text:
Seleucid Dynasty
Get Seleucid Dynasty essential facts below. View Videos or join the Seleucid Dynasty discussion. Add Seleucid Dynasty to your PopFlock.com topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
Former Hellenistic state
Basileía t?n Seleukid?n
312 BC-63 BC
Tetradrachm of Seleucus I - the horned horse, the elephant and the anchor all served as symbols of the Seleucid monarchy.[1][2]
The Seleucid Empire (teal) in 281 BC on the eve of the murder of Seleucus I Nicator
Seleucia
(305-240 BC)
(240-63 BC)
Common languages
Greek (official)[3]
Aramaic[3]
Olympianism
Babylonian religion[4]
Basileus
o 305-281 BC
Seleucus I (first)
o 65-63 BC
Philip II (last)
o Wars of the Diadochi
312 BC
o Battle of Ipsus
o Roman-Seleucid War
o Treaty of Apamea
o Maccabean Revolt
o Seleucia taken by Parthians
o Battle of Ecbatana
o Annexed by Rome
63 BC
303 BC[5]
800,000 km2 (310,000 sq mi)
Preceded by Succeeded by
Macedonian Empire
Province of Syria
Hasmonean kingdom
Osroene
The Seleucid Empire (;[6]Ancient Greek: ?, Basileía t?n Seleukid?n) was a Hellenistic state in Western Asia that existed from 312 BC to 63 BC. It was founded by Seleucus I Nicator following the division of the Macedonian Empire established by Alexander the Great.[7][8][9][10] After receiving Babylonia in 321 BC, Seleucus expanded his dominions to include much of Alexander's Near Eastern territories, establishing a dynasty that would rule for over two centuries. At its height, the empire spanned Anatolia, Persia, the Levant, Mesopotamia, and what are now Kuwait, Afghanistan, and parts of Turkmenistan.
The Seleucid Empire was a major center of Hellenistic culture, privileging Greek customs and language while generally tolerating the wide variety of local traditions. An urban Greek elite formed the dominant political class, and was reinforced by steady immigration from Greece.[10][11][12][13] The empire's western territories were repeatedly contested with Ptolemaic Egypt, a rival Hellenistic state. To the east, conflict with Chandragupta of the Maurya Empire in 305 BC led to the cession of vast territory west of the Indus and a political alliance.
In the early second century BC, Antiochus III the Great attempted to project Seleucid power and authority into Hellenistic Greece, but his attempts were thwarted by the nascent Roman Republic and its Greek allies; the Seleucids were forced to pay costly war reparations and relinquish territorial claims west of the Taurus Mountains, marking the gradual decline of their empire.
Mithridates I of Parthia conquered much of the remaining eastern lands of the Seleucid Empire in the mid-second century BC, while the independent Greco-Bactrian Kingdom continued to flourish in the northeast. The Seleucid kings were thereafter reduced to a rump state in Syria, until their conquest by Tigranes the Great of Armenia in 83 BC and ultimate overthrow by the Roman general Pompey in 63 BC.
Contemporary sources, such as a loyalist decree honoring Antiochus I from Ilium, in Greek language define the Seleucid state both as an empire (arche) and as a kingdom (basileia). Similarly, Seleucid rulers were described as kings in Babylonia.[14]
Starting from the 2nd century BC, ancient writers referred to the Seleucid ruler as the King of Syria, Lord of Asia, and other designations;[15] the evidence for the Seleucid rulers representing themselves as kings of Syria is provided by the inscription of Antigonus son of Menophilus, who described himself as the "admiral of Alexander, king of Syria". He refers to either Alexander Balas or Alexander II Zabinas as a ruler.[16]
Partition of Alexander's empire
Alexander, who quickly conquered the Persian Empire under its last Achaemenid dynast, Darius III, died young in 323 BC, leaving an expansive empire of partly Hellenised culture without an adult heir. The empire was put under the authority of a regent in the person of Perdiccas, and the territories were divided among Alexander's generals, who thereby became satraps, at the Partition of Babylon, all in that same year.
Rise of Seleucus
Alexander's generals (the Diadochi) jostled for supremacy over parts of his empire. Ptolemy, a former general and the satrap of Egypt, was the first to challenge the new system; this led to the demise of Perdiccas. Ptolemy's revolt led to a new subdivision of the empire with the Partition of Triparadisus in 320 BC. Seleucus, who had been "Commander-in-Chief of the Companion cavalry" (hetairoi) and appointed first or court chiliarch (which made him the senior officer in the Royal Army after the regent and commander-in-chief Perdiccas since 323 BC, though he helped to assassinate him later) received Babylonia and, from that point, continued to expand his dominions ruthlessly. Seleucus established himself in Babylon in 312 BC, the year used as the foundation date of the Seleucid Empire.
Babylonian War (311-309 BC)
The rise of Seleucus in Babylon threatened the eastern extent of Antigonus I territory in Asia. Antigonus, along with his son Demetrius I of Macedon, unsuccessfully led a campaign to annex Babylon. The victory of Seleucus ensured his claim of Babylon and legitimacy. He ruled not only Babylonia, but the entire enormous eastern part of Alexander's empire, as described by Appian:
Always lying in wait for the neighboring nations, strong in arms and persuasive in council, he [Seleucus] acquired Mesopotamia, Armenia, 'Seleucid' Cappadocia, Persis, Parthia, Bactria, Arabia, Tapouria, Sogdia, Arachosia, Hyrcania, and other adjacent peoples that had been subdued by Alexander, as far as the river Indus, so that the boundaries of his empire were the most extensive in Asia after that of Alexander. The whole region from Phrygia to the Indus was subject to Seleucus.[17]
Seleucid-Mauryan War (305-303 BC)
In the region of Punjab, Chandragupta Maurya (Sandrokottos) founded the Maurya Empire in 321 BC. Chandragupta conquered the Nanda Empire in Magadha, and relocated to the capital of Pataliputra. Chandragupta then redirected his attention back to the Indus and by 317 BC he conquered the remaining Greek satraps left by Alexander. Expecting a confrontation, Seleucus gathered his army and marched to the Indus. It is said that Chandragupta could have fielded a conscript army of 600,000 men and 9,000 war elephants.[18]
Mainstream scholarship asserts that Chandragupta received, formalized through a treaty, vast territory west of the Indus, including the Hindu Kush, modern day Afghanistan, and the Balochistan province of Pakistan.[19][20] Archaeologically, concrete indications of Mauryan rule, such as the inscriptions of the Edicts of Ashoka, are known as far as Kandahar in southern Afghanistan. According to Appian:
He [Seleucus] crossed the Indus and waged war with Sandrocottus [Maurya], king of the Indians, who dwelt on the banks of that stream, until they came to an understanding with each other and contracted a marriage relationship.[17]
"Chandra Gupta Maurya entertains his bride from Babylon": a conjectural interpretation of the "marriage agreement" between the Seleucids and Chandragupta Maurya, related by Appian[17]
It is generally thought that Chandragupta married Seleucus's daughter, or a Macedonian princess, a gift from Seleucus to formalize an alliance. In a return gesture, Chandragupta sent 500 war elephants,[21][22][23][24][25] a military asset which would play a decisive role at the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC. In addition to this treaty, Seleucus dispatched an ambassador, Megasthenes, to Chandragupta, and later Deimakos to his son Bindusara, at the Mauryan court at Pataliputra (modern Patna in Bihar state). Megasthenes wrote detailed descriptions of India and Chandragupta's reign, which have been partly preserved to us through Diodorus Siculus. Later Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the ruler of Ptolemaic Egypt and contemporary of Ashoka the Great, is also recorded by Pliny the Elder as having sent an ambassador named Dionysius to the Mauryan court.[26]
The Indians occupy [in part] some of the countries situated along the Indus, which formerly belonged to the Persians: Alexander deprived the Ariani of them, and established there settlements of his own. But Seleucus Nicator gave them to Sandrocottus (Chandragupta Maurya) in consequence of a marriage contract, and received in return five hundred elephants.[27]
Other territories ceded before Seleucus' death were Gedrosia in the south-east of the Iranian plateau, and, to the north of this, Arachosia on the west bank of the Indus River.
Coin of Seleucus I Nicator
Following his and Lysimachus' victory over Antigonus Monophthalmus at the decisive Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC, Seleucus took control over eastern Anatolia and northern Syria.
In the latter area, he founded a new capital at Antioch on the Orontes, a city he named after his father. An alternative capital was established at Seleucia on the Tigris, north of Babylon. Seleucus's empire reached its greatest extent following his defeat of his erstwhile ally, Lysimachus, at Corupedion in 281 BC, after which Seleucus expanded his control to encompass western Anatolia. He hoped further to take control of Lysimachus's lands in Europe - primarily Thrace and even Macedonia itself, but was assassinated by Ptolemy Ceraunus on landing in Europe.
His son and successor, Antiochus I Soter, was left with an enormous realm consisting of nearly all of the Asian portions of the Empire, but faced with Antigonus II Gonatas in Macedonia and Ptolemy II Philadelphus in Egypt, he proved unable to pick up where his father had left off in conquering the European portions of Alexander's empire.
Breakup of Central Asian territories
In Bactria, the satrap Diodotus asserted independence to form the Greco-Bactrian kingdom c. 245 BC.
Drachm of the Frataraka ruler Vahbarz (Oborzos), thought to have initiated the independence of Persis from the Seleucid Empire. The coin shows on the reverse an Achaemenid king slaying an armoured, possibly Greek or Macedonian, soldier.[28][29] This possibly refers to the events related by Polyainos (Strat. 7.40), in which Vahbarz (Oborzos) is said to have killed 3000 Seleucid settlers.[30][28][29]
Antiochus I (reigned 281-261 BC) and his son and successor Antiochus II Theos (reigned 261-246 BC) were faced with challenges in the west, including repeated wars with Ptolemy II and a Celtic invasion of Asia Minor--distracting attention from holding the eastern portions of the Empire together. Towards the end of Antiochus II's reign, various provinces simultaneously asserted their independence, such as Bactria and Sogdiana under Diodotus, Cappadocia under Ariarathes III, and Parthia under Andragoras. A few years later, the latter was defeated and killed by the invading Parni of Arsaces - the region would then become the core of the Parthian Empire.
Diodotus, governor for the Bactrian territory, asserted independence in around 245 BC, although the exact date is far from certain, to form the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom. This kingdom was characterized by a rich Hellenistic culture and was to continue its domination of Bactria until around 125 BC when it was overrun by the invasion of northern nomads. One of the Greco-Bactrian kings, Demetrius I of Bactria, invaded India around 180 BC to form the Indo-Greek Kingdoms.
The rulers of Persis, called Fratarakas, also seem to have established some level of independence from the Seleucids during the 3rd century BC, especially from the time of Vahbarz. They would later overtly take the title of Kings of Persis, before becoming vassals to the newly formed Parthian Empire.[28][29]
The Seleucid satrap of Parthia, named Andragoras, first claimed independence, in a parallel to the secession of his Bactrian neighbour. Soon after, however, a Parthian tribal chief called Arsaces invaded the Parthian territory around 238 BC to form the Arsacid dynasty, from which the Parthian Empire originated.
Antiochus II's son Seleucus II Callinicus came to the throne around 246 BC. Seleucus II was soon dramatically defeated in the Third Syrian War against Ptolemy III of Egypt and then had to fight a civil war against his own brother Antiochus Hierax. Taking advantage of this distraction, Bactria and Parthia seceded from the empire. In Asia Minor too, the Seleucid dynasty seemed to be losing control: the Gauls had fully established themselves in Galatia, semi-independent semi-Hellenized kingdoms had sprung up in Bithynia, Pontus, and Cappadocia, and the city of Pergamum in the west was asserting its independence under the Attalid Dynasty.[] The Seleucid economy started to show the first signs of weakness, as Galatians gained independence and Pergamum took control of coastal cities in Anatolia. Consequently, they managed to partially block contact with the West.[31]
Revival (223-191 BC)
Silver coin of Antiochus III the Great.
The Seleucid Empire in 200 BC (before expansion into Anatolia and Greece).
A revival would begin when Seleucus II's younger son, Antiochus III the Great, took the throne in 223 BC. Although initially unsuccessful in the Fourth Syrian War against Egypt, which led to a defeat at the Battle of Raphia (217 BC), Antiochus would prove himself to be the greatest of the Seleucid rulers after Seleucus I himself. He spent the next ten years on his anabasis (journey) through the eastern parts of his domain and restoring rebellious vassals like Parthia and Greco-Bactria to at least nominal obedience. He gained many victories such as the Battle of Mount Labus and Battle of the Arius and besieged the Bactrian capital. He even emulated Seleucus with an expedition into India where he met with King Sophagasenus (Sanskrit: Subhagasena) receiving war elephants, perhaps in accordance of the existing treaty and alliance set after the Seleucid-Mauryan War.
Actual translation of Polybius 11.34 (No other source except Polybius makes any reference to Sophagasenus):
He [Antiochus] crossed the Caucasus Indicus (Paropamisus) (Hindu Kush) and descended into India; renewed his friendship with Sophagasenus the king of the Indians; received more elephants, until he had a hundred and fifty altogether; and having once more provisioned his troops, set out again personally with his army: leaving Androsthenes of Cyzicus the duty of taking home the treasure which this king had agreed to hand over to him.[32] Having traversed Arachosia and crossed the river Enymanthus, he came through Drangene to Carmania; and as it was now winter, he put his men into winter quarters there.[33]
When he returned to the west in 205 BC, Antiochus found that with the death of Ptolemy IV, the situation now looked propitious for another western campaign. Antiochus and Philip V of Macedon then made a pact to divide the Ptolemaic possessions outside of Egypt, and in the Fifth Syrian War, the Seleucids ousted Ptolemy V from control of Coele-Syria. The Battle of Panium (198 BC) definitively transferred these holdings from the Ptolemies to the Seleucids. Antiochus appeared, at the least, to have restored the Seleucid Kingdom to glory.
Expansion into Greece and war with Rome
The reduced empire (titled: Syria, Kingdom of the Seleucids) and the expanded states of Pergamum and Rhodes, after the defeat of Antiochus III by Rome. Circa 188 BC.
Following the defeat of his erstwhile ally Philip by Rome in 197 BC, Antiochus saw the opportunity for expansion into Greece itself. Encouraged by the exiled Carthaginian general Hannibal, and making an alliance with the disgruntled Aetolian League, Antiochus launched an invasion across the Hellespont. With his huge army he aimed to establish the Seleucid empire as the foremost power in the Hellenic world, but these plans put the empire on a collision course with the new rising power of the Mediterranean, the Roman Republic. At the battles of Thermopylae (191 BC) and Magnesia (190 BC), Antiochus's forces suffered resounding defeats, and he was compelled to make peace and sign the Treaty of Apamea (188 BC), the main clause of which saw the Seleucids agree to pay a large indemnity, to retreat from Anatolia and to never again attempt to expand Seleucid territory west of the Taurus Mountains. The Kingdom of Pergamum and the Republic of Rhodes, Rome's allies in the war, gained the former Seleucid lands in Anatolia. Antiochus died in 187 BC on another expedition to the east, where he sought to extract money to pay the indemnity.
Roman power, Parthia and Judea
The Hellenistic Prince, a bronze statue originally thought to be a Seleucid, or Attalus II of Pergamon, now considered a portrait of a Roman general, made by a Greek artist working in Rome in the 2nd century BC.
The reign of his son and successor Seleucus IV Philopator (187-175 BC) was largely spent in attempts to pay the large indemnity, and Seleucus was ultimately assassinated by his minister Heliodorus.
Seleucus' younger brother, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, now seized the throne. He attempted to restore Seleucid power and prestige with a successful war against the old enemy, Ptolemaic Egypt, which met with initial success as the Seleucids defeated and drove the Egyptian army back to Alexandria itself. As the king planned on how to conclude the war, he was informed that Roman commissioners, led by the Proconsul Gaius Popillius Laenas, were near and requesting a meeting with the Seleucid king. Antiochus agreed, but when they met and Antiochus held out his hand in friendship, Popilius placed in his hand the tablets on which was written the decree of the senate and told him to read it. When the king said that he would call his friends into council and consider what he ought to do, Popilius drew a circle in the sand around the king's feet with the stick he was carrying and said, "Before you step out of that circle give me a reply to lay before the senate." For a few moments he hesitated, astounded at such a peremptory order, and at last replied, "I will do what the senate thinks right." He then chose to withdraw rather than set the empire to war with Rome again.[34]
On his return journey, according to Josephus, he made an expedition to Judea, took Jerusalem by force, slew a great many who had favored Ptolemy, sent his soldiers to plunder them without mercy. He also spoiled the temple, and put the constant practice of offering a daily sacrifice of expiation, for 3 years and 6 months.[35]
The latter part of his reign saw a further disintegration of the Empire despite his best efforts. Weakened economically, militarily and by loss of prestige, the Empire became vulnerable to rebels in the eastern areas of the empire, who began to further undermine the empire while the Parthians moved into the power vacuum to take over the old Persian lands. Antiochus' aggressive Hellenizing (or de-Judaizing) activities provoked a full scale armed rebellion in Judea--the Maccabean Revolt.[36] Efforts to deal with both the Parthians and the Jews as well as retain control of the provinces at the same time proved beyond the weakened empire's power. Antiochus died during a military expedition against the Parthians in 164 BC.
Civil war and further decay
Coin of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
After the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid Empire became increasingly unstable. Frequent civil wars made central authority tenuous at best. Epiphanes' young son, Antiochus V Eupator, was first overthrown by Seleucus IV's son, Demetrius I Soter in 161 BC. Demetrius I attempted to restore Seleucid power in Judea particularly, but was overthrown in 150 BC by Alexander Balas - an impostor who (with Egyptian backing) claimed to be the son of Epiphanes. Alexander Balas reigned until 145 BC when he was overthrown by Demetrius I's son, Demetrius II Nicator. Demetrius II proved unable to control the whole of the kingdom, however. While he ruled Babylonia and eastern Syria from Damascus, the remnants of Balas' supporters - first supporting Balas' son Antiochus VI, then the usurping general Diodotus Tryphon - held out in Antioch.
Meanwhile, the decay of the Empire's territorial possessions continued apace. By 143 BC, the Jews in the form of the Maccabees had fully established their independence. Parthian expansion continued as well. In 139 BC, Demetrius II was defeated in battle by the Parthians and was captured. By this time, the entire Iranian Plateau had been lost to Parthian control.
Demetrius Nicator's brother, Antiochus VII Sidetes, took the throne after his brother's capture. He faced the enormous task of restoring a rapidly crumbling empire, one facing threats on multiple fronts. Hard-won control of Coele-Syria was threatened by the Jewish Maccabee rebels. Once-vassal dynasties in Armenia, Cappadocia, and Pontus were threatening Syria and northern Mesopotamia; the nomadic Parthians, brilliantly led by Mithridates I of Parthia, had overrun upland Media (home of the famed Nisean horse herd); and Roman intervention was an ever-present threat. Sidetes managed to bring the Maccabees to heel and frighten the Anatolian dynasts into a temporary submission; then, in 133, he turned east with the full might of the Royal Army (supported by a body of Jews under the Hasmonean prince, John Hyrcanus) to drive back the Parthians.
Sidetes' campaign initially met with spectacular success, recapturing Mesopotamia, Babylonia, and Media. In the winter of 130/129 BC, his army was scattered in winter quarters throughout Media and Persis when the Parthian king, Phraates II, counter-attacked. Moving to intercept the Parthians with only the troops at his immediate disposal, he was ambushed and killed at the Battle of Ecbatana in 129 BC. Antiochus Sidetes is sometimes called the last great Seleucid king.
After the death of Antiochus VII Sidetes, all of the recovered eastern territories were recaptured by the Parthians. The Maccabees again rebelled, civil war soon tore the empire to pieces, and the Armenians began to encroach on Syria from the north.
Collapse (100-63 BC)
Seleucid Kingdom in 87 BC
By 100 BC, the once formidable Seleucid Empire encompassed little more than Antioch and some Syrian cities. Despite the clear collapse of their power, and the decline of their kingdom around them, nobles continued to play kingmakers on a regular basis, with occasional intervention from Ptolemaic Egypt and other outside powers. The Seleucids existed solely because no other nation wished to absorb them - seeing as they constituted a useful buffer between their other neighbours. In the wars in Anatolia between Mithridates VI of Pontus and Sulla of Rome, the Seleucids were largely left alone by both major combatants.
Mithridates' ambitious son-in-law, Tigranes the Great, king of Armenia, however, saw opportunity for expansion in the constant civil strife to the south. In 83 BC, at the invitation of one of the factions in the interminable civil wars, he invaded Syria and soon established himself as ruler of Syria, putting the Seleucid Empire virtually at an end.
Seleucid rule was not entirely over, however. Following the Roman general Lucullus' defeat of both Mithridates and Tigranes in 69 BC, a rump Seleucid kingdom was restored under Antiochus XIII. Even so, civil wars could not be prevented, as another Seleucid, Philip II, contested rule with Antiochus. After the Roman conquest of Pontus, the Romans became increasingly alarmed at the constant source of instability in Syria under the Seleucids. Once Mithridates was defeated by Pompey in 63 BC, Pompey set about the task of remaking the Hellenistic East, by creating new client kingdoms and establishing provinces. While client nations like Armenia and Judea were allowed to continue with some degree of autonomy under local kings, Pompey saw the Seleucids as too troublesome to continue; doing away with both rival Seleucid princes, he made Syria into a Roman province.
Bagadates I (Minted 290-280 BC) was the first native Seleucid satrap to be appointed.[37]
The Seleucid empire's geographical span, from the Aegean Sea to what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan, created a melting pot of various peoples, such as Greeks, Armenians, Georgians, Persians, Medes, Assyrians and Jews. The immense size of the empire, followed by its encompassing nature, encouraged the Seleucid rulers to implement a policy of ethnic unity--a policy initiated by Alexander.
The Hellenization of the Seleucid empire was achieved by the establishment of Greek cities throughout the empire. Historically significant towns and cities, such as Antioch, were created or renamed with more appropriate Greek names. The creation of new Greek cities and towns was aided by the fact that the Greek mainland was overpopulated and therefore made the vast Seleucid empire ripe for colonization. Colonization was used to further Greek interest while facilitating the assimilation of many native groups. Socially, this led to the adoption of Greek practices and customs by the educated native classes to further themselves in public life, and at the same time the ruling Macedonian class gradually adopted some of the local traditions. By 313 BC, Hellenic ideas had begun their almost 250-year expansion into the Near East, Middle East, and Central Asian cultures. It was the empire's governmental framework to rule by establishing hundreds of cities for trade and occupational purposes. Many of the existing cities began--or were compelled by force--to adopt Hellenized philosophic thought, religious sentiments, and politics although the Seleucid rulers did incorporate Babylonian religious tenets to gain support.[38]
Synthesizing Hellenic and indigenous cultural, religious, and philosophical ideas met with varying degrees of success--resulting in times of simultaneous peace and rebellion in various parts of the empire. Such was the case with the Jewish population of the Seleucid empire; the Jews' refusal to willingly Hellenize their religious beliefs or customs posed a significant problem which eventually led to war. Contrary to the accepting nature of the Ptolemaic empire towards native religions and customs, the Seleucids gradually tried to force Hellenization upon the Jewish people in their territory by outlawing Judaism. This eventually led to the revolt of the Jews under Seleucid control, which would later lead to the Jews achieving independence from the Seleucid empire.
As a Hegemonic empire, much of the state's wealth accumulation centered around maintaining its sizable military.[39][40][41][42] While the motive is simple enough, the Seleucid empire boasts of a sophisticated political economy that extracts wealth from local temples, cities (or poleis), and royal estates; much of which was inherited from their Achaemenid predecessors. Recent discussion indicates a market-oriented economy under the Seleucids.[42] However, evidencing limits our understanding of the Seleucid economy to the Hellenistic Near-East; that is, through their holdings in Syria, Asia Minor, and Mesopotamia. Little is known about the economy of the Upper Satrapies.
Seleucid Bronze Coin Depictinding Antiochus III with Laureate head of Apollo Circa. 200 BCE
Currency plays an increasingly central role under the Seleucids; however, we should note that monetization was nothing new in their newly acquired lands.[42] Rather, the introduction and widespread implementation of currency is attributed to Darius I's tax reforms centuries prior;[42] hence, the Seleucids see a continuation rather than shift in this practice, i.e. the payment of taxation in silver or, if necessary, in kind.[39] In this regard, the Seleucids are notable for paying their sizeable armies exclusively in silver.[41] Nevertheless, there are two significant developments of currency during the Seleucid period: the adoption of the "Attic Standard" in certain regions,[42] and the popularization of bronze coinage.[41]
The adoption of the Attic standard was not uniform across the realm. The Attic standard was already the common currency of the Mediterranean prior to Alexander's conquest; that is, it was the preferred currency for foreign transactions.[41] As a result, coastal regions under the Seleucids --Syria and Asia Minor--were quick to adopt the new standard.[41] In Mesopotamia however, the millennia-old shekel (weighing 8.33g Silver) prevailed over the Attic standard.[41] According to Historian R.J. van der Spek, this is due to their particular method in recording price, which favored bartering over monetary transactions.[42] The Mesopotamians used the value of one shekel as a fixed reference point, against which the amount of a good is given.[42][43] Prices themselves are accounted in terms of their weight in silver per ton, i.e. 60g Silver, Barley, June 242 BCE.[43] The minute difference in weight between a Shekel and Didrachm (weighing 8.6g Silver) could not be expressed in this barter system. And the use of a Greek tetradrachm would be "a far too heavy denomination...in daily trade."[42]
Bronze coinage, dating from the late fifth and fourth century, and was popularized as a "fiduciary" currency facilitating "small-scale exchanges" in the Hellenistic period.[42][41] It was principally a legal tender which circulated only around its locales of production;[3]however, the great Seleucid mint at Antioch during Antiochus III's reign (which Numismatist Arthur Houghton dubs "The Syrian and Coele-Syrian Experiment") began minting bronze coins (weighing 1.25-1.5g) to serve a "regional purpose."[44] The reasons behind this remain unclear. However, Spek notes a chronic shortage of silver in the Seleucid empire.[42] In fact, Antiochus I's heavy withdrawal of silver from a satrap is noted by the Babylonian astronomical diary (AD No. -273 B 'Rev. 33'): "purchases in Babylon and other cities were made in Greek bronze coins."[42] This was unprecedented because "in official documents [bronze coins] played no part";[42] it was a sign of "hardship" for the Seleucids.[42] Nevertheless, the low denomination of bronze coinage meant it was used in tandem with bartering; making it a popular and successful medium of exchange.[41]
Agriculture, like most pre-modern economies, constituted a vast majority of the Seleucid economy. Somewhere between 80 and 90% of the Seleucid population was employed,[39] in some form, within the prevailing agricultural structures inherited from their Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid predecessors.[41] These included temples, poleis, and royal estates. We should clarify that the term poleis, according to Spek, did not confer any special status to cities in the Seleucid sources; it was simply the term for "city"--Greek or otherwise.[39] Regardless, agricultural produce varied from region to region. But in general, Greek poleis produced: "grain, olives and their oil, wine...figs, cheese from sheep and goats, [and] meat."[41] Whereas Mesopotamian production from temple land consisted of: "barley, dates, mustard (or cascuta/dodder), cress (cardamom), sesame and wool"; which, as the core region of the Seleucid empire, was also the most productive.[42][39]
Price of barley and dates per tonne
Recent evidence indicates that Mesopotamian grain production, under the Seleucids, was subject to market forces of supply and demand.[42] Traditional "primitivist" narratives of the ancient economy argue that it was "marketless"; however, the Babylonian astronomical diaries show a high degree of market integration of barley and date prices--to name a few--in Seleucid Babylonia.[43] Prices exceeding 370g silver per ton in Seleucid Mesopotamia was considered a sign of famine. Therefore, during periods of war, heavy taxation, and crop failure, prices increase drastically. In an extreme example, Spek believes tribal Arab raiding into Babylonia caused barley prices to skyrocket to a whopping 1493g silver per ton from 5-8 May, 124 BCE.[43] The average Mesopotamian peasant, if working for a wage at a temple, would receive 1 shekel; it "was a reasonable monthly wage for which one could buy one kor of grain= 180 [liters]."[43] While this appears dire, we should be reminded that Mesopotamia under the Seleucids was largely stable and prices remained low.[42] With encouraged Greek colonization and land reclamation increasing the supply of grain production, however, the question of whether this artificially kept prices stable is uncertain.[42]
The Seleucids also continued the tradition of actively maintaining the Mesopotamian waterways. As the greatest source of state income, the Seleucid kings actively managed the irrigation, reclamation, and population of Mesopotamia.[42] In fact, canals were often dug by royal decrees, to which "some were called the King's Canal for that reason."[39] For example, the construction of the Pallacottas canal was able to control the water level of the Euphrates which, as Arrian notes in his Anabasis 7.21.5, required: "over two months of work by more than 10,000 Assyrians."[39]
Role of the State--Political Economy
As a hegemonic empire, the state's primary focus was maintaining its sizable army via wealth extraction from three major sources:[41] tribute from autonomous poleis and temples, and proportional land-tax from royal land.[45][46] The definition of "royal land" remains contested. While all agree poleis do not constitute royal land, some remain uncertain over the status of temple land.[47][45] Yet, they commanded notable economic power and functioned almost independently from the state.[40] Nevertheless, the Seleucid manner of extraction, in contrast to earlier regimes, is considered more "aggressive" and "predatory."[46][40]
Episodes of Seleucid Dispoliation from Michael J. Taylor's Sacred Plunder
In theory, the Seleucid state was an absolute monarchy that did not recognize private property in our modern sense.[47] Any land that was not delegated to the poleis or temples was considered private property of the sovereign;[47] thus, considered as Royal Land and liable to direct tax by the state. Here, a "proportional land-tax", that is, a tax based on the size of one's plot, is collected by the local governor (or Satrap) and sent to the capital.[45] However, there is no evidence for the amount that was taxed on any given region.
Tribute was heavily levied on poleis and temples. Although tribute is paid annually, the amount demanded increases significantly during wartime. During a civil war in 149 BCE, Demetrius II demanded the province of Judaea to pay 300 talents of silver, which was seen as "severe."[45] But this was far from an isolated case. In fact, the Babylonian Astronomical Diaries in 308/7 BCE note hefty a 50% tax on harvest "from the lands of the temple of Shamash (in Sipprar or Larsa)."[47] Nevertheless, annual tribute was "a long-accepted and uncontroversial practice."[40] Also, royal land was regularly donated to the temples and poleis; albeit under the assumption that a greater share of revenue is given to the state in exchange.[47][46] The controversial practice of temple "despoliation", however, was a regular occurrence under the Seleucids--in contrast to earlier times.[40] Although the Seleucid kings were aware and appreciated the sacrosanctity of religious treasures, their concentration in these places "proved irresistible" in the face of "short-term fiscal constraints."[40] As an example, Antiochus III's despoliation of the Anahit Temple in Ecbatana, wherein he procured 4000 silver talents, was used to fund his Great Eastern campaign.[40] According to historian Michael J. Taylor:[40]
"It is difficult to believe that these monarchs who knew enough to bow before Nabu, bake bricks for Esagil, and enforce kosher regulations in Jerusalem, would be blithely aware of the political hazards of removing Temple treasures. It is more likely that they knew the risks but took them anyway."
A rebellion in 169 BCE during Antiochus III's campaign in Egypt demonstrates that these "risks" occasionally backfire.[46] The increasingly bold interference is due, in large part, to the appointment of provincial high-priests by the monarch himself.[46][39] Often they were his court "favorites",[39] whose prerogatives were purely administrative; essentially, they served to collect tribute for the state.[46] Unsurprisingly: "native elites profoundly feared that the arrival of a Seleucid official might quickly cascade into a wholesale removal of Temple treasures."[40]
Academic Discussion
Interpretations on the Seleucid economy since the late 19th century traditionally fell between the "modernist" and "primitivist" camps.[42][41] On one hand, the modernist view--largely associated with Michael Rostovtzeff and Eduard Meyer--argues that the Hellenistic economies operated along price-setting markets with capitalist enterprises exported over long distances in "completely monetarized markets."[41] On the other hand, the primitivist view--associated with M.I. Finley, Karl Polanyi and Karl Bücher--interprets ancient economies as "autarchic" in nature with little to no interaction among each other.[4]However, recent discussion has since criticized these models for their grounding on "Greco-centric" sources.[39][48]
Recent discussion has since rejected these traditional dichotomies.[42][41][48] According to Spek and Reger, the current view is that while the Seleucid economy--and Hellenistic economies more broadly--were partially market-oriented, and partially monetarized.[42] While the market was subject to forces of supply and demand, a majority of produce still consumed by their producers; hence, "invisible" to the observer.[42][41]
Family tree of Seleucids
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Seleucid Empire" - news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (January 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Seleucus
Laodice of Macedonia Antiochus
from Orestia, Macedonia Ptolemy
somatophylax
1.Apama
daughter of Spitamenes
satrap of Sogdiana Seleucus I Nikator
emperor of Seleucid Empire
305-281 BC 2.Stratonice
daughter of Demetrius I
king of Macedonia Didymeia
Stratonice of Syria
king of Macedonia (1) Antiochus I Soter
281-261 BC (1) Achaeus the Elder
landowner in Asia Minor (2) Phila
? Antigonus II Gonatas
Apama II
? Magas
king of Cyrene Stratonice
? Demetrius II
king of Macedon 2.Berenice
daughter of Ptolemy II
king of Egypt Antiochus II Theos
261-246 BC 1.Laodice I
Laodice II
? Seleucus II Callinicus Alexander
landowner in Asia Minor Andromachus
landowner in Asia Minor Antiochis
? Attalus
Attalid dynasty
daughter of Achaeus
landowner in Asia Minor (1) Seleucus II Callinicus
246-225 BC (1) Antiochus Hierax
ruler of Asia Minor (1) Stratonice
? Ariarathes III of Cappadocia (1) Laodice
? Mithridates II of Pontus Achaeus
commander of Asia Minor Laodice
Mithridates II of Pontus
Antiochis
? Xerxes
king of Sophene & Commagene Seleucus III Ceraunus
225-223 BC Antiochus III the Great
222-187 BC Laodice III
daughter of Mithridates II of Pontus
Cleopatra I Syra
? Ptolemy V of Egypt Antiochus
co-emperor
210-193 BC Laodice IV
? 3.Antiochus IV Epiphanes Seleucus IV Philopator
187-175 BC Antiochus IV Epiphanes
175-164 BC Antiochis
? Ariarathes IV of Cappadocia
? Pharnaces I of Pontus
Mithridatic dynasty Laodice V
? Perseus
king of Macedonia Demetrius I Soter
161-150 BC Antiochus V Eupator
164-161 BC Laodice VI
? Mithridates V of Pontus
Mithridatic dynasty Laodice
? Mithridates III of Pontus Alexander Balas
150/152-146 BC Cleopatra Thea
daughter of Ptolemy VI of Egypt
2.Rhodogune of Parthia
Mithridates I of Parthia Demetrius II Nicator
145-138 BC 1.Cleopatra Thea
Ptolemy VI
of Egypt
queen of Syria
126-121 BC Antiochus VII Sidetes
138-129 BC Antiochus VI Dionysus
144-142/1 BC
(1) Seleucus V Philometor
co-king of Syria 126-125 BC 1.Tryphaena
Ptolemy VIII of Egypt (1) Antiochus VIII Grypus
co-king of Syria 125-122 BC
king of Syria 122-96 BC 2.Cleopatra Selene
Ptolemy VIII of Egypt Antiochus IX Cyzicenus
king of Syria
116-96 BC Cleopatra IV of Egypt
Ptolemy VIII of Egypt Alexander II Zabinas
(1) Seleucus VI Epiphanes
96-94 BC (1) Antiochus XI Epiphanes
94-93 BC (1) Laodice VII Thea
? Mithridates I Callinicus
king of Commagene (1) Philip I Philadelphus
94-83/75 BC (1) Demetrius III Eucaerus
96-87 BC (1) Antiochus XII Dionysus
87-82 BC Antiochus X Eusebes
95-92/88 BC Cleopatra Selene
Ptolemy VIII of Egypt
Philip II Philoromaeus
65-64 BC Antiochus XIII Asiaticus
69-64 BC Seleucus VII Philometor
83-69 BC Berenice IV
Ptolemy XII of Egypt
List of Seleucid rulers
History of Greater Iran
Pre-Islamic
BCE / BC
Kura-Araxes culture c. 3400 - c. 2000
Proto-Elamite civilization 3200-2800
Elamite dynasties 2800-550
Jiroft culture
Mannaeans
Lullubi
Gutians
Cyrtian
Corduene
Bactria-Margiana Complex 2200-1700
Kingdom of Mannai 10th-7th century
Neo-Assyrian Empire 911-609
Urartu 860-590
Median Empire 728-550
Scythian Kingdom 652-625
Achaemenid Empire 550-330
Ancient kingdom of Armenia 331 BCE - 428 CE
Seleucid Empire 330-150
Caucasian Iberia c. 302 BCE - 580 CE
Greco-Bactrian Kingdom 250-125
Parthian Empire 248 BCE-224 CE
Caucasian Albania 2nd century BCE -
8th century CE
Roman Empire 27 BCE - 330 CE
CE / AD
Kushan Empire 30-275
Sasanian Empire 224-651
Afrighid dynasty 305-995
Hephthalite Empire 425-557
Kabul Shahi kingdom 565-879
Dabuyid dynasty 642-760
Bagratid Armenia 880s - 1045
Alania 8th/9th century - 1238 / 9
Kingdom of Georgia 1008-1490
Rashidun Caliphate 637-651
Umayyad Caliphate 661-750
Abbasid Caliphate 750-1258
Shirvanshah 799-1607
Tahirid dynasty 821-873
Dulafid dynasty 840-897
Zaydis of Tabaristan 864-928
Saffarid dynasty 861-1003
Samanid Empire 819-999
Sajid dynasty 889/90-929
Ziyarid dynasty 928-1043
Buyid dynasty 934-1055
Sallarid dynasty 941-1062
Ghaznavid Empire 975-1187
Ghurid dynasty pre-879 - 1215
Seljuk Empire 1037-1194
Khwarazmian dynasty 1077-1231
Sultanate of Rum 1077-1307
Salghurids 1148-1282
Ilkhanate 1256-1353
Kart dynasty 1231-1389
Ottoman Empire 1299-1923
Muzaffarid dynasty 1314-1393
Chupanid dynasty 1337-1357
Jalairid Sultanate 1339-1432
Timurid Empire 1370-1507
Qara Qoyunlu Turcomans 1407-1468
Aq Qoyunlu Turcomans 1378-1508
Safavid Empire 1501-1722
Mughal Empire 1526-1857
Hotak dynasty 1722-1729
Afsharid dynasty 1736-1750
Zand dynasty 1750-1794
Durrani Empire 1794-1826
Qajar dynasty 1794-1925
Cilician pirates
^ Cohen, Getzel M; The Hellenistic Settlements in Syria, the Red Sea Basin, and North Africa, p. 13.
^ Lynette G. Mitchell; Every Inch a King: Comparative Studies on Kings and Kingship in the Ancient and Medieval Worlds, p. 123.
^ a b Richard N. Frye, The History of Ancient Iran, (Ballantyne Ltd, 1984), 164.
^ Julye Bidmead, The Akitu Festival: Religious Continuity and Royal Legitimation in Mesopotamia, (Gorgias Press, 2004), 143.
^ a b c d e Taagepera, Rein (1979). "Size and Duration of Empires: Growth-Decline Curves, 600 B.C. to 600 A.D.". Social Science History. 3 (3/4): 121. doi:10.2307/1170959. JSTOR 1170959.
^ Oxford English Dictionary, . "Seleucid, n. and adj." Oxford University Press (Oxford), 1911.
^ Jones, Kenneth Raymond (2006). Provincial reactions to Roman imperialism: the aftermath of the Jewish revolt, A.D. 66-70, Parts 66-70. University of California, Berkeley. p. 174. ISBN 978-0-542-82473-9. ... and the Greeks, or at least the Greco-Macedonian Seleucid Empire, replace the Persians as the Easterners.
^ Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies (London, England) (1993). The Journal of Hellenic studies, Volumes 113-114. Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies. p. 211. The Seleucid kingdom has traditionally been regarded as basically a Greco-Macedonian state and its rulers thought of as successors to Alexander.
^ Baskin, Judith R.; Seeskin, Kenneth (2010). The Cambridge Guide to Jewish History, Religion, and Culture. Cambridge University Press. p. 37. ISBN 978-0-521-68974-8. The wars between the two most prominent Greek dynasties, the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucids of Syria, unalterably change the history of the land of Israel...As a result the land of Israel became part of the empire of the Syrian Greek Seleucids.
^ a b Glubb, John Bagot (1967). Syria, Lebanon, Jordan. Thames & Hudson. p. 34. OCLC 585939. In addition to the court and the army, Syrian cities were full of Greek businessmen, many of them pure Greeks from Greece. The senior posts in the civil service were also held by Greeks. Although the Ptolemies and the Seleucids were perpetual rivals, both dynasties were Greek and ruled by means of Greek officials and Greek soldiers. Both governments made great efforts to attract immigrants from Greece, thereby adding yet another racial element to the population.
^ Steven C. Hause; William S. Maltby (2004). Western civilization: a history of European society. Thomson Wadsworth. p. 76. ISBN 978-0-534-62164-3. The Greco-Macedonian Elite. The Seleucids respected the cultural and religious sensibilities of their subjects but preferred to rely on Greek or Macedonian soldiers and administrators for the day-to-day business of governing. The Greek population of the cities, reinforced until the second century BC by immigration from Greece, formed a dominant, although not especially cohesive, elite.
^ Victor, Royce M. (2010). Colonial education and class formation in early Judaism: a postcolonial reading. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 55. ISBN 978-0-567-24719-3. Like other Hellenistic kings, the Seleucids ruled with the help of their "friends" and a Greco-Macedonian elite class separate from the native populations whom they governed.
^ Britannica, Seleucid kingdom, 2008, O.Ed.
^ Susan M. Sherwin-White; Ama1/2lie Kuhrt (1993). From Samarkhand to Sardis: A New Approach to the Seleucid Empire. University of California Press. p. 40. ISBN 978-0-520-08183-3.
^ Nigel Wilson (2013). Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece. p. 652. ISBN 9781136788000.
^ Paul J. Kosmin (2014). The Land of the Elephant Kings. p. 112. ISBN 9780674728820.
^ a b c Appian, History of Rome, "The Syrian Wars" 55
^ Pliny, Natural History VI, 22.4
^ Vincent A. Smith (1972). A?oka. Asian Educational Services. ISBN 81-206-1303-1.
^ Clark, Walter Eugene (1919). "The Importance of Hellenism from the Point of View of Indic-Philology". Classical Philology. 14 (4): 297-313. doi:10.1086/360246. S2CID 161613588.
^ Vijay Katchroo. Ancient India, p. 196
^ William Hunter. The Imperial Gazetteer of India. p. 167
^ C. D. Darlington. The evolution of man and society. p. 223
^ Tarn, W. W. (1940). "Two Notes on Seleucid History: 1. Seleucus' 500 Elephants, 2. Tarmita". Journal of Hellenic Studies. 60: 84-94. doi:10.2307/626263. JSTOR 626263.
^ Partha Sarathi Bose (2003). Alexander the Great's Art of Strategy. Gotham Books. ISBN 1-59240-053-1.
^ Pliny the Elder, "The Natural History", Chap. 21 Archived 28 July 2013 at the Wayback Machine
^ Strabo 15.2.1(9)
^ a b c Engels, David (201). "Iranian Identity and Seleucid Allegiance: Vahbarz, the Frataraka and Early Arsacid Coinage". In K. Erickson (ed.). The Seleukid Empire, 281-222 BC: War within the Family. Swansea. pp. 173-196.
^ a b c Erickson, Kyle (2018). The Seleukid Empire 281-222 BC: War Within the Family. ISD LLC. p. 175. ISBN 9781910589953.
^ Kosmin, Paul J. (2018). Time and Its Adversaries in the Seleucid Empire. Harvard University Press. p. 207. ISBN 9780674976931.
^ Castrén, Paavo (2011). Uusi antiikin historia (in Finnish). Otava. p. 244. ISBN 978-951-1-21594-3.
^ Kosmin 2014, pp. 35-36. sfn error: no target: CITEREFKosmin2014 (help)
^ Polybius, Histories, Book 11, 1889, p 78, trans. Friedrich Otto Hultsch, Evelyn Shirley Shuckburgh
^ "Livy's History of Rome". mu.edu.
^ Flavius Josephus, The War of the Jews 1.1§2
^ Chanukah, Shabbat 21b, Babylonian Talmud
^ "History of Iran: Seleucid Empire". iranchamber.com.
^ Julye Bidmead, The Akitu Festival: Religious Continuity and Royal Legitimation in Mesopotamia, 143.
^ a b c d e f g h i j van der Spek, Robartus Johannes (2000). "The Seleucid State and the Economy" In Production and Public Powers in Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society Supplementary. pp. 27-36. ISBN 978-0906014257.
^ a b c d e f g h i Taylor, Michael J. (2014). "Sacred Plunder and the Seleucid Near East". Greece & Rome. 62 (2): 222-241 – via JSTOR.
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Reger, Gary (2003). "The Economy" in "A Companion to the Hellenistic World" by Andrew Erskine. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing Limited. pp. 331-353. ISBN 978-1-4051-3278-7.
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v van der Spek, Robartus Johannes (2004). "Palace, Temple and Market in Seleucid Babylonia". Topoi: 303-332 – via Academia.
^ a b c d e van der Spek, Robartus Johannes (2014). "The Volatility of Prices of Barley and Dates in Babylon in the Third and Second Centuries BC." In Documentary Sources in Ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman Economic History, by Heather D. Baker and Michael Jursa. Oxford and Philadelphia: Oxbow Books. pp. 234-259. doi:10.2307/j.ctvh1dn9m.15.
^ Houghton, Arthur (2003). "Some Observations on Coordinated Bronze Currency Systems in Seleucid Syria and Phoenicia". Israel Numismatic Journal. 15: 35-47 – via Academia.
^ a b c d Mittwoch, A. (1955). "Tribute and Land-tax in Seleucid Judaea". Biblica. 36. No.3: 352-361 – via JSTOR.
^ a b c d e f Gilles, Gorre; Honigman, Sylvie (January 2013). Egitto: Dai Faraoni Agli Arabi." Kings, Taxes and High Priests: Comparing the Ptolemaic and Seleukid Policies. Milan: Dipartimento di Studi letterari, filologicie linguistici dell'Università degli Studi di Milano. pp. 105-119. ISBN 978-8862276412.
^ a b c d e van der Spek, Robartus Johannes (1993). "New Evidence on Seleucid Land Policy." In De Agricultura: In Memoriam Pieter Willem de Neeve, by Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg and Pieter Willem de Neeve,. Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben. pp. 303-332. ISBN 978-90-50-63070-2 – via Research Gate.
^ a b Aphergis, Gerassmimos George (October 2008). "The Seleucid Economy". The Classical Review. 58 (2): 520-522 – via JSTOR.
G. G. Aperghis, The Seleukid Royal Economy. The Finances and Financial Administration of the Seleukid Empire, Cambridge, 2004.
Laurent Capdetrey, Le pouvoir séleucide. Territoire, administration, finances d'un royaume hellénistique (312-129 avant J.C.). (Collection "Histoire"). Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2007.
D. Engels, Benefactors, Kings, Rulers. Studies on the Seleukid Empire between East and West, Leuven, 2017 (Studia Hellenistica 57).
A. Houghton, C. Lorber, Seleucid Coins. A Comprehensive Catalogue, Part I, Seleucus I through Antiochus III, With Metrological Tables by B. Kritt, I-II, New York - Lancaster - London, 2002.
Paul J. Kosmin, The Land of the Elephant Kings: Space, Territory, and Ideology in the Seleucid Empire (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014).
R. Oetjen (ed.), New Perspectives in Seleucid History, Archaeology and Numismatics: Studies in Honor of Getzel M. Cohen, Berlin - Boston: De Gruyter, 2020.
Michael J. Taylor, Antiochus the Great (Barnsley: Pen and Sword, 2013).
Livius, The Seleucid Empire by Jona Lendering
Genealogy of the Seleucids
Seleukid Bibliography maintained at the History Department of Utrecht University
Seleucid Research Bibliography, compiled and maintained by the Seleucid Study Group
Rulers of the Ancient Near East
Territories/
[1][2][3][4]
Ebla
Akshak/
Akkad
Preceded by: Chronology of the Neolithic period
4000-3200 BCE Naqada culture (4000-3100 BCE) Proto-Cannaanites Sumerian period (4000-2340 BCE) Susa I
Pre-Dynastic period (4000-2900 BCE)
Naqada I
Naqada II
Egypt-Mesopotamia relations
Uruk period
(4000-3100 BCE)
(Anonymous "King-priests")
Legendary ante-deluvian rulers:
In Eridu: Alulim, Alalngar, then in Bad-tibira: En-men-lu-ana, En-men-gal-ana, Dumuzid, the Shepherd, then in Larag: En-sipad-zid-ana, then in Zimbir: En-men-dur-ana, then in Shuruppag: Ubara-Tutu
"then the flood swept over"[5] Susa II
(Uruk influence or control)
3200-3100 BCE Proto-Dynastic period
(Naqada III)
Early or legendary kings:
Upper Egypt
Finger Snail Fish Pen-Abu Animal Stork Canide Bull Scorpion I Shendjw Iry-Hor Ka Scorpion II Narmer / Menes Lower Egypt
Hedju Hor Ny-Hor Hsekiu Khayu Tiu Thesh Neheb Wazner Nat-Hor Mekh Double Falcon Wash
3100-2900 BCE Early Dynastic Period
First Dynasty of Egypt
Narmer Menes Hor-Aha Djer Djet Merneith?DenAnedjib Semerkhet Qa'a Sneferka Horus Bird Canaanites Jemdet Nasr period Proto-Elamite
(Susa III)
2900 BCE Second Dynasty of Egypt
Hotepsekhemwy Nebra/Raneb Nynetjer Ba Nubnefer Horus Sa Weneg-Nebty Wadjenes Senedj Seth-Peribsen Sekhemib-Perenmaat Neferkara I Neferkasokar Hudjefa I Khasekhemwy
Early Dynastic Period I (2900-2700 BCE)
First Eblaite
(Semitic) First kingdom
of Mari
(Semitic) Kish I dynasty
Jushur, Kullassina-bel
Nangishlishma,
En-tarah-ana
Babum, Puannum, Kalibum
2800 BCE
Kalumum Zuqaqip Atab
Mashda Arwium Etana
Balih En-me-nuna
Melem-Kish Barsal-nuna Uruk I dynasty
Mesh-ki-ang-gasher
Enmerkar ("conqueror of Aratta")
2700 BCE Early Dynastic Period II (2700-2600 BCE)
Zamug, Tizqar, Ilku
Iltasadum Lugalbanda
Dumuzid, the Fisherman
En-me-barage-si ("made the land of Elam submit")[6]
Aga of Kish Gilgamesh Old Elamite period
Indus-Mesopotamia relations
2600 BCE Third Dynasty of Egypt
Djoser Sekhemkhet Sanakht Nebka Khaba Qahedjet Huni
Early Dynastic Period III (2600-2340 BCE)
Sagisu
Abur-lim
Agur-lim
Ibbi-Damu
Baba-Damu Kish II dynasty
(5 kings)
Uhub
Mesilim Ur-Nungal
Udulkalama
Labashum Lagash
En-hegal
Lugalshaengur Ur
A-Imdugud
Ur-Pabilsag
Meskalamdug
(Queen Puabi)
Akalamdug
Enun-dara-anna
Mes-he
Melamanna
Lugal-kitun Adab
Nin-kisalsi
Me-durba
Lugal-dalu
2575 BCE Old Kingdom of Egypt
Fourth Dynasty of Egypt
Snefru Khufu
Djedefre Khafre Bikheris Menkaure Shepseskaf Thamphthis Ur I dynasty
Mesannepada
"King of Ur and Kish", victorious over Uruk
2500 BCE Phoenicia (2500-539 BCE) Second kingdom
(Semitic)
Ikun-Shamash
Iku-Shamagan
Ansud
Sa'umu
Ishtup-Ishar
Ikun-Mari
Iblul-Il
Nizi Akshak dynasty
Unzi
Undalulu Kish III dynasty
Ku-Baba Uruk II dynasty
Enshakushanna Mug-si Umma I dynasty
Pabilgagaltuku Lagash I dynasty
Ur-Nanshe
Akurgal A'annepada
Meskiagnun
Elulu
Balulu Awan dynasty
Ukkutahesh
Hishur
2450 BCE Fifth Dynasty of Egypt
Userkaf Sahure Neferirkare Kakai Neferefre Shepseskare Nyuserre Ini Menkauhor Kaiu Djedkare Isesi Unas Enar-Damu
Ishar-Malik Ush
Enakalle
Elamite invasions
(3 kings)[7] Shushuntarana
Napilhush
2425 BCE Kun-Damu Eannatum
(King of Lagash, Sumer, Akkad, conqueror of Elam)
2400 BCE Adub-Damu
Igrish-Halam
Irkab-Damu Urur Kish IV dynasty
Puzur-Suen
Ur-Zababa Lugal-kinishe-dudu
Lugal-kisalsi E-iginimpa'e
Meskigal Ur-Lumma
Gishakidu
(Queen Bara-irnun) Enannatum
Entemena
Enannatum II
Enentarzi Ur II dynasty
Mesh-ki-ang-Nanna II Kiku-siwe-tempti
2380 BCE Sixth Dynasty of Egypt
Teti Userkare Pepi I Merenre Nemtyemsaf I Pepi II Merenre Nemtyemsaf II Netjerkare Siptah
Adab dynasty
Lugalannemundu
"King of the four quarters of the world"
2370 BCE Isar-Damu Enna-Dagan
Ikun-Ishar
Ishqi-Mari Invasion of Mari
Anbu, Anba, Bazi, Zizi of Mari, Limer, Sharrum-iter[7] Ukush Lugalanda
Urukagina Luh-ishan
Puzur-Nirah
Ishu-Il
Shu-Sin Uruk III dynasty
Lugalzagesi
(Governor of Umma, King of all Sumer)
2340 BCE Akkadian Period (2340-2150 BCE)
Akkadian Empire
Sargon of Akkad Rimush Manishtushu Akkadian Governors:
Eshpum
Ilshu-rabi
Epirmupi
Ili-ishmani
2250 BCE Naram-Sin Lugal-ushumgal
(vassal of the Akkadians)
2200 BCE First Intermediate Period
Seventh Dynasty of Egypt
Eighth Dynasty of Egypt Second Eblaite
(Vassals of UR III) Shakkanakku
Ididish
Shu-Dagan
Ishma-Dagan
(Vassals of the Akkadians)
Shar-Kali-Sharri
Igigi, Imi, Nanum, Ilulu (3 years)
Shu-turul Uruk IV dynasty
Ur-nigin
Ur-gigir Lagash II dynasty
Puzer-Mama
Ur-Ningirsu I
Pirig-me
Lu-Baba
Lu-gula
Ka-ku
Hishep-Ratep
Khita
Puzur-Inshushinak
2150 BCE Ninth Dynasty of Egypt
Meryibre Khety Neferkare VII Nebkaure Khety Setut Neo-Sumerian Period (2150-2000 BCE)
Nûr-Mêr
Ishtup-Ilum
Ishgum-Addu
Apil-kin Gutian dynasty
(21 kings)
La-erabum
Si'um Kuda (Uruk)
Puzur-ili
Ur-Utu Umma II dynasty
Lugalannatum
(vassal of the Gutians) Ur-Baba
Gudea
Ur-Ningirsu
Ur-gar
Nam-mahani
Tirigan
2125 BCE Tenth Dynasty of Egypt
Meryhathor Neferkare VIII Wahkare Khety Merykare Iddi-ilum
Ili-Ishar
Tura-Dagan
Puzur-Ishtar
Hitial-Erra
Hanun-Dagan
(Vassals of Ur III)[8] Uruk V dynasty
Utu-hengal
Ur III dynasty
"Kings of Ur, Sumer and Akkad"
Ur-Nammu Shulgi Amar-Sin Shu-Sin Ibbi-Sin
2000 BCE Middle Kingdom of Egypt
Eleventh Dynasty of Egypt
Mentuhotep I Intef I Intef II Intef III Mentuhotep II Mentuhotep III Mentuhotep IV
circa 2000 BCE Amorite invasions Elamite invasions
Kindattu (Shimashki Dynasty)
2025-1763 BCE Twelfth Dynasty of Egypt
Amenemhat I Senusret I Amenemhat II Senusret II Senusret III Amenemhat III Amenemhat IV Sobekneferu? Third Eblaite
Ibbit-Lim Immeya Indilimma Old Assyrian Empire
Puzur-Ashur I Shalim-ahum Ilu-shuma Erishum I Ikunum Sargon I Puzur-Ashur II Naram-Sin Erishum II Shamshi-Adad I Ishme-Dagan I Mut-Ashkur Rimush Asinum Ashur-dugul Ashur-apla-idi Nasir-Sin Sin-namir Ipqi-Ishtar Adad-salulu Adasi Bel-bani Libaya Sharma-Adad I Iptar-Sin Bazaya Lullaya Shu-Ninua Sharma-Adad II Erishum III Shamshi-Adad II Ishme-Dagan II Shamshi-Adad III Ashur-nirari I Puzur-Ashur III Enlil-nasir I Nur-ili Ashur-shaduni Ashur-rabi I Ashur-nadin-ahhe I Enlil-Nasir II Ashur-nirari II Ashur-bel-nisheshu Ashur-rim-nisheshu Ashur-nadin-ahhe II Isin-Larsa period (Amorites)
Dynasty of Isin: Ishbi-Erra Shu-Ilishu Iddin-Dagan Ishme-Dagan Lipit-Eshtar Ur-Ninurta Bur-Suen Lipit-Enlil Erra-imitti Enlil-bani Zambiya Iter-pisha Ur-du-kuga Suen-magir Damiq-ilishu
Dynasty of Larsa: Naplanum Emisum Samium Zabaia Gungunum Abisare Sumuel Nur-Adad Sin-Iddinam Sin-Eribam Sin-Iqisham Silli-Adad Warad-Sin Rim-Sin I (...) Rim-Sin II Sukkalmah dynasty
Siwe-Palar-Khuppak
1894-1595 BCE Second Intermediate Period
Thirteenth Dynasty of Egypt
Fourteenth Dynasty of Egypt Abraham
(Biblical) Yamhad
First Babylonian dynasty
("Old Babylonian Period")
(Amorites)
Sumu-abum Sumu-la-El Sin-muballitSabium Apil-Sin Sin-muballit Hammurabi Samsu-iluna Abi-eshuh Ammi-ditana Ammi-saduqa Samsu-Ditana
Early Kassite rulers
Second Babylonian dynasty
("Sealand Dynasty")
Ilum-ma-ili Itti-ili-nibi Damqi-ilishu
Ishkibal Shushushi Gulkishar
mDI?+U-EN Peshgaldaramesh Ayadaragalama
Akurduana Melamkurkurra Ea-gamil
Seventeenth
Fifteenth Dynasty of Egypt
("Hyksos")
Semqen 'Aper-'Anati Sakir-Har Khyan Apepi Khamudi Mitanni
Kirta Shuttarna I Parshatatar
New Kingdom of Egypt
Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt
Ahmose I Amenhotep I
Third Babylonian dynasty (Kassites)
Agum-Kakrime Burnaburiash I Kashtiliash III Ulamburiash Agum III Karaindash Kadashman-harbe I Kurigalzu I Kadashman-Enlil I Burnaburiash II Kara-hardash Nazi-Bugash Kurigalzu II Nazi-Maruttash Kadashman-Turgu Kadashman-Enlil II Kudur-Enlil Shagarakti-Shuriash Kashtiliashu IV Enlil-nadin-shumi Kadashman-Harbe II Adad-shuma-iddina Adad-shuma-usur Meli-Shipak II Marduk-apla-iddina I Zababa-shuma-iddin Enlil-nadin-ahi Middle Elamite period
Kidinuid dynasty
Igehalkid dynasty
Untash-Napirisha
Thutmose I Thutmose II Thutmose III
Hatshepsut?Amenhotep II Thutmose IV Amenhotep III Akhenaten Smenkhkare Neferneferuaten?Tutankhamun Ay Horemheb Hittite Empire
Nineteenth Dynasty of Egypt
Ramesses I Seti I Ramesses II Merneptah Amenmesses Seti II Siptah Twosret? Elamite Empire
Shutrukid dynasty
Shutruk-Nakhunte
1155-1025 BCE Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt
Setnakhte Ramesses III Ramesses IV Ramesses V Ramesses VI Ramesses VII Ramesses VIII Ramesses IX Ramesses X Ramesses XI
Twenty-first Dynasty of Egypt
Smendes Amenemnisu Psusennes I Amenemope Osorkon the Elder Siamun Psusennes II
Solomon Syro-Hittite states Middle Assyrian Empire
Eriba-Adad I Ashur-uballit I Enlil-nirari Arik-den-ili Adad-nirari I Shalmaneser I Tukulti-Ninurta I Ashur-nadin-apli Ashur-nirari III Enlil-kudurri-usur Ninurta-apal-Ekur Ashur-dan I Ninurta-tukulti-Ashur Mutakkil-Nusku Ashur-resh-ishi I Tiglath-Pileser I Asharid-apal-Ekur Ashur-bel-kala Eriba-Adad II Shamshi-Adad IV Ashurnasirpal I Shalmaneser II Ashur-nirari IV Ashur-rabi II Ashur-resh-ishi II Tiglath-Pileser II Ashur-dan II Fourth Babylonian dynasty ("Second Dynasty of Isin")
Marduk-kabit-ahheshu Itti-Marduk-balatu Ninurta-nadin-shumi Nebuchadnezzar I Enlil-nadin-apli Marduk-nadin-ahhe Marduk-shapik-zeri Adad-apla-iddina Marduk-ahhe-eriba Marduk-zer-X Nabu-shum-libur Neo-Elamite period (1100-540 BCE)
1025-934 BCE Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth Babylonian dynasties ("Period of Chaos")
Simbar-shipak Ea-mukin-zeri Kashshu-nadin-ahi Eulmash-shakin-shumi Ninurta-kudurri-usur I Shirikti-shuqamuna Mar-biti-apla-usur Nabû-mukin-apli
911-745 BCE Twenty-second Dynasty of Egypt
Shoshenq I Osorkon I Shoshenq II Takelot I Osorkon II Shoshenq III Shoshenq IV Pami Shoshenq V Pedubast II Osorkon IV
Twenty-third Dynasty of Egypt
Harsiese A Takelot II Pedubast I Shoshenq VI Osorkon III Takelot III Rudamun Menkheperre Ini
Twenty-fourth Dynasty of Egypt
Tefnakht Bakenranef
Kingdom of Samaria
Kingdom of Judah Neo-Assyrian Empire
Adad-nirari II Tukulti-Ninurta II Ashurnasirpal II Shalmaneser III Shamshi-Adad V Shammuramat (regent) Adad-nirari III Shalmaneser IV Ashur-Dan III Ashur-nirari V
Ninth Babylonian Dynasty
Ninurta-kudurri-usur II Mar-biti-ahhe-iddina Shamash-mudammiq Nabu-shuma-ukin I Nabu-apla-iddina Marduk-zakir-shumi I Marduk-balassu-iqbi Baba-aha-iddina (five kings) Ninurta-apla-X Marduk-bel-zeri Marduk-apla-usur Eriba-Marduk Nabu-shuma-ishkun Nabonassar Nabu-nadin-zeri Nabu-shuma-ukin II Nabu-mukin-zeri
Humban-Tahrid dynasty
Teumman
Ummanigash
Tammaritu I
Indabibi
Humban-haltash III
745-609 BCE Twenty-fifth Dynasty of Egypt
("Black Pharaohs")
Piye Shebitku Shabaka Taharqa Tanutamun Neo-Assyrian Empire
(Sargonid dynasty)
Tiglath-Pileser+Shalmaneser+Marduk-apla-iddina II Sargon+Sennacherib+Marduk-zakir-shumi II Marduk-apla-iddina II Bel-ibni Ashur-nadin-shumi+Nergal-ushezib Mushezib-Marduk Esarhaddon+Ashurbanipal Ashur-etil-ilani Sinsharishkun Sin-shumu-lishir Ashur-uballit II
Assyrian conquest of Egypt
626-539 BCE Twenty-sixth Dynasty of Egypt
Necho I Psamtik I Necho II Psamtik II Wahibre Ahmose II Psamtik III Neo-Babylonian Empire
Nabopolassar Nebuchadnezzar II Amel-Marduk Neriglissar Labashi-Marduk Nabonidus Median Empire
Deioces Phraortes Madius Cyaxares Astyages
539-331 BCE Twenty-seventh Dynasty of Egypt
(Achaemenid conquest of Egypt)
Achaemenid Empire
Cyrus Cambyses Darius I Xerxes Artaxerxes I Darius II Artaxerxes II Artaxerxes III Artaxerxes IV Darius III
Twenty-eighth Dynasty of Egypt
Twenty-ninth Dynasty of Egypt
Thirtieth Dynasty of Egypt
Thirty-first Dynasty of Egypt
331-141 BCE Ptolemaic dynasty
Ptolemy I Soter Ptolemy Keraunos Ptolemy II Philadelphus Ptolemy III Euergetes Ptolemy IV Philopator Ptolemy V Epiphanes Cleopatra I Syra (regent) Ptolemy VI Philometor Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator Cleopatra II Philometor Soter Ptolemy VIII Physcon Cleopatra III Ptolemy IX Lathyros Ptolemy X Alexander Berenice III Ptolemy XI Alexander Ptolemy XII Auletes Cleopatra VI Tryphaena Berenice IV Epiphanea Ptolemy XIII Ptolemy XIV Cleopatra VII Philopator Ptolemy XV Caesarion Hellenistic Period
Argead dynasty: Alexander I Philip Alexander II Antigonus
Seleucid Empire: Seleucus I Antiochus I Antiochus II Seleucus II Seleucus III Antiochus III Seleucus IV Antiochus IV Antiochus V Demetrius I Alexander III Demetrius II Antiochus VI Dionysus Diodotus Tryphon Antiochus VII Sidetes
141-30 BCE Kingdom of Judea
Simon Thassi John Hyrcanus Aristobulus I Alexander Jannaeus Salome Alexandra Hyrcanus II Aristobulus II Antigonus II Mattathias Alexander II Zabinas Seleucus V Philometor Antiochus VIII Grypus Antiochus IX Cyzicenus Seleucus VI Epiphanes Antiochus X Eusebes Antiochus XI Epiphanes Demetrius III Eucaerus Philip I Philadelphus Antiochus XII Dionysus Antiochus XIII Asiaticus Philip II Philoromaeus Parthian Empire
Mithridates I Phraates Hyspaosines Artabanus Mithridates II Gotarzes Mithridates III Orodes I Sinatruces Phraates III Mithridates IV Orodes II Phraates IV Tiridates II Musa Phraates V Orodes III Vonones I Artabanus II Tiridates III Artabanus II Vardanes I Gotarzes II Meherdates Vonones II Vologases I Vardanes II Pacorus II Vologases II Artabanus III Osroes I
30 BCE-116 CE Roman Empire
(Roman conquest of Egypt)
Province of Egypt Roman Empire
Judea Roman Empire
116-117 CE Roman Empire
Province of Mesopotamia under Trajan Roman Empire
Parthamaspates of Parthia
Syria Palaestina Roman Empire
Province of Mesopotamia Sinatruces II Mithridates V Vologases IV Osroes II Vologases V Vologases VI Artabanus IV
224-270 CE Sasanian Empire
Province of Asoristan
Ardashir I Shapur I Hormizd I Bahram I Bahram II Bahram III Narseh Hormizd II Adur Narseh Shapur II Ardashir II Shapur III Bahram IV Yazdegerd I Shapur IV Khosrow Bahram V Yazdegerd II Hormizd III Peroz I Balash Kavad I Jamasp Kavad I Khosrow I Hormizd IV Khosrow II Bahram VI Chobin Vistahm
270-273 CE Palmyrene Empire
Vaballathus Zenobia Antiochus
Syria Roman Empire
Province of Mesopotamia
395-618 CE Byzantine Empire
Byzantine Egypt Byzantine Empire
Palaestina Prima, Palaestina Secunda Byzantine Empire
Byzantine Syria Byzantine Empire
Byzantine Mesopotamia
(Sasanian conquest of Egypt)
Province of Egypt
Shahrbaraz Sahralanyozan Shahrbaraz Sasanian Empire
Khosrow II Kavad II
Byzantine Mesopotamia Ardashir III Shahrbaraz Khosrow III Boran Shapur-i Shahrvaraz Azarmidokht Farrukh Hormizd Hormizd VI Khosrow IV Boran Yazdegerd III Peroz III Narsieh
639-651 CE Muslim conquest of Egypt Muslim conquest of the Levant Muslim conquest of Mesopotamia and Persia
Rulers of Ancient Central Asia
^ W. Hallo; W. Simpson (1971). The Ancient Near East. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich. pp. 48-49.
^ "Rulers of Mesopotamia". cdli.ox.ac.uk. University of Oxford, CNRS.
^ Thomas, Ariane; Potts, Timothy (2020). Mesopotamia: Civilization Begins. Getty Publications. p. 14. ISBN 978-1-60606-649-2.
^ Roux, Georges (1992). Ancient Iraq. Penguin Books Limited. pp. 532-534 (Chronological Tables). ISBN 978-0-14-193825-7.
^ "The Sumerian king list: translation". etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 8 May 2008.
^ Per Sumerian King List
^ a b Per Sumerian King List
^ Unger, Merrill F. (2014). Israel and the Aramaeans of Damascus: A Study in Archaeological Illumination of Bible History. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 5. ISBN 978-1-62564-606-4.
DECIPHERING DANIEL (program 12 of 12)
Seleucid_dynasty


text:
SHOWTIME® DOCUMENTARY FILMS ACQUIRES WORLDWIDE RIGHTS TO THE ONE AND ONLY DICK GREGORY FROM DIRECTOR ANDRE GAINES
Documentary Feature About Comedy Legend and Activist, Executive Produced by Kevin Hart and Lena Waithe,
Will Premiere on Sunday, July 4 at 9 PM ET/PT
LOS ANGELES – June 9, 2021 – SHOWTIME Documentary Films today announced that it has acquired worldwide rights to THE ONE AND ONLY DICK GREGORY, the directorial debut from producer Andre Gaines (The Lady and The Dale, Bill Nye: Science Guy). The documentary feature unpacks the career of Dick Gregory, the activist, pop-culture icon and thought leader who changed the lives of millions across the world through constant disruption and awareness. The film will have a World Premiere at the Tribeca Film Festival on Saturday, June 19 as part of the festival's inaugural Juneteenth programming slate, ahead of the SHOWTIME premiere on Sunday, July 4 at 9 p.m. ET/PT. The announcement was made by Vinnie Malhotra, Executive Vice President, Nonfiction Programming, Showtime Networks Inc.
To watch and share the first look clip, visit: https://youtu.be/QZjZ1VbhgvM.
"There is no more important time than now to revisit the life of Dick Gregory," said Malhotra. "His fearless voice rose to the challenges of his time, calling upon Americans to question their beliefs, in an era where you risked your livelihood – maybe even your life – to speak out. Though a comedic genius of his generation, comedy turned out just to be the beginning of one of the most unique and impactful journeys of any person we've seen. Andre and team have done a remarkable job in showing just how Gregory walked the walk and talked the talk in a way we have rarely seen anyone else do."
Gregory inspired a generation through on-the-ground activism, an untiring desire to help and his influential comedy. Featuring archival footage of his early career as a comedian, the film is bookended with Gregory's own voice just before his death in 2017, reflecting on the impact of his life on the world as a self-described "agitator." Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock, Kevin Hart, Wanda Sykes, W. Kamau Bell and others discuss Gregory's paradigm-shifting significance on the art of comedy and culture. The film features original music by Black Thought of the Grammy® award winning hip-hop band The Roots.
"Dick Gregory is as present to me now as he was when I first started filming him six years ago – a trivial length of time when compared to the nearly six decades that this one man so greatly influenced American history, comedy, activism, and nutrition," said Gaines. "He emptied himself completely for the movement, and while the enormity of his sacrifices are rarely acknowledged, he gave every artist a master class for what it truly means to both entertain and educate. Knowing Dick Gregory was a transformative experience that not only influenced the making of this film, but me as a man. Vinnie and the team at SHOWTIME have been incredible partners to help bring this timely story to the world, and I cannot wait for Dick Gregory to finally get his due."
Gaines founded and runs Cinemation Studios which is based in Los Angeles. His producing credits include the four-part documentary series, The Lady and the Dale, the remake of Stephen King's Children of the Corn, Spike Lee's Da Sweet Blood of Jesus, and the award-winning film Bill Nye: Science Guy.
THE ONE AND ONLY DICK GREGORY is a Cinemation Studios production, written and directed by Gaines, and produced by Gaines and Valerie Edwards. The film is executive produced by Kevin Hart and Bryan Smiley for Hartbeat Productions, Lena Waithe and Rishi Rajani for Hillman Grad Productions, and Christian Gregory, Chad Troutwine and Matt Rachamkin.
Showtime Networks Inc. (SNI), a wholly owned subsidiary of ViacomCBS Inc., owns and operates the premium service SHOWTIME®, which features critically acclaimed original series, provocative documentaries, box-office hit films, comedy and music specials and hard-hitting sports. SHOWTIME is available as a stand-alone streaming service across all major streaming devices and Showtime.com, as well as via cable, DBS, telco and streaming video providers. SNI also operates the premium services THE MOVIE CHANNEL™ and FLIX®, as well as on demand versions of all three brands. SNI markets and distributes sports and entertainment events for exhibition to subscribers on a pay-per-view basis through SHOWTIME PPV®. For more information, go to www.SHO.com.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized on June 10, 2021 .
Hip-Hop Legend Kurtis Blow to Release 'The Breaks' Gold Record as a Limited Edition NFT RISE AGAIN TULSA AND THE RED SUMMER
Dionne Warwick Kicks Off 2022 with the Single, "Power In The Name" featuring Krayzie Bone & NomaD
TV-One Airing Encore Presentation of "Unsung" with Mtume
STATEMENT FROM CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER REV. AL SHARPTON ON MEETING WITH PRESIDENT BIDEN AND VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS AFTER THEIR REMARKS ON VOTING RIGHTS
The Mtume family sadly announce the passing of James Mtume (Forman) – sunrise January 3rd, 1946, sunset January 9th, 2022.
Run-DMC Co-Founder Darryl McDaniels and Random House to Publish Picture Book 'Darryl's Dream'

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
American Songwriter Debut
"Gungor will hit the road this October, taking their sweeping, cinematic pop-folk sound to more than 60 cities. Whenever they aren't on tour, though, husband-and-wife duo Michael and Lisa Gungor can be found in Denver, just a few miles east of the foothills of the Rockies. That area comes alive on their album, I Am Mountain, which mixes the rootsy twang of the Wild West with the giddy uplift of the Mile High city. "Wayward and Torn" opens with the audible crunch of footsteps of gravel, followed by bluesy acoustic guitar and honking harmonica. It's the most southern-sounding tune on the album, and it doesn't quite fit with the rest of the tracklist . . . but we like it that way. The band does, too.
"Human beings evolved to live and thrive within tribes and groups, yet there are some of us that don't always have the easiest time finding a tribe that would have us," Michael Gungor says. "This short little song doesn't entirely fit the rest of the record musically. But the slight musical incongruities of the song actually become a manifestation of the song's lyrical intention within the arc of the record. Our music has never really been able to find a format or genre to belong to. But on the way, we've met plenty of interesting, if heretical, people who also enjoy wandering the edges of the camps. 'All who are worn, wayward and torn, you're welcome here.'"
Guess that means there's room for us."
Tagged: American Songwriter, Debut, I Am Mountain, Wayward And Torn
USA Today Debut
"I am mountain, I am dust," Michael Gungor sings on the title track from the forthcoming Gungor album I Am Mountain. The perspective constantly shifts in a song that begins with a repetitive piano pattern but later swells to a stirring chant, finding beauty and mystery in both the micro and the macro of the universe. I Am Mountain, which premieres at USA TODAY, is the latest from the Grammy-nomination pop-folk collective fronted by Michael and his wife, Lisa. The group's new album comes out Sept. 24.
A month later, the group — whose music has earned comparisons to Sufjan Stevens, Arcade Fire and Bon Iver — will begin a headlining tour that will take them across the U.S. and to Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Europe.
Tagged: Debut, I Am Mountain, USA TODAY
Gungor, Los Angeles, CA


text:
Q: googletest install on Ubuntu 16.04 - make errors I'm trying learn/install the Google Test Framework.  I basically tried to follow these instructions to install it on Ubuntu 16.04:

*

*sudo apt-get install libgtest-dev

*cd /usr/src/gtest

*sudo cmake CMakeLists.txt

*sudo make

On sudo make it outputs a lot of errors (screenshot below).  Initially it was complaining about c++11. So, I added set(CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD 11) to the CMakeLists.txt file which actually seem to help but now I'm having the errors below.
Has anyone encountered this or have any idea on how to resolve it?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Cuomo proposes spending $1B to make Javits convention center exhibit space 11% bigger
access_time April 26, 2016 personHeywood Sanders
The New York State Convention Center Development Corporation recently released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for a designer/builder for Gov. Andrew Cuomo's planned expansion of the Javits Center on Manhattan's west side. So now there are some specifics on the $1 billion boondoggle, but no real indication of where the public dollars are actually going to come from, beyond that "a State appropriation of $1 billion, bond issuance proceeds, cash on hand, and other sources as required." It's nice to have "cash on hand."
The project would include a new 480,000-square-foot marshaling facility, with 27 loading docks — because what Manhattan most needs are fleets of 18-wheelers hauling stuff on city streets — roof terrace for outdoor events, and 92,000 square feet of new prime exhibit space, together with added meeting room and ballroom space. That amounts to just an 11 percent increase in exhibit space — what a deal for a billion bucks in public dollars!
Gov. Cuomo proclaimed last January that the Javits was the "busiest convention center in the United States," with more than 2 million visitors annually. The Javits' annual report shows attendance of 2,056,500 in 2014. But that year Chicago's McCormick Place saw total attendance of 2.34 million. So "busiest" might be open to some question. And those Javits attendance figures include big public shows like the New York International Auto Show that sees a million attendees itself, almost entirely from the New York metro area.
The real issue with the Javits is dismal attendance at conventions and trade shows, the events that draw out-of-town visitors and fill hotel rooms. In 2000, the Javits drew 1.25 million convention and trade show attendees. For 2014, the total was just 629,500. And those attendees produced just 478,000 hotel room nights — a tiny fraction of the 31.6 million room nights filled in the city in 2014. That may be why the Cuomo administration has yet to produce any kind of market analysis or feasibility study for the expansion: It likely won't produce any real increase in the Javits' convention business.
Former NYC deputy mayor proposes $8b convention center in Queens, says it's really free
NY Assembly mulls Javits bill
Seattle's convention center seeks a $300m federal bailout because it forgot to budget enough money to…
folderConvention Center Follies
Glendale's new arena lease to require shoveling less money at AEG than city was shoveling at Coyotes
Mark Davis definitely going to announce plans to use Las Vegas as Raiders move threat
4 comments on "Cuomo proposes spending $1B to make Javits convention center exhibit space 11% bigger"
Scola says:
Is drawing out of town visitors and filling hotel rooms an actual problem in New York?
Karl in SD says:
Scola: My thoughts exactly. NY has always been such a business and tourism draw, I can't imagine a lot of conventions there because there's no need to discount hotel rooms, (which convention groups want), since occupancy and rates are already so high. Conventions tend to focus on the markets where there's a TON of hotel rooms at lower, more negotiable rates, (Vegas, Orlando, and yes, San Diego).
I guess Cuomo thinks an expansion to the Javits Center would create great demand for his useless LaGuardia Airtrain (that will take longer to get to the airport than the options available today).
Hmmmm, or rather brrrrrr… about the "roof terrace" that would realistically be usable for maybe 5 months a year. Ever been on the west side where the bay/river is in sight? October – April there's a steady chilling wind that
blows in as far as 10th Ave., rattling windows and freezing toes even where buildings block the winds direct path.
NY'ers who are famous for ignoring obvious daily life deficiencies 'cuz they want to be on or near the island would not be cast aside so easily
by the out-of-towners paying through the nose to be there.
To types like the son of Mario the pious and the other Albany crooks the phrase "cash on hand" means jacking up the cost of living (additional taxes) for the suckers who can't leave and most likely will never have their shadow darken yet another NYS boondoggle. Someone "living" in Suffolk will be on the hook for a new NFL palace in Buffalo as those in Saranac Lake would be for this latest attempt to apply lipstick to the aging pig on the far west side.
Ironic that it took 2 Albany crooks – Joe Bruno & Shelly Silver (to paraphrase George Steingrabber – "One's a born liar, the other's convicted.") to put down yet another potential far west side monument – the King Bloomie boondoggle – for personal gratification and political enrichment.
Thank you for the last paragraph that shows the stark numbers that should have NYS residents bombarding the Albany crooks about this –
although history has shown that it rarely makes a difference.


text:
Hong Kong police launch new attack on occupiers
by Sally Kincaid
Published Tue 2 Dec 2014
Hong Kong police clash with protesters in Mong Kok (Pic: Wing1990hk on Wikimedia Commons)
An estimated 40 people were hospitalised during the democracy protests in Hong Kong last weekend.
Police used batons and pepper spray against protesters, and were filmed kicking and punching them.
Protesters have been camping out in central Hong Kong since September. They are campaigning against plans by the Chinese government to allow only state-approved candidates to stand in elections.
The police launched their attack after protesters tried to occupy the roads surrounding government buildings.
Huge numbers of people have been arrested, including many student leaders. Members of the left wing League of Social Democrats have been issued with court orders restricting their movments.
People are determined not to abandon the occupations. Student leader Oscar Lai told protesters, "We will continue our fight for democracy.
"We will keep up the pressure on our government."
Police attacked occupiers in the area of Mong Kok night after night. Early on Monday of last week the police attacked those occupying the Admiralty site outside government offices, assaulting and arresting demonstrators.
The term "going shopping" took on a new meaning after chief executive CY Leung called on protesters to clear the Mong Kok site and for shoppers to return.
Protesters returned to the site chanting "we are going shopping".
A group of secondary school pupils staged a barefoot walk around the government headquarters last weekend.
They knelt down after every 28 steps and walked around the buildings nine times to remember the police's use of tear gas on 28 September.
Young workers are also joining the protests. Police attacked one protester who was walking to work with his briefcase after helping to defend the protest.
The Chinese Central Government and government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region has refused a delegation of British MPs entry into Hong Kong.
They were told they should not get involved with internal affairs.
The street occupations have been inspiring, and have shown determination and imagination.
But the Hong Kong state is out to win the propaganda war against the democracy movement.
The protesters need a strategy to re-build the popular support they had at the beginning if they are going to succeed.
This means getting into communities and work places outside the protests zones
Tue 2 Dec 2014, 15:38 GMT
Hong Kong protests - lighting the fuse?
Thugs attack Hong Kong demonstrations
Hong Kong's protesters refuse to leave the streets


text:
Latest helpline trends: Quarter 3, 2021
The Insafe network of helplines collects data about the types of calls received and this is analysed every three months to look at trends, and new and emerging issues. The most recent helpline data covers the period from July to September 2021. This reporting period saw over 15,000 contacts made to the helpline network and continued the overall upward trend in numbers of people reaching out to helplines.
2021-12-14 BIK Team helplines	 media literacy/education	 media specialist, organisations and industry, research, policy and decision makers
The main users of the Insafe helplines continue to be teens (aged 12 to 18), with this group accounting for 59 per cent of all contacts during this reporting period. It is also interesting to note that 24 per cent of contacts were made by parents which is higher than it has ever been and perhaps is a reflection of the growing concerns that parents have about what their children are doing when they go online. A recent spate of worrying headlines, coupled with an acknowledgement that most people have been spending increasing amounts of time online as a result of the ongoing pandemic, will no doubt have contributed to their concerns. It is, however, reassuring that parents are recognising the services that helplines are able to offer and making use of these.
This particular reporting period covers the summer holiday period and so it is understandable that there are fewer calls from teachers during this quarter.
62 per cent of contacts were from those identifying as female; a figure which remains consistent over recent reporting periods. Helplines work hard to promote their services to all, but some of the stigma associated with boys and young men acknowledging that they might need help and support, and the perception from some that asking for help is a sign of weakness, means that this is an ongoing challenge.
Helplines record contacts against 16 different categories and, as usual, the main reason for contacting a helpline is cyberbullying with over 17 per cent of contacts relating to this. Sextortion was referenced by several helplines and this category accounts for five per cent of all contacts. Sexting, sextortion and sexual harassment account for 16 per cent of all contacts when taken collectively and perhaps reflects a growing global concern about online sexual harassment and abuse, particularly of women and girls.
Figure 1: Reasons for contacting helplines July – September 2021 (© Better Internet for Kids)
Reasons for contacting Insafe helplines
Percentage of contacts
Advertising/commercialism 1.06 per cent
Hate speech 1.15 per cent
Grooming 2.86 per cent
Excessive use 3.19 per cent
Sexual harassment 4.87 per cent
Technical settings 4.37 per cent
Sextortion 5.02 per cent
Online reputation 4.78 per cent
Gaming 4.80 per cent
e-Crime 6.90 per cent
Sexting 5.69 per cent
Data privacy 8.07 per cent
Media literacy/education 7.10 per cent
Potentially harmful content 12.47 per cent
Love/relationships/sexuality (online) 10.38 per cent
Cyberbullying 17.30 per cent
Helpline statistics can be accessed in detail at www.betterinternetforkids.eu/helpline-statistics where country comparisons can also be made.
Children in Latvia learn about internet safety through audio fairy tales
The Latvian Safer Internet Centre, together with children from the Riga French Lycée, has released nine fairy tales about internet safety, in audio format, for 7-12-year-old children to promote safe, responsible and meaningful use of the internet.
2021-09-29 BIK Team
The Insafe network of helplines collects data about the types of calls received and this is analysed every three months to look at trends, and new and emerging issues. The most recent helpline data covers the period from April to June 2021 and, unusually, saw a reduction in the number of calls when compared to the previous reporting period. During Q1 there were over 17,000 contacts made to helplines but only 15,733 during Q2. However, this is due in part to changes in the way that some helplines are collecting and reporting data.
2021-09-06 media literacy/education, potentially harmful content	 Luxembourg Safer Internet Centre
Helpline services in Luxembourg rebranded as KJT
The Kanner-Jugendtelefon (in English, children and youth telephone), part of the Luxembourg Safer Internet Centre (SIC) and now available under the international number 116111, was founded in 1992. Over the years, the service has adapted its offer to meet the needs of children and young people in the country, and it has recently changed its name to reflect its evolving nature.


text:
Effective date: January 10, 2019
DiscountLooker ("us", "we", or "our") operates the https://DiscountLooker.com website (the "Service").
We use your data to provide and improve the Service. By using the Service, you agree to the collection and use of information in accordance with this policy. Unless otherwise defined in this Privacy Policy, terms used in this Privacy Policy have the same meanings as in our Terms and Conditions, accessible from https://DiscountLooker.com
Your Shop/Store Data
While using our Service, we may ask you to provide us with certain information that can be used to contact or identify you ("Data of Your Shop/Store"). This information may include, but is not limited to:
Telephone Number/Mobile Number
Your usernames, passwords, email addresses and other security-related information used by you in relation to our Services.
Data either created by you or by a third party and which you wish to store on our servers such as image files, documents etc.
Offers/Discounts available from time to time
DiscountLooker uses the collected data for various purposes:
To send message(s) or email(s)
To show Offers/Discounts available from time to time
Your usernames, passwords, email addresses and other security-related information used by you in relation to our Services
Your information, regarding your Shop/Store including Personal Data, may be transferred to — and maintained on — computers located outside of your state, province, country or other governmental jurisdiction where the data protection laws may differ than those from your jurisdiction.
DiscountLooker will take all steps reasonably necessary to ensure that your data is treated securely and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and no transfer of your Personal Data will take place to an organization or a country unless there are adequate controls in place including the security of your data and other personal information.
DiscountLooker may disclose your Personal Data in the good faith belief that such action is necessary to:
To protect and defend the rights or property of DiscountLooker
By email: contact@DiscountLooker.com
By visiting this page on our website: https://DiscountLooker.com/contact
DiscountLooker empowers different small and medium sized businessmen to reach a large number of people. Discountlooker supports physical stores by marking their presence in digital world. Businessmen can register here, and create their store. Discountlooker aims at helping customer about locally available discounts.
Manage Stores
Shoppers Login
SiteMap | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer
© 2021 - DiscountLooker (Powered by EnSkyAR.com)


text:
C3 Madagascar
Rural Entrepreneurs
Junior Ecoguards
I am leading this conservation organisation to contribute to build local capacity that the future generation thrive in harmony with the environment.
Lalarisoa Rakotoarimino, Programme Coordinator
C3 Madagascar and Indian Ocean Islands
C3 Madagascar started in 2009 in the far north of Madagascar, based in the town of Antsiranana.
The challenges faced in the north are similar to those faced by many remote tropical coastal regions today; deforestation, lack of reliable water and electricity supply, overfishing, exploitation of endangered species for international trade, coral bleaching and increasing frequency of storm surges and coastal erosion. C3 partnered with the communities of Nosy Hara Marine Park to build awareness, capacity and inspiration for environmental stewardship. With most community members in our target region living on less than $1 per day, we first needed to address the drivers of poverty and environmental destruction.
Based on consultations, research and feasibility studies, we identified key healthcare, education and capacity building needs of each community and delivered services such as a visiting doctor, new school furniture and books and good governance, organisational capacity building and business training to local association so that people could have their basic needs addressed. Communities are now motivated to commit to Park management and monitoring along with the government agency, Madagascar National Parks, facilitated by C3. In the last two years fisheries infractions have dropped by 90% and there have been no dugong or sea turtle mortalities. Businesses including ecotourism and duck farming are flourishing today and also help deflect pressure off coral reefs and seagrasses.
Sadly, most conservation NGOs in Madagascar come in from outside with their own prescriptive approaches, which unfortunately usually fail long-term because of lack of local leadership and understanding the local context and complex and diverse cultures. We are proud to be locally-led and locally-governed and yet have the capacity to manage donor funds as any foreign NGO. We were declared Project Champions when compared to other marine NGOs in 2018 by UNDP Global Environment Facility, our successful model for community environmental stewardship was featured in a UNEP film in 2019 and our Junior Ecoguard network has received several international accolades.
C3 Madagascar is truly community centred as its name implies. We're not a NGO which comes and goes to rural communities in order to implement top-down projects conceived in costly offices in cities by development personnel. We're grassroots, located in the community and all of our ideas come from the community and complement the country's overarching sustainable development goals.
We don't intend to impress you with technical jargon and to win over our donors with flashy propaganda. Ultimately conservation and development need not be over-complicated or theoretical; we have developed successful environmental stewardship models with proven impact and our job is to adapt, replicate and scale up what we do to reach more and more communities and areas of critical biological importance.
We only promise to deliver effective, sustainable and impactful conservation and development at the best possible price. The reason we can deliver at much lower cost than most NGOs is that we are locally-based, locally-run and have hundreds of community volunteers, well-researched suppliers and a policy of zero or minimal waste.
The international community has to admit that conservation has not been successful to date, we are still losing hundreds of species and swathes of habitat each year. With limited funds and time, we must shift our paradigm away from neo-colonial conservation approaches and waiting for data to inform decisions, instead we need to capacitate communities to manage and monitor key biodiversity areas with their own drive and commitment before it is too late.
It is also time for donors to take a good hard look at value for money when it comes to future conservation investments and move away from an approach which has historically supported short-lived outcomes with high administrative cost and unfortunately led to corruption and external dependence of local institutions.
Junior Ecoguards across 70 schools
Conservation Ambassadors
Community enterprises across 5 communities
C3 MadagascarLot II PA 12 Bis, Soavinimerina, Ambohimanga Rova, Antananarivo, Avaradrano
info@c3mada.org
C3Update
C3 Madagascar (CONSERVATION CENTREE SUR LA COMMUNAUTE C3 MADAGASCAR), in accordance with Article No. 5 of Ordinance No. 60133, is registered as a non-profit organization in Madagascar under the Direction of the Territorial Administration of Antananarivo with Registration No. 1206/14-MID/SG/DGAT/DIRAT/ANT/ASS.
This website only uses essential cookies to improve your experience. Close


text:
Microsoft releases OCR Library for Windows Runtime
Published: September 19th, 2014
- Rob Marvin
The Windows App Team announced the release of a Microsoft OCR Library for Windows Runtime, enabling developers to integrate text-recognition capabilities in Windows Phone 8/8.1 and Windows 8.1 apps.
Optical character recognition (OCR) software converts images containing text into a digitally readable format. The technology's inclusion in Windows Runtime, Microsoft's Windows 8/8.1 application architecture, allows Windows developers to copy text from images, perform text searches in images and translate text from a multitude of image types.
The OCR Library was released in a NuGet package format, and it runs entirely on the client by supporting 21 languages and image processing from sources such as cameras and image files. Developers simply open an app in Visual Studio and pull up the Microsoft OCR NuGet package.
When adding the new Windows Runtime library to an application, the developer controls how the OCR Library extracts, interprets and returns text—configuring the library to recognize text patterns such as email addresses, phone numbers and URLs. Microsoft has also released a sample OCR Library app to test the technology.
More information can be found on the Windows blog and on MSDN.
Microsoft, OCR, optical character recognition, text recognition, Windows, Windows 8.1, Windows Phone, Windows RT, Windows Runtime
About Rob Marvin
Rob Marvin has covered the software development and technology industry as Online & Social Media Editor at SD Times since July 2013. He is a 2013 graduate of the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications at Syracuse University with dual degrees in Magazine Journalism and Psychology. Rob enjoys writing about everything from features, entertainment, news and culture to his current work covering the software development industry. Reach him on Twitter at @rjmarvin1.
View all posts by Rob Marvin
2021 Year in Review: Microsoft


Very SHOCKING drama in Star Plus' Yeh Hai Mohabbatein after this happens..
Very SHOCKING drama in Star Plus' Yeh Hai Mohabbatein after this happens..
Star Plus' Yeh Hai Mohabbatein has been witnessing a lot of interesting twists and turns in the upcoming track of the show. The viewers are all set to get entertained with a lot of interesting twists and turns. As per the current track, Ishita and Raman's romance returned back.
Ishita and Raman's romantic dance has been a treat for the viewers but soon a new drama might unfold as Nidhi successfully plots against Gulaboo and make the family believe that Gulaboo is a thief and has come to steal money.
Now Ishita will also start doubting on Gulaboo and she will be seen investigating. However, it would be interesting to watch as to how Raman save himself from Tisha's evil plan and keep the Gulaboo act alive for some more days. (Also Read: Woah! Karan Patel wants to be the HOST of Nach Baliye 8 to support Divyanka & Vivek!?).
Previous articleWoah! Karan Patel wants to be the HOST of Nach Baliye 8 to support Divyanka & Vivek!?


One of the newest initiatives at the Conservancy is our response to the challenge of the escalating presence of exotic and invasive species in our region. The Conservancy has played a key role in the inter-agency regional CISMA (Cooperative Invasive Species Management Area) effort to raise awareness and conduct surveys on the threat from a myriad of plant and animal invasive species.
In addition to these inter-agency efforts, the Conservancy is also partnering with several researchers on cutting edge field research to better understand the behavior of the Burmese Pythons in our area.
The Conservancy's goal is to help contribute solutions help control the spread of invasive and damaging species in an effective and humane manner.