Makings of a Dynasty
Egypt is the oldest Empire on earth, with Cleopatra being closer to us in history than the Pyramids were to her. Many cultures from Ethiopians to Romans ruled Egypt. The most intriguing may be the Macedonian Ptolemaic dynasty. How did this come to be? The answer lies in Alexander the Great. In 332 BCE Alexander liberated Egypt from the Persian Empire and was proclaimed Pharaoh by the natives. On his death however, the empire Alexander had forged was partitioned by his generals; Egypt and Libya going to Ptolemy I Soter. Ptolemy was both Greek King, and Egyptian Pharaoh, doing much to appease both cultures of his subject. To consolidate his rule, Ptolemy had to play a careful game. He started this cautious strategy by not doing much of significance; only joking, Ptolemy stole the corpse of Alexander whilst it travelled through Syria into Macedonia. This was because in Macedonian custom the king must bury his predecessor, a symbolic gesture that the new king was accepted by old. Ptolemy had the body moved through resting places in Egypt until finally interring him in Alexandria. This solidified Ptolemies rule tenfold, both by showing the world that Alexander trusted Ptolemy to carry out his wishes (as Alexander had legitimately wanted to rest in Libya, but the new king did not), and also by showing Ptolemy's rivals (who all commanded equally respectable provinces) that he was capable of extreme power plays and did not fear the consequences. Ptolemy kept his rule agreeable to the population by embarking on repairs to the Nile's agriculture (which had been mismanaged under the Persians), and increasing Alexandria's size and respectability. Ptolemy did this by sending scholars across the Hellenic world to purchase books for the Library of Alexandria; combined with increasing the size of the royal quarter of Alexandria (which was actually 1/4 of the city).
(The Ptolemaic Kingdom is seen in red, which includes the overseas possessions acquired, and Syria, which was lost and regained several times)
Administration of Ptolemaic Egypt
Egypt was always ruled by a seriously competent administrative system that the Egyptians had worked out themselves, meaning the Ptolemies simply adapted it. Egypt's administration was largely economic, based on maximising both external and internal profit. This meant that the highest office of state below king himself was that of 'dioiketes', meaning manager, whose main concern was the fiscal management of the kingdom. The 'dioiketes' was assisted in his monumental task by the 'eklogistes', meaning accountant, and in the later Ptolemaic period by the 'idios logos', meaning privy purse; who dealt with the crown's private funds (which were large to say the least). Having discussed the larger state role, on the local level Egypt was broken down into 'nomoi' which were formed of around forty administrative districts. The 'nomoi' was similar in size to a medium to large British county, like my native Essex. The aim of teach 'nome' was to produce food on a large scale. Land in the 'nomoi' was technically property of the king (every meter of Egypt belonged to the king, yes), but the land was broken down into 'basilike ge', tended to by royal farmers who paid a yearly rent (in grain) to the crown, 'ge en aphesi', meaning remitted land, which fell into sub-categories. 'hiera ge' was temple land given to temples to form their income, 'klerouchike', land given to Macedonian soldiers who in return for the land would fight for Egypt (the exact definition of the feudal model of Medieval Europe). There was also private land, 'idioktetos ge', city land (held by the three Greek city states, Alexandria, Naukratis, and Ptolemais), called 'politike ge', and finally 'ge en doreai', meaning land held in gift; which was given to royal employees to live in whilst they were on duty (eg the land that a 'eklogistes' may live and farm on). Thus it can be inferred that Egypt's administration had two groupings, and five sub-categories. Egypt's 'nomoi' were administered by, as military governor, the 'strategoi', who were principally Macedonian, but some Egyptian 'strategoi' can be affirmed such as a man called Sennushepes who was in charge of the Royal Harem, additionally being in high office at the Koptite 'nome'. Below the 'strategoi' were the religious class, who frequently held secular office combined with their prestigious religious appointment's. The support of the powerful Egyptian preisthood was pivotal to controlling the country, as the majority of Ptolemaic Egypt was native Egyptian, meaning home grown sources of authority; combined with the pious nature of the Egyptians, equalled a subservient population. The priests commonly acted as mid level bureaucrats in each 'nome', assisting the 'strategoi' to administer government edicts, and suppress discontent.
(The 'nomoi' of Lower Egypt', point of accuracy; Lower Egypt refers to the northernmost part, as it is the end of the Nile, with Upper Egypt is the southernmost part as this is the source of the Nile)
Economy
It is expected, in most modern governments, that the citizens must pay taxes on various things including goods, not just the annual tax report. In the ancient world, this taxing of things other than a yearly bill, was ludicrous and seen in very few states and on very few goods; other than Egypt. All land in Egypt was owned by the crown, meaning landowners were simply renting their land from the crown. This rent was paid in grain, or coin (but far more in grain). To pay this rent the farmer would need to farm, using seeds. Seeds bought from a government agency, money going to the crown. At each harvest, the seeds you borrowed would be repaid back with any surplus being kept by the individual, money to the crown. To tend the land tools would need to be bought, from the crown. And finally the tax paid was in grain, which was sold by the crown to foreign powers for cash. This meant that the state was extraordinarily involved in the economic activity of a citizen and profited heavily from it. But there were other ventures apart from farming surely? Yes, for instance brewing beer (which has a rich history in Egypt). The story is the same as farming. Brewing required a license, which cost a fee. The barley would have to be bought from a state owned company, with heavy tax. The beer would have to be sold back to a state owned company, which made a profit on the beer. Products going oversees found an even heavier tax. This means that the system used in the modern age was already used, two millennia ago in Egypt. As much as Egypt generated massive wealth, it was not a story of riches for the Ptolemies. Massive martial requirements took large amounts of the revenue, and massive building projects such as the lighthouse of Alexandria required more money still. In the later years of the Kingdom the crown found itself in debt to a dangerous benefactor, Rome. Ptolemy XII racked up intense debts to Rome, and as the penultimate generation of Ptolemaic ruler, it spelled the kingdoms destruction, something even the wealth of Egypt could not stave off. Mismanagement of the economy was also an issue towards the later years of the Ptolemies, perhaps from 100 BCE - 30 BCE. When Augustus incorporated Egypt as a Roman province in 30 BCE he found the irrigation ditches were filled with silt, the dams were ill-managed and the ground not cared for, meaning Egypt's main economic revenue, agriculture, was operating under its maximum efficiency, something the Romans would be quick to fix.
Military
The Ptolemies operated a hybrid Macedonian-Egyptian army, but traditional navy. The army was large, but varied from time, needs and cost. At the creation of the Kingdom Ptolemy was a govener of the Macedonian Empire and so had a largely Macedonian army. The core was heavy pike-men, 'pexhetairoi', meaning foot companion. These men were Macedonian veterans of Alexander who were tempted to Egypt by land grants and wealth. They used a 'sarrisa' pike of over 6m in length, a 'xiphos' short sword, and used a small shield, wearing bronze plate or a 'linothorax'. The problem with this unit was that Macedonians increasingly wished to stay in Macedonia, not go to any of the dozens of regional governers, some as far as current Afghanistan. This meant that the Ptolemies had to adapt and use natives, for after all the Egyptians were hardy warriors. At Gaza in 312 Ptolemy I Soter counted 12,000 infantry, of which roughly 10,000 would have been pike-men; however at Raphia in 217 BCE, the Ptolemaic infantry comprised 30,000 Egyptians, created in a new social class called 'machimoi'. This meant that the Ptolemaic armies were usually larger than their counterparts, due in course to the Ptolemaic wealth and the large population. The cavalry of the Ptolemies was also the target of reduced Greek manpower and was usually of poorer quality than the rivals to the Ptolemies, such as the Antigonids who had actual Greek cavalry, or the Seleucids who had Eastern horsemen and cataphracts. In the later years of the Ptolemies a form of medium infantry appears, called the 'thyreophoroi'. They are almost similar to the Roman army of the period. They carried javelins for skirmishing, although a good deal more than the two 'pila' a roman would carry, a short sword, and large oval shield. They were organised into groups of hundreds led by a 'hekatontarch', and included standard bearers and musicians. Whilst this unit appears undoubtedly due to its effectiveness, it was also most likely due to cost. Equipping large numbers of this universally good soldier was cheaper than equipping a large force of specialist soldiers like the Macedonian 'pexhetairoi' of old. In the reign of Cleopatra and her father, an actual Roman unit appears. After Ptolemy XII was restored to the throne by the Roman governor of Syria, Aulius Gabinius, he left for the crowns protection 2,000 legionaries and 500 Auxiliary cavalry. In 50 BCE when the new Governor of Syria sent his sons to recollect the roman soldiers for the defence of Syria against the Parthians, the 'gabiniani', as they were called, killed the sons and refused to go. This Roman infantry was valuable to the Ptolemies and in 48 BCE when Ceasar arrived in Alexandria, the 'gabiniani' formed the core of the Ptolemaic army (who were still sufficiently well suited to fighting that Cesar comments on their ferocity). Egypt always lacked one thing that armies of the time found vital, elephants. Indian elephants were (in reverse to what is now found), bigger, more aggressive and in higher supply than the African elephant. The African Bush Elephant, which the Ptolemies turned to Ethiopia for, were inferior to their Indian counterparts and at Raphia in 217 BCE the smaller Africans were routed clearly by the Indians. Ptolemy, after winning the battle, quickly stole all the remaining Selucid Indian elephants, a telling sign of their effectiveness. The Ptolemaic navy was always strong, and operated multiple fleets in the Mediterranean. The Ptolemaic navy was however one of similar variety to its neighbours, nothing unique like its army. the tactics involved were mainly that of transferring a land battle onto sea via ship boarding, meaning the battles were slogging matches (where the Ptolemies lost quite often).
(A centurian of the 'gabiniani', clearly taken to Egyptian culture, the cartouche of Cleopatra's name on the shield is very prominent)
Religion
The religious affairs of Ptolemaic Egypt were a careful balance of Egyptian native gods and imported Greek ones. This was made possible by the support of the native priests, who accepted the new Pharaohs as anointed by Ra, and so the common people also believed this. However the Greek king aspect of Ptolemaic rule is clear, with many gods being hybrids of Greek and Egyptian, such as Serapis (a completely new god formed of most main gods from both pantheons). The Ptolemies sponsored great endeavours of Egyptian temple building, such as the Temple of Horus the Behdetite at Edfu, which is almost entirely Ptolemaic. At Philae and Kom Ombo, (which from first hand experience are stunning), the Ptolemies left their mark and sponsored these projects throughout their dynasty even economic hardship. By leaving the old temples intact and creating new ones to their new gods, the Ptolemies signalled their respect for the Old Kingdoms, but also showed their religious legitimacy and power to the natives.
(The god Serapis, created by the Ptolemies to fuse both Greek and Egyptian religions into a god for all)
Conclusion
To conclude, the Ptolemies found themselves in Egypt thanks to the foresight of their founder, Ptolemy I Soter, in recognising the wealth that Egypt had. They administered it through a rigid structure of central government, characterised by figures such as the 'dioiketes' and various regional 'strategoi' of each 'nome', in which fiscal agriculture was the reigning policy. The economy prospered in the early stages due to high government involvement and high taxes, combined with total state control of the economy and land. The military was strong and large, the army starting as the army Alexander had left; that of heavy pike-men and cavalry, but was left as native pike-men and Romanised medium-infantry who were more cost effective than actually effective. Additionally the Ptolemaic army saw actual Roman influence in the form of the 'gabiniani', Roman troops who refused to go back to Rome and played kingmaker in Alexandria. The religious management was tolerant, with hybrid gods forming the people together and state sponsored Egyptian Pantheon temples being built throughout the Kingdoms period. Overall Ptolemaic Egypt was one of prosper but slow decline, seen by the Ptolemies being the last of Alexanders successors to be independent, eventually amalgamated into Rome.
Thank you terribly for reading this as at some points myself I considered if watching paint dry was more interesting! Max Scourfield
留言