Some unpublished coins of eastern dynasts

Newell, Edward Theodore, 1886-1941
Numismatic Notes and Monographs
American Numismatic Society
New York
Worldcat Works




Open access edition funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities/Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book Program.


Table of Contents




by Edward T. Newell

From among some recent accessions to the writer’s cabinet, the following coins have been selected for immediate publication. They appear to represent hitherto unknown varieties and, therefore, offer a certain amount of interest to students and collectors.


Melekiathon (?)

Second reign, circa 386–361 B.C.

1 Bearded Heracles, nude except for lion’s skin hanging from his shoulders, advancing to r., holding in outstretched l. a bow, and brandishing in raised r. a club.

Rev. Lion to r., its head facing with jaws open. Above, globular object and the faint traces of an inscription. Dies: ↑. Persic stater. Gr. 10. 48.

The attribution of this interesting coin to Melekiathon of Citium is proposed with a certain amount of hesitancy. The fabric of the coin appears to be certainly Cypriote. This being the case, the obverse type of the fighting Heracles at once suggests Citium as the probable mint. The reverse type, on the other hand, so far as the actual attitude of the lion goes, is entirely new for Citium. In point of fact, the lion is not represented in quite this manner on any other known coin of Cyprus. Instead of the half lion or couched attitude assumed by this beast on the coins of Amathus, 1 or his being seated, as on the coins of Baalmelek I of Citium, 2 or prowling, as on the coins of Salamis, 3 or devouring his prey, 4 the king of beasts on our coin, has apparently come to a sudden stop. A snarl seems to be issuing from his half open jaws as his head swings round to face some unexpected noise or sudden danger. Distinctly Greek is this masterly conception of a startled lion; and even the worn condition of the die is unable to destroy the spirited and arresting effect produced by the entire design.

Greek, too, are the details of the Heracles figure as compared with all the similar productions, except one, of the Citian mint. On them, the design and execution are distinctly influenced by the oriental art of Phoenicia and the Persian Empire. Heracles is depicted in the stiff, angular style of the ancient Orient, great attention being paid to detail and but little to realism. Particularly is this noticeable in the manner with which he strides along planting his weight evenly upon both his feet. On the other hand, the new coin reminds us at once of the ephemeral issues in Citium of the Athenian Demonicus. 5 As on these, so, too, our Heracles does not wear the lion’s skin over his head but hanging from the shoulders and retained by the two front paws tied about his neck. According to the dictates of a more realistic style, the upper portion of Heracles' body is thrust forward as he rushes with uplifted club to meet his foe. His entire weight rests upon his advanced left foot, the right serving merely to propel him forward. So similar is our coin in this to the rare issues of Demonicus, that the writer was at one time somewhat inclined to assign his piece to that shadowy ruler. But there exist several deterring reasons. In the first place, there is the reverse type. While the standing Athena is a very natural design for the Athenian Demonicus to have chosen, the lion savours more of the local dynasty which was of eastern origin, and so appears, in one form or another, on all of their coins right down to the final extinction of the autonomous city state by Ptolemy I of Egypt. Furthermore, the worn condition of the reverse die suggests long continued use. Even the obverse die shows a distinct fracture running between the chin of Heracles and his breast. Now, what little we know (or, rather, can surmise) of Demonicus' career in Cyprus, 6 would seem to show that he could have ruled there but a very short time—certainly not more than a year, at most. And this would seem to be too brief a period of time for the appearance of coins with both the Athena and the lion types.

As stated before, the lion is more closely associated with the local Citian dynasts who were of Semitic origin. The first to strike coins, Baalmelek I, chose for a type the seated lion, 7 while all of his Semitic successors adopted the lion and stag type. It was the foreigner, Demonicus, who first replaced the lion type with another. 8 The Heracles figure, being in this guise rather more that of the Hellenic hero than of the Phoenician Melkarth, is retained, though now it is represented in the pure Greek style and not in the Cypriote. The Heracles on our coin appears to be a direct copy of the one on Demonicus’ issue. Style, technique, attitude and details (except for the club which is held horizontally instead of upright) are absolutely identical. For this reason the coin falls naturally into the first years of Melekiathon’s second reign, immediately after the overthrow of Demonicus, the Athenian adventurer and usurper—the natural supposition being that the latter’s Greek die-cutter continued to work for the rightful ruler of Citium after his restoration. He continues to employ the Greek manner instead of the Cypriote, but in the position of the club in Heracles’ hand he assimilates his design more closely to the issues immediately preceding the rise of Demonicus to power.

The assignment of our coin on grounds of style to the first years of Melekiathon’s second reign is supported by comparing the Heracles figure to that found on the gold half darics of both Melekiathon and his successor Pumiathon. 9 On these the lion’s skin, instead of falling from the shoulders as heretofore, is invariably draped over the outstretched left arm of Heracles. Furthermore, the lion’s skin again covers the hero’s head, which has not been the case 10 since the reign of Baalmelek I.

Absolute certainty as to the attribution can hardly be attained until a specimen from a sharp reverse die will have enabled us to read the inscription. Any discussion of this inscription at the present time would be worse than useless. While faint traces of some letters may still be distinguished above the lion’s back, the legend itself remains quite indecipherable.



373—circa 361 b.c.

2 Facing bust of the Cypriote Aphrodite wearing a turreted crown, the whole in dotted circle.

Reverse. Forepart of Pegasus to r. Below: image (Ba Ni). On r., NI. The whole in a dotted circle.

Dies: ↑. Wt. 3.39 g r. From the collection of Col. Allotte de la Fuÿe, No. 682.

On this coin we have a most unusual representation of the divinity, supposed to be the Cypriote Aphrodite, who appears so frequently—but in profile—on the gold and silver coinages of Nicocles, Euagoras II, Pnytagoras, and Nicocreon of Salamis. So far as the writer is aware, this is the first known occurrence of the facing type of the goddess. We should compare it with the facing Heracles’ head on the gold quarter stater of Euagoras I, the predecessor of Nicocles, 11 or the facing satrap’s head on certain silver obols assigned by Babelon 12 to Euagoras II, or, finally, with the facing head of the Paphian Aphrodite on a beautiful little sixth of a stater 13 usually given to Nicocles of Paphos. Even more unusual for Cyprus, is the reverse type of the winged horse which appears to occur on no other known coin of the island. The type itself is probably borrowed from the common little silver fourth-century obols of Celenderis 14 or from the obol of uncertain mintage but assigned to Cilicia by Mr. Hill. 15

As the inscription reads only Ba Ni in Cypriote characters and NI in Greek characters, the coin may be attributed to either Nicocles (373-361 b.c.) or Nicocreon (331-310 b.c.). The style, however, is excellent and the earlier of the two kings is therefore to be preferred. Furthermore, an assignment to Nicocreon is strongly refuted by both style and fabric. The coin is struck on a thin and well formed planchet, while the common bronze coins bearing Alexandrine types which must be given 16 to Nicocreon’s reign are struck on thick, dumpy flans of somewhat clumsy manufacture. Their style, too is later and much more summary than that of the present coin.


Uncertain Ruler, Pu ….

3 Lion, with open jaws, lying to 1. Above, ornament (?) of uncertain form. In the exergue, traces of an inscription (?). The whole is surrounded by a circle of fine dots.

Reverse. The Cypriote sign Pu in the dotted ring of an Ankh. Outlines of ivy leaves fill the four corners of the surrounding dotted square, the whole is contained in a shallow incuse square. Persic stater. Wt. Gr. 10.72. Dies:↘.

This coin was purchased by the writer in December, 1924, in Cairo, Egypt. With it there were three or four staters of Baalmelek I (479-449 b.c.) and of Azbaal (449-425 b.c.) of Citium, the entire lot being claimed by its owner to have come recently from Cyprus. There was every indication present that these coins had been found together. Further particulars concerning this probable hoard are unknown.

By its types the coin described above is more or less closely associated with the stater in the British Museum 17 formerly assigned to Soli 18 but later given by Six 19 to Golgi. Mr. Hill follows a safer course in placing the coin among the uncertain. 20 Babelon 21 remains undecided between Golgi and Soli. The new coin varies from the British Museum specimen in representing the lion as lying to the left instead of crouching to the right. The style is also somewhat later, especially noticeable in the incuse square which is shallower and slightly larger. Important is the Cypriote sign Pu, contained in the Ankh, as this at least gives us the first letter of the king’s name who once caused our coin to be struck. The four ivy leaves in outline, in the four corners of the surrounding dotted square, are reminiscent of a similar symbol on certain staters of Idalium from the middle of the fifth century b.c. 22 and even more so of a like symbol on certain staters of Paphos dated circa 460 b.c. 23 The general style and appearance of our coin is very like that of these Paphian staters. Interestingly enough, too, these staters are likewise inscribed with the Cypriote signs Pu and Pu-nu (for Pnutos or Pnytagoras ?), As the types forbid the attribution of our stater to Paphos, we would suggest its assignment to Soli, situated just across the mountains from Paphos to the North. In support of this, attention should be called to an inscription actually found at Soli which mentions the name of a certain Πνυτέλλας son of Πνυταγόρας. 24 Whether one or both of these persons were ever rulers of Soli may well be questioned, but at least we have definite evidence of persons of a certain amount of importance at Soli bearing names commencing with the same letter as appears on our coin. Another solution would be to suppose that the dynast who places the sign Pu upon his Paphian coins also ruled at one time in Soli. Both M. Babelon and Mr. Hill place his reign at about 460 b.c. This fits in well, not only with the general style of our stater, but also with the fact that it seems to have been found in company with certain coins of Citium struck by two kings whose reigns cover the years 479 to 425 b.c.


Kings of Byblus

Early Fifth Century b.c.

4 Sphinx, wearing the crown (the Pshent) of Upper and Lower Egypt, reclining to 1.

Reverse. Conventional thunderbolt in a dotted circle, the whole contained in an incuse square. Persic stater. Gr. 8.80. Dies: ↑.

5 Similar types. Third of a Persic stater (tetrobol).

Gr. 2.75. Dies:↖.

6–7 Similar types. Obols. Gr. 0.61 and 0.60.

Dies: ↑. and ↖.

8-10 Similar types. Hemi-obols. Gr. 0.38, 0.34, 0.27. Dies: ↗, ↑. and ↖.

The interesting little group described above once formed part of the splendid collection of Phoenician coins gathered together during his long residence at Beyrout by Dr. Jules Rouvier. The two larger coins (Nos. 4 and 5) are still unpublished as they were only acquired by the learned Doctor after the appearance of his well known 'Monnaies des Villes de la Phénicie' in the Jour. Internationale d'Archéologie Numismatique, Vols. II—VII, 1899-1904. To the two smaller coins described by Rouvier 25 have been added similar specimens also acquired since the publication of that work. All of these pieces have been found at various times in the ancient port of Byblus. 26 Their attribution to Gebal-Byblus can therefore hardly be questioned. It is furthermore directly supported by the appearance of an Egyptian sphinx as the obverse type.

The long dominion of Egypt over Byblus (Gebal) and its great influence there 27 ever afterwards, are well known and have now been emphasized the more by the remarkable discoveries recently made in the necropolis of the old city. 28 It is therefore not surprising to find a typically Egyptian sphinx adorning the obverses of this the earliest coinage of Gebal. For we certainly see before us no Greek sphinx, made so familiar to us by vase paintings, bas-reliefs, gems, or the coins of Chios or of Idalium. Our sphinx is wingless; it is couched in the Egyptian manner and not seated upon its haunches; it wears the combined crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt, and, finally, it is of masculine gender—at least so far as the smallness of the design and the heavy corrosion of the surfaces will allow us to judge.

The reverse type is quite new. Having at first only two very badly preserved specimens at his disposal, Dr. Rouvier interpreted this design as that of a lion. Instead, now that some larger and better preserved specimens have turned up, we must recognize in it a conventional thunderbolt somewhat in the form of a double fleur-de-lys. Unfortunately ancient oriental art does not offer us any contemporaneous 29 examples of similar form. On the other hand, the thunderbolts occurring on sixth and early fifth century coins of Elis 30 present many suggestive parallels. Also the thunderbolts appearing in later Indian art (and, probably derived from this, those in Chinese 31 and Japanese art as well) have frequently a fleur-de-lys or lotus-like shape. Unless we postulate a Greek origin then, the derivation of the thunderbolt on our Byblite coins remains somewhat of a mystery. Egyptian it certainly is not, as the thunderbolt appears to be unknown on the banks of the Nile. It can therefore have little or no connection with the obverse type of the sphinx. Whatever its origin, 32 the adoption of the thunderbolt for the reverse type probably has some purely local significance, which escapes us.

Not the least curious aspect of this thunderbolt type is the fact that some sixteen hundred years later the identical design of the double fleur-de-lys in a circle of dots should bob up again among the strangely eclectic types found on the coins of the Atabeg rulers in northern Mesopotamia. On Plate II, A, a specimen of the fairly common copper falus of Mu’ izz-ed-din Sinjar-Shah, the Atabeg Emir in El-Jezireh 1180-1208 A.D. is reproduced. That a large proportion of the old designs used on their coins by his contemporaries also go back to numismatic types of preceding peoples and ages, is well known. But this particular coin type of the Emir of Jezireh has remained without a prototype until the sudden appearance in Dr. Rouvier’s collection of the earliest known issues of the great and wealthy city of Gebal. Can it be that a die-cutter in distant Mesopotamia had seen one of these early coins of the Phoenician city and had been struck by the ornamental effectiveness of its reverse type? Or was he merely copying some artistic design or heraldic device with which he was familiar? And is it, then, only due to chance that this should have been so strikingly similar to the early Byblite type?

But to return to the coins themselves. Neither the sphinx nor the thunderbolt ever occur again on the issues of Gebal. They are replaced by more Semitic or Persian designs, such as the Phoenician war-galley, the vulture devouring a ram, or the lion attacking a bull. With a change in types comes also a change in standards. Heretofore the only known coins of Gebal, before the arrival of Alexander the Great, were based on the so-called Phoenician weight standard. In this 33 system the shekel (or didrachm) weighed about grammes 7.15, the half shekel (or drachm) gr. 3.60, the trihemiobol gr. 0.90, the obol gr. 0.60, the hemiobol gr. 0.30. Into this scheme the earliest coins of Gebal described above apparently do not fit as they would thereby be too heavy. Instead, they are obviously of the Persic weight standard, such as was at this time employed by her more northerly neighbor Aradus. According to the Persic standard, 34 the stater weighed gr. 10.60, the shekel (or drachm) gr. 5.30, the third stater (or tetrobol) gr. 3.35, the twelfth stater (or obol) gr. 0.83, the twenty-fourth of a stater (or hemiobol) gr. 0.42. It will be noticed that our coins are very considerably lighter than this norm, but this is unquestionably due to the very serious corrosion from which they have one and all suffered, and to the subsequent necessary cleaning to which they have been subjected. It is interesting to learn, therefore, that, at first, Gebal followed the same monetary standard as its northern neighbor Aradus, but that later, about the middle of the fifth century b.c., it adopted the standard then being used by its-southern neighbor, Sidon.


Tigranes II 35

20-12 (?) b.c.

12 Bust of king to r., slightly bearded and wearing a tall Armenian tiara ending in five long spikes or rays and adorned with an eight-pointed star. The whole is surrounded by a filleted border. Reverse. On r., ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ | ΜΕΓΑΛΟϒ. On l., ΤΙΓΡΑΝΟϒ | ΦΙΛΟΠΑΤΟΡΟΣ | ΚΑΙΦΙΛΕΛΛ- ΗΝΟΣ. Tigranes, bearded, draped in a mantle and wearing a tall tiara standing to l. He holds an uncertain object (two ears of wheat or thunderbolt ? ?) in his outstretched r. and rests his l. on a long sceptre or spear. Drachm. Gr. 3.83 (a small piece has been broken out). Dies: ↑ Purchased from the collection of Prof. Charles C. Torrey.

Hitherto the only 36 known coin of this king was a badly preserved bronze piece in the Paris collection. Like the portrait on that coin, our drachm represents the king as wearing a beard. This peculiarity serves to distinguish him from his namesakes Tigranes I the Great and Tigranes III, whose coins show them both to have been quite beardless. In view of the poor state of preservation of the copper coin in Paris, the present piece is important because it furnishes us with a splendid portrait of this little-known prince.

The coin is interesting also because it gives us the full titles of the king, the Paris specimen reading only Βασιλέως Τιγράνου. Apparently he was forced by his jealous and more powerful neighbors to omit from his coins the grandiloquent title Βασιλεύς Βασιλέων used by his father Artavasdes and his grandfather Tigranes I. He adopted, instead, the Parthian formula of Βασιλεύς Μέγας. To this he added, also more Parthico, the familiar titles of φιλοπάτωρ and φιλέλληνος. His son and successor, Tigranes III, imitated him, except that he omitted the φιλοπάτωρ.

Of the history of this prince we know little beyond the fact that he was a brother of Artaxias II (34–20 b.c.), both being sons of Artavasdes I (56–30 b.c.) of Armenia. He lived as an exile at Rome until, at the request of the Armenians, Augustus in 20 B.C. sent him home with Tiberius instructing the latter to place him upon his ancestral throne. This was accomplished, 37 and he reigned until possibly 38 about 12 B.C.

On the strength of our new coin it would seem desirable to remove from Tigranes III, and assign, instead, to Tigranes II, the copper piece described by Babelon on page 216 No. 28 (Plate xxix, Fig. 19) of his work. This specimen is so badly corroded that the short beard, characteristic of Tigranes II, is not apparent and it was probably for this reason that the coin was given to the third of that name whose portrait on well preserved coins is seen to be beardless. The reverse of the Paris specimen bears a standing figure of the king very similar to the one appearing on our drachm, except that he faces to the right and holds an eagle on his outstretched left. The title φιλέλληνος, which does not occur on any other known coin of Tigranes III, is clearly decipherable and so adds one more reason for recognizing in this piece a bronze issue corresponding with our new drachm.


Ariarathes II

Circa 301-280 b.c.

13 Beardless bust of ruler to l. wearing a tiara of the Cappadocian form. On r., behind the head, ..PAT..

Reverse. Lioness to l. suckling her cub to r. Bronze. Gr. 3.55. Dies: ↓. Originally in the collection of Dr. Pozzi.

This is altogether a very curious coin whose attribution is somewhat uncertain. In fabric and style it is very similar to other coins usually assigned to Cappadocia or the neighboring province of Sophene. The tiara or satrapal bonnet adorning the head is in its form strikingly similar to those affected by contemporary rulers of both of these districts. 39 It is, therefore, to one or the other that our piece should be assigned. Unfortunately the king’s name on the obverse is largely ‘off flan,’ only the three letters P A T remaining. Of all the names which have come down to us as having been borne by the various petty rulers of Cappadocia and Sophene in the Third Century B.C. (the period indicated by the style and fabric of our coin), only the name Ariarathes will fit the three letters still visible.

No less than ten rulers of Cappadocia were named Ariarathes. Of all of these we possess coins, with the exception, possibly, of the eighth whose issues are quite uncertain and possibly never existed. From the third of this name on, every one bears the title of Βασιλεύς, and on his coins is adorned with the royal diadem. Our coin, possessing neither the title nor the diadem, would therefore appear to belong to an earlier period and this would perhaps also account for the unusual manner in which the name is spelled, namely (Άρια) P A T (ου) The later kings, commencing with Ariarathes III, invariably employ the form ΑΡΙΑΡΑΘΟϒ The form APIAPATOϒ, as it appears to be on our specimen, would be an unusual but quite possible rendering of the Aramaic image as found on the known issues of Ariarathes I and II. 40 The Aramaic letter teth image in names is almost as frequently rendered by its Greek equivalent tau as it is by theta c. f. image which is given by Greek historians as Πυμιάτος or Πυματος; image which the Greeks transcribed as Βοδόστωρ; on coins we have image and TEIPIBAZOϒ. also image and its equivalent ΤΕΡΣΙ etc. etc.). The form APIAPATOϒ could, therefore, form the transitional stage between the Aramaic image of the earliest Cappadocian coins and the ΑΡΙΑΡΑΘΟϒ of the later issues. This would place our coin, then, either among the earliest issues of Ariarathes III or the latest issues of Ariarathes II. As the latter enjoyed a long reign and as it has hitherto been possible to assign to him only one comparatively insignificant bronze coin, 41 it would seem more plausible to attribute the new variety to him.. In that case, then, the reverse type would also fit well with the scenes drawn from hunting and animal life so favored on their coins by the first three rulers of Cappadocia (cf. the griffin and stag of Ariarathes I, the royal archer and ibex of Ariarathes II, the royal rider, probably also engaged in the chase, of Ariaramnes).

With Ariarathes III Athena is definitely adopted by the Cappadocian kings and remains almost the invariable reverse type until the end of the dynasty. If our proposed attribution be accepted, then we must recognize the fact that it was Ariarathes II who first introduced portraiture on the Cappadocian coinage, and not his son Ariaramnes as hitherto supposed. Our coin thus adds one more portrait to the long series which gives such a human interest to the royal coinages of Asia.

The reverse type of the lioness suckling her young is decidedly novel, not appearing, so far as the present writer is aware, on, any other known coin of the classical age.



End Notes

B. M. C. Cyprus, Plate I, Nos. 1–15.
Ibid, Plate II. Nos. 7–14.
Ibid, Plate XII. Nos. 6–8.
Ibid, Plate XXIV, Nos. 10–11.
Ibid, Plate XIX, Nos. 9–13.
Ibid, Introd. xxxvii ff.; Babelon, Mélanges Numismatiques, II. pp. 71 ff.; Perses Achém, pp. cxxxi ff.; Traité II, pp. 750 ff.
There is an earlier, but uninscribed issue, which has been assigned to Citium (B. M. C. Cyprus, Plate II, 7, and Plate XIX, 1–2). These coins show a couched lion and may be attributed to Baalmelek I or his immediate predecessor.
Hill (B. M. C. Cyprus, p. xxxvi) following Imhoof- Blumer (Monn. Gr. p. 383, No. 101), and Six (Rev. Num. 1883, p. 336, No. 44) assigns a stater with horseman as the obverse type to Melekiathon. Babelon in his Traité does not even mention this coin, and its attribution, at best, is very doubtful.
B. M. C. Cyprus, Plate XIX, No. 6 and Plate IV, Nos. 20–23.
Both M. Babelon and Mr. Hill are mistaken in describing Heracles on the staters of Azbaal (449–425 b.c.), Baalmelek II (425-400 b.c.), Baalram (early fourth century) and Melekiathon (first reign) as wearing the lion’s skin over his head. The lion’s head has fallen off and can clearly be distinguished just below the hero’s right armpit. For this fact, notice particularly B. M. C. Cyprus, Plate III, Nos. 2, 3, 11 and 12.
B. M. C. Cyprus, Plate XI, 13.
Traité IP, Plate CXXVIII, Nos. 23–24.
Ibid, Plate CXXIX, No. 16.
Cf. Babelon, Traité II2, Plate CXL, Nos. 9-15.
B. M. C. Cilicia, Plate XXXII, 10.
‘Some Cypriote Alexanders,’ Num. Chron. 1915, p. 308, Nos. 9–10, Plate XIII. Nos. 12–14.
B. M. C. Cyprus, Plate XIII, No. 5.
Rev. Num., 1883, p. 305, No. 10.
Num. Chron., 1897, p. 210, No. 12.
B. M. C. Cyprus, p. 69, No. 1.
Traité, II1. p. 607.
B. M. C. Cyprus, Nos. 10–19, Plate V, Nos. 9–12.
Ibid, Plate VII, Nos. 4 and 9.
O. Hoffman, Die Griechischen Dialekte, Vol. I, p. 51, No. 88.
Jour. Inter. d'Arch. Num. 1901, p. 38, Nos. 629 and 628.
As the writer was informed by Dr. Rouvier himself. See also Babelon, Traité II2, p. 543, Note 1. The badly corroded surfaces, so typical of silver coins long exposed to the deleterious action of salt water, go far to corroborate this statement.
Cf. Prof. Ed. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums,2 1, 2, pp. xix, 391 ff.; G. F. Hill, B. M. C. Phoenicia, p. lxi.
Les Travaux Archéologiques en Syrie de 1920 a 1922.
Compare, however, certain Hittite seals from the Cappadocian district which bear designs somewhat analagous to the thunderbolt on our Byblite coins (G. Contenau, La Glyptique Syro-Hittite, Plate XI, Nos. 60–62; L. Delaporte, Catalogue des cylindres orientaux du Musée du Louvre, Plate 98, Nos. 13, 14 and 16). These particular seals Contenau places in the first period or about 24001500 B.C. See also Jacobsthal, Der Blitz in der orientalischen und griechischen Kunst, Berlin, 1906.
C. T. Seltman, The Temple Coins of Olympia, Plates I–V.
Cf. Stein: Serindia, Plate LXIV.
Let us hope that the many excavations now being carried on in Syria and Palestine will some day furnish us a clue.
Babelon, Traité, II2, pp. 535–536
Ibid, pp. 509–510.
By some modem historians called Tigranes III.
Babelon, Rois de Syrie etc., p. ccv. has shown that the coins attributed to Tigranes II by Mommsen and by Victor Langlois (Numismatique de l'Arménie dans l'Antiquité, 1859, pp. 36–38, Plate III, 4) must be given, instead, to Tigranes III.
Th. Mommsen, Res Gestae Divi Augusti, p. 112; Boeckh, C. I. G., No. 4040, col. IV, lines 2 and 7.
Due to the complete absence of any information on the subject in our classical sources, no two authorities agree as to the real duration of Tigranes II’s reign. Among the more recent writers Asdourian, Die politischen Bezieh- ungen zwischen Armenien und Rome, Venice 1911, pp. 67-9 and 194, gives Tigranes’ reign as “um 20–19 v. Chr.”; Aslan, Études Historiques sur le Peuple Arménien, Paris, 1909, pp. 114 and 117 places his reign between 20 and 5 B.C.; Dolens and Khatch, Histoire des anciens Arméniens Geneva 1907, calling this king Tigranes II on p. 155 and Tigranes III on p. 226, give as his reign 20–6 B.C. The only fact that is certain is that he commenced to reign about 20 B.C. and that, as Dolens and Khatch state, ibid. p. 155, “Sur le règne de ce Tigrane II nous ne connaissons absolument rien.’’
See Friedlander in Zeitschr. f. Num., IV, 271 (fig.) and VII, 229; Reinach, Trois Royaumes de l'Asie Mineure, pp. 32 ff., Plate I, Nos. 5 ter and 6; Blau, Zeitsch. f. Num,. VII, 37; Imhoof-Blumer, Portraits, p. 42.
Reinach, loc. cit. pp. 26-30
Ibid. No 4.


Pl. I


Pl. II


Numismatic Notes and Monographs

  • Sydney P. Noe. Coin Hoards. 1921. 47 pages. 6 plates. 50c.
  • Howland Wood. The Mexican Revolutionary Coinage, 1913-1916. 1921. 44 pages. 26 plates. $2.00.
  • Agnes Baldwin. Five Roman Gold Medallions. 1921. 103 pages. 8 plates. $1.50.
  • Sydney P. Noe. Medallic Work of A. A. Weinman. 1921. 31 pages. 17 plates. $1.00.
  • David Eugene Smith, LL.D. Computing Jetons. 1921. 70 pages. 25 plates. $1.50.
  • Edward T. Newell. The First Seleucid Coinage of Tyre. 1921. 40 pages. 8 plates. $1.00.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. French Orders and Decorations. 1922. 110 pages. 35 plates. $2.00.
  • Howland Wood. Gold Dollars of 1858. 1922. 7 pages. 2 plates. 50c.
  • R. B. Whitehead. Pre-Mohammedan Coinage of Northwestern India. 1922. 56 pages. 15 plates. $2.00.
  • George F. Hill. Attambelos I of Characene. 1922. 12 pages. 3 plates. $1.00.
  • M. P. Vlasto. Taras Oikistes (A Contribution to Tarentine Numismatics). 1922. 234 pages. 13 plates. $3.50.
  • Howland Wood. Commemorative Coinage of United States. 1922. 63 pages. 7 plates. $1.50.
  • Agnes Baldwin. Six Roman Bronze Medallions. 1923. 39 pages. 6 plates. $1.50.
  • Howland Wood. Tegucigalpa Coinage of 1823. 1923. 16 pages. 2 plates. 50c.
  • Edward T. Newell. Alexander Hoards—II. Demanhur Hoard. 1923. 162 pages. 8 plates. $2.50.
  • Harrold E. Gillingham. Italian Orders of Chivalry and Medals of Honour. 1923. 146 pages. 34 plates. $2.00.
  • Edward T. Newell. Alexander Hoards— III. Andritsaena. 1924. 39 pages. 6 plates. $1.00.
  • C. T. Seltman. A Hoard from Side. 1924. 20 pages. 3 plates. $1.00.
  • R. B. Seager. A Cretan Coin Hoard. 1924. 55 pages. 12 plates. $2.00.
  • S. R. Milbank. The Coinage of Aegina. 66 pages. 5 plates. $2.00.
  • Sydney P. Noe. A Bibliography of Greek Coin Hoards. 1925. 275 pages. $2.50.
  • Edward T. Newell. Mithradates of Parthia and Hyspaosines of Characene. 1925. 18 pages. 2 plates. 50c.
  • Sydney P. Noe. The Mende (Kaliandra) Hoard. 1926. 36 pages. 4 plates. $1.50
  • Agnes Baldwin. Four Medallions from the Arras Hoard. 1926. 36 pages. 4 plates. $1.50.
  • H. Alexander Parsons. The Earliest Coins of Norway. 1926. 41 pages. I plate. 50c.