Question on Seleukid govermental practicies

**Pharnakes** · 10-31-2007, 00:16

Could the kind histroians who inhabit this forum, please explain to me in slightly more detail how the Seleukid practice of having two capitals worked, and who was ussualy selected to rule in them? ie, was it the king and his heir, or what?

Any and all information/opinions would be greatly appreciated, as would suggestion of books/articles/websites on the matter.

Thank you

**abou** · 10-31-2007, 01:41

Information on the dual kingship of the Seleukids is sparse and therefore tricky. Generally, the junior king (in our case, the heir) would be the son of the senior king and rule the east.

Antiochos I as heir to Seleukos I ruled from Baktria. It seems that sometime after when Seleukos I died and Antiochos I came to power, the junior king ruled from Ekbatana in Media instead of Baktria. We see this in the Usurper Molon who ruled as Satrap of Media and Viceroy of the Upper Satrapies.

The senior king, as you can imagine, ruled the west. This was not because of a certain favoritism, but more because the main rivals of the Seleukids were, of course, in the west. Initially it seems that Seleukeia was the seat of power, both in the west and in general, but with its temporary capture by Ptolemaios III in the 3rd Syrian War the emphasis then changed to Antiocheia. Although, to be entirely honest, I can't speak with 100% certainty on that and it seems to have been a decision that was up in the air until the capture of Seleukeia.

For sources there is a particular book listed in the bibliography sticky, but good luck finding it as it is extremely rare. If you have access to JSTOR you might find some good articles there.

**Pharnakes** · 10-31-2007, 09:35

Thanks very much Abou, I just needed the basics, really, the details can be worked out later.

Incedentaly, has the EB team ever made plans to implement this into EB? Or is there some major reason why it won't work? (If there is I would like to no before I waste too much of my time on it

)

Thanks you

**Pharnakes** · 11-01-2007, 12:50

More questions, you say the western capital would be either Antiocheia or Seleukeia, and the east in the timeframe was ruled from Ekabatana. I assume that the king would not spend all of his time in his capital, but would go on tour through his satrapies?

Also is anything know of the coronation cermonies, ie. where di they occur, was the ling of the east crowned in Seleukia, and then sent to the east, or did he officaly take the control of the eastern satrapies when he reached Ekbatana?

**Pharnakes** · 11-02-2007, 18:28

Bump.

**abou** · 11-02-2007, 19:53

Originally Posted by Pharnakes

More questions, you say the western capital would be either Antiocheia or Seleukeia, and the east in the timeframe was ruled from Ekabatana. I assume that the king would not spend all of his time in his capital, but would go on tour through his satrapies?

Yes, you could assume that. That and campaigning.

Also is anything know of the coronation cermonies, ie. where di they occur, was the ling of the east crowned in Seleukia, and then sent to the east, or did he officaly take the control of the eastern satrapies when he reached Ekbatana?

Not that I know of.

**Pharnakes** · 11-02-2007, 21:34

Thanks for that. Also if it is not too much to ask, would it be alright if I asked you to validate (in terms of histroical accuracy) a few ideas I have on this, but which the team would like to keep secret for the moment. Prehaps in return for this favour, you could use the idea in eb, if you think it of sufficent merit?