The Ptolemies were rulers of ancient Egypt that began with Ptolemy I, who was a field marshal under Alexander the Great. Before the Greeks, Egypt had been under the control of the Persians, however this changed in 332 BC when Alexander and his men crossed into Egypt, Alexander was crowned Pharaoh and he founded Alexandria (Fox 2004: 194-198.). After his death in 323 BC, Ptolemy became the satrap for Egypt after the empire Alexander had created began to fragment. Ptolemy had to fight different rivals during the Wars of the Successors, for example Perdiccas in 321 BC, but in the end he was able to control Egypt (Ellis 2005: 35-36.). The hereditary Ptolemy line would span just under 300 years in Egypt, however it ultimately ended in 31 BC with the death of Cleopatra VII and the beginning of Roman control. Portraying themselves as pious worshippers of the Egyptian gods would have been important for the Ptolemies as it was not just key to have the support of the Greeks living in Egypt, but the local population as well. It also could have helped them retain power, as the role of the Pharaoh was a religious one, so Egyptian religion would have been hard to escape as ruler of the country. In this essay I will argue that the Ptolemies would have been able to show themselves as pious through continuing the role of the Pharaoh and the duties that came with it, through financial donations and protection of temple, through the temples they built, through contrasting the Persians impiety with their piety and through visual images.
It could be argued that the Ptolemies were able to depict themselves as pious worshippers of the Egyptian gods because they continued the role of the Pharaoh. The Pharaoh was seen in Egyptian religion as a connection between the gods and the people; if the Pharaoh worshipped the gods, they would bring peace and prosperity to Egypt (Morenz 1973: 50.). There are many instances of the Ptolemies carrying out this role, which began with Alexander being crowned as Pharaoh when he arrived in Egypt in 332 BC. An oracle gave Alexander legitimacy for taking on this role by saying he was a descendant of an Egyptian god, so he was recognised as an heir of the native divinities (Holbl 2001: 78-79.). This would have helped the Ptolemies in portraying themselves as pious as the connection to Alexander would have made their power in Egypt more legitimate and could have conveyed the idea they were associated with Egyptian religion and custom. Ptolemy I claimed that he shared the same father as Alexander, as Philip II allegedly impregnated his mother before she married Lagos (Alan 2010: 402.). Therefore, having this family bond could have enhanced his legitimacy as Pharaoh and perhaps furthered the impression that Ptolemy I and the rest of his lineage had a closer connection to the gods. There is also evidence that Ptolemy V was crowned Pharaoh and it could be assumed all the Ptolemies were, but if they were not crowned, they were definitely treated as Pharaohs (Alan 2010: 404.). In at least acting in the role of Pharaoh, the Ptolemies could be seen as pious as they would have performed the ceremonial task of appeasing the gods (even though in actuality this was done by priests) so that the gods would return the favour and keep the Nile flood high each year. While this was more of a theoretical role, it was still an important part of Egyptian religion and would have had an impact on their pious portrayal. While they were also playing this abstract role, there is evidence to suggest that they were physically getting involved. For example, during a visit to the Egyptian provinces Ptolemy II examined construction work at the temple of the ram at Mendes, and Ptolemy VIII and Cleopatra II inaugurated the temple at Edfu in 142 BC (Holbl 2001: 280.)(Chauveau 1997: 43.). Ptolemy IX additionally gave offerings in 115 BC at Elephantine (Holbl 2001: 280.). These incidents could portray the Ptolemies as pious because it could have been seen by Egyptians as if they cared about the gods and were willing to travel outside of Alexandria in order to show their piety and devotion. Even if they could not understand the language that rites and religious practices were performed in, it still shows an admiration for native cults (Chauveau 1997: 43.). There was also the link the Ptolemies made to Isis and Osiris’ marriage through their own brother-sister marriage (Alan 2010: 403.). This could have been seen a pious worship as they were emulating the gods, implying there was a strong connection even though they were ‘foreign’ rulers. Therefore, by both ceremoniously and actually performing the role of the Pharaoh the Ptolemies could have portrayed themselves as pious worshippers of Egyptian gods as they maintained the link between the gods and Egypt, while also literally showing the people their involvement in religion.
Another way that the Ptolemies portrayed themselves as pious was through donating and protecting temples. The temples were an integral part of Egyptian religion as they facilitated the relationship between the Pharaoh and the gods, so that the priests on behalf of the Pharaoh could perform rites and rituals so that the gods would make Egypt prosperous (Alan 2010: 406.). Ptolemy I showed his piety for the gods through making himself patron of Egyptian sanctuaries and issued a decree that ‘forbids the sale or other alienation of temples and sacred precincts (Rigsby 1988: 273.)’, with the punishment being a fine (Holbl 2001: 88.). This is significant as it shows respect for the residence of the gods as Ptolemy I is bringing into force rules that protect temples. By publicly taking on the role he is showing the people that he is being active, rather than passive, in his devotion to the gods. The Ptolemies can be seen in other instances as well as the previous one as wanting to protect the sanctity of temples. Temples were where people could take refuge if they needed to do so, however near the end of the Ptolemaic period some would abuse this rule, like debt or tax collectors. Priests would appeal to the King and ask for decrees that said no one could violate the temple (Chauveau 1997: 40-41.). There are some that survive, for example a stelae in the village of Theadelphina from 93 BC saying ‘Place of asylum by ordinance. Access forbidden to undesirables – To king Ptolemy…(Bernard 1981: 30-40.)’. This could demonstrate the Ptolemies piety, especially Ptolemy X in this case as he was the one who issued this particular decree, because it shows that they are engaged in the problems of local temples and therefore by extension the gods (Chauveau 1997: 41.). There was also land allocated to temples called basilike ge, which was farmed by royal farmers, even though theoretically all land belonged to the King (Alan 2010: 404.). This shows respect for Egyptian gods as the Ptolemies would have willingly given away land they could have used to collect tax so that the temples could prosper. Tithes (one tenth of annual earnings) and state grants that temples would have obtained from the Crown would also tie into this point as the Ptolemies were giving temples riches directly (Alan 2010: 406.). Ptolemy II again shows this financial aiding of temples when he donated the Dodekaschoinos at the temple of Isis on Philae, which meant giving the temple the taxes from the twelve mile district (Holbl 2001: 86.). These instances could have been seen as a financial sacrifice for the Ptolemies and could have highlighted their piety as they made a loss in order to allow for better temples and therefore pleased gods.
There was also a lot of active building work carried out by the Ptolemies which showed their devotion. For example, the temple of Horus the Behdetite at Edfu was mainly a Ptolemy construction from between 237- 57 BC (Alan 2010: 406). This demonstrated the Ptolemies piety in that it would have created more shelter for the gods while they were on earth, but additionally by keeping Nectanebo II’s holy-of-holiest shrine it showed a connection to Egypt’s religious past that perhaps the Ptolemies would have wanted to highlight in order to show their continuation of worship of the Egyptian gods (Alan 2010: 406.). It was also said that Ptolemy III, with the help of the goddess of calculation and construction Seshat, was able to determine the size of the chapels with a rope and pointer (Holbl 2001: 87.). This account would have aided the idea that the Ptolemies were pious as it shows the gods interacting directly with Ptolemy III, which could imply that he was worthy enough for the gods to engage with him. The fact that Ptolemy III was there and getting involved in the creation of the temple could also add to the portrayal of piety as it could demonstrate active engagement with the native religion and could be seen as worship in that Ptolemy III was honouring the gods with the temple. Ptolemy II aided the growth of the cult of Isis when he built and adorned his impressive naos at the temple of Isis on Philae (Bagnall 2007: 31.)(Holbl 2001: 86.). This could be evidence of devotion to the gods as his addition to the temple would have enhanced the amount of people worshipping Isis, due to its growth from a local cult into a one more widely recognised. Therefore, by building and adding to temples, the Ptolemies were able to demonstrate their piety by showing active devotion not just to the most prominent gods, but to local ones as well.
The early Ptolemies portrayed themselves as pious worshippers through contrasting themselves to the earlier Persian rulers of Egypt. The Persian rule in Egypt began with the Twenty-Seventh Dynasty when they defeated the Twenty-Sixth Dynasty at the battle of Pelusium in 525 BC. The first Persian ruler in Egypt, Cambyses, was believed to have killed the Apis bull at Memphis because according to Herodotus he ‘formed the suspicion [the Egyptians] were making merry at his misfortune.(Herodotus 3.27)’. This would have been seen as sacrilegious as it was believe that the bull was a manifestation of the god Ptah, thus killing the bull could have been interpreted as Cambyses trying to kill a god (Depuydt 1995: 119-120.). When Alexander the Great was in Egypt, he made sure to pay great respect and made offerings to Apis, which set an example that the Ptolemies followed of ‘anti-Persian royal ideology.(Holbl 2001: 81.)’, which then lead them to create a distinction between themselves and the previous rulers. The Ptolemies recovered statues that were stolen by the Persians whilst they were in power during the First Syrian War in 274-271 BC, the Third Syrian war 246-241 BC and the Fourth Syrian War 219-217 BC. After he recovered some of the statues during the first war, Ptolemy II invited priests from all over Egypt to go to his grand cult festival in celebration (Holbl 2001: 81.). This portrays the Ptolemies as pious worshippers of the Egyptian gods because it seems as if they are rectifying the sacrilegious acts committed by the Persians, which as a result could enhance their own piety. Therefore, the Ptolemies depict themselves as devout through first highlighting impious acts and then redressing the harm caused.
Additionally, there was the cultivation of the Ptolemies reverence for the Egyptian gods through physical portrayal. For example, in figure one Ptolemy II and Arsinoe II are sacrificing to the gods, which include the new and deceased ram of Mendes, Harpokrates and Hatmehit. This displays their piety as they are being depicted performing religious rituals that were common practices in Egyptian religion. It could also link into the previous argument as they are worshiping the ram of Mendes, highlighting their respect for the embodiment of the god unlike Cambyses.
Figure 1. A Mendes Stele Figure 2. Relief in the birth house of Kom Ombo . Holbl 2001: Fig. 3.3. Holbl 2001: Fig. 9.4
In figure two it can also be argued that Ptolemy VIII is being shown as pious as he is providing the god Min with geese and reeds. There are also two divine escorts on the boat with Ptolemy, which could show that he has help and support from the gods, thus implying piety as he is worthy enough to receive them. The fact that Ptolemy is also surrounded by birds could imply that Egypt is prosperous because of his offerings and devotion to the gods due to the fact nature is flourishing.
Figure 3. Image on the temple of Dendara
Chauveau 1997: Fig. 11
Finally, in figure three Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV are shown at the temple of Dendara worshipping deities. This would have been a good opportunity for the Ptolemies to portray their piety as many people would have visited the temple and seen the display. Therefore, there is evidence of the Ptolemies being shown as pious in imagery throughout the Ptolemaic period, thus demonstrating themselves as consistently pious to the Egyptian people. Without the ability to communicate like nowadays in the twenty-first century, images on temples and other accessible places for the people would have been key as it spread the idea that the Ptolemies were pious and did worship the Egyptian gods in areas that people would have visited regularly.
In conclusion, the Ptolemies were able to portray themselves as pious worshippers of Egyptian gods through the role of the Pharaoh as it was necessary to keep the gods pleased and keep them providing for Egypt. The contributions and temple building would have displayed their economic commitment as well as respect for lesser known gods. In addition the amending of the sacrilegious acts of the previous Persian rulers would have highlighted their piety in comparison to the previous rulers. Finally visual images would support many of the previous factors as visual propaganda to passers-by. All of these factors would have been important, however it could be argued that temples were a major factor as they facilitated the depiction of piety with regards to the other factors. Without temples it would have been difficult for the Ptolemies to push the idea they were different to the Persians or that they were devout Pharaohs. However, all the factors combined would give a strong indication of Ptolemaic piety.