tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post758536630578105986..comments2023-09-13T03:59:16.632-07:00Comments on Plato's Athena: Parallel Lives?: Saul and Alexander; David and Ptolemy I; Solomon and Ptolemy IIScot Griffinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06981163430986536509noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-59878619370965319002014-11-22T09:57:51.142-08:002014-11-22T09:57:51.142-08:00Let me be more clear: "The simplest explanati...Let me be more clear: "The simplest explanation, and the one I came up with initially, was that the inversion was a suggestion of how Ptolemy I should have acted <b>had he followed the laws of the Primary History</b>." The intent of the authors of the Primary History was to drive a wedge between the Yahwists of Palestine and the Ptolemies of Egypt by demonstrating that the Ptolemies did not keep the laws of the Primary History (and suggesting that the Seleucid did or would have). <br /><br />By Macedonian standards, what Ptolemy did was well-regarded, even by Seleucus himself, who benefited greatly from both the assassination and its fallout (he became satrap of Babylon, which established his claim to later become king of Babylon and his empire as a whole).<br /><br />I doubt that executing the assassins of a king would be judged as "cruel" by anyone in those days. But rewarding those assassins could lead to the conclusion that the one who rewarded them was complicit in the assassination. (Ptolemy did not "pardon" the assassins, he promoted them.)<br /><br />"I suppose it all comes down to: where does the story of Ptolemy making the assassins regents come from? From Ptolemy himself?"<br /><br />We don't know. There were at least three histories of this period written in the fourth century BCE, and none has survived. Our knowledge of what happened comes from later histories that do not attribute the source(s) used.Scot Griffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06981163430986536509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-64870190297888633772014-11-20T14:17:19.496-08:002014-11-20T14:17:19.496-08:00And Alexander's empire may never have been uni...And Alexander's empire may never have been united under Hellenistic rule, but isn't it possible that Ptolemy's "derfeat" of Perdiccas, despite Anitpater's succession as regent, was perceived as a victory of one of Alexander's successors over the other? That Ptolemy was deemed to have become the ultimate successor? Guy Gadboisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-14096782767526312852014-11-20T14:14:04.961-08:002014-11-20T14:14:04.961-08:00What if it was the opposite? What if the Seleucid...What if it was the opposite? What if the Seleucid inversion was to make Ptolemy look bad? What if what Ptolemy actually did (making the assassins regents) mad him look good, i.e., he showed compassion by pardoning the assassins instead of executing them, and the Seleucid inversion of having David execute the assassins was meant to make the hero Ptolemy/David look cruel? I suppose it all comes down to: where does the story of Ptolemy making the assassins regents come from? From Ptolemy himself? Guy Gadboisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-3545180892877447202014-11-18T09:38:15.415-08:002014-11-18T09:38:15.415-08:00The simplest explanation, and the one I came up wi...The simplest explanation, and the one I came up with initially, was that the inversion was a suggestion of how Ptolemy I should have acted.Scot Griffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06981163430986536509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-43915944030821265762014-11-18T09:36:42.921-08:002014-11-18T09:36:42.921-08:00First, Ptolemy did not equate himself with David. ...First, Ptolemy did not equate himself with David. That was a Seleucid innovation. Bosworth believes that Ptolemy equated himself in his autobiography with a well-known hero of the Illiad to evoke the idea that Ptolemy was equally heroic. I believe that the author of Samuel deliberately referred to another Homeric hero as a hint that David was based on Ptolemy I. Scot Griffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06981163430986536509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-80757866265096673222014-11-18T09:12:29.368-08:002014-11-18T09:12:29.368-08:00Any explanation for the inversion between the stor...Any explanation for the inversion between the story of David ordering Baanah and Rechab executed, and Ptolemy I replacing Perdiccas with Peithon and Antigenese? Is this a later Seleucid change? Guy Gadboisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-72798241203662732802014-11-18T09:09:42.469-08:002014-11-18T09:09:42.469-08:00Would like more on the Seleucid/Ptolemy treaty, in...Would like more on the Seleucid/Ptolemy treaty, including the Roman component!Guy Gadboisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-35568953178780224072014-11-18T09:08:06.092-08:002014-11-18T09:08:06.092-08:00I don't think the difference between a king v....I don't think the difference between a king v. satrap v. regent would have mattered to the people living within those "kingdoms." All three titles were commensurately powerful, and the citizens would have viewed satraps and regents as essentially kings. So the inversion between Ishbosheth's story and Perdiccas' story isn't a big one, and perhaps not even an inversion at all. Guy Gadboisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945636119241982317.post-83768126191306481822014-11-18T09:02:35.671-08:002014-11-18T09:02:35.671-08:00Can you explain why Ptolemy/David would want to eq...Can you explain why Ptolemy/David would want to equate himself (themselves) with Patrocles? Would this have enhanced Ptolemy's/David's exploits by linking them to the heroic deeds described in the Iliad? Guy Gadboisnoreply@blogger.com