Biblically Adjusted – Other Dynasties, Hyksos, Shishak and Various People

For information about the Egyptian Dynasties, please right click upon the link below:

https://www.godswordexplained.com/?page_id=3149

This web-page document covers Other Dynasties, Hyksos, Shishak and Various People.

Here, and in this order, you will find information regarding the:

Argead Dynasty – – c. 700-310 BC / 332-309 BC – – ruled the kingdom of Macedon in ancient Greece

Achaemenid Dynasty – – late 7th century-329 BC – – ruled the Persian Empire

Chaldean Dynasty – – 626-539 BC – – a tribal group in Mesopotamia, after the decline of the Neo-Assyrian Empire

Seleucid Dynasty – – 312-63 BC – – a Hellenistic successor State to the Empire of Alexander the Great

Ptolemaic Dynasty – – 305-30 BC – – a Macedonian Greek royal family that ruled Egypt

Roman Pharaoh / “Egypt’s Thirty-fourth Dynasty” – – 30 BC-313 AD – – after Rome conquered Egypt, Roman emperors were essentially considered pharaohs by the Egyptians.

You will also find some information upon:

The Hyksos, who once ruled Egypt, but they didn’t arrive as invaders

Joseph, he was Imhotep of Egypt – see https://www.godswordexplained.com/?page_id=3152

Shishak, king of Egypt, also known as the Egyptian Pharaoh Sheshonq I / Hedjkheperre Setpenre / Shoshenq I Meriamun

Manetho, who was an Egyptian priest of the Ptolemaic Kingdom who lived in the early third century BC

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260?AD-30 May 339 AD), also known as Eusebius Pamphilius

George Syncellus (died after 810 AD) who was a Byzantine chronicler and ecclesiastical official

and Sextus Julius Africanus (c. 160-c. 240 AD) was a Christian traveller and historian.

Finally, the following web-page document covers Biblical Information and Dating as well as much information about the Egyptian Dynasties as given below.

For this information, please right click upon the link below:

https://www.godswordexplained.com/?page_id=675

Biblically Adjusted Other Dynasties, Hyksos, Shishak and Various People

Argead Dynasty

The Thirty-Second Dynasty of Egypt (Macedonian) ruled from 332 to 323 BC.

The Macedonian Greeks under Alexander the Great ushered in the Hellenistic period with his conquest of Persia and Egypt. The Argeads ruled from 332 to 309 BC.

The Argead Dynasty, also known as the Temenid Dynasty, was an ancient Macedonian royal house of Dorian Greek provenance. They were the founders and the ruling dynasty of the kingdom of Macedon from about 700 to 309 BC.

The Thirty-Third Dynasty of Egypt (Ptolemid) ruled from 323-30 BC. [Ptolemaic Dynasty]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argead_dynasty

The Argead dynasty, also known as the Temenid dynasty was an ancient Macedonian royal house of Dorian Greek provenance. They were the founders and the ruling dynasty of the kingdom of Macedon from c. 700 to 310 BC.

Their tradition, as described in ancient Greek historiography, traced their origins to Argos, of Peloponnese in Southern Greece, hence the name Argeads or Argives. Initially rulers of the tribe of the same name, by the time of Philip II they had expanded their reign further, to include under the rule of Macedonia all Upper Macedonian states. The family’s most celebrated members were Philip II of Macedon and his son Alexander the Great, under whose leadership the kingdom of Macedonia gradually gained predominance throughout Greece, defeated the Achaemenid Empire and expanded as far as Egypt and India. The mythical founder of the Argead dynasty is King Caranus. The Argeads claimed descent from Heracles through his great-great-grandson Temenus, also king of Argos.

History: Succession disputes

The death of the king almost invariably triggered dynastic disputes and often a war of succession between members of the Argead family, leading to political and economic instability. These included:

Six-year Macedonian interregnum (399–393 BC), after the death of king Archelaus, between Orestes, Aeropus II, Amyntas II and Pausanias

Macedonian war of succession (393–392 BC), after the death of king Pausanias, between Amyntas III and Argaeus II

Macedonian war of succession (369–368 BC), after the death of king Amyntas III, between Ptolemy of Aloros and Alexander II of Macedon

Macedonian war of succession (360–359 BC), after the death of king Perdiccas III, between Philip II (who deposed Amyntas IV), Argeus (supported by Athens), Pausanias (supported by Thrace) and Archelaus (supported by the Chalcidian League)

Wars of the Diadochi (323–277 BC), after the death of king Alexander the Great, between his Diadochi (“Successors”)

Additionally, long-established monarchs could still face a rebellion by a relative when the former’s kingship was perceived to be weak. An example was Philip’s rebellion against his older brother, king Perdiccas II, in the prelude to the Peloponnesian War (433–431 BC).

Argead Rulers

Reign – – – Monarch Namen – – – Comments

c.?808-778 BC – – Karanos – – Founder of the Argead dynasty and the first king of Macedon. (Possibly Fictional).

c.?778-750 BC – – Koinos – – (Possibly Fictional).

c.?750-700 BC – – Tyrimmas – – (Possibly Fictional).

c.?700-678 BC – – Perdiccas I.

c.?678-640 BC – – Argaeus I.

c.?640-602 BC – – Philip I.

c.?602-576 BC – – Aeropus I.

576-547 BC – – Alcetas.

547-498 BC – – Amyntas I – – Vassal of the Achaemenid Empire in 512/511 BC. Historians recognize Amyntas as the first Macedonian monarch of historical importance.

497-454 BC – – Alexander I – – Fully subordinate part of the Achaemenid Empire after 492 BC, then full Independence after 479 BC following the withdrawal of the Achaemenid army.

454-413 BC – – Perdiccas II.

413-399 BC – – Archelaus.

399-396 BC – – Orestes – – Ruled jointly with Aeropus II, until he was murdered by Aeropus II.

399-394/393 BC – – Aeropus II – – Joint rule with Orestes until 396 BC, then sole rule.

393 BC – – Amyntas II – – Very brief reign ended with his assassination by an Elimieotan nobleman named Derdas.

393 BC – – Pausanias – – Assassinated by, Amyntas III in the year of his accession.

393 BC – – Amyntas III (First Reign).

393-392 BC – – Argaeus II – – Usurped throne from Amyntas III for about a year with the aid of the Illyrians.

392-370 BC – – Amyntas III (Second Reign) – – Restored to the throne after around one year.

370-368 BC – – Alexander II – – Assassinated by his maternal uncle Ptolemy of Aloros.

368-359 BC – – Perdiccas III – – Ptolemy of Aloros was his regent from 368-365 BC, until he was murdered by Perdiccas III.

359 BC – – Amyntas IV – – Young son of Perdiccas III, throne usurped by Philip II.

359-336 BC – – Philip II – – Expanded Macedonian territory and influence to achieve a dominant position in the Balkans, confederated most of the Greek city-states in the League of Corinth under his hegemony.

336-323 BC – – Alexander III the Great – – The most notable Macedonian king and one of the most celebrated kings and military strategists of all time. By the end of his reign, Alexander was simultaneously King of Macedonia, Pharaoh of Egypt and King of Persia, and had conquered the entire former Achaemenid Empire as well as parts of the western Indus Valley.

323-317 BC – – Philip III Arrhidaeus – – Half-Brother of Alexander the Great, Titular figurehead king of the Macedonian Empire, during the early Wars of the Diadochi; was mentally disabled to at least some degree. Executed by Olympias.

323/317-309 BC – – Alexander IV – – Son of Alexander the Great and Roxana of Bactria, who was yet unborn at the time of his father’s death. A pretender upon his birth, from 317 BC the titular figurehead king of the Macedonian Empire, during the early-middle Wars of the Diadochi. Executed by Cassander.

Achaemenid Dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaemenid_dynasty

The Achaemenid dynasty was a royal house that ruled the Persian Empire, which eventually stretched from Egypt and Thrace in the west to Central Asia and the Indus Valley in the east.

Origins

The history of the Achaemenid dynasty is mainly known through Greek historians, such as Herodotus, Thucydides, and Xenophon. Additional sources include the Bible, other Jewish religious texts, and native Iranian sources.

Darius the Great, in an effort to establish his legitimacy, later traced his genealogy to Achaemenes, Persian “Haxamanis”. His son was given as Teispes, and from him came in turn Ariaramnes, Arsames, and Hystaspes. However, there is no historical evidence for any of these.

Dynasty

The Persian Empire was a hereditary monarchy, though the spirit of eldest son succession was often violated through palace intrigues. The historical kings as given in Greek sources are:

Achaemenid Rulers

Name – – – Date – – – Comments

Cyrus I late 7th century BC King of the city of Anshan in Persia.

Cambyses I – – early 6th century–559 BC – – Vassal of Astyages, king of the Medes (584-550), and married to his daughter Mandane.

Cyrus II – – 559–530 BC – – Conquered the Mede empire c. 550 BC, thus founding the Persian Empire; conquered Lydia in 547 BC, which already controlled several Hellenic cities on the Anatolian coast; soon extended his control to include them; conquered the Neo-Babylonian Empire in 539 BC, freeing the Hebrews enslaved by the Babylonians.

Cambyses II – – 530–522 BC – – Focused his efforts on conquering Egypt, Libya, and Ethiopia.

Bardiya (or Smerdis or Tanyoxarces) – – 522 BC – – There is some confusion about this person. He was either Cambyses II’s brother or an imposter – a Mede priest (Magus) pretending to be the brother.

Darius I (“the Great”) – – 522–486 BC – – Cousin and brother-in-law of Cambyses II; succeeded to the throne as the result of a coup that ousted Bardiya; continued the expansion of the Persian Empire into western Anatolia and Thrace; made war on the Scythians; invaded mainland Greece in 490 BC to punish Athens for helping the Ionian city-states revolt in 499. This effort ended with the Athenian victory at the battle of Marathon.

Xerxes I – – 486–465 BC – – Quelled a revolt in Egypt, then invaded Greece in 480 BC to finish what his father had started; ravaged Athens after the populace had abandoned the city, but lost sea and land battles at Salamis, Plataea, and Mycale and was forced to withdraw from both the Greek mainland and Anatolian Greece. He probably signed a peace treaty with Athens in 469 BC after the Battle of Eurymedon (Peace of Callias).

Artaxerxes I – – 465–424 BC – – Came to the throne after a series of palace murders; defeated an Athenian force in 454 BC that was aiding an Egyptian revolt (which began in 460 BC); granted asylum to Themistocles; signed a second peace with Athens in 449 BC after losing a naval battle to Cimon’s fleet off Cyprus.

Xerxes II – – 424 BC – – First in line for the throne; murdered after 45 days by Sogdianus.

Sogdianus (Secydianus) – – 424–423 BC – – Bastard son of Artaxerxes I; murdered Xerxes II; murdered in turn by his half brother Ochus seven months later.

Darius II (“Ochus”) – – 423–404 BC – – Entered into an alliance with Sparta after Athens’ losses during the Sicily campaign in 412 BC.

Artaxerxes II – – 404–358 BC – – Was the target of Cyrus the Younger’s “anabasis” – his ill-fated march “up country” to usurp the throne from his brother; supported Athens in the Corinthian War (supplying Conan with a fleet of ships), then switched sides to support Sparta; was eventually able to dictate terms to both sides, imposing the “King’s Peace” in 387 BC, which permanently ceded all the Anatolia cities to Persia. Had to put down repeated revolts in Egypt, during which he hired out-of-work Athenian strategoi. Endured a series of satrap revolts in the later years of his reign.

Artaxerxes III (“Ochus”) – – 358–338 BC – – Also came to the throne as a result of a series of palace murders; revolt of Artabazus in Phrygia; additional revolts in Egypt, Phoenicia and Cyprus; gave modest help to the Greeks’ attempt to rein in Philip II’s increasing power in Macedon (siege of Perinthus in 340 BC).

Artaxerxes IV (“Arses”) – – 338–336 BC – – Placed on the throne as an adolescent by Bagoas, advisor to the King, after Bagoas had poisoned Artaxerxes III; poisoned by Bagoas when he threatened to punish him for his crimes.

Darius III – – 336–330 BC – – Placed on the throne by Bagoas; poisoned Bagoas when he learned of a plot to kill him. Spent most of his reign fighting Alexander III of Macedon; captured and killed by the Bactrian satrap Bessos after Alexander’s conquest was complete.

Artaxerxes V (“Bessus”) – – 330–329 BC – – Satrap of Bactria; assumed title of “King” after death of Darius III; tried to resist Alexander, but was betrayed by his generals and killed by Darius’ brother, Oxathres.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Achaemenian-dynastyhttps://www.britannica.com/topic/Achaemenian-dynasty

Achaemenian Dynasty, (559–330 BC), ancient Iranian dynasty whose kings founded and ruled the Achaemenian Empire. Achaemenes (Persian Hakhamanish), the Achaemenians’ eponymous ancestor, is presumed to have lived early in the 7th century BC, but little is known of his life. From his son Teispes two lines of kings descended. The kings of the older line were Cyrus I, Cambyses I, Cyrus II (the Great), and Cambyses II. After the death of Cambyses II (522 BC) the junior line came to the throne with Darius I. The dynasty became extinct with the death of Darius III, following his defeat (330 BC) by Alexander the Great.

Probably the greatest of the Achaemenian rulers were Cyrus II (reigned 559–c. 529 BC), who actually established the empire and from whose reign it is dated; Darius I (522–486 BC), who excelled as an administrator and secured the borders from external threats; and Xerxes I (486–465 BC), who completed many of the buildings begun by Darius. During the time of Darius I and Xerxes I, the empire extended as far west as Macedonia and Libya and as far east as the Hyphasis (Beas) River; it stretched to the Caucasus Mountains and the Aral Sea in the north and to the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Desert in the south.

The Achaemenian rule of conquered peoples was generally liberal; the empire itself was divided into provinces (satrapies), each administered by a satrap who underwent frequent inspections by officials reporting directly to the king.

Royal inscriptions were usually trilingual, in Old Persian, Elamite, and Akkadian; Aramaic, however, was employed for imperial administration and diplomatic correspondence.

Building activity was extensive during the height of the empire, and of the several Achaemenian capitals, the ruins at Pasargadae and at Persepolis are probably the most outstanding. Achaemenian sculptured reliefs and a great number of smaller art objects present a remarkably unified style for the period. Metalwork, especially in gold, was highly developed, and a variety of carefully executed examples survive.

Cyrus the Great King of Persia

[Cyrus the Great was the founder of the Achaemenian Empire. His empire, stretching from the Aegean Sea to the Indus River, was the largest that had ever existed at the time of his rule. Cyrus pieced his kingdom together using a mixture of conquest and diplomacy, attesting to his skills as a warrior and a statesman. His reputation as “great” was probably enhanced by the extent to which his figure was mythologized. The Greek historian Herodotus recorded one of the most well-known legends about the ruler in his History.]

Cyrus the Great (born 590–580 BC, Media, or Persis [now in Iran]—died c. 529 BC, Asia) was a conqueror who founded the Achaemenian empire, centred on Persia and comprising the Near East from the Aegean Sea eastward to the Indus River. He is also remembered in the Cyrus legend—first recorded by Xenophon, Greek soldier and author, in his Cyropaedia—as a tolerant and ideal monarch who was called the father of his people by the ancient Persians. In the Bible, he is the liberator of the Jews who were captive in Babylonia.

Life and legend

Cyrus was born between 590 and 580 BC, either in Media or, more probably, in Persis, the modern Fars province of Iran. The meaning of his name is in dispute, for it is not known whether it was a personal name or a throne name given to him when he became a ruler. It is noteworthy that after the Achaemenian empire the name does not appear again in sources relating to Iran, which may indicate some special sense of the name.

Most scholars agree, however, that Cyrus the Great was at least the second of the name to rule in Persia. One cuneiform text in Akkadian—the language of Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq) in the pre-Christian era—asserts he was the son of Cambyses, great king, king of Anshan, grandson of Cyrus, great king, king of Anshan, descendant of Teispes, great king, king of Anshan, of a family [which] always [exercised] kingship.

In any case, it is clear that Cyrus came from a long line of ruling chiefs.

The most important source for his life is the Greek historian Herodotus. The idealized biography by Xenophon is a work for the edification of the Greeks concerning the ideal ruler, rather than a historical treatise. It does, however, indicate the high esteem in which Cyrus was held, not only by his own people, the Persians, but by the Greeks and others. Herodotus says that the Persians called Cyrus their father, while later Achaemenian rulers were not so well regarded. The events of the childhood of Cyrus, as told by Herodotus with echoes in Xenophon, may be called a Cyrus legend since it obviously follows a pattern of folk beliefs about the almost superhuman qualities of the founder of a dynasty. Similar beliefs also exist about the founders of later dynasties throughout the history of Iran. According to the legend, Astyages, the king of the Medes and overlord of the Persians, gave his daughter in marriage to his vassal in Persis, a prince called Cambyses. From this marriage Cyrus was born. Astyages, having had a dream that the baby would grow up to overthrow him, ordered Cyrus slain. His chief adviser, however, instead gave the baby to a shepherd to raise. When he was 10 years old, Cyrus, because of his outstanding qualities, was discovered by Astyages, who, in spite of the dream, was persuaded to allow the boy to live. Cyrus, when he reached manhood in Persis, revolted against his maternal grandfather and overlord. Astyages marched against the rebel, but his army deserted him and surrendered to Cyrus in 550 BC.

Cyrus’s Conquests

After inheriting the empire of the Medes, Cyrus first had to consolidate his power over Iranian tribes on the Iranian plateau before expanding to the west. Croesus, king of Lydia in Asia Minor (Anatolia), had enlarged his domains at the expense of the Medes when he heard of the fall of Astyages, and Cyrus, as successor of the Median king, marched against Lydia. Sardis, the Lydian capital, was captured in 547 or 546 BC, and Croesus was either killed or burned himself to death, though according to other sources he was taken prisoner by Cyrus and well treated. The Ionian Greek cities on the Aegean Sea coast, as vassals of the Lydian king, now became subject to Cyrus, and most of them submitted after short sieges. Several revolts of the Greek cities were later suppressed with severity. Next Cyrus turned to Babylonia, where the dissatisfaction of the people with the ruler Nabonidus gave him a pretext for invading the lowlands. The conquest was quick, for even the priests of Marduk, the national deity of the great metropolis of Babylon, had become estranged from Nabonidus. In October 539 BC, the greatest city of the ancient world fell to the Persians.

In the Bible (e.g. Ezra 1:1–4), Cyrus is famous for freeing the Jewish captives in Babylonia and allowing them to return to their homeland. Cyrus was also tolerant toward the Babylonians and others. He conciliated local populations by supporting local customs and even sacrificing to local deities. The capture of Babylon delivered not only Mesopotamia into the hands of Cyrus but also Syria and Palestine, which had been conquered previously by the Babylonians. The ruler of Cilicia in Asia Minor had become an ally of Cyrus when the latter marched against Croesus, and Cilicia retained a special status in Cyrus’s empire. Thus it was by diplomacy as well as force of arms that he established the largest empire known until his time.

Cyrus seems to have had several capitals. One was the city of Ecbatana, modern Hamadan, former capital of the Medes, and another was a new capital of the empire, Pasargadae, in Persis, said to be on the site where Cyrus had won the battle against Astyages. The ruins today, though few, arouse admiration in the visitor. Cyrus also kept Babylon as a winter capital.

No Persian chauvinist, Cyrus was quick to learn from the conquered peoples. He not only conciliated the Medes but united them with the Persians in a kind of dual monarchy of the Medes and Persians. Cyrus had to borrow the traditions of kingship from the Medes, who had ruled an empire when the Persians were merely their vassals. A Mede was probably made an adviser to the Achaemenian king, as a sort of chief minister; on later reliefs at Persepolis, a capital of the Achaemenian kings from the time of Darius, a Mede is frequently depicted together with the great king. The Elamites, indigenous inhabitants of Persis, were also the teachers of the Persians in many ways, as can be seen, for example, in the Elamite dress worn by Persians and by Elamite objects carried by them on the stone reliefs at Persepolis. There also seems to have been little innovation in government and rule, but rather a willingness to borrow, combined with an ability to adapt what was borrowed to the new empire. Cyrus was undoubtedly the guiding genius in the creation not only of a great empire but in the formation of Achaemenian culture and civilization.

Little is known of the family life of Cyrus. He had two sons, one of whom, Cambyses, succeeded him; the other, Bardiya (Smerdis of the Greeks), was probably secretly put to death by Cambyses after he became ruler. Cyrus had at least one daughter, Atossa (who married her brother Cambyses), and possibly two others, but they played no role in history.

When Cyrus defeated Astyages he also inherited Median possessions in eastern Iran, but he had to engage in much warfare to consolidate his rule in this region. After his conquest of Babylonia, he again turned to the east, and Herodotus tells of his campaign against nomads living east of the Caspian Sea. According to the Greek historian, Cyrus was at first successful in defeating the ruler of the nomads—called the Massagetai—who was a woman, and captured her son. On the son’s committing suicide in captivity, his mother swore revenge and defeated and killed Cyrus. Herodotus’s record may be apocryphal, but Cyrus’s conquests in Central Asia were probably genuine, since a city in farthest Sogdiana was called Cyreschata, or Cyropolis, by the Greeks, which seems to prove the extent of his Eastern conquests.

The Legacy of Cyrus

It is a testimony to the capability of the founder of the Achaemenian empire that it continued to expand after his death and lasted for more than two centuries. But Cyrus was not only a great conqueror and administrator; he held a place in the minds of the Persian people similar to that of Romulus and Remus in Rome or Moses for the Israelites. His saga follows in many details the stories of hero and conquerors from elsewhere in the ancient world. The manner in which the baby Cyrus was given to a shepherd to raise is reminiscent of Moses in the bulrushes in Egypt, and the overthrow of his tyrannical grandfather has echoes in other myths and legends. There is no doubt that the Cyrus saga arose early among the Persians and was known to the Greeks. The sentiments of esteem or even awe in which Persians held him were transmitted to the Greeks, and it was no accident that Xenophon chose Cyrus to be the model of a ruler for the lessons he wished to impart to his fellow Greeks.

In short, the figure of Cyrus has survived throughout history as more than a great man who founded an empire. He became the epitome of the great qualities expected of a ruler in antiquity, and he assumed heroic features as a conqueror who was tolerant and magnanimous as well as brave and daring. His personality as seen by the Greeks influenced them and Alexander the Great, and, as the tradition was transmitted by the Romans, may be considered to influence our thinking even now. In the year 1971, Iran celebrated the 2,500th anniversary of the founding of the monarchy by Cyrus.

Darius I – King of Persia

Darius I (born 550 BC—died 486 BC) was the king of Persia in 522–486 BC, one of the greatest rulers of the Achaemenid dynasty, who was noted for his administrative genius and for his great building projects. Darius attempted several times to conquer Greece; his fleet was destroyed by a storm in 492 BC, and the Athenians defeated his army at Marathon in 490 BC.

Ascent to Monarchy

Darius was the son of Hystaspes, the satrap (provincial governor) of Parthia. The principal contemporary sources for his history are his own inscriptions, especially the great trilingual inscription on the B?situn (Behistun) rock at the village of the same name, in which he tells how he gained the throne. The accounts of his accession given by the Greek historians Herodotus and Ctesias are in many points obviously derived from this official version but are interwoven with legends.

According to Herodotus, Darius, when a youth, was suspected by Cyrus II the Great (who ruled from 559 to 529 BC) of plotting against the throne. Later Darius was in Egypt with Cambyses II, the son of Cyrus and heir to his kingdom, as a member of the royal bodyguard. After the death of Cambyses in the summer of 522 BC, Darius hastened to Media, where, in September, with the help of six Persian nobles, he killed Bardiya (Smerdis), another son of Cyrus, who had usurped the throne the previous March. In the B?situn inscription Darius defended this deed and his own assumption of kingship on the grounds that the usurper was actually Gaumata, a Magian, who had impersonated Bardiya after Bardiya had been murdered secretly by Cambyses. Darius therefore claimed that he was restoring the kingship to the rightful Achaemenid house. He himself, however, belonged to a collateral branch of the royal family, and, as his father and grandfather were alive at his accession, it is unlikely that he was next in line to the throne. Some modern scholars consider that he invented the event of Gaumata in order to justify his actions and that the murdered king was indeed the son of Cyrus.

Darius did not at first gain general recognition but had to impose his rule by force. His assassination of Bardiya was followed, particularly in the eastern provinces, by widespread revolts, which threatened to disrupt the empire. In Susiana, Babylonia, Media, Sagartia, and Margiana, independent governments were set up, most of them by men who claimed to belong to the former ruling families. Babylonia rebelled twice and Susiana three times. In Persia itself a certain Vahyazdata, who pretended to be Bardiya, gained considerable support. These risings, however, were spontaneous and uncoordinated, and, notwithstanding the small size of his army, Darius and his generals were able to suppress them one by one. In the B?situn inscription he records that in 19 battles he defeated nine rebel leaders, who appear as his captives on the accompanying relief. By 519 BC, when the third rising in Susiana was put down, he had established his authority in the east. In 518 BC Darius visited Egypt, which he lists as a rebel country, perhaps because of the insubordination of its satrap, Aryandes, whom he put to death.

Fortification of the Empire

Having restored internal order in the empire, Darius undertook a number of campaigns for the purpose of strengthening his frontiers and checking the incursions of nomadic tribes. In 519 BC he attacked the Scythians east of the Caspian Sea and a few years later conquered the Indus Valley. In 513 BC, after subduing eastern Thrace and the Getae, he crossed the Danube River into European Scythia, but the Scythian nomads devastated the country as they retreated from him, and he was forced, for lack of supplies, to abandon the campaign. The satraps of Asia Minor completed the subjugation of Thrace, secured the submission of Macedonia, and captured the Aegean islands of Lemnos and Imbros. Thus, the approaches to Greece were in Persian hands, as was control of the Black Sea grain trade through the straits, the latter being of major importance to the Greek economy. The conquest of Greece was a logical step to protect Persian rule over the Greeks of Asia Minor from interference by their European kinsmen. According to Herodotus, Darius, before the Scythian campaign, had sent ships to explore the Greek coasts, but he took no military action until 499 BC, when Athens and Eretria supported an Ionian revolt against Persian rule. After the suppression of this rebellion, Mardonius, Darius’ son-in-law, was given charge of an expedition against Athens and Eretria, but the loss of his fleet in a storm off Mount Athos (492 BC) forced him to abandon the operation. In 490 BC another force under Datis, a Mede, destroyed Eretria and enslaved its inhabitants but was defeated by the Athenians at Marathon. Preparations for a third expedition were delayed by an insurrection in Egypt, and Darius died in 486 BC before they were completed.

Darius as an Administrator

Although Darius consolidated and added to the conquests of his predecessors, it was as an administrator that he made his greatest contribution to Persian history. He completed the organization of the empire into satrapies, initiated by Cyrus the Great, and fixed the annual tribute due from each province. During his reign, ambitious and far-sighted projects were undertaken to promote imperial trade and commerce. Coinage, weights, and measures were standardized and land and sea routes developed. An expedition led by Scylax of Caryanda sailed down the Indus River and explored the sea route from its mouth to Egypt, and a canal from the Nile River to the Red Sea, probably begun by the chief of the Egyptian delta lords, Necho I (7th century BC), was repaired and completed.

While measures were thus taken to unite the diverse peoples of the empire by a uniform administration, Darius followed the example of Cyrus in respecting native religious institutions. In Egypt he assumed an Egyptian titulary and gave active support to the cult. He built a temple to the god Amon in the Kharga oasis, endowed the temple at Edfu, and carried out restoration work in other sanctuaries. He empowered the Egyptians to re-establish the medical school of the temple of Sais, and he ordered his satrap to codify the Egyptian laws in consultation with the native priests. In the Egyptian traditions he was considered as one of the great lawgivers and benefactors of the country. In 519 BC he authorized the Jews to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, in accordance with the earlier decree of Cyrus. In the opinion of some authorities, the religious beliefs of Darius himself, as reflected in his inscriptions, show the influence of the teachings of Zoroaster, and the introduction of Zoroastrianism as the state religion of Persia is probably to be attributed to him.

Darius was the greatest royal architect of his dynasty, and during his reign Persian architecture assumed a style that remained unchanged until the end of the empire. In 521 BC he made Susa his administrative capital, where he restored the fortifications and built an audience hall (apadana) and a residential palace. The foundation inscriptions of his palace describe how he brought materials and craftsmen for the work from all quarters of the empire. At Persepolis, in his native country of Fars (Persis), he founded a new royal residence to replace the earlier capital at Pasargadae. The fortifications, apadana, council hall, treasury, and a residential palace are to be attributed to him, although not completed in his lifetime. He also built at Ecbana and Babylon.

Greco-Persian Wars (492–449 BC)

Greco-Persian Wars, (492–449 BC), series of wars fought by Greek states and Persia over a period of almost half a century. The fighting was most intense during two invasions that Persia launched against mainland Greece between 490 and 479 BC. Although the Persian empire was at the peak of its strength, the collective defence mounted by the Greeks overcame seemingly impossible odds and even succeeded in liberating Greek city-states on the fringe of Persia itself. The Greek triumph ensured the survival of Greek culture and political structures long after the demise of the Persian empire.

Establishment and Expansion of the Achaemenian Empire (559–500 BC)

In 559 BC the Persian king Cyrus II founded the Achaemenian dynasty, and he would spend the rest of his life extending his rule, which ultimately reached from the Indus River valley to the Aegean Sea. After the Persians defeated Croesus of Lydia about 546 BC, the small Greek states on the Asian coast were reduced piecemeal, and Sparta, the strongest state on the Greek mainland, did nothing more than lodge diplomatic protests.

Darius, who reigned from 522 to 486 BC, consolidated and extended the Persian empire. From his capital, far inland at Susa, the royal roads led to about 20 provinces, called satrapies, which were governed by satraps possessing full military and civil powers. The conquered peoples owed tribute and military service to the king. So long as they fulfilled their obligations, they were generously treated—permitted to practice their own religion and manage their internal affairs—but disobedience was harshly punished by massacre or deportation. The imperial army consisted of archers and sparabra (“shield bearers”), a type of light infantry armed with a spear and wicker shield; Median and Persian cavalry; and the best troops of the subject peoples. The navy was drawn from the Greek states of Asia Minor and from Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Egypt. Supreme authority in war and peace was vested in the Persian monarch, whose absolute powers were tempered only by the custom of consulting his Persian officials. Darius was described as “the great king, king of kings, king of the countries possessing all kinds of peoples, king of this great earth far and wide.” As the vicegerent of the Persian god, Ahura Mazda, Darius laid claim to world rule.

In 514 BC Darius prepared to conquer Europe. Having made a reconnaissance by sea of Greece and Scythia, he decided to attack Scythia first and instructed a Samian engineer to build a pontoon bridge across the Bosporus. The imperial army overran eastern Thrace and crossed the Danube on a pontoon bridge that was constructed by Greek contingents within the Persian navy. The Persians then advanced far into what is now Ukraine, probably in 513 BC. The Scythians retreated until Darius outran his lines of supply and then harassed his forces when he turned back. The Greek commanders in the Persian navy, although asked by the Scythians to cut the bridge over the Danube, remained loyal to Darius, but some Greek states bordering the Bosporus and the Hellespont rose in rebellion at the news of his discomfiture. These operations convinced Darius that a strong bridgehead in Europe was necessary. His generals punished the Greek rebels, established a satrapy in southern Thrace that cut off the Scythians from their Spartan allies, and received the submission of the king of Macedonia. Meanwhile, the Persian navy reduced Lemnos and Imbros (Gökçeada), and a Persian force was ready in 500 BC to attack Naxos, the strongest island in the Cyclades. This expedition was probably intended to pave the way for an invasion of Greece.

The Ionian Revolt (499–493 BC)

Discontent in the Greek states of Asia Minor was caused as much by Persia’s support of tyrants as by demands for tribute and service. This policy was exploited by two unscrupulous tyrants. Histiaeus, tyrant of Miletus, had been detained at Susa. His son-in-law Aristagoras, ruling at Miletus as his deputy, had promoted the Persian expedition to Naxos. When the expedition proved unsuccessful, Histiaeus and Aristagoras, fearing Persian reprisals, planned to raise the Greek states of Asia Minor in revolt. Aristagoras proclaimed a constitutional government at Miletus, and the tyrants were expelled from the other states.

During the winter Aristagoras sailed to Greece in search of support. The Spartans, realizing their limitations as a land power, refused to send troops, but the Athenians promised 20 triremes and the Eretrians 5 triremes. When these ships arrived in 498 BC, the Ionians started operations by capturing and burning most of Sardis, the capital of the satrapy. This success inspired uprisings in the Greek states of the Bosporus and Hellespont, Caria, and the Greek cities of Cyprus. At this stage the Athenians withdrew their ships, and the Eretrians probably followed their example.

The rebels had little chance of defeating the three Persian army groups that were deployed in 497 BC, and everything depended on an offensive by sea in order to secure Cyprus and confine the Phoenician fleet to the southern Mediterranean. The Persians were quick to see the importance of Cyprus. One army group landed in the north of the island with a Phoenician fleet in support and attacked Salamis by land and sea. Here the Ionians defeated the Phoenician fleet, but the Cyprian Greeks were routed by the Persian army. The last Greek stronghold on the island capitulated in 496 BC. Meanwhile, two Persian army groups regained control of the Bosporus and Hellespont. Although they were delayed by a defeat at the hands of the Carians in 496 BC, they mounted a final campaign in 495 BC. While the Persian army held the coast near Miletus, a large fleet, recruited from Egypt, Phoenicia, and Cyprus, advanced to harbours controlled by the army and engaged the Ionian fleet of 353 triremes near the island of Lade off Miletus. The Persian victory at sea was decisive. Miletus fell in 494 BC, and the revolt was stamped out in 493 BC.

The Ionian Revolt was of great value to the Greek cause: it postponed the Persian attack on Greece until the Greek mainland states were capable of united action, it weakened Persian confidence, and it taught the Greeks some valuable lessons. Individually, the Greeks had outfought the Persians on land and sea, and resistance therefore did not seem hopeless. However, the need for close cooperation and strong leadership in the future was obvious. The Ionians had indeed created a council of deputies drawn from the individual states and had entrusted to it the direction of strategy, but they had failed to include in the council the Greeks of the Bosporus, Hellespont, and Cyprus. They had also failed to appoint a commander in chief of the allied forces until the eve of the battle of Lade, when it was already too late.

The Persian Attack and the Battle of Marathon (490 BC)

Darius punished the ringleaders in Asia by execution or deportation, but he made a liberal settlement with the states. Democratic governments were permitted, a moderate rate of tribute was imposed, and the states had to submit their disputes to arbitration. This was politic, since Darius hoped to use the Ionian fleet against Greece. In Europe his son-in-law Mardonius extended Persian rule to the borders of Macedonia, and his envoys visited the free Greek states to ask for “earth and water,” the tokens of submission to Persia. By 491 BC Eretria and Athens knew that an attack by sea was impending.

Before the Ionian Revolt Sparta and Athens had been at war, but the Persian threat brought them closer together. Athenian policy toward Persia had vacillated before and during the Ionian Revolt, but the will to resist was now strengthened by the Persian support of the exiled Athenian tyrant Hippias. The Athenians were also receiving advice from Miltiades, the leader of a semi-independent Athenian principality in the Chersonese. As a vassal of Darius, Miltiades had fought with the Persians in the Scythian campaign, and he was thus well versed in Persian tactics. Even so, Sparta and Athens had no plans for united action when the Persian force, perhaps comprising about 25,000 fighters, sailed across the Aegean, landed on Euboea, and captured Carystus and Eretria. In September 490 BC the Persian army landed unopposed on the plain of Marathon in north-east Attica, where the lines of supply with Euboea and the east were easy and secure. The speed and the initiative of the Persians found Athens still isolated.

The Athenian army was at Athens, prepared to repel any landing in its vicinity, and the small fleet was ready to attack any Persian convoy in the area. When news came from Marathon, the assembly sent a runner to inform Sparta and decided on the proposal of Miltiades to send the heavily armed hoplite army to the foothills above Marathon. The decision was wise, for the alternative—to stay and defend Athens—would have cut Athens off from Sparta by land and sea and exposed the city to blockade. At Marathon, however, the polemarchos (supreme military commander) Callimachus and the 10 generals (each of whom held operational command for one day according to Herodotus) had to choose between attack and delay. Miltiades’s advice prevailed: the Athenians would attack as soon as opportunity offered.

First the Athenians advanced their position to within a mile of the enemy by felling trees and creating obstacles for the dreaded Persian cavalry. Then the opportunity came. Before dawn some Ionian deserters reported, “The cavalry are away.” Miltiades, who held the operational command, attacked at dawn. With a thin centre and strengthened wings, the line of about 10,000 Athenians and 1,000 Plataeans charged the enemy infantry before the cavalry could return. The Greek wings defeated the Persians and wheeled inward to attack the Persian centre, which had driven the Greek centre back. The longer spears and heavier armour of the bronze-clad Greek infantry prevailed over the Persians with their short spears, wicker shields, and padded clothing. The rout was complete. According to Herodotus, the Greeks lost 192 soldiers, the Persians 6,400. The majority escaped to the fleet, which sailed at once, hoping to surprise Athens, but the Athenians—by a forced march—arrived that evening to defend the city. The Persians then departed. The next day a Spartan force, which had been delayed by religious observances at Sparta, reached Athens and went on to view the battlefield.

One episode from the Greek victory at Marathon would serve as the inspiration for the modern marathon footrace. According to legend, an Athenian messenger was sent from Marathon to Athens, a distance of about 25 miles (40 km), and there he announced the Persian defeat before dying of exhaustion. Herodotus, however, relates the events of Pheidippides (also spelled Phidippides or Philippides), a h?merodromos, or professional long-distance “day runner,” employed by the Athenian military as a courier. Pheidippides was dispatched from Athens to Sparta before the battle in order to request assistance from the Spartans; he is said to have covered about 150 miles (240 km) in about two days.

The Expedition of Xerxes (480–479 BC)

The Persian failure at Marathon was followed by a full-scale invasion. It was delayed, by a revolt in Egypt and the death of Darius, until 480 BC, when Darius’s successor, Xerxes, crossed the Hellespont in late spring with a vast army and a large fleet. The advance was slow, and the fleet had to provision the army. The Greeks therefore had ample time to make preparations. The problem of uniting those states that had the will to resist Persia, about 30 in number, was solved by Sparta, which held a congress of delegates and formed a general alliance. The states agreed to stop all wars among themselves and conferred the command by land and sea on Sparta. The congress met regularly, each state having one vote, and decisions by the majority were binding on all members. It possessed recruiting, diplomatic, and judicial powers. In the field the commander in chief, nominated by Sparta, consulted the commanders of the national contingents but made his own decision. Thus, the Greek congress was a highly centralized and efficient organization for allied action. Its chief strength on land lay in the Spartans and their allies, and at sea it lay in the Athenians, ably led by Themistocles, who had increased the fleet to 200 ships. A coordinated defence of both elements was now possible. It lay with Sparta to choose the time and place for applying the relatively small but excellent forces of the Greek congress.

The Battle of Thermopylae

The first decision, to hold the narrow Vale of Tempe between Macedonia and Thessaly, was abandoned when it was realized that the position could easily be turned. The Greeks then occupied the still narrower pass of Thermopylae with 6,000 or 7,000 hoplites and stationed 271 triremes at Artemisium in northern Euboea. The positions were linked by communication between the Spartan commanders, King Leonidas at Thermopylae and Eurybiades at Artemisium, who intended to halt and damage the Persian forces. Meanwhile, Xerxes was advancing slowly. He made no use of separate columns, and his fleet suffered heavy losses in a storm when it was convoying supply ships along the coast. It was already August when Xerxes began the operations, which extended over three days.

On the first day, Xerxes sent a detachment of 200 ships, unseen by the Greeks, to sail around Euboea and close the narrows of the Euripus Strait. He also attacked with his best infantry at Thermopylae, where the Greeks inflicted heavy casualties. During the afternoon the Greek fleet, having learned about the Persian detachment from a deserter, engaged the main Persian fleet with some success. The Greeks intended to sail south that night and destroy the detachment the next day, but a tremendous storm kept the Greeks at Artemisium and wrecked the 200 Persian ships off south Euboea. On the second day, news of the Persian disaster was brought up by a reinforcing squadron of 53 Athenian ships. Xerxes attacked again with no success at Thermopylae, and the Greeks sank some Cilician vessels off Artemisium.

A Greek traitor, Ephialtes, offered to guide the Persians along a mountain path and turn the position at Thermopylae. The Immortals, a cadre of elite Persian infantry, were entrusted to him. At dawn on the third day, they began to descend toward the plain behind the Greek position. Leonidas retained the troops of Sparta, Thespiae, and Thebes and sent the remainder south. He then advanced. He and his soldiers fought to the death, except the Thebans, who surrendered. Meanwhile, the Persian fleet attacked at noon. Both sides suffered heavy losses, and the Greeks realized that they could succeed only in narrower waters. That evening, when the fall of Thermopylae was known, the Greek fleet withdrew down the Euboic channel and took station in the narrow straits of Salamis.

Salamis, Plataea, and the Destruction of the Persian Invasion Force

In September Xerxes, joined by many Greeks north of Attica, burned Athens. The city was almost deserted, for the Athenians on the advice of Themistocles had entrusted themselves to “the wooden wall” of their ships in accordance with a Delphic oracle. The Greek congress decided to fortify the isthmus and keep the fleet forward at Salamis. This decision caused dissension among the ship captains. Many wished to retire to the Argolic gulf. Themistocles clinched the matter by informing Xerxes of their desire, for Xerxes, who saw the end of the campaigning season close at hand, sent 200 ships that night to cut the Greek line of retreat and posted the main fleet of 1,207 ships off the eastern exit of the straits of Salamis. During the night, the Greeks learned of his dispositions and intentions. At dawn they moved northward, feigning a retreat, drew the main fleet into the strait, and then returned to engage at close quarters. A detachment under the Corinthian Adeimantus sailed to meet the 200 Persian ships. The 310 remaining Greek ships, stoutly built for ramming, had room to maneuve against the congested stream of Persian ships, which, designed for boarding tactics, proved less handy under oar and fell foul of one another. The result was a complete triumph for Greek seamanship. The Persians fled in confusion. Soon afterward their fleet, superior still in numbers but not in morale, set sail for Asia.

That winter, while Xerxes departed to Asia, a large army wintered in Thessaly under the command of Mardonius. By skilful diplomacy, he drew the Greeks forward in the summer of 479 to the northern foothills of Mount Cithaeron near Plataea, where difficulties of supply forced the Greek army of 110,000 soldiers to withdraw during the night. The withdrawal was disorderly, and dawn found the army scattered. Mardonius at once attacked a group of 11,500 Spartan and Tegean hoplites who had halted on hilly ground. Their commander, Pausanias, undismayed by the swarms of Persian infantry, led his fighters downhill in close formation, charged at the double, and overwhelmed the enemy. When the Athenians came up after defeating the Thebans, the Greeks stormed the camp, and the survivors of the Persian army fled. Meanwhile, the Greek fleet had passed to the offensive at Mycale on the Asian coast opposite Samos. The Persians refused battle, beached their ships, and joined a large supporting army, but the Spartan king Leotychides landed his troops farther north and attacked with complete success. The victories of Plataea and Mycale ended the Persian invasion.

The Greek Offensive and the Peace of Callias (478–449 BC)

The Greek triumph was due to Spartan leadership, Athenian loyalty, and Greek fighting power. The Spartans, however, had no desire to campaign in Asia, whereas the Athenians were ready to deploy their fleet in support of the Ionians. Hence arose the Delian League, formed by Athens as executive leader and by many Greek states on the islands and Asian coast, to defend Greek liberty and exact retribution from Persia. A series of successful operations culminated about 467 BC in victory at the Eurymedon River in Pamphylia, where an allied force of 300 ships under Cimon defeated a Persian army and navy.

In 460 BC the Athenians and their allies supported Egypt in a successful revolt, but the Persian army returned to the attack. Egypt made a separate peace, and the Greeks, overconfident in their sea power, were trapped on the Nile and annihilated in 454 BC. By this time the Athenians were at war with Sparta, but a truce on the Greek mainland enabled them to launch successful attacks on Cyprus in 450–449 BC. In 449 BC the Peace of Callias finally ended the hostilities between Athens and its allies and Persia. In exchange for peace, Artaxerxes I of Persia recognized the liberty of the Greek states in Europe and Asia and vowed to keep the Persian fleet out of the Aegean.

Persia – Historical Region, Asia

Persia, historic region of southwestern Asia associated with the area that is now modern Iran. The term Persia was used for centuries and originated from a region of southern Iran formerly known as Persis, alternatively as Pars or Parsa, modern Fars. The use of the name was gradually extended by the ancient Greeks and other peoples to apply to the whole Iranian plateau. The people of that region have traditionally called their country Iran, “Land of the Aryans.” That name was officially adopted in 1935 AD.

Ancient Iran

Ancient Iran, historic region of southwestern Asia that is only roughly coterminous with modern Iran. The term Persia was used for centuries, chiefly in the West, to designate those regions where Persian language and culture predominated, but it more correctly refers to a region of southern Iran formerly known as Persis, alternatively as Pars or Parsa, modern Fars. Parsa was the name of an Indo-European nomadic people who migrated into the region about 1000 BC. The first mention of Parsa occurs in the annals of Shalmanesar II, an Assyrian king, in 844 BC. During the rule of the Persian Achaemenian dynasty (559–330 BC), the ancient Greeks first encountered the inhabitants of Persis on the Iranian plateau, when the Achaemenids—natives of Persis—were expanding their political sphere. The Achaemenids were the dominant dynasty during Greek history until the time of Alexander the Great, and the use of the name Persia was gradually extended by the Greeks and other peoples to apply to the whole Iranian plateau. This tendency was reinforced with the rise of the Sasanian dynasty, also native to Persis, whose culture dominated the Iranian plateau until the 7th century ad. The people of this area have traditionally referred to the region as Iran, “Land of the Aryans,” and in 1935 AD the government of Iran requested that the name Iran be used in lieu of Persia. The two terms, however, are often used interchangeably when referring to periods preceding the 20th century.

Chaldean Dynasty

The Chaldean Empire, also known as the Neo-Babylonian Empire, was the last Mesopotamian empire ruled by native monarchs, lasting from 626 BC to 539 BC. It arose from the remnants of the Assyrian Empire, with Nabopolassar becoming king of Babylon and establishing the Chaldean dynasty. The empire’s most renowned ruler was Nebuchadnezzar II, who expanded its territory and made Babylon a major cultural and economic centre.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaldean_dynasty

The Chaldean dynasty, also known as the Neo-Babylonian dynasty and enumerated as Dynasty X of Babylon, was the ruling dynasty of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, ruling as kings of Babylon from the ascent of Nabopolassar in 626 BC to the fall of Babylon in 539 BC. The dynasty, as connected to Nabopolassar through descent, was deposed in 560 BC by the Aramean official Neriglissar (560–556 BC), though he was connected to the Chaldean kings through marriage and his son and successor, Labashi-Marduk (556 BC), might have reintroduced the bloodline to the throne. The final Neo-Babylonian king, Nabonidus (556–539 BC), was genealogically unconnected to the previous kings, but might, like Neriglissar, also have been connected to the dynasty through marriage.

History

The term “Chaldean dynasty”, and the corresponding “Chaldean Empire”, an alternate historiographical name for the Neo-Babylonian Empire, derives from the assumption that the dynasty’s founder, Nabopolassar, was of Chaldean origin Though contemporary sources suggest an origin in southern Mesopotamia, such as the Uruk prophecy text describing Nabopolassar as a “king of the sea” (i.e. southernmost Babylonia) and a letter from the Assyrian king Sinsharishkun describing him as “of the lower sea” (also southernmost Babylonia), there is no source that ascribes him a specific ethnic origin. Since the Chaldeans lived in southernmost Mesopotamia, many historians have identified Nabopolassar as Chaldean, but others have referred to him as Assyrian or Babylonian.

The issue is compounded by the fact that Nabopolassar never wrote of his ancestry, going as far as identifying himself as a “son of a nobody”. This is almost certainly a lie since an actual son of a nobody, i.e. an obscure figure, would have been unable to gather enough influence to become king of Babylon. There is several pieces of evidence that links Nabopolassar and his dynasty to the city of Uruk (which was located south of Babylon), prominently that several of Nabopolassar’s descendants lived in the city and that his son and successor, Nebuchadnezzar II, worked as a priest there before becoming king. In 2007, the Assyriologist Michael Jursa identified Nabopolassar as the son of Nebuchadnezzar (or Kudurru), a governor of Uruk who had been appointed by the Neo-Assyrian king Ashurbanipal. This Nebuchadnezzar belonged to a prominent political family in Uruk, which would explain how Nabopolassar could rise to power, and the names of his relatives correspond to names later given to Nabopolassar’s descendants, possibly indicating a familial relationship through patronymics. As Nabopolassar spent his reign fighting the Assyrians, calling himself a “son of a nobody” instead of associating himself with a pro-Assyrian governor might have been politically advantageous.

Nabopolassar’s descendants ruled Babylonia until his grandson, Amel-Marduk, was deposed by the general and official Neriglissar in 560 BC. Neriglissar was powerful and influential prior to becoming king, but was not related to the dynasty by blood, instead likely being of Aramean origin, probably of the Puqudu clan. He was not completely unconnected to the Chaldean dynasty, however, having secured his claim to the throne through marriage to one of Nebuchadnezzar II’s daughters, possibly Kaššaya. Neriglissar was succeeded by his son, Labashi-Marduk, who was deposed shortly thereafter. Why Labashi-Marduk was deposed is not known, but it is possible that he was the son of Neriglissar and a wife other than Nebuchadnezzar II’s daughter, and thus completely unconnected to the Chaldean dynasty.

The leader of the coup to depose Labashi-Marduk was likely the courtier Belshazzar, who in Labashi-Marduk’s place proclaimed Nabonidus, Belshazzar’s father, as king. The sources suggest that while he was part of the conspiracy, Nabonidus had not intended, nor expected, to become king himself and he was hesitant to accept the nomination. Nabonidus’s rise to the throne put Belshazzar first in the line of succession (it would not have been suitable for him to have become king himself while his father was still alive) and also made him one of the wealthiest men in Babylonia as he inherited Labashi-Marduk’s family’s estates. It is probable that Nabonidus, like Neriglissar, was also married to a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar II and that this was the method in which he had secured a claim to the throne. This would also explain later traditions that Belshazzar was a descendant of Nebuchadnezzar II. Nabonidus appears to have been a devotee of the god Sîn, though the extent to which he might have attempted to elevate Sîn over Babylon’s national deity Marduk is disputed. Subsequent Babylonians appear to have remembered Nabonidus as unorthodox and misguided, though not insane or necessarily a bad ruler. Belshazzar never became king and Babylon ultimately fell under Nabonidus’s leadership, as Cyrus the Great of the Achaemenid Empire invaded Babylonia in 539 BC and put an end to the Neo-Babylonian Empire. The fates of Nabonidus and Belshazzar are not known. Nabonidus may have been allowed to live and retire but it is typically assumed that Belshazzar was killed.

https://www.britannica.com/place/Chaldeahttps://www.britannica.com/place/Chaldea

Chaldea – Ancient State, Middle East.

Chaldea, land in southern Babylonia (modern southern Iraq) frequently mentioned in the Old Testament. Strictly speaking, the name should be applied to the land bordering the head of the Persian Gulf between the Arabian desert and the Euphrates delta.

Chaldea is first mentioned in the annals of the Assyrian king Ashurnasirpal II (reigned 884/883–859 BC), though earlier documents referred to the same area as the “Sealand.” In 850 Shalmaneser III of Assyria raided Chaldea and reached the Persian Gulf, which he called the “Sea of Kaldu.” On the accession of Sargon II to the Assyrian throne (721), the Chaldean Marduk-apla-iddina II (the biblical Merodach-baladan), ruler of Bit-Yakin (a district of Chaldea), seized the Babylonian throne and, despite Assyrian opposition, held it from 721 to 710. He finally fled, however, and Bit-Yakin was placed under Assyrian control.

With this decline of Assyrian power, a native governor, Nabopolassar, was able, in 625, to become king of Babylon by popular consent and to inaugurate the Neo-Babylonian empire under a possibly Chaldean dynasty that lasted until the Persian invasion of 539 BC. The prestige of his successors, Nebuchadnezzar II (reigned 605–562) and Nabonidus (reigned 556–539), was such that “Chaldean” became synonymous with “Babylonian.”

“Chaldean” also was used by several ancient authors to denote the priests and other persons educated in the classical Babylonian literature, especially in traditions of astronomy and astrology.

Babylonia – Ancient Region, Mesopotamia.

Babylonia, ancient cultural region occupying southeastern Mesopotamia between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (modern southern Iraq from around Baghdad to the Persian Gulf). Because the city of Babylon was the capital of this area for so many centuries, the term Babylonia has come to refer to the entire culture that developed in the area from the time it was first settled. Before Babylon’s rise to political prominence (c. 1800 BC), however, the area was divided into two countries: Sumer in the south-east and Akkad in the north-west.

The history of Sumer and Akkad is one of constant warfare. The Sumerian city-states fought one another for the control of the region and rendered it vulnerable to invasion from Akkad and from its neighbour to the east, Elam. Despite the series of political crises that marked their history, however, Sumer and Akkad developed rich cultures. The Sumerians were responsible for the first system of writing, cuneiform; the earliest known codes of law; the development of the city-state; the invention of the potter’s wheel, the sailboat, and the seed plow; and the creation of literary, musical, and architectural forms that influenced all of Western civilization.

This cultural heritage was adopted by the Sumerians’ and Akkadians’ successors, the Amorites, a western Semitic tribe that had conquered all of Mesopotamia by about 1550 BC. Under the rule of the Amorites, which lasted until about 1600 BC, Babylon became the political and commercial centre of the Tigris-Euphrates area, and Babylonia became a great empire, encompassing all of southern Mesopotamia and part of Assyria to the north. The ruler largely responsible for this rise to power was Hammurabi (c. 1530–1521 BC), the sixth king of the 1st dynasty of Babylon, who forged coalitions between the separate city-states, promoted science and scholarship, and promulgated his famous code of law.

After Hammurabi’s death, the Babylonian empire declined until 1488 BC, when the Hittite invader Mursil I unseated the Babylonian king Samsuditana, allowing the Kassites from the mountains east of Babylonia to assume power and establish a dynasty that lasted 300 years.

During the last few centuries of Kassite rule, religion and literature flourished in Babylonia, the most important literary work of the period being the Enuma Elish, the Babylonian epic of creation. During this same time, however, Assyria broke away from Babylonian control and developed as an independent empire, threatening the Kassite dynasty in Babylonia and on a few occasions temporarily gaining control. Elam, too, grew powerful and ultimately conquered most of Babylonia, felling the Kassite dynasty (c. 1175 BC).

In a series of wars, a new line of Babylonian kings, the 2nd dynasty of the city of Isin, was established. Its most outstanding member, Nebuchadrezzar I (reigned 1133–1110 BC), defeated Elam and successfully fought off Assyrian advances for some years.

For several centuries following Nebuchadrezzar I’s rule, a three-way struggle developed among the Assyrians and Aramean and Chaldean tribesmen for control of Babylonia. From the 9th century to the fall of the Assyrian empire in the late 7th century BC, Assyrian kings most frequently ruled over Babylonia, often appointing sub-kings to administer the government. The last ruling Assyrian king was Ashurbanipal, who fought a civil war against his brother, the sub-king in Babylon, devastating the city and its population.

Upon Ashurbanipal’s death, a Chaldean leader, Nabopolassar, made Babylon his capital and instituted the last and greatest period of Babylonian supremacy. His son Nebuchadrezzar II (605–562 BC) conquered Syria and Palestine; he is best remembered for the destruction of Judah and Jerusalem in 587 BC and for the ensuing Babylonian captivity of the Jews. He also revitalized Babylon, constructing the wondrous hanging gardens and rebuilding the Temple of Marduk and its accompanying ziggurat.

The Persians, under Cyrus the Great, captured Babylonia from Nebuchadrezzar’s last successor Nabonidus in 539 BC. Thereafter, Babylonia ceased to be independent, passing eventually in 331 BC to Alexander the Great, who planned to make Babylon the capital of his empire and who died in Nebuchadrezzar’s palace. After Alexander’s death, however, the Seleucids eventually abandoned Babylon, bringing an end to one of the greatest empires in history.

Neo-Babylonian Empire – Ancient Empire, Asia

Neo-Babylonian empire, ancient Middle Eastern empire with its capital at Babylon. It dominated much of Southwest Asia from shortly after its founding in 626 BC until the defeat of its final king by the Persian king Cyrus the Great in 539 BC. Memory of this empire was preserved through the centuries by the biblical accounts of the deeds of one of its kings, Nebuchadnezzar II.

Historical overview

Nabopolassar (Akkadian: Nabu-apla-usur), likely a member of the ruling family of Uruk, seized the throne of Babylon in 626 BC, inaugurating a dynasty that was described by later biblical and classical authors as Chaldean and known in modern scholarship as Neo-Babylonian. By 616 BC Nabopolassar had conquered the rest of Babylonia, a region that stretched from the area around what is now Baghdad to the Persian Gulf. In the years that followed he attacked cities in Assyria—with Medean and, later, Scythian support—and sacked Nineveh, the Assyrian capital, in 612 BC. The Neo-Assyrian empire met its end in or shortly after 610 BC with the defeat of Ashur-uballi? II and his Egyptian allies at Harran. Egypt, which had expanded its influence in Palestine as Assyrian power there had waned, became the primary adversary of the fledgling Neo-Babylonian empire. Nabopolassar’s eldest son, Nebuchadnezzar II (also spelled Nebuchadrezzar; Akkadian: Nabu-kudurri-usur)—named after the king Nebuchadnezzar I, of the unrelated second dynasty of Isin, who had lived centuries earlier—led the Babylonian forces in the Levant.

In 605 BC Nebuchadnezzar crushed the Egyptian forces near Carchemish in a cruel, bloody battle and pursued them into the south. On receiving news of his father’s death shortly afterward, he returned immediately to Babylon to secure his throne. The Babylonian chronicle, a cuneiform tablet that records a number of important events in Neo-Babylonian history, covers the years 605–594 BC, and not much is known from other sources about the later years of this famous king. It records a number of campaigns into the Levant, where Nebuchadnezzar took Ashkelon in 604 BC, fought against both the Egyptians and the Arabs between 601 BC and 598 BC, and put down a revolt in Jerusalem in 597 BC, after which he returned to Babylonia to fight enemies by the Tigris River in 596 BC. Having put down a revolt in Babylonia with much bloodshed, Nebuchadnezzar campaigned further in the west. He continued these military campaigns throughout his reign, even attempting an invasion of Egypt, the culmination of his expansionist policy, in 568 / 567 BC. Nebuchadnezzar eventually agreed to a border with Egypt, allowing the two empires to coexist.

A period of instability followed the end of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. His son Amel-Marduk (Hebrew: Evil-Merodach) reigned briefly, between 562 and 560 BC. His rule was opposed by others in the ruling class who supported his brother-in-law Neriglissar (Akkadian: Nergal-shar-u?ur), who became king after Amel-Marduk’s assassination. During his four-year reign, Neriglissar undertook, with his land forces and a fleet, a campaign in 557 BC into the “rough” Cilician land, which may have been under the control of the Medes. In 556 BC he was succeeded by his young son Labashi-Marduk, who was murdered soon after taking the throne.

Stability was restored when Nabonidus (Akkadian: Nabu-na?id), a man unrelated to the previous kings, took the throne of Babylon. Nabonidus was from Harran, leading some scholars to suggest that he was an Aramaean. His mother, Adad-guppi, is well known, thanks to an inscription written in the first person but almost certainly after her death, which details much of her life. A devotee of the moon god Sin in Harran, she went to Babylon and managed to secure positions for herself and her son at court. When Nabonidus took the throne, Adad-guppi was reportedly 95 years old, making it likely that her son was in his 60’s when he became king. According to the inscription, she died in the ninth year of her son’s reign (equivalent to the year 547 BC), having lived to 104 years of age, and was buried with many fine grave goods after a lavish funeral. Nabonidus, himself devoted to the moon god, revived the position of high priestess of Sin at Ur and appointed his daughter to it. He was assisted in his administrative duties by his son Belshazzar (Akkadian: Bel-shar-usur). Despite his age, Nabonidus led several military campaigns during his rule. During his western campaigns he raided Cilicia in 555 BC and secured the surrender of Harran, which had been ruled by the Medes. He concluded a treaty of defense with Astyages of Media against the Persians, who had become a growing threat since 559 BC under their king Cyrus II. Nabonidus was a polarizing figure during his reign: modern excavators have found fragments of propaganda poems written both against him and in support of him.

About 552 BC Nabonidus left Babylon under the care of Belshazzar and took up residence in Taima (Tayma) in northern Arabia. Several reasons for this move have been suggested: that he was escaping domestic turmoil in Babylon, that his position on the international stage was under threat with the rise of Persian power to the east, or that he wanted to promote the cult of the moon god in that region. This caused a religious crisis because, without a king to lead the rituals, the New Year festival had to be canceled, which threw off the rest of the ritual cycle. Nabonidus returned to Babylonia in 542 BC. Three years later Cyrus attacked northern Babylonia with a large army, defeated Nabonidus, and entered the city of Babylon without a battle. The other cities did not offer any resistance either. With Nabonidus’s surrender, after which he received a small territory in eastern Iran, the Neo-Babylonian empire came to an end.

Babylonia under the Neo-Babylonians

Babylonia thrived after the fall of the Assyrian empire, assisted by its lack of external enemies near its heartland for the first 60 years of its rule. The Neo-Babylonian kings oversaw a period of rapid social and economic consolidation. The business class regained its strength, not only in the trades and commerce but also in the management of agriculture surrounding urban areas. The cultivation of cereal grains, dates, and vegetables grew in importance, aided by imperial maintenance of existing canal systems and construction of many supplementary canals to make the land more fertile. Livestock breeding—sheep, goats, beef cattle, and horses—flourished, as did poultry farming. Much was done to improve communications, both by water and by land, with the western provinces of the empire. Trade arteries that once ran through Assyria were rerouted through Babylonia. The empire had a well-functioning administrative system, which collected high taxes and tributes that were used to maintain Babylon’s armies and carry out imperial building projects.

The Babylonian dialect of Akkadian gradually became Aramaicized; it was still written primarily on clay tablets that often bore added material in Aramaic lettering. Parchment and papyrus documents have not survived. In contrast to advances in other fields, there is no evidence of much artistic creativity. Aside from some of the inscriptions of the kings, especially Nabonidus, the main efforts were devoted to the rewriting of old texts. In the fine arts, only a few monuments have any suggestion of new tendencies. An interest in earlier styles can be seen in the collection of Ennigaldi-Nanna, the daughter of Nabonidus and high priestess at Ur. Her assemblage of objects from various periods, many of them labeled, was called the world’s first museum by Leonard Woolley, who excavated the room.

Building activities

During the reigns of Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, there were widespread building activities in Babylonia. Temples and ziggurats were repaired or rebuilt in almost all the old dynastic cities. Ur was practically rebuilt under Nebuchadnezzar, while Babylon itself was enormously enlarged and surrounded by a double enceinte, or line of fortification, consisting of towered and moated fortress walls. Inside the walls a wide processional way lined with public buildings led through the center of Babylon to the temple and ziggurat of its patron god, Marduk. Where the street passed through the inner-city wall, the facades of the famous Ishtar Gate and those facing the adjoining street were ornamented in brightly glazed brickwork, with huge figures of bulls, lions, and dragons modeled in relief. This form of decoration—a costly process, since each of the bricks composing the figures had to be separately cast—provided a solution for the problem of embellishing mud-brick facades.

Glazed brickwork appears again in the court of honor of Nebuchadnezzar’s palace, using a more sophisticated design that suggests familiarity with Greek ornament. That king enlarged the old palace and added many wings, so that hundreds of rooms with large inner courts were now at the disposal of the central offices of the empire. Colorful glazed-tile bas-reliefs decorated the walls. For the rest, there were few innovations in the planning of either palaces or temples during the Neo-Babylonian period. Also (strangely enough, in view of the prolonged excavations that took place at this site), examples of contemporary art are limited almost exclusively to cylinder seals and terra-cotta figurines of unpretentious design.

Some building activities attributed to Nebuchadnezzar in texts have not been verified archaeologically. He reportedly erected a large wall, the Median Wall, north of the city between the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers. According to Greek estimates, the Median Wall may have been about 100 feet (30.5 metres) high. According to tradition, he built a set of terrace gardens, called the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, to recreate a hilly terrain for his Median wife. Moreover, Nebuchadnezzar claimed to have finished the Etemenanki, the ziggurat with a shrine of Marduk on the top that is thought to have inspired the biblical Tower of Babel. Construction of this building began in the time of Nebuchadnezzar I of Isin, about 1123 BC. It stood as a “building ruin” until the reign of Esarhaddon of Assyria, who resumed building in about 680 BC but did not finish. Nebuchadnezzar II was able to complete the building. The mean dimensions of the Etemenanki are found in the Esagila Tablet, which has been known since the late 19th century. The building measured about 300 feet (91.4 metres) on each side of the base, and it was 300 feet in height. There were five terracelike gradations surmounted by a temple, the whole tower being about twice the height of other temples.

Nabonidus likewise devoted himself to the renovation of many temples, taking an especially keen interest in old inscriptions. He sponsored building projects in 15 different Babylonian cities, repairing not only temples and ziggurats but also palaces and city walls. He supported renovations to the ziggurat at Ur, where his daughter was high priestess, and rebuilt the temple of Sin in Harran. Nabonidus also undertook building projects in Taima.

Policy of deportation and the Babylonian Exile

The Neo-Babylonians’ predecessors, the Neo-Assyrians, made deportation a core principle of their imperial policy. Peoples who did not accept Assyrian control were often moved to parts of the empire where they were cut off from potentially sympathetic neighbors and reliant on imperial protection. This policy was extensively documented in Assyrian accounts and artistic depictions of the era, as well as in the description in the Hebrew Bible of the 8th-century exile of Israel after the fall of its capital, Samaria. The Assyrian policy of settling foreign populations in recently vacated lands is also known from this account.

The account of the 6th-century Babylonian Captivity, or Exile, in the Hebrew Bible attests to the continuation, to some degree, of this policy under the Neo-Babylonians. However, the lack of contemporary sources and archaeological evidence for this period in the Levant leaves the motive and scope of the policy’s implementation under the Neo-Babylonians unclear. Some scholars argue that the Neo-Babylonians continued ruling the region as the Assyrians had: extracting tribute from local vassals and incorporating their western provinces as part of the empire. Others suggest that the Neo-Babylonians only superficially controlled the Levant, either exiling urban elites while allowing the rural population to remain or emptying out the entirety of the population in much of the area. Still others believe that the northern and southern Levant were treated differently, the northern parts being ruled as part of the empire and the southern forming a buffer zone with Egypt, meaning that deportations were likely more widespread in the southern Levant than in the northern region.

The Neo-Babylonians in the Bible and later media

Prior to modern archaeological discoveries, the Neo-Babylonians were known primarily from the Bible, which focuses on the deeds of Nebuchadnezzar. Despite the fateful part the Neo-Babylonian king played in Judah’s history, Nebuchadnezzar is seen in Jewish tradition in a predominantly favorable light. It was claimed that he gave orders for the protection of the Hebrew prophet Jeremiah, who regarded him as God’s appointed instrument whom it would be impious to disobey. The prophet Ezekiel expressed a similar view concerning Nebuchadnezzar’s attack on Tyre. A corresponding attitude to Nebuchadnezzar as God’s instrument against wrongdoers occurs in the Apocrypha in 1 Esdras and, as a protector to be prayed for, in Baruch. In Daniel (Hebrew Bible) and in Bel and the Dragon (Apocrypha), Nebuchadnezzar appears as a man, initially deceived by bad advisers, who welcomes the situation in which truth is triumphant and God is vindicated.

Daniel also refers to a state of madness that afflicted Nebuchadnezzar for seven years. This seven years’ madness likely refers to the episode in which Nabonidus, his eventual successor, moved his capital from Babylon to Taima in the Arabian desert.

These biblical accounts influenced later depictions of the Neo-Babylonian kings. In modern times Nebuchadnezzar has been treated as the type of a godless conqueror; Napoleon was compared to him. The events of Nebuchadnezzar is the basis of Giuseppe Verdi’s opera Nabucco, while his supposed madness is the theme of William Blake’s picture Nebuchadnezzar.

Below is a list of Neo-Babylonian kings and their regnal years.

Akkadian name – – – common (classical or Biblical) name – – – regnal years

Nabu-apla-u?ur – – Nabopolassar – – 626–605 BC.

Nabu-kudurri-u?ur – – Nebuchadnezzar II – – 605–562 BC.

Amel-Marduk – – Evil-Merodach – – 562–560 BC.

Nergal-shar-u?ur – – Neriglissar – – 560–556 BC.

Labashi-Marduk – – not applicable – – 556 BC.

Nabu-na?id – – Nabonidus – – 556–539 BC.

Assyria – Ancient Kingdom, Mesopotamia

Assyria, kingdom of northern Mesopotamia that became the center of one of the great empires of the ancient Middle East. It was located in what is now northern Iraq and southeastern Turkey.

Assyria was a dependency of Babylonia and later of the Mitanni kingdom about 1750 BC. It emerged as an independent state about 1400 BC, and in the subsequent period it became a major power in Mesopotamia, Armenia, and sometimes in northern Syria. Assyrian power declined after the death of Tukulti-Ninurta I (c. 1256 BC). It was restored briefly in the 11th century BC by Tiglath-pileser I, but during the following period both Assyria and its rivals were preoccupied with the incursions of the seminomadic Aramaeans. The Assyrian kings began a new period of expansion in the 9th century BC, and from the mid-8th to the late 7th century BC, a series of strong Assyrian kings—among them Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon—united most of the Middle East, from Egypt to the Persian Gulf, under Assyrian rule. The last great Assyrian ruler was Ashurbanipal, but his last years and the period following his death, in 627 BC, are obscure. The state was finally destroyed by a Chaldean-Median coalition in 612–609 BC. Famous for their cruelty and fighting prowess, the Assyrians were also monumental builders, as shown by archaeological sites at Nineveh, Ashur, and Nimrud.

Seleucid Dynasty

The Seleucid Dynasty (312-63 BC) was a Macedonian Greek royal family that ruled the Seleucid Empire, a Hellenistic state in West Asia, after the death of Alexander the Great. Founded by Seleucus I Nicator, it initially covered vast territories from Thrace to India, including Babylonia, Syria, and Anatolia. The dynasty’s power gradually declined due to internal strife, external pressures from Rome and the rise of the Parthian Empire, ultimately leading to its demise in 63 BC with the Roman conquest of Syria.

Seleucus I Nicator established the Seleucid Empire in 312 BC, following the division of Alexander the Great’s empire. He expanded its territory significantly, particularly after the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC.

The Seleucid Empire was a Hellenistic state, adopting Greek culture and language, which influenced the region’s administration, architecture, and art.

The Capital was initially based at Seleucia (305–240 BC) and then based at Antioch (240–63 BC).

Key Seleucid rulers included Seleucus I Nicator, Antiochus I Soter, Antiochus II, Antiochus III the Great, and Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

Internal power struggles and dynastic wars weakened the empire, especially after the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

Resistance to Seleucid power in Asia, wars with the Ptolemies of Egypt, the rise of the Parthian Empire, and the growing influence of Rome all contributed to the dynasty’s decline.

The Seleucid Empire was ultimately overthrown by the Roman Republic in 63 BC, when Pompey the Great annexed Syria as a Roman province.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seleucid_Empire

This era was in the Hellenistic period:

• Wars of the Diadochi 312 BC.

• Battle of Ipsus 301 BC

• Roman–Seleucid war 192–188 BC

• Treaty of Apamea 188 BC

• Maccabean Revolt 167–160 BC

• Seleucia taken by Parthians 141 BC

• Battle of Ecbatana 129 BC

• Annexed by Rome 63 BC

Partition of Alexander’s Empire

Alexander, who quickly conquered the Persian Empire under its last Achaemenid dynast, Darius III, died young in 323 BC, leaving an expansive empire of partly Hellenised culture without an adult heir. The empire was put under the authority of a regent, Perdiccas, and the vast territories were divided among Alexander’s generals, who thereby became satraps at the Partition of Babylon, all in that same year.

Rise of Seleucus

Alexander’s generals, known as diadochi, jostled for supremacy over parts of his empire following his death. Ptolemy I Soter, a former general and then current satrap of Egypt, was the first to challenge the new system, which eventually led to the demise of Perdiccas. Ptolemy’s revolt created a new subdivision of the empire with the Partition of Triparadisus in 320 BC. Seleucus, who had been “Commander-in-Chief of the Companion cavalry” (hetairoi) and appointed first or court chiliarch (which made him the senior officer in the Royal Army after the regent and commander-in-chief Perdiccas since 323 BC, though he helped to assassinate him later) received Babylonia and, from that point, continued to expand his dominions ruthlessly. Seleucus established himself in Babylon in 312 BC, the year later used as the foundation date of the Seleucid Empire.

Babylonian War (311–309 BC)

The rise of Seleucus in Babylon threatened the eastern extent of the territory of Antigonus I Monophthalmus in Asia. Antigonus, along with his son Demetrius I Poliorcetes, unsuccessfully led a campaign to annex Babylon. The victory of Seleucus ensured his claim of Babylon and legitimacy. He ruled not only Babylonia, but the entire enormous eastern part of Alexander’s empire.

Seleucid–Mauryan War (305–303 BC)

Chandragupta Maurya (Sandrokottos) founded the Maurya Empire in 321 BC after the conquest of the Nanda Empire and their capital Pataliputra in Magadha. Chandragupta then redirected his attention to the Indus River region, and by 317 BC, he conquered the remaining Greek satraps left by Alexander. Expecting a confrontation, Seleucus gathered his army and marched to the Indus. It is said that Chandragupta could have fielded a conscript army of 600,000 men and 9,000 war elephants.

Chandragupta received, formalized through a treaty, territory west of the Indus, including the Hindu Kush, modern day Afghanistan, and the eastern part Balochistan province of Pakistan, bordering on the Indus. Archaeologically, concrete indications of Mauryan rule, such as the inscriptions of the Edicts of Ashoka, are known as far as Kandahar in southern Afghanistan.

It is generally thought that Chandragupta married Seleucus’s daughter, or a Macedonian princess, a gift from Seleucus to formalize an alliance. In a return gesture, Chandragupta sent 500 war elephants, a military asset which would play a decisive role at the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC. In addition to this treaty, Seleucus dispatched an ambassador, Megasthenes, to Chandragupta, and later Deimakos to his son Bindusara, at the Mauryan court at Pataliputra (modern Patna in Bihar state). Megasthenes wrote detailed descriptions of India and Chandragupta’s reign, which have been partly preserved to us through Diodorus Siculus. Later Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the ruler of Ptolemaic Egypt and contemporary of Ashoka the Great, is also recorded by Pliny the Elder as having sent an ambassador named Dionysius to the Mauryan court.

Westward Expansion

Following his and Lysimachus’ decisive victory over Antigonus at the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC, Seleucus took control over eastern Anatolia and northern Syria.

In the latter area, he founded a new capital at Antioch on the Orontes, a city he named after his father. An alternative capital was established at Seleucia on the Tigris, north of Babylon. Seleucus’s empire reached its greatest extent following his defeat of his erstwhile ally, Lysimachus, at Corupedion in 281 BC, after which Seleucus expanded his control to encompass western Anatolia. He hoped further to take control of Lysimachus’s lands in Europe – primarily Thrace and even Macedonia itself, but was assassinated by Ptolemy Ceraunus on landing in Europe.

His son and successor, Antiochus I Soter, was left with an enormous realm consisting of nearly all of the Asian portions of the Empire, but faced with Antigonus II Gonatas in Macedonia and Ptolemy II Philadelphus in Egypt, he proved unable to pick up where his father had left off in conquering the European portions of Alexander’s empire.

Breakup of Central Asian Territories

Antiochus I (reigned 281–261 BC) and his son and successor Antiochus II Theos (reigned 261–246 BC) were faced with challenges in the west, including repeated wars with Ptolemy II and a Celtic invasion of Asia Minor—distracting attention from holding the eastern portions of the Empire together. Towards the end of Antiochus II’s reign, various provinces simultaneously asserted their independence, such as Bactria and Sogdiana under Diodotus, Cappadocia under Ariarathes III, and Parthia under Andragoras. A few years later, the last was defeated and killed by the invading Parni of Arsaces—the region would then become the core of the Parthian Empire.

Diodotus, the Seleucid governor for the Bactrian territory, asserted independence in around 245 BC, although the exact date is far from certain, to form the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom. This kingdom was characterized by a rich Hellenistic culture and was to continue its domination of Bactria until around 125 BC when it was overrun by the invasion of northern nomads. One of the Greco-Bactrian kings, Demetrius I of Bactria, invaded India around 180 BC to form the Indo-Greek Kingdoms.

The rulers of Persis, called Fratarakas, also seem to have established some level of independence from the Seleucids during the 3rd century BC, especially from the time of Vahbarz. They would later overtly take the title of Kings of Persis, before becoming vassals to the newly formed Parthian Empire.

The Seleucid satrap of Parthia, named Andragoras, first claimed independence, in a parallel to the secession of his Bactrian neighbour. Soon after, however, a Parthian tribal chief called Arsaces invaded the Parthian territory around 238 BC to form the Arsacid dynasty, from which the Parthian Empire originated.

Antiochus II’s son Seleucus II Callinicus came to the throne around 246 BC. Seleucus II was soon dramatically defeated in the Third Syrian War against Ptolemy III of Egypt and then had to fight a civil war against his own brother Antiochus Hierax. Taking advantage of this distraction, Bactria and Parthia seceded from the empire. In Asia Minor too, the Seleucid dynasty seemed to be losing control: the Gauls had fully established themselves in Galatia, semi-independent semi-Hellenized kingdoms had sprung up in Bithynia, Pontus, and Cappadocia, and the city of Pergamum in the west was asserting its independence under the Attalid dynasty. The Seleucid economy started to show the first signs of weakness, as Galatians gained independence and Pergamum took control of coastal cities in Anatolia. Consequently, they managed to partially block contact with the West.

Revival (223–191 BC)

A revival would begin when Seleucus II’s younger son, Antiochus III the Great, took the throne in 223 BC. Although initially unsuccessful in the Fourth Syrian War against Egypt, which led to a defeat at the Battle of Raphia (217 BC), Antiochus would prove himself to be the greatest of the Seleucid rulers after Seleucus I himself. He spent the next ten years on his anabasis (journey) through the eastern parts of his domain and restoring rebellious vassals like Parthia and Greco-Bactria to at least nominal obedience. He gained many victories such as the Battle of Mount Labus and Battle of the Arius and besieged the Bactrian capital. He even emulated Seleucus with an expedition into India where he met with King Sophagasenus (Sanskrit: Subhagasena) receiving war elephants, perhaps in accordance of the existing treaty and alliance set after the Seleucid-Mauryan War.

When he returned to the west in 205 BC, Antiochus found that with the death of Ptolemy IV, the situation now looked propitious for another western campaign. Antiochus and Philip V of Macedon then made a pact to divide the Ptolemaic possessions outside of Egypt, and in the Fifth Syrian War, the Seleucids ousted Ptolemy V from control of Coele-Syria. The Battle of Panium (200 BC) definitively transferred these holdings from the Ptolemies to the Seleucids. Antiochus appeared, at the least, to have restored the Seleucid Kingdom to glory.

Expansion into Greece and War with Rome

Following the defeat of his erstwhile ally Philip by Rome in 197 BC, Antiochus saw the opportunity for expansion into Greece itself. Encouraged by the exiled Carthaginian general Hannibal, and making an alliance with the disgruntled Aetolian League, Antiochus launched an invasion across the Hellespont. With his huge army he aimed to establish the Seleucid empire as the foremost power in the Hellenic world, but these plans put the empire on a collision course with the new rising power of the Mediterranean, the Roman Republic. At the battles of Thermopylae (191 BC) and Magnesia (190 BC), Antiochus’s forces suffered resounding defeats, and he was compelled to make peace and sign the Treaty of Apamea (188 BC), the main clause of which saw the Seleucids agree to pay a large indemnity, to retreat from Anatolia and to never again attempt to expand Seleucid territory west of the Taurus Mountains. The Kingdom of Pergamum and the Republic of Rhodes, Rome’s allies in the war, gained the former Seleucid lands in Anatolia. Antiochus died in 187 BC on another expedition to the east, where he sought to extract money to pay the indemnity.

Roman Power, Parthia and Judea

The reign of his son and successor Seleucus IV Philopator (187–175 BC) was largely spent in attempts to pay the large indemnity, and Seleucus was ultimately assassinated by his minister Heliodorus.

Seleucus’ younger brother, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, now seized the throne. He attempted to restore Seleucid power and prestige with a successful war against the old enemy, Ptolemaic Egypt, which met with initial success as the Seleucids defeated and drove the Egyptian army back to Alexandria itself. As the king planned on how to conclude the war, he was informed that Roman commissioners, led by the Proconsul Gaius Popillius Laenas, were near and requesting a meeting with the Seleucid king. Antiochus agreed, but when they met and Antiochus held out his hand in friendship, Popilius placed in his hand the tablets on which was written the decree of the senate and told him to read it. The decree demanded that he should abort his attack on Alexandria and immediately stop waging the war on Ptolemy. When the king said that he would call his friends into council and consider what he ought to do, Popilius drew a circle in the sand around the king’s feet with the stick he was carrying and said, “Before you step out of that circle give me a reply to lay before the senate.” For a few moments he hesitated, astounded at such a peremptory order, and at last replied, “I will do what the senate thinks right.” He then chose to withdraw rather than set the empire to war with Rome again.

On his return journey, according to Josephus, he made an expedition to Judea, took Jerusalem by force, slew a great many who had favored Ptolemy, sent his soldiers to plunder them without mercy. He also spoiled the temple, and interrupted the constant practice of offering a daily sacrifice of expiation, for three years and six months.

The latter part of his reign saw a further disintegration of the Empire despite his best efforts. Weakened economically, militarily and by loss of prestige, the Empire became vulnerable to rebels in the eastern areas of the empire, who began to further undermine the empire while the Parthians moved into the power vacuum to take over the old Persian lands. Antiochus’ aggressive Hellenizing (or de-Judaizing) activities provoked a full scale armed rebellion in Judea—the Maccabean Revolt. Efforts to deal with both the Parthians and the Jews as well as retain control of the provinces at the same time proved beyond the weakened empire’s power. Antiochus orchestrated a military campaign, capturing Artaxias I, King of Armenia, and reoccupying Armenia. His offensive ventured as far as Persepolis, but he was forced from the city by the populace. On his return home, Antiochus died in Isfahan in 164 BC.

Civil War and Further Decay

After the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid Empire became increasingly unstable. Frequent civil wars made central authority tenuous at best. Epiphanes’ young son, Antiochus V Eupator, was first overthrown by Seleucus IV’s son, Demetrius I Soter in 161 BC. Demetrius I attempted to restore Seleucid power in Judea particularly, but was overthrown in 150 BC by Alexander Balas—an impostor who (with Egyptian backing) claimed to be the son of Epiphanes. Alexander Balas reigned until 145 BC when he was overthrown by Demetrius I’s son, Demetrius II Nicator. Demetrius II proved unable to control the whole of the kingdom, however. While he ruled Babylonia and eastern Syria from Damascus, the remnants of Balas’ supporters—first supporting Balas’ son Antiochus VI, then the usurping general Diodotus Tryphon—held out in Antioch.

Meanwhile, the decay of the Empire’s territorial possessions continued apace. By 143 BC, the Jews in the form of the Maccabees had fully established their independence. Parthian expansion continued as well. In 139 BC, Demetrius II was defeated in battle by the Parthians and was captured. By this time, the entire Iranian Plateau had been lost to Parthian control.

Demetrius Nicator’s brother, Antiochus VII Sidetes, took the throne after his brother’s capture. He faced the enormous task of restoring a rapidly crumbling empire, one facing threats on multiple fronts. Hard-won control of Coele-Syria was threatened by the Jewish Maccabee rebels. Once-vassal dynasties in Armenia, Cappadocia, and Pontus were threatening Syria and northern Mesopotamia; the nomadic Parthians, brilliantly led by Mithridates I of Parthia, had overrun upland Media (home of the famed Nisean horse herd); and Roman intervention was an ever-present threat. Sidetes managed to bring the Maccabees to heel and frighten the Anatolian dynasts into a temporary submission; then, in 133, he turned east with the full might of the Royal Army (supported by a body of Jews under the Hasmonean prince, John Hyrcanus) to drive back the Parthians.

Sidetes’ campaign initially met with spectacular success, recapturing Mesopotamia, Babylonia, and Media. In the winter of 130/129 BC, his army was scattered in winter quarters throughout Media and Persis when the Parthian king, Phraates II, counter-attacked. Moving to intercept the Parthians with only the troops at his immediate disposal, he was ambushed and killed at the Battle of Ecbatana in 129 BC. Antiochus Sidetes is sometimes called the last great Seleucid king.

After the death of Antiochus VII Sidetes, all of the recovered eastern territories were recaptured by the Parthians. The Maccabees again rebelled, civil war soon tore the empire to pieces, and the Armenians began to encroach on Syria from the north.

Collapse (100–63 BC)

By 100 BC, the once-formidable Seleucid Empire encompassed little more than Antioch and some Syrian cities. Despite the clear collapse of their power, and the decline of their kingdom around them, nobles continued to play kingmakers on a regular basis, with occasional intervention from Ptolemaic Egypt and other outside powers. The Seleucids existed solely because no other nation wished to absorb them—seeing as they constituted a useful buffer between their other neighbours. In the wars in Anatolia between Mithridates VI of Pontus and Sulla of Rome, the Seleucids were largely left alone by both major combatants.

Mithridates’ ambitious son-in-law, Tigranes the Great, king of Armenia, however, saw opportunity for expansion in the constant civil strife to the south. In 83 BC, at the invitation of one of the factions in the interminable civil wars, he invaded Syria and soon established himself as ruler of Syria, putting the Seleucid Empire virtually at an end.

Seleucid rule was not entirely over, however. Following the Roman general Lucullus’ defeat of both Mithridates and Tigranes in 69 BC, a rump Seleucid kingdom was restored under Antiochus XIII. Even so, civil wars could not be prevented, as another Seleucid, Philip II, contested rule with Antiochus. After the Roman conquest of Pontus, the Romans became increasingly alarmed at the constant source of instability in Syria under the Seleucids. Once Mithridates was defeated by Pompey in 63 BC, Pompey set about the task of remaking the Hellenistic East, by creating new client kingdoms and establishing provinces. While client nations like Armenia and Judea were allowed to continue with some degree of autonomy under local kings, Pompey saw the Seleucids as too troublesome to continue; doing away with both rival Seleucid princes, he made Syria into a Roman province.

Seleucid Rulers

King – – – Reign – – – (BC) – – – Consort(s) – – – Comments

Seleucus I Nicator – – Satrap 320–315, 312–305 BC., King 305–281 BC. – – Apama.

Antiochus I Soter – – Co-ruler from 291, ruled 281–261 BC. – – Stratonice of Syria – – Co-ruler with his father for 10 years.

Antiochus II Theos 261–246 BC. – – Laodice I then Berenice – – Berenice was a daughter of Ptolemy II of Egypt. Laodice I had her and her son murdered.

Seleucus II Callinicus – – 246–225 BC. – – Laodice II – – Brother of Antiochus Hierax.

Seleucus III Ceraunus (or Soter) – – 225–223 BC. – – Seleucus III was assassinated by members of his army.

Antiochus III the Great – – 223–187 BC. – – Laodice III then Euboea of Chalcis – – Antiochus III was a brother of Seleucus III.

Seleucus IV Philopator – – 187–175 BC. – – Laodice IV – – This was a brother-sister marriage.

Antiochus (son of Seleucus IV) – – 175–170 BC. – – Antiochus IV as co-ruler.

Antiochus IV Epiphanes – – 175–164 BC. – – Laodice IV – – This was a brother-sister marriage.

Antiochus V Eupator – – 164–162 BC. – – Son of Antiochus IV and Laodice IV.

Demetrius I Soter – – 162–150 BC. – – Apama ? then Laodice V ? – – Son of Seleucus IV Philopator and Laodice IV.

Alexander I Balas – – 150–145 BC. – – Cleopatra Thea – – Son of Antiochus IV and Laodice IV.

Demetrius II Nicator first reign – – 145–138 BC. – – Cleopatra Thea – – Son of Demetrius I.

Antiochus VI Dionysus (or Epiphanes) – – 145/144–142/141 BC. ? – – Son of Alexander Balas and Cleopatra Thea.

Diodotus Tryphon – – 142/141–138 BC. – – General who was a regent for Antiochus VI Dionysus. – – Took the throne after murdering his charge.

Antiochus VII Sidetes (or Euergetes) – – 138–129 BC. – – Cleopatra Thea – – Son of Demetrius I.

Demetrius II Nicator second reign – – 129–125 BC. – – Cleopatra Thea – – Demetrius was murdered at the instigation of his wife Cleopatra Thea.

Alexander II Zabinas 128–123 BC. Counter-king who claimed to be an adoptive son of Antiochus VII Sidetes.

Cleopatra Thea – – 125–121 BC. – – Daughter of Ptolemy VI of Egypt. Married to three kings: Alexander Balas, Demetrius II Nicator, and Antiochus VII Sidetes. Mother of Antiochus VI, Seleucus V, Antiochus VIII Grypus, and Antiochus IX Cyzicenus. Coregent with Antiochus VIII Grypus.

Seleucus V Philometor – – 126/125 BC. – – Murdered by his mother Cleopatra Thea.

Antiochus VIII Grypus – – 125–96 BC. – – Tryphaena of Egypt then Cleopatra Selene I of Egypt.

Antiochus IX Cyzicenus – – 116/113–95 BC. – – Cleopatra IV of Egypt then Cleopatra Selene I of Egypt.

Seleucus VI Epiphanes Nicator – – 96–94 BC.

Antiochus X Eusebes Philopator – – 95–92 BC or 95-88 BC – – Cleopatra Selene I.

Demetrius III Eucaerus (or Philopator) – – 96–87 BC.

Antiochus XI Epiphanes Philadelphus – – 94–93 BC.

Philip I Philadelphus – – 94–75 BC. or 94-83 BC.

Antiochus XII Dionysus – – 87–82 BC.

Cleopatra Selene or Seleucus VII – – 82–69 BC.

Antiochus XIII Asiaticus – – 82–64 BC.

Philip II Philoromaeus – – 65–64 BC or 69-64 BC (Died Possibly c.56 BC).

Ptolemaic Dynasty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemaic_dynasty

The Ptolemaic dynasty, also known as the Lagid dynasty, was a Macedonian Greek royal house which ruled the Ptolemaic Kingdom in Ancient Egypt during the Hellenistic period. Reigning for 275 years, the Ptolemaic was the longest and last dynasty of ancient Egypt from 305 BC until its incorporation into the Roman Republic in 30 BC.

Ptolemy, a general and one of the somatophylakes (bodyguard companions) of Alexander the Great, was appointed satrap of Egypt after Alexander’s death in 323 BC. In 305 BC he declared himself Pharaoh Ptolemy I, later known as S?ter “Saviour”. The Egyptians soon accepted the Ptolemies as the successors to the pharaohs of independent Egypt. The new dynasty showed respect to local traditions and adopted the Egyptian titles and iconography, while also preserving their own Greek language and culture. The Ptolemaic period was marked by the intense interactions and blending of the Greek and Egyptian cultures. Under the Ptolemies, Hellenistic religion was largely shaped by religious syncretism and imperial cult. Elements of Greek education became widespread in urban spaces, culminating in the foundation of the Mouseion (including the Library of Alexandria) and the Serapeum. During the Hellenistic period, the city of Alexandria, founded by Alexander the Great, would gradually surpass Athens taking its place as the intellectual centre of the Mediterranean world.

To emulate the previous dynasties of Egypt, the Ptolemaic dynasty eventually adopted the practice of inbreeding including sibling marriage; this did not start in earnest until nearly a century into the dynasty’s history. All the male rulers of the dynasty took the name Ptolemy, while queens regnant were all called Cleopatra, Arsinoe, or Berenice. The most famous member of the line was the last queen, Cleopatra VII, known for her role in the Roman political battles between Julius Caesar and Pompey, and later between Octavian and Mark Antony. Her apparent suicide after the Roman conquest of Egypt marked the end of Ptolemaic rule in Egypt.

Rulers and Consorts

Ptolemy I Soter (303–282 BC) married first Thaïs, then Artakama, then Eurydice, and finally Berenice I.

Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 BC) married Arsinoe I, then Arsinoe II; ruled jointly with Ptolemy Epigonos (267–259 BC).

Ptolemy III Euergetes (246–221 BC) married Berenice II.

Ptolemy IV Philopator (221–203 BC) married Arsinoe III.

Ptolemy V Epiphanes (203–181 BC) married Cleopatra I Syra.

Ptolemy VI Philometor (181–164 BC, 163–145 BC) married Cleopatra II, briefly ruled jointly with Ptolemy Eupator in 152 BC.

Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator (possibly never reigned).

Ptolemy VIII Physcon (170–163 BC, 145–116 BC) married Cleopatra II, then Cleopatra III; temporarily expelled from Alexandria by Cleopatra II from 131 to 127 BC, then reconciled with her in 124 BC.

Cleopatra II Philometor Soteira (131–127 BC), in opposition to Ptolemy VIII Physcon.

Ptolemy Apion (c. 120–96 BC), son of Ptolemy VIII. Last Ptolemaic king of Cyrene.

Cleopatra III Philometor Soteira Dikaiosyne Nikephoros (Kokke) (116–101 BC) ruled jointly with Ptolemy IX Lathyros (116–107 BC) and Ptolemy X Alexander I (107–101 BC).

Ptolemy IX Lathyros (116–107 BC, 88–81 BC as Soter II) married Cleopatra IV, then Cleopatra Selene; ruled jointly with Cleopatra III in his first reign.

Ptolemy X Alexander I (107–88 BC) married Cleopatra Selene, then Berenice III; ruled jointly with Cleopatra III till 101 BC.

Berenice III Philopator (81–80 BC).

Ptolemy XI Alexander II (80 BC) married and ruled jointly with Berenice III before murdering her; ruled alone for 19 days after that.

Ptolemy XII Neos Dionysos (Auletes) (80–58 BC, 55–51 BC) married Cleopatra V Tryphaena.

Cleopatra VI Tryphaena (58–57 BC) ruled jointly with Berenice IV Epiphaneia (58–55 BC), possibly identical with Cleopatra V Tryphaena.

Cleopatra (“Cleopatra VII Thea Philopator”, 51–30 BC) ruled jointly with Ptolemy XIII Theos Philopator (51–47 BC), Ptolemy XIV (47–44 BC) and Ptolemy XV Caesarion (44–30 BC).

Arsinoe IV (48–47 BC), in opposition to Cleopatra.

Ptolemy of Mauretania (13 or 9 BC–AD 40) Client king and ruler of Mauretania for Rome.

Dates in brackets on the Cup of the Ptolemies represent the regnal dates of the Ptolemaic pharaohs. They frequently ruled jointly with their wives, who were often also their sisters, aunts or cousins. Several queens exercised regal authority. Of these, one of the last and most famous was Cleopatra (“Cleopatra VII Philopator”, 51–30 BC), with her two brothers and her son serving as successive nominal co-rulers. Several systems exist for numbering the later rulers; the one used here is the one most widely employed by modern scholars.

Other notable members of the Ptolemaic Dynasty

Ptolemy Keraunos (died 279 BC) – eldest son of Ptolemy I Soter. Eventually became king of Macedonia.

Ptolemy Apion (died 96 BC) – son of Ptolemy VIII Physcon. Made king of Cyrenaica. Bequeathed Cyrenaica to Rome.

Ptolemy Philadelphus (born 36 BC) – son of Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII.

Ptolemy of Mauretania (died 40 AD) – son of King Juba II of Numidia and Mauretania and Cleopatra Selene II, daughter of Cleopatra VII and Mark Antony. King of Mauretania.

Ptolemy II of Telmessos, grandson of Ptolemy Epigonos, flourished second half of 3rd century BC and first half of 2nd century BC.

Ptolemy of Cyprus, king of Cyprus c. 80–58 BC, younger brother of Ptolemy XII Auletes.

https://www.deviantart.com/seekhim/art/The-33rd-Egyptian-Dynasty-Ptolemid-521483590

Name – – – Meaning – – – Dates

Ptolemy I Soter – – Warlike, Saviour – – 323-285 BC.

Berenice I – – Bringer of Victory

Thais

Artakama

Ptolemy II Philadelphios – – Warlike, Brotherly love – – 284-246 BC.

Arsinoe I – – Uplifted mind

Arsinoe II

Ptolemy III Euergetes – – Warlike, Benefactor – – 246-222 BC.

Berenice II

Ptolemy IV Philopator – – Lover of his Father – – 222-204 BC.

Arsinoe III

Ptolemy V Epiphanies – – Divine Manifestation – – 204-180 BC.

Cleopatra I – – Glory of her Father

Ptolemy VI Philometor – – Lover of his Mother – – 180-145,164-145 BC.

Cleopatra II Philometora Soteria – – Lover of her Mother, Saviour

Ptolemy VIII Euergetes / Physcon – – Benefactor, Potbelly – – 170-163, 145-132, 112- 116 BC.

Cleopatra II * – – — – – 131-127 BC.

Cleopatra III Philometor Soteira Dikaiosyne Nikerphorus Kokke – – 116-101 BC.

Ptolemy IX Soter – – — – – 116-107, 88-81 BC.

Cleopatra III* – – — – – 116-101 BC.

Cleopatra Selene – – Brightness

Ptolemy X Alexander – – Defender of Mankind – – 107-88 BC.

Cleapatra III

Cleopatra Selene

Berenice III Phlopater * – – Lover of her father – – 81-80 BC.

Ptolemy XI Alexander – – — – – 80 BC.

Ptolemy XII Auletes Neos Dionysos – – Flute player, Son of Dionysus – – 80-58, 55-51 BC.

Cleopatra V Tryphaena* – – Magnificent – – 58-57 BC.

Berenice IV Epiphania* – – Divine manifestation – – 58-55 BC.

Cleopatra VI Tryphaena*

Cleopatra VII Thea Philopater* – – Father loving goddess – – 51-30 BC.

Ptolemy XIII – – — – – 51-38 BC. 51-38 BC.

Arsinoe IV* – – — – – 48-47 BC.

Ptolemy XIV – – — – – 47-44 BC.

Ptolemy XV Phliopator Philometor Caesar Cesarion – – 44-30 BC.

NOTES

The names of queens are included.

Pharaohs and their queens are placed together.

Reigning queens are marked with *

The Ptolemaic Period: 332-30 BC.

Egypt is ruled by people of Greek / Macedonian descent.

The 32nd Dyansty (Macedonian) 332-323 BC.

The 33rd Dynasty (Ptolemid) 323-30 BC.

EVENTS

After the death of Alexander the Great, one of his generals, Ptolemy I, seizes control of Egypt.

Many Greek and Macedonian settlers are recruited into the army and government.

Greek culture is encouraged.

Egyptian cities and monuments are given Greek names.

The Ptolemies are fascinated with Egyptian religion and culture.

Pictures of the Ptolemies are made in Egyptian style.

Ptolemaic rulers are looked upon as divine.

Ptolemies follow the ancient Egyptian custom of rulers intermarrying within the family.

Many temples are built for the Egyptian gods.

Greek gods become identified with Egyptian gods and are often combined.

Egyptian gods are given Greek names.

Under the Ptolemid, Egypt seizes control of Judea for a time.

There are power struggles with the Seleucid Dynasty.

Alexandria becomes a major centre of trade, learning, and culture.

The Library of Alexandria is built.

The Pharos (Lighthouse) of Alexandria was built (270 BC). The lighthouse’s construction began in 280 BC and was completed around 270 BC. The lighthouse was a massive structure, estimated to be over 100 metres (330 feet) tall. It served as a navigational aid, guiding ships into the harbour of Alexandria. Sostratus of Cnidus is credited with designing and building the lighthouse. While the lighthouse endured several earthquakes throughout its history, including those in 796 AD and 951 AD, the most destructive earthquake, occurring in 1303, and had an estimated intensity of 8+. It originated from the island of Crete, causing significant damage to the structure. The lighthouse had stood for over 1500 years, before being damaged by earthquakes in the 14th century to the point of abandonment. Following these earthquakes, the lighthouse gradually fell into disrepair and was eventually dismantled, with its stones being used to construct the Qaitbay Citadel in the 15th century. The lighthouse’s legacy lives on, with its remains still visible in Alexandria’s harbour and with the Qaitbay Citadel standing on its original site. The lighthouse became one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World and is considered the first lighthouse in history.

Egypt becomes very wealthy but is mostly benefits the monarchy and the Greek officials.

Native Egyptians are heavily taxed and exploited.

Roman Pharaoh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_pharaoh

The Roman pharaohs, rarely referred to as ancient Egypt’s Thirty-fourth Dynasty, were the Roman emperors in their capacity as rulers of Egypt, especially in Egyptology. After Egypt was incorporated into the Roman Republic in 30 BC by Octavian, the people and especially the priesthood of the country continued to recognize the Roman emperors as pharaohs, according them traditional pharaonic titularies and depicting them with traditional pharaonic garb, engaging in traditional pharaonic activities, in artwork and at temples throughout Egypt.

Though the Egyptians themselves considered the Romans to be their pharaohs and the legitimate successors of the ancient pharaohs, the emperors themselves never adopted any pharaonic titles or traditions outside of Egypt, as these would have been hard to justify in the Roman world at large. Most emperors probably gave the status accorded to them by the Egyptians little care and rarely visited the province more than once in their lifetime. Their role as god-kings was only ever officially acknowledged by the Egyptians themselves. This was a sharp contrast to the preceding dynasty of the Hellenistic Ptolemaic Kingdom, who had spent the majority of their lives in Egypt. Pharaohs before Egypt’s incorporation into the Achaemenid Empire in the Late Period had also all ruled the country from within Egypt. Egypt was, however, governed differently from other Roman provinces, with emperors hand-picking governors for the region and often treating it more like a personal possession than a province. Though not all emperors were recognized as pharaohs, Egyptian religion demanded the presence of a pharaoh to act as the intermediate between humanity and the gods. The emperors filling this role proved to be the most simple solution, and was similar to how the Persians had been regarded as pharaohs centuries prior (constituting the Twenty-Seventh and Thirty-First Dynasties).

Though Egypt continued to be a part of the Roman Empire until it was conquered by the Rashidun Caliphate in 641 AD, the last Roman emperor to be conferred the title of pharaoh was Maximinus Daza (reigned 311–313 AD). By his time, the view of Romans as pharaohs had already been declining for some time due to Egypt being on the periphery of the Roman Empire (in contrast to the traditional pharaonic view of Egypt as the center of the world). The spread of Christianity throughout the empire in the 4th century, and the transformation of Egypt’s capital Alexandria into a major Christian center, decisively ended the tradition, due to the new religion being incompatible with the traditional implications of being pharaoh.

The names of the emperors were written in hieroglyphs phonetically, based on the renditions of their names in Greek. This way of rendering the names led to the Roman pharaohs having a significant impact on modern Egyptology since the readings of their names marked an important step in the decipherment of hieroglyphs.

History

Cleopatra VII had affairs with Roman dictator Julius Caesar and Roman general Mark Antony, but it was not until after her 30 BC suicide (after Mark Antony’s defeat against Octavian, who became Emperor Augustus) that Egypt became a province of the Roman Republic. Subsequent Roman emperors were accorded the title of pharaoh, although exclusively while in Egypt. As such, not all Roman emperors were recognized as pharaohs. Although Octavian made a point of not taking the Pharaonic crown when he conquered Egypt, which would have been difficult to justify to the wider empire considering the vast amount of propaganda which he had spread about the “exotic” behavior of Cleopatra and Antony, the native population of Egypt regarded him as the pharaoh succeeding Cleopatra and Caesarion. Depictions of Octavian, now called Augustus, in traditional pharaonic garbs (wearing different crowns and the traditional kilt) and sacrificing goods to various Egyptian gods were made as early as around 15 BC and they are present in the Temple of Dendur, built by Gaius Petronius, the Roman governor of Egypt. Even earlier than that, Augustus had been accorded royal titles in the Egyptian version of a 29 BC stele made by Cornelius Gallus, despite royal titles not being present in the Latin or Greek-language versions of the same text.

Unlike the preceding Ptolemaic pharaohs and pharaohs of other previous foreign dynasties, the Roman emperors were rarely physically present in Egypt. As such, the traditional role of the pharaoh, a living embodiment of the gods and cosmic order, was somewhat harder to justify; an emperor rarely visited the province more than once in their lifetime, a sharp contrast to previous pharaohs who had spent a majority of their lives in Egypt. Even then, Egypt was hugely important to the empire as it was highly fertile and the richest region of the Mediterranean. Egypt was governed differently from other provinces, emperors treating it more like a personal possession than a province; hand-picking governors and administering it without the Roman Senate’s interference; senators were rarely made governors of Egypt and they were even typically barred from visiting the province without explicit permission.

Vespasian (69–79 AD) was the first emperor since Augustus to appear in Egypt. At Alexandria he was hailed as pharaoh; recalling the welcome of Alexander the Great at the Oracle of Zeus-Ammon of the Siwa Oasis, Vespasian was proclaimed the son of the creator-deity Amun (Zeus-Ammon), in the style of the ancient pharaohs, and an incarnation of Serapis in the manner of the Ptolemies. As pharaonic precedent demanded, Vespasian demonstrated his divine election by the traditional methods of spitting on and trampling a blind and crippled man, thereby miraculously healing him.

To the Egyptians, their religion demanded that there was a pharaoh to act as the intermediary between the gods and humanity. As such, the emperors continued to be regarded as pharaohs since this proved the most simple solution, disregarding the actual political situation, similar to how Egypt had regarded the Persians or Greeks before the Romans. The abstract nature of the role of these “Roman pharaohs” ensured that the priests of Egypt could demonstrate their loyalty both to their traditional ways and to the new foreign ruler. The Roman emperors themselves mostly ignored the status accorded to them by the Egyptians; in Latin and Greek their titles continued to be Roman only (Imperator in Latin and Autokrator in Greek) and their role as god-kings was only ever acknowledged domestically by the Egyptians themselves. Not all Egyptians were positively inclined towards the Roman emperors; there were a handful of Egyptian revolts against Roman rulers and there are surviving examples of texts by Egyptian priests lamenting Roman rule of Egypt and calling for the reinstatement of a native dynasty of pharaohs.

As Christianity became more and more accepted within the empire, eventually becoming the state religion, emperors no longer found it possible to accept the traditional implications of being pharaoh (a position firmly rooted in the Egyptian religion) and by the early 4th century, Alexandria itself, the capital of Egypt since the time of Alexander the Great, had become a major center of Christianity. By this point, the view of the Romans as pharaohs had already declined somewhat; Egypt being on the periphery of the Roman Empire was much different from the traditional pharaonic view of Egypt as the center of the world. This was evident in the imperial pharaonic titulatures; though early emperors had been given elaborate titulatures similar to those of the Ptolemies and native pharaohs before them, no emperor after Marcus Aurelius (161–180) is attested by more than a nomen (though still written in royal cartouches). Although there continued to be Roman emperors for centuries, until the Fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD, and Egypt continued to be a part of the empire until 641 AD, the last Roman emperor to be conferred the title of pharaoh was Maximinus Daza (reigned 311–313 AD).

Despite actual dynastic relationships (there were at least four distinct dynasties of Roman emperors between Augustus and Maximinus Daza), the period of Roman rule over Egypt in its entirety is sometimes referred to as the Thirty-fourth Dynasty. Some nineteenth century Egyptian scholars, such as Mikhail Sharubim and Rifa’a al-Tahtawi, split the Roman emperors into two dynasties, a Thirty-fourth Dynasty for pagan emperors and a Thirty-fifth Dynasty encompassing Christian emperors from Theodosius I to the Muslim conquest of Egypt in 641 AD, although no Christian Roman emperor was ever referred to as pharaoh by the population of ancient Egypt.

List of Emperor-Pharaohs

Name – – – Reign – – – Notes

Augustus – – 30 BC–14 AD – – First Roman emperor and the first Roman ruler to control Egypt. Instituted new unpopular taxation systems in Egypt and banned Egyptian cults in Rome itself.

[Jeremiah 31:15 ¶ Thus saith the LORD; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, [and] bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they [were] not. [Matthew 2:19]]

[Matthew 2:18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping [for] her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not. [Jeremiah 31:15]]

[Matthew 2:19 ¶ But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,]

c. 1 AD January 18 – – Herod the Great dies; kingdom split among his sons.

Tiberius – – 14 AD–37 AD – – Left little impression on Egypt.

Caligula – – 37 AD–41 AD – – Left little impression on Egypt; lifted the ban on Egyptian cults in Rome instituted by Augustus.

Claudius – – 41–54 AD – – Left little impression on Egypt; rebuked requests from Alexandria to gain its own self-governing senate.

Nero – – 54–68 AD – – Sent a small group of praetorian guards to explore along the Nile river south of Egypt, perhaps intended as a scouting mission for a later conquests in the region.

Galba – – 68–69 AD – – Left little impression on Egypt.

Otho – – 69 AD – – Left little impression on Egypt.

There are no known traces of the brief reign of Vitellius (69) in Egypt.

Vespasian – – 69–79 AD – – First emperor to visit Egypt since Augustus; received a traditional pharaonic coronation

Titus 79–81 AD – – Left little impression on Egypt

Ouespasianos – – – – – Left little impression on Egypt

Domitian – – 81–96 AD – – Introduced Egyptian deities on coins minted in Alexandria and founded temples dedicated to deities such as Isis and Serapis in Italy. Using the trappings of being pharaoh, he also sought to add further legitimacy to imperial rule.

Nerva – – 96–98 AD – – Left little impression on Egypt

Trajan – – 98–117 AD – – Egyptian sources from Trajan’s time associate empress Pompeia Plotina with the goddess Hathor, the first known direct association between the imperial family (other than the emperor) and Egyptian deities.

Hadrian – – 117–138 AD – – Paid a 8 / 10-month long state visit to Egypt in 130–131 AD, visiting many sites of note and founding Antinoöpolis. Hadrian’s cult of Antinous was influenced by Egyptian theology. Ruled during a period of Roman Egyptomania.

Antoninus Pius – – 138–161 AD – – Celebrated in Ancient Egypt due to overseeing the completion of a Sothic cycle in 139. His long reign saw the last significant temple constructions in Egypt. Visited Alexandria in the 150’s to sponsor various new buildings.

Lucius Verus – – 161–169 AD – – Joint emperor with Marcus Aurelius.

Marcus Aurelius – – 161–180 AD – – Faced with a native Egyptian revolt led by Isidorus in 171–175 AD and the revolt of the Egypt-supported usurper Avidius Cassius 175 AD. Toured Egypt in 176 AD, the province at the time badly affected by the Antonine Plague. Replaced Demotic with Greek for official use in Egypt.

Commodus – – 180–192 AD – – Last emperor to be widely attested as pharaonic patron in Egyptian temples. Subsequent decline of representations of emperors is probably attributable to decreased resources available to the clergy and temples rather than a change in imperial attitude and policy.

Neither of the two ephemeral emperors of the Year of the Five Emperors (193 AD) are attested by any pharaonic titles; Pertinax was briefly recognized in Egypt, 22 days before his assassination, and Didius Julianus was not acknowledged in Egypt at all. The usurper Pescennius Niger was the recognized successor of Pertinax in Egypt but no known pharaonic titles of his survive either.

Septimius Severus – – 193–211 AD – – Toured Egypt together with the imperial family in 199–200 AD. Repaired old buildings and established senates in Alexandria and elsewhere. Religious division and controversy led to the first large-scale persecution of Christians in Egypt in 201 AD.

Geta – – 211 AD – – Briefly joint emperor with Caracalla.

Caracalla – – 211–217 AD – – Extended Roman citizenship to all inhabitants of the Roman Empire through the 212 Antonine Constitution; his name Aurelius was then common, particularly in Egypt.

Macrinus – – 217–218 AD – – Broke long-standing convention and sent a prefect and a senator to govern Egypt, though both were deposed and the senator killed after Macrinus’s death

Diadumenian – – 218 AD – – Junior joint emperor with Macrinus

Elagabalus (218–222 AD), who succeeded Macrinus and Diadumenian, is not mentioned in any surviving Egyptian sources. His successor Severus Alexander (222–235 AD) was recognized in Egypt, but no pharaonic titles survive. The ephemeral emperors Maximinus Thrax (235–238 AD), Gordian I (238 AD), Gordian II (238 AD), Pupienus (238 AD), Balbinus (238 AD) and Gordian III (238–244 AD) did little of consequence in Egypt and are unrecorded in surviving Egyptian documents.

Philip – – 244–249 AD – – Due to decades of mismanagement and civil strife Egypt had fallen into poverty by the time of Philip’s reign. Last pharaoh to be commemorated at the great temple at Esna.

Decius – – 249–251 AD – – Oversaw the Decian persecution of Christians. His reign saw southern Egypt being raided by the Blemmyes, the first time southern Egypt was attacked since the time of Augustus.

Emperors Trebonianus Gallus (251–253 AD) and Aemilianus (253 AD) were recognized in Egypt, as attested by official documents and coins minted in Alexandria, but neither is attested by any pharaonic titles.

Valerian – – 253–260 AD – – Demonized by Christians for renewing persecutions, but popular among the Egyptian clergy.

After Valerian, Egypt was controlled by a sequence of usurpers: Macrianus Minor (260–261 AD), Quietus (260–261 AD) and Lucius Mussius Aemilianus (261–262 AD), though none of them are attested with any pharaonic titles. The legitimate emperor Gallienus (262–268 AD) was then recognized, though there are likewise no known pharaonic titles from his reign. Few records survive from Egypt from Gallienus’s successors, with little evidence of the reigns of Claudius Gothicus (268–270 AD), Quintillus (270 AD), Aurelian (270–275 AD) and Tacitus (275–276 AD), though they were all presumably recognised. Throughout most of 271 AD, Egypt was occupied by Zenobia of the Palmyrene Empire, until the province was retaken by Aurelian. The brief reign of emperor Florian (276 AD) was explicitly rejected in Egypt, with the Egyptian legions backing Probus instead.

Probus – – 276–282 AD – – Seized the imperial throne with Egyptian support. Defeated the Blemmyes, who had penetrated as far north as Coptos.

Emperors Carus (282–283 AD), Carinus (283–285 AD) and Numerian (283–284 AD) are not recorded in Egyptian sources.

Diocletian – – 284–305 AD – – Reforms removed much of Egypt’s idiosyncrasy, further integrating Egypt economically and administratively with the other provinces. Lands in southern Egypt were abandoned during a state visit in 298. The Diocletianic Persecution was particularly severe in Egypt.

Maximian – – 286–305 AD – – Western Roman emperor, ruling jointly with Diocletian; did not actually control Egypt.

Galerius – – 305–311 AD – – Persecutions of Christians continued until a deathbed decree of religious toleration by Galerius.

Maximinus Daza – – 311–313 AD – – Last emperor regarded to have been pharaoh by the Egyptians

The last aggressively Pagan emperor to control Egypt, Maximinus Daza, was the last Roman emperor to be acknowledged in hieroglyphic texts. Although royal cartouches are recorded from later times (the last known cartouche being from the reign of Constantius II in 340 AD), the pagan Egyptians posthumously used cartouches of Diocletian, rather than acknowledging the later Christian emperors.

Hyksos

The Hyksos “invasion” of Egypt around 1471 BC marked a significant turning point in Egyptian history, leading to the establishment of the Second Intermediate Period

The Hyksos would soon forever leave Egypt, and thus their expulsion ended the Hyksos-built 15th Dynasty.

Middle Kingdom of Egypt

The Middle Kingdom of Egypt (1573–1532 BC) is the period from the end of the First Intermediate Period to the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period. In addition to the Twelfth Dynasty, some scholars include the Eleventh, Thirteenth and Fourteenth Dynasties in the Middle Kingdom.

The Second Intermediate Period (1532–1478 BC) is a period of disarray between the end of the Middle Kingdom, and the start of the New Kingdom. It is best known as when the Hyksos, whose reign comprised the Fifteenth Dynasty, made their appearance in Egypt.

The Thirteenth Dynasty [1532 to c. 1499 BC] was much weaker than the Twelfth Dynasty [1573 to 1532 BC], and was unable to hold onto the two lands of Egypt. Either at the start of the 13th Dynasty, c. 1532 BC or towards the middle of it in c. 1513 BC, the provincial ruling family in Xois, located in the marshes of the eastern Delta, broke away from the central authority to form the Canaanite Fourteenth Dynasty.

The Hyksos made their first appearance during the reign of Sobekhotep IV [Khaneferre Sobekhotep IV 1519–1517 BC], and c. 1515 BC took control of the town of Avaris (the modern Tell el-Dab’a/Khata’na), conquering the kingdom of the 14th Dynasty. [The Fourteenth Dynasty was a local group from the eastern Delta, based at Avaris, that ruled from either 1533 BC or c. 1513 BC until c. 1500 BC.] Sometime around 1500 BC, the Hyksos, perhaps led by Salitis [(Salitis) Ruled Lower Egypt and founded the 15th Dynasty c. 1500 BC], conquered Memphis, thereby terminating the 13th Dynasty. The power vacuum in Upper Egypt resulting from the collapse of the 13th Dynasty allowed the 16th Dynasty to declare its independence in Thebes, only to be overrun by the Hyksos kings shortly thereafter.

Subsequently, as the Hyksos withdrew from Upper Egypt, the native Egyptian ruling house in Thebes set itself up as the Seventeenth Dynasty [1500 to 1478 BC]. This Dynasty eventually drove the Hyksos back into Asia under Seqenenre Tao, Kamose and finally Nebpehtire Ahmose I (Ahmosis I) , the latter being the first pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty [c. 1478 to 1324 BC] and the New Kingdom (1478–1087 BC).

1517 BC Hyksos “invasion” of Egypt. The Hyksos “invasion” of Egypt around 1517 BC marked a significant turning point in Egyptian history, around the Second Intermediate Period (1532–1478 BC). The Hyksos, originally identified by Wikipedia as a Semitic people, likely from Western Asia, gained control of the north-eastern Nile Delta and established their own Dynasty. This period saw a decline in Egyptian power and the rise of a “foreign” ruling class.

1479 BC Kamose start of reign [Egyptian Dynasty 17]. A Pharaoh who ruled over southern Egypt.

Kamose was the last king of the Theban Seventeenth Dynasty at the end of the Second Intermediate Period.

1478 BC Kamose end of reign [Egyptian Dynasty 17].

1478 BC Ahmose I start of reign [Egyptian Dynasty 18]. A Pharaoh who gained control over all of Egypt.

Ahmose I was the Pharaoh and founder of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt in the New Kingdom of Egypt, the era in which ancient Egypt achieved the peak of its power. His reign is dated to the beginning of the Late Bronze Age.

1473 BC Ahmose I end of reign [Egyptian Dynasty 18].

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seqenenre_Tao

Seqenenre Tao (also Seqenera Djehuty-aa or Sekenenra Taa, called ‘the Brave’) was a pharaoh who ruled over the last of the local kingdoms of the Theban region of Egypt in the Seventeenth Dynasty during the Second Intermediate Period.

He probably was the son and successor to Senakhtenre Ahmose and Queen Tetisheri.

With his queen, Ahhotep I, Seqenenre Tao fathered two pharaohs: Kamose, his immediate successor who was the last pharaoh of the Seventeenth Dynasty, and Ahmose I, who, following a regency by his mother, was the first pharaoh of the Eighteenth. Seqenenre Tao is credited with starting the opening moves in a war of revanchism against Hyksos incursions into Egypt, which saw the country completely liberated during the reign of his son Ahmose I.

Reigned: 1480-1479 BC. Seqenenre Tao died in his 40’s in battle with the Hyksos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamose

Kamose was the son of Seqenenre Tao and the brother of Ahmose I, founder of the Eighteenth Dynasty. His mother is unknown, but is thought to be Ahhotep I. His reign is important for the decisive military initiatives he took against the Hyksos, who had come to rule much of Ancient Egypt. His father had begun the initiatives and lost his life in battle with the Hyksos. It is thought that his mother, as regent, continued the campaigns after the death of Kamose, and that his full brother made the final conquest of them and united all of Egypt.

https://www.livescience.com/hyksos-did-not-invade-egypt.html

Foreign Dynasty’s rise to power in ancient Egypt was an inside job.

The Hyksos once ruled Egypt, but they didn’t arrive as invaders.

A man called “Abisha the Hyksos” was part of a foreign delegation described in a painting on the tomb of Khnumhotep II (c. 1553 BC) This is one of the earliest known uses of the term “Hyksos.”

A mysterious Dynasty of foreigners may not have invaded and taken control of ancient Egypt as was long thought. Rather, the ethnic group known as the Hyksos seems to have seized power from within Egypt.

The Hyksos ruled Egypt from 1497 BC to 1474 BC. But the new study, which involved chemical analyses of teeth collected from Hyksos cemeteries, suggests that this ethnic group thrived in Egypt for generations.

Though the Hyksos were the first foreigners to rule ancient Egypt, written records of their reign are scant. For hundreds of years, the only known mention of the Hyksos was in the Greek tome “Aegyptiaca,” or “History of Egypt,” written by a Ptolemaic priest named Manetho who lived in the early third century BC and who chronicled the rule of the pharaohs.

According to Manetho, the Hyksos made their move after the end of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom, which crumbled around 1500 BC. During a time when Egypt was in turmoil, Hyksos leaders purportedly led an invading army “sweeping in from the northeast and conquering the northeastern Nile Delta,” researchers wrote in a new study, published in the journal PLOS One.

Deciphered hieroglyphics later provided historians with a little more detail about the alleged Hyksos coup, but accounts of this Dynasty remained biased and incomplete. Egyptian rulers frequently destroyed records or spread propaganda about their predecessors, and the Hyksos people were linked to “disorder and chaos” by the dynasties that succeeded them, according to the study.

Non-Egyptian customs

In 1885, archaeologists uncovered ruins of the Hyksos capital, the city of Avaris, at a site on the Nile Delta called Tell el-Dab’a, about 75 miles (120 kilometres) north of Cairo. Decades of excavation followed; architectural details and cultural artifacts found in cemeteries, temples and residences hinted that the Hyksos originated in the Near East, said lead study author Chris Stantis, a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Archaeology and Anthropology at Bournemouth University in Poole, England.

“The tombs with non-Egyptian burial customs were especially intriguing — typically males buried with bronze weaponry in constructed tombs, without scarabs or other protective amulets like Egyptians would have been buried with,” Stantis told Live Science in an email.

“The most elite had equids of some sort (potentially donkeys) buried outside the tombs, often in pairs as though ready to pull a chariot. This is both a foreign characteristic of burial style, but also suggestive of someone [with] very high status,” Stantis said.

But long before the Hyksos emerged as a ruling Dynasty in 1497 BC, waves of migration brought this ethnic group into Egypt’s delta region, the scientists reported in the study.

Migration of women

Stantis and her co-authors collected enamel samples from the teeth of 75 ancient people in three locations at Tell el-Dab’a. They scrutinized the enamel for strontium isotopes (variations of an element), and then compared the ratios with isotopes preserved in other remains and artifacts from the region and along the Nile, to determine whether the people living in Tell el-Dab’a were “local.”

“Strontium enters our bodies primarily through the food we eat,” Stantis said. “It readily replaces calcium, as it’s a similar atomic radius. This is the same way lead enters our skeletal system; although, while lead is dangerous, strontium is not.”

Because strontium reflects the underlying geology of a region, and because dental enamel geochemistry takes shape early in life, individuals with enamel values that match local values are thereby considered to be local to the region, Stantis explained.

The scientists also used geochemical analysis to determine the sex of the individuals, to better understand the male-to-female ratio in the Hyksos capital.

Isotopes in the majority of the teeth — belonging to 36 individuals — identified them as settling in Egypt prior to the start of the Hyskos Dynasty, contradicting the narrative that the Hyksos first appeared as an invasive army. Intriguingly, the wide range of isotope values hinted that immigrants “did not come from one unified homeland,” representing “an extensive variety of origins,” according to the study.

Chemical analysis of the teeth also revealed that 30 of the individuals were female, while only 20 were found to be male. If the Hyksos had appeared in Egypt as invaders, the first wave of Hyksos would likely be all male, because men were typicallythe fighters in ancient societies. By comparison, the large number of women “immigrants” pre-dating the Hyksos Dynasty suggests that women were at the forefront of the Hyksos migration to Egypt, the researchers reported.

“Some previous research talked about men moving into Egypt: shipbuilders, merchants, mercenaries. The concept of women moving, as a family or possibly alone, hasn’t really been discussed,” Stantis explained.

“We need to look more into who these women were and why they moved, but the fact that there’s more women than men changes a lot of interpretations.”

With a clearer picture of when the Hyksos arrived and how they settled in Egypt, the next steps will involve piecing together how the Hyksos adapted to the customs of their new home and how they blended new practices with their own cultural traditions, Stantis said.

“Are the individuals buried in the Near Eastern styles first-generation immigrants, or are they continuing their ancestral funerary customs despite being born and raised in the Delta?” she said. “Dietary isotopes would also let us think about whether nonlocals were eating significantly different foods from locals, or if they shifted quickly to Egyptian food customs.”

Originally published on Live Science.

The Hyksos “invasion” of Egypt around 1517 BC marked a significant turning point in Egyptian history, leading to the establishment of the Second Intermediate Period and the first foreign Dynasty to rule the country. The Hyksos, a group of people from the Near East, initially settled in the Nile Delta and gradually gained power, eventually taking control of northern Egypt.

The Hyksos possessed advanced weaponry, including bronze weapons and composite bows, as well as the use of horses and chariots, which gave them a military edge over the Egyptians.

While traditionally portrayed as a forceful “invasion”, evidence suggests the Hyksos blended into Egyptian society and adopted aspects of Egyptian culture and governance, according to www.ancient-egypt-online.com.

The Hyksos rule marked the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period in Egyptian history, a time of political fragmentation and instability.

The Hyksos established their own Dynasty in the Delta, ruling from their capital in Avaris, while the legitimate Egyptian pharaohs retreated to Thebes in the south.

The Hyksos were eventually expelled from Egypt by Ahmose I, who founded the Eighteenth Dynasty and reunited the country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyksos

Background and arrival in Egypt

The only ancient account of the whole Hyksos period is by the Hellenistic Egyptian historian Manetho, who exists only as quoted by others. As recorded by Josephus, Manetho describes the beginning of Hyksos rule thus:

A people of ignoble origin from the east, whose coming was unforeseen, had the audacity to invade the country, which they mastered by main force without difficulty or even battle. Having overpowered the chiefs, they then savagely burnt the cities, razed the temples of the gods to the ground, and treated the whole native population with the utmost cruelty, massacring some, and carrying off the wives and children of others into slavery (Contra Apion I.75-77).

Manetho’s invasion narrative is “nowadays rejected by most scholars.” It is likely that more recent foreign invasions of Egypt influenced him. Instead, it appears that the establishment of Hyksos rule was mostly peaceful and did not involve an “invasion” of an entirely foreign population. Archaeology shows a continuous Asiatic presence at Avaris for over 150 years before the beginning of Hyksos rule, with gradual Canaanite settlement beginning there c.?1532 BC during the Twelfth Dynasty. Strontium isotope analysis of the inhabitants of Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period Avaris also dismissed the invasion model in favour of a migration one. Contrary to the model of a foreign invasion, the study didn’t find more males moving into the region, but instead found a sex bias towards females, with a high proportion of 77% of females being non-locals.

Administration

The Hyksos show a mix of Egyptian and Levantine cultural traits. Their rulers adopted the full ancient Egyptian royal titulary and employed Egyptian scribes and officials. They also used Near-Eastern forms of administration, such as employing a chancellor (imy-r khetemet) as the head of their administration.

Rulers

The names, the order, length of rule, and even the number of Fifteenth Dynasty rulers are not known with complete certainty. After the end of their rule, the Hyksos kings were not considered legitimate rulers of Egypt and were omitted from most king lists. The fragmentary Turin King List included six Hyksos kings, however only the name of the last, Khamudi, is preserved. Six names are also preserved in the various epitomes of Manetho, however, it is difficult to reconcile the Turin King List and other sources with names known from Manetho, mainly due to the “corrupted name forms” in Manetho. The name Apepi/Apophis appears in multiple sources, however.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khamudi

Khamudi (also known as Khamudy) was the last Hyksos ruler of the Fifteenth Dynasty of Egypt. Khamudi came to power in 1475 BC or 1476 BC, ruling the northern portion of Egypt from his capital Avaris. His ultimate defeat at the hands of Ahmose I, after a short reign, marks the end of the Second Intermediate Period.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-second-intermediate-kingdom-of-ancient-egypt.html

Rise To Power And Accomplishments

The Hyksos Dynasty of Egypt was ruled by six kings from Avaris, but only five are known. These were Salitis, Sakir-Har, Khyan, Apophis, and Khamudi. The Hyksos rule lasted for one-hundred-and-eight years. Although the Hyksos had established their rule in Upper Egypt, the remnants of the 14th Dynasty also ruled Lower Egypt, which by now was the 16th Dynasty. The 16th Dynasty pharaohs continued to drive away the Hyksos invaders, but failed in their efforts miserably as town after town fell to their enemies. The Hyksos started an offensive to eventually claim the city of Thebes itself. Much of the defeat of the 16th Dynasty was attributed to the famine that continued to prevail in Lower Egypt.

Challenges and Controversies

The Second Intermediate Kingdom had three dynasties that ruled at the same time. The Abydos Dynasty was also located in Upper Egypt, although its rule had the shortest reign, the duration of which was presided over by its four kings: Wepwawetemsaf, Pantjeny, Snaaib, and Seneb Kay. As the Hyksos were sacking El-Lisht, the capital city of the 15th Dynasty in Lower Egypt, another ruling provincial house in Thebes broke away from Itj-tawny. This faction later became the 17th Dynasty. and was the driving force behind the expulsionary war against the Hyksos from Egypt. The 17th Dynasty created the impetus behind the restoration of many temples in Upper Egypt, and its last two kings prompted the push to remove all Hyksos powers out of Egypt.

Decline and Demise

The 17th Dynasty was ruled by nine pharaohs. Their first rulers were more interested in trading with the Red Sea merchants and mining gold than in sharing rule with the other ruling dynasties in either Upper or Lower Egypt. However, the fact that they were more interested in making money would eventually support their wars in liberating Egypt against the northern Hyksos usurpers. The final war against the Hyksos started with the last two pharaohs of this Dynasty, namely Segenenre Tao and his son Wadjkheperre Kamose. The latter, Pharaoh Kamose, was the catalyst that eventually led to the regrouping of the Hyksos rule into the northern part of Egypt at Fayyum. The Hyksos would soon forever leave Egypt, and thus their expulsion ended the Hyksos-built 15th Dynasty.

Historical Significance and Legacy

The Second Intermediate Kingdom of Ancient Egypt was a period characterized by rulers preoccupied with making money, mining for gold, fighting the famine in Lower Egypt, and fighting off the Hyksos invaders from the north. The liberation of Egypt from the Hyksos invaders would pave the way for an era of peace that follow, allowing for the development of the art and culture that would pervade in the next dynasties to come, in which time the home-ruled New Kingdom would have total control of Egypt and all its territories. The 17th Dynasty would continue on to become the 18th Dynasty, with the ascension of Pharaoh Kamose’s brother, Ahmose I. It is said that the complete expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt was not achieved until the beginning of rule under Pharaoh Ahmose I.

https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/63775/what-is-the-significance-of-pharaoh-versus-king-in-ancient-egypt

What is the significance of “Pharaoh” versus “King” in ancient Egypt?

On Wikipedia, I started from the page of Ramses II, who is described as a pharaoh, and kept clicking on the ‘predecessor’ link. Every predecessor was a pharaoh until I got to Ahmose I.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmose_I

Ahmose I is also listed as a pharaoh but the page shows that he had two predecessors, Kamose and Khamudi, both of whom are listed as either ‘king’ or ‘ruler’ instead of pharaoh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khamudi

The predecessor pages of both Kamose and Khamudi omit the title of pharaoh for several generations. I didn’t go too far up the Khamudi predecessors, but the Kamose predecessors are all listed as kings up until Sobekemsaf I, who is listed as a pharaoh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sobekemsaf_I

Sobekemsaf’s predecessor, Rahotep, is also written as a pharaoh, but my predecessor search ends there as there is no predecessor link on his page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahotep

Rahotep is in the 17th Dynasty. I checked some previous dynasties, and it appears that all the prior rulers were called kings, up until the 13th Dynasty where they are called pharaohs again. I stopped searching here because I’m guessing going back to the 1st Dynasty will have similar results as switching back and forth between king and pharaoh.

So, my question is, what exactly is it that makes a pharaoh and how does it differentiate from king? In other words, why aren’t Kamose and Khamudi listed as pharoahs?

Replies:

1. It’s quite complicated and it depends on which users of the word ‘pharaoh’ you are talking about (ancient Egyptians or historians, or perhaps folks who write Wikipedia articles etc.). The Wikipedia entry for Pharaoh partly answers your question.

2. Technically speaking, ancient Egyptian rulers wre all kings, and pharaoh was more or less a nickname for the ruler which later gradually became an official title.

Pharaoh is the common title now used for the monarchs of ancient Egypt from the First Dynasty (c. 1822 BC) until the annexation of Egypt by the Roman Empire in 30 BC, although the term “pharaoh” was not used contemporaneously for a ruler until Merneptah, c. 1233 BC, during the Nineteenth Dynasty, “king” being the term used most frequently until the middle of the Eighteenth Dynasty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharaoh[1]

The word pharaoh ultimately derives from the Egyptian compound “great house”, written with the two biliteral hieroglyphs pr “house” and “column”, here meaning “great” or “high”. It was used only in larger phrases such as smr pr-?? “Courtier of the High House”, with specific reference to the buildings of the court or palace. From the Twelfth Dynasty onward, the word appears in a wish formula “Great House, May it Live, Prosper, and be in Health”, but again only with reference to the royal palace and not the person.

Sometime during the era of the New Kingdom, Second Intermediate Period, pharaoh became the form of address for a person who was king. The earliest confirmed instance where “pr” is used specifically to address the ruler is in a letter to Akhenaten (reigned 1392–1374 BC) that is addressed to “Great House, L, W, H, the Lord”. However, there is a possibility that the title was applied to Thutmose III (1463–1451 BC), depending on whether an inscription on the Temple of Armant can be confirmed to refer to that king. During the Eighteenth Dynasty (c. 1478 to 1324 BC) the title pharaoh was employed as a reverential designation of the ruler. About the late Twenty-First Dynasty (980 to 943 BC), however, instead of being used alone as before, it began to be added to the other titles before the ruler’s name, and from the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty (720–656 BC) it was, at least in ordinary usage, the only epithet prefixed to the royal appellative.

Other notable epithets are nswt, translated to “king”; ?m, “Majesty”; jty for “monarch or sovereign”; nb for “lord”; and “hq” for “ruler”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharaoh#Etymology[2]

So “king” is the more or less correct English translation of one title of ancient Egyptian monarchs, while “pharaoh” is the English form of the ancient Egyptian term for the palace, which later became a title for the monarch of Egypt.

And I am not certain whether the Wikipedia pages on Egyptian rulers follow the practices of modern Egyptologists when deciding whether to use pharaoh or king to describe a ruler, and I am not certain if it makes any difference.

3. Is there any text that Egyptologists employ in using the term Pharoah pre-Akhenaten and Pre-Thutmose? Because Rahotep precedes both Thutmose and Akhenaten, and is written as a pharaoh. Snefru is also written as a pharaoh, while he precedes all three mentioned above by more than thousand years.

4. A Pharaoh must rule over all of Egypt; other sovereigns who rule over only part of Egypt are mere kings.

One might think of Pharaoh being similar to a German or Anglo-Saxon King of Kings, except for the absence of subordinate kings. I would definitely not use Emperor as a synonym, as I can find no indication that the tile of Pharaoh implies imperial ambitions outside of Egypt. (Many pharaohs had such ambitions – but it’s not implied in the title.)

The Egyptian Seventeenth Dynasty was one of great turmoil, with the Hyksos invaders ruling over much of Egypt for several generations. During this time there are no Pharaohs, until Ahmose I ejects the last Hyksos and re-establishes pharaonic rule over all of Egypt, from Thebes.

The Biblical Shishak king of Egypt is the Egyptian Pharaoh Sheshonq I, also known as Hedjkheperre Setpenre – – Shoshenq I Meriamun

Hedjkheperre Setpenre – – Shoshenq I Meriamun – – Son of Nimlot A, a brother of Osorkon the Elder and a Great Chief of the Meshwesh (Libyans). The biblical Shishak who reigned for 21 years – – 943–922 BC.

Check: Before him ruled Psusennes III – – Possibly the same person as Psusennes II.

And after him ruled Sekhemkheperre Setepenre – – Osorkon I Meriamun – – Son of Shoshenq I. – – 922–887 BC.

c. 945 BC – – Psusennes II end of reign [Egyptian Dynasty 21].

c. 945 BC – – Sheshonq I start of reign [Egyptian Dynasty 22 [Libyan]].

1 Kings 11:40 Solomon sought therefore to kill Jeroboam. And Jeroboam arose, and fled into Egypt, unto Shishak king of Egypt, and was in Egypt until the death of Solomon.

931 BC – – Solomon’s reign ends & Israel is divided into Israel & Judah [1 Kings 12, 13]. And the time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel [was] forty years [1 Kings 11:42]. Solomon dies age 61 of natural causes. The nation splits after Solomon.

931 BC – – Rehoboam – king of Judah [Southern Kingdom] start – 17 years.

931 BC – – Jeroboam I – king of Israel [Northern Kingdom] start – 22 years.

926 BC – – Invasion by Shishak [1 Kings 14:25].

1 Kings 14:25 ¶ And it came to pass in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, [that] Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem:

Also recorded in:

2 Chronicles 12:2 And it came to pass, [that] in the fifth year of king Rehoboam Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, because they had transgressed against the LORD,

2 Chronicles 12:3 With twelve hundred chariots, and threescore thousand horsemen: and the people [were] without number that came with him out of Egypt; the Lubims, the Sukkiims, and the Ethiopians.

2 Chronicles 12:4 And he took the fenced cities which [pertained] to Judah, and came to Jerusalem.

2 Chronicles 12:5 ¶ Then came Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam, and [to] the princes of Judah, that were gathered together to Jerusalem because of Shishak, and said unto them, Thus saith the LORD, Ye have forsaken me, and therefore have I also left you in the hand of Shishak.

2 Chronicles 12:6 Whereupon the princes of Israel and the king humbled themselves; and they said, The LORD [is] righteous.

2 Chronicles 12:7 And when the LORD saw that they humbled themselves, the Word of the LORD came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled themselves; [therefore] I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance; and my wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak.

2 Chronicles 12:8 Nevertheless they shall be his servants; that they may know my service, and the service of the kingdoms of the countries.

2 Chronicles 12:9 So Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, and took away the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king’s house; he took all: he carried away also the shields of gold which Solomon had made.

2 Chronicles 12:10 Instead of which king Rehoboam made shields of brass, and committed [them] to the hands of the chief of the guard, that kept the entrance of the king’s house.

2 Chronicles 12:11 And when the king entered into the house of the LORD, the guard came and fetched them, and brought them again into the guard chamber.

2 Chronicles 12:12 And when he humbled himself, the WRATH of the LORD turned from him, that he would not destroy [him] altogether: and also in Judah things went well.

c. 924 BC Sheshonq I end of reign [Egyptian Dynasty 22 [Libyan]].

c. 924 BC Osorkon I start of reign [Egyptian Dynasty 22 [Libyan]].

Conclusion: The dates are agreeable with Shishak attacking Jerusalem after Solomon died in 931 BC and before 924 BC being the end of the reign of Shishak. The attack occurred in 926 BC; 4 years before the end of Shishak’s 21 year reign which ended in 922 BC.

Various People

Manetho

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manetho

Manetho was an Egyptian priest of the Ptolemaic Kingdom who lived in the early third century BC, at the very beginning of the Hellenistic period. Little is certain about his life. He is known today as the author of a history of Egypt in Greek called the Aegyptiaca, likely commissioned by Ptolemy II Philadelphus (28 March 284 – 28 January 246 BC). None of Manetho’s texts have survived; they are lost literary works, it is known primarily from later references in Josephus’s treatise Against Apion (c. 95 AD) and works by the Christian historians Julius Africanus (c.160–c.240), Eusebius (c. 260 – 339), and George Syncellus (d. 810).

Manetho lived and worked at the very beginning of the new Hellenistic order in Egypt, when the Macedonian Greek Diadochi (successors) of Alexander the Great (d. 323 BC) fought each other for control of the new empire, a struggle finally ending in partition. In Egypt, diadochos Ptolemy I Soter founded the Ptolemaic Kingdom in 305 BC. Reigning for nearly three centuries, the Ptolemies were the final and longest-lived dynasty of ancient Egypt before Roman conquest in 30 BC. They introduced the Hellenistic religion, a unique syncretism between Greek and Egyptian religions and cultures. Manetho wrote Aegyptiaca in order to preserve the history of his homeland for posterity and—as evidenced by his having written it in Greek—for its new foreign rulers.

Manetho originated in Sebennytos and was likely a priest of the solar deity Ra at Heliopolis. He was an authority on the temple cult of Serapis (a Hellenistic appropriation of Osiris and Apis).

Manetho coined the term “dynasty” (using the Greek word dynasteia); his conception was not based on bloodlines—as we understand the term “dynasty” today—but rather as groupings of monarchs punctuated by discontinuities, either geographical (e.g., moving the capital) or genealogical. After each discontinuity came a new dynasty.

Manetho wrote at the request of Ptolemy I or Ptolemy II to give an account of the history of Egypt to the Greeks from a native perspective. When it was written, it would have proven to be the authoritative account of the history of Egypt, superior to Herodotus in every way. The completeness and systematic nature in which he collected his sources was unprecedented.

Most of the ancient witnesses group Manetho together with Berossos, and treat the pair as similar in intent, and it is not a coincidence that those who preserved the bulk of their writing are largely the same (Josephus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Syncellus). Certainly, both wrote about the same time, and both adopted the historiographical approach of the Greek writers Herodotus and Hesiod, who preceded them. While the subjects of their history are different, the form is similar, using chronological royal genealogies as the structure for the narratives. Both extend their histories far into the mythic past, to give the deities rule over the earliest ancestral histories.

https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Manetho/home.html

Manetho was an Egyptian priest who lived in the early 3rd century BC and wrote one or more books in Greek to acquaint the Mediterranean world with the history and civilization of his country. His original works have perished; what has survived has been transmitted to us as fragments in about a dozen ancient authors, the most important of whom are Josephus, who quotes long passages of connected discourse, and Eusebius and the Christian chronographer Africanus, who for the most part have preserved dry lists of Egyptian kings, grouped by “Dynasties” and only infrequently relieved by a bit of context.

For many centuries — once the knowledge of hieroglyphics had been lost — the writings of Manetho, mangled as they are, were one of the world’s chief sources of information on Egyptian history; only with the 19c decipherment of hieroglyphics and archaeological investigations was Manetho slowly superseded in favor of first-hand knowledge from the papyri and tombs of Egypt themselves.

https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674993853

Manetho was an Egyptian of the third century BC. Born probably at Sebennytus in the Delta, he became a priest or high priest at Heliopolis. Apparently he and a Greek Timotheus did much to establish the cult of Serapis in Egypt. Eight works or parts of works were ascribed to him, all on history and religion and all apparently in Greek: Aegyptiaca, on the history of Egypt; The Sacred Book on Egyptian religion; An Epitome of Physical Doctrines; On Festivals; On Ancient Ritual and Religion; On the Making of Kyphi (an incense); The Criticisms of Herodotus; and the spurious Book of Sothis. These survive only as quoted by other writers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius

Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260?AD – 30 May 339 AD), also known as Eusebius Pamphilius.

Most scholars date the birth of Eusebius to some point between 260 and 265 AD. He was most likely born in or around Caesarea Maritima. Nothing is known about his parents. He was baptized and instructed in the city, and lived in Syria Palaestina in 296 AD, when Diocletian’s army passed through the region (in the Life of Constantine, Eusebius recalls seeing Constantine traveling with the army).

Eusebius succeeded Agapius as Bishop of Caesarea soon after 313 AD and was called on by Arius who had been excommunicated by his bishop Alexander of Alexandria. An episcopal council in Caesarea pronounced Arius blameless. Eusebius enjoyed the favour of the Emperor Constantine. Because of this he was called upon to present the creed of his own church to the 318 attendees of the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. However, the anti-Arian creed from Palestine prevailed, becoming the basis for the Nicene Creed.

Of the extensive literary activity of Eusebius, a relatively large portion has been preserved. Although posterity suspected him of Arianism, Eusebius had made himself indispensable by his method of authorship; his comprehensive and careful excerpts from original sources saved his successors the painstaking labor of original research. Hence, much has been preserved, quoted by Eusebius, which otherwise would have been lost.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Syncellus

George Syncellus (died after 810 AD) was a Byzantine chronicler and ecclesiastical official. He lived many years in Palestine (probably in the Old Lavra of Saint Chariton or Souka, near Tekoa) as a monk, before coming to Constantinople, where he was appointed synkellos (literally, “cell-mate”) to Tarasius, patriarch of Constantinople.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sextus_Julius_Africanus

Sextus Julius Africanus (c. 160 – c. 240 AD) was a Christian traveller and historian of the late 2nd and early 3rd centuries. He influenced fellow historian Eusebius, later writers of Church history among the Church Fathers, and the Greek school of chroniclers.

Africanus may have served under Septimius Severus against the Osroenians in 195 AD. He went on an embassy to the emperor Severus Alexander to ask for the restoration of Emmaus, which had fallen into ruins. His mission succeeded, and Emmaus was henceforward known as Nicopolis.

Africanus travelled to Greece and Rome and went to Alexandria to study, attracted by the fame of its catechetical school, possibly about the year 215 AD. He knew Greek (in which language he wrote), Latin, and Hebrew. He was at one time a soldier and had been a pagan; he wrote all his works as a Christian.

Whether Africanus was a layman or a cleric remains controversial.

God's Word Explained

Pages

Biblically Adjusted – Other Dynasties, Hyksos, Shishak and Various People