Philip II and Alexander the Great: Father and Son ... - Historia Antigua

THE ROLE OF THE ARGEADAI 129
invented most probably in the court circles of Ptolemy I, attempted to
anchor Ptolemaic lineage directly on the mortal line of Argead kings
by presenting him as the illegitimate son of Philip II. 42 According to
Pausanias and Curtius, our sources for the story, Ptolemy’s mother
was a concubine of Philip II. Having become pregnant by him, she
was married off to the obscure Lagus who bore the responsibility of
raising the bastard son of the Macedonian king. 43 The historicity of
this claim has been discredited, but veracity is not what matters in
this context. Instead, it is the illusion that the two houses, Argead and
Ptolemaic, were tightly linked through blood that was promoted by
the Ptolemies. Against this background, one can interpret the close
association of Alexander and Ptolemy I’s statues in dynastic celebrations
and central public buildings as promoting this fi ctional halfbrother
relationship. Examples of this association can be found in the
no-doubt massively attended procession of the Ptolemaia, as well as
in the dynastic sculptural group situated at the now lost Tychaion,
which housed the inscribed plaques of the laws of Alexandria. 44
Without naming Philip as the father, Aelian preserves another
relevant snippet of gossip, whereby Arsinoe gave birth to an illegitimate
Ptolemy while she was married to Lagus. In this version, the latter did
not bear his responsibility with dignity. 45 Instead, he exposed the
infant on a bronze shield to die. The child survived through the intervention
of a male eagle, which sheltered it from the elements and fed
it with his own blood. The currency of the eagle myth could fi nd a
possible parallel in the choice of the Ptolemaic eagle as a symbol
for the Ptolemaic dynasty. It is interesting to note how both stories
about the illegitimate birth (with Philip as the only named father candidate)
and the descent from Heracles (as the son of Zeus) can be seen
as coming together in the Ptolemaic eagle; arguably the most recognizable
symbol of the Ptolemaic dynasty.
As hinted at above, Ptolemy I’s choice of coin iconography was not
wholly innovative. He made use of traditional themes that already existed
on Argead coinage, and which communicated the earthly power and
divine connections of the kings. 46 The staple of Ptolemaic coin iconography,
the eagle, fi rst appeared on the coinage of Archelaus. 47
Closer to the “Ptolemaic eagle” type with its closed wings, standing
on Zeus’ thunderbolt, was the “eagle” coinage of Amyntas III, Perdikkas
III, and, later on, Alexander III. 48 Although the eagle does not fi gure
on coins of Philip II, Zeus’ iconic symbol, the thunderbolt, occurs
frequently. 49 The laureate head of the king of the gods was another
very common image on Ptolemaic coins, while the portrait of the
Ptolemaic king frequently depicted him wearing Zeus’ aegis. 50 Zeus
was introduced on Macedonian coinage on Philip’s silver tetradrachms