ptolemaic Sea Empire

    The Ptolemaic Sea Empire

    chapter 5 The Ptolemaic Sea Empire Rolf Strootman Introduction: Empire or “Overseas Possessions”? In 1982, archaeologists of the State Hermitage Museum excavated a sanctu- ary at the site of Nymphaion on the eastern shore of the Crimea. The sanctu- ary had been in use from ca. 325 bce until its sudden abandonment around 250 bce.1 An inscription found in situ associates the site with Aphrodite and Apollo, and with a powerful local dynasty, the Spartokids.2 Built upon a rocky promontory overlooking the Kimmerian Bosporos near the port of Panti- kapaion (the seat of the Spartokids), the sanctuary clearly was linked to the sea. Most remarkable among the remains were two polychrome plastered walls covered with graffiti depicting more than 80 ships—both war galleys and cargo vessels under sail— of varying size and quality, as well as images of animals and people. The most likely interpretation of the ship images is that they were connected to votive offerings made to Aphrodite (or Apollo) in return for safe voyages.3 Most noticeable among the graffiti is a detailed, ca. 1.15 m. wide drawing of a warship, dated by the excavators to ca. 275–250, and inscribed on its prow with the name “Isis” (ΙΣΙΣ).4 The ship is commonly 1 All dates hereafter will be Before Common Era. I am grateful to Christelle Fischer-Bovet’s for her generous and critical comments. 2 SEG xxxviii 752; xxxix 701; the inscription mentions Pairisades ii, King of the Bosporos (r. 284/3– 245), and his brother. Kimmerian Bosporos is the ancient Greek name for the Chan- nel now known as the Strait of Kerch, and by extension the entire Crimea/ Sea of Azov region; see Wallace 2012 with basic bibliography.
  • Chapter 8 Antiochus I, Antiochus IV And

    Chapter 8 Antiochus I, Antiochus IV And

    Dodd, Rebecca (2009) Coinage and conflict: the manipulation of Seleucid political imagery. PhD thesis. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/938/ Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Glasgow Theses Service http://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] Coinage and Conflict: The Manipulation of Seleucid Political Imagery Rebecca Dodd University of Glasgow Department of Classics Degree of PhD Table of Contents Abstract Introduction………………………………………………………………….………..…4 Chapter 1 Civic Autonomy and the Seleucid Kings: The Numismatic Evidence ………14 Chapter 2 Alexander’s Influence on Seleucid Portraiture ……………………………...49 Chapter 3 Warfare and Seleucid Coinage ………………………………………...…….57 Chapter 4 Coinages of the Seleucid Usurpers …………………………………...……..65 Chapter 5 Variation in Seleucid Portraiture: Politics, War, Usurpation, and Local Autonomy ………………………………………………………………………….……121 Chapter 6 Parthians, Apotheosis and political unrest: the beards of Seleucus II and Demetrius II ……………………………………………………………………….……131 Chapter 7 Antiochus III and Antiochus
  • SELEUKID STUDY DAY VII 'Warfare, Military & Society in the Seleukid

    SELEUKID STUDY DAY VII 'Warfare, Military & Society in the Seleukid

    SELEUKID STUDY DAY VII ‘Warfare, Military & Society in the Seleukid Kingdom’ (Sunday, 28 July to Sunday, 4 August 2019) Abstracts Almagor, Eran, Jerusalem, Israel ([email protected]) Plutarch (Life of Demetrius) and Others on the Battles of Ipsos and Kyrrhestika This paper aims to re-discuss the depiction of the Battles of Ipsos (301) and Kyrrhestika (285) as they are found in Plutarch’s Life of Demetrios (chs. 28–29 and 48–49 respectively), the main or only source for both military engagements. It purports to explore the information provided by Plutarch and to offer a reconstruction of the battle’s stages, in particular with regard to the feasible role (and number) of elephants employed. This conjecture will be made also with relation to proposals concerning Plutarch’s ultimate source as a means to better understand the battles. A comparison will be made with the descriptions of Ipsos by Diodoros (and scattered details found in other authors) and of Kyrrhestika by Polyainos. One of the points to be made is the extent to which Plutarch’s depictions echo each other and serve as a literary closure in his work: the first battle saw the end of Antigonos, the second the political end of Demetrios, his son. As the winner in both battles, Seleukos plays the role of the protagonist’s rival and limit. Berzon, Catherine, Moscow, Russia ([email protected]) The War between Demetrios I and Alexander Balas in the Light of Classical and Cuneiform Evidence The paper is concerned with the chronology and crucial events of the war between King Demetrios I Soter and the usurper Alexander Balas.
  • Thessaly and Macedon at Delphi

    Thessaly and Macedon at Delphi

    ELECTRUM * Vol. 19 (2012): 41–60 doi: 10.4467/20843909EL.12.002.0743 THESSALY AND MACEDON AT DELPHI Emma M.M. Aston Abstract: The Daochos Monument at Delphi has received some scholarly attention from an art- historical and archaeological perspective; this article, however, examines it rather as a refl ection of contemporary Thessalian history and discourse, an aspect which has been almost entirely ne- glected. Through its visual imagery and its inscriptions, the monument adopts and adapts long- standing Thessalian themes of governance and identity, and achieves a delicate balance with Mac- edonian concerns to forge a symbolic rapprochement between powers and cultures in the Greek north. Its dedicator, Daochos, emerges as far more than just the puppet of Philip II of Macedon. This hostile and largely Demosthenic characterisation, which remains infl uential even in modern historiography, is far from adequate in allowing for an understanding of the relationship between Thessalian and Macedonian motivations at this time, or of the importance of Delphi as the pan- Hellenic setting of their interaction. Looking closely at the Daochos Monument allows for a rare glimpse into the Thessalian perspective in all its complexity. Keywords: Daochos, Philip II of Macedon, the Daochos Monument, Delphi, Thessaly. Introduction Reconstructing Thessaly’s early involvement in Delphi and its Amphiktyony draws the scholar towards the shimmering mirage of Archaic Thessalian history. Like all mirages, it is alluring, and represents something which the viewer wishes keenly to fi nd: in this case an ambitious, powerful, energetic Thessaly extending its infl uence outside its own borders and claiming a stake in wider Greek affairs.1 Also in the nature of mirages, when grasped it proves insubstantial.
  • Judea/Israel Under the Greek Empires." Israel and Empire: a Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism

    Judea/Israel Under the Greek Empires." Israel and Empire: a Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism

    "Judea/Israel under the Greek Empires." Israel and Empire: A Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism. Perdue, Leo G., and Warren Carter.Baker, Coleman A., eds. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015. 129–216. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 30 Sep. 2021. <http:// dx.doi.org/10.5040/9780567669797.ch-005>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 30 September 2021, 15:32 UTC. Copyright © Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker 2015. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 5 Judea/Israel under the Greek Empires* In 33130 BCE, by military victory, the Macedonian Alexander ended the Persian Empire. He defeated the Persian king Darius at Gaugamela, advanced to a welcoming Babylon, and progressed to Persepolis where he burned Xerxes palace supposedly in retaliation for Persias invasions of Greece some 150 years previously (Diodorus 17.72.1-6). Thus one empire gave way to another by a different name. So began the Greek empires that dominated Judea/Israel for the next two hundred or so years, the focus of this chapter. Is a postcolonial discussion of these empires possible and what might it highlight? Considerable dif�culties stand in the way. One is the weight of conventional analyses and disciplinary practices which have framed the discourse with emphases on the various roles of the great men, the ruling state, military battles, and Greek settlers, and have paid relatively little regard to the dynamics of imperial power from the perspectives of native inhabitants, the impact on peasants and land, and poverty among non-elites, let alone any reciprocal impact between colonizers and colon- ized.
  • Macedonia, Alexander the Great, and the Hellenistic World Alexander Captured and Founded Alexander’S Empire City-States Along the Mediterranean Sea

    Macedonia, Alexander the Great, and the Hellenistic World Alexander Captured and Founded Alexander’S Empire City-States Along the Mediterranean Sea

    qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui opasdfghjklzxc vbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerMacedonia, Alexander tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasthe Great, and the dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxHellenistic World cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrtyWorld History Workbook Series uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf © Student Handouts ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc Student Handouts (order #3261838) vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw Ancient Macedonia Conquests of Alexander the Great The Macedonians were culturally Alexander’s first actions as king and ethnically related to the Greeks. In of Macedon involved putting down local fact, the Macedonians were looked revolts within Greece, including the upon as the “barbarian cousins” by the destruction of Thebes. Greeks of Athens, Sparta, etc. King Philip II of Macedon expanded his territory north to the Danube River and south into the Greek peninsula (the Peloponnesus). By 338 B.C.E., Philip II had conquered all of the Greek city-states except for Sparta. He was killed while planning to attack Persia in 336 B.C.E. Alexander the Great The young Alexander, son of Philip II, was tutored by the famous After earning decisive control philosopher Aristotle. Although the over the Greek city-states, Alexander son of
  • Tales of Philip II Under the Roman Empire

    Tales of Philip II Under the Roman Empire

    Tales of Philip II under the Roman Empire: Aspects of Monarchy and Leadership in the Anecdotes, Apophthegmata , and Exempla of Philip II Michael Thomas James Welch BA (Hons. Class 1) M.Phil. A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2016 School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry P a g e 1 | 270 Abstract This thesis examines the role anecdotes, apophthegmata , and exempla play in the historiography of the Macedonian king Philip II in the Roman world - from the first century BCE to the fourth century CE. Most of the material examined comes from moral treatises, collections of tales and sayings, and military works by Greek and Latin authors such as Plutarch, Valerius Maximus, Aelian, Polyaenus, Frontinus, and Stobaeus (supplemented with pertinent material from other authors). This approach will show that while many of the tales surely originate from the earlier Greek world and Hellenistic times, the use and manipulation of the majority of them and the presentation of Philip are the product of a world living under Roman political and cultural domination. This thesis is divided into six chapters. Chapter one defines and discusses anecdotal material in the ancient world. Chapter two examines two emblematic ancient authors (Plutarch and Valerius Maximus) as case studies to demonstrate in detail the type of analysis required by all the authors of this study. Following this, the thesis then divides the material of our authors into four main areas of interest, particularly concerning Philip as a king and statesman. Therefore, chapter three examines Philip and justice.
  • "Antiochos I Soter" In: the Encyclopedia of Ancient History

    "Antiochos I Soter" In: the Encyclopedia of Ancient History

    1 Antiochos I Soter ROLF STROOTMAN Antiochos I Soter was the second king of the Seleucid Empire (b. ca. 323 BCE; r. 281–261, as sole king). He was the son of SELEUKOS I NIKATOR and his Iranian wife, Apame, daughter of the Bactrian warlord Spitamenes. The importance of Antiochos’ long reign (about 33 years, including his time as co-ruler) lies in his efforts to consolidate and organize his father’s Figure 1 Ruined head of Antiochos I of Kom- conquests. magene. West Terrace, Nemrud Dagı, Turkey. Already ca. 294/3 Seleukos gave Antiochos Photograph © Robert Harding Picture Library/ the title of basileus, “king,” and made him ruler Alamy. of Babylonia and the Upper Satrapies. To secure the succession even further, Antiochos not been universally accepted yet. A famous married Stratonike, the daughter of DEMETRIOS inscription from ILION in Antiochos’ honor I POLIORKETES and formerly his father’s consort, (OGIS 219) states that his reign began with an event that was presented in literature as an otherwise unknown uprising in northern a moving love story (Brodersen 1985). Oper- Syria (there is no evidence warranting the ating from Babylonia, Antiochos spent the speculation of Tarn (1926) that PTOLEMY II next decade consolidating and organizing PHILADELPHOS was directly responsible for these Seleukos’ acquisitions in the east, while his upheavals). Although Antiochos put down the father consolidated and further expanded the revolt, he arrived in Asia Minor too late to western part of the empire. Antiochos restore full Seleucid authority there. Asia constructed fortified towns to control the Minor and Thrace had been acquired by his major routes and irrigation works in Iran and father only one year earlier.
  • Antiochus Epiphanes

    Antiochus Epiphanes

    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 10-1944 Antiochus Epiphanes. Brougher Petty Maddox University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Maddox, Brougher Petty, "Antiochus Epiphanes." (1944). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2011. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/2011 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. • UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Louisville In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Kaster of Arts Department of History by Brougher Petty Maddox .. \ 1944 -T .4 .4¥ To ,Ida Roe and c. ,Sidney Maddox, my,parents, I, in affectionate appreciation. ABBREVIATIONS App. Syr. Appian, ~oman History Book XI, Ia! Syrian ~. Bactria W. W. Tarn, IQ! Greeks !n Bactria and India. ~ British Museum Catalogue , ) , t CAB Cambridge Ancient HistorI. Diod~ Sic. Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheea \ t Hel. Q1!. W. W. Tarn, Hellenistic Civilisation ~ # I ( H. W. M. Rostovtzeff, Social ~ Economic History 2t the Hellenistic World, 3 Vols. House Sel. E. R. Bevan, House of Seleucus, Vol. II. Bevan, Egypt E. R. Bevan, A History Q! Egypt.
  • Queen Regency in the Seleucid Empire

    Queen Regency in the Seleucid Empire

    Interregnum: Queen Regency in the Seleucid Empire by Stacy Reda A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Arts in Ancient Mediterranean Cultures Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2014 © Stacy Reda 2014 Author’s Declaration I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. This is a true copy of the thesis, including any required final revisions, as accepted by my examiners. I understand that my thesis may be made electronically available to the public. ii Abstract An examination of the ancient sources indicates that there were possibly seven Queens Regent throughout the course of the Seleucid Dynasty: Apama, Laodice I, Berenice Syra, Laodice III, Laodice IV, Cleopatra I Thea, and Cleopatra II Selene. This thesis examines the institution of Queen Regency in the Seleucid Dynasty, the power and duties held by the Queen Regent, and the relationship between the Queen and her son—the royal heir. This thesis concludes that Queen Regency was not a set office and that there were multiple reasons and functions that could define a queen as a regent. iii Acknowledgements I give my utmost thanks and appreciation to the University of Waterloo’s Department of Classical Studies. The support that I have received from all members of the faculty during my studies has made a great impact on my life for which I will always be grateful. Special thanks to my advisor, Dr. Sheila Ager, for mentoring me through this process, and Dr. Maria Liston (Anthropology) for her support and guidance.
  • Understanding the Bones: the Human Skeletal Remains from Tombs I, II and III at Vergina

    Understanding the Bones: the Human Skeletal Remains from Tombs I, II and III at Vergina

    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2014-05-26 Understanding the Bones: The Human Skeletal Remains from Tombs I, II and III at Vergina McLeod, Jolene McLeod, J. (2014). Understanding the Bones: The Human Skeletal Remains from Tombs I, II and III at Vergina (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/28565 http://hdl.handle.net/11023/1562 master thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Understanding the Bones: The Human Skeletal Remains from Tombs I, II and III at Vergina by Jolene McLeod A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF GREEK AND ROMAN STUDIES CALGARY, ALBERTA MAY, 2 2014 © Jolene McLeod 2014 Abstract This thesis presents an examination of the publications about the human remains from Tombs I, II, and III at Vergina. An overview of the controversy surrounding this topic presents a starting point, and explains why the bones have become so contentious. Since most arguments about identity propose either Philip II or his son Arrhidaios, I have examined the historical context of both their murders and burials, and those of their wives Kleopatra and Adea-Eurydike.