DOCSLIB.ORG

The Formation of the Kingdom of Cyrene at the End of the 2Nd C. BC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Formation of the Kingdom of Cyrene at the End of the 2Nd C. BC ELECTRUM * Vol. 8 Kraków 2004 Tomasz Grabowski The Formation of the Kingdom of Cyrene at the End of the 2nd c. BC Cyrene came under the rule of the Ptolemies in the first years of Ptolemy I’s govern­ ment, i.e. at the beginning of the formation of the Ptolemaic empire at the end of the 4th century BC. Next to Cyprus, it was the most valuable Ptolemaic possession outside Egypt. The Mediterranean policy of the initially powerful Ptolemaic empire was be­ coming increasingly passive already at the end of the 3rd century BC. Multiplying inter­ nal difficulties accelerated the process of decline, as the state was gradually losing all its external colonies with the exception of Cyprus and Cyrene. Ultimately, however, the Dynasty lost them as well. The circumstances in which an independent state in Cyrene was formed are not altogether clear. The Ptolemaic empire was first divided in 164 BC. That year the es­ tranged brothers, Ptolemy VI Philometor and Ptolemy VIII Euergetes, formally divided the kingdom. The older brother was to rule Egypt and the younger one Cyrene.1 The following years saw Euergetes’ continuous intrigues aimed at capturing at least Cyprus; his efforts, however, remained unsuccessful. After the death of Ptolemy VI, Cyrene was united with the rest of the Ptolemaic empire as a result of establishing the joint rule of Cleopatra II (Philometor’s widow) and Ptolemy VIII. The period of their joint regency was also filled with intrigues and rivalry sometimes turning into open civil war. When he died in 116 BC, Ptolemy VIII left a peculiar will. In it, he sanctioned the division of his own state and bequeathed the rule of Egypt to a woman - his second wife, Cleopatra III. She was to choose one of her two sons as a joint ruler. The other son was to receive Cyprus, and Ptolemy Apion, Euergetes’ illegitimate son, was to rule Cyrene.2 Cyrene, like Cyprus, was to be an independent kingdom. This is stated clearly 1 Polyb. XXXI 18; Liv. epit. XLV1-XLVII; Pomp. Trog. epit. XXXIV. 2 lust. XXXIX 3, 5. Cyprus is not mentioned in the sources, but Otto/Bengston 1938: 117 proved that the will included a bequest of the island to the son whom the mother would not choose to rule Egypt. 86 Tomasz Grabowski by Justin (XXXIX 5,2): „Frater eius expaelice susceptus, cuipater Cyrenaearum regnum testamento reliquerat, herede populo Romano instituto, decedit However, the situation took a different turn and the will was never executed. Cleopatra III did not manage to deprive the older son, Ptolemy IX Soter II Lathyros, of power or to gain power herself together with her favourite, Alexander. The latter took possession of Cyprus, but not as an autonomous ruler. We may presume that Ptolemy Apion did not come into possession of Cyrene bequeathed by his father, either. This is indicated by Ptolemy IX Soter II and his wife Cleopatra Selene’s letter to the Cyrenians, dated Phamenoth 24th of the 9th year (i.e. April 10, 108 BC), which does not mention Apion or his rule.3 In 108 BC, Ptolemy Apion was not a sovereign ruler of Cyrene; he was not even a governor, or administrator. This is indicated by the fact that in the above-mentioned letter the king directly addresses regional government representatives. It seems improb­ able that a governor should have been overlooked if there had been one. This would have been contrary to the practice of the Ptolemaic administration.4 Also the Cyrenaicans’ pséphisma and inscriptions in honour of kings founded by a court official in Cyrene prove that it was Soter II, not Apion, who ruled Cyrene at the time.5 The existence of an independent kingdom of Cyrene is verified in approximately 100 BC. It was at that time that Rome issued a decree ordering the kings of Egypt, Cyprus, Cyrene and Syria to make an effort to prevent any part of their kingdoms from becoming a hotbed of Cilician pirates. The exact dating of this lex depiratispersequendis is also problematic, but it ranges between 101-100 BC.6 Naturally, it is possible that Ptolemy Apion took possession of Cyrene in 116 BC, after his father’s death, and lost it in the subsequent years, prior to 108 BC.7 There is no evidence to either prove or disprove this thesis; however, it seems rather unlikely. We may therefore conclude that Apion came into power in Cyrene only in 108-100 BC. It is difficult to date the event more exactly, since the Dynasty’s history was very compli­ 3 SEG IX, 5 and Oliverio 1932: 259, no 538: Paai/.EU^ nroZ.Epaio<; Kat PaaiXiaaa KXEOttETpa f] a6fi3.<pE. Also see related prostagma-. PaaiXeug Kat PaaD.iaarp; npoara^evratv. Concerning the date see Otto/Bengston 1938: 122-123, 174-175; Roussel 1939: 13; Will 1982:440-442. 4 Cf. Otto/Bengston 1938: 122-123. Cf. also comments on the unlikelihood of Apion acting as a gover­ nor of Cyrene when Euergetes was alive. Cf. also Stieglitz 1997: 301. 5 SEG IX, 5; 62; Oliverio 1932: 71, no 9; Fraser 1956-1958: 113-114, no 7. Psephisma-. Paatz.Ei [njroXcpaicDi Kai paciXiaaai KXcunerpat rat abstapai Ocofg ZojreTtcn Kai rwi uiwi [ajvrwv IIto- 3.epa(coi. Stolos’ inscriptions: 0eov Xwrepa rov ¿k PaaiXxcog nroXEpaiou row Seutepou EvEpyErov oraz Oeov ZatTEpa rov ey Paai3.Ea><; ITtoXEpaiou Osou Emepyetou. Otto/Bengston 1938; 123, 162-163, 174-175 proved that the first two inscriptions must originate from a period prior to 107 BC, most probably 109-108 BC. The third inscription was dated similarly, cf. Fraser 1956-1958: 114. 6 SEG III 378, B 9. An amended version of this inscription from Delphi and a complementary (up to a point) text from Cnidos were published by Hassall/Crawford/Reynolds 1974: 195-220. The most probable date according to the authors is the end of 101 or the beginning of 100 BC. Pohl 1993: 221 convincingly argues for 100 BC. Cf. also Giovannini/Grzybek 1978: 33-47 (early 99 BC); Sumner 1978: 225 (late 100 or early 99 BC). 7 As is believed by Luzzatto 1941: 288, but this version is unlikely. The Formation of the Kingdom of Cyrene at the End of the 2nd c. BC 87 cated at that time. In any event, the chaos that prevailed in Egypt in this period was advantageous for Apion’s claim to his due inheritance. After the death of Euergetes, the feuds for power broke out again. Cleopatra II was victorious over her daughter Cleopatra III. The mother forced the daughter to abandon her plan of sharing the regency with her favourite son, Alexander. However, Cleopatra II soon disappeared from the historical arena. Alexandria was left with an estranged pair: Cleopatra III and her older son, Ptolemy IX Soter II. The mother was the dominant figure, still attempting to establish joint rule with Alexander. The situation in Alexandria deteriorated. In 110 BC Ptolemy IX had to leave the capital, and his brother, Ptolemy Alexander, took the throne. In February 109 at the latest the situation went back to what it had been before; the only difference was that Alexander became an independent king of Cyprus. Ptolemy IX had to escape from Al­ exandria again in 108 BC, when he took shelter in Cyrene, but this time he returned quickly. The letter mentioned above, dated April 10, 108 BC, was written in this period. The third time Cleopatra finally had her own way. Alexander took the Egyptian throne and Ptolemy IX escaped to Cyprus, which had been abandoned by his brother, and managed to keep it despite transitory failures. He seems never to have given up his rights to Egypt. In 103 BC, taking advantage of Cleopatra’s involvement in the dynastic feuds of the Seleucids, he attempted to invade Egypt.8 As we can see, in the years 107-106 BC Cleopatra was triumphant. She expelled Soter from Egypt and even took Cyprus away from him for some time. She had no reason to make a concession to Apion, especially since her behaviour indicated that she was determined to preserve the unity of the kingdom. It is also unlikely that she should have conceded the rule of Cyrene during the feud with Ptolemy IX in the subsequent years. Although she could not stop the return of the hated son to Cyprus, she quickly foiled his attempt to invade Egypt. Her power in Egypt was unthreatened. It is not cer­ tain whether it was her or Ptolemy IX who had control of Cyrene in this period.9 Apion did not necessarily owe Cyrene to the reconciliation with the kings of Egypt (Cleopatra or Alexander).10 More probably, it may have been a result of Roman intervention; Rome may have finally demanded that Euergetes’ last will should be executed.11 It is therefore 8 lust. XXXIX 4; Josephus Flavius, Ant. lud. 13, 334-335. Written accounts are very scant. The fact that Ptolemy IX lost the throne both in 110 and 108 BC is indicated by inscriptions and papyruses. One of these events is referred to in Josephus’s account (Ant. Jud. 13, 278): So they returned to Samaria, and shut them again within the wall, till they were forced to sendfor the same Antiochus a second time to help them, who procured about six thousand men from Ptolemy Lathyrus, which were sent them without his mother’s consent, who had then in a manner turned him out of his government. On the situation in Egypt in these years cf. Otto/Bengston 1938: 161-171; van’t Dack et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cleopatra II and III: the Queens of Ptolemy VI and VIII As Guarantors of Kingship and Rivals for Power
    Originalveröffentlichung in: Andrea Jördens, Joachim Friedrich Quack (Hg.), Ägypten zwischen innerem Zwist und äußerem Druck. Die Zeit Ptolemaios’ VI. bis VIII. Internationales Symposion Heidelberg 16.-19.9.2007 (Philippika 45), Wiesbaden 2011, S. 58–76 Cleopatra II and III: The queens of Ptolemy VI and VIII as guarantors of kingship and rivals for power Martina Minas-Nerpel Introduction The second half of the Ptolemaic period was marked by power struggles not only among the male rulers of the dynasty, but also among its female members. Starting with Arsinoe II, the Ptolemaic queens had always been powerful and strong-willed and had been a decisive factor in domestic policy. From the death of Ptolemy V Epiphanes onwards, the queens controlled the political developments in Egypt to a still greater extent. Cleopatra II and especially Cleopatra III became all-dominant, in politics and in the ruler-cult, and they were often depicted in Egyptian temple- reliefs—more often than any of her dynastic predecessors and successors. Mother and/or daughter reigned with Ptolemy VI Philometor to Ptolemy X Alexander I, from 175 to 101 BC, that is, for a quarter of the entire Ptolemaic period. Egyptian queenship was complementary to kingship, both in dynastic and Ptolemaic Egypt: No queen could exist without a king, but at the same time the queen was a necessary component of kingship. According to Lana Troy, the pattern of Egyptian queenship “reflects the interaction of male and female as dualistic elements of the creative dynamics ”.1 The king and the queen functioned as the basic duality through which regeneration of the creative power of the kingship was accomplished.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Ancient Egypt “Passionate, Erudite, Living Legend Lecturers
    “Pure intellectual stimulation that can be popped into Topic Subtopic the [audio or video player] anytime.” History Ancient History —Harvard Magazine The History of Ancient Egypt “Passionate, erudite, living legend lecturers. Academia’s best lecturers are being captured on tape.” —The Los Angeles Times The History “A serious force in American education.” —The Wall Street Journal of Ancient Egypt Course Guidebook Professor Bob Brier Long Island University Professor Bob Brier is an Egyptologist and Professor of Philosophy at the C. W. Post Campus of Long Island University. He is renowned for his insights into ancient Egypt. He hosts The Learning Channel’s popular Great Egyptians series, and his research was the subject of the National Geographic television special Mr. Mummy. A dynamic instructor, Professor Brier has received Long Island University’s David Newton Award for Teaching Excellence. THE GREAT COURSES® Corporate Headquarters 4840 Westfields Boulevard, Suite 500 Chantilly, VA 20151-2299 Guidebook USA Phone: 1-800-832-2412 www.thegreatcourses.com Cover Image: © Hemera/Thinkstock. Course No. 350 © 1999 The Teaching Company. PB350A PUBLISHED BY: THE GREAT COURSES Corporate Headquarters 4840 Westfi elds Boulevard, Suite 500 Chantilly, Virginia 20151-2299 Phone: 1-800-TEACH-12 Fax: 703-378-3819 www.thegreatcourses.com Copyright © The Teaching Company, 1999 Printed in the United States of America This book is in copyright. All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise), without the prior written permission of The Teaching Company.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ptolemies: an Unloved and Unknown Dynasty. Contributions to a Different Perspective and Approach
    THE PTOLEMIES: AN UNLOVED AND UNKNOWN DYNASTY. CONTRIBUTIONS TO A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AND APPROACH JOSÉ DAS CANDEIAS SALES Universidade Aberta. Centro de História (University of Lisbon). Abstract: The fifteen Ptolemies that sat on the throne of Egypt between 305 B.C. (the date of assumption of basileia by Ptolemy I) and 30 B.C. (death of Cleopatra VII) are in most cases little known and, even in its most recognised bibliography, their work has been somewhat overlooked, unappreciated. Although boisterous and sometimes unloved, with the tumultuous and dissolute lives, their unbridled and unrepressed ambitions, the intrigues, the betrayals, the fratricides and the crimes that the members of this dynasty encouraged and practiced, the Ptolemies changed the Egyptian life in some aspects and were responsible for the last Pharaonic monuments which were left us, some of them still considered true masterpieces of Egyptian greatness. The Ptolemaic Period was indeed a paradoxical moment in the History of ancient Egypt, as it was with a genetically foreign dynasty (traditions, language, religion and culture) that the country, with its capital in Alexandria, met a considerable economic prosperity, a significant political and military power and an intense intellectual activity, and finally became part of the world and Mediterranean culture. The fifteen Ptolemies that succeeded to the throne of Egypt between 305 B.C. (date of assumption of basileia by Ptolemy I) and 30 B.C. (death of Cleopatra VII), after Alexander’s death and the division of his empire, are, in most cases, very poorly understood by the public and even in the literature on the topic.
    [Show full text]
  • Who's Who in Ancient Egypt
    Who’s Who IN ANCIENT EGYPT Available from Routledge worldwide: Who’s Who in Ancient Egypt Michael Rice Who’s Who in the Ancient Near East Gwendolyn Leick Who’s Who in Classical Mythology Michael Grant and John Hazel Who’s Who in World Politics Alan Palmer Who’s Who in Dickens Donald Hawes Who’s Who in Jewish History Joan Comay, new edition revised by Lavinia Cohn-Sherbok Who’s Who in Military History John Keegan and Andrew Wheatcroft Who’s Who in Nazi Germany Robert S.Wistrich Who’s Who in the New Testament Ronald Brownrigg Who’s Who in Non-Classical Mythology Egerton Sykes, new edition revised by Alan Kendall Who’s Who in the Old Testament Joan Comay Who’s Who in Russia since 1900 Martin McCauley Who’s Who in Shakespeare Peter Quennell and Hamish Johnson Who’s Who in World War Two Edited by John Keegan Who’s Who IN ANCIENT EGYPT Michael Rice 0 London and New York First published 1999 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2004. © 1999 Michael Rice The right of Michael Rice to be identified as the Author of this Work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
    [Show full text]
  • PERSPECTIVES on PTOLEMAIC THEBES Oi.Uchicago.Edu Ii
    oi.uchicago.edu i PERSPECTIVES ON PTOLEMAIC THEBES oi.uchicago.edu ii Pre-conference warm-up at Lucky Strike in Chicago. Standing, left to right: Joseph Manning, Ian Moyer, Carolin Arlt, Sabine Albersmeier, Janet Johnson, Richard Jasnow Kneeling: Peter Dorman, Betsy Bryan oi.uchicago.edu iii O CCASIONAL PROCEEdINgS Of THE THEBAN WORkSHOP PERSPECTIVES ON PTOLEMAIC THEBES edited by Pete R F. DoRMAn and BetSy M. BRyAn Papers from the theban Workshop 2006 StuDIeS In AnCIent oRIentAL CIvILIzAtIon • nuMBeR 65 the oRIentAL InStItute oF the unIveRSIty oF ChICAgo ChICAgo • ILLInois oi.uchicago.edu iv Library of Congress Control Number: 2001012345 ISBN-10: 1-885923-85-6 ISBN-13: 978-1-885923-85-1 ISSN: 0081-7554 The Oriental Institute, Chicago © 2011 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. Published 2011. Printed in the United States of America. studIeS IN ANCIeNT orIeNTAL CIvILIzATIoN • NUmBer 65 The orIeNTAL INSTITUTe of The UNIverSITy of ChICAgo Chicago • Illinois Series Editors Leslie Schramer and Thomas g. Urban Series Editors’ Acknowledgments rebecca Cain, françois gaudard, foy Scalf, and Natalie Whiting assisted in the production of this volume. Cover and Title Page Illustration Part of a cosmogonical inscription of Ptolemy vIII euergetes II at Medinet habu (Mh.B 155). Photo by J. Brett McClain Printed by McNaughton & Gunn, Saline, Michigan The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Services — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library materials, ANSI z39.48-1984.
    [Show full text]
  • The Circulation of Ptolemaic Silver in Seleucid Coele Syria and Phoenicia from Antiochus Iii to the Maccabean Revolt: Monetary Policies and Political Consequences
    ELECTRUM * Vol. 26 (2019): 9–23 doi: 10.4467/20800909EL.19.001.11204 www.ejournals.eu/electrum THE CIRCULatION OF PtoLEMAIC SILVER IN SELEUCID COELE SYRIA AND PHOENICIA FROM ANTIOCHUS III to THE MACCABEAN REVOLT: MonetaRY POLICIES AND POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES Catharine Lorber Abstract: This paper examines the circulation of Ptolemaic silver in the closed monetary zone of Seleucid Coele Syria and Phoenicia. No new silver coinage entered the zone under Antiochus III and Seleucus IV, though hoards were deposited in the Transjordan and eastern Judah in the early years of Antiochus IV. Trade between Phoenicia and Egypt is excluded as an explanatory factor, but the patterns are consistent with Josephus’ account of the dowry of Cleopatra I and Tobiad tax farming. In the 160s BCE fresh Ptolemaic silver began to enter the closed monetary zone, with the earliest finds in Judah, Samaria, and “southern Palestine.” This new influx, like the didrachms “of an uncertain era,” may represent a subsidy from Ptolemy VI to the Maccabees and other dissidents from Seleucid rule. Keywords: closed monetary zone, Ptolemaic silver coinage, dowry, Tobiad, tax farming, Judah, Antiochus III, Antiochus IV, Ptolemy V, Ptolemy VI. When Antiochus III seized Phoenicia and Palestine from Ptolemy V, the region com- prised a closed monetary zone in which Ptolemaic coinage was the sole legal tender. Somewhat surprisingly, Antiochus III maintained the closed monetary zone for precious metal coinage, which in practice meant silver coinage. This curious situation was de- fined by Georges Le Rider in 1995 through the study of coin hoards.1 The hoards reveal that for nearly half a century the only silver coinage circulating in Seleucid Coele Syria and Phoenicia was Ptolemaic.
    [Show full text]
  • Handout: Daniel Lesson 7 Daniel 11:2-45 Covers the Period from the Persian Age to Seleucid Ruler Antiochus IV in Three Parts: 1
    Handout: Daniel Lesson 7 Daniel 11:2-45 covers the period from the Persian Age to Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV in three parts: 1. The Persian kings from Cambyses to Xerxes I: 529-465 BC (11:2) 2. Alexander the Great and the division of his empire: 336-323 BC (11:3-4). 3. Battles of the Greek Seleucids, the kings of the north and the Greek Ptolemies, the kings of the south (11:5-45). Part three concerning the history of the Greek Seleucids and Greek Ptolemies divides into six sections (11:5-45): 1. The reigns Ptolemy I Soter, 323-285 BC, and Seleucus I Nicator 312/11-280 BC (11:5) 2. The intrigues of Ptolemy II Philadelphus 285-246 BC and Antiochus II Theos 261-246 BC (11:6). 3. The revenge of Ptolemy III Evergetes 246-221 for the deaths of his sister Berenice and her baby by making war against the kingdom of Seleucus II Collinicus 246-226 BC (11:7-9). 4. The reign of Antiochus IV the Great 223-187 BC (11:10-19). 5. The reign of Seleucus IV Philopator 187-175 BC (11:20). 6. The cruel reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes 175-164 BC, his persecution of the Jews, and his destruction (11:21-45). 2 Three more kings are going to rise in Persia; a fourth will come and be richer than all the others, and when, thanks to his wealth, he has grown powerful, he will make war on all the kingdoms of Greece. The four kings of Persia who came after Cyrus: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 473 Appendix 3A, VI, Attachment 6 DESCENDANCIES PTOLEMAIC
    Appendix 3A, VI, Attachment 6 DESCENDANCIES PTOLEMAIC MONARCHS/RELATIVES Ptolemy II Philadelphus to Ptolemy VIII Physcon Refer to prefaces of Attachments 4 and 5 for source information, manners of identification, etc. (1) Resumed from Appendix 3A, VI, Attachment 4, B(6). Ptolemy II Philadelphus / + ? / + ? / + Arsinoe [#3] (3A,VI,Att.4,C(1)/ / + Arsinoe [#2] (3A,VI,Att.4,C(1) / / / / / -- Berenice [II] Ptolemy III a Son a Son Berenice IV + Antiochus II Euergetes (3A,VI,Att. 5(1) / + Berenice IV / + Berenice III (3A,VI,Att.4,B(6) / + ? / + ? / or + Agathocleia / Queen of Cyrene a Son-- a Daughter-- / ? “Brother,” “Sister,” Ptolemy IV Philopater undesignated, undesignated, Continued in part (2) -----------of Ptolemy IV------------ Ptolemy II ultimately succeeded Ptolemy I--who “died in the 84th year of his age, after a reign of 39 years, about 284 years before Christ”--when Ptolemy Ceraunus of Macedon (son of Ptolemy I by Eurydice #3), was unable to mount the Egyptian throne. L 511; 3A, VI, Attachment 4, C(6) and narrative E. “Laodike [Laodice #2], wife of Antiochos II [Attachment 5, (1)] was divorced by him in 252 in order to marry Berenike [Berenice II], daughter of Ptolemais II, a marriage that appears to have been one of the conditions for ending the Second Syrian War.” Burstein, p. 32, fn. 2. (After a revolt by Ptolemy II’s [half-] “brother [by the same mother] Magas, king of Cyrene, which had been kindled by Antiochus [II] the Syrian king,” there was “re-established peace for some time in the family of Philadelphus. Antiochus [II]...married Berenice [II] the daughter of Ptolemy [II].
    [Show full text]
  • The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt
    Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum herausgegeben von Martin Hengel und Peter Schäfer 7 The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt The Struggle for Equal Rights by Aryeh Kasher J. C. B. Möhr (Paul Siebeck) Tübingen Revised and translated from the Hebrew original: rponm fl'taDij'jnn DnSQ HliT DDTlinsT 'jp Dpanaa (= Publications of the Diaspora Research Institute and the Haim Rosenberg School of Jewish Studies, edited by Shlomo Simonsohn, Book 23). Tel Aviv University 1978. CIP-Kurztitelaufnahme der Deutschen Bibliothek Kasher, Aryeh: The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt: the struggle for equal rights / Aryeh Kasher. - Tübingen: Mohr, 1985. (Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum; 7) ISBN 3-16-144829-4 NE: GT First Hebrew edition 1978 Revised English edition 1985 © J. C. B. Möhr (Paul Siebeck) Tübingen 1985. Alle Rechte vorbehalten. / All rights reserved. Printed in Germany. Säurefreies Papier von Scheufeien, Lenningen. Typeset: Sam Boyd Enterprise, Singapore. Offsetdruck: Guide-Druck GmbH, Tübingen. Einband: Heinr. Koch, Tübingen. In memory of my parents Maniya and Joseph Kasher Preface The Jewish Diaspora has been part and parcel of Jewish history since its earliest days. The desire of the Jews to maintain their na- tional and religious identity, when scattered among the nations, finds its actual expression in self organization, which has served to a ram- part against external influence. The dispersion of the people in modern times has become one of its unique characteristics. Things were different in classical period, and especially in the Hellenistic period, following the conquests of Alexander the Great, when disper- sion and segregational organization were by no means an exceptional phenomenon, as revealed by a close examination of the history of other nations.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on 2010 Season
    The Brooklyn Museum’s 2010 Season of Fieldwork at the Precinct of the Goddess Mut at South Karnak by Richard Fazzini, Brooklyn Museum Abstract The main emphasis of the Expedition’s fieldwork in the 2010 Season was on the area of Chapel D and the Taharqa Gateway. We further excavated the walls built in and around both stone structures and between the Taharqa Gate and the baked brick building (probably a bath) to the south. The most significant result was confirmation of what we had long believed was true of the history of the Mut Precinct: it was not until the reign of Taharqa that the precinct was expanded to include the area between the First Pylon of the Mut Temple and the later north enclosure wall. In fact, the wall running north from the Taharqa Gate ran up to (and possibly under) the enclosure wall, while its southern wall ran to join the earlier Tuthmoside precinct wall running to the west end of the Mut Temple’s First Pylon. The main restoration/conservation project was reconstruction and re-erection of the small healing magic chapel of Horwedja before the east wing of the Mut Temple’s First Pylon. The Brooklyn Museum’s archaeological expedition to the Precinct of Mut is conducted under the auspices of the American Research Center in Egypt and with the permission of the Supreme Council of Antiquities. 1 Fig. 1 is a plan of the northern part of the site showing the areas where the expedition worked in 2010; that work is described below. North of the Mut Temple’s 1 st Pylon Work continued on the Ptolemaic and Roman Period buildings between the Mut Temple’s First Pylon and Temple A’s porch 2 where in 2009 we had begun to uncover 1 The Expedition acknowledges with gratitude the cooperation and assistance of officials of the Supreme Council of Antiquities, in particular Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Karnak's Quaysides
    Karnak’s Quaysides Angus Graham, Luc Gabolde, Mansour Boraik To cite this version: Angus Graham, Luc Gabolde, Mansour Boraik. Karnak’s Quaysides: Evolution of the Embankments from the XVIIIth Dynasty to the Graeco-Roman Period. Harco Willems (Université catholique de Louvain); Jan-Michael Dahms (Université de Heidelberg). The Nile: Natural and Cultural Landscape in Egypt, 36, Transcript Verlag, pp.97-144, 2016, Mainz Historical Cultural Sciences, 9783837636154. 10.14361/9783839436158-004. hal-01894903 HAL Id: hal-01894903 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01894903 Submitted on 13 Oct 2018 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives| 4.0 International License Karnak’s Quaysides Evolution of the Embankments from the Eighteenth Dynasty to the Graeco-Roman Period MANSOUR BORAIK, LUC GABOLDE, ANGUS GRAHAM 1. Introduction The results presented by Luc Gabolde and Angus Graham at the symposium held at Mainz in March 20131 have in part already been published or are in print.2 The authors proposed to the editors – who were very kind to accept it – a re-orientation of their contribution to the proceedings focused on the recent results gained through archaeology, history, geoarchaeology and geophysical survey on the evolution of the Nile embankments/quaysides at Karnak from the Eighteenth Dynasty onwards.
    [Show full text]
  • Ptolemaic Pharaohs of Egypt Ptolemy Ii
    THE MARION COUNTY MANNA PROJECT offers Commentary on the PTOLEMAIC PHARAOHS OF EGYPT PTOLEMY II Listed on page 2 are the Pharaohs of the Ptolemaic Dynasty (regnal dates are approximate). Subse- quent to the death of Alexander the Great (1) in 323 BC, they ruled Egypt (2) from 305 BC until 30 BC, when they were conquered by the Roman Republic (3) just prior to the founding of the Roman Empire in 27 BC. The Septuagint (LXX) (4), the Greek translation of the Old Testament (5), was written by seventy Jewish Translators/Interpreters under royal compulsion during Ptolemy II's reign. That is con- firmed by historian Flavius Josephus (6), who writes that Ptolemy II, desirous to collect every book in the habitable Earth, applied Demetrius Phalereus (7) to the task of organizing an effort with the Jewish High Priests (8) to translate the Jewish books of the Law for his library. Josephus thus places the origins of the Septuagint in the 3rd century BC, when Demetrius and Ptolemy II lived. Accord- ing to Jewish legend, the seventy wrote their translations independently from memory, and the re- sultant works were identical at every letter. (b) + + + + + + + + + If you're seeking additional info about Christianity on a more personal level, consider visiting a Christian Church here in Marion County (9). Introduce yourself to members and ask to speak with someone to learn more about Jesus. Surrendering your life to Christ (10) (c) is the most rewarding, everlasting decision you'll ever make, and it's comforting to have someone guide you as you begin your new life as a child of the Most High! May God shower you with great favor in this endeavor! + + + + + + + + + Footnotes, Page Credits and External Resources appear on page 3.
    [Show full text]