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.
|
| 9 |
NH 5.101.
|
| 10 |
14.665.
|
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 | |
| 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.
|
| 14 |
Herodotus 1.176.
|
| 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.
|
| 18 |
33.20.
|
| 19 |
TAM 266 = OGIS 746.
|
| 20 |
Livy 37.16.
|
| 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.
| 22 |
Polybius 22.5.
|
| 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 | |
| 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.
|
| 4 |
Strabo 14.665.
|
| 5 |
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.
Quadruple Units:
Obv. Laureate bearded head of Bellerophon, facing.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ Chimera r.; in exergue, 
(preserved only on 1α).
Double Unit:
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.
Units:
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.
3. Units.
α. London 1.03 = BMC p. 38, 4; β. Paris 1.41 = Waddington 3007; Berlin 1.00.
Units:
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
4. Units.
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.
The types of issues 3 and 4 are those of certain small bronzes of Patara, 37 but whether these are earlier or later than the League coins is not clear.
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 | |
| 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 | |
| 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 | |
| 44 |
Iliad 6.172f.
|
| 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.
|
| 46 |
14.665.
|
| 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.
|
| 50 |
SNGvAulock 4249–53.
|
| 51 |
Traité II.2, 219; see also Mørkholm-Zahle, p. 92.
|
| 52 |
See pp. 212–13.
|
| 53 |
BMC 1.
|
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.
| Kemer Hoard | Other | Totals | |||
| Series 1 | Coins | Coins | Coins | Dies | |
| West | |||||
| Xanthus | 4 | 11 | 15 | 14 | |
| Sidyma | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1–2 | |
| Pinara | – | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| Cadyanda | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | |
| Cadyanda or Candyba | 1 | – | 1 | 1 | |
| Tlos | 3 | 9 | 12 | 9 | |
| Patara | 4 | 18 | 22 | 19 | |
| South | |||||
| Phellus | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | |
| Antiphellus | 1 | – | 1 | 1 | |
| Aperlae | – | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Cyaneae | 5 | 3 | 8 | 6 | |
| Trebendae | 1 | – | 1 | 1 | |
| Myra | 18 | 18 | 36 | 22–23 | |
| Limyra | 8 | 24 | 32 | 18–19 | |
| Gagae | – | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Rhodiapolis | 7 | 11 | 18 | 5–6 | |
| East | |||||
| Olympus, true League | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
| Olympus, pseudo-League | 26 | 7 | 33 | 17 | |
| Phaselis, true League | 5 | 1 | 6 | 3 | |
| Phaselis, pseudo-League | 35 | 19 | 54 | 32–33 | |
| Imitations | 2 | – | 2 | 2 | |
| 125 | 131 | 256 | 156–61 | ||
| Series 2 | |||||
| Limyra | – | 10 | 10 | 7 | |
| Olympus, pseudo-League | 4 | 14 | 18 | 11 | |
| Phaselis, pseudo-League | 4 | 9 | 13 | 12 | |
| 8 | 33 | 41 | 30 | ||
| Series 3 | |||||
| Cyaneae | – | 4 | 4 | 4 | |
| Limyra | – | 10 | 10 | 7 | |
| Olympus, pseudo-League | – | 4 | 4 | 4 | |
| Phaselis, pseudo-League | – | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| – | 19 | 19 | 16 | ||
| Totals | 133 | 183 | 316 | 201–6 |
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 | |
| 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
perform other
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,
as all
such things by necessity are settled by the Romans …. Similarly, judges and magistrates are elected from the cities in proportion
to their
votes.
79
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 | ||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ||
| West | ||||||||||
| Telmessus | ? | x | x | x | x | x | ||||
| XANTHUS | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
| Sidyma | x | x | x | x | ||||||
| PINARA | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
| Cadyanda | x | x | x | x | ||||||
| TLOS | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |
| PATARA | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||
| South | ||||||||||
| Candyba | ? | x | x | x | x | |||||
| Phellus | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
| Antiphellus | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
| Aperlae | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||||
| Cyaneae | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
| Trebendae | x | x | x | x | ||||||
| MYRA | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |
| Arycanda | x | x | x | x | ||||||
| Limyra | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
| Gagae | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||||
| Rhodiapolis | x | x | x | x | x | |||||
| East | ||||||||||
| OLYMPUS | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||||
| Phaselis | x | x | x | x | x | x |
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.
|
| 79 |
14.665.
|
| 80 |
14.667.
|
| 81 |
14.664–67.
|
| 82 |
NH 95–96 and 100–101.
|
| 83 |
Geog. 5.3.
|
| 84 |
TAM 905 (Opramoas) and IGR 704 (Jason).
|
| 85 |
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 ↑↖.
(Kemer) indicates that the coin is from the Kemer 1970 Hoard.
Mints are listed in order from west to east, and commentary on each mint follows its catalogue. General commentary follows Series 3.
Drachms:
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.
5.2 = 8.1 (Cadyanda). The die's slight deterioration (spreading lines in the field present only on the Cadyanda coin) shows that Xanthus's coin was the first struck.
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.
Sidyma lies on the southwestern slope of Mt. Cragus, west of the Xanthus River, and some eight or nine miles northwest of Xanthus. Sidyma's remains from pre-Roman times are not extensive.
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.
8.1 = 5.2 (Xanthus). The die's slight deterioration (spreading lines in the field present only on the Cadyanda coin) shows that Xanthus's coin was the first struck.
8.2 = 7.1 (Pinara). The die break at one of the lower leaves of the wreath on Cadyanda's coin indicates that the die was used first for Pinara.
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.
18. Rev. ΠΑ; to r., 
.
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
| 86 |
14.665–66.
|
| 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.
|
| 92 |
Issue 64.
|
| 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).
|
| 94 |
Polybius 31.4–5.
|
| 95 |
Jameson, p. 281; Jones, p. 102. For the Orthagoras inscription, see pp. 11–12.
|
| 96 |
Gordian
, p. 42.
|
| 97 |
Issue 63.
|
| 98 | |
| 99 | |
| 100 |
M. Thompson, The Agrinion Hoard, ANSNNM 159 (New York, 1968), pp.
31–37.
|
| 101 | |
| 102 |
Issue 80.
|
| 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 | |
| 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).
|
For a possible issue of Candyba, see issue 9, minted by Cadyanda or Candyba.
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).
36.2 = 39.1 (Gagae). It is not clear which city's coins were struck first. The dies of issue 36 are very close to the early obverse dies at Myra.
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 was situated on one of Lycia's few level plains, a few miles in from the southern coast. Strabo describes Limyra merely as a small city (πολίχνη).
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.
39.1 = 36.2 (Limyra). This coin, the only silver coin known of Gagae, was presumably struck at Limyra: see commentary on that city.
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.
|
| 113 |
Issue 78.
|
| 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.
|
| 117 |
See below.
|
| 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.
|
| 120 |
Issue 83.
|
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.
43. Rev. ΟΛΥΜΠΗ; to l., 
; to r., Ι (?).
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.
The city of Olympus is discussed together with Phaselis after the catalogue of that mint, which follows directly.
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 | |
| 131 | |
| 132 |
Drachms:
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.
Unlike Olympus, Phaselis retained the full six-letter ethnic in Series 2.
Drachms:
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 | |
| 138 | |
| 139 | |
| 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 | |
| 142 | |
| 143 |
46.1.
|
| 144 | |
| 145 | |
| 146 | |
| 147 | |
| 148 |
47.19–47.26.
|
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.
177
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: So far he had not dared to trust himself to any city, but now he entered the walls of
little Phaselis, for she was robbed of her terrors by her scanty population, and her
houses were drained of their inhabitants; there were more men on board the ship than in all the town.
183
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
enriching them
with stolen wealth. They select, for this purpose, the inhabitants of conveniently situated towns, where it is often desirable
and
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.
186
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 | |
| True League | Pseudo-League | |
| 188/172–167? | ||
| Group A | ||
| 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 |
| 88–84? | 88–84? | |
| Groups D′, E | Series 2 (Limyra only) | Series 2 |
| 84–77? | ||
| 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 | |
| 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 | |
| 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.
|
| 175 |
Verr. 2.1.95.
|
| 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.
|
| 179 |
1.41.5.
|
| 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.
|
| 181 |
Att. 6.5.3.
|
| 182 |
NH 5.100.
|
| 183 |
8.251–54.
|
| 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).
|
| 187 |
Verr. 2.1.56–57.
|
| 188 | |
| 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 [1946], 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 | |
| 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.
|
| 59 |
A. Akarça, Les Monnaies grecques de Mylasa
(Paris, 1959), pp. 97–98 (provenances) and p. 58, 13 (the later piece with ethnic). L.
Robert agrees with her attribution in "ΑΙΤΗΣΑΜΕΝΟΣ sur les monnaies," Hellenica 11–12 (1960), p. 53, n.
1, and has recently pointed out the impossibility of Sheridan's attribution, in "Rhodes," p. 32, n. 119. Akarça makes one further argument for Mylasa, which
will not stand: that one of the reverse letter combinations (ΛΜ/ΑΥ, p. 58, 12) can be read as ΜΥΛΑ. Weak enough from the awkward
placement of
the letters and from the improbability of only one of the many combinations being significant, the argument is destroyed by
the obverse die
identities between Akarça's 12 (not in Sheridan's compilation) and Sheridan's 124–26 (with ΞΑ/ΛΜ) and 152 (with ΠΕ/ΛΜ). Nevertheless,
the
coins belong to Mylasa.
|
| 60 |
Plate 1, G = "Coins Lycia," pp. 37 and 41–42, 33 (not illustrated; commentary combined with that of 34).
|
| 61 | |
| 62 |
E. S. G. Robinson, "British Museum Acquisitions for the Years 1933–1934," NC 1936, p. 193.
L. Robert has published another example in "Rhodes," p.
30.
|
| 63 | |
| 64 |
L. Robert has recently questioned the attribution of the ΚΥ countermark to Cyaneae, ascribing it instead to the island of Cythnos, where, to be sure, autonomous bronze types include the Rhodian rose
and a cithara ("Rhodes," pp. 7–29). The possibility is intriguing. But the only
specific argument against Cyaneae adduced by Robert is that the
countermark reads ΚΥ rather than ΛΥ ΚΥ ("Rhodes," p. 13). As the present study shows,
however, the abbreviation ΛΥ for the federal ethnic ΛΥΚΙΩΝ did not appear until the 40s b.c., surely long after the
countermark was applied, and the small size of a countermark hardly allows for the full ΛΥΚΙΩΝ. In any case it seems unlikely
that a single
city's countermark need have included the federal ethnic at all. Robert further fails to mention the analogous
countermark with ΑΝ, for which there is no good candidate among the islands. As the Sidetan tetradrachms thus counterstamped
so often bear
countermarks of the cistophoric mints (see BMC, p. lxxxiii) it seems reasonable to look for the source of the ΑΝ
countermark also on the mainland of Asia Minor. Cyaneae and Antiphellus, some eight miles apart, and situated between
Rhodes and Side, still seem to be the most probable appliers of the ΚΥ and ΑΝ
countermarks.
|
| 65 |
For the ancient evidence for these terms, see Études, pp. 151–52 and 166 ff.
|
All examples known to me of the quadruple and double units are listed. The mass of illegible and unattributable specimens of the single units was so discouraging, however, and the pressure of time so great, that while in London, Oxford, Paris, and Berlin in 1973 and 1974 I cast only those cabinets' best-preserved specimens of each obverse style at each mint. The coins omitted cannot, I am sure, affect in any way the conclusions reached; but the catalogue of the single units does not constitute a corpus.
Dies are not numbered, but die identities are noted where ascertainable. Relative die axes of the quadruple and double units are uniformly ↑↑, with but one variant each of ↑↗ and ↑↖. The axes of the single units are more random, but tend to favor the upright position.
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 the letters nor the sequence of coins catalogued indicate particular dies, and only a representative selection of obverse dies is illustrated for most issues.
To avoid frequent repetition, the types of each of the three denominations are here given for all mints.
Quadruple Units:
Obv. Apollo Patroös standing facing, holding filleted branch in out-stretched r. hand and bow in lowered l. hand.
Rev. ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ above and city initials to either side of cithara; all in incuse square.
Double Units:
Obv. Laureate head of Apollo r.; behind shoulder, often, bow and quiver.
Rev. ΛΥ ΚΙΩΝ above and city initials to either side of draped bust of Artemis r.; all in incuse square.
Units:
Obv. Laureate head of Apollo r.; behind shoulder, occasionally, bow and quiver.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ or ΛΥΚΙ above and city initials to either side of crossed bow and quiver; all in incuse square (Phellus, Cyaneae, and Myra sometimes vary the crossed arrangement: all variations are illustrated).
Quadruple Units: 12 coins, av. wt. 4.71
Double Units: 11 coins, av. wt. 2.74
Units: 93 coins recorded, av. wt. 1.35
Xanthus: Rev. ΞΑ.
Quadruple Unit.
A quadruple unit of Xanthus is catalogued in Mionnet. 200 There seems no reason to doubt the accuracy of the description, although no such coins have been found by the present author.
59. Double Unit.
α. London 3.31 = BMC 3
60. Units.
α. New York 1.39; β. London 1.01 = BMC 4; Athens 1.13; Berlin 1.26
Pinara: Rev. ΠΙ.
61. Double Unit.
α. Paris 3.06 = Waddington 3174
62. Units.
α. Paris 1.27 = Waddington 3171; Athens 0.99; Oxford 2.46
Cadyanda: Rev. ΚΑ.
63. Quadruple Unit.
α. Athens 4.18
64. Units.
α. Paris 0.60 = Waddington 3035; London 0.89 = BMC Cragus 17; New York 1.08
The ΚΑ coins, issues 63 and 64, are assigned to Cadyanda rather than to Candyba for three reasons. The western city, Cadyanda, is the only one which certainly struck Period II silver. Of the 22 non-ΚΑ multiple units known, 17 are from other western mints; thus the ΚΑ quadruple unit would seem more probably a striking of a western mint, i.e. Cadyanda. And the single units of the ΚΑ city are all of style A (to be discussed below). With only three of these units known, the absence of style B cannot be pressed, but the evidence as we have it does conform to the usage of the western rather than the southern mints.
Tlos: Rev. ΤΛ.
65. Quadruple Units.
α. London 5.37; β. Paris 3.61; Berlin 2.77; Weber 7304, 5.22. 65α and 65β are from the same dies.
66. Double Units.
α. Athens 1.73; Berlin 2.64
67. Units.
α. London 1.25, found at Tlos = BMC 4 = Fellows, p. 284, 12; β. Paris 1.38 = Waddington 3187; Athens 1.74, 1.60, 1.14; Berlin 2.00, 1.37; London 1.48 = BMC 3; New York 1.62, 1.61, 1.59, 1.40; Paris 1.34 = Waddington 3188, 1.70; private coll. 1.76
Patara: Rev. ΠΑ.
68. Quadruple Units.
α. Von Aulock 4.79 = SNG 4382; β. Paris 3.89 = Waddington 3140; Athens 3.07; London 4.84
69. Double Units.
α. Berlin 3.07; β. New York 1.84; J. L. Warren, "On Some Coins of Lycia under the Rhodian Domination, and of the Lycian League," NC 1863, p. 44, 8; Berlin 2.70 = Kl. Münz., p. 307, 1; Paris 2.00
70. Units.
α. Oxford 1.46; β. London 1.17 = BMC 2; Athens 1.89, 0.90; Berlin 1.58, 1.12; Paris 1.52 = Waddington 3137; Vienna 1.23; private coll. 1.23
70α and the Vienna coin are probably from one obverse die, and 70β and the heavier Athens coin from another.
| 200 |
Vol. 3, p. 445, 78.
|
Phellus: Rev. øΕ.
71. Quadruple Unit.
α. Athens 4.68
72. Units.
α. Paris 1.12 = Waddington 3168; β. London 1.58; γ. Berlin 1.28; δ. Paris 1.45 = Waddington 3167; ε. New York 1.18, overstruck; Athens 1.54, 1.17; Berlin 1.61, 1.41, 1.56 = Beiträge, p. 108, 17, called Rhodiapolis; Cambridge 1.29 = SNGFitz 5048; London 1.71; New York 1.21; private coll. 1.19
72ε is the only overstruck League bronze coin known. The obverse, inverted, shows possible traces of a helmet bowl, crest, and visor, and the reverse shows the remains of a circular dotted border; but the issue overstruck cannot be identified.
Antiphellus: Rev. ΑΝ.
73. Double Unit.
α. Paris 2.82 = Waddington 3017
74. Units.
α. Winterthur 1.33; β. Paris 1.34 = Waddington 3015; Athens 1.22, 1.16; Berlin 1.46, 1.06; Paris 0.83 = Waddington 3016
Aperlae: Rev. ΑΠ.
75. Double Unit.
α. Oxford 3.18, purchased at Phellus 201 = "Coins Lycia," pp. 38 and 42, 40 (only Π preserved and very faint).
76. Units.
α. Berlin 1.06 = Beiträge, p. 78, 28, and pp. 111–12; β. Paris 1.06 Waddington 3022; γ. von Aulock 1.23 = SNG 4270
Cyaneae: Rev. ΚΥ.
77. Units.
α. Paris 1.11 = Waddington 3062; β. Berlin 0.65; γ. New York 0.97; Berlin 1.31; London 0.85
Trebendae: Rev. ΤΡ.
78. Units.
α. London 1.68 = BMC 1; β. Paris 1.42; γ. Oxford 1.24, purchased on the Finiki-Elmali road, which runs up the Arycandus valley = "Coins Lycia," p. 38, 66; London 1.32, found at Patara = BMC 2 = Fellows, p. 284, 11
Myra: Rev. ΜΥ.
79. Units.
α. Paris 1.26 = Waddington 3121; β. Oxford 1.49; γ. von Aulock 2.25 = SNG 4366; Athens 1.53; Berlin 1.11; London 1.58, found at Patara = BMC 6 = Fellows, p. 284, 9; New York 1.55; Paris 1.59 = Waddington 3120
Arycanda: Rev. Υ or Α.
80. Units
α. Paris 1.45 = Asie Mineure, p. 117, 2; β. Paris 1.49 = Waddington 3024 = Asie Mineure, p. 117, 1; Athens 1.56 = Mavromichali 77, described with ΑΡ
80α has Υ; 80β and probably the Athens coin have Α.
Limyra: Rev. ΛΙ.
81. Double Unit.
α. Private coll. 3.78
82. Units.
α. New York 1.08; β. Berlin 1.34; London 1.04 = BMC 8; Paris 1.10 = Waddington 3070, 1.40 = Waddington 3071
Gagae: Rev. ΓΑ.
83. Quadruple Unit.
α. Paris 6.82 = Waddington 3066
This and the single drachm of issue 39 are the only known coins of Gagae struck before Imperial times.
Uncertain.
Quadruple Unit.
α. Private coll. 7.24 (Plate 14, A).
The city initial to the left is completely obliterated. The vertical stroke visible to the right may be part of a Ρ, but seems more probably an Ι. Pinara and Limyra are thus the most probable candidates for the mint of this coin, although Sidyma, Trebendae, and Arycanda cannot be ruled out.
Units.
Berlin 0.92 (Κ to l.); Hague 1.91; Athens 1.85; London 1.65; New York 1.32, 1.20, 1.18; Paris 0.93; Vienna 1.14, 1.11; private coll. 1.09
These three bronze denominations of Period III, all with reverse types in incuse square, are the only Lycian League bronzes bearing the full federal ethnic ΛΥΚΙΩΝ combined with city initials. These markings connect the three denominations and also suggest that their chronology cannot be too different from that of the Period II silver, the only other League emissions with this combination of markings. The quadruple bronze units' reverses are, furthermore, identical in all respects to those of the Period II silver. The quadruple and double units' low placement of the mint initials is also suggestive: this low placement, as has been seen, was first introduced late in Period II, and is found elsewhere only on the earliest issues of Period IV. (The units' reverse type, occupying the lower corners of the incuse square, prevents this placement on the smallest coins.)
The weights of the three denominations of these "civic bronzes," as they will henceforth be termed for convenience, agree tolerably well with the interpretation of the coins as pieces of one, two, and four units. The average weight of the quadruple units is 4.71; of the double units 2.74; and of the units 1.35. These weights are all slightly heavier than those found for the three denominations of Period I, but here as there the double unit is very close to twice the weight of the single unit, and the quadruple unit somewhat less than four times the weight of the single unit. In both periods, however, the largest coins are well over three times the weight of the smallest and so must be considered quadruple rather than triple units. (See Table 8 for a summary of Lycian bronze weights.)
The almost invariably miserable condition of the Period III bronzes renders somewhat uncertain any discussion of their types and styles; in many cases, even the mint attributions are only probable. For this reason the identification of the quadruple units' obverse type as Apollo Patroös is a bit tentative. The figure has a decidedly feminine appearance on Tlos's issue 65, but on no others, so that if the same deity is represented throughout, as it must be, it is probably masculine. The bow in the left hand can be seen on several examples; 202 and the object in the right hand is most probably a filleted branch, for on 65α there are visible below the arm traces of what seem to be the branch's stem and a hanging fillet. On 68α there is a typical Apolline hairstyle of long ringlets, as on later portrayals of Apollo Patroös. No deity other than Apollo Patroös seems indicated, and the scanty evidence as well as general probability point to this god—for he was portrayed on both earlier and later League coins, as well as on Lycian coins struck under Rome in the first and third centuries a.d. 203
| Quadruple Units | Double Unites | Units | ||
| West | ||||
| Xanthus | X | A | A | |
| Pinara | ? | A | A | |
| Cadyanda | x | A | ||
| Tlos | x | A? | A | |
| Patara | x | A, B | A, B | |
| South | ||||
| Phellus | x | B | A | |
| Antiphellus | B | A, B | ||
| Aperlae | A, B | |||
| Cyaneae | A, B | |||
| Trebendae | A, B | |||
| Myra | A, B | |||
| Arycanda | A, B | |||
| Limyra | ? | A? | A, B | |
| Gagae | x |
The obverse styles of Apollo head on the double and single units furnish the chief grounds for the chronology here assigned all the civic bronzes of Period III: overlapping or succeeding late Period II, continuing alone for some decades, and then overlapping the earlier series of Period IV (the League silver struck in the names of the districts).
The obverses of Period III can be divided into two chief styles, called A and B in Table 4. Style A is the old "ringlet" style of Period II's Series 1 and 2, with the hair rolled at the forehead, gathered in a chignon at the back of the neck, and falling in two ringlets down the neck. On most examples these ringlets are tightly curled and hang in an inverted V; in a common variation the two coils hang parallel. 204
Style B has a wave or curl at the forehead, and the rest of the hair hanging in three, four (usually), or more parallel vertical ringlets. 205 On most of these coins there is a chignon, but on some there is none. 206 A variation (with chignon) has the forehead hair not in a short waving lock but in an additional tight coil, curving over the brow and terminating next to the first of the parallel hanging ringlets. 207
Style A is found at every mint on the single units, but only at the western mints on the double units. Style B, on the other hand, is predominantly a southern style, as can be seen in Table 4. The reason for this is not clear.
Style A, the old "ringlet" style, must be contemporary with or some-what later than the Period II drachms of this style. The new bronze issues may well have been introduced late in Period II, just when the number of silver mints was being so drastically reduced, or it may have commenced only after the silver was discontinued. The absence of Olympus and Phaselis would seem to indicate that this bronze coinage started only after their defection from the League, so that Period III probably did not commence before ca. 100 b.c..
Many of the district silver coins of Period IV have the parallel ringlets of style B, but none are like the coins of style B without the chignon. Possible models for the non-chignoned variety of style B may be sought in the Roman Republican coinage of the 80s b.c. 208 Roman denarii would no doubt have been familiar in Lycia during and after the First Mithradatic War and could conceivably have influenced the types of the Lycian bronzes. This resemblance cannot be pushed too far, however.
But the single units at least continued into the second half of the century, as shown by those of style B with the coil of hair curving over the brow. This unusual coiffure is precisely that of the Period IV hemidrachms from Series 4 on. 209 As Series 4 is dated below to the 30s b.c., the small civic bronzes of Period III must still have been being struck then, contemporary with Series 4 and perhaps even Series 5 of the districts' hemidrachms. This is quite possible, for, as will be seen, the Period V bronzes of the districts seem to have commenced only ca. 31 b.c., contemporary with Series 5 or 6 of the districts' hemidrachms of Period IV.
Arycanda, some twenty miles inland, up the Arycandus River, appears among the civic bronzes of Period III for the first and only time in the League coinage. 210 Her use of three initials (in monogram) is doubtless to avoid confusion with Araxa, although no coins of Araxa are yet known. 211
Four Period II cities, besides the dubious Candyba, are missing among the civic bronzes. Sidyma, known only from one or two coins, is probably absent merely by chance; civic bronzes of this city may well appear one day. Olympus and Phaselis are not represented because, as has been seen, they had withdrawn from the League and ceased coining true League money by the time the civic bronzes first appeared.
Puzzling, however, is the absence of Rhodiapolis, 212 which had an appreciable silver coinage. Perhaps its absence is due to chance; if not, could it be that Rhodiapolis too was allied, although indirectly, with the Cilician pirates, perhaps through the pirate-allied Olympus and Phaselis? Gagae, however, southeast of Rhodiapolis, is shown by its civic bronzes to have been still a League member in the early first century. Rhodiapolis's absence remains unexplained.
Finally, the absence of Balbura and Bubon is significant, for these cities, we are told, were added to the League by Murena in 84 b.c. 213 If they did not strike in Period III, their position in the League can be presumed to have been a subordinate one. They cannot have been League members, but must have been in the position of mandated territories.
| 201 | |
| 202 |
63a, 65a, 65b, and 68b.
|
| 203 |
See pp. 20–21, and Plate 1, A-F.
|
| 204 |
See enlargements of 67α and 67β on Plate 14. Compare, e.g., issues 12, 13, 19, 38, and 51–54 in Period II.
|
| 205 |
See enlargement of 70β on Plate 14. Compare issues 88–90 and 92 of Series 2 in Period IV.
|
| 206 |
E.g. 69β, 73α, and 75α on Plates 13–14.
|
| 207 |
See enlargement of 74β on Plate 14. Compare issues 102–10 of Series 4–6 in Period IV.
|
| 208 |
See especially the large outputs of L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi (Crawford 340/1 = Sydenham 650–71; 90 b.c.) and C. Marcius Censorinus (Crawford 346/2 = Sydenham 714; 88 b.c.,) and also L. Julius Burso (Crawford 352/1 = Sydenham 728; 85 b.c.). The dates
given are Crawford's. The type was also copied in the 60s b.c. by Piso's son (Crawford 408/1 = Sydenham
840–78).
|
| 209 |
See Plates 18–19.
|
| 210 | |
| 211 |
One would still rather suspect that Araxa struck League coins during Period II or III, and
such coins may yet appear.
|
| 212 |
A small civic bronze is attributed to Rhodiapolis by M. Kroner
in Beiträge, p. 108, 17. This is presumably the coin so attributed in the Berlin cabinet, but
the coin is actually of Phellus, whose incompletely preserved initials ΦΕ were read as
ΡΟ. In this case as in many others, a cast of the coin has proved more easily legible than the coin itself.
|
| 213 |
Period IV consists of drachms, hemidrachms, and quarter drachms. The hemidrachms are the basic denomination, and their types repeat those of the Period II drachms: obv. head of Apollo, and rev. lyre in incuse square. Only a few anomalous Period IV issues, however, follow Period II in bearing the full federal ethnic ΛΥΚΙΩΝ on the reverse; the bulk of Period IV has instead Λ and Υ to either side of Apollo's neck on the obverse, and the mint initials alone on the reverse. This de-emphasis of the federal ethnic seems precisely analogous to Moretti's finding in his study of Lycian ethnics in inscriptions: that the last known example of the federal ethnic (e.g. Λύϰιος ἀπὸ Πατάϱων), which had been the usual form in the second century, belongs to the Sullan era. The simple municipal ethnic (e.g. Παταϱεύς) prevailed after that time, when Rome's predominance in the east had rendered League membership increasingly meaningless. 214
On the drachms, issued only under Augustus, the types are obv. head of Augustus, and rev. sometimes one but usually two lyres, without the incuse square. The two lyres indicate that the denomination is twice that of the hemidrachms with but one lyre. The drachms usually have Λ and Υ on the obverse, as on the hemidrachms, and the mint initials on the reverse. The types of the quarter drachms are obv. head of Artemis, and rev. quiver upright in incuse square.
The hemidrachms can be divided into seven distinct series, and all but the last reduced-weight series are precisely to the weight of the Roman quinarius of ca. 48–ca. 23 b.c. The drachms weigh exactly twice as much as the hemidrachms; but since a Roman quinarius of this time weighed less than half a denarius, the Lycian drachms weigh somewhat less than denarii. The quarter drachms weigh a little less than half the weight of a hemidrachm, just as the Roman sestertii of this time weigh slightly less than half the weight of a quinarius. At the very end of Period IV comes a final emission, of hemidrachms only, of reduced weight (see Figures 7–10, below).
A few small Period IV silver issues were struck in the names of cities, either alone or in combination with one or another of the districts: Telmessus (?), Pinara, Tlos, Cyaneae, and Myra. The great bulk of the Period IV coinage, however, was struck by the two monetary districts of Cragus and Masicytus.
No mention of the districts occurs in the literary sources, which describe only two mountains or mountain ranges, Cragus and Masicytus. According to the geographers, Cragus lay in the west, between the Xanthus Valley and the western coast; on its slopes were several cities including "a city of the same name." 215
No traces of a site for the city of Cragus have been found, however; and an ingenious suggestion that Cragus was an earlier name for Sidyma (which lay on Cragus's slopes, and for which no coins were known before this century) was disproved by the appearance of the first League drachm reading ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΣΙ. 216 Strabo's mention of a city named Cragus must therefore be accepted as an error.
Cragus and Masicytus as monetary districts, rather than cities, were first proposed by J. P. Six in 1886 and his interpretation of the coins' legends has been rightly accepted ever since. 217 The district Cragus's name appears in full, ΚΡΑΓΟС, on a few coins. 218
The geographers' accounts of the location of Masicytus differ considerably, and it is clear that the term was used rather vaguely for the entire inland mountain range running west to east in the south central area, between the Xanthus Valley and the Solyma mountains to the east, and north of the coastal cities from Phellus eastward. The interior was little known to the geographers, but this general location is adequate for present purposes.
The mountain is mentioned five times in the sources. Pliny has mons Masicitus, with manuscript variants Masycitus and Massycites , the two latter spellings impossible because of the coins' occasional ΜΑΣΙ. Ptolemy has τοῦ Μασιϰύτου ὄϱους, with a variant Μασιϰίτου; and πϱὸς δὲ τῷ Μάσιϰύτῳ ὄϱει, where variants Μασιϰύτει, Μασιϰυτεῖ and Μασιϰύτῃ may have arisen from ὂϱει, or, more probably, from Pliny's Massycites—but these variants are found not in the manuscripts themselves but only in editions of recent centuries. The fourth-century a.d. poet Quintus Smyrnaeus also mentions the mountain twice: ἄντια Μασσιϰύτοιο and αἰπὐ τε Μασσιϰύτοιο. In both cases the double sigma is necessitated by the meter. There is no evidence beyond these five citations: no coins or inscriptions give the full name of the mountain or of the monetary district. That the mountain's name was Masicytus (Μασίϰυτος) seems clear; and this is the spelling universally agreed on. 219
The attribution of coins reading ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΜΑ, ΜΑΣ, or ΜΑΣΙ gave more trouble than those of Cragus to pioneer numismatists, for no city with such initials was mentioned in the sources. The first suggestion of
Masicytus as a mint was made by Pellerin in 1763: publishing such coins, he commented,
Elles doivent … appartenir aux habitants de la montagne appellée Μασίϰυτος par Ptolemée, &
Massycites
par Pline; n'ayant que ce seul lieu connu en Lycie, dont le nom commence par ΜΑΣ. Il y avoit apparemment une ville portant
le nom de
la montagne, dont les anciens Écrivains n'ont pas fait mention.
Pellerin therefore attributed his coins to "Massycites," and with the slight change of a transposed y and i, "Massicytes" then became the accepted attribution for over a century. 220 By the time BMCLycia ap- peared in 1897, either a rereading of the geographers or of the coins bearing ΜΑΣΙ had led to the spelling Masicytes, which has been nearly canonical ever since. There is, however, no basis whatever for spelling the district's name with the termination -es; this comes solely from Pellerin's poor text of Pliny. The correct name of the mountain is Masicytus (Μασίϰυτος); so is that of the monetary district.
That Cragus and Masicytus were districts of some sort has been accepted as a working hypothesis, certainly correct but supported by virtually no proof other than the coins. On these Cragus's name is found at times together with one or another of those of the western cities Telmessus, Xanthus, and Tlos; and Masicytus's occasionally with Myra's, in the south.
An inscription, long known, from Roman times mentions a συντέλ[εια]πϱὸς τῷ Κϱάγῳ. 221 Συντέλεια usually means a simple league or federation, but is used twice by Polybius for a district within the Achaean League; and thus the term is intelligible for a formal subdivision of the Lycian League also, for the Lycian federation used many of the same technical terms as the Achaean League. 222
The gist of the inscription is the honoring of one Marcus Aurelius Apollonius of Oenoanda for his service first as priest of Apollo Patroös and then as ἀϱχιφύλαξ of the συντέλεια. Inscriptions provide the three titles ἀϱχιφύλαξ, ὑποφύλαξ, and παϱαφύλαξ, the first two officials of the Lycian League itself, and the last of an individual town. The very fact that an ἀϱχιφύλαξ, rather than one of the junior officials, was charged with the district around Mt. Cragus would seem to show that the area did indeed exist as a formal sub-unit of the League. The office of ἀϱχιφύλαξ has sometimes been interpreted as a police position of some sort, 223 but Jones has recently revived the older interpretation that the ἀϱχιφύλαϰες of the League and of the συντέλειαι were charged with the collection of the imperial tribute. 224 This is precisely what Marcus Aurelius Apollonius had been charged with as ἀϱχιφύλαξ of the συντέλεια πϱὸς τῷ Κϱάγῳ; and thus the only mention of a district within the League is made in a financial context, that of the imperial tax collection.
This context becomes significant on the realization that the chief evidence for the districts—their coinage—appears only after the First Mithradatic War. For it was in 84 b.c. that Sulla undertook the reorganization of the Province of Asia, and imposed on it the penalty for aiding Mithradates: 20,000 talents, five years' tribute (i.e. for the years 88–84), and the costs of the war. For the purpose of collecting this large indemnity Sulla divided the Province of Asia into forty-four districts: Asiam in quattuor et quadraginta regiones Sulla distribuit. 225 Just what these regiones were is unclear: they must have been smaller than the large geographical units (e.g. Ionia and Caria) of which the province was composed, yet large enough to contain at least several important cities each. Whether the regiones were responsible for regular taxes as well as the war indemnity is not certain, and how long they continued in existence is also unknown. The usual view is that "they remained the basis of the financial organization of Asia," 226 but the last actual evidence for moneys collected "according to Sulla's distribution" is from 62 b.c. 227
Nevertheless, arbitrary financial districts were created in the Province of Asia in 84 b.c. for the purpose of
collecting moneys for Rome. Can we assume a similar purpose for the Lycian districts? The
obvious flaw to the parallel is that Asia was a province, tributary to Rome, while Lycia had been confirmed by Sulla in 84 in her freedom.
Yet how genuine was this freedom? It was virtually meaningless: Lycia was "free" only on
sufferance, by the grace of Rome. Speaking of the results of the Mithradatic wars, which so
greatly extended Rome's dominion, Appian says, "Egypt alone was lacking to
complete the whole circuit of the Mediterranean."
228
This may be excused as rhetorical exaggeration, but Appian elsewhere specifically states that Rome, when severely pressed financially in 81 b.c., declared that even lands
and cities autonomous and free from taxes should all then pay tribute: All the allied nations and kings, and not only the tributary cities,
but those which had delivered themselves to the Romans voluntarily under sworn agreements, and those which because of furnishing
aid in war
or for some other merit were autonomous and not subject to tribute, all were now required to pay and obey. …
229
Magie thinks this statement "hardly credible unless we suppose that it applied to those formerly free," 230 yet Appian is explicit. Elsewhere Appian states that Sulla in 84 had granted freedom to Ilium, Chios, Lycia, Rhodes, Magnesia, and some others "either for the aid they had furnished during the war, or because of what they had suffered owing to their friendship towards him" (ἢ συμμαχίας ἀμειβόμενος, ἢ ὧν διὰ πϱοθυμίαν ἐπεπόνθεσαν οὗ ἕνεϰα). 231 He now says that in 81 b.c. tribute was imposed on "those which because of furnishing aid in war or for some other merit" (ὅσαι διὰ συμμαχίαν ἢ τινα ἀϱετὴν ἄλλην) had been autonomous. The closeness in wording of the two passages makes unmistakable the conclusion that the same peoples were the subjects of both passages.
Under whatever euphemism, then, and some euphemism there must have been, it appears that Lycia and other nominally "free" lands began in 81 b.c. to make financial contributions to Rome. Lycia in any case was paying tribute to Rome in the 40s b.c., while still "free," for in return for what she had suffered from Brutus's invasion, Antony after Philippi declared her free from taxes. 232 There thus seems little ground to doubt that she paid even earlier.
The explanation must be that Cragus and Masicytus were districts created by Rome to facilitate the collection of Lycian "contributions" to the Roman treasury. If each district was assessed separately, this would explain why an ἀϱχιφύλαξ rather than a ὑποφύλαξ was charged with the συντέλεια πϱὸς τῷ Κϱάγῳ. Whether the districts performed any other administrative functions is uncertain. If formed in 81 b.c., the districts would at first have collected revenues in the still abundant silver coinage of Period II. Even if the districts created in 81 in the Province of Asia fell into disuse after a few decades (and this is not certain), Lycia's unified internal government could well have resulted in longer-lived financial districts than those of the Province.
Creation of the districts in 81 b.c. does not necessarily imply, of course, that their coinage started promptly in that year. The Period II drachms had been struck in quantity in previous decades. Silver seems not to have been struck in Lycia at all for some decades after 81 b.c., as the districts' silver coinage (Period IV) appears to have commenced only in the 40s b.c. When the districts' coinage did appear, however, it is significant that it corresponded exactly to a Roman denomination.
| 215 |
Strabo 14.665.
|
| 216 |
See issue 6, and BMC, p. xlvii.
|
| 217 |
"Monnaies lyciennes," RN 1886, p. 436.
|
| 218 |
143.6–143.9.
|
| 219 |
Pliny, NH 5.100; Ptolemy, Geog. 5.3.1 and 5.3.3;
Quintus Smyrnaeus, Post-homerica 3.234 and 8.107. For coins with ΜΑΣΙ or ΜΑСΙ see issues 116
and 169. On the mountain and its name, see C. Müller and C. T. Fischer's edition of
Ptolemy's Geography, vol. 1, pt. 2 (Paris, 1901), pp. 838–39 and
843.
|
| 220 |
Recueil, vol. 2, p. 136. Six (above, n. 217) and Babelon (in
Waddington
) furnish happy examples of scholars drawing on ancient rather than secondary sources: they term the district Masicytus although without comment.
|
| 221 |
OGIS 565 = IGR 488.
|
| 222 |
Polybius 5.94.1 (τῆς συντελείας τῆς Πατϱιϰῆς, not πατϱιϰῆς, as usually edited, giving quite a
different sense) and 38.16.4 (Πατϱεῖς δὲ ϰαὶ τὸ μετὰ τούτων συντελιϰόν). See RE IVA, col. 1457 (Kahrstedt) for other examples of the word's usage; and GFS, p. 221.
|
| 223 |
E.g. Magie, "Chief Guardian" (p. 531), and GFS, "head of the federal police" (p. 254).
|
| 224 |
Jones, p. 404, n. 16, citing this inscription and TAM 905 = IGR 739, IIE
and IIIF. See commentaries in IGR and OGIS, which derive from Fougères, pp. 117 f. Both
Apollonius and Opramoas had first paid the tribute out of their own funds and later sought reimbursement "temperately," by
which we may
understand they did not exact full repayment from their fellow citizens. This also explains how one could fill the office
of archiphylax
"generously" (e.g. TAM 905, IIE and XVIIA), an adverb rather difficult to apply to service as a police chief.
|
| 225 |
Cassiod., Chron. 670.
|
| 226 |
E.g. Broughton, p. 518.
|
| 227 |
Pompey in 67 and Flaccus in 62 levied special assessments for ship building: Qui [Sulla] cum
omnes Asiae civitates pro portione in provincias discripsisset, illam rationem in imperando sumptu et Pompeius et Flaccus
secutus est
(Cic., Flac. 32). Magie doubts the districts remained in effect after Sulla's time, but his doubt seems based at least in part on a misreading of this passage, for
Magie equates the regiones with Cicero's civitates, whereas the equivalent word (a peculiar choice, to be sure) is provincias (pp. 1116–18, n.
17).
|
| 228 |
Mith. 121.
|
| 229 |
BCiv. 1.102.
|
| 230 |
P. 1118, n. 18. Magie, however, refers the statement to 84 b.c., at the time of the
imposition of the war indemnity (p. 238), whereas the statement occurs in Appian immediately before Sulla's second consulship in 80 b.c. (BCiv.
1.103).
|
| 231 |
Mith. 61.
|
Weights are crucial to the explanation of Period IV's three denominations. It can be seen in Figure 7 that the weights of the hemidrachm Series 7 drop off considerably from those of Series 1–6, and this late, reduced-weight series will be omitted from subsequent figures comparing the hemidrachms' weights with those of other coinages.
Figure 8 shows the weights of the three Lycian denominations of Period IV. The figure speaks for itself: the three denominations are in the ratio 4:2:1. An even closer correspondence between the drachms and the hemidrachms of Series 6 can be seen in Figure 9. Hoard and other evidence, to be discussed below, shows that the Augustus head drachms were contemporary with Series 6, and it can be seen from Figure 9 that the drachms weigh precisely twice as much as the contemporary hemi- drachms of that series. I would suggest that this relationship determined the weight of the drachms: they are not "reduced" from denarii or Attic drachms or anything else, nor were their low weights as compared to denarii necessarily deliberately chosen to keep them within Lycia's borders. The drachms merely are the doubles of the pre-existing hemidrachms, as is shown by their usual reverse type of two lyres instead of the one of the hemidrachms.
This is not to say that the Lycian drachms were not expected to circulate as denarii. Their size, weight, and general format, with the emperor's head, usually surrounded by a linear circle, accord perfectly with denarii of the time. A number of other silver coinages similarly resembling denarii are known from Asia in the late first century b.c., although these do not bear the Emperor's head; on a few such drachms of Plarasa and Aphrodisias in Caria the denarius sign (*) is actually found. 233 The first known hoard containing the Lycian Augustus head drachms, the Lycia 1935 Hoard, is published in this study. It contained only Lycian material, but other hoards show that the later official Lycian denarii of Trajan, issued in great quantity, circulated along with other denarii despite the Lycian coins' low weights. 234 Nevertheless, as the drachms were issued in the name of a (at least nominally) free people, and do not bear Augustus's name, they are, of course, not denarii but drachms.
Figure 10 compares the weights of the full-weight hemidrachms of Series 1–6 with those of the Roman quinarii of the second half of the first century b.c. This date is important. The fractional Roman denominations, the quinarius and sestertius, were issued only intermittently in the course of the Roman coinage. Introduced with the denarius in the third century, they were struck then for only a few years. Both were revived during the Social War of the early first century, and again during the Civil War of 49–44 b.c., after which the sestertius lapsed for good while the quinarius continued for two decades or so. The quinarius was struck "in spectacularly large quantities as part of the main-stream coinage of the Republic in 101 and 99–97, by Antonius (alone or with Lepidus) in 43–42, by Antonius and Octavian in 39 and by Octavian in 29." 235 Quinarii of the late second and early first centuries are far heavier than those of the revived denomination of ca. 48 b.c. on, averaging some 0.3 grams more than the later ones. The denarius stayed the same weight, but whereas the early quinarii weighed fully half as much as denarii, the later quinarii were markedly reduced in weight. It is these later quinarii with which the Lycian hemidrachms are compared: their standards are obviously the same.
As has just been discussed, Augustus's Lycian drachms probably circulated as denarii. Certain Lycian bronzes issued under him are also clearly sestertii and dupondii. 236 Therefore it is not surprising that Series 6 of the hemidrachms, contemporary with the drachms, also was based on the Roman coinage. And the districts' hemidrachms, all struck to the same weight, must then have been intended to complement the Roman coinage from the start. They must have been struck to circulate as quinarii from the outset.
As will be discussed below, the suggestion is not made that the hemidrachms travelled directly to Rome as tribute—there is no evidence for that—but that they were struck in connection with Lycian participation in Roman military activities in the eastern Mediterranean in the second half of the first century.
To summarize, Period IV, the silver of the districts Cragus and Masicytus, consisted of three denominations:
| a |
Shaded areas indicate hoard coins: from the Marmaris 1976 Hoard in Series 1–5, and the Lycia 1935 Hoard, chiefly in Series 6.
|
| a |
Shaded areas indicate hoard coins.
|
| a |
Shaded areas indicate hoard coins.
|
| a |
Shaded areas indicate hoard coins. Quinarius weights are from the ANS collection; BMCRE;
Robertson; G. G. Belloni, Le Monete Romane dell'età Repubblicana
(Milan, 1960); and I. G. Mazzini, Monete Imperiali Romane, 1
(Milan, 1957).
|
| 232 |
Appian, BCiv. 5.7. We can assume that this freedom from taxation was short-lived. H.
A. Cahn has kindly pointed out an obvious parallel to our districts' coinages: the strikings of the Macedonian regions,
issued in the middle of the second century b.c., just before Macedon was formally incorporated into the Roman
Empire (BMC-Macedon, pp. 7–8, nos. 1–10).
|
| 233 |
BMCCaria, Plarasa and Aphrodisias, Appendix 10a, and p. xxxiv.
|
| 234 |
E.g. K. Regling, "Römischer Denarfund von Fröndenberg," ZfN 1912, p. 236, n. 4. J. P.
Kent of the British Museum also tells me that Lycian denarii of Trajan are represented in virtually every large denarius
hoard of the period unearthed in Britain. For full discussion of the Lycian Augustus-head drachms' metrology, see now A. S. Walker, The Metrology of the Roman
Silver Coinage, pt. 1, British Archaeological Reports Supplementary Series 5 (Oxford, 1976), and pt. 2,
British Archaeological Reports Series 22 (Oxford, 1977).
|
| 235 |
Crawford, p. 628.
|
| 236 |
Issues 178–80, 182–84, 187, 189–91.
|
This study was completed in essentially its present form late in 1975. At that time but two hoards containing the district hemidrachms were known. The Lycia 1863 Hoard, of which only three unusual coins out of "ein Sack voll" were described, was of no help; but the major Lycia 1935 Hoard provided a key point in the district hemidrachms' chronology.
Road building and attendant development in southwestern Turkey in recent years doubtless led to the discovery of two additional hoards which have surfaced since 1975. Others may be expected, but the number of new coins in these two hoards was so considerable that the catalogue of Period IV's hemidrachms and quarter drachms (which comprised most of the 1977 hoard) has been rewritten to include them and a small number of other late arrivals. The arrangement and dating given here are precisely those arrived at in 1975 with the help only of the 1935 hoard and internal stylistic criteria.
The two new hoards have added but two new issues (137 and 140, both quarter drachms); and they have, most satisfactorily, confirmed at least to some degree the relative arrangement of the hemidrachm Series 1–7 which had been deduced earlier. The known contents of the four hoards are as follows.
| Marmaris 1976 | Lycia 1935 | Lycia 1863 | Lycia 1977 | ||
| Hemidrachm Series | 1 | 43 | 1 | ||
| 2 | 19 | ||||
| 3 | 24 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 4 | 19 | 1 | |||
| 5 | 25 | 4 | |||
| 6 | 1 | 12–16 | 1 | ||
| Drachms | 36 + | 1 | |||
| Quarter drachms | 24 | ||||
| Hemidrachm Series | 7 | 2 |
The hoard 237 is known only because it contained the first known silver coin of Pinara, of our hemidrachm Series 3. A bag full of heavily oxidized, brittle, and for the most part illegible coins was brought from Satalia (modern Antalya) to Beirut in 1863 to be sold to jewelers there. The only record made was that the hoard consisted of coins of the Lycian League, "both autonomous and of Augustus." A line drawing permits identification of Pinara's coin struck from 96.1b as the hoard coin; but only two other individual coins are mentioned. One was a hemidrachm with ΜΥΡΑ and bee (issue 101), and the other an Augustus head drachm with ΚΡ ΤΛΩ and caduceus (issue 114). These three coins may have been singled out because they bore cities' initials; it is useless to speculate on what else was in "the bag full" of coins.
The hoard 238 contained over 55 coins —drachms and hemidrachms of the districts. It was first recorded at a London dealer's in 1936 by Sir Edward Robinson, who acquired eleven of the coins and donated them in that year to the British Museum. The accessions book there records his intention to mention the hoard in the 1937 Numismatic Chronicle, but no report is found there. Fortunately, however, the accessions book records for each of the museum's eleven coins the number originally assigned it in Sir Edward's list of the hoard, for no other account of the hoard has survived either in his manuscript hoard book at the museum or among his own papers. Still more fortunately—indeed almost miraculously—the bulk of the hoard was still at the London dealer's in 1974: it had been put away for safekeeping during World War II, and somehow overlooked since. (It is now, however, dispersed.) The dealer generously allowed me to cast and record the 35 coins still in his possession; with the 11 at the British Museum, 46 of the 55 (the highest number known in Sir Edward's list) or more original coins are known. And, with the aid of Robinson's numbers preserved in the British Museum's accessions book, three of the missing nine can be identified, and the other six identified at least as examples of two alternate issues.
| Series | Issue | Number of Coins | Robinson Number | Disposition | |
| Hemidrachms | |||||
| Cragus | 1 | 84 | 1 | – | New York 1 |
| Masicytus | 3 | 95 | 1 | 1 | London 1 |
| Cragus | 4 | 103 | 1 | – | New York 1 |
| Masicytus | 6 | 110 | 12–16 | 4 | London 1; New York 2; private coll. 1 ; in trade 8 |
| Drachms | |||||
| Cragus | 111 | 4–6 | – | New York 1; in trade 3 | |
| 112 | 1–4 | 27 | London 1 | ||
| Tlos-Cragus | 114 | 2–7 | 20 | London 1; New York 1 | |
| Masicytus | 116 | 4 | 32 | London 1 ; in trade 3 | |
| 117 | 2–3 | 29 | London 1; New York 1 | ||
| 118 | 2 | 36 | London 1; New York 1 | ||
| 119 | 1 | – | In trade 1 | ||
| 120 | 10 | 42 | London 1 ; in trade 9 | ||
| 122 | 7+ | 49, 55 | London 2; in trade 2 | ||
| 123 | 1–2 | 31 | London 1 |
The provenance of the hoard is unknown, but can probably be safely assumed to have been Lycia; the date of its discovery, ca. 1935.
Some slight wear is evident on the first three hemidrachms listed, but the remaining coins are all in virtually unworn condition. As will be seen below, the Augustan drachms were probably all issued in the approximate decade 28/27–19/18 b.c., and the hoard's burial date may thus be taken as ca. 15 b.c.
The significance of the hoard lies in its association of the drachms with the hemidrachms of Series 6. The large numbers of each present in the hoard, all in excellent condition, show that the two are contemporary. This is the first clear indication of the date of any of the districts' hemidrachm issues. Series 6's association with the drachms is further confirmed by the observation that only among the drachms and in Series 6 are there known plated coins, bronze cores, and coins of billon. All other League silver coins, of whatever period or denomination, are of pure metal.
| 237 |
C. Weckbecker, "Aus Syrien," Wiener Numismatische Monatshefte 1 (1865), pp. 99–100. I thank
Margaret Thompson for pointing out this reference.
|
| 238 |
Coin Hoards 1, 110.
|
In the spring of 1976, word was received of a Lycian League hoard containing, apparently, only hemidrachms of the districts. 239 The owner of a lot of 87 of the coins kindly allowed me to weigh and cast them, and subsequently supplied impressions of a second lot of 43 coins. He knew of a further 5 coins, separated from the others on no particular basis ("with the swoop of a hand in a dark bar"), and understood that the original hoard was composed of close to 200 coins. There is no reason to suspect that the two recorded lots totalling 130 coins are not roughly representative of the whole hoard.
The first lot's owner had purchased them from a dealer in Europe. This dealer and another with whom the coins' owner spoke, as well as another collector who had been offered similar coins in Marmaris, all reported that the hoard had been found there: in Marmaris in southern Caria. Although near to Lycia, this spot is the only non-Lycian provenance for any League coins known to the present author. In recent years, however, Marmaris has become an important center of the coin trade in southwestern Anatolia, and one should maintain some skepticism about the accuracy of the reputed find spot.
The coins are hemidrachms of Cragus and Masicytus, all in extremely fresh condition. There are few previously known coins which can compare to them in freshness, and the hoard coins therefore figure prominently in the plates of this publication. The distribution of the 130 recorded coins and the numbers of coins previously known for each district in each series are shown below.
As can be seen, the 130 hoard coins form a substantial addition to the 424 earlier ones. Indeed, if Series 6 (one hoard coin) and 7 (no hoard coins) are disregarded, the remaining 129 hoard coins equal precisely half the 258 coins previously known from Series 1–5.
| Cragus | Masicytus | |||
| Series | Previously Known | Hoard Coins | Previously Known | Hoard Coins |
| 1 | 33 | 25 | 57 | 17 |
| 2 | 19 | 14 | 12 | 5 |
| 3 | 15 | 14 | 30 | 10 |
| 4 | 14 | 5 | 25 | 14 |
| 5 | 23 | 2 | 30 | 23 |
| 6 | – | – | 83 | 1 |
| 7 | 33 | 0 | 50 | 0 |
| Totals | 137 | 60 | 287 | 70 |
Cragus's hoard coins in Series 1–3 outnumber Masicytus's, the relative numbers present from the two districts in these three series being the reverse of those of the previously known coins. Cragus's contribution to the hoard diminished sharply in Series 4 and 5, while Masicytus's became dominant in Series 4, furnished the great preponderance of Series 5, and ended with the single hoard coin present from Series 6. Such a distribution pattern suggests that the hoard was an accumulation hoard rather than a currency hoard, and that the fresh condition of all the coins cannot be adduced as support for a relatively short period of minting, such as the ca. 25 years that will be proposed below. Some very slight wear, it is true, can perhaps be detected on Series 1, but its amount is hard to assess, as this series's dies were cut with a blunter tool than those of succeeding series, and therefore even the freshest coins lack the fine detail of those of later series. Beyond this observation, no pattern of wear was present to support or contradict the order assigned the series in this study.
The absence of Series 7 does, however, confirm that this reduced-weight series was the very latest; and the single coin of the large Series 6 indicates that the hoard was buried just as this series commenced. Series 6 is thus confirmed as the penultimate series. Cragus's Series 5 is poorly represented in the hoard, but the very large number of Masicytus's Series 5 coins accords well with the supposition that that series immediately preceded Series 6.
The following issues were in the hoard.
| Cragus | Masicytus | |||
| Series | Issue | Coins | Issue | Coins |
| 1 | 84 | 25 | 85 | 11 |
| 86 | 2 | |||
| 87 | 4 | |||
| 2 | 88 | 4 | 91 | 1 |
| 89 | 7 | 92 | 4 | |
| 90 | 3 | |||
| 3 | 93 | 8 | 97 | 3 |
| 94 | 6 | 98 | 2 | |
| 99 | 5 | |||
| 4 | 102 | 5 | 103 | 14 |
| 5 | 104 | 1 | 107 | 8 |
| 105 | 1 | 108 | 15 | |
| 6 | – | – | 110 | 1 |
These 130 coins were struck from 110 obverse dies. Only 33 of these 110 dies were previously known, while 77 were new—one more confirmation of the enormous original quantity of the Lycian League coinage. Two of the coins are of particular interest: 102.1 and 102.2, whose reverse legends ΚΡΑΓ are cut over ΜΑΣΙ, the only recuttings of inscriptions known in the Period IV coinage.
The burial date of the Marmaris 1976 Hoard, interred early in the striking of Series 6, must have been approximately 25 b.c.
| 239 |
Coin Hoards 3, 83.
|
Late in 1977 R. H. J. Ashton at the suggestion of G. J. Jenkins very kindly sent me casts of 31 Lycian League coins, clearly a hoard, which he had acquired from a European dealer. 240 The hoard contained 7 hemidrachms and 24 quarter drachms, a considerable addition to the number of these small coins known. A summary follows.
| Cragus | Masicytus | |||
| Issue | Coins | Issue | Coins | |
| Hemidrachm Series 5 | 106 | 1 | 107 | 1 |
| 108 | 2 | |||
| Hemidrachm Series 6 | 110 | 1 | ||
| Quarter Drachms | 125 | 2 | 130 | 1 |
| 131 | 2 | |||
| 132 | 2 | |||
| 133 | 5 | |||
| 135 | 4 | |||
| 137 | 2 | |||
| 139 | 3 | |||
| 140 | 3 | |||
| Hemidrachm Series 7 | 142 | 1 | 150 | 1 |
Masicytus thus provided 27 of the hoard's coins, Cragus only 4. The 7 hemidrachms were all from Series 5, 6, and 7—yet another indication that these three series were contiguous and the last three struck. The association of these three series alone with the quarter drachms also suggests that most of these small coins may have been struck rather late in the course of Period IV; this probability will be discussed below in the light of other evidence as well, after the catalogue of Period IV.
The hoard can be presumed to have been found in Lycia, but there is no direct evidence of this. Its burial may be put, tentatively, to ca. 15 b.c. or later.
| 240 |
Coin Hoards 4, 78.
|
The hemidrachm Series 1–6 are catalogued first, followed by the drachms, the quarter drachms, and the reduced-weight hemidrachms of Series 7.
As in the catalogue of Period II's silver issues, 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 102.1 indicates the first obverse die catalogued in issue 102. When more than one coin from one obverse die is illustrated, the illustrations follow the order of the catalogue, and illustrated coins are marked with an asterisk. Every obverse die is illustrated except in the hemidrachm Series 1–6, where only selected representatives of the multitude of nearly identical dies are illustrated.
The reverse dies found with each obverse die are indicated by lower case letters (a, b, c) following the obverse die number; these letters are not repeated on the plates. Brackets to the right indicate reverse die links.
Relative die axis positions are not given, as the great majority are ↑↑, with the few exceptions either ↑↗ or ↑↖.
The four hoards discussed above are cited as (Lycia 1863), (Lycia 1935), (Lycia 1977), and (Marmaris).
Hemidrachms or Kitharephoroi:
Obv. ΛΥ to either side of laureate head of Apollo r.
Rev. Mint initials to either side of cithara; all in incuse square.
Exceptions to the given format will be noted as they occur.
Cragus: 60 coins, 45 obv. dies, 57 rev. dies
Masicytus: 78 coins, 65 obv. dies, 54 rev. dies
Total: 138 coins, 110 obv. dies, 111 rev. dies
84. Obv. No ΛΥ on 84.1.
Rev. ΚΡ (ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΚΡ on 84.1a).
On the coin struck from 84.18 the mint initials are near the middle of the sides of the incuse square; on all other coins of the issue the mint initials are placed low.
85. Obv. No ΛΥ on 85.1–85.4.
Rev. ΜΑ (ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΜΑ on 85.1a–85.4a).
86. Rev. ΜΑ; above cithara, small star.
87. Rev. ΜΑ; to l., plectron. (to r. on 87.14a).
On the coins struck from 85.5–85.12 the Μ is high in the reverse square; on all other coins of issues 85–87 both letters are low.
On the coins struck from 85.17–85.28 the lyre is adorned with a tie to the right.
Cragus: 35 coins, 27 obv. dies, 33 rev. dies
Masicytus: 17 coins, 17 obv. dies, 17 rev. dies
Total: 52 coins, 44 obv. dies, 50 rev. dies
88. Obv. No inscription; Apollo wears wreath and taenia.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΚΡΑ.
89. Obv. Apollo wears wreath and taenia.
Rev. ΚΡ; to r., filleted branch.
90. Obv. Apollo wears wreath and taenia.
Rev. ΚΡΑ; to l., tripod (to r. on 90.7a).
91. Obv. No inscription.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΜΑΣ.
92. Obv. Apollo wears fillet and wreath (wreath only on 92.1–92.2).
Rev. ΜΑ; to r., filleted branch.
Cragus: 30 coins, 20 obv. dies, 27 rev. dies
Pinara: 3 coins, 2 obv. dies, 3 rev. dies
Masicytus: 40 coins, 30 obv. dies, 36 rev. dies
Cyaneae: 7 coins, 5 obv. dies, 5 rev. dies
Myra: 8 coins, 6 obv. dies, 7 rev. dies
Total: 88 coins, 63 obv. dies, 78 rev. dies
93. Rev. ΚΡ; to l., eagle on omphalos (to r. on 93.14a).
94. Rev. ΚΡ; to l., ear of corn.
95. Obv. Seemingly no inscription.
Rev. ΚΡ.
The coin struck from 93.14 is of anomalous style.
96. Rev. ΠΙ.
97. Rev. ΜΑ; to l., serpent coiled around omphalos.
98. Rev. ΜΑ; to l., owl.
99. Rev. ΜΑ; to l., torch.
100. Rev. ΚΥ; to l., helmet.
101. Rev. ΜΥΡΑ; to l., bee.
Cragus: 19 coins, 9 obv. dies, 18 rev. dies
Masicytus: 40 coins, 23 obv. dies, 36 rev. dies
Total: 59 coins, 32 obv. dies, 54 rev. dies
102. Obv. No ΛΥ; a taenia replaces Apollo's laurel wreath.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΚΡΑΓ.
The reverse dies of the first two coins catalogued are cut over Masicytus. On 102.1a the right upright of the Μ is clearly preserved under the Κ. On 102.2a a similar trace of the Μ remains; most of the Α is visible under the Ρ, to which the lower right portion of the Α gives the apparent form R; and to either side of the peak of Cragus's Α are remains of serifs terminating the upper horizontal stroke of a Σ. See enlargements on Plate 27.
103. Obv. No ΛΥ; a taenia replaces Apollo's wreath.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΜΑΣΙ.
Cragus: 28 coins, 20 obv. dies, 24 rev. dies
Masicytus: 57 coins, 44 obv. dies, 54 rev. dies
Total: 85 coins, 64 obv. dies, 78 rev. dies
104. Rev. ΚΡ; to l., filleted branch.
105. Rev. ΚΡ; to l., branch.
106. Obv. Apollo wears wreath and taenia on 106.9–106.12.
Rev. ΚΡ; to l., ear of corn, crudely rendered.
On all dies of issues 104 and 105 Apollo wears across his forehead what appears to be a flat narrow strap, which passes under the ringlet curving across his brow.
107. Rev. ΜΑ; to l., filleted branch.
108. Rev. ΜΑ; to l., branch.
109. Obv. Apollo wears wreath and taenia on 109.10–109.11.
Rev. ΜΑ; to l., winged caduceus (to r. on 109.5–109.11).
On all obverse dies of Masicytus in Series 5 except 109.10–109.11 Apollo wears across his forehead what appears to be a flat narrow strap, which passes under the ringlet curving across his brow.
Masicytus: 86 coins, 62 obv. dies, 78 rev. dies
110. Rev. ΜΑ; to r., tripod (to l. on 110.2a).
The obverse dies of issue 110 fall into three distinct classes. 110.1 is anomalous. 110.2–110.22 have large heads executed in low relief. 110.23–110.62 have smaller heads, worked in higher relief, and with finer features. Apollo wears both wreath and taenia on 110.57.
Coins struck from 110.3 and 104.4 include plated coins and bronze cores; these are the only such kitharephoroi known.
Drachms:
Obv. ΛΥ to either side of head of Augustus r.
Rev. Two citharas.
Exceptions to the given format will be noted as they occur.
Cragus: 22 coins, 10 obv. dies, 18 rev. dies
Tlos-Cragus: 10 coins, 7 obv. dies, 9 rev. dies
Masicytus: 129 coins, 71 obv. dies, 110 rev. dies
Total: 161 coins, 88 obv. dies, 137 rev. dies
111. Obv. No inscription.
Rev. ΛΥ to either side of single cithara above, and ΚΡ to either side below; to r., branch.
112. Rev. ΚΡ below (to either side on 112.2b-c); above, plectrum (below on 112.2b-c).
113. Rev. ΚΡ below; to either side, branch and star (in center on 113.1b).
Tlos-Cragus
114. Obv. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ to l. on 114.1.
Rev. ΤΛΩ above and ΚΡ below; in center, winged caduceus.
115. Rev. Μ over Α to l. of single cithara; to r., tripod.
116. Rev. Μ over Α to r. (to l. on 116.1b and 116.2a); to l., aphlaston (to r. on 116.1b and 116.2a).
117. Rev. ΜΑ to either side; in center, bow.
118. Rev. ΜΑ to either side (omitted on 118.4a); in center, aphlaston (cut over bow on 118.4a).
119. Rev. ΜΑ to either side; above, plectrum.
120. Rev. ΜΑ to either side (below on 120.11d–120.12a and 120.13b–120.14a); in center, two plectra.
121. Rev. ΜΑ below; no symbol.
122. Rev. ΜΑ below (to either side on 122.1a; above on 122.2a–122.5a); in center, ear of corn.
123. Rev. ΜΑ to either side; in center, owl above brach (branch omitted on 123.1a).
117.1 = 118.1; 117.3 = 118.2; 118.7 = 119.1.
As noted in the catalogue, coins struck from 116.3 include a billon piece, and coins struck from 118.2 include an Æ core—or perhaps a test piece, as the weight is so high. I am indebted to Mr. Graham Pollard of Cambridge for advising me of the true metal of the coin in question struck from 116.3, which had been published both as silver and as bronze.
Quarter Drachms or Hemikitharephoroi:
Obv. Head of Artemis r.
Rev. Quiver in incuse square.
Cragus: 19 coins, 10 obv. dies, 14 rev. dies
Tlos-Cragus: 10 coins, 7 obv. dies, 8 rev. dies
Masicytus: 60 coins, 31 obv. dies, 41 rev. dies
Myra and Masicytus-Myra: 4 coins, 2 obv. dies, 2 rev. dies
Total: 93 coins, 49 obv. dies, 65 rev. dies
124. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΚΡ below (positions reversed on 124.1a and 124.3c; letters illegible on 124.3b); to l., stag's head facing (to r. on 124.3c).
125. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΚΡ below; to l., filleted branch.
126. Rev. ΛΥ, ΚΡ, 
(?), and star.
127. Obv. Head l.; to l., ΛΥ.
Rev. ΛΥ above, ΚΡ below (retrograde on 127.2a); and uncertain symbol to r. (127.1a) or l. (127.2a).
128. Obv. Double linear border.
Rev. ΛΥ above and ΚΡ below; to r., ear of corn.
124.1 = 130.1 (Masicytus). This die was used in its earlier state for the coins struck for Masicytus and for that struck from reverse die 124.1a. The coins from reverse die 124.1b, however, show recutting. The crown of the head has been deepened and extended to the rear; the hair behind the ear has been reworked; and the eye made more protruberant. See enlargements on Plate 27. The die was thus used first for Masicytus.
Imhoof-Blumer in Kl. Münz. attributed to Myra the coins struck from 124.2c = 124.3d because he read the poorly preserved Κ as a Μ, and the symbol as an Υ, giving an awkwardly arranged ΜΥΡ.
Tlos-Cragus
129. Obv. Head l. on 129.1–129.2; ΛΥ to l. (129.1), to r. (129.4), below (129.6), or to either side (129.2, 129.5); or ΛΥΚΙΩΝ to l. (129.7); or uncertain inscription, if any (129.3).
Rev. ΤΛ above and ΚΡ below; to r., winged caduceus (to l. on 129.5a–129.7a).
130. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΑ below; to l., stag's head facing.
131. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΑ below; to l., filleted branch.
132. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΑ below; to l., torch.
133. Rev. ΜΑ below (133.1a–133.2a) or ΛΥ below (123.3a–123.4a); to r. above, crescent (to l. on 123.4a).
134. Rev. ΜΑ below; above, crescent and star.
135. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΑ below.
136. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΑ below; to l., branch.
137. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΑ below; to l., bow.
138. Obv. ΛΥ to either side; linear border.
Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΑ below; to r., aphlaston.
139. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΑ below; to l. (to r. on 139.4a), uncertain symbol, possibly Isis crown (symbol doubtfully present on 139.1a).
130.1 = 124.1 (Cragus). See Cragus for a discussion of this die. The coin struck from 133.3 was originally published as a striking of Lycia in genere. Hemidrachms previously attributed to Lycia in genere, however, are issues of Masicytus (see issue 150 below). As no other coins of Lycia in genere are known except in Period I, and as both symbol and obverse style are the same throughout issue 133, it seems certain that all of the issue belongs to the district of Masicytus.
The three coins of issue 137 have anomalous relative die positions of ↑↓. The only other silver Lycian League coin with this relative position is the first hemidrachm catalogued in issue 148 below.
140. Rev. ΛΥ above and ΜΥ below; to l., Isis crown.
The Υ below has the form 
, the stroke to lower left ending only at the margin of the incuse square. The
obverse style of this issue is virtually identical to that of several dies of the bronze issues 190–94 below (see Plate 36).
These bronze
issues, which share many obverse dies, include coins with and without the Isis crown symbol, and with varying inscription
combinations: ΜΑ,
ΜΥ, ΜΑ-ΜΑ, ΜΑ-ΜΥ, ΛΥ-ΜΑ, and ΛΥ-ΜΥ. Many of the renditions of the Υ in ΜΥ on these bronze coins have the form : this is doubtless the origin of the , which must be understood as an Υ, making issue 140 definitely
Myra's.
Myra-Masicytus
141. Obv. ΛΥ to r.
Rev. ΜΑ above and ΜΥ below.
Hemidrachms or Kitharephoroi of Reduced Weight:
Obv. ΛΥ to either side of laureate head of Apollo r.
Rev. Mint initials to either side of cithara; all in incuse square.
Exceptions to the given format will be noted as they occur.
Cragus: 35 coins, 20 obv. dies, 31 rev. dies.
Telmessus-Cragus?: 2 coins, 2 obv. dies, 2 rev. dies.
Masicytus: 55 coins, 40 obv. dies, 47 rev. dies.
Total: 92 coins, 62 obv. dies, 80 rev. dies.
142. Rev. ΚΡ.
143. Rev. ΚΡ (143.1a–143.2a), ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΚΡ (143.3a–143.4a), or ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΚΡΑΓΟϹ (143.5a–143.7a); to r., ear of corn (to l. on 143.4a–143.7a).
143.7 may be a recut version of 143.6.
144. Rev. ΚΡ to l., filleted branch.
145. Rev. ΚΡ; to r., star; to l., branch, filleted on 145.1a and perhaps others (symbols' positions reversed on 145.1a).
146. Rev. ΚΡ; to l., Τ; to r., star.
147. Rev. ΚΡ; to l., 
(147.1a) or 
(147.1b–l47.2a;
to r. on 147.2a).
142.8 = 143.1; 142.9 = 144.1.
The Oxford and Paris specimens of issue 146 have been attributed to Tlos-Cragus. It is highly unlikely, however, that Tlos would not have identified itself here as elsewhere by the use of two or three letters, ΤΛ or ΤΛΩ; and the star furthermore may be associated with that on issue 145. The Τ would seem a mere issue mark.
Telmessus-Cragus
148. Rev. ΤΕ above and ΚΡ below.
The issue was first described by Imhoof-Blumer in Monn. gr. in 1883, and there attributed to Telmessus and Cragus. One might suspect that the Τ and Ε were simply issue marks (compare the Τ and star of issue 146 and the monograms of 147). The die axis orientation of the first coin catalogued in issue 148, however, is ↑↓, known elsewhere in League silver only on the quarter-drachm issue 137 above. This anomalous die axis orientation would seem to strengthen the supposition that issue 148 was not struck at a regular League mint, and thus may be of Telmessus—although this is far from certain.
Telmessus's earliest League issues were, bronzes: for these and a discussion of when the city may have joined the League, see issues 178–81 below, and commentary on Series A-D of Period V's bronze.
149. Rev. ΜΑ to r. (149.1a) or either side (149.2a); to l., ear of corn.
150. Obv. ΜΑ replaces ΛΥ on 150.1.
Rev. ΛΥ (ΛΥΚΙΩΝ on 150.1a); to l., bow; to r., arrow.
151. Obv. No ΛΥ; ΜΑ to either side on 151.9.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ (ΛΥΚΙΟΛ on 151.1a; apparently omitted on 151.9a) and ΜΑ; to l., aphlaston (to r. on 151.3a–151.5a).
152. Obv. No ΛΥ; ΜΑ to either side.
Rev. ΜΑ; to l., star.
153. Rev. ΜΑ.
154. Rev. ΜΑ; above, two stars.
155. Rev. ΜΑ (retrograde on 155.3a–155.4a).
156. Obv. Head l. and ΛΥ retrograde on 156.3–156.5.
Rev. ΜΑ; to l., branch; to r., star.
157. Obv. Head l. and ΛΥ retrograde on 157.2.
Rev. ΜΑ, retrograde; to l., branch; to r., trident head (?).
158. Obv. Head l. and ΛΥ retrograde on all dies except 158.1.
Rev. ΜΑ; to l., trident head; to r., caduceus (symbols' positions reversed on 158.12a).
151.9 = 152.1; 153.3 = 154.1.
The first coin catalogued in issue 150 is tentatively assigned to Arycanda in the BMC because the marking to right on obverse was read as 
. It is, however, a simple Α:
the imperfection read as completing the supposed monogram is merely a depression in the coin's surface. And with dies in issues
151 and 152
now known to bear ΜΑ on obverse, the marking to the left on the "Arycanda" coin can be
recognized as the remains of an Μ. The Paris example of issue 150 was also misattributed, understandably, to
Lycia
in genere, but there can be little question that all of issue 150 belongs to Masicytus.
241
The London specimen of issue 155 is hesitantly assigned in the BMC to Amelas, a city known only to Pliny. 242 Imhoof-Blumer in 1902 recognized, however, that the ΑΜ coins must be issues of Masicytus with retrograde ethnics: he thought he had found an obverse die link between ΜΑ and ΑΜ coins. 243 The dies Imhoof was comparing were probably 157.2 and 158.2, which are not truly identical, although very close indeed. Nevertheless, their extreme similarity and the frequency with which left-facing heads and retrograde obverse ethnics appear in Series 7 make it certain that the occasional League coins with ΑΜ are Masicytus's.
Amelas thus disappears as a mint. It has further been demolished as a city by L. Robert, who has restored the corrupt passage of Pliny in which it made its sole appearance: "Ascandiandalis, Amelas, Noscopium" is now correctly read as "Cadyanda, Lissa, Melanoscopium. 244
| Cragus | Tlos-Cragus | Pinara | Telmessus-Cragus | Masicytus | Cyaneae | Myra | Myra-Masicytus | Total | ||||||||||
| Coins | Obv. Dies | Coins | Obv. Dies | Coins | Obv. Dies | Coins | Obv. Dies | Coins | Obv. Dies | Coins | Obv. Dies | Coins | Obv. Dies | Coins | Obv. Dies | Coins | Obv. Dies | |
| Hemidrachms | ||||||||||||||||||
| Series 1 | 60 | 45 | 78 | 65 | 138 | 110 | ||||||||||||
| Series 2 | 35 | 27 | 17 | 17 | 52 | 44 | ||||||||||||
| Series 3 | 30 | 20 | 3 | 2 | 40 | 30 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 6 | 88 | 63 | ||||||
| Series 4 | 19 | 9 | 40 | 23 | 59 | 32 | ||||||||||||
| Series 5 | 28 | 20 | 57 | 44 | 85 | 64 | ||||||||||||
| Series 6 | – | – | 86 | 62 | 86 | 62 | ||||||||||||
| Total | 172 | 121 | 3 | 2 | 318 | 241 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 6 | 508 | 375 | ||||||
| Drachms | 22 | 10 | 10 | 7 | 129 | 71 | 161 | 88 | ||||||||||
| Quarter | ||||||||||||||||||
| Drachms | 19 | 10 | 10 | 7 | 60 | 31 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 90 | 49 | |||||||
| Hemidrachms | ||||||||||||||||||
| Series 7 | 35 | 20 | 2 | 2 | 55 | 40 | 92 | 62 |
| 241 |
See the quarter-drachm issue 133 above, and the bronze coin 203α below, with ΜΑ and the same symbols as issue 150.
|
| 242 |
NH 5.101.
|
| 243 |
Kl. Münz., p. 306, Masikytes 1.
|
| 244 |
Villes, pp. 161–68. Robert here resurrects Cadyanda in the literature: see commentary on that city in Period II.
|
The hemidrachms of Period IV divide themselves into seven obvious series. In the first five series, issues of the two districts are parallel in obverse style, reverse format, and often even identity or similarity of symbols. Except for a very few instances among issues of the last, reduced-weight Series 7, there are no obverse die links between issues of the same mint. Nor are there any obverse links known between the two districts' issues of any one series, despite the often virtual indistinguishability of their obverses, and despite the recut reverses (from ΜΑΣΙ to ΚΡΑΓ) known. 245 This is perhaps due to our lack of material, for one such obverse link between districts is known in the quarter drachms; 246 but such links would in any case tell us little, for the five early series are so clearly closely coordinated with each other anyway.
In a few cases the assignment of issues to series is somewhat arbitrary: e.g. Series 3's issues 95 and 99, and Series 5's issue 106, all of poor style. The placement of the city issues 96, 101, and 102 is also a bit uncertain (see discussion below). But the remaining issues sort themselves out with little question into the seven clear-cut series.
The order of the series is more of a problem. The order was at first based on internal evidence alone, from the coins' weights and from an analysis of their style, that least reliable of criteria. As discussed above, some confirmation of the relative order of some series was subsequently provided by the appearance of the Marmaris 1976 and Lycia 1977 Hoards. The historical interpretation of the coinage rests on the series' arrangement, supported by stylistic and other arguments for that arrangement.
Series 1 is without doubt the earliest series. It is the largest series, in terms of both coins and obverse dies known. 247 It is also slightly heavier than the other series. 248 Most of its coins bear no symbol. Its placement of the mint initials continues the low placement which is found elsewhere, with only a few scattered exceptions, only on the late drachms of Period II, the multiple-unit bronzes of Period III, and some of the hemidrachms of Series 2 in Period IV. Reverses found with Masicytus's 85.5–85.12 have the left-hand mint initial in the center of the square, and the right-hand initial dropped; this arrangement is found elsewhere only on some late Period II reverses. Series 1's obverses, while distinct from those of Period II, do show a relatively informal hairstyle such as was common in the earlier part of Period II; all other series in Period IV have increasingly formalized and rigid coiffures. Series 1 despite its great size contains but one holed coin: Series 2 has one, and Series 3–7 have two to six each, as do the drachms and quarter drachms. Finally, only Series 1's obverses have the federal initials ΛΥ placed awkwardly close to Apollo's neck, with the Λ often actually on the neck; on succeeding series the initials are placed more gracefully in the field.
Series 2, despite the obvious coiffure change from loose locks to parallel ringlets, would seem for a number of reasons to follow Series 1. Issues 88 and 91 continue the dropped mint initials of late Period II, of Period III, and of Series 1 of Period IV; in Series 3–6 the mint initials are never low. Series 2 shares with Series 1 the Α with angled crossbar, Α; this form of the letter is the usual one in these two series, while an Α with straight cross-bar is the favored, if not the only, form in later series.
Series 2's issues 88 (Cragus) and 91 (Masicytus), interestingly, are the only two parallel issues in all of Period IV which are not executed in the same obverse style, and the obverses of 91 are very close indeed to many of Series 1. All the dies of these Series 1 and 2, furthermore, seem to have been engraved with a tool somewhat broader or blunter than that used for succeeding series. Cragus's issue 88 introduces a new coiffure: Apollo wears both taenia and wreath, and his hair is arranged in a waving lock passing over and under the taenia at the brow, in parallel ringlets over the cheek and neck, and curled in two overlapping rounds in a chignon at the back. This twofold chignon is a feature of many of the Series 1 and Series 2 obverses, but is found nowhere else in Period IV; in all succeeding issues the chignon is formed by a single coil in the plane of the field.
Whether Series 3 or Series 4 comes next is far from clear, but Series 3 has been placed thus because of the general similarity of its obverse coiffures to many of those of Series 1 and 2; and because the mannered coiffures of Series 4, with the coil of hair curving over the forehead, are so similar to those of Series 5 and 6. Series 3 opens with two obviously parallel issues: on Cragus's 93 an eagle perches on the omphalos, and on Masicytus's 97 a serpent twines around the sacred rock. 249 The other issues of Series 3 repeat with more or less success the attractive obverse style of issues 93 and 97: Apollo's hair is arranged in loose waves (of long hair, not the short locks of earlier issues) or a loose roll at the brow and over the ear, a chignon of a single coil behind the neck, and one long, loosely waved lock falling diagonally forward from behind the ear across the neck.
In Series 3 have been placed the small civic issues of Pinara, Cyaneae, and Myra, because their obverse coiffures
are so very close to those of the district coins of this series. One such die of this style is known in Series 6, however,
250
and it is conceivable that the civic issues belong there. As has been seen, contemporary with Series 6 were the Augustus head drachms, and among these is found the silver coinage of Tlos in Period IV.
251
And as will be seen below, roughly contemporary with Series 6 and the drachms were Series B and C of the bronze coinage of
Period V.
In Series B Tlos appears (and in later series as well), and four other cities also, making
their only appearance in the bronze coinage of Period V—Telmessus, Xanthus, Cyaneae, and Myra.
It remains possible that all the civic issues are contemporary, and that the civic hemidrachm issues belong in Series 6, but
the bulk of
the internal numismatic evidence supports the present placement. Pinara's issue 96 is very close indeed to Cragus's 95; and issue 95 lacks the distinctive form of
the rho, 
, which is present on all the drachms of Cragus and Tlos-Cragus. Cyaneae's issue 100 is very close to Masicytus's issue 99; and
Myra's issue 101 is at least as close to Masicytus's issue 98, especially to obverse 98.1, as it is to Series 6's obverse 110.1. The civic issues' symbols are all
placed at the left, the normal location in the League silver coinage and on the district coins of Series 3; the coins of Series
6 with one
exception have the symbol to the right. Were obverse die 110.1 unknown, the question of whether the civic hemidrachms belonged
in Series 6
would never have arisen; it is simpler to understand that die as an anachronism than to separate the civic hemidrachms from
the district
hemidrachms of Series 3.
Series 4 introduces yet another style of obverse, with the hair over the forehead coiled in a tight ringlet, which continues over the temple and ends by falling vertically over the cheek, forward of and parallel to the four coiled ringlets falling over the neck. A formalized flat single-loop chignon projects at the back of the neck. Exceptionally among the League's kitharephoroi, Apollo wears no wreath: only a taenia binds his hair. In the profile (especially the lips), in the fineness of the engraving tool used, and in the depiction of the hair at the crown—arranged in a swirling S-curve and often escaping in a few short ends at the very top of the head—Series 4 strongly resembles Series 3. Yet Series 4's ringlet hair style with its coil over the forehead becomes the dominant, when not the only, style of the succeeding Series 5–7. Even though Series 4 has the highest coin to obverse die ratio of any series, the known number of obverse dies is the smallest in any series, 252 so that it almost certainly was the smallest of any of the hemidrachm series of Period IV.
Series 5's issues 104 and 107, and 105 and 108, are the last parallel pairs of issues in Period IV. Each pair bears the same symbol, similarly placed, and all have the same obverse style: similar to that of Series 4, but with the short-lived taenia now replaced for good by the usual wreath. A line across the forehead, found on issues 104–5 and 107–9, is somewhat puzzling: it seems to be the lower edge of a band, rather than a cord, but nowhere continues as one would expect were it intended for a taenia.
The filleted branch symbol of issues 104 and 107 is of course the same as that of Series 2's issues 89 and 92. Yet the symbol's depiction and placement are quite different in the two series, and the two series' obverses are also distinctly different. The corn ear symbol of Cragus's issue 106 is also that of Series 3's issue 94, and some of 106's obverses 253 seem to be crude copies of Series 2 coins. One of Masicytus's issue 109's obverses 254 also seems to copy Series 2, yet the other dies of issue 109 clearly belong with issues 107 and 108; this offers some justification for the inclusion of the rather anomalous issue 106 in Series 5.
The two hoards unearthed since the seven hemidrachm series were put in their present order have provided some confirmation of the order of the last three series. 255 The Marmaris 1976 Hoard contained between 19 and 43 coins of each of Series 1–5, one single coin of Series 6, and none of Series 7. One can deduce that Series 7 had not yet commenced, and was thus the last series, and that Series 6 had just started to be struck, and was thus the penultimate series. The Lycia 1977 Hoard contained, in addition to a large number of quarter drachms, seven hemidrachms: these were all from Series 5, 6, and 7, strongly suggesting that Series 5 immediately preceded Series 6.
Only in Series 6 and 7 in any case does the parallelism of Series 1–5 disappear. Letter forms also associate these two final
series: only
in them are found Μ's with spreading uprights, 
; in Series 1–5 the Μ's invariably have parallel vertical
sides. As Series 7's weights clearly show it to have been the last series, it is apparent even without hoard evidence that
Series 6 must
have been the penultimate series. Series 6 is unique in having been struck by one district only, Masicytus. It can be divided into three distinct stylistic groups: one from the single anomalous die 110.1, a second from
the dies with large, flat heads (110.2-110.22), and a third from dies whose relief is somewhat higher and whose types are
much smaller
(110.23-110.62). The single Marmaris 1976 Hoard coin of this issue was of the second style; and many of the dies of
the third style are close to many of Masicytus's in Series 7.
256
Even apart from its low weight, Series 7 is set apart by its debased style, frequent use of two symbols, variations in format
including
left-facing Apollo heads, ethnics written vertically or retrograde, and Cragus's use of the peculiarly shaped rho, .
Occasional die links between issues, stylistic similarities, and repetition of symbols indicate that each district's issues
of Series 7
were probably struck within a fairly short period of time, even though the number of issues known is large in relation to
the number in
previous series. Among Cragus's issues of Series 7, 142, 143, and 144 are die linked, 144
and 145 each bear a filleted branch, and 145 and 146 each bear a star. Among Masicytus's issues, 150, 151, and 152 each have obverses with ΜΑ replacing ΛΥ; 151 and 152 are die linked, as are 153 and 154;
152, 154, and 156 each bear a star; 155, 156, and 157 each bear a branch; 157 and 158 each bear a trident head; 156 and 157
each include
retrograde reverse inscriptions; and 156, 157, and 158 each include left-facing obverse heads.
In summary, it is certain that Series 1 was the first series and that Series 7 was the last; virtually certain that Series 2 was the second, and that Series 6 was the penultimate series; and highly probable that Series 5 preceded Series 6. Only the relative placement of Series 3 and 4 remains conjectural. The absolute dating of the hemidrachms depends upon the positions held by Series 2 and Series 6, for whose dates there is external evidence, as will be seen below, and the positions occupied by these two series are fortunately fairly well assured.
| 245 |
Found with 102.1 and 102.2.
|
| 246 | |
| 247 |
See Table 5.
|
| 248 |
See Figure 7.
|
| 249 | |
| 250 |
110.1.
|
| 251 |
Issue 114, with which the quarter-drachm issue 129 must be associated.
|
| 252 |
See Table 5.
|
| 253 |
106.9–106.12.
|
| 254 |
109.11.
|
| 255 |
See above, pp. 124 and 127–30.
|
| 256 |
Compare 110.33–110.62 with Masicytus's issues 149–152 and with 156.1–156.2.
|
The order of Cragus's issues 111–13 is uncertain. Seven of Cragus's ten known dies were used for the relatively large issue 111; whether the smaller issues 112 and 113 precede or follow 111 is unclear. The smaller issues' more pleasing obverses and more carefully rendered lyres would seem to indicate that they were struck first; but the single lyre and reverse placement of the ΛΥ on issue 111, the double symbol of 113, and the reverse curve of the neck truncation on 112 and 113 have led to the arrangement presented. In any case, the two small issues were insignificant ones.
The arrangement of Masicytus's drachms is also largely stylistic, although a few issues are connected by obverse die links. The drachms can be divided into four groups: issues 115–16, 117–19, 120, and 121–23.
Issues 115 and 116 are closely connected by obverse style, although no actual links have been found, and by their unique reverse placement of the mint initials to one side or another. These issues have been placed first in the series because of this unusual format, the single lyre of issue 115, and their large heads which alone in the series are fairly competent portraits of Augustus. These two issues also differ sharply from others in the precision of their weights (17 of the 22 coins of good silver weighing between 3.46 and 3.60): the obvious care taken here would also seem to place them first in the series.
Issues 117–19 are die linked; two obverses are shared by 117 and 118, which are further connected by the recutting of the reverse found with 118.4; and another obverse die is shared by 118 and 119. The three issues have the same reverse format, with initials to either side and symbol in center.
Issue 120, with two plectra in the center, would seem to follow, even if not immediately, issue 119, which has the single plectron. Sixteen of issue 120's reverses repeat the format of 117–19, with mint initials to either side, but five reverses have the initials below the citharas, as on the following issues 121 and 122.
Issues 121 and 122 introduce a dotted, rather than a linear, border on the reverse; and issue 123 (with the exception of the anomalous first coin listed) has dotted borders on both obverse and reverse. These borders and the double symbol of 123 form the basis of these three issues' placement at the end of the drachm series. The occasional low placement of the mint initials on 120 becomes dominant (17 of 24 reverses) in 121 and 122; issue 123 returns to the format with initials at either side.
The arrangement proposed is hardly confirmed by, but does accord well with, the Lycia 1935 Hoard. The only issues of Masicytus not present in that deposit are the insignificant 121 (3 obverse dies) and the larger initial issue 115, which according to the arrangement given would have been struck farthest away in time from the hoard's burial. And only one (possibly there was a second) coin was present from the large final issue 123; presumably then the hoard was buried during or very shortly after that issue's striking.
But the great value of the Lycia 1935 Hoard is its association of the drachms with the hemidrachm Series 6. This indication that Series 6 is Augustan in date is the first clear indication of the date of any of the hemidrachm issues, and is of central importance in the chronology and interpretation of the district coinage which will be given.
Perhaps the tripod of issue 115, placed to the right, is to be equated with the tripod symbol of Series 6, which is also,
most unusually in
the hemidrachm series, placed to the right. Another clear confirmation of the contemporaneity of the drachms and Series 6
is furnished by
the observation that only among the drachms and in Series 6, in all the League's silver coinage, are there found bronze cores,
plated
coins, and coins of billon. Many of Masicytus's drachms also have Μ's with spreading
uprights, , a letter form first found on the hemidrachms in Series 6.
The only obverse die link between districts in all the League coinage is found in the quarter drachms, between Cragus's issue 124 and Masicytus's issue 130, each with facing stag head as symbol. Two coins are known from the shared die at Masicytus, and four at Cragus. Three of the Cragus coins were struck after the obverse die had been recut: the die was thus apparently used first for Masicytus's coinage.
A filleted branch, on Cragus's issue 125 and Masicytus's 131, is the only other quarter-drachm symbol common to both districts. These issues with the shared die and common symbols have been placed first in the arrangement, and the districts' other issues placed after them in the order in which the author quite subjectively viewed their decreasing attractiveness. Some confirmation of the order will, however, emerge below.
Cragus's and Tlos-Cragus's Augustus-head drachms all bear a peculiarly shaped rho, . Series 6 of
the hemidrachms has been shown by hoard evidence to be contemporary with the drachms; this series, of course, struck exclusively
by
Masicytus, bears no rhos; but the succeeding Series 7, when
Cragus resumed striking, continues the use of this rho.
Tlos-Cragus's quarter drachm issue 129 has this peculiar letter form, and this together with its symbol and the
ΛΥΚΙΩΝ of obverse 129.7 clearly show that it was contemporary with Tlos-Cragus's drachm issue 114 and
with Series 6 of the hemidrachms. This strange rho is possibly present also on Cragus's issue 128, whose linear border would also seem to associate it with the drachms. Cragus's issue 127, with its left-facing heads and ΛΥ placed to the left as on
Tlos-Cragus's 129.1, may also be of approximately this date, but the rest of Cragus's quarter drachms would seem to be earlier than Series 6 and the introduction of the drachms.
At least some of Masicytus's quarter-drachm issues also must be Augustan in date. The
linear border of issue 138 is again suggestive, and this issue's aphlaston symbol is of course that of the drachm issues 116
and 118. The
bow of 137 is found elsewhere only on the drachm issue 117. The Μ's with spreading uprights, , which first
appeared on the hemidrachms of Series 6 and on the drachms, are found on the quarter drachms from issue 135 on. The rest of
Masicytus's issues, all with Μ's with vertical uprights as on the hemidrachm Series 1–5, are
then presumably earlier than Series 6. It is not safe to assume contemporaneity between Lycian League issues of different
denominations
merely on the basis of identical symbols, but it is tempting to associate the distinctive filleted branch of issues 125 and
131 with the
hemidrachm Series 2; and possibly issue 132's torch with Masicytus's hemidrachm issue
99 in Series 3.
Myra's issue 140 and Masicytus-Myra's issue 141, however, would not seem to be associated with Myra's hemidrachm strikings in Series 3, but are more probably contemporary with Series 6. The symbol of issue 140 is that of the bronze issues 191 and 193 below, and the obverse head is virtually identical to that of the die linked bronze issues 192–95—which were Augustan in date. The placement of the ΛΥ on issue 141 associates this issue too with Tlos-Cragus's 129 and thus with the drachms and Series 6.
Detailed knowledge of Lycian history in the first century b.c., is not to be had. 257 The country is mentioned in the sources only when from time to time it entered the course of Roman history. As the century wore on and Rome became more and more involved in the east, we learn of ever more frequent occasions when Lycia was called upon for aid by one or another of the great forces in conflict around her. But of her own affairs, of internal developments, we know nothing. This historical summary that follows is thus a skewed one, comprising only external developments. Nevertheless the emphasis is probably the pertinent one so far as correlation with Lycia's coinage is concerned.
We have seen above that Lycia probably suffered seriously during the First Mithradatic War. What part if any the League played in 77 b.c. in Servilius Isauricus's capture and destruction of the pirate strongholds of Olympus and Phaselis is unknown, but it seems inevitable that Lycia must have supported Isauricus's expedition to at least some extent.
In 67, however, the Lycians are definitely known to have participated in another Roman move against the Cilician pirates, this time their final and effective suppression by Pompey. Under his extraordinary command, which gave him power over the whole Mediterranean and the right to demand aid from all the lands bordering it, the sea was swept free of pirates within a few months, such were the magnitude of his preparations and the speed of his movements. All the lands ringing the Mediterranean were organized under subordinates: Appian states, for example, that Metellus Nepos was in charge of Lycia, Pamphylia, Cyprus, and Phoenicia. 258 Lycian participation is thus assured, although no specifics are known.
Nothing further is heard of Lycia until nearly two decades later, when the Roman Civil Wars broke out. It is probable that Lycia was among the lands supplying ships, money, and supplies to Pompey in 49 b.c. The country is not specifically named among those supporting him by the two chief sources, Appian and Julius Caesar. 259 Cicero does list Lycia among the countries supplying a fleet to Pompey; 260 but, as Treuber points out, Cicero was merely listing lands which gossip reported as having aided Pompey. 261 Still, as Treuber admits, it is hard to see how Lycia could have escaped Pompey's requisitions.
During the Alexandrian War of 48–47 b.c., Caesar's fleet attacking Egypt included 12 ships from the Province of Asia, 9 (originally 10) from Rhodes, 8 from Pontus, and 5 from Lycia. 262 The relative number of ships here from little Lycia is surprisingly high. That Caesar and the Lycians were on good terms is strongly suggested by this, as well as by the Lycians' later support of his adherent Dolabella and then by their refusal to aid the tyrannicides Cassius and Brutus. Dio Cassius in fact explains this refusal: Ariobarzanes, Rhodes, and Lycia would not ally themselves with the tyrannicides "because they had been treated well by the earlier Caesar." 263
Dolabella in 43 hired a fleet from the Rhodians, Lycians, Pamphylians, and Cilicians in order to attack Cassius in Syria. Cassius, besieged, sent for ships to Phoenicia, Lycia, and Rhodes, but was rebuffed by all but one Phoenician city. Sending again to the same lands and also to Cleopatra, he again failed. Cleopatra declined on a pretext "but was really cooperating with Dolabella because of her relations with the elder Caesar." Rhodes and Lycia replied (no doubt untruthfully) that they had supplied ships to Dolabella only as an escort, not knowing that they were to be used in war; but that they would help neither Cassius nor Brutus in civil wars. 264
Cassius defeated and killed Dolabella and, after meeting with Brutus in Smyrna early in 42, Cassius undertook an attack on Rhodes, while Brutus invaded Lycia. Their motives were twofold: to collect plunder and money, and to remove the possibility of having the unfriendly Rhodian and Lycian fleets at their rear when finally confronting Antony and Octavian. Cassius defeated the Rhodians in a naval battle off Cos, entered the city of Rhodes, and exacted tribute. After an initial defeat of the Lycian federal army, Brutus besieged and took Xanthus, but only after fierce fighting. The city was destroyed by fire and most of its inhabitants perished—by their own hands and to Brutus's dismay, if we can believe the lurid accounts. 265 The historians revel in the siege, clearly exaggerating the story to stress the parallel with the Xanthians' mass self-destruction during Harpagus's siege in the fifth century; but whether Xanthus and its citizens perished at their own hands or at the Romans', the damage was done and the largest city of Lycia destroyed. Patara capitulated shortly after, and Myra soon surrendered to one of Brutus's lieutenants. From both cities Brutus demanded all stores of precious metals, public and private alike; and from the League's emissaries who came in search of peace he demanded a contribution of 150 talents. He further ordered the Lycian fleet to sail to Abydus and join his forces. As no further naval engagements preceded Philippi, however, this fleet can have seen no action on his behalf.
After the defeat and death of the tyrannicides at Philippi in October of 42, Antony toured the east. He confirmed Lycia in her "freedom," declared her free from taxes, and urged the resettling of Xanthus. 266 Perhaps this remission of taxes was in lieu of the gift of money Antony and Octavian had promised the Lycians after hearing of their conquest by Brutus. 267 As Treuber suggests, however, it is hardly credible that Antony did not later impose taxes on Lycia. 268 Lycia as part of the east fell to Antony in the division of the Roman world made by him and Octavian at Brundisium in 40 b.c.; and it would most likely have been among the "other nations" who contributed 30,000 troops for his invasion of Parthia in 36 b.c. 269 Lycia also must inevitably have contributed to his vast preparations for Actium, for he exacted help from all rulers, peoples, and cities "between Syria, Lake Maeotis, Armenia, and Illyria." 270 Dio Cassius says that both sides' preparations for Actium "far surpassed in size anything that had ever been before," and that on Antony's side were ranged "the regions subject to Rome in continental Asia," as well as other areas, and also "practically all the Kings and potentates whose territories bordered on that of the Roman empire then under his control." 271
A period of relative peace began for Lycia as for the Roman world as a whole after Antony's defeat at Actium left Octavian/Augustus secure in what was to be his long and prosperous reign. The Lycian League must have been called upon for assistance in Augustus's remaining Asiatic campaigns against Parthia and Armenia, although we know no details beyond the peripheral fact that it was at Limyra that Augustus's grandson Gaius Caesar died in a.d. 4 while returning to Rome, of wounds received in Armenia. 272 A temple of "Caesar" was built at Xanthus and a cult established there, but whether this honored Julius Caesar or Augustus is not known. 273 Augustus and his immediate successors were granted various honors and titles by a number of Lycian cities, 274 and to the honors known from inscriptions can now be added numismatic evidence of honors granted Augustus after Actium. 275
In a.d. 43, however, Claudius ended Lycia's two centuries of nominal freedom by declaring Lycia a Roman province. The reason given was a revolt among the Lycians, during which Roman citizens had been slain (τοὺς τε Λυϰίους στασιάντας, ὥστε ϰαὶ 'Ρωμαίους τινας ἀποϰτεῖναι). 276 Modern scholars have usually regarded these "disorders" as a mere pretext, considering Lycia's annexation a result of Claudius's territorial ambitions. But a recently published inscription describes rich and influential Lycians, exiled during what was apparently still the period of independence, appealing to Rome for aid. It has therefore been postulated that a social revolution of the lower classes did indeed occur and led Rome to intervene—of course on the side of the wealthy—and that this uprising was the occasion for Lycia finally being placed under close control as a province. 277
This was not, however, the end of the Lycian League. The League continued to function for at least three centuries as the internal government of the country, subject to close and constant Roman supervision. But the League's coinage clearly ceased before Lycia became a province, and Lycia's provincial history and coinage do not concern us here. 278
The Lycian League drachms with Augustus's head can only be dated by comparison to other Augustan issues. The poor and mechanical style of the Lycian coins, however, makes meaningful comparisons difficult—as does the repetition of various stylistic features in different metals and denominations throughout the ca. 31–19/18 b.c. span of the relevant Augustan coinage.
Perhaps the closest parallel to Masicytus's initial drachm issues 115 and 116 are denarii of 31–27 b.c. 279 The "layered" hair of many coins of issues 117–23 may echo that of cistophori of ca. 25–20 b.c. 280 A row of short free locks across the top of the head is a notable feature of this final issue 123, and this feature is seen on the cistophori of 19/18 b.c.—but also on some drachms of 31–29 b.c. 281 Tlos-Cragus's drachm obverses 114.1–114.5 are very close, especially in the swirl of locks at the nape of the neck, to the large Augustan bronzes of ca. 27–23 b.c.—but also to denarii recently dated to 21/20 b.c. 282 The most prominent feature of Cragus's chief issue 111 is the lock of hair jutting forward over the forehead: this feature is found on denarii of 31–29 b.c., but also on cisto- phoroi of 24–20 b.c. 283 It therefore seems unwarranted to date the Lycian drachms more precisely than to ca. 31–19/18 b.c., or, perhaps more probably to ca. 28/27 b.c.–19/18 b.c., the span covered by the cistophori of the Province of Asia. The variety of obverse styles found in Masicytus's relatively large output could well have spanned this approximate decade; and somewhere in this period the drachms of Cragus and Tlos-Cragus must also have been struck. During this period the hemidrachm Series 6 was also struck, for, as has been mentioned several times, the Lycia 1935 Hoard has provided the valuable information that this series was contemporary with the drachms.
The lightweight hemidrachm Series 7 is thus probably later than 19/18 b.c. It has long been thought that the League's coinage continued at least as late as Tiberius's time, because of a bronze League coin overstruck on a coin of that emperor; but the coin is now known to be a forgery. 284 Nevertheless, there is no reason Series 7 could not have been struck this late, possibly at the time of the opening of the Imperial mint at Caesareia in Cappadocia. It is impossible, however, to suggest an exact date for Series 7 between the broad limits of 19/18 b.c. and a.d. 43.
But when did the district hemidrachms commence? The only other indication of their dates, besides the Lycia 1935 Hoard, is found in Brutus's eastern coinage, two issues of which can be associated with hemidrachm Series 2.
A small isolated denarius issue of Brutus, heretofore rather mystifying, bears as obverse type a head of Apollo like no other in all the Roman coinage but strikingly similar in every detail to the obverses of Series 2's issues 88–90 and to most of those of issue 92. 285 The denarius's obverse bears no inscription; its reverse has Q CAEPIO BRVTVS IMP and shows a trophy with two shields, flanked by male and female captives. Its obverse is virtually identical to the Lycian ones: the hair at the crown is waved in unusual and rather confused short parallel S-curves; the curling lock at the forehead is the same; five ringlets fall over the cheek and neck; a double-looped chignon is at the rear of the head; and Apollo wears, unusually, both taenia and wreath. There can be little doubt that this issue of Brutus and Lycian hemidrachm Series 2 are connected in some way.
Another, earlier, denarius issue of Brutus also seems linked with Lycia and with Series 2 by more than curious coincidence. This issue, also an isolated one, bears a head of Liberty and the inscription LEIBERTAS on obverse; and on the reverse CAEPIO BRVTVS PROCOS and a triple type—quiver, cithara, and filleted laurel branch. 286 None of these three objects occurs as a type on any other Roman Republican coinage. All of course refer to Apollo but all are especially associated with Lycia. The quiver is the reverse type of the quarter drachms and the type of the countermark used on the late Period II issues. The cithara is obvious. The filleted branch is in every detail similar to the symbol on Series 2's issues 89 and 92, the very issues whose heads so resemble the other denarius issue of Brutus just mentioned. The upright branch with its long stem and few large leaves and the fillet tied in one large loop above is the same on both Roman and Lycian coins. Further, the symbol on the Lycian coins is placed, unusually, to the right, just where the branch occurs on the Roman coins.
All the tyrannicides' eastern coins are of course dated to the years 43–42 b.c., and are ranged in order by the titles assumed by Brutus and Cassius. Michael Crawford, whom I follow here, states that Brutus's coins progress from 1) those with simple cognomen, BRVTVS, through 2) those with title as proconsul, Q CAEPIO BRVTVS PROCOS, to 3) those with title as Imperator, first Q CAEPIO BRVTVS IMP and then M BRVTVS IMP. Crawford believes that the coins with title of proconsul began shortly after the tyrannicides' meeting in Smyrna early in 42, and that those with the title of Imperator "presumably began after the two men met at Sardis late in 42 and were acclaimed" for their victories over Rhodes and Lycia. 287 Thus both the lyre-reverse denarius and the Apollo-obverse denarius were struck precisely during the period of Brutus's conquest of Lycia. As Cassius struck coins obviously commemorating his victory over Rhodes at the battle of Cos, 288 so then would these denarii of Brutus seem to commemorate his invasion of Lycia.
A tentative outline of the relationships of the Roman and Lycian issues may be suggested. The first of the Lycian issues must be 88 and 91. Issue 88's obverses seem the finest of all, Lycian or Roman, of this style, and thus were probably the prototypes of all. The difference in coiffure style between Cragus's 88 and Masicytus's 91, a difference not found between any other parallel issues in all the hemidrachm series, may be attributed to the disruption caused by the invasion. The remaining Lycian issues of Series 2 would follow, with 89 and 92 bearing the same filleted-branch symbol as the lyre-reverse denarii. These lyre-reverse denarii, most probably roughly contemporary with the Lycian issues, may have been struck by the Romans in Lycia itself, presumably from the exacted tribute. The quiver and lyre refer to Apollo, i.e. Lycia, and the filleted branch specifically to the Lycian Apollo Patroös, whose cult image at Patara carried just such a branch. 289
Finally, the Apollo-head denarii, so clearly imitating the Lycian Apollo heads, would seem unmistakably to commemorate the Lycian conquest. Their fine style argues for their having been struck under settled conditions, i.e. after Brutus's return to Sardis, where Crawford believes Cassius's coins commemorating his Rhodian victory were struck, and where other coins of Brutus as Imperator were struck. 290
Booty from Xanthus and Patara would probably have been greater than that from Myra, and this may explain why Cragus's coins and obverse dies from Series 2, alone in all the hemidrachm series, outnumber Masicytus's, for these hemidrachms would of course have been struck not for the League's needs but for Brutus's exactions. This imbalance cannot be stressed, however, as the surviving material is so scant.
It is now that the importance of the stylistic order of hemidrachm Series 1–6 becomes apparent, for, with Series 2 dated to 42 and Series 6 to ca. 28/27–19/18 b.c., the explanation of the historical context of all the series depends on this order. A possible date for Series 1 will be suggested shortly, but Series 3, 4, and perhaps 5 must be considered as struck between Brutus's invasion in 42 b.c. and the battle of Actium in 31 b.c.—that is, during the period of Antony's overlordship of the East.
Two observations support, albeit weakly, such a period for Series 3 and 4. The civic issues of Series 3, unique among Period IV's hemidrachms, may reflect the "freedom" confirmed by Antony in 41 b.c. And Series 4's obverse style may possibly go back to an Egyptian prototype. The coiffure with the front coil of hair extending from the top of the forehead to the cheek, first introduced into the Lycian coinage in this series, is found elsewhere on ancient coins only on those of the earlier Ptolemies. 291 Antony's Egyptian associations after 36 b.c. may have been responsible for this new style. Cleopatra sent Antony money in 36 b.c.; and during the preparations for Actium she furnished 200 of his 800 ships, 20,000 talents, and supplies for the whole army during the war. 292 In the coins making up these 20,000 talents perhaps there were old bronzes which provided the immediate inspiration for the Apollo of Series 4. In any case, the head would have seemed familiar to Egyptian seamen.
Series 5 may also have been part of the preparations for Actium, or may have been struck shortly after, before Octavian's authority had become firmly established. It is impossible to say.
Throughout Series 1–5, Cragus and Masicytus struck issues which are virtually indistinguishable from each other in obverse style and parallel in reverse format and markings. This parallelism ceased in Series 6, struck only by Masicytus, and is not found again in the League's silver: neither the Augustan drachms, contemporary with Series 6, nor the reduced hemidrachms of Series 7 exhibit it. As has been discussed, Brutus destroyed Xanthus in 42 b.c., and Antony urged the Lycians shortly after to rebuild and resettle it. It is hard to see how the exactions of the next decade would have allowed this. The bronzes of Period V, to be treated in the next chapter, include strikings of several cities honoring Augustus in Series B, shortly after 27 b.c.—but Xanthus appears for the first and only time after Period III in the bronzes of Period V's Series C, here dated to the late 20s b.c. I would suggest that Cragus's absence in the hemidrachm Series 6 reflects a temporary remission of taxes granted to Cragus by Augustus in order to bring about the restoration of Xanthus. Cragus's drachm output was also exceedingly small in comparison with Masicytus's: in hemidrachm Series 1–5, Cragus has 120 known obverse dies to Masicytus's 196; but among the drachms, Cragus has only 10 known dies to Masicytus's 88.
But when was Series 1 struck, and the hemidrachm coinage of the districts initiated? The coins themselves provide no clues. Five possible historical occasions present themselves: Servilius's campaign of 77 b.c., Pompey's pirate conquest of 67 b.c. and his exactions of 49 b.c., Caesar's Alexandrian campaign of 47, and Dolabella's attack on Cassius in 43 b.c.
It is worth noting that the dated Ephesian cistophori, which had been issued annually ever since 134/3 b.c., ceased in 67 and resumed only under proconsular control in 58 b.c. This and other evidence has led Broughton to postulate a shortage of precious metals in the second quarter of the first century b.c., with the result that stocks of gold and silver in both Rome and Asia were held at Rome's disposition. 293 A hiatus in Lycian silver minting would thus be reasonable after the end of Period II.
It is here proposed that Period IV's hemidrachm Series 1 was struck under the overlordship of Julius Caesar. If the hemidrachms' standard, as seems evident, 294 was based on that of the Roman quinarii of the second half of the first century, Period IV's silver can only have appeared in 48 b.c. or later, for in that year Caesar seems to have revived the Roman quinarius. 295 Further, Caesar is the only one of the men just cited who from his position was directly involved with provincial administration. He is known to have reformed the tax system of the Province of Asia, instituting a fixed tribute collected directly by the local authorities. 296 While any or all of the men cited may have demanded aid, Julius Caesar seems the one most likely to have initiated a basic and lasting change in Lycia's coinage.
| Date | Under Whom Struck | Hemidrachm Series | Drachm Issues | Quarter Drachm Issues |
| 48–42 B.C. | Julius Caesar | 1 | ||
| 42 B.C. | Brutus | 2 | ||
| early 30s B.C. | Antony | 3 | 124–26, 130–34 | |
| late 30s B.C. | Antony | 4 | ||
| late 30s–27 B.C. | Antony or Octavian | 5 | ||
| ca. 28/27–ca. 19/18 B.C. | Augustus | 6 | All | 127–29, 135–41 |
| 19/18 B.C.–A.D. 43 | ? | 7 |
| 257 |
The following historical summary is based on the modern histories cited in n. 3, as well as the ancient historians cited for
specific
details.
|
| 258 |
Mith. 94–95.
|
| 259 |
App., BCiv. 2.49; Caes., BCiv. 3.3–5.
|
| 260 |
Att. 9.9.
|
| 261 |
P. 189, n. 3.
|
| 262 |
Caes, Bell. Al. 13.
|
| 263 |
47.32.
|
| 264 |
App., BCiv. 4.60–61.
|
| 265 |
App., BCiv. 4.75–81; Plut., Brut. 30–32; Dio Cass. 47.34.
|
| 266 |
App., BCiv. 5.7.
|
| 267 |
Dio Cass. 47.36.
|
| 268 |
Treuber, p. 204.
|
| 269 |
Plut., Ant. 37.
|
| 270 |
Plut., Ant. 56.
|
| 271 |
50.6.
|
| 272 |
Dio Cass. 55.10a.9. J. Borchhardt's excavations at Limyra have
recently revealed a rich cenotaph erected there to Gaius's memory. See, most recently, M. Mellink, "Archaeology in
Asia Minor," AJA 79 (1975), p. 212, and 80 (1976), p. 274,
where preliminary reports are cited.
|
| 273 | |
| 274 |
E.g. TAM 556 = IGR 546; see also Magie, p. 529 and p. 1386, n. 46.
|
| 275 |
See Period V, Series B and commentary on Series A-D.
|
| 276 |
Dio Cass. 60.17; see also Suet., Claud. 25.3.
|
| 277 |
SEG 18, 143. The most recent commentary is that in GFS, pp. 260–61.
|
| 278 |
But see Appendix 3 for Claudius's small Lycian output, apparently struck ca. a.d. 43 just as the country became a province.
|
| 279 |
31–29 b.c., with
CAESAR DIVI F, BMCRE, Augustus
590–608; 29–27 b.c., with IMP CAESAR
, BMCRE, Augustus 622–32. See Plate 26, A-C. The traditional
attribution of these denarii to the east has been abandoned in recent years in favor of an uncertain mint in Italy:
for a brief summary of the evidence see the introduction to nos. 190 ff. in Ashmolean. The linear border repeated on
the Lycian drachms is introduced to the Roman coinage on these Augustan issues.
|
| 280 | |
| 281 |
See Plate 26, G, and Cistophori, Group VII (Pergamum, 19/18 b.c.); and Plate 26, A (see above, n. 279).
|
| 282 |
Bronzes: see Plate 26, J, and BMCRE, Augustus 713–20; and Plate 26,
K, and BMCRE, Augustus 721–28. On these bronzes, see below, pp.
208–10. Denarii: Plate 26, D, and BMCRE, Augustus 662–63,
attributed to Samos in 21/20 b.c. by C. H. V. Sutherland,
"L'Attribution des deniers Augustéens aux types du 'temple', de la 'couronne', et du 'jeune taureau'," RN 1974, p.
62.
|
| 283 |
Denarii: see Plate 26, B (see above, n. 279). Cistophori: see Plate 26, F (see above, n. 280).
|
| 284 |
See Appendix 2, under Cragus.
|
| 285 |
Crawford 503/1 = Sydenham 1293. See Plate 16, B.
|
| 286 |
Crawford 501/1 = Sydenham 1287. See Plate 16, A. The object to the left has invariably been described as a plectrum, but surely
is not. It
is a quiver of the common cylindrical type with conical lid which often has a central projection. This object occurs throughout
the Lycian
League coinage: see e.g. 4α-β, 12.2, 70β, 85.2, the quarter-drachm issues 124–41; and also the countermark present on 53.11
and others. For
larger numismatic representions of such quivers, see BMCIonia, pl. 10, 4, and pl. 18, 9–10.
|
| 287 |
P. 741, n. 3.
|
| 288 |
Crawford 505/1–3 = Sydenham 1311–13.
|
| 289 |
See pp. 20–21, and Plate 1, 2α and A-F.
|
| 290 | |
| 291 |
On second century coins of Ptolemies V-VIII, on heads of Libya or of Isis: BMC-Ptolemies, Ptolemy
V, 83 ff.; Ptolemy VI, 9 ff. and 28 ff. Ptolemy VIII, 6 ff. and 67 ff.
|
| 292 |
Dio Cass. 49.31.4; Plut., Ant. 56.
|
| 293 |
T. R. S. Broughton, "A Significant Break in the Cistophoric Coinage of Asia," AJA 41 (1937),
pp. 248–49.
|
| 294 |
See Figure 10.
|
| 295 |
Crawford 452/3 = Sydenham 1012.
|
| 296 |
App., BCiv. 5.4; Dio Cass. 42.6.
|
| 214 |
See above, pp. 12–13.
|
Period V consists of the bronze issues of the districts of Cragus and Masicytus, together with a few strikings of cities (Telmessus, Xanthus, and Tlos in the west, and Cyaneae and Myra in the south), which sometimes but not always bear also the name of a district.
Table 7 Types of Period V
Series A-E (four denominations)
Double Units (A, C, D, E)
Obv. Head of Apollo.
Rev. Cithara in wreath (A, C, D) or standing Apollo (E).
Units (all series)
Obv. Head of Artemis.
Rev. Stag (A, B), quiver (C, D a ), or standing Artemis (E).
Half Units (A, B, E)
Obv. Head of Apollo (A), of Artemis (B), or of Hermes (E).
Rev. Quiver and bow crossed in incuse square (A), quiver in incuse square (B), or caduceus in incuse square (E).
Quarter Units (A)
Obv. Head of Artemis.
Rev. Quiver.
Series B, the only series of A-E without double units, also contains very large coins which must be considered Roman denominations:
Sestertii (B)
Obv. Head of Augustus.
Rev. Cithara, usually in wreath.
Dupondii (B)
Obv. Head of Apollo.
Rev. Tripod, sometimes in wreath.
Series F (uncertain denominations)
Obv. Head of Apollo.
Rev. Tripod.
Obv. Head of Apollo.
Rev. Head of Artemis, or standing Apollo.
Series G (uncertain denominations)
Obv. Stag.
Rev. Lyre.
Obv. Head of Apollo.
Rev. Head of Artemis.
The Period V coins fall into seven series (coincidentally the same number as the number of hemidrachm series in Period IV, but there is no correlation between the two sets of series). As indicated in Table 7, Series A contains four denominations. Series B-E each contain two or three of these denominations, whose weights drop and some of whose types change between certain series. Series B also contains quasi-sestertii and quasi-dupondii. The last two series, F and G, abandoning the denominations of A-E, consist chiefly of coins of new weights and with significantly different types.
Table 8 compares the weights of Lycian bronzes. For Period V, it shows the cities and districts striking each series, the different series' denominations, and the weights of these denominations. In each case, the denomination called "unit" is the most common and most universally struck.
| The Dynast Pericles a | 2.03 | 1.18 | ||||||
| 4-Unit | 2-Unit | Unit | ||||||
| Lycian League Period I | 3.53 | 2.15 b | 1.08 | |||||
| Lycian League Period III | 4.71 | 2.74 | 1.35 | |||||
| Lycian League Period V | ||||||||
| Total | ||||||||
| Obverse | Denominations: Known Mints and Average Weights c | |||||||
| Dies | Series | Mints | Sest. | Dup. | 2-Unit | Unit d | ½-Unit | ¼-Unit |
| 64 | A | 9.64 | 4.69 | 2.36 | 1.11 | |||
| Cragus | x | x | x | x | ||||
| Tlos-Cragus | x | x | x | x | ||||
| Masicytus | x | x | x | x | ||||
| 38 | B | 25.12 | 14.26 | 3.48 | 1.53 | |||
| Telmessus-Cragus | x | x | x | |||||
| Tlos | x | |||||||
| Tlos-Cragus | x | x | x | x | ||||
| Cyaneae | x | x | ||||||
| Masicytus | x | x | x | x | ||||
| Myra-Masicytus | x | |||||||
| 32 | C | 6.04 | 3.54 | |||||
| Cragus | x | x | ||||||
| Xanthus-Cragus | x | x | ||||||
| Masicytus | x | x | ||||||
| 9 | D | 4.40 e | 2.71 | |||||
| Cragus | x | |||||||
| Tlos | x | |||||||
| 30 | E | 5.87 | 3.06 | 1.72 | ||||
| Cragus | x | x | x | |||||
| Masicytus | x | x | x | |||||
| Total | ||||||||
| Obverse | Uncertain Denominations | |||||||
| Dies | Series | Mints | ||||||
| 42 | F | 8.05 f | 3.99 | |||||
| Tlos-Cragus | x | |||||||
| Tlos | x | |||||||
| Masicytus | x | |||||||
| 12 | G | 3.87 | 2.46 | |||||
| Cragus | x | x | ||||||
| Masicytus | x | x | ||||||
| Claudius g | 14.78 | 7.69 | 4.09 | |||||
| Myra, Non-League h | 3.70 |
Die identities are not noted, although the total number of obverse dies known for each issue is given. (At times the coins' poor preservation makes these totals only approximate.) The occasional die links between issues are noted as they occur. Except for the very smallest coins, where die axis positions become rather random, relative die axis positions are, as usual in the League coinage, ↑↑, ↑↗, or ↑↖ and are therefore not given.
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 the letters nor the sequence of coins catalogued indicate particular dies, and only a representative selection of obverse dies is illustrated for most issues.
Series A-D are discussed following the catalogue of Series D, and each successive series following its catalogue.
Double Units:
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. Cithara in wreath.
Units:
Obv. Head of Artemis r.
Rev. Stag r.
Half Units:
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. Bow and quiver crossed in incuse square.
Quarter Units:
Obv. Head of Artemis r.
Rev. Quiver.
Double Units: 4 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 9.64
Units: 26 coins, 13 obv. dies, av. wt. 4.69
Half Units: 42 coins, 37–39? obv. dies, av. wt. 2.36
Quarter Units: 14 coins, 12–13? obv. dies, av. wt. 1.11
Units
159. Obv. ΔΙ.
Rev. ΛΥ ΚΡ; in exergue, plectron.
α. New York 4.27 (ex Heller); Athens 5.91 (plectron omitted), 4.45 = Mavromichalis 91; Berlin 5.47, 3.16; London 3.97 = BMC Dias-Cragus 1. 6 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 4.54.
160. Obv. ΕΠ.
Rev. ΛΥ ΚΡ; in exergue, plectron.
α. Oxford 3.99, purchased on the Makri (Telmessus)-Elmali road = "Coins Lycia," pp. 38 and 42, 46. 1 coin, wt. 3.99.
Half Units
161. Obv. ΔΙ.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙ ΚΡ.
α. Berlin 2.07; Berlin 2.71, 2.47, 2.41; Copenhagen 2.88 = SNG 75; London 2.04, found at Pinara = BMC Cragus 1 = Fellows, p. 284, 10; Oxford 2.13; Paris 3.07 = Waddington 3047. 8 coins, 7? obv. dies, av. wt. 2.47.
162. Obv. ΕΠ.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙ ΚΡ.
α. Berlin 2.32; private coll. 2.71. 2 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 2.52.
Quarter Units
163. Obv. ΔΙ.
Rev. ΛΥ ΚΡ.
α. Paris 0.78 = Waddington 3050; Oxford 1.26 (ΚΡ retrograde); Berlin 1.08. 3 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 1.04.
164. Obv. ΕΠ.
Rev. ΛΥ ΚΡ.
α. Berlin 0.74. 1 coin, wt. 0.74.
The traditional ascription of the coins with ΔΙ on obverse has been to Dias, a city known only from Stephanus of Byzantium: a location in the west of Lycia has been assumed from its apparent association with Cragus on the coins. Publishing the unique coin of issue 160, however, Sir Edward Robinson in 1914 demolished the attribution to Dias. This coin, similar in every way to those with ΔΙ, showed that both sets of initials must be those of individuals rather than of cities, as no Lycian town whatever is known commencing with ΕΠ. ΔΙ and ΕΠ are thus officials of some sort, as must be ΙΠΠΟΛΟ and ΑΠΟ, found on the Series A coins of Masicytus—the only other individuals named in Period V.
Tlos-Cragus
Double Units
165. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛω ΚΡ.
α. Berlin 8.80; London 7.76 = BMC Cragus 20 (the ΤΛ(ω) not noted). 2 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 8.28.
The reverse wreaths are composed of trios of leaves, but the lashings connecting the trios are not shown.
Units
166. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛω ΚΡ.
α. Berlin 4.30; Berlin 6.15; Munich 3.60 = Hirsch 21 (Nov. 16, 1908) 3648; Paris 2.93; private coll. 6.06; Vatican 5.00. 6 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 4.67.
Half Units
167. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛ ΚΡ.
α. Paris 2.91 = Waddington 3192; Athens 2.93. 2 coins, 1? obv. die, av. wt. 2.92.
Double Units
168. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ and ΙΠΠΟΛΟ.
α. Paris 12.87 = Waddington 3102; Paris 9.14 = Waddington 3103 (the ΙΠΠΟΛΟ, in minute letters under the cithara, not noted). 2 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 11.01.
Units
169. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ or ΜΑϹΙ, and ΙΠΠΟ or ΙΠΠΟ; exergue line formed by torch on most if not all examples.
α. Copenhagen 5.20 = SNG 99; Athens 5.38; Berlin 4.93, 4.79; Berne 4.42; Cambridge 5.10 = SNGFitz 5042; London 4.29 = BMC 28, 4.60 = BMC 29, 4.48; Paris 5.47 = Waddington 3104, 5.04 = Waddington 3105 (ΜΑ replacing ΛΥ on obverse); private coll. 4.63; Winterthur 4.43. 13 coins, 6 obv. dies, av. wt. 4.83.
Half Units
170. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ and ΙΠΠΟ or ΙΠ; dotted border around the incuse square on some examples.
α. Paris 2.64 = Waddington 3106; β. Paris 2.61; Athens 2.40, 2.19; Berlin 2.30 (ΛΥ, Ι[Π?], and ΜΑ on reverse); Copenhagen 2.42 = SNG 98; New York 2.80; Oxford 2.21, purchased on the Makri (Telmessus)-Elmali road = "Coins Lycia," pp. 38 and 43, 57; Paris 2.88; private coll. 3.45, 1.60. 11 coins, 10–11? obv. dies, av. wt. 2.50.
Quarter Units
171. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ and ΙΠ.
α. Von Aulock 1.12 = SNG 4344; Berlin 1.29. 2 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 1.21.
ΙΠΠΟΛΟ is most probably an abbreviation of 'Ιππόλοχος (a name known from several Lycian inscriptions. In myth, Hippolochus was the son born to Bellerophon after his marriage to the daughter of the king of Lycia. Hippolochus became father of Glaucus, second in command of the Lycian contingent at Troy, and uncle of the first in command, Sarpedon, son of Zeus and of Hippolochus's sister. Hippolochus would understandably have been a frequently used name in Hellenistic and later Lycia.
Half Units
172. Obv. ΛΥ (on at least one die).
Rev. ΛΥ (on at least one die) and ΚΡ.
α. Berlin 2.06; β. London 1.94; Athens 2.95; Berlin 2.10, 1.55; Cambridge 2.62 = SNGFitz 5029, 2.06 = SNGFitz 5030; London 2.92 = BMC 16. 8 coins, 8? obv. dies, av. wt. 2.28.
The usual bow is omitted on a few reverses.
Quarter Units
173. Rev. ΛΥ ΚΡ.
α. Paris 1.44 = Waddington 3049; Berlin 1.05; London 1.49 = FITA, p. 476, attributed to Cremna in Galatia, 0.77 = Weber 7261. 4 coins, 3–4 obv. dies, av. wt. 1.19.
Half Units
174. Rev. ΛΥΚΙ ΜΑ.
α. Private coll. 2.12; Athens 2.98, 2.59; Paris 2.36 = Waddington 3089. 4 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 2.51.
Quarter Units
175. Obv. ΜΑ (on at least one die).
Rev. ΛΥ ΜΑ.
α. Athens 1.44; Athens 1.42, 1.14. 3 coins, 3? obv. dies, av. wt. 1.33.
Half Units
176. Obv. ΜΑ (probably).
Rev. ΑΠΟ.
α. London 1.81; Athens 1.15; Berlin 2.07, 1.79; Paris 2.18 = Waddington 3107, 1.76; Vienna 1.79. 7 coins, 6–7 obv. dies, av. wt. 1.79.
Quarter Unit
177. Obv. Markings, if any, off flan.
Rev. ΑΠΟ.
α. Paris 0.50. 1 coin, wt. 0.50.
The types of issues 172–77 repeat those of the first section of Series A, and are not found again in the district coinage. The weights of issues 172–75 agree closely with those of the earlier fractions of Series A, but the weights of issues 176–77, with ΑΠΟ, are somewhat lighter. Their types place them in Series A, but their weights seem intermediate between Series A and B.
ΑΠΟ has understandably often been interpreted as the initial letters of the small city of Apollonia, on the south shore of Lycia, 297 although, oddly, the only really reliably published coin with this inscription ( Waddington 3107) is there listed by Babelon simply as an issue of Masicytus. But the insignificance of little Apollonia, which appears in only one (epigraphical) of the types of evidence (literary, epigraphical, and numismatic) for the League cities summarized in Table 2, leads one to the presumption that ΑΠΟ is merely the abbreviation of an individual's name, just as are ΔΙ, ΕΠ, and ΙΠΠΟΛΟ. The coins' poor preservation does not allow certainty, but an obverse inscription ΜΑ does seem present on several examples of issue 176—Babelon read ΜΑ on Waddington 3107—and this unusual appearance of the district initials on the obverse is also found on issue 175. Apollonia then would not seem to have been a Lycian League mint, or, indeed, a mint at any time whatever.
| 297 |
E.g. Asie Mineure, p. 113; Warren, p. 44, n. 1, cited in BMC, p.
lxii; HN
2, p. 694, where the inscription is erroneously given as ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΑΠΟ; Moretti, p. 203, citing
Fougères, p. 35; Jones, p. 102; Jameson, col. 281.
|
Sestertii:
Obv. Head of Augustus r. (l. on 187).
Rev. Cithara (within wreath except on 190).
Dupondii:
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. Tripod (within wreath except on 180 and 191).
Units:
Obv. Head of Artemis r.
Rev. Stag r.
Half Units:
Obv. Head of Artemis r.
Rev. Quiver in shallow incuse square.
Sestertii: 8 coins, 5–6 obv. dies, av. wt. 25.12
Dupondii: 8 coins, 5 obv. dies, av. wt. 14.26
Units: 111 coins, 26 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.48
Half Units: 3 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 1.53
Telmessus-Cragus
Sestertius
178. Rev. ΚΡ ΤΕΛ.
α. London 25.27 = G. F. Hill, "Greek Coins Acquired by the British Museum in 1922," NC 1923, pp. 230–31, 38. 1 coin, wt. 25.27.
Dupondii
179. Obv. To r., cithara.
Rev. ΚΡ ΤЄΛ.
α. Paris 15.56. 1 coin, wt. 15.56.
180. Rev. ΚΡ ΤЄΛ; no wreath.
α. New York 14.78 = Münzen und Medaillen 41 (June 18, 1970) 258. 1 coin, wt. 14.78.
Units
181. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΕΛ ΚΡ or ΤЄΛ ΚΡ.
α. Von Aulock 4.49 = SNG 4454; β. Berlin 3.28; Athens 4.11; Berlin 4.07; Copenhagen 3.08 = SNG 136; London 2.33 = BMC 3, 3.11 = BMC 4, 3.12 = BMC 5; Paris 3.41 = Waddington 3186, 3.32; Vienna 3.64 (ΛΥ replaces ΚΡ on reverse), 3.50. 12 coins, 6 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.46.
Sestertius
182. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛ.
α. Boston 25.03. 1 coin, wt. 25.03.
The similarity of the reverse format to Telmessus's sestertius, and especially the placement of the Τ so far to the left, with ample room between it and the cithara for an Ε, might lead to the supposition that the coin is a striking of Telmessus rather than of Tlos. The Τ and Λ are well preserved, however, and there seems no trace of an Ε on the coin.
Tlos-Cragus
Sestertius
183. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΚΡ ΤΛ.
α. Paris 24.21 = Waddington 3060. 1 coin, wt. 24.21.
Dupondius
184. Rev. ΚΡ ΤΛω.
α. Private coll. 15.37. 1 coin, wt. 15.37.
Units
185. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛ ΚΡ.
α. New York 3.44 = Weber 7306; β. Berlin 3.64; Athens 4.69, 3.49, 3.04, 2.79; Berlin 5.11; Cambridge 4.82 = McClean 8883; Copenhagen 4.49 = SNG 149; London 3.51, 3.40, 2.51; New York 3.33; Paris 3.57 = Waddington 3193, 3.32, 2.88; private colls. 4.46, 4.22, 3.73; von Aulock 4.48 = SNG 4470; Weber 7307, 4.53. 21 coins, 4 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.76.
Hall Units
186. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛ ΚΡ.
α. New York 1.54 (ΤΛ not preserved); β. Copenhagen 1.38 = SNG 64, called Cragus, although the ΤΛ is clear. 2 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 1.46.
Sestertius
187. Rev. ΛΥ ΚΥ.
α. Paris 29.08 = Waddington 3064 = FITA, p. 342, erroneously described as of Tlos. 1 coin, wt. 29.08.
Babelon in Waddington read ΛΥ ΚΥΑ on reverse. The present author can read only ΛΥ ΚΥ on this worn coin, whose letters are so faint that they unfortunately do not show up in the photograph.
Units
188. Rev. ΚΥΑ ΛΥ; on 187β and perhaps others, a torch forms the exergue line.
α. Paris 3.09; β. Copenhagen 5.05 = SNG 73; Aberdeen 2.07 = SNGDavis 322; Athens 3.92, 3.86, 2.93; Berlin 4.01, 3.36, 3.33, 3.04; Cambridge 4.74 = SNGFitz 5032; Copenhagen 2.83 = SNG 74; London 5.14 = BMC 3, 2.92 = BMC 4, 2.40 = BMC 5, 3.46, 2.95, 2.49; New York 3.42; Paris 3.29 = Waddington 3063, 3.52; private colls. 3.60, 3.07, 2.59; von Aulock 4.16 = SNG 4319; Winterthur 2.82 = Ratto (Apr. 4, 1927) 2228. 26 coins, 8 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.39.
Sestertii
189. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ (189α), ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΜΑ (189β), or ΜΑ ΛΥΚΙΩΝ (189γ); to r., winged caduceus.
α. New York 25.40 = Auctiones A.G. (Sept. 30, 1976) 247 = SNGvAulock 4361; β. London 25.54 = BMC 38 = Laffranchi, p. 294; γ. Paris 21.28 = Waddington 3116. 3 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 24.07.
190. Obv. ΛΥ?
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΜΑ; to r., winged caduceus; no wreath.
α. Florence?
190α is known only from two eighteenth-century publications: A. F. Gorius, Antiqua Numismatica… Magni Ducis Etruriae (Florence, 1740), vol. 3, pp. 53–54, pl. 5, E; and J. Eckhel, Numi Veteres Anecdoti (Vienna, 1775), p. 217, pl. 13, 1. Both works' illustrations are here reproduced, as efforts to locate the coin and obtain a better record have been unsuccessful. The obverse inscription of the illustrations is of course extremely doubtful.
Dupondii
191. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΜΑ; to l. or r., branch; no wreath.
α. Paris 12.88 = Waddington 3101; β. New York 13.59 (ex Heller); γ. Egger 46 (May 11, 1914) 1917, 15.15; Athens 14.05 (ΛΥΚΙΩΝ omitted) = Mavromichalis 112; London 12.70 = BMC 35. 5 coins, 2? obv. dies, av. wt. 13.67.
191α-β and the London coin are die duplicates.
Units
192. Obv. ΛΥ or ΛΥΚΙ or ΜΑ or no inscription.
Rev. ΜΑ.
α. Berlin 2.99; β. Paris 2.93; γ. Glasgow 3.63 = Hunter, p. 502, 6; δ. Berlin 3.70; ε. New York 3.65; Athens 4.03, 3.95 = Mavromichalis 99, 3.63, 3.42, 3.41; Berlin 3.76, 3.66, 3.32, 3.16; Cambridge 4.30 = McClean 8879, 3.76 = SNGFitz 5043; Copenhagen 3.25 = SNG 100; Glasgow 2.98 = Hunter, p. 502, 7; London 4.34 = BMC 31, 3.84, 3.49 = BMC 32, 2.92 = BMC 30, 2.65 = BMC 30A; New York 3.30 = Weber 7279; Oxford 3.33, 3.27, 3.15; Paris 2.98 = Waddington 3098, 3.64 = Waddington 3100, 3.96, 3.82, 3.19, 3.01; private coll. 3.20; von Aulock 3.82 = SNG 4341; in trade 2.32. 31 coins, 7 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.50.
193. Obv. ΛΥ or no inscription.
Rev. ΜΑ; above or to r., Isis crown.
α. London 2.87 = BMC 33; β. Paris 3.43 = Waddington 3099; Athens 2.95, 2.81; Von Aulock 3.39 = SNG 4342. 5 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.15.
Myra-Masicytus
Units
194. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΥ.
α. Copenhagen 2.31 = SNG 109; β. Paris 2.83; Berlin 3.02. 3 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 2.72.
195. Obv. ΛΥ or ΜΑ or no inscription.
Rev. ΜΥ; above or to l. or r., Isis crown.
α. London 3.00; β. London 3.59 = BMC 9; Berlin 3.73, 3.65, 2.92; Copenhagen 3.23 = SNG 108; London 4.52 = BMC 8; Paris 3.66 = Waddington 3099, 3.44, 3.34; private coll. 3.33; von Aulock 3.90 = SNG 4362; Weber 7285, 3.41. 13 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.52.
None of the three coins of issue 194 bears Masicytus's initials, but the issue is catalogued under Myra-Masicytus rather than Myra because of the extensive die linkage (see below) between issues 192–95.
Masicytus or Myra-Masicytus
Half Unit
196. Obv. Illegible inscription to r.
Rev. Illegible inscription.
α. Private coll. 1.68. 1 coin, wt. 1.68.
The similarity between issues 192–93 of Masicytus and 194–95 of Myra-Masicytus has often been noted, and Myra therefore understood as a, if not the, mint of the Masicytus district. 298 But the numerous die links between the city and district issues have gone unrecognized except for one handwritten ticket in the trays of the Cabinet des Médailles in Paris. Eight obverses in all are known for the four issues 192–95. Four of these are known in more than one issue, and all die links are indicated on Plate 36. The pattern of die linkage shows no relationship with obverse legend, whether ΛΥ, ΜΑ, or no inscription.
| Issue | Rev. Markings | ||||
| ΛΥ | ΛΥ | ΜΑ | No Insc. | 192 193 194 195 |
ΜΑ ΜΑ and symbol ΜΥ ΜΥ and symbol |
The obverse legends seem to be irrelevant. All four tightly die linked issues must have been contemporary, and all must have been struck at Myra.
The types of issue 196 are of course those of the quarter drachms. The weight of the coin, however, shows that it cannot have been a bronze core for a plated quarter drachm, but must be considered a simple bronze coin. The reverse is unfortunately quite illegible, but the piece must be a half unit of Myra-Masicytus, or perhaps more probably of the district alone, whose other bronze coinage was far larger than that of the city.
| 298 |
E.g. BMC, p. liii.
|
Double Units:
Obv. Head of Apollo r. (occasionally l. on 200).
Rev. Cithara in wreath.
Units:
Obv. Head of Artemis r. (occasionally l. on 201).
Rev. Quiver.
Double Units: 45 coins, 20–22 or fewer obv. dies, av. wt. 6.04
Units: 39 coins, 12 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.54
Double Units
197. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΚΡ; above, on most if not all dies, small star.
α. Paris 7.70 = Waddington 3053; β. Paris 8.17; Athens 6.56; Glasgow 5.73 = Hunter, p. 500, 3; Klagenfurt; Paris 5.81 = Waddington 3054; private coll. 7.62, 7.13; von Aulock 12.02 = SNG 4309; Ratto (Apr. 4,1927) 2226. 10 coins, 5 obv. dies, av. wt. 7.59.
Units
198. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΚΡ; to l. above, star.
α. Copenhagen 4.30 = SNG 66; Athens 3.58; private coll. 4.02. 3 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 3.97.
199. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΚΡ; to r., branch.
α. Berlin 3.38. 1 coin, wt. 3.38.
Xanthus-Cragus
Double Units
200. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΚΡ ΞΑΝ.
α. Copenhagen 3.42 = SNG 69; β. von Aulock 3.80 = SNG 4315; γ. Munich 5.20; δ. London 5.42 = BMC Cragus-Xanthus 29; ε. London; ȝ. Paris 6.23 = Waddington 3056; Athens 6.23, 5.64; Berlin 6.51, 5.17; Copenhagen 6.42 = SNG 70; Klagenfurt; London 5.93 = BMC Cragus-Xanthus 28; Munich 6.86; Oxford 5.85; Paris 6.95 = Waddington 3057, 7.76; private coll. 4.61; Vatican 4.55. 19 coins, 4–6 obv. dies, av. wt. 5.68.
200α and 200β share a reverse die; 200β and 200γ share an obverse die; 200γ and 200δ share another reverse die; and 200δ and 200ε share another reverse die. The obverses with ringlets, both left-facing and right-facing, and those with taenia and long flowing locks are thus all firmly associated.
Units
201. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΚΡ ΞΑΝ or ΞΑΝ ΚΡ.
α. New York 2.71; β. private coll. 4.63; γ. Oxford 2.63, purchased at Antiphellus = "Coins Lycia," p. 38, 48; Athens 3.96, 3.52; Berlin 4.11, 2.61; Copenhagen 3.95 = SNG 71, 3.39 = SNG Phliasia-Laconia 487, called Zacynthus; Hague 3.95; London 3.60 = BMC Xanthus-Cragus 5, 2.72 = BMC Cragus-Xanthus 30; New York 3.48; Paris 2.35 = Waddington 3202, 3.08; von Aulock 3.55 = SNG 4316, 3.51 = SNG 4317, 3.32 = SNG 8489; Winterthur 3.23. 19 coins, 5 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.38.
201α is from the obverse die of 205α (Series D, Cragus).
Double Units
202. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑϹΙ or ΜΑ.
α. Athens 5.87 = Mavromichalis 102; β. Berlin 6.78; Athens 6.06, 5.82, 5.41; Berlin 6.61, 5.44; Klagenfurt (2); London 5.17 = BMC 36, 4.57; Paris 5.20, 4.68; private coll. 6.60, 5.27; von Aulock 4.65 = SNG 4345. 16 coins, 11 or fewer obv. dies, av. wt. 5.58.
Units
203. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ; to l., arrow; to r., bow (201α only).
α. Oxford 2.85; β. London 3.71; Athens 3.92, 2.75; Berlin 4.63; Paris 3.62; von Aulock 3.86 = SNG 4343. 7 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.62.
204. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ; to r., stag's head.
α. London 4.34 = BMC 34; β. Athens 3.19; Athens 3.95; Berlin 3.69, 2.60; New York 4.08; Paris 3.59, 3.40; private coll. 4.22. 9 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.67.
Double Unit:
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. Cithara in wreath.
Units:
Obv. Head of Artemis r. (occasionally l. on 205).
Rev. Quiver (stag r. on 207).
Double Unit: 1 coin, wt. 4.40
Units: 30 coins, 8 obv. dies, av. wt. 2.71
Units
205. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΚΡ.
α. New York 3.21; β. Paris 2.78 = Waddington 3048; γ. London 2.52 = BMC 21; δ. von Aulock 3.20 = SNG 4307; Athens 2.48, 2.46, 2.39; Berlin 2.71, 2.62, 2.33, 2.33; Copenhagen 2.64 = SNG 65, 2.04 = SNG 67; Hannover 2.48 = SNGvAulock 4308 = Hirsch 25 (Nov. 29, 1909) 2594; New York 3.11; Paris 1.92; von Aulock 3.49 = SNG 8488; Weber 7262, 2.46. 18 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 2.62.
205α and SNGCop 65 are from the obverse die of 201α (Series C, Xanthus-Cragus).
205γ and the two coins of issue 207 (Series D, Tlos) are from another obverse die. 205γ and 205δ are from the same reverse die; and 205δ's obverse is possibly a heavily recut version of that used for 205γ and issue 207: the hair at the crown and at the nape seems the same. If so, Tlos's issue 207 will have been struck before Cragus's 205.
Double Unit
206. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛ.
α. Berlin 4.40. 1 coin, wt. 4.40.
Another coin of this issue is published in Mus. Hederv., p. 253, Tlos 1, pi. 21, 14 (line drawing).
Units
207. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΥ.
α. Berlin 2.71; Berlin 3.20. 2 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 2.96.
The two coins of issue 207, with its anomalous stag reverse, are die duplicates. Their obverse die was also used for 205γ: see commentary under that issue. That the two coins of issue 207 belong here in Series D rather than in Series B's issue 185 is shown by this die link, and by the coins' omission of 185's ΚΡ.
208. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛ.
α. Berlin 3.65; β. Cambridge 2.81 = SNGFitz 5044, called Masicytus; γ. Oxford 3.14; Copenhagen 2.23 = SNG 147; Paris 2.39 = Waddington 3189, 2.97, 2.31; private coll. 3.46; Winterthur 2.50; Hirsch 21 (Nov. 16, 1908) 3667 = Walcher de Molthein 2545. 10 coins, 4 obv. dies, av. wt. 2.83.
Most of the surviving coins of Period V are of Series A-D, which contain a rather bewildering number of variant issues with the same or similar types. Attempts to arrange these by style—e.g. by Apollo's hair style, the use of symbols, or the placement of inscriptions—all lead to chaos because of the wide range of weights found with any given pair of types. These weights, however, furnish one key to the arrangement.
Certain groupings of issues—those with ΔΙ, ΕΠ, and ΙΠΠΟΛΟ 299 —are obvious and show that four denominations existed, whose weights were in the ratio of 8:4:2:1, and whose obverse types alternated between heads of Apollo and heads of Artemis. These coins with "magistrates'" names are among the heaviest of the Period V bronzes, and with them have been placed the other groupings of the same types and similar weight; 300 these heavy coins form Series A. The remaining coins then sort themselves out by weight and occasional changes of type into three further series, B-D.
The chief denomination, the one found in every series, is the next-to-largest denomination. This has arbitrarily been termed the "unit"; there are thus also double units, half units, and quarter units, although each of these other denominations is not found in every series. The "units" of Period V are in no way related to the "units" of Periods I or III; in each case the term denotes merely the most common and most universally struck denomination in that period.
The types of the four "local denominations" of Series A-D are:
Double Units (A, C, D):
Obv. Head of Apollo.
Rev. Cithara in wreath.
Units (all series):
Obv. Head of Artemis.
Rev. Stag (A, B, and one die in D) or quiver (C, D).
Half Units (A, B):
Obv. Head of Apollo (A) or Artemis (B).
Rev. Quiver and bow crossed in incuse square (A) or quiver in incuse square (B).
Quater Units (A):
Obv. Head of Artemis.
Rev. Quiver.
The smallest denomination, the quarter unit, was struck in Series A only, and does not reappear in the League coinage. The half unit was struck heavily in Series A, rarely in Series B, apparently not at all in C or D, but was revived briefly in the following Series E, with different types. 301 The incuse square on the reverse is the mark of the half unit throughout; an incuse square makes its appearance in Period V only on these three series' half units. The half units' types change between Series A and B, and the units' reverse type changes between Series B and C. Weights drop between Series A and B, and again between Series C and D. 302
The double units were struck with unvarying types in Series A, C, and D. They are missing only in Series B, and it is precisely here that two exceptional groups of very large bronzes seem to belong. The largest of these coins have Augustus's head on obverse, and cithara in wreath on reverse, as on the double units of the regular coinage; the smaller coins (which are nonetheless larger and heavier than the double units) have Apollo's head on obverse and a tripod, sometimes in wreath, on reverse. The weights of these large coins, as well as their marked resemblance to certain bronzes of the Province of Asia, show that without doubt they were intended to pass as sestertii and dupondii. 303
To return to Series A: it has already been noted how their heavy weights set all issues of this series apart from other issues. Cragus's issues 159–64 and Masicytus's 168–71 are firmly associated with each other because of the "magistrates'" names they bear. Tlos's issues 165–67 bear no names, but the double unit and the unit each have the cursive omega, ω. The Apollo heads on the double unit and half unit could not be more similar, and the Artemis of the unit shares with them, quite exceptionally, the small pronounced tightly rolled chignon at the nape of the neck. Masicytus's double units' and half units' Apollo heads are also very similar to each other. Some day double units to accompany Cragus's issues 159–64 and quarter units to accompany Tlos's 165–67 may well turn up, and when they do, their heads will be similar to the corresponding ones in their series. This is the extent of the stylistic similarity in Series A, however. The heads of Artemis vary relatively little, but the Apollo heads of different mints do not correspond at all: compare 161α, 165α, and 168α. Further, Cragus's 172 is quite unlike its 161, and Masicytus's 176 quite unlike its 168. Only the types of the fractions, and the heavy weights, set Series A apart.
The remaining "units" with stag reverses are all of distinctly lower weight, and these form the bulk of Series B. Many of these units are among the most attractive of all League bronzes, and they survive in great numbers. No double units can be associated with them, but three small coins, all poorly preserved and nearly or totally illegible, seem to be their half units. These three small coins' combination of types (Artemis head and quiver in incuse square) is unique among League bronzes, although it is of course that of the silver quarter drachms. The obverse styles agree perfectly with their accompanying units: compare 186α and β and 185α, and 196α and issues 192–95. Their weights are also just right for the half denomination of the Series B units. 304 These three small coins thus confirm the distinction between Series A and B.
That the sestertii and dupondii of Series B are associated with each other is clear from several observations. The average weight of the dupondii is far higher than that of any of the bronze "local denominations," and is approximately half that of the sestertii. Two dupondii (179α and 184α) bear the wreath of the sestertii, the wreath enclosed by two dotted circles precisely as on most of the sestertii, and this wreath is of a new type. It is not formed of two continuous branches, as is the wreath of Series A, but is composed of separate trios of leaves, with the lashings between the trios clearly shown. Further, one sestertius of Masicytus (190α) has the unusual reverse format of Masicytus's dupondius issue 191, with the ΛΥΚΙΩΝ between the two concentric circles enclosing the reverse type. Finally, only on the sestertii and dupondii in all the League's coinage are found the small, roughly centered, conical cavities known from a number of other ancient coinages. Whatever the purpose of these small cavities, their occurrence on our sestertii and dupondii links these two denominations. 305
Several indications associate the Roman-denomination coins with the "local-denomination" coins of Series B. Their issuers
are the same, or
nearly so: only among the sestertii and dupondii and the smaller coins of Series B do Telmessus and Cyaneae appear in Period V. Only in Series B in all of Series A-E, as has been noted, are double units
lacking. The Roman-denomination coins will have taken their place: the sestertii's appropriation of the double units' cithara
as reverse type
must be the explanation of the dupondii's novel reverse type of the tripod. The odd upsilon, , of Masicytus's and Myra-Masicytus's
Series B units is found elsewhere in the bronze coinage only on Masicytus's dupondii:
compare especially 191γ and 195α.
Series C, struck to the same weight as Series B, contains only double units and units, and the units introduce a new reverse type: the quiver. No longer needed for the smaller denominations, the quiver probably replaced the stag because of its simplicity and greater ease of depiction. None of the cities of Series B are present in C, while Xanthus here makes its only appearance in Period V. The wreath formed of trios of leaves which the sestertii and dupondii introduced is found now on some of Xanthus's double units (see 200ε–ȝ); it continues in Series D on Tlos's issue 206. One coin of late Series A exhibits a linear rather than a dotted border (177α), but linear borders become common only on the sestertii and dupondii of Series B, and then on the "local denominations" of Series C, D, and E.
Series D, like Series C, is composed of double units—of which only one or two in Series D are known—and units. With the exception of the one reverse die of issue 207, Series D's units continue the quiver reverse type of Series C, and are further linked to C by the obverse common to 201α (Series C, Xanthus-Cragus) and 205a (Series D, Cragus). Issue 205 is also linked to Tlos's Series D units by another die link (205γ-δ-207α). Masicytus is not represented in Series D, and the small Series D might well be considered a subgroup of Series C. Perhaps it is best thought of in that way, but it is of distinctly lighter weight than Series C, and thus seems to be a separate and presumably later emission.
Once again the diversity of styles of Apollo head in Series A-D may be mentioned. The two known obverses of Telmessus-Cragus's dupondius issues 179 and 180 are completely different. Yet Xanthus-Cragus's double unit issue 201 employed three distinct styles of Apollo head: left-facing, with ringlets; right-facing, with ringlets; and right-facing, with long flowing locks; and all three styles are firmly connected by reverse links. Cragus's double unit 197α's obverse (Series C) is very close to that of Masicytus's 168α (Series A), yet the lighter weights and the linear border of 197 separate it from 168. The bronze coinage of the districts was clearly controlled far less rigidly than the silver.
| 299 |
Issues 159–64 and 168–71.
|
| 300 |
Issues 165–67 and 172–77.
|
| 301 |
Issues 212, 218–19.
|
| 302 |
See Table 8.
|
| 303 |
The average weights of the relevant sestertius and dupondius issues (see below, pp. 208–10 and n. 306), from examples in BMCRE, Ashmolean, Robertson, and the ANS trays (leaving out two greatly worn coins),
are 23.44 and 12.59, respectively. Issued in an autonomous area, and not official Roman strikings, the Lycian coins should
perhaps not be
termed simply sestertii and dupondii. Such considerations lead to the terminology used for the silver of Period IV: drachms
and
subdivisions, even though the coins are taken as the virtual equivalents of denarii, quinarii, and silver sestertii. There
are no
convenient alternative terms, however, for the large bronzes; but it must be remembered that these Lycian sestertii and dupondii
are not of
course official Roman issues.
|
| 304 |
See Table 8.
|
| 305 |
The holes appear on 187α's obverse (Cyaneae's sestertius), possibly on 189α's obverse and
definitely on 189β's and 189γ's reverses (Masicytus's sestertii). They also are found
on all obverses of Masicytus's dupondius issue 191. These holes occur to my knowledge
only on Ptolemaic and occasional Seleucid coins before the time of these Lycian issues. How they were created is discussed
by J.
Condamin and J. Guey, "Fabrication des grands bronzes lagides à cavités centrales," Collectionneurs et Collections numismaliques—Monnaies, Médailles et Jetons, catalogue of the May-Sept. 1968 exposition at the
Hôtel de la Monnaie, Paris. I thank H. B. Wells for having pointed out this reference.
|
The clearest indication of the date of Series A-D is furnished by the sestertii and dupondii of Series B, which bear a striking resemblance to certain sestertii, dupondii, and smaller bronzes issued by the Province of Asia. These "Asiatic" coins bear on obverse a portrait of Augustus, and on reverse a wreath, normally enclosed between two concentric dotted circles, surrounding either a large C·A or AVGVSTVS. 306 The portraits are obviously the prototypes of the Lycian ones: the rendering is identical, including the swirl of hair at the nape of the neck, which can be distinguished on the better-preserved Lycian sestertii. Many of the Asiatic coins bear a corona navalis, but the reverses with simple laurel wreath are again the models for the Lycian coins: the wreaths are formed of five triplets of leaves on each side, the lashings between the triplets clearly indicated. Even the large dot between the two upper ends of the wreaths on the Asiatic coins is repeated on several of the Lycian sestertii and on the dupondius 184α. Many or most of the Asiatic sestertii and dupondii are of orichalcum, but it has unfortunately not been possible to ascertain whether any of the Lycian coins are of this alloy.
So close are the Lycian and Asiatic obverse portraits (although of course the inscriptions vary) that Laffranchi was led in 1916 to attribute all the Asiatic C·A coins to Lycia. 307 One wonders, indeed, if the Lycian sestertii's obverse dies were not cut in Ephesus or Pergamum. One detail shows that at least the Lycian reverse dies, however, were cut at home: on the Asiatic coins the loops of the bow tying the wreath are below the wreath, with the ends "hanging up" (the wreath must have been visualized as lying on a horizontal surface), while on the Lycian coins the ends of the tie invariably hang down.
The disputed meaning of the C·A on the Asiatic coins, and the chronology of these and the associated series with reverse legend AVGVSTVS have, one hopes, been finally settled by a convincing study by C. H. V. Sutherland. 308 Sutherland's conclusions are that the C·A does indeed stand for the Commune Asiae, and that the wreaths represent those granted to Augustus after Actium. Sutherland notes that "the role of the Commune Asiae in depicting wreaths is clearly paralleled by that of ϰοινά or concilia elsewhere, especially those of the Gauls under Augustus himself and of Cyprus under Claudius." 309 To these ϰοινά can now be added that of the Lycians.
The Asiatic coins must be dated to between 27 b.c., when Octavian assumed the title of Augustus, and 23 b.c., when he took the further title Tribunicia Potestas, which occurs on subsequent bronzes of the provinces. 310 The Lycian sestertii can thus be assumed to date from the same period, ca. 27–23 b.c., and to these years then also belong the dupondii and "local denominations" of Series B.
It is surprising that this obvious parallelism between the Lycian and Asiatic sestertii has gone almost completely unnoticed. It is especially remarkable that Michael Grant does not recognize the parallel. 311 He states that the Lycian coins' portraiture derives from certain denarii struck before 27 b.c. 312 —coins which, to the present author's eye, bear little or no particular resemblance to the Lycian bronzes. Grant dates the Lycian sestertii, whose denomination he does not recognize, to ca. 30–29 b.c., styling Tlos's and Masicytus's (whose mint he correctly takes as Myra)—but not Telmessus's and Cyaneae's—liberatio coinages. He further postulates that the coins record the elevation of the four minting cities to "cities of the first class." Neither the four mints' sestertii themselves nor anything we know of the history of the time suggests any reason for the assumption that some of the coins represent liberatio coinages while others do not; and what Grant means by "cities of the first class" is far from clear. 313 In any case, as Sutherland has shown for other areas, the coins' issuance would not seem to reflect any change in the status of the cities themselves, but their granting of honors to the victor of Actium.
The peculiar rho, , found on the Lycian drachms of Period IV, which were struck under
Augustus, is possibly present on Series B, and defi- nitely present on
Series C and part of D, as well as on the following Series E. The linear borders of C and D also point in a general way to
an Augustan date,
as does Series C's 201γ, where Artemis's coiffure with the two rolls of hair pulled
to the back possibly imitates an early Augustan aureus.
314
It has been suggested above that Augustus's Lycian drachms ceased ca. 19/18 b.c., and with them the full-weight hemidrachms. The reduced-weight hemidrachms of Series 7 fall at some undetermined
time after that date, but also employ the peculiar rho. It is thus impossible to be certain of a terminal date for the
bronzes following Series B; but the competent and pleasant styles of Series C, at least, seem to make it unlikely that that
series was
contemporary with the hemidrachm Series 7 which has such a variety of debased styles. The most likely period for Series C
and probably D of
the bronzes may be ca. 23–19/18 b.c.
Series A, the earliest in Period V, would have been struck before ca. 27 b.c., but whether before or after Actium is not clear. It will be recalled that the small civic bronzes of Period III continued into the 30s b.c. at least, 315 and thus that the introduction of the large bronzes of Period V might well be ascribed to Augustus after 31 b.c. But there are possible indications that the new bronzes commenced earlier, in the late 30s b.c. under Antony. It is hard to account for the large drop in weight between Series A and B if A was struck 31–27 b.c., so closely preceding B; and some of Series A-D's types may possibly be connected to other coinages associated with Antony and Cleopatra.
Cleopatra's aid to Antony was considerable; she sent him great sums of money on at least two occasions, in 36 b.c. during his war with the Parthians, and again during his preparations for Actium. 316 Possible Egyptian models were suggested above for the hemidrachm Series 4, here dated to the late 30s b.c., and it is also tempting to suggest Egyptian-related models for the bronze units of Series A-D.
The Artemis head of the units is not an uncommon depiction, and the stag and quiver reverses accompanying the goddess's head on the Lycian coins are nothing if not banal. Nevertheless, the coins' strong resemblance to certain Cretan bronzes is worth noting. 317 The most recent analysis of these Cretan coins dates them only roughly to somewhere in the middle of the first century b.c. 318
Crete had come under Antony's control in 39 b.c., and he had ceded "Κϱήτης τινα" to Cleopatra in 37/6. 319 And in 34 b.c. he made further grants to Cleopatra and her children by him: among these rather sweeping grants was that of "Syria and all the lands between the Euphrates and the Hellespont," given to the young Ptolemy Philopator. 320
The Cretan bronzes could well have formed part of any large shipment of money sent by Cleopatra to Asia Minor in the 30s, and could easily have made their way to Lycia. But even if the Cretan coins did suggest the types and style of Series A, this need not necessarily mean a pre-Actian date for the latter. As Series B-E all seem Augustan in date, A may have been also. The introduction of the new large coins could well have been occasioned directly or indirectly by Augustus's assumption of power, and by the general peace and prosperity which followed. Series A may have been struck either under Augustus or under Antony.
Another phenomenon in the Lycian coinage may also reflect Egyptian associations: it is possible that the central cavities found on the Lycian sestertii and dupondii may be attributable to the influence of the recent Egyptian overlordship during the late 30s.
| 306 |
BMCRE 707–36. See Plate 26, J-K.
|
| 307 |
Laffranchi, pp. 294–98; see also G. F. Hill, "Greek Coins Acquired by the British Museum in 1922," NC 1923, pp. 230–31.
|
| 308 |
"Symbolism," pp. 94–109.
|
| 309 |
"Symbolism," p. 108.
|
| 310 |
BMCRE 737–44.
|
| 311 |
FITA pp. 342–43.
|
| 312 |
BMCRE "633, etc."
|
| 313 |
Especially when he cites Strabo's omission of Telmessus
and Cyaneae in Strabo's list of
the six leading cities as evidence that Telmessus and Cyaneae were
not previously "first-class" cities (FITA, p. 343, n. 6, referring not to Strabo himself but to Jones, p. 102, where the list occurs), yet
ignores Strabo's inclusion of Myra and Tlos among the six leading cities when arguing that these two
cities also were not among the leading six (p. 343, n. 3). Nor do the sestertius mints correspond with those known from inscriptions
to
have had the later title of Metropolis of the Lycian People: these were Telmessus, Xanthus, Tlos, Patara, and Myra. Grant illustrates three Lycian
League coins in FITA, and errs in his discussion of each. His attribution of a Cragus coin of issue 173 to Cremna in Galatia is understandable, being presumably based on the location the coin occupied
until recently in the British Museum's trays; but the other two cases involve gross errors. The long-published sestertius
of Cyaneae, 187α, he unaccountably identifies as of Tlos. And he has confused two smaller bronzes, one with Augustus's
portrait (217α) and another which is overstruck on a coin of Tiberius (Appendix 2, no.
10), calling 217α the overstrike.
|
| 314 |
BMCRE 643.
|
| 315 |
See above, p. 108.
|
| 316 |
Dio Cass. 49.31.4; Plut., Ant. 56. See above, p. 182.
|
The major city of Telmessus makes its first appearance in the Lycian League coinage in the Series B bronzes of Period V: the city was con- spicuously absent from the other cities striking during Periods II and III. A border city, Telmessus in pre-League times was often aligned differently from the rest of Lycia, 321 and it has been uncertain just when the city formally became part of the Lycian League.
When in 188 Lycia proper was granted to Rhodes, Telmessus was given instead to Eumenes of Pergamum, and it remained Attalid until 133, when that kingdom came to an end. Strabo says, "When the kingdom was dissolved, the Lycians took it [Telmessus] back again" (ϰαταλυθείσης δὲ τῆς βασιλείας ἀπέλαβον πάλιν οἱ Λύϰιοι). 322 That it joined the League so early, however, has been doubted because of Appian's statement that "some Telmessians and also some Lycians" (τινες… Τελμισέων τε ϰαί Λυϰίων) 323 aided Rhodes in 88 against Mithradates; the implication is clear that Telmessus was not yet counted among "the Lycians."
Telmessus's absence among the drachms of Period II confirms Appian. Further, the city's absence among the civic bronzes of Period III strongly suggests that Telmessus remained apart from the League even after the time of Mithradates. Its possible silver issue 148, in hemidrachm series 7, would have been struck after 19/18 b.c. Its earliest League strikings are its bronze issues 178–80 of Series B. Telmessus thus appears to have joined the Lycian League only after Actium.
| 317 |
BMCCyrenaica, pp. 114–15, 4–16 (see Plate 26, H); and BMCCrete, Cnossus 66–67 (see Plate 26,
I). The coins in BMCCyrenaica are assigned on p. cxxvi to Crete, which had been added in 67 b.c. to the province of Cyrenaica.
|
| 318 |
Robinson in BMCCyrenaica puts his Cretan coins to Antony's time;
and the Cnossian ones have recently been associated with these by A. E. Chapman, "Some First Century b.c. Bronze Coins of Knossos," NC 1968, pp. 13–26. I am grateful to T. V.
Buttrey, who is preparing an article on the coins, for sharing with me his conviction that they are almost certainly
pre-Antonian, perhaps as early as the 60s b.c.
|
| 319 |
Dio Cass. 49.32.5.
|
| 320 |
Dio Cass. 49.41.3.
|
In contrast, Xanthus was well represented in Periods II and III. It is surprising not to find it among the leading cities striking Series B in ca. 27–23 b.c., but to find it only somewhat later in Series C, where it is the sole city represented. As has been noted, Brutus destroyed Xanthus in 42 b.c. and Antony after Philippi remitted the Lycians' taxes and urged them to rebuild the city. 324 There is, however, no record of his aiding them, and every likelihood that his own pressing concerns shortly led to a restoration of the tribute. The period of relative peace and heal- ing that commenced for the whole Roman world after Actium is the most probable time for the restoration of Xanthus. That Xanthus first reappears in the Lycian coinage only after ca. 23 b.c. would seem to confirm that it was rebuilt under Augustus.
Double Units:
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. Apollo Patroös standing facing, holding filleted branch in outstretched r. hand, and bow and sometimes arrow in lowered l. hand.
Units:
Obv. Head of Artemis r.
Rev. Artemis Huntress standing facing.
Half Units:
Obv. Head of Hermes wearing petasus (or Augustus, bareheaded, on 217), usually r.
Rev. Winged caduceus in incuse square.
Double Units: 52 coins, 14 obv. dies, av. wt. 5.87
Units: 19 coins, 5? obv. dies, av. wt. 3.06
Half Units: 15 coins, 11? obv. dies, av. wt. 1.72
Double Units
209. Obv. ΚΡ.
Rev. ΚΡ.
α. London 5.86 = BMC 19; β. Athens 5.56; Athens 6.22; Berlin 6.78, 5.41, 4.04; London 5.73 = BMC 18; Paris 4.91 = Waddington 3051; private coll. 6.45; Yale 6.32; von Aulock 5.27 = SNG 4310; Watcher de Molthein 2530; G. Hirsch 24 (June 28, 1960) 104; Rosenberg 72 (July 11, 1932) 676. 14 coins, 4 obv. dies, av. wt. 5.69.
Units
210. Obv. ΚΡ.
Rev. ΚΡ.
α. London 2.73; β. London 3.03; Glasgow 3.11 = Hunter, p. 500, 4; Winterthur 4.57. 4 coins, 1? obv. die, av. wt. 3.36.
Half Units
211. Obv. ΚΡ.
Rev. ΚΡ or ΚΡ ΛΥ.
α. London 2.25; β. Paris 1.14 = Waddington 3173, called Pinara; γ. Berlin 1.21; Athens 1.34; Berlin 1.28; Munich 2.67. 6 coins, 4? obv. dies, av. wt. 1.65.
The London, Athens, and Munich pieces, which vary widely in size and weight, are from the same dies.
The letters on the Paris coin, clearer on the cast than on the coin itself, are ΚΡ rather than ΠΙ.
Double Units
212. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ.
α. Paris 6.75; β. London 5.72; Athens 6.67, 6.46, 6.37, 5.80; Berlin 4.95; Cambridge 6.11 = SNGFitz 5041, 5.35 = McClean 8877; Copenhagen 5.71 = SNG 85; cast in London; Munich 6.49; Oxford 6.52, 5.27; Paris 6.78 = Waddington 3093, 5.14; von Aulock 5.11 = SNG 4339. 17 coins, 6 obv. dies, av. wt. 5.95.
212β and 213α are from the same obverse die.
213. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ; to r., branch.
α. Milan 6.38; β. Berlin 6.32; Berlin 6.21; Glasgow 6.77 = Hunter, p. 502, Myra 2; Munich 6.43; New York 6.15; Ontario; private colls. 5.48, 5.01; Vienna 6.41, 5.87, 5.74; Winterthur 5.45. 13 coins, 4 obv. dies, av. wt. 6.02.
212β and 213α are from the same obverse die.
214. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ; to r., star (often poorly preserved).
α. Copenhagen 6.94 = SNG 86; London 5.35; Munich 5.54; New York 5.97; Oxford 5.83, purchased at Antiphellus = "Coins Lycia," p. 38, 56; Paris 5.47; Vatican 5.30; Vienna 5.70. 8 coins, 1 obv. die av. wt. 5.76.
Units
215. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ.
α. New York 2.33; β. London 2.96; Berlin 2.63; Glasgow 3.21 = Hunter, p. 501, 4; London 3.62, 3.24; Munich 3.31, 2.21; Paris 3.18 = Waddington 3092; private coll. 3.11; Vienna 2.34. 11 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 2.92.
216. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ; to r., branch.
α. Private coll. 3.18; β. private coll. 3.35; London 3.01; Paris 2.99 = Waddington 3091. 4 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.13.
Half Units
217. Obv. ΛΥ. Head of Augustus r.
Rev. ΜΑ.
α. Winterthur 1.75 = FITA, p. 333; β. Athens 2.71 = Mavromichalis 97, obverse described as Hermes. 2 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 2.23.
Grant in FITA erroneously describes 217α as struck over a coin of Tiberius, and cites the coin as evidence that Augustus's portrait was used posthumously in Lycia. Grant has, however, confused 217α with another coin, a long-known Cragus overstrike with completely different types, which is now recognized as a modern forgery. 325
218. Obv. ΛΥ (on some dies).
Rev. ΛΥ, ΜΑ, or ΛΥ ΜΑ.
α. Berlin 1.96; β. Paris 1.37 = Waddington 3086; γ. Copenhagen 1. 54 = SNG 97; Berlin 2.06, 1.29; London 2.01 = BMC 25; Paris 1.79. 7 coins, 6? obv. dies, av. wt. 1.72.
The inclusion of 218α, without Masicytus's initials (the coin bears only ΛΥ), is based on the analogy of issues 133 and 150.
| 325 |
See Appendix 2, under Cragus.
|
| 321 |
On Telmessus's earlier affiliations, see Jameson, pp. 266–67.
|
| 322 |
14.665.
|
| 323 |
App., Mith. 24.
|
| 324 |
App., BCiv. 5.7.
|
The three denominations of Series E continue from Series A-D, and the use of the reverse incuse square continues to mark the half-denomination. The double units' and units' reverses now portray standing figures of Apollo and Artemis, instead of mere attributes of those deities; and the half units' obverses, unprecedentedly in the League coinage, depict a third deity, Hermes—with one exceptional die showing instead a bare head of Augustus.
The emperor's head shows that the series is still Augustan in date. The introduction of Hermes, and the evident equation of Augustus with the god, is part of a widespread phenomenon of the time: Hermes, patron of commerce, was associated in popular belief with peace, and the relieved inhabitants of the Roman Empire tended in the peaceful years after Actium to identify the young Augustus with Hermes. 326
Cragus's three denominations of Series E do not use the federal ethnic ΛΥ, but all have ΚΡ on
both obverse and reverse. On obverses of all denominations, the Ρ is often awkwardly placed immediately before the face, rather
than below
chin level. These rhos continue the peculiar form found on Series C and D, on the
Augustan drachms, and on the hemidrachms of Series 7.
Uncertain Denomination (219):
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. Tripod.
Uncertain Denomination (220–22):
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. Head of Artemis r. (220); or Apollo Patroös standing facing, holding filleted branch in outstretched r. hand, and bow and sometimes arrow in lowered l. hand (221–22).
Uncertain Denomination (219): 5 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 8.79 Uncertain Denomination (220-22): 59 coins, 39? obv. dies, av. wt. 3.99
Tlos-Cragus
Uncertain Denomination
219. Rev. ΚΡ ΤΛΩ.
α. Berlin 11.76; β. von Aulock 7.60 = SNG 4314; γ. London 7.59 = BMC 27; Berlin 7.85 == J.-A. Blanchet, "Monnaies grecques inédites ou peu connues," RN 1893, pp. 457–58 = Monn. gr., p. 329, 24; Paris 9.15 = Waddington 3055. 5 coins, 3 obv. dies, av. wt. 8.79.
The two Berlin coins are die duplicates. The von Aulock and Paris coins are from another obverse die.
That 219 is a single issue despite its variety of obverse styles seems probable from the uniformity of its reverses: all with the same letter forms—ΚΡ ΤΛΩ as opposed to Tlos-Cragus's dupondius issue 184 with ΚΡ ΤΛω—and all with the tripod executed in the same strange linear style, with the vessel on top indicated only in outline. The extreme similarity of 219γ's obverse to many in issues 220–22 also supports the placement of 219 in Series F. And although 219's types are of course those of the dupondius issue 184 of Series B, 219's coins are smaller, more crudely fashioned, and, most significantly, only a little over half the weight of the proper dupondii.
Uncertain Denomination
220. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΤΛ, or ΛΤ (on one die), or ΤΥ (on two other dies).
ΛΤ: α. Berlin 2.84; Berlin 3.62; Paris 4.59 = Waddington 7147.
ΤΛ: β. Paris 3.67 = Waddington 3090, called Masicytus; γ. Oxford 3.95, purchased at Xanthus = "Coins Lycia," p. 38, 65; Athens 3.92, 3.57, 3.53; Berlin 3.94, 3.89; Heller 3.82; London 4.31 = BMC 7, 4.17 = BMC 8, 2.87; New York 4.52, 3.78, 3.15 = Egger 46 (May 11, 1914) 1931; Paris 3.54 = Wadding- ton 3190; private colls. 4.59, 3.47, 3.25, 3.09; Winterthur 3.42; von Aulock 3.28 = SNG 4465; in trade.
ΤΥ: δ. Paris 3.65; ε. Berlin 4.10 = Monn. gr., p. 329, 26, called Tymena; Berlin 3.75; London 3.08 = BMC Ty… 1; private coll. 2.8; von Aulock 3.73 = SNG 4474, called "Tyberissos?"; Kimpel, FPL 43 (Mar. 1974) 71. For all of issue 220: 32 coins, 22 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.66.
220γ, with ΤΛ, and 220δ, with ΤΥ, are from the same obverse die.
Much has been written about the attribution of the ΤΥ coins, the most favored mint in recent years being Tyberissos. 327 Mørkholm alone seems to have suspected that the ΤΥ inscription was a mere blunder. 328 The poor and careless execution of the entire series, the reversed city ethnic ΛΤ on one die, the identity of style between the ΤΥ and ΤΛ coins in general, and the obverse link between 220γ and 220δ—all these make it a virtual certainty that a hurried or incompetent engraver made errors on three dies, adding ΛΤ and ΤΥ to the issue's other combinations ΛΥ and ΤΛ. There was no Lycian mint commencing with ΤΥ. 329
Uncertain Denomination
221. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ; to r., branch.
α. Berlin 4.47; Athens 3.91; Paris 7.38; von Aulock 4.90 = SNG 4340. 4 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 5.17.
222. Obv. ΛΥ.
Rev. ΜΑ.
α. London 4.67 = BMC 27; β. Berlin 4.92 = Watcher de Molthein 2536; γ. Paris 3.33 = Waddington 3073, called Limyra; δ. Berlin 4.98; ε. Paris 5.10 = Waddington 3094; Athens 4.60; Berlin 4.08, 3.46; Copenhagen 4.69 = SNG 87; Glasgow 3.56 = Hunter, p. 502, 5; London 3.78, found at Tlos = BMC 26 = Fellows, p. 284, 17, and 5.63, 3.53; New York 4.33; Oxford 4.32, purchased at Castelloryzo (ancient Megiste) = "Coins Lycia," p. 38, 54, and 5.56, purchased on the Makri (Telmessus)-Elmali road = "Coins Lycia," p. 38, 55; Paris 3.74 = Waddington 3095, 3.29 = Waddington 3096, 4.55; private colls. 4.31, 4.02, 3.79, 3.09, 2.51; in trade 4.77. 23 coins, 16 obv. dies, av. wt. 4.19.
| 326 |
See J. Chittenden, "Hermes-Mercury, Dynasts, and Emperors," NC 1945,
pp. 41–57. I thank Carmen Arnold-Biucchi for pointing out this reference.
|
| 327 |
The most complete discussion is that of L. Robert, in "Lycie," pp. 188–96.
|
| 328 |
Under SNGvAulock 4474, called "Tyberissos?" he remarks, "Vielleicht ist Τυ aber für ΤΛ (Tlos) verschrieben."
|
| 329 |
Hill in the BMC, p. lvi, mentions "a small bronze coin of the League reading ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΤΥ (in the Bibliothèque
Nationale at Paris)." The coin so ticketed there actually reads ΤΡ: see 78β.
|
Series F consists chiefly of one uncertain denomination—that of issues 220–22—which cannot be equated with any of the denominations previously used in Period V. 330 Tlos's innovation in this series of depicting Apollo and Artemis together on the same coin is probably significant. Heretofore in the Period V coinage the deity pictured on obverse had indicated the denomination, and the reverse types had without exception been mere references to the deity on obverse. The abandonment of the old denominations of Series A-E would seem to be announced in Series F and G by the inclusion of two deities' heads (or two deities' attributes, on Series G's 225–26) simultaneously.
Masicytus's issues 221–22 seem to follow closely on this district's preceding issues 212–14, which bear precisely the same types. The coarser execution and considerably lighter weight of the later issues 221–22 clearly distinguish them, however, from the earlier 212–14.
Tlos's issue 220 bears a different reverse type from Masicytus's 221–22: a head of Artemis. But that 220–22 form a single series is shown by the weights and also by the observation that while some of Masicytus's obverse heads (e.g. 222γ) are nearly identical to Tlos's obverses, others (e.g. 222δ-ε) are nearly identical to Tlos's reverses. Even Tlos was not completely consistent: 220α seems to show Apollo on both sides. The iconography is certainly confused, but it is probably valid to consider Tlos's reverse heads as Artemis and Masicytus's obverse heads as Apollo, despite their frequent great resemblance to each other.
Issue 219 may have been intended as the double denomination of 220. Its weights (even leaving out the anomalous high weight of 219α) are a bit heavy for this, though; and 219 bears Cragus's initials, while 220 does not. The Κ&Ρ, however, might have been taken over from issue 184 along with its types.
Series F, which introduces the new denomination of issues 220–22, was a large one: more obverse dies (39) are known for these issues than for the whole of any other series.
Uncertain Denomination (223-24):
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. Head of Artemis r.
Uncertain Denomination (225–26):
Obv. Stag r.
Rev. Cithara.
Uncertain Denomination (223-24): 23 coins, 10 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.87
Uncertain Denomination (225-26): 9 coins, 2 obv. dies, av. wt. 2.46
Uncertain Denomination
223. Obv. ΚΡ.
Rev. ΛΥ.
α. Paris 4.20; β. New York 3.83; γ. New York 4.96 = Weber 7265; Berlin 4.08 = Walcher de Molthein 2529; London 5.02 = BMC 22; Oxford 4.13; Paris 3.42; private colls. 4.95, 3.91; Kastner 8 (Nov. 25, 1975) 82, 4.04. 10 coins, 5 obv. dies, av. wt. 4.25.
Uncertain Denomination
224. Obv. ΛΥ or ΜΑ.
Rev. ΛΥ or ΜΑ.
α. Berlin 4.43; β. London 3.74 = Weber 7278; γ. private coll. 3.25; Athens 3.61; Berlin 3.07; Copenhagen 4.21 = SNG 101, 3.87 = SNG 102; London 3.09; New York 4.04; private coll. 3.81; von Aulock 3.01 = SNG 4346; Winterthur 3.17; Weber 7264, 3.24. 13 coins, 5 obv. dies, av. wt. 3.58.
At least one side of each coin of issue 224 bears ΜΑ.
The obverses and reverses of issues 223–24 have often been confused with each other in earlier publications, but the coins' very slight concavities are found only on the sides with Artemis's head, showing that the goddess is depicted on the reverse.
Uncertain Denomination
225. Obv. ΚΡ.
Rev. ΛΥ.
α. Paris 2.52 = Waddington 3052; Athens 2.53; Berlin 2.77, 2.26, 2.15; Cambridge 3.02 = SNGFitz 5031; Klagenfurt; London 1.89 = Weber 7260. 8 coins, 1 obv. die, av. wt. 2.45.
Uncertain Denomination
226. Obv. ΜΑ.
Rev. ΛΥ.
α. Berlin 2.52. 1 coin, wt. 2.52.
Presumably because the side with the federal ethnic is normally the obverse in the League coinage, the coins of issues 225–26 have always been described with the cithara as the obverse type. But that the stag belongs on obverse is shown by the proportion of stag dies (1) to cithara dies (3) in issue 225; by the dotted border around the cithara in issue 226, a feature found far more frequently on reverses than obverses; and, most conclusively, by the slight concavity of the sides with the cithara.
| 330 |
See Table 8.
|
Series G differs from the other Period V coinage in having the district initials, in most cases, on the obverse and the federal initials on the reverse. It and issue 220 of Series F also differ from earlier series in having two deities (or two deities' attributes) on each coin. Issues 223–24 continue the denomination, whatever it is, of Series F; but issues 225–26 seem too heavy to be the half denomination. What if any relationship exists between the two denominations of Series G is unclear.
Many of 223–24's rather crude busts strongly resemble some of those of the non-League issue of Myra discussed below. 331 This issue of Myra appears to date from provincial times, for it bears neither ΛΥ nor ΜΑ, and its die axis favors the ↑↓, position which is first found in Lycia in Claudius's provincial coinage. 332 On both Myra's coins and those of 223–24 is found a bust which emphasizes a heavy loop of drapery below the neck, and a bare upper right arm; the lower edge of the bust thus has a scalloped outline. This type of bust occurs once in Series F (see 220α), but becomes standard in Series G. It is not surprising to find it on the very last of the free League's issues.
It was mentioned above 333 that inscriptions show that individual Lycians dropped the use of the federal ethnic in identifying themselves after the First Mithradatic War, using thereafter only a simple municipal ethnic. This de-emphasis of the federal ethnic in inscriptions is explained by the decreased independence and importance of the League after Sulla's time; and the de-emphasis of the federal ethnic on the League's silver of Period IV as compared to Period II is here attributed to the same historical considerations.
A further similar development seems apparent here on the late bronzes of Period V. The usual ΛΥ on obverse and district initials on reverse of Series A-D are altered in Series E, where Cragus put its own initials on both sides of its coins. Series F returned to the usage of Series A-D, but Series G reverses that usage, placing the district initials in the more prominent obverse position and relegating the federal initials to the reverse. This placement may well reflect the last stages of the League's "independence," before Claudius finally deprived it of the last shred of its autonomy. The districts, as collectors of tribute, remained important, but the League as a political entity must have seemed ever less worthy of emphasis.
| Series | Date | Under whom struck |
| A | Late 30s B.C.–ca. 27 B.C. | Antony or Augustus |
| B | ca. 27–23 B.C. | Augustus |
| C | ca. 23–19/18 B.C.? | Augustus |
| D | shortly after C | Augustus |
| E | after D, but before A.D. 14 | Augustus |
| F | after E | ? |
| G | after F, but before A.D. 43 | ? |
It has long been recognized that the Lycian League's coins of Augustus's time show that Lycia, while still nominally free, was already by that time for all practical purposes a part of the Roman Empire. Warren in 1863 remarked, "The Augustan denarius [drachm] of Massikytes… illustrates well the position of federalism in Lycia under Augustus, a Roman dependency that still retained its own laws and internal government." 334 And in 1906 Regling commented, "Das Fehlen des Kaisartitels hier [on the Augustus-head drachms] wie auf der Goldmünzen der bosporanischen Dynastie hat gewiss seinen staatsrechtlichen Grund: der lykische Bund war dem Reiche zwar zugehörig, aber nicht untertan." 335
The League's coinage can now be seen to reflect direct Roman dominance, and probably control, even more clearly and even earlier. The sestertii and dupondii of Series B of Period V reflect honors paid to Augustus after Actium by the Lycian League, just as they were by the Province of Asia. The League's silver coinage of Period IV, struck to the standard of the contemporary quinarius, appears to have been introduced when the quinarius itself was revived, in the early or mid 40s b.c.; and these district hemidrachms seem to have been struck in connection with Roman needs and military activities in the East. Finally, the districts themselves appear to have been Roman creations, formed after the First Mithradatic War in order to collect Lycian "contributions" to the Roman treasury. That perceptive scholar Oskar Treuber aptly compared the Lycians' relationship to Rome after this war with that of the Lampsacenes as described by Cicero: populi Romani condicione sociis, fortuna servis, voluntate supplicibus (by their status the allies, by their condition the slaves, by their disposition the humble suppliants, of the Roman nation). 336 Even as early as this the Lycians were, as Treuber well knew, "ihrer formellen Rechtstellung nach Bundesgenossen des römischen Volke, ihrer faktischen Stellung nach aber Knechte." 337
That the Lycians alone preserved even a nominal autonomy as late as a.d. 43, long after the rest of the Mediterranean world had been turned into Roman provinces, is nonetheless rather remarkable. Jones has ascribed this enduring autonomy to the Lycians' "political genius"; Robert considers it due to Lycia's geographical situation, with its high mountains and rugged terrain. 338 Both factors no doubt played a part. Another, however, is shown by the League's coinage: from the time of Sulla on, Rome was already receiving tribute and no doubt everything else she wanted from the Lycians.
| 331 |
See Appendix 1, under Myra, and Plate 41, A.
|
| 332 |
See Appendix 3.
|
| 333 |
See the beginning of the Period IV chapter.
|
| 334 |
Warren, p. 38.
|
| 335 |
K. Regling, "Zur griechischen Münzkunde," ZfN 1906, p. 51, n. 2.
|
| 336 |
Cic., Verr. 2.1.32.
|
| 337 |
Treuber, p. 187.
|
| 338 |
Jones, pp. 95 and 104–5; Robert, "Lycie," p. 208.
|
| a |
There is one exception: the one reverse die of Series D, issue 207, has a stag instead of a quiver.
|
| a |
See n. 49.
|
| b |
Known from one coin only.
|
| c |
Obverse die links are indicated by brackets to the left.
|
| d |
Unit denotes the commonest and most universally struck denomination.
|
| e |
Known from one coin only.
|
| f |
If the anomalous high weight of 219α is omitted (8.79 g), the remaining four specimens of this denomination have an average
weight of
8.05.
|
| g |
See Appendix 3.
|
| h |
See Appendix 1, under Myra.
|
As noted at the outset of this study, "mint" has been used strictly in the sense of the more cumbersome "issuing authority," not in the sense of the actual location at which a coin was struck. The question of just where certain coins were actually struck has been touched on from time to time, but the situation varies from one period to the next in the League's coinage; indeed, in Period IV, where the chief issuing authorities are the two great districts, the question is not only which cities acted as the districts' mints but which cities belonged to which district.
It is impossible to say where this scanty bronze coinage, issued in the name only of "the Lycians," was struck. As already mentioned, its types echo those of Xanthus Valley cities and perhaps most if not all of it was struck in the west.
There are five die linked groups of drachms of different cities in Period II. In Series 1, one group includes Xanthus, Sidyma, Pinara, and Cadyanda; another Aperlae and Trebendae; another Limyra and Gagae; and another, of pseudo-League coins, Olympus and Phaselis. In Series 3, light-weight drachms of Limyra and Cyaneae are also die linked. It was concluded above that Xanthus at a minimum cut the dies for her three neighbors and most probably also actually struck their coins; and Limyra probably struck the small emission of Gagae, whose silver is known only from one coin. It is also possible that Myra struck the inconsequential coinage of Aperlae and of Trebendae, whose one known joint obverse so strongly resembles several of Myra's. But the die common to Olympus and Phaselis would seem a traveling one, connected with the introduction of these two cities' pseudo-League coinages, because the two groups of dies following it in the substantial outputs of the two cities are quite unlike. It is impossible to suggest whether or not Limyra actually struck the coin of Cyaneae linked to Limyra's coinage in Series 3, for the surviving material is so slight.
More Period II intercity die links will undoubtedly appear in the future. The evidence does not, however, suggest a single "central mint." The links all involve pairs or small groups of nearby cities, and indicate local cooperation in the mechanics of minting, either when one or more of the cities involved had a negligible output or when a variation in the standard coinage was being introduced.
A similar pattern of scattered die connections between pairs of nearby cities is found in the bronze Lycian coinage of Gordian III, where seven pairs of cities are die linked. 339 No central mint is there indicated, nor is any in Period II. The Lycian League's Period II coinage was obviously centrally controlled as to weight, types, and format, but the great bulk of it must have been struck at the cities whose names appear on the coins.
While one style of Apollo head is found at all mints, a second style is found at seven of the eight southern mints and at one (Patara) of the western mints. 340 This hardly, however, suggests central minting. Three cities (Phellus, Cyaneae, and Myra, all close geographically) use variations in the standard crossed arrangement of the units' reverse type, but these variations are different on each city's coins. There seems no reason to doubt that each city struck its own bronzes during Period III.
The League could have organized its Period IV and Period V minting in three possible ways: at a single central mint; at two different mints, one for each district; or at any number of mints, with one or the other district, or both together, using at any particular time the facilities of whichever city practical and political considerations dictated. The evidence is far from clear, and it is not impossible that the League used all of these systems at one time or another during Periods IV and V.
To consider the silver first: only one obverse link is known between districts, that between the quarter-drachm issues Cragus 124 and Masicytus 130. These issues have been placed first in the quarter-drachm arrangement because of this link, the issues' common symbol, and the coins' pleasing and competent obverse heads. After a single following issue of each district, however, the districts' quarter drachms diverge markedly in style, in symbols, and in volume. This lone die link can be explained as satisfactorily by coordination between mints at the inception of a new coinage as by the postulation of a central mint. After all, some sort of tangible example of the types and format of a new coinage would have to go from one mint to another at the introduction of a new denomination.
Two reverse dies are known in hemidrachm Series 4 with Cragus's initials cut over Masicytus's. 341 But no obverse die links are known between districts in any hemidrachm series, despite the extremely close stylistic resemblance of at least one pair of parallel issues of the two districts in each of Series 1–5. 342 These similarities could have been the result of central minting, or they could have arisen because dies were cut centrally and then sent to locations where stores of metal were actually struck. The complete lack of links leads the author to favor the latter possibility. In either case, the political conclusion is obvious and the same: firm central planning and control.
But a number of issues in Series 1–5 are not so closely related, either in style or markings, to any issue of the other district. Series 3 contains coins with the initials of three cities, and it is reasonable to assume that these dies were cut and the coins struck at those cities (Pinara, Cyaneae, and Myra). Perhaps the other non-parallel district issues of Series 1–5 vary because struck more independently of central control and at different cities; or perhaps they vary because struck later than the obviously parallel issues of each series, after the originally commissioned dies for that series had worn out.
After Series 5 the parallelism between the districts ceases. Only Masicytus struck hemidrachms in Series 6; and the contemporary Augustan drachms of the two districts, and of Tlos-Cragus, differ markedly. A minimum of three mints must be proposed here.
There is no other candidate than Myra for the chief mint of the district of Masicytus. And, despite the complete lack of numismatic evidence, Patara seems to the present author the most probable mint for the bulk of Cragus's silver coinage. It is Patara and Myra which recur paired again and again throughout the League's history. It is from these two cities, Lycia's chief ports, that the Lycian ships would have sailed in aid of various Romans during the Civil Wars; and it is for the crews of those ships that the hemidrachms of Period IV would seem to have been struck. It has been seen that Patara was where the League's records were kept and where its secretariat was located; yet by Byzantine times Myra had become the formal capital. At these two cities were the only two Roman granaries known in Lycia. These were the only two cities attacked by Brutus after his capture of Xanthus: may he not have been directing his attempts at the two districts' treasuries? These are the two Lycian cities we know which honored Germanicus when in a.d. 17 he toured Asia after receiving his extraordinary command over the "provinces beyond the sea." 343 Here were the homes of the two leading cults of provincial Lycia, that of Apollo Patroös at Patara and that of Eleuthera at Myra, whose festivals were celebrated together with that of the Emperor. 344 The second century a.d. inscription honoring the Lyciarch Jason lists the cities which honored Jason, but gives only three decrees in full: those of the League as a whole, and those of Patara and Myra, despite the fact that Jason was a native of Cyaneae. 345 Finally, the only homonoia coins known from Lycia are those struck under Gordian III, and they celebrate the alliance of Patara and Myra. 346 With all due respect granted to the richness and importance of Xanthus, at least before Brutus's advent, Patara and Myra would seem to have been the Lycians' politically most important cities. I would therefore suggest that they were the chief, although not the only, mints of Cragus's and Masicytus's silver coinage.
To turn to the bronzes: it was presumably at home that the Period V bronzes of Telmessus, Tlos, Xanthus, Cyaneae, and Myra were struck. The issues of these cities and of the districts as a whole were clearly correlated as to types, weights, and denominations, but the lack of stylistic resemblances between city and district coins fails to suggest any particular city as the mint of the district coins of Cragus. Both Tlos and Xanthus issued bronzes linked with Cragus's issue 203 in Series D; perhaps that small issue then should be divided between those two cities. But both Tlos and Cragus alone appear in Series A; and both Xanthus and Cragus in Series C, and the city and district issues are very unlike each other in both these series. One again thinks of Patara for the mint of the bronzes bearing only Cragus's initials. Tlos, however, was also a major mint of the later series of bronze in Period V.
It remains unexplained why Patara is missing from the list of cities striking bronze throughout Period V, and especially why she is absent from those striking the sestertii and dupondii honoring Augustus in Series B. (No sesterii or dupondii are known for Myra, either, of course, but Masicytus's sestertii and dupondii are to be understood as hers.) These large coins are extremely rare, and it might be suggested that sestertii and dupondii of Patara (or of Cragus alone, which could be understood as Patara's) could one day appear. But as no smaller denominations of either Patara or Cragus alone are known in Series B, this likelihood would seem remote.
A further question remains: which of the other cities known from Periods II-V belonged to each of the two districts of Cragus and Masicytus? The present study has produced virtually no new evidence here. A brief review of the numismatic evidence for district membership follows.
During Periods IV and V, the names of four cities appear on the coins without mention of either district:
Three cities are named on the coins together with Cragus: 347
Only one city struck in combination with Masicytus:
Among the four cities which struck independently, two (Tlos and Myra) are also named in combination with districts. Their inclusion or omission of their districts' initials seems at times quite casual: Tlos used Cragus's initials on one but not the other of its two known sestertii; and the densely die linked bronze units of issues 192–95 read ΜΑ-ΜΑ, ΜΑ-ΜΥ, ΛΥ-ΜΑ, or ΛΥ-ΜΥ, as obverses with federal or district markings were coupled in no apparent pattern with reverses bearing district or civic initials. The "independent" issues of Pinara and Cyaneae cannot therefore be taken as evidence that these cities were not members of one district or another. It can surely be assumed that the districts embraced all of the territory of the Lycian League after the First Mithradatic War.
Cragus then included Telmessus, Tlos, and Xanthus. Along with these must go the cities die linked with Xanthus in Period II: Sidyma, Pinara, and Cadyanda. Only four of these six are mentioned by Ptolemy in his list of the cities "around Mt. Cragus" 348 (Xanthus, Tlos, Sidyma, and Pinara); Telmessus Ptolemy listed earlier as a city "on the shore"; and Cadyanda does not appear at all in his work. And Patara, also listed as "on the shore," has of course just been proposed here as the chief minting city of the Cragus district.
Only Myra is shown by the coins to have been in the Masicytus district. To judge by its League coinage, however, Masicytus was the larger, or at least the richer, of the two districts, and must therefore have embraced considerable territory, especially as it did not include the major western cities. Ptolemy lists as "by Mt. Masicytus" Phellus, Trebendae, Myra, Limyra, and Rhodiapolis: all these can be presumed to have been part of the Masicytus district.
Other mints which Ptolemy had earlier listed as "on the shore" were Patara, Antiphellus, Aperlae, Gagae, Olympus, and Phaselis. Antiphellus, so near Phellus; Aperlae, on the coast between Phellus and Myra; and Gagae to the southeast, die linked with Limyra in Period II, must also all have belonged to Masicytus. Cyaneae does not appear in Ptolemy but various considerations also place it in Masicytus: it is on the southern plain well to the east of Phellus and Antiphellus; it was die linked with Limyra in Period II, Series 3; only its sestertii and those of Masicytus exhibit the central cavities; and both inscriptions and coins show that it had a local cult of Eleuthera, the goddess of Myra. 349 Arycanda's easterly location makes certain its inclusion in Masicytus also. Candyba, a possible League mint, is placed by Ptolemy in the Milyas; but the city's location, so close to Phellus, Antiphellus, and the Myrus River make probable its membership also in the Masicytus district.
The only questionable cases are Olympus and Phaselis on the east coast. As has been seen in the discussion of Period II, their second century membership ended before the close of that century, and the two cities' absence in the Period III coinage seems to show that they were not members subsequently, at least as late as the 30s b.c. Perhaps after 67 b.c. they came under the jurisdiction of the Province of Cilicia; if they were Lycian League members at all late in the century, it must have been in some sort of subordinate status such as Balbura, Bubon, and Calynda evidently had. 350
The above division of League mints between the two districts of Cragus and Masicytus is of course that shown on Table 2. Cragus embraced the mints there called western: Telmessus, Xanthus, Sidyma, Pinara, Cadyanda, Tlos, and Patara. Masicytus included those there called southern: Candyba, Phellus, Antiphellus, Aperlae, Cyaneae, Trebendae,6 Myra, Arycanda, Limyra, Gagae, and Rhodiapolis.
| 339 |
Gordian
, pp. 29–30.
|
| 340 |
See Table 4.
|
| 341 |
102.1 and 102.2.
|
| 342 |
Series 1, issues 84 and 85; Series 2, 88 and 91, and 89 and 92; Series 3, 93 and 97; Series 4,102 and 103; and Series 5, 104
and 107,
and 105 and 108.
|
| 343 | |
| 344 |
TAM 905 = IGR 739, XIIIC.
|
| 345 |
IGR 704.
|
| 346 | |
| 347 |
Issue 147's markings are, it is true, ΚΡ and
or , but it seems unlikely
that the monograms stand for Patara; simple letters are the invariable rule elsewhere
in the silver coinage.
|
| 348 | |
| 349 |
IGR 700;
Gordian
95–96.
|
| 350 |
See above, p. 109, and Appendix 1, under Balbura.
|
| Mint | Period | Issues |
| Antiphellus | II | 23 |
| III | 73–74 | |
| Aperlae | II | 23A |
| III | 75–76 | |
| Arycanda | III | 80 |
| Cadyanda | II | 8, 9? |
| III | 63–64 | |
| Cragus (see also Telmessus-, Tlos-, and Xanthus-Cragus) | IV | 84, 88–90, 93–95, 102, 104–6, 111–13, 124–28, 142–47, 148?, |
| V | 159–64, 172–73, 197–99, 205, 209–11, 223, 225 | |
| Cyaneae | II | 24–26, 55, 77 |
| III | 77 | |
| IV | 100 | |
| V | 187–88 | |
| Gagae | II | 39 |
| III | 83 | |
| Limyra | II | 36–38, 50, 56 |
| III | 81–82 | |
| Lycia in genere | I | 1–4 |
| Masicytus (see also Myra-Masicytus) | IV | 85–87, 91–92, 97–99, 103, 107–10, 115–23, 130–39, 149–58, 168–71, |
| V | 174–77, 189–93, 196?, 202–4, 212–18, 221–22, 224, 226 | |
| Myra (see also Myra-Masicytus) | II | 28–35 |
| III | 79 | |
| IV | 101, 140 | |
| Myra-Masicytus | IV | 141 |
| V | 194–95, 196? | |
| Olympus | II | 41 (true League); 42–45, 51–52, 57 (all pseudo-League) |
| Patara | II | 14–20 |
| III | 68–70 | |
| Phaselis | II | 46 (true League); 47, 53–54, 58 (all pseudo-League) |
| Phellus | II | 21–22 |
| III | 71–72 | |
| Pinara | II | 7 |
| III | 61–62 | |
| IV | 96 | |
| Rhodiapolis | II | 40 |
| Sidyma | II | 6 |
| Telmessus-Cragus | IV | 148? |
| V | 178–81 | |
| Tlos (see also Tlos-Cragus) | II | 10–13 |
| III | 65–67 | |
| IV | 182, 206–8, 220 | |
| Tlos-Cragus | IV | 114, 129 |
| V | 165–67, 183–86, 219 | |
| Trebendae | II | 27 |
| III | 78 | |
| Xanthus (see also Xanthus-Cragus) | II | 5 |
| III | 59–60 | |
| Xanthus-Cragus | V | 200–1 |
| Imitations | II | 48–49 |
Because of the great variety of issues and mints in the Lycian League coinage, the banality of the coins' types, and the difficulty in reading correctly the small bronzes in particular, it is not surprising that numerous misattributions of League coins have been made and that many non-League coins have been attributed to the League. It is hoped that most of these misattributions have been laid to rest in the present work. Those which have come to my attention are listed below and are either discussed or referred to the issues where the coins properly belong.
Pseudo-Rhodian drachms with an eagle across Helios's cheek on the obverse have been assigned to a number of Lycian mints, but the coins are of Mylasa in Caria: see the beginning of the chapter on Period II.
Kitharephoroi (e.g. BMC 1): see issue 155. Amelas was not a League mint, nor a city at all.
Bronzes (e.g. Warren, p. 44, n. 1; BMC, p. lxii): see issues 176–77. Apollonia was not a mint at any time.
Small bronzes with ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΑΡΑ have been reported (Mionnet, Suppl. 7, p. 6, 18) and rejected (Asie Mineure, pp. 113–14). No such coins were found by the present author. Nevertheless, they may have existed, for Araxa is known to have been a League member at least in the early second century b.c. (see above, pp. 11, 12).
Kitharephoroi (e.g. BMC 4): see issue 150. Arycanda is not known to have struck silver League coins. As she struck in Period III, however, silver coins may yet appear.
Bronzes: Arycanda did strike in Period III, see issue 80. Buta large bronze with types similar to the League's (obv. head of Apollo; rev. ΑΡΥ ΚΑΝ and stag in wreath) has also been attributed to Arycanda (Paris = Recueil, p. 135 = Asie Mineure, p. 117; 3). The coin's poor preservation prevented both the recognition of the turreted crown on the obverse head and the proper reading of the reverse legend, which is ΑΒΥ. The coin is a striking of Abydus, of the issue of BMCTroas Abydus 42-43. The report of a continuation of the legend, ΚΑΝ, below the stag, arose from an apparent Κ scratched into the coin and from leaves in the wreath resembling the other letters.
Conveniently contiguous alphabetically are these three cities, two of which struck small bronze coins with League types. Bubon struck coins with obv. Artemis head and rev. ΒΟΥ and bow and quiver crossed, but without incuse square (BMC 1); and Bubon and Calynda struck coins with the same obverse type and rev. stag with ΒΟΥ (SNGvAulock 4286) or ΚΑΛΥ (BMC 4–7). None of these issues is precisely similar in its types and size to League coins, and none bears the federal or district ethnic; they must therefore be regarded merely as imitations of League strikings. See above, p. 109. Balbura, Bubon, and Calynda were not League mints.
Bronzes (e.g. BMC Dias-Cragus 1): see issues 159, 161, and 163, with commentary following issue 164. Dias was not a League mint.
Kitharephoroi (e.g. Waddington 3010): see issue 150.
Quarter drachms (e.g. J. L. Warren, "On Some Coins of Lycia under the Rhodian Domination, and of the Lycian League," NC 1863, p. 42, 4): see issue 133.
Bronzes: Waddington 3088, ascribed to Masicytus, is a small piece with obv. head of Artemis and rev. head of Hermes in incuse square, with ethnic described as ΜΑ. The true reading, however, is ΛΑ; the coin is of Latus in Crete: Crète, p. 220, 3. Another small bronze attributed to Masicytus is Waddington 3097, with obv. female head 1. and rev. ΜΑ and flower. I have not been able to discover the correct attribution of this coin, but it is not Masicytus's.
Quarter drachms: Myra did strike at least two issues of this denomination (issues 140–41), but other quarter drachms ascribed to this city (Kl. Münz., p. 306, Myra 1) are actually of Cragus (issue 124).
Bronzes: a small issue of bronzes with League types (obv. ΜΥ and head of Apollo and rev. cithara in wreath: BMC 7) might be considered a League issue. The coins do not, however, bear the federal or district ethnic, and, most significantly, do not have the standard League die axis position of ↑↑. Eleven of the fifteen coins known to me of this issue have an orientation of ↑↓; only four have ↑↑. The issue thus must date from Roman times, when the ↑↓ orientation became common, as in Myra's non-League issue BMC 10, and as in Claudius's Lycian strikings of, probably, a.d. 43: see Appendix 3. A brockage of this issue at the ANS further tends to confirm the Roman associations of the issue, brockages being predominantly a Roman phenomenon. The mean weight found was 3.70: see Table 7. An example is pictured on Plate 41, A; a reverse link exists between a coin with this obverse coiffure and one similar to SNGvAulock 4367, with a different hair style.
Bronzes: Patara did strike in Period III, but a large bronze of Period V (obv. head of Artemis and rev. stag) described with ΠΑ ΚΡ on reverse in a sale catalogue of the last century (Sotheby, June 29, 1863, 446), one can only conclude, was misread. Nevertheless, the error has been repeated in the BMC, p. lii, and in HN 2, p. 696. Suggestively, the next lot in the Sotheby catalogue contained a similar error: see under Trabala, below.
Pinara issued several issues of League silver and bronze (see index), but one small bronze coin ( Waddington 3173) attributed to Pinara is of Cragus: see issue 208.
Bronzes: Mionnet reports small bronzes with obv. ΛΥ and Apollo head and rev. ΠΟΔ and bow and quiver crossed in incuse square (Suppl. 7, p. 22, 88). The issue's existence is accepted by von Aulock ( Gordian , pp. 34 and 51). No such coins have been found by the present author, however, and most probably the attribution arose from a misreading of Masicytus's issue 176, with ΑΠΟ on reverse. Like the coin described in Mionnet, this issue is unusual in not bearing ΛΥΚΙ or ΛΥΚΙΩΝ on reverse; the three letters of ΑΠΟ are so arranged that the Π could easily be taken for the first letter; and the Α is often poorly rendered with a low cross bar and could easily be read as a Δ. Podalia was not a League mint.
Kitharephoroi: a small issue bearing Τ, star, and ΚΡ has been ascribed to Tlos-Cragus ( Waddington 3044) but is more probably of Cragus: see issue 146.
Bronzes: a bronze with Artemis head and stag is described in a nineteenth century sale catalogue (Sotheby, June 29, 1863, 447) as bearing ΤΡΑ ΚΡ on reverse. The attribution is surely due to a misreading of ΤЄΛ ΚΡ: see issue 181. See under Patara, above. Trabala was not a League mint.
The Period III bronzes with ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΤΡ (issue 78) have often been ascribed to this northern city (Trebenna is one possibility mentioned in BMC, p. lxviii; it is definitely accepted in Gordian , p. 54). The coins are, however, of Trebendae: see commentary following issue 27. Trebenna was not a League mint.
Bronzes bearing this reverse legend have been ascribed to various insignificant Lycian cities whose names start with these letters. The legend, however, is a blundered one and the coins are of Tlos: see issue 220. There was no League mint commencing with Ty.
Known forgeries of Lycian League coins include imitations of the kitharephoroi of Periods II and IV, and a bronze piece purporting to be of Period V struck over Tiberius. Numbers indicate individual coins.
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΠΑ Cithara in incuse square.
Nos. 1 and 2 are die duplicates.
The multiple-ringlet coiffure of all four coins is not found elsewhere in Period II, but on silver only in Period IV, where Series 2 may have furnished the prototypes of the forgeries' obverses. The atrocious style of nos. 1–3, and the impossible weights of nos. 1 and 2, further conclusively condemn these three examples. No. 4 is more competently done, but its unusually high weight and generally heavy obverse execution also reveal its falseness.
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. ΦΑΣΗΛΙ Cithara; to l., Isis crown; to r., torch; all in incuse square.
The obverse is most awkward and unprecedented. On the reverse, the symbol to l. is unusually high and the lettering much too regular. The Φ, in particular, is rendered with an almost perfect circle, unlike that on any other coin of Phaselis.
Obv. Head of Apollo r.
Rev. ΛΥΚΙΩΝ ΚΡΑΓ Cithara in incuse square.
The coin weighs too much, especially in view of its poor condition. Suspicions of its genuineness were confirmed on the arrival of the Vienna plaster cast of 102.9: the New York piece is a cast of the Vienna coin. It is remarkable that such a poorly preserved coin was selected for reproduction.
Obv. ΛΥ Head of Apollo r.
Rev. ΚΡ Cithara; to r., filleted branch; all in incuse square.
Die duplicates, nos. 7–9 are fairly well executed imitations of Series 2's issue 88. The lyre with its indentation at the bottom and with its strings so close to the uprights is suspicious, but the coins' fatal flaw is of course that their weights fall not in the range of Period IV but in that of Period II. The reverse die used for these silver pieces is that used for the bronze forgery no. 10 below.
Obv. Head of Zeus r.
Rev. ΚΡ to either side of Cithara; to r., filleted branch; all in incuse square.
The coin is struck over a coin of Tiberius from Smyrna: obv. ΤΙΒЄΡΙΟϹ ϹЄΒΑϹΤΟϹ and head of the emperor, and rev. ΙЄΡΩΝΥΜΟϹ ΖΜΥΡΝΑωΝ and garlanded altar (BMCIonia, Smyrna 263–65). To the right on the obverse of no. 10 can be seen traces of Tiberius's obverse inscription; and on the reverse there are visible traces of the undertype's circular border, inscription, and, inverted, the top of the altar crossing the body of the cithara.
The coin has been published three times by Imhoof-Blumer, who regarded it as evidence that the League's coinage extended at least as late as the reign of Tiberius (Monn. gr., p. 325, 2; Choix, pl. 4, 149; and "Griechische Ueberprägungen," ZfN 1878, p. 149, 16). This conclusion was accepted by Head (BMC, p. xlviii).
The coin, however, is like no other in all the League coinage. Its reverse, purportedly of the age of Tiberius, repeats rather suspiciously those of Brutus's time; and no other Lycian League coin in any metal portrays Zeus. That this coin of Tiberius was overstruck with the reverse die used for the obvious silver forgeries nos. 7–9 shows conclusively that no. 10 is a modern overstrike. The League's coinage may well have lasted into Tiberius's time, but no. 10 is not part of that coinage.
Two other forgeries, which I have not seen, are mentioned in the literature. Both are silver coins supposedly of Cragus. Waddington 3042, with types of Apollo and cithara, has the remarkable weight of 9.22, and was long ago recognized by Imhoof-Blumer as a retouched coin of Mytilene (Kl. Münz., p. 305). Imhoof Blumer then published another silver coin, weight 4.87, with the types of no. 10 above, concluding that it was a "fine cast" of another coin of no. 10's issue (Kl. Münz., p. 305, 1). It can only have been a direct modern striking in silver.
All issue numbers are prefixed by "C" to avoid confusion with Lycian League issue numbers. In other respects the formats for the silver and bronze catalogues follow, respectively, those of the catalogues of the silver and bronze coins of the League.
The silver coins are termed denarii, as they bear Claudius's portrait, name, and titles. Their weights, however, fall far below those of Claudius's denarii from the Roman mint.
The three bronze denominations have been arbitrarily termed double units, units and half units, the unit here as elsewhere defined as the most common denomination. Their weights seem to bear more relation to earlier local bronze issues than to contemporary Roman bronze denominations. 351 Many of the bronze coins are in very poor condition. Only reasonably certain die identities are indicated; there may well be others, unrecognized.
Denarii
Obv. ΤΙΒΕΡΙΟϹ ΚΛΑΥΔΙΟϹ ΚΑΙϹΑΡ ϹΕΒΑϹΤΟϹ Laureate head of the emperor r.
Rev. ΓЄΡΜΑΝΙΚΟϹ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤωΡ Varying type.
C1. Rev. Cithara; to l., and r. on C1.1a–C1.3c, ΛΥ. Imhoof-Blumer 1–2; Regling, p. 49, I.
C1.1 = C2.2; C1.3 = C2.3 = C3.1 = C5.2; C1.4 = C2.6 = C4.1.
C2. Rev. Apollo Patroös standing facing, holding branch in outstretched r. hand and bow in lowered l. hand; to l. and r. on C2.1a–C2.2a, ΛΥ. Imhoof-Blumer 3; Regling, pp. 49–50, II.
C2.2 = C1.1; C2.3 = C1.3 = C3.1 = C5.2; C2.6 = C1.4 = C4.1.
The reverse type is that used throughout the League's coinage, and on the later Lycian coins of Gordian III from Patara. 352 The figure on the last two coins of issue C2 seems to belong to this issue rather than to issue C4 because of the figure's nearly facing position and hipshot posture; the bow can be recognized, held vertically, below the left hand.
C3. Rev. Artemis standing facing, holding spear in l. hand. Imhoof-Blumer 5; Regling, p. 50, III.
C3.1 = C1.3 = C2.3 = C5.2; C3.2 = C5.1.
C4. Rev. Spes standing l., holding flower in outstretched r. hand and holding up the hem of her garment with her l. hand. Imhoof-Blumer 4; Regling, p. 50, IV.
C4.1 = C1.4 = C2.6.
The reverse figure, which at first glance seems to be the same as that of issue C1, does on closer inspection indeed appear to be Spes, as identified by Imhoof-Blumer. The figure is similar to that on a number of Claudius's issues from the Roman mint. 353
C5. Rev. Leto running l., carrying her infant twins.
C5.1 = C3.2; C5.2 = C1.3 = C2.3 = C3.1.
C6. Rev. Apollo or Artemis walking r., holding bow in outstretched l. hand, and arrow (?) in lowered r. hand. Imhoof-Blumer 6.
It is not clear to the present author whether the reverse figure is Artemis, as described in previous publications, or Apollo.
Bronze
Obv. ΤΙΒΕΡΙΟΣ ΚΛΑΥΔΙΟΣ ΚΑΙΣΑΡ ΣΕΒΑΣΤΟΣ Head of the emperor l. (all denominations).
Rev. ΠΑΤΗΡ ΠΑΤΡΙΔΟΣ ΓΕΡΜΑΝΙΚΟΣ ΑΥΤΟΚΡΑΤΩΡ (double units and units) or ΠΑΤΗΡ ΠΑΤΡΙΔΟΣ (half units). Varying type.
Double Units
C7. Rev. Apollo Patroös as on issue C2. Imhoof-Blumer 7; Regling, p. 46, Ia.
α. London 15.24↖ = "Miscellanea," p. 401; Berlin 10.60↑
C7α is from the obverse die of C8α and C10α.
C8. Rev. Artemis standing facing, holding short torch in r. hand and Nike in l. hand; behind her, stag. Imhoof-Blumer 9.
α. Paris 13.44↓,; β, Berlin 14.82↓; Cambridge 18.83↓ (obv. countermark: P) = SNGFitz 5023; Oxford 14.86↑
C8α is from the obverse die of C7α and C10α. C8β is from the obverse die of C9α. The Cambridge coin is also from the obverse die of C8β.
C9. Rev. Cult-image of Artemis Eleuthera, the goddess of Myra, standing facing in two-columned temple with steps at front; on floor to goddess's right, uncertain circular object; in pediment, eagle; at sides and top of gable, three Nikes. Imhoof-Blumer 11; Regling, p. 48, VIa.
α. London 15.83↖ = "Miscellanea," p. 400; β. Oxford 14.06↑; Berlin 13.62↓, (obv. countermark: Μ)
The reverse type is found also on Gordian III's coins from Myra. 354 C9α is from the obverse die of C8β.
C10. Rev. Libertas standing facing, holding pileus in outstretched r. hand. Imhoof-Blumer 13; Regling, p. 47, IVa.
α. Berlin 15.78↑; β. private coll. 16.55↑; private coll. 13.70↑
The reverse type is found on several issues of Claudius from the Roman mint. 355
C10α is from the obverse die of C7α and C8α. The other two coins of issue C10 share another obverse die.
Units
C11. Rev. Apollo Patroös as on issues C2 and C7. Imhoof-Blumer 8; Regling, p. 46, Ib.
α. Private coll. 7.73↑ (rev. Ϲ replaces Σ); β. cast in London; γ. Paris 8.00↓; Berlin 10.00↓ ("aus Lykien"), 8.66↑ = Svoronos 15; London 9.72↑, 7.53↑, 5.60↓; New York 10.20↑; Oxford 7.59↓; private coll. 9.04; von Aulock 7.42 = SNG 6907, called Bithynia = Hirsch 13 (May 15, 1905) 2892
C11β is from the obverse die of C12β and C14α. C11γ is from the obverse die of C13α. The heavier Berlin coin and the von Aulock coin are die duplicates, and are from the obverse die of the heavier Athens coin of issue C14. The lighter Berlin coin and the Oxford coin are die duplicates of C11α. The heaviest London coin and the privately owned coin are die duplicates.
C12. Rev. Artemis as on issue C8. Imhoof-Blumer 10; Regling, p. 46, IIb.
α. Berlin 7.15↑ = Crète 14; β. Oxford 6.65↑; London 8.65↓ = Weber 7251; New York 7.56↓; Oxford 7.89↓; private coll. 8.10↑; Santamaria (Nov. 21, 1932) B157
C12β is from the obverse die of C11β and C14α. The privately owned coin is from the obverse die of C15β. The London and Santamaria pieces are die duplicates.
C13. Rev. Cult image of Artemis Eleuthera as on issue C9. Imhoof-Blumer 12; Regling, p. 48, VIb.
α. Berlin 6.41↓; β. Paris 7.07↑ = Crète 17; private coll. 7.41↓
C13α is from the obverse die of C11γ.
C14. Rev. Libertas as on issue C10. Imhoof-Blumer 14; Regling, p. 48, IVb.
α. Berlin 6.65↓; Athens 8.27↓, 6.56↓; Berlin 8.10↓, purchased in Pinara (Regling, p. 49), 5.78↑; Cambridge 7.93↑ = SNGFitz 5024; London 6.05↓; private coll. 7.24↑; Vienna, known only from Crète 16 (obv. not illustrated)
C14α is from the obverse die of C11β and C12β. The heavier Athens coin is from the obverse die of the heavier Berlin and the von Aulock examples of issue C11. The privately owned coin is from the dies of the London example.
C15. Rev. Warrior mounted on horse galloping r.; he wears helmet and cuirass and his chlamys blows behind him; he carries a shield and brandishes a javelin; to l., on pedestal, statue of an armored warrior (?), wearing triple-crested helmet or rayed crown, holding patera or shield in l. hand, and javelin (?) in upraised r. hand. Imhoof-Blumer 15; Regling, p. 47, Vb.
α. Paris 7.34↓; β. New York 9.01↖ = Crète 18 = Ball 6 (Feb. 9, 1932) 587 = Hirsch 13 (May 15, 1905) 2893 (not illustrated); Athens 6.99↓, 6.98↓, (obv. countermark: Ο); Berlin 9.42↓, 7.43↑, 7.39↑; London 7.28↓; Winterthur 8.54↓; von Aulock 7.55 = SNG 6908, called Bithynia
C15β is from the obverse die of the privately owned specimen (not illustrated) of issue C12. The heavier Athens coin, the heaviest Berlin coin, the London coin, and the Winterthur coin are die duplicates of C15α; and the middle-weight Berlin coin is from their obverse die. The lightest Berlin coin and the von Aulock coin are die duplicates of C15β.
Cl6. Rev. Leto as on issue C5. Regling, p. 46, IIIb.
α. Berlin 8.75↓; Athens 6.06↑, from a hoard found on Delos ca. 1905
Half Units
C17. Rev. Apollo Patroös as on issues C2, C7, and C11.
α. Private coll. 3.44↖; London 5.13↑; Oxford 3.88↑, purchased at Castelloryzo (ancient Megiste) = "Coins Lycia," p. 37, 38 (not illustrated; the denomination not recognized)
The London coin is from the dies of C17α.
C18. Rev. Mounted warrior as on issue C15 but with the statue omitted.
α. London 3.89↑
Imhoof-Blumer, pp. 22–23, discusses two earlier publications of a coin of, apparently, this issue, but concludes that it was a bronze core of a denarius. No denarii with this reverse type are known, however.
| Denarii | Double Units | Units | Half Units |
| 1 Cithara | |||
| 2 Apollo | 7 Apollo | 11 Apollo | 17 Apollo |
| 3 Artemis
4 Spes |
8 Artemis | 12 Artemis | |
| 5 Leto
6 Apollo or Artemis |
9 Eleuthera 10 Libertas |
13 Eleuthera 14 Libertas 15 Warrior 16 Leto |
18 Warrior |
The first small assemblage of Claudius's Lycian strikings was published in 1890 by J.N. Svoronos, who, however, attributed the coins to Crete. 356 G. F. Hill in 1903 first assigned the coins to their proper home in Lycia, 357 and his publication was followed in 1905 and 1906 by brief, non-illustrated studies by F. Imhoof-Blumer and K. Regling, adding new types and denominations. 358 No subsequent study of the coinage is known to me.
The present compilation strengthens and confirms the conclusions reached by Imhoof-Blumer and Regling: that Claudius's Lycian silver and bronze were small and brief emissions, most probably to be placed in a.d. 43, in which year Claudius finally ended Lycia's fragile autonomy by formally incorporating her in the Roman Empire.
The limited material available to the earlier investigators did not allow them to realize the extensive die linkage found in both the silver and the bronze series. Only 11 obverse dies are known for the silver, and multiple obverse die links connect 5 of the 6 issues. The repeated obverse links among the bronze coins show that these too must have been brief and concentrated issues (see Table 10).
The federal initials ΛΥ are found only on some of the denarii of issues C1 and C2; the remaining coins of these issues do not have the ΛΥ. A helpful die flaw shows that some and thus very likely all of the coins with ΛΥ preceded those without. The obverse die C1.3 (= C2.3, C3.1, and C5.2) was in its unflawed state when used with reverses C1.3a-b (with ΛΥ); when used with reverse C1.3c (also with ΛΥ), C1.3 had developed a small but obvious flaw, a short line rising vertically from the top of the head towards the Λ in ΚΛΑΥΔΙΟϹ. This flaw is found on all of the other coins (none with ΛΥ) of issues C1, C2, C3, and C5 for which this obverse die was used. The initial use, and prompt abandonment, of the federal initials is a circumstance which seems most understandable if the coins were struck at the very moment when Lycia's independency was being ended. The Roman types of Spes and Libertas might also be viewed, if ironically, as appropriate to such a change of status.
Several issues are here either published or illustrated for the first time, but in themselves add little to the significance of the coinage. One might single out only issues C17 and C18, which clearly are the smallest denomination of the bronze series, and recognized as such for the first time. Imhoof-Blumer had suggested another bronze coin in the Waddington collection as representing this smallest denomination, 359 but where this intriguing coin should be attributed I have been unable to discover.
| 351 |
See Table 8.
|
| 352 |
See pp. 20–21 and Plate 1, A-F.
|
| 353 |
E.g. BMCRE, Claudius 124–35.
|
| 354 |
E.g.
Gordian
134–64. A bust of the same goddess is found on autonomous bronzes of Myra (BMC
10). These appear to be from provincial times, as their die axes are usually ↑↓, as in the issue discussed in Appendix 1,
Misattributions, under Myra.
|
| 355 |
E.g. BMCRE, Claudius 145–46.
|
| 356 |
Crète, pp. 336–37, nos. 10–12 and 14–18.
|
| 357 |
"Miscellanea," pp. 400–402.
|
| 358 |
Works cited in abbreviations list.
|
In late December 1982, as the page proofs of this study were being corrected, the ANS acquired a silver drachm of the League's Period II, uniquely inscribed ΑΠ. The coin was too interesting to omit. Text and tables above have been altered to reflect knowledge of it, but the only place its description could be accommodated was here. Practical considerations also dictated placing its illustration slightly out of numerical order on the plates; but it will be found incorporated into Plate 5, next to the Trebendae coin with which it shares an obverse die.
Aperlae 1 coin
23A. Rev. ΑΠ to l., Isis crown.
23A.1 = 27.1 (Trebendae). The identity of the rather confused locks at the crown, and some small die breaks in the field to l., show that 23A.1 is the same die as 27.1. Recutting of the hair in front of the laurel wreath on 23A.1 shows that Aperlae's coin was struck after Trebendae's.
Aperlae and Apollonia, the two candidates for te issuer of the League's silver and bronze with ΑΠ, both lay on the southern coast between Antiphellus and Myra. Aperlae was by far the more important: it is known from four of the five non-numismatic sources of evidence summarized in Table 2's columns 5-9, while Apollonia is known from none. And Aperlae, in Roman times if not earlier, was the chief member of a sympolity which included Apollonia and two other small towns: a resident of any of the four was termed an 'Απεϱλειτής. 360 Aperlae is clearly the more probable issuer of the League silver and bronze with ΑΠ. 361 As mentioned in the commentary under Trebendae's issue 27, above, however, the strong similarity of the joint Trebendae-Aperlae die to several of Myra's suggests the strong possibility that Aperlae's and Trebendae's small coinages were actually struck at Myra.
| 359 |
Imhoof-Blumer 16 =
Waddington
3011. Obverse and reverse are transposed in the published descriptions, and the inscription is not so complete as described.
The
obverse bears a poppy head or caduceus head between leaves or corn ears above, clasped hands, and Λ (?) and Υ below; the reverse
bears ]ΙΟΣ
ΚΛΑΥΔΙΟΣ surrounding a tripod.
|
| 360 |
IGR 690 and 692-93.
|
| 361 |
Other League bronzes with ΑΠ have occasionally been attributed to Apollonia, but the letters seem to refer to an individual,
and are not
evidence for Apollonia as either a League mint or League member: see issues 176-77 above.
|
Lycian League silver coins are identified in the catalogue and on the plates by issue number and die number: thus 84.1 is the first die catalogued in issue 84. Asterisks in the catalogue indicate the particular specimens illustrated.
Lycian League bronze coins are identified by issue number and Greek minuscules: thus 60α is the coin indicated by "α" in the catalogue of issue 60.
On the plates, brackets above the numbers indicate obverse die links; brackets below the numbers indicate reverse die links.
Lycian provincial strikings under Claudius form Appendix 3. Issue numbers here are prefixed by "C"; otherwise the formats for silver and bronze follow those of the League silver and bronze.
Other coins are identified on the plates by capital letters, and a key to these follows.
Plate 1
Plate 12
Plate 14
Plate 16
Plate 26
Plate 41
Plates 42–44
Lycian provincial coinage under Claudius. See Appendix 3.
