For nearly two and one-half centuries, the peculiar silver coins known to ancients and moderns alike as "Cistophori" have been discussed by numismatists and historians without any consensus being achieved as to the time of their introduction. The range of dates suggested spans almost a century (228-133 B.C.). The only common denominator is a universal agreement as to the importance of establishing the date within narrow limits; for the Cistophoric coinage was the chief currency of Asia Minor for over 300 years.
Modern study of the Cistophori began in 1734 with the publication of A. X. Panel's De Cistophoris. Fr. Panel was the first to identify the silver tetradrachms weighing about 121/2 grams and bearing a mystic cista within an ivy wreath on the obverse and a bow-case entwined by serpents on the reverse with the Cistophori mentioned by Livy 1, Cicero,2 and Festus.3 Panel associated the Cistophoric types with the cult of Sabazius,4 a deity honored in Lydia and Phrygia particularly, and postulated that the Cistophori were issued on the occasion of the festivals called Sabazia.5 Panel also recognized that the series of letters marking the Cistophori of Ephesus were dates and believed that they were reckoned from the Era of the Sabazia.6
This opinion was rejected by Eckhel who stressed the commercial, rather than the medallic, character of the Cistophori. Eckhel noted the advantages to the cities in Asia Minor of issuing coins of uniform weight and type; the use of a common currency would have facilitated commercial transactions among the cities and contributed to their mutual welfare.7 This raison d'�tre for the Cistophori was accepted by du Mersan who nevertheless felt that the choice of types was motivated by the common religious heritage of the cities of Mysia, Ionia, Lydia and Phrygia.8
The first–and only–corpus of the known varieties of Cistophori was published in 1855 by Pinder,9 who was also responsible for identifying the drachms and didrachms with a lion's skin and club within a wreath on the obverses and a bunch of grapes on an ivy leaf on the reverses as fractions of the Cistophoric tetradrachms.10 Pinder observed that the weight, style and flan size of the Pergamene regnal coins ( Plate I, 1-3) differed from that of the Cistophori and postulated that the latter succeeded the royal coins bearing the portrait of Philetaerus. Pinder also recognized that the dates which were "rarely absent" on the Cistophori of Ephesus were reckoned from the formation of the Province of Asia in 134/133 B.C. Although Pinder did not explicitly state that the Cistophoric coinage began about that time, his discussion implies that this was his opinion.11 Livy's testimony that Cistophori were present in great numbers in the Roman triumphs of 190 B.C. was discounted as an anachronistic use of the word "cistophorus" for the coinage then circulating in Asia Minor.12
Theodor Mommsen concurred with Pinder's analysis of Livy and specifically stated that the cistophorus was first struck in 133 B.C. when the Attalid kingdom passed into Roman hands.13 Mommsen viewed the cistophorus as the coin of the Province of Asia14 and sought its raison d'�tre in terms of Roman convenience: the Cistophoric weight standard approximated the Rhodian and the Cistophoric tetradrachm was easily convertible into three Roman denarii.15 On more subjective grounds, Mommsen felt that under the Attalid kings civic issues of silver in large quantities would not have been permitted.16
In 1867, F. Lenormant expressed concern over Pinder's and Mommsen's dismissal of the testimony of Livy. He, as many subsequent numismatists, regarded Livy's statements as facts, and placed the beginning of the Cistophoric coinage around the year 200, "�videmment sous l'autorit�" of the kixsngs of Pergamum. According to Lenormant, the first Cistophoric mints were restricted to Mysia (Pergamum, Adramyteum and Parium); after the enlargement of the Attalid kingdom in 189 B.C., the number of mints was expanded to include cities in Ionia, Lydia, Phrygia and Caria.17 The success of the cistophorus was attributed to its "ingenious" weight standard which permitted exchange with tetradrachms of Attic weight at the rate of four to three and with the Roman denarius at the rate of one to three.18
A new solution was put forward in 1880 by B. V. Head in his Coinage of Ephesus. 19 He, too, discounted Livy's testimony but felt that the number of undated Ephesian Cistophori attested to a significant period of circulation prior to 133 B.C.,20 and placed the beginning of the Cistophoric coinage in 159 B.C., "perhaps on the occasion of the accession of Attalus II."21 Head, however, apparently attributed the idea of striking Cistophori to Eumenes II, whose decision was actively supported by the Romans. In Head's view, the Cistophoric coinage was designed to supplant the Rhodian currency of similar weight in the eastern Mediterranean, further accelerating the decline of Rhodes after the creation of a free port at Delos in 167 B.C.22
New evidence for a third-century dating of the earliest Cistophori was, however, published by Imhoof-Blumer in 1884.23 Imhoof cited a series of Cistophori bearing the initials BA-EY (Plate XXXVIII) and dates ranging from B to Δ, which he assigned to King Eumenes II and dated 188-186 B.C.24 Since the BA-EY pieces were only issued by unimportant cities and were not the earliest in the series, to judge from the size of the flans, the style, and the nature of the reverse marks, the Cistophoric coinage must have been begun elsewhere at an earlier date. Imhoof believed that the Cistophori could only have been introduced at a city already accustomed to the Rhodian weight standard. Of all the cities which issued Cistophori, only Ephesus had previously struck Rhodian-weight coins and Imhoof placed the beginning of the Cistophoric coinage at Ephesus about 215-210 B.C. He found confirmation for his hypothesis in the fact that many of the early Ephesian Cistophori bore symbols which were types on the coins struck under Ptolemaic rule (258-202 B.C.). According to Imhoof, Pergamum, Sardes, Tralles and Apameia began to strike Cistophori shortly after 215-210 "durch �bereinkommen oder aus eigener Initiative."25 Imhoof's solution restored credibility to Livy's statements and was accepted with little or no modification by all numismatists and historians until 1950.26
In that year, S. P. Noe published his reappraisal of the evidence for the beginning of the Cistophoric coinage.27 Noe contested Imhoof's two most important conclusions: that the Cistophori were introduced ca. 215-200 B.C. and that they were first struck at Ephesus. Imhoof's chief reason for choosing Ephesus was the Cistophoric weight standard, which approximated the Rhodian standard then in use at Ephesus. Noe, following van Hoorn,28 pointed out that the Cistophoric types were closely associated with Pergamum, but omitted any direct reference to Artemis or Ephesus. The cista mystica itself, and the grapes and ivy leaf on the fractions, are allusions to Dionysus, a deity highly honored at Pergamum, from whom the Attalids claimed descent. The reverses of the tetradrachms, with their prominent bow-case, and the club and pelt on the fractional obverses, both refer to Heracles, father of Telephus, the legendary founder and first king of Pergamum. Noe also pointed out that the Cistophori of Sardes, acknowledged even by Imhoof to be among the earliest issues,29 could not possibly have been struck between 220 and 190 B.C. when Sardes was in Seleucid possession. The rare Cistophori of this city bearing the ethnic in monogram form () must have been struck during the brief period between 228 B.C., when Attalus I captured Sardes after the death of Antiochus Hierax, and 220 B.C., when the city was lost to Achaeus. The earliest Cistophori of Pergamum, Apameia, Tralles and Ephesus could therefore be dated ca. 228 B.C. Since the introduction of Cistophori at Ephesus in 228 would have required the consent of the Ptolemies, Noe interpreted the early Cistophoric coinage as evidence for an "economic offensive" on the part of Egypt and Pergamum, in which the Cistophori were "intended to supplant [the Seleucid] currency" in Asia Minor.30
The arguments of Imhoof-Blumer and Noe were founded on a common premise: that there existed dated Cistophori from the early years of the reign of Eumenes II (197-159 B.C.) and that these pieces were struck some 20 to 30 years after the first Cistophori of Pergamum, Ephesus, Sardes, Tralles, and Apameia. However, in 1954, E. S. G. Robinson established beyond doubt that the BA(ΣIΛEΩΣ) EY(MENOY) referred to on the dated pieces was not Eumenes II, but the pretender Aristonicus.31 The transferral of the BA-EY series from 196-186 B.C. to 132-130 B.C. considerably weakened the arguments for a third-century origin of the cistophoric coinage and Noe himself immediately abandoned his earlier position. One of the most important results of the Aristonicus solution, as Robinson realized, was that it was no longer necessary to postulate that cistophoric and Attic weight silver coins were produced simultaneously at the Pergamene mint. Robinson believed that the cistophori replaced the regnal coins. If the date of the last Philetaerus pieces could be determined, the beginning of the cistophoric coinage would also be established.32
The publication of Ulla Westermark's corpus of the Philetaerus tetradrachms followed six years later.33 Westermark presented cogent arguments for placing the end of the Pergamene regnal coinage in 190 B.C., and her thesis was subsequently accepted by all the reviewers.34 However, Westermark left the question of the beginning of the cistophoric coinage open, since hoard evidence seemed to indicate that the Attic and Cistophoric weight coins were intended for different markets.35
In 1963, the debate over the date of the earliest Cistophori was resumed with the publication of Henri Seyrig's "Questions cistophoriques."36 Seyrig concurred with Noe's conclusion that Sardes could not have struck Cistophori between 220 and 190 B.C., but also cited hoard evidence which indicated that no Cistophori were struck at Sardes before 220.37 Seyrig raised other objections to pre-Magnesia issues of Cistophori at Ephesus, Tralles and Apameia and felt that the "federal character" of the Cistophori ruled out the striking of these coins by Pergamum alone in the years prior to the Treaty of Apameia.38According to Seyrig, the Cistophoric coinage replaced the Pergamene dynastic coinage in 188 B.C., when the Attalid kingdom was enlarged to include Ephesus, Sardes and Tralles, and when "l'Asie Mineure ... pour la premi�re fois semble m�re pour une tentative d'union mon�taire. C'est × ce moment que les conditions semblent r�unies pour la cr�ation d'un num�raire qui ... allait mettre dans un rapport simple la drachme attique et le denier romain."39 Seyrig's thesis has recently been echoed by Colin Kraay, with the qualification that the Cistophoric coinage was not a federal currency but "the regal coinage of the kingdom of Pergamum."40
Christof Boehringer has also argued for 190 B.C. as the probable date of inception of the Cistophoric coinage, but in his view, the replacement of Attic weight coinage at Pergamum by the Cistophori was only temporary. Boehringer postulated a revival of the Philetaerus types from 164 to 140 B.C., with Pergamene Alexander types and Cistophori being struck simultaneously. This hypothesis has little to recommend it and, as we shall see, there is objective evidence which renders the proposal unacceptable.41
Setting aside for the moment the possibility of the simultaneous issuance of Attic and Cistophoric weight coins by Pergamum, the consensus regarding the beginning of the Cistophoric coinage about 190 must now be brought into question. New evidence has come to light which once again necessitates a complete reconsideration of the circumstances which led to the introduction of the cistophorus in Asia Minor.
The most important piece of evidence was published by Seyrig himself only two years after his "Questions cistophoriques" appeared.42 A hoard of 752 tetradrachms buried at Mektepini in Phrygia in 190-188 B.C., contained 22 Pergamene Philetaerus and Alexander tetradrachms of Westermark's Group VI, but not a single specimen from Group VII. As Seyrig recognized, the Group VII pieces must have been struck after 188 B.C.43 Westermark postulated only seven years for this group, but the minimum number of 16 variations of reverse marks struck from only 24 obverse dies suggests an incomplete record. Group VII pieces were probably issued over a longer period of time, perhaps about two decades.44 In any case, the redating of the latest Philetaerus pieces suggests a post-Apameia date for the earliest Cistophori, if the Cistophori replaced the regnal coins and the two types were not struck concurrently.
The extensive record of Cistophoric reverse die variations presented in this volume enables this assumption to be tested objectively for the first time.45 It will be noticed that in the entire series of Pergamene Cistophori there are only two cases where the reverse marks duplicate those of the Philetaerus tetradrachms ( Plate I, 2-9). In both cases, the supervising magistrate is AΣ. The shared marks appear solely on the latest regnal tetradrachms and on the first Pergamene Cistophori. According to the Boehringer chronology, the AΣ Cistophori would have been struck in 190, the AΣ Philetaerus pieces (Group VII) after 164. This is clearly impossible. The AΣ pieces must be contemporary. The Attic and Cistophoric weight systems appear to have overlapped for about a year or two, a period barely sufficient to acquaint the populace with the strange new money. Then the Attic weight emissions ceased. An exact parallel is to be found in the recent introduction of the decimal system in Great Britain where, for a few years, shillings and new pence circulated together. During that time both forms of money were legal tender and prices were quoted according to both systems.
It is impossible to determine from either internal or hoard evidence precisely when the change in Pergamene types and weight standards took place. The terminus post quem is ca. 180 B.C., allowing only seven years for Group VII, although ca. 170 B.C. appears more likely. Hoards buried during the decade 150-140 B.C.46 contain many varieties of Cistophori of Pergamum, Ephesus, Sardes, Tralles, Apameia and Laodiceia, and the new coins must have been introduced before ca. 160 B.C. Within this period only one set of circumstances seems to fulfill the conditions under which a coinage as unique as the Cistophoric would have been instituted, although it must be remembered that numismatic changes do not always coincide with political events.
When the Galatians ravaged Pergamene territory in 168 B.C., Attalus II was sent to Rome to appeal for aid.47 The Romans were, however, unwilling to offer any support to Eumenes and the deputation sent to discourage the Gauls only served to intensify their plundering of the Pergamene countryside and slaughtering of captives. Roman animosity toward Eumenes is also recorded in a letter of Attalus II in which he mentions "the envy and detraction and baneful suspicion" the Romans "felt against my brother."48 Charges of disloyalty and similar Roman efforts to weaken his power caused Eumenes himself to journey to Italy in 167. The senate refused, however, to receive him and decreed that henceforth no kings would be allowed to enter the city of Rome. This rebuff served further to encourage the Asiatic Gauls and Eumenes was forced to return to Pergamum at once, where without Roman support he was again able to defeat the barbarians.
It is at this time that Eumenes II emerges as the champion of the Greeks of Asia Minor. According to Polybius, Rome�s attempt to nullify Eumenes� victory over the Galatians by declaring the latter free and independent, and the sending of a commissioner to Sardes to hear complaints against the king, only united the Greeks behind the Pergamene ruler. �The more severely the Romans treated Eumenes, the greater was the friendliness of the Greeks.�49 After the rebuff in Italy, the Ionian League declared Eumenes �common benefactor of the Greeks� and thanked him for his �many great battles against the barbarians ... in order that the inhabitants of the Greek cities might always live in peace and prosperity.� The Ionians also voted him a golden wreath, promised to erect a gilded statue of the king in any Ionian city he chose, and inaugurated games in celebration of their deliverance from the barbarians. In his reply, Eumenes offered to pay for the statue himself and asked that it be placed at Miletus.50 Sardes and Tralles thanked the king for defeating the Galatians and instituted Panathenaea and Eumeneia in his honor.51 Cos created a priesthood for his worship with sacred processions in his honor.52 Teos and Cyzicus inaugurated worship of Eumenes� mother and Teos also created a priest for the worship of the king�s wife.53 All these honors granted to the Pergamene royal family were genuine expressions of gratitude to the man whom Polybius calls the greatest royal benefactor to the Greek cities of his time.54
Against this background, the adoption of new coin types celebrating the two deities, Dionysius and Heracles, from whom the Attalids claimed descent, seems perfectly appropriate. Nor is it surprising to find that the expanded number of cities which now issued coins of Pergamene design includes Ionian Ephesus, and Tralles and Sardes which had just inaugurated religious festivals in honor of Eumenes II.
The extravagant honors accorded Eumenes at this time do not, however, account for the change from the Attic to the cistophoric weight standard. The new system is not easy to explain. The cistophorus has been described as a silver piece of reduced Chian or Rhodian weight, as a didrachm on the Aeginetan standard, and as three Attic drachms or three Roman denarii. Metrological Tables II and III (below pp. 128 and 129) demonstrate that, at the time of its introduction, the cistophorus was intended to be a silver tetradrachm of about 12.60 gm; the drachms and didrachms were to weigh about 3.05 and 6.15 gm respectively.55 The new cistophoric tetradrachm was thus equal in weight to three Attic drachms of about 4.2 gm each; the fractional cistophori are nearly equal in weight to the drachms struck by Rhodes after 166 B.C.56
Exchange rates for the new coins were consequently easy to calculate, but the apparent flexibility of the cistophoric weight system did not result in the acceptance of the cistophorus as an international currency to rival the Attic weight coinages of the second century B.C. On the contrary, the cistophorus is a local currency, rarely found outside Pergamene territory. Foreign coins are almost unknown in cistophoric hoards. Eumenes II seems to have created a monetary monopoly by the introduction of the cistophorus,57 thereby further consolidating his political supremacy in Asia Minor through economic means. This step was very likely taken after the defeat of the Galatians and the acceptance of Pergamene dynastic cults in the Greek cities of Asia Minor in 166 B.C.58
Livy 37.46.3; 37.58.4; 37.59.4; 39.7.1.
Cicero, ad Att. 2.6.2; 2.16.4; 11.1.2; de Domo 52.
Schaefer, cols. 1540-51; Picard, Rev Arch 1961, pp. 129-76. The cult of Zeus Eisele, "Sabazios," pp. 232-64; Sabazius was introduced at Pergamum by the wife of Eumenes II, Queen Stratonice of Cappadocia: Inschriften von Pergamon, no. 248, 11. 45-47 ( = Welles, RC no. 67, 11. 1-13); Hansen, p. 400ff. The Zeus worshipped at Pergamum as Sabazius was Dionysiac in character: Cicero, de Nat. Deor. 3.23.58.
Panel, p. 38ff
Panel, p. 62
Eckhel, p. 364ff.
du Mersan, NC 1846, pp. 1-2.
Pinder, pp. 533-635.
Pinder, p. 537.
Pinder, p. 553f. and 553, n. 1: "Wenn man mit diesen sch�nen und zahlreich erhaltene Münzen der Attaler hinsichtlich des Stils des Cistophoren vergleicht, so m�chte man letztere gern für j�nger halten, und annehmen dass von Rhodos, Carien, Phrygien aus, erst etwa unter gemeinsam römischer Verwaltung sich der Münzfuss der Cistophoren durch die Provinz Asien verbreitet h�tte ... Die Jahrzahlen, welche auf ephesicher Cistophoren selten fehlen, bezeugen stets die Pr�gung nach dem Ende des pergamenischen Reiches, und geben einen chronologischen Anhalt auch für andere Cistophoren von gleichem Stile" Cf. p. 540: "Fast von allen l�sst sich nachweisen dass sie in der römischen Zeit, welcher die meisten Cistophoren angeh�ren, der Sitz des Conventus iuridicus waren. Diese Centralst�dte sind es, die für ihren Sprengel die gemeinsam Münze, die Cistophoren pr�gten."
Pinder, p. 553f. and 553, n. 1.
Mommsen, Geschichte, p. 704: "die Provinz Asia ... die Cistophorus ist deren Münze."
Mommsen, Geschichte, p. 704; "es kaum glaublich ist, dass die Attaler eine so machtige und compacte stadtische Pragung zugelassen haben sollten."
Lenormant, RN 1867, pp. 182-84. See also Lenormant, Monnaie II, pp. 42-44; and Lenormant "Cistophori," pp. 1211-13.
Lenormant, RN 1867, p. 183.
Head, NC 1880, pp. 85-173.
Head, NC 1880, p. 147: "Supposing the above-described fifteen or more varieties to be the symbols of annual magistrates, like the dated coins which follow, they may very probably be the coinage of the twenty-five years between B.C. 159 and 133." Bunbury, NC 1883, p. 193ff. believed that the new varieties he could add attested to an even longer period and justified Lenormant's early dating of the coinage based on Livy. Noe also assumed that the changing symbols corresponded to successive magistrates having annual terms of office. I have rejected this assumption as in valid based on the number of obverse dies used with each variety of reverse symbol; see my discussion under Pergamum Series 16-19, Ephesus Series 29-32 and Tralles Series 2-5.
Head, NC 1880, p. 146.
Head, NC 1880, p. 145f.
Imhoof, AbhBerlin 1884, pp. 28-35.
The reasons for Imhoof's dating and all other interpretations of the BA EY pieces are cited and discussed in the catalog under Aristonicus, below p. 103. A BA-EY tetradrachm of Thyatira had been published as early as 1845 (Borell, NC 1845, p. 13), but the importance of the series for determining the beginning date of the cistophori was not appreciated until Imhoof's discussion of 1884.
Imhoof, AbhBerlin 1884, p. 33.
The only significant objection was that of von Fritze AbhBerlin , 1910, pp. 15-19, who believed that the BA-EY pieces were among the earliest cistophori, and that the cistophoric coinage was begun at Pergamum and Ephesus ca. 190 B.C. See. von Fritze, Nomisma , 1910, p. 20ff.; and von Fritze, Mysien , p. 3ff. All the following place the beginning of the cistophoric coinage in the late third or early second century, either at Ephesus, or at Pergamum under Attalus I or Eumenes II: E. Babelon, Traité l, pp. 511-13; Chapot, pp. 339-40; Cardinali, pp. 240-43; Hill, Historical Greek Coins, p. 139; Grueber, BMC Rep II, p. 502, n. 2; Head HN2, p.534; Regling, "Kistophoren,"col. 524f.; Rostovtzeff, "Pergamum," p. 612; Robert, Villes, pp. 34ff., 48f.; Babelon, "P�n�tration," p. 17f.; Hansen, Attalids, pp. 206-8; Magie II, p. 775f.; Seltman.p. 239; McShane, p. 136 and n. 163.
Noe, ANSMN 1950, pp. 29-41.
van Hoorn, Mnemosyne 1915, pp. 233-37.
Imhoof, AbhBerlin 1884, p. 33.
Noe, ANSMN 1950, p. 39.
Robinson, NC 1954, pp. 1-8. See above, p. 12, n. 24.
Robinson, NC 1954, p. 7.
Das Bildnis des Philetairos von Pergamon , Stockholm, 1960.
O. Merkholm, NNUM 5 (May 1961) pp. 122-23; M. Schliiter, HBN 1961, pp. 131-33; C.Boehringer, JNG 1962, pp. 241-45; P. Naster, RBN 1962, pp. 295-97; R. Rago, RIN 1962, pp. 123-24; M. Thompson, AJA 1962, p. 108; P. Franke, Gnomon 1962, pp. 589-96; see also Jenkins, Iraq 1958, p. 161f.; Kleiner, ANSMN 1971, p. 117.
M. Rostovtzeff, Studies ... Buckler, pp. 277-98. Westermark, p. 18: "Es erscheint jedoch nicht leicht, Anfang und Ende dieser Pragungen in unmittelbare Verbindung miteinander zu bringen,da sie ganz verschiedene Absatzgebiete hatten ... In einigen der anderen Stadte, die Cistophoren pragen, werden zudem auch MUnzen attischen Gewichts gleichzeitig ausgegeben. KSnnte das nicht auch in Pergamon der Fall gewesen sein?"
Seyrig, RN 1963, pp. 22-31.
Seyrig, RN 1963, pp. 23-24.
Seyrig, RN 1963, p. 24. See also Seyrig, Trisors, pp. 35-36, 122.
Kraay, pp. 8-9, also felt that the Cistophoric standard was incompatible with the Attic standard of the Seleucids and that the cistophorus of 12.5 gm was designed to complement the Roman monetary system (three denarii of 4.1 gm). See also Will, II, p. 192 and Carrata Thomes, pp. 11-13.
Boehringer, pp. 11-14, 40-50. See also my review, AJA 1973, pp. 353-54. The existence of Attalid Attic weight silver emissions between 181 and 167 is attested by the presence of two Medusa/Athena Nikephoros pieces in the Sitichoro hoard ( IGCH 237). Le Rider, RN 1973, pp. 66-79, esp. pp. 68-71.
Ol�ay-Seyrig, Le trésor de Mektepini en Phrygie. The validity of Seyrig's argument regarding the date of the Group VII issues has been doubted by W. Schwabacher, Gnomon 1967, pp. 423-24.
Ol�ay-Seyrig, pp. 14, 29-31.
Westermark, pp. 71ff. Boehringer, p. 13.
A full discussion appears in the catalogue of Pergamene Cistophori, below pp. 22-40. See my review in AJA 1973, pp. 353-54.
The historical account which follows is drawn from Polybius 29-31, Livy 45 and the relevant inscriptions and other ancient sources cited in the notes. I have also relied heavily on the following modern discussions of these sources: U. Wilcken, "Attalos," RE 2 (1896), cols. 2168-77; G. Cardinali, Il regno di Pergamo, Rome, 1906; F. St�helin, Geschichte der kleinasiatischen Galater, 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1907; H. Willrich, "Eumenes," RE 6 (1909), cols. 1090-105; G. De Sanctis, "Eumenes II e le citt� greche d'Asia," RivFil 1925, pp. 68-78; M. Rostovtzeff, "Pergamum" and "Rhodes, Delos and Hellenistic Commerce," CAH 8 (1930), pp. 590-667 and The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, 2nd ed., Oxford, 1952; F. Hiller von Gaertringen, "Rhodos," RE Suppl. 5 (1931), cols. 731-840; W. Zscheitzschmann, "Pergamon," RE 19 (1937), cols. 1235 63; E. V. Hansen, The Attalids of Pergamon, Ithaca, 1947; D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor, Princeton, 1950; P. M. Fraser and G. E. Bean, The Rhodian Peraea and Islands, Oxford, 1954; E. Badian, Foreign Clientelae, Oxford, 1958; R. B. McShane, The Foreign Policy of the Attalids of Pergamum, Urbana, 1964, with comprehensive bibliography to date.
Welles, RC no. 61, 11. 14-15.
Welles, RC no. 52. 11. 8-13; Dittenberger, OGIS no. 763. See Holleaux, REG 1924, pp. 305-30.
Haussoullier, BCH 1881, p. 385; Dittenberger OGIS no. 305, 11. 7-12; Robert, Rev. Phil 1934 pp. 279-91.
Dittenberger, SIG 3 no. 1028.
Dittenberger, OGIS nos. 308-9, 325.
It seems to be a general rule that Hellenistic drachms and didrachms weigh less than one quarter and one half of the weight of a tetradrachm. This may perhaps be accounted for by the fact that it was considerably more expensive to produce four drachms than a single tetradrachm. The additional labor cost may have been offset by striking the fractional pieces at slightly less than their theoretical weight.
The connection with the Roman denarius is unlikely and, as Broughton, p. 557 recognized, fiscally unsound: �Since three denarii normally weighed 180 × grains (11.644 grammes) and a cistophorus (4 Rhodian drachmae) of full weight contained 192 × grains (12.441 grammes), the apparent advantage in exchange lay with the Roman coins and it becomes difficult to explain the continued popularity and survival of the cistophorus except on the ground of Asian conservatism, especially as the Romans apparently demanded some other advantages also for the denarius in exchange.� If the cistophoric coinage was begun in 166 B.C., as I have suggested, a weight standard designed � la romaine, with a built-in profit for the Romans, is even harder to accept, in view of the strained Roman-Pergamene relations at that time.
See below, pp. 124-25. Attic or Rhodian weight pieces which reached cities where cistophoric mints were located were apparently melted down and restruck. Plates XV,1; XVI,1; XXIII,12 and XXV,9 illustrate cistophori struck over one Thasian and two Macedonian tetradrachms, and a fractional cistophorus of Tralles struck over a Rhodian didrachm. The Attic pieces were trimmed to approximate cistophoric weight before restriking; the unaltered Tralles/Rhodes overstrike was already known to Pinder (pl. I,16) and used as evidence for the compatability of the two weight standards (�Cistophoren,� p. 551). I discussed the four overstrikes in ANSMN 1972, pp. 30-32.
The objection might still be raised that Livy mentions cistophori in the triumphs of M. Acilius Glabrio, Scipio Asiaticus, Gnaeus Manlius Vulso and Aemilius Regillus. However in a less often quoted passage (34.52.5) Livy states that in the triumph of Flamininus in 194 B.C. �there were 84,000 Attic coins called �tetrachma� and the weight of silver in them is about equivalent to three denarii each.� Since Livy�s conception of the Attic tetradrachm is obviously inaccurate, he is a very unreliable witness with respect to the other coins he mentions, especially since he is our only evidence for a pre-Magnesian cistophorus. See Noe, ANSMN 1950, pp. 29-31. For Livy�s reference to denarii in 340 B.C. (8.11.16), see Thomsen I, p. 31.
Obv.: Cista mystica with half-open lid, from which a serpent issues to l.; all within ivy wreath.
Rev.: Two coiled serpents with heads erect; between them an ornamented bow-case with strap at r., usually containing a strung bow. To l., ethnic, as below; other marks as indicated.
Didrachms and Drachms
Obv.: Club, over which a lion�s skin is draped; all within a wreath.
Rev.: Bunch of grapes, placed upon a vine leaf. To l., ethnic, as below; other marks as indicated.
The following forms of ethnic are employed:
For each denomination, Arabic numerals indicate obverse dies, numbered consecutively for all series; lower case letters indicate reverse dies within one series. Entries preceded by an asterisk are illustrated. All entries are tetradrachms unless otherwise indicated.
1-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.50↑ ( Plate I, 5)
Series 1b: To r., thyrsus, horizontal.
2-a. *Ankara (Sahnah 1952, 8), 12.57 ( Plate I, 7);
2-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 28), 12.46↗
3-a. *Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 27), 12.69↑. ( Plate I, 8)
3-b. *Hague, 12.41↑. AΣ ( Plate I, 9)
3-c. ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 1), 12.43↖. AΣ
4-d. *Milan, 12.61↑. AΣ ( Plate I, 10)
The first three series of cistophori struck at Pergamum all bear the mark (either or AΣ) of the magistrate who supervised the transition from the Attic-weight regnal series to the lighter cistophoric coins. Both and AΣ, as well as a third variant, AΣK, occur on the latest Philetaerus types identified by Westermark1 ( Plate I, 2-4). The enclosure of AΣ in a rectangular frame does not recur in any other series of either the regnal or the cistophoric pieces, and there can be no doubt that the cistophori of Series 1-3 are the first to be issued at Pergamum. Further confirmation comes from the use of the thyrsus as symbol in Series 1, a mark also appearing on the latest Philetaerus pieces2 and on the unique tetradrachm with the portrait of Eumenes II ( Plate I, 1); and from the exact duplication of the AΣ and dolphin on the regnal and cistophoric tetradrachms (Plate I, 3-4 and 8). The common markings probably indicate that for a year or two, the two series were produced simultaneously in order to acquaint the public with the new type of money.
The first series clearly show the signs of experimentation in format which mark any new coin type. The very earliest Pergamene pieces (Series 1a) do not even bear the mint mark which appears on all subsequent issues. This is not strange, for although it is a unique instance on the cistophori,3 it conforms to the system then in use at the Pergamene mint. The magistrate�s mark is in the left field; no ethnic was used on the regnal coins because the types themselves proclaimed their Pergamene origin. It was immediateley realized, however, that in order to distinguish the Pergamene cistophori from those of the other cities, a mint mark had to be included, for the types at all mints were identical. The mark chosen was a monogram comprising the first three or four letters of the ethnic, placed either horizontally () or on its side () in the initial issues. Series 1b retains the thyrsus of Series 1a but substitutes the ethnic for . In Series 2, both the ethnic and are present, and in Series 3, , or AΣ, and a symbol (dolphin) are all used.
In addition to their variations in format, these first experimental strikings vary with regard to the diameter and thickness of the flan, although the weight is restricted to the narrow range of 12.4-12.7 gm which is characteristic of all the series discussed in this volume.4
The piece from the Şahnah hoard of ca. 128 B.C. is surprisingly well preserved, although the three specimens in the Yeşilhisar hoard of 130 B.C. and the Bahkesir hoard of ca. 135 B.C. show signs of considerable wear.
Series 4: To r., palm branch, horizontal.
2-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.61↗ (Plate I, 11); New York City, private coll. (Hirsch, Mar. 8-12, 1971, 193), 12.50↗. Palm curved downward
2-b. London, BMC 92, 12.63↑. Palm curved downward
2-c. Paris, 12.29↑ (pierced). Palm curved downward
5-d. *ANS-ETN, 12.56↗. Palm curved upward ( Plate I, 12)
Series 5: To r., club, upright. Pinder 82.
5-a. *ANS, 12.55↑ ( Plate I, 13)
6-b. Berlin, 12.65
7-c. *Hess-Leu, May 12-13, 1970, 248 = Feuardent Dec. 19, 1921, 141, 12.56↗ ( Plate II, 1)
Series 6: To r., eagle l.; placed horizontally.
7-b. Copenhagen, SNG 409, 12.54↑
9-d. *ANS-Strauss, 12.56↑ ( Plate II, 4)
9-e. Von Aulock, SNG 1367, 12.29; Berlin 12.60
11-g. *Von Aulock, SNG 1368, 12.08. Eagle on fulmen, star above ( Plate II, 6)
Series 7: To r., caduceus, horizontal.
9-b New York City, private coll. 12.43↖; Bourgey, March 10, 1976, 92, 12.51
9-d. Lockett, SNG 2715 (Naville, Apr. 4, 1921, 2259), 12.58↑
9-e. Stuttgart, 12.44↑
12-g. Von Aulock, SNG 7462, 12.41
12-h. Cambridge, SNG 4215, 12.29↑
12-i. Vienna, 12.48↗
13-j. ANS-Strauss, 12.82↑
13-k. *ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 2), 12.41↑ ( Plate II, 9); Hague, 11.84↑
14-l. London, BMC 86, 12.39↑ (pierced)
14-m. *Paris, 12.10↖ ( Plate II, 10)
14-n. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 2), 12.60↖
14-p. Bourgey, Dec. 20, 1932, 211
16-r. *ANS-Strauss, 12.67↖ ( Plate II, 12)
16-s. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 1), 12.61↗
– Commerce (Bahkesir 1958, 3)
1-a. *Dewing (Hess-Leu, Apr. 7, 1960, 203), 5.85↑ ( Plate II, 13); Paris, 6.08 Below l., caduceus, upright; below r.,
Series 8: To r., amphora, horizontal.
16-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.69↖ ( Plate III, 1); Von Aulock, SNG 7461, 12.63
17-d. Uncertain provenance
18-e. *Gotha, 12.40↗ ( Plate III, 3)
18-f. Ciani, Feb. 20, 1935, 161
19-g. *Paris, 12.37↑ ( Plate III, 4)
20-h. *Munich, 12.67↑ (pierced) ( Plate III, 5)
– Commerce (Bahkesir 1958, 4)
Series 4-8 follow the first series in a continuous die-linked sequence. Series 4 (palm branch) is linked to Series 2 by obverse die P2. Series 5 (club) shares obverse P5 with Series 4 and P7 with Series 6 (eagle). The latter is known in three variants and is linked to Series 7 (caduceus) by die P9. Series 7 and 8 (amphora) share obverse P16.
The die linkage confirms what might otherwise be surmised from the common format of the early issues. With the exception of the club of Series 5, all the symbols are oriented horizontally, even when this results in a configuration as curious as the eagle on fulmen placed on its side, or the amphora with its open top to the right. The horizontal orientation nevertheless parallels the placement of the ethnic () and perhaps provides the explanation for the position of the symbols. Such an orientation of marks is much less common on the cistophori of other mints where the ethnic reads from left to right (EФE, TRAΛ, etc.), and on the Pergamene fractions where the ethnic is placed horizontally, the symbol is upright ( Plate II, 13).
The eagle and club are common symbols at Tralles (Series 2, 7, 31, 35, 40 and 41). An upright club is also used on the pieces of Ephesus Series 8 and the caduceus and dolphin appear on Apameia Series 2 and 7 as well. The horizontal thyrsus, amphora and upright club are all early symbols on the cistophori of Sardes and Synnada (Series 1, 3 and 5).
Pergamum Series 6, 7 and 8 are struck from five, six and five obverse dies respectively, more than any of the earlier issues. The increase in output perhaps reflects a greater demand for the cistophori after a cautious introduction in small numbers. Very few of these early series were still in circulation when the recorded cistophoric hoards were buried (after 145 B.C.).
Westermark, pls. XV, 8-9, 11; XVI, 1-3.
Westermark, pls. XIII, 10-12; XIV, 1-2.
With the possible exception of Sardes-Synnada Series 7.
For an analysis of the cistophori prior to 128 B.C. by weight, see Table II, below p. 128.
Series 9: To r., owl, placed horizontally.
21-b. Berlin, 12.67
22-c. Kress, Oct. 4, 1962, 155 = Kress, Nov. 30, 1961, 198, 12.3
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 5)
2-a. *Ankara (Şahnah 1952, 9), 6.13. Below l., owl upright; below r., ( Plate III, 7)
3-a. *Ankara ( Plate III, 8)
Series 9 is not linked to any other Pergamene series but clearly belongs among the earliest issues on the basis of the horizontal orientation of the owl. Series 10, represented only by a unique didrachm, may be an early issue because of the irregular form of the Pergamene monogram () which does not recur elsewhere. On the didrachms of both series the ethnic and symbol are placed in an upright position.
Series 11a: To r., race-torch, horizontal. Pinder 84a.
23-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.59↑ ( Plate III, 9)
23-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.36↖; Munich
23-c. ANS (Asia Minor 1962, 32), 12.64↖; Commerce
23-d. London, BMC 90, 12.45↑
23-e. Cambridge, SNG 4213, 12.39↑
23-g. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 19), 12.55↖
23-h. Vienna, 12.35↑
23A-i. Vienna, 12.30↑. Doublestruck
24-b. Munich, 12.66↑. Obverse die identical to Sardes-Synnada 10
24-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 18), 12.51↖. Obverse die identical to Sardes-Synnada 10
25-c. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 2), 12.53↖
25-d. *ANS-Strauss 12.66↗ ( Plate III, 11); ANS-Strauss 12.78↑
26-e. *Fogg ( Plate III, 12)
27-g. *Commerce, 12.18. Impress of circular die ( Plate III, 13)
Series 12: To r., star. Pinder 83.
28-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.57↑. Six rays
28-c. Von Aulock, SNG 7463, 12.38. Six rays
28-d. New York City, private coll., 12.34↑. Six rays
– Commerce (Bahkesir 1958, 6). Six rays
28-e. ANS-Strauss, 12.65↖ Berlin, 12.42. Eight rays
29-e. London, 12.64↑. Eight rays
29-f. ANS-BYB, SNG 971, 12.61↖. Eight rays
30-g. *ANS-ETN, 10.96↖. Eight rays ( Plate IV, 2)
The two varieties of Series 11 were both known to Pinder. Each has for symbol a race-torch, placed on its side. Series 11b has a small monogram () in the lower left field which may be expanded as Synnada and is used on the cistophori of that city. One of the dies used in Series 11b (P24, Plate III, 10) is identical to a Sardes-Synnada obverse die (S10, Plate XXX, 3) which is associated with a sword on the reverses. Pergamum Series 12 has a star in the right field, a mark which is also used on the cistophori of Sardes-Synnada, and is linked to the sword series. The implications of this inter-city linkage are discussed in the section on Sardes-Synnada.
Series 13: To r., bunch of grapes.
Series 14: To r., ear of grain. Pinder 81.
32-a. *Munich, 11.47↖ ( Plate IV, 4); ANS-Strauss, 12.58↑
32-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 3), 12.67↑
32-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 4), 12.62↖
32-d. De Luynes 2499, 12.55
33-e. Hirsch, June 25-28, 1963, 429 (Asia Minor 1962, 33)
Series 15: To r., stylis.
34-a. *ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 7), 12.52↖ ( Plate IV, 5)
34-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.54↑; Berlin 12.22
35-c. ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 8), 12.42↗
35-d. London, 12.60↑
35-e. Copenhagen, SNG 406, 12.42↑
35-f. Cambridge, SNG 4214, 12.57↑
4-a. *Commerce, Above l., stylis, horizontal; omitted or off flan to l. ( Plate IV, 6)
Series 13-15 are not linked to any other Pergamene series, but their placement in the sequence is fairly secure. They certainly precede Series 23, in which a complication in reverse format is introduced, and Series 20-22, which are sequentially die linked to Series 23. Among the Pergamene issues of single-symbol format, they must come rather late. The reverse marks are oriented vertically; the two specimens of Series 15 in the Bahkesir hoard are in excellent condition; and the Series 14 piece from the 1962 hoard of ca. 145 B.C. is comparably well preserved. The bunch of grapes and ear of grain are used as marks on the cistophori of Sardes (Series 10 and 11) and are close in date to the star series there.5 A bunch of grapes is used later at Pergamum in Series 29 and is the reverse type of the drachms and didrachms of all the cistophoric mints. The ear of grain also appears on the cistophori of Tralles (Series 12 and 47).
Series 16: To r., bee and flower, placed horizontally.
36-a. *Judd ( Plate IV, 7)
36-b. Copenhagen, SNG 410, 12.59↑
Series 17: To r., head of Athena r., in crested helmet.
37-a. *Berlin, 12.68 ( Plate IV, 8); ANS-Strauss, 11.79↖
37-b. London, 12.63↑
Series 18: To r., Nike l., holding wreath. Pinder 78.
37-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.17↖ ( Plate IV, 9); Munich
37-b. Copenhagen, SNG 403, 12.22↑
37-c. Paris, 11.84↖ (pierced)
Series 19: To r., serpent staff.
Series 16-19 are associated with only two obverse dies, both very close in style and undoubtedly by the hand that engraved dies P3 and 4. The bee and flower of Series 16 are oriented horizontally as on many of the early Pergamene issues. In Series 17-19, which were all struck from a single obverse die, the symbols are placed vertically, henceforth the rule at the Pergamene mint. The flower of Series 16 also appears on the cistophori of Apameia (Series 13). The Athena head and Nike are both used as symbols at Tralles (Series 44 and 24); Nike is an Ephesian cistophoric mark as well ( Series 23). The serpent staff of Series 16 becomes the civic badge of Pergamum after 123 B.C. ( Plate X, 10) and is also used on some late dated cistophori of Sardes.6
The use of only one obverse die for Series 17-19 indicates that they were of very short duration, struck in very small numbers, or both. The contrast with the large output of Series 6, 7, 8 and 11 is striking. It is unlikely that the reverse symbols which distinguish the series connote annual (or periodic) emissions and would be synonymous with dates if the �code� were known. If each symbol represented a period of equal duration, the fluctuations in numerical terms of the cistophori issued during a single Pergamene series would be enormous–in fact, too great to be accounted for by economic factors. This interpretation must be rejected. It is here assumed that the Pergamene marks are the badges of monetary magistrates and connote personal control during varying terms of office.
Series 20: Above l., wreath.
38-a. *Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 29), 12.52↑. Obverse die identical to Apameia 17 ( Plate IV, 11)
Series 21: To r., ivy leaf.
38-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.44↑. Leaf on side; obverse die identical to Apameia 17 ( Plate IV, 12)
38-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.57↑. Leaf downward; obverse die identical to Apameia 17
Series 22: To r., cornucopiae. Pinder 80.
41-a. *ANS-ETN, 12.50↑ ( Plate V, 3)
41-b. Oslo, 12.11↑
42-d. *ANS-Strauss, 12.60↗ ( Plate V, 4); ANS-Strauss, 12.56↗
43-e. Copenhagen, SNG 404, 12.44↑
44-f. Berlin, 12.50
44-g. Copenhagen, SNG 405, 12.60↑
Series 20-22 are linked to each other and to the series which follow and their position in the Pergamene sequence is certain. Series 20 is known in a single specimen from the Yeşilhisar hoard. Its symbol, a wreath, is irregularly placed in the upper left field. Due to its scarcity, it is impossible to determine whether this was the format used for all the reverses of this series or whether the one known die is exceptional and represents only a variant introduced by the engraver. The obverse (P38) is also used in Pergamum Series 21 and Apameia Series 18, and once again documents the sharing of dies between cistophoric cities.7 The wreath is also used for Apameia Series 17, Ephesus Series 30 (where it is similarly located on the reverses) and Tralles Series 8, 9, and 34. The cornucopiae is likewise a common cistophoric symbol; it appears in Ephesus Series 24, Tralles Series 13 and Apameia Series 19.
Series 23a: To r., dolphin.
45-a. *Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 20), 12.61↖ ( Plate V, 6)
46-b. *ANS, 12.44↗. Obverse die identical to Apameia 24 ( Plate V, 7)
46-c. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 5), 12.60↗. Obverse die identical to Apameia 24
48-f. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 24), 12.53↑
48-g. Kastner, Nov. 26, 1974, 95, 12.38
49-i. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 25), 12.67↖
50-j. ANS (Asia Minor 1962, 35), 12.67↑
50-k. Von Aulock, SNG 7460, 12.55; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 22), 12.47↑
51-l. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 23), 12.53↑
52-m. *ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 9), 12.57↗ ( Plate V, 11)
54-o. *Cambridge, McClean 7697, 12.38↑. Obverse die identical to Apameia 28 ( Plate VI, 1)
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 8-13; Bahkesir 1958, 10)
Series 23b: To r., dolphin; in l. serpent coil, prow r.
50-a. *Winterthur, 12.48↗ ( Plate VI, 2)
50-b. London, 12.35↑
51-c. *ANS, 12.37↑ ( Plate VI, 3)
55-d. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 21), 12.68↗
56-e. Athens, 12.07↗; Kress, Sept. 16-17, 1957, 47
56-f. Ankara (Şahnah 1952, 7), 12.61
58-h. Berlin, 12.53
Series 23c: To r., dolphin; below l., M; below r., A.8
Series 24a: To r., filleted thyrsus. Pinder 77.
52-a. *ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 11), 12.54↑ ( Plate VI, 5);
ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 12), 12.39↑
52-b. ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 13), 12.70↑
52-c. Copenhagen, SNG 407, 12.41↑; Von Aulock, SNG 1366, 12.38
52-d Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 8), 12.52↗
52-e. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 9), 12.50↗; New York City, private coll., 12.67↗
53-g. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 11), 12.61↑
54-i. ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 14), 12.68↑. Obverse die identical to Apameia 28
59-j. *ANS-ETN, 12.61↗ ( Plate VI, 8)
60-k. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 12), 12.60↑
60-l. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 13), 12.54↑
61-m. Copenhagen, SNG 408, 12.37↑
61-n. Kress, Nov. 21, 1966, 284
62-o. ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 15), 12.55↑
62-p. ANS (Asia Minor 1970, 1), 12.47↑
62-q. ANS-Strauss, 12.39↑
62-r. ANS-Strauss, 12.50↑
63-s. *ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 16), 12.55↑ ( Plate VI, 9)
63-t. London, BMC 89, 12.53↑
64-u. *ANS-Strauss, 12.72↑ ( Plate VI, 10)
65-v. Von Aulock, SNG 7457, 12.80
65-w. Munich, 12.74↗
66-xx. Seyrig, 12.69↑
66-y. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 14), 12.70↑
67-z. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 15), 12.54↑
68-aa. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 16), 12.62↑
69-bb.*ANS-Strauss, 12.37↑. Obverse die identical to Apameia 37 ( Plate VI, 12)
70-cc. *ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 17), 12.61↑ ( Plate VII, 1)
70-dd. ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 18), 12.71↑
71-ee. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 15), 12.59↖. To l.,
72-ff. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 2), 12.65↑; Berlin, 12.71. To l.,
73-hh.*Munich, 12.35. To l., ( Plate VII, 2)
75-jj. *ANS-Strauss, 12.24↑. To l., ; obverse die identical to Apameia 38 ( Plate VII, 3)
76-kk. Paris, 12.74↑
77-ll. ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 19), 12.59↖
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 16-22)
Series 24b: To r., filleted thyrsus; in l. serpent coil, prow r.
76-a. *ANS-Ives, 12.38↗ ( Plate VII, 4)
77-d. Hirsch, March 22, 1976, 126, 12.45
Series 24c: To r., filleted thyrsus, over which, prow l.
53-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 7458, 12.58 ( Plate VII, 6)
– Commerce (Bahkesir 1958, 20)
Series 24d: To r., filleted thyrsus; below l., Δ.9
77-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 7464, 12.62 ( Plate VII, 7)
– Commerce (Bahkesir 1958, 21)
Series 24e: To r., filleted thyrsus between Δ and A.
77-a. *Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 26), 12.59↗ ( Plate VII, 8)
77-a. *ANS (Bahkesir 1958, 22), 12.37↑ ( Plate VII, 9)
Series 23 and 24 are known in several variants and are by far the most frequently encountered of the early Pergamene cistophori. The survival rate is not the result of chance finds, but accurately reflects the production rate in antiquity. The two series are known in 14 and 22 obverse, and 24 and 45 reverse dies respectively and probably represent the Pergamene cistophoric issues of nearly a decade. The linkage between the two series is so frequent and so complicated that the dolphin and thyrsus symbols must have been used simultaneously rather than consecutively. This is further confirmed by the format of the reverse dies in the two series. In both cases, magistrates� initials are occasionally placed to left and right in the lower field of the reverses (Series 23c and 24d). In Series 23b and 24b, a diminutive prow is added as a secondary symbol and placed in the lower coil of the left serpent; in Series 24c the prow is placed over the thyrsus.
Does the addition of the prow have any significance with regard to the Pergamene fleet? Five duplicate pieces of Series 24a (54-h) in excellent condition were in the 1962 hoard and are clearly among the latest pieces present. The duplication of paired dies does not occur elsewhere in that hoard and indicates that the five Pergamene specimens must have been struck just prior to burial. The datable Attic-weight pieces in the 1962 hoard were struck as late as 150 B.C. and the Pergamene cistophori with thyrsus as symbol probably date ca. 150-140 B.C. Such a date coincides with the period immediately following the naval defeat of Andriscus in 148 B.C.10 and it is tempting to associate the prow on the cistophori with this event. In any case, after the defeat of Prusias of Bithynia in 154 B.C. and the subsequent payment of the indemnity for war damages,11 Pergamum possessed the most powerful fleet in the Greek east, and it would not be surprising to find reference to this naval supremacy in the Pergamene coinage.
Series 23 and 24 also document the reintroduction of magistrates� monograms or initials on the Pergamene silver. Series 23c includes the letters M - A to lower left and right on the reverses. Series 24d has a Δ to lower left; possibly a second letter is off flan to the right. In Series 24e, Δ and A flank the thyrsus and probably indicate the same authority, while the of Series 24f is above the symbol. Such irregularity in placement is characteristic of the initial stages of almost any change in format, and has been noted previously with respect to the design of the earliest cistophoric reverses.
Pergamene obverses P46, 54, 69 and 75 are also used for the cistophori of Apameia Series 21, 23 and 24. 12 A filleted thyrsus is the distinguishing mark of Tralles Series 18.
The implications of this Pergamum-Apameia linkage are discussed in the section on Apameia. See also Table I, below p. 126.
Imhoof recorded a variety of this series in his collection with Δ below left and A below right (SNR 1913, p. 27, no. 70). The piece was not illustrated. The Bahkesir and Von Aulock specimens were struck partially off flan to the right and may also be thyrsus and Δ - A types.
SERIES 25a-26, 139-136 B.C.
Series 25a: To r., Macedonian helmet facing.
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 24)
Series 25b: To r., crested helmet l.
80-b. ANS-Strauss (Ratto, Feb. 8, 1928, 589), 12.45↖
84-h. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 17), 12.87↑
84-i. Karlsruhe, 12.47↑ (pierced)
84-j. Oslo, 12.09↑ (pierced)
85-k. *Oslo, 12.44↑ ( Plate VIII, 3)
86-l. *Leningrad ( Plate VIII, 4)
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 27-28)
Series 26: To r., NI. Pinder 76.
Series 25 and 26 do not share obverse dies with any other Pergamene series, but their place in the sequence is fairly secure. Series 20-24 are all die linked and the style of obverses P78-87 is much closer to that of the dies of 23 and 24 than to any of the series from 1-19. Moreover, P79 is identical with Apameia obverse A40 (Series 24) which follows Apameia Series 23. The latter employs two dies of Pergamum Series 23 and 24. Neither Series 25 nor 26 is present in the Bahkesir or 1962 hoards, although nine of the eighteen pieces come from hoards buried after 131 B.C.
The NI used in place of a symbol in Pergamum Series 26 is transitional between the earlier series and those which regularly combine symbols with monograms or initials.
On the revolt of Andriscus and his defeat by the Romans supported by a Pergamene fleet, see Strabo 8.6.23; 13.4.2; Pausanias 7.13.1; 16.1.8; and Polybius 36.10; 36.17.13-14.
See the discussion under Apameia and Table I, below p. 126.
Series 27: Above center, ME; to r., club entwined by serpent.
89-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.65↑
90-d. ANS-Strauss, 12.55↑ ANS-BYB, SNG 972, 12.63↑
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 33)
Series 28: Above center, EP; to r., fulmen, vertical. Pinder 86.
91-b. ANS-Gans, 12.42↖
91-c. Munich, 12.16↖
92-d. *ANS-Strauss, 11.97↗ ( Plate VIII, 9)
93-f. Munich, 12.19↑ (pierced)
94-g. Kress, Jan. 22, 1968, 166
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1935, 1)
Series 29: Above center, AΣ; to r., ivy leaf, upward, and bunch of grapes.
96-a. Gotha, 12.44↗
96-c. Uncertain provenance
96-e. *Commerce ( Plate VIII, 12)
Series 30: Above center, AΣ; to r., gorgoneion. Pinder 85.
97-b. Athens, 12.49↑; Schulman, June 6-7, 9-11, 1969, 1320
98-c. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 37), 12.71↗
98-d. ANS-BYB, SNG 973, 12.66↑
98-e. ANS-BYB, SNG 974, 12.64↑
98-f. Paris, 12.24↑
98-g. Peus F.P.L., October 1969, 52.
99-j. Cahn, Oct. 15ff, 1929, 193, 12.96; Glendining, Oct. 27-28, 1971, 81
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 41-49)
Series 31a: Above center, MH; to r., club with lion�s skin; in l. serpent coil, Δ; in r. serpent coil, I. Pinder 87.
101-b. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 51), 12.72↑
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 52)
102-b. Berlin, 12.39
104-c. Cambridge, SNG 4216, 12.33↑
105-d. *Paris, 12.05↗ ( Plate IX, 7)
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 55-57)
Series 27-31 are the latest Pergamene emissions in the 1928 hoard and must date to the years just prior to 128 B.C. No Pergamene piece with the civic badge of a serpent staff ( Plate X, 10)13 was included in that hoard or in the Yeşilhisar or Şahnah hoards of 130-128 B.C. There can be no doubt that the introduction of this device must have occurred after 128 and that the universally accepted date for this change in format (134/133 B.C.) must be rejected. It is now clear that the only city to begin to employ an invariable civic symbol in 134 was Ephesus. However attractive, the traditional view, which associates the Dionysus of Tralles, the flutes of Apameia, etc., with the reorganization of the Attalid cities by the Romans upon the formation of the Province of Asia,14 is negated by the abundant evidence to the contrary.
Series 27-30 do, however, attest to a less radical change in Pergamene format at about the time of the creation of the Province of Asia. A periodically changing symbol still occupies a position in the right field, but a monogram (or initials) now appears between the serpents� heads. This format was to remain the rule for all subsequent Pergamene cistophori until the discontinuation of the series in 67 B.C. On the latest Pergamene pieces ( Plate X, 11)15 the initials are associated with the mark of the prytaneis ()16 and these officials may also have been responsible for the coinage at this date, if not from its inception.
Series 27 pairs a club entwined by a serpent with ME and Series 28 a fulmen with EP. Series 29 and 30 combine AΣ with a bunch of grapes and ivy leaf and a gorgoneion respectively. The use of both initials and symbols may indicate dual responsibility for the series involved. The retention of AΣ in Series 30 may point to a longer term of office for one of the two magistrates.
In Series 31 a further elaboration takes place. A second monogram or pair of initials is introduced within the coils of the serpents. Whatever the significance of the symbol, the initials clearly refer to persons associated with the coinage and their relative prominence in the designs undoubtedly corresponds to the degree of their importance in the mint. (The club and pelt used as symbol in Series 31 is the obverse type of the drachms and didrachms of all the cistophoric mints.)
Plate X, 10 = New York City, private coll., 12.05↗ (unpublished).
106-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.32↖ ( Plate IX, 8)
107-b. Paris, 11.73↑
108-b. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1935, 2), 12.19↗
109-a. *ANS, 12.50↖ ( Plate IX, 11); Kress, June 30, 1964, 267
109-b. Athens, 12.20↖
Series 32-35 continue the format used in Series 31: monogram above, symbol to right, initials in serpent coils. In both Series 32 and 33 the monogram is and the initials are Y - Λ, although the symbol changes from a facing head to a caduceus-club. This retention of letters while the symbol changes is analogous to the modification of Series 29 in Series 30. In Series 34 and 35, the letters (Y - A) remain constant, while both the monogram and symbols change. None of the rare pieces from these four series is from a hoard interred prior to 128 B.C., although two of the eight were included in later hoards. Series 32-35 almost certainly postdate 128 B.C.
110-a. *Gotha, 12.40 ( Plate IX, 12)
111-b. *Berlin, 12.49 ( Plate X, 1)
111-c. Kress, July 21, 1969, 166
112-a. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 4), 12.67↑
112-b. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 5), 12.69↑
112-c. *Munich, 12.62↑ ( Plate X, 2)
114-e. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1935, 3), 12.16↑
115-g. Cambridge, McClean 7698, 12.40↑
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1935, 4-6)
117-b. *Berlin, 12.37 ( Plate X, 6)
117-c. Berlin, 12.64
117-d. Beirut Univ., 12.44↑
118-e. Athens (Delos 1906), 11.49↑
Series 37c: Above center, ΔH; to r., winged caduceus.
The ear of grain entwined by a serpent in Series 36 resembles the similarly entwined branch in Series 35 and may follow it. The monogram used ( ) probably refers to the same official whose mark ( ) appears in Series 37a and whose initials distinguish the reverses of Series 37c. A winged caduceus is the symbol in Series 37a, b and c.
Although no letters appear in the serpent coils, Series 36 and 37 must follow Series 31. No pieces from these series are present in the 1928 hoard, but in deposits buried during the late second or early first centuries B.C. they are frequently included.17 The two series thus represent a reversion to an earlier format. A similar arrangement is used for the Pergamene cistophori of 123-67 B.C., ( Plate X, 10-11).
For example BMCLydia cxxxvif. The misdating of the Tralles pieces with ΠTOΛ and dates A to H was corrected by Regling, Frankfurter Münzzeitung 1932, pp. 506-7, 509-10.
Plate X, 11 = ANS-Strauss, 12.56↑
Uncertain: To r., symbol off flan: no other marks.
121-a. *Istanbul. Struck over a Pergamene cistophorus of Series 12 ( Plate X, 12)
One piece in the Istanbul Museum must remain unclassified until the appearance of new evidence. The reverse symbol is off flan and the die cannot be identified with that of any other known piece. The obverse die is also unique. Because the types are struck over a Pergamene cistophorus of Series 12, the Istanbul specimen must postdate 155 B.C. Stylistically it appears to date about 155-150 B.C. (compare Plate IV) but in any case must precede the adjustments in reverse format after 140B.C. It is possible that the piece in fact belongs to Series 12 and represents immediate restriking after misstriking, rather than overstriking in the conventional sense of the word.
bunch of grapes
ear of grain
bee and flower
dolphin and prow
dolphin and M - A
thyrsus and prow
prow over thyrsus
thyrsus and Δ
thyrsus and Δ - A
ME and serpent-entwined club
EP and fulmen
AΣ and grapes with ivy leaf
AΣ and gorgoneion
ΔH and winged caduceus
Series 1: To r., head of leopard r.
1-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.58↗ ( Plate XI, 1)
1-b. *Hague, 12.61↑. Ethnic to r.; symbol to l. ( Plate XI, 2)
Series 2: To r., bust of Helios facing.
1-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.67↑ ( Plate XI, 3); Kress, Nov. 30, 1961, 207; Commerce
2-b. *Winterthur, 12.50 ( Plate XI, 4); ANS-Strauss, 12.64↑; Hague-van Rede, 11.07↑
3-c. Münz. u. Med. F.P.L., Jan. 1963, 25
4A-e. Vienna, 12.18↑. Ethnic to r.; symbol to l.
The first two series of cistophori at Ephesus are linked by a common obverse die (El) and exhibit features comparable to the contemporary issues of Pergamum. There is a similar irregularity with respect to the placement of the ethnic and the symbol: EФE appears in both the left and right fields in both series. The use of an animal's head as symbol, placed almost as if it were an outgrowth of one of the serpents, is paralleled in the initial series of Apameia. The size of the cista in the earliest Ephesian obverses is considerably larger than in succeeding decades. Only 1 of the 11 known coins from Series 1 and 2 comes from a recorded hoard (Asia Minor 1928, 58). As might be expected, the earliest cistophori had, for the most part, ceased to circulate by the time the earliest cistophoric hoards were buried.
Series 3: To r., head of Artemis, r., with quiver.
5-a. Jameson, 1500, 12.31
6-c. *ANS, 12.34↗. Ethnic to r.; symbol to l. ( Plate XI, 7)
Series 4: To r., bow in case r.
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 23)
Series 5: To r., quiver and bow r.
6-b. Berlin, 12.24
Series 6: To r., stag feeding r.
7-a. ANS-Strauss, 11.23↑
7-b. *Berlin, 12.03 ( Plate XI, 11)
7-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 59), 12.48↑
7-d. Von Aulock, SNG 7831, 12.37
7-e. Myers, Apr. 11, 1975, 133, 12.55
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 24)
1-a. *London (Naville, Apr. 4, 1921, 2438), 6.03↑
( Plate XI, 12); Ankara
Series 7: To r., strung bow and arrow r.
8-a. Oxford, 12.46↑
8-b. *Vienna, 12.05↖ ( Plate XI, 13)
Series 3 is the last series to reflect the experimentation with the format of the Ephesian reverses. As in the first two series, the ethnic is variously placed to the left or to the right. The symbol–Artemis with quiver–is the first of many allusions on the Ephesian cistophori to the chief deity of the city. This and the immediately following issues celebrate Artemis in her role as divine huntress. Series 4 and 5, which share obverse die E6 with Series 3, have for symbols a bow in case, and a quiver and bow, respectively. The three issues were either of short duration or small in size, for obverse E6 does not show any serious signs of wear in any of the recorded specimens. The feeding stag of Series 6 is another reference to Artemis and is linked to the quiver and bow of Series 5 on the didrachms only. The bow and arrow used in Series 7 is perhaps to be associated with these early issues where the instruments of archery are so prominent. One example each of Series 4 and 6 was present in the Yeşilhisar hoard buried in 130 B.C., and the latter piece bears signs of considerable wear.
Series 8: To r., club, upright.
9-a. *Berlin, 12.34 ( Plate XII, 1)
9-b. Von Aulock, SNG 1855, 12.28
Series 9: To r., date palm.
9-a. *Cambridge, SNG 4428, 12.37↑ ( Plate XII, 2)
Series 10: To r., candelabrum.
9-b. London, 12.60↑; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 61), 12.37↑
Series 11: To r., cock r.
9-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 7834, 12.68; Vienna, 12.36↗ ( Plate XII, 4)
– Commerce (Bahkesir 1958, 25)
1-a. *Berlin, 3.05 ( Plate XII, 5)
Series 8-11 must fall in the decade 160-150, since both the earliest issues and those which postdate 150-145 can be securely identified by format and die linkage. The placement of these four series before Series 12-21 is arbitrary, as is the sequence from 8 to 11. All four series were struck from a single obverse die (E9) which shows no signs of wear in any surviving specimen. The club, placed vertically, is an early symbol at Pergamum (Series 5) and Sardes (Series 3). The cock appears again in Series 38 at Ephesus. The Yeşilhisar piece is only somewhat worn and the ANS piece from the Asia Minor 1970 hoard ( IGCH 1460) is surprisingly well preserved for its burial ca. 95 B.C.
Series 12: To r., forepart of stag r. Pinder 17.
10-a. *Winterthur, 12.68 ( Plate XII, 6); Berlin, 12.02 (pierced)
10-b. Munich, 12.65↖
11-d. *Istanbul ( Plate XII, 7)
Series 13: To r., cult statue of Artemis Ephesia facing. Pinder 19.
12-a. *Paris, 11.93↑ ( Plate XII, 9); Stockholm, 11.70↑ (pierced)
13-b. Copenhagen, SNG 325, 12.25↑
14-c. London, BMC 143, 11.78↑; von Aulock, SNG 1852, 12.64; Munich, 12.37↑
14-d. Berlin, 12.63
15-e. *ANS (Kress, March 19-21, 1959, 239), 12.59↖ ( Plate XII, 10)
15-f. Berlin, 12.59
16-h. Hirsch, June 26-29, 1967, 3202
17-i. Stack's, June 10-11, 1970, 344, 12.8
Series 14: To r., Artemis facing, holding torches.
18-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 7830, 12.54
18-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 40), 12.62↖
18-c. Wulfing, 12.50↑ ( Plate XII, 12)
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 26)
Series 15: To r., Artemis r., drawing arrow from quiver with r., holding bow in extended l., with hound (?)
18-b. Cambridge, SNG 4429, 12.51; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 53), 12.29↖
Series 16: To r., temple key.
18-b. Von Aulock, SNG 1854, 12.10
Series 17: To r., bee within wreath.
18-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.50↑ ( Plate XIII, 3)
18-b. ANS-ETN, 12.03↑; ANS-Strauss, 12.66↗; Zara
18-c. ANS-Strauss, 12.05↑ (pierced)
18-d. London, BMC 152, 12.70↗
18-e. Copenhagen, SNG 309, 12.60↑; von Aulock, SNG 7838, 12.70
18-f. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 41), 12.62↑
18-g. Paris, 12.41↑
18-h. Ratto, Apr. 4, 1927, 1933, 12.50
18-i. Hamburger, May 29ff., 1929, 362, 12.67
18-j. Budapest, 12.52↑
18-l. Vienna, 12.41↗
18-m. Berlin, 12.58
19-m. *ANS-Strauss, 12.64↗ ( Plate XIII, 4)
Series 12-17 bear symbols which make almost exclusive reference to Artemis or to the city itself. Series 13-15 depict Artemis herself; Series 16 has as symbol the key to the temple of Artemis; and the bee in wreath of Series 17 is distinctly civic in nature, the bee being an Ephesian coin type in its own right. Obverse E10 has the curved cista lid characteristic of the earliest Ephesian dies, and the large size of the cista of obverse E11 is likewise an early feature. Series 12 and 13 share obverse die E12 and the Artemis with torches of Series 14 is so close to the Artemis Ephesia of Series 13 that the two are very likely contemporary series. (The Artemis with torches reappears in Series 38 in conjunction with the cock of Series 11.) Series 14-17 all share obverse E18. None of the 24 surviving pieces struck from this die shows any sign of die wear or breakage. If the four series were not issued simultaneously they must have been short in duration, very small in quantity, or both. The three pieces from the Yeşilhisar hoard are in worn to fine condition. Obverse E19 is undoubtedly by the same hand as E18.
Series 18: To r., bee.
20-a. *Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 43), 12.59↑ ( Plate XIII, 6)
Series 19: To r., bow case with strap r. Pinder 18.
20-a. *Paris, 12.56↑ ( Plate XIII, 7)
Series 20: To r., stag r.
20-b. ANS-BYB, SNG 1055, 12.56↑; ANS, 12.57↑
20-c. Gotha, 11.29↑
Series 21: To r., stag r., behind which, palm tree.
21-a. *ANS (Balikesir 1958, 27), 12.43↑ ( Plate XIII, 9)
22-b. ANS, 12.48↑; Berlin, 12.70
22-c. ANS-Strauss, 12.36↑
22-d. Berlin, 12.17
22-e. Von Aulock, SNG 1853, 12.40; Munich, 12.12↑ (pierced)
22-f. Cambridge, SNG 4430, 12.61↑
22-g. London, BMC 151, 12.71↑
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 61)
3-a. *Munich ( Plate XIII, 11)
4-a. *Paris, 3.06↖ ( Plate XIII, 12)
Series 18 (bee), which survives in a unique specimen from the Yeşilhisar hoard, may merely be a variant of the bee within wreath of Series 17. It is linked to Series 19 (bow-case) and 20 (stag) by obverse E20. Signs of die wear and a few small breaks in the obverses of the four examples of Series 20 establish it as the last of the three. In Series 21 a palm is placed behind the stag. This is a major coin type at Ephesus, as is the bee of Series 18. The stag and palm piece from the Balikesir hoard is rather worn; the London specimen from the 1928 hoard is better preserved although buried about a decade later.
Series 22: To r., Artemis slaying stag r.
25-a. Oxford, 12.66↑
25-b. Von Aulock, SNG 7832, 12.55
25-c. ANS-Strauss, 12.24↑
25-d. *Paris, 12.28↑ ( Plate XIV, 2)
26-d. *ANS-Strauss, 11.90↑ ( Plate XIV, 3)
26-e. Klenau, Dec. 11, 1971, 277
27-d. Kress, Nov. 29, 1962, 305, 12.3
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 28)
Series 23: To r., Nike r., holding wreath. Pinder 16.
26-c. *ANS-Strauss, 12.41↑ ( Plate XIV, 5); Paris, 12.23↑ (pierced)
26-d. Paris, 11.78↑; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 55), 12.54↑
Series 24: To r., cornucopiae.
28-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 38), 12.63↖
28-c. ANS (Balikesir 1958, 29), 12.53↖
29-d. ANS (Balikesir 1958, 30), 12.55↗
29-e. Von Aulock, SNG 7840, 12.50
29-f. Vienna, 12.25↖
Series 22 is the last of the early issues which directly refers to or depicts the patron goddess of Ephesus. The reverses, which show Artemis slaying a stag, are struck in conjunction with two obverse dies (E25 and 26) used in Series 23, which has for symbol Nike with wreath. Die breaks which develop in the left field of E25 and in the right field of E26 in Series 23 establish that series as the later of the two. (A Nike with wreath is also used as symbol in Pergamum Series 18 and Tralles Series 24.) Series 24, which bears a cornucopiae on its reverses survives in seven specimens, five of which come from recorded hoards. The ANS piece from the 1962 hoard, buried about 145-140 B.C., is fairly well preserved, the two from the Balikesir hoard are very well preserved, and the two Yeşilhisar specimens are somewhat worn. If the varying condition of the hoard coins is contradictory, the high frequency of the cornucopiae pieces in the hoards suggests a fairly late placement in the Ephesian sequence. Series 24 is probably one of the last to be struck before the format of the Ephesian reverses was made more complex by the addition of secondary symbols or control marks. (The cornucopiae is also used in Pergamum Series 22, Tralles Series 13 and Apameia Series 19.)
Series 25: To r., eagle r., fillet in beak.
31-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.50↑
31-d. ANS (Asia Minor 1970, 7), 12.46↖
31-e. Copenhagen, SNG 310, 12.31↑; Berlin, 12.59
31-f. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 48), 12.52↑
31-g. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 49), 12.54↗
31-h. Frankfurt, 11.98
31-i. Ratto, Apr. 4, 1927, 1934, 12.59↑
Series 26: To r., filleted hand l.
32-b. Von Aulock, SNG 7836, 12.52; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 44), 12.69↑
32-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 45), 12.38↗
32-d. Paris, 11.59↑ (pierced)
33-e. London, BMC 149, 12.59↑
33-f. Copenhagen, SNG 311, 12.33↑; Berlin, 12.50
33-g. *Berlin, 12.06 (pierced) ( Plate XIV, 11)
33-h. Vienna, 12.16↗
Series 27: Above l., star; to r. laurel branch, filleted. Pinder 21.
34-b. Uncertain provenance; Commerce
35-c. *ANS, 12.11↑. Struck over a tetradrachm of Thasos ( Plate XV, 1)
35-d. ANS-Strauss, 12.48↑
35-e. Berlin, 12.64
35-f. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 46), 12.70↖
35-g. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 47), 12.48↑
35-h. New York City, private coll., 12.00↑
35-i. BollN vol. 7 no 6., Dec. 1970, 151
36-i. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 64), 12.58↗
36-j. ANS-ETN, 12.34↑
36-k. Kress, Feb. 10, 1969, 223
37-k. *Hirsch, Dec. 11-14, 1967, 2171 ( Plate XV, 2)
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 65)
Series 28: Above l., bee; to r., coiled serpent on cista. Pinder 22.
37-a. ANS (Balikesir 1958, 31), 12.56↑
37-b. *Vienna, 12.19↑ ( Plate XV, 3)
38-d. Kastner, Nov. 26, 1974, 100 (ex Jacoby), 12.51
38-e. Berlin, 12.35
39-e. *Berlin, 12.53 ( Plate XV, 5)
39-f. ANS-Strauss, 12.23↑; von Aulock, SNG 7837, 12.68
40-i. ANS-BYB, SNG 1056, 12.38↗
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 32)
5-a. *Paris, 3.04↑ ( Plate XV, 6); ANS-Stephens, 3.06↑
6-a. *Berlin, 3.09 ( Plate XV, 7)
Series 25-28 document the transition from a simpler to a more elaborate system of reverse control marks at Ephesus. The first three of these series are closely related although there is no die linkage among the known specimens. Obverse dies E30-35 are very close in style and each of the three reverse marks is a prominently filleted object: Series 25, eagle with fillet in beak; Series 26, filleted left or right hand (of Artemis?); and Series 27, filleted branch. In the last-mentioned series, a second control mark is added: a star, placed in the upper left field. Two similarly located marks are also used in Series 28, which shares obverse E37 with Series 27. In the latter series, the bee to the left is an appropriate Ephesian device and the serpent on cista to the right is a variation on the obverse type itself. Series 26 is the latest Ephesian issue to appear in the 1962 hoard; Series 27 is the latest in the Balikesir hoard.
One example of Series 27 ( Plate XV, 1) is struck over a tetradrachm of Thasos of the Heracles Soter type. The piece, which weighs only 12.11 gm, is the result of reducing the size and hence the weight of the flan of the originally Attic-weight piece, before restriking it with the cistophoric dies. The Thasian tetradrachms are traditionally dated after 146B.C., but this date has recently been questioned by M. Thompson, who prefers to place the beginning of the Heracles series a few decades earlier.1 The evidence of the Ephesian overstrike does not unequivocably rule out the traditional chronology, but renders it unlikely. The cistophorus can be dated about 145 B.C. and it is improbable that the undertype is a Thracian tetradrachm of the very earliest variety which had been brought to Ephesus from Thasos and restruck in the very year it entered into circulation. Enough is visible of the Thasian undertype that a systematic comparison with other Thasian pieces might lead to an identification of the dies. If the issue marks were found to be rather late in the series, as seems likely, Thompson's suggestion would be confirmed and the Thasian chronology placed on firm ground.
Series 29: Below l., coiled serpent; above l. and r., Dioscuri caps surmounted by stars.
41-a. *Gotha, 12.04↑ ( Plate XV, 8)
42-b. *ANS-ETN, 12.45↖ ( Plate XV, 9)
Series 30a: Above l., wreath; to r., aplustre r.
41-a. *Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 52), 12.37↖ ( Plate XV, 10)
Series 30b: Above l., wreath; to r., aplustre r.; within l. serpent coil, prow r.
Series 31: To r., prow facing, within wreath.
43-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 7843, 12.33 ( Plate XV, 12)
Series 32: To l., prow r.; to r., EФE.
43-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.29↖ ( Plate XV, 13)
Series 29 employs as a secondary symbol the coiled serpent (minus cista) of Series 28, which perhaps indicates a common authority, partially responsible for both issues. The transfer of the symbol to the left field may signify a subsidiary role during the second term of office. Further speculation is unwise. The phenomenon is not paralleled elsewhere on Ephesian cistophori prior to 133 B.C., unless the bee of Series 18 represents a continuation into a second year of the bee in wreath authority, or the addition of a palm tree in Series 21 to the stag of Series 20 indicates a comparable extended tenure of office. After the Ephesian mint comes under Roman control in 133, the carrying over of control marks in two or more consecutive years can be documented with certainty. For the undated issues, it is impossible to calculate the length of time any specific symbol remained in use. As noted above, Series 8-11 are all struck from a single obverse die, whereas Series 2, 22, 27 and 28 each make use of four obverse dies. A similarly pronounced fluctuation in the number of dies used in a single series has also been noted at Pergamum.
Series 30a and 30b share obverse E41 with Series 29 and are likewise dual symbol issues. It is tempting to see some significance in the addition of the prow in Series 30b and the overall reference to naval prominence in the aplustre, wreath and prow of Series 30a-32. If the sequence presented here is correct, these issues are contemporary with Series 23 and 24 at Pergamum, where a diminutive prow is similarly inserted in the coil of the left serpent. The Pergamene issues have been tentatively associated with the naval victory over Andriscus in 147 B.C. and the Ephesian series may commemorate the same occasion.
Thompson, ANSMN 1966, p. 61 and n. 4; see also Le Rider, Thasos , p. 190. I discussed the Ephesus/Thasos overstrike in ANSMN 1972, pp. 30-32.
Series 33: Above l., K (year 20=140/139 B.C.); to r., bust of Artemis r., with quiver. Pinder 24.
44-a. ANS, 12.50↗
44-c. London, 12.26↑
44-d. Von Aulock, SNG 7833, 12.58
44-e. New York City, MMA (Ward 661), 12.46; Schlessinger, Feb. 4, 1935, 1264, 12.30; Vienna, 12.25↗
45-g. Paris, 12.32↑; Winterthur, 11.89
3-a. *Naville, Apr. 4, 1921, 2439, 6.02 ( Plate XVI, 3)
Series 34a: Above l., A; above r., K (year 21 = 139/138 B.C.); to r., double cornucopiae.
46-b. Copenhagen, 12.66↑
46-c. Oxford, 12.30↑
47-d. Bern, 12.52
47-e. London, 12.65↑
47-f. London, 12.65↑
47-g. Von Aulock, SNG 1857, 12.45; Kress, July, 21, 1969, 171
47-h. Berlin, 12.39
Series 34b: Above l., A; above r., K (year 21 = 139/138 B.C.); above center, bee; to r., double cornucopiae. Pinder 23.
47-a. *Paris, 12.40↑ ( Plate XVI, 6); von Aulock, SNG 7841, 12.74
47-b. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 69), 12.67↗. K erased
Series 35: Above l., A (year 1 = 139/138 B.C.); above center, bee; to r., double cornucopiae.
48-b. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 16), 12.59↑; Kress, June 30, 1964, 286
4-a. *ANS-Stephens, 6.15↑. No date; to l., bee on side ( Plate XVI, 8)
7-a. *Berlin, 2.73. No date; to l., bee on side ( Plate XVI, 9)
Series 36: Above r., B (year 2 = 138/137 B.C.); to r., bust of Artemis Ephesia facing, with lofty headdress. Pinder 20.
48-a. * Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 58), 12.67↗ ( Plate XVI, 10)
49-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 57), 12.60↑; Hirsch, June 27, 1973, 104, 12.43
49-c. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 71), 12.43↑; von Aulock. SNG 7842, 12.65
49-d. London, BMC 144, 12.65↑; Kress, June 30, 1964, 285
49-e. Berlin, 12.52 (pierced); Vienna, 12.38↗
49-f. Serrure, Apr. 10, 1911, 43; Kress, Nov. 10, 1969, 243
49-g. Lockett, SNG 2813 (Naville, April 4, 1921, 2435), 12.64↑
50-g. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 72), 12.71↗; Paris, 12.30↑
50-h. Von Aulock, SNG 1858, 12.59
50-i. Helbing, Apr. 12, 1927, 1774 = Helbing, March 22, 1920, 111
51-j. *ANS-Strauss, 12.65↑ ( Plate XVI, 11); Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 56), 12.74↑
51-l. Kress, Nov. 30, 1961, 208
52-m. ANS-BYB, SNG 1057, 12.46↗; Kress, March 15, 1966, 188, 11.95
52-n. ANS-BYB, SNG 1058, 12.58↗; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 60), 12.50↗; Commerce
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 73-79)
Series 33-36 are the only known issues of Ephesian cistophori which bear dates prior to the formation of the Province of Asia in 134/133 B.C. Five of the pieces come from the Yeşilhisar hoard, buried in 130 B.C., and 12 others from the 1928 hoard, buried in 128 B.C. In both hoards these dated pieces are well represented and only those bearing provincial era dates outnumber them. None of these series is present in the Balikesir and 1962 hoards buried ca. 135 and ca. 140 B.C. respectively. Series 33 (year 20) must post-date 158 B.C., since one surviving specimen ( Plate XVI, 1) was struck over a Macedonian tetradrachm of the first district, a series securely dated to 158-149 B.C.2. Part of the legend MAK ... ΠPΩ and the end of the club are still visible beneath the cistophoric obverse. Series 34 and 35 (years 21 and 1) are extremely close in style and format. Both have a double cornucopiae as principal symbol; the A is placed to the left in both cases; and in Series 34b and 35 a bee appears between the serpents' heads. Although there are no die links among the known specimens, it seems certain that several of the dies of years A and A K were executed contemporaneously by the same man, rather than 20 years apart. On one of Newell's pieces (47-b), where the K is erased, the two series appear almost identical, and on the didrachms and drachms, where the dates are omitted, the two series are indistinguishable. Series 36 shares obverse die E48 with Series 35 and replaces the double cornucopiae with a bust of Artemis; the date is shifted to the upper right field. No early Ephesian cistophori are known bearing the dates Γ to |Θ.
I have suggested elsewhere3 that the four series are dated for the twentieth and twenty-first regnal years of Attalus II (140/139 and 139/138) and the first and second regnal years of Attalus III (139/138 and 138/137). This would explain why pieces marked A K and A are so close in style and format. They were issued in the same calendar year, but commemorate different regnal years. The erased K on Newell's piece may represent an adjustment made by the Ephesian mint officials after the death of Attalus II. In order to avoid restriking still unissued, and now misdated, A K pieces, the K was simply removed, rendering the coins indistinguishable from those shortly to be struck from the new year A dies.
The Macedonian issues of 168-146 B.C. have been discussed most recently by MacKay, pp. 256-64, with earlier bibliography.
53-a. *ANS, 12.39↑. Doublestruck ( Plate XVII, 1)
Series 38: Above center, Artemis facing, holding torches; to r., cock.
53-a. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 17), 12.40↑
53-c. *Berlin, 12.61 ( Plate XVII, 2)
54-e. ANS, 12.28↑
54-f. Berlin, 12.38
54-g. Von Aulock, SNG 7835, 12.72; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 51), 12.52↗
54-h. Vienna, 12.52↗
54-i. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 50), 12.65↑
55-i. Kress, Oct. 23, 1963, 480
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 82)
Series 39: Above center, nude man facing, leaning on spear held in r.; to r., hippocamp.
56-a. *ANS-ETN, 11.75↑ ( Plate, XVII, 4)
Series 37-39 are the only three series which appear to postdate the dated issues of 140-137 B.C., since they alone have reverse symbols placed between the serpents' heads. It is tempting to assign them on an annual basis to the three years 137/136, 136/135, 135/134, but because two of the series survive in only a single specimen it is unwise to assume that the record is complete. Series 37 most closely resembles the dated issues: the monogram occupies the position formerly reserved for the date, the circular altar replaces the bee of years A K and A, and the owl is in the right field. Series 37 shares obverse E53 with Series 38, which employs two symbols already used at Ephesus: the Artemis with torches of Series 14 appears between the serpents' heads, and the cock of Series 11 is placed to the right. Series 39 replaces Artemis with a nude warrior leaning on a spear, and the cock with a hippocamp. The four pieces of Series 38 from the Yeşilhisar and 1928 hoards are all well preserved.
All following series, all denominations:
Obv.: As above.
Rev.: As above, except to l., EΦE; to r., torch; other marks as indicated.
ANSMN 1972, pp. 17-23.
Series 40: Above l., A (year 1 =134/133 B.C.); above center, bee. Pinder 25.
57-a. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 83), 12.47↗
59-d. London, 12.58↑
59-e. Berlin, 12.49
59-f. Munich, 12.62↑; Ankara (şahnali 1952, 4), 12.70
59-g. Von Aulock, SNG 7844, 12.50
59-h. Klenau, July 10, 1971, 87
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 84)
5-a. *Munich, 6.22 ( Plate XVII, 6)
8-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 1859, 3.00↗( Plate XVII, 7)
Series 41: Above l., B (year 2 = 133/132 B.C.); above center, bee. Pinder 26.
59-a. *Cambridge, SNG 4431, 12.44↑ ( Plate XVII, 8)
61-c. Paris, 12.61↗
61-d. Munich, 12.55↗
61-e. Vienna, 12.60↗
62-f. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 19), 12.55↗
62-h. Artemis Antiquities F.P.L. 6, 1972, 41
62A-i Vatican, 12.06↖ (pierced)
63-j. *Hague, 12.41↗ ( Plate XVII, 9); ANS-Strauss, 12.03↗
63-k. Ankara (şahnali 1952, 3), 12.62; de Luynes 2597, 12.60
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 87-89)
Series 42a: Above l., Γ (year 3=132/131 B.C.); above center, bee. Pinder 27.
63-a. *Istanbul ( Plate XVII, 10)
64-c. New York City, private coll., 12.58↑
65-d. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 20), 12.43↗
65-f. Oxford, 12.18↑
66-g. Von Aulock, SNG 7846, 12.62
67-h. Berlin, 12.45; Commerce (Asia Minor 1966, 22), 12.61
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 92)
Series 40-42a are the first three annual emissions of the Ephesian mint under Roman control, and bear dates reckoned from the formation of the Province of Asia in 134/133 B.C. Their sequence is confirmed not only by the marks A, B, Γ, but by die linkage as well. The format of these earliest provincial issues is identical. In all three series the date is placed in the upper left field and a bee is included between the serpents' heads. Series 40-42a have many points of resemblance with the earlier dated series, especially Series 34a and 35 where a bee is similarly located on the reverses. Apart from style, the emissions of years 139/138 (Series 35) and 134/133 (Series 40) are distinguishable only by the substitution of the torch for the double cornucopiae. Whatever function the changing symbols served prior to 134, the bee and torch have no comparable significance. The torch, which remains the civic symbol of the Ephesian mint until the introduction of cistophori of new types under Mark Antony, is in actuality a subsidiary type, not a control mark; the bee also seems to lack any temporal significance. The introduction of civic badges on the Ephesian cistophori predates the parallel phenomenon at Pergamum by at least eight to ten years, and that at Tralles and Apameia by several decades. There is no apparent explanation for this disparity in time, although with the removal of direct Pergamene supervision upon the death of Attalus III, one would not expect uniformity at the various mints. The immediate decision at Ephesus to date the coinage from the Roman provincial era possibly reflects a readier acceptance of Roman domination than in the other Attalid cities. It is perhaps significant that it was an Ephesian fleet that turned back the pretender Aristonicus, while other cities opened their gates to him as the rightful heir to the Attalid throne.4
Series 42b: Above l., Γ (year 3 = 132/131 B.C.)
69-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.13↗
69-c. ANS-Strauss, 11.80↗; Vienna, 12.29↗
69-d. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 21), 12.44↑
69-e. Ankara (şahnali 1952, 6), 12.54
70-g. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 94), 12.71↑; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 65), 12.62↑
70-h. Von Aulock, SNG 7845, 12.58
71-i. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 22), 12.63↗
71-j. Athens, 12.37↗
71-k. Kress, October, 4, 1962, 165, 12.7
72-l. London, 12.68↑
73-m. London, BMC 156, 12.52↗
73-n. Copenhagen, SNG 317, 12.12↑
74-o. Glasgow, Hunter, 26
74-p. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 62), 12.65↗
74-q. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 63), 12.68↗
74-r. Vienna, 12.58↗
74-s. Moshniagin, 12.65↑
75-t. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 64), 12.57↗
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 95-96)
Series 43a: Above l., Δ (year 4 = 131/130 B.C.); above center, bee.
Series 43b: Above center, Δ (year 4 = 131/130 B.C.). Pinder 28.
77-b. Kress, July, 5, 1971, 178 = Hirsch, July 1-4, 1969, 2357a
78-c. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 24), 12.73↗
78-e. Gotha, 11.94↗
79-e. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 66), 12.65↑
80-f. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 97), 12.63↑
81-g. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 25), 12.33↗
82-h. ANS-Strauss, 12.60↗
83-i. ANS-Strauss, 12.38↑
84-j. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 26), 12.43↗
85-k. Copenhagen, SNG 318, 12.26↑; Berlin, 12.60
85-l. Schulman, June 6-7, 9-11, 1969, 1476
86-m. Von Aulock, SNG 7847, 12.55
86-n. Munich, 12.64↗
86-o. M�nster, 12.24↗
87-p. Berlin, 11.16
88-q. Ankara (şahnali 1952, 5), 12.69
88-r. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 67), 12.67↗
88-s. Vienna, 12.41↗
89-t. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 68), 12.40↗
90-u. Budapest, 11.86↑
91-v. Karlsruhe, 12.11↑
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 98-101)
Series 44a: Above center, E (year 5=130/129 B.C.)
92-a. ANS-Strauss, 12.61↗ (pierced)
92-b. *Amsterdam, 12.19↑ ( Plate XVIII, 6); von Aulock, SNG 1860, 12.55; Kress, Nov. 24, 1966, 546
92-c. Frankfurt, Bundesbank (Button, Oct. 2-3, 1958, 55), 12.43↗
92-d. Helbing, Mar. 20, 1928, 344, 12.65
93-f. Hannover 201, 12.13
93-g. Aberdeen, SNG 272, 12.56↗; Glendining, Apr. 7, 1971, 89, 12.70
93-h. New York City, private coll., 12.53↑
94-i. ANS-Strauss, 12.62↗
94-j. Berlin, 12.51
95-k. London, BMC 157, 12.27↑; Paris, 12.28↑
96-l. Copenhagen, SNG 320, 12.40↑
97-m. Vienna, 12.67↑
97-n. ANS (Asia Minor 1970, 8), 12.44↑
98-n. *Cambridge, McClean 8087, 12.44↑ ( Plate XVIII, 7)
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 103-6)
98-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.60↑ ( Plate XVIII, 8); Gotha, 12.58↗
98-b. London, 12.73↗
Series 42b-44b reflect a brief period of uncertainty with regard to the format of the cistophoric reverses and to the inclusion or omission of marks indicating personal control. Series 42b, 43b and 44a omit the civic bee as secondary symbol, although in 43a the format of the first three emissions is retained. The removal of the bee in 42b did not affect the location of the date, but in Series 43b and 44a, it was thought preferable to place the Δ and E between the serpents' heads where formerly the bee had been. Finally, in Series 44b, personal marks make their appearance. The date is between the serpents' heads as before, but a symbol and a monogram (lyre and ) have been added in the upper left and right fields respectively. The use of a personal monogram in conjunction with a symbol is characteristic of Pergamene emissions from Series 27 on, as well as of the latest issues of Tralles, Apameia and Sardes. The monogram plus symbol format was, however, quickly rejected at Ephesus, and Series 44b is the only surviving instance of its occurrence on the Ephesian cistophori before or after 133 B.C.
Series 44c: Above l., E (year 5= 130/129 B.C.); above center, stag r.
99-a. Berlin, 12.43
100-b. *ANS-Strauss, 12.67↗( Plate XVIII, 9); Vienna, 12.36↗
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 107)
Series 45: Above l., ⊏ (year 6 = 129/128 B.C.); above center, stag r.
100-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.54↖
100-c. Hirsch, Nov. 22-24, 1971, 194, 12.59
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 109)
With Series 44c a format is selected which remains the norm for all other Ephesian cistophoric emissions through 67 B.C. The date is again placed in the upper left field, but the position formerly occupied by the Ephesian bee or the date is now reserved for a symbol of purely temporal and probably personal significance. That the format was arrived upon late in 130/129 B.C. is confirmed by the use of obverse E100 in both Series 44c and 45, the latter issued in 129/128 B.C. In these two series the symbol between the serpents' heads is a stag, which is also reused on the coins of year H.5 The survival and revival of symbols on the late Ephesian cistophori is an interesting phenomenon which, however, is beyond the scope of this volume.6
bow in case
quiver and bow
bow and arrow
forepart of stag
Artemis with torches
Artemis with hound
bee within wreath
bow case with strap
stag and palm
Artemis slaying stag
eagle with fillet
hand with fillet
star and filleted branch
bee and serpent on cista
serpent and Dioscuri caps
wreath and aplustre
wreath and aplustre and prow
prow within wreath
K and Artemis with quiver
A K and double cornucopiae
A K and bee and double cornucopiae
A and bee and double cornucopiae
B and Artemis with headdress
Artemis with torches and cock nude man and hippocamp
A and bee and torch
B and bee and torch
Γ and bee and torch
Γ and torch
Δ and bee and torch
Δ and torch
E and torch
E and stag and torch
⊏ and stag and torch
SNG von Aulock 1861.
I discussed these late issues in a summary fashion in ANSMN 1972, pp. 23-30.
Series la: To 1., humped bull 1., placed vertically; to r. TPA.
1-a. *ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 118), 12.42↑. Impress of circular die ( Plate XIX, 1)
Series 1b: To 1., TPAΛ; to r., humped bull r. Pinder 141.
1-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 84), 12.69↗
3-e. *ANS (Balikesir 1958, 34), 12.14↑ ( Plate XIX, 4)
Series 1c: To 1., TPAΛ; to r., forepart of humped bull r.
4-a. Von Aulock, SNG 3251, 12.52
4-b. *Paris, 12.12↑ ( Plate XIX, 5)
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 35)
The earliest cistophoric issues of Tralles are readily identifiable by the irregular placement of the symbol and the occurrence of both three- and four-letter ethnics. The first series, which is known in three variants, appropriately depicts the humped bull which is an important coin type in its own right at Tralles. In Series la, known in a unique specimen, the three-letter ethnic TPA is located in the right field, and the symbol is awkwardly placed in a vertical position in the left field. This orientation is characteristic of many of the earliest Pergamene symbols, and the irregular placement of the ethnic is a feature of the earliest cistophori of both Pergamum and Ephesus. In Series 1b and 1c, the ethnic assumes its standard four-letter form and the symbol is in the right field. Whether the distinction between the humped bull and the forepart alone is merely a variation in die cutting or has some chronological significance is indeterminable. The four specimens which were present in the hoards of 135-128 B.C. are all worn.
Series 2: To r., eagle r. with head reverted, on fulmen.
4-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.55↑ ( Plate XIX, 6)
5-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.21↑
6-d. Von Aulock, SNG 8282, 12.55
6A-e. Bourgey, March 10, 1976, 98, 12.58
7-g. London, BMC 10, 12.25↑
Series 3: To r., laureate head of Zeus r. with scepter.
8-b. London, BMC 2, 12.63↑
8-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 81), 12.60↑
8-d. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 82), 12.52↑
8-e. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 83), 12.63↖
8-f. *Vienna, 11.70↗ ( Plate XIX, 10)
9-g. Cambridge, McClean 8725, 12.80↑
9-h. Berlin, 12.47
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 122)
11-j. Copenhagen, SNG 636, 12.37↑. No scepter
11-k. Sofia. No scepter
11-1. Leningrad. No scepter
2-b. *Berlin, 6.17. To 1., TPA ( Plate XX, 2)
3-b. *Von Aulock, SNG 3265, 6.00. To 1., TPA ( Plate XX, 3)
Series 4: To r., helmet 1., below which, fulmen. Pinder 147.
12-a. ANS (Balikesir 1958, 37), 12.46↑; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 86), 12.55↖
12-c. ANS-Strauss, 12.68↑
12-d. Copenhagen, SNG 639, 12.56↑; von Aulock, SNG 3246, 12.44
12-e. Paris, 11.42↑; Grahm, June 9, 1930, 521; Stuttgart, 12.55↑
Series 5: To r., maeander. Pinder 143.
13-b. *Leningrad ( Plate XX, 7)
14-b. Copenhagen, SNG 644, 10.53↑
16-c. Naville, June 18, 1923, 2685
16-d. London, BMC 4, 12.52↑
16-e. Von Aulock, SNG 3245, 12.69↑
16-f. Berlin, 12.29
16-g. *Berlin, 12.45 ( Plate XX, 8); Commerce
16A-h. Vienna, 12.56↗
Series 2-5 follow Series 1 in an unbroken die-linked sequence. Series 2 utilizes obverse T4, also used for Series lc; Series 2 and 3 share die T7; and Series 3, 4 and 5 were all struck during the lifetime of T12. The eagle on fulmen of Series 2 and the laureate Zeus head of Series 3 are, like the humped bull, major coin types at Tralles, and appropriate symbols for the city of Zeus Larasius. The cistophori of Tralles are comparable to those of Ephesus in the repeated reference on them to the chief deity of the city. The maeander of Series 5 is also civic in nature and recalls the favorable position of Tralles in the rich Maeander valley.
Because of the continuous die linkage, the first series at Tralles present a rare opportunity to observe the pattern of die production at this early period. The first series employs four obverse dies, one of which (T4) was in sufficiently good condition to be reused in Series 2 which ultimately required three additional dies. Series 3 was struck from six different obverses, one of which (T7) was carried over from the preceding series, while another (T12) was retained for Series 4 and 5. The latter eventually required four additional dies. It is unlikely that Series 3 and 5 represent periods from four to six times as long as that of Series 4, but whether the varying number of dies corresponds to economic or to chronological factors cannot really be ascertained. It has been shown at Pergamum and Ephesus that the symbols almost certainly do not carry chronological connotations. (The dolphin and thyrsus are employed at Pergamum (Series 23 and 24) for almost a decade; Series 8-11 at Ephesus may all have been struck in the same year; and Series 33-35 at Ephesus exactly correspond to three annual issues using one symbol per year.) Tralles Series 1-5 appear to substantiate a similarly erratic pattern for that mint.
Series 6: To r., bucranium.
13-b. ANS-ETN, 12.03↑; ANS-Strauss, 12.09↑; London, BMC 3, 12.51↑
13-c. ANS-Strauss, 12.56↑; Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 89), 12.65↖
17-d. * Winterthur, 12.58↗ ( Plate XX, 10); von Aulock, SNG 3244, 12.55
Series 7: To r., eagle with spread wings, head reverted.
16-a. *Yale ( Plate XX, 11)
Series 8: To r., wreath.
18-a. *ANS (Kress, Nov. 29, 1962, 302), 12.19↑ ( Plate XX, 13); Petsalis
19-b. *Kress, July 21, 1969, 182a ( Plate XXI, 1)
20-c. *Booth, 12.21↑ ( Plate XXI, 2)
Series 6-8 are the last of the early die-linked issues at Tralles. Both Series 6 (bucranium) and Series 7 (eagle) share obverse dies with Series 5, and therefore do not seem to be sequential but contemporary. The simultaneous use of different symbols further complicates the pattern discussed above and may indicate two minting authorities with overlapping or identical terms of office. In the later issues of both Pergamum and Ephesus the doubling of symbols or pairing of symbols and monograms on a single piece is common. If, as has been suggested, this connotes multiple control, the simultaneous use of symbols on different pieces may signify a similar condition for the earlier emissions.
Series 8 shares obverse T18 with Series 7. The wreath is used again at Tralles in Series 9 and 34, and is also the symbol for Pergamum Series 20, Ephesus Series 30 and Apameia Series 14.
Series 9: To r., wreath, below which, fulmen.
Series 10: To r., fulmen, horizontal.
23-c. Naville, July 2, 1929, 394, 12.76
Series 11: To r., fulmen, vertical.
2-a. *ANS-ETN, 2.99↑ ( Plate XXI, 8)
Series 12: To r., ear of grain.
25-a. *ANS, 12.47↖ ( Plate XXI, 9)
26-c. Copenhagen, SNG 643, 12.38↑
27-d. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 75), 12.45↖
27-e. *Vienna, 12.54↖ ( Plate XXI, 10)
Series 9-12 are not linked to the previous issues, but may be placed next in the sequence on the basis of style and on the character of the reverse symbols. Series 9-11 have as distinguishing marks a wreath over fulmen, a horizontal fulmen and a vertical fulmen respectively, which seem to be variations on the wreath of Series 8 and the eagle on fulmen and helmet above fulmen of Series 2 and 4. The position in the sequence of Series 9-11 is confirmed to a degree by the affinity in style between dies T19 and 20 (Series 8) and T21 (Series 9). Series 11 and 12 are linked by the drachms. The style of tetradrachm obverses T24 (Series 11) and T25 and 27 (Series 12) is also very close. The ear of grain has no special significance for Tralles and is also used in Pergamum Series 14 and Sardes Series 11.
Series 13: To r., cornucopiae.
Series 14: To r., coiled serpent on cista.
29-a. *Leningrad ( Plate XXI, 14)
29-b. Von Aulock, SNG 8280, 10.97
Series 15: To r., humped bull r., filleted, on maeander. Pinder 142.
30-a. *Winterthur (Kress, Dec. 4-6, 1957, 42), 12.58 ( Plate XXII, 1); Paris, 12.23↗
30-b. Glasgow, Hunter 1, 12.32 (pierced); Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 85), 12.33↑
30-c. Berlin, 11.93
Series 16: To r., draped female (?) figure facing.
32-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 73), 12.60↑
32-d. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 74), 12.70↖
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 126)
The sequence of emissions from Series 13 to Series 28 is almost entirely arbitrary, for die linkage is rare. However, there can be little doubt that these series follow Series 1-12, which are unquestionably the earliest, and precede Series 29-47, in which the reverse format is complicated by the multiplication of symbols and the addition of monograms or initials.
Series 13-16 have as symbols a cornucopiae, coiled serpent on cista, humped bull on maeander and draped female of uncertain identity. The cornucopiae, as the ear of grain of Series 12, is a symbol of prosperity and fertility. The serpent on cista is a variation on the cistophoric obverse type itself, while the bull on maeander is distinctly civic in nature. The latter combines two of the earliest Tralles symbols ( Series 1 and 5) but is neither linked nor stylistically close to the dies of those series. The cornucopiae is also used as a symbol in Pergamum Series 22, Ephesus Series 24 and Apameia Series 19, and the serpent on cista is employed for Ephesus Series 28. Series 16 appears in worn condition in the 1928, Yeşilhisar and 1955 hoards.
Series 17: To r., Athena Promachus.
33-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.33↗ ( Plate XXII, 6); Naville, Apr. 4, 1921, 2734, 12.35
33-b. Copenhagen, SNG 638, 12.38↑
Series 18: To r., filleted thyrsus.
34A-b. *ANS, 12.54↑. To 1., TPAΛΛl ( Plate XXII, 8)
Series 19: To r., round shield. Pinder 146.
35-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 80), 12.53↑
36-d. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 32), 12.49↑
37-e. Berlin, 10.55 (plated)
38-f. Von Aulock, SNG 3248, 12.52
39-g. Naville, July 2, 1930, 1030
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 38)
Series 20: To r., warrior striding r., shield in 1., sword in r. Pinder 140.
40-a. ANS, 12.45↑
40-b. London, BMC 14, 12.55↗
40-c. Von Aulock, SNG 3249, 12.40; Paris, 11.96↑ (pierced)
40-d. *Berlin, 12.55 ( Plate XXII, 11)
41-f. Totten; Vienna, 12.52↗
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 39)
6-a. *Cambridge, McClean 8728, 5.44↑. Bow (?) in 1. ( Plate XXII, 13)
Series 21: To r., poppy head. Pinder 144.
42-b. *Berlin, 12.55 ( Plate XXIII, 2); ANS-Strauss, 12.22↑; Vienna, 11.83↗
42-c. Oxford, 12.34↗
43-d. Von Aulock, SNG 3243, 12.45
43-e. Copenhagen, SNG 642, 12.14↑; Paris, 12.33↗
43-f. Princeton Library
43-g. Zagreb, 12.24
– Commerce (Bahkesir 1958, 40)
8-b. *Uncertain provenance ( Plate XXIII, 4)
Series 22: To r., covered loutrophorus.
45-a. ANS (Balikesir 1958, 41), 12.39↑
45-b. Paris, 12.05↑
45-c. *Dresden, 12.37↗ ( Plate XXIII, 6)
46-d. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 128), 12.63↑
46-f. Hirsch, June 25-28, 1963, 441 (Asia Minor 1962, 48)
47-g. ANS (Asia Minor 1962, 47), 12.62↗
47-h. Copenhagen, SNG 641, 11.92↑; von Aulock, SNG 3247, 12.32
47-i. Vienna, 12.08↗
48-k. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 76), 12.62↑
50-m. ANS, 12.56↗
9-a. *ANS, 6.18↑ ( Plate XXIII, 9)
10-a. *Berlin, 5.89. To 1., TPA ( Plate XXIII, 10)
6-a. *Berlin, 3.05 ( Plate XXIII, 11)
Series 17 survives in only three specimens, all struck from the same obverse die, and has as symbol the armed Athena. A helmeted head of Athena is used later for Tralles Series 44. The filleted thyrsus of Series 18 makes reference to the cult of Dionysus, which the cistophoric types themselves commemorate. It is also used for Pergamum Series 24 and Sardes Series 13. One of the reverse dies used in Tralles Series 18 (b) presents the ethnic in a unique form: TPAΛΛl. There is no other early cistophorus with a six-letter ethnic.
The round shield of Series 19 is one of several military symbols on the cistophori of Tralles. One piece of this series was in the 1958 Balikesir hoard buried about 135 B.C. The pieces from the Yeşilhisar and 1928 hoards are somewhat worn. Series 20 has as symbol an armed warrior and is likewise present in the Balikesir hoard. It shares obverse T41 with Series 21. The poppy head of this series is shown with an ear of grain in Tralles Series 47 and is another reference to the agricultural prosperity of the city. Series 21 is among those in the Balikesir hoard, as is Series 22 which has as symbol a covered loutrophorus. The ANS piece from that hoard is rather worn, while the two specimens from the 1962 hoard, buried ca. 145-140 B.C. are in better condition.
Series 23: To r., filleted tripod. Pinder 148.
51-b. London, BMC 13, 12.16↑
51-c. Glasgow, Hunter 2, 12.08
51-d. Von Aulock, SNG 3252, 12.48
51-e. Berlin, 12.40
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 132)
Series 24: To r., Nike 1., holding wreath.
51-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 3250, 12.55 ( Plate XXIII, 13); Athens, 11.91↑
52-b. *ANS-Strauss, 12.53↑ ( Plate XXIII, 14)
52-c. Gotha, 11.98↑
52-d. Klenau, Dec. 11, 1971, 284 = Klenau, July 9, 1971, 103
Series 23 and 24 are linked by obverse T51. The tripod of the former series is also the symbol of Apameia Series 7; the Nike with wreath of Series 24 is used for Pergamum Series 18 and Ephesus Series 23. Three pieces having a tripod as symbol were in the 1928 hoard, one of which ( Plate XXIII, 12) was overstruck on a Macedonian tetradrachm of the first district. Part of the legend. .... ΩTHΣ (reading downward) is still visible in the left field of the reverse. Like the Ephesian cistophorus struck over a similar Macedonian piece ( Plate XVI, 1), the coin must postdate 158 B.C. and is probably somewhat later.1 In both cases the Attic weight piece was trimmed in order to approximate the size and weight of a cistophoric flan.
Series 25: To r., cuirass.
53-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 87), 12.59 ↑
53-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 88), 12.35↑
11-a. *Ankara (şahnali 1952, 11), 6.05 ( Plate XXIV, 2)
Series 26: To r., eagle 1. on cuirass.
54-a. Vienna, 12.40↗
54-b. Copenhagen, SNG 640, 12.58↑
54-c. Von Aulock, SNG 8283, 12.54
54-d. *Berlin, 12.38 ( Plate XXIV, 3)
Series 27: To r., eagle r. on prow.
Series 28: To r., torch.
56-a. *ANS-ETN, 12.62↑ ( Plate XXIV, 5)
57-b. ANS-BYB, SNG 1145, 12.43↑
57-c. New York City, private coll., 12.53↖
Series 25-28 survive in very few specimens. The cuirass of Series 25 is another of the military symbols used at Tralles. All four tetradrachms and the didrachm from the hoards of 130-128 B.C. are considerably worn. Series 26 adds an eagle to the cuirass, a combination which appears later in Series 38. In Series 27, which is known in a unique piece, an eagle perched on a prow is the symbol. Series 25 and 26 may therefore be very close in time; the style of dies T54 and 55 is similar. Series 28 has a torch for symbol, previously used by Pergamum (Series 11) and subsequently adopted by Ephesus (Series 40-45) as the civic badge on its cistophori. The torch is also a subsidiary symbol in Tralles Series 30 and a second term of office may be implied by its recurrence there.
Series 29: To r., winged caduceus.
Series 30: Above center, torch; to r., lyre.
Series 31: To r., star, below which, club.
60-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.11↑ ( Plate XXIV, 11)
61-b. Copenhagen, SNG 651, 11.86↑
Series 29-32 document a change at Tralles from a single to a dual symbol format, a change which is paralleled at Ephesus at the same date in Series 25-28. Tralles Series 29 has a winged caduceus in the right field, a symbol also used in Pergamum Series 37-38. It is adopted at a later date at Laodiceia as the civic badge on its cistophori. The Tralles piece shares a die with Series 30 which uses two symbols: a torch, placed between the serpents' heads, and a lyre, in the right field. Both symbols also appear on the drachms, although on the didrachm the torch is omitted. While this omission may be attributable to the smaller size of the flan, the inclusion of the torch on the even smaller drachms of Series 30 makes this explanation doubtful. If the omission of the torch is intentional, it may indicate that the two minting authorities shared responsibility for certain denominations, but not for others. The phenomenon is repeated in Series 41, although in Series 43 the initials ΣT are both present and absent on coins of the same denomination struck from a common obverse die. The fractional cistophori of Tralles are far more numerous than those of the other mints but they do not survive in a quantity sufficient to determine whether the presence or absence of symbols carries any significance or is merely due to variations in die cutting.
Series 31 and 32 have much in common although they are not linked. Both are dual-symbol types with the two marks placed one above the other in the right field. In the former series a star is placed above a club; in the latter the star is over a fulmen. An extended magistracy may be implied by the retention of one symbol. In Series 32 a monogram is added to the reverse symbols. Although its form, , is strikingly similar to the mark of the prytaneis, , which appears on first-century Pergamene cistophori,2 in this case it must refer to the same official whose initials, YΠ, appear in Series 33, 35 and 37. The inconspicuous addition of initials to the reverse dies has already been observed in Pergamum Series 23 and 24 (ca. 147-140 B.C.).
This series has been discussed most recently by MacKay. The Tralles/Macedonia overstrike was published by me in ANSMN 1972, pp. 30-32.
Series 33: To r., Tyche holding cornucopiae in 1., below which, various initials. Pinder 165.
62-a. *Berlin, 12.39. Below Tyche, YΠ ( Plate XXIV, 13)
13-a. *ANS, 5.45↑. Below Tyche, OA ( Plate XXV, 1)
13-b. Ankara. Below Tyche, OA
Series 34: To 1., below TPAΛ, wreath; to r., Tyche holding cornucopiae in 1., below which, various initials.
14-a. *Berlin, 5.83 (pierced). Below Tyche, ΔAI ( Plate XXV, 3)
Series 35: To 1., below TPAΛ, eagle 1. on fulmen; to r., Tyche holding cornucopiae in 1., below which, various initials. Pinder 166.
64-a. Copenhagen, SNG 652, 11.89↑. Below Tyche, ΔA
65-b. *Berlin, 12.15. Below Tyche, ΔA ( Plate XXV, 5)
66-b. *ANS, 12.24↑. Below Tyche, ΔA ( Plate XXV, 6)
14-a. Ankara (Sahnali 1952, 14), 6.25. Below Tyche, ΔA
15-c. *Berlin, 6.14. Eagle above TPA; below Tyche, OA ( Plate XXV. 8)
9-a. *ANS-Strauss, 3.05↑. Eagle above TPAΛ; below Tyche, ( Plate XXV, 11)
17-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 3266, 6.06 ( Plate XXV, 13)
Series 37: To 1., above TPAΛ, star, below which, double cornucopiae; to r., Tyche holding cornucopiae in 1., below which, various initials.
67-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 3253, 12.53. Below Tyche, YΠ ( Plate XXVI, 1)
67-c. Berlin, 11.95 (pierced). Below Tyche, uncertain initials
16-a. *ANS-ETN, 5.91↑ ( Plate XXVI, 3); Munich, 6.10. Below Tyche, ΞAN
Series 38: To 1., above TPAΛ, eagle r. on cuirass; to r., Tyche holding cornucopiae in 1., below which AΠ.
67-a. *Vienna, 12.65↑ ( Plate XXVI, 5)
Series 33-38 are closely related die-linked issues. All have Tyche in the right field and most are multiple symbol plus initials types. Two pieces from Series 34 and 36 are probably the latest in the 1962 hoard and may be dated with some confidence to the years around 145 B.C.
Series 33 is the simplest in format. Tyche is in the right field and two initials appear below her. Two variants are known: OA and YΠ. The first is known only on the fractions and the second is represented by a unique tetradrachm. The record is therefore very likely incomplete. The presence of a variety of initials or monograms in conjunction with an invariable symbol in the right field is paralleled on the contem porary cistophori of Pergamum (Series 23c and 24d-f).
In Series 34 a wreath is added in the left field. The two surviving varieties of initials are ΔAI and ΠE; ΠE appears only on the drachms, ΔAI only on the tetradrachms and didrachms. In Series 35 the secondary symbol is an eagle on fulmen; the various initials are OA and YΠ as in Series 33, ΔA as in Series 34 and . Series 36 has a double cornucopiae as subsidiary mark; is the only known variety. In Series 37 a star is added to the cornucopiae; ΞAN and YΠ are the only variants of which the reading is certain. Series 38 pairs an eagle on cuirass with AΠ. The wreath, eagle on fulmen and eagle on cuirass used as secondary symbols in these series were previously used as sole symbols in Series 2, 8 and 26 respectively.
The pattern of die linkage and the repetition of initials suggests that the six issues are probably not strictly sequential but more or less contemporary emissions of the period ca. 145-140 B.C. Surprisingly, these series are almost unrepresented in the hoards buried during the revolt of Aristonicus.
69-b. *ANS-ETN, 12.51↑ ( Plate XXVI, 7)
69-c. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 135), 12.67↑; Davis, GCNAC 234, 12.54↑; Hirsch, May 28-30, 1962, 161
70-d. *Berlin, 12.30 ( Plate XXVI, 8); Hirsch, Apr. 1, 1974, 158, 11.46
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 136)
70-f. *Berlin, 12.76 ( Plate XXVI, 9)
11-a. *Berlin, 3.15. Above r., star; below r., Helios above ( Plate XXVI, 11)
70-a. *Totten. ΔlOΓE ( Plate XXVI, 12)
70-b. Berlin, 12.40. ΔlOΓE
72-b. *Paris, 11.95↑. ΔlOΓE ( Plate XXVI, 13)
70-c. Copenhagen, SNG 650, 12.6↑
72-d. Berlin, 12.32
72-e. Kress, Apr. 2, 1973, 333 = Kress, June 30, 1964, 300
73-f. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 137), 12.60↑; ANS, 12.68↑; von Aulock, SNG 3256, 12.44
73-g. London, BMC 28, 12.34↑
74-h. ANS-BYB, SNG 1146, 12.76↑
74-i. Uncertain provenance
76-k. Cambridge, SNG 4898, 12.10↖
77-l. *Berlin, 12.11 ( Plate XXVII, 2).
77A-m. *Vienna, 12.43↗ ( Plate XXVII, 3)
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 138-43)
19-a. *ANS-BYB, SNG 1147, 6.17↖. Monogram off flan ( Plate XXVII, 4)
12-a. *Egger, May 11, 1914, 1573 ( Plate XXVII, 5)
Series 41: Above center, star; to r., eagle r.
78-a. *Berlin, 12.47 ( Plate XXVII, 6)
20-a. *Berlin, 5.78. No star ( Plate XXVII, 7)
Series 39-41 are also complex in format, combining two symbols and a monogram. In each series a symbol is placed between the serpents' heads and a second symbol is in the right field. A monogram or abbreviated name usually appears below, even on the drachms. None of the series is present in the 1962 or Balikesir hoards, although 11 pieces are known in the hoards buried after 130 B.C. The series therefore almost certainly follow Series 33-38.
In Series 39 the primary symbol is a Helios head, the secondary symbol a star, and the monogram , , or . The sun deity is also present in Series 45 and on the cistophori of Ephesus (Series 2). In Series 40, the chief and subsidiary symbols are eagle and fulmen respectively, both attributes of Zeus Larasius and commonly used on the coinage of Tralles; the monogram is which must refer to the official who also signs as ΔIOΓE. Series 41, represented by only one tetradrachm and one didrachm, omits a monogram and substitutes a star for the fulmen, but retains the eagle. The star is absent on the didrachm. For the possible significance of this omission, see the discussion of Series 29-32.
79-a. *Cambridge, SNG 4899, 12.48↑ ( Plate XXVII, 8)
Series 43: Above center, ΣT; to r., headdress of Isis.
79-a. *Berlin, 12.26 ( Plate XXVII, 9)
– *Commerce, 3.02↑ ( Plate XXVII, 10)
13-a. Boston, 62.559, 3.04↑. I to 1., T to r.
Series 44: Above center, A; to r., head of Athena r. in crested helmet.
74-a. *ANS, 12.50↑ ( Plate XXVII, 12)
81-b. Vienna, 12.50↗
82-c. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 36), 12.44↑
84-e. Berlin, 12.34
85-f. Frankfurt, Bundesbank (Hess-Leu, Apr. 16, 1957, 282 = Naville, July 2, 1929, 395), 12.77↖; Kastner, Nov. 26, 1974, 98, 12.47
87-c. Vienna, 12.25↑
88-d. ANS-Strauss, 11.73↗; Berlin, 12.30
88-e. Von Aulock, SNG 3255, 12.52
90-h. ANS (Asia Minor 1970, 20), 12.30↑
91-i. *Sofia (pierced) ( Plate XXVIII, 4)
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 146-48)
14-a. *Cambridge, McClean 8729, 2.89. Monogram off flan ( Plate XXVIII, 5)
92-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.44↑
92-a. *Ankara (şahnali 1952, 15), 12.56 ( Plate XXVIII, 8)
94-b. Berlin, 11.52
95-c. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 151), 12.67↑
95-d. Von Aulock, SNG 3254, 12.55
97-f. Schulman, Nov. 10-12, 1966, 797
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 152)
Uncertain: To r., illegible symbol; no other marks.
16-a. *Vienna, 2.58↗ ( Plate XXVIII, 11)
Series 42-47 are clearly the latest Tralles series. Many of the pieces are in optimum condition in the hoards buried during the revolt of Aristonicus. They are all alike in format: a monogram is placed between the serpents' heads and a single symbol is located in the right field. This is the formula introduced at Pergamum about 134 B.C. which persists there until 67 B.C. It is also the system used in the Sardes cistophori struck between 134 and 128 B.C.
Series 42 and 43 are extremely rare and do not appear in any hoards. Their placement in the sequence is somewhat arbitrary; it is also possible that they follow Series 47 and date to the period immediately following 128 B.C., the date of burial of the 1928 hoard. In Series 44 the letter A appears between the serpents' heads; it may refer to the same magistrate whose monogram, is similarly placed on the tetradrachms of the succeeding series.
The cistophori of Series 45-47 are the most numerous of the Tralles pieces in the hoards buried during the revolt of Aristonicus. Series 45 may be the earliest of the three since it is present in the Yeşilhisar hoard, whereas Series 46 and 47 are absent. All three series have the monogram . The symbols (Helios, helmet, poppy head and ear of grain) were all used on earlier cistophori of Tralles (Series 4, 12, 21 and 39).
The Tralles cistophori of 128-85 B.C. are not within the scope of this volume, but it should be mentioned that their format is little different from that of Series 42-47, the only change being that the monogram is replaced by a name always reduced to its first four letters ( Plate XXVIII, 12).3 The symbols in the right field, unlike the contemporary issues of Pergamum, Ephesus and Laodiceia continue to change on a regular basis, usually with each change of name. This similarity in format is another confirmation that Series 42-47 are the latest of the early cistophori struck at the mint of Tralles.
eagle on fulmen
helmet above fulmen
wreath above fulmen
ear of grain
serpent on cista
bull on maeander
eagle on cuirass
eagle on prow
torch and lyre
star above club
Tyche and initials
Tyche and wreath and initials
Tyche and eagle on fulmen and initials
Tyche and cornucopiae and initials
Tyche and star above cornucopiae and initials
Tyche and eagle on cuirass and initials
star and eagle
ΣT and Isis headdress
A and Athena head
PLATE XXVIII, 12 = ANS (Glendining, Apr. 7, 1971, 102), 12.38↑; otherwise unpublished.
1-a. ANS-BYB, SNG 1142, 12.65↑
1-b. *Von Aulock, SNG 3121, 12.53 ( Plate XXIX, 1)
2-c. Vienna, 11.70↗
3-d. *Berlin, 12.47 ( Plate XXIX, 2)
3-e. Weber 6898, 12.14
4-f. Von Aulock, SNG 8253, 11.78
4A-g. Kress, Nov. 1971, 296, 12.12
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 33)
1-a. *Paris, 6.00↑ ( Plate XXIX, 3); Copenhagen, SNG 460, 5.29↑; London, BMC Ephesus 154, 5.89↖ (pierced); Berlin, 5.84; Ankara; Hess, Dec. 1, 1931, 613, 5.85; ANS-Strauss, 5.86↖; ANS, 6.37↖. Below l., thyrsus, upright; below r.,
6-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.21↗ ( Plate XXIX, 6)
7-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 71), 12.67↖
7-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 3122, 12.56 ( Plate XXIX, 8)
The earliest cistophori of Sardes bear a mint mark in monogram form () which incorporates the first three or four letters of the ethnic. cistophori of this type were known to Pinder and attributed to Sardes.
In Series 1, the symbol is a thyrsus, placed horizontally. This mark, similarly oriented, is used for the first series of Pergamum, which also employs an ethnic in monogram form. The didrachms also parallel the Pergamene fractions in format: the symbol is to the left and placed upright, and the ethnic is to the right. No other Sardes fractions are recorded. However, because of the rarity of the cistophori of this city, it is unwise to conclude that drachms were never struck or that there were no subsequent didrachm issues.
Series 2 survives in a unique reverse die, which bears a symbol which resembles a spear head but may merely be a variant of the thyrsus of Series 1. Series 3 has an upright club as symbol, a mark also used on the early reverses of Pergamum (Series 5) and Ephesus (Series 8). The Heracles club is an appropriate cistophoric symbol, as is the thyrsus of Series 1, which alludes to Dionysus. The wing which distinguishes the cistophori of Series 4 is present on only one specimen, which shares obverse S7 with Series 3.
The style, as well as the format, of these early Sardes pieces is very close to that of several Pergamene dies. Sardes tetradrachm obverses Sl-7 appear to be products of the same man that engraved Pergamum dies P12-15, 18 and 20 (Plates II, 8-11; III, 3 and 5). This stylistic affinity, and details such as the nature and orientation of the reverse ethnic and symbols, substantiates Noe's early observation that "the [Sardes obverse] cista, though not quite so large as at Pergamum, is of the same proportions. The reverses are so close as to seem copied one from the other. There is little room for doubt that they are contemporaneous, or nearly so."1
8-a. *Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 72), 12.71↑. ( Plate XXIX, 9)
8-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.69↑. ( Plate XXIX, 11)
9-b. *Ankara (şahnali 1952, 10), 12.55. ; off flan ( Plate XXIX, 12); Bourgey, March 10, 1976, 12.45. .
9-c. *Vienna, 12.07↗. on side ( Plate XXX, 1)
9-d. *Von Aulock, SNG 3971 (Kress, June 30, 1964, 299), 12.82. ; omitted ( Plate XXX, 2)
10-e. *Von Aulock, SNG 8443, 12.15. ; omitted; obverse die identical to Pergamum 24 ( Plate XXX, 3)
Series 5 and 6 survive in only eight specimens, yet three different monograms are used in the left field , which is certainly a variant of the (= ΣAP) of Series 1-4, must also indicate Sardes. and have usually been interpreted as Synnada, although Bunbury thought the monogram on his piece, now in London ( Plate XXIX, 10), was a magistrate's monogram.2 I am of the opinion that the two monograms denote Synnada, although Noe, upon discovering the common use of dies and symbols among , and felt compelled to interpret all three monograms as standing for Sardes.
It is inconceivable that these cistophori of Sardes and Synnada, which bear identical reverse control marks, and are struck from common obverse dies, were produced in two distinct mints, one in Lydia, the other in Phrygia. It is also improbable that either Sardes or Synnada was responsible for striking silver for both cities. More likely, a third, central mint produced coins for the two smaller cities. That this is the case, and that the central mint was Pergamum, is substantiated by several considerations. First, obverse die S10 ( and sword) is identical to Pergamum obverse P24 (Series 11b, Plate III, 10). Second, the Pergamene obverse is associated with three reverse dies all bearing the monogram (= CYNNAΔA) in the lower left field. All the pieces of Pergamum Series 11b should therefore be considered as joint issues of Pergamum and Synnada. Third, the two symbols used in Sardes-Synnada Series 5 and 6 are oriented horizontally, as are many of the early Pergamene symbols. The amphora of Series 5 is in fact used on the reverses of Pergamum Series 8. (On one specimen of Series 6 (9-c; Plate XXX, 1) the ethnic is also placed on its side, as the of Per- gamum.) Fourth, the style of Sardes-Synnada obverses S8 and 9, which are not duplicated in the recorded Pergamene series, is very close to that of S10/P24 and many other Pergamene dies (compare Plate III).
It seems, therefore, very likely that all the early cistophori of Sardes and Synnada, which so often share symbols with the cistophori of Pergamum (Table I, below p. 126), were produced at the Pergamene mint rather than at either Sardes or Synnada.
Series 7: To l., BA; to r., ΣY and sword in sheath; below l., AP.
9-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 8444, 12.74. Sword horizontal ( Plate XXX, 4)
9-b. *Munich (Kress, June 22, 1970, 185), 11.98↑. Sword vertical ( Plate XXX, 5)
Series 7 is the most curious variety of cistophori known. The symbol used is the sword in sheath of Series 6, oriented horizontally on von Aulock's piece and vertically on the Munich specimen. In the left field, where one would expect the mint mark of Sardes or Synnada, (because Series 6 and 7 share obverse S9), one finds the two letters BA. To the right, near the symbol, ΣY appears. A third pair of letters, AP, is situated in the lower left field.
The apparent absence of a mint mark, and the presence of other letters in the left and right fields, makes interpretation of this series difficult. The resemblance of the BA - IY format to the BA - EY cistophori of Aristonicus (Plate XXXVIII), and the sharing of dies between these pieces and the piece of Series 6 led Franke to attribute the von Aulock specimen to Synnada (ΣY) and to interpret BA - AP as an abbreviation for BA(ΣIΛEOΣ) AP(IΣTONIKOY). His suggestion has subsequently been accepted by Colin Kraay.3 Unfortunately, however, the shared die between BA - ΣY-AP and Sardes-Synnada Series 6, and the linkage between the latter and Pergamum Series 11b (ca. 160-155 B. C.), rule out King Aristonicus as a possible reading.
I regret that I can offer no alternative solution, but one detail seems clear: AP is not to be read in conjunction with BA or ΣY; it either represents the initials of a Pergamene mint official, for it is located in the same place as the of Series 6 and the of Series 8 ( Plates XXIX, 11 and XXX, 6) or it is the abbreviated ethnic of a city, as the in this position on reverses of Pergamum Series 11b.
9-a. * ANS-Strauss, 12.77↗ ( Plate XXX, 6); ANS-Strauss, 12.56↑.
Series 9: To l., ΣAP; to r., fulmen, vertical.
11-a. *Berlin, 12.64 ( Plate XXX, 9)
Series 10: To l., ΣAP; to r., bunch of grapes.
12-a. *Berlin, 12.36 ( Plate XXX, 10)
13-a. *ANS, 12.71↑ ( Plate XXX, 11)
Series 8 is the last series in which appears, and presumably no other cistophori were issued for or by Synnada until after 128 B.C., when the ethnic ΣYN appears on a few recorded pieces ( Plate XXXI, 10).4 This change in mint mark exactly parallels the substitution of AΠA for on the late cistophori of Apameia. Two other mint marks appear on coins of Series 8: , which is the earliest form of the Sardes monogram, and ΣAP, which, as ΣYN and AΠA, eventually replaces the monogram form, although at a much earlier date (EΦE and TPAΛ were employed at Ephesus and Tralles from the outset.). The symbol used in Series 8, a star, also appears on the contemporary cistophori of Pergamum (Series 12; Table I, below p. 126). The which is present on one reverse die of this series ( Plate XXX, 6) undoubtedly refers to the same official as the of Series 6, with which Series 8 shares obverse S9, a die also used for Series 7.
Series 9 and 10 are both linked to Series 8 and employ the ΣAP form of mint mark. The bunch of grapes of Series 10 is also used as symbol in the contemporary Series 13 of Pergamum. Sardes Series 11 also employs a contemporary Pergamene mark: the ear of grain of Pergamum Series 14. The unique reverse die of Series 11 is marked ; the ethnic in monogram form does not subsequently appear on the cistophori of Sardes.
Noe, ANSMN 1950, pp. 35f.
Bunbury, NC 1883, pp. 187f. Bunbury's perceptive remarks, based on very little material, are worth quoting in their entirety, in light of the interpretation proposed below. "The absence on this coin of the unfailing monogram in the place usually occupied by that or by some other monogram indicative of the city where the coin was struck, as in the cases of Adramyttium and Parium, seem at first sight to leave no doubt that here also the monogram, though otherwise unknown, must be so interpreted. But repeated attempts, both on my own part, and on those of my numismatic friends, failed to suggest any plausible solution, and the field of conjecture is materially narrowed by the circumstance that cistophori certainly appear to have been issued only by cities of considerable importance. In this state of doubt, I observed that Dr. Pinder cites from the Museum at Munich, a coin which bears indeed the ordinary monogram of Pergamum [Series 11b], but has beneath it one which, though not identical with that on my coin, closely resembles it, especially in the position of the lunated sigma, and this suggested to my mind the possibility that the monogram which had so long puzzled me was merely that of a magistrate, which had been placed by an error of the moneyer in the space which ought to have been occupied by the name of the city, and that the latter had inadvertently been omitted altogether. Strong confirmation of this idea is found in the position of the diota that forms the accessory symbol in the field to the right, which is precisely similar to [the amphora, Pergamum Series 8] already described. The same singularity of the accessory symbol being placed in a horizontal position or direction if the coin is viewed in the ordinary manner, is found in several other instances on cistophori of Pergamum–in the case of the caduceus [Series 7], the flaming torch [Series 11], and even the eagle [Series 6]–but as far as I have observed on those of no other city. Hence its occurrence on the coin in question appears to be almost conclusive as to its attribution [to Pergamum] notwithstanding the omission of the otherwise universal characteristic of the monogram of Pergamum."
Kraay, p. 7.
Series 12: To l., ΣAP; to r., scallop shell (?).
Series 13: To l., ΣAP; to r., filleted thyrsus.
16-a. *Glasgow, Hunter 1, 12.58 ( Plate XXXI, 2)
16-b. Berlin, 12.75
17-b. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 110), 12.41↗
17-c. London, BMC 6, 12.65↑
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 111)
Series 12 and 13 survive in only three specimens, all employing ΣAP as mint mark. Series 13 (filleted thyrsus) may be contemporary with Pergamum Series 24 which bears the same symbol. Series 14 presents the mint mark in a new form: . The orientation of the ethnic is the same as that of Pergamum. The position of these three series in the Sardes sequence is arbitrary. The condition of the ANS piece from the 1928 hoard (no. 110, Series 14) is poor; the coin shows signs of long circulation.
Plate XXXI, 11 = ANS (Kress, May 30, 1962, 389), 12.27↑
18-a. *ANS (Münz. u. Med., June 18-19, 1970, 249), 12.47↑ ( Plate XXXI, 4)
18-a. *ANS (Hess-Leu, Mar. 24, 1959, 266), 12.53↑ ( Plate XXXI, 5)
19-a. ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 112), 12.59↗
19-d. Von Aulock, SNG 3123, 12.63
19-e. Schweizerischer Bankverein F.P.L., Spring 1976, 55, 12.64
20-f. *Paris, 12.28↑ ( Plate XXXI, 8)
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 114-16)
22-a. *Berlin (Naville, July 2, 1929, 393), 12.64 ( Plate XXXI, 10)
Series 15 and 16 share obverse die S18, yet each of the two surviving specimens bears a different form of ethnic: Series 15 employs CAP, oriented horizontally unlike the of Series 14; Series 16 uses the more common ΣAP form. The linkage confirms that even at this late date, more than one form of ethnic was still being used simultaneously on the cistophori of Sardes.
Tyche is also used as symbol in Tralles Series 33-38; Apollo is prominent on the autonomous bronze of Sardes. The of Series 15 is undoubtedly a personal monogram, as the and of Series 6 and 8 and probably the AP of Series 7. In Series 16 the magistrate's monogram, , is placed between the serpents' heads. This is a feature of all Pergamene cistophori after 134 B.C. and an identical monogram, similarly located on the reverses, appears on the cistophori of Pergamum Series 32 and 33 (ca. 128B.C.).
Series 17 and 18 continue the format used for Series 16. In both series, ΣAP is the ethnic and a monogram is placed between the serpents' heads: , or in Series 17; in Series 18. As in Series 15 and 16, a standing deity of local significance is used as the symbol in the right field. In Series 18 an eagle on fulmen is added above ΣAP - an allusion to Zeus, who appears in Series 17. A similarly located eagle was also used on the earlier cistophori of Tralles Series 35 (in conjunction with Tyche) and the designer of the Sardes cistophori has almost certainly taken those coins as his model.
The ANS and BM pieces of Series 17a from the 1928 hoard are very well preserved and must have been struck shortly before their burial in 128 B.C. Such a date is confirmed by the inclusion of a diminutive ⊏ in the left serpent coil of the unique specimen of Series 17b. The ⊏, which had long before dropped out of the Greek alphabet, can only be a date. As suggested in BMC, the only suitable possibility is year 6 of the provincial era beginning in 134/133 B.C., i.e., 129/128 B.C.
sword in sheath
BA-ΣY-AP and sword in sheath
bunch of grapes
ear of grain
serpent around omphalus
The early cistophori of Apameia are distinguished by the monogram which is located in the left field of the reverses. This mark was interpreted as Parium for many years, a city in Mysia, but is universally accepted today as denoting Apameia. Later cistophori bearing AΠA on the reverses are known and are certainly products of Apameia ( Plate XXXVI, 8).1 It is unlikely that Parium () struck cistophori only before 133 B.C. and Apameia (AΠA) only after 133 B.C. Although there are no die links between the two series, a flute is used as symbol on four of the latest series of pre-133 Cistophori, and a double flute appears on all of the post-133 AΠA pieces. and AΠA must both refer to a single city, namely Apameia.
Series 1: To r., head of lion r.
1-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.67↑ (Plate XXXII, 1)
1-b. ANS-BYB, SNG 1150, 12.64. Impress of circular die
Series 2: To r., dolphin.
1-a. *Hague, 12.70 (Plate XXXII, 2)
1-b. London, BMC 8, 12.69
The first series of cistophori of Apameia is strikingly similar to the initial emission of Ephesus. In both cases the symbol is an animal head so placed as to appear almost as an outgrowth of one of the serpents which entwines the bow-case. However, unlike the cistophori of Ephesus, and of Pergamum and Tralles also, the earliest dies exhibit no signs of experimentation in format. From the start, the ethnic appears in the left field and the symbol is to the right. In this respect, the early Apameia issues are com- parable to those of Sardes-Synnada where an ethnic in monogram form, placed in an upright position, is also used.
Apameia Series 2 employs a dolphin as distinguishing mark. This symbol also appears in the contemporary Pergamum Series 3 and the later Pergamum Series 23. None of the four known specimens of Series 1 and 2 comes from a recorded hoard.
Series 3: To r., seated sphinx r.
2-a. *London, BMC 4, 12.73t (Plate XXXII, 3)
2-b. *ANS-Strauss, 12.64↑ (Plate XXXII, 4); ANS-ETN, 12.37↑. Sphinx on club
2-c. Von Aulock, SNG 3449, 12.66. Sphinx on club
2-d. *ANS, 12.65↑. Sphinx on caduceus (Plate XXXII, 5)
2-e. ANS (Asia Minor 1962, 51), 12.60↑. Sphinx on caduceus
Series 4: To r., herm r.
3-a. *Paris, 12.39↑. Herm on caduceus (Plate XXXII, 6)
3-b. Von Aulock, SNG 3452, 12.39. Herm on caduceus
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 42). Herm on caduceus
3-c. Berlin, 12.68. Herm on club
3-d. Athens, 11.82↑ (pierced). Herm on club
4-e. *Leningrad. Herm on club (Plate XXXII, 7)
Series 3 and 4 are not linked, but are extremely close in format and style. Obverse dies A2 (Series 3) and A1 (Series 1 and 2) are so similar as to be nearly indistinguishable, and A4 (Series 4) is clearly a contemporary product of the same die engraver. The primary symbol in Series 3 is a seated Sphinx; in Series 4, a herm. In both cases the marks are variously placed on a club or a caduceus; one die of Series 3 (a) bears only the primary mark. These variations must have served some control function at the mint. They can hardly be die cutters' signatures, for the same hands can be seen to have produced dies of each type. The caduceus is an early symbol in its own right at Apameia (Series 5) and the club is used in the contemporary series of Pergamum and Sardes-Synnada (Series 5 and 3 respectively).
Two of the pieces from these series come from hoards buried between 145 and 135 B.C. but none is present in the hoards buried after 130 B.C. As was the case with the mints already discussed, most of the earliest Cistophoric issues had disappeared from circulation by the time the Province of Asia was formed.
Series 5: To r., caduceus, upright.
5-a. *Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 98), 12.62↖ (Plate XXXII, 8)
Series 6: To r., harpa, upright.
5-a. *Karlsruhe, 11.94↑ (pierced) (Plate XXXII, 9)
6-b. *ANS, 12.49↖ (Plate XXXII, 10); Seyrig, 12.57
Series 7: To r., tripod. Pinder 73.
6-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 3453, 12.74 (Plate XXXII, 11)
6-b. Paris, 11.48↑ (pierced)
The sole distinguishing mark of Series 5 is a caduceus. The symbol may denote the same authority or serve the same control function as the smaller caduceus added to the Sphinx and herm of Series 3 and 4. The caduceus is also an early cistophoric mark at Pergamum (Series 7), but the orientation of the symbol differs for the two cities. The caduceus of the Apameia tetradrachms is in an upright position whereas on the Pergamene tetradrachms it is placed horizontally. It has, however, been noted that the horizontal orientation at Pergamum parallels the downward placement of the ethnic, and that on the fractional cistophori of Series 7, where the ethnic is upright, so too is the caduceus. At Apameia, the vertical position of the symbol also parallels the upright placement of the monogram.
This similarity in format, and identity in marks, is complemented by a remarkable affinity in style. The obverse die used in Apameia Series 5 (A5) is very close to Pergamum dies P23-27 and Sardes-Synnada S8-10. In my opinion, they are all products of the same hand and the coins were all struck at the same mint, i.e., Pergamum.
The single surviving specimen of Series 5 is from the Yeşilhisar hoard of 130 B.C. and shows signs of wear. Series 6 and 7 are linked to each other and to Series 5. The symbols (harpa and tripod) are not known at Pergamum, but dies A5 and 6 are clearly products of the Pergamene workshop. None of the surviving specimens from these two series is from a recorded hoard.
Plate XXXVI, 7 = ANS-Strauss, 12.501↑. Mionnet's attribution of the pieces (nos. 219ff.) to Apameia was first objected to by du Mersan, NC 1846, p. 8. Pinder catalogued the cistophori under Parium (nos. 69ff.) but expressed doubts as to du Mersan's attribution (p. 539, n. 2). The Parium reading was upheld by Bunbury, NC 1883, p. 184, but rejected by Imhoof, AbhBerlin 1884, p. 33. Imhoof later cited a group of pieces having a flute in the right field (Series 26-29) as transitional between the early issues and the later AΠA pieces bearing a double flute. The differing format, flan size, etc. were attributed to chronological rather than geographical factors (Imhoof, KleinAsiatische Munzen, p. 206).
Series 8: To r., sword in sheath. Pinder 74.
7-a. *Paris, 12.80↖ (Plate XXXII, 12)
Series 9: To r., star.
8-a. *Winterthur, 12.33 (Plate XXXIII, 1)
8-b. Berlin, 12.34
Series 8 and 9 survive in only three specimens. The unique piece of Series 8 was known to Pinder and has a sword in sheath on the reverse. The distinguishing mark of Series 9 is a star. Both the sword in sheath and star are used on the contemporary Cistophori of Sardes-Synnada (Series 6-8) and are die linked there. The star is also a contemporary Pergamene symbol (Series 12), (Table I, below p. 126). The two obverse dies used in the Apameia series (A7 and 8) are certainly products of the engraver of Apameia A5-7, Pergamum P23-27 and Sardes-Synnada S8-10. None of the three Apameia pieces is from a recorded hoard.
Series 10: To r., fulmen, vertical.
9-a. *London, BMC 2, 10.64↑ (Plate XXXIII, 2)
10-b. *Berlin, 11.99 (Plate XXXIII, 3)
Series 11: To r., prow, r. Pinder 72.
10-a. *Vienna, 12.60 (Plate XXXIII, 4)
10-b. Gotha, 12.67↗
10-c. Copenhagen, SNG 148, 11.84↑
Series 12: To r., trident, horizontal.
11-a. *ANS-ETN, 12.46↖ (Plate XXXIII, 5)
Series 13: To r., flower.
11-a. *ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 38), 12.33↖ (Plate XXXIII, 6)
1-a. *Copenhagen, SNG 149, 5.79↑ (Plate XXXIII, 7)
Series 14: To r., filleted bucranium. Pinder 70.
12-a. *Paris, 12.15↑ (Plate XXXIII, 8)
12-b. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 97), 12.62
Series 15: To r., human ear r.
13-a. *Glasgow, Hunter, Parium 8 (pierced) (Plate XXXIII, 9); ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 39), 12.50
Series 16: To r., omphalus.
14-a. *ANS-BYB, SNG 1151, 12.76↑ (Plate XXXIII, 10)
Series 10-16 are probably to be placed in the decade 160-150 B.C., although the relative sequence is arbitrary. The issues which precede and follow this group may be fairly securely identified on the basis of internal die linkage, dies shared with Pergamum, and the use of symbols and monograms found on cistophori of Pergamum and Sardes-Synnada (Table I, below p. 126).
The obverses of Series 10-16 are very close in style to those of Series 5-9. Series 10 and 11 share obverse A10. The vertically-oriented fulmen of Series 10 is also used as symbol in the roughly contemporary Sardes Series 9. The fulmen is a common feature of the cistophori of Tralles (Series 2, 4, 10, 11, 35 and 40). Series 12 and 13 share obverse All. The flower of Series 13 is perhaps related to the approximately contemporary bee and flower of Pergamum Series 16.
The unique didrachm of Apameia Series 13 has the ethnic in the left field and the symbol to the right. This arrangement conforms to the format of the tetradrachms, but reverses the normal positions of ethnic and symbol on the fractions of Pergamum and Sardes-Synnada. As was the case with Pergamum and Sardes, no drachms of Apameia survive. The record is, however, too fragmentary to determine whether it is an accurate reflection of the fractional emissions in antiquity.
The Series 14 piece from the Yeşilhisar hoard is quite worn and the two pieces of Series 13 and 15 from the 1955 Asia Minor hoard ( IGCH 1458, burial ca. 95 B.C.) bear signs of very long circulation; almost all details of the obverse cista and reverse bow-case have been effaced.
Series 17: To r., wreath.
15-a. *ANS-Strauss, 12.73↖ (Plate XXXIII, 11); von Aulock, SNG 3448, 12.62; Vienna, 12.30
16-b. *London, BMC 1, 12.69↑ (Plate XXXIII, 12)
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 43)
Series 18: To r., bee.
17-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 8331, 12.60. Obverse die identical to Pergamum 38 (Plate XXXIV, 1)
18-b. London, BMC 3, 12.32
18-c. *Boston, 12.59 (Plate XXXIV, 2)
Series 19: To r., cornucopiae.
19-a. *Geneva (Münz. u. Med., June 5-6, 1959, 504), 12.49↑ (Plate XXXIV, 3)
19-b. Berlin, 12.63
Series 17-19 are not die linked, but their position in the sequence of Apameia cistophori may be determined by reference to the order of emissions at Pergamum. Apameia Series 18 has a bee as distinguishing mark. Although this symbol is not used on any of the known cistophori of Pergamum, one obverse of this series (A17) is identical with Pergamene die P38. The Pergamene obverse is associated with reverses bearing a wreath or ivy leaf. Apameia Series 18 is thus exactly contemporary with Pergamum Series 20 and 21.
Apameia Series 17, which has a wreath as reverse symbol, is struck from two dies (A15 and 16) which are very close in style to A18 –the second die used in the bee series. The Apameia wreath series is probably contemporary with the wreath series of Pergamum. The symbol which follows the Pergamene wreath and ivy leaf series in die linked sequence is a cornucopiae. This mark is also used at Apameia and probably is to be placed immediately after the bee in the Apameia series (Table I, below p. 126).
Series 20: To r., round cap (pileus?).
20-a. ANS-Strauss, 12.41↑
20-b. London, BMC 7, 12.40↑
20-c. *Commerce, 12.36 (Plate XXXIV, 4)
20-d. Schulman, May 6-7, 1963, 219
20-e. Dresden, 12.65/
Series 21: To r., Dioscurus cap surmounted by star. Pinder 75.
21-a. ANS (Balikesir 1958, 44), 12.30↑
21-b. ANS (Balikesir 1958, 45), 12.43↑
21-c. Cambridge, SNG 4934, 12.79↖
21-d. Oxford, 12.00↑
21-f. * London (Weber 5144), 12.68↑ (Plate XXXIV, 5)
22-f. *ANS-Strauss, 12.05↑ (Plate XXXIV, 6)
23-g. Von Aulock, SNG 8333, 12.63
23-h. Berlin, 12.49
24-i. *Von Aulock, SNG 3451, 12.48 Obverse die identical to Pergamum 46 (Plate XXXIV, 7)
2-a. *Vienna, 6.20↑ (Plate XXXIV, 8); Ankara (Şahnali 1952, 2), 6.07
Series 20 has a round cap as symbol, which may be a variant of the pileus with star of Series 21. The style of obverse dies A20 (Series 20) and A21 (Series 21) is very close. The position of the latter series in the Apameia sequence may be ascertained since obverse A24 is identical with Pergamum die P46 (Plate V, 7). The Pergamene obverse is associated with a dolphin on the reverses, a series linked both to the cornucopiae (Series 22) which precedes it, and to the thyrsus (Series 24) which follows it. The Pergamene cornucopiae, dolphin and thyrsus series were struck during the decade 150-140 B.C. The two Apameia pieces with Dioscurus cap as symbol from the Balikesir hoard (burial ca. 135 B.C.) are quite worn.
Series 22: To r., bunch of grapes.
25-a. *Gotha, 12.59↑ (Plate XXXIV, 9)
3-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 3456, 6.18. Grapes and ivy leaf? (Plate XXXIV, 10)
Series 23: To r., head of elephant r. Pinder 69.
25-a. *ANS (Asia Minor 1970, 29), 12.07/ (Plate XXXIV, 11); Leningrad
25-b. Athens, 12.30/
26-c. *ANS, 12.28↑ (Plate XXXIV, 12)
26-d. Berlin, 12.43
27-e. *Leningrad (Plate XXXIV, 13)
28-f. *Von Aulock, SNG 3450, 12.69 (Plate XXXV, 1); Commerce. Obverse die identical to Pergamum 54
28-g. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 96), 12.58. Obverse die identical to Pergamum 54
29-h. Von Aulock, SNG 8332, 12.73
30-i. *London, BMC 6, 12.55↑ (Plate XXXV, 2)
31-j. London, BMC 5, 12.30↑
31-k. Cambridge, SNG 4933, 12.60↗
31-1. Oxford, 12.53↑
31-m. Athens, 11.44↑
31-n. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 92), 12.55↗
31-o. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 93), 12.56↗. Impress of circular die
32-p. Berlin, 11.65
32-q. Berlin, 12.01
32-r. Naville, July 2, 1930, 1031
33-s. *ANS (Balikesir 1958, 46), 12.63↑ (Plate XXXV, 3)
34-u. Cambridge, SNG 4932, 12.69↗
34-v. Vienna, 12.54
35-x. ANS (Asia Minor 1970, 30), 12.52↑
36-x. * ANS-Strauss, 12.67↑ (Plate XXXV, 4); ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 153), 12.38t; Sofia
36-y. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 94), 12.68↑
– Commerce (Asia Minor 1928, 154; Balikesir 1958, 47)
Series 24: To r., head of elephant r. in rectangular frame.
37-a. *Ankara (şahnali 1952, 1), 12.67. Obverse die identical to Pergamum 69 (Plate XXXV, 5)
38-b. * Istanbul. Obverse die identical to Pergamum 75 (Plate XXXV, 6)
39-c. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 95), 12.50↑
40-d. *Glasgow, Hunter, Parium 7 (pierced). Obverse die identical to Pergamum 79 (Plate XXXV, 7)
Series 25: To r., owl facing in rectangular frame, below which, various letters. Pinder 71.
40-a. *ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 40), 12.50↑. Below owl, M; obverse die identical to Pergamum 79 (Plate XXXV, 8)
41-b. Gotha, 12.60↑. Below owl, A
41-c. *Paris, 12.55↑. Below owl, A (Plate XXXV, 9)
Series 22-25 may be dated with confidence to ca. 145-139 B.C. Series 22 and 23 and Series 24 and 25 are linked to each other, and Series 23, 24 and 25 share dies with the Pergamene series of the same period (Table I, below p. 126). Moreover, Apameia Series 26-28 bear dates from 138-135 B.C.
Series 23 is by far the most extensive of the Apameia issues, to judge from the number of obverse dies employed. Twelve dies are known for this one series, whereas the total for the previous 22 series is only 25 obverses, with no more than 2 dies connected with any issue except Series 21, which has 4 obverses. One notes a parallel situation at Pergamum: Series 23, 14 obverse dies; Series 24, 22; Series 1-22, 45, dies. Since the contemporaneity of Pergamum Series 23-25 and Apameia Series 21-25 is established by inter-city die linkage, the reason for the common pattern of production becomes clear: the cistophori of Pergamum and Apameia were struck at a single mint.
Series 24 and 25 bear symbols enclosed in a rectangular frame, the former carrying over the elephant head of Series 23, the latter having an owl as symbol. This framing device is unknown in any other cistophoric series, before or after 128 B.C., with one exception: the enclosure of AΣ in a rectangular frame on the earliest emissions of Pergamum. The inclusion of letters beneath the framed owl of Series 25 parallels the cautious introduction of initials and monograms on the contemporary cistophori of Pergamum (Series 23c, 24d, e and f).
Series 23-25 are frequently found in the cistophoric hoards buried after 140 B.C.: Balikesir, two pieces; Yeşilhisar, five; Şahnali, one; Asia Minor 1928, two; Asia Minor 1955, one; and Asia Minor 1970, two specimens.
SERIES 26-28, 139-135 B.C.
42-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 3454, 12.92 (Plate XXXV, 10)
– Commerce (Balikesir 1958, 48)
Series 27: Above l., Γ (year 3 = 137/136 B.C.); to r., flute; in l. and r. serpent coils, Δl.
44-b. *ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 155), 12.80↗. Above r., flute; to r., Δl; below l., ΔI (Plate XXXV, 12)
44-c. *Berlin, 12.53. Above 1., Al; above r., Γ; in l. serpent coil, ΔI ( Plate XXXVI, 1)
Series 28: Above l., Δl; above r., A (year 4 = 136/135 B.C.); to r., flute; in l. serpent coil, ΔI.
In Series 26-28 the symbol in the right field is a flute,2 which unites the group in the absence of die linkage. In each series, a variety of initials and dates also appears, documenting a complex system of controls for the silver issued in the name of Apameia by Pergamum.
Two sets of initials are used in Series 26: AP, placed in a serpent coil, as the prow in Pergamum Series 23b and 24b; 3 and ΔI, located above the symbol, as the monogram in Pergamum Series 24f. In the upper left field appears. Apameia Series 27 and 28 are marked ΔI twice on each reverse die; AP does not recur, nor does . Instead, in the upper left or right field, a single letter is used, Γ or A. Since these letters occur on cistophori datable on other criteria to about 140-135 B.C., , Γ and A must surely be dates reckoned according to the regnal years of Attalus II and III as in Ephesus Series 33-35. (year 21) is thus the last year of the reign of the former, 139/138 B.C., and Γ and A the third and fourth years of Attalus III, 137/136 and 136/135 B.C. While it is perhaps only an accident of survival, it is worthy of note that years Γand A do not appear on the known cistophori of Ephesus, while A and B do occur on the Ephesian coins but not on those of Apameia. The appearance of Attalid regnal dates on the Apameia silver is not as surprising as for Ephesus, since its cistophori were produced at the Pergamene mint. It remains a mystery, however, why some cistophori of Ephesus and Apameia are dated by the regnal years of the last two Attalid kings when the silver coins of Pergamum itself bear no dates whatsoever.
A double flute is later adopted as the standard civic symbol of Apameia on its first century cistophori ( Plate XXXVI, 7). See Imhoof, KleinAsialische Münzen, p. 206.
Series 29: Above 1., EI; above r., flute; in l. serpent coil, Δl.
46-b. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 42), 12.52t; von Aulock, SNG 8334, 12.60
46-c. Paris, 12.22↑
Series 30: To r., club with pelt; in r. serpent coil, HΓI.
47-b. *Princeton Museum, 12.33↑. in lower l. serpent coil; ΛH in upper r. serpent coil ( Plate XXXVI, 5)
48-a. *Von Aulock, SNG 3455, 12.37 ( Plate XXXVI, 6)
48-b. Paris, 12.25↑
Series 29-31 are the last of the early cistophoric emissions of Apameia. Series 29 is clearly related to the previous three series: the flute is retained as symbol and ΔI is again placed in a serpent coil. In the upper left field, where one might expect a date, El appears. Unless this mark in some way denotes year 5, it must be the initials of a second magistrate. (In Series 26-28 two sets of initials were used on each reverse die: ΔI and AP or ΔI and Δl.)
Series 29 shares obverse A46 with Series 30, which has a club and pelt as symbol; HΓI, alone or with ΛH, replaces Δl in the serpent coils. The final emission of Apameia, Series 31, pairs a cornucopiae with MH. In this series, the magistrate's initials appear twice, as ΔI in Series 27 and 28. Thus, despite the irregular placement of the ethnic to the right and to the left, as in the early series of Pergamum, Ephesus and Tralles, Apameia Series 31 must come late in the sequence of issues.4
The fortuitous presence of a specimen from Series 30 in fdc condition in the Balikesir hoard enables one to fix with some confidence the date of the latest Apameia cistophori marked with The piece is the latest in the hoard and since it is linked to Series 29 (El and flute and ΔI) and, by inference, to the dated pieces of 139-135 B.C., Series 30 must have been struck around 134 B.C. It thus seems likely that the early cistophori of Apameia ceased when the Province of Asia was formed in 134/133 B.C. Whether the decision was Roman or Pergamene cannot be determined from either the literary or numismatic evidence.
sword in sheath
bunch of grapes
elephant in frame
owl in frame
Γ and flute and ΔI
Δ and flute and ΔI
EI and flute and ΔI
pelt over club and HΓI
cornucopiae and MH
Series 1: On obv. cista, ΛAOΔ; to r., wolf r.
1-a. ANS-BYB, SNG 1153, 12.49↗
1-b. ANS (Asia Minor 1955, 43), 12.25↗
1-c. ANS, 12.27↑
1-d. *Von Aulock, SNG 3796, 12.54 ( Plate XXXVII, 1)
1-e. Istanbul (Yeşilhisar 1963, 100), 12.66↑
2-f. *Berlin, 12.19 (Plate XXXVII, 2)
1-a. *Dewing (Plate XXXVII, 3)
1-b. Istanbul. Symbol off flan to r.
Series 2: On obv. cista, ΛAOΔ; to r., wolf r., above which, ivy leaf.
1-a. *Kastner, Nov. 26, 1974, 97, 12.38 (Plate XXXVII, 4)
Series 3: On obv. cista, ΛAOΔ; to r., wolf r., below which, lyre.
1-a. *Berlin, 11.67 (Plate XXXVII, 5)
1-b. Von Aulock, SNG 8405, 12.64
2-b. *London, BMC 2, 12.52↑ (Plate XXXVII, 6)
Series 4: On obv. cista, ΛAOΔ; to r., forepart of wolf, below which, turreted head of city goddess r. Pinder 58.
1-a. *Brussels, de Hirsch 1578, 12.24↑ (Plate XXXVII, 7); von Aulock, SNG 8404, 12.65
1-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.58↑
2-b. *London, BMC 1, 12.30↑ (Plate XXXVI, 8)
2-c. *ANS (Balikesir 1958, 50), 11.83↑ (Plate XXXVII, 9)
Series 5: On obv. cista, ΛAOΔ; to r., crater.
2-a. *Vienna, 12.27↗ (Plate XXXVII, 10)
Series 6: On obv. cista, ΛAO; to r., owl r.
3-a. *ANS-ETN, 12.35↖ (Plate XXXVII, 11)
3-b. ANS-Strauss, 12.23↑
Series 7: On obv. cista, ΛAO; to r., head of Aphrodite (?) wearing stephane.
3-a. *London, BMC 3, 12.51↑ (Plate XXXVII, 12)
3-b. Copenhagen, SNG 486, 11.85↑
4-c. *Von Aulock, SNG 3797, 12.55 (Plate XXXVII, 13)
2-a. Bern (de Luynes 2738), 5.85 (Plate XXXVII, 14)
The symbols used on the early cistophori of Laodiceia are, for the most part, distinctly civic in nature. The wolf, which appears in four of the seven series, is often used on the bronze coinage and is a canting type: Laodiceia is bounded on one side by the river ύΛϰος. The Aphrodite head of Series 7 is an obverse type on the Laodiceian bronzes and the turreted head of the city goddess in Series 5 is another local reference.
The rarity of these early Laodiceia cistophori accurately reflects the very small number of pieces struck in antiquity. Only four tetradrachm obverse dies survive, two of which (L1 and 2) were each used for four of the supeven known series; a third (L3) was used for two of the seven series.1 The small number of dies and the frequent linkage both confirm that the seven series were produced during a very brief span in the history of the city. Hoard evidence is not sufficient to identify this period within narrow limits. However, the ANS piece of Series 4 from the Balikesir find (burial ca. 135 B.C.) attests to a long period of circulation before the coin was deposited in the hoard (Plate XXXVII, 9).2 It is likely that Series 6 and 7 were also struck well before 135 B.C. although they are not linked to Series 1-5. They may actually precede Series 1-5.
Internal evidence confirms the indications of the Balikesir hoard. The seven series consist of four single- and three dual-symbol types. In the latter, the two marks are placed one above the other in the right field. Precisely this format is employed at Tralles between 160 and 145 B.C. (Series 4, 9, 31 and 32). The style of the Laodiceia dies is also comparable to that of Tralles: compare tetradrachm obverse L1 with T27 (PLATES XXXVII, 1, 4, 5, 7 and XXI, 10), L2 with T18 (PLATES XXXVII, 2, 6, 8-10 and XX, 12-13), and L4 with T61 (PLATES XXXVII, 13 and XXIV, 12). The style of the didrachm obverses is also close: compare L1 and 2 (Plate XXXVII, 3 and 14) with T1, 2, 3, 5, 8 and 12 (PLATES XX, 1-3; XXII, 2; XXIII, 4; XXIV, 9). There is also a striking stylistic affinity between the reverse dies of the two cities. Although die linkage between tetradrachms of Laodiceia and Tralles is impossible because the Laodiceia obverses are marked ΛAO or AAOA,3 inter-city die linkage may one day be demonstrated with the fractional obverse dies.
In my opinion, the early cistophori of Laodiceia were produced at the Tralles mint sometime between 160 and 145 B.C. Such an arrangement for Tralles and Laodiceia would parallel the striking of cistophori for Sardes, Synnada, Apameia and KOP by Pergamum.4 In each case, it is the larger city that coins silver for the smaller town or towns, while the right of striking bronze coins for local circulation is retained by the latter.
The two surviving didrachm obverse dies thus represent a very high proportion of fractions struck in comparison with tetradrachms. The only other instance where this occurs is at Tralles.
See also the discussion under Asia Minor 1876, below p. 107f.
The presence of ΛAO or ΛAOΔ on the obverse cistas may in fact be a labelling device designed to differentiate easily the dies of the two cities.
wolf and ivy leaf
wolf and lyre
wolf and turreted head
The cistophori of Synnada were also issued for a very brief time, probably ca. 160-150 B.C.
Series 1: To 1., KOP; to r., fish 1.; in 1. serpent coil, AP; above r., Γ (year 3 = 137/ 136 B.C.).
1-a. *Berlni, 12.40↑ (Plate XXXVI, 8)
A unique cistophorus in Berlin, formerly in the collection of Imhoof-Blumer, poses a special problem in interpretation. In the left field, where the ethnic of the issuing city normally appears, are the three letters KOP. In the initial publication of this "Cistophor �lteren Stils" Imhoof attributed the coin to an unidentified city of the Province of Asia, the name of which began with the letters KOP. (Coryphantis was excluded as "Namen unbedeutender Ortschaften k�nnen hier nicht in Betracht kommen.") The AP placed in the left serpent coil was interpreted as the initial letters of a magistrate's name.1
In 1929, K. Regling suggested that KOP denoted an unknown Asian city named in honor of a member of the gens Cornelia and that the Γ in the upper right field signified year 3 of the Roman provincial era, i.e., 132/131 B.C.2
Recently H. Seyrig reopened the discussion of this "cistophore �nigmatique" and suggested that KOP and AP be read in conjunction as Corragus, son of Aristomachus, who served under Eumenes II. Seyrig placed the piece among the earliest cistophori, struck shortly after the extension of the Pergamene kingdom in 188 B.C. The exceptional character of the piece, issued not by a city but by the governor of Phrygia, was thought to be consistent with "les d�buts d'un monnoyage encore imparfaitement �tabli." Seyrig rejected the letter Γ as representing year 3, for such dates were unknown on other cistophori "d'ancien style."3
Seyrig's thesis must, however, be rejected for three reasons. First, if the cistophori did not begin until 166 B.C., as I have suggested, the association of KOP with a provincial governor of ca. 188 B.C. must be excluded. Second, the KOP cistophorus is not among the earliest of the series. The style of the obverse is most comparable to that of dies used for Pergamum and Apameia between 140 and 135 B.C. (PLATES VI-VII and XXXV). The format of the reverse, with a pair of initials placed in one of the serpent coils, is also characteristic of many cistophori after 140 B.C. Finally, cistophori of this period are often dated–by the regnal years of the Attalid kings. Γ is undoubtedly year 3 of the reign of Attalus III, 137/136 B.C.
In my opinion, the KOP cistophorus is a product of the Pergamene mint. It is dated according to the reign of an Attalid king, as are the contemporary cistophori of Apameia (issued by Pergamum). This view is substantiated by the magistrate's signature–AP also placed his initials in the serpent coil of an Apameia cistophorus dated , 139/138 B.C. (Series 26, Plate XXXV, 10).
The identification of KOP remains problematical. Although the letters are unquestionably the initials of a city of the Attalid kingdom, only the insignificant village of Coryphantis fits this description. The identification with Coryphantis is, however, not as unlikely as Imhoof believed, since one must no longer postulate the existence of a mint in the town. The fish would also be an appropriate symbol for this coastal village near Adramyteum.4 Perhaps the inhabitants of the town rendered a special service to the Attalids or paid an unusually large sum in taxes in 137/136 B.C., in order to receive such recognition from the royal government.5
However, it is best to leave the question of KOP open. Regrettably, the discovery of a hoard of KOP cistophori of certain provenance might not aid in an identification–the city KOP might be located anywhere in Attalid territory; the coins marked KOP were minted in Pergamum and their circulation may not have been concentrated in the region of KOP.
Imhoof, SNR 1905, p. 162 = Imhoof, Münzkunde, p. 2 and n. 4.
Regling, Bronzen, p. 386.
H. Seyrig, RN 1963, pp. 29-31.
Strabo 13.1.51 (C607).
See my remarks on the nature of the cistophoric coinage, below pp. 120ff.
1-a. *London (Asia Minor 1928, 158), 12.72↑ (Plate XXXVI, 9)
One piece from the Asia Minor 1928 hoard must remain unclassified until the appearance of additional evidence. The ethnic is illegible as a result of die wear and the combination of symbol and monograms is otherwise unknown. The arrangement of marks on the reverse die indicates a date after 134 B.C. for the piece, which accords well with the very fine condition of the coin in the 1928 hoard (burial 128 B.C.).
Any connection between the of this piece and the cistophori of Apameia is doubtful; the style, format, and monogram are foreign to the coins of that city. An expansion of as Heracleia is also unlikely; is almost certainly a personal monogram. What remains of the ethnic suggests that it comprises three or four letters placed horizontally, which excludes Pergamum, as well as Apameia, as possibilities; the absence of ΛAOΔ on the obverse cista and the late style eliminates Laodiceia. The placing of a monogram or symbol between the serpents' heads is characteristic of the Cistophori of Ephesus, Tralles and Sardes after 134 B.C. Ephesus, however, is to be eliminated as its post-134 tetradrachms all bear dates as well as a torch on the reverses. Sardes remains a candidate, but the style of the obverse is alien. The cistophori of Tralles Series 45-47 (Plate XXVIII) are, however, quite comparable in both style and format, and a subsidiary monogram also frequently appears in the lower field of the reverses of that city (PLATES XXIV-XXVII).
Letters in brackets are the die combinations in NC 1954, pp. 7-8.
Series 1: To 1., θYA; above center, fulmen, horizontal; to r., beardless head of Dionysus (?) r.; in 1. and r. serpent coils, BA and EY; on lower part of bow-case, B (year 2 = 133/132 B.C.). Pinder 136.
1-a. [A/c] *ANS, 12.42 Heracleia ( Plate XXXVIII, 1)
1-b. [A/b] Commerce, 12.28 Heracleia
1-c. – Oxford (Kircheldorf, October 7, 1957, 338), 12.42↑
1-d. – Copenhagen; Grabow, July 27-28, 1939, 499
1-e. [A/a] London, 12.08↑ (pierced); Istanbul
2-e. [B/a] *ANS-ETN (Asia Minor 1928, 117), 12.52/. Impress of circular die ( Plate XXXVIII, 2); Paris, 12.10↑
2-f. – Von Aulock, SNG 3198, 12.65
2-g. – Münz. u. Med., June 18-19, 1970, 250, 12.54↑
3-h. [C/d] *Berlni (Naville, April 4, 1921, 2733), 12.55↑ ( Plate XXXVIII, 3); ANS-Strauss (Naville, July 2, 1930, 1028), 12.66↑
3-i. – Artemis Antiquities F.P.L. 6, 1972, 76
Series 2: Below, AΠOA; above center, fulmen, horizontal; to 1., bearded head of Zeus(?) 1.; to r., beardless head of Dionysus (?) r.; in 1. and r. serpent coils, BA and EY; on lower part of bow-case, Γ (year 3 = 132/131 B.C.).
2-a. [B/e] London, 12.43↑
2-b. [B/f] Bobert, Villes1, pl. II, 7
2-c.[B/g] Paris, 12.35↑; Commerce, 12.67↑
2-d. [B/h] Sofia
2-e. [B/i] Von Aulock, SNG 2897 (Cahn, January 1952, 110), 12.75↑
2-f. – Von Aulock, 12.64↑
2-g. – *Commerce, 12.17↑ ( Plate XXXVIII, 4)
3-h. [C/j] *ANS-ETN, 12.50↑ ( Plate XXXVIII, 5)
Series 3: Below, AΠOΛ; above center, fulmen, horizontal; to 1., bearded head of Zeus (?) 1.; to r., beardless head of Dionysus (?) r.; in 1. and r. serpent coils, BA and EY; on lower part of bow-case, A (year 4 = 131/130 B.C.). Pinder 137.
2-a. – *Commerce, 12.53↑ ( Plate XXXVIII, 6)
2-b. – Münz. u. Med., June 18-19, 1970, 247, 12.60↑
2-c. – Copenhagen
3-d. – Göttingen (Glendining, Apr. 7, 1971, 101), 12.54↑
4-e. [D/l] *Vatican, 12.21/ ( Plate XXXVIII, 8); Munich, 12.40↑
Series 4: Below, ΣTPA; above center, fulmen, horizontal; to 1., beardless head of Dionysus (?) 1.; to r., bearded head of Zeus (?) r.; in 1, and r. serpent coils, BA and EY; on lower part of bow-case, A (year 4 = 131/130 B.C.).
The cistophori of Thyatira, Apollonis and Stratoniceia, three small Lydian cities, posed an apparently insurmountable problem to numismatists for many years. These rare coins all bear dates commemorating the second through fourth regnal years of a BA(ΣIΛEΩΣ) EY(MENOY), who was universally assumed to be Eumenes II of Pergamum (197-159 B.C.).
Cistophori of two of these cities (Thyatira and Apollonis) were known to Pinder, and included without commentary in his enumeration of cistophoric variants (nos. 136 and 137). Imhoof was the first to discuss the series and point out the problems involved in interpreting the numismatic evidence. Despite the absence of die linkage, Imhoof was convinced that the similarity in format and style of the few specimens known to him was sufficient grounds for attributing all three variants to a single mint. Thyatira was chosen for only on its pieces was θYA located in the position normally occupied by the ethnic; AΠOΛ and ΣTPA, which were placed below the bow-case, were regarded as abbreviated magistrates' names.1 (A similar assumption had been made by both Pinder and Bunbury.)2 Since Thyatira did not become an Attalid possession until 189 B.C. when Eumenes "invaded the territory around Thyatira,"3 the dates on the cistophori must have been reckoned from the enlargement of the Pergamene kingdom after the Peace of Apameia. Imhoof later modified this thesis and accepted AΠOΛ and ΣTPA as referring to Apollonis and Stratoniceia, but the admission of three cities only seemed to reinforce his dating, for Stratoniceia was named after Stratonice, a Cappadocian princess whom Eumenes II did not marry until 188 B.C.
Imhoof's solution was generally accepted by numismatists and historians alike until Louis Robert reopened the discussion in 1935.4 Robert argued that the conjunction of dates with the legend BA - EY could only refer to regnal years, since there is no surviving document which refers to an era beginning in 188, although there are many inscriptions dated by the regnal years of Eumenes II. This serious objection to Imhoof's dating had, however, grave implications for the cities involved. The text which relates Eumenes' invasion of the "territory around Thyatira" must now be understood to mean that Antiochus' occupation of Thyatira and its territory was temporary. Eumenes must have been attempting to regain Attalid territory, rather than initiating a raid designed to capture Seleucid Thyatira, the traditional interpretation. Moreover, Stratoniceia must have been a much earlier Seleucid foundation in honor of the other Stratonice, wife of Antiochus III.
All these difficulties surrounding the dating of the BA - EY coins were eliminated when, in 1954, E. S. G. Robinson reexamined the numismatic evidence in a now- famous essay in NC.5 Robinson noticed that the cistophori of Thyatira were confined to year two; that those of Apollonis were struck only in years three and four, using two dies of Thyatira year two; and that the only known Stratoniceia pieces were dated year four. This evidence for a mobile mint under the direction of King Eumenes was confirmed by the unified format of all three cities: the Dionysus and Zeus heads and the fulmen are really sub-types, not symbols; the only variables are the date and place of mintage. Robinson proposed that BA - EY be identified with the pretender Aristonicus. It was Aristonicus who, after the bequest of Attalus III in 134 B.C., rose up in revolt against Rome, claiming the throne of Pergamum for himself as Eumenes III. In the course of his revolt, Aristonicus had occupied Thyatira and Apollonis in succession, and was trapped at Stratoniceia in the fourth and final year of his "reign."6
Robinson's identification of BA - EY as Aristonicus and his dating of the coins to 133-130 B.C. are universally accepted today, and there is little that can be added to his masterly discussion of the series. Nevertheless, it is interesting to compare the Aristonicus cistophori with the tetradrachms of the other cities. The first obverse die employed for the cistophori of Aristonicus ( Plate XXXVIII, 1) is so close in style to Ephesus dies E47-52 ( Plate XVI, 5-11) that the same designer may have worked first at Ephesus (140-137 B.C.) and later for Aristonicus. Not only are the form and proportions of the cistas of both mints similar, but so are the movement of the writhing serpent and the shape of the wreath as well. Whether or not the Thyatira engraver is to be identified with the designer of E47-52, the Ephesian dies were clearly his model. It is also these Ephesian tetradrachms that provided a precedent for placing regnal dates on the cistophori. The format of the reverses is a composite of that used by several cities. The placing of a symbol between the heads of the serpents was first introduced at Tralles about 145 B.C. (Series 30), but is also characteristic of most of the Ephesian cistophori after 139 B.C. A fulmen was so placed on the reverses of Tralles Series 40 (ca. 140-135 B.C.). The pairing of symbols to left and right on the cistophori of Apollonis and Stratoniceia are paralleled by the earlier reverses of Ephesus Series 27-29 and Tralles Series 34-38, although on none of these is the ethnic transferred from the left field to below the bow-case. Symbols had also previously been placed in the serpent coils of Pergamum Series 23 and 24 and Ephesus Series 30, and pairs of letters were similarly located in Apameia Series 26-31 (139-134 B.C.) and on the cistophorus of KOP. It is thus clear that in both style and format the cistophori struck for Aristonicus were modelled on the tetradrachms issued by the other cistophoric mints between 140 and 134 B.C.
Although the above catalogue records 25 die combinations, nearly twice the number known to Robinson, no new obverse dies have appeared, nor have any new hands been detected. Obverse dies 1-3 and all the reverse dies of Series 1 and 2 as well as dies a-d of Series 3 are products of a single hand; obverses 4 and 5 and the reverse dies associated with them were engraved by a second man. The expanded die record thus reconfirms what Robinson had already noticed: that no more than one die cutter was employed by Aristonicus at any given time.7 The "mobile mint" of the Attalid pretender obviously consisted of only one skilled artist and a few other workmen responsible for preparing the flans and striking the coins.
A unique specimen recently seen on the U.S. market ( Plate XXXVIII, 10) presents a special problem. Several experts have assured me that the antiquity of the piece is not in question, but its status as official issue or copy is open to discussion. The coin is an undated cistophoric tetradrachm of poor style marked θYA on the reverse. It is possible that this piece was struck for Aristonicus during the first year of his "reign" and that the pretender-king was at first only able to secure the services of an unskilled die cutter, who was replaced in year two. Nevertheless, it seems more likely that the piece is a barbarous imitation of a cistophorus of Thyatira. The obverse die very closely copies Aristonicus obverse 1 ( Plate XXXVIII, 1), but the reverse die is a crude, misunderstood imitation of its Thyatiran model. The Dionysius (?) head is considerably enlarged and EY is misplaced in the upper right serpent coil. The ethnic and BA are mostly off flan; the A of θYA is correctly located in the left field, but the A of BA is similarly misplaced in the upper rather than lower coil. The date is omitted. The flan is smaller and thicker than its model, but the weight (12.63 gm) is normal; the die axes (↓), however, reverse the usual upright convention of the Attalid and Aristonicus cistophori. It is doubtful that the engraver of these crude dies set the pattern for the subsequent BA - EY strikings. If the piece is a copy, it is still possible that undated cistophori of Thyatira year one were struck in antiquity, but do not survive.
Imhoof, AbhBerlni 1884, pp. 28ff. A cistophorus of Thyatira was first published by Borell, NC 1845, p. 13.
Pinder, p. 565; Bunbury, NC 1883, p. 195f. See Imhoof, AbhM�nchen 1890, p. 773f.
Robert, Villes 1, pp. 31-40, 48-49.
Robinson, NC 1954, pp. 1-8. See Robert, Villes2, pp. 252-60.
F. Carrata Thomes, La rivolla di Aristonico e le origini della provincia Romana d' Asia, Turin, 1968.
Robinson, NC 1945, p. 2.
Burial ca. 150-145 B.C.
The hoard was recorded by E. H. Bunbury, who received a single lot of 54 Cistophoric tetradrachms from Mr. Lawson of Smyrna in 1876. Bunbury described the contents as:
with the qualification that "none of the pieces bore a date or the name of a magistrate."1
The majority of the pieces was purchased by Bunbury, but in his publication specific reference was made to only 21 tetradrachms. Some of these pieces were probably among those acquired by the British Museum from Bunbury's collection, and are so indicated.
The single Laodiceia piece is almost certainly the wolf above lyre variety described by Bunbury, although the symbols on the hoard specimen were not mentioned. Bunbury's Laodiceia piece is now in the British Museum (12.52, very fine).
The presence of nine Ephesian cistophori having a bee in wreath as symbol (Series 17, ca. 150 B.C.) suggests that these pieces are among the latest in the hoard. (Bunbury does not mention duplication of marks in any other instance.) The 12 other varieties of Pergamene and Ephesian symbols are also early marks at their respective mints. The Pergamene pieces only run through Series 21, ca. 150 B.C.; the remaining Ephesus cistophori through Series 22, also ca. 150 B.C. The hoard may therefore have been deposited about 150-145 B.C. If this burial date is accurate, the presence of an early Laodiceia piece in very fine condition indicates that its seven series of cistophori were struck shortly before 150 B.C.2
Bunbury, NC 1883, pp. 181-201.
Burial ca. 145-140 B.C.
The hoard is said to have been found in Asia Minor in 1962 and to consist of 71 Atticcistophoric-weight tetradrachms:
|Bithynia, Prusias I and II||11|
|Syria, Antioch, Demetrius I||8|
Only 34 of the pieces have been recorded, but the homogeneity of this group suggests that it is an accurate sample of the entire hoard. Lot A (nos. 1, 12-13, 17-21, 22-25, 33, 37-40, 48 and 50) was examined by C. Boehringer in 1962;3 several of these pieces were subsequently sold at auction by G. Hirsch, Munich. Lot B (nos. 30-32, 34-36, 41-47, 49 and 51) was acquired by the ANS in 1970.
Because of the incompleteness of Bunbury's record, this hoard has not been used as evidence for dating the cistophori listed in the catalogue.
I am indebted to Dr. Boehringer for furnishing details of the contents of the hoard and of the 19 pieces he examined prior to the hoard's publication in Chronologie, pp. 183-85.
1-11. Bithynia, Prusias I and II: Obv., head of Prusias r.; Rev., Zeus standing, holding wreath and scepter, BAΣIΛEΩ ΠPOYΣIOY.
|1.||Prusias II: eagle on fulmen and||Hague (Hirsch, February 21-22, 1963, 1269); Boehringer, pl. 40.1; extra fine|
12-16. Mysia, Pergamum: Obv., head of Philetaerus r.; Rev., Athena seated, holding wreath, ΦIΛETAIPOY.
|12.||Eumenes II: and thyrsus||Hirsch, February 21-22, 1963, 1272; Boeh ringer, pl. 40.2; extra fine|
|13.||Eumenes II: AΣ and stylis||Hirsch, February 21-22,1963,1271; Boehringer, pl. 40.3; extra fine|
17-21. Pamphylia, Side: Obv., head of Athena r.; Rev., Nike 1. with wreath.
|17.||pomegranate and XPY||Hirsch, February 21-22, 1963, 1304; fine to very fine|
|18-21.||pomegranate and KΛEYX||Hirsch, February 21-22, 1963, 1302-3; Hirsch, June 25-28, 1963, 478; very fine. Hirsch, February 21-22, 1963, 1311; Boehringer, pl. 40.10; very fine Hirsch, February 21-22, 1963, 1313; very fine|
22-29. Syria, Antioch: Obv., head of Demetrius r., within wreath; Rev., Tyche seated, BAΣIΛEΩΣ ΔHMHTPIOY.
|22.||Demetrius I:||Hirsch, June 25-28, 1963, 478; very fine.|
|23.||Demetrius I:||Hirsch, February 21-22,1963,1311; Boeh-ringer, pl. 40.10; very fine|
|24.||Demetrius I:||Hirsch, February 21-22, 1963, 1313; very fine|
|25.||Demetrius I: ΣΩTHPOΣ and and H and B ΞP (year 162 = 151/150 B.C.)||Hirsch, February 21-22,1963,1314; Boeh-ringer, pi. 40.12; very fine to extra fine|
30-71. Cistophori of Pergamum (11+), Ephesus (3+), Tralles (7+) and Apameia (1+).
|30. eagle||ANS, 12.59; very fine|
|31. caduceus||ANS, 12.66; fine|
|32. race-torch||ANS, 12.64; fine|
|33. ear of grain||Hirsch, June 25-28, 1963, 429; Boehringer, pl. 40.13; very fine to extra fine|
|34-35. dolphin||ANS, 12.73, 12.67; very fine to extra fine|
|36-40.||filleted thyrsus||ANS, 12.65; Commerce, 4; Boehringer, pl. 40.14; extra fine. All five were struck from the same pair of dies|
|41. cornucopiae||ANS, 12.65; very fine|
|42. eagle with fillet||ANS, 12.69; fine|
|43. filleted hand||ANS, 12.65; very fine|
|44-45. Zeus head||ANS, 12.60, 12.58; fine|
|46. bucranium||ANS, 12.57; very fine|
|47-48. loutrophorus||ANS, 12.62; Hirsch, June 25-28, 1963, 441; Boehringer, pl. 40.19; very fine to extra fine|
|49. Tyche and wreath and ΔAI||ANS, 12.63; very fine|
|50. Tyche and double cornucopiae and||Commerce, 1; Boehringer, pl. 40.18; extra fine|
|51. seated sphinx on caduceus||ANS, 12.60; fine to very fine|
With the exception of the Hierapytna hoard buried in Crete about 45 B.C.,4 the 1962 Asia Minor deposit is the only recorded find of Attic-weight coins mixed with a significant number of cistophori. As a rule, the cistophori did not leave Attalid territory, and it is almost certain that this hoard was buried in the area under Pergamene control. Philetaerus and cistophoric tetradrachms constitute 47 of the 71 pieces in the find; the remaining 24 pieces were struck at mints to the north, south and east (Bithynia, Pamphylia and Syria).5 The latest datable foreign piece is a well-preserved tetradrachm of Demetrius I of Syria (year BΞP = 151/150 B.C.). The absence of tetradrachms of Alexander I Balas of Syria (struck after 150 B.C.) and of Nicomedes II of Bithynia (struck after 149 B.C.) also suggests a burial date about 150 B.C.
However, as one would expect, the locally acceptable coins are not only more numerous, but also somewhat more recent, than the foreign pieces of Attic weight. The absence of cistophori of Ephesus and Apameia dated 140-136 B.C. (Ephesus Series 33-36, Apameia Series 26-28) provides a terminus ante quem for the burial. The three Ephesian pieces in the hoard, datable ca. 145 B.C., (nos. 41-43, Series 24-26) are somewhat earlier in the die sequence than the dated tetradrachms of 140 B.C. and show signs of wear. The Tralles pieces of complex format, also datable ca. 145 B.C., are very well preserved. The five Pergamene cistophori having a filleted thyrsus as symbol (nos. 36-40, Series 23a, ca. 147-140 B.C.) are all struck from the same pair of dies; they are clearly very recent issues of the Pergamene mint, as their excellent state of preservation confirms. The deposit was probably buried ca. 145 B.C. or somewhat later.
IGCH 352. Raven, NC 1938, pp. 133-58. Oeconomides = Kleiner, RBN 1975, pp. 5-19.
The absence of cistophoric countermarks on the five Pamphylian pieces indicates that the application of bow-in-case countermarks by the cistophoric mints is to be dated after 145 B.C. The hoards of ca. 190 B.C., notably the Mektepini find (Ol�ay-Seyrig, Mektepini) do not contain any countermarked coins. The Urfa hoard (IGCH 1772), dated ca. 185-160 B.C. by M. J. Price (NC 1969, pp. 10-14), and the Tell Kotchek hoard (IGCH 1773), dated ca. 160 B.C. by Seyrig (Trésors, pp. 65-71), as well as the Babylon find (IGCH 1774) of ca. 155 B.C. (Regling, ZNum 1928, pp. 92-132) contain many Pamphylian pieces bearing anchor and Helios countermarks, but no specimen countermarked with a bow-in-case.
Burial ca. 135 B.C.
The hoard is said to have been found in the immediate environs of Balikesir in 1958 and was acquired in the same year by a European dealer. Of the original deposit of approximately 100 cistophoric tetradrachms, only 50 have been recorded. These were seen in two lots of 28 and 22 pieces. The latter represents the first part of the hoard to be received by the dealer, including what were said to be many of the best-preserved pieces. The varying condition of the coins was recorded by a correspondent who examined them prior to their sale. The lot of 28 pieces constitutes the unsold portion of the entire hoard, and was acquired by the ANS.
|1.||dolphin and AΣ||ANS, 12.43|
|2-3.||caduceus||ANS, 12.41; Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|4.||amphora||Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|5.||owl||Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|6.||star||Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|7-8.||stylis||ANS, 12.52, 12.42|
|9-10.||dolphin||ANS, 12.57; Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|11-19.||thyrsus||ANS, 12.54, 12.39, 12.70, 12.68, 12.55, 12.55, 12.61, 12.71, 12.59 Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|20.||prow over thyrsus||Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|21.||thyrsus and Δ||Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|22.||thyrsus and||ANS, 12.37|
|23.||bow in case||Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|24.||stag feeding||Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|25.||cock||Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|26.||Artemis with torches||Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|27.||stag and palm||ANS, 12.43|
|28.||Artemis slaying stag||Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|29-30.||cornucopiae||ANS, 12.53, 12.55|
|31-32.||bee and serpent on cista||ANS, 12.56; Commerce, 1 "extra fine"|
|33.||thyrsus, horizontal||Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|34.||humped bull||ANS, 12.14|
|35.||forepart of bull||Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|36.||head of Zeus||ANS, 12.52|
|37.||helmet above fulmen||ANS, 12.46|
|38.||shield||Commerce, 1 "extra fine"|
|39.||warrior||Commerce, 1 "extra fine"|
|40.||poppy head||Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|42.||herm||Commerce, 1 "fine"|
|43.||wreath||Commerce, 1 "very good"|
|44-45.||Dioscurus cap||ANS, 12.30, 12.43|
|46-47.||elephant head||ANS, 12.63; Commerce, 1 "very fine"|
|48.||and flute and ΔI||Commerce, 1 "extra fine"|
|49.||club and H Γ I||ANS, 12.62|
|50.||wolf and turreted head||ANS, 11.83|
The two lots together form a fairly homogeneous group which is probably a relatively accurate reflection of the entire hoard. The bulk of the recorded pieces falls in the period after 155 B.C. The Pergamene specimens run through Series 24f (ca. 140B.C.), those of Ephesus through Series 28 (ca. 143 B.C.), those of Tralles through Series 22 (ca. 150 B.C.). The Apameia pieces include one specimen dated 139 B.C. (no. 48) and another which may be dated about 135 B.C., both in extra fine to fdc condition.
The burial should therefore be dated about 135 B.C. The absence of comparably late pieces of Ephesus and Tralles may be explained by the sale of several of the best- preserved pieces before the existence of the hoard was brought to Noe's attention in 1960.
Burial ca. 130 B.C.
The hoard was found in mid-July 1963 by a shepherd on a hill called �amlik or Belenalan, three miles north of the village of Yeşilhisar, in the district of Savaştepe in the vil�yet of Balikesir. The coins, all cistophoric tetradrachms, were in a small earthenware pot; part of the latter has been recovered and is in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum. Of the 104 coins, several were sold immediately. One hundred were subsequently acquired by the museum in Istanbul, but 11 of these are certainly intrusions. The hoard has been published by Nekriman Ol�ay.6 The numbers given below are those of Ol�ay's catalogue.
|3-4.||ear of grain||12.67, 12.62|
|6-16.||thyrsus||12.67, 12.32, 12.52, 12.50, 12.49, 12.61, 12.60, 12.54, 12.70, 12.54, 12.62|
|21.||dolphin and prow||12.68|
|22-25.||dolphin||12.47, 12.53, 12.53, 12.67|
|26.||thyrsus and A - A||12.50|
|40.||Artemis with torches||12.70|
|41.||bee in wreath||12.62|
|42.||A and double cornucopiae||12.65|
|44-45.||hand with fillet||12.69, 12.38|
|46-47.||star and filleted branch||12.70, 12.48|
|48-49.||eagle with fillet||12.52, 12.54|
|50-51.||Artemis with torches and cock||12.65, 12.52|
|52.||wreath and aplustre||12.37|
|53.||Artemis with hound||12.29|
|54.||bow in case||12.59|
|56-58.||B and Artemis with headdress||12.75, 12.60, 12.67|
|60.||B and Artemis with headdress||12.50|
|62-65.||Γ and torch||12.65, 12.68, 12.57, 12.62|
|66-68.||△ and torch||12.65, 12.67, 12.40|
|73-74.||draped figure||12.60, 12.70|
|75.||ear of grain||12.45|
|76-78.||loutrophorus||12.60, 12.70, 12.52|
|81-83.||head of Zeus||12.60, 12.63, 12.52|
|85.||bull on maeander||12.33|
|86.||helmet over fulmen||12.55|
|90.||wreath and Tyche||12.62|
|92-94.||elephant head||12.55, 12.56, 12.68|
|95.||elephant in frame||12.50|
|99.||EI and flute and ΔI||12.41|
|30.||and serpent staff||12.38|
|31.||and serpent staff||12.54|
|32.||and serpent staff||12.60|
|33.||NI and serpent staff||12.12|
|34.||AΠ and within wreath and serpent staff||11.40|
|35.||AP and and serpent staff||11.72|
|36.||EY and and serpent staff||12.15|
|37.||Q and and serpent staff||11.32|
|69.||N Γ and quiver||12.23|
|70.||Ξ ⊏ and palm between two cornucopiae||11.95|
|91.||ΔION and club||11.77|
The 11 coins here identified as intrusions vary in condition from very fine to poor. All postdate 128 B.C.; nos. 30-33 should be dated 123-95 B.C.; nos. 34-36, 95- 67 B.C.;7 no. 37, 50/49 B.C.; nos. 69 and 70, 82/81 and 69/68 B.C. respectively; and no. 91, 128-85 B.C. If these coins are excluded from the lot, the remaining 89 cistophori constitute the bulk of a hoard which was certainly buried ca. 130 B.C. to judge from the 7 Ephesian pieces struck in years Γ and A, (132/131 and 131/130 B.C. respectively). The cistophori of Pergamum, Sardes, Tralles, Apameia and Laodiceia contained in this hoard are consistent with this date. The latest pieces of these mints represented in the lot are Pergamum no. 17 (Series 25b, ca. 139 B.C.); Sardes no. 72 (Series 5, ca. 160 B.C.); Tralles no. 79 (Series 45, ca. 130 B.C.); Apameia no. 99 (Series 29, ca. 135 B.C.); and Laodiceia no. 100 ( Series 1, 160-145 B.C.). The homogeneity of the 89 recorded pieces renders it likely that the 15 dispersed pieces would not substantially alter these conclusions.
Ol�ay, Istanbul ArkM�z Yilliĝi 1964, pp. 58-63, 171-177.
Kleiner, ANSMN 19 (1974), pp. 8-12.
Burial ca. 128 B.C.
The hoard is said to have been found in Asia Minor in 1928. E. T. Newell saw 142 pieces, all cistophoric tetradrachms, in four lots during 1928-29. The last of the four, 47 pieces, had previously been recorded by G. F. Hill, together with 16 additional specimens retained by the British Museum. The London lot of 63 cistophori was published by Hill in 1929.8 Of the 158 tetradrachms recorded by Newell and Hill, 79 pieces are now in the ANS and the British Museum. The remaining pieces were dispersed in 1929.
|2.||race-torch and||ANS, 12.53|
|3.||ivy leaf||BM, 12.56|
|4.||cornucopiae 5-13. dolphin||BM, 12.55|
|5-13.||dolphin||ANS, 12.60, 12.66; BM, 12.67; Commerce, 6|
|14-22.||thyrsus||ANS, 12.61, 12.59; Commerce, 7|
|23-24.||Macedonian helmet||ANS, 12.79; Commerce, 1|
|25-28.||crested helmet||ANS, 12.78, 12.65; Commerce, 2|
|30-33.||ME and serpent-entwined club||ANS, 12.76, 12.51; BM, 12.65; Commerce, 1|
|34-35.||EP and fulmen||ANS, 12.53; BM, 12.74|
|36-49.||A∑ and gorgoneion||ANS, 12.69, 12.71, 12.73, 12.70; BM, 12.70; Commerce, 9|
|50-52.||MH and club and pelt and Δ - I||ANS, 12.70, 12.72; Commerce,1|
|53-57.||MH and club and pelt and||ANS, 12.72, 12.75; Commerce, 3|
|58.||bust of Helios||ANS, 12.57|
|60-61.||stag and palm||BM, 12.40; Commerce, 1|
|62-63.||eagle with fillet||ANS, 12.48; Commerce, 1|
|64-65.||star and filleted branch||ANS, 12.58; Commerce, 1|
|66.||bee and serpent on cista||ANS, 12.57|
|67.||wreath and aplustre||BM, 12.56|
|68.||K and Artemis with quiver||ANS, 12.68|
|69.||A K and bee and cornucopiae||ANS, 12.67|
|70.||A and bee and cornucopiae||ANS, 12.51|
|71-79.||B and Artemis with headdress||ANS, 12.43, 12.71; Commerce, 7|
|80-82.||Artemis with torches and cock||ANS, 12.52; BM, 12.47; Commerce, 1|
|83-84.||A and bee and torch||ANS, 12.47; Commerce, 1|
|85-89.||B and bee and torch||ANS, 12.64; BM, 12.67; Commerce, 3|
|90-92.||Γ and bee and torch||ANS, 12.71; BM, 12.35; Commerce, 1|
|93-96.||Γ and torch||ANS, 12.65, 12.71; Commerce, 2|
|97-101.||Δ and torch||ANS, 12.63; Commerce, 4|
|102-6.||E and torch||ANS, 12.54; Commerce, 4|
|107.||E and stag and torch||Commerce, 1|
|108-9.||⊏ and stag and torch||ANS, 12.73; Commerce, 1|
|110-11.||and serpent-entwined omphalus||ANS,||12.41; Commerce, 1|
|112-16.||ΣAP and and Zeus||ANS, 12.59; BM, 12.72; Commerce, 3|
|117.||BA - EY and B||ANS, 12.52|
|118-19.||Thumped bull||ANS, 12.42, 12.63|
|120.||eagle on fulmen||ANS, 12.60|
|121-22.||head of Zeus||ANS, 12.45; Commerce, 1|
|123.||helmet over fulmen||ANS, 12.66|
|124.||fulmen, horizontal||ANS, 12.52|
|125-26.||draped figure||ANS, 12.63; Commerce, 1|
|128-29.||loutrophorus||ANS, 12.63; BM, 12.53|
|130-32.||tripod||ANS, 12.53, 12.39; Commerce, 1|
|134.||winged caduceus||ANS, 12.71|
|135-36.||star and Helios and||ANS, 12.67; Commerce, 1|
|137-43.||eagle and fulmen and||ANS, 12.60; Commerce, 6|
|144-48.||and Helios||ANS, 12.62, 12.55; Commerce, 3|
|149-50.||and helmet||ANS, 12.62; BM, 12.61|
|151-52.||ear of grain||ANS, 12.67; Commerce, 1|
|153-54.||elephant head||ANS, 12.38; Commerce, 1|
|155-56.||Γ and flute and ΔI||ANS, 12.80; BM, 12.59|
|157.||club and pelt and HΓI||ANS, 12.64|
|158.||and head and||BM, 12.72|
The burial date of the hoard may be fixed with confidence due to the presence of numerous dated Ephesian pieces which include all the varieties with regnal dates and a continuous series of pieces with provincial era dates through year ⊏ or 129/128 B.C. The latest series of Sardes, Thyatira, Tralles and Apameia are all present, as are Pergamene Series 27-28 and 30-31. All these series must therefore antedate 128 B.C. It seems certain, however, that Series 32-38 at Pergamum were struck in the years immediately following 128 B.C., and that the civic badge, the serpent staff, did not become a feature of the Pergamene Cistophori until about 123 B.C. The traditional date for this change in format at Pergamum, 134/133 B.C., adhered to even by Hill, despite the evidence of this hoard, must be rejected.
Hill, NC 1929, pp. 73-86.
Burial ca. 128 B.C.
The hoard was found in an olive grove outside the village of Şahnali in the district of Dalama in the vil�yet of Aydin and was acquired by the Ankara Archaeological Museum in 1952. The deposit consisted of nine cistophoric tetradrachms and six didrachms. All are illustrated in Saadet Onat Taner's publication of the find in 1959.9 The numbers given below are those of Taner's catalogue.
|1. elephant head in frame||12.67|
|2. Dioscurus cap||6.07|
|3. B and bee and torch||12.62|
|4. A and bee and torch||12.70|
|5. Δ and torch||12.69|
|6. Γ and torch||12.54|
|7. filleted thyrsus||12.61|
|10. and sword in sheath||12.55|
|12. poppy head||6.08|
|13. Zeus head||6.07|
|14. eagle on fulmen and Tyche||6.25|
|15. and poppy head and ear of grain||12.56|
The hoard is interesting because it is the only recorded deposit buried before 100 B.C. that contains fractional cistophori. Even here no drachms are present, although in the 1970 Asia Minor hoard ( IGCH 1460, burial ca. 95 B.C.) both didrachms and drachms are included with the hoarded tetradrachms.
The 15 pieces may represent a gradual accumulation rather than a currency hoard. Four of the coins are among the earliest cistophori issued (no. 8, ca. 165 B.C.; and nos. 9, 10 and 13, ca. 160 B.C.), yet do not appear to have been in circulation for a very long time. Nevertheless, the date of the burial can be fixed with confidence, for 5 of the 15 pieces were struck between 134 and 128 B.C. The 4 Ephesus pieces are dated 134/133, 133/132, 132/131 and 131/130 B.C.; the Tralles piece, (Series 47), in excellent condition, was probably struck about 128 B.C. In the much larger Yeşilhisar hoard of 130 B.C. no specimen of Tralles Series 47 was included, whereas in the even larger 1928 hoard, two specimens of this variety were present. The hoard was therefore buried ca. 128 B.C.
Taner, pp. 139-44. See the review by Atlan, Belleten vol. 25 no. 95 (1960), pp. 485-91.
Ever since the publication of A. X. Panel's De Cistophoris in 1734, the conception of the cistophoric coinage as a "Pan-Asiatic, federal currency"1 has dominated modern criticism. In recent years, the role of the Attalids of Pergamum in the creation of the cistophorus has been increasingly emphasized, yet the concept of a partnership still lingers.2 Above all, the assumption that the cistophori were issued by independent mints, one located in each of the cities whose ethnic appears on the reverses, remains unquestioned.3 The inter-city linkage already documented in this study necessitates not only a reexamination of this assumption but a complete reconsideration of the nature of the cistophoric coinage.
The royal mint at Pergamum was responsible for striking cistophori on a regular basis for four Attalid cities: Pergamum itself, Sardes, Synnada and Apameia. Occasional special issues, as the cistophori marked KOP and BA-ΣY-AP, were also entrusted to the Pergamene mint. A careful study of the cistophori produced at Pergamum provides valuable insight into the nature of the entire cistophoric coinage.
Table I summarizes the intra- and inter-city die linkage previously outlined separately for each city in the Catalogue.
The following observations may now be made with respect to the operation of the royal mint:
Head, HN 4, pp. 534f.
Seyrig, RN 1963, p. 24, describes the cistophoric coinage as a "union mon�taire" and speaks of "le caract�re f�d�ral du monnoyage cistophorique." However, on pp. 21f., Seyrig underlines the essentially Pergamene character of the cistophoric coinage: "Les villes qui ont frapp� des tetradrachmes attiques �taient, dans le temps o� elles les frappaient, des villes libres, �trang�res au royaume de Pergame; cependant que la frappe du cistophore implique, dans les m�mes conditions, l'appartenance de la ville × ce royaume." Kraay, p. 8: "The cistophori, produced on a uniform pattern at a number of mints, are the regal coinage of the kingdom of Pergamum. We should no longer speak of an 'economic entente' or 'a quasi-federal currency,' as though the issuing cities were doing a favour to the royal government; they no doubt coined when they were told to coin, and with silver provided by the royal treasury."
With the exception of the cities of Apollonis, Stratoniceia and Thyatira, which Robinson, NC 1954, pp. 1ff., showed to be the temporary locations of the "mobile mint" of Aristonicus. See above pp. 103-6 for a full discussion of these issues.
The royal mint at Pergamum was the foremost of the early cistophoric mints. It coined silver for cities as far apart as Sardes and Synnada and it employed more die cutters and unskilled workmen and struck more cistophori than any other mint. Nevertheless, the Attalids found it wise to divide the responsibility for their immense coinage to some degree. When the mint at Pergamum began to issue cistophori around 166 B.C., cistophoric mints were simultaneously established at Ephesus in Ionia and at Tralles in Lydia.6
The mint at Tralles appears to have been largely responsible for meeting the fractional silver currency needs of the Attalid kingdom. The cistophoric drachms and didrachms of Tralles survive in far greater numbers than those of any other city. Indeed, there are no known early drachms of Pergamum, Sardes, Synnada or Apameia, and the fractional cistophori of Ephesus are extremely rare. This can hardly be accidental. In the only two recorded hoards containing fractional cistophori, the Tralles pieces considerably outnumber those of all other cities combined. In the Şahnali 1952 find (burial ca. 128 B.C.) there were four didrachms of Tralles but only one didrachm each of Pergamum and Apameia.7 In the 1970 Asia Minor hoard (burial ca. 95 B.C.) there was only one drachm of Ephesus, but six drachms and two didrachms of Tralles.8 It is unlikely that the silver currency needs of Tralles differed substantially from those of the other large Attalid cities. In view of the direct royal supervision of the cistophoric coinage of Pergamum, Sardes, Synnada and Apameia outlined above, it seems very likely that while token amounts of fractional cistophori were minted for most cities, the striking of drachms and didrachms was concentrated at Tralles by royal design.
A larger body of material than presently available may one day be assembled and reveal that even the fractional cistophori marked , , and EΦE were struck at Tralles. The advantages of such a system are obvious. The concentration of specialized die cutters and the preparation of all flans of fractional weight at a single mint would have been more economical for the royal government. The Pergamene mint may have been too burdened with the striking of coins for four cities to assume the responsibility for the fractional cistophori of the entire kingdom.
The cistophori of both Tralles and Ephesus differ from those issued by the Pergamene mint in the prominence of civic and religious symbols used as control marks. Although the marks used at Ephesus and Tralles are undoubtedly also personal devices, they seem to be restricted to a remarkably narrow range:
References to the cult of Artemis and to the city:
|Artemis head||bow case with strap|
|bow in case||stag|
|quiver and bow||stag and palm|
|stag feeding||Artemis slaying stag|
|bow and arrow||hand with fillet|
|forepart of stag||bee and serpent on cista|
|Artemis Ephesia||K and Artemis with quiver|
|Artemis with torches||A K and bee and double cornucopiae|
|Artemis with hound||A and bee and double cornucopiae|
|temple key||B and Artemis with headdress|
|bee within wreath||and altar and owl|
|bee||Artemis with torches and cock|
References to the cult of Zeus Larasius and to the city and the Maeander valley:
|humped bull||eagle on prow|
|eagle on fulmen||star above fulmen and|
|helmet above fulmen||Tyche and wreath|
|maeander||Tyche and eagle on fulmen|
|bucranium||Tyche and cornucopiae|
|eagle||Tyche and star above cornucopiae|
|wreath above fulmen||Tyche and eagle on cuirass|
|fulmen, horizontal||fulmen and eagle and|
|fulmen, vertical||star and eagle|
|bull on maeander||and eagle head|
|eagle on cuirass|
The symbols almost have the character of mint marks and supplement the ethnic placed in the opposite field as a means of identifying the issuing city.9 The cistophori struck by the royal mint at Pergamum are not so distinguished since the types themselves proclaim their origin–the Attalid dynasty claimed descent from Dionysus and Heracles.10
In this respect, the cistophori of Tralles and Ephesus may be compared with the posthumous issues of Alexander types by the cities of Asia Minor. In order to distinguish among the various cities that struck tetradrachms of uniform types, subsidiary marks of local significance were commonly included–a sphinx at Chios, an amphora at Temnus, a lion at Miletus, Pegasus at Alabanda, Tyche at Sardes and Smyrna, etc. Yet the comparison is deceptive. As Seyrig has shown, such autonomous issues of coins in precious metals are a sign of the independence of a city from royal control.11 The status of Tralles and Ephesus is more akin to that of the cities which issued Alexander tetradrachms during the king's lifetime. Some of these cities also placed mint marks on their issues, e.g. (Aradus) and ΣI (Sidon), and there is considerable evidence that certain of Alexander's mints performed a specialized function.12 Nevertheless, the types of the silver coins remained those chosen by the king. Although they were struck in many different places, the silver issued during the lifetime of Alexander was clearly, in the words of A. R. Bellinger, "the king's money."13
The cistophori struck at the mints of Ephesus and Tralles were the king's coins as much as those issued by the royal mint at Pergamum. The cistophori of all three mints bore devices selected by the king or his fiscal officers and were produced from silver provided by the royal treasury. Like the lifetime issues of Alexander the Great, the cistophori were struck by a limited number of strategically located mints under the king's direct control. While the royal title is lacking on the cistophori, the king's money is occasionally dated by the years of his reign.14 The dependence of Aradus and Sidon on Alexander has never been questioned; the subservient status of the cistophoric mints at Tralles and Ephesus should now also be recognized.
Robinson, NC 1954, pp. 1-8.
See above, pp. 100-1 for a full discussion of the KOP cistophorus.
A fourth mint at Laodiceia may have struck cistophori for a short time between 160 and 145 B.C., although, as I have suggested, above, pp. 98-99, the cistophori of Laodiceia wereprobably produced at Tralles.
See above, p. 118 for the complete contents of the Şahnali hoard.
Civic badges eventually characterized the cistophoric issues of all the mints under Roman control, e.g., the torch of Ephesus, standing Dionysus of Tralles, double flute of Apameia and serpent staff of Pergamum.
The Pergamene origin of the cistophoric types was definitively established by van Hoorn, Mnemosyne 1915, pp. 233-37. See above, pp. 120f.
Seyrig, RN 1963, pp. 19-22.
One aspect of the peculiar nature of the cistophoric coinage is the limited area in which the royal currency circulated. Seyrig has underscored the fact that cistophori are rarely found outside Attalid territory.15 No early cistophori have been discovered in Syria or Greece, nor in Rhodes or most of the other islands. Only a few specimens have been found at Delos and cistophori are infrequently mentioned in the Delian inventories.16 Conversely, foreign coins are rarely found in cistophoric hoards.17 The cistophorus appears to have been the exclusive legal currency of the Pergamene kingdom. This fact is not so surprising. The Ptolemies also instituted a monetary monopoly and a comparable situation could have been achieved in Attalid Asia Minor by royal decree.
What is so peculiar about the cistophori is that they rarely left the area in which they were struck. The king certainly could not have limited transactions in cistophori beyond the borders of his realm by decree alone. It is very difficult to believe that any Attalid decree would have prevented a foreign merchant from accepting cistophori as payment if his client provided an amount of cistophoric silver equal in bullion value to the asking price in Attic or Rhodian drachms. Moreover, the cistophoric weight of 12.60 gm was ideally suited for such exchanges with either Attic or Rhodian currency.18 Yet such transactions were apparently rare. Only one explanation as to why the cistophori tended to remain at home appears probable. The royal silver must have had a higher value within Attalid territory than outside it. Some degree of overvaluation must be postulated or else the flexibility of the cistophoric weight standard would have encouraged rather than discouraged export of these coins. The exact means by which Eumenes II established a monetary monopoly for the cistophori may never be fully understood, but that such a monopoly was achieved cannot be doubted.