Having read your recent response about an ethnic Greek marriage for Alexander, and how the Greeks perceived their identity, it left me wondering about this. Didn’t the Ptolemies in Egypt create a very distinct line between Greeks and Egyptians in their kingdom? In the sense that at least for government purposes, the Greeks, specifically, ruled?
What you said about not having a unified sense of Greek ethnicity is completely in tune with what I learned as well, but I can’t conciliate this with how the Ptolemies handled ethnicity since the very beginning, right after Alexander’s death (so the very period you answered about). I’m not gonna pretend I’m a specialist in Ptolemaic Egypt but I never read about a specific Egyptian Greek / Alexandria / Naukratis sense of separate identity for this time period, or even remnants of identities of mainland Greek polities, it’s always dealt as this sorta unified sense of “Greeks” versus Egyptians. Suggesting that this idea of greekness existed since Alexander’s day as well. I’m kinda troubled with that. Thanks so much for the attention!
Macedonian-Persian Marriages after Susa
So let me immediately say that I am not much of a Hellenistic historian. But I do teach a class that deals with race and ethnicity in antiquity, so I’d like to recommend my colleague Denise McCoskey’s Race: Antiquity and It’s Legacy. She has a fair bit in there on Ptolemaic Egypt, in fact, and among the things she points out is the problem with the evidence.
She includes not only literary evidence, but other textual evidence including things like tax records, epigraphy, and archaeological evidence…all of which muddy the waters. Outside of the Ptolemies themselves (and there’s some question about them, especially by the end), there was quite a lot of mixing between Greeks and Egyptians. These “mixed ethnicity” individuals might use a Greek name or an Egyptian name, depending on context, and they might hold relatively high office. So, we actually can’t assume someone is Greek due to use of a Greek name.
This was especially true in Alexandria, but other places in Egypt as well. And it contrasts with what’s being presented in at least some of the literature of the period.
What I love about archaeology and epigraphy is that both continually swoop in and mess up our literary textual history. LOL
I was just reading a really good chapter, “Alexander the Great and the Macedonian and Persian Elite: The Mass-marriages in Susa in Context,” by Krzysztof Nawotka for Legacy of the East and Legacy of Alexander (2023), ed. by Nawotka and Wojciechowska. He takes on the perception, oft repeated, that the Macedonians en masse rejected their Persian brides soon after Alexander’s death. For a long time, accepted perception was that the others divorced very quickly, except for Seleukos and his wife Apama (mother of Antiochus I). But we don’t actually have evidence for that, and a bit of evidence to the contrary.
It’s only Krateros who we know for sure divorced his wife in order to marry Phila (Antipatros’s daughter)…which was a political alliance, not necessarily Krateros’s rejection of a high princess of Achaemenid blood (e.g., Darius’s own niece). In fact, it seems that she agreed to the divorce, and may have come out of it better than poor Phila, who was stuck marrying that dweeb Demetrios Poliorketes. 😂 Amastris married the petty tyrant Dionysios of Herakleia, wound up fabulously wealthy, then later married Lysimachos, and had a city named after her. Next to Apama, Seleukos’s wife, she had one of the most distinguished political careers for the Persian elite women…married to three Macedonian/Greek men in succession. Similarly, it would seem that Eumenes stayed married to his wife Artonis, (despite assumption, there’s no record that he divorced her and remarried); she was given his remains after his death following the Battle of Gabiene. Also, with Peukestis’s role, there’s a VERY high likelihood that he, also, kept his wife.
We might speculate that Perdikkas and Ptolemy put aside their wives as both happily played political marriage games, but we’re not actually told as much—unlike with Krateros. I could see Kleopatra demanding that she be sole wife as part of her marriage proposal to Perdikkas. And quite possibly Antipatros demanded the same on behalf of Eurydike, as it seems Krateros divorced his wife in order to marry Phila. Yet Ptolemy certainly kept Laïs around, possibly as a wife. Then Berenike…so why not just keep on Artakama too? It might have been politically advantageous, at least early in his reign, when nobody knew precisely how things would fall out.
Yet the plain fact is…we just don’t know about c. 80+ of the 92 weddings held in Susa.
Anyway, I’ve been among those who assumed/argued the prior position myself—for widespread divorce. But Nowotka’s chapter made me stop and rethink. This presumption that the ancient Greeks were always of the attitude “We’re Greeks and you’re not…and we don’t want your women either, we want PURE Greek children” isn’t nearly as strong as we’ve assumed from literature. I’ve come around in the last 10 years to thinking the Greeks were less ethnocentric, at least at certain times in their history, than we’ve popularly thought. That’s not to say they didn’t care about ethnicity—they manifestly did—but it was only one of several factors.
What DOES seem to be true is that class mattered more. So elite Persian women married to elite Greek men served a purpose. But I do note that Alexander kept in Persia the native women who’d married Macedonian soldiers, and any children, when those men went back to Macedonia. Arrian says he did so for fear that they wouldn’t be welcome, whereas he would provide for them in Persia. (What became of them after his death is, alas, anybody’s guess. Maybe Seleukos continued with the precedent. I’m not sure that we know.)
But hopefully that adds a bit more context to how we look at those marriages. As noted, this is something about which my own opinion has been evolving.
