The Hellenistic period was influenced more by the cities than by the kings who ruled those cities. In the beginning it was in favor of the kings, however things changed as time passed. From the public inscriptions present in the city agora we know that transactions of this type took place between the two parties. Cities provided legitimacy and favor to the king, as well as troops and resources later in patronage. In exchange the king would provide financial relief and ownership of the debt. Hellenistic cities also exercised their power more prominently during the period of decline of the kingdoms, as seen in the Maccabees, in which the Seleucids unable to maintain power over Judea were expelled. Related to that factor was the ability of cities to dictate who would be customers. It seems that the cities had to some extent the ability to choose who best served their interests between the Diadochi and Rome where they were chosen, or Rome was called upon to mediate. The use of ruler cults by successor states was also a defining tool of the Hellenistic period. Again, as a source of legitimacy that cities can sustain or as a means of determining loyalty to different factions. However, it was also used against rulers as the Athenians many demolished the Antigonid cult when their favor was not beneficial to the city. The cults also had the effect of writing into their poems of praise the expectations of the king's duty to the city. Therefore, it could be said that the cities of the Hellenistic period exerted a greater influence on how the events of the Hellenistic period were conducted more noticeably as successor states began to lose power. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The relationship between cities and kings appears to work on a transaction-like basis, in which the city obtains exemption from tribute and payment of debts from rival dynasties. In exchange the king obtains the prestige of the cult of the sovereign and consequently the approval of his kingship. These enrollments appear to demonstrate a short-term benefit to cities as they gain immediate tax relief. However, they would later be required to provide resources to the king on a long-term basis. Yet, as shown in the Theos inscription concerning Antiochus (Austin, 2006, p. 344) there is a sense of triumph in these transactions through the translated lines “thus giving an example to all Greeks of how he treats those who are his benefactors...". The line can be interpreted in two ways: that of persuading other cities to accept the patronage of their benefactors since they will receive these exemptions. In this case the cities would passively advertise the king and thus show the influence that the cities had in defining the territories of the Hellenistic era. Likewise, it could be a demonstration of the city's prestige where the king had to provide such profits to be worthy of the city's approval. Indeed, Tan (2019) believes that these inscriptions were used as a measure of the value of a city that a king had to pay as poleis used such inscriptions to compare and bargain with the king. Therefore, cities later assimilated into the Seleucid empire would measure the benefits gained from Teos and require a greater reward to consider joining the kingdom. Thus, the inscriptions serve as evidence in favor of the cities having greater power over the kings. Thus, from both perspectives, cities effectively exercised power over kings in defining the progress of the Hellenistic era. The power of cities is also worth mentioning. Later, inHellenistic period, when the strength of the successors was significantly weakened, the cities were more likely to seek independence. It is notable that rebellions were common during the Hellenistic period and some were more successful than others, as in the case of the Bactrian Kingdom. In the case of Jerusalem, the city bordered Ptolemaic Egypt and the Seleucids. One of the tales of the Maccabees speaks of Jerusalem gathering 6,000 soldiers to fight the various Seleucid armies with a force of over 20,000. The Seleucid army suffered enormous losses despite its numerical advantage and was forced to cede religious control to the Jews during the first conflict. Ignoring the veracity of the numbers, this demonstrates the power of the cities in their ability to exercise dominion over the surrounding region and negotiate with their patron kingdom. The Seleucids, despite their numerically superior armies, were unable to quell this rebellion and so had to first reduce their influence within the region and then be expelled from the city. This can be seen as demonstrating the idea that cities have a greater influence on the course of Hellenistic progress towards the end. Therefore, the influence of the kings deteriorated in favor of the cities as time passed. Another factor towards the strengthening of the cities in the Hellenistic age in favor of the kings was the presence of the Romans. The Romans were a patron in the Mediterranean world but one of the most in favor of autonomy. Their permitted presence on cities places greater demands on successor states in the deal, such as Teos inscription. It is assumed that the Romans were not patrons, as relations between kings and cities were, but allies. This is seen in 1 Maccabees 8, where the Jews offered the Romans a defense treaty. They accepted these terms and thus the city was a “friend and ally” of Rome despite the difference in power. Even cities not affiliated with the Romans benefited from their presence. If they didn't like a king, the polis had the means to contact the Romans to force the successors into a disadvantageous position. This shows that the polis had the means to exert pressure on its supposed patrons through the presence of a third party, the Romans. Therefore, the cities of the Hellenistic period had greater influence than the kings due to the presence of the Romans who supported their interests. Rulers worshiped and sang poems that would usually be defined as the successor king's influence on the Hellenistic period and cities could be subverted by the poleis to advance their agenda. Ruler cults were transitory aspects of a city's culture; they continued to worship the king only to the extent that it was advantageous. Such a case occurred in Athens with the abolition of the cult of the ruler of Philip V and that of his ancestors when his actions were not in the interests of Athens. This occurred during the Macedonian Wars which saw Athens ultimately supporting the Romans in the fight against the Macedonians. Their removal of the cult meant the abolition of their allegiance to the Antigonids. So, in this sense, the cults of rulers who idolized kings were controlled by cities who chose whether they were worthy of worship or not. Thus, the cities had control of the Hellenistic aspect of the rulers' cults as opposed to the rulers who theoretically own the cult. Likewise, poems of praise were used by citizens as a means of controlling their patron rather than the other way around. The poems in venerating kings as divine figures set forth their expectations for them. They were held to the standard of the gods and were therefore expected to bring prosperity and security to the city. As shown in Demetrius Poliorketes's poem of praise, the king was compared to a living god. His divinity, as Chaniotis (2003, p. 344) states,..