HiramOfTyre

We all know a lot about how traditional Egyptian culture and religion adapted and evolved under the Ptolemies. So why is there so little information on the Seleucids?

I mean, they had territory in parts of Anatolia, Phoenicia, Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, Israel and Judaea, etc. What happened to the traditional cultures and religions of those areas? Did they evolve or change? Were they replaced by Greek customs instead? I've often heard the claim that the traditional Near Eastern religions (worshiping gods like Baal, Marduk, Ishtar, Asherah, Teshub, Kubaba, Ea, etc. died out or declined in favour of the Greek gods and religions). I've even heard claims that the Seleucids banned any religions other than their own, though I'm not sure how true any of that is.

So what happened to the traditional cultures? Were they replaced by Greek culture? Did they become slowly 'Hellenised'? Did they remain the way they always had been? A mix?

Guaporense

That depends on the region. In Anatolia and Syria, Hellenic culture advanced to the greatest extent, in Anatolia, Hellenic culture was actually spreading before the Macedonian conquests, by Roman times it was fully hellenized.

In Palestine they were nearly replacing the local gods with Hellenic gods by ca. 180 BC, when a violent revolt erupted.

In the regions near India, however, Hellenization was more superficial and restricted to the few Hellenic cities established in these regions, such as Ai-Khanoum.

Overall, the degree of Hellenization can be probably mapped by the foundings of cities, the areas with the densest clusters of Hellenic cities were the Levant north of Palestine and Anatolia:

MinoanGoddess

After the death of Alexander the Great in the afternoon of 11 June 323 BCE, his empire was divided by his generals, the Diadochi. One of them was his friend Seleucus, who became king of the eastern provinces - more or less modern Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, together with parts of Turkey, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. His kingdom was to have two capitals, which were founded in c.300: Antioch in Syria and Seleucia in Mesopotamia. Babylon and Seleucia in Pieria were other important cities.

The Seleucid Empire (Syria)

MinoanGoddess

"So why is there so little information on the Seleucids?" There is actually a lot of information available. It is under "Hellenistic Near East"


Erotes on the Euphrates: A Figured Frieze in a Private House at Hellenistic Jebel Khalid on the Euphrates

MinoanGoddess

The Seleucid presence in Mesopotamia and the interaction with local societies has long been a subject of interest among archaeologists and ancient historians. Opinions have leaned towards different degrees of co-existence between Greco-Macedonian settlers and local Babylonians in the cities of Hellenistic Mesopotamia.The numerous written records of Roman authors travelling in the region centuries after the Seleucid conquest form an important argument for this view. The impression left by these authors is that of a Mesopotamia populated by a variety of different peoples, often a mixture of Mesopotamians, Jews, Syrians, Greeks and others.However, the shifting focus in the wake of post-colonialism from the bipolarity of inherenting concepts such as ‘hellenisation’ towards acknowledging the ‘middle-ground’, has fostered the birth of concepts such as hybridism and cross-cultural interaction amongst several others.
In recent Mesopotamian studies the focus has been on therather than the separationof settlers and the indigenous community. Investigations and re-investigations of archaeological material such as terracotta figurines and ceramic wares from the cities of both Babylon and Uruk have recently formed the basis for challenges to the notion of ethnics segregation.
The investigation forms the background for a development of her model called ‘the social networks model’. Essentially, it is a model proposing that the initially distinct Greek and Babylonian groups of the society over time mixed and dissolved into groups of social class, age, gender and profession each containing both ethnicities. A ‘hybridsociety’ had formed.

Cultural interaction and the emergence of hybrids in the material culture of hellenistic Mesopotamia: An interpretation of terracotta figurines, ceramic ware and seal impressions. (Sidsel Maria Westh-Hansen) - Academia.edu

gaius valerius

It's important to also point out the various semi-independant temple-states that adorned the Seleucid territory and who's autonomy was never encroached on - yes, even promoted - by the Seleucids.

laketahoejwb

I am just a biginner studying the Seleucid's but on threir religion, i offer this:


http://www.cephas-library.com/catholic_race_change_pt_3.html

One feature of Seleucid rule was the resurrection of Babylonia, whose ancient culture was to the Seleucids what that of Egypt was to the Ptolemies. Cuneiform literature revived (under Persian rule the art had decayed); besides scientific astronomical work and business documents, chronicles of current events were written, and myths were versified. Rituals, incantations, and omen literature were frequently copied and studied, as were Sumerian hymns and their Babylonian translations. . . . The last cuneiform document extant dates from 7 B.C. This activity points to a RELIGIOUS REVIVAL, which was fostered by the early kings. Antiochus I carried to completion Alexander’s project of restoring Bel’s temple at Babylon which Xerxes had destroyed. He re-founded Nebo’s temple at Borsippa, while Bel’s priest Berossus dedicated to him (Antiochus) his work on Babylonian history. Under Seleucus a priest of Uruk, possibly at his request, found at Susa and copied the old ritual of the gods at Uruk, whose worship was re-established. The temple of Anu at Uruk was restored in 182 B. C. under Seleucus IV. The priests of Uruk also collected a temple library. Mr. Sidney Smith has suggested to me [Dr. Tarn] that the Seleucids favoured Babylonian religion as a bulwark against Zoroasterianism (ibid., pp. 118, 119).

Lake

Nikator

The Seleucid Empire was an incredibly broad one and the processes at work in it weren't half as clear (nor are they half as understood) as those that happened in the Problematic Empire (although again, that's actually variable, depending on whether you are just talking about Egypt or the Levant, Cyprus, southern Anatolian coast and parts of the Aegean). The reason so much less is known is because a) it's less studied for a myriad of academic reasons (other topics looked more interesting, accessing the countries over which it held domain etc.) and b) because the papyrological evidence that is so plentiful and informative in Egypt doesn't exist in the Seleucid Empire, yes there are records from Babylonia but these aren't as extensive and they only represent a fraction of an empire that stretched from Anatolia to Iran - in places like Iran there wasn't a written tradition at all.

In regards to your question the traditional religions and customs lived on but they did evolve and change according to the degree of Hellenic influence as Guaporense pointed out and this varied on the amount of settlement of Greeks and Macedonians who settled there. In places like the Levant, Syria and Anatolia there was quite a high degree of Hellenisation that went on and local cults changed and new ones were introduced. Elsewhere, like Iran where there was far less Greek settlement the amount of Hellenisation was far less. For an example of where the whole process of Hellenisation going horribly wrong one only has to look at the Books of Maccabees whereby Antiochus IV caused the Jews to revolt by banning their religion and trying to institute Greek cults. His father Antiochus III died while sacking a temple in Elymais in Iran (though he had no problem with the Jews). This shows how differently different a single religious group was treated by two rulers, which I think makes it clear how complex religion in the Seleucid period of the Near East was.