At the end of antiquity Alexandria’s religious system must have resembled a ‘‘palimpsest,’’ to use Haas’ fortunate metaphor, on which the cults imported at various points by each of the communities that made up the city’s urban mosaic were superimposed (Haas 1997). But this diversity of cults probably existed from the city’s origin. In this respect, Alexandria probably differed hardly at all from the majority of Greek cities in the hellenistic period. But what distinguished the city from the rest was the fact that its status was ambiguous, since it was created practically ex nihilo by royal initiative. Was it a Greek city, invented for Greeks, ‘‘on the edge’’ of Egypt, as in the famous expression Alexandria ad Aegyptum? This conceptualization, which has long flourished, is now being called into question. It is true that the city seems to have conformed to the quadrilateral ‘‘Hippodamian’’ plan that was typical of the great hellenistic cities, and that it was centered around the agora and the royal palaces. But the city’s structure also comprised numerous elements borrowed from Egypt, as has been demonstrated by the recent discoveries of pharaonic statues and bas-reliefs in the waters of the harbors (Empereur 1998-2002; Goddio 1998). These derived largely from Heliopolis, and they were obviously reused to give Alexandria an Egyptian color. Furthermore, if the city was initially conceived as the seat of a foreign power imposed upon Egypt, the new masters soon demonstrated their integration into the Egyptian system, be this by contributing to the performance of traditional cults or by having themselves crowned ‘‘in the Egyptian fashion’’ at Memphis (as became normal from Ptolemy IV, r. 222-205 BC). From the third century BC, many Egyptians were reaching the corridors of power and being included in the royal entourage, whilst people of Greek descent were sometimes taking on Egyptian names and holding the top priestly jobs in Egyptian temples (Clarysse 1999). In short, Alexandria was of course home to a ‘‘mixed’’ population. Was the site on which it was founded inhabited beforehand? The issue is in dispute. The name Rhakotis is traditionally regarded as that of the ‘‘Egyptian village’’ that had preceded the city, but it has recently been reinterpreted as a general term designating a building site. So we could be dealing with a somewhat ironic name adopted by the Egyptians to designate the capital under construction (Chauveau 1997).
World History
