Arsinoe and Berenice at the Olympics Author(s): Chris Bennett Reviewed work(s): Source: Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik,

Bd. 154 (2005), pp. 91-96 Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20190990 . Accessed: 16/07/2012 04:20
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik.

http://www.jstor.org

91

Arsinoe

and

Berenice

at

the Olympics
in the chariot I and Tha?s, events of the

of the Ptolemaic the existence Throughout Greek Games. The earliest known victory

its members competed dynasty, is that of Lagus, son of Ptolemy

at the Lycaean

festival of 308/7 (SIG3 314); the latest that of Ptolemy XII in the pair at the Basileia of Lebedeia,
12 in the late 70s or early 60s.1 Pausanias notes an Olympic victory statue of sons of Ptolemy probably a Macedonian I II dedicated by Aristolaus, and one of Ptolemy (6.17.3). He also records that Ptolemy in 286, the summer of the last full won the pair of colts on its introduction in the 69th Pythian Games won the same race on its Bilistiche IPs mistress and that Ptolemy year of his sole reign (10.7.8),

introduction in the 129th Olympics of 264 ? She had very probably been victorious in the quadriga for
colts when at the previous or with what II were Berenice Olympics.4 from result.5 Finally, at the Olympics, though we do not know competed victor lists, we learn that Ptolemy VI and the Panathenaic of 162, and that Ptolemy VI was again in the Panathenaia II also

Cleopatra victorious

both victors, probably at the Panathenaia in the next Panathenaia. We also learn that Ptolemy V had been victorious of 182, and that his son, the future Ptolemy VI, was probably a victor at the same games.6 victories were celebrated Ptolemaic by poets of the court, and some of these poems have been recovered. An encomium written

in II was published for a Nemean victory of Berenice by Callimachus are attributed to Posidippus, the 1970s.7 The epigrams of P. Mil. Vogl. VIII 309, generally clearly part has added many new events to our list of the sporting triumphs of the same tradition.8 Their discovery

of Ptolemy II and his family. Epigram AB 78 is particularly informative:9

1 W. criptions 481. The VoUgraff, grecques: Inscriptions textes, de B?otie, BCH 25 (1901) (Paris, of 365-375, 1971) No. also LTnstitut 22. For Fernand-Courby, Ptolemy Nouveau choix as Ptolemy d'ins XII

traductions,

commentaires

"king

Philopator"

rather than Ptolemy IV, see M. Holleaux, Observations sur une inscription de L?badeia, BCH 30 (1906) 469-481
Presumably events. in boys' their personal participation on horseback statue of Ptolemy mentioned mounted than epiklesis 2 Pausanias dates 6.15.10. the victory before his assumption the title "Neos victories interesting 6.16.9 Dionysios" in the late 60s. the statue commemorated It would be

at 480

events rather by his sons in equestrian sponsored sons were to know which and when. The involved, does not certainly refer to any Ptolemaic king.

in Pausanias

3 Pausanias 5.8.11. The date is given in the Olympic victory list in A. Schoene (ed.), Eusebi Chronicorum Libri Duo
(Berlin, Leclercq, 1866/1875) Histoire the victor as "Philistiachos", 1207, naming I (Paris, 185 n. 1, and on des Lagides 1903) the 131st. Either he was a corruption of "Bilistiche"; cf. already A. Bouch? evidently similar cognates O. Masson, Sur le nom de Bilistich?, favorite or he confused Bilistiche's two victories.

de Ptolem?e II, in Studia inHonorem Uro Kajanto

Olympics before counting

(Helsinki, 1985) 109-112. Pausanias dates the victory to the third

inclusively

4 P.

Oxy XVII2082

F6+7. The entry is heavily reconstructed (cf. the photograph now available online (February 2005)

at http://www.papyrology.ox.ac.uk). Bilistiche and Kosmetatou, depends assumed, apparently

as Bilistiche see now E. in the list. For the victor is certain The event from its position at 21. The date 50 18-36 Status of Ptolemaic the Quasi-Institutional Mistress, (2004) AfP Royal than is generally in 264. This may be less certain on the absence of an entry for the pair of colts, an event introduced an entry for that event might the list have been. The text following F6 and F7 lies where since the break between covered Roman events. War. and Not much of note in the Mamertine extra text, I have while in 264 in 268 15.4-5), (Livy, Per. happened no reason to dispute Hunt's that the fit between judgement in this note. a victory. Rome F6 was and F7 fully is too

engaged tight to admit ^

However,

the date 2.24.

is assumed It seems

to be correct safe to assume

Hyginus,

De Astronom?a

6 182: IG II22314 lines 41 (Ptolemy V), 56 (Ptolemy his son); 162: SEG XLI 115 in Unes 22 (Cleopatra II), 32 (Ptole 158: 2316 line 45 IG II2 my VI); (Ptolemy VI). See S. V. Tracy C. Habicht, New and Old Panathenaic Victor Lists, Hespe ria 60 (1991) IS1-236.
7 P. J. Parsons, Callimachus: suggests The Victoria a date of 243 of Berenices, or 241, ZPE favouring in P. Mil. 25 (1977) 1-50. A. Cameron, Callimachus and His Critics 106, (Princeton, 1995) 8 Cf. M. Fantuzzi, the former. Vogl. VIII 309, in B. Acosta-Hughes et al. (eds.), Labored in

Structure

the Hippika

Papyrus Leaves: Reflections on an Epigram Collection Attributed to Posidippus (P.Mil. Vogl. VIII309) (Washington D.C., 2004) 212-224 at 220-224. Editio princeps: G. Bastianini C. Gallazzi (eds.), Posidippo di Pella. Epigrammi (P.Mil. Vogl. VIII309) (Milan, 2001); editio minor (designated AB): C. Austin G. Bastianini (eds.), Posidippi Pellaei Quae Supersunt

92

C. Bennett

OCOlSo?, ?|IOV [k]?,?0C;, e[?] 7Tc[ot' ?]?7tOCT?, 710CVT8? ?p?GK?l yvcoGx? ?,?y?iv, oti |ioi ?o^[a rca?moyovo? apiiaxi Kai (lev y?p |noi rcpo7?xTco[p nio??|ii]a?o? Ilioaicov ??xxaa? xnnov knx axa[?icov, inynip B?p?v?KT| ?jiot) 7cax[po?* a]p[ji]axi ??1)kt[oc? ?'] ?^paxo ?v[?koc ?' ocmfi? naoaq

?K?aaiAicptc] ?aa[i]A,?'oc v?kt|v ?i?? Tcaxfip

Tcaxpo? ?%covovojior Tiochpo? vov k?[k?,t|hxxi

viica? xp?i? ?v?? ?? ??tB?mr 'Apaiv?T)

Ti|xco] y?vo? tepov cp?yyo?] rcapO?vio? [T)??yu]vaiKcov [?aoiA,i]c.

xaDuMa] fjt?[v ?]7i????V'OA,\)[|Li7r]?a ex>%? [?? ?]v?? o?kod

Kai rcai?cov rca??a? a?0?o(pop9['o]c; ?? TxGp?TtTCOD X??,??OD OC????T?TOVB?p[?]v?KTj[? apfxaai xfj? ?aaiA?DO'oar|c, Tell, MaK?xa[i], ax?cpavav.

all ye bards, of my fame, [if it ever pleases you] to speak of what is known, because my glory [goes back a long way].

My grandfather [Ptole]my [won]with his chariot,

at Pisa, driving his team on the race-courses as did Berenice, my father's mother. Then again with his chariot a king son of a king my father was victorious, with his father's name. And all three victories for harnessed races were won by Arsinoe in a single [competition]. now honour [I my father's] sacred clan [and] 'women's name I am given] as the virgin [queen]. [is the

[pride']

saw [these triumphs from] a single house Olympia children winning and the children's prizes with their chariots. crown Celebrate, O ye Macedonians, Queen Berenice's for winning From this we learn with the full four-horse of team.

in chariot royal family had won victories as Ptolemy events at the Olympic Games. Three of them are readily identifiable I, Berenice I, and Ptole II known of II. the was, (Pausanias 6.17.3). my arguably, previously Ptolemy victory Only that several members the Ptolemaic The identities of "Arsinoe" candidates. and "Berenice" For "Arsinoe" there are two known are perhaps not immediately obvious. For each of them we have Arsinoe I and Arsinoe II, the queens of Ptole

the daughter of Ptolemy II, and my II, while for "Berenice" we have Berenice Syra (or Phernophorus), as a as an victor in contender and Berenice II, the queen of Ptolemy HI, who is already known Olympic a as as was II II. and Arsinoe and known of the Nemean who, games, queen, Ptolemy officially daughter

Omnia (Milan, A. Casanova 2002 (Florence,

2002); (eds.),

additional

critical

notes

in E. Livrea, un anno

Critica

testuale convegno herein

ed esegesi the

del nuovo

IIpapiro 61-77. 2002) identification

di Posidippo Individual

challenge collection

to the usual

epigrams as the author of Posidippus of more than one

dopo. Atti del are identified of

internationale by number

Posidippo, di studi Firenze in AB.

in G.

Bastianini giugno a recent

13-14 For

assigned

these

epigrams, considers

see S. Schr?der,

Skeptische of

?berlegungen

zum Mail?nder Epigrammpapyrus

as a whole may be

(P. Mil. Vogl. VIII 309), ZPE 148 (2004) 29-73. While
author, he at least

Schr?der considers that the

the Hippika epigrams

the work

three

considered here, AB 74,78, and 79, to be thework of a single author (ZPE 148 at 72).
9 Reconstruction, and between 50 at 26-27', differences and translation after AB. Cf. the version transcription at http://www.chs.harvard.edu/classicsat/issue_l/greektext.html the versions these reconstructions do not affect the identification of of B. Acosta-Hughes involved. and E. Kosmetatou, (as of June, 2005). The AfP slight

the royal women

Arsinoe

and Berenice

at the Olympics

93

as a traitor early in the I was disgraced has pointed out, Arsinoe and that she would be named in any context that included either Berenice, unlikely II. As to Berenice, while she is called a certain that the "Arsinoe" of AB 78 is Arsinoe such as Philotera, here and in AB 79 and AB 82, the title is also known for princesses As Kosmetatou II, and Berenice,

reign.10 It is very therefore all but both ?aoitaaaa, sister of Arsinoe

she is also called rcocpG?vio?, the infant daughter of Ptolemy III.11 More significantly, was a and, from other epigrams, we learn that she also won young unmarried woman, indicating that she in the Nemean and Isthmian Games as a child (rcoc??), i.e. between about 7 and 14 years old,12 victories these by her father.13 Noting accompanied won an in that Berenice II difficulties involved and the great chronological supposing Olympic points, the death of her father Magas, and king of Cyrene, victory in 248, the only possible occasion between to Ptolemy has convincingly of AB 78 must be her marriage III, Thompson argued that the Berenice personally present Berenice These were not merely aristocrats. They played an the sporting triumphs of wealthy the and power of the dynasty, in role legitimacy dynastic propaganda, publicly demonstrating important over This is particularly clear from the dates of the its good fortune, and its triumphs adversity. Panathenaic victories. The victory of Ptolemy V's son in 182, when the prince was at most four years old,15 advertised strated the arrival of a long-awaited heir, while the victories of Ptolemy VI and Cleopatra II, Syra.14 victories and that she was at least at the latter event,

occurring in the year following their brief expulsion by their brother Ptolemy VIII, publicly demon
their legitimacy, and the security of their rule. Ptolemy II was fully aware of in the epigrams are, therefore, not only this aspect of the games.16 The dates of the victories celebrated the of interest to literary history, and conversely we may refine our estimates of the dates by considering their restoration, political them. surrounding as that of Arsinoe that the II was at the same Olympics of II.17 This Bing suggests victory Ptolemy cannot be right, since there were only three chariot events at this time. He also construes AB 88 tomean circumstances

II and Berenice I all won victories as rulers in the same Olympics, that Ptolemy which must I, Ptolemy an then be the Games of 284.18 This is attractive notion, and not impossible, but it reads too much into the text, which is concerned with the relative merits of the three victories. It does not seem possible to date any of them. It is even possible that Ptolemy II was not yet king when he won.19 However, the can be dated. II and Berenice, remaining two victories named in AB 78, those of Arsinoe to must return Arsinoe's fall between her after the triple triumph Egypt collapse of her disastrous to her half-brother in 280/79 and her death. Whether she died in 270 or marriage Ptolemy Ceraunus

10 dippus'

E. Kosmetatou, Hippika,

Constructing in Acosta-Hughes

Legitimacy: et al., Labored

The

Ptolemaic

in Papyrus

Leaves,

as a Means Familiengruppe at 232 n. 24. 225-246

for

Self-Definition

in Posi

11Philotera: OGIS 35; Berenice daughter of Ptolemy III:OGIS 56 (Canopus decree).

12 13 Philo,De Isthmian Op. Mun. Games: AB 36 (105), quoting Hippocrates. AB 79,80,81. in K. Gutzwiller alia corte (ed.), The New A Hellenistic Posidippus. Poetry su alcuni Riflessioni di epigrammi 82; Nemean Poet Games: of

14 D. Book

J. Thompson, see [to appear]; Berenice Otto, Zur

Posidippus, also L. Criscuolo,

the Ptolemies, e politica

Agoni

di Alessandria.

Posidippo, Chiron 33 (2003), 311-332 at 328-330. My thanks to Dorothy Thompson for providing me an advance copy of
her article. ^ W. II is assumed Geschichte in P. Mil. der Zeit Vogl. des VIII309,206, without (Munich, discussion. 1934) 7; L. Koenen, Die "demotische Zivilprozess 6. Ptolem?ers

ordnung" und die Philanthropa vom 9. Okt. 186 vor Chr., AfP 17 (1960) 11-16 at 13-14 n. 2.
*" Most Propaganda recently, (Toronto, Criscuolo, 2000) Chiron 33, passim; cf. R. A. Hazzard, Imagination of a Monarchy: Studies in Ptolemaic 57-58,66-75.

17 P.
253 n. 23.

Bing, Posidippus and the Admiral: Kallikrates of Samos in theMilan Epigrams, GRBS 43 (2002/3) 243-266

at

18 Bing, GRBS 43 at 253 n. 23. For critical remarks on the structure of AB 88 see now Schr?der, ZPE 148 at 40-42.
19 Seen. 2.

94

C. Bennett

are in question: those of 276 and 272.21 Although victors in chariot events 268,20 only two Olympics son have been proposed in both Games of Philaeterus of in 276, and Attalos, adopted Pergamon son of Eteocles of Athens in 272 neither date is remotely certain, which prevents us from Glaucon, we may be sure that she won further refining the date of Arsinoe's victories by elimination.22 However, has recently argued that itmust postdate the = 272/1. of the royal couple, who first appear in the dynastic cult in year 14 (Macedonian) He suggests that both deification and marriage took place in the previous year.23 This attractive proposal to the pair, 3 Thoth year 12 (Egyptian), must be that the dated earliest reference requires, however, deification I. This date is given in 272, using a regnal era based on the death of Ptolemy to which itself is dated Since this is after II 21,24 stele, year Ptolemy changed the basis of his date of year 12 is based on the start of his regnal era,25 it is more usually assumed that the retrospective with his to 2 which it November 274 26 Whatever the resolution of this father, coregency equates equivalent the Pithom to 1November a terminus ante quern. Fortunately, we also have a terminus only provides = includes a reference 275/4, post quern. The Cypriote inscription KAI 43, dated year 11 (Macedonian) to Arsinoe was not shows that she had at the time it the written.27 Hence I, which yet been disgraced difficulty, the Pithom Stele marriage The victories must be dated to 272. 43, and her Olympic to is less IF s clean sweep rules out the determine. Arsinoe easy triumph of 272, and it is clear from the epigram that Berenice's and Olympics victory must be later. Thompson 28 to summer must that it her Kosmetatou Antiochus II in 252 recognized predate marriage Enough of the victor list of 268 survives in P. Oxy XVII 2082 to exclude a victory for Berenice in that year. It postdate KAI date of Berenice's seems highly unlikely that Ptolemy that the pair of colts was a new event that would II, knowing to risk being upstaged have permitted his daughter which attention, would by his mistress, are as the 264. 260 of We left with and 256 candidates. against Olympics possible We games. have It has two other clues. First, Berenice been text of AB that suggested 81 seems to be more a child attract argues of Arsinoe IImust them as queen, i.e. after her marriage to her brother. The date of this event has been much debated. Hazzard

had previously won victories at the Nemean and Isthmian she won in two different Nemean victories but the Games, two victories neither in a single Games.29 Since of them can have occurred much

fragmentary she is said to have been later than 260. Very question. Second,

compatible with at the time of these victories,

three years elapsed between these Games and the Olympics in probably IF s presence for at least the Isthmian victory, and probably also the Nemean Ptolemy

at least

de chronologie probl?mes hell?nistique it is the scope of this article far Kosmetatou, (Basel, 1990) AfP recently, beyond to discuss this controversial is that none of the numerous raised to date against Grzybek's thesis issue, my opinion objections are convincing, or collectively, either individually and that his proposal is more likely than not. 270: most ptol?ma?que: 50 at 34-35. While

20

For

268:

E. Grzybek, 103-112. For

Du

calendrier

mac?donien

au calendrier

21 So also Bing, GRBS 43 at 253 n. 23. 22 L. Moretti, Olympionikai, i vincitori negli antichi agoni olimpici (Rome, 1957) 135-136 nos. 538, 542. On Attalos
see also L. Moretti, 2^ alignment 140-158. Hazzard, Iscrizioni agonistiche greche (Rome, 1953) 94-99; on Glaucon see also Criscuolo, Chiron 33, 320-322. the Julian 41 (1987) The retitling cult is given in P. Hibeh 89-90. of the priest of the dynastic Imagination, see R. A. Hazzard, The Regnal Years II Philadelphos, of Ptolemy of Macedonian regnal years I 99. On Phoenix

24 Pithom Stele (CCG 22183) line 15-16: ?. Naville, La st?le de Pithom, ZAS 40 (1902) 66-75; Grzybek, Calendrier
mac?donien, 69-112.

25A. E. Samuel, Ptolemaic Chronology (Munich, 1962) 27-28.

26 E.g. Grzybek, Calendrier mac?donien, 92, who however equates the date to 6 November 274 in error.

27 J. Teixidor, Ptolemaic Chronology

Bennett, 2^ Three Notes on Arsinoe Poet Thompson, of the Ptolemies;

in the Phoenician
C. J. Bennett Constructing

Inscriptions from Cyprus, ZPE 71 (1988) 188-190, C. J.

(eds.), A Delta-Man 232. in Yebu (Parkland FL, 2003) 64-70. Legitimacy

I, in A. K. Eyma

Kosmetatou,

29 P. Mil.

Vogl. VIII309,205-206,

followed by Criscuolo, Chiron 33 at 312.

Arsinoe

and Berenice

at the Olympics

95

one,

clearly

advertised

Berenice

the royal family was thoroughly so. We It was not always II .30 As adopted by Arsinoe questionable until

as a legitimate secure.

daughter

of the dynasty,

whose

prominent

position

in

are told that Ptolemy II had his children by Arsinoe I posthumously a must of have been children condemned traitor, their prospects to remove The effect of the adoption was all taint, in effect this happened.

relegitimising them, as Ptolemy HI implicitly recognized by naming Arsinoe II as his mother in all his
this adoption occurred, but Berenice's childhood public documents. We do not know when and Ptolemy IPs public endorsement of them, could only occur after it. They therefore imply had occurred before about 260. The triumphs, that it too

adoption must have had a very considerable impact on succession politics. For most of the - was decade after Arsinoe IFs death, Ptolemy "the Son" whoever he was31 coregent and recognized a son of Arsinoe heir. If, as Bevan, and more recently Tunny, have suggested, he was himself I,32 the a prerequisite for his ascent to the coregency, and we could date it to the after Arsinoe IFs death. However, "the Son" is not named amongst her children by period immediately were the Theocritus the scholiast, and, since the scholia initially compiled by Theon under Augustus, adoption would have been omission cannot be due to any damnatio memoriae II.33We may imposed by Ptolemy this possibility. For any other background, the adoption of Arsinoe Fs children would a significant threat to "the Son's" position by reintroducing her sons into the line of "brothers". It is not stretching credulity to see it as a major factor behind his revolt in therefore have exclude

represented as his succession 259, which would

imply that it had occurred fairly recently.34 as a satirical if Cameron has correctly understood another epigram attributed to Posidippus Also, on Bilistiche's she was not popular at court.35 One likely reason is that, as Olympic lampoon victory, the king's principal mistress, she was in a position in this decade to entertain hopes of emulating his mother's successful career, and to be accused of doing so, whether or not that was her actual ambition. The adoption would have made was it clear personal, to the king significance occurred after 264. All these factors, that any such ambitions were unlikely to succeed, and that her not dynastic. This consideration that the adoption suggests

though circumstantial, point to a date in the late 260s for the adoption,36 and hence for Berenice's Nemean and Isthmian victories. That is, they were in either 263 or 261, or just possibly a victory in the Olympics 259. While of 260 remains possible, 256 is more likely. Again we may look at the political circumstances.

3^ Schol.

vet. Theocritus

17.128,

G. H. Macurdy,

Hellenistic

Queens:

a study

of woman-power

inMacedonia,

Seleucid,

Syria, and Ptolemaic Egypt (Baltimore, 1932) 121. 31 The question is surveyed inW. Hu?, Ptolemaios der Sohn, ZPE 121 (1998) 229-250, with update in idem, Noch einmal: Ptolemaios der Sohn, ZPE 149 (2004) 232. Again, its complexities are beyond the scope of this article.My opinion
Telmessos. son of Lysimachus and Arsinoe of II, adopted II, and that he later became Ptolemy, by Ptolemy Ptolemy He was not Ptolemy who was a son of Ptolemy II by a mistress, most Andromachou, (notwith likely Bilistiche to the contrary assertions in AfP 50 at 20 and 23), and who may be identified with the Ptolemy who standing Kosmetatou's died at Ephesus. M. Domingo Bruder des K?nigs Ptolemaios III. Euergetes, und My lasa: Bemerkungen Ptolemaios, Gygax, is that he was

zu I. Labraunda Nr. 3, Chiron 30 (2000) 353-366,

with "the Son" rather than Andromachou. The House of Ptolemy (London, 32 E. R. Bevan,

suggests that Ptolemy "the Brother" of Ptolemy III should be identified

1927) 66; J. A. Tunny, Ptolemy "the Son" Reconsidered: Are there too

many Ptolemies?, ZPE 131 (2000) 83-92. 33 P. M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford, 1972) 1474; cf. Hu?, ZPE 149 at 232. 34 ZPE 121 at 240-241. Hu?, 35AB 127 = Anth. Pal. V 202; A. Cameron, Two Mistresses of Ptolemy Philadelphus, GBRS 31 (1990) 287-311.
36 changes general Hazzard, intended thesis Imagination, to revitalize plausible. 44-46, his rule 66-79, in about etc., has 263/2. argued While some that Ptolemy of his II undertook are a number less of actions than and arguments as part of this activity. convincing others, policy the

seems

If correct,

the adoption

probably

took place

96

C. Bennett

once suggested, age. It may be, as Macurdy By this time Berenice was certainly of marriageable to "the Son", and that this was one of the II had originally that Ptolemy intended that she be married reasons he had relegitimised Arsinoe F s children.37 If so, the plan had backfired: "the Son" had rebelled were and was no longer available. At least two, probably Ptolemaic available: the future three, princes and their likely half brother Ptolemy Andromachou; but evidently own to his her her of brothers. Given any precedent by betrothing Ptolemy own his the alleged plot of Arsinoe his poor experience with succession politics disputed succession, son her eldest and the revolt "the in favour of of Son" it is not surprising III, I, presumably Ptolemy a as a to choice of heir. The same policy that he had decided not to take step that would tip his hand Ptolemy explains therefore to Posidippus.38 of his sons from the epigrams attributed One may the striking omission as at least in her Berenice's for an part, Olympic prominence, advertising availability interpret In the event it took four more years to find one, and it too ended badly. exogamous dynastic marriage. I therefore suggest the following for the Olympic and the composition of the victories chronology Birth of Berenice III, his brother Lysimachus, II had decided not to follow

Hippika:
c. 275 c. 275/4 c. 274/2 I and exile of Arsinoe Disgrace and marriage of Arsinoe Deification

II

270/268

272 Triple Olympic victory of Arsinoe II Death of Arsinoe II

268 Olympic 264 Olympic victory of Bilistiche victory of Bilistiche Posthumous by Arsinoe adoption of Berenice and Isthmian victories of Berenice Nemean Revolt of "the Son" in the quadriga for colts in the pair for colts II

c. 263/2 263 and/or 261 259

256Olympic victory of Berenice

c. 256-252 of the latest epigrams in the Hippika Composition to Antiochus II.39 252 Berenice's marriage

San Diego

Chris Bennett

37

Macurdy,

Hellenistic

Queens,

87.

38 For this reason, among others, I think Criscuolo's suggestion (Chiron 33 at 325) that Ptolemy IIImarried Berenice II in 249 is quite unlikely. Kosmetatou, Constructing Legitimacy 231-232 suggested AB 78 and AB 88 honoured Ptolemy III
as well 39 J?rgen as his sister, but this is clearly an error - cf. Kosmetatou, for AfP 50 at 26 n. 36. led to this note, and to her, Dorothy Thompson and thanks My Hammerstaedt to Elizabeth Kosmetatou on earlier the discussions that

for comments

drafts.