During the past century, a great deal of scholarly attention has been directed to elucidating the coinage, and through it the internal history, of Lycia before the arrival of Alexander. 1 This was inevitable. Preeminent in Homer among the peoples of Asia, the Lycians seem always to have possessed a strong sense of national unity, which kept them free of outside colonization and relatively free from foreign domination throughout the archaic and classical periods. Even under the Persian Empire, whose strength they could not resist, the Lycians retained some degree of autonomy, for local dynasts coined in their own names throughout the fifth and much of the fourth centuries. During this time, although inevitably influenced by the Greek and Achaemenid worlds, a vigorous and original culture flourished in Lycia, whose architecture, sculpture, and coins all evoke admiration today.
For over a century and a half after the fall of the last dynast, ca. 362 b.c., the Lycians seem to have struck virtually no coins. 2 But in the early second century b.c. our sources speak of a formal Lycian League of cities which were now thoroughly Hellenized, and which struck a large and uniform federal coinage in silver and in bronze. Most of this coinage has been loosely dated over the entire two-century span from 167 b.c., when Lycia was freed from Rhodian dominion, to a.d. 43, when she finally lost her autonomy and was absorbed into the Roman Empire. Although the League coins are frequently cited as evidence for the membership of this or that city in the League, they have received remarkably little direct study.
Indeed, the League itself has been little studied, presumably because the Lycians were not racially Greek, and their government was not considered part of the stream of Greek political development. 3 Yet the area was almost completely Hellenized by the time the League sprang up, and its institutions so far as we understand them seem thoroughly Greek. In this politically sophisticated federation, at the end of the second century b.c. the largest cities controlled three votes each in the assembly, while other cities, according to size, controlled two or one. 4 But an examination of the League's institutions is not, and cannot be, the subject of this study. The coinage can, however, tell us something of the League's changing membership at different periods, and at times illuminate Lycia's relationships with her neighbors—and among these neighbors must of course be classed Rome.
As has been stated, scant attention has been paid to the Lycian League's coinage. Several scholars early in this century examined certain series struck under Augustus and Claudius, 5 but the last work to survey even briefly the League coinage as a whole appeared over half a century ago. 6 Except for the BMC and Historia Numorum, which are inevitably incomplete and occasionally inaccurate as well as extremely imprecise about chronology and even the denominations in use, no useful treatment of the Lycian League's coinage exists.
The southern coast of Asia Minor consists chiefly of two large mountainous bulges. The eastern is Cilicia Tracheia, separated by the Pamphylian Gulf from the western, which is Lycia. Northeast of Lycia lies Pamphylia, the border, ill-defined, shifting several times during antiquity; to the north are Pisidia and Phrygia; to the west, again across a shifting border, Caria; and to the southwest, some fifty miles away, the powerful island of Rhodes.
Lycia extends approximately 80 miles east to west, and 40 north to south, with an area of about 3400 square miles. A mountainous land, its two highest peaks are just under and just over 10,000 feet—and this within 10 or 20 miles of the sea. There are few plains: one in the north central region, which played little part in Lycian affairs either in classical times or in the period of the League; one around Telmessus in the west; one along both sides of the Xanthus River, the heartland of Lycia; and one east of Limyra, on the southern coast.
Although Lycia enjoyed a network of roads under the Roman Empire, travel in earlier times was extremely difficult: Alexander avoided the mountainous southern coast by marching across the level country in the north. And even in modern times, only very recently has a road system been built, notably along the coast. Internal communications in antiquity were thus chiefly by sea or by the rivers which flow to the southern coast. Of these the most important, west to east, were the Xanthus, the Myrus, the Arycandus, and the Limyrus.
All of the known minting cities of the Lycian League lie within easy reach of the coast or of one of these rivers. Telmessus, a major city, is on the northern part of the western coast. Patara, Lycia's chief port, lies on the western portion of the southern coast, near the mouth of the Xanthus River. A few miles up that river is Xanthus, Lycia's largest city. And within easy reach of the river's tributaries to the north lie Sidyma, Pinara, Tlos, and Cadyanda. Within an area no more than 10 by 20 miles in the center of the southern coast are Candyba, Phellus, Antiphellus, Aperlae, Cyaneae, Trebendae, and Myra. Slightly to the east lie Limyra, Rhodiapolis, and Gagae, around a small coastal plain; up the Arycandus River, which flows through this plain, is Arycanda. And on the eastern coast, cut off by the high Solyma Mountains from the rest of Lycia, are Olympus and Phaselis.
Broughton has estimated Lycia's population in ancient times as 200,000; 7 Moretti considers this high. 8 Two hundred thousand would indeed be considerably greater than the current population, but this is quite possible, as Broughton notes that in many instances Asian areas and cities are known to have had ancient populations greater than their modern ones. Lycia's population, however, whatever its absolute size, was dispersed in many small communities. Pliny states that while Lycia formerly had 70 cities, in his time it contained but 36. 9 Strabo, speaking of ca. 100 b.c., says that 23 cities shared the vote in the federal assembly. 10 But numerous sympolities are known from inscriptions, and these doubtless each controlled one vote. And what, in any case, is the definition of a city as opposed to a deme or village? It is clear that speculation on the absolute number of "cities" is idle. We can be sure only that the Lycian population was scattered in many small communities over its mountainous land.
Sea trade and agriculture seem to have been the Lycians' chief sources of livelihood. Timber was a highly important product, but ancient writers mention also wine, fruits, fish, sponges, cattle, and goats—but no mines, and nothing exceptional that would explain the rather surprising amount of coin struck in classical times, or in the period of the Lycian League, as one of the results of this study has been that the surviving League silver is a very small sample indeed of the original output.
Early nineteenth-century explorers in Lycia included the Englishmen Capt. Francis Beaufort, Sir William Leake, Sir Charles Fellows, Sir Charles Cockerell, and others. Later in the century three Austrian teams visited the area and also wrote valuable accounts of the topography and copied many inscriptions: O. Benndorf and G. Niemann, E. Peterson and F. von Luschan, and R. Heberdey and E. Kalinka. 11 But Lycia has remained little known. Archaeological excavations started only after the Second World War, 12 and the area remains one of the least visited and least known in Asia Minor. Especially now that roads have been built, much of archaeological and numismatic interest will certainly appear in coming years.
|6||A. W. Hands, Common Greek Coins (London, 1907), pp. 151–68, preceded only by Warren, pp. 35–44, and W. Köner, "Beiträge zur Münzkunde Lyciens," pp. 93–122, in M. Pinder and J. Friedlaender, Beiträge zur älteren Münzkunde (Berlin, 1851).|
|7||Broughton, pp. 815–16.|
|8||Moretti, p. 172.|
Although neighboring lands were settled by Greeks in heroic and archaic times, Lycia managed to remain free of Greek colonization. 13 That several Lycian cities have Greek names does not contradict this statement, for in most cases it is known that these were not the cities' original names: Xanthus, for example, was called Arna in the Lycian language. Even the national name of the Lycians was adopted only during the Hellenization following Alexander's conquest, as in their own language the Lycians were the Termilai. Phaselis on the eastern coast was indeed a Rhodian foundation, but in early times this coast, separated from Lycia proper by the Solyma Mountains, was not Lycian but Pam-phylian.
The Lycian culture of classical times flourished in the Xanthus Valley and along the southern coast. Its limits, as shown by the characteristic and picturesque rock-cut and tower tombs and by inscriptions in the Lycian language and script, were the western coast of the Gulf of Tel-messus to the west, Bubon to the north, and Rhodiapolis to the east, with no such remains north or northeast of Arycanda and Rhodiapolis, and none on the eastern coast. Local dynasts, whom the coins show to have controlled shifting groups of cities, governed Lycia at this time. Some of these dynasts emerged at certain times as leaders of the whole people, the most outstanding being Pericles, who in the first half of the fourth century commanded all Lycia except the east coast. But the cities clearly retained some degree of autonomy, since in the fourth century coins were struck also in the names of several of the larger cities.
Lycia alone in western Asia Minor stayed free of Croesus's dominion in the sixth century. After the desperate but unsuccessful resistance of the Xanthians to Harpagus, 14 Lycia passed into the Persian Empire, but presumably on favorable terms, for the Lycian princes coined in their own names, and Lycia did not join her western neighbors in the Ionian Revolt. Later in the fifth century she was at least briefly a member of the Delian League, for the tribute lists for 446 b.c. assess the Λύϰιοι ϰαὶ συν[τελεῖς] for ten talents.
The dynast. Pericles, mentioned above, joined in the Revolt of the Satraps. When this collapsed in 362 b.c., Lycia was placed under the control of Mausolus of Caria, whose house continued to control Lycia until Alexander's arrival. The dynasts would seem to have disappeared under Carian rule, for it was the cities with which Alexander dealt, and which submitted individually to him.
After Alexander's death, Lycia fell to Antigonus. The Ptolemies, however, also coveted it; and, after various vicissitudes, the area came completely under their control in the 270s and remained Egyptian territory until the end of the century. Papyri show that the Lycian cities did not pay tribute but a variety of specific taxes, and a well-known inscription from Telmessus gives a vivid picture of Ptolemaic exploitation. 15 This document of 240 b.c. records several acts of one Ptolemy son of Lysimachus (perhaps a nephew of Ptolemy III) upon receiving control of the city from the Egyptian king. Ptolemy son of Lysimachus found the city "suffering from the wars"—i.e. the Syrian Wars. He remitted the dues on certain crops and pasturage, and regulated more strictly the taxes due on a variety of grains, in order to curb the illegal exactions of the tax farmers. The Egyptians nonetheless thoroughly exploited Lycia economically; and the large number of Lycians known to have served in Ptolemaic armies also attests the impoverishment of the area during the period of Egyptian control.
This control weakened late in the century under the ineffective Ptolemies IV and V, and in 197 b.c. Antiochus III of Syria took possession of Lycia. It is known specifically that he took Limyra, Andriace (Myra's port), Patara, Xanthus, and probably Telmessus, but the sources read as though he gained control of the whole country. 16
It is to this period that a fragment of Agatharchides may belong, although there are difficulties: "the Arycandians, neighbors of the Limyreans, having become involved in debt because of their profligacy and extravagances, and because of idleness and fondness for pleasure being unable to repay their loans, turned their hopes to Mithradates, thinking that they would be rewarded by the abolition of their debts." 17 If the attribution to Agatharchides is correct, the fragment cannot refer to the invasion of Mithradates VI of Pontus, for Agatharchides wrote in the late second century b.c. But the reference to the cancellation of debts would fit nicely, for Mithradates did enact just such a policy. The fragment, however, does not sound like what we know otherwise of the Lycian response to Mithradates.
The usual view is that the fragment refers to the time of Antiochus III. When in 197 he sailed along the southern coast of Asia Minor, winning over the cities, he sent his army from Syria to Sardes under two generals. As one of these was named Mithradates, it is to him that the fragment may refer. The cancellation of debts in this case might well refer to Ptolemaic taxes (it would appear safe in any case to disregard the reference to profligacy and extravagance), although it is perhaps doubtful that the Egyptians at this late date were able to collect their revenues with much rigor. Nor is it likely that Antiochus's army passed very near to Arycanda. It is a pity we cannot be sure to which ruler, Antiochus III or Mithradates VI, this fragment refers, for it would be valuable to know how far either one of them penetrated into Lycia, and what the local response was.
There is no specific record of how easily Antiochus occupied Lycia. Livy says that in Cilicia only Coracesium resisted him and that the Rhodians helped "preserve the liberty of" several Carian cities. He then exasperatingly concludes with "it is hardly worth while to record in detail the events in this part of the world." 18 An inscription records Antiochus's dedication of Xanthus to Leto, Apollo, and Artemis. 19 This is usually taken as indicating that Xanthus was able to arrange some sort of compromise with the Syrian king, but it may have been a kind of face-saving measure, if not an indication that Lycia's relationship to Antiochus was closer to alliance than subjection.
One telling incident, however, seems to show that the Lycians were willing allies of Antiochus. When in 190 a mixed Roman and Rhodian naval force attempted to win over Patara with its important harbor, "the citizens, joining the troops of the king whom they had as a garrison," fought with the invaders, and, as the battle went on, "larger numbers were rushing out of the city, and … the whole population was pouring forth." 20 But finally they (and Livy says "the Lycians," not the Syrian garrison) were defeated and driven back into the city; the Romans, however, did not take the city but sailed off. A Lycian contingent of light-armed troops also served in Antiochus's army at Magnesia. 21
That this help was given willingly is also implied by the report that the Ilians, who interceded for Lycia at Apamea, did not plead duress, as surely would have been expected were such a plea possible. They merely begged forgiveness, for the sake of the kinship between Ilium and Lycia, for the Lycians' ἁμαϱτήμενα. 22 Polybius reports that the Ilians were successful to the extent that the only punishment Rome inflicted on Lycia was to grant her to Rhodes, who had taken the winning side in the late war. For her help, Rhodes was awarded Caria south of the Maeander and all of Lycia exceptTelmessus, which was given to Eumenes. 23
But Lycia bitterly resented this ruling, and Rhodes apparently had to subjugate the country forcibly. The Lycians revolted repeatedly, and the Rhodians later spoke of the "three wars" they had to wage there. A Lycian embassy to Rome in 177 procured an attempted compromise: Rome stated, no doubt falsely, that she had never intended the Lycians to be subjects of the Rhodians, but allies. This pleased neither side. At last the Rhodians made the mistake of attempting to mediate in the Roman-Macedonian conflict and the ensuing negotiations, and in 167 b.c. Rome, angered, stripped Rhodes of her mainland territories and declared the Lycians free. 24
From 167 until a.d. 43, when Claudius formally incorporated them into the Roman Empire, the Lycians retained their freedom, which, however, became increasingly nominal as time went on. To this period of slightly over two centuries the coinage of the Lycian League has traditionally been ascribed. The lower limit must still hold, but the upper limit should be raised somewhat, as will be seen.
|11||O. Benndorf and G. Niemann, Reisen im südwestlichen Kleinasien 1: Reisen in Lykien und Karien (Vienna, 1884); E. Peterson and F. von Luschan, Reisen im südwestlichen Kleinasien 2: Reisen in Lykien, Milyas, und Kibyratis (Vienna, 1889); R. Heberdey and E. Kalinka, Bericht über zwei Reisen im südwestlichen Kleinasien, Denkschrift der Akademie Wien 45 (Vienna, 1896). For these and other travelers' accounts, see the bibliographies in the works cited in n. 3. Recent works dealing with the area are TSS, which treats only Lycia's eastern coast; and Bean's posthumous book, Lycian Turkey (London and New York, 1978), a splendid survey which appeared only after the completion of the present study.|
|12||P. Demargne and others in Xanthus, J. Borchhardt in Myra and Limyra, C. Bayburtluoǧlu in Arycanda, and S. Buluç in Patara. M. Mellink's excavations in the northern plateau deal with earlier times and are beyond the area of the Lycian League.|
|13||This synopsis of Lycian history down to the arrival of Antiochus III contains nothing, I believe, that is not generally accepted. Fuller treatment and specific references to the ancient sources can be found in Treuber, Magie, and Jones.|
|15||TAM 1 = OGIS 55.|
|16||Livy 33.19–20 mentions no individual cities, but Antiochus's possession of Patara is repeatedly cited in 37.16 and elsewhere. Specific cities are given in Jerome, Comm. in Daniel 11.15 (Porphyrius frag. 46 in F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, 2 Teil, B [Berlin, 1929], p. 1224); this and Jerome on Daniel 11.17–19 (Jacoby frag. 47), as well as Livy, imply that Antiochus won control over all Lycia.|
|17||Athenaeus 12.527F. See also Kalinka in TAM, pp. 288–89, and Magie, pp. 1384–85, n. 41.|
|19||TAM 266 = OGIS 746.|
|21||Livy 37.40; Appian, Syr. 32.|
A strong sense of national consciousness and unity is evident throughout Lycian history and a league of some sort is often assumed in classical times, chiefly because of the Λύϰιοι ϰαὶ συν[τελεῖς] entry in the Athenian tribute lists and because of the common reverse type, the triskeles, of so many of the dynasts' coins. 25 Mutual cooperation among the Lycians is clear, but to what extent this was voluntary rather than formalized and obligatory is not known. In any case, any early League would have been one of princes, not of cities; and it would have come to an end in the fourth century when the country was made subject to Mausolus.
The start of the League has often, especially in numismatic circles, been taken as 167 b.c. This date was based not only on the obvious fact that in 167 Lycia became free, but also on the BMC's dating of the League coinage. Hill in the BMC dated the League's silver coins to after 167 not only because of political considerations, but also because the earliest League silver so clearly imitated the Rhodian plinthophoric drachms and, at the time the BMC was written, the Rhodian plinthophoroi were themselves dated to after 167. 26 But Hill also, unfortunately, flatly stated that the Lycian League commenced only upon the withdrawal of the Rhodians; 27 and Head in Historia Numorum has followed the BMC in calling 167 the start both of the coinage and of the League itself. 28
But the start of the Lycian League has long been suspected by its historians to have occurred earlier, quite possibly in the late third century. Proof both of this and of an earlier date for the Rhodian plinthophoroi has slowly been accumulating. The Rhodian coins will be discussed below, but a summary of the evidence for a late third-century start for the League follows.
Both Treuber and Fougères had suggested that the League's origin was to be put in the third century, probably in its closing years when Ptolemaic control was weakening, 29 but J. A. O. Larsen first presented hard evidence for the League's existence before 167 b.c. He noted in 1945 that OGIS 99, which must be dated between 188 and 181, is a decree of τὸ ϰοινὸν τῶν Λυϰίων; and that in the 180s b.c. there were recorded at Athens and at Cos athletic victors identified by a form of ethnic characteristic of federal states: Λύϰιος ἀπὸ Γάγων Λύϰιος ἀπὸ ᾽Αντιφέλλου, Λύϰιος ἀπὸ Πατάϱων. Larsen also believed that the numismatists' dating of League coins to after 167 was arbitrary. 30
Dramatic evidence for an even earlier League, organized and effective, appeared shortly thereafter. In 1948 G. E. Bean published a long inscription from Araxa at the northern end of the Xanthus River. 31 The monument is a eulogy of one Orthagoras of Araxa, who had a long and varied career in public service. Moagetes, tyrant of Bubon, just north of Araxa, had been raiding Araxa's territory. Orthagoras first commanded his city's troops in fighting off the Bubonians, and went as Araxa's ambassador to the larger city of Cibyra, to which Bubon was evidently subject in some way. He also, which is what interests us here, went to the Lycian federal government in order to seek its aid. In this he was unsuccessful, the League apparently regarding the dispute as a mere border skirmish; but the League did appoint Orthagoras as its own ambassador to Moagetes, with whom some settlement was eventually reached.
Subsequently two would-be tyrants seized Xanthus, killed many of the citizens, and set themselves up as despots. This time, its major city threatened, the League intervened militarily, with Orthagoras commanding Araxa's contingent, and the tyrants were, after some difficulties, overthrown. Orthagoras next was involved in a war, whose outcome is unknown, between the League and Termessus, most probably Termessus Major in Pisidia.
He then successfully represented Araxa in a territorial dispute with an unnamed neighbor: the arguments were made to the federal government, presumably to a court of some sort, and were settled peaceably by that body. Orthagoras also arranged admission to the League of a small town near Araxa. Finally, he served as envoy to the first two of the pentaeteric festivals organized by the Lycians in honor of 'Ρώμη θεὰ ἐπιφανής.
There is no clear-cut evidence of the date of this highly interesting inscription, but various indications point to ca. 180 b.c., which now seems generally accepted. 32 One reason for the dating is the use of praenomina alone to refer to two Roman legates: this usage, characteristic of the early second century, is not found later. Another reason is the establishment of the cult of 'Ρώμη θεὰ ἐπιφανής. The epithet is most easily understood in relation to Rome's defeat of Antiochus, and thus the two festivals Orthagoras attended in his official capacity late in his career would have been in 189 and 185 b.c. 33 His active life, and that of the League, thus seem to antedate the 180s by some decades.
While this inscription provides little detail about the internal organization of the League, it does present us with a clear picture of an active and effective confederation in the earliest decades of the second century, and probably at the very end of the third century as well, for Orthagoras's career must have extended over some considerable time. The League sent ambassadors; waged wars; settled disputes, presumably in a court; and evidently had a fixed seat of government to which appeals could be sent, with an executive committee there of some sort which could make decisions between regular sessions of the assembly.
A final bit of information enables us to set the League's formation at least as early as 206/5 b.c. An illuminating study of the forms of ethnics used by individual Lycians, which extends the work on this subject by Larsen mentioned above, forms part of Moretti's lucid work on the Greek leagues. He finds three types of ethnics. The simple Λύϰιος, used chiefly by mercenaries, is found from the mid-fourth to the mid-third century. The federal ethnic, Λύϰιος ἀπὸ, e.g. Πατάϱων, is found first at the very end of the third century (see below), while most examples date from the early or middle second century. The simple municipal ethnic, e.g. Παταϱεύς, first appears in the first half of the second century, and later prevails over the federal ethnic by the time the predominant Roman influence in the affairs of the east had made membership in the League increasingly meaningless. Moretti observes that it is not without significance that the last known example of the federal ethnic belongs to the Sullan era. The importance of these ethnics for the start of the League, however, is that the earliest example of the federal ethnic found by Moretti is in a decree of Miletus, dated to spring 206-spring 205: the decree grants citizenship to a number of foreigners, among them one [Σϰ]ύμνος Πολέμωνος Λύϰιος ἀπὸ Ξάνθου. 34
It is accordingly to the decades preceding 167 b.c. that the following bronze issues have been assigned. They surely antedate the League's silver, with its profile heads, whatever the exact date of the silver's introduction, and are also presumably earlier than the Rhodian plinthophoroi which the League silver imitated. As will be seen below, the Rhodian coins are now known to have commenced some years before 167 b.c., but that date will be used here as a convenient and historically significant terminus ante quem for the Lycian League's bronzes of Period I.
|23||Polybius 21.24 and 45; Livy 37.56 and 38.39.|
|24||Polybius 24.15, 25.4–5, 30.5, and 30.31; Livy 41.6, 41.25, 42.14, and 44.15. Livy again maddeningly says (41.25) that "it is not worth relating" the Lycians' struggles with the Rhodians.|
|25||See Mørkholm-Zahle, pp. 112–13.|
|26||BMCCaria and BMCLycia use 168, or at times 166, instead of 167, but 167 b.c. would appear to be the correct date. That the Lycian silver coins imitated the Rhodian plinthophoric drachms is stated not in BMCLycia but in BMCCaria, p. cvi; the Rhodian plinthophoroi's start is there dated to ca. 167 (pp. cix and 252). Perhaps because this is not mentioned specifically in BMCLycia, Larsen seems unaware of this reason for Hill's dating of the Lycian drachms, regarding the accepted terminus post quem of 167 b.c. as purely arbitrary ("Representation and Democracy in Hellenistic Federalism," ClassPhil 1945, pp. 72f.).|
|27||BMCLycia, p. xxii.|
|28||HN 2, p. 693 (168 b.c. instead of 167 b.c., but see above, n. 26).|
|29||Treuber, p. 149; Fougères, pp. 15f.|
|30||ClassPhil 1945, p. 72 f. See above, n. 26.|
|31||"Notes and Inscriptions from Lycia," JHS 1948, pp. 46-56.|
|32||Bean (above, n. 31) was uncertain about the date, but other scholars have agreed on ca. 180 b.c.: J. and L. Robert, "Bulletin Épigraphique," REG 1950, pp. 185–97, no. 183; L. Moretti, "Una nuova iscrizione di Araxa," Riv.Fil.Cl. 78 (1950), pp. 326–50; Larsen, "The Araxa Inscription and the Lycian Confederacy," ClassPhil 1956, pp. 151–69; Jones, pp. 100–101.|
|33||It may be objected that the Lycians would not have instituted, and then continued to celebrate, a cult of the goddess Roma just as their country was given by Rome to Rhodes. But immediately after Apamea the Lycians had received a false report: the Ilians, who had interceded for them, reported to the Lycians that they had successfully secured their freedom; only later did the bitter truth become evident (Polybius 22.5). The Roberts (see above, n. 32) accept this interim as the time of the establishment of the cult; and, as they say, once the Lycians had publicly announced festivals in honor of the world's leading power and their only hope of eventual relief from Rhodian occupation, what else could they possibly do but continue those festivals?|
|34||Moretti, pp. 188–90; the Miletus decree is Milet III, Das Delphinion (Berlin, 1915), p. 205, no. 46 (as cited in Moretti, p. 215, n. 36). Perhaps because of the high interest of the Orthagoras inscription, this clear evidence of Moretti's for the League's existence in the third century has been ignored by Jones and Larsen in their subsequent works. That the Ptolemies were still in control in 206–205 b.c. is shown by TAM 263, the latest evidence for Egyptian rule in Lycia: the inscription records the dedication of a temple at Xanthus on behalf of Ptolemy V, who acceded late in 205 (or perhaps 204).|
|1||Most recently, O. Mørkholm has been analyzing with considerable success the coinage of Lycian dynasts of classical times. See Mørkholm and Mørkholm-Zahle, and also N. Olçay and O. Mørkholm, "The Coin Hoard from Podalia," NC 1971, pp. 1–29, and O. Mørkholm and J. Zahle, "The Coinages of the Lycian Dynasts Kheriga, Kherêi and Erbbina," Acta Archaeologica 47 (1976), pp. 47-90.|
|2||Any minting during this period was minimal. Dr. Mørkholm tells me he suspects that some of the cities' coinages contemporary with the dynasts' may have continued for a while after the dynasts' overthrow; A. D. H. Bivar has suggested that certain small bronzes with Aramaic inscriptions were struck in Lycia under Persian rule in the later fourth century ("A 'Satrap' of Cyrus the Younger," NC 1961, pp. 124–27); and some of the autonomous bronze of League cities may possibly antedate the League coinage (e.g. BMC Patara 11–12).|
|3||The earliest works to deal with the Lycian League and its history are Treuber and Fougères; the former is concerned chiefly with Lycian history, with which it deals exhaustively, and the latter concentrates on the League and its institutions. E. A. Freeman also discussed the League briefly in his History of Federal Government in Greece and Italy , 2nd ed. (London and New York, 1893). Renewed attention has been paid to the League in the last two decades by Moretti, by J. A. O. Larsen, GFS and a number of articles, and by S. Jameson in a revised article on Lycia in RE Suppl. 13. H. von Aulock, Gordian , gives a convenient summary of Lycian geography and history, and a valuable compilation of sources (ancient and modern literary, inscriptions, coins) for each of the twenty cities which struck under Gordian. And of course Lycia and the League are also discussed in Magie and in Jones.|
|5||Laffranchi (pp. 294–98) is alone in recognizing that the largest Lycian League bronzes, with Augustus's head, are sestertii. Claudius's Lycian strikings are not true League coins, although a few bear ΛΥ; they were most probably struck immediately after Lycia became a province (see Appendix 3).|
This study deals with the post-Alexander Lycian League and its coinage in silver and bronze, ca. 200 b.c.–a.d. 43. Approximately 1,825 League coins have been located and are catalogued. Coins are considered League strikings if their markings include either 1) ΛΥΚΙΩΝ, or ΛΥ, the federal ethnic, or 2) ΚΡ or ΜΑ, the abbreviations of the League's two great subdivisions in the late first century, Cragus and Masicytus; or both types of inscription. Pseudo-League strikings of Olympus and Phaselis, with ΟΛΥΜΠΗ or ΦΑΣΗΛΙ replacing ΛΥΚΙΩΝ, are also included in the catalogue. Nineteen or twenty Lycian cities struck League coinage, and a few also struck autonomous issues during the second and first centuries b.c. These autonomous issues are not treated here.
Throughout the study, the term "mint" is used in the sense of the issuing authority, not necessarily the location at which a coin was actually struck.
For lack of a better term, "Period" has been used to denote the five major divisions of the League's coinage, alternately bronze and silver. There is, however, some considerable chronological overlap between Periods II and III, III and IV, and IV and V.
The cataloguing varies somewhat between the bronze and silver issues. Periods II and IV, the silver coinages, have series denoted by Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3). Here and in the silver issues of Appendix 3, obverse dies are numbered; reverse dies are indicated by lower case Roman letters (a, b, c); and brackets to the right indicate reverse die identities. Asterisks indicate coins illustrated.
Periods I, III, and V, the bronze coinages, have series denoted by upper-case Roman letters (A, B, C). There and in the bronze issues of Appendix 3, dies are not numbered, and Greek minuscules (α, β, γ) indicate merely the coins selected for illustration.
Relative die axes are not given because virtually all are ↑↑, with the few variations either ↑↗ or ↑↖; the only exceptions to this rule are issues of very small coins such as issue 4, in which a significant number of axes are random.
In the following catalogue of Period I, dies are not numbered. The three coins of issue 1 are from three pairs of dies, and the dies of issues 3 and 4 cannot be identified with certainty. Relative die axes of the few coins known of issues 1–3 are, like those of all Lycian League issues, ↑↑ with the few variations either ↑↗ or ↑↖. In issue H, however, composed of very small coins, in which a significant number of axes are random.
Coins illustrated are indicated by Greek minuscules (α, β, γ) merely for the purpose of identifying the coins on the plates and to facilitate reference to them in the text. Neither these letters nor the sequence of coins catalogued indicate particular dies, and only a representative selection of obverse dies is illustrated.
Obv. Laureate bearded head of Bellerophon, facing.
Obv. Head of Apollo facing; to l., bow and quiver.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ Apollo Patroös standing facing, holding branch (probably, although it is not preserved) in outstretched r. hand, and bow in lowered l. hand.
Obv. Laureate head of Apollo facing; to r., cithara.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ Head of Artemis facing; to l., bow and quiver.
Quadruple Units: 3 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.53
Double Unit: 1 coin, wt. 2.15
Units: 3 coins, av. wt. 1.15
1. Quadruple Units.
α. Private coll. 4.12; β. Paris 2.86 = "Rhodes," p. 31, fig. 4 = BMC pl. 44, 14 = E. Babelon, "Récentes acquisitions du Cabinet des Médailles," RN 1893, p. 336, 22; Oxford 3.62, purchased at Kestep in the Xanthus Valley = "Coins Lycia," pp. 37 and 41–42, 34.
2. Double Unit.
α. Oxford 2.15, purchased at Kestep = "Coins Lycia," pp. 37 and 42, 35.
α. London 1.03 = BMC p. 38, 4; β. Paris 1.41 = Waddington 3007; Berlin 1.00.
Obv. Radiate bust of Apollo facing; to r., cithara (present on many and perhaps all specimens).
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ Bow and quiver.
Units: 15 coins, av. wt. 1.07
α. New York 0.98; β. Paris 1.26 = Waddington 3009; γ. Oxford 0.86; Berlin 1.32, purchased at Pinara, 1.04; Copenhagen 1.23 = SNG 39, 0.95 = SNG 40; London 1.69 = BMC p. 38, 1; New York 1.26, 1.07, 0.86; Paris 1.00 = Waddington 3008, 0.61; Vienna 1.11, 0.79.
Issues 1–4 differ from all other League issues in bearing only the simple inscription ΛΥΚΙΩΝ, without further city or district identification. (The exergue monogram of issue 1 cannot, perhaps fortunately, be equated with any known mint—but its position and the fact that it is a monogram rather than simple initials would indicate a reference to an individual rather than to a mint, whatever that individual's relationship to the coinage.) Issues 1–4 are also alone among League issues in bearing facing heads, as did the dominant coinage of the area, the Rhodian, down to the 170s b.c. Sir Edward Robinson long ago in 1914 recognized that these four issues were associated and that they were among the earliest issues of the Lycian League. 35
Issues 3 and 4, which are the same size and weight (average weights 1.15 and 1.07, respectively), appear to be not contemporary but successive issues. Issue 4 appears to be the later, with its inanimate reverse type of bow and quiver both simpler in execution than the facing head of issue 3, and also related to the crossed bow and quiver of later small bronze issues. 36
The average weight of the three known specimens of issue 1 is 3.53; the single weight of issue 2 is 2.15. These agree tolerably well with a quadruple and a double, respectively, of the weight of the smallest denomination represented by issues 3 and 4; and issues 1 and 2 may then be considered multiples of one or another of these smaller issues. Issue 3 seems the more likely, as it, like 1 and 2, bears two animate types, and like them appears to show a simple head rather than a bust, and a radiate one at that, such as appears on issue 4. Accordingly, issues 1–3 have been placed in Series A of the Lycian League's first period of coinage, and issue 4 in the following Series B.
All of Period I's types show connections with the Xanthus Valley, the heartland of Lycia and presumably of the League, and this is appropriate for the League's first coinage, possibly minted in one or another of the major western cities of Xanthus and Patara. And, al- though the Xanthus Valley is probably the area of Lycia most travelled by antiquarians and scholars during the last two centuries and thus would be expected to provide more coin provenances than other areas, it is noteworthy that all three known provenances of Period I coins are in the west.
Although the single coin of issue 2 is poorly preserved, its reverse representation of Apollo is precisely that found on Lycian coins throughout the League's history and even later: Apollo (sometimes radiate), stands left (facing or half-facing), clad in a long gown, holding a branch (sometimes filleted) in his extended right hand and a bow (and sometimes also an arrow) in his lowered left hand. This most probably is the figure portrayed on League bronzes of various cities in the mid-first century b.c.; 38 and is without a doubt that shown on the late first-century bronzes of the districts of Cragus and Masicytus, 39 on both the silver and bronze of Claudius from, probably, a.d. 43, 40 and on the Imperial bronzes of Gordian III from the mid-third century a.d. 41 The base lines on Claudius's and Gordian's coins show that a statue was portrayed, and the Apollo of Gordian's coins, sometimes shown in his temple, is unquestionably a cult image. But in any case the consistent iconography, unvarying over more than four centuries, demands a specific model. This can only be the renowned Apollo Patroös at Patara, for it is Patara's coins under Gordian which make extensive and virtually exclusive use of this figure. Apollo's cult and oracle at Patara were widely famed throughout antiquity, and it is strange that the Apollo on Gor- dian's coins has never, apparently, been identified as the actual Apollo of Patara. 42 So too must the earlier coins, under Claudius and under the free League, show the same cult image.
Inscriptions reveal that the Lycian League's records were kept at Patara, and Apollo's temple there has been suggested as the actual repository. The coins would seem to confirm this. The coins' Apollo is here called Apollo Patroös, the epithet under which he was known to the Patarans and to the League. Numerous inscriptions of the League refer to Apollo Patroös, whose priest was a League official, and whose cult with its oracle was celebrated at Patara. 43
Issue 1 shows a spirited rendition of the chimera, body tense, head facing. When Bellerophon, banished from Corinth, arrived at "Lycia and the stream of Xanthus," the first task assigned him by the "king of wide Lycia" was to slay this mythical creature, part lion, part goat, and part serpent, which breathed forth terrible fire. 44 In later times the chimera became localized and identified with a burning jet of natural gas escaping from a hillside above Olympus on the eastern coast; this weak flame can still be seen today. The identification of the monster with the natural phenomenon may have been made in the third century b.c., 45 but as several localities in Lycia alone were named Chimera, one suspects that gas may have escaped from the earth also in other places in this land so subject to earthquakes.
In any case, the coins show a mythical creature and not a gas flame, and it is with the city of Xanthus that the myth is connected. Strabo furthermore specifically states that the scene of the myth was the mountains of the western coast. 46
By the time the coins of Period I were struck, Lycia had become quite thoroughly Hellenized, and the chimera of the coins may well be understood as a deliberate reference to the Greek Bellerophon, grandfather of the Lycian Homeric heroes Glaucus and Sarpedon. Furthermore, the bearded head of issue 1's obverse may represent Bellerophon himself. Babelon suggested that the head was Helios, "type rhodien et carien." 47 But Helios is never, to my knowledge, shown bearded. Hill in the BMC did not describe the obverse; and Robinson called the head Heracles, believing that the Lycian obverse imitated certain coins of Selge which show a head of that deity. 48 But the style of the Lycian and Selgean coins is quite dissimilar, those of Selge showing the hair and beard in short, tightly curled, distinctly separate locks, while the Lycian heads' hair and beard are loosely waved and long and flowing. And Heracles, while he appears occasionally on Lycian coins of the classical period, has no particular connection with either Lycia or the chimera, while Bellerophon assuredly does.
Even though it was probably struck more than a century and a half before the first League coins, the coinage of the dynast Pericles was the last major coinage struck in Lycia before the League's. In these circumstances Pericles's coinage may have circulated for some considerable time, and might be considered to have furnished some of the models for the League coinage. The two League denominations represented by issue 2 and issues 3 and 4 (here termed double units and units, respectively) are the same sizes and approximate weights of the two small bronze denominations of Pericles, the chief if not the only Lycian bronze prior to the League's. 49 And Pericles's staters showing his facing laureate head, with long flowing hair and beard, 50 may possibly have served as the artistic prototype for the head of issue 1.
Whether or not issue 1 portrays Bellerophon, however, the choice of the chimera for the reverse must be significant. While the chimera is depicted in Lycian art from the late fifth century onward, there is but one instance of its use on Lycian classical coinage, although other monsters are frequently depicted. 51 Its appearance on issue 1 would seem to be intended to stress the Lycians' ties with Greece and with the Greek world, and if this is so, the most probable time for the commencement of Period I is the time of the Lycians' alliance with Antiochus and other Asiatic Greeks against Rome. It is worth noting that Telmessus, a major Lycian city which was not a formal member of the Lycian League until Augustan times, 52 also issued bronzes under Antiochus's dominion. These coins were the size of issue 1, with facing Helios head on obverse and Apollo seated on the omphalos on the reverse, as on Seleucid coins. 53
Period I must have ended before the Lycian adoption of the Rhodian plinthophoric format, with obverse head in profile and reverse type in incuse square. This is the format of most of the League coinage, especially the silver, and it is first seen on the silver drachms of the following Period II. A discussion of the date of this style's introduction, first at Rhodes and then in Lycia, will be found in the commentary on Period II.
|35||"Coins Lycia," pp. 41–42.|
|36||See below, the units of Period III and the half units of Series A of Period V.|
|37||BMC Patara 4 and 11–12.|
|38||E.g. Plate 1, A and B, bronze coins of Period III (63α and 71α).|
|39||E.g. Plate 1, C, a bronze coin of Series F of Period V (222δ). Series E also shows the same figure.|
|40||E.g. Plate 1, D, a drachm from Appendix 3's obverse die C2.4; and E, a bronze coin from Appendix 3 (C11α).|
|41||E.g. Plate 1, F. See also BMC Myra 14–17 and 19 (the latter a homonoia coin of Myra and Patara, struck at Patara); and Gordian 193–221, 230–31, and 253 (all Patara), 258–59 (Myra-Patara), and 297–98 (Rhodiapolis, the only other two coins in von Aulock's compilation with this reverse type).|
|42||On Apollo Patareus and Apollo Patroös, see RE II, col. 63 (Wernicke). G. F. Hill long ago equated the Apollo of Claudius's coins with the figures shown on the Masicytus bronzes and the Imperials of Gordian, but made no suggestion as to the prototype ("Miscellanea," NC 1903, p. 402). Even von Aulock in his recent Gordian did not attempt to identify the coins' Apollo.|
|43||On the storage of the League's records at Patara, see the commentary on that city in Period II, and especially n. 106. On Apollo Patroös and his cult, see TAM 420 = IGR 680, and TAM 905 = IGR 739, IIB, XIIIC, and XVIIE.|
|45||RE III, col. 2281, s.v. Chimaira 2 (Ruge). Strabo speaks of the locality called Chimera in the west (14.665). Pliny mentions one on the southern coast (NH 5.131) and one in the east (NH 5.100), and says that the latter is one of two nearby places where fires burn.|
|47||RN 1893, p. 336, 22.|
|48||"Coins Lycia," p. 42, n. 19: BMC Selge 35. This coin shows Heracles's head to r.; 36–44, with facing heads, would seem closer parallels.|
|49||BMC, pp. 36–37, nos. 158–62 and 163–64. The sizes are those of the League issues 2, and 3–4. Pericles's weights average 2.03 (14 specimens located) compared to issue 2's single weight of 2.15; and 1.18 (12 specimens located) compared to issue 3's 1.15 (3 specimens) and issue 4's 1.07 (15 specimens). See Table 8. Other extremely minor bronze issues possibly struck in Lycia before the League coinage are mentioned in n. 2.|
|51||Traité II.2, 219; see also Mørkholm-Zahle, p. 92.|
|52||See pp. 212–13.|
There are two drachm coinages which have in the past been erroneously attributed to Lycia. The first of these is a series of pseudo-Rhodian drachms, without ethnic, whose obverse shows a facing head of Helios with an eagle in front of one cheek, and whose reverse shows the usual Rhodian rose with a great many differing combinations of letters and monograms. 54 It was in the last century ascribed to various cities of Caria, and also to Lycia. A number of the reverse combinations (e.g. ΞΑ ΜΑ) were applicable to Lycia and seemed analogous to the true Lycian League coins with, e.g., ΚΡ ΞΑΝ or ΚΡ ΤΛ. 55 The error of accepting these coins as Lycian has persisted as recently as 1950, for Magie regarded them as evidence that Xanthus was briefly a member of the Masicytus district. 56
Hill's attribution of the coins to Caunus, 57 plausible politically although not yet the true attribution, has unfortunately been revived in the most recent and thorough publication of the series, by W. Sheridan in 1972. 58 Sheridan appears not to have grasped the arguments of A. Akarça, who in 1959 convincingly ascribed the coins to Mylasa. Akarça's reasons were that no finds of the coins have ever been reported from Caunus (or from Lycia, for that matter), while the six known provenances are all from the environs of Mylasa; and that an identical head of Helios with eagle across his cheek is found on silver coins, probably of the Augustan period, inscribed ΜΥ ΛΑСΕωΝ. 59 In any case, this pseudo-Rhodian series is emphatically not Lycian.
Sir Edward Robinson in 1914 published a silver drachm of another pseudo-Rhodian class, which he had acquired in Lycia. The coin was countermarked with a chimera, and he suggested that it had been struck and countermarked in Lycia during the period of Rhodian supremacy. 60 He noted a similar piece at the British Museum, whose countermark had previously been identified as a lion, 61 and a third example has since surfaced, from the island of Calymnos. 62 The beast of the countermark is remarkably similar in its stance to that of issue 1, with the lion head facing and the goat head reverted; and Robinson is undoubtedly right, as usual, that the countermark was applied in Lycia. It is less certain, however, that the coins were also struck in Lycia.
Several other silver coins, long known, seem to have been counter-marked by individual Lycian cities during the period of the League. A Rhodian drachm of the pre-plinthophoric series bears a stamp with a cithara bracketed by the letters ΚΥ, just as on the League silver of Cyaneae; and several tetradrachms of Side bear countermarks of a cithara and ΑΝ similarly arranged, evidently applied by Antiphellus. 63 These two cities issued very little League silver in Period II (Cyaneae is known from eight coins, Antiphellus from but one) and may have completed their contributions to the League with this counterstamped foreign currency. 64
The earliest true Lycian League silver, however, that struck by the cities, consisted of drachms whose format echoes that of the plinthophoric drachms of Rhodes. The Rhodian obverses show a radiate head of Helios facing right; the Lycian ones a laureate head of Apollo facing right. The Rhodian reverses have the Rhodian rose in a shallow incuse square with, above, a magistrate's name written out in full, and, to either side, about half-way down the square, the two letters ΡΟ. The Lycian coins replace the rose with a cithara, also in a shallow incuse square, with, above, the federal ethnic ΛΥΚΙΩΝ, and, in the same locations as the Rhodian Ρ and Ο, the first two letters of the particular minting Lycian city. The Rhodian coins with this format were known in antiquity as plinthophoroi (πλινθοφόϱοι, as opposed to δϱάχμαΙ παλαιαί or old style drachms) and the Lycian ones as kitharephoroi (ϰιθαϱηφόϱοι). 65
The Lycian drachms of Period II divide into three series: the bulk of the coins are in Series 1, with relatively small numbers in the later, reduced-weight Series 2 and 3. The original series, Series 1, is very close in its weights to the Rhodian plinthophoroi—at least to the full-weight plinthophoroi, for this coinage also in its final years included small emissions of reduced-weight coins. 66 Groups A-D, shown in Figure 2, are the large, full-weight plinthophoric groups.
The Rhodian plinthophoroi were struck to a standard noticeably higher than that of the old style drachms. 67 The weight of the Lycian coins of Series 1 is intermediate between these two, but must be understood as representing a standard very slightly reduced from that of the plinthophoroi. This slight reduction was generally the case among the many imitations of Rhodian coinage: the weights of the plinthophoric style coins of Carian Stratoniceia from the Muǧla 1965 Hoard, for instance, fall in exactly the same range as those of Period II's Series 1. 68
Late in 1970 a deposit reported to have consisted of some 200 Lycian League drachms was unearthed in Lycia. 69 One account gave the find spot as near modern Finike, on the southern coast; another, from probably a more reliable source, gave it as near modern Kemer on the eastern coast (not to be confused with another Kemer in western Lycia). The composition of the known portion of the hoard (133 coins, of which well over half are from the east coast cities of Olympus and Phaselis) confirms Kemer as the find spot. Only slightly over a hundred of the Rhodian-weight Lycian kitharephoroi struck by the cities were known before the appearance of this hoard, which has approximately doubled the number known of these civic coins of the League.
All the hoard coins were issues of the cities, with ΛΥΚΙΩΝ and city initials on the reverse; or, in the case of most of the coins of Olympus and Phaselis, with ΟΛΥΜΠΗ or ΦΑΣΗΛΙ replacing ΛΥΚΙΩΝ. Fourteen of the sixteen cities known to have struck League silver were represented, two of them for the first time. The hoard contained, however, none of the commonest League silver, that struck by the districts of Cragus and Masicytus, and none of the relatively rare city issues with the district issues' format (ΛΥ on obverse replacing ΛΥΚΙΩΝ on reverse).
Virtually all of the hoard coins, furthermore, were of Rhodian weight, peaking at 2.80 grams (see Figure 2, above). Indeed, with very few exceptions, 70 all the previously known examples of League coins issued by the cities and bearing ΛΥΚΙΩΝ on reverse are of Rhodian weight. The Cragus and Masicytus pieces, on the other hand, most of which have ΛΥ on obverse, and all the civic pieces with the same format are struck to a lighter standard, peaking at 1.80 grams.
A basic distinction is to be made between the two groups of kitharephoroi. One group is the civic kitharephoroi with ΛΥΚΙΩΝ on reverse: these comprise the present work's Period II. The other group is the district kitharephoroi of Cragus and Masicytus, with which are to be classed the rare civic kitharephoroi with ΛΥ on obverse; these form Period IV. Both weight standards and the usual placement of the ethnic differentiate Periods II and IV.
Because the League silver has not been understood as comprising two separate groups, confusion has been the rule in most former treatments of their denominations. Hill in the BMC's catalogue calls the districts'—and Limyra's, for some reason—kitharephoroi drachms, but does not venture a denomination for the other mints' coins. Elsewhere in the BMC he calls the League's silver "drachms and hemidrachms (of degraded? Rhodian weight)." In the drachms he includes all the kitharephoroi, city and district; by hemidrachms he means the small district silver pieces with Artemis's head and quiver as types. 71 In still another place in the BMC he considers these smaller coins as half drachms or quarter drachms, and then lists them in the catalogue as quarter drachms, once with a question mark and once without. 72 Head in Historia Numorum repeats Hill's indecision, mercifully in shorter form, 73 and these two publications have been generally followed. The first work which has consistently distinguished the two classes of kitharephoroi is O. Mørkholm's publication of SNGvAulock, where the heavier coins are consistently called drachms and the lighter ones hemidrachms. 74
To return to the Kemer Hoard: through the kindness of many individuals in this country and in Europe it has been possible to collect a record of 133 of the reported approximately 200 coins. The coins reached various parts of Europe in separate lots, two of about 50 coins each, one of probably 30 or so, and the remainder apparently a few at a time. The known mints of the Period II drachms, the number of their coins previously known, and those known from the Kemer Hoard are given in Table 1. The mints are listed geographically from west to east, in order to facilitate later discussion; this is the order employed in the catalogue and in the discussion of individual mints. Table 1 also gives the number of obverse dies known for each mint in each of the three Series (1, 2, and 3) of Period II, both before and after the appearance of the Kemer Hoard.
All the coins of Period II have the same format, with ΛΥΚΙΩΝ and two city initials on the reverse. ΟΛΥΜΠΗ or ΦΑΣΗΛΙ, however, replaces ΛΥΚΙΩΝ on most coins of Olympus and Phaselis. Such coins of these two cities, without the federal ethnic, may be considered and are here termed, pseudo-League coins. The only true-League coins of Olympus and Phaselis are found in Series 1; their coins of Series 2 and 3 are all pseudo-League.
|Cadyanda or Candyba||1||–||1||1|
|Olympus, true League||2||1||3||1|
|Phaselis, true League||5||1||6||3|
Series 1's coins, as noted above, are of Rhodian weight, or nearly so: just very slightly under the weight of the Rhodian plinthophoric drachms. Series 2 is noticeably reduced from Series 1; and Series 3 is still further reduced (see Figure 3).
Figure 4 shows the weights of each area (west, south, and east) within Series 1, and of each mint within Series 2 and 3. The Kemer Hoard has nearly doubled the number of coins known of Series 1, and added a few to the examples previously known of Series 2. It contained no coins of Series 3. That the geographical breakdowns within each series agree with each other confirms the validity of the division of Period II into the three series. This uniformity in weights is a new phenomenon for Lycia: Lycian silver in classical times had been struck to differing contemporary weight standards, the cities and dynasts of the west using a lighter standard than those of the south central region. 75
The Kemer hoard has provided the first silver coins known of Antiphellus and of Trebendae. It included the second known drachm of Sidyma, although no record was obtained of this piece and it has unfortunately dropped from sight; the third drachm of Phellus; and the third and fourth of Cadyanda (although one of these may instead be of Candyba, for which no other League coins are known). The only other known drachms of Cadyanda are also here published for the first time.
The Kemer Hoard also contained true League coins of Olympus and Phaselis, i.e. coins with the legends ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΟΛ and ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΦΑ, instead of these cities' usual markings of ΟΛΥΜΠΗ and ΦΑΣΗΛΙ. One true League coin of Phaselis has been for some years in a private collection, but unpublished; and one of Olympus in the Copenhagen cabinet was published in SNGCop in 1955, but in vain, for the coin has gone seemingly unnoticed ever since. 76
Several new issues of known mints also appeared in the hoard, and the large number of coins from the two eastern cities of Olympus and Phaselis has seriously altered the understanding of these cities' emissions. But the surviving proportion of all League Period II coinage is pitifully small. Only for one mint, Rhodiapolis, in Period II do the coins exceed two per obverse die, and only for a handful of other cities do they even approach two. For all of Period II, leaving aside the five hoard coins reported but not recorded, there are known 311 coins from 201 dies, a ratio of almost exactly 1.5 to 1. Clearly the known material represents but a mere fraction of the original output, and any conclusions drawn from the surviving material must be regarded as tentative.
|a||Brackets to the left indicate obverse die identities; dotted brackets to the right indicate cases where the reverse initials of one city have been cut over those of another. See discussion after Xanthus. "Pseudo-League" coins are those without the federal ethnic, ΛΥΚΙΩΝ. Indefinite numbers of new dies result from specific reported hoard coins of which no cast or photographic record could be obtained, and of which the dies are thus not known. Die totals are of course reduced by the number of shared dies. A number of coins in trade since 1970 are quite possibly, even probably, from the hoard but are not here or in the catalogue called hoard coins in the absence of specific evidence.|
|a||Shaded areas indicate Kemer Hoard coins.|
|a||Shaded areas indicate Kemer Hoard coins.|
|66||For discussion of the Rhodian plinthophoric drachm groups, see below, pp. 81–84.|
|67||R. H. J. Ashton has kindly pointed out (private communication) that the old style drachms were of substandard weight, weighing considerably less than the appropriate fraction of the contemporary old style didrachms and tetradrachms; and that even though the plinthophoroi are somewhat heavier than the old style drachms, they still were struck to a reduced standard in terms of those didrachms and tetradrachms.|
|68||H. von Aulock, "Zur Silberprägung des karischen Stratonikeia," JNG 1967, pp. 7–9 ( IGCH 1357).|
|69||The hoard is mentioned in Gordian , pp. 34, 37, 47, and 52; it is no. 96 in Coin Hoards 1.|
|70||These exceptions form Series 2 and 3, in contrast to Series 1 of Rhodian weight.|
|71||P. xxii. The Artemis-head pieces are indeed the half denominations of the district kitharephoroi but bear no relation to the heavier civic drachms.|
|72||P. xlviii; in catalogue, Cragus 15, Masicytus 24.|
|73||HN 2, p. 693.|
|74||His division of the two classes in SNGvAulock is nearly perfect; he recognizes that the lighter civic coins (nos. 4318 and 4365) are to be classed with the district issues, but calls no. 4325 (an unusual heavy coin, with only Μ for mint identification) a drachm of Masicytus rather than of Myra. Still, Mørkholm seems to be the first scholar to have recognized that the kitharephoroi fall into two distinct groups.|
|75||Mørkholm, pp. 65–76.|
French excavators at one of the major Lycian sanctuaries, the Letoön near Xanthus, unearthed in the summer of 1975 a deposit under the cella of one of the sanctuary's temples. The hoard is the first containing Lycian League material to have been found under controlled conditions, and it is the first to contain another coinage together with the League's. The coins were found over a limited area under the cella floor, or more accurately in the earth under where the floor had been, for the blocks had been removed in late antiquity. The following brief summary is based on a provisional account of the hoard, written before all the coins had been properly cleaned and identified. 77
The hoard contained about 30 bronzes and about 50 silver coins. Identified silver coins are three kitharephoroi of the League with reverse legend ΛΥΚΙΩΝ, hence probably city coins of Period II; eight Rhodian drachms, both old style and plinthophoroi; 41 Rhodian triobols (the only two described are plinthophoric); and at least one pseudo-Rhodian drachm (the last coin described, erroneously called a hemidrachm). The only bronze coins described are three small ones of Xanthus as issue 60 in Period III, below. 78
Clearly none of the Letoün Hoard coins are included in the present study, and it would be premature to speculate on the hoard's date or significance without fuller knowledge. It is mentioned here only for completeness.
|76||SNGCop 111; cf. Mionnet, Suppl. 7, p. 17, 69. Overlooked, for example, by Jones: "It is curious that the coins of Olympus, though of federal type, never bear the name of the federation" (p. 102), and by von Aulock, who is at least aware of the Mionnet entry ( Gordian , p. 34). Waddington and Warren, however, appear to have seen true League coins of Olympus (Asie Mineure, p. 113; Warren, p. 42).|
Our chief literary source for the Lycian League is Strabo. In the midst of his
geographical account of the country, he says of the League:
There are twenty-three cities which share the vote. The Lycians come together
from their various cities to their congress (συνέδϱιον), at whichever city they have selected. Each of the largest
cities controls three votes, the medium-sized two, and the others one. In the same fashion they pay their contributions and
liturgies. Artemidorus said that the six largest cities were Xanthus, Patara, Pinara,
Olympus, Myra, and Tlos …. At the congress first they choose the Lyciarch and the other officials of the League, and
appoint common courts of justice. Earlier they used to decide about war and peace and alliances, but now they do not, of course,
such things by necessity are settled by the Romans …. Similarly, judges and magistrates are elected from the cities in proportion
And near the end of his treatment of Lycia, Strabo says of Phaselis: "Now this city too is Lycian … but it has no part in the common League and is a separate organization to itself." 80 The floruit of Strabo's source, Artemidorus of Ephesus, was in the 169th Olympiad, 104–100 b.c., and this gives us the valuable information that at the very end of the second century b.c. the six most important cities were Xanthus, Pinara, Patara, and Tlos in the west, Myra in the south, and Olympus in the east. Phaselis, however, was not then a League member.
The names of these six cities are capitalized in Table 2, which gives a brief summary of the several types of evidence for the nineteen Lycian cities which coined for the League, and for a twentieth, Candyba, which may have coined. Most of these cities minted the silver drachms of Period II, while two (Telmessus and Arycanda, italicized) are known only from later issues. Among the cities striking the civic bronzes of Period III, only Arycanda is not yet known in silver. Drachms of Arycanda may yet appear, for drachms of several other cities are known from only one coin or from a very few.
Columns 1–4 of Table 2 give the League coinages of the twenty cities: column 1 shows the drachms of Period II and column 2 the civic bronzes of Period III. Columns 3 and 4 give silver and bronze struck during Periods IV and V in the names of the cities, although the bulk of the coinage struck in those periods was, of course, in the names of the districts, with only occasional issues bearing city initials. Many of the League cities also struck autonomous coinages, some quite possibly contemporary with League issues; these are not included in this study.
|League Coinage||Literary Sources||Inscriptions||Gordian III Coins|
|Per. II||Per. III Æ||Per. IV||Per. V Æ||Strabo||Pliny||Ptolemy|
Columns 5–7 give the occurrences of the minting cities in the three chief geographical treatments of Lycia: Strabo, 81 who wrote in Augustan times but whose account was based on the earlier work of Artemidorus; Pliny, 82 from the late first century a.d.; and Ptolemy, 83 from the middle of the second century a.d.
Roughly contemporary with Ptolemy or perhaps a bit earlier was an extremely rich Lycian citizen named Opramoas: a long inscription from his native city of Rhodiapolis lists the cities which benefited from his donations. This inscription, supplemented by a few others in TAM, provides the inscriptional data shown in column 8 for all the cities except Trebendae and Candyba. These two, however, occur in a contemporary inscription listing the cities honoring the Lyciarch Jason of Cyaneae. 84
Lycia as a Roman province coined under Claudius in a.d. 43 (see Appendix 3), and under Domitian, Nerva, and Trajan in the brief period a.d. 95–99, but these strikings bear no indication of mint. Lycia's final ancient coinage was an isolated and rather surprising outburst of Imperial bronzes in 242–44, under the young Gordian III and his wife Tranquillina. Twenty cities struck this coinage; the fourteen that correspond to the League mints are shown in column 9.
This tabular form should be more useful, and certainly is more compact, than a textual description, city by city, with all these bits of evidence. Von Aulock's recent compilation and study of the coinage of Gordian and Tranquillina includes for each of their minting cities an excellent summary of its geographical, inscriptional, and numismatic evidence. 85 For many of the League cities, the inscriptions have been conveniently collected in TAM, which includes the inscriptions from the western mints, Arycanda and Rhodiapolis among the southern mints, and both the eastern mints.
Several cities which in the past have erroneously been ascribed League coinage are discussed in Appendix 1.
|a||Period II silver mints are in Roman letters, and Strabo's six largest cities are in capital letters. Italic letters indicate cities whose coinages are only known later than Period II.|
|77||E. Hansen and C. Le Roy, "Au Létôon de Xanthos: les deux temples de Léto," RevArch 1976, pp. 321–25. I am obliged to M. Mellink and H. Metzger for having put me in touch with M. Le Roy, who was directly responsible for the excavation of the temple where the hoard was found. I am much indebted to M. Le Roy for his long and extremely helpful letters on the subject of the hoard, which he expects will be published by O. Picard.|
|78||Hansen and Le Roy (above, n. 77), p. 324, n. 1.|
|82||NH 95–96 and 100–101.|
|84||TAM 905 (Opramoas) and IGR 704 (Jason).|
|85||Gordian . The following additional cities struck under Gordian: Arneae, Podalia, Acalissus, Corydalla, Choma, and Trebenna.|
Obverse dies are numbered within each issue. Individual dies are referred to on the plates and in the discussion by issue number followed by die number: thus 8.3 indicates the third obverse die of issue 8.
Illustrated coins are marked with asterisks. When more than one coin from one obverse die is illustrated, the illustrations follow the order of the catalogue. Every obverse die is illustrated. Unknown obverse dies are indicated in the catalogue by an x.
The reverse dies found with each obverse die are shown by lower-case letters (a, b, c) following the obverse die number; these lower-case reverse letters are not repeated on the plates. Brackets to the right indicate reverse die identities.
Relative die axis positions are not given, as the great majority are ↑↑, with the few variations either ↑↗ or ↑↖.
Mints are listed in order from west to east, and commentary on each mint follows its catalogue. General commentary follows Series 3.
Obv. Laureate head of Apollo r.; behind shoulder, usually, bow and quiver.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ above and city initials to either side of cithara; all in shallow incuse square (the inscriptions vary on the pseudo-League and imitative issues 42–45 and 47–49).
Xanthus 15 coins, 14 obv. dies, 15 rev. dies
5. Rev. ΞΑ (Ξ alone on 5.10a).
5.1 = 6.1 (Sidyma). It is not clear which city's coins were struck first.
Xanthus lies on a high plateau over the Xanthus River, some eight miles north of the southern coast of Lycia. Xanthus's remains are the most extensive and impressive in Lycia; from it come the Nereid monument and other remarkable sculptured tombs now in the British Museum. And Strabo, speaking of ca. 100 b.c., says that Xanthus was, besides one of the six cities controlling three votes each in the federal assembly, "the greatest city in Lycia." 86
It is therefore somewhat surprising that but 15 of the 316 coins of Period II are of Xanthus. But as these 15 are struck from 15 reverse and 14 obverse dies, of a variety of styles, it is clear that the surviving material is a poor guide to the original size of Xanthus's League coinage. Most of the drachms of Period II presumably were melted down for recoining as the lighter district issues of Period IV; any surviving today must have been lost or buried before the change in standard. The Kemer Hoard, for example, buried in eastern Lycia just as the coins' standard started to fall, has expanded the known Period II Series 1 coinage of Olympus from 8 to 36 examples. A hoard of similar date from the west could well do the same for Xanthus.
What is remarkable, however, given the meager amount of material available from Xanthus and the three other Xanthus Valley cities of Sidyma, Pinara, and Cadyanda, is the amount of die linkage connecting these cities. Two Xanthus coins share an obverse die and the two Pinara coins a reverse die: this is all the intra-city linkage provided by the 21 coins of these four cities. But there are three inter-city obverse links: Xanthus-Sidyma, Xanthus-Cadyanda, and Pinara-Cadyanda; and there are also two cases of recut reverses, from coins other than the obverse-linked ones: Cadyanda cut over Xanthus, and Pinara also cut over, most probably, Xanthus. A schematic portrayal of these relationships follows. The cities' positions correspond to their geographical locations, Cadyanda being the northernmost and Xanthus the southernmost. The arrows point towards the second users, when known, of the particular dies. The recuttings are self-explanatory, and the Xanthus-Cadyanda and Pinara-Cadyanda dies have broken down somewhat by the time of their use by Cadyanda.
The recutting of Xanthus's reverses for Pinara and Cadyanda, together with the shared obverses and strong similarities between other obverses of the four cities, shows that Xanthus was probably the source of all four cities' dies. But once again the vexing question of central mint or travelling dies arises. Three possibilities present themselves: Xanthus sent out dies to each of the other three cities separately; it sent out one group of dies which went in turn to each of the other cities; or it struck all the coins itself. The obverse link between Pinara and Cadyanda rules out the first possibility. The second, one traveling group of dies, is not disproved but is indicated as unlikely by the fact that the Sidyma reverse is not a recut one. A traveling group of dies would presumably have gone first to Sidyma, then to Pinara, and finally to Cadyanda, the farthest town from Xanthus. It seems unlikely that the mint workmen would have cut a fresh reverse for use at Sidyma while saving used Xanthus reverses for later recutting at Pinara and Cadyanda—especially as Sidyma's Σ would have covered Ξ so much more easily than would Pinara's Π.
Therefore it seems probable that all the coins of the four cities were struck at Xanthus. That the die breaks and recuttings all show Xanthus as the dies' first user need indicate only that the home city's required coinage was struck first, which is after all what one would expect.
It is interesting to note that, although Patara and Tlos in the west minted under Gordian, none of these four die linked cities of Xanthus, Sidyma, Pinara, and Cadyanda did. (The only other Period II mint missing from Gordian's mints is the insignificant Trebendae.) Whatever the nature of the bond between the four cities here discussed, it evidently was an enduring one.
Sidyma 2 coins, 1–2 obv. dies, 1–2 rev. dies
6. Rev. ΣΙ.
6.1 = 5.1 (Xanthus). It is not clear which city's coins were struck first.
The reverse die used with 6.1 is not recut. Although a Σ could easily cover a previous Ξ, and the Ι is tilted somewhat, there is no trace whatever of a previous letter under the Ι, and, with the cithara off-center to the right as it is, the space would hardly have been large enough for an Α.
The coin struck from 6.x was reliably reported to have been in the Kemer 1970 Hoard, but no record was made of it, and its dies are unknown.
The single drachm here catalogued, first published in 1902, is the only known coin of the city. A second League drachm from the Kemer Hoard has unfortunately dropped from sight. Sidyma's drachms seem to have been struck at Xanthus. 87
Only four of the 16 cities represented in Period II are missing from those striking the civic bronzes of Period III. The absence of two, Olympus and Phaselis, is probably significant and will be discussed below. But that no small bronzes of Sidyma or of Rhodiapolis have yet appeared is probably due to chance.
Pinara 2 coins, 2 obv. dies, 1 rev. die
7. Rev. ΠΙ, cut over Xanthus.
7.1 = 8.2 (Cadyanda). It is not clear which city's coins were struck first.
Pinara's only known reverse die has clear remains of an Α under the Ι. There are also traces of an erasure under the Π, and this was probably of an Ξ, as remains of a horizontal stroke are visible at the bottom left of the left upright of the Π.
Pinara was located on the northern slopes of Mt. Cragus, perhaps 14 miles in a direct line from Xanthus. Pinara's ruins from the period of independence and from Roman times are impressive. Strabo, besides naming it as one of the six Lycian League cities with three votes, singles it out individually as "one of the largest cities in Lycia."
Strabo's statement that the Lycian cities made contributions to the League's treasury in proportion to their votes in the assembly does not correlate well with the League's coinage at the time Strabo was describing (the very end of the second century b.c.), or at any other time. Four of Strabo's largest cities (Xanthus, Tlos, Patara, and Myra) did have relatively large league coinages, seemingly throughout Series 1. But Olympus's true League coinage was extremely scant (one obverse die only is known); and her pseudo-League coinage (without ΛΥΚΙΩΝ) does not count, especially as it must be understood in connection with the even larger pseudo-League coinage of Phaselis—which Strabo explicitly states was not a League member at the end of the second century b.c. Nor do the two coins known of Pinara, the sixth of Strabo's largest cities, correspond in any way to the importance of the city. The coins' one reverse die is a recut Xanthian one; one of their two obverse dies was shared by Cadyanda; and the coins probably were even struck at Xanthus.
A change of a very few letters in Strabo would change Pinara to Limyra, and such an emendation would agree far better with the existing coinage. But this is unwarranted. A long inscription of 81 b.c., recording Sulla's orders during the reorganization of Asia, specifies six cities in Lycia which were allied with Carian Stratoniceia, where the inscription was found. These Lycian cities are Xanthus, Patara, Pinara, Myra, Tlos—and Limyra. 88 With the substitution of Limyra for Olympus, this list tallies precisely with Strabo's. Olympus would by 81 b.c. have fallen away from the League into piracy, 89 and Limyra had presumably risen to prominence, possibly replacing Olympus as a three-vote member; her increased importance may well be reflected in her relatively large late Period II coinage. But for present purposes, the inscription neatly confirms Strabo's accuracy in including Pinara among the League's six largest cities.
Pinara must then have fulfilled its League obligations in coin other than the League's own, perhaps in Rhodian plinthophoroi. Here is a clear instance where a city's known importance does not correlate with the size of its coinage; may it serve as a caution.
Cadyanda 3 coins, 3 obv. dies, 3 rev. dies
8. Rev. ΚΑ.
The reverse die used with 8.3 has clear remains of an Ξ under the Κ.
To call Cadyanda a Xanthus Valley city is perhaps stretching things a bit: the city lies almost equidistant from the upper Xanthus River and the Gulf of Telmessus, and faces southwest. From its high site one overlooks the sea at Telmessus as well as the river and the sea beyond Patara. Yet Cadyanda is only seven or eight miles from the river, no farther from it than is Sidyma. The northernmost of the minting cities of the west, Cadyanda is still only about 30 miles from Xanthus as the crow flies. Cadyanda's ruins, especially from the Roman period, are impressive: a temple, baths, stadium, agora, gymnasium (?), theater, and walls. Kalinka calls it a "small but magnificent town." 90 It had, however, been unknown in the literature until L. Robert resurrected it from a corrupt passage in Pliny. The foolish "Ascandiandalis, Amelas, Noscopium" has now been restored to its original "Cadyanda, Lissa [a known town], and Melanoscopium." 91
Although the silver coins of Cadyanda are here published for the first time, the small civic bronzes with mint initials ΚΑ have long been known. 92 It has been uncertain whether their mint was Calynda, in the far west, west of the Gulf of Telmessus; Cadyanda; or Candyba, inland in the south. The three cities' names are maddeningly similar—but at least we are spared considering Caryanda, mercifully situated in Caria.
Earlier scholars hesitantly gave the small bronzes to Cadyanda; they have been followed, also hesitantly, by Magie. 93 Calynda has been favored by no one: it is too far from the other Lycian mints and furthermore was until ca. 163 b.c. a dependency of Caunus, after which date it placed itself under the protection of Rhodes. 94 Candyba is favored hesitantly by Jameson and definitely by Jones, on the grounds that Cadyanda lay north of Telmessus, which after 167 b.c. was Attalid; but they do not take into account the recent Orthagoras inscription showing that Araxa, still further north, was an active League member in the early second century. 95 Von Aulock also tentatively assigns the ΚΑ bronzes to Candyba, which was the only city of the three to strike Imperials under Gordian. 96
An indication that Cadyanda was responsible for the ΚΑ coins might have been found in the large ΚΑ bronze, or "quadruple unit," at Athens, 97 had it been known, for nine of the other eleven coins of this rare denomination are from Xanthus Valley towns, as are nine of the twelve identifiable coins of the "double units" of Period III.
But the silver drachms here published firmly link the ΚΑ city, which must be Cadyanda, to the other cities of the Xanthus Valley. It may be objected that Candyba is somewhat closer, in air miles, to Xanthus than is Cadyanda. But overland communications, over the mountains, between Candyba and Xanthus are unthinkable: any practical route between the two would go by way of rivers and the sea, past other active mints which Candyba would surely have used in preference to the more remote Xanthus.
Furthermore, the inscriptions in TAM, although chiefly from Roman times, do show which cities were in easy reach of others. The inscriptions from Xanthus in TAM make mention of citizens of nine other communities. 98 Four (Rome, Aetolia, Tarsus, and Laodiceia) are non-Lycian, and five are Lycian. And these five are precisely the five other western League mints: Patara, Tlos, Sidyma, Pinara, and Cadyanda. No Lycian cities of the south or east occur in the Xanthus inscriptions. Cadyanda, then, must be assigned the League silver catalogued above; quite possibly the drachm of issue 9, following; and the ΚΑ bronzes of Period III.
9. Rev. ΚΑ; to r., Isis crown.
The attribution of this coin must remain uncertain. Its obverse style is like no other known in all the League coinage. Its fabric, thick and lumpy, is also unusual. Its symbol is unusually placed to the right, yet this placement is found occasionally on coins of mints throughout Lycia (Tlos, Patara, Myra, Rhodiapolis) and does not help to attribute the coin. Its Isis crown symbol is, however, found elsewhere only on coins of the south and east. 99
Otto Mørkholm thinks, and he is quite correct as usual, that there is a distinct possibility the ΚΑ coins emanated from two mints, and that issue 9 may be of Candyba, with the Isis crown symbol of the other southern and eastern mints being regarded as differentiation enough between the coins of Cadyanda and Candyba. Precisely this sort of differentiation seems all that was made between the Achaean League coins of Messene and Megalopolis, for example. 100 The Isis crown's southern and eastern associations are, however, suggestive but hardly conclusive, for the two symbols used at Tlos in the Xanthus Valley are also found elsewhere only in in the south and east. 101
Further, in Lycia in Period III Arycanda took care to distinguish itself from Araxa on its coins, using Υ or Α instead of a simple ΑΡ. 102 One might then expect that Candyba, if indeed it struck issue 9, would with a single stroke (Κ) have distinguished itself from Cadyanda.
Although it remains possible that Candyba struck issue 9, the evidence is inconclusive and does not seem to warrant the rather drastic step of definitely assigning the ΚΑ drachms to two separate mints. If Cadyanda did strike issue 9, however, the striking was probably done at home. This might explain the coin's variance in style and fabric from Cadyanda's issue 8, struck at Xanthus, and from the known coins of Xanthus.
Tlos 12 coins, 9 obv. dies, 9 rev. dies
10. Rev. ΤΛ.
11. Rev. ΤΛ; to l., branch (see also issue 13).
12. Rev. ΤΛ; to l., helmet (to r. on 12.3a).
13. Rev. ΤΛ; to l., branch (see also issue 11).
Issues 11 and 13 have been separated because of obverse style and also because 13 has the dropped mint initials found only on some later Period II coins of Series 2 and 3.
One of Strabo's six largest League cities, Tlos lay north of Xanthus, Sidyma, and Pinara, just east of the Xanthus River. From Tlos's lofty site are visible the sea to the west and the central Lycian mountains to the east. Strabo placed Tlos among the most important Lycian cities; and his statement is confirmed by inscriptional evidence. 103 It is notable that Tlos's Period II coining was independent of that of Xanthus and the three other cities die linked with Xanthus. Tlos also produced a great deal of Period IV and V coinage, in silver and bronze, in her own name.
Patara 22 coins, 19 obv. dies, 22 rev. dies
14. Rev. ΠΑ (Π alone on 14.3a) (see also issue 19).
15. Rev. ΠΑ; to l., filleted branch.
16. Rev. ΠΑ; to r., caduceus.
17. Rev. ΠΑ; to r., star.
19. Rev. ΠΑ (Π alone on 19.7a) (see also issue 14).
20. Rev. ΠΑ; to l., star.
Issues 14 and 19 have been separated because of obverse style. The coin struck from 19.1, despite its having the curling hair of issue 14, has been placed in issue 19 because its head is smaller than those of issue 14 and because the coin's reverse is similar to that of the coin struck from 19.2.
Also one of Strabo's six largest cities, Patara lay at the mouth of the Xanthus River, on Lycia's southern coast. Patara's port, today silted up, was important in antiquity: it is mentioned repeatedly in Livy's account of Antiochus III's conflict with Rome. Patara is the one Lycian city specifically known to have been besieged by Mithradates VI in 88 b.c., and it is one of the three known to have capitulated to Brutus in 42 b.c.
Patara's location would have made it a natural center of Lycian activities, being easily reachable both by sea and by the important highway of the Xanthus Valley. It was, in practical terms, the geographic center of Lycia. Larsen indeed considers Patara the capital of the Lycian League, but it seems doubtful that there was a formal political capital: Strabo explicitly stated that the federal assembly met in whichever city seemed convenient. Larsen, however, supports his statement with Livy's characterization of Patara as "caput gentis"; 104 Moretti replies that the term was probably used in a general sense, as the Latin equivalent of the rather pompous designation of μητϱόπολις τοῦ Λυϰίων ἔθνους, applied in inscriptions of the Roman period to several cities. 105 As Livy, however, used the term in the speech of a Rhodian urging Rome to capture Patara, where a large part of Antiochus's fleet was based, it would seem to the present author that the term might be taken as referring simply to Patara's strategic military importance.
Larsen also adduces the fact that the League's records are known to have been stored at Patara; Kalinka, however, believed that the actual depository was the temple of Apollo Patroös at Patara; 106 and Moretti, observing that the Eleans similarly deposited copies of their public acts at Olympia, notes that this does not mean that Olympia was the capital of the Eleans. Larsen further notes that Vespasian used League moneys for repairs to the baths at Patara; 107 but this act was far later than the period of independence and, while it may well attest Patara's importance, does not necessarily imply that it was a formal political capital.
Perhaps the argument here is only semantic. While it cannot be shown that Patara was the "capital" of the League, if indeed the League had one, still Patara's location made it an almost inevitable center for national activities at all periods. As Larsen rightly notes, the League's records and "permanent secretariat" (such a body, whatever its form, clearly existed to deal with emergencies) must have been located at some fixed place. 108 This was almost certainly Patara, as shown by the discussion above and now also by the figure of Patara's Apollo Patroös on League coins throughout the League's whole period of coining. 109
|87||See above, pp. 43–44.|
|88||OGIS 441, ll. 209–14.|
|89||See below, pp. 87–95.|
|90||TAM, p. 240.|
|91||Villes, pp. 161–68, commenting on Pliny, NH 5.101.|
|93||Magie, p. 1380, n. 33. Some earlier scholars favoring Cadyanda were Fougères (p. 35), Babelon (see Waddington 3035), and Head (HN 2, p. 695).|
|95||Jameson, p. 281; Jones, p. 102. For the Orthagoras inscription, see pp. 11–12.|
|96||Gordian , p. 42.|
|98||Citizens of Cadyanda appear in the Xanthian inscriptions TAM 307, 330, and 335.|
|99||At Cyaneae, Aperlae, Trebendae, Myra, Olympus, and Phaselis.|
|100||M. Thompson, The Agrinion Hoard, ANSNNM 159 (New York, 1968), pp. 31–37.|
|101||The helmet at Limyra, Gagae, and Olympus; the branch at Olympus and Phaselis.|
|103||See n. 88.|
|104||Livy 37.15; Larsen, "The Araxa Inscription and the Lycian Confederacy," Class-Phil 1956, p. 166 and p. 169, n. 42, and GFS, pp. 254 and 256. In the 1956 article Larsen's position is closer to that of the present author; he suggests Patara as no more than the home of the League's "secretariat." In GFS he seems to argue for Patara as a full-fledged capital.|
|105||Moretti, p. 217, n. 74. Other cities receiving this honorific were Telmessus, Tlos, Xanthus, and Myra.|
|106||TAM, p. 146. The evidence is TAM 247, an inscription from the western coast dated ἐπὶ ἀϱχιεϱέος Λιϰιννίου Στασιθέμιδος Ξανδίϰου ϰη´ διὰ τῶν ἐν Πατάϱοις ἀϱχείων.|
|107||TAM 396 = IGR 659, mentioned by Larsen only in GFS, which appeared after Moretti's reply to his 1956 article (see nn. 104 and 105).|
Phellus 3 coins, 3 obv. dies, 3 rev. dies
21. Rev. ΦΕ; to l., crossed bow and quiver.
22. Rev. ΦΕ; to l., quiver.
Phellus is one of the two Period II cities whose sites are uncertain. But while there are as yet no candidates for the site of the other, Trebendae, there are two contenders for the site of Phellus. Early nineteenth-century travelers thought Phellus was to be identified with ruins north of Antiphellus, on the mountain called today the Fellendaǧ, from which flows a river, the Fellen Tchai. The site commands a rich, well-watered plain, and the identification, in the absence of inscriptions, was based on the obvious identity of the ancient and modern names.
But in 1892 O. Benndorf argued for another site southeast of Antiphellus, across the bay, and this has been until recently the generally accepted location (e.g. on the BMC's map). In 1958, however, G. E. Bean, in a thorough review of the old evidence augmented by some new data, argued again for the older site on the Fellendaǧ; and von Aulock, who also knew the country well, agreed with him. 110 This inland site is accordingly that shown on the map in this study.
The coinage does not favor one location over another. Phellus's dies, especially that of 21.1, clearly imitate the lovely obverse of Cyaneae's issue 25, but the two sites are almost equidistant from Cyaneae.
Antiphellus 1 coin
23. Rev. ΑΝ; to l., star.
Antiphellus on the southern coast is today Kaş (formerly Andifilo). This drachm is the first League coin in silver from the city, although its Period III civic bronzes have long been known, and it fulfills G. F. Hill's prediction that its kitharephoroi would one day appear. 111
Aperlae See p. 251.
Cyaneae 8 coins, 6 obv. dies, 8 rev. dies
24. Rev. ΚΥ; to l., grape cluster.
25. Rev. ΚΥ; to l., sword in scabbard with strap, behind shield.
26. Rev. ΚΥ; to l., Isis crown.
Cyaneae lay some few miles inland from the southern coast, between Phellus and Myra. Not one of Strabo's six largest cities, its Period II coinage seems not to have been extensive. But in the late first century b.c., when the district coinage was predominant in Lycia, Cyaneae struck bronze and silver in its own name, joining the district Masicytus and the important cities of Tlos and Telmessus in striking sestertii with the head of Augustus. 112
Trebendae 1 coin
27. Rev. ΤΡ; to l., Isis crown.
27.1 = 23 A.1 (Aperlae). See p. 251.
Small bronzes with the initials ΤΡ have long been known, 113 but this drachm is the first published silver coin with this inscription.
The second (not the first) edition of Historia Numorum describes the League bronzes of Tr… as bearing ΤΡΕ as well as ΤΡ, and this of course has been widely repeated. No League coins with ΤΡΕ have been found by the present author, however, and one must assume that ΤΡΕ entry is an error. 114 Thus the third letter of the Tr… mint need not necessarily have been e.
Trabala, a city known only from Stephanus of Byzantium, has been suggested as the mint of the bronzes, but this would also seem an error. 115 Trabala may be dismissed.
The BMC also cites Trebenda [sic], Trysa, and Trebenna as possibilities. Trebenna, an important city in Imperial times, lay well north of Phaselis, on the border between Lycia and Pamphylia. The only one of the Tr… cities known to have struck any other coins at all (Imperials of Gordian III, Trebenna has understandably often been favored as the League's Tr… mint: by Waddington, Fougères, Head, Ruge, and, in recent years, von Aulock. But Jones in 1937 realized that the original League could not have extended so far north; and he and Magie favor Trebendae. 116
The coins clearly show that the mint was not Trebenna. The civic bronzes of Period III include all the League mints of Period II except Sidyma (known from but one Period II drachm) and, in the east, Rhodiapolis, Olympus, and Phaselis. The obverse style of many of the civic bronzes shows that at least some of them overlapped the later district silver issues of Period IV; and, whatever the date of the introduction of the civic bronzes, the absence among them of Olympus and Phaselis suggests that these bronzes commenced only after Olympus and Phaselis had left the League. These two cities seceded in order to join forces with the pirates who had come to control Cilicia and Pamphylia, 117 and it is most unlikely that Trebenna, still further to the north, could have remained (if she ever was) a League member and issued the small ΤΡ bronzes.
There are three further indications that the Tr… mint was in the south. The two known provenances of the ΤΡ civic bronzes of Period III are both southern: one coin was purchased on the Finike-Elmali road, which runs up the Arycandus River; and another was found at Patara. The ΤΡ drachm is one of only eight true League coins weighing 3.00 g or more; of the other seven, fully five are from Myra's issues 28 and 29. And now, of course, the obverse link with Aperlae (see p. 251) quite firmly places the ΤΡ mint in the south. The joint obverse of these two cities is remarkably similar to several of Myra's: compare issues 28-29, and especially 29.3. The crudely worked hair at the crown, the open mouth, and even the somewhat melted appearance of the coins (struck from dies of poor metal?) are the same. It is quite possible that Myra cut the dies for, or even actually struck, the small coinages of Aperlae and of the ΤΡ mint. But what was the Tr… city?
With Trebenna eliminated the remaining candidates are Trysa and Trebendae. Trysa, situated between Cyaneae and Myra, is chiefly known for its nearby Heroön, dating probably from archaic times. Inscriptions identify the city's site, which is not large. Trysa is not mentioned in Strabo, Pliny, Ptolemy, or the inscriptions of Column 8 of Table 2.
Trebendae's site is unknown, but two inscriptions link it with Myra, which it must have been near. One records a dedication to ᾽Ελευθέϱᾳ τϱεβενδατιϰῇ (Eleuthera was the well-known goddess of Myra), and one is the grave marker of a Μυϱεὺς ἀπὸ Τϱεβένδων. The date of these inscriptions is uncertain, but Trebendae (or, more precisely, the city of the [Τ]ϱεβενδατῶν) occurs also in the second-century a.d. inscription honoring Jason of Cyaneae. The true termination of the city's name, unrecoverable from these three inscriptions, can be determined from a sixth-century life of St. Nicholas of Sion, Bishop of Myra. The life describes in detail the saint's travels and good deeds, relating at one point a visit εἰς Τϱεβένδας. Thanks to Santa Claus, then, of all people, we know that the city's proper name was Τϱεβένδαι, or Trebendae, and it is now realized that the city was indeed named in Ptolemy: the manuscripts read in garbled fashion ᾽Αϱαβένδαι, Τϱάβενδαι, Τϱεβένδα, or Τϱεβένδαι, and have often been amended to Arycanda by editors unfamiliar with Trebendae. 118
Trebendae was thus a small city near Myra, so small as to have been united in sympolity with Myra at one time (the Μυϱεὺς ἀπὸ Τϱεβένδων), yet a League member in its own right in the second century a.d. (the Jason inscription). As stated above, Jones and Magie favor Trebendae as the Tr… mint; the ΤΡΕ error in HN 2 prevented them from considering Trysa. Although neither of these insignificant southern cities is a very satisfactory candidate, Trebendae is the more likely. It is the only one of the two to appear in any of the ancient geographers, or in any inscriptions except purely local ones, and it is the only one of the two whose League membership is attested at any period.
Myra 36 coins, 22–23 obv. dies, 30–31 rev. dies
28. Rev. ΜΥ (see also issue 35).
29. Rev. ΜΥ; to l., Isis crown.
30. Rev. Μ; strap on lyre.
31. Rev. ΜΥ; to l., star.
32. Rev. ΜΥ; to r., ear of corn.
33. Rev. ΜΥ; to r., pileus (?) surmounted by star.
34. Rev. ΜΥ; to l., winged caduceus.
35. Rev. ΜΥ (see also issue 28).
The arrangement of Myra's many issues is tentative and somewhat arbitrary. Issues 28 and 29 are extremely close in style, and 28 has been placed first because of its lack of symbol. Issue 35, also with no symbol, has been separated from 28 and placed last because its obverse style, rectangular reverses, and dropped mint initials (on the coins struck from 35.3–35.5) are characteristic of Series 2 and 3. Issue 34 has been placed immediately before 35 because of 34's occasional rectangular reverses and the single dropped initial of the reverses found with 34.4; the only other Period II die with a single dropped initial is that used with Xanthus's 5.13, which is similar to the obverses of issue 35. The proper order of the remaining issues is quite uncertain.
Myra and Patara have the largest number of issues and obverse styles of any of the League mints of Period II. Only Olympus and Phaselis have more surviving coins, and only Phaselis has more known obverse dies. This is not surprising, for Myra was one of Strabo's six largest cities, the only one of the six in the south central region, and a highly important port (the actual port was Andriace, as Myra was a few miles inland from the mouth of the Myrus River). Myra was probably the chief city of the later district of Masicytus, and became highly important in Roman and Byzantine times.
Limyra 32 coins, 18–19 obv. dies, 28–29 rev. dies
36. Rev. ΛΙ; to l., helmet.
37. Rev. ΛΙ (see also issues 38, 50, and 56).
38. Rev. ΛΙ; to l., fulmen, sometimes winged, on 38.1a–b and 38.9a–14b (see also issues 37, 50, and 56).
Issue 38 contains coins both with and without symbol. There seems to be no way to separate the two groups into two successive issues. Obverse die 38.1 is used with reverses both with and without symbol, and the die shows a large and handsome head which one would expect to come very early in the series of dies of this style, with the hair falling in two ringlets; thus the die cannot be seen as the transitional one between coins without and with fulmens. Further, 38.5 (used without fulmen) is very close to 38.9 (with); and 38.10–38.14 (with) are very close to 38.15 (without). The symbol must have been used only intermittently throughout the issue.
Limyra, nevertheless, appears to have struck Gagae's League coinage of Period II in addition to her own. Gagae's sole known drachm is struck from Limyra's obverse 36.2. Gagae's one known reverse die and the two reverse dies found with 36.2, all with the same symbol, are also alike in the rather inept preparation of the dies. When each of the dies was cut away on four sides to produce the raised square punch, the four cuttings were not leveled with each other, with the result that on the coins struck from these dies some of the lines forming the border of the incuse square are prolonged into the surrounding raised area. Because of these similarities, and on the analogy of the conclusion reached above for Xanthus and its neighbors (that Xanthus struck the die linked drachms of all of them), it is probable that Gagae's small League emission was actually minted at Limyra.
Limyra's issue 38 is a large one, far larger (at least, so far as we know) than other mints' issues with this obverse style with the hair rolled at the forehead and falling down the neck in two tightly curled ringlets. The placement of this obverse style at the end of Series 1 is thus further confirmed, for Limyra alone of all the League's mints of the west and south continued striking during Series 2.
The inscription from Stratoniceia mentioned above 119 is probably significant here. It gives the names of six Lycian cities prominent in 81 b.c. Of Strabo's six largest cities, only Olympus is absent; this is because Olympus had by the early first century fallen away from the League into piracy. The inscription substitutes Limyra for Olympus. Limyra's importance must then have grown between ca. 104–100 b.c. and 81 b.c. Perhaps she assumed Olympus's place as a three-vote member of the assembly. In any case, Limyra's increased mint activity from late Series 1 onward would seem to reflect her increased importance.
Gagae 1 coin
39. Rev. ΓΑ; to l., helmet.
Gagae, a small city at the eastern end of the south coast, is one of the few Period II cities not represented in the small bronze "units" of Period III. This lack is no doubt due to chance, as a "quadruple unit" of Gagae (the only other known League coin of this city) appears in Period III. 120
Rhodiapolis 18 coins, 5–6 obv. dies, 10–11 rev. dies
40. Rev. ΡΟ (ΡΩ, apparently, on 40.1a); to l., fillet (to r. on 40.1a).
Obverse die 40.2 may be a recut version of 40.1. Reverse die 40.2a is described in its initial publication as having a spear to r. This is more probably a flaw; there seems to be a similar defect to the left also.
Rhodiapolis has by far the highest ratio of coins to obverse dies of any silver mint in this study, even though that ratio is only 3:1. Perhaps some small earlier hoard is responsible, especially for the seven pre-Kemer Hoard coins struck from 40.5. Both von Aulock and another observer report that there were "very many" coins of Rhodiapolis in the Kemer Hoard; 121 presumably many of these were among the coins which have fallen from sight, for the seven hoard coins here recorded can hardly be described as "very many." At any rate, Rhodiapolis's considerable contribution to the hoard may be a result of her location in the far east of the south central region, on the western flanks of the Solyma mountains shutting off the east coast.
Rhodiapolis is one of only four Period II cities not represented in the civic bronzes of Period III. The absence of one of these four, Sidyma, for which only one coin is known in Period II (and that struck at Xanthus) is not surprising; presumably her output of Period III bronzes was minuscule also. Two others, however, are Olympus and Phaselis, and their absence is significant. The striking of the civic bronzes seems to have commenced only after these two eastern cities had left the League to join forces with the pirates who by the end of the second century controlled the coasts of Cilicia and Pamphylia. 122 Rhodiapolis's absence from Period III is thus a bit puzzling. 123
|108||E.g. the situations described in the Orthagoras inscription: see pp. 11–12.|
|109||See commentary on Period I.|
|110||Bean, "Die Lage von Phellos," Anzeiger der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, Phil.-hist. Klasse 1958, pp. 49–58; von Aulock, Gordian , pp. 49-50. Bean's arguments are too lengthy to review here, but include a summary of the often conflicting accounts in the literature, the size of the ruins (those on the Fellendaǧ are the larger), and the find-spots of numerous grave inscriptions mentioning Phellus.|
|111||BMC, p. lix, note.|
|112||See issues 100 and 187–88.|
|114||HN 1, p. 580; HN 2, p. 698. The source of the error is most probably a mistaken interpretation of Waddington 3199 (an autonomous coin, perhaps of Trebenna, with club and ΤΡΕ on reverse) as a League coin. The Waddington catalogue appeared between HN 1 and HN 2, and HN 2 included from it many Lycian issues not in the earlier edition.|
|115||BMC, p. lxviii. The sole report of a reading ΤΡΑ ΚΡ occurs in a nineteenth century sale catalogue: see Appendix 1, under Trabala. The small bronzes with ΤΡ had previously been ascribed to Traballa in Mionnet, Suppl. 7, p. 24, 93.|
|116||Waddington, Asie Mineure, p. 115; Fougères, p. 35; Head, HN 2, p. 698; RE VIA, col. 2268 (Ruge); von Aulock, Gordian , p. 54; Jones, both eds. p. 103; Magie, pp. 1380–81, n. 33.|
|118||Full accounts and discussions of the evidence for Trebendae are given by W. Ruge in RE VIA, cols. 2267–68, and by L. Robert in "Lycie," pp. 199-200 and 206–8.|
|119||See n. 88.|
Olympus, League Coinage 3 coins, 1 obv. die, 2 rev. dies
41. Rev. ΟΛ; to l., Isis crown.
Olympus, Pseudo-League Coinage (without ΛΥΚΙΩΝ)
33 coins, 17 obv. dies, 25 rev. dies
42. Rev. ΟΛΥΜΠΗ; to l., helmet; to r., sword behind shield.
44. Rev. ΟΛΥΜΠΗ; to l., Π and torch; to r., Μ.
45. Rev. ΟΛΥΜΠΗ; to l., branch; to r., trophy.
42.1 = 47.1 (Phaselis). It is not clear which city's coins were struck first.
The low placement of the monograms of issue 43 would seem to be analogous to the low placement of the mint initials found at other mints on reverses coupled with this obverse style with rolled hair and ringlets at the neck.
The obverse dies of issue 44 are very similar to the early obverses of issue 45. Obverse dies 45.5 and 45.6, of very different styles, are reverse linked. The common reverse shows several small die breaks only on the coin struck from 45.6, indicating that obverse die 45.6 followed 45.5. The internal arrangement of issue 45, and the placement of issues 43 and 44, are determined by this observation.
Phaselis, League Coinage 6 coins, 3 obv. dies, 5 rev. dies
46. Rev. ΦΑ.
Phaselis, Pseudo-League Coinage (without ΛΥΚΙΩΝ)
54 coins, 32–33 obv. dies, 46–47 rev. dies
47. Rev. ΦΑΣΗΛΙ; to l. or r., Isis crown; to l. or r., torch (see also issue 58).
46.3 broke down badly in the course of its use; examples showing three stages of deterioration are illustrated.
47.1 = 42.1 (Olympus). It is not clear which city's coins were struck first.
Phaselis's pseudo-League issue 47 has been arranged internally chiefly on the basis of decreasing torch size. Decreasing size is what one would expect in any case; and, on the reverses used with 47.21 on, the torch is very small and invariably placed to the right, as in Series 2. That the coins placed first are indeed the earliest is confirmed by the similarity of 47.1 and 47.2 to 46.1; and of 47.3–47.9 to Olympus's 42.2–42.3, these two groups succeeding the jointly used obverse die 42.1 = 47.1—for the jointly used die is most understandable as the introductory die of the pseudo-League coinage at both mints.
Phaselis's single pseudo-League issue 47 parallels in its succession of obverse styles Olympus's four pseudo-League issues 42–45. Besides the similarities just mentioned, compare also Olympus's 44.1–45.5 with Phaselis's 47.19–47.26, and Olympus's 45.6–45.11 with Phaselis's 47.29–47.32.
Despite the variety of obverse styles, the pseudo-League series of both Olympus and Phaselis seem compact ones which cannot be spread over the whole period of Series 1. The two obverse styles of Olympus's issue 45 are reverse linked, as has been mentioned (the link between 45.5 and 45.6). Phaselis's 47.13 and 47.14, also of very different obverse styles, are also reverse linked; and although Phaselis's obverses 47.27 and 47.28 resemble 47.11–47.15 to a considerable extent, the reverses used with 47.27 and 47.28 are virtually identical to those used with 47.22–47.26.
Further, the wide range of weights in the pseudo-League issues, especially at Phaselis, may indicate hasty striking. The weights of the five Kemer Hoard pieces, all in superb condition, from the single obverse die 47.32 are 3.64, 3.32, 2.67, 2.48, and 2.05, the heaviest coin almost 80 percent heavier than the lightest.
More material would almost certainly show an even tighter internal structure for these pseudo-League series. This is in complete contrast to the almost invariably isolated issues of true League coinage at the other mints of Series 1.
The east coast of Lycia, separated by the high Solyma mountains from Lycia proper, was in the period before the League not truly Lycian. No remains of the classical Lycian culture are found there; and the early coinage of Phaselis bore no relation to that of Lycia. Phaselis was assessed separately from "the Lycians and their allies" in the fifth-century Athenian tribute lists, and in the fourth century the city was allied with Mausolus of Caria against the rest of Lycia. Even early in the second century Phaselis seems to have sided with Rome against Antiochus III, with whom the rest of Lycia was allied. 124 Bean has suggested that Phaselis, originally a Rhodian colony, was first associated with Lycia when Lycia fell under Rhodian domination after Apameia. 125 But it is perhaps unlikely that Rome would have accorded an ally the harsh treatment received from Rhodes by the rest of Lycia; and other evidence suggests that Phaselis remained politically separate from Lycia for much of the second century.
Phaselis's coinage with Alexander's types, roughly contemporary with those of Perge and Aspendus, also reflects a Pamphylian rather than a Lycian orientation, at least until Apamea. According to the most recent dating, Phaselis's Alexanders ended in 189/8 b.c., and her flat-flan Persian-weight staters may have been struck even later. 126
And aside from the coins (for, as will be seen below, Phaselis's League coinage seems to have commenced only late in the second century), three other bits of evidence suggest that Phaselis was not a League member until the latter part of the century. One of the groups of inscriptions mentioned above bearing federal ethnics and dated to ca. 180 b.c., during the Rhodian occupation, included in the same catalogue a Λύϰιος ἀπὸ Πατάϱων, a Λύϰιος ἀπὸ ᾽Αντιφέλλου, and a Φασηλίτης; a reasonable deduction is that Phaselis was not yet a League member. 127 Countermarked tetradrachms of Side have also been mentioned above. Most of these are countermarked by the cistophoric mints, and it is presumed that this was done at the time of the introduction of the cistophoroi, perhaps 167/6 b.c. Two tetradrachms, however, bear a lyre between the letters Α and Ν, a counterstamp interpreted as that of the League member Antiphellus; and another Sidetan tetra- drachm has a Phaselitan countermark of prow and Φ. 128 Whether these countermarks were applied ca. 167 as were those of the cistophoric mints, or somewhat later, the disparity between Antiphellus's and Phaselis's countermarks suggests different political affiliations, i.e. that Phaselis was then independent. Finally, from the first book of Maccabees comes a report of a Roman letter on behalf of the Jews which was sent in 138 b.c. to "many kings and countries." 129 Among these countries are both Lycia and Phaselis. An official Roman letter to the Lycian League would surely have reached all League members; a separate letter to Phaselis almost certainly implies that at least as late as 138 b.c. Phaselis was still independent.
Phaselis's smaller neighbor to the south, Olympus, is not mentioned in any of the literary sources before the period of the League. Its League coinage is the earliest evidence, other than the remains on the site, for the city. Olympus is generally considered a Hellenistic foundation, probably dating from the late fourth or very early third century. 130 Its overland access to Lycia proper was (and is) far easier than Phaselis's, and it is thus quite possible that it was a League member well before Phaselis.
The parallelism between the coinages of Olympus and Phaselis has often been disregarded or unrecognized, because of Strabo's statement that Olympus was a League member and Phaselis was not. The BMC, for example, calls a pseudo-League drachm of Olympus "League coinage," and pseudo-League drachms of Phaselis, coins with "types of the Lycian League." 131 But the two cities' strikings are parallel throughout. Thanks to the Kemer Hoard, we now know that both cities produced small emissions of true League coins. The bulk of the coinage of both cities, however, was coins of the type here termed pseudo-League, since they omit the federal ethnic. On this pseudo-League coinage the six letters of the federal ethnic, ΛΥΚΙΩΝ, have been replaced by the first six letters of the municipal ethnics, ΟΛΥΜΠΗ(ΝΩΝ) or ΦΑΣΗΛΙ(ΤΩΝ); and the glaring empty spaces to either side of the cithara, where the two mint initials had been, were then filled with two symbols (these are the only coins of Period II to bear two symbols). The pseudo-League coins of both cities are completely analogous and must be understood together.
The shared die which initiates both series attests the synchronism of the start of the two cities' pseudo-League coinage. In the case of the shared dies of Xanthus and its neighbors, and of Limyra and Gagae, the explanation seems to be that one city struck in addition to its own the insignificant League coinage of its neighbor or neighbors. The case of Olympus and Phaselis requires a different explanation. Both cities had large pseudo-League coinages, the largest two series in all of Period II. Although these two long series of strikings exhibit a similar succession of obverse styles, the resemblances are not so great that one would expect to find actual die links between them even were more material available. The two series almost certainly were struck at the two cities, and in this case the shared die must have been a traveling one, sent from one city to the other (presumably also with a reverse die, unusable in the second city) as the simplest way of communicating the format of the new pseudo-League coinage.
The pseudo-League coinage continued in Series 2 and 3. During the whole of Period II, Olympus employed six symbols on its pseudo-League coinage, and Phaselis four; of these, three were common to both mints. 132 The progression of styles in Series 1 was, as we have seen, parallel at the two mints, and their obverses became even more similar in Series 2. The pseudo-League coinages reflect the obvious close political relationship of the two cities when this coinage was struck. What the nature of that relationship was will be seen below.
Imitations of Pseudo-League Coinage, Mint(s) Uncertain
2 coins, 2 obv. dies, 2 rev. dies
48. Rev. ΟΛΥΜΠΗ; to l., Isis crown (?); to r., torch (?).
The coin is struck over an old style Rhodian drachm. When the coin is rotated a quarter turn counter-clockwise, the outline of the rose can be seen on the reverse with the letters Ρ and Ο closely bracketing the stem. This is the placement of the ethnic only on the old style drachms; the Ρ and Ο on the plinthophoroi are higher and farther apart.
49. Rev. ΦΑΣΗΛΙ (traces only); to l., helmet; to r., branch.
Although little of the ethnic remains, there can be seen at the left a low vertical stroke, presumably the remains of a Φ; and to the right the lower portions of one vertical and two slanting strokes that correspond exactly to the lower portions of ΗΛ.
Issues 48 and 49 appear to be imitations. Their obverse styles are quite peculiar; and while the coin of issue 48 (the only overstruck League drachm known) combines Olympus's name with Phaselis's symbols, the coin of issue 49 does precisely the reverse. It is tempting to speculate that these two coins were struck east of Lycia by Cilician pirates or their Pamphylian allies. The Rhodian coin would have provided a convenient flan for a novice striker.
|121||Gordian , p. 52; and private communication from a dealer who saw a lot of 30 to 35 coins before it was dispersed without record. Only two, if any, of the seven recorded Rhodiapolis hoard coins can have come from this lot.|
|122||See below, pp. 87–95.|
|123||See commentary on Rhodiapolis at the end of Period III.|
|124||Livy 37.22–24. The island of Megiste, off the southern coast and site of a Rhodian colony, was also on the Roman side. On Phaselis's affiliations prior to the period of the League, see Jameson, pp. 268–70.|
|125||TSS, pp. 155–56.|
|126||O. Mørkholm, "The Era of the Pamphylian Alexanders," ANSMN 23 (1978), pp. 69–75. The Persian-weight coins referred to are as BMC 14.|
|127||T. Klee, Zur. Gesch. d. Gymn. Agone an griech.-Festen (Leipzig-Berlin, 1918) pp. 4 ff, as cited in Moretti, p. 214, n. 27. On the significance of the various types of ethnic see above, pp. 12–13.|
|128||See p. 26 and n. 63. The Phaselitan countermark is published in Mowat, p. 202, 31.|
|129||I Maccabees 15, 16–24.|
|130||In TSS, p. 177, Bean notes at Olympus good coursed polygonal masonry of early Hellenistic type, and suggests that the city cannot have been founded much after 300 b.c. Cicero also describes Olympus, perhaps with some exaggeration, as an "ancient city": Verres 2.1.56.|
|131||BMC Olympus 1, Phaselis 16–17.|
|132||Common symbols: torch, branch, fulmen. The Isis crown is also found both on Olympus's true League coinage and Phaselis's pseudo-League coins, but this is not significant as the coins were probably separated in time and the symbol was a widely used one.|
Obv. Laureate head of Apollo r.; behind shoulder, occasionally, bow and quiver.
Rev. Cithara in shallow incuse square.
Limyra 10 coins, 7 obv. dies, 8 rev. dies
50. Rev. ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ ΛΙ (see also issues 37, 38, and 56).
Obverse styles, with the hair falling in ill-defined locks, differ somewhat from the late obverses of Limyra of Series 1. Yet there are strong similarities: the profiles, the division of the hair in the middle of the crown, and the low relief of the dies.
None of Limyra's Series 2 coins bears a fulmen on the reverse, as do some of her late coins of Series 1 and some of hers of Series 3.
Olympus, Pseudo-League Coinage (without ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ)
18 coins, 11 obv. dies, 15 rev. dies
51. Rev. ΟΛΥΜΠΗ (51.2a), ΟΛΥΜΠ (51.1a–c, 51.2c-51.4a), ΟΛΥΜ (51.1d, 51.5a–51.7a), or incompletely preserved ethnic (51.2b); torch; and sword behind shield.
52. Rev. ΟΛΥΜΠΗ (52.1a), ΟΛΥΜΠ (52.2a), or ΟΛΥΜ (52.1b, 52.3a, 52.4a); fulmen; and branch.
Olympus's Series 2 coins are of different issues, i.e. with different symbol pairs, from those of Series 1. The invariable six-letter ethnic of Series 1 now usually has only five or even four letters.
Phaselis, Pseudo-League Coinage (without ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ)
13 coins, 12 obv. dies, 13 rev. dies
53. Rev. ΦΑΣΗΛΙ, fulmen, and torch.
54. Rev. ΦΑΣΗΛΙ and branch.
The coin struck from 54.2 has been placed in issue 54 as it bears no symbol to the left, and seems to have a branch to the right. The ethnic is, however, quite illegible.
Obv. Laureate head of Apollo r.; behind shoulder, occasionally, bow and quiver.
Rev. Cithara in shallow incuse square.
Cyaneae 4 coins, 4 obv. dies, 4 rev. dies
55. Rev. ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ ΚΥ.
55.1 = 56.1 (Limyra). It is not clear which city's coins were struck first.
Cyaneae had no coins of Series 2. Issue 56 is differentiated from Cyaneae's coins of Series 1 by its poor style and very low relief, by its lack of symbols, by its absence from the Kemer Hoard, and, of course, most importantly, by its low weight. It is further firmly associated with Limyra's Series 3 coins by the die link most fortunately produced by our meager material.
Limyra 10 coins, 7 obv. dies, 9 rev. dies
56. Rev. ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ ΛΙ; and winged fulmen on 56.3a-b, 56.5a, and 56.6a (see also issues 37, 38, and 50).
56.1 = 55.1 (Cyaneae). It is not clear which city's coins were struck first.
Limyra's Series 3 obverses are of a variety of styles, all crude and uncertain, but none similar to the city's Series 2 obverses. Some of the Series 3 reverses bear a fulmen, as do some of those of the large issue 38 in Series 1; but none of the coins of issue 50 in Series 2 have the fulmen.
Olympus, Pseudo-League Coinage (without ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ)
4 coins, 4 obv. dies, 4 rev. dies
57. Rev. ΟΛΥΜΠ (57.1a–57.2a) or ΟΛΥΜ (57.3a–57.4a); branch; and torch (?).
Issue 57's reverses have only five or four letters in the ethnic, continuing the trend towards abbreviation commenced in Series 2. The workmanship on this issue is crude in the extreme, even the identification of the symbols being doubtful.
Phaselis, Pseudo-League Coinage (without ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ) 1 coin
58. Rev. ΦΑΣΗΛΙ, Isis crown, and torch (see also issue 47).
This coin, although bearing the symbols of issue 47 above, has been assigned here for three reasons. The first, of course, is the low weight. The second is the obverse style, unlike any in issue 47 but not dissimilar, so far as can be told from the coin's mutilated condition, to a number of other obverses of Series 3. The third consideration is the presence of the countermark.
The countermark on Phaselis's issue 58 is clearly a mark applied at home, in Lycia, for the type is that of many later issues of the League. Seven examples of this countermark appear on coins of Period II, and their distribution provides a final confirmation of the division here presented into Series 1, 2, and 3. The 255 coins of Series 1 furnish 2 examples, one of which falls at the very end of Series 1; the 41 coins of Series 2 furnish 3; and the 19 coins of Series 3 furnish 2. 133 The countermarks, increasingly concentrated towards the end of Period II, indicate that a fundamental change must have taken place in the League's coinage at some point after the conclusion of Period II. This change clearly was the introduction of the district coinage. 134
The present author must confess to some difficulty in accepting that a countermark would be applied in order not to increase but to decrease a coin's value, for the district coins, to which the civic coins of Period II were apparently being made equivalent, were lighter. One would expect that the earlier coins would have been melted and restruck in order to gain the extra silver. But perhaps the difference was not worth the effort involved. In any case, there are other instances of countermarking making heavier coins equivalent to lighter ones, the most noteworthy being perhaps the tetradrachms of Side countermarked by the cistophoric mints. The explanation of this would seem to be that the countermarks were applied by overworked mints just as the cistophoroi were introduced, and that in Attalid territory the two denominations were decreed to be equivalent. 135
|133||Series 1: coins struck from Myra 29.1, Limyra 38.15. Series 2: coins struck from Limyra 50.6, Olympus 52.4, Phaselis 53.10. Series 3: coins struck from Limyra 56.7, Phaselis 58.1. This countermark appears on no other Lycian League coins and on no other ancient coins, to my knowledge; and no other countermarks appear on any other Lycian League coins.|
|134||Coins of Series 3 (see Figure 6, p. 96) have the same weight range as do the silver district coins of Period IV, but Series 3 is indistinguishable in its format from the heavier coins of Series 1 and 2 and as a practical matter would have had to be countermarked along with them. Even aside from the weights, it is of course quite possible that all previous issues required revalidation when the district coinage was introduced.|
Despite the several die links found between cities in Period II, obverse links between issues of any one city are completely lacking. Few issues of any city have strong stylistic resemblances to any other of the same city, showing that the absence of die links is not due to chance, but that the League coinage was a sporadic one, produced in isolated bursts.
Only style, then, the least reliable criterion for arrangement, can serve as a guide for ordering Series 1. Series 2 and 3, of course, clearly follow Series 1, as shown by the declining weights; the diminished numbers of Series 2 in the Kemer Hoard, and the complete absence there of Series 3; the abbreviation of the ethnic on Olympus's coins of Series 2 and 3; and the increasing frequency of the quiver countermark towards the end of Period II. But with one or two exceptions, the suggested order of issues in Series 1 must be regarded as highly tentative and a bit arbitrary.
One exception is the issues struck from obverse dies with Apollo's hair rolled back from the forehead in a neat roll which continues into a chignon at the back, with two tightly curled ringlets falling down the neck, sometimes parallel but more often arranged in an inverted V. These obverses, hereafter termed "ringlet" obverses, seem for several reasons to come at or near the end of Series 1. They are found at seven mints: Xanthus, Tlos, Patara, Myra, Limyra, Olympus (pseudo-League only), and Phaselis (true League and pseudo-League). 136 Limyra has by far the largest output of this style of obverse in Series 1, and it is Limyra alone whose true League coinage continues together with the pseudo-League coinages in Series 2—and it is in Series 2 that the ringlet obverses become the dominant style. And only on reverses coupled with ringlet obverses can be found an occasional change in format, seemingly minor but significant: mint initials placed not in the center of the sides of the incuse square but at the bottom. These dropped initials, found at six of the seven mints using the ringlet obverses, 137 continue as the usual placement in Series 2 on Limyra's coins (the only ones in Series 2 with mint initials). Dropped initials continue through Period III, and are found also at the beginning of the silver coinage of Period IV.
Perhaps preceding the ringlet style fairly closely is another type of obverse, with hair falling loosely and almost vertically over the ears and neck in lightly waved parallel strands, and characterized by an unusual arrangement of locks at the forehead. The lock second from the top, instead of curling forward or backward in the usual loop, is pulled straight back, apparently caught under the wreath. This style, found only at Myra and Phellus in the true League coinage, is echoed in both the pseudo-League coinages, 138 once linked by a reverse die to a ringlet obverse. Further, of the two reverses known that bear one dropped initial, one is found with an obverse of this style and one with a ringlet obverse. 139
To turn to the beginning of Period II: as the kitharephoroi imitated the Rhodian plinthophoroi, it is understandable that the League obverse dies which seem to come first are clearly derivative of the plinthophoroi. At Xanthus (and at its neighbors for whom it struck, Sidyma, Pinara, and Cadyanda), Patara, Cyaneae, Myra (and its neighbors for whom it probably struck, Aperlae and Trebendae), and Olympus are found dies which are virtually indistinguishable, although used across the entire country. 140 These dies are closer than any others to the Helios head of the plinthophoroi: they show heads in fairly high relief, with strong features, and loosely waved hair arranged at the brow and side of the head in short locks, waving alternately backward and forward. This style will be termed "proto-Rhodian." Almost certainly it was used for the earliest coins of Period II. Many other Lycian obverses continue this general style, some with marked success. 141 Some are less successful, 142 most of them having a decidedly feminine cast, and will be referred to as "weak Rhodian."
Thus the "proto-Rhodian" coins seem to be the earliest in Series 1, and the "ringlet" coins the latest or nearly the latest, but the order of all the other styles is almost completely conjectural. The interesting problem, however, is the placement of the pseudo-League issues relative to the true League issues of the same and other mints. Olympia's scant true League coinage (one obverse die only) is of good "proto-Rhodian" style and would seem to have been struck early in Series 1. Phaselis's true League coinage would seem to have been struck later: two of its dies are of the late "ringlet" style, and the other of "weak Rhodian" style, and the reverse found with the latter seems to have the low placed initials characteristic of late Series 1. 143 And at both Olympus and Phaselis, the pseudo-League coinages, which alone continue in Series 2 and 3, would clearly seem to follow those cities' true League coinages.
An effort has been made above to show that the pseudo-League coinages were compact ones, struck over a relatively short period of time despite their variety of obverse styles. 144 Most of the pseudo-League obverses seem poor imitations of true League coins of other mints. The die which initiates both pseudo-League series is a typical example of weak Rhodian style, very close to one in Phaselis's small true League coinage; 145 but the dies which follow it at Olympus and the similar ones placed immediately after it at Phaselis are increasingly weak copies with increasingly fussy detail and flat relief. Other dies seem to reflect certain dies of Phellus and Myra. 146 And even the ringlet dies of the pseudo-League series differ from those of the true League coins. While the pseudo-League ringlet dies of Olympus are similar to one attractive but atypical die at Limyra, 147 the bulk of the pseudo-League ringlet dies at Phaselis are of indifferent quality and differ from nearly all true League dies, even those of Phaselis itself, in the prominence of the chignon and in its unbroken connection with the roll of hair starting at the forehead. 148 At both Olympus and Phaselis, this particular variety of the ringlet obverse, with the roll of hair from the brow reaching directly to and merging smoothly with the chignon, continues as the only coiffure found in Series 2.
The arrangement suggested, with all of Phaselis's pseudo-League coinage placed after its true League coinage, may well not be quite correct. The two may have been parallel to some degree, with the true League 46.1 contemporary with the earliest pseudo-League strikings at both Olympus and Phaselis. The bulk of the pseudo-League coinages, how- ever, would appear to have been struck late in Series 1, continuing through Series 2 and 3. A historical explanation for this will be suggested in the next section.
|135||See BMCLycia, pp. lxxxiii-lxxxiv, and Mowat, pp. 189–207. I owe this interpretation of the cistophoric mints' countermarks to a patient explanation by M. J. Price. See also H. Seyrig, "Monnaies hellénistiques," RN 1963, p. 26, and F. S. Kleiner, "The Dated Cistophori of Ephesus," ANSMN 18 (1972), pp. 31–32.|
|136||Xanthus 5.11–5.14, Tlos 12.2–13.1, Patara 19.2–20.4, Myra 35.1–35.2, Limyra 38.1–38.15, Olympus 43.1–45.5 (pseudo-League), and Phaselis 46.2–46.3 (true League) and 47.19–47.26 (pseudo-League). Perhaps with these should be classed Xanthus 5.8, Antiphellus 23.1, Cyaneae 26.1–26.4, and Myra 35.3–35.5, with hair rolled at the forehead as on the "ringlet" dies, but with two loosely waving locks instead of ringlets falling over the neck.|
|137||Reverses found with Xanthus 5.14, Tlos 13.1, Myra 35.3–35.5, Limyra 38.9–38.15, Olympus 43.1 (monograms rather than mint initials), and Phaselis 46.3 (the last coin listed), and perhaps also 46.1 (an obverse of different style).|
|138||Phellus 22.1, Myra 34.1–34.4, Olympus 45.6–45.11, and Phaselis 47.11–47.13.|
|139||Myra 34.4, Xanthus 5.13.|
|140||E.g. Xanthus 5.1 = Sidyma 6.1, and 5.2 = Cadyanda 8.1; Pinara 7.2; Patara 14.1–14.2; Cyaneae 24.1; Aperlae 23A.1 = Trebendae 27.1; Myra 28.1–29.4; and Olympus 41.1. Of the eleven issues here, six use no symbol (the five western ones and Myra's 28), one uses a grape cluster (Cyaneae's), and four use the Isis crown (Aperlae's, Trebendae's, Myra's 29, and Olympus's). Such stylistic affinities coupled with the use of the same symbol, or lack of symbol, are not found elsewhere in the true League coinage.|
|141||E.g. Tlos 11.1–11.2, Phellus 21.1–21.2, Cyaneae 25.1, and Limyra 36.1.|
|142||E.g. Xanthus 5.6; Limyra 36.2 = Gagae 39.1; Rhodiapolis 40.1–40.2; Olympus 42.1 = Phaselis 47.1, and 42.2–42.3; Phaselis 46.1 and 47.2–47.13.|
|144||See commentary on Olympus and Phaselis following issue 47.|
|145||Olympus 42.1 = Phaselis 47.1. The die is very close to Phaselis's true-League 46.1.|
|146||Compare Olympus 45.6–45.11 with Phellus 22.1 and Myra 34.1–34.4.|
|147||Compare Olympus 44.1–45.5 with Limyra 38.1.|
The end of the Lycian League's Period II coinage is here associated with the period of the first Mithradatic War, but the start of the coinage cannot be dated with any precision. The chronology suggested rests entirely on the unpublished work of G. K. Jenkins on the Rhodian plinthophoroi. Nearly one thousand plinthophoric drachms and hemidrachms from the Marmaris 1945 Hoard ( IGCH 1355) have been subjected to a die study by Jenkins and found to fall into two main periods, the first of which can be further subdivided into three groups, and the second into two more groups. To these last two can be added a sixth group not present in the Marmaris 1945 Hoard. An extremely tentative chronology can be worked out for these six groups of Rhodian plinthophoroi, and the only dating possible at the present time for the Lycian League coins of Period II depends on their associations with the Rhodian coins. One hopes that Mr. Jenkins will himself publish, in at least summary form, the results of his painstaking die study of the important plinthophoric coinage. 149 I am extremely grateful to him for so generously allowing his work to be used here.
The traditional view has been that the plinthophoroi started only after 167 b.c., 150 but L. Robert has shown from inscriptional evidence that they started even earlier: definitely by 169, when they appear in the Delian inventories; and probably in the 170s, as a treaty seemingly dated to 173/2 b.c. calls for payment in "old style" drachms. It is therefore quite possible, Robert believes, that they commenced soon after Apameia in the 180s b.c. 151 Even if struck this early, however, it is clear that the plinthophoroi did not circulate widely at first. The complete absence of plinthophoric Rhodian coins in northern Greece down to 167 b.c. is well known: Hackens remarks, "Tout se passe comme si l'étalon lourde [of the plinthophoroi] était resté propre à Rhodes même, la circulation de ces monnaies au loin était peut-être rendu difficile, avant 166, par l'existence de monnaies légères, que les Rhodiens dépensaient à l'étranger, en retenant pour eux les drachmes lourdes." 152 And Robert's treaty of 173/2, from Asia Minor, be it noted, specified payment in old style drachms.
Jenkins's work has permitted the identification of the earliest plinthophoroi. To avoid confusion with the Lycian League's periods, the Rhodian issues will be called "Groups," and designated by letters. Groups A, B, and C form the first main period. Group A, drachms only, was struck in the names of 25 magistrates, nine of whom appear also on the Rhodian old style coinage, and four of these nine also on the Rhodian Alexander coinage, recently dated to ca. 202–188 b.c. 153 It must be Group A which occurs in the inscriptions, and its tight die linkage indicates a concentrated period of minting. It could well all have been struck before 167 b.c.
Group B, drachms and hemidrachms, and Group C, again drachms only, are easily distinguished from A by obverse style: the heads are larger, with shorter and more crisply waved hair. 154 There is a limited amount of die linkage within each of these two groups, but none between them, or between them and Group A. The high frequency of name repetition among the three groups A, B, and C strongly indicates that all must have been struck within a few decades at most, perhaps by 150 at the latest. 155
A considerable gap may be assumed between Jenkins's Groups A-C and D, for of the 26 names in D, only two are found among the 33 of A-C, no more than chance might provide between two such large groups of names. Group D and a small group, perhaps a mere sub-group, here called D′, are the latest groups contained in the Marmaris 1945 Hoard. Group D includes a small number of drachms, a great mass of hemidrachms "die-linked into one monstrous group in such a way as to make the sequence just as speculative as it would be without any links at all," 156 and the plinthophoric gold issues. 157 The latest hoard group D′ was struck by two men only, Neon (drachms and hemidrachms) and Peritas (drachms only). Peritas continues from Group D, where he had struck gold fractions with the same symbol (coiled serpent) which he employed on his drachms of D′.
Not represented in the Marmaris Hoard is a final group of Rhodian drachms and hemidrachms, Group E. These are of debased style and careless execution, with flat relief, and are of distinctly lighter weight than Groups A-D. 158 Group D′ would also seem to have been of debased weight, although the number of weights known for this small group is very small. 159
D and D′ are thus connected by Peritas and his serpent, and D′ and E by reduced weight; two of E's eleven names are also found in D. 160 Changes in the reverse format also unite the three groups. The gold of Group D introduces more than one tendril at the base of the stem, and sepals now fringed on both sides (rather than one as heretofore) and extending to the bottom of the flower; these changes occur occasionally on D's silver, and become usual in D′ and E. The initials ΡΟ are invariably at the center of the sides of the incuse square in Groups A-C. One example of a drachm with one initial dropped to the bottom of the square has been found among the rather rare drachms of Group D, but coins with both initials placed at the bottom of the square are common in D′ and E. A final indication that D′ and E were close in time is furnished by a small hoard seen at a London dealer's in late 1974: it contained only drachms of D′ and E. 161
Jenkins considered that the obverses of D′ resembled the portraits of Mithradates VI of Pontus, and this resemblance formed the basis of his dating of the Marmaris 1945 Hoard to ca. 100–90 b.c. Group E's heads also resemble the later, romanticized portraits of Mithradates with flowing hair, first issued in quantity after his invasion of Asia Minor in 88 b.c. 162 The unruly hair, the heads tilted back, and the upturned eyes of the Rhodian pieces all recall the Mithradatic portraits. These resemblances are a slim peg indeed on which to hang the suggested dating of the latest plinthophoroi, but in the total absence of helpful mixed hoards or other hard evidence it is unfortunately the only indication available at the present time. A date during Mithradates's invasion of 88–84 b.c. would satisfactorily explain, however, the last plinthophoroi's obviously hasty production, as shown in their debased style and careless striking, and their reduced weight standard. "Standard" is too precise a word, perhaps, for their weights do not peak; perhaps "weight range" is a more accurate description of the scattered weights the coins exhibit—yet another probable indication of hasty striking.
Perhaps all of Groups D, D′, and E cannot be fitted into the years of the First Mithradatic War, although the three groups would seem to have been close in time. Even though Rhodes sided with Rome against Mithradates, it is tempting to explain her plinthophoric coinage in gold as produced by the same exigencies which led to the equally isolated gold issues of Ephesus, Priene, and other southwestern Asia Minor mints at the time of the Mithradatic invasion.
To recapitulate: the Rhodian plinthophoric coinage commenced in the 170s or perhaps the 180s b.c., the first period of minting lasting at most a few decades. The second minting period ended during or shortly after the First Mithradatic War of 88–84 b.c., and cannot have started too long if at all before that conflict. Considerable time separated the two periods of coinage.
The significance of this for the Lycian League is that the reduced weight of Lycian Period II Series 2 is precisely that of Rhodian Group E (see Figure 5). Further, in both Group E and Series 2 dropped mint initials become common, after their introduction and infrequent use in immediately preceding issues. Both Group E and Series 2 are poorly and evidently hastily executed coinages, and they are probably contemporary with each other and reflect the crisis of Mithradates's invasion. Further, it will be argued below that historical considerations peculiar to Olympus and Phaselis strongly suggest that these two cities' pseudo-League coinages fell between ca. 100 and 77 b.c.; as these pseudo-League coinages started in late Series 1 and continued through Series 2 and 3, the attribution of Series 2 to 88–84 b.c. seems almost inevitable.
The Kemer 1970 Hoard, with its latest coins those of Series 2, would then have been buried during the Mithradatic invasion. It is possible that the Marmaris 1945 Hoard, too, should be dated a bit later than 100–90 b.c.
The start of the Lycian League silver coinage cannot, however, be dated with any assurance. What are probably its earliest issues, those of "proto-Rhodian" style, 163 would seem not to have Rhodian Group A as their model, being far closer in general appearance to Rhodian Groups B, C, and even D. All that the elimination of Group A tells us, however, is that the Lycian silver coins probably did not antedate ca. 167 b.c., which in any case would have been extremely unlikely on historical grounds, Lycia having been before that year under Rhodian dominion. The great variety of styles and issues in Series 1 suggests that the coinage lasted at least some decades—but did it start fairly promptly after 167 or later in the century? There is no answer, at least from the coins.
There is no answer from the history of the area, either. Asia Minor enjoyed a period of relative peace and prosperity between 167 b.c. and the coming of Mithradates in the next century. The only major interruption was the revolt of Aristonicus in 133–129 b.c., and in this Lycia seems to have taken no part. Her Period II silver must then have been largely struck for local purposes; presumably the federal troops were paid in it. Internal disturbances and border skirmishes such as are described in the Araxa inscription may well have continued, and as the second century wore on the League no doubt had to defend its coastal cities against the growing threat of piracy. But we have no details of specific conflicts of any kind, and no firm indications as to when in the second century the Lycian League silver commenced.
Mithradates burst upon southwestern Asia Minor in the spring of 88 b.c., taking first Phrygia, Mysia, and "those parts of Asia lately acquired by the Romans," and "sending to the lands round about he reduced (ὑπηγάγετο) Lycia and Pamphylia and the country as far as Ionia." 164 Then, after seizing or being welcomed in many of the cities of Ionia and Caria, he sent his generals to besiege, among others, "the Lycians who were still resisting (Λυϰίοις ἔτι ἀντέχουσι)." 165 Late in the year, while Rhodes was withstanding his siege, "some Lycians and Telmessians fought together with the Rhodians (τινες ἀυτοῖς Τελμισέων τε ϰαὶ Λυϰίων συνέμαχουν.) 166 And during this siege, a group of Rhodian ships attacked a number of Mithradates's vessels at sea and pursued those they did not sink to Lycia, 167 which seems to imply that some part at least of Lycia was by then under the Pontic king's control. But this part did not include the important port of Patara, which had been of such use to Antiochus III; for on relinquishing his unsuccessful siege of Rhodes, Mithradates sailed to Lycia, besieged Patara, and commenced to cut timber for siege machines from a grove sacred to Leto (presumably at the Letoön, between Patara and Xanthus). Warned in a dream, he left his general Pelopidas to continue the war against the Lycians, and he himself retired to the Province of Asia. 168 Whether Patara fell we do not know, nor does the literature give us any other details whatever of the extent or success of Mithradates's attempts on Lycia and Pamphylia.
In 86 b.c. the Roman Lucullus collected a fleet from various Asiatic communities to attempt to win back Cos and Cnidus. As Attaleia in Pamphylia contributed to this fleet, it is assumed that any Pontic occupation of the Pamphylian plain was brief; but, as no mention is made of Lycia or Lycian cities, it can perhaps be inferred that Mithradates met there with greater success. 169
In any case, at the end of the First Mithradatic War, Lycia was among the states of southwestern Asia Minor on whom freedom was bestowed (or whose freedom was confirmed) by Sulla, "either for the help they had provided during the war, or because of what they had suffered owing to their friendship towards him." 170 These states in the southwest included Rhodes, Cos, Stratoniceia, little Tabae, and Lycia. 171 These communities were all within the Rhodian commercial sphere. It is worth noting that Rhodes, Cos, Stratoniceia, and Lycia were the major issuers of plinthophoric-style Rhodian-weight coins in the period between Apameia and Mithradates. 172
Another historical development which seems to bear directly on the Lycian League coinage is the development of piracy in the eastern Mediterranean during the second and early first centuries, for at some time before 77 b.c. Olympus and Phaselis had joined forces with the Cilician pirates. 173 Rhodes had been seriously weakened by Rome in 167 b.c., and was thereafter increasingly unable to perform her old function, as the strongest naval power in the area, of policing the seas. By the third quarter of the second century, Cilicia Tracheia, by then nearly free of external control, became a base of operations for the Syrian pretenders Alexander Balas and Tryphon; when these two fell, they were succeeded by independent entrepreneurs, the pirates. These attacked not only shipping but also land settlements, plundering and looting and doing, furthermore, an enormous business in selling their captives into slavery. Side among other cities entered into alliance with them: the pirates used Pamphylian harbor facilities at will, and Side's market came to handle slaves in a quantity second only to those sold at Delos.
Rome first moved against the pirates in 102 b.c., sending out a force under M. Antonius, grandfather of the triumvir. He defeated the pirates in a naval campaign, but gained no land victories or annexations, and his expedition seems to have had little effect. A Roman law generally attributed to 101/100 b.c. asks free peoples and rulers in alliance with Rome to oppose the pirates and to refuse them shelter, but there is no suggestion of renewed military action. 174 Then in 88 came Mithradates, postponing for some years any further action. It is generally agreed that the disruptions and hardships produced by the Pontic invasion would inevitably have greatly increased the pirates' power, both through added recruits and weakened defenses.
At the end of the First Mithradatic War, Sulla's lieutenant Murena conquered the Moagetid dynasty of Cibyra, north of the Xanthus valley, and added several of its cities to the League; this annexation is interpreted as motivated by Rome's need for easy access to the Pamphylian Gulf in order to continue the campaign against the pirates.
The next mention of Lycia itself is of, most probably, 80/79 b.c. Cicero mentions Lycia among the areas plundered by Verres as legate of Dolabella, 175 governor in that year of the new Province of Cilicia (doubly a misnomer as it included not Cilicia but Pamphylia and neighboring areas, and was a sphere of operations rather than a firmly held province). As the Lycian League could hardly have been subject to the governor of Cilicia, Jones has suggested, I think rightly, that "Lycia" here must refer to the east coast only, to the cities of Olympus and Phaselis, which by then had withdrawn from the League. 176
This departure from the League would seem to be connected with these two cities' pseudo-League coinages, although there is little certainty about either the date of the estrangement or the start of the pseudo-League coins. The circumstances of the withdrawal from the League, however, I believe have been generally misunderstood, and they are important for understanding the pseudo-League coinages.
It is necessary to work backwards from 77 b.c., when the events occurred of which the sources tell us. In that year
the Romans, starting a new campaign against the Cilician pirates, overthrew a pirate chieftain named Zenicetes. Strabo is the chief source:
Near the mountain ridges of the Taurus lies the piratical
stronghold of Zenicetes—I mean Olympus, both mountain and fortress… but when the mountain
was captured by Isauricus, Zenicetes burnt himself up with his whole house. To him belonged also Corycus and Phaselis and many places in Pamphylia; but
all were taken by Isauricus.
P. Servilius Vatia Isauricus, governor of the Province of Cilicia from 78 to 74, after defeating Zenicetes conquered Isauria, another center of brigandage, and thus opened up the northern side of Cilicia Tracheia to attack. But renewed hostilities with Mithradates prevented the Romans from pressing this advantage, and the final eradication of the pirates came only in 67 b.c., under Pompey.
Servilius's Lycian campaign is also mentioned in a number of other sources. 178 Florus states that a naval battle preceded the land attacks, and that Servilius captured the pirates' "strongest cities, full of plunder collected over a long period (validissimas urbes et diutina praeda abun- dantes)." 179 Cicero says that lands of Olympus, Phaselis, and Attaleia were made public lands by the Romans, 180 and it is generally assumed that Zenicetes's territory was incorporated by Servilius in the Province of Cilicia: Lycians from the eastern coast would then have been the Lycians mentioned by Cicero in his army in 57–56 b.c. when he was Cilicia's governor. 181
Olympus and Phaselis were evidently reduced rather thoroughly by Servilius. Pliny, drawing on an older source, says of Olympus's site, "a city was here (oppidum ibi fuit)"; 182 and Lucan describes Pompey, fleeing in 48 b.c. after Pharsalus, entering Phaselis:
Yet, on the other hand, Phaselis figures prominently in Brutus's letters to the Lycians in 42 b.c. 184 If the letters can be trusted, Phaselis would seem by then to have become once again a city both Lycian and of some consequence.
The evidence cited so far does not necessarily conflict with the usual view held today: that Zenicetes or a pirate predecessor had captured Olympus and Phaselis and other areas by force, and that the cities were oppressed and miserable under the pirates' rule. 185 Only the harsh treatment afforded Olympus and Phaselis by the Romans might make one question this view: if the cities had been forcibly conquered by the pirates and then liberated by Servilius, why were they not restored to the Lycian League, Rome's sure ally? Only recently, as has been noted, a large part of Cibyra had been ceded to the League.
But Cicero's Verrine orations, the oldest and most nearly contemporary source for Servilius's
campaigns, give quite a different picture of the cities' departure from the League. Speaking in ca. 70 b.c., with
Servilius himself sitting as one of the audience, Cicero says of the pirates:
They are the
general enemies of all mankind; but none the less there are some people of whom they make friends, not only sparing them but
with stolen wealth. They select, for this purpose, the inhabitants of conveniently situated towns, where it is often desirable
sometimes necessary for them to put in. Thus Phaselis, captured as you know by
Publius Servilius, was not originally a Cilician pirate town, but inhabited by Lycians, a Greek people. But since
its position on a projecting headland was such that the pirates had often to touch there on their outward journey from Cilicia, and land there again on their way back from our own part of the world, they entered into
trade relations with it in the first place, and later took it into partnership.
Cicero proceeds to speak of the corruption of Messana in Sicily, originally the home of honest men, which became "the Phaselis of this pirate [Verres]," and thereby waxed rich and prosperous. Cicero also contrasts Verres's private possession of Sicily's plundered treasures with Isauricus's proper action in turning over to the state the booty from Olympus, "an ancient city, full of riches and works of art." 187
The truth thus seems to have been that Olympus and Phaselis willingly cooperated with the Cilician pirates, and that during their alliance, commercial at first, then political, the two cities prospered greatly. Bean finds it surprising that the name of Zenicetes continued to be used in the region—but nothing could be more understandable. 188 It seems inescapable that the large, late pseudo-League coinages of these two cities, especially perhaps that of the otherwise insignificant Olympus, be associated with the two cities' prosperity under the pirates, a prosperity quite unconnected with the League. The pseudo-League coinages imitate the League's, the coin in current use, but do not bear the League's name because they were not struck under the League's aegis or for its purposes. And, has been noted above, the only two known imitations of League drachms do not copy true League coins but the pseudo-League coinages. 189 This is understandable if it was only the pseudo-League coinages which circulated outside of Lycia, and it may well be that the imitations were struck by other east coast Lycian, or Pamphylian, towns allied with the pirates or by groups of pirates themselves.
Precision about the exact dates or the political implications of the pseudo-League coinages is not to be had. It is of course always possible that Olympus and Phaselis, as did many other cities, struck two types of coins simultaneously, for different purposes and recipients. But the pseudo-League series does seem to follow the true League coinage at Phaselis; and Olympus's pseudo-League series is almost certainly later than that city's small true League output. Nor need the issuance of pseudo-League coinage necessarily indicate that the city striking it had ceased to be a member of the League: true League moneys may have been limited to actual League activities and the imitative coins intended for circulation outside of Lycia. Nonetheless, as we know the two cities had at some point turned to piracy, that Phaselis was not a member ca. 104–100, 190 and that apparently neither city was a member in 81 b.c., 191 it seems reasonable to associate the appearance of the pseudo-League coinages with the two cities' departure from the League.
When did this defection occur? The usual modern view of the cities as captured and oppressed by the pirates has, one hopes, been here refuted. The modern view also usually holds that Zenicetes' rise to power occurred not earlier than the First Mithradatic War, whose disturbances and dislocations increased the pirates' strength and numbers. But the combination of Florus's "diutina praeda" and Strabo's statement that Phaselis was not a League member ca. 104–100 b.c. leads to the supposition that Phaselis defected from the League in the last decade of the second century, to be followed shortly by Olympus. (Zenicetes's own overlordship need not, of course, have commenced this early.) Such a date, combined with the newly found prosperity of both cities, would offer a reasonable explanation of their large pseudo-League coinages, which then would have started ca. 100 b.c. Piracy, after all, had been increasing all through the second century; could its spread to Pamphylia and Phaselis have led to the Romans' first concerted action against it, the expedition of M. Antonius in 102 b.c.?
A number of inscriptions relate to the problems in the area, but none afford any reliable dating for Phaselis's and Olympus's withdrawals. A group of inscriptions honoring one Aechmon, an admiral of the League who defeated the League's "enemies" in a naval battle off the Chelidonean Islands, at the southeast corner of Lycia, and in three succeeding land battles, has in one place or another been ascribed to all the Roman expeditions against the pirates: M. Antonius in 102, Servilius Isauricus in 77, and Pompey in 67 b.c. 192 But it is quite unclear to which, if indeed any, of these campaigns the inscriptions refer, especially as they make no mention of Rome; and of course they do not state who the "enemies" were.
In the Roman law against piracy of 101/100 (?) mentioned above, an isolated fragment reads Π]αμφυλία ϰαί Λυ[ϰία?]. 193 The section seems to deal with extending the Province of Cilicia to these areas and may well indicate that they were then in league with the pirates. But the section is unfortunately quite mutilated, and the fragment's placement and interpretation uncertain.
Finally, an Athenian inscription honoring an Athenian admiral records the bestowal on him of wreaths by Athens, the Lycian League, and the cities of Cythnos, Phaselis, "Myra in Lycia," Side, and Celenderis. 194 The interpretation can only be that the admiral, whose name is lost, led an Athenian expedition against the pirates, most probably at Rome's request. The original publication and IG II2 date the inscription to Servilius's campaign of 77 b.c.—which is obviously quite impossible, as Phaselis was one of the cities reduced by Servilius. Nor does any date in the early first century seem likely, because of the inclusion of the pirate-dominated cities of Celenderis, and, especially Side. 195 The admiral also had gone as emissary to one Lucius Furius Crassopes. Equating this individual with another of the same name who may have been a functionary of some sort in Macedonia after the middle of the second century, Blinkenberg dated the inscription to the second half of the second century. 196 This would seem the most probable date. And, while it does not help in the question of when Phaselis left the League, it does help in the related question of just when Phaselis was a League member. It has been shown above from non-numismatic evidence that Phaselis was not a member before the 130s b.c.—and indeed, were it not for the ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΦΑ drachms of the Kemer Hoard, it would probably be argued here that Phaselis was never a member. Its mention separately from the League in the Athenian inscription cannot be taken as evidence that it was not a League member, for Myra is also named separately, although located in Lycia; presumably these two cities were more deeply involved than others with the Athenian expedition. But the inscription does at least furnish an occasion—virtually the only one known from any period before Imperial times—when Phaselis acted in concert with the rest of Lycia. A plausible time for this would be precisely the later second century b.c., when the pirates' power was first being felt in the areas bordering Cilicia. Neighboring cities may have resisted them at first, Phaselis quite possibly allying herself with the League for this purpose, but then after a while realizing that greater practical gains could be derived from cooperation with the enterprising pirates than from alliance with stay-at-home honest men. 197
If then we can suggest that Phaselis's League membership started only in the late second century b.c., and ended before ca. 104–100 b.c., this would be the period of the ringlet-obverse League dies, or at least of their introduction. 198 Only Limyra, whose dies of this style are so numerous, many of them of degraded style, would seem to have continued striking into the first century, along with Olympus and Phaselis, whose pseudo-League coinages would then have commenced ca. 100 b.c.
The date of the last small section, Series 3 of Period II, is somewhat puzzling. On one hand, one would expect that the coinage of Olympus and Phaselis would have ceased at least by 77 b.c., when Servilius destroyed the two cities, and that therefore Series 3, ending before 77 b.c., would have closely followed Series 2.
On the other hand, the weights of the 19 coins of Series 3 fall precisely within the range of the district coinage of Period IV (see Figure 6). It will be suggested below that the districts were created in 81 b.c., but that their coinage did not start until the time of the Roman Civil Wars of the 40s b.c. Period IV's standard is that of Roman quinarii of the 40s through the 20s; quinarii of the 80s (the denomination lapsed between the 80s and the 40s) were considerably heavier, averaging 0.3 grams more than those of the 40s.
Therefore if Series 3 is dated before 77 b.c. it is difficult to understand its standard. If, as is possible, it is reduced from that of quinarii of the 80s, it provides a curious and most coincidental anticipation of the standard of later quinarii and of Lycian Period IV.
Possibly, however, Period II's Series 3 came in the early 40s, after the cities of the eastern coast had recovered somewhat, immediately before the introduction of the districts' own coinage. If so, the case for Roman direction and probably even supervision of the district coinage is strengthened; for while the poorly executed coins of Series 3 bear little enough resemblance to those of Series 2, they are completely dissimilar in every way to those of Period IV. Series 3's few coins present a wide variety of obverse styles, all inept copies of earlier dies; but Period IV employs in each series a large number of nearly identical and competently cut dies of a given style—just as in the Roman coinage. On balance, however, a date before 77 b.c. for Series 3 seems more likely.
The number of mints active (see Table 3) during Series 1 shrank from seventeen to six to one. The six mints using the "ringlet" obverses for true League coinage were all major cities, which could be expected to continue a federal coinage after the initial contributions of the whole membership. But the continuance of Limyra alone in the final stage of Series 1 and in Series 2 and, joined only by Cyaneae, in Series 3 requires explanation. As has been seen, Limyra seems by 81 b.c. to have been elevated to membership among the six leading cities of the League; but this is insufficient to explain why she alone continued in the first century to strike League money. Quite possibly pirate attacks had by the late second century rendered coastal cities insecure, but Limyra is not far from the sea, and one might expect that Xanthus, for example, or Tlos, would have been considered safer from the pirates.
|Rhodes||LYCIA: PERIOD II|
|167–150?||167 or later—late 2nd century|
|Groups B, C||Series 1 (all non-"ringlet" obverses: all 17 mints)|
|late 2nd century|
|Series 1 ("ringlet" obverses: Xanthus, Tlos, Patara, Myra, Limyra, Phaselis)|
|ca. 100–88 or later||ca. 100–88 or later|
|Group D||Series 1 ("ringlet" obverses continued: Limyra only)||Series 1|
|Groups D′, E||Series 2 (Limyra only)||Series 2|
|Series 3 (Limyra, Cyaneae only)||Series 3|
Another explanation, particularly if Limyra's latest Series 1 coinage fell after 88 b.c.—and this is not certain—might be that Mithradates's efforts to subdue Lycia were successful and that most of the country fell to the king's forces. Appian's account, unspecific as it is, does sound as though this was the case. 199 The coinage then might suggest that Mithradates did in fact subdue all of western Lycia and all of the southern coast with its harbors at Patara and Myra, and left unsubdued only the inland eastern region around Limyra and the eastern coast.
|a||Rhodian weights are drawn from the ANS collection and BMCCaria, SNGCop, SNGvAulock, and SNGLockett, augmented by a few examples in the ANS photo file.|
|149||T. Hackens has discussed Jenkins's work very briefly in "Délos," pp. 518–34, passim.|
|150||E.g. BMCCaria, p. cix.|
|151||Études, pp. 166–76. The Delian inscriptions mention οδίαι δύο παλαιαί · πλινθοφόϱος μία in 169 b.c.; and a treaty of Miletus and Heraclea Latmos specifying δϱαχμὰς παλαιάς (the adjective necessitated by the new coinage) is dated by Robert to 173/2 b.c. C. Boehringer has proposed a further indication that the plinthophoroi started before 182 b.c. at the latest (Chronologie, p. 16). Boehringer notes that certain large bronzes of Philip V of Macedon bear as obverse type a radiate profile head of Helios (SNGCop 1258–60); as both type and weight were previously unknown in Macedon, Boehringer suggests that Philip's coins imitate similar sized ones of Rhodes with the same obverse type and with a reverse of rose in dotted circle (BMCCaria, Rhodes 312–23). The Rhodian bronzes are usually and no doubt correctly associated with the plinthophoric silver, but their obverse heads are closest to those of the latest plinthophoroi; and their reverses show certain traits (most notably the double-fringed sepals) which first appear on the late plinthophoroi: see text below. Thus Philip's coins cannot have had this particular Rhodian bronze issue as a model, and do not date the plinthophoroi's introduction.|
|152||"La Circulation monétaire dans la Béotie hellénistique: Trésors de Thèbes 1935 et 1965," BCH 1969, p. 722. Plinthophoroi are conspicuously absent from hoards from northern and central Greece which contain old style drachms and imitations and which were buried during the decade or so preceding 167 b.c.: IGCH 228 and 231–33.|
|153||F. Kleiner, "The Alexander Tetradrachms of Pergamum and Rhodes," ANSMN 17 (1971), pp. 114–25.|
|154||Examples of all the plinthophoric groups' drachms are shown on Plate 12.|
|155||It is this first main period, Groups A–C, which appears in the Naxos 1926 Hoard ( IGCH 255; "Délos," p. 520). This hoard is dated to ca. 150 b.c. because of its Athenian New Style coinage, the latest 159/8 b.c. on Thompson's dating. That the hoard's plinthophoroi can now be shown to be approximately this age does not, however, confirm Thompson's dating of the New Style coinage, because of the probable hiatus in the Rhodian coinage after the appearance of Group C. On the contrary, if the Athenian hoard coins are to be dated by the low chronology, thirty years later, the hoard supports the hiatus in the Rhodian coinage.|
|156||Communication from Mr. Jenkins.|
|157||The plinthophoric gold has been collected by Hackens, "Délos," pp. 503–34.|
|158||For the weights of the plinthophoric groups, see Figures 2 and 5. I have found a record of 11 magistrates in Group E: Euphanes, Zenon, Thrasymenes, Kallixein…, Lysimachos, Maes, Menodoros, Nikagoras, Nikephoros, Philostratos, and Philon. Examples of Group E in addition to those illustrated here may be found in BMC-Caria, pl. 40, 7–8, and SNGCop, nos. 819, 824, and 833–39 (these last recognized as a separate group). The carelessly cut reverse dies of E are the first on which the central petal's free edge is either left or right; earlier it is invariably to the right.|
|159||Fourteen weights are known, twelve of them of the well preserved latest coins from the Marmaris 1945 Hoard. Only four exceed 2.75 (as compared to at least two-thirds of Groups A-D), and three (two of them hoard coins) fall below 2.30 (as compared to only one of the many coins found of Groups A-D).|
|160||Maes and Nikephoros.|
|161||Communication from Mr. Jenkins.|
|162||See Plate 12, G (ca. 96 b.c.) and H (88 b.c.). On Mithradates's coinage and portraiture, see M. J. Price, "Mithradates VI Eupator, Dionysus, and the Coinages of the Black Sea," NC 1968, pp. 1–12; and F. S. Kleiner, "The Giresun Hoard," ANSMN 19 (1974), pp. 3–7 and 24–25. Kleiner dates G on p. 6.|
|163||See p. 78 above, and n. 140.|
|164||App., Mith. 20.|
|165||App., Mith. 21.|
|166||App., Mith. 24.|
|167||App., Mith. 25.|
|168||App., Mith. 27.|
|169||App., Mith. 56; Plut. Luc. 3.|
|170||App., Mith. 61.|
|171||Appian mentions only Lycia and Rhodes; OGIS 441 supplies Stratoniceia; for Cos and Tabae see Magie, p. 233 f.|
|172||BMCCaria Cos 117–18 (drachms) and 165–68 (hemidrachms): E. S. G. Robinson has shown that the two are associated ("British Museum Acquisitions for the Years 1933–1934," NC 1936, pp. 193–94). The Coan tetrobols (BMC 119–55) must come somewhat later, but just when is uncertain. Stratoniceia's pre-Mithradatic drachms and hemidrachms were struck to good Rhodian weight, as was Lycia's Series 1 of Period II (H. von Aulock, "Zur Silberprägung des karischen Stratonikeia," JNG 1967, pp. 7–9); and, like Lycia's, her coinage seems to have continued into Roman times using the same types but lighter weights (e.g. BMC 6–8).|
|173||The Cilician pirates are discussed in all the general treatments of the history of this time. The most comprehensive account is found in Piracy.|
|174||SEG 3, 378.|
|176||Pp. 403–4, n. 13.|
|177||14.671, erroneously placed in the Cilician section of Strabo's work.|
|178||Full lists of the sources for Servilius's campaign are given in Piracy, p. 216, n. 1, and in Broughton, p. 522, n. 115. See also H. A. Ormerod, "The Campaigns of Servilius Isauricus against the Pirates," JRS 1922, pp. 35–36.|
|180||Leg. agr. 1, frs. 3 and 5; 2, fr. 50. This mention of Attaleia is the only evidence for its inclusion in Zenicetes's territory. The city had furnished ships to Lucullus in 86 b.c. so was evidently friendly to Rome then; but, surrounded by pirates as it was on all sides (in Lycia, Side, and Cilicia itself), it is hard to see how it could have avoided coming to terms with them.|
|184||E.g. letters 27 and 28.|
|185||E.g. Ormerod (above, n. 178, "Campaigns"), pp. 40–41, and Piracy, p. 216; Magie, pp. 287–88 and 527; Moretti, p. 202; Bean in TSS, pp. 33 and 156; von Aulock in Gordian , p. 46. Jones, however, realized that Zenicetes "seduced" Olympus, and that it was Servilius who punished the cities in alliance with the pirate (pp. 104–5). And L. Robert, interpreting a recently published inscription as a Roman warning to the Pamphylian city of Syedra to resist pirates lest it be treated (by the Romans) as an accomplice, says, "tel est le sort des populations qui composent avec les pirates et les laissent s'installer; Phasélis et Olympus furent prisés et détruites par P. Servilius Isauricus" (Documents, pp. 94–95).|
|186||Verr. 2.4.21. See also Cass. Dio 36.21, from a somewhat later period, on cities in alliance with pirates. Ormerod cites an experience of Col. Leake's early in the last century: Leake travelled by sea one March from Cilicia to the southern coast of Lycia, and was compelled to follow the coast of the Pamphylian Gulf all the way, as the crew was afraid at that time of year to cross the gulf directly (W. Leake, Journal of a Tour in Asia Minor [London, 1824], p. 132, note).|
|188||TSS, p. 156. Zenicetes's name is found in Imperial times at both Olympus and Phaselis (TAM 951 and 1204), but to my knowledge nowhere else in Lycia.|
|189||See issues 48 and 49.|
|190||See above, p. 38.|
|191||See above, pp. 87-95.|
|192||TAM 264–65 and 319 = OGIS 552–54 = IGR 607, 616, and 1516.|
|193||SEG 3, 378A, Il. 7–8.|
|194||IG II2, 3218.|
|195||E.g. Magie, p. 1163, n. 13: "perhaps in the early first century."|
|196||C. Blinkenberg, Triémiolia. Étude sur un type de navire rhodien. Det. Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab. Arch.-Kunsthist. Meddelelser 2, 3: Lindiaka 7 (1938), as cited in L. Robert, "Hellenica," Rev. phil. 18 (1944), pp. 13–17. Robert is not certain here whether the inscription is from the late second or early first century. He later ("Contributions à un lexique épigraphique," Hellenica 2 , p. 123) seems to accept the traditional first century date—but as stated in the text above this is impossible. On L. Furius Crassopes, see RE 7, col. 352, no. 55 (Groag).|
|197||A remark of the fifth century wit Stratonicus may still have been applicable in the period under discussion. When asked who were the most shameless of men, he replied, "In Pamphylia, the Phaselitans; but in all the inhabited world, the Sidetans" (Ath. 8.350a).|
|198||Similar coiffures are found on a number of western Asiatic stephanophoric tetradrachms, usually now considered roughly mid-second century in date (e.g. BMC-Troas, Aegae 9 and Myrina 1–19). More probable models for the Lycian "ringlet" obverses, however are the later and lighter coins of Alabanda with reverse numbers, ranging from 1 to 33 (e.g. Plate 12, F). These Alabandan coins are closer to the Lycian drachms both stylistically and geographically. Previously dated loosely only to after 168 b.c., they have recently been tentatively assigned by G. Le Rider to the years after 134/133 b.c. ("Numismatique grecque," AnnÉcPratHÉt 1974, pp. 258–59). Such a dating would accord well with the late second century date here proposed for the Lycian coins with "ringlet" obverses but unfortunately does not provide a useful terminus post quem for the latter other than 134/133 b.c.|
|199||See above, pp. 86–87.|
|a||The Rhodian weights include only the full-weight plinthophoroi of Jenkins's Groups A-D (see pp. 81–84). They are drawn from the ANS collection and BMCCaria, SNGCop, SNGvAulock, and SNGLockett.|
|54||BMCCaria, Rhodes 210–18.|
|55||E.g. issues 114, 185, 200–201.|
|56||Magie, p. 1381, n. 33.|
|57||BMCCaria, p. xliv.|
|58||"A Hoard of Rhodian-Type Drachms," ANSMN 18 (1972), pp. 5–15, especially pp. 5–6. Sheridan essentially publishes a hoard, now IGCH 1335.|