Ptolemy, son of Philip II ?

[delos13]

We all "know" that Ptolemy was rumoured to be an illegitimate son of king Philip of Macedon. Can anybody point me in the direction of the original source where this rumour was first mentioned?

thanks in advance.

[agesilaos]

Ther earliest would be the Victory stele of Ptolemy III, but if one takes the stories in both Curtius and Pausanias as coming from Kleitarchos then he would be the first, that would be pure supposition,however, and the lack of any evidence for the link in Ptolemaic propaganda before Euergetes would seem to militate against it.

[ruthaki]

I will try and remember where I learned details of this. I believe his mother was either one of the court ladies or another of Philip's romantic conquests. She later married a man named Lagos. But Ptolemy was always accepted in the Macedonian court.

[Alexias]

If I remember rightly, Philip would have been about 13 at the time of Ptolemy's conception, and might well have been a hostage to the Illyrian king at that age.

[ruthaki]

I don't think Ptolemy was much older than Alexander. Possibly Philip was a teen-ager but likely a bit older than 13. However you never know in that day and age. LOL.

[agesilaos]

He was hostage in Thebes, learning that women are not the only fruit! Pseudo-Lucian 'Makrobioi' 12 states that Ptolemy was 84 when he abdicated in 285/4 making his birth year 369/8.

[delos13]

Thank you all who respoded and before proceding, I would like to clarify that I am looking for the information where and by who the fact was first mentioned, regardless whether it's true or false, or even if it was feasible (age wise) but of course thanks for additional info and fruit for thought.

Ther earliest would be the Victory stele of Ptolemy III, but if one takes the stories in both Curtius and Pausanias as coming from Kleitarchos then he would be the first, that would be pure supposition,however, and the lack of any evidence for the link in Ptolemaic propaganda before Euergetes would seem to militate against it.

I had to google all 3 of them to compare the times they lived and wrote, so in chronological order it's Ptolemy III (reign 246-222 BC), then Curtius (wrote between 41 - 79 AD) and then Pausanius (wrote in 2nd C AD). So, it means Victory stele of Ptolemy III is the earlier source (that we know of) mentioning the fact? Is the text of the stele available anywhere online? As for the Curtius and Pausanius, can you let me know in what works and where in the work they mentioned it? I understand that I ask for a very specific information and you may not have it handy, but if you do (or anybody else in the forum), I really appreciate your help!

[marcus]

Thank you all who respoded and before proceding, I would like to clarify that I am looking for the information where and by who the fact was first mentioned, regardless whether it's true or false, or even if it was feasible (age wise) but of course thanks for additional info and fruit for thought.

OK, here are the references:

Curtius 9.8.22
... Ptolemy had given the king special cause for concern, for he had received a wound in the left shoulder which, slight though it was, posed a danger disproportionate to its size. He was a blood-relative of Alexander and some believed he was Philip's son (it was known for certain that he was the child of a concubine of Philip's) ...

Suda (Lambda 25)
[Lagos] married Arsinoe, the mother of Ptolemaios the Saviour.[1] This Ptolemaios, not related to him at all, Lagos in fact exposed upon a bronze shield.

Plutarch, Moralia 458a-b
So also Ptolemy, when he was jeering at a pedant for his ignorance, asked him who was Peleus’ father; and the pedant replied, “I shall tell you if you will first tell me who was the father of Lagus.” This was a jest at the dubious birth of the king, and everyone was indignant at its improper and inopportune character; but Ptolemy said, “If it is not the part of a king to take a jest, neither is it to make one.”

Pausanias 1.6.2
The Macedonians consider Ptolemy to be the son of Philip, the son of Amyntas, though putatively the son of Lagus, asserting that his mother was with child when she was married to Lagus by Philip. And among the distinguished acts of Ptolemy in Asia they mention that it was he who, of Alexander's companions, was foremost in succoring him when in danger among the Oxydracae. After the death of Alexander, by withstanding those who would have conferred all his empire upon Aridaeus, the son of Philip, he became chiefly responsible for the division of the various nations into the kingdoms.

Pausanias 1.6.8
If this Ptolemy really was the son of Philip, son of Amyntas, he must have inherited from his father his passion for women, for, while wedded to Eurydice, the daughter of Antipater, although he had children he took a fancy to Berenice, whom Antipater had sent to Egypt with Eurydice.

As far as I can tell, these are all the references there are ... (Actually, on checking, there is another reference in the Suda, but only to the fact that Philip made a noble woman named Arsinoe pregnant before he married Olympias. It doesn't say that her child was Ptolemy.)

All the best

[marcus]

I will try and remember where I learned details of this. I believe his mother was either one of the court ladies or another of Philip's romantic conquests. She later married a man named Lagos. But Ptolemy was always accepted in the Macedonian court.

Ptolemy's mother was Arsinoe, a noble woman.

There would be no reason why Ptolemy wouldn't be accepted. If he were indeed Philip's illegitimate son, then one might assume that only the throne would be unattainable to him - and even that might be argued against. There would be no reason not to accept Ptolemy at court, so long as he was doing what all the young men of the court were expected to do - learn to fight!

Ptolemy does appear to have been made one of Alexander's 'mentors', being 8-10 years older than the prince. This indicates that he was favoured, but more that he was dependable, loyal, and probably a good student within the ranks of the Royal Pages. It doesn't mean he was Alexander's half-brother, of course.

ATB

[delos13]

Marcus, many thanks for the details. I never heard of Suda.... well, more things to learn.

[agesilaos]

.

[agesilaos]

It is not Suda, as in an author but The Suda it is a Byzantine encyclopedia but of uneven value, which is to say where its statements can be tested probably a third are either mistaken attributing the action of one homonymous person to another, or simply wrong. It has to be used cautiously, therefore. There is an online Suda project which is a lay translation with the accuracy of the translation moderated, I don't think it is available in hard copy.There is a discussion of the parentage of Ptolemy on an earlier thread ' Ptolemy & Alexander Brothers???'

[delos13]

Thanks, Agesilaos, for clarification. You were right to presume I thought it was a name of some author. My knowledge of Byzantine empire is rather poor. The online project sounds even better than hard copy - mainly because it's easier to search for specific name/subject, though for purely pleasure of reading I still prefer hard copies of the books. I'll check out the earlier discussion on Pothos as well.

[ruthaki]

Everyone has their own opinions of Ptolemy and I've even read some that called him 'self-serving'. At any rate, in doing all my research for Shadow of the Lion, I concluded that he was trustworthy and well thought of not only by Alexander but by other members of the Companions and the court. At one point even Kleopatra (Alexander's sister who was in exile) asked him to marry her. He declined. So I have used him in a favorable way in my novel. Although he isn't always active in the story, I lead with a prologue and end with an epilogue in his point of view and he is woven into the tapestry of the story just as Alexander is.

[marcus]

Everyone has their own opinions of Ptolemy and I've even read some that called him 'self-serving'. At any rate, in doing all my research for Shadow of the Lion, I concluded that he was trustworthy and well thought of not only by Alexander but by other members of the Companions and the court. At one point even Kleopatra (Alexander's sister who was in exile) asked him to marry her. He declined. So I have used him in a favorable way in my novel. Although he isn't always active in the story, I lead with a prologue and end with an epilogue in his point of view and he is woven into the tapestry of the story just as Alexander is.

To some extent I think all of Alexander's companions/marshals had to be self-serving, especially when you consider how easy it was to fall in and out of favour. I would say that, if Ptolemy were that way inclined, it was no more so than anyone else.

Having said that, he held very few high commands during Alexander's lifetime, except for being one of the somatophylakes. He was entrusted with various missions, most notably in India - as far as I recall, the first time he really got any independent responsibility was when he went to pick up Bessus after the Sogdians agreed to hand him over, so that was in 329BC. So it probably would be unfair to call him totally self-serving, as he was nowhere near as prominent as, say Craterus. But he had influence, being able to pick up Egypt on Alexander's death!

Kleopatra's proposal was entirely political, as Ptolemy was one of the few men with the power to protect her and to further her own aims. His refusal was similarly political.