From after Alexander’s triumphant entry into Egypt in 332 BCE until Cleopatra VII’s (in)famous suicide in 31 BCE, the Macedonians ruled over Egypt. Alexander founded Alexandria, or at least had the idea of it. His general Ptolemy ended up with Egypt when the dust settled by 305 BCE, and his family, the Ptolemies, would rule Egypt for about 275 years. The Ptolemies would build the Library of Alexandria and cultivate Alexandria as a cosmopolitan city of learning and commerce. At the end there would be Cleopatra (VII), the very famous lover of Caesar and Marc Antony, who would die by suicide by clasping an asp to her breast: no wonder Hollywood ran wild with the theme.

And for most people, that’s about all is known about the Ptolemies and Egypt in this period. Jewish and Christian scholars and students might add a few details about the translation of the Septuagint and the development of a prominent Jewish community in Alexandria. Yet, on the whole, Ptolemaic Egypt is passed over in terms of the grand story of history. We tend to focus a lot more on what came before and what would come afterward, both in terms of Egyptian and Classical history.

Guy de la Bédoyère has attempted to put forth a comprehensive narrative of Ptolemaic Egypt in The Fall of Egypt and the Rise of Rome.

The author began with an overview of the Macedonian conquest of the Persian Empire and the restive condition of Egypt under the later Achaemenid period. He then explored, in greater detail, the lives and reigns of each successive Ptolemaic monarch.

The author took time out in the middle of the historical narrative to explore life under the Ptolemies: the growth and nature of Alexandria, the people’s experience of the government, the temple building executed by the Ptolemies, and the state of affairs regarding the afterlife and what we have uncovered archaeologically about mummies, their burials, and the like.

The story the author tells is of a decently begun and stable kingdom which is able to project its power beyond Egypt into the Levant, Asia Minor, and Greece itself. Yet by the time of the 2nd century BCE, the Ptolemies have grown ever weaker and less stable: they have lost power over a lot of the territory outside of Egypt; they suffer continual rebellions from various parts of Egypt; there are persistent droughts and famines undermining Egypt’s ability to feed itself and project the kind of strength the Ptolemies would like to project.

The author made it quite clear how the Ptolemies end up only persevering as an empire at Rome’s pleasure. The author does also cover the rise of Rome: he explored how pivotal their success against the Carthaginians in the First and Second Punic War proved in Rome’s standing in the region. The only reason the Seleucids under Antiochus IV Epiphanes did not overtake Ptolemaic Egypt was Rome’s demand for Antiochus to withdraw or risk incurring Rome’s displeasure.

The Romans were intelligently maneuvering themselves in the eastern Mediterranean: they would allow the Ptolemies and Seleucids to fight against each other or others as long as neither got an overwhelming advantage over the other; meanwhile, they defeat the Macedonians in their homeland time and again, and ultimately end up the rulers of Macedon and Greece. Their incursions into Asia Minor are profiled as well, along with the ultimate end of the Seleucid Empire at their hands.

For the majority of its existence in the first century BCE, Ptolemaic Egypt continued being Ptolemaic only because Rome allowed it. Roman soldiers became a more prevalent sight in Egypt. The author well described how Cleopatra VII consorts with Caesar and Antony in turn in order to preserve her power and kingdom. If Actium and what happened afterward had gone differently, it would not be too difficult to imagine a divided Roman Empire with Alexandria as its eastern capital with Caesar’s son Caesarion ruling over it, or perhaps even a united Roman Empire under Caesarion based in Alexandria.

At the same time, there are reasons why such demands a world of fantasy, and this is what the author well attests in what he says and what he is unable to say: Ptolemaic Egypt was never really that strong. There’s not nearly as much material evidence regarding Ptolemaic Egypt as one might imagine: the author does a great job giving evidence when evidence exists, and so there will be certain events and situations which receive a lot of good quality attestation, but these are minority experiences over this 275 year period. We probably know a lot more about Roman Egypt, and certainly more about Late Period Egypt, than we do about Ptolemaic Egypt. Some of that was because of later destruction, including how much of ancient Alexandria has been washed away into the sea. But Ptolemaic Egypt was very much a small elite Macedonian leadership exploiting, and generally oppressing, the wider Egyptian populace. Mummification standards were not nearly as good as in the past; tomb building was in the past, and most Ptolemaic burials involve re-using ancient Egyptian tombs for that purpose. A few papyrus scraps of records have been preserved, and they tell of continual difficulties throughout the land.

Many consider Cleopatra’s suicide the end of ancient Egyptian history, and for understandable reasons: it would be almost a millennium before Egypt would be ruled over by someone who lived in Egypt, and another millennium before that ruler was an Egyptian. The Ptolemies at least tried to present themselves as part of the Egyptian religious universe; much of the temple facades we have come to associate with ancient Egypt are really Ptolemaic in origin. But the light truly had gone out centuries before, and the land and its people were in many respects limping onward.

Thus, in the end, as the book well attests, the Ptolemies were really doomed, and there are reasons why they are only popularly remembered for a few things. History really passed them by, and not much remains about them and their rule. The effects of Ptolemaic rule, however, would be long lasting: Alexandria would ever remain a powerful commercial city, and Egypt’s grain and trade connection with India would allow the Roman Empire to thrive as it did in the first couple centuries of our era.

One cannot blame an author for the challenges they experience with their source material; I want to emphasize how excellent of a resource this is regarding Ptolemaic Egypt. But it does go to show just how little we know about this period of Egyptian and Classical/Hellenistic history.

For roughly 300 years the Ptolemies ruled Egypt, and this book is a fun and informative read. Buy this book and enjoy learning about this dynasty that led up to the story of Marc Anthony and Cleopatra.

Super interesting look into the last days of Egypt, and what was happening in Rome at the time. Even if your not a history buff, I think this is still an accessible read.

Rating: 3.5/5

As Guy de la Bédoyère rightly points out, the "Ptolemies generally exist at the end of books of Egyptian history or as a preamble to a biography of Cleopatra VII." Being that there is 300 years of history within the Ptolemaic dynasty, it's quite an injustice. Setting the record straight, Bédoyère attempts to create an up-to-date timeline of the Ptolemies, beginning with Alexander the Great. While it is true that Alexander never formally ruled Egypt, he established a foothold and declared the site for the future city of Alexandria. After his sudden death, it was one of his general/bodyguards, Ptolemy I Soter, who would become the dynasty's founder.

All the Ptolemies, in some form or another, embraced Egyptian religion, myth and tradition. This is a kingdom that had lasted three millennia, and most native Egyptians couldn't even read hieroglyphs, but they recognized the importance of a facade of assimilation. The problem is, with a Greek pharaoh came a Greek ruling class. Rebellion became endemic in Egypt at this time. Those who spoke and read Greek were given greater privileges. In a world at war, Ptolemaic Egypt instead followed a course of Enlightenment and showmanship, exemplified in the Library and Pharos of Alexandria. The glory days of conquest like that of the 18th dynasty were long gone.

As much of a crash course this book is, it was easy to follow as far as the monarchy was concerned. I was never confused on who was related to whom, next in line, currently on the throne, etc. However, I am so glad I took notes as I read because the way it is structured is very cumbersome. For example, instead of incorporating famous monuments under the pharaohs who ordered their construction, they are described separately in Part 2. There's a lot of backtracking, which results in repetition and plenty of "see Chapter _" throughout. The evolving life of its rebellious citizens is also never fully explored, so I'm left wondering why the Greek nobility was so disliked. There's not a gradual "rise" of Rome either, instead appearing mainly in Part 3. But in the end, Egypt's "fall" was not a fall at all, but adaptation to inevitable global change.

Thank you NetGalley and Yale Books for approving my request!

My feelings on this book are conflicted. There are some good bits! There are also some frustrating bits that definitely got in the way of my enjoyment.

The good bits: just the existence of a book about the Ptolemys is a pretty good thing, I think. They so often get ignored in histories of Egypt; and they just end up as a prologue to Cleopatra VII. And I get it - it's hard to figure out where they fit in, as an invading ruling family that doesn't fit with OG Egypt. I am also intrigued by the idea of putting the Ptolemaic dynasty and the rise of Rome together: if you know anything about the two, you know they have a stunning convergence in Cleopatra VII/ Caesar / Marc Antony, but what de la Bedoyere shows is the ways Egypt and Rome had been interacting for generations beforehand, and why therefore Caesar went to Egypt and Cleopatra thought getting the Romans involved made sense. I have a much greater appreciation now for the ways Rome was meddling in their surrounds, and how Egypt and Syria and others were using external players in their internal struggles.

Other positive aspects are the fact that the women get some discussion (although that's also a source of frustration, see below), and the fact that this is written fairly accessibly, within the confines of 'there are a lot of the same names and that gets very confusing'. I appreciated that the author did acknowledge things like 'Roman historians have a LOT of prejudice' and that there are several aspects of Ptolemaic history where historians simply do not have enough information to adequately explain things.

So. The less good bits. Firstly, the frustrating-ness is partly a product, I suspect, of writing a book that's intended to be generally accessible - so it doesn't go into a lot of detail about some aspects, and doesn't have all THAT many references either. Instead, the author just makes claims... which are sometimes such that I raised my eyebrows. Perhaps the most egregious, from my perspective, is the fact that he doesn’t try to examine why various non-Roman kings in the Mediterranean world would appeal to Rome at the start, when Rome is an international upstart. He simply says that it happens because the Romans had won some wars. There seems to be an underlying assumption that Rome was always going to preeminent, so it makes sense that everyone acknowledged this early on. I wanted to write "needs more evidence" in the margin.

Secondly, the portrayal of the women is fairly problematic. The second Ptolemy was the first to marry his sister. De la Bedoyere blithely states that the sister, Arsinoe, basically made the marriage happen after she ran to her brother for help when previous marriages had gone badly wrong, because she was so ambitious. There is no explanation offered for her characterisation as 'ambitious'. The fact that she married various rulers doesn't tell us anything about HER attitudes. There is no suggestion that maybe Ptolemy forced or convinced her to marry him. Given the extravagant after-death cult stuff set up by Ptolemy II - which may be partly about playing into Egyptian religion - it seems more like to me Ptolemy II was either besotted or very, very political (why not have both?!). There are other moments when the various other Cleopatras, Berenices, and Arsinoes are also treated like this: mothers acting as king instead of stepping down for their sons, or manipulating brothers... and maybe some of them were indeed political machines! But I need evidence of that - because achieving that in such a patriarchal world would be admirable and worthy of applause! I point you also to this claim: "Worried that her power and influence were waning after his triumph over [another ruler], [Cleopatra Thea] tried to poison her son. Having already killed one child, killing another must have seemed comparatively easy." NO WORDS.

Fourthly, connected to what I said earlier about acknowledging the problems with Roman sources in particular: relaying what those sources say in great detail, AND THEN spending a couple of lines saying 'but we can't take everything they say at face value' doesn't really work. Pretty sure that's what lawyers do when they know a jury will be asked to ignore some evidence, but THEY'VE ALREADY HEARD IT (lol, at least that's how it works on tv, and you see what I mean). I really think those sections - usually bad-mouthing a Ptolemy, and especially Cleopatra VII - needed to be PREFACED with 'but the Romans had an agenda'. I really got the sense that de la Bedoyere doesn't care for Cleopatra VII at all, to be honest; he claims she didn't care for Egypt in the slightest, just her own power, and again - I'd like to see more evidence please.

Finally, there are some odd choices in terms of the book's presentation. Every now and then there are boxes with random bits of information that is tangentially connected to the main part of the story. I found these more distracting than helpful - although I guess YMMV and maybe for some people this really works.

Overall... I'm reluctant to recommend this to an Egypt or Rome novice. I really think you need a slightly sophisticated reader who is able and willing to question some of the assumptions, and put things into context. So like I said: I am conflicted.

More military history and less palace politics then I was looking for. There is also a lot more time spent on Egypt than on Rome - I thought it was going to show the histories of the two countries in parallel but we really only get Rome history in bits in pieces as they begin to interact with Egypt. It was an OK basic history of the time period in Egypt, but i think it could have been presented better.

A fascinating history of Ptolemaic Egypt that charts an enthralling narrative through this messy and confusing period of history. While histories of the Greeks, Alexander and the Roman Empire abound, it is much harder to find an accessible history of Egypt. Guy de la Bedoyere has produced a learned, enjoyable and exciting history of the almost 300 years of Ptolemaic rule from the rise of Ptolemy the first to the death of Cleopatra VII. While the big picture history of the nation necessarily dominates, I loved that de la Bedoyere introduces fragmentary scraps of recovered writings that gives insight into the lives of the ordinary people too.

A fascinating glimpse of a history I was barely taught in school. As a beginner on Ptolemaic Egypt, I was really pleased with how digestible this book was for me. The rise and fall of empires such as this is both incredibly interesting to learn about and also something that raises awareness of the transience of humankind.

A really insightful look at the last ruling dynasty of Egypt, and the background events and circumstances that shaped the famous Cleopatra. Rome can be seen as the new power player, that eventually takes over a dying kingdom.

Ancient Egypt – pyramids, mummies, scarab beetles and hieroglyphics. Ancient Egypt has captured the imagination of children all over the world. I was one such child. Our local museum has a tiny room dedicated to treasures from ancient Egypt. It was, and still is, a favourite space to explore. One may wonder what life was like all those years ago – how were the pyramids built? What did the ancient Egyptians eat? What was Cleopatra like? And, crucially, how did ancient Egyptian life end? This final pondering is the topic of Guy de la Bédoyère’s latest book, The Fall of Egypt and the Rise of Rome: A History of the Ptolemies. A huge thank you to Yale University Press and Net Galley for an advanced copy of this book.

The period classified as ancient Egypt spanned over 3000 years and comprised more than 30 dynasties. As the title suggests, this book focuses on the fall of Egypt, and as such, it hones in on the last and longest dynasty of ancient Egypt: the Ptolemaic dynasty. De la Bédoyère sets the scene perfectly as we enter the world of Ptolemaic Egypt. With the unexpected death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC, Alexander's empire was divided. Egypt was given to Ptolemy I. Ptolemy I was crowned, and as described by de la Bédoyère, an absolute monarchy was established, drawing on the older Egyptian royals' traditions and the models of Hellenistic ruling. This blending of Hellenistic and Egyptian culture was unique to the dynasty.

Throughout this book, we meet a cast of historical figures. From Alexander the Great and Ptolemy I to the charming Sosibius, formerly enslaved Eulaeus and Lenaeus, and Julius Caesar, Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII, each more fascinating than the last. De la Bédoyère describes life in Ptolemaic Egypt and the power and bloodshed in perfect detail. This final dynasty of ancient Egypt was witness to murders, executions, assassinations, plots, uprisings, and suspicious deaths. It will always amaze me how much extant primary source material there is from antiquity. De la Bédoyère carefully drew on these source materials to construct what these people may have been like.

The Fall of Egypt and the Rise of Rome: A History of the Ptolemies by Guy de la Bédoyère is a wonderfully detailed account of the last dynasty of ancient Egypt. Reading this book will give one a greater understanding of this historical period and be captivated by its sheer brutality and complexity. De la Bédoyère has created a pivotal text that helps us comprehend the intertwined histories of ancient Rome and ancient Egypt. As such, I highly recommend Guy de la Bédoyère’s latest book, The Fall of Egypt and the Rise of Rome: A History of the Ptolemies.

A dull trot through subject matter extremely rich in storytelling potential. My full review can be found on Open Letters Review.

I really enjoyed the history of the Ptolemies, I really didn't know anything about them and this worked well. It had that historical feel that I was looking for and it was researched really well. Guy de la Bedoyere was able to create a strong nonfiction book and can't wait for more.

As a Ancient History fanatic I really enjoyed this book! This book gives a really interesting background on the Ptolemaic dynasty and how the Roman and Greek world interacted with Egypt. most of the time people just hear that there was some interaction between Cleopatra and Marc Anthony but the mixing of the two cultures goes way further than that. I will say though that the start of the book kind of flung you in and did not set a scene. Felt like a text book (which I don't mind) but may be off putting to other people. Overall, I really liked it!

This is by far my favorite period of ancient history and this piece was both riveting and concise. I'll be reaching for this title more than a few times.

I love Egypt and to read a book about something that I love with all my heart hits different. Loved everything about this book. I rated it 4 stars.

As usual the author uses droll humor to discuss the modern myths about the Ptolemaic rulers (notably Cleopatra VII) while acknowledging that much of Egyptology is conjecture because of incomplete--come on, it happened a long time ago!--evidence. He emphasizes that, "in antiquity, especially Egypt, the symbolic always obscured the truth. What really happened was of secondary importance, or even irrelevant." It does make the reader consider the nature of, and societal/political uses for, "history." Recommended for all libraries.

An interesting look and Ptolemaic Egypt and the effect it had on Rome’s rise and the effect Rome’s rise had on Ptolemaic Egypt.