metaphysical purposes.^76 Stronach and Zournatzi have argued that the
point of Thucydides’contrast between Thracian and Persian practices of
gift-giving (2.97.3–4) was motivated by contemporary war-time pre-
occupations with Persian money (during the later part of the Pelopon-
nesian War), rather than being an intended ethnographic comment. At
any rate, Xenophon adds an important gloss to Thucydides’statement
about Thracian gift-giving:‘Then one Gnesippos, an Athenian, arose and
said that it was an ancient and most excellent custom that those who had
possessions should give them to the king for honour’s sake, and that
to those who had nought, the king should give,“that so”, he continued,
“I too may be able to bestow gifts upon you and do you honour”.^77
We are entitled to conclude, on the basis of these different perspectives,
that current research on Persian administrative archives suggests that we
have even less reason than may previously have been thought to imagine
an Achaemenid administrative area, a‘satrapy’on the European side of
the Bosporus; that comparisons between Persian and Thracian adminis-
trative practice seem to have little substance, beyond broad regional
and general structural resemblance; and that categorical claims about
the ways in which rulers (Macedonian as well as Thracian) exercised
power over their subjects are not substantiated. Royal powers were
qualified in various ways—by social practice, as well as by traditional
loyalties. What is more, analyses of social relations have tended to
underestimate how the intensification of commercial interactions modi-
fied social practice, as the region became increasingly more accessible to
a wider range of interest groups.
THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF REGIONAL TRADE
SaltThe infrastructure of trade relies on a substructure of subsistence and
social practice. One of the most fundamental products that needed to be
brought inland was salt. Under the peace terms negotiated by Aemilius
Paullus, salt was banned as an import to Macedonia, although the
(^76) Zournatzi 2000, 693–8, admits (695) that the common feature is the inscription of
ownership; Archibald 1998, 318–35, App. 2; cf. SEG 47.1061, with several alternative,
metaphysical interpretations of inscriptions from Duvanli, including ̃̃ ̧ ̄Ì ̄ äA
äܺå ìå=‘earth protect me’.
(^77) Xen.Anab. 7.3.28 (tr. Stronk); Stronach and Zournatzi 2002; Miller 2010, 870–2; 874–8;
Aperghis 1999 on Persian storehouses.
222 Regionalism and regional economies