Inheriting The Ancient Near East After Alexander The Great

*Includes pictures *Includes ancient accounts *Includes a bibliography for further reading In 323 BCE, Alexander the Great was on top of the world. Never a man to sit on his hands or rest upon his laurels, Alexander began planning his future campaigns, which may have included attempts to subdue the Arabian Peninsula or make another incursion into India. But fate had other plans for the young Macedonian king. One night, while feasting with his admiral Nearchus, he drank too much and took to bed with a fever. At first, it seemed like the fever was merely a consequence of his excess, and there was not much concern for his health, but when a week had elapsed and there was still no sign of his getting better, his friends and generals began to grow concerned. The fever grew, consuming him to the point that he could barely speak. After two weeks, on June 11, 323 B.C., Alexander the Great, King of Macedon, Hegemon of the League of Corinth, King of Kings, died. On his deathbed, some historians claim that when he was pressed to name a successor, Alexander muttered that his empire should go "to the strongest." Other sources claim that he passed his signet ring to his general Perdiccas, thereby naming him successor, but whatever his choices were or may have been, they were ignored. Alexander's generals, all of them with the loyalty of their own corps at their backs, would tear each other apart in a vicious internal struggle that lasted almost half a century before four factions emerged victorious: Macedonia, the Seleucid Empire in the east, the Kingdom of Pergamon in Asia Minor, and the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt. During the course of these wars, Alexander's only heir, the posthumously born Alexander IV, was murdered, extinguishing his bloodline for ever. For a time, the Seleucids commanded the largest empire in the world as it stretched from the high plains and deserts of what is now Afghanistan in the east to parts of the Levant and Asia Minor in the west. The empire's early kings were strong and shrewd and committed to the ideas of Hellenism as much as holding power and expanding the realm of their empire, but later rulers did not prove as capable. In time, the Seleucid royal house often descended into orgies of violence which were driven by ambitious men and women. Despite its troubles and its sheer size and scope, the Seleucid Empire lasted for several centuries, and it would not truly reach its end until the heyday of the legendary Roman general Pompey the Great in the 1st century BCE. Although Alexander never lived to rule over Egypt, one of his generals, Ptolemy I, did, and it was he who established the last great pharaonic dynasty in Egypt, known as the Ptolemaic Dynasty. Despite the infighting among them, one thing Alexander's generals did agree upon was their Hellenistic culture. Most famously, Ptolemy's line firmly established the Hellenistic culture of the Greeks while ruling over Egypt, and by marrying within their family line, the Ptolemaic pharaohs kept their Hellenistic heritage until the very end of Ptolemy's line, which died with Cleopatra in 30 BCE. The Ptolemies gave ancient Egypt an injection of vitality that had not been seen in the Nile Valley for centuries, preserving many aspects of native Egyptian culture while adding their own layer of Hellenic culture. The first few Ptolemaic rulers proved as able as any of their Egyptian predecessors as they worked to make Egypt a first-rate power in the world once again. Unfortunately, these able rulers were followed by a succession of corrupt and greedy kings, more concerned with personal wealth and power than the stability and greatness of their kingdom. Eventually, Ptolemaic Egypt collapsed due to weak rulers, internal social problems, and the rising power of Rome, but before the Ptolemaic Dynasty was extinguished, it proved to be one of the most impressive royal houses in ancient Egyptian history.

*Includes pictures *Includes ancient accounts of the Seleucid Empire *Includes a bibliography for further reading In 323 BCE, Alexander the Great was on top of the world. Never a man to sit on his hands or rest upon his laurels, Alexander began planning his future campaigns, which may have included attempts to subdue the Arabian Peninsula or make another incursion into India. But fate had other plans for the young Macedonian king. One night, while feasting with his admiral Nearchus, he drank too much and took to bed with a fever. At first, it seemed like the fever was merely a consequence of his excess, and there was not much concern for his health, but when a week had elapsed and there was still no sign of his getting better, his friends and generals began to grow concerned. The fever grew, consuming him to the point that he could barely speak. After two weeks, on June 11, 323 B.C., Alexander the Great, King of Macedon, Hegemon of the League of Corinth, King of Kings, died. On his deathbed, some historians claim that when he was pressed to name a successor, Alexander muttered that his empire should go "to the strongest." Other sources claim that he passed his signet ring to his general Perdiccas, thereby naming him successor, but whatever his choices were or may have been, they were ignored. Alexander's generals, all of them with the loyalty of their own corps at their backs, would tear each other apart in a vicious internal struggle that lasted almost half a century before four factions emerged victorious: Macedonia, the Seleucid Empire in the east, the Kingdom of Pergamon in Asia Minor, and the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt. During the course of these wars, Alexander's only heir, the posthumously born Alexander IV, was murdered, extinguishing his bloodline for ever. Despite the infighting among them, one thing Alexander's generals did agree upon was their Hellenistic culture. Most famously, Ptolemy's line firmly established the Hellenistic culture of the Greeks while ruling over Egypt, and by marrying within their family line, the Ptolemaic pharaohs kept their Hellenistic heritage until the very end of Ptolemy's line, which died with Cleopatra in 30 BCE. Although the Seleucid Empire is less well known, Alexander's general Seleucus was no less successful in "Hellenizing" Persia and parts of Asia Minor. The Greek influence is still readily visible in the region thousands of years later. Anthropologists have found that some of the earliest Buddha statues constructed in India bear an uncanny resemblance to Ancient Greek depictions of Apollo, and local legend has it that the wild olive trees that grow in some regions of Afghanistan sprang from the olive seeds that Macedonian soldiers spat out on the march - not to mention the presence of Balkan features such as red hair and blue eyes among a significant amount of the locals there to this day. Legends of Alexander crop up amid the popular mythology of half the world, and while some among the Persian Empire called him "the accursed," it is now widely believed that the story of the prophet Dhul-Qarnayn ("The Two-Horned One") in the Qur'an is a reference to Alexander. For a time, the Seleucids commanded the largest empire in the world as it stretched from the high plains and deserts of what is now Afghanistan in the east to parts of the Levant and Asia Minor in the west. The empire's early kings were strong and shrewd and committed to the ideas of Hellenism as much as holding power and expanding the realm of their empire, but later rulers did not prove as capable. In time, the Seleucid royal house often descended into orgies of violence which were driven by ambitious men and women. Despite its troubles and its sheer size and scope, the Seleucid Empire lasted for several centuries, and it would not truly reach its end until the heyday of Rome. As a result, the Seleucid Empire managed to leave an indelible mark on the region that has lasted to this day.

This book combines concepts from the history of religions with Byzantine studies in its assessments of kings, symbols, and cities in a diachronic and cross-cultural analysis. The work attests, firstly, that the symbolic art and architecture of ancient cities—commissioned by their monarchs expressing their relationship with their gods—show us that religiosity was inherent to such enterprises. It also demonstrates that what transpired from the first cities in history to Byzantine Christendom is the gradual replacement of the pagan ruler cult—which was inherent to city-building in antiquity—with the ruler becoming subordinate to Christ; exemplified by representations of the latter as the ‘Master of All’ (Pantokrator). Beginning in Mesopotamia, the book continues with an analysis of city-building by rulers in Egypt, Greece, and Rome, before addressing Judaism (specifically, the city of Jerusalem) and Christianity as shifting the emphasis away from pagan-gods and rulers to monotheistic perceptions of God as elevated above worldly kings. It concludes with an assessment of Christian Rome and Constantinople as typifying the evolution from the ancient and classical world to Christendom.

This work offers a reconstruction of the politics of ancient Israel within the wider political environment of the ancient Near East. Gottwald begins by questioning the view of some biblical scholars that the primary factor influencing Israel's political evolution was its religion.

Until recently, many scholars have read Paul’s use of the word Christos as more of a proper name (“Jesus Christ”) than a title, Jesus the Messiah. One result, Joshua W. Jipp argues, is that important aspects of Paul’s thinking about Jesus’ messiahship have gone unrecognized. Jipp argues that kingship discourse is an important source for Paul’s christological language: Paul uses royal language to present Christ as the good king. Jipp surveys Greco-Roman and Jewish depictions of the ideal king and argues for the influence of these traditions on several aspects of Paul’s thought: king and law (Galatians 5–6; Romans 13–15; 1 Corinthians 9); hymning to the king (Colossians 1:15-20); the just and faithful king; the royal roots of Paul’s language of participation “in Christ”; and the enthroned king (Romans 1:3-4; 1 Corinthians 15:20-28). Jipp finds that Paul’s use of royal tropes is indeed significant. Christos is a royal honorific within Paul’s letters, and Paul is another witness to ancient discussions of monarchy and ideal kingship. In the process, Jipp offers new and noteworthy solutions to outstanding questions concerning Christ and the law, the pistis Christou debate, and Paul’s participatory language.

An introduction to the archaeology and history of ancient Palestine, from the destruction of Solomon's temple to the Muslim conquest.

''No better explanation of medievalism is available to the general reader.'' --Booklist A revised and expanded edition of Norman Cantor's splendidly detailed and lively history of the Middle Ages, containing more than 30 percent new material from the original edition.

First published in 1936, Western Civilization in the Near East traces the spread and growth of Western civilization in the countries of the Levant and their immediate hinterland. The author argues that modern civilization took birth in Western Europe and then slowly spread to the rest of Europe and to all other parts of the earth, leading to the Europeanization of mankind. While Europe’s modern civilization initially enabled it to dominate the world economically and political, it also provided non-European people with the resources to ultimately resist and reject Europe’s control. This universal acculturation and the ensuing birth of a coherent and closely-knit humanity, facing similar social, economic, and cultural problems determined the new trends of world history. This book only focuses on the European contact with the Muslim East and the consequences of the contact. The language used is a reflection of its era and no offence is meant by the Publishers to any reader by this republication. This book will be of interest to students of history, political science, international relations, and geography.