Here are some posts I enjoyed this week:
An archaeologist has studied the Egyptian temples and their many carved writings during the beginning of the Ptolemaic period, when huge changes occurred as Roman rule replaced Egyptian, and has decided that the native priests and religion underwent a resurgence and great innovation rather than the decline that had previously been (mostly) assumed. Interesting cultural response to a lot of “new” and foreign elements. Click here for Archaeology News Network “Temple culture in Ptolemaic Egypt alive and kicking”
If you enjoy historical fiction, here’s a great prize list to check out. The long list of the Sir Walter Scott Prize, given to a book first published in the UK. There’s also a link to another 20 books they wanted to recommend from Australia, Africa and Canada. So get reading! Click here for the website of the Walter Scott Prize for Historical Fiction
Ramses II gets a redo. Four colossal statues, two seated, two standing, used to preside over the entrance to Karnak Temple. An earthquake knocked them down. One of them is being restored and put upright, says the Egyptian antiquities ministry. Click here for the Archaeology News Network “Egypt begins restoration of colossus of Ramses II at Karnak Temples”
Roman rule didn’t hold sway over Egypt until the end of the Ptolemaic era, c. 80 BCE. The beginning of the Ptolemaic era was 250 years earlier in 323 BCE, and saw Macedonian Greeks take control of the country from the Persian satraps.
Roman rule didn’t hold sway over Egypt until the end of the Ptolemaic era, c. 80 BCE. The beginning of the Ptolemaic era was 250 years earlier in 323 BCE, and saw Macedonian Greeks take control of the country from the Persian satraps.
Thanks for the clarification. I think the point of this woman’s work is that while it seems like foreign influences drove out the traditional forms of religious practice, they didn’t. Tradition thrived by innovating–if that isn’t a contradiction in terms. I was being was too loose in my identification of the “foreign”. Not my period, and I always think of the Romans when thinking of the Ptolemies–as in Cleopatra etc. My mistake and thanks.
Thanks for the clarification. I think the point of this woman’s work is that while it seems like foreign influences drove out the traditional forms of religious practice, they didn’t. Tradition thrived by innovating–if that isn’t a contradiction in terms. I was being was too loose in my identification of the “foreign”. Not my period, and I always think of the Romans when thinking of the Ptolemies–as in Cleopatra etc. My mistake and thanks.
Comments are closed.