Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 14
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Polansky, David 2016. Drawing Out the Leviathan: Kenneth Waltz, Hobbes, and the Neorealist Theory of the State. International Studies Review, Vol. 18, Issue. 2, p. 268.

    Serrati, John 2016. The Encyclopedia of Empire.

    Taylor, Michael J. 2014. SACRED PLUNDER AND THE SELEUCID NEAR EAST. Greece and Rome, Vol. 61, Issue. 02, p. 222.

    2014. A Companion to Hellenistic Literature.

    2014. Alexander's Heirs.

    Morton, Peter 2013. EUNUS: THE COWARDLY KING. The Classical Quarterly, Vol. 63, Issue. 01, p. 237.

    Boulay, Thibaut 2012. The Encyclopedia of Ancient History.

    Hannestad, Lise 2012. The Encyclopedia of Ancient History.

    2010. A Companion to Ancient Macedonia.

    De Angelis, Franco De Angelis and Garstad, Benjamin 2006. Euhemerus in Context. Classical Antiquity, Vol. 25, Issue. 2, p. 211.

    Trundle, Matthew 2005. Ancient Greek Mercenaries (664-250 BCE)1. History Compass, Vol. 3, Issue. 1, p. **.

    2005. Titus Quinctius Flamininus.

    Juhel, Pierre 2002. ‘On orderliness with respect to the prizes of war’: the Amphipolis regulation and the management of booty in the army of the last Antigonids. The Annual of the British School at Athens, Vol. 97, p. 401.

    Ando, Clifford 1999. Was Rome a Polis?. Classical Antiquity, Vol. 18, Issue. 1, p. 5.


Hellenistic kings, War, and the Economy1

  • M. M. Austin (a1)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 February 2009

My title links together kings, war, and the economy, and the linkage is deliberate. I do not of course wish to suggest that Hellenistic kings did nothing but fight wars, that they were responsible for all the wars in the period, that royal wars were nothing but a form of economic activity, or that the economy of the kings was dependent purely on the fruits of military success, though there would be an element of truth in all these propositions. But I wish to react against the frequent tendency to separate topics that are related, the tendency to treat notions relating to what kings were or should be as something distinct from what they actually did, and the tendency to treat political and military history on the one hand as something separate from economic and social history on the other.

A number of provisos should be made at the outset. The title promises more than the paper can deliver; in particular, more will be said about kings and war than about kings and the economy. The subject is handled at a probably excessive level of generalization and abstraction. I talk about Hellenistic kings in general, but in practice it would obviously be necessary to draw distinctions between different dynasties, different times and places, and individual rulers, and some of those distinctions I shall indicate. Conclusions are provisional and subject to modification and considerable expansion in detail. Finally, two points of terminology. I use the word ‘Hellenistic’ for no better reason than out of the force of acquired habit, but of course the word and the concept are modern inventions that were unknown to the ancient world.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

F. Millar , ‘Emperors, Frontiers, and Foreign Relations, 31 B.C. to A.D. 378’. Britannia 13 (1982), 123

B. Bar-Kochva , The Seleucid Army (Cambridge, 1976), 85f.

B. Shaw , Past and Present 105 (1984), 4452

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Classical Quarterly
  • ISSN: 0009-8388
  • EISSN: 1471-6844
  • URL: /core/journals/classical-quarterly
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *