Ptolemy Euergetes, the Benefactor, son of Ptolemy Philadelphus and Arsinoe II, was the third of his race to become king of Egypt. He ascended the throne when past his early youth, and appears to have remained unmarried until this time. We know little of his early life, and one writer suggests that the all-pervading power and influence of his stepmother, Arsinoe II, may have caused him to absent himself from his native land, but this is merely hypothesis.

He chose for himself, or his father chose for him, Berenike, daughter and heiress of Magas, King of Cyrene, who at the time of their marriage was reigning queen in her father’s stead, the Egyptian prince having been declared Lord of Cyrene, and on this marriage King Consort, while she now became Berenike II of Egypt. Magas was the son of Berenike I, the grandmother of Euergetes by a marriage previous to that with Ptolemy Sotor, hence there was a sort of cousinship between Euergetes and his bride. Personal acquaintance there may have been also, and real affection, of which it is pleasant to read, appears between them. It is said too that no breath of scandal touched Ptolemy Euergetes’ name, which is indeed an unique record in his family. Like many other princes, and others of a later day, Euergetes may have been sent abroad to complete his education and see some thing of the world. If these travels led him to Cyrene, as appears likely, since he was proclaimed Lord of the same on the death of Magas, he may have become familiar with the lady of his choice and seen or heard tales of her prowess. A brave and valiant figure, this same Berenike II, warm-hearted, affectionate and courageous to a degree. Stories are told of her valor in rescuing her father, when in the midst of enemies, by riding in among and putting them to flight. Like the late Empress of Austria she was a splendid horsewoman, was accustomed to break horses for the Olympian games and performed other equestrian feats.

An individual figure was she, like her predecessor on the throne of Egypt, Arsinoe II, but a very different one, save in the fact that the husband of both seemed devoted to them. With these experiences behind her Berenike could not have been very young when she became queen of Egypt. Such as she was, doubtless handsome, intrepid and fascinating, she won the heart of a prince to whom she seems to have given her own unreservedly; even so the course of true love did not run quite smooth. Her mother, Berenike, also opposed the match, for reasons not given, but did not succeed in breaking it off. One line by a poet of the time gives an attractive touch to the picture of the new queen.

“He who seated facing thee sees and hears thy laughter sweet.”

Of her, too, we have portraits on the coins, beautiful, regular-featured and conventional. These were gold octadrams and others. In some she appears with the king, in some alone, with diadem, veil and necklace. Others are remarkable for the absence of the veil, there is a cornucopia and it is accompanied by a single star. Berenike II was the first Egyptian queen who bore her title on the coins.

Shortly before the accession of Ptolemy III and his marriage, which occurred 247 B. C., had come the tragic news of the murder of his sister Berenike, the young queen of Syria, of which it is uncertain whether his father was aware. Euergetes, apparently the most personally valiant and warlike of the three first Ptolemies, set out to avenge her death.

Queen Berenike II implored the gods to restore her beloved husband, and vowed to Venus the tresses of her hair, bright, beautiful and abundant, in case of his safe return. Fragments of papyri, found by Professor Petrie, confirm the fact that the king was successful in his war, and came again in triumph. With what rejoicing he was received by his wife we can well imagine, who faithfully carried out her vow and this “woman’s crown” was placed in the sanctuary. The king, while highly appreciating this token of affection, must have felt some regret at the sacrifice. It recalls a story of later date where the Duchess of Marlborough, of the time of William III, cut off her beautiful hair, not to dedicate it to the gods, but to throw it indignantly at her husband’s feet, as revenge for some act of his of which she did not approve. She had not even the satisfaction of rousing him, for he took no notice, but after his death she found locked up in a drawer her heavy curls, which he had always admired.

Berenike’s hair, however, was stolen from the temple, to the grief and indignation of the king. To account for it courtiers and poets devised legends and the mathematician Conon said it had been raised to the heavens to become a constellation, the “Coma Berenice,” a small group of stars still to be seen. Of this miracle Catullus wrote:

And speaking of the king it continues:

And the hair, impersonated by the poet, laments its separation from its mistress’s head. These flights of fancy were no doubt very pleasing to the king.

Like her mother-in-law, if to a less degree, Berenike II seems to have taken an active interest in the affairs of the kingdom. At Canopus, an old trading post, a temple was erected to the king and queen, who were there deified as “Benefactor Gods,” referring probably to the active measures which they took to avert a threatened famine. From the Canopus decree which bears some resemblance to the celebrated Rosetta stone, and from a gold plaque found in the ruins of tombs we obtain this information. In the sanctuary at Philae is still a pedestal placed here by Euergetes and his wife, on which stood the sacred boat with the image of Isis, and on a wall in the same temple is his father Ptolemy Philadelphus offering incense and pouring water on the altar.

To the Princess Berenike, probably the first child of this marriage, who had died, a statue was set up, beside the gods. The head-dress of young Berenike differs in that it has two ears of corn, in the midst of which is the asp-shaped diadem, behind is a papyrus-shaped sceptre, about which the tail of the diadem’s serpent is wound.

The year after the Canopus decree, the tenth of his reign, Ptolemy Euergetes went with great pomp to the refounding of the temple of Edfu, in Upper Egypt, one of the most splendid with which the Ptolemy name is connected, and where a great feast was held for six days.

We know but little definitely about the private life of the king and queen, but one or two incidents connected with her are preserved. Other wives or mistresses, claimants on her husband’s affection, made no figure, if they existed, so we may believe Berenike’s marriage relations to have been more than usually peaceful and happy. One pleasant anecdote is told of her which Mahaffy gives in a footnote. While the king was one day playing at dice, an officer came to him to read out a list of criminals to be condemned, but the queen gently took it away and would not allow him to decide so important a matter so hastily, and at such a time, and it further states that the king yielded to her wishes. That the queen thus dared to interfere and the king so readily accepted her action seems to give proof of the peculiarly amiable relations existing between them.

The queen is also spoken of as a patroness of various aromatic oils, toilette articles, etc., which leads us to suppose she was particular about and careful of her personal appearance. Ptolemy Euergetes was, like his predecessor, fat and handsome, with a full, voluptuous face. The early Ptolemies all had full, voluptuous faces, but handsome, while in the cases of their successors the features were less regular, the nose sharper, and the chin more prominent.

The royal pair had several children, of whom the oldest succeeded his father, the king dying in the twenty-fifth year of his reign. The three first Ptolemies were men of mark, their descendants were decadents, profligate, perfidious and cruel, unfaithful in every way to moral obligations and their task of governing.

Ptolemy Philopator was a young man when he ascended the throne, 222 B. C., his name is said to signify “the son designated for the throne by his father,” with whom, as was so frequently the case, he had probably already been associated in the government. Some authors even suggest that he was not even innocent of the death of this parent, as that of the other was certainly laid at his door, and that he selected the name Philopater to disarm suspicion. But possibly, like Cambyses, as he proved himself a man of evil, nothing was too bad to believe of him. Immediately on his accession he murdered his younger brother Magas, of this there seems no doubt. Berenike II was much attached to this younger son and perhaps wished him to succeed his father, as Philadelphus had done, in preference to Keraunos, which may have been the cause of the new king’s unnatural hatred against her, she was given in charge of Sosibios, an official and favorite of the king’s, and is said either to have been murdered or committed suicide by poison, so unendurable to the high-spirited princess was her imprisonment. She who had been reigning queen and so beloved. It was a melancholy close to her life’s story.

A number of other murders are laid to the king’s charge, through the influence of the same Sosibios. Polybius, who is deemed a reliable authority on this period, says the king “would attend to no business and would hardly grant an interview to the officials about the court,” but was “absorbed in unworthy intrigues and senseless and continual drunkenness,” and “treated the several branches of the government with equal indifference;” all was managed by the officials, or any who might seize the power. His generals fought his battles and gained his victories, with little thanks due to the wisdom or judgment of the king. Agathocles and Sosibios were his leading ministers. But occasionally, at least, he seems to have roused himself and appeared in person on the field, as we read of his setting out from Alexandria with 70,000 infantry, 5,000 cavalry and 73 elephants. At Raphia was fought a great battle, between Antiochus of Syria and Ptolemy, which was opened by a charge of elephants in which the Egyptians came off victorious.

And here we catch a glimpse of the next queen of Egypt (subsequently deified with her husband as gods Philapatores) Arsinoe III, daughter of Euergetes I and Berenike II. She accompanied her brother and rode with him, a fearless horsewoman, like her mother, perhaps, in front of the troops, before the battle, exhorting the soldiers to courage and conquest. Like her mother also she is said to have dedicated a lock of her hair in the temple, but the story is not so well authenticated. Besides this little glimpse of her personality at the battle, which shows vigor and bravery, we learn little of her, probably she was fair, perhaps virtuous. She was a late child of her parents’ marriage, it may be the youngest, and it seems to be implied that she was early left an orphan and had a sad youth. It was some years after this battle about 213 B. C. that she was married to Ptolemy Philopator, and became Arsinoe III of Egypt. Her husband, given to debauchery, amusing himself with literary work, a taste he shared with the earlier Ptolemies, and not, we may imagine, of a very high character, and under the influence of his minister, Sosibios, as well as Agathocles and Agathoclea, sister of the latter, could not have been a very love inspiring companion. The queen bore a son in 210 or 209 B. C., who succeeded his father at five years of age, under the title of Ptolemy V, Epiphanes.

The cruelties to the Jews practiced or allowed by Ptolemy IV were in contrast to the policy of his predecessors, and though some inscriptions remain (the temple of Edfu has mention of this) which do him honor, the weight of testimony seems to be that he was an oppressive and cruel king and hated by his subjects. Yet these few inscriptions, as is frequently the case, for in any important matter the testimony is often conflicting, give a different and better view of his character. The chief cause of, or accessory to many murders he undoubtedly was.

A temple in Nubia gives pictures of Ptolemy Philopater and his wife, Arsinoe III, receiving offerings, as well as those of his father and mother, grandfather and grandmother. It is thought that the Prince of Nubia may have assisted in putting down a revolt of his subjects.

The murder of Arsinoe III was due to the influence of the king’s shameless mistress, Agathoclea and her brother Agathocles, but what had made the unfortunate queen especially obnoxious to them we do not know. Perhaps she was merely an obstacle in the path of their ambition, and they thought that if they could get the child absolutely in their power they could regulate things better to their own liking; perhaps some stories, true or false, were raised against the queen to justify their proceedings. She seems to have had a sad life and to have been friendless in the midst of enemies.

There is something very pathetic in the story of the early life of Ptolemy V., Epiphanes, who became king, at five years of age, his father dead, his mother murdered, so soon that he could scarcely have remembered her, and he left in the hands of her murderers. Polybius gives a picture of these events in the following words: “The next step of Agathocles was to summon a meeting of the Macedonian guards. He entered the assembly accompanied by the young king and his own sister, Agathoclea. At first he feigned not to be able to say what he wished for tears, but after again and again wiping his eyes with his chlamys, he at length mastered his emotion, and, taking the young king in his arms, he spoke as follows: Take this boy, whom his father on his death bed placed in this lady’s care (pointing to his sister) and confided to your loyalty, men of Macedonia. Her affection has but little influence in securing the child’s safety; it is on you that safety now depends, ‘his fortunes are in your hands.’” He then proceeded to inveigh against Tlepolemus, governor of Pelusium, and a general in the army, who was evidently popular with the soldiers and in so doing overshot his mark.

The murder of the queen, and even of the man into whose hands the letter ordering the same had fallen, seems gradually to have been traced (though at first kept secret) to its true authors, and this added to other acts of cruelty and unlawful seizure of power, raised a storm of feeling among the soldiers and the populace generally, against Agathocles and his associates, and his words were received with “hootings and loud murmurs,” so that he began to fear the worst for himself and made haste to escape. The fury of a mob, of any nationality and at any period of the world’s history, once raised, is not easy to allay, and seldom have such uprisings been known, unattended by bloodshed. In this, as in other cases, there were some leaders ready to fan rather than to extinguish the flame of popular wrath, and they determined to overthrow the obnoxious ministers.

The whole city was in a ferment and the next morning the Macedonian guard broke open the palace, seized the person of the little king, placed him on horseback and led him among the people, who shouted and clapped their hands. They then put him on the royal seat and extracted from the, doubtless frightened, child permission to surrender to the populace “those who had injured him or his mother.” Pitiful it must have been to see a mere baby placed in such circumstances. Whether he really understood anything of what was going on, or had any affection for those in question we cannot tell. It of course resulted in the murder of Agathocles and all his kinsfolk. A fate well deserved perhaps by most of them, but horrible to contemplate. But the dreadful thirst for blood was awakened in the angry crowd, and there were bound to be victims, more or less numerous.