Hi everyone,
I read the other day that Alexander's friend Ptolemy was the son of Arsinoe, who was a concubine of Philip of Macedon. If this is true, how come Philip's concubine became another man's wife (or mistress)? Did Philip hand her over? Presumably the arrangement was amicable since Alexander and Ptolemy ended up as friends, but it struck me as odd. Does anyone know anything about this?
Why was Ptolemy's mother Philip's concubine?
Moderator: pothos moderators
Re: Why was Ptolemy's mother Philip's concubine?
She was not Philip's concubine, this was propaganda put about by Ptolemy in the Successors wars, but I think it was almost certainly untrue.
Ptolemy was not senior until the later years of Alexander's reign , yet even an unacknowledged son of Philip would have had a higher status, I think. After Alexander's death the successors all tried desperately to tie themselves to the Macedonian royal family, and to Philip in particular so as to tap the army's remaining loyalties. Hence the endless dynastic marriages and alliances.Large parts of the Alexander Romance also started in Alexandria during this period, so the propaganda machine was fairly busy there.Susan
Ptolemy was not senior until the later years of Alexander's reign , yet even an unacknowledged son of Philip would have had a higher status, I think. After Alexander's death the successors all tried desperately to tie themselves to the Macedonian royal family, and to Philip in particular so as to tap the army's remaining loyalties. Hence the endless dynastic marriages and alliances.Large parts of the Alexander Romance also started in Alexandria during this period, so the propaganda machine was fairly busy there.Susan
- marcus
- Somatophylax
- Posts: 4871
- Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 7:27 am
- Location: Nottingham, England
- Has thanked: 45 times
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Why was Ptolemy's mother Philip's concubine?
Hi Kate,Just to add to Susan's reply (she beat me to it!), I don't see that there would have been any problem with Arsinoe, even had she been Philip's concubine, attaching herself to another man. The whole point about concubinage is that someone is prepared to 'look after' the woman, and if he decides not to do so after a while, then she is perfectly able to find herself another 'protector' (to use a quaint 19th century term). Now, had she been a slave (and I don't think there is any suggestion that she was), it would have been different, but still not impossible that she would have ended up freed and attached (whether married or not) to another man.But, ultimately, as the story is a later fiction, it's a bit academic!All the bestMarcus