THE MARRIAGE OF PTOLEMY I AND BERENICE I* Abstract: This article examines the uncertainty about the date of Ptolemy I’s marriage to Berenice I. While modern estimates range from 317 to 285, I suggest that a date between 320 and 315 is more probable. More important than establishing the date of this marriage, however, is revealing the underlying scholarly assumptions that have often been of dubious nature. Particularly obstructive has been the belief in Ptolemy’s serial monogamy — especially in light of explicit evidence that he was polygamous. Even historians who acknowledge Ptolemy’s polygamy appear entrenched in the side-effects of this fal- lacious notion when they persist that Berenice remained Ptolemy’s mistress until the birth of the future Ptolemy II. This note may then serve as a general warning about the intricacies of the marital behav- ior of the (early-) Hellenistic dynasties. When did Ptolemy I marry Berenice I? Scholars have tried endlessly to answer this question. While it remains unclear at what date Berenice became Ptolemy’s wife, as we shall see, estimates range from 317 to 285 BCE. Earlier scholars particularly seem unsure what would actually con- stitute marriage in the case of Macedonian or Hellenistic royalty. For instance, Bengtson can state in one passage that Ptolemy married Beren- ice in 317 BCE1, and a few pages later claim she had to wait until about 290 BCE before she became his “legitimate wife”2. This confusing termi- nology implies there was such an impossible thing as an “illegitimate wife”. It may prove helpful to reveal why there is such uncertainty about the status of Berenice. My object, then, is to examine the underlying assumptions behind the wide range of estimates, and to suggest that an earlier date, between 320 and 315 BCE, is more probable than a later one. * The present note is part of a preliminary study of Ptolemaic marital relations. I would like to express my gratitude to Chris Bennett (Visiting Scholar, UCSD) for our stimulating personal correspondence on the matter. In the following, references to Ben- nett’s online articles on http://www.tyndalehouse.com/Egypt/ptolemies/ptolemies.htm will be cited s.v. the individual entries. Thanks are also due to the pertinent comments of this journal’s anonymous reviewers. 1 Bengtson (1975) 24: “Ptolemaios hatte im Jahre 317 Berenike, die Tochter des Lagos und der Antigone, einer Halbschwester des 1. Ptolemäers, geheiratet.” Berenice, it should be noted, was not the daughter of Lagus, but of Magas; for which, i.a., see: Büchler (1875) 59; Beloch (1912-1927) IV.2 601-602; Macurdy (1932) 104; Ogden (1999) 70. 2 Bengtson (1975) 33: “Doch hatte Berenice noch eine lange Wartezeit vor sich, bis sie endlich von Ptolemaios zu seiner legitimen Gemahlin erhoben worden ist (wahr- scheinlich erst gegen 290 v.Chr.).” Ancient Society 41, 83-92. doi: 10.2143/AS.41.0.2129565 © 2011 by Ancient Society. All rights reserved. 994571_AncientSociety_41_04.indd4571_AncientSociety_41_04.indd 8833 221/10/111/10/11 111:081:08 84 B. VAN OPPEN DE RUITER We should bear in mind that marriage required neither priests nor clerks to be officiated3. Women were commonly offered into marriage by their father or closest male relative; but lacking such evidence, we should assume a woman became a king’s wife when it pleased him and none of her relatives voiced any objections. What complicates the issue is that Macedonian kings and noblemen were frequently polygamous4. In the case of Ptolemy I that definitely applies. Plutarch recounts that when Pyrrhus visited the king in Alexandria (298 BCE), Berenice was held in the greatest esteem among Ptolemy’s wives (gunaik¬n)5. The plural here clearly indicates that there were more than two wives at the king’s court. Nevertheless, historians have often attempted to differenti- ate between the principal wives, concubines and courtesans of Macedo- nian and Hellenistic kings. Plutarch unequivocally states in another passage that Ptolemy, like Demetrius, Lysimachus, and their Macedonian predecessors, was polyg- amous6. That is to say, he held several wives concurrently, rather than serially. Before the death of Alexander the Great, Ptolemy had taken both Thaïs and Artacama in marriage7. We should not assume, because 3 Lacey (1968) 106-107, 110-112; Vatin (1970); Pomeroy (1975) 62-65, (1984) 83-123; Just (1989) 40-75; Patterson (1991) 48-61; Blundell (1995) 66-71, 119-124, 198-200; Ogden (1999) xvii-xviii. Legal issues involving marriage in ancient Athens doubtless did not apply to royal marriages. 4 Carney (1992) 169-189; Ogden (1999) esp. ix-xix, 68-73. 5 Plut., Pyrrh. 4.4: t®n dè Bereníkjn ör¬n mégiston dunaménjn kaì prwteúou- san âret±Ç kaì ƒronßsei t¬n Ptolemaíou gunaik¬n (“seeing that Berenice had the greatest influence and was foremost in virtue and insight among the wives of Ptolemy”); cf. S Theoc. 17.34: aÀtj ên ta⁄v sɃrosi gunaizìn eΔdjlov ¥n (“she was manifest among the modest [scil., chaste] wives”). While guna⁄kev could here be taken to mean “(royal) women” (including concubines and/or courtesans), “wives” seems the more natural reading, and is understood as such by scholars; e.g., see: Beloch (1912-1927) IV.2 180-181 (accepting that Berenice had become Ptolemy’s wife [Gemahlin] after 309, but became queen between 298 and 294); Macurdy (1932) 105; Seibert (1967) 72; Pomeroy (1984) 13; Ogden (1999) 68, (2008) 356. 6 Plut., Comp. Demetr. Ant. 4.1: Djmßtriov mén, oû kekwluménon, âllˆ âpò Filíppou kaì ˆAlezándrou gegonòv ên ∂qei to⁄v Makedónwn basileÕsin, êgámei gámouv pleíonav, ¿sper Lusímaxov kaì Ptolema⁄ov, ∂sxe dè dià tim±v ºsav ∂gjmen (“Demetrius did not do what was prohibited, but what had become customary for the kings of Macedon from Philip and Alexander, for he made many marriages, just as Lysimachus and Ptolemy, and held all the women he married in honor”). 7 Ptolemy’s son, Lagus, born in wedlock with the Athenian courtesan Thaïs, was old enough to win a chariot race at the Arcadian Lycaea in 308/7; Diod. 17.72; Curt. 5.7.3- 11; Plut., Alex. 38; Athen. 13.576D-E (™ QaÚv … Ptolemaíwç êgamßqj, “Thaïs… was married to Ptolemy”); Just., Epit. 1.2.7, 15.2; Syll.3 no. 314(B) = IG V.2 550; RE s.v. ‘Thais’, 2nd ser. V.1 1185; Beloch (1912-1927) IV.2 181-182; Seibert (1967) 77-78; 994571_AncientSociety_41_04.indd4571_AncientSociety_41_04.indd 8844 221/10/111/10/11 111:081:08 THE MARRIAGE OF PTOLEMY I AND BERENICE I 85 the sources are silent about their further careers, that Ptolemy repudiated either one of them. It would seem rather from Plutarch that they lived out their lives in Egypt8. Around the time of the Settlement at Tripara- disus (321 BCE) Antipater gave his daughter Eurydice in marriage to Ptolemy9. Pausanias contends that Ptolemy later fell in love with Beren- ice and had children with her, while still living in wedlock with Eury- dice10. Like Cassander and Lysimachus, Ptolemy further vied for the hand of Cleopatra, the sister of Alexander the Great, at the very time Berenice was about to give birth to her son Ptolemy11. In addition to his wives, he may also have held Lamia as a courtesan, whom Demetrius captured from Ptolemy after the Battle of Salamis (306 BCE)12. Antipater had sent Berenice to Egypt with her cousin Eurydice, as many historians assert, as her attendant13. With her first husband, an oth- erwise unknown Philip, she had three children14. Her eldest child, Magas (b. ca. 325/4 BCE?), named after her father, was appointed as Ptolemaic Pomeroy (1975) 141, (1984) 13; Ellis (1994) 4, 8-9, 15, 47, 84; Collins (1997) 441, 444; Ogden (1999) 68-69, 231-233, 240-243; Huß (2001) 305 n. 4; Bennett s.v. ‘Thais’. Ptol- emy received Artacama, the daughter of Artabazus, at the wedding ceremony in Susa in 324; Plut., Alex. 70, Eum. 1.7; Arr., Anab. 7.4.4-8; Athen. 13.538A-539A; RE s.v. ‘Artakama’, I.1 1303; Beloch (1912-1927) IV.2 178; Seibert (1967) 72; Bengtson (1975) 14; Ellis (1994) 15, 27, 75; Whitehorne (1994) 114; Brosius (1996) 78; Ogden (1999) 69; Huß (2001) 92; Bennett s.v. ‘Artakama’. 8 Cf. Bouché-Leclercq (1903-1907) I 7 n. 1, 26; Beloch (1912-1927) IV.2 178; Bevan (1927) 51; Macurdy (1932) 102; Seibert (1967) 72; Bengtson (1975) 15; Ellis (1994) 15; Collins (1997) 444; Ogden (1999) 69; Hölbl (2001) 14. 9 Diod. 18.8.7; Plut., Demetr. 32, 46; App., Syr. 62; Paus. 1.6.8; RE s.v. ‘Eurydice’, no. 16, III.1 1326; Beloch (1912-1927) IV.2 178-179; Seibert (1967) 16-17; Will (1979- 1982) I 34; Ellis (1994) 41, 53, 59, 79; Whitehorne (1994) 114; Hölbl (2001), 24; Ben- nett s.v. ‘Eurydice’. 10 Paus. 1.6.8 (Ωv EûrudíkjÇ … sunoik¬n ∫ntwn … Bereníkjv êv ∂rwta ¥lqen … pa⁄dav êz aût±v êpoißsato). 11 Diod. 20.37.3-6; RE s.v. ‘Kleopatra’, no. 13, XI.1 737; Bouché-Leclercq (1903- 1907) I 66; Beloch (1912-1927) IV.1 144; Macurdy (1932) 46-47; Seibert (1967) 23-24; Ellis (1994) 45; Ogden (1999) 73; Meeus (2009) esp. 81-84 (I owe this reference to one of the anonymous reviewers); Bennett s.v. ‘Ptolemy I’, n. 37. 12 Plut., Demetr. 16; RE s.v. ‘Lamia’, no. 5, XII.1 546-547; Beloch (1912-1927) IV.1 421; Ogden (1999) 73, 177, 221, 241-242; (2008) 355; Bennett s.v. ‘Lamia’. 13 For Berenice, see: S Theoc. 17.34, 61; Plut., Pyrrh. 4; Paus. 1.6.8, 1.7.1; OGIS no.