The practice by which the king associated a son with himself, as secondary king, dates from the very beginning of the kingdom of the successors; Antigonus on assuming the diadem in 3o6 caused Demetrius also to bear the title of king. In the Seleucid kingdom the territorial expanse of the realm made the creation of a distinct subordinate government for part of it a measure of practical convenience. The king's government was carried on by officials appointed by him and responsible to him alone. Govern ment at the same time, as an oriental despotism understands it, of ten has little in view but the gathering in of the tribute and compulsion of the subjects to personal service in the army or in royal works, and if satisfied in these respects will leave much independence to the local authorities. In the loosely-knit Seleucid realm it is plain that a great deal more independence was left to the various communities—cities or native tribes—than in Egypt, where the conditions made a bureaucratic system so easy to carry through. In their outlying possessions the Ptolemies may have suffered as much local independence as the Seleucids ; the internal government of Jerusalem, for instance, was left to the high priests. In so far as the older Greek cities fell within their sphere of power, the successors of Alexander were forced to the same ambiguous policy as Alexander had been, between recognizing the cities' unabated claim to sovereign independence and the necessity of attaching them securely. In Asia Minor, the "enslavement" and liberation of cities alternated with the circumstances of the hour, while the kings all through professed themselves the champions of Hellenic freedom, and were ready on occasion to display munificence toward the city temples or in public works, such as might reconcile republicans to a position of dependence. Antiochus III. went so far as to write on one occasion to the subject Greek cities that if any royal mandate clashed with the civic laws it was to be disregarded. How anxious the Pergamene kings, with their ardent Hellenism, were to avoid offence is shown by the elaborate forms by which, in their own capital, they sought to give their real control the appearance of popular freedom. A similar problem confronted the Antigonid dynasty in the cities of Greece itself, for to maintain a predominant influence in Greece was a ground-principle of their policy. Demetrius had presented himself in 307 as the liberator, and driven the Macedonian garri son from the Peiraeus ; but his own garrisons held Athens thirteen years later, when he was king of Macedonia, and the Antigonid dynasty clung to the points of vantage in Greece, especially Chal cis and Corinth, till their garrisons were finally expelled by the Romans in the name of Hellenic liberty.
man times was mainly in the hands of Arabians or Indians; between Alexandria and Yemen it was carried by Greeks. The west coast of the Red sea was dotted with commercial stations of royal foundation from Arsinoe north of Suez to Arsinoe in the south near the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb. From Berenice on the Red sea a land-route struck across to the Nile at Coptos ; this route the kings furnished with watering stations. That there might also be a waterway between Alexandria and the Red sea, they cut a canal between the Delta and the northern Arsinoe. It was Alexandria into which this stream of traffic poured and made it the commercial metropolis of the world. We hear of direct dip lomatic intercourse between the courts of Alexandria and Pat aliputra, i.e., Patna. An alternative route went from the Indian ports to the Persian gulf, and thence found the Mediterranean by caravan across Arabia from the country of Gerrha to Gaza; and to control it was no doubt a motive in the long struggle of the Ptolemaic and Seleucid houses for Palestine, as well as in the attempt of Antiochus III. to subjugate the Gerrheans. Or from the Persian gulf wares might be taken up the Euphrates and car ried across to Antioch; this route lay altogether in the Seleucid sphere. With Iran Antioch was connected most directly by the road which crossed the Euphrates at the Zeugma and went through Edessa and Antioch-Nisibis to the Tigris. The trade from India which went down the Oxus and then to the Caspian does not seem to have been considerable. From Antioch to the Aegean the land high-road went across Asia Minor by the Cilician gates and the Phrygian Apamea.
Finance.—Of the financial organization of the Macedonian kingdoms we know practically nothing, except the case of Egypt. Here the papyri and ostraca have put a large material at our dis posal; but the circumstances in Egypt' were too peculiar for us to generalize upon these data as to the Seleucid and Antigonid realms. That the Seleucid kings drew in a principal part of their revenues from tribute levied upon the various native races, distributed in their village communities as tillers of the soil goes without saying. In districts left in the hands of native chiefs these chiefs would themselves exploit their villages and pay the Seleucid court tribute. To exact tribute from Greek cities was invidious, but Seleucid kings often did so. Sometimes, no doubt, this tribute was demanded under a fairer name, as the contribution of an ally, like the TaXarix& levied by Antiochus I. The royal domains, again, and royal monopolies, such as salt-mines, were a source of revenue. As to indirect taxes, like customs and harbour dues, while their existence is a matter of course, their scale, nature and amount is quite unknown to us. Whatever the financial system of the Antigonid and Seleucid kingdoms may have been, it is clear that they were far from enjoying the affluence of the Ptolemaic. During the first Seleucid reigns indeed the revenues of Asia may have filled its treasuries, but Antiochus III. already at his acces sion found them depleted, and from his reign financial embarrass ment, coupled with extravagant expenditure, was here the usual condition of things. Perseus, the last of the Antigonid house, amassed a substantial treasure for the expenses of the supreme struggle with Rome, but it was by means of almost miserly econ omies.