“The Hellenistic ruler cult and Ptolemy I’s quest for legitimacy”
- Authors: Ntuli, Sihle
- Date: 2017
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/6097 , vital:21031
- Description: Alexander III died suddenly in Babylon in 323 BC. With Philip III Arrhidaeus in a mentally deficient state and Alexander IV not being of age, Alexander died without a suitable heir. The task of succeeding one of the most storied legacies in the ancient world was left to the generals of Alexander III. On his deathbed, Alexander was asked who should lead the Macedonians, of which he allegedly replied “the strongest”. Thus began the process of selecting the individual who would succeed Alexander the Great, which ended up becoming a contentious task due to Macedonian succession customs. Subsequently the ‘Successors’ quarrelled over who should succeed Alexander as the true successor. The wars of the Successors are founded on an issue of legitimacy that qualifies the notion of the strongest. Being deemed the true successor of Alexander the Great meant the opportunity to continue a period of Macedonian dominance following the reigns of Philip II and Alexander III. Alexander III is hailed as one of the most extraordinary individuals of the ancient world with his imperial campaigns being widely documented, political stability being pinpointed as one of the Macedonian strong points during the period of their dominance. The ruler cult is a point of reference for the explaining the relative political stability throughout the reign of Alexander the Great. The ruler cult can be understood as a sociopolitical construct that hybridized the notion of the ruler with that of a religious leader. The oriental influence of Alexander’s campaigns in Asia would inform the customs and practices of the divine ruler. The Macedonians’ ability to establish a presence in foreign territories made such a social construct a necessity in the task of centralizing of minds for political stability. Alexander’s rendition of the cult informed the formalized Ptolemaic ruler cult. The similarities and differences of the renditions help us to understand this political tool that Ptolemy I required in order to be deemed the true successor of Alexander the Great. The following will be an investigation into whether Ptolemy I is able to attain legitimacy, firstly as a successor to Alexander the Great, secondly as Pharaoh of Egypt.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: Ntuli, Sihle
- Date: 2017
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/6097 , vital:21031
- Description: Alexander III died suddenly in Babylon in 323 BC. With Philip III Arrhidaeus in a mentally deficient state and Alexander IV not being of age, Alexander died without a suitable heir. The task of succeeding one of the most storied legacies in the ancient world was left to the generals of Alexander III. On his deathbed, Alexander was asked who should lead the Macedonians, of which he allegedly replied “the strongest”. Thus began the process of selecting the individual who would succeed Alexander the Great, which ended up becoming a contentious task due to Macedonian succession customs. Subsequently the ‘Successors’ quarrelled over who should succeed Alexander as the true successor. The wars of the Successors are founded on an issue of legitimacy that qualifies the notion of the strongest. Being deemed the true successor of Alexander the Great meant the opportunity to continue a period of Macedonian dominance following the reigns of Philip II and Alexander III. Alexander III is hailed as one of the most extraordinary individuals of the ancient world with his imperial campaigns being widely documented, political stability being pinpointed as one of the Macedonian strong points during the period of their dominance. The ruler cult is a point of reference for the explaining the relative political stability throughout the reign of Alexander the Great. The ruler cult can be understood as a sociopolitical construct that hybridized the notion of the ruler with that of a religious leader. The oriental influence of Alexander’s campaigns in Asia would inform the customs and practices of the divine ruler. The Macedonians’ ability to establish a presence in foreign territories made such a social construct a necessity in the task of centralizing of minds for political stability. Alexander’s rendition of the cult informed the formalized Ptolemaic ruler cult. The similarities and differences of the renditions help us to understand this political tool that Ptolemy I required in order to be deemed the true successor of Alexander the Great. The following will be an investigation into whether Ptolemy I is able to attain legitimacy, firstly as a successor to Alexander the Great, secondly as Pharaoh of Egypt.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
Representations of the ‘other’: a comparison between Roman descriptions of Britons, Gauls and Germans pre-AD 300 and Sir Harry Smith’s portrayal of the Xhosa 1830s – 1850s
- Authors: Van Wezel, Amy Hester
- Date: 2016
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/4223 , vital:20634
- Description: Stereotypical representations of an ‘ethnically’ or ‘racially’ different ‘other’ in ancient texts would seem to reappear throughout history. By comparing Roman views of Britons, Gauls and Germans, with Sir Harry Smith’s views of the Xhosa, this study seeks to explore the extent to which these stereotypical images were employed and for what reasons. Through close textual analyses, the descriptions of these peoples are examined and compared, taking into consideration the different authors’ context and agendas. By highlighting Caesar’s views of the abilities of the ‘other’ and Tacitus’ judgements of the moral character of the ‘other’, compared with Smith’s view of the same, the study aims to draw out the role of the author’s ‘self’ in complex and contradictory representations of the ‘other’, while arguing that various overwhelmingly negative images served to justify imperial conquest and rule. The extent to which the ‘other’ was perceived as remote and different from themselves, epitomised in the dichotomy between the ‘barbarism’ and ‘civilisation’, is examined, comparing a variety of Roman authors with Smith. The similar idea of ‘civilising missions’ are discussed, while acknowledging the differences between the policies of the Roman and British Empires toward the ‘other’. The connections between how the ‘other’ was portrayed in relation to ‘Empire’ and the ways in which they were treated is also explored stressing even further the different approaches taken by Roman and British authorities to include these peoples within their Empires. While certain stereotypes are shown to have persisted from Roman times, reappearing in the writing of Sir Harry Smith, summed up in the archetypal ‘barbarian’, I argue that the use of these images was varied, inconsistent and reflected more the motives and personalities of the writers themselves, whofor the most part ascribed to imperial ideologies.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2016
- Authors: Van Wezel, Amy Hester
- Date: 2016
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/4223 , vital:20634
- Description: Stereotypical representations of an ‘ethnically’ or ‘racially’ different ‘other’ in ancient texts would seem to reappear throughout history. By comparing Roman views of Britons, Gauls and Germans, with Sir Harry Smith’s views of the Xhosa, this study seeks to explore the extent to which these stereotypical images were employed and for what reasons. Through close textual analyses, the descriptions of these peoples are examined and compared, taking into consideration the different authors’ context and agendas. By highlighting Caesar’s views of the abilities of the ‘other’ and Tacitus’ judgements of the moral character of the ‘other’, compared with Smith’s view of the same, the study aims to draw out the role of the author’s ‘self’ in complex and contradictory representations of the ‘other’, while arguing that various overwhelmingly negative images served to justify imperial conquest and rule. The extent to which the ‘other’ was perceived as remote and different from themselves, epitomised in the dichotomy between the ‘barbarism’ and ‘civilisation’, is examined, comparing a variety of Roman authors with Smith. The similar idea of ‘civilising missions’ are discussed, while acknowledging the differences between the policies of the Roman and British Empires toward the ‘other’. The connections between how the ‘other’ was portrayed in relation to ‘Empire’ and the ways in which they were treated is also explored stressing even further the different approaches taken by Roman and British authorities to include these peoples within their Empires. While certain stereotypes are shown to have persisted from Roman times, reappearing in the writing of Sir Harry Smith, summed up in the archetypal ‘barbarian’, I argue that the use of these images was varied, inconsistent and reflected more the motives and personalities of the writers themselves, whofor the most part ascribed to imperial ideologies.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2016
Britain after the Romans : an interdisciplinary approach to the possibilities of an Adventus Saxonum
- Lloyd-Jones, Glyn Francis Michael
- Authors: Lloyd-Jones, Glyn Francis Michael
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Great Britain -- History -- Anglo-Saxon period, 449-1066 , Civilization, Anglo-Saxon , English philology -- Old English, ca. 450-1100 , English literature -- Old English, ca. 450-1100 , Anglo-Saxon race , Genetic genealogy
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:3657 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1019806
- Description: In the fifth century, after the departure of the Romans, according to tradition, which is based on the ancient written sources, Britain was invaded by the Angles and Saxons. This view has been questioned in the last century. The size of the ‘invasion’, and indeed its very existence, have come into doubt. However, this doubting school of thought does not seem to take into account all of the evidence. An interdisciplinary, nuanced approach has been taken in this thesis. Firstly, the question of Germanic raiding has been examined, with reference to the Saxon Shore defences. It is argued that these defences, in their geographical context, point to the likelihood of raiding. Then the written sources have been re-examined, as well as physical artefacts. In addition to geography, literature and archaeology (the disciplines which are most commonly used when the coming of the Angles and Saxons is investigated), linguistic and genetic data have been examined. The fields of linguistics and genetics, which have not often both been taken into consideration with previous approaches, add a number of valuable insights. This nuanced approach yields a picture of events that rules out the ‘traditional view’ in some ways, such as the idea that the Saxons exterminated the Britons altogether, but corroborates it in other ways. There was an invasion of a kind (of Angles – not Saxons), who came in comparatively small numbers, but found in Britain a society already mixed and comprising Celtic and Germanic-speaking peoples: a society implied by Caesar and Tacitus and corroborated by linguistic and genetic data.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
Britain after the Romans : an interdisciplinary approach to the possibilities of an Adventus Saxonum
- Authors: Lloyd-Jones, Glyn Francis Michael
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Great Britain -- History -- Anglo-Saxon period, 449-1066 , Civilization, Anglo-Saxon , English philology -- Old English, ca. 450-1100 , English literature -- Old English, ca. 450-1100 , Anglo-Saxon race , Genetic genealogy
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:3657 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1019806
- Description: In the fifth century, after the departure of the Romans, according to tradition, which is based on the ancient written sources, Britain was invaded by the Angles and Saxons. This view has been questioned in the last century. The size of the ‘invasion’, and indeed its very existence, have come into doubt. However, this doubting school of thought does not seem to take into account all of the evidence. An interdisciplinary, nuanced approach has been taken in this thesis. Firstly, the question of Germanic raiding has been examined, with reference to the Saxon Shore defences. It is argued that these defences, in their geographical context, point to the likelihood of raiding. Then the written sources have been re-examined, as well as physical artefacts. In addition to geography, literature and archaeology (the disciplines which are most commonly used when the coming of the Angles and Saxons is investigated), linguistic and genetic data have been examined. The fields of linguistics and genetics, which have not often both been taken into consideration with previous approaches, add a number of valuable insights. This nuanced approach yields a picture of events that rules out the ‘traditional view’ in some ways, such as the idea that the Saxons exterminated the Britons altogether, but corroborates it in other ways. There was an invasion of a kind (of Angles – not Saxons), who came in comparatively small numbers, but found in Britain a society already mixed and comprising Celtic and Germanic-speaking peoples: a society implied by Caesar and Tacitus and corroborated by linguistic and genetic data.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »