The Ptolemaic
and
Roman
Periods
(from 331
b. c. onwards).
administration of a satrap, who submitted without resistance on the approach of the
Macedonian army. Alexander was welcomed by the natives, whom he knew how to treat
with gentleness and consideration, was crowned king, and assumed all the sounding titles
appropriate to a son of Ra (331 b .c .) . During the few months that he passed among them
he accustomed the Egyptians to the change of masters; and on his death (323 b . c .)
the government passed without disturbance into the hands of Ptolemy, one of his most
distinguished generals. After a few years Ptolemy, who had at first ruled in the name of
the Macedonian kings, assumed the royal titles for himself, and thus founded a Dynasty
which lasted until the Roman conquest. With the personal and family relations of
Ptolemy Soter and his successors it is unnecessary to deal; for the present purpose it is
sufficient to understand how Egypt under their rule developed fresh vitality and acquired
a new importance in the history of the world, though at the expense of a partial sacrifice
of nationalism. To estimate the political position it is necessary to realize how widely
the centres of culture and interest had been displaced since the period which was
considered in the last section. In the course of the thousand years which had elapsed the
ancient Oriental empires had fallen one by one. Babylonians, Assyrians, Hittites had
disappeared from the stage of history, to be replaced by the Persians, whose power in
turn had just been shattered by Alexander. The islands and cities of Greece in the
meanwhile had evolved their incomparable civilization, which was already dying down
when the Macedonians took up the torch of Hellenism to carry it to the east. In the
western half of the Mediterranean the lately founded colonies of Magna Graecia had now
attained a high position, and Syracuse was aspiring to the hegemony of Sicily and Lower
Italy. Rome was conquering her neighbours in the peninsula one by one, and unifying
the heterogeneous elements of her growing dominion. In North Africa Cyrene was
wealthy and prosperous, and Phoenician Carthage was consolidating a formidable
commercial state.
On the death of Alexander his loosely welded eastern empire resolved itself into
several minor kingdoms, of which Egypt was only one, and to the first view hardly the
most important In Greece itself the kingdom of Macedon retained its own proper
territory and a certain suzerainty over many cities and states outside i t ; but Athens,
Sparta, and Aetolia were independent and influential factors. Lastly, the various Aegean
islands possessed the nucleus of a confederacy and Rhodes was a first-rate naval power.
Thus, as a result of the westerly trend of colonization on the one side and the dismemberment
of Persia on the other, the Mediterranean towards the end of the fourth century
b . c. was encircled by a number of rival states expectantly awaiting a struggle the issue
of which it was impossible to forecast. The first Ptolemies, by astute diplomacy and
seasonable campaigns, gained a brilliant place among these various competitors, which was
successfully maintained for more than a century. Cyprus and Cyrene were permanently
annexed to their dominions; Palestine and Phoenicia were conquered; and in alliance
with Rhodes and the islands the Egyptian fleet controlled the Aegean. To the far-sighted
policy of Ptolemy II must be attributed the beginning of a friendship with Rome which
continued unbroken till the close of the Dynasty. Commerce was fostered, the trade-
routes to the Red Sea were reopened, and Egyptian ships sailed not only to Africa and
Arabia, but even it is said as far as India.
Under the fifth and sixth Ptolemies, however, there began a decline from which the
country never recovered. Palestine and Phoenicia were lost. Nubia, now completely
independent, perpetually menaced the Thebaid; and the weakness of the central government
tempted the ambition of the kings of Macedon and Syria. The traditional
friendship with Rome saved the later Ptolemies from the rapacity of the other Hellenistic
sovereigns, but nothing could restore their waning fortunes. As the Romans extended
their irresistible dominion Egypt fell more and more under their influence; and from the
time when Ptolemy VII appealed to the Senate to restore him to the throne it may
be said that his country only retained its independence through the forbearance of its too
powerful protector. It was not, however, until the Ptolemaic Dynasty became extinct by
the deaths of Cleopatra and Caesarion (30 b . c .) that Egypt became a Roman province.
Of the internal organization of the country under the Ptolemies it is premature to write
until the mass of papyri and other material bearing upon the subject has been edited. It
seems, however, that Egypt prospered in their days; and if the riches of a Ptolemy were
a proverb among contemporaries, it does not necessarily follow that they were wrung by
extortion from the fellahin, who were probably at least as well treated as they had been
under their native kings. The administration was in the hands partly of foreign officials,
partly of natives; and there is considerable evidence to show that the races lived on terms
of friendship and mutual toleration. Documents were commonly drawn up in both
languages; and though the highest posts in the government were generally assigned to
Greeks, yet a native Egyptian occupied an influential place at the court of Ptolemy VII,
and another was viceroy of Cyrene, while a mere chance has preserved the information
that an Egyptian was governor of the Thebaid under Ptolemy X. An inscription records
the name of many Greeks as well as natives amongst the worshippers of the old gods of
the Cataract; and the foundation of the Serapeum is only the most striking example of the
not uncommon fusion of religious cults.
Alexandria, with its famous museum and library, naturally became the focus of all
literary and intellectual activity, but numerous other Greek cities were founded in various
parts of the country. It is important, moreover, to observe that the influx of foreigners
was not confined to the Greek element. Caesar describes the cosmopolitan character
of the Alexandrian mob when he visited the city; and it is known that the standing
army was composed of mercenaries of every race—Libyans, Thracians, Celts, and others.
Besides all these, great numbers of emigrant Jews had settled in Alexandria, and some
had even established themselves in the Fayyum. Ptolemy III again deliberately brought
back captives from his Asiatic campaign to cultivate the crown lands; and it seems that
a certain number of Persians lived in the Thebaid. It would therefore be far from
surprising if the craniological series were to show some trace of the influence of various
non-indigenous race-stocks.
Native art had sunk to a very low ebb after its temporary renascence under the
Twenty-sixth Dynasty. The best products are of foreign origin ; a hybrid of Greek and
Egyptian sculpture failed to obtain any considerable vogue, and the work of the Ptolemaic
period in Egypt is, generally speaking, of the most debased character. A single exception
must be made in favour of architecture, for it is impossible to disparage the temples of
Philae, Karnak, Kom Ombo, Denderah, and Edfu. Even here, however, the slovenliness
and incompetence of the sculptor is only rendered the more apparent by contrast; and
the reliefs on the walls of these magnificent buildings are a pitiful travesty of those which
were executed in the old days.
The skulls, of which measurements are given in this volume, were obtained in the
excavations at Denderah (the ‘ Tentyra’ of Graeco-Roman times). It may be remarked
in passing that they are the only series (except that of the Thirtieth Dynasty) which had
Th e Ptolemaic
and
Roman
Periods
(from 331
B.c. onwards).