¹ See pl. 1, no. 1.

² Kiang, Dawson, “An Unpublished Coin Portrait of Ptolemy VI Philometor,” American Numismatic Society Museum Notes 10 (1962) 69–76Google Scholar; see also The Burton Y. Berry Collection, vol. 3: Megaris to Egypt (American Numismatic Society Sylloge Numorum Graecorum; Glückstadt: Augustin, 1962) no. 149Google Scholar.

³ Kiang, “An Unpublished Coin Portrait,” 73–74.

⁴ Vollenweider, Marie L., “Das Bildnis des Scipio Africanus,” Museum Helveticum 15 (1958) 29;Google Scholar see my pl. 1, figs. A and B.

⁵ Svoronos, Ioannes N. (Die Münzen der Ptolemäer [4 vols; Athens: Sakellarios, 1904–8])Google Scholar illustrated the silver tetradrachm in vol. 3, pl. 48, nos. 19 and 20 (see my pl. 1, no. 7). Helmut Kyrieleis (Bildnisse der Ptolemäer [Berlin: Mann, 1975]) shows the statue head on pls. 49–51 (see my pl. 3, no. 17). The similarity of the statue head to the portraits on the coinage shows that the portraits were not assimilated with the features of Alexander Bala, as Kiang proposed (“An Unpublished Coin Portrait,” 76). His submission has been rightly dismissed by Richter, Gisela M. A., The Portraits of the Greeks (3 vols.; London: Phaidon, 1965) 3. 266Google Scholar. Throughout this article, I shall use the numerical system in Svoronos to identify Ptolemaic coins.

⁶ Hazzard, Richard A. (Ptolemaic Coins [Toronto: Kirk & Bentley, 1995] 1–22Google Scholar) has revised the survey done by Newell, Edward T. (Royal Greek Portrait Coins [New York: Wayte Raymond, 1937] 23–26Google Scholar and 86–92).

⁷ The first dated tetradrachms of Ptolemy VI from Alexandria were struck in his 27th Macedonian regnal year or 155/4 bce. Otto Mørkholm (“Ptolemaic and Chronology: The Dated Silver Coinage of Alexandria,” American Numismatic Society Musuem Notes 20 [1975] 8–10 and 19) erroneously presumed that Ptolemy VI dated his coins on the Egyptian civil calendar. Samuel, Alan E. (Ptolemaic Chronology [Münchener Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte 43; Munich: Beck, 1962] 128Google Scholar) observed, however, that at least two papyri have survived dated with the Macedonian years of Ptolemy VI: Wilcken, Ulrich, Urkunden der Ptolemäerzeit (2 vols.; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1922–27)Google Scholar vol. 1 nos. 111 and 113. Both papyri were official documents from Alexandria; other official documents from Alexandria probably use the same kind of regnal years. Ptolemy VI began his reign with his second Macedonian year because he was coregent with his father in 180/1 bce. I shall discuss the coregency in a subsequent article.

⁸ Svoronos, Die Münzen der Ptolemäer, 1380–82. See also my pl. 1, no. 2a.

⁹ See pl. 1, no. 2; also Smith, R. R. R., Hellenistic Royal Portraits (Oxford: Clarendon, 1988) pl. 75Google Scholar, nos. 15 and 16. The British Museum now houses the unique gold octadrachm. The monogram (ΠΑ) only appears in the period ca. 180–176 bce.

¹⁰ See pl. 1, nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 respectively.

¹¹ Mørkholm, , “The Portrait Coinage of Ptolemy V: The Main Series,” in Mørkholm, Otto and Waggoner, Nancy M., eds., Greek Numismatics and Archaeology: Essays in Honor of Margaret Thompson (Wetteren: Cultura, 1979) 203–14Google Scholar; and idem, “Some Coins of Ptolemy V from Palestine,” Israel Numismatic Journal 5 (1981) 5–10.

¹² Kyrieleis (Bildnisse, pl. 41) illustrated the alabaster head now housed in the Ägyptische Museum (Berlin). For the coins with a boyish portrait, see my pl. 1, no. 8, and pl. 2, nos. 15 and 16.

¹³ Newell, Edward T. (Standard Ptolemaic Silver [The Coin Collector Series 7; New York: Raymond, 1941])Google Scholar surveyed the entire series of standard tetradrachms. A revised survey appears in Hazzard, Ptolemaic Coins, 19–50.

¹⁴ Livy 36.4.2.

¹⁵ Ibid. 37.3.9–11.

¹⁶ According to Polybius (22.17.6–7), Ptolemy V got Aristonicus to raise a mercenary force in Greece in about 185 bce. The monarch also renewed his alliance with the Achaean League (Polybius 22.3.5–9 and 7.1–2). Both acts lead modern historians to suspect that he was planning a war. Typical are the comments of Bevan, Edwyn R., A History of Egypt under the Ptolemaic Dynasty (London: Methuen, 1927) 277Google Scholar; also see my n. 7. The purpose of the coregency of 180/1 bce was to settle the succession before the war.

¹⁷ Polybius 22.3.8–9.

¹⁸ Diodorus Siculus 29.29.1; also Hieronymus In Dan. 9.20, who took his story from Porphyry, a polymath of the third century ce. Possibly both Diodorus and Porphyry used the same source.

¹⁹ See P. Freib. 3.12–33. The protocol of legal documents started with the plural participle βασιλευόντων, again suggesting that Cleopatra I considered herself a sovereign in her own right. Pestman, Pieter W. (La chronologie égyptienne d'après les textes démotiques [Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 15; Leiden: Brill, 1967] 46–47Google Scholar) cites the demotic evidence. Terence B. Mitford (“Ptolemy Macron,” in Studi in onore di Aristide Calderini e Roberto Paribeni [3 vols.; Milan: Ceshina, 1956–57] 2. 178–80) published an inscription with a votive formula placing the queen's name and title ahead of her son's: [ἀρετῆς ἕνεκε]ν καὶ εὐνοί[ ας τῆς είς Βασίλισσαν Κλεοπάτρ]α θεὰν Ἐπι [ φάνην καὶ Βασιλέα Πτολεμαῖο]ν, κ.τ.λ. (“because of excellence and goodwill toward Queen Cleopatra, the Goddess Epiphanes, and King Ptolemy…”).

²⁰ Diodorus Siculus 28.14.1; Hieronymus In Dan. 9.20. Breaking a promise of clemency, Ptolemy V tortured and killed the rebel chiefs who surrendered to him in 197 bce (Polybius 22.17.1–5). Ptolemy V faced revolts from the natives until the very last years of his reign.

²¹ About 1900, modern scholars were still not certain when Ptolemy V commenced his reign and how he dated his documents. See n. 49.

²² Kornemann, Ernst, “Zur Geschichte der antiken Herrscherkulte,” Klio 1 (1901) 83Google Scholar n. 2; and Tondriau, Julien L., “Notes ptolémaiques II: Sur l'origine du titre épiphanès,” Aegyptus 28 (1948) 1711–72.Google Scholar

²³ Pfister, Friedrich, “Epiphanie,” PWSup 4 (1924) 306–8Google Scholar.

²⁴ Nock, Arthur D., “Notes on Ruler-Cult,” JHS 48 (1928) 38–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar. He supposed that Ptolemy V assumed the epiklesis in 197 bce. Nock's theory of how Ptolemy got his surname was influenced by how Antiochus IV became a θεὸς ἐπιφανής: ὄτῳ παρὰ τῶν Σύρων ἐπώνυμον ῆν ἐπιφανής, ὅτι τῆς ἀρπαζομένης ὑπὀ ἀλλοτρίων βασιλεὺς οἰκεῖος ᾤφθη (“He was called Epiphanes, because when the government was seized by usurpers he showed himself a true king”) (Appian Syr. 8.45).

²⁵ This document was published in Pestman, Pieter W. et al. , Recueil de textes démotiques et bilingues (3 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1977) 2. 81–91Google Scholar, no. 8. The document is also known as P.dem.Dublin 1659 and P.dem.Hincks 2.

²⁶ Ijsewijn, Jozef, De sacerdoribus sacerdotiisque Alexandri Magni et Lagidarum eponymis (Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België. Klasse der Letteren. Verhandelingen 42; Brussels: Paleis der Academiën, 1961) 88Google Scholar.

²⁷ The descriptor was probably introduced into the papyri at the beginning of a new Macedonian regnal year, because the appointment of eponymous priests at Alexandria and the change in the protocol of legal texts were made on the Macedonian calendar. I argue (“The Regnal Years of Ptolemy II Philadelphos,” Phoenix 41 [1987] 142Google Scholar) that the Egyptian regnal year usually had the same numeral or one numeral more than the corresponding year on the Macedonian system. Thus the term Θεὸς Ἐπιφανής likely was added to the protocol during the course of the seventh Egyptian year of Ptolemy V or sometime after 12 October 199 bce. Presumably the king became Θεὸς Ἐπιφανής shortly before the appearance of the term in the documents.

²⁸ Polybius 22.17.7.

²⁹ Since Ptolemy V was only a minor in 199/8, he could hardly take credit for the actions of his ministers or generals, who in any case had not achieved anything notable in his early years. Will, Edouard (L'histoire politique du monde hellénistique [2 vols.; Annales de l'est. Mémoire 32; Nancy: Presses Universitaires de Nancy, 1979 and 1982] 2. 190)Google Scholar dated the proclamation of the king's majority (ἀνακλητηρία) to 197 (Polybius 18.55.3). The king took full credit for the actions of his ministers and generals in the Rosetta Stone (OGIS 1.90) dated 27 March 196 bce.

³⁰ Tondriau, Julien L., “Le thiases dionysiaques royaux de la cour ptolémaïque,” Chronique d'Egypte 41 (1946) 149–56Google Scholar; and idem, “Rois lagides compareés ou identifiés à des divinityés,” Chronique d'Egypte 45/6 (1948) 132Google Scholar. Both articles document Ptolemy IV's interest in Dionysus, but find no primary source suggesting that Ptolemy V shared the same zeal.

³¹ See the gold octadrachms minted at Alexandria ca. 204–198 bce (Svoronos, Die Münzen der Ptolemäer, 1139) and the similar silver tetradrachms (ibid., 1270, 1275, 1276, etc.). All these coins bear the diademed and draped bust of Ptolemy IV facing right on the obverse. See my pl. 1, no. 6.

³² Polybius 15.25.9 and 34.5–6. Ptolemy IV's reputation was not enhanced by a history written about him by Ptolemaeus of Megalopolis (Athenaeus 246c), governor of Cyprus between 197/6 and 180 bce, if we accept the dates of Bagnall, Roger S., The Administration of the Ptolemaic Possessions outside Egypt [Columbia Studies in Classical Tradition 4; Leiden: Brill, 1976] 255–56.Google Scholar

³³ Kiang, “An Unpublished Coin Portrait,” 75. The reverse inscription ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΟϒ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ referred to the honorand on the obverse. Kiang's interpretation of the stars as symbols of divinity was conventional. Head, Barclay V. (Historia Numorum [2d ed.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1911] 762)Google Scholar long ago associated the stars on the tetradrachms of Antiochus IV of Syria with symbols of divinity.

³⁴ Svoronos, Die Münzen der Ptolemäer, 1254 and 1257; for 1254 see my pl. 2, no. 15.

³⁵ Ibid., 1249; see my pl. 2, no. 16.

³⁶ See Hazzard, Ptolemaic Coins, 4; and further in text below.

³⁷ During the Hellenistic age, the ^* indicated either a star or a comet. The Romans first made an artistic distinction between the two after 27 bce, when they added a tail to the comet. Augustus thus issued silver denarii showing a comet with eight rays and a tail (Roman Imperial Coins, no. 253).

³⁸ Ginzel, Friedrich K. (Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen Chronologie [3 vols.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1906–1914] 2. 538)Google Scholar calculated the date of the lunar eclipse.

³⁹ Arrian Anab. 3.7.6 and 15.7. Arrian's sources for the story were Ptolemy and Aristobulus, who probably witnessed the eclipse (Arrian Anab. Pro. 1–2).

⁴⁰ Diodorus Siculus 19.55.7–8. Presumably Diodorus's source was Hieronymus of Cardia, a contemporary of the event and a companion of Antigonus and Demetrius.

⁴¹ Ibid., 16.66.3. Barrett, Anthony A. (“Comets in Greek and Roman Sources before A.D. 410” Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 72 [1978] 88)Google Scholar suggested that Diodorus might be confirmed by Pliny 2.22.90.

⁴² Proclus In Platonis Timaeum commentarii 285f; because so little of the writings of Theophrastus survives, one can not confirm the comment from them. Some modern scholars question the authenticity of the comment. See, for example, Long, Anthony A., “Astrology: Argument Pro and Contra,” in Barnes, Jonathan, ed., Science and Speculation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982) 166.Google Scholar

⁴³ Callimachus F. 228; Vermeule, Emily discusses the role of this kind of poetry in Aspects of Death in Early Greek Art and Poetry (Berkley: University of California, 1975) 15–17 and 199–200.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Grzybek, Erhard, Du calendrier macédonien au calendrier ptolémaïque: problèmes de chronologie hellénistique (Schweizerische Beiträge zur Altertumswissenschaft 20; Basel: Reinhardt, 1990) 103–12Google Scholar. The full moon is apparent from Bickermann, Elias J., Chronology of the Ancient World (London: Thames & Hudson, 1968) 122Google Scholar, who took his material from the tables of Grinzel, Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen Chronologie.

⁴⁵ See pl. 2, no. 10; Bank Leu sold the gold double octadrachm as lot no. 174 on 25 April 1978. Castor and Pollux were associated with stars as early as Euripides Hel. 140 (ca. 412 bce).

⁴⁶ Hazzard, Richard A. and FitzGerald, M. Pim Vatter, “The Regulation of the Ptolemaieia: A Hypothesis Explored,” Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 85 (1991) 6–23.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Martianus Capella (7.838) and Schol. Germanicus (Arat. 366) called the star Ptolemaion and Ptolemaeus respectively. The difference is unimportant.

⁴⁸ Probably three ἐνιαυτοί of each πεντετηρίς had 365 days; the fourth ἐνιαυτός had 366 days. The penteteris, therefore, would have been similar to the calendar used by the astronomer Dionysius between 272 and 241 bce. Dionysius's calendar has been discussed by Boeckh, August, Ueber die vierjährigen Sonnenkreise der Alten (Berlin: Reimer, 1863) 286–340Google Scholar and more recently by van der Waerden, B. L., “Greek Astronomical Calendars III, The Calendar of Dionysius,” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 29 (1984) 125–30.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Svoronos, Die Münzen der Ptolemäer, 848–53, 1089–1112 and 1205–28; the best catalogue of the series was the one produced by Mørkholm, Otto, “The Ptolemaic Coins of an Uncertain Era,” Nordisk Numismatik Årsskriff (1977) 24–46Google Scholar. Mørkholm believes that the series originated from Aradus and an era beginning in 259 bce. He has been corrected, however, by Hazzard and FitzGerald, “The Regulation of the Ptolemaieia,” 9–12 and in much greater detail in Richard A. Hazzard, Imagination of a Monarchy: Studies in Ptolemaic Propaganda (forthcoming). Hazzard, Richard A. (“The Tyre Hoard of 1955: IGCH 1591,” Cornucopiae 3 [1975] 57–63Google Scholar) first proposed that the series dated from an era of 262. See pl. 2, nos. 11–13. The silver octadrachms of Ptolemy V are listed by Svoronos as 1230; one is shown on my pl. 2, no. 14.

⁵⁰ Athenaeus 197c–203a. Only two scholars have questioned whether the pageant was part of a different festival than the Ptolemaieia: Fraser, Peter M., “Two Hellenistic Inscriptions from Delphi,” Bulletin de correspondence hellénique 78 (1959) 53 n. 3Google Scholar, and idem, Ptolemaic Alexandria (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1. 238Google Scholar; and Rice, E. E., The Grand Procession of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983) 184 and 186Google Scholar. Their arguments have not influenced other scholars such as Heinen, Heinz, “Ptolemy II and the First Syrian Wars,” CAH² 7 (1984) 417.Google Scholar

⁵¹ The incident was reported by Hyginus Poet. astr. 2.24. Pfeiffer, Rudolf (Callimachus [2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1949 and 1953] 1. 112–25, F. 110)Google Scholar presents what is left of Callimachus's work from PSI 9.1092 and P.Oxy. 20.2258c. The poem survives in better form as Catullus 66.

⁵² Yeomans, Donald K., Comets: A Chronological History of Observation (New York: Wiley, 1991) 364Google Scholar. Yeomans's primary source was a Babylonian clay tablet in the British Museum. Presumably any observation made at Babylon could also be made at Alexandria where the skies are almost always clear. Ptolemy V's date of birth is reported on the Rosetta stone (OGIS 1.90, line 46).

In a discussion of P.Gurob 12, Josiah G. Smyly observed that Ptolemy V became a coregent within days of his birth when his name appeared in the protocol of legal texts dated in his father's thirteenth regnal year (Greek Papyri from Gurob [Cunningham Memoirs 12; Dublin: Hodges & Figgis, 1921] 27)Google Scholar. Smyly's argument has been accepted by Meyer, Ernst, Untersuchungen zur Chronologie der ersten Ptolemäer auf Grund der Papyri (Leipzig: Teubner, 1923) 43Google Scholar; by Wilcken, Ulrich, Archiv für Papyrusforschung 7 (1924) 71Google Scholar; and more recently by Koenen, Ludwig, “The Ptolemaic King as Religious Figure” in Bulloch, Anthony and Gruen, Erich S., eds., Images and Ideologies: Self Definition in the Hellenistic World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993) 79Google Scholar. Pestman (“La chronologie égyptienne,” 36) noted that Ptolemy V's name also appeared in demotic texts starting in the fourteenth year of Ptolemy IV (Spiegelberg, W., Die demotischen Papyri Hauswaldt [Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1913] no. 14).Google Scholar

⁵³ Polybius (15.20.1–2) apparently placed the accession of Ptolemy V during Olympiad 144.2 or 203/2 bce. Most modern historians accepted this date until Samuel (Ptolemaic Chronology, 168) used Egyptian documents to reckon the accession between the summer and 8 September 204 bce. Subsequent to Samuel's study, Walbank, Frank W. (A Historical Commentary on Polybius [3 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1957–79] 2. 22)Google Scholar thought that it was now “wholly uncertain whether Polybius believed Epiphanes' accession to have been in 204/3 or 203/2.” Ho Peng Yoke reports the comet of 204 (“Ancient and Medieval Observations of Comets and Novae in Chinese Sources,” Vistas in Astronomy 5 [1962] 123, no. 23)Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ Livy 29.14.3. Note, however, the comment of Barrett (“Comets in Greek and Roman Sources,” 83) about the ambiguity of the word fax in Livy. The comets of 210 and 204 are the only unusual astronomical events now known for the reign of Ptolemy V (204–180 BCE) if we follow the record of observation by Yeomans, Comets, 364–65.

⁵⁵ Justinus Epit. 37.2.1: Huius futuram magnitudinem etiam caelestia ostenta praedixerant, nam et eo quo genitus est anno et eo quo regnare primum coepit stella cometes per utrumque tempus LXX diebus ita luxit ut caelum omne conflagrare videretur. Justin's source was Timagenes of Alexandria, a writer of the first century bce. Chinese and Babylonian sources did not report a sighting of a comet for the year of Mithridates' birth (123 bce), but they did record a comet for the spring of the year of his accession (120 bce). The sighting apparently only lasted about 56 days. See Yeoman, Comets, 365.

⁵⁶ Herrmann, Peter, “Antiochos d. Grosse und Teos,” Anatolia 9 (1967) 29–157Google Scholar; Robert, Louis, “Bulletin épigraphique,” Revue des études grecques 82 (1969) 502–5, no. 495Google Scholar; Jean, and Robert, Louis, La Carie; histoire et géographie historique avec le recueil des inscriptions antiques (2 vols.; Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1953 and 1954) 2. 288–89, no. 7Google Scholar; Robert, Louis, “Le sanctuaire d'Artémis à Amyzon,” Comptes rendus de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (1953) 403–15Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Polybius 15.20.1–8. Three modern historians have doubted the existence of a compact between Philip V and Antiochus III: Magie, David, “The Agreement between Philip V and Antiochus III for the Partition of the Egyptian Empire,” JRomS 29 (1939) 32–44Google Scholar; De Regibus, Luca, “Tolemeo Epifane e l'intervento romano nel Mediterraneo orientale,” Aegyptus 32 (1952) 97–100Google Scholar; and Errington, R. Malcolm, “The Alleged Syro-Macedonian Pact and the Origins of the Second Macedonian War,” Athenaeum 49 (1971) 336–54Google Scholar. All these discussions have been dismissed by Will, L'histoire politique, 2. 114 –17.

⁵⁸ For this chronology of events, see Holleaux, Maurice, Etudes d'épigraphie et d'histoire grecques (3 vols.; Paris: Boccard, 1938) 3. 317–35Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Polybius 18.55.2.

⁶⁰ For a fascinating study of the court politics at the succession, see Mooren, Leon, “The Ptolemaic Court System,” Chronique d'Egypte 60 (1985) 214–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶¹ Pestman, Pieter W., “Harmachis et Anchmachis, deux Rois indigènes du temps des Ptolémées,” Chronique d'Egypte 40 (1965) 157–70Google Scholar. The names of the indigenous chiefs have long been subject to comment. Clarysse, Willy cited much of the older bibliography in “Horgonepher et Chaennophris les derniers pharaons indigènes,” Chronique d'Egypte 53 (1978) 243–53.Google Scholar

⁶² Will, Edouard, “The Succession to Alexander,” CAH² 7 (1984) 25Google Scholar.

⁶³ The great celebration of 262 BCE is discussed in chapter 5 of Richard A. Hazzard, Imagination of a Monarchy: Studies in Ptolemaic Propaganda.

⁶⁴ Athenaeus 196a–197c.

⁶⁵ Ptolemy II deified his parents together as the Θεοὶ Σωτῆρες (“savior gods”) in 282 BCE, but referred to his father individually as Ptolemy or as King Ptolemy until the twenty-third regnal year or 263/2, when Ptolemy II started calling him Πτολεμαῖος Σωτήρ. Christian Habicht (Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte [Zetemata. Monographien zur klassischen Altertumswissenschaft 14; Munich: Beck, 1956] 109) presumed from Pausanias 1.8.6 that Ptolemy I got his epiklesis from the Rhodians in 304; Habicht's theory has been questioned by Hazzard, Richard A., “Did Ptolemy I Get His Surname from the Rhodians in 304?” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 93 (1992) 52–56Google Scholar; and Gauthier, Philippe, “Bulletin épigraphique,” Revue des études grecques 106 (1993) 522, no. 379.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Athenaeus 197c–203b.

⁶⁷ Svoronos, Die Münzen der Ptolemäer, 1249. It was the only coin listed by Svoronos to use the epiklesis in the legend. All other portrait coins of Ptolemy V bore the inscription ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΟϓ ΒΑΣΩΣ.

⁶⁸ Skeat, Theodore C., The Reigns of the Ptolemies (Münchener Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte 39; Munich: Beck, 1954) 12.Google Scholar