STATE OF MACEDONIA AND CHALKIDIKE. 45 the siege of Syracuse), we have heard nothing either of the kings of Macedonia, or of the Chalkidic Grecian cities in the peninsula of Thrace adjoining Macedonia. Down to that year, Athens still retained a portion of her maritime empire in those regions. The Plataeans were still in possession of Skijne (on the isthmus of Pal lene) which she had assigned to them ; while the Athenian admi- ral Euetion, seconded by many hired Thracians, and even by Per dikkas king of Macedonia, undertook a fruitless siege to reconquer Amphipolis on the Strymon. 1 But the fatal disaster at Syracuse having disabled Athens from maintaining such distant interests, they were lost to her along with her remaining empire, perhaps earlier ; though we do not know how. At the same time, during the last years of the Peloponnesian war, the kingdom of Mace- donia greatly increased in power ; partly, we may conceive, from the helpless condition of Athens, but still more from the abili- ties and energy of Archelaus, son and successor of Perdikkas. The course of succession among the Macedonian princes seems not to have been settled, so that disputes and bloodshed took place at the death of several of them. Moreover, there were distinct tribes of Macedonians, who, though forming part, really or nomi- nally, of the dominion of the Temenid princes, nevertheless were immediately subject to separate but subordinate princes of their own. The reign of Perdikkas had been troubled in this manner. In the first instance, he had stripped his own brother Alketas of the crown, 2 who appears (so far as we can make out) to have had 1 Thucyd. vii, 9. 8 This is attested by Plato, Gorgias, c. 26. p. 471 A. . . . /Of ye (Archelaus son of Perdikkas) npurov plv TOVTOV avrbv rbv deaTroTTjv Kal fielov (Alketas) /jteraTre/Atyu/zevof, <jf uiroduauv rt/v up- XTJV rjv TLepdiKKctf aiirbv a<j> eihero, etc. This statement of Plato, that Perdikkas expelled his brother Alketas from the throne, appears not to be adverted to by the commentators. Perhaps it may help to explain the chronological embarrassments connected with the reign of Perdikkas, the years of which are assigned by different authors, as 23, 28, 35, 40, 41. See Mr. Clinton, Fasti Hellen. ch. iv, p. 222 where he discasscs the chronology of the Macedonian kings : also Krebs, Lection. Di- cdcieffi, p. 159. There are no means of determining when the reign of Perdikkas began nor exactly, when it ended. We know from Thucydides that he was king in 432, and in 414 B. c. But the fact of his acquiring the crown by the ex
