[HOME]

The Sequence of Rulers

 

This page presents an overview discussion of how the sequence of Ptolemaic rulers was determined and the names by which they are known. It covers six topics, each of which may be accessed by selecting the appropriate link from the following list:

1. The classical sources
2. The dynastic cult lists
3. The papyrological evidence
4. Additional names
5. The numbering of Ptolemaic Kings and Queens
6. Egyptian royal titulary

1. The Classical Sources

The basic sequence of the Ptolemaic kings is provided by the Canon of Claudius Ptolemy, which gives it as follows:

Ptolemy son of Lagus            
Philadelphus                        
Euergetes                          
Philopator                           
Epiphanes                           
Philometor                          
Euergetes II                        
Soter                                 
Neos Dionysus                     
Cleopatra                            

Claudius Ptolemy presented this kinglist as part of a sequence from Nabonassar king of Babylon till his own day. The purpose of the list was to aid in the reckoning of elapsed time, since no absolute dating system was then in widespread use, and dates were based on regnal years. It is clear that he chose the simplest possible sequence needed to support his chronographical purposes.

The account of Eusebius, which draws extensively on the lost histories of Polybius of Tyre, gives a more complete picture, particularly in explaining the conflicts between Philometor and his brother, and between Soter (II) and his brother. Thus Eusebius gives the following kinglist:

Ptolemy son of Lagus        
Ptolemy Philadelphus                        
Ptolemy Euergetes                          
Ptolemy Philopator                           
Ptolemy Epiphanes                           
Ptolemy Philometor                          
Ptolemy the younger, Euergetes
Ptolemy Physcon called Soter
Ptolemy Alexander
Ptolemy Philadelphus, who is Soter restored                                 
Ptolemy Neos Dionysus, Philadelphus                     
Cleopatra                            

In addition, he explains the coregency of Ptolemy son of Lagus and Ptolemy Philadelphus, the joint rule of Ptolemy Philometor and Ptolemy Euergetes II and the temporary expulsion of Ptolemy Philometor by Ptolemy Euergetes II, the brief reigns of Cleopatra Berenice and Ptolemy Alexander (II), the temporary expulsion of Ptolemy Neos Dionysus by Cleopatra Tryphaena and Berenice, and the joint rule of Cleopatra with her two brothers Ptolemy in turn, though not her joint rule with Caesarion. In the classical sources, the coregency of Caesarion is noticed by Dio Cassius. From other classical accounts, notably from the Epitome of Pompeius Trogus as preserved by Justin, from Pausanias, and from Caesar's account of the Alexandrian war, we obtain some additional details, notably the expulsion of Ptolemy Euergetes II by his sister Cleopatra, and the proclamation of Arsinoe as a joint ruler with Ptolemy in opposition to their sister Cleopatra.

Thus, combining the classical accounts we obtain the following kinglist:

The accounts of Ptolemy and Porphry are those that have proven, from contemporary evidence, to be the most reliable. The Canon of Ptolemy, in the first instance, was taken to be reliable because of the correctness of the astronomical events that were dated by it. Even Eusebius began to corrupt the names, confusing Soter II (Ptolemy IX) with Physcon (Ptolemy VIII) and calling him the otherwise-undocumented "Philadelphus" in his second reign. Clement of Alexandria follows Ptolemy, though he knows Ptolemy VIII as "Physcon" and Ptolemy IX as "Lathurus", recognises the "children of Cleopatra" as rulers for 18 days, and gives different reign lengths in some instances. Later chroniclers become increasingly confused and corrupt. The following examples are taken from Frick's edition of Chronica Minora:

 ("Pt." = "Ptolemeus"; "Tol." = "Tolomeus"; "f." = "filius/filia"; "fr." = "frater")

Ý

2. The Dynastic Cult Lists

The contemporary records present a sequence of rulers in the context of the dynastic cult. The rulers are presented as couples, of gods and goddesses, starting with the deified Alexander (who is usually omitted in modern discussions), and usually ending with the most recently added divine couple, i.e. the current rulers. The list increases in length and complexity over the course of time. Eventually, it becomes so long and complex that it is presented only rarely, and no examples are known after the reign of Ptolemy Neos Dionysus.

Although usually given in Greek or demotic, the last known instance is presented in hieroglyphics. It is given in the Temple of Kom Ombo and dates from the reign of Ptolemy Neos Dionysus. This list gives the rulers in the following order, with Greek equivalents and current modern identifications:

[The two saviour gods	Qeoi SwthreV	Ptolemy I + Berenice I
The two sibling gods	Qeoi Adelfoi	Ptolemy II + Arsinoe II
The two benefactor gods	Qeoi Euergetai	Ptolemy III + Berenice II
The two fatherloving gods	Qeoi FilopatoreV	Ptolemy IV + Arsinoe III
The two manifest gods	Qeoi Epifanoi	Ptolemy V + Cleopatra I
The god with the noble father	QeoV Eupator	Ptolemy Eupator
The two motherloving gods	Qeoi FilomhtoreV	Ptolemy VI + Cleopatra II
The young fatherloving god	QeoV NeoV Filopator	(Ptolemy son of Ptolemy VI or) Ptolemy Memphites
The three benefactor gods	Qeoi Euergetai	Ptolemy VIII + Cleopatra II + Cleopatra III
The brother-loving goddess	Qea FiladelfoV	Cleopatra IV?
The saviour god	QeoV Swthr	Ptolemy IX
The fatherloving goddess	Qea Filopator	Berenice III

In principle, the list clearly gave the deified predecessors of the ruling couple. Early versions always began with the Qeoi Adelfoi, though the Qeoi SwthreV were normally inserted before them after the time of Ptolemy Philopator. Minor variations in the order of the names of the dynastic gods occur in later times:

• The QeoV Eupator first appears after the  Qeoi FilomhetoreV and then before them.
  

• The Qeoi FilomhtoreV becomes the QeoV Filomhtor when the second set of  Qeoi Euergetai first make their appearance, and only later revert to the plural.
  
• The QeoV NeoV Filopator first appears late in the reigns of the second set of the Qeoi Euergetai and never appears in the final position in the list.
  
• The Kom Ombo list is the only recorded appearance of the Qea FiladelfoV
  
• The QeoV Swthr is given as the QeoV Filomhtor Swthr in earlier lists

Most of these gods can be identified with kings already known from the classical sources, and with their queens; thus the dynastic cult lists serve to confirm the list we have already derived. However, four of the dynastic gods listed above are not known as such from the classical sources: the QeoV Eupator, the QeoV NeoV Filopator, the Qea FiladelfoV and the Qea Filopator. The QeoV Eupator was identified with a son of Ptolemy Philometor who was named in dating formulae and was therefore a coregent. The Qea Filopator was likewise identified, from her position in this and similar lists, as Cleopatra Berenice.

On the assumption that the list named regents and coregents, and some numismatic evidence, Ptolemy Neos Philopator was also identified as an ephemeral king, and was supposed to have been a son of Ptolemy Philometor who was murdered by Ptolemy Euergetes II when he seized power. It is now clear that this did not happen, and it appears that the QeoV NeoV Filopator should rather be identified with the prince Ptolemy Memphites, known from classical sources to have been murdered by his father.

Similarly, the identity of the Qea FiladelfoV has recently been reevaluated. She was supposed by Lepsius to be Cleopatra the niece and wife of Ptolemy Euergetes II, but she is never elsewhere attested under this title. Chauveau has plausibly argued that she was Cleopatra, the sister and wife of Ptolemy Soter II, who was certainly never a ruling queen.

In other words, these lesser honorees were included for political reasons and not necessarily because they had actually been rulers or coregents. Thus, the lists of the dynastic cult need to be interpreted with care and with supporting evidence.Ý

3. The Papyrological Evidence

A second source of contemporary evidence is given by the dating formulae used in papyri. In full form, these give the date as a day and month in a numbered regnal year of a named king, or set of rulers if there is more than one king. In the case of joint rulers, the order in which they are listed is assumed to give an order of precedence. Additionally, a complete dating formula will name the gods of the dynastic cult, the current eponymous priest, athlopore and canephore, and frequently other hierophants as well. Since several of these priesthoods were changed annually, the names of the current office holders can frequently be used to establish a date even when the exact formula is lost.

Again, by and large, these formulae confirm the classical lists. They do provide one ruler not attested either by the classical sources or in the dynastic cult:

• Ptolemy "the Son" (NioV), a coregent of Ptolemy Philadelphus.

They also attest that Ptolemy Epiphanes was associated with Ptolemy Philopator as coregent almost from the moment of his birth.

Most importantly, the dating formulae make it clear that in later periods the queens were usually corulers with the kings, and were at times the senior ruler, being named before the associated king, although it was very rare for a queen to reign alone. This explains the variation between singular and plural gods in the dynastic lists: a ruling queen did not become immortal on the death of her male partner, but continued into the next reign. The classically-derived kinglists thus represent a somewhat misogynistic perspective.

Additionally, they show that Ptolemy Philadelphus was not so-called in his lifetime, and provide a number of cult titles that are not otherwise known:

• Eucharistos for Ptolemy Epiphanes
  

• Philometor Soteira for the sister-wife of Ptolemy Euergetes II in her own reign in opposition to him
  
• Philometor Soteira Dikaiosyne Nikephoros for the niece-wife of Ptolemy Euergetes II in her own reign
  
• Philopator Philadelphus for Ptolemy Neos Dionysus
  
• Epiphaneia for Berenice, the daughter of Ptolemy Neos Dionysus
  
• Philopator, later Cleopatra Thea Neotera Philopator kai Philopatris for queen Cleopatra
  
• Philopator (II) for the elder son of Ptolemy Neos Dionysus
  
• (Probably) Philopator Philadelphus (II) for the younger son of Ptolemy Neos Dionysus
  
• Caesar Philopator Philometor for Caesarion

The details of these refinements may be found at the appropriate points in the Ptolemaic Genealogy.

A list that takes all these modifications into account is as follows:

Ý

4. Additional Names

Many, and probably all, of the Ptolemaic rulers were given secondary names or popular nicknames in addition to their formal titles. Quite a few of these have come down to us in the literary sources, and are sometimes used even today in place of the formal epithets to identify a particular ruler. The following list gives the nicknames I have identified. Epithets commonly used today are underlined.

Ý

5. The Numbering of Ptolemaic Kings and Queens

The Hellenistic Greeks did not use the ordinal numbering system that we are accustomed to using to distinguish various rulers of the same name. Instead they used epithets of various types, though on occasion, if an epithet was used more than once, its second occurrence might be so marked (for example: Euergetes II).

Modern scholars, being accustomed to an ordinal system and finding it convenient, have assigned ordinal numbers to the various kings and, on occasion, coregents of the dynasty, and to the queens, both queens consort and queens regnant. In the case of the Arsinoes and Berenices, there is no ambiguity about the numbering. However, the Ptolemies and the Cleopatras are subject to several different numbering systems. I briefly summarise here the various systems known to me. The system used here is the one most widely used by modern scholars, namely the system of the Paully-Wissowa Real-Encyclopädie.

5.1 The Arsinoes

Here there is no ambiguity:

• Arsinoe I: First wife of Ptolemy Philadelphus
  

• Arsinoe II: Second wife of Ptolemy Philadelphus
  
• Arsinoe III: Wife of Ptolemy Philopator
  
• Arsinoe IV: Sister of Cleopatra Philopator, queen in opposition to her

5.2 The Berenices

Here again there is no ambiguity:

• Berenice I: Wife of Ptolemy son of Lagus
  

• Berenice II: Wife of Ptolemy Euergetes
  
• Berenice III: Wife of Ptolemy Alexander I and successor to Ptolemy Soter II
  
• Berenice IV: Daughter of Ptolemy Neos Dionysus

 Other Berenices are known, daughters of Philadephus, Euergetes and probably of Euergetes II, but these are not given ordinals because they were not queens.

5.3 The Cleopatras

Here again there is no ambiguity for the first four Cleopatras:

• Cleopatra I: Wife of Ptolemy Epiphanes
  

• Cleopatra II: Wife of Ptolemy Philometor and Ptolemy Euergetes II
  
• Cleopatra III: Daughter of Cleopatra II and Ptolemy Philometor, second wife of Ptolemy Euergetes II
  
• Cleopatra IV: First wife of Ptolemy Soter II.

From here on there are at least five different systems. They may be tabulated as follows. The system used here is underlined.

Berenice IV was also called "Cleopatra"; however she is (as yet) never numbered as such.

5.4 The Ptolemies

Here again there is no ambiguity for the first five Ptolemies. After that there are at least four systems in the literature. They may be tabulated as follows. The system used here is underlined.

None of these systems are particularly rational. All include coregents who never reigned as senior ruler (Eupator, Philopator Philadelphus, Caesarion -- though Caesarion at least had a full pharaonic titulary) but none assign a number to Ptolemy "the Son". Presumably this is because he was omitted from the dynastic cult -- but so was Alexander II. Even though it now seems likely that "Ptolemy VII" -- whoever he was -- never reigned, even as a coregent, the underlined system, introduced in the Real-Encyclopädie, is adopted here because of its general acceptance by classical historians. Ý

6. The Egyptian Titulary

In addition to the Greek names and epithets given by the classical sources, the cult lists and the dating formulae, almost all Ptolemaic kings, including the junior colleagues of Cleopatra III and Cleopatra VII, also held a full fivefold name as pharaoh. For most kings, these names are given on major decrees or in temples:

• Ptolemy II: the Pithom and Mendes Stelae
  

• Ptolemy III: the Canopus Decree
  
• Ptolemy IV: the Raphia Decree
  
• Ptolemy V: the Rosetta Stone
  
• Ptolemy VI: the Philae Decree
  
• Ptolemy VIII: the Temple of Philae
  
• Ptolemy IX: the Temple of Edfu (both reigns)
  
• Ptolemy X: the Temple of Edfu
  
• Ptolemy XII: the Temple of Kom Ombo

For some kings additional Horus or Two Ladies names are known, and Ptolemy IX took on a complete new titulary in his second reign. Some of the royal names of Ptolemy I and Ptolemy XV, which are not completely known, are recoverable from particular inscriptions; these are discussed at the appropriate place. None of the royal names of Ptolemy XI, Ptolemy XIII or Ptolemy XIV are known as yet. The reign of Ptolemy XI was so short he may never have received any.

Some of the Ptolemaic queens were also granted some Egyptian royal titles. Arsinoe II even received a nsw-bty name, possibly posthumously. Other queens received a Horus name. Horus names are known from temple contexts as follows:

• Berenice II: the Temple of Philae
  

• Cleopatra I: the Temple of Edfu
  
• Cleopatra III: the Temple of El-Kâb
  
• Cleopatra VII: the Temple of Hermonthis.

Ý

Website © Chris Bennett, 2001-2011 -- All rights reserved