Abstract
AbstractChapter 4 revisits ‘resistance’ in Seleucid Babylonia through the cuneiform scholarly texts, in particular the Late Babylonian Chronicles, Astronomical Diaries, and ex eventu prophecies. The relatively ‘unnegative’ picture of the Seleucids that emerges from the Diaries and Chronicles can give the impression that the Babylonians (or at least the temple elites who produced these texts) were generally content with the Seleucid imperial regime. It is clear, however, that Babylonian scholars of the Hellenistic period were consistently engaging with Seleucid kingship in an evaluative way. Whether through reports of contemporary royal patronage (or the lack thereof), or ex eventu predictions about the fates of good and bad kings, Akkadian texts of the Hellenistic period articulate paradigms of royal action against which rulers might be judged, and while there is no blanket rejection of the Macedonian Dynasty, it seems that not all Seleucid rulers were judged favourably. While the lacunose and laconic nature of the material makes it difficult to ascertain the precise evaluative force of individual statements, clusters of negativity can be detected around Antiochus IV and Seleucus I, two rulers who, significantly, are associated with ‘Hellenizing’ activity in and beyond Babylonia. It is debatable whether these cases can be classed as ‘resistance literature’ or viewed as anti-Hellenic or anti-Hellenistic. Yet the identification and analysis of such clusters of concern or critique can facilitate a more differentiated history of elite responses to Hellenistic imperialism, within Babylonia and elsewhere.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call