Political Assassination and Monarchical Rule in the Hellenistic Period
Final Report Abstract
The Hellenistic monarchies were characterised by violent disputes over the ruler's throne. These were fostered by the lack of binding succession rules, as only dynastic affiliation, but not primogeniture represented a factor of legitimate succession to the throne. As a result, not only was the monarch himself constantly threatened by attacks from his immediate family, but the king's relatives also had to fear being eliminated by him or by other family members as potential rivals. In research, Weber's charisma is often emphasised as the basis for the legitimisation of Hellenistic rule. But charisma had to be proven on the battlefield first before it could become a key legitimising factor. The first question that therefore arose was how a monarch who had only come to the throne by murdering his predecessor legitimised himself. Individual rulers, namely Philip II and Alexander III, were undoubtedly able to develop a high degree of charisma, which provided them with a comparatively long reign. However, their rule as well was based on their dynastic affiliation and both are suspected of having begun their reign with murder. The assassination of Philip II is one of the best-known cases of political murder in antiquity. This is followed by the question of the elites and members of the court or politically relevant social groups who could grant the ruler charisma in interaction with him or withdraw acceptance, whereby the latter could easily mean his death sentence. The competition of individual courtiers for the ruler's favour and the best social position at court was also potentially lifethreatening for the monarch and his relatives. In the highly hierarchically organised Hellenistic court societies, there was a constant struggle for power. The Ptolemaic and Seleucid empires in particular were characterised in equal measure by long dynastic continuity and constant intra-dynastic disputes over the royal throne, making the rule of the individual monarch extremely fragile. The project analysed political murder as an extreme case of physical violence in relation to the complex of power and rule in the context of Hellenistic monarchies. With the help of modern sociological concepts on the triad of power – rule – violence, the project was designed to contribute to the understanding of monarchical power structures and court societies as well as to the discourse on rule and violence in Hellenistic times.
