Ptolemy an Argead

[Alexias]

I am currently reading 'Alexander the Great: Myth, Genesis and Sexuality' by Daniel Ogden. It is an interesting read, although sometimes you get the impression that it is erudition for erudition's sake, in that it seems every possible association with Alexander's siring mythology and the Argead's founding mythology has been chased down. I am only about half way through at the moment, so haven't reached the bit on Alexander's sex life.

But anyway, it seems that Ptolemy, rather than being Philip's son, may have been a distant cousin of Philip and a member of the Argead family. Ptolemy's mother seems to have been called Arsinoe (although I don't think this is 100% certain, but assumed to be true). The writer Satyrus gives the descent of an Arsinoe as Amyntas I, Bocrus, Meleager, Arsinoe. So, if this is the same Arsinoe as Ptolemy's mother, it would explain Curtius's statement (9.8.22), when Ptolemy was bitten by a snake in India, that Alexander was concerned partly because Ptolemy was a blood-relative.

So, Philip was a great, great-grandson of Amyntas I (d. c497 BC), as was Ptolemy Soter and, interestingly, so was Ptolemy of Alorus.

[Jeanne Reames]

Daniel is KING of finding every single obscure mention out there. It's his super-power. Haha. He redefines "thorough."

[marcus]

... and, interestingly, so was Ptolemy of Alorus.

I'm not sure that's a definite, though, is it?

Re. Satyrus on Arsinoe:

Theophilus of Antioch, 2.7
But Satyrus, also giving a history of the Alexandrine families, beginning from Philopator, who was also named Ptolemy, gives out that Bacchus was his progenitor; wherefore also Ptolemy was the founder of this family. Satyrus then speaks thus: That Dejanira was born of Bacchus and Althea, the daughter of Thestius; and from her and Hercules the son of Jupiter there sprang, as I suppose, Hyllus; and from him Cleodemus, and from him Aristomachus, and from him Temenus, and from him Ceisus, and from him Maron, and from him Thestrus, and from him Acous, and from him Aristomidas, and from him Caranus, and from him Coenus, and from him Tyrimmas, and from him Perdiccas, and from him Philip, and from him AEropus, and from him Alcetas, and from him Amyntas, and from him Bocrus, and from him Meleager, and from him Arsinoe, and from her and Lagus Ptolemy Soter, and from him and Arsinoe Ptolemy Euergetes, and from him and Berenice, daughter of Maga, king of Cyrene, Ptolemy Philopator.

[marcus]

It's a very good book. I like that it is so thorough!

The burn of Chugg in the introduction is so withering, it's worth the purchase price of the book in itself ...

[Alexias]

... and, interestingly, so was Ptolemy of Alorus.

I'm not sure that's a definite, though, is it?

I don't think the Ptolemy of Alorus thing came from this book, but from something else I was looking into at the time. it was a year ago so I would need to hunt for it, and for information on the two pretenders Philip had to deal with on the death of Perdiccas, who may also have been relatives (not his half-brothers though).

[Alexias]

It seems as if Ptolemy of Alorus may have been the son of Amyntas II. Amyntas II (reigned c 394-3 BC) may have been the grandson of Alexander I - father Philip or Menelaus, sons of Amyntas II. Alexander I (the Philhellene) was the son of Amyntas I. This would make Ptolemy the great-great-grandson of Amyntas I.

Alternatively, Amyntas II, who only ruled for a few months before being assassinated, may have been a son of Archelaus I, son of Perdiccas II, son of Alexander I, son of Amyntas I. I think this would make Ptolemy a great, great, great grandson of Amyntas I.

Either way, it would seem that Ptolemy was a recognised Argead. I think I got most of this information from William Smith's Dictionary and/or Wikipedia, so may not be 100% reliable.

[marcus]

It seems as if Ptolemy of Alorus may have been the son of Amyntas II. Amyntas II (reigned c 394-3 BC) may have been the grandson of Alexander I - father Philip or Menelaus, sons of Amyntas II. Alexander I (the Philhellene) was the son of Amyntas I. This would make Ptolemy the great-great-grandson of Amyntas I.

Alternatively, Amyntas II, who only ruled for a few months before being assassinated, may have been a son of Archelaus I, son of Perdiccas II, son of Alexander I, son of Amyntas I. I think this would make Ptolemy a great, great, great grandson of Amyntas I.

Either way, it would seem that Ptolemy was a recognised Argead. I think I got most of this information from William Smith's Dictionary and/or Wikipedia, so may not be 100% reliable.

There are various theories, yes. But, if I recall correctly, much of the speculation comes from the idea that Ptolemy would not have been able to take the throne (even though he never achieved it, anyway, thanks to the Thebans) had he not been an Argead. Ergo, he must have been an Argead for him even to have tried ... and there are then various suggestions about how he might have been related.

So he might have been, yes, but there's no definitive source material that confirms it.

Then again, he might have chanced it using his marriage to Amyntas' daughter, Eurynoe, as legitimisation ...

[Alexias]

Then again, he might have chanced it using his marriage to Amyntas' daughter, Eurynoe, as legitimisation ...

Very true, but he seems to have been important enough for his son (a Pausanias?) to be included in the 30 hostages sent to Thebes. There again, this would have been Philip's cousin and grandson to Amyntas III and Eurydike.

[marcus]

Then again, he might have chanced it using his marriage to Amyntas' daughter, Eurynoe, as legitimisation ...

Very true, but he seems to have been important enough for his son (a Pausanias?) to be included in the 30 hostages sent to Thebes. There again, this would have been Philip's cousin and grandson to Amyntas III and Eurydike.

That is true; but I would argue that as the king's brother-in-law, he was already important enough for his son to be sent as a hostage, irrespective of his own pedigree. To have married Eurynoe he must have been an important noble - one of Amyntas' hetairoi, an aristocrat, and presumably a major landowner.

[marcus]

One of the arguments for Ptolemy of Alorus being an Argead is the fact that any regent tended to be a born Argead, rather than simply being married to one. I'd be happy to accept this, tentatively, as we don't really know enough to say that for sure: previous regents might have been born Argeads, but this might merely have established a precedent rather than a hard and fast rule.