Allen Alexander Kendall, University of Michigan
Ptolemaic dynastic successions were often bloody, especially when they devolved into civil wars or when the populace of Alexandria violently intervened. Only Peter Fraser has specifically written on the latter, and he has harshly (and racistly) criticized the role of the Alexandrians in dynastic politics, saying that “the throne [was] at the disposal of the mob…partly because of the gradual Egyptianizing of the Greeks of the middle and lower classes” (Fraser, 131). He further asserts that the intervention of the Alexandrian crowds was “due solely to dissatisfaction with, and hostility against individual members of the royal house” (Fraser, 128).
I, however, propose a different understanding of these interventions. When we look at the circumstances of popular unrest in the role of monarchs’ removal from the throne, we see a common trend. In most cases, the violent actions of the people follow upon the violent mistreatment of women in the royal family, or else to support a queen’s bid for the throne. Recent scholarship has demonstrated the gradual growth of power among royal women (Whitehorne; Kunst; Sewell-Lasater), but these have not taken into account the role of popularity in the power of royal women. A few examples will demonstrate the trend.
When Ptolemy V became king as a child, Agathocles and Agathoclea murdered the queen Arsinoe III and took power for themselves as the boy’s regents (Hölbl, 134-36). When the news of this reached the people, they slaughtered regents, leaving the young Ptolemy V on the throne. Later, in the civil war between Cleopatra II and Ptolemy VIII, the people of Alexandria drove Ptolemy VIII out of Egypt in support of Cleopatra as sole monarch (Diodorus 33.12; Justin 38.8.11). Towards the end of the dynasty, Cleopatra Berenike III came to the throne, and the Roman general Sulla sent her cousin Ptolemy XI to rule alongside her. She but in less than three weeks, Ptolemy had her killed—a fatal error. In response, the people dragged him from the palace to the gymnasium and killed him. (Porphyry FGrH 260 Fr. 2.-10-11; Cicero, De Rege Alexandrino Fr. 9; Appian Bellum Civile 1.102; Whitehorn, 176-7).
This analysis reveals certain aspects of dynastic politics in the Ptolemaic dynasty. First, it demonstrates the significance of popularity in royal politics. Succession politics depended as much upon the goodwill of the people of Alexandria as upon the machinations of the royal family. Secondly, this demonstrates that the people of Alexandria held a particular regard for women of the royal family, and when royal women held in high regard were murdered or mistreated, this was sufficient to arouse popular anger. This anger is not due not to mere dislike of individual kings, but rather usually due to the popular regard for a queen. The increased political participation of the people of Alexandria is due, not to the Egyptianizing of the Greek population, as Fraser suggests, but (at least partially) to the increasingly prominent role of royal women in the Ptolemaic dynasty.