Almost every Hellenistic state had deified rulers and it was not only the powerful Diadochi but petty native rulers of minor kingdoms that received divine honour, when their courts were imbued with several oriental ideas and customs. The divine kingship itself was never new one, but it was a usual practice of the ancient (pre-Hellenistic) Orient. And studies of the apotheosis of Hellenistic kings, especially of native ones, are also important not only for the history of the Hellenistic world itself, but for the exposition of the origin and reason of this practice. So this monograph treated the divine kingship of the Nabataeans, because in their case not mythologically but factually the development of this native (Arab) people from their tribal community to the kingdom and attest the formation of the divine kingship directly in process of this development (not through myths, theological theories nor mythological rulers that most of ancient peoples had. The writer summarized as follows (1) there would be no apotheosis of the ruler without his claim to absolute proprietorship, and therefore this practice is proper to the society governed by the king and not by the tribal chieftain and accustomed to private property, (2) one of the early kings might have been deified by his greatness, but the royal blood itself was always sacred, (3) this sacred blood was considered to come down from Dusares, the great vegetation god of the nation, and thus they believed that the king was able to assure the people of annual fecundity of the nature, being the epiphany of this god, (4) such an institution was objectively a mean of exaction but subjectively of peace and prosperity both to the king and to the people.
|
