{"title":"Social and economic analysis of the interaction between priesthood and royalty in Ptolemaic Egypt","authors":"Nataliya S. Basalova","doi":"10.20323/2499-9679-2021-3-26-158-164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes social and economic relations between the priesthood and the Ptolemaic kings. The author examines the peculiarities of this issue coverage in Russian and foreign scientific literature, concluding that the problem was viewed more from a materialistic, religious, or artistic perspective, but not from the point of view of socio-economic analysis. The author considers the well-known fact of the Ptolemies' tolerance to the existence of the priesthood caste and their specific status in Egyptian society and studies the specificity of economic relations between power and the priesthood. The author makes a conclusion about the existence of a complex financial scheme which was beneficial both for the Ptolemies and the priesthood, as it was aimed at increasing the amount of temple lands: on the one hand, the policy raised the prosperity and the social status of priests, but, on the other hand, it led to the increase of lands which belonged to the Ptolemies by right of supreme rulers. However, basing on documents, the author states that under the Ptolemies private property of the priests became symbolic and was subjected to forced sale in case the priests had any debts to the royal treasury. The author emphasizes the fact that under the Ptolemies the priesthood became legal holders of the temple posts, while under the pharaohs priests’ positions were hereditary. Thus, royal power could influence social policy of the church, while the pharaohs were not allowed to interfere in it. The author concludes that the introduction of the sale of temple posts affected not only the material position of the priests, but also their status, as it influenced the requirements set for the candidates to priests. The author also examines the methods of economic pressure on the part of the Ptolemies (asilia, apomoira), which led to both economic subjection of temples to royal power and to the loss of the priests' right of autonomy in financial matters.","PeriodicalId":282574,"journal":{"name":"Verhnevolzhski Philological Bulletin","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Verhnevolzhski Philological Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20323/2499-9679-2021-3-26-158-164","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The article analyzes social and economic relations between the priesthood and the Ptolemaic kings. The author examines the peculiarities of this issue coverage in Russian and foreign scientific literature, concluding that the problem was viewed more from a materialistic, religious, or artistic perspective, but not from the point of view of socio-economic analysis. The author considers the well-known fact of the Ptolemies' tolerance to the existence of the priesthood caste and their specific status in Egyptian society and studies the specificity of economic relations between power and the priesthood. The author makes a conclusion about the existence of a complex financial scheme which was beneficial both for the Ptolemies and the priesthood, as it was aimed at increasing the amount of temple lands: on the one hand, the policy raised the prosperity and the social status of priests, but, on the other hand, it led to the increase of lands which belonged to the Ptolemies by right of supreme rulers. However, basing on documents, the author states that under the Ptolemies private property of the priests became symbolic and was subjected to forced sale in case the priests had any debts to the royal treasury. The author emphasizes the fact that under the Ptolemies the priesthood became legal holders of the temple posts, while under the pharaohs priests’ positions were hereditary. Thus, royal power could influence social policy of the church, while the pharaohs were not allowed to interfere in it. The author concludes that the introduction of the sale of temple posts affected not only the material position of the priests, but also their status, as it influenced the requirements set for the candidates to priests. The author also examines the methods of economic pressure on the part of the Ptolemies (asilia, apomoira), which led to both economic subjection of temples to royal power and to the loss of the priests' right of autonomy in financial matters.