@inproceedings{Stronach_Zournatzi_2002, title={Odrysian and Achaemenid tribute: some new perspectives}, volume={I}, archiveLocation={Τομέας Ελληνικής και Ρωμαϊκής Αρχαιότητας - Επιστημονικό έργο}, url={https://hdl.handle.net/10442/16843}, abstractNote={In a passage that immediately follows his account of the tribute which the Odrysian rulers required of their subjects, and wherein it is stated that this tribute regularly consisted of roughly equal amounts of tax (phoros) and gifts (dora), Thucydides (2.97) draws a direct comparison between the Odrysian and Achaemenid attitudes to gifts. He asserts that, in contrast to Persian royal practice, the Odrysian kings had established a usage, which was also current among the other Thracians, namely, to receive rather than give, and that they (the Odrysae) carried this custom to such great lengths that it was impossible to accomplish anything if one did not offer them gifts. Our study juxtaposes the comment of Thucydides with, among others: 1) the testimony of Herodotus (3.89.3) that gifts accounted for the entire – presumably far from negligible – imperial revenues of Cyrus the Great and his successor Cambyses and 2) the view, which is widely espoused today, that the offering of (probably obligatory) gifts to the Persian monarch from his subjects is the central theme of the main pictorial expression of Achaemenid imperial rule in the reliefs which adorn the socle of the Apadana at Persepolis. Such comparisons lead to the conclusion that Thucydides 2.97 conveys only “partial truths” about the respective approaches to gifts in the Odrysian and Persian kingdoms. Accordingly, this study proposes that Thucydides’ comment was influenced by the different nature of Athens’ diplomatic relations at the time with the Odrysian and the Persian dynasts, respectively.}, publisher={International Foundation Europa Antiqua}, author={Stronach, David B. and Zournatzi, Antigoni}, editor={Fol, AlexanderEditor}, year={2002}, pages={333–343} }