Belief in belief and divine kingship in early Ptolemaic Egypt: the case of Ptolemy II Philadelphus and Arsinoe II

One of the main questions accompanying the phenomenon of deified kings in the Graeco-Roman world is whether people actually believed in the divine nature of their potentates. Taking Ptolemy II Philadelphus and his sister/wife Arsinoe II as a case of study, I argue that even though divine kingship was a political development that sought to establish a dynasty and, hence, political stability within a Hellenistic kingdom, it nevertheless generated a kind of belief. Drawing on Daniel Dennett's notion of 'belief in belief', I suggest that in the case of Ptolemaic Egypt believing in the belief that Ptolemy II and his sister/wife were divine was a possible 'religious' reaction by the people of Egypt. Such an approach suggests that the phenomenon of divine kingship generated a kind of response that must not be overseen or rejected solely on the basis of the political agendas that in principle motivated such practices, as most scholars have traditionally argued.One of the main questions accompanying the phenomenon of deified kings in the Graeco-Roman world is whether people actually believed in the divine nature of their potentates. Taking Ptolemy II Philadelphus and his sister/wife Arsinoe II as a case of study, I argue that even though divine kingship was a political development that sought to establish a dynasty and, hence, political stability within a Hellenistic kingdom, it nevertheless generated a kind of belief. Drawing on Daniel Dennett's notion of 'belief in belief', I suggest that in the case of Ptolemaic Egypt believing in the belief that Ptolemy II and his sister/wife were divine was a possible 'religious' reaction by the people of Egypt. Such an approach suggests that the phenomenon of divine kingship generated a kind of response that must not be overseen or rejected solely on the basis of the political agendas that in principle motivated such practices, as most scholars have traditionally argued