- Seleucids, Seleucid Empire, Ancient History, Classics, Greek Epigraphy, Ancient Greek History, and 11 moreHellenistic History, Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor, Ancient Near Eastern History, Achaemenid History, Ancient Greek Epigraphy, Seleukids, Hellenistic Babylonia, Akkadian, Hellenistic and Roman Syria, Late Babylonian grammar, and Astronomical Diariesedit
The paper is concerned with the chronology and crucial events of the war between Demetrios I Soter and the usurper Alexander Balas. The literary evidence (Flavius Josephus, Trogus/Justin and others) will be confronted with the Babylonian... more
The paper is concerned with the chronology and crucial events of the war between Demetrios I Soter and the usurper Alexander Balas. The literary evidence (Flavius Josephus, Trogus/Justin and others) will be confronted with the Babylonian Astronomical Diaries (AD – 149 A rev. 3ʹ–14ʹ). This will allow for a more precise reconstruction of the events. It will become clear that, in 161 SE B = 151/150 BC = by April 150 BC, Demetrios lost his authority not only in Syrian cities, but also in some of Eastern provinces, such as in Mesopotamia. This is evidenced by another cuneiform text containing in the dating formula the name of king Alexander (BiMes 24. 12. rev. 15). Of particular importance for the course of events was a strong famine in Antioch at the beginning of the 150 BC. Probably, this was one of the reasons that prompted Balas to oppose openly Demetrios. Although this put Demetrios under heavy pressure, Alexander was still defeated in the first major battle. The second battle took place soon afterwards, probably in May–June of 150 BC. Both sides suffered tangible losses, and Demetrios was killed either in or soon after this clash. It is noteworthy that the last Seleucid war elephants were involved in the hostilities and may have died in these battles. Thus, along with the refinement of the chronology, it was proved that the war was not limited to just one battle and the usurper’s victory was not so easy for him, as was previously thought. And additional circumstances known from cuneiform sources make it possible to understand better the nature of this military conflict.
Research Interests:
The events of the mid 260's, connected with the death of prince Seleukos, the eldest son of Antiochos I, are one of the most little-known and dimly lit pages of the dynastic history of the Seleukids. Therefore the theme is not studied... more
The events of the mid 260's, connected with the death of prince Seleukos, the eldest son of Antiochos I, are one of the most little-known and dimly lit pages of the dynastic history of the Seleukids. Therefore the theme is not studied deep enough and some positions, existent in historiography now, are stale and need a rethinking. So, the goal of this article is to represent on the grounds of the examination and comparison all the facts the more likely version of circumstances which led to untimely death of prince Seleukos. After analyzing all known sources (narrative, epigraphic and cuneiform) we can think that the prince fell a victim of the court intrigues as the result of the pre-arranged and step-by-step operated actions. In favor of this, supposition eloquently testifies a gradual promotion as successor the king’s younger son Antiochus (II). It is shown especially brightly in one of the cuneiform texts (AION Suppl. 77.15), argumentative of the unique dual co-ruling in the Seleukid state. Anyway we do not have any facts concerning the conspiracy, and one can think that there were personal motives of the king as the main and supreme cause of the removal of Seleukos. At the same time it is quite possible that officially the prince was blamed for some evil minds against his father and put to death.
Research Interests:
The article is devoted to examination of the biography of prince Antiochus, the eldest son and co-ruler of the King Antiochus III the Great. The author pays particular attention to such events of the heir’s life as his coronation, the... more
The article is devoted to examination of the biography of prince Antiochus, the eldest son and co-ruler of the King Antiochus III the Great. The author pays particular attention to such events of the heir’s life as his coronation, the chronological and geographical scope of his official life and the marriage to his sister Laodike in the context of the Seleucid matrimonial policy. The deeds of Antiochus the Younger as a co-ruler of his father are considered separately; there were several directions: a political settlement of relations with Greek city-states of Western Asia Minor, diplomatic-representative role, participation in war campaigns (including a personal command of some contingents). A special attention is given to official royal titulature of the co-ruler, which apparently underwent a change on the turn of the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC. So, the biography of the prince Antiochus the Younger gives a perfect example that allows to analyze the position of the co-ruler and his formal status, more clearly define the nature of his authorities and reveal his role in the system of government as a whole.
Research Interests:
The paper seeks to analyze the terminology used in the titulature of a co-ruler in the Seleukid Kingdom, to mark out its main stages and to trace the development and evolution of the official titles of a joint-king. On the... more
The paper seeks to analyze the terminology used in the titulature of a co-ruler in the Seleukid Kingdom, to mark out its main stages and to trace the development and evolution of the official titles of a joint-king. On the base of epigraphic, cuneiform and numismatic sources the author distinguishes next formula types: βασιλεύς = šarru (LUGAL), υἱός = mār (DUMU) šarri (LUGAL) and υἱός [καὶ] βασιλεύς; in some cases co-ruler could be named without any titles (he was mentioned only by name usually in the documents issued on behalf of «the senior» monarch). It is important to note that the titulature of a co-ruler in the Seleukid state blends together both the Oriental and Hellenic traditions, which had a mutual influence on each other. An evolution touches only the Greek titulature of a co-ruler, while the traditional Babylonian terminology used for designation of status of the crown prince practically did not undergo any changes.
Research Interests:
Berzon K. Review on: Chrubasik B. Kings and Usurpers in the Seleukid Empire: The Men who would be King. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. 336 p.