Skip to main content

Full text of "A history of ancient coinage, 700-300 B.C"

See other formats 


13 


A    HISTORY   OF 

ANCIENT   COINAGE 

700-300  B.C. 


OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

LONDON  EDINBURGH  GLASGOW  NEW   YORK 

TORONTO      MELBOURNE      CAPE   TOWN      BOMBAY 

HUMPHREY    MILFORD 

PUBLISHER  TO  THE  UNIVERSITY 


A  HISTORY  OF 
ANCIENT  COINAGE 


700-300  B.C. 


BY 


PERCY  GARDNER,  Litt.D.,  F.B.A. 

LINCOLN    AND    MERTON    PROFESSOR    OF   CLASSICAL    ARCHAEOLOGY    IN   THE 
UNIVERSITY   OF   OXFORD 


WITH   ELEVEN   PLATES 


OXFORD 

AT  THE   CLARENDON   PRESS 

1918 


CJ 

Gr3 


PRINTED    IN   ENGLAND 
AT   THE   OXFORD   UNIVERSITY    PRESS 


INSCRIBED   TO 

BARCLAY  VINCENT  HEAD 

AS   A   MEMORIAL 

OF 

SIXTEEN    YEARS 

OF   COMMON   TOIL 

AND 

UNINTERRUPTED    FRIENDSHIP 


PREFACE 

In  the  course  of  the  last  fifty  years  the  science  of  Greek 
coins,  ancient  numismatics,  has  undergone  great  develop- 
ments. Up  to  about  1860  the  study  had  been  gradually 
taking  shape,  and  many  able  scholars  and  numismatists, 
such  as  Sestini,  Eckhel,  and  later  Millingen  and  others,  had 
opened  up  great  fields  of  study,  and  showed  much  penetra- 
tion and  erudition  in  the  discussion  of  the  various  classes 
of  coins  and  their  relations  to  the  cities  which  issued  them. 
Yet  these  writers  had  scarcely  founded  a  science  of  ancient 
numismatics.  Methods  had  still  to  be  sought  out  and  estab- 
lished. The  pioneers  of  numismatic  method  were  Mommsen, 
in  the  opening  chapters  of  his  Geschichte  des  romischen 
Miinzicesens  (1865),  and  Brandis,  in  his  Miinz-,  Mass-  und 
Geicichtswesen  in  Vorderasien  (1866).  These  writers  clearly 
saw  that  for  the  formation  of  numismatics  as  a  branch  of 
historical  science  two  points  were  fundamental.  First,  it 
was  necessary  to  determine  not  only  the  cities  which  struck 
each  group  of  coins,  but  also  the  date  and  occasion  of  each 
issue.  And  secondly,  as  coins  were  measures  of  value  and 
a  medium  of  exchange,  the  one  most  important  fact  in 
regard  to  them  was  the  quantity  of  precious  metal  which 
each  contained;  in  fact  their  weight.  Eckhel  in  his 
great  Doctrina  Numorum  Veterum  (1792-8),  which  is  still 
valuable  as  a  storehouse  of  learning  and  a  model  of  good 
sense,  had  but  a  very  vague  notion  of  the  dates  of  coins ; 
and  their  weights  had  not  been  seriously  considered.  The 
works  of  Brandis  and  Mommsen  were  epoch-making;  but 
they  could  not  carry  very  far,  because  the  essential  point 
of  the  dates  of  issues  had  not  been  satisfactorily  gone  into. 


viii  PREFACE 

In  the  period  1870-90  a  fresh  turn  was  given  to  the  study- 
by  a  series  of  more  thorough  attempts  to  connect  the  suc- 
cessive issues  of  money  with  the  history  of  the  mint-cities 
to  which  they  belonged.  In  this  field  B.  V.  Head's  Coinage 
of  Syracuse  (1874)  may  be  said  to  have  opened  the  door. 
It  is  only  a  monograph  of  eighty  pages,  but  its  value  was 
at  once  recognized  in  the  Universities  of  Europe ;  and  it 
proved  the  first  of  a  number  of  similar  treatises,  which 
tended  gradually  to  introduce  into  numismatics  the  true 
historic  method.  The  work  was  in  a  remarkable  degree 
international.  In  Holland  J.  P.  Six,  in  Switzerland 
F.  Imhoof-Blumer,  in  France  W.  H.  Waddington  and 
Theodore  Reinach,  in  Germany  A.  von  Sallet  and  R.  Weil, 
in  England  A.  J.  Evans,  may  be  specially  mentioned  as 
having  made  very  useful  contributions.  And  when  in 
1887  Mr.  Head  published  his  Historia  Numorum  he  was 
able,  as  a  result  of  combined  labours,  to  present  the  coins 
of  the  Greeks  as  orderly  series  under  each  mint-city  or 
kingdom.  The  new  edition  of  the  Historia  (1911)  shows 
a  great  number  of  alterations  and  additions  in  consequence 
of  the  discoveries  and  researches  of  twenty-four  years ;  but 
it  is  astonishing  how  well  the  main  lines  of  the  book  have 
endured.  On  similar  principles  to  Mr.  Head's,  but  on  a 
much  larger  scale,  M.  Babelon  is  now  publishing,  volume 
by  volume,  a  complete  digest  of  the  published  coins  of  the 
Greek  world,  down  to  300  B.C.,  ranged  under  mints  and 
rulers  (Traite  des  Monnaies  grecques  et  romaines). 

A  still  more  elaborate  work,  a  Corpus  of  Greek  Coins, 
is  in  progress  under  the  auspices  of  the  Prussian  Academy 
of  Sciences.  In  proposing  this  work,  as  far  back  as  1887, 
Mommsen  wrote :  '  It  is  beyond  doubt  that  students  who 
plan  some  study  in  the  field  of  Antiquity,  whether  con- 
cerned with  History,  Language,  Religion  or  Art,  or  any 
other  subject,  find  no  more  serious  hindrance  and  con- 
stant impediment  than  the  want  of  a  rationally  ordered 


PREFACE  ix 

collocation  of  ancient  coins.'  The  Corpus  has  the  able 
assistance  of  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer,  of  Winterthur,  with 
whom  work  very  competent  scholars.  But  the  penalty 
resulting  from  their  attempt  to  include  every  known  coin, 
and  to  go  carefully  into  every  detail,  is  that  the  Corpus 
moves  very  slowly.  A  few  parts  only,  dealing  with  the 
coins  of  a  few  cities  and  districts  of  Northern  Greece, 
have  appeared.  If  carried  on  thus,  the  work  will  not  be 
completed,  literally,  for  several  centuries. 

A  talented  numismatist,  M. Theodore  Beinach,  has  written:  * 
'  Nous  avons  des  catalogues  dont  quelques-uns  sont  des 
ceuvres  scientifiques  de  premier  ordre,  des  monographies, 
des  manuels  disposes  suivant  l'ordre  ge'ographique  ou  syste- 
matique.'  '  1/histoire  de  la  monnaie  chez  les  Grecs  n'a  jamais 
ete  ecrite.'  I  am  ambitious  enough  to  try  to  put  together 
at  least  the  outlines  of  such  a  history. 

The  plan  followed  by  Mr.  Head  and  M.  Babelon,  though 
perhaps  the  best  for  their  purpose,  has  certain  disadvan- 
tages. It  gives  the  succession  of  monetary  issues  under 
each  state  and  city,  but  it  does  not  include  the  comparison 
together  of  the  coins  of  different  cities,  even  when  the  cities 
lie  near  together  and  the  coins  are  contemporary.  Each 
city  is  treated  as  if  it  were  quite  independent  of  its  neigh- 
bours. For  example,  in  the  Historia  Numorum,  Rhegium 
appears  on  p.  107,  and  the  closely  kindred  Chalcidic  colony 
of  Messana  on  p.  151 :  Byzantium  is  considered  on  p.  266, 
and  Calchedon,  only  divided  from  it  by  the  Bosporus,  on 
p.  511.  It  is  not  easy,  without  much  investigation,  to  trace 
political  or  commercial  influence  of  one  city  on  another. 
Especially  it  is  hard  to  determine,  on  the  evidence  to  be 
found  in  the  book,  why  one  city  uses  the  Aeginetan  standard 
for  its  coin,  another  the  Corinthian,  another  the  Attic,  and 
so  on.  M.  Babelon  is  clearly  aware  of  this  defect ;  and  in 
the  recent  volumes   of  his  great  work  he  has  commonly 

1  L'Histoire  par  les  Monnaies,  1894,  p.  4. 


x  PREFACE 

prefixed  to  the  account  of  the  coinage  of  the  cities  of  each 
district  a  general  sketch  of  its  character.  This  is  excellent ; 
but  even  so,  the  means  for  following  lines  of  numismatic 
connexion  is  incomplete. 

It  seems  that  there  is  need  for  another  history  of  coin- 
age constructed  on  a  different  plan,  taking  cities  in  groups 
rather  than  separately,  tracing  lines  of  trade  influence  from 
district  to  district,  trying  to  discern  the  reasons  why  par- 
ticular coin  standards  found  acceptance  in  one  locality  or 
another.  Head's  book  is  really  a  history  of  the  coinages 
of  cities  and  states  ;  it  is  desirable  as  a  supplement  to  trace 
at  least  the  outlines  of  the  history  of  Greek  and  Asiatic  and 
Italian  coinages  as  a  continuous  activity.  This  is  the  plan 
of  the  present  work.  It  could  not  have  been  attempted  if 
such  works  as  the  Historia  Numorum,  M.  Babelon's  Traite 
des  Monnaies  grecques,  and  the  Catalogue  of  Greek  Coins  in 
the  British  Museum  (27  volumes)  had  not  lain  ready  to 
hand.  Such  works  furnish  abundant  material;  but  the 
material  can  only  be  used  by  those  thoroughly  familiar 
with  the  coins  themselves. 

I  have  been  unable  at  present  to  continue  this  history 
into  the  Hellenistic  age.  The  truth  is  that,  in  the  case  of 
coins,  as  in  the  case  of  politics,  religion,  and  all  else,  the 
problems  of  the  Hellenistic  age  are  not  the  same  as  those 
of  the  autonomous  age.  We  have  kingdoms  in  the  place 
of  city-states.  The  question  of  coin  standards  becomes  far 
simpler  in  consequence  of  the  wide  adoption  of  the  Attic 
weight.  But  the  question  of  mints  becomes  infinitely  more 
complex,  and  in  fact  is  full  of  difficulties  at  present  insoluble, 
because  the  mint-cities  seldom  place  their  names  on  their 
money,  more  often  a  monogram  difficult  of  interpretation. 

It  is  unfortunate  that  while  continental  scholars  have 
all  written  the  weights  of  coins  in  grammes,  English  numis- 
matists have  used  the  Troy  measure  of  grains.  As  the 
British  Museum  Catalogues  go  by  grains,  I  have  felt  bound, 


PREFACE  xi 

whenever  I  give  a  weight,  to  express  it  according  both  to 
the  English  and  the  continental  methods.  I  have  not,  in 
giving  these  weights,  attempted  minute  accuracy,  as  I  think 
such  accuracy  misleading,  since  coins  of  the  same  group 
differ  considerably  in  weight,  and  it  is  quite  clear  that 
ancient  mints  did  not  attain  to  great  accuracy,  even  in 
the  case  of  gold  coins.  Silver  coins  from  the  same  dies 
often  differ  markedly  in  weight ;  and  bronze  coins  are 
usually  only  token-money,  of  which  the  weight  is  unim- 
portant. It  appears  that  in  antiquity,  as  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  the  number  of  coins  struck  out  of  a  talent  or  mina 
of  metal  was  more  regarded  than  the  weight  of  individual 
specimens.  To  weigh  coins,  as  some  numismatists  have 
done,  to  the  thousandth  of  a  gramme  seems  to  me  absurd  ; 
and  the  result  is  to  give  to  their  calculations  an  exactness 
which  is  quite  illusory. 

The  plates  are  arranged  to  give  a  general  view  of  the 
coins  of  districts  and  periods.  It  was  quite  impossible  to 
figure  every  coin  mentioned  in  the  text.  In  order  to 
supplement  the  plates,  I  have  added  references  to  the  plates 
of  the  British  Museum  Guide  to  Greek  and  Roman  Coins 
(B.  M.)  and  to  those  of  M.  Babelon's  Traite  des  Monnaies 
grecques  et  romaines  (B.  T.)  in  the  case  of  coins  figured  in 
those  works. 

Parts  of  some  of  the  following  chapters  have  already 
appeared  in  print  in  less  developed  form:  two  papers  on 
the  origins  of  coinage  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  British 
Academy,  papers  on  the  coinages  of  the  Ionian  Revolt  and 
the  Athenian  Empire  in  the  Journal  of  Hellenic  Studies. 
These  have  been  largely  rewritten. 

I  should  add  that  the  dates  I  have  accepted  in  the  text 
for  events  in  Greek  history  are  only  approximate,  taken 
from  ordinary  books  of  reference,  unless  when  any  of  my 
arguments  depended  on  an  exact  date.  It  is  clear  that 
if  I  had  tried  to  determine  the  exact  date  of  events  in 


xii  PREFACE 

Greek  history,  it  would  have  involved  endless  research, 
and  the  result  when  reached  would  have  been  only  con- 
jectural. Nor  would  the  investigation  have  been  in  the 
line  of  my  work. 

It  is  with  great  satisfaction  that  I  have  inscribed  this 
work  to  the  memory  of  Barclay  Head,  as  he  inscribed  the 
Historia  Numorum  to  the  memory  of  Joseph  Eckhel.  For  six-; 
teen  years  (1871-87)  my  desk  at  the  British  Museum  was 
within  a  few  feet  of  Head's,  and  almost  daily  in  those  years 
we  discussed  together  problems  of  Greek  numismatics.  That 
he  valued  my  collaboration  is  proved  by  the  acknowledge- 
ment of  it,  expressed  with  characteristic  generosity,  in  the 
Introduction  to  his  Catalogue  of  the  Coins  of  Attica.1  But 
my  obligations  to  him  are  greater,  because,  while  I  had 
a  variety  of  interests,  his  whole  mind  was  concentrated  on 
the  subject  of  our  study.  My  dedication  must  stand  as 
a  memorial  of  a  friendship  never  clouded.  I  must  add  that 
to  watch  the  science  of  ancient  numismatics  taking  form 
year  by  year,  and  constantly  improving  in  methods  and 
results,  was  an  experience  of  a  rare  and  very  instructive 
kind. 

I  have  to  thank  Dr.  George  Macdonald  for  kindly  reading 
my  proofs,  and  making  many  useful  suggestions.  The  very 
full  and  useful  General  Index  I  owe  to  Miss  Edith  Legge. 

P.  G. 

1  p.  lxix. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 


PREFACE vii 


INTRODUCTION 

I.  Greek  Trade-eoutes 
II.  Classes  of  Traders  .        .        . 

III.  Bankers 

IV.  Early  Measures  of  Value       .        • 
V.  The  Origin  of  Coin- standards 

VI.  Mutual  Relations  of  Precious  Metals 
VII.  Rights  of  Coinage    . 
VIII.  Monetary  Alliances 
IX.  Mother-city  and  Colony  . 
X.  Standard  Currencies 
XI.  Monometallism  and  Bimetallism     . 
XII.  The  Dating  of  Greek  Coins   . 

XIII.  Hoards 

XIV.  Fabric 


1 
9 
13 
20 
24 
31 
36 
42 
44 
49 
52 
56 
59 
64 


FIRST  PERIOD:  TO  480  b.c. 

CHAPTER  I 
Early  Electrum 

^  1.  Origin  of  Coinage 67 

^2.  Ionia 70 

CHAPTER  II 

Lydian  and  Persian  Coinage 

^4  1.  Gold  of  Lydia 83 

2.  Gold  of  Persia 86 


xiv  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

CHAPTEE  III 
The  Coinage  op  the  Ionian  Revolt 91 

CHAPTER  IV 
Supposed  Electrum  Coins  of  European  Greece       .        .104 

CHAPTEE  V 
Pheidon  and  Peloponnesus 

§  1.  Coinage  at  Aegina 109 

2.  Influence  of  Aegina 122 

CHAPTEE  VI 
Early  Coins  of  Euboea 124 

CHAPTEE  VII 
Early  Coins  of  Corinth  and  Corcyra 

§  1.  Corinth .         .134 

2.  Corcyra        .         . 138 

CHAPTEE  VIII 
Early  Coins  of  Athens 

§  1.  The  Earliest  Coinage 141 

2.  The  Reforms  of  Solon 143 

3.  The  Coinage  of  Peisistratus 153 

4.  The  Olive- wreath  of  Athena 16 1 

CHAPTEE  IX 
Early  Silver  of  Asia 

§  1.  Earliest  Issues 164 

2.  The  Attic  Standard 173 

3.  Phoenician  Standard 174 

4.  Persian  Standard 179 

CHAPTEE  X 
Early  Coins  of  Thrace  and  Macedon 

§  1.  Thasian  Standard .187 

2.  Abderite  Standard 1 90 

3.  Chalcidice 197 

4.  The  Thracian  Chersonese 199 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  XI 

Coixs  of  South  Italy,  600-480  b.c.    . 

CHAPTER  XII 
Coixs  of  Sicily,  550-480  b.c.     . 

CHAPTER  XIII 
Coixs  of  Cyrexe,  630-480  b.c.  . 


XV 

PAGE 

.       201 

.     212 

.     218 


SECOND  PERIOD  :   480-300  b.c. 

CHAPTER  XIY 
Coixs  of  the  Athexiax  Empire 

§  1.  Athens,  Silver 222 

2.  Electrum  of  Asia  Minor 232 

3.  The  Islands 243 

4.  Ionia  and  Caria 248 

5.  Pontus  and  Propontis 263 

6.  Thrace  and  Macedon 269 

7.  Italy  and  Sicily 282 

8.  Historic  Results 285 

9.  Gold  at  Athens 290 

10.  Bronze  at  Athens  .                  295 


CHAPTER  XV 

Silver  of  Asia,  400-330  b.c. 

§  1.  Spread  of  the  Chian  Standard 

2.  Attic  Standard       . 

3.  The  Persian  Region 

4.  Pontus 

5.  Thrace  and  Macedon 


298 
311 
312 
317 
322 


CHAPTER  XYI 
Gold  of  Asia  Mlxor,  &c. 

§  1.  407-394  B.C.    ........  327 

2.  394-330  B.c 330 


xvi  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  XVII 
Coins  of  Phoenicia  and  Africa,  480-330  b.c. 

§  1.  Phoenicia 340 

2.  Carthage 347 

3.  Cyrene 350 

CHAPTER  XVIII 
Coins  of  Hellas,  480-330  b.c. 

§  1.  Northern  Greece 353 

2.  Corinth  and  Colonies 369 

3.  Peloponnesus 378 

4.  The  Islands 389 

CHAPTER  XIX 
Coins  of  South  Italy,  480-330  b.c. 

§  1.  Greek  Cities 393 

2.  Etruria.         .         .         . 398 

3.  Spain  and  Gaul 402 

CHAPTER  XX 
Coins  of  Sicily,  480-330  b.c. 

§  1.  480-406  b.c 404 

2.  406-330  b.c 411 

CHAPTER  XXI 
Coins  of  Philip  and  Alexander 422 

GENERAL  INDEX  . 441 

INDEX  TO  PLATES 457 

PLATES  I-XI. 


INTRODUCTION 

I.    Greek  Trade-boutes. 

The  history  of  Greek  commerce  has  yet  to  be  written. 
There  are,  indeed,  in  existence  a  few  books  which  pro- 
fessedly treat  of  it;1  but  they  are  necessarily  built  on 
inadequate  foundations,  since  the  preliminary  studies,  which 
should  furnish  them  with  a  basis,  have  scarcely  been  made. 
The  data  for  a  construction  of  a  history  of  Greek  commerce 
would  include  not  merely  an  examination  of  the  works  of 
ancient  writers,  and  a  detailed  survey  of  geography,  but 
also  a  fuller  investigation  of  published  inscriptions,  and, 
in  addition,  of  all  the  results  of  excavation  on  classical 
soil.  The  results  of  such  excavation,  down  to  the  middle  of 
the  last  century,  were  not  adequately  recorded.  Even  since 
then  they  have  only  in  some  cases  been  recorded  in  sufficient 
detail :  objects  in  themselves  uninteresting,  and  of  no 
money  value,  such  as  unpainted  vases  and  common  bronze 
utensils  and  tools,  have  been  often  thrown  away.  Yet 
such  objects  might  be  of  great  value  for  indicating  the  lines 
of  ancient  commerce.  Coins,  however,  which  are  also  of 
inestimable  importance  for  commercial  inquiries,  have  been 
carefully  examined  and  published ;  and  the  value  of  such 
works  as  Head's  Historia  Numorum  has  been  generally 
recognized.  It  is  the  object  of  this  book  to  make  the 
facts  of  coinage  useful  for  the  knowledge  of  commercial 
intercourse. 

1  E.  Speck  (1905)  devotes  a  volume  of  his  Handelsgeschichte  des  Altertums  to 
Greece  ;  and  his  work  is  of  value.  Of  course,  there  are  many  smaller  works 
and  monographs  which  throw  light  on  particular  fields  of  ancient  commerce. 
An  excellent  book,  though  now  somewhat  out  of  date,  is  Buchsenschiitz, 
Besitz  und  Erxcerb  im  griech.  Alterium,  1869.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  Mr.  A.  E. 
Zimmern,  in  his  recent  work  on  the  Greek  Commonwealths,  has,  in  the  chapters 
devoted  to  commerce,  frequently  followed  untrustworthy  modern  authorities 
who  put  theories  in  the  place  of  facts. 

195T  B 


2  INTRODUCTION 

I  will  begin  by  sketching  the  main  features  of  Greek 
commerce. 

Attempts  have  been  made  by  some  recent  writers  to  trace 
the  trade-routes,  and  to  track  the  commerce  of  the  Minoan 
and  Mycenaean  ages.1  The  results  reached  by  them  are 
somewhat  speculative.  In  the  absence  of  literature,  attempts 
to  utilize  pottery  and  schemes  of  ornament  for  proof  of 
trade  influences  and  ethnographic  connexions  are  meritorious, 
but  they  are  risky.  Peoples,  even  if  unrelated,  at  the  same 
stage  of  civilization  often  produce  implements  and  earthen- 
ware of  closely  similar  character;  nor  does  the  imitation 
by  one  people  of  the  rude  art  products  of  another  prove 
identity  of  race.  In  any  case,  the  subject  of  the  present 
book  being  the  coins  of  the  Greeks,  I  cannot  investigate 
the  civilization  which  prevailed  in  Hellas  before  the  Greeks 
came  in. 

In  the  Homeric  age  commerce  can  scarcely  be  said  to 
have  existed  among  the  Greeks.2  The  state  of  society  was 
such  as  scarcely  to  require  it.  The  Homeric  nobles  produce 
on  their  own  lands  nearly  all  that  they  require  for  their 
rude  mode  of  living.  The  chief  necessary  which  they  had 
to  go  to  the  town  and  fetch  seems  to  have  been  iron.3 
Luxuries  they  imported,  or  rather  bought  of  the  foreign 
merchants  who  visited  their  shores.  The  chief  riches  of 
the  Homeric  chiefs  consisted  in  their  flocks  and  herds  and 
their  slaves.  These  alone  they  could  offer  to  merchants  in 
exchange  for  wares.  Hence  prices  are  always  in  Homer 
reckoned  in  oxen  ;  and  we  are  told  that  when  a  cargo  of 
Lemnian  wine  reached  the  Greek  camp  before  Troy,  the 
chiefs  purchased  amphoras  of  it  for  cattle  and  hides.4  The 
real  resources  of  Greek  lands,  the  purple-fisheries  of  Cythera, 
the  copper-mines  of  Cyprus,  the  gold-mines  of  Thasos,  seem 
to  have  been  in  the  hands  of  Phoenicians  ;  and  from  the 

1  See  especially  W.  Leaf,  Troy,  a  study  in  Homeric  geography ;  V.  Berard,  Les 
Phiniciens  et  V 'Odyssee. 

1  A  great  part  of  this  and  the  following  two  sections  is  repeated  from 
Gardner  and  Jevons,  Manual  of  Greek  Antiquities,  pp.  386  and  foil.,  with  the 
permission  of  the  publishers. 

3  II.  xxiii.  835.  *  27.  vii.  474. 


GREEK  TRADE-ROUTES  3 

Phoenicians  came  most  of  the  articles  of  manufacture  and 
luxury  used  by  the  Greeks  of  that  age.  Vases  for  unguents 
and  vessels  of  bronze,  and  clothes  dyed  with  purple,  the  skilful 
Sidonians  manufactured  themselves ;  ivory  they  brought 
from  Egypt,  and  tin  from  Britain  or  the  East.  Slaves, 
in  those  days  the  most  important  article  of  commerce,  they 
bought  and  sold  everywhere.  Their  factories  were  to  be 
found  on  many  shores  where  any  gain  was  to  be  made  by 
trading,  and  their  voyages  reached  as  far  as  Britain. 

They  did  not,  however,  possess  a  monopoly  of  trade. 
Ruder  peoples  organized  expeditions,  partly  for  piratical 
purposes,  and  partly  for  trade.  The  Taphians  and  Tele- 
boans,1  who  are  supposed  to  have  lived  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Corcyra,  traded  in  metal  and  slaves  with  the  opposite 
inhabitants  of  Italy  and  Sicily ;  and  the  Phaeacians,  sup- 
posing them  to  have  been  a  real  and  not  an  imaginary 
people,  seem  to  have  possessed  an  extensive  and  lucrative 
trade.  The  Lemnians  exported  their  wine  in  their  own 
ships,  and  the  Cretans  were  celebrated  as  bold  sailors  and 
organizers  of  piratical  expeditions  as  far  as  the  coasts  of 
Africa,2  In  the  traditions  of  the  Argonautic  expedition  we 
may  see  proof  that  even  the  Achaeans  did  not  shrink  from 
long  and  venturesome  expeditions,  though  they  had  as  yet 
small  idea  of  trading ;  rather  they  endeavoured  to  surprise 
and  sack  the  cities  of  richer  peoples  and  to  bring  home 
wealth  and  honour.  The  gold,  which  we  know  to  have 
been  used  in  some  parts  of  Greece  in  Homeric  times,  may 
have  either  been  thus  acquired  or  brought  over  the  sea 
by  wealthy  Phoenicians  or  Lydians. 

It  was  doubtless  the  pressure  of  population  which  caused 
the  Greeks  about  the  eighth  century  before  our  era  to  turn 
their  attention  to  the  spreading  of  colonies  over  the  shores 
of  the  Mediterranean,  and,  as  a  consequence,  to  commerce. 
We  may  call  this  a  consequence,  because  in  most  cases 
communication  was  kept  up  between  the  mother-city  and 
the  colony ;  the  latter,  finding  itself  in  the  midst  of  a  new 
set  of  surroundings  and  productions,  acquired  new  wants 

1  Od.  xv.  427.  »  Od.  xiv.  245. 

B2 


4  INTRODUCTION 

and  new  tastes,  and  then  communicated  these  wants  and 
tastes  to  its  parent,  together  with  the  materials  for  their 
satisfaction.  Thus  a  lively  trade  between  old  and  new 
Greek  cities  arose  throughout  the  Levant ;  and  the  Greek 
traders,  by  a  process  which  we  can  but  rarely  trace  in 
history,  gradually  ousted  the  Phoenicians  from  many  of 
their  factories  and  trading  stations,  inheriting  their  tradi- 
tions and  their  relations  to  the  barbarous  tribes  of  the 
interior.  For  the  western  trade  Corinth  became  the  most 
important  city.  The  incomparable  position  of  this  city,  the 
Acropolis  of  which  is  placed  on  a  lofty  rock  commanding 
both  the  eastern  and  western  seas  of  Greece,  gave  it  mar- 
vellous advantages.  No  trireme  could  be  dragged  across 
the  isthmus  which  divided  the  two  seas  without  permission 
of  the  Corinthians ;  and  as  the  Greeks  dreaded  the  open 
sea  of  Cape  Malea,  they  eagerly  sought  such  permission. 
By  the  colonies  of  Corcyra  and  Dyrrhachium,  Corinth 
commanded  the  Adriatic  Sea,  and  pushing  on,  founded 
mighty  cities  in  Italy  and  Sicily,  including  Syracuse  itself. 
Scarcely  less  active  in  the  same  region  were  the  people  of 
Chalcis  in  Euboea,  who  founded  Naxus  and  Catana  in  Sicily. 
On  the  coast  of  Macedonia  a  whole  district  was  settled  by 
these  same  Chalcidians,  and  received  its  name  from  them. 
Miletus  took  as  a  special  province  the  Euxine  Sea  and 
studded  its  shores  with  flourishing  towns.  Greek  settlers 
occupied  the  coasts  of  Cyprus,  and  even  the  distant  Libya 
received  a  colony  in  Cyrene.  In  the  time  of  the  Persian 
wars,  the  people  of  Phocaea  sailed  as  far  as  Massilia  and 
settled  there.  Before  the  Persians  conquered  Egypt  the 
Greeks  had  settled  in  large  numbers  at  Naucratis  on  the 
Nile,  and  had  in  their  hands  much  of  the  trade  of  that  rich 
country. 

The  history  of  Greek  commerce  may  be  most  aptly 
divided  into  three  periods.  The  first  comprises  the  time 
when  no  Greek  city  was  specially  pre-eminent  above  the 
rest,  although  Corinth  in  the  west  and  Miletus  in  the  east 
took  usually  the  lead.  The  second  period  begins  with  the 
fall  of  Miletus  and  with  the  sudden  expansion  of  Athenian 


GREEK  TRADE-ROUTES  5 

commerce,  the  Athenians  inheriting  Milesian  supremacy  in 
the  Euxine  and  forming  a  strict  commercial  confederacy  in 
the  Levant.  This  period  begins  with  the  Persian  wars  and 
ends  with  the  taking  of  Athens  by  Lysander.  The  third 
period  includes  the  rise  and  activity  of  the  city  of  Rhodes, 
which  was  founded  about  408  B.C.,  and  almost  immediately 
became  a  centre  of  Greek  commerce,  continuing  to  be 
wealthy  and  flourishing  until  the  Romans  were  supreme  in 
all  parts  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea. 

It  is  into  these  three  periods  that  the  history  of  coinage 
also  divides  itself;  the  Persian  wars  of  490-480  b.c,  and 
the  fall  of  Athens  in  405  b.  c,  with  the  contemporary  de- 
struction of  the  cities  of  Sicily,  forming  strong  dividing 
lines.  In  the  body  of  the  present  work  these  three  periods 
are  kept  separate,  except  in  some  districts,  such  as  Lower 
Italy,  Cyrene,  and  Peloponnesus,  where  the  line  is  harder 
to  draw.  In  these  districts  the  later  two  periods  are  treated 
together. 

Two  cardinal  points  must  be  always  borne  in  mind 
in  any  consideration  of  Greek  commerce.  Firstly,  the 
interior  of  the  country  being  rough  and  mountainous, 
and  scantily  provided  with  roads,  while  the  sea  on  the  other 
hand  is  gentle  and  alluring,  the  greater  part  of  Greek  trade 
was  always  sea-borne.  The  inland  trade  was  largely  carried 
on,  not  with  wagons,  but  with  sumpter  beasts,  ponies  and 
mules,  which  climbed  up  the  narrow  paths  leading  from 
town  to  town.  Secondly,  Greek  ships  at  sea  always  hugged 
the  land.  The  storms  in  the  Mediterranean  are  sudden  and 
violent,  but  they  soon  pass.  When  they  came  on,  the  ships 
ran  for  the  shelter  of  an  island,  as  steamers  often  do  to  this 
day.  Creeping  along  the  coast  from  headland  to  headland, 
or  passing  from  island  to  island  in  the  Aegean,  ships  made 
their  journeys  slow  but  sure.  Such  stretches  as  that 
between  Corfu  and  Italy,  or  that  between  Crete  and  Egypt, 
seemed  to  the  Greek  sailors  long  and  perilous. 

Taking  Athens,  Aegina,  and  Corinth  as  the  centre,  we 
find  radiating  from  it  four  principal  courses  of  trade.  The 
first  led  in  a  north-easterly   direction   past  the  coasts  of 


6  INTRODUCTION 

Macedon  and  Thrace,  through  the  Bosporus  into  the 
Euxine  Sea.  This  line  of  trade  was  perhaps  to  the  Greeks 
the  most  important  of  all.  The  shores  of  Macedon,  Thrace, 
Pontus,  and  Bithynia  were  to  the  Greeks  what  the  wide 
plains  of  North  and  South  America  are  to  ourselves.  Thence 
came  their  supply  of  food  and  the  raw  materials  of  manu- 
facture, and,  above  all,  slaves,  the  largest  and  most  profitable 
object  of  ancient  commerce.  In  ancient  as  in  modern  days, 
the  plains  of  Southern  Russia  produced  a  plenteous  harvest 
of  corn,  and  fed  innumerable  herds  of  oxen,  which  supplied 
the  Greek  tanners  with  hides.  At  the  mouth  of  the  Bory- 
sthenes  and  in  the  Propontis  were  some  of  the  most  pro- 
ductive fisheries  known  to  the  Greeks,  supplying  them  with 
immense  quantities  of  salt  fish,  which,  with  bread,  was  the 
staple  of  their  food.  The  vast  forests  of  Bithynia  and  the 
Danube  valley  furnished  an  inexhaustible  supply  of  timber 
for  house  and  ship  building,  while  even  at  that  period 
Greece  was  poor  in  forest ;  as  well  as  tar  and  charcoal. 
Flax  and  hemp  also  came  largely  from  the  Euxine.  The 
great  bulk  of  these  products  the  Greek  colonists  did  not 
produce  on  their  own  lands,  but  procured  by  barter  from 
the  barbarous  tribes  of  the  interior.  The  tribes  of  Scythians, 
who  dwelt  on  the  northern  shores  of  the  sea,  learned  to 
cultivate  corn  for  export,  and  to  breed  cattle ;  and  bringing 
these  to  the  Greeks,  obtained  in  return  oil  and  bronzes,  and 
more  especially  wine,  which  was  very  necessary  to  their 
enjoyment,  and  yet  could  not  be  grown  so  far  north.  Their 
kings  were  generally  on  good  terms  with  the  Hellenic 
colonists  ;  and  in  our  own  day  the  tombs  of  these  chiefs  in 
the  Crimea  have  been  in  many  cases  opened,  and  found  to 
contain  elegant  pottery,  jewelry,  and  ornaments,  which 
exhibit  Greek  art  almost  at  its  best.  The  influence  of 
Athens  in  particular  is  very  clear  in  these  elegant  luxuries ; 
a  fact  which  reminds  us  that  at  Athens  the  public  police 
force  consisted  of  slaves  imported  from  Scythia,  the  rogorai. 
In  all  periods  the  city  which  controlled  the  gates  of  the 
Euxine,  of  which  the  most  important  was  guarded  by 
Byzantium,  was  commercially  the  most  important  in  Hellas. 


GREEK  TRADE-ROUTES  7 

We  can  trace  a  succession  of  dominant  cities :  Miletus  down 
to  500 ;  then  Aegina ;  Athens  at  the  time  of  the  Athenian 
Empire ;  Sparta,  Athens,  and  Persia  alternately  in  the 
early  fourth  century ;  then  Rhodes.  It  is  worth  while,  in 
passing,  to  correct  an  absurd  mistake,  into  which  some 
recent  writers  have  fallen,  of  supposing  that  whereas  Athens 
exported  oil  and  pottery,  she  exported  the  oil  in  the  fragile 
and  delicate  painted  vases  abounding  in  our  museums,  which 
are  hopelessly  unfit  for  such  a  purpose. 

The  second  great  line  of  trade  was  that  of  which  at 
successive  periods  Rhodes  and  Delos  were  the  emporia,  and 
which  led  from  Hellas  past  Rhodes  and  Cyprus  along  the 
coast  of  Phoenicia  to  Egypt.  This  route  was  the  more 
important  because  along  it  came  the  products  of  the  Far 
East,  of  India  and  Arabia,  and  Babylon.  Before  the 
foundation  of  Alexandria,  the  great  cities  of  Phoenicia 
retained  the  commerce  of  Farther  Asia  in  a  great  degree  in 
their  own  hands,  but  at  a  later  period  it  was  more  widely 
spread,  and  shared  by  Antioch  on  the  north  and  Alexandria 
on  the  south.  Babylon  furnished  the  Greeks  with  carpets 
and  other  stuffs,  India  with  precious  stones,  silk,  and  ivory, 
Arabia  with  frankincense  and  various  spices.  The  valley  of 
the  Nile  exported  both  in  later  Greek  and  in  Roman  times 
immense  quantities  of  corn,  as  well  as  writing-paper  and 
linen  made  of  the  papyrus  plant,  ivory,  and  porcelain. 
Phoenicia  supplied  the  Greeks  with  fewer  and  fewer  articles 
as  their  own  resources  developed ;  but  cloth  of  purple, 
alabaster  flasks  of  ointment,  and  fragrant  woods  seem  to 
have  been  exported  through  Tyre  and  Sidon  until  Roman 
times.  Cyprus  furnished  not  only  an  abundant  supply 
of  copper,  but  in  addition  manufactured  cloth  of  both 
finer  and  coarser  texture.  Cyrene,  which  could  be  reached 
either  through  Egypt  or  direct  by  way  of  Crete,  supplied 
wool  and  silphium,  an  article  very  much  used  in  ancient 
medicine,  and  found  nowhere  but  in  the  Cyrenaic  district. 
The  people  of  Peloponnesus  sailed  to  both  Cyrene  and 
Egypt  by  way  of  Crete. 

The  third  line  of  trade,  which  was  always  largely  in  the 


8  INTRODUCTION 

hands  of  Corinth,  and  her  colonies,  passed  through  that  great 
commercial  metropolis,  and  led  through  the  Corinthian 
gulf,  past  the  coasts  of  Acarnania  and  Epirus  to  the  various 
ports  on  both  sides  of  the  Adriatic  Sea.  Although  the 
Adriatic  was  reckoned  a  very  dangerous  sea,  both  on 
account  of  its  frequent  storms  and  because  of  the  hardihood 
of  the  Illyrian  pirates,  yet  it  produced  great  gain  to  the 
merchants  who  ventured  on  it.  They  exchanged  Greek 
wine  and  manufactured  goods  for  the  produce  of  agricul- 
ture and  grazing  offered  them  by  the  farmers  of  the  Epirote 
and  Italian  coasts.  On  the  Italian  side  the  harbours  of 
Adria  and  Ancona  lay  open,  and  offered  access  to  the 
peoples  of  Eastern  Italy. 

More  celebrated  and  frequented  was  the  fourth  line  of 
trade,  which  led  either  from  the  Corinthian  Gulf  or  round 
the  promontory  of  Malea  across  to  Sicily,  and  through  the 
Straits  of  Messina  to  the  western  coasts  of  Italy,  to  Gaul 
and  Spain.  As  far  to  the  north  as  Cumae  this  route  passed 
a  continuous  succession  of  Greek  colonies,  and  even  in  Gaul 
and  Spain  Massilia  and  Emporiae  stood  ready  to  harbour 
the  Greek  merchants,  and  to  give  them  facilities  for 
obtaining  the  produce  of  the  interior.  Corn  and  cheese 
were  obtained  from  Sicily,  wood  from  the  forests  of  Southern 
Italy.  The  merchants  who  were  so  venturesome  as  to 
penetrate  to  Spain  reaped  a  rich  reward  in  the  shape  of 
gold,  with  which  Spain  at  that  time  abounded.  But  the 
jealousy  of  Carthaginians  and  Etruscans  prevented  the 
commerce  of  the  Greeks  from  ever  spreading  in  force  to 
the  west  and  north  of  Cumae.  To  Italy  and  Sicily  the 
Greeks  of  Hellas  brought  in  return  for  the  products  of  the 
soil  wine,  pottery,  and  articles  of  manufacture. 

These  four  routes  were  the  chief  lines  by  which  the  riches 
of  the  barbarians  flowed  into  Greece.  Of  course,  among 
the  great  Greek  cities  themselves,  scattered  over  the  coasts 
of  Asia  Minor,  Sicily,  and  Italy,  and  the  mainland  of  Hellas, 
there  was  constant  intercourse  and  a  continual  exchange 
of  goods,  for  particular  classes  of  which  special  cities  and 
districts  were  famous.      Thus   Chios   exported   the  finest 


GREEK  TRADE-ROUTES  9 

wine,  as  did  Cnidus  and  Thasos ;  the  wool  of  the  Milesians, 
probably  derived  from  Phrygia,  was  universally  appreciated ; 
Corinth  and  Chalcis  supplied  the  Greek  world  with  articles 
of  bronze ;  Athens  with  painted  pottery  and  with  silver 
from  the  Laurian  mines,  with  oil,  honey,  and  figs  ;  Thessaly 
with  horses  ;  Arcadia  with  asses  ;  Sparta  and  Epirus  with 
dogs  ;  Boeotia  with  eels  from  the  Copaic  lake ;  the  district 
about  Mons  Pangaeus  with  silver.  The  internal  trade  of 
the  Peloponnese  was  mainly  in  the  hands  of  astute  natives 
of  Aegina,  who  travelled  as  pedlars  over  the  country, 
carrying  wares  adapted  to  the  needs  of  the  hardy  peasantry. 

Besides  the  sea-routes  there  were  a  few  long  land-routes 
leading  to  far  countries,  the  beginnings,  if  not  the  ends  of 
which  were  known  to  the  Greeks.  From  the  Greek  colonies 
of  the  Crimea  ways  led  north  to  the  Baltic,  whence  amber 
was  derived.  Greek  coins  have  been  found  at  Bromberg  in 
Prussia,  and  a  notable  hoard  of  gold  ornaments  of  Ionian 
work  at  Vettersfelde.  Again,  starting  from  the  Sea  of 
Azov,  a  line  of  trade  ran  up  to  the  Ural  mountains,  whence 
gold  was  to  be  had.  Most  eastern  caravan  routes,  until  the 
time  of  Alexander,  reached  the  Mediterranean  at  Tyre  and 
Sidon,  and  this  trade  was  in  Phoenician  hands ;  but  the 
Royal  Road  from  Ephesus  to  Sardes  and  thence  to  the  cities 
of  Persia  was  trodden  by  Greeks,  both  politicians  and 
traders,  at  all  periods. 

Such  in  its  general  features  was  the  frame  on  which  was 
woven  the  fabric  of  Greek  commerce. 


II.     Classes  of  Teadees. 

Plato  in  the  Politicus  l  distinguishes  two  classes  of  dealers. 
The  first  consists  of  those  who  sell  only  the  goods  they 
themselves  produce  (avrorrooXai).  The  second  consists  of 
those  who  buy  in  order  to  sell  again  at  a  profit.  In  the 
latter  class  are  included  both  shopkeepers  or  hucksters 
(/ca7T7/Xot),  whose  business  is  retail,  and  merchants 2  (efuropoi) 

1  Polit.  260  c.  *  Repub.  371. 


10  INTRODUCTION 

who  deal  wholesale  between  market  and  market,  or  city 
and  city. 

We  are  told  that  among  the  Locrians  *  the  second  and 
third  of  these  classes  were  wanting  ;  that  the  husbandmen 
sold  their  products  one  by  one  to  the  consumer  and  not  in 
the  mass  to  dealers.  Such  a  state  of  things  could  exist  only 
in  a  very  simple  society  ;  and  among  the  Greeks  generally 
the  two  classes  of  hucksters  and  merchants  were  numerous 
and  clearly  distinguished  one  from  the  other. 

In  poor  and  mountainous  or  barren  districts,  such  as 
Arcadia,  the  hucksters  usually  moved  from  place  to  place 
carrying  with  them  a  pack  of  goods  for  sale.  But  wherever 
the  Greek  population  gravitated,  as  it  normally  did,  into 
cities,  these  petty  dealers  did  not  acquire  wandering  habits, 
but  remained  attached  to  a  certain  spot  in  the  market-place. 
Here  their  booths  stood  side  by  side  with  the  factories  of 
those  who  made  articles  for  sale,  sandal-makers,  for  in- 
stance, or  wreath- makers.  Among  the  most  numerous  classes 
of  them  were  dealers  in  wine,  oil,  and  fish.  Sometimes  covered 
halls  were  erected  in  order  to  contain  a  certain  class  of 
them,  halls  which  thenceforth  became  the  markets  for  a 
particular  class  of  goods,  the  wine-market,  for  instance,  or 
the  fish-market.  In  large  cities  there  might  be  found  in 
the  market-place  several  detached  halls  of  this  character, 
near  together  but  disconnected.  Even  where  everything 
was  sold  in  the  open  Agora,  dealers  in  the  same  commodities 
would  naturally  gravitate  to  the  same  quarter  of  it,  forming 
what  were  termed  kvkXoi  for  the  sale  of  such  and  such 
goods.  The  Agoras  were  not  always  in  the  cities ;  some- 
times they  were  situated  on  a  convenient  spot  on  the 
boundaries  of  two  or  more  states,  to  be  used  in  common  by 
them ;  sometimes  they  were  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
celebrated  temples,  which  attracted  crowds  of  votaries. 

Not  all  times  were  equally  devoted  to  marketing. 
Special  days  were  set  apart  in  many  cities  for  fairs,  the 
first  of  the  month  being  a  favourite  time.  On  the  occasion 
of  all  great  festivals,  and  more  especially  of  the  Olympic, 

1  Heracleides,  Polit.  30. 


CLASSES  OF  TRADERS  11 

Nemean,  and  Pythian  games,  the  assembly  offered  an  irre- 
sistible opportunity  to  petty  dealers  of  all  sorts,  who  turned 
the  place  of  meeting  into  a  great  fair,  and  provided  the 
visitors  with  goods  to  carry  away  in  memory  of  the  feast. 
The  meeting  of  the  Amphictionic  council,  the  annual 
assemblies  of  the  Achaeans  and  Aetolians,  and  all  other 
such  gatherings  were  used  in  the  same  way.  It  is  generally 
regarded  by  numismatists  as  established  that  it  was  on  the 
occasion  of  these  festivals  that  many  issues  of  coins  appeared. 
The  coins  which  bear  the  name  of  the  Eleians,  for  example, 
were  almost  certainly  struck  on  the  occasions  of  the  Olym- 
pian festivals,  and  their  types  bear  a  close  relation  to  the 
worship  of  the  Olympian  Zeus,  and  his  messenger  Victory. 
Finally,  armies  on  the  march  were  accompanied  by  crowds 
of  hucksters  ready  to  provide  the  soldiers  with  the  necessaries 
of  a  campaign  in  return  for  the  booty  they  might  acquire, 
and  especially  to  buy  up  the  numerous  enemies  who  should 
be  captured  and  reduced  to  a  condition  of  slavery.  In 
passing  through  a  friendly  country,  the  army  would  halt  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  a  city,  and  the  inhabitants  would 
come  out  and  form  a  temporary  Agora  without  the  walls, 
where  the  soldiers  could  buy  what  they  required.  Hence 
generals  in  the  field  were  obliged  to  constantly  issue  a 
supply  of  money,  and  in  a  large  number  of  the  coins  which 
have  come  down  to  us  we  find  traces  of  a  military  origin. 

With  regard  to  the  transactions  of  merchants  we  get 
much  information  from  the  Attic  orators,  which  is  well 
summed  up  by  Biichsenschutz,  from  whose  work1  the 
following  is  an  extract : 

'  The  merchant  embarks  certain  goods  for  a  place  where 
he  is  sure  of  disposing  of  them,  or  at  least  has  reasonable 
expectations  of  doing  so  ;  and  either  makes  the  journey  on 
board  the  ship,  or  commits  the  goods  to  a  trustworthy 
person  whom  he  sends  with  them.  As  he  thus  runs  the  risk 
of  finding  under  certain  circumstances  at  the  destination  no 
market  for  his  goods,  he  is  in  that  case  compelled  to  repair 
to  another  port  which  offers  better  prospects,  unless  on  the 

1  Besitz  tout  Ertoerb,  p.  459. 


12  INTRODUCTION 

journey  he  has  already  received  news  of  the  altered  circum- 
stances and  changed  his  plan  in  accordance  with  them.  It 
is  obvious  that  the  merchants  must  have  sought  means  of 
gaining  news  as  to  favourable  or  unfavourable  conditions  in 
the  markets  to  which  they  intended  to  send  their  wares,  as 
well  as  to  the  prices  of  the  goods  they  intended  to  purchase 
in  exchange.  In  the  speech  against  Dionysodorus,  Demo- 
sthenes gives  a  clear  outline  of  the  way  in  which  a  company 
of  corn  merchants  keep  themselves  informed  by  corre- 
spondence of  the  current  prices  of  corn,  in  order  thence  to 
determine  whither  to  send  their  cargoes  from  Egypt.  For 
the  forwarding  of  such  news,  as  well  as  for  the  buying  and 
selling  of  goods,  merchants  kept  agents  at  important  places. 
For  instance,  we  find  it  stated  that  a  merchant  resident  at 
Athens  sends  word  to  a  partner  at  Rhodes,  giving  him 
directions  as  to  a  corn-ship  on  her  way  from  Egypt  which 
is  to  call  at  Rhodes  ;  a  merchant  of  Heraclea  has  an  associate 
at  Scyros,  who  makes  thence  business  trips ;  in  another 
case  the  son  and  the  partner  of  a  merchant  resident  at 
Athens  pass  the  winter  at  the  Bosporus,  probably  with 
a  stock  of  goods  or  to  make  purchases ;  at  least  it  is  stated 
that  they  were  commissioned  to  receive  payments.' 

The  Greek  merchant  would  not  be  able,  as  a  rule,  to  dis- 
pose of  his  whole  cargo  to  one  purchaser,  but  would  sell  it 
by  portions  to  the  various  retail  dealers.  Sometimes  indeed 
a  speculator  would  try  to  buy  up  all  of  a  particular  com- 
modity, such  as  corn  or  olives,  which  was  in  the  market,  in 
order  to  gain  the  control  of  the  supply  of  that  commodity 
and  raise  the  price  against  the  consumers.  No  behaviour 
was  so  unpopular  in  antiquity  as  this,  and  those  who 
attempted  it  were  very  often  victims  of  the  general  indig- 
nation. But  there  does  not  seem  to  have  been,  as  among  us, 
a  class  of  general  dealers  or  speculators  intervening  between 
merchant  and  shopkeeper. 

On  receiving  payment  for  his  goods  in  money,  the  mer- 
chant might  sometimes  sail  home  with  it.  This,  however, 
took  place  seldom,  partly  because  the  money  current  at  one 
seaport  was  usually  not  taken  at  another,  except  at  a  con- 
siderable reduction,  every  city  having  its  own  types  and 
monetary  standard.  There  were  certain  kinds  of  coin  which 
had  a  more  general  circulation,  as  the  silver  coin  of  Athens 


CLASSES  OF  TRADERS  13 

and  afterwards  that  of  Alexander  the  Great  in  the  Levant, 
the  money  of  Corinth  in  Sicily  and  on  the  Adriatic,  and  the 
gold  coins  of  Philip  in  Central  Europe.  But  usually  the 
money  received  by  merchants  had  to  be  either  expended  by 
them  in  the  same  or  a  neighbouring  port,  or  else  taken 
away  and  melted  down  in  order  to  pass  as  bullion.  There- 
fore, after  disposing  of  his  cargo,  the  merchant  would  search 
about  for  a  new  stock  of  goods  such  as  he  might  judge  to 
be  in  demand  at  his  native  city  or  elsewhere ;  and  thus  the 
process  already  described  would  be  repeated.  It  will  be 
evident  from  this  description  that  merchants  among  the 
Greeks  could  not  usually  confine  themselves  to  dealing  in 
one  or  two  classes  of  goods,  but  must  be  ready  to  purchase 
whatever  was  cheap.  There  were,  perhaps,  exceptions  in 
case  of  dealers  who  attended  specially  to  classes  of  goods  in 
demand  everywhere,  such  as  corn  and  slaves.  Transactions 
among  Greeks  took  place  for  money,  but,  in  dealing  with 
the  barbarians,  the  Greeks  retained  barter  at  all  periods 
of  their  trade. 

That  which  produces  the  greatest  differences  between 
ancient  and  modern  trade  is  the  fact  that  in  ancient  times 
buying  and  selling  took  place  not  on  credit  but  for  cash. 
This  makes  the  mechanism  of  ancient  trade  extremely 
simple.  But  it  does  not  follow  that  a  merchant  must  have 
then  possessed  a  large  trading  capital.  A  large  part  of  his 
working  capital  could  be  borrowed  on  the  security  of  his 
goods. 

III.    Bankers. 

As  a  large  proportion  of  the  wealth  of  many  Greeks  con- 
sisted in  gold  and  silver  money,  they  sought  from  the 
earliest  times  to  turn  it  to  account  by  lending  it  to  those 
persons  who  could  profitably  employ  it,  and  receiving 
interest  in  return.  This  lending  was  accompanied  in 
various  cities  by  various  ceremonies,  the  chief  object  of 
which  was  to  secure  witnesses  of  the  transaction  and  to 
prevent  the  borrower  from  denying  the  loan.  Sometimes 
the  contract  was  made  in  the  presence  of  a  sort  of  notary 


14  INTEODUCTION 


appointed  by  the  State;  more  frequently  it  was  arranged 
before  witnesses  summoned  by  the  parties.  At  Athens  the 
terms  of  the  loan,  the  amount,  rate  of  interest,  and  period 
were  carefully  stated  in  a  document  which  was  sealed  by 
both  parties  and  deposited  in  the  custody  of  some  trust- 
worthy person.  It  is  said  that  in  the  city  of  Cnossus *  the 
borrower  made  a  pretence  of  stealing  the  money  lent  him, 
in  order  that,  if  he  did  not  repay  it  in  time,  the  lender 
would  have  him  in  his  power.  A  more  usual  precaution 
would  be  to  require  a  person  of  respectability  as  surety 
for  the  repayment.  As  regards  the  goods  which  are  the 
material  security  of  a  loan,  Biichsenschiitz,2  whose  chapters 
on  these  subjects  are  admirable,  remarks  that  they  may  be 
either  handed  bodily  over  to  the  lender  of  money,  in 
which  case  they  would  by  us  be  called  pledged,  or  retained 
by  the  borrower,  whose  creditor  acquired  certain  rights 
over  them,  a  condition  to  which  we  give  the  name  of 
mortgage.  Furniture,  slaves,  or  horses  might  be  given  in 
pledge ;  lands,  houses,  or  ships  would  usually  be  mortgaged. 
The  nature  of  pledges  is  simple,  and  they  need  not  occupy 
us  further,  if  we  only  observe  that  he  who  lent  money  on 
a  living  pledge,  such  as  a  horse  or  slave,  ran  great  risk  of 
its  dying,  and  of  his  security  becoming  thus  worthless. 
Mortgages  were  more  usual  and  of  more  importance. 

Money-lenders  in  Greece  were  of  two  classes,  either 
private  individuals  who  had  to  live  on  the  interest  of  their 
property,  and  possessed  that  property  in  the  form  of  money, 
or  else  rpair^iTai  or  dpyvpaftoifiot,  money-changers.  Indeed, 
private  persons  usually  intrusted  these  latter  with  spare 
capital,  their  professional  habits  and  business  abilities 
rendering  them  able  to  make  better  use  of  it  than  the 
owners  could,  while  the  money-changers  gave  good  security 
to  their  creditors  and  allowed  them  a  fair  rate  of  interest.3 
As  in  Greece  every  considerable  city  had  its  own  coinage, 

»  Plutarch,  Quaest.  Gr.  53.  2  Besitz  und  Encerb,  p.  485. 

3  Compare  Matt.  xxv.  27,  '  Thou  oughtest  therefore  to  have  put  my  money 
to  the  exchangers,  and  then  at  my  coming  I  should  have  received  mine  own 
with  usury'. 


BANKEES  15 

money-changers  must  have  had  a  very  large  stock  of  gold 
and  silver ;  and  they  would  naturally  constitute  par  excel- 
lence the  class  with  money  to  lend.  Further,  their  profession 
compelled  them  to  live  in  the  market-place  at  a  spot  known 
to  all.  Hence  all  in  need  of  funds  resorted  to  them,  and 
they  become  bankers  almost  in  our  sense  of  the  word. 
Some  of  them  attained  great  wealth  and  world-wide  credit. 
Thus  Pasion l  employed  a  capital  of  fifty  talents,  of  which 
eleven  belonged  to  his  depositors.  Merchants  would  without 
witnesses,  such  was  his  reputation  for  probity,  deposit  sums 
of  money  with  him,  which  he  at  once  entered  in  his  books. 
On  the  credit  of  his  name  money  could  be  procured  in  any 
Greek  town,  and  deeds  of  all  classes  were  deposited  with 
him  for  safe  custody.  It  was  customary  for  merchants  to 
make  payments  one  to  another,  when  they  could  not  meet, 
by  leaving  the  sum  with  a  trapezites,  with  orders  to  him  to 
deliver  it  to  the  proper  person,  who  was  also  obliged,  before 
receiving  it,  to  prove  his  identity. 

It  was  the  trapezitae,  then,  who  usually  lent  on  mortgage 
(irrrodrJKT]).  The  security  was  sometimes  a  manufactory  with 
slaves  in  it.  A  still  better  class  of  security  was  the  lands 
and  farming  capital  of  the  citizens.  It  was  usual  to  set  up 
on  mortgaged  lands  an  inscription  on  stone  stating  the 
name  of  the  creditor  and  the  amount  due  to  him.  In  some 
states  there  seems  to  have  been  a  less  primitive  arrangement 
in  the  shape  of  a  register  of  mortgages  kept  by  authority. 
In  case  of  default  of  payment  on  the  part  of  the  owner  of 
the  land,  the  holder  of  the  mortgage  apparently  had  the 
right  to  occupy  it,  even  although  the  value  of  the  land 
exceeded  the  amount  of  the  debt  It  would  hence  appear 
that  foreigners  and  metoeci,  being  incapable  of  holding 
land,  could  not  lend  on  this  sort  of  security,  or,  if  they  did 
so,  must  do  without  the  customary  remedy. 

To  commerce  the  trapezitae  were  of  the  utmost  impor- 
tance, since  without  such  aid  as  they  afforded  merchants 
could  only  have   traded  to   the   amount   of   their    actual 

1  Demosth.  pro  Phorm.  5. 


16  INTRODUCTION 

capital  in  coin.  The  ordinary  course  of  proceeding  was  as 
follows :  A  merchant,  say  at  Athens,  wishes  to  carry  a 
cargo  to  the  Euxine.  He  finds  a  trapezites  willing  to  lend 
8,000  drachmas  on  the  outward  cargo  on  condition  that  he 
undertakes  by  written  contract  to  make  that  cargo  of  the 
value  of  12,000  drachmas.  The  rate  of  interest  is  fixed  for 
the  whole  voyage  at  so  much  per  cent.  Either  an  agent 
of  the  trapezites  sails  with  the  ship,  or  else  he  appoints 
some  person  at  a  port  on  the  Euxine  to  receive  the  money. 
When  the  cargo  is  sold  on  arriving  at  its  destination, 
principal  and  interest  are  paid.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
cargo  is  lost  at  sea,  the  trapezites  loses  his  venture.  Thus 
the  system  of  borrowing  on  cargoes  served,  so  far  as  the 
merchant  was  concerned,  the  purpose  of  insurance,  besides 
increasing  his  available  capital  and  so  extending  trade. 
The  rate  of  interest  was,  of  course,  high  and  proportioned  to 
the  risks  of  the  voyage,  the  course  of  which  was  carefully 
specified  beforehand  ;  in  the  contract  it  was  sometimes  also 
stated  that  if  the  voyage  were  prolonged  into  the  winter 
season  the  rate  of  interest  should  be  higher.  In  the  case 
we  have  supposed,  our  merchant,  after  disposing  of  his 
cargo  on  the  Euxine,  and  paying  his  debt  with  the  proceeds, 
would  find  himself  deprived  of  means  for  the  return  voyage 
unless  he  could  again  find  a  lender.  It  was  therefore  far 
more  usual  for  those  who  sailed  from  Greek  ports  to  borrow 
for  the  double  journey,  out  and  home,  and  repay  the  loan 
to  the  original  lender  on  their  return.  Unfortunately, 
Greek  commercial  honour  never  being  very  high,  this  course 
of  proceeding  gave  opportunity  for  a  great  deal  of  dis- 
honesty and  fraud.  Various  means  of  self-defence  were 
adopted  by  the  lenders,  such  as  sending  an  agent  on  board 
or  requiring  a  surety  who  remained  at  home,  but  their 
chief  reliance  was  on  the  strictness  of  the  laws,  which  were 
very  severe  against  those  who  attempted  fraud,  more 
especially  at  Athens. 

Sometimes  capitalists,  instead  of  lending  on  a  cargo, 
would  lend  money  on  the  ship  herself.  This  was  in  most 
respects  less  risky,  the  value  of  a  ship  being  easier  to  dis- 


BANKERS  17 

cover.  Accordingly,  while  lenders  would  advance  not  more 
than  two-thirds  of  the  stated  value  of  a  cargo,  which  might 
easily  suffer  depreciation,  we  find  that  they  would  lend  on 
a  ship  up  to  its  fall  worth.  But  there  was,  of  course,  much 
risk  of  its  being  lost,  a  danger  no  doubt  taken  into  view  in 
fixing  the  rate  of  interest. 

The  functions  of  temples  in  regard  to  finance  must 
not  be  overlooked.  As  the  interests  of  the  state  and  of  the 
deities  who  protected  it  were  identical,  it  was  not  unnatural 
that  the  temples  should  be  the  place  where  the  revenues  of 
the  state  were  stored.  The  tribute  from  the  allies  at  Athens 
was  laid  up  in  the  precinct  of  Athena.  Athena  received 
her  share  of  it,  but  the  rest  was  used  for  revenue  or  for 
war. 

It  is  commonly  stated  that  besides  being  capitalists  and 
lending  money,  temples  received  sums  on  deposit  for  safe 
keeping  and  restored  them  to  the  lenders  on  demand.  The 
temple  of  Artemis  at  Ephesus  seems  to  have  been  especially 
used  for  this  purpose,  and  some  writers  go  so  far  as  to 
compare  its  position  in  the  commercial  world  to  that  now 
held  by  the  Bank  of  England.  This,  however,  is  gross 
exaggeration.  As  a  rule,  money  placed  in  a  temple  became 
sacred  and  could  not  be  withdrawn,  or  at  least  could  only 
be  taken  for  purposes  of  state.  Most  of  the  passages  quoted 
in  defence  of  the  view  just  mentioned  refer  to  peculiar 
cases.  Xenophon,  for  example,  deposited  a  sum  of  money 
in  the  Ephesian  temple  and  afterwards  withdrew  it,  but  it 
was  in  order  to  found  a  new  temple  of  Artemis  in  Pelopon- 
nese.  In  other  instances  we  hear  of  money  left  by  states 
and  individuals  in  the  hands  of  the  people  of  Ephesus  and 
by  them  honourably  returned.  They  may  have  kept  the 
treasures  in  the  temple  or  its  vicinity ;  but  lending  to  the 
Ephesian  state  was  another  thing  than  lending  to  the  estate 
of  the  goddess.  It  is  obvious  that  if  it  had  been  lawful  to 
place  money  in  temples  for  security  and  withdraw  it  at 
pleasure,  such  a  privilege  would  have  been  very  frequently 
used,  and  the  priests  would  have  become  regular  bankers, 
which  they  never  were.     It  was,  however,  maintained  by 


18  INTRODUCTION 


I 


E.  Curtius  that  the  earliest  coins  were  issued  by  temples 
which  felt  the  need  of  a  ready  currency,  and  this  theory, 
though  not  proved,  is  not  impossible. 

In  a  somewhat  different  category  must  be  placed  the 
wealth  belonging  to  the  temples  of  many  of  the  great  deities 
of  Greece,  notably  in  that  of  Athena  at  Athens.  In  the 
opinion  of  the  Greeks  the  deities  of  a  state  were  quite  as 
much  concerned  in  its  preservation  as  were  the  citizens 
themselves ;  the  state  therefore  did  not  hesitate  in  times  of 
straits  to  borrow  money  from  the  sacred  treasuries,  to  be 
repaid  at  some  more  convenient  season.  We  have  an 
Athenian  inscription  !  which  records  such  a  transaction. 
It  appears  that  in  the  time  of  the  Peloponnesian  war,  during 
the  eleven  years  433-422  B.C.,  considerable  sums  of  money 
were  advanced  to  the  Athenian  state  by  the  treasurers  of 
Athena  and  of  the  other  gods  ;  and  that,  after  the  conclusion 
of  the  peace  of  Nicias  in  421  B.C.,  this  money  was  repaid 
with  interest.  This  was  probably  no  isolated  case  ;  but  the 
same  thing,  at  least  as  far  as  the  borrowing  was  concerned, 
would  have  taken  place  in  other  cities.  But,  on  the  whole, 
the  Greeks  respected  these  deposits ;  and  when  temple 
treasures  were  violated,  as  by  the  Pisatae  when  they  obtained 
possession  of  Olympia,  and  by  the  Phocians  when  they 
seized  Delphi,  all  that  was  best  in  the  race  was  scandalized, 
and  a  speedy  vengeance  of  the  offended  gods  fell  on  the 
violators. 

Interest  (tokos)  was  reckoned  among  the  Greeks  in  one 
of  two  ways,  either  by  stating  the  number  of  drachms  to  j 
be  paid  per  month  for  the  use  of  each  mina,2  or  by  stating 
the  proportion  of  the  whole  sum  lent  to  be  paid  yearly  or j 
for  the  period  of.  the  loan.      The  rate  of  interest  was,  of) 
course,  higher  than   among  us,  12   per  cent,  per   annum 
being   considered   a   very  low  rate,  and  instances   occur- i 
ring    in    which    24   per   cent,   was   charged.      At  Athens! 
interest  was  generally  paid   monthly,  at  the  new   moon. 

1  c.  I.  No.  273. 

*  As  the  mina  contained  100  drachms,  a  drachm  in  the  mina  per  mont 
would  be  twelve  per  centum  per  annum. 


BANKERS  19 

j  We  find  10  or  12  per  cent  paid  for  a  loan  on  a  single 
voyage  from  Athens  to  the  Bosphorus  ;  but  we  must  re- 
member that  a  part  only  of  this  amount  represents  interest 
on  money  ;  the  remainder  was  paid  for  risk.  For,  as  already 
shown,  if  the  ship  were  wrecked  at  sea,  or  captured  by 
pirates,  or  otherwise  lost,  the  capitalist  who  had  lent  money 
on  her  cargo  was  the  chief  sufferer,  recovering  no  part  of 
his  venture.  The  rate  of  interest  being  thus  high,  we  can 
understand  how  private  persons  in  the  great  cities,  possessing 
no  lands  but  only  capital  in  the  shape  of  money,  managed 
to  live  in  comfort  on  the  interest  of  it. 

Throughout  the  period  of  Greek  autonomy  the  value  of 
money,  that  is,  of  gold  and  silver,  fell  steadily.  A  scale  is 
given  by  the  rate  of  payment  of  those  who  at  Athens 
attended  the  ecclesia.  Towards  the  end  of  the  fifth  century 
it  was  only  an  obolus ;  it  rose  to  three  obols  by  390  b.  a,  and 
stood  at  a  drachm  in  the  time  of  Alexander.  Boeckh  calcu- 
lated that  in  the  period  from  Solon  to  Demosthenes  prices 
increased  fivefold. 

In  the  time  of  the  Athenian  Empire  skilled  workers  or 
mercenary  soldiers  would  be  paid  from  half  a  drachm  to  a 
drachm  a  day.  Assuming  a  drachm  a  day  to  be  sufficient  to 
keep  a  family  in  ordinary  comfort,  this  indicates  an  expendi- 
ture of  360  drachms  a  year.  At  1 2  per  cent,  interest  such 
an  annual  revenue  would  be  provided  by  a  capital  of 
3,000  drachms  or  half  a  talent,  corresponding  in  weight  of 
silver  to  about  £120  to  £130  of  our  money. 

The  denominations  of  coins  in  Greece  were  simple.  At 
Athens  eight  oboli  went  to  the  drachm,  a  hundred  drachms 
to  the  mina.  sixty  minas  to  the  talent.  The  term  stater  was 
vaguely  applied  to  any  standard  coin  in  general  use ;  such  as 
the  daric  in  Persia,  the  tetradrachm  at  Athens,  the  didrachm 
at  Aegina.  A  simple  and  rough,  but  sufficiently  accurate 
scale  of  values  to  keep  in  mind  would  equate  the  daric,  or 
the  Attic  gold  stater,  with  the  English  sovereign;  the 
twentieth  part  of  the  daric,  the  silver  shekel,  with  the 
English  shilling ;  the  Attic  drachm  with  the  French  franc. 
The  purchasing  power  of  money  was,  of  course,  much  greater 

c2 


20  TNTEODUCTION 

in  Greece  than  in  modern  times ;  but  to  determine  the  exact 
purchasing  value  of  Greek  coins  as  compared  with  our  own 
is,  of  course,  an  insoluble  problem.  Many  luxuries  which 
the  modern  artisan  buys  for  a  few  pence  would  have  been 
beyond  the  reach  of  Croesus ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  a 
Greek  could  have  bought  for  a  drachm  a  terra-cotta  figurine 
for  which  a  modern  collector  would  give  hundreds  of  pounds. 
The  equation  above  given  that  a  family  could  live  comfort- 
ably on  a  drachm  (a  franc)  a  day  gives  the  best  practical 
test  of  purchasing  power. 

IV.     Early  Measures  of  Value. 

Aristotle,  in  language  on  which  the  best  instructed 
political  economist  could  scarcely  improve,  has  explained 
the  true  origin  of  a  metallic  currency.1 

'  As  the  benefits  of  commerce  were  more  widely  extended, 
by  importing  commodities  of  which  there  was  a  deficiency, 
and  exporting  those  of  which  there  was  an  excess,  the  use  of 
a  currency  was  an  indispensable  device.  As  the  necessaries 
of  nature  were  not  all  easily  portable,  people  agreed,  for 
purposes  of  barter,  mutually  to  give  and  receive  some  article 
which,  while  it  was  itself  a  commodity,  was  practically  easy 
to  handle  in  the  business  of  life,  some  such  article  as  gold  or 
silver,  which  was  at  first  defined  merely  by  size  and  weight, 
although  finally  they  went  further,  and  set  a  stamp  upon 
every  coin  to  relieve  them  from  the  trouble  of  weighing  it, 
as  the  stamp  impressed  upon  the  coin  was  an  indication  of 
quantity.' 

Aristotle  is,  of  course,  right  in  the  main ;  but  he  is  wrong 
when  he  supposes  the  need  for  a  coinage  to  press  most  on 
merchants  and  shippers.  Those  who  dispose  of  great  quanti- 
ties of  goods  (efiiropoi)  need  a  coinage  less  than  the  stall- 
keepers  and  pedlars,  koltt^Xoi,  to  whom  small  change  is 
almost  a  necessity.  Thus  it  was  the  Aeginetans,  the  pedlars 
of  Greece,  who  first  struck  money  in  Europe.  The  great  ; 
mercantile  cities  of  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Carthage  adopted  the 
invention  much  later. 

1  Politics,  i.  6,  14.     Welldon's  translation. 


EARLY  MEASURES  OF  VALUE  21 

We  can  trace,  though  not  in  detail,  three  stages  through 
which  trade  passed  in  early  Greece,  in  the  development  of 
a  coinage : 

(1)  The  pre-metallic  stage.  Among  the  more  backward 
races  of  the  world  even  now,  or  until  very  recently,  the 
medium  of  exchange  or  measure  of  value  has  been  some 
article  which  was  portable,  and  the  value  of  which  was 
recognized  by  all.  Every  reader  of  travels  in  Africa  knows 
that,  in  the  interior  of  that  continent,  the  yard  of  cloth  is 
or  was  the  unit  of  value :  the  traveller  bargains  with  a  chief 
as  regards  the  number  of  yards  he  must  pay  for  permission 
to  pass  through  the  chiefs  territory.  In  China,  shells 
passed  as  currency,  as  in  parts  of  Africa  and  South  Asia  : 
we  are  even  told  that  compressed  cubes  of  tea  passed  as 
currency  in  Turkestan.  Much  curious  lore  of  this  kind  is 
to  be  found  in  Ridgeway's  Origin  of  Currency.  The  only 
pre-metallic  unit  of  value  which  we  can  clearly  trace  in 
Greece  is  cattle,  the  ox  in  particular,  which  served  as  the 
measure  of  wealth  to  the  Homeric  Achaeans.  The  well- 
known  Homeric  line,  '  Arms  worth  a  hundred  kine  for  arms 
worth  nine,'  proves  this.  In  the  early  laws  of  Rome,  as 
well  as  in  the  laws  of  Draco,  fines  were  assessed  in  oxen. 
And  the  very  \rord pecunia,  which  is  closely  related  to  pecus, 
a  flock,  bears  record  of  a  time  when  in  Latium  wealth  was 
calculated  in  flocks  and  herds,  as  was  wealth  in  Palestine  in 
the  days  of  Job. 

(2)  The  next  stage  in  currency  is  the  use  of  the  precious 
metals  by  weight.  "When  once  gold,  silver,  and  bronze 
circulated  freely,  their  superior  fitness  as  currency  enabled 
them  to  drive  out  all  competitors.  An  ox  is  well  enough  to 
reckon  by,  but  when  it  comes  to  halves  and  quarters  of  the 
unit  a  difficulty  arises  ;  the  half  of  an  ox  would  be  a  most 
inconvenient  thing  to  take  in  payment.  But  metals  can 
easily  be  divided  and  lose  nothing  in  the  process.  In  fact, 
in  the  ancient  world  most  nations  which  had  passed  beyond 
the  stage  of  barter  used  the  precious  metals  by  weight  in 
their  trade.  This  fact  is  made  familiar  to  us  by  several 
passages   in  Genesis.     'Abraham  weighed  to  Ephron  the 


22  INTRODUCTION 

silver,  which  he  had  named  in  the  audience  of  the  children 
of  Heth,  four  hundred  shekels,' x  on  a  recognized  standard. 
This  custom  of  weighing  the  precious  metals  recurred  both 
in  ancient  and  mediaeval  times,  when  the  currency  of  coin 
had  been  debased  beyond  a  certain  point,  and  had  become 
unworthy  of  trust.  It  is  even  carried  on  at  the  present  day 
at  the  counter  of  banks,  where  gold  is  weighed  before  it  is 
accepted. 

(3)  The  third  stage  concerns  us  more  closely.  It  consists 
in  the  circulation  of  the  precious  metals,  no  longer  in  bars 
or  ingots  to  be  cut  up  as  occasion  demanded,  but  in  units  of 
fixed  amount.  In  Egyptian  wall-paintings  there  is  fre- 
quently represented  the  weighing  of  rings  of  gold  or  silver. 
These  rings  the  records  show  to  have  been  of  fixed  weight. 
The  form  is  very  suitable,  because  if  a  ring  be  everywhere 
rounded,  it  is  almost  impossible  to  'sweat'  it  without 
detection.  Rings  of  fixed  weight  could  be  used  alike  for 
ornament  and  for  currency.  The  servant  of  Abraham  at 
the  well  gave  Rebekah  a  gold  ring  half  a  shekel  in  weight, 
and  two  bracelets  of  ten  shekels  weight.2  In  Syria  to  this 
day  women  carry  much  of  their  wealth  thus  on  their  persons, 
and  it  can  be  readily  spent. 

The  Greek  fashion,  however,  in  early  times,  seems  to  have 
been  to  use,  not  rings,  but  bars  or  pellets  of  fixed  weight. 
In  gold,  they  would  be  pellets;  in  bronze  or  iron,  bars  of 
recognized  size.  From  the  gold  pellet,  when  once  the  notion 
had  been  started  of  stamping  it  to  guarantee  weight  and 
fineness,  there  sprang  the  electrum  coinage  of  Ionia.  From 
the  bars  or  spits  (o/SeXot")  of  bronze  or  iron  sprang,  as  we 
shall  see  in  a  future  chapter,  the  silver  coinage  of  Greece 
Proper. 

In  the  Iliad  we  read  of  talents  of  gold.  Achilles  proposes 
as  the  first  prize  for  a  race  a  vessel  of  silver,  for  the  second 
an  ox,  for  the  third  a  half  talent  of  gold.3  And  as  the  third 
prize  might  well  be  of  half  the  value  of  the  second,  this  at 
once  suggests  that  the  talent  of  gold  and  the  ox  would  be  of 
equal  value.     Certainly,  since  at  the  time  both  oxen  and 

1  Genesis  xxiii.  16.  2  Genesis  xxiv.  22.  8  Iliad,  xxiii.  760. 


I  fixed  weights  of  gold  were  in  use  as  measures  of  value,  some 
I  kind  of  relation  between  the  two  would  have  to  be  recog- 
I  nized.  and  equality  is  the  simplest  of  all  relations.  A  writer 
on  Talents  at  Alexandria  of  about  a.  d.  1001  roundly  says 
that  the  Homeric  talent  was  of  the  same  weight  as  the  later 
daric,  that  is  to  say,  contained  130  grains  (grm.  8-42)  of  gold. 
But  it  is  hard  to  see  whence  a  writer  of  the  Roman  Age  can 
have  learned  such  a  fact:  it  must  almost  certainly  be  a 
theory  of  some  earlier  writer  on  metrology.  In  itself  it  is 
very  probable 2 ;  but  the  majority  ofmodern  scholars  decline 
to  allow  that  the  Homeric  talent  had  any  fixed  weight  or 
value.  It  ought  to  mean  the  equivalent  in  gold  of  the 
amount  of  bronze  which  a  man  could  conveniently  carry : 
whether  it  had  become  conventionalized  as  a  fixed  weight 
it  is  not  easy  to  determine.  But  however  the  word  talent 
may  be  used  in  Homer,  it  may  be  regarded  as  very  probable 
that  pellets  of  gold  of  the  weight  of  the  later  darics  were 
in  use  as  early  as  the  eighth  century,  and  probably  much 
earlier. 

Julius  Pollux  tells  us 3  that  at  the  Delian  festival  the  prizes 
to  be  given  were  announced  as  to  be  in  oxen,  according  to 
ancient  precedent ;  but  that,  in  fact,  for  each  ox  was  substi- 
tuted a  didrachm  of  Attic  weight.  But  there  can  be  little 
doubt  that  by  this  phrase  is  meant  an  Attic  didrachm  of  silver 
(135  grains,  grm.  8-74) ;  so  that  if  the  passage  proves  anything, 
it  indicates  that  an  ox  was  only  of  the  value  of  two  silver 
drachms,  which  is  certainly  too  low.  An  Attic  didrachm  of 
gold  was  of  nearly  the  same  value  as  a  daric ;  but  such  coins 
were  not  issued  until  the  fourth  century,  and  so  they  can 
scarcely  have  directly  succeeded  oxen. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  bars  of  bronze,  if  of  well-known 
diameter,  might  be  estimated  by  length  only,  a  foot  or  an 
inch  having  a  recognized  value.  Butter  is  thus  sold  at 
Cambridge  in  the  market.  But  it  seems  a  fatal  objection 
to  this  view  that  the   bronze  oboli  were  spits,  coming  to 

1  Hultsch,  Metrologici  Scriptores,  i,  p.  301. 

»  See  Ridgeway  in  Jmtrn.  Hell.  Stud.,  1887,  p.  133. 

s  Onomasticon,  ix.  61. 


24 


INTRODUCTION 


a  point,  and  thus  cannot  have  been  of  an  uniform  diameter 
throughout. 


V.    The  Origin  of  Coin-standaeds. 

The  question  of  the  ultimate  origin  of  the  weight 
standards  used  for  coins  in  Hellas  is  a  very  complicatec 
and  difficult  one.  Several  recent  German  writers,  such 
Brandis,  Hultsch,  Lehmann-Haupt,  and  Haeberlin,  have 
worked  out  most  elaborate  theories,  deriving  these  standards 
from  those  in  use  in  the  great  Empires  of  the  East.  A 
brief  account  of  these  theories  will  be  found  in  the  Intro- 
duction to  the  Historia  Numorum,  and  in  Mr.  Hill's 
Handbook  of  Greek  and  Roman  Coins. 

Not  only  do  such  writers  believe  in  an  accurate  trans 
mission  of  measure  and  weight  from  Babylon  to  the 
West,  but  they  also  think  that  the  Greeks  made  in  theii 
turn,  in  the  times  before  the  Persian  Wars,  elaborate  anc 
complicated  systems  of  weights  and  measures,  the  talent 
being  of  the  weight  of  a  cubic  foot  of  water,  and  the 
measures  of  length,  surface,  and  weight  fitting  together  ii 
a  coherent  scheme. 

Attempts  have  been  made,  for  example,  to  show  that  the 
weight  of  the  Attic  talent,  used  for  silver  coin,  corre 
sponds  to  that  of  water  filling  a  cube  of  the  Attic  foot 
Whether  this  view  be  sound  or  not  I  cannot  here  inquire 
but  if  it  be  a  fact,  it  may  very  probably  result  from  ai 
adjustment  of  the  foot  in  the  fifth  century,  long  after  the 
introduction  of  the  Attic  coin- weight. 

It  has  even  been  maintained  that  a  study  of  the  Frencl 
system  of  metres  and  litres,  introduced  in  the  time  of  the 
Revolution,  and  based  on  scientific  investigation,  is 
necessary  preliminary  to  understanding  ancient  weights 
and  measures.  The  contrary  is  the  truth.  The  moderi 
scientific  methods  of  determining  weights  and  measures 
are  completely  foreign  to  peoples  in  the  mental  condition 
in  which  the  Greeks  were  when  coinage  began. 

We  English,  who  retain  in  a  modified  form  the  mediaeval 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  COIN-STANDARDS  25 

weights  and  measures,  the  mile  of  1,760  yards,  the  perch, 
the  fathom,  the  quarter  of  corn,  troy,  avoirdupois,  and 
apothecaries'  weights  and  the  like,  are  far  more  nearly  in 
touch  with  ancient  ways  of  measuring.  The  attempt  to 
squeeze  Greek  coin-weights  into  metric  systems  is  mis- 
leading. We  must  take  them  as  they  stand,  in  all  their 
irregularity  and  inaccuracy,  and  try  to  discover  how  they 
worked,  not  according  to  preconceived  theory,  but  in  com- 
mercial practice.  Only  so  can  we  approach  the  historic 
facts  of  Greek  money-changing  and  commerce. 

As  I  have  above  given  to  Mommsen  and  Brandis  the 
credit  of  first  introducing  method  into  the  metrology  of 
coins,  I  must  express  regret  that  their  followers  in  Germany 
have  often  made  in  this  matter  schemes  which  are  merely 
fantastic.  Mr.  Hill's  sober  judgement  is  that  '  the  least 
satisfactory  department  of  ancient  numismatics  is  that 
which  is  occupied  with  questions  of  metrology  '.*  Beloch 
is  still  more  severe.  'Ancient  metrology ',  he  writes,2  'seems 
on  the  point  of  losing  all  solid  ground  under  its  feet,  and 
becoming  a  meeting-place  of  wild  fancies.'  Brandis  began 
by  inventing  for  Babylon,  besides  the  mina  of  60  shekels, 
a  mina  of  50  shekels,  which  never  really  existed.  Subse- 
quent writers  have  improved  upon  this,  and  tried  by 
raising  or  diminishing  a  standard  of  weight  by  some  pro- 
portion, a  fifth  or  a  sixth,  or  it  may  be  a  twenty-fourth,  to 
derive  other  standards.  As  Beloch  observes,  by  such  a 
process  it  is  easy  to  derive  any  weight  from  any  other,  and 
he  proceeds  by  way  of  reductio  ad  absurdum  to  derive  the 
French  kilogram  from  the  Egyptian  kite.  But  unfortunately 
Beloch,  while  rightly  rejecting  these  extravagances,  falls 
into  a  pit  of  his  own  digging.  He  produces  the  fact,  on 
which  we  shall  comment  later,  that  at  Delphi  the  Attic 
mina  was  officially  equated  with  35  Aeginetan  didrachms 
(just  about  its  true  value),  and  draws  from  it  the  unjustified 
inference  that  the  Aeginetan  mina,  instead  of  consisting  of 
100  drachms,  contained  only  70.  Now  we  have  several 
extant  weights  which  follow  a  mina  (9,700  grains,  grm.  628-5) 

1  Handbook,  p.  26.  2  Griech.  Geschichte,  i.  2,  338. 


26  INTRODUCTION 

•which  can  scarcely  be  any  but  the  Aeginetan ;  but  for  an 
Aeginetan  mina  of  the  same  weight  as  the  Attic  there  is 
no  authority  whatever.  He  goes  on  to  make  a  mina  at 
Thasos  of  45  Thasian  staters  of  150  grains,  grm.  9«70,  also 
equal  to  the  Attic  mina ;  a  Milesian  mina  of  30  staters,  and 
so  on.  He  writes  1 :  '  All  the  Greek  systems  which  were 
widely  accepted  before  Alexander  the  Great  stand  in  the 
closest  relations  one  to  another;  they  all  are  based  on 
a  mina  of  436-6  grammes,  6,700  grains,  or  on  one  half  as 
heavy  again,  and  differ  only  as  this  mina  is  variously 
divided/     This  is  mere  fancy. 

A  useful  corrective  to  the  a  priori  metrologists  is  fur- 
nished by  Professor  Bidgeway's  Origin  of  Currency  and 
Weight  Standards,  which  is  a  broad  and  comparative 
survey,  and  contains  a  great  amount  of  interesting  infor- 
mation. But  unfortunately  Ridgeway  has  adopted  the 
theory  that  the  weights  of  silver  coins  in  Greece  were  fixed 
by  a  continuous  series  of  attempts  so  to  adjust  them  as  to 
make  them  stand  in  a  convenient  relation  to  the  gold 
shekel  of  130  grains  (grm.  8*42).  This  theory  I  hold  to  be, 
save  in  a  few  instances,  quite  baseless  2 ;  and  thus,  while  the 
earlier  part  of  Ridgeway 's  book  is  useful,  the  latter  part  is 
of  a  much  lower  order  of  value.  He  is  much  more  at  home 
in  dealing  with  the  practices  of  primitive  peoples  than  in 
explaining  Greek  customs. 

I  feel  that  in  skirting  a  shore  thus  strewn  with  wrecks 
I  cannot  be  too  careful  in  adhering  closely  to  that  for  which 
we  have  definite  evidence.  And  if  sometimes  I  have  to 
propound  hypotheses,  I  will  at  all  events  let  it  be  clearly 
seen  on  what  facts  I  base  them. 

In  regard  to  the  coinage  of  Greece,  as  in  regard  to 
sculpture,  vase-painting,  and  other  developments  of  Hellenic 
civilization,  there  are,  and  probably  will  always  be,  two 
views :  the  view  of  those  who  derive  the  origin  of  Greek 
civilization  from  the  East,  from  the  old  and  established 
cultures  of  Babylon  and  Egypt  in  the  eighth  and  seventh 


1  Griech.  Geschichte,  ii.  1,  345.  2  See  chs.  v  and  xvi,  below. 


; 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  COIN-STANDARDS  27 

centuries  B.C.,  and  the  view  of  those  who  think  it  more  or 
less  continuous  from  the  pre-Hellenic  civilizations,  which 
we  now  call  Minoan  and  Mycenaean.  In  my  view  there 
was  little  actual  survival  from  prehistoric  to  historic  times. 
The  invasions  of  the  Hellenes  from  the  North  seem  to  have 
made  an  almost  complete  end  of  the  Mycenaean  culture  ; 
a  few  centuries  of  comparative  barbarism  intervened  ;  after 
which  fresh  seeds  of  culture  were  imported  by  the  Greeks 
from  their  Asiatic  neighbours.1 

What  positive  evidence  have  we  as  to  the  weights  in  use 
in  Minoan  and  Mycenaean  Greece  ?  It  is  put  together  by 
Sir  Arthur  Evans  in  a  paper  in  the  Corolla  Numismatica.2 
But  weights,  unless  they  bear  an  inscription,  are  very  hard 
to  identify  as  belonging  to  this  or  that  system ;  and  we 
have  not  yet  attained  to  certainty.  In  Evans's  opinion  the 
Kedet  system  of  Egypt,  the  gold  shekel  system  of  Babylon, 
and  the  Phoenician  silver  shekel  system  were  all  in  use  in 
the  Minoan  world.  But  apparently  the  Minoans  had  no 
native  system  of  their  own.  From  this  point  of  view  the 
question  is  only  whether  the  Greeks  received  these  oriental 
weights  through  the  Minoans,  or  whether  they  derived 
them  direct  from  the  east.  But  there  are  a  few  other  data. 
Professor  E.  A.  Gardner  weighed  the  gold  rings  found  in 
the  Acropolis  graves  at  Mycenae 3 ;  but  the  weights  he 
records  are  so  varied  and  erratic  that  it  does  not  seem  safe 
to  base  any  conclusion  on  them.  More  important  are 
certain  dumps  or  pellets  of  silver,  one  of  which  was  found 
in  the  magazines  of  the  palace  at  Cnossus.  These  are  of 
forms  very  similar  to  that  of  the  earliest  electrum  coins,  of 
which  Evans  is  disposed  to  consider  them  the  forerunners. 
The  weight  of  the  Cnossian  example  is  56-4  grains  (grm.  3-65). 
Three  other  examples  were  found  in  the  Mycenaean  ceme- 
tery at  Salamis  in  Cyprus.  The  weights  are :  132*9  grains 
(grm.  8-60) ;  72-9  grains  (grm. 4-72);  and72-2grains  (grm. 4-67). 
If  these  pellets  of  metal  had  all  conformed  to  one  standard, 
their  evidence  would  have  been  important.   As  it  is,  though 

1  See  especially  Poulsen,  FruJtgriechische  Kunst.  *  p.  336  and  foil. 

8  Journ.  HeU.  Stud.,  x.  90. 


28  INTRODUCTION 

severally  they  can  be  fitted  into  various  scales  of  weight, 
the  first  to  the  Phoenician,  the  second  to  the  Egyptian,  the 
third  and  fourth  to  the  Babylonic,  yet  they  do  not  prove 
the  use  of  pellets  of  silver  of  fixed  weight  as  currency ; 
certainly  they  do  not  prove  that  it  was  from  the  primitive 
inhabitants  of  Hellas  that  the  Ionians  and  the  Dorians 
derived  their  monetary  standards. 

The  view  maintained  in  this  book  is  that  there  were  three 
chief  original  monetary  systems  in  the  Greek  world, 
whence  all,  or  almost  all  others  were  derived  : 

(1)  The  gold  system,  exemplified  in  the  gold  staters  issued 
by  Croesus  and  the  Persians. 

(2)  The  silver  system,  exemplified  in  the  silver  staters 
issued  by  the  people  of  Aegina. 

(3)  The  bronze  system,  in  partial  use  in  the  Greek  cities 
of  Italy  and  Sicily,  and  probably  derived  from  the  original 
inhabitants  of  those  countries. 

Of  these  the  first  is  the  most  important :  the  third  is 
important  for  Rome,  but  not  for  Hellas. 

(1)  The  coinage  of  Lydia  and  Ionia  starts,  so  far  as  we 
can  judge,  with  a  gold  stater  of  130  grains  (grm.  8-42) ; 
though  the  actual  gold  of  Lydia  is  about  four  grains  lighter, 
and  the  coinage  of  Phoenicia  seems  to  take  its  origin  from 
a  gold  stater  of  double  the  weight,  260  grains  (grm.  16-84). 
These  two  staters  correspond  with  the  sixtieth  part  of  two 
minae,  weights  representing  which  were  actually  found  by 
Layard  at  Nineveh.  The  heavier  standard,  with  a  mina  of 
about  1,010  grammes  (15,600  grains),  was  represented  by 
bronze  lions,  bearing  inscriptions  both  cuneiform  and 
Aramaic.  The  lighter  standard,  with  a  mina  of  about  505 
grammes  (7,800  grains),  was  represented  by  stone  ducks, 
bearing  cuneiform  inscriptions.  Whether  these  minae 
(manahs)  were  formed  by  multiplication  of  the  above- 
mentioned  staters,  or  whether  the  staters  were  arrived  at 
by  dividing  the  minae,  is  not  certain,  but  the  latter  view 
seems  clearly  preferable.  Two  lion  weights  are  inscribed 
respectively  :  (1)  '  Five  manahs  of  the  King  ',  in  cuneiform  ; 
1  Five  manahs  weight  of  the  country ',  in  Aramaic ;  (2)  '  Two 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  COIN-STANDARDS  29 

manahs  of  the  King ',  in  cuneiform  ;  '  Two  manahs  weight 
of  the  country ',  in  Aramaic.  The  Aramaic  legends  are 
important,  as  they  seem  to  show  that  the  standard  which 
they  represent  was  in  use  in  Mesopotamia  and  Syria,  and 
this  is  confirmed  by  other  evidence.  But  the  lighter  mina 
was  historically  more  important,  as  the  whole  coinage  of 
Lydia  and  Ionia  is  dominated  by  it.  In  discussing  the 
early  electrum  coinage  of  Asia,  I  shall  show  how  the 
weights  of  the  early  coins  of  Asia  Minor,  gold,  electrum, 
and  silver,  are  related  to  the  Lydian  gold  shekels. 

That  the  Homeric  Greeks  equated  this  shekel  with  their 
older  measure  of  value,  the  ox,  is  probable ;  but  it  is  likely 
that  this  equation  was  only  a  rough  adjustment  for  practical 
purposes.  It  must  have  been  quite  conventional,  since 
obviously  oxen  differ  very  much  one  from  another  in  value ; 
and  it  is  quite  natural  that  when  once  the  Ionians  had 
accepted  the  current  gold  pellet  as  the  standard  of  value,  it 
soon,  in  virtue  of  its  greater  stability  and  definiteness,  would 
drive  out  the  old  method  of  reckoning  in  cattle  or  other 
units  of  value,  or  cause  it  to  fall  into  line. 

(2)  It  might  not  be  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the 
tradition  of  Mycenae  had  some  influence  on  the  origin  of 
the  one  really  Greek  system  of  weights  and  coinage — that  of 
Aegina — a  system  which,  with  small  exceptions,  was  not 
applied  to  gold  but  only  to  silver.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Pheidonian  weights,  which  were  the  regulating  condition 
of  that  coinage,  may  have  been  of  pure  Hellenic  origin,  and 
come  in  with  the  Hellenes  from  the  north.  To  this  question 
I  will  return  when  I  treat  of  the  Aeginetan  coinage.  How- 
ever this  be,  it  is  certain  that  between  the  Ionian  coinage, 
which  started  with  the  gold  stater,  and  divided  it,  or  its 
equivalent  in  electrum,  into  thirds,  sixths,  twelfths,  and 
twenty-fourths,  and  the  Aeginetan  coinage,  which  started 
with  the  bronze  or  iron  spit,  and  went  on  to  the  silver 
drachm  and  didrachm,  there  was  a  broad  line  of  distinction. 
The  one  represented  the  Ionian,  the  other  the  Dorian  stream 
of  influence.  In  coinage,  as  in  architecture  and  in  sculp- 
ture, and,  in  fact,  in  every  department  of  civilization,  the 


30  INTRODUCTION 

Ionian  and  the  Dorian  contributions  were  the  two  elements 
which  made  up  the  Hellenic  whole. 

We  may  perhaps  find  a  silver  standard  independent  of 
that  of  Aegina  in  use  at  Samos  and  at  Cyrene  in  the  sixth 
century.  This  question  is  discussed  below,  where  I  have 
conjectured  its  derivation  from  the  Egyptian  Kat. 

(3)  The  unit  of  value  in  Italy  and  Sicily,  before  the 
establishment  of  the  Greeks  in  those  countries,  was  the 
litra  or  pound  of  bronze.  This  had  indeed  been  the  case  in 
Greece  Proper  before  the  coming  in  of  the  Aeginetan  and 
Euboic  silver ;  but  in  Greece  after  that  time  the  bronze  unit 
of  value  seems  to  vanish  ;  while  the  iron  unit  held  its  place 
only  in  Sparta.  In  Italy  and  Sicily,  owing  to  the  tenacity 
of  the  native  population,  reckoning  in  pounds  of  bronze 
went  on  at  the  same  time  as  reckoning  in  silver.  But  in 
Sicily,  when  the  bronze  litra  had  been  equated  with 
13-5  grains  of  silver  (grm.  0-87),  and  the  drachm  of  silver 
made  equal  to  five  litrae,  a  simple  and  easy  way  of  double 
reckoning  was  set  up,  and  it  was  not  until  the  issue  of  gold 
coins  at  Syracuse,  at  the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  that  the 
equivalence  of  a  round  number  of  litrae  with  coins  of  fresh 
denominations  was  seriously  aimed  at. 

In  Italy,  as  we  know  from  the  history  of  the  Roman 
coinage,  bronze  as  a  measure  of  value  better  held  its  own, 
as  indeed  would  be  expected  from  the  stronger  character  of 
the  native  population.  At  Tarentum,  for  example,  Evans 
has  proved  the  use  of  the  bronze  litra  and  its  equivalent  in 
silver.  In  Etruria,  silver  and  bronze  lived  on  equal  terms, 
and  every  silver  coin  had  a  value  in  bronze,  commonly 
indicated  by  numerals  on  the  coin  itself.  We  may  suspect 
that  the  continuous  fall  in  the  standards  of  the  silver  coins 
of  the  Greek  cities  of  South  Italy,  a  fall  not  easy  to  under- 
stand, and  presenting  a  marked  contrast  to  the  strict 
maintenance  of  full  weight  in  the  cities  of  Sicily,  may  have 
been  due  to  the  influence  of  bronze. 

It  is  often  by  no  means  easy  to  determine  to  which 
standard  a  given  coin  belongs.  We  cannot,  in  assigning  it 
to  one  or  another,  go  merely  by  the  weight,  since  with  time 


THE  OKIGIN  OF  COIN-STANDARDS  31 

coins  may  either  gain  weight  by  oxidation  or  lose  it  by 
friction  or  decay.  One  has  to  use  the  reason  as  well  as  the 
scales  ;  and  in  so  doing  there  is,  of  course,  a  danger  of 
importing  erroneous  theory  into  the  question. 

It  is  also  difficult  to  assign  names  to  the  various  standards 
in  use.  The  names  at  present  in  use  are  often  unsatisfactory. 
I  have  as  far  as  possible  taken  a  safe  line  by  naming  each 
standard  after  the  city  from  which  it  seems  to  proceed,  or 
indeed  the  most  important  city  which  used  it.  It  is  much 
more  satisfactory  to  speak  of  the  standard  of  Miletus  or 
Corinth  or  Abdera,  than  of  the  Graeco-Asiatic  or  the  Baby- 
Ionic  standard.  In  fact  cities,  in  adopting  some  standard 
for  their  coins,  usually  modified  it ;  and  then  commonly 
preserved  their  own  version  for  centuries.  This  is  a  pro- 
cedure we  could  hardly  have  expected.  But  such  is  the 
fact.  It  is  astonishing  how  little  cities  such  as  Athens, 
Ephesus,  Syracuse,  vary  the  weights  of  their  coins  over  long 
periods  of  time.  Some  other  cities,  such  as  Abdera,  have 
not  unfrequent  changes  in  standard;  and  the  reasons  for 
such  changes  have  to  be  carefully  sought. 

VI.     Mutual  Relations  op  Peecious  Metals. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  functions  of  coins  in  the  commerce 
of  the  Greek  states  cannot  be  traced,  unless  we  are  able  with 
some  confidence  to  determine  the  mutual  relations  in  value 
of  the  metals  used  for  money:  for  coins  in  Greece  were 
merely  bullion,  with  an  official  stamp  to  guarantee  weight 
and  fineness.  In  a  great  empire  the  money  of  the  state  may 
circulate  for  a  time  at  a  fictitious  value.  In  the  Middle 
Ages  kings  were  able  to  compel  their  subjects,  by  threats  of 
punishment,  to  take  their  depreciated  coin  at  its  nominal 
value,  though  in  the  long  run  such  artificial  inflation  failed. 
But  the  case  was  different  in  Greece.  Each  city  had  its 
coinage,  but  it  had  no  means  whatever  of  forcing  it  into 
circulation  beyond  the  limits  of  the  city's  territory,  except 
by  taking  care  that  the  coin  was  of  full  weight  and  pure 
metal.    Tyrants  like  Dionysius  of  Sicily  attempted  to  tamper 


32  INTRODUCTION 

with  the  state  coinage,  but  their  success  must  have  been 
both  slight  and  transient. 

Fortunately  we  are  able,  within  certain  limits,  to  fix  the 
relative  values  of  gold, silver,  electrum,and  bronze  in  different 
regions  at  successive  periods  of  history.  I  propose  in  this 
place  to  give  a  summary  of  our  knowledge  of  the  matter 
which  in  future  chapters  I  can  expand.1 

As  regards  the  proportional  values  of  the  three  metals, 
gold,  silver,  and  electrum,  in  the  ancient  world  we  owe  an 
excellent  summary  of  our  knowledge  to  an  investigation  by 
M.  Theodore  Reinach.2  On  nearly  all  points  the  conclusions 
of  M.  Reinach,  based  as  they  are  upon  a  careful  examination 
of  ancient  texts  and  inscriptions  and  of  extant  coins,  seem 
to  me  to  be  solidly  established. 

In  Asia,  from  the  beginning  of  coinage  down  to  the  middle 
of  the  fourth  century,  the  ratio  of  value  between  gold  and 
silver  was  13§  to  1.  This  is  a  view  maintained  by  Mommsen 
and  Brandis,  and  it  seems  trustworthy.  It  is  indeed  estab- 
lished by  induction  from  a  consideration  of  the  Persian 
coinage.  The  gold  daric  or  stater  in  that  empire  weighed 
up  to  130  grains  (grm.  8-42)  and  the  silver  shekel  up  to 
86  grains  (grm.  5*57).  Now  we  know  on  the  definite  authority 
of  Xenophon3  that  twenty  of  the  silver  coins  passed  as 
equivalent  to  one  of  the  gold ;  so  we  have  the  formula 
1,720  grains  of  silver  are  equivalent  to  130  of  gold,  and  the 
relation  between  these  numbers  is  nearly  13§  to  I .  The  same 
equation  holds  in  the  Lydian  coinage  which  preceded  the 
daric ;  and  we  cannot  doubt  that  it  was  an  old-established 
equivalence.  Herodotus,  it  is  true,  in  his  account  of  the 
revenues  of  Persia,4  says  that  gold  was  thirteen  times  as 
valuable  as  silver ;  but  this  is  clearly  only  an  approximate 
statement.     The  relation  13£  to  1,  although  at  first  glance 

1  Especially  useful  are  papers  by  M.  E.  Babelon,  Origines  de  la  monnaie, 
1897,  chs.  6-8,  and  by  M.  Theodore  Reinach,  VHistoire  par  les  monnaies,  1902, 
chs.  4  and  5. 

*  V 'Histoire  par  les  monnaies,  1902,  ch.  4. 

3  Anab.  i.  7, 18.  Cyrus  pays  3,000  darics  in  discharge  of  a  debt  of  ten  talents 
of  silver,  or  60,000  shekels. 

4  Hdt.  iii.  95,  1. 


MUTUAL  RELATIONS  OF  PRECIOUS  METALS  33 

more  complex,  is  in  reality  simpler,  for  by  working  on  it 
the  silver  shekel  is  almost  exactly  two-thirds  of  the  weight 
of  the  daric ;  and  this  fact  would  greatly  simplify  the 
process  of  weighing  (86  +  43  =  129). 

It  appears  from  Egyptian  inscriptions  that  gold  was  in 
Egypt  regarded  as  twelve  or  thirteen  times  as  valuable  as 
silver.1  Of  course,  however,  the  ratio  varied  from  time  to 
time.  And  we  know  that  in  very  early  times  gold  was 
plentiful  in  Egypt  in  comparison  with  silver.  But  Ridge- 
way  is  not  justified  in  thinking  that  in  Hellas  a  higher 
proportion  than  14  to  1  prevailed  between  the  two  metals. 

But  there  was  in  use  in  Asia  as  a  measure  of  value  a  third 
metal,  electrum,  a  mixture  of  gold  and  silver ;  of  which,  in 
fact,  the  earliest  coins  are  composed.  The  same  authorities 
who  have  established  the  proportionate  values  of  gold  and 
silver  have  shown  that  electrum  was  not  regarded  as  a  com- 
pound, but  as  a  separate  kind  of  metal,  and  reckoned  in 
Asia  as  of  ten  times  the  value  of  silver  and  three-fourths  of 
the  value  of  pure  gold.  Hence  electrum  coins  were  usually 
struck  not  on  the  standard  used  for  gold,  but  on  that  used 
for  silver.  We  are  told  by  Herodotus  that  the  bricks  of 
electrum  or  white  gold  dedicated  by  Croesus  at  Delphi  were 
of  the  same  size  as  the  bricks  of  pure  gold,  but  weighed  only 
four-fifths  as  much.  An  easy  calculation  based  on  the 
specific  gravities  of  gold  and  silver  respectively  shows  that 
these  electrum  bricks  contained  70  per  cent,  of  gold  and 
30  per  cent,  of  silver,  approximately.  Isidore  of  Seville 2 
says  that  electrum  contained  three-fourths  gold  and  one- 
fourth  silver.  But  we  do  not  know  whence  he  gained  this 
information.  Pliny  states  that  the  term  electrum  is  applied 
to  all  gold  mixed  to  the  extent  of  at  least  one-fifth  with 
silver. 

The  question  of  the  relation  in  value  between  gold  and 
electrum  nevertheless  offers  problems  which,  in  the  present 
state  of  our  knowledge,  we  are  scarcely  able  to  solve. 
What  has  caused  the  utmost  perplexity  to  numismatists  is 

1  E.  Babelon,  Origines  de  la  monnaie,  p.  311.  *  Orig.  xvi.  24. 

1»67  D 


34  INTRODUCTION 

the  very  remarkable  fact  that  the  proportion  between  gold 
and  silver  in  the  composition  of  the  coins  varies  greatly, 
and  with  it  their  intrinsic  value.  It  is  possible  by  weighing, 
first  in  air  and  then  in  water,  to  determine  the  specific 
gravity  of  electrum  coins  ;  and  from  the  specific  gravity  it 
is  possible  to  deduce,  within  certain  limits,  their  composition, 
the  proportion  of  gold  and  silver  which  they  contain.  In 
1887  I  applied  this  method  to  a  number  of  electrum  coins 
of  Cyzicus  ;  and  in  the  same  year  B.  V.  Head  made  a  series 
of  similar  investigations  as  regards  other  electrum  coins.1 
The  results  are  extraordinary,  and  very  disconcerting. 
Instead  of  the  proportions  of  gold  and  silver  being  fixed, 
they  vary  in  an  extreme  degree.  In  the  case  of  a  set  of 
electrum  coins  of  Cyzicus  of  various  ages,  I  found  the  per- 
centage of  gold  to  vary  from  58  to  33  per  cent.  Mr.  Head, 
ranging  over  a  wider  field,  found  that  the  percentage  of 
gold  in  early  electrum  coins  varied  from  72  to  10  or  even 
5  per  cent.  Thus  of  coins  of  the  same  weight,  one  might 
be  sixfold  the  value  of  another. 

J.  Hammer  has  analysed  a  far  larger  number  of  coins 
with  similar  results.2  The  view  which  he  accepts  is  that 
electrum  was  coined  as  it  was  found  in  the  rivers.  He 
shows  that  modern  investigations  prove  that  gold  thus 
found  contains  up  to  40  per  cent,  of  silver.  Yet  it  is  hard 
to  believe  that  Lydians  and  Greeks,  even  in  the  sixth 
century,  were  unaware  of  a  process  for  separating  the  two 
metals.  It  is  still  harder  to  suppose  that  the  same  dis- 
ability existed  in  the  case  of  the  people  of  Cyzicus  down  into 
the  fourth  century.  The  Greeks,  even  at  an  early  period, 
were  perfectly  well  aware  of  the  methods  for  mixing  gold 
and  silver;  and  they  used  touchstones,  found  in  the  very 
district  of  Lydia  where  coinage  originated,  which  enabled 
them  to  determine  with  considerable  accuracy  the  degree 
of  alloy  in  coins  professedly  of  gold.  How  then  is  it 
possible  that  they  can  have  accepted  debased  coins  of 
electrum  as  of  equal  value  with  coins  of  good  quality  ? 
The  view  of  Brandis  and  Mommsen,  that  electrum  was 

1  In  the  Numism.  Chronicle.  2  Zeitschr.f.  Numism.,  xxvi,  p.  47. 


I 


MUTUAL  EELATIONS  OF  PRECIOUS  METALS   35 

originally  regarded  as  a  metal  apart,  and  conventionally 
accepted  as  of  ten  times  the  value  of  silver,  or  three- fourths 
of  the  value  of  gold,  strange  as  it  may  seem,  is  after  all 
probably  the  true  one.  For,  remarkable  as  it  may  be  that 
Greek  merchants  should  be  willing  to  accept  coins  not 
guaranteed  by  any  king  or  city  at  a  fixed  and  conventional 
rate,  it  is  still  more  improbable  that  they  should  have  to 
value  every  piece  of  money  offered  them  by  means  of  the 
touchstone,  and  make  the  simplest  bargain  into  a  very 
elaborate  arithmetical  problem.  In  the  latter  case,  one 
cannot  see  what  advantage  the  electrum  coinage  would 
possess  over  bars  or  rings  of  gold  or  silver,  which  as  a 
matter  of  fact  it  superseded  in  commerce. 

It  is,  however,  improbable  that  this  conventional  value 
iof  electrum  lasted  after  the  sixth  century.  In  the  case  of 
the  electrum  coins  issued  by  the  cities  which  took  part  in 
the  Ionian  Revolt,  and  still  more  in  the  case  of  the  later 
Cyzicene  and  Lampsacene  electrum  staters,  it  is  probable 
that  the  value  in  exchange  better  conformed  to  intrinsic 
value.  At  a  relation  of  10  to  1  a  Cyzicene  stater  of  254 
grains  would  be  nearly  the  equivalent  of  38  Attic  silver 
drachms,  and  we  know,  as  is  shown  below,  that  25  drachms 
was  much  nearer  to  its  actual  valuation. 

M.  Reinach  maintains  that  as  the  value  of  gold  in  relation 
to  silver  fell  in  Greece,  the  value  of  electrum  fell  also, 
retaining  its  proportion  to  gold  of  three-fourths.  Thus  in 
the  early  part  of  the  fourth  century  electrum  was  in  Greece 
no  longer  ten  times  as  valuable  as  silver,  but  nine  times, 
or  three-fourths  of  twelve  times.  And  in  the  days  of 
Alexander,  on  the  same  principle,  electrum  fell  to  seven 
and  a  half  times  the  value  of  silver.  This  view  seems 
plausible,  but  it  does  not  agree  with  the  facts  in  regard  to 
Cyzicene  staters. 

While,  however,  electrum  coinage  thus  offers  unsolved 
difficulties,  this  is  not  really  the  case  with  gold  and  silver 
issues.  Habit  was  of  infinitely  greater  power  in  the  ancient 
than  in  the  modern  world,  and  conventions  were  more 
readily  accepted.     Thus  there  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing 

d  2 


36  INTRODUCTION 

tliat  the  proportionate  value  of  gold  and  silver  as  maintained 
by  the  Lydians  and  the  Persians  might  persist  for  an 
indefinite  period.  In  France,  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
the  proportion  of  15|  to  1  was  long  maintained  in  coinage, 
and  was  only  overturned  by  the  vast  output  of  silver  in 
America. 

As  the  Treasurers  at  Athens  sometimes  required  gold  for 
dedications,  we  find  in  the  Athenian  treasure-lists  a  fairly 
complete  account  of  the  value  of  gold  at  Athens  at  various 
periods.  It  is  true  that  these  treasure-lists  which  have 
come  down  to  us  are  usually  mutilated  or  fragmentary,  but 
it  has  been  possible  to  collect  their  testimony.  They  prove 
that  when  the  gold  and  ivory  statue  of  Athena  was  being 
constructed,  438  B.C.,  gold  was  bought  at  the  rate  of  14 to  1. 
But  when,  towards  the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  gold  coins 
began  to  be  struck  at  Athens,  it  is  almost  certain  that  the 
rate  had  fallen  to  12  to  1.  For  not  only  the  drachm  was 
struck  in  gold,  but  also  the  third  and  the  sixth  of  the 
drachm.  If  gold  were  at  12  to  1  these  would  be  equivalent 
respectively  to  a  tetradrachm  and  a  didrachm  in  silver ;  but 
at  any  other  proportion  they  would  not  work  in.  In  the 
pseudo-Platonic  dialogue  Hipparchus l  the  value  of  gold  in 
relation  to  silver  is  distinctly  stated  to  be  twelvefold.  And 
this  relation  seems  to  have  persisted  until  the  great  issues 
of  gold  coins  by  Philip  of  Macedon,  and  the  dissipation  of 
the  gold  treasures  of  the  Persian  kings  by  Alexander,  brought 
down  the  value  of  gold  in  Greece  to  10  to  1,  a  value  confirmed 
by  the  Athenian  accounts  of  306  b.c. 

These  values  held  in  Greece  Proper  as  a  rule. 

In  Sicily,  gold  seems  to  have  retained  its  value  better 
than  in  Greece.  In  the  time  of  Timoleon  it  was  still  twelve 
times  as  valuable  as  silver.2 

VII.     Rights  of  Coinage. 

At  what  period  the  right  to  issue  coin  came  to  be 
regarded   as   belonging  only  to  autonomous  cities,  tribes, 

1  p.  231  d.  2  Head,  Coinage  vf  Syracuse,  p.  28. 


RIGHTS  OF  COINAGE  37 

and  kings  is  not  an  easy  question.  M.  Babelon  has  main- 
tained that  the  earliest  coins  were  minted  not  by  cities  but 
by  capitalists  and  merchants,  and  he  cites  many  mediaeval 
and  modern  parallels.1  This  question  I  have  discussed  in 
my  chapter  on  the  earliest  electrum  coinage.  However 
that  be,  it  is  certain  that  in  the  course  of  the  sixth 
century,  if  not  earlier,  private  issues  ceased  and  civic 
coinages  took  their  place. 

Besides  autonomous  cities,  it  would  seem  that  in  early 
times  the  great  religious  centres  of  Greece  sometimes  issued 
coins.  This  was  natural  enough.  Many  of  the  shrines  of 
Greece,  notably  those  at  Delphi,  Delos,  Olympia,  and 
Miletus,  were  possessed  of  great  wealth,  drawing  revenues 
from  lands  and  houses  as  well  as  by  the  exercise  of  religious 
functions.  As  the  great  temples  exercised  some  of  the 
functions  of  modern  banks  in  lending  money  on  lands  or 
goods,  it  is  not  unnatural  that  they  should  have  struck 
coin  bearing  as  device  an  attribute  or  the  effigy  of  the  deity 
to  whom  they  were  consecrated.  Ernst  Curtius  sought 
here  the  origin  of  the  religious  character  of  the  types 
commonly  borne  by  coins ;  and  though  this  view  is  an 
exaggeration,  and  the  civic  devices  were  usually  religious 
as  well  as  those  of  the  temples,  yet  we  are  in  a  position, 
in  a  few  cases,  to  prove  the  striking  of  coins  by  the  religious 
corporations  of  temples.  A  coin  of  Miletus,  struck  in  the 
fourth  century,  bears  the  legend  'Ey  AiSvficov  itprj,  where 
SpaxfiTj  is  probably  understood.  This  must  clearly  have 
been  struck  on  some  special  religious  occasion,  very  probably 
at  the  time  of  the  rebuilding  of  the  temple  of  Apollo  in 
334  b.c.  And  as  the  weight,  27  grains  (grm.  1-75),  is  just 
half  of  that  of  the  Rhodian  drachm  then  current,  it  seems 
to  prove  that  a  special  issue  was  made  on  a  reduced 
standard.  The  Jews,  in  Roman  times,  struck  sacred  coins 
for  offerings  in  the  Temple,  whence  money-changers  set 
up  their  tables  in  the  precincts  to  provide  such  coin  in 
exchange  for  foreign  money.  Olympia  was  not  a  town,  but 
only  a  sacred  site,  hence  when  we   find    coins  inscribed 

1  Origine*  de  la  monnaie,  pp.  93-134. 


38  INTRODUCTION 

'OXv/x-ttikou  (i.e.  vofiia-fia)  we  may  be  sure  that  such  coins 
were  issued  in  the  sacred  precincts,  probably  to  provide 
memorials  for  the  visitors  who  thronged  the  sacred  place 
at  the  time  of  the  festival.1  In  fact,  the  whole  coinage 
which  bears  the  name  of  the  people  of  Elis  probably 
belonged  to  the  temple  and  the  festival,  with  which  the 
types  which  it  bears  are  closely  connected,  Zeus,  Hera,  the 
eagle,  the  thunderbolt,  and  the  like.  In  the  same  way, 
the  abundant  coins  issued  at  Heraea  in  the  fifth  century, 
and  inscribed  'ApKaSiKov,  were  probably  issued  on  the  occa- 
sion of  the  festival  of  Zeus  Lycaeus.  At  the  time  the 
people  of  Arcadia  had  no  federal  union,  and  cities  such  as 
Mantinea  and  Psophis  struck  their  own  coins,  so  that  it 
seems  certain  that  the  issue  at  Heraea  was  a  religious  rather 
than  a  civic  one.  The  coins,  again,  issued  at  Delphi  after 
the  sacred  war,  and  bearing  the  legend  'AiifyiKTiovcov?  are 
certainly  no  federal  issue,  but  temple  coins,  perhaps  struck 
on  the  occasion  of  the  Pythian  festival  of  346  b.  c. 

The  great  mass  of  Greek  coins,  however,  at  all  events 
after  the  Persian  conquest  of  Asia  Minor,  was  struck  by 
the  civic  authorities  of  the  Hellenic  cities. 

Students  of  Greek  coins  are  apt  to  receive  the  impression 
that  each  Greek  city-state,  and  each  independent  tribe, 
issued  coins,  choosing  their  types  and  their  weights  in  a 
perfectly  arbitrary  way.  M.  Francois  Lenormant  puts  this 
view  as  follows  3 :  '  Every  city  had  its  coins,  which  it  struck 
and  regulated  at  will,  acting  in  the  matter  with  complete 
independence,  in  the  isolation  of  its  own  sovereignty,  and 
without  caring  what  course  was  taken  by  its  nearest  neigh- 
bours.' The  number  of  mints  was  certainly  great,  between 
1,500  and  2,000.  More  than  fifty  Greek  cities  in  Sicily 
struck  coins.  The  little  island  of  Ceos,  not  ten  miles  across, 
had  three  active  mints.  Some  towns  are  only  known  to 
have  existed  by  their  extant  coins.  Nevertheless  the  state- 
ment of  Lenormant  is  an  extreme  exaggeration.  The 
Greeks  have  always  had  a  keen  commercial  instinct,  and 

1  Head,  H.  N.,  p.  420.  2  Ibid.,  p.  342. 

8  Histoire  de  la  monnaie  dans  Vantiquite,  ii,  p.  54. 


RIGHTS  OF  COINAGE  39 

when  one  reflects  on  the  chaos  which  must  naturally  have 
resulted  in  trade,  if  cities  really  used  their  autonomy  in  this 
unbridled  fashion,  one  sees  that  there  must  have  been 
restrictions  of  some  kind,  else  the  work  of  money-changers 
in  commercial  centres  would  have  been  impossibly  com- 
plicated ;  and  the  Greek  world,  like  the  Roman  world  at 
certain  periods,  would  have  fallen  back  on  only  accepting 
the  precious  metals  by  weight,  and  not  as  currency.  There 
must  have  been  in  all  important  markets  predominant 
coinages,  and  other  coinages  of  any  importance  would  have 
to  stand  in  some  denned  relationship  with  these.  If  we 
look  at  the  coins  of  the  less  wealthy  Greek  cities,  we  often 
find  that  they  seem  to  have  been  issued  only  on  two  or 
three  occasions  in  the  history  of  those  cities.  Of  course,  it 
is  not  easy  to  prove  a  negative,  or  definitely  to  assert  that 
since  no  coins  of  other  periods  have  survived,  therefore 
they  were  not  struck.  But  where  negative  evidence  is 
cumulative,  it  may  demand  acceptance.  It  is  contrary  to 
common  sense,  and  to  our  evidence,  to  suppose  that  cities 
took  no  account  of  their  neighbours'  coin-standards  in 
fixing  their  own.  If  that  had  been  the  case,  the  present 
book  would  have  been  without  basis.  But  in  our  days  no 
historic  student  believes  that  events  happen  by  accident : 
we  look  for  lines  of  influence  and  connexion  everywhere, 
and  attach  special  value  to  indications  of  commercial 
influence. 

It  will  be  well  to  begin  with  instances  in  which  we  have 
actual  evidence  of  the  restriction  of  the  right  of  coinage. 

It  is  the  view  of  nearly  all  numismatists l  that  the  great 
King  of  Persia  allowed  in  his  dominions  no  issues  of  gold 
coins  save  the  royal  darics.  There  is  no  definite  statement 
of  an  ancient  historian  to  be  quoted  to  this  effect ;  but  the 
survey  of  ancient  coinage  seems  clearly  to  establish  the  fact. 
Darius  prided  himself,  as  Herodotus  tells  us,  on  the  purity 
of  his  gold  coin 2 ;  and  no  other  coins  in  pure  gold  were 


1  M.  Babelon  is  an  exception.     Traite,  ii.  2,  5, 
1  Hdt.  iv.  166. 


40  INTRODUCTION 

issued  in  Asia  until  about  400  b.  c,  though  the  Greek  cities 
of  the  coast  struck  money  in  silver  freely ;  and  a  few  of 
them  issued  coins  of  electrum.  Persian  satraps  also  struck 
silver  money  in  Cilicia  on  the  occasion  of  military  expedi- 
tions, but  no  gold.  At  a  later  time  this  monopoly  of  gold 
coinage  was  taken  on  by  the  Romans  as  part  of  their  policy, 
and  rigidly  guarded  through  all  their  history. 

A  second  example  may  be  found  in  the  monetary  policy 
of  Athens  in  the  time  of  her  empire,  476-405  b.  c.  Here  we 
have  the  authority,  not  only  of  numismatic  facts  but  of  in- 
scriptions, for  the  statement  that  it  was  a  part  of  Athenian 
state  policy  to  prohibit  the  issue  of  coins  in  all  places  which 
were  under  the  Athenian  dominion,  and  to  force  the  subject 
cities  to  use  the  silver  owl  coins  of  Athens.    (See  Chap.  XIV.) 

A  third  example  may  be  found  in  the  coinage  of  Boeotia. 
Mr.  Head  has  shown ]  that  for  sixty  years  from  the  battle  of 
Coroneia  (447  b.  c.)  to  the  peace  of  Antalcidas  (387  b.  c.) 
Thebes  used  her  position  as  head  of  the  Boeotian  League  to 
monopolize  the  coinage.  During  these  sixty  years  all  coins 
struck  in  Boeotia  bear  the  name  and  the  types  of  the 
dominant  city.  Whether  Corinth  moved  on  the  same  lines 
will  be  discussed  below. 

We  cannot  doubt  that  when  the  history  of  Greek  coinage 
is  better  known  to  us  we  shall  find  abundant  instances  of 
this  restriction  by  dominant  cities  of  the  privilege  of  coinage 
in  states  controlled  by  them.  How  far  the  motive  was 
commercial,  and  how  far  merely  pride  and  a  love  of  domi- 
nance, is  a  difficult  question.  At  Athens  certainly  the 
finance  of  the  state  was  largely  based  on  the  resources 
obtained  from  the  silver  mines  of  Laurium  and  Thrace,  and 
the  utilization  of  these  resources  in  the  form  of  coin ;  but  it 
does  not  follow  that  this  motive  held  in  all  other  cases. 

As  regards  rulers  and  tyrants  it  appears  that,  generally 
speaking,  the  issue  of  coins  with  the  ruler's  name  is  a  proof 
of  a  claim  to  complete  autonomy.  But  there  are  excep- 
tions to  this  rule.  One  of  the  most  noteworthy  is  found  in 
the  case  of  Themistocles.    When  he  went  over  to  the  King 

1  Numismatic  Chronicle,  1881,  p.  206. 


RIGHTS  OF  COINAGE  41 

of  Persia,  the  latter  assigned  to  him  some  of  the  Greek 
cities  of  Asia  Minor  as  a  possession.  In  the  city  of  Magnesia 
he  struck  coins  with  his  own  name  (8e/ztoroicXeoy)  and  no 
sign  of  Persian  overlordship.  Other  Persian  satraps,  such  as 
Pharnabazus  and  Orontes,  followed  the  example ;  and  in  the 
fourth  century  the  Persian  admirals  and  generals  at  the 
head  of  military  expeditions  struck  in  the  cities  of  Cilicia 
silver  coins  which  bore  their  names.  When  the  Phoenician 
kings  of  Citium  in  Cyprus  issued  in  the  fourth  century  gold 
money  bearing  their  names,  it  may  fairly  be  considered  as 
a  proof  that  they  threw  up  their  allegiance  to  the  Great 
King ;  but  the  same  does  not  hold  of  issues  of  silver  money. 

Often,  it  appears,  while  a  predominant  ruler  or  city  im- 
posed coin  of  large  denomination  in  a  district,  to  the  lesser 
cities  was  left  the  privilege  of  striking  small  silver  or  bronze 
coins  for  local  circulation.  The  small  divisions  of  the  early 
Attic  money  are  seldom  found  in  the  hoards  of  Sicily  or 
Asia,  in  which  Athenian  tetradrachms  are  of  frequent 
occurrence,  but  seem  to  have  been  meant  only  for  Attica ; 
and  in  the  later  time  of  the  first  Athenian  Empire,  when 
Attic  tetradrachms  passed  everywhere  in  the  lands  around 
the  Aegean,  a  number  of  towns  in  the  Propontis,  Mysia, 
Troas,  and  elsewhere  issued  small  silver  coirs,  sometimes 
following  the  Attic  standard  and  sometimes  departing  from 
it.  As  to  bronze  coin,  it  may  be  said  to  have  been  in  all 
Greek  lands  a  mere  money  of  account,  struck  to  meet  the 
needs  of  local  markets,  and  having  no  circulation  beyond 
them.  There  is  in  this  respect  a  strong  contrast  between 
!  Greece  and  Rome,  as  the  Roman  coinage  began  with  the  as 
or  pound  of  bronze,  and  bronze  coins  were  for  centuries 
state  issues  of  wide  circulation. 

In  the  Hellenistic  age  the  matter  became  more  compli- 
cated. Philip,  Alexander,  and  the  kings  who  followed 
Alexander,  Seleucus,  Ptolemy,  and  the  rest  had  regular 
state  coinages  uniform  through  their  dominions;  and  the 
mint-cities  where  the  coins  were  struck  are  indicated  on 
the  coins  at  most  by  a  few  letters,  a  monogram,  or  a  small 
subsidiary  device.     At  that  time  the  appearance  of  a  civic 


42  INTRODUCTION 

coinage  bearing  the  name  of  a  city  at  length  is  important, 
indicating  some  survival  of  autonomy,  or  grant  of  autonomy 
by  a  king.  This,  however,  is  a  matter  which  lies  outside 
the  scope  of  the  present  work,  though  it  would  well  repay 
investigation. 


VIII.     Monetary  Alliances. 

Confederacies  of  cities  in  earlier  Greece,  and  the  federal 
unions  of  later  Greece,  such  as  the  Achaean  and  Aetolian 
Leagues,  naturally  affected  or  even  brought  to  an  end  the 
autonomous  issues  of  coins.  The  early  confederacies  were 
of  various  degrees  of  closeness,  varying  from  a  mere  mone- 
tary convention  to  a  close  political  alliance ;  and  this  variety 
is  reflected  in  the  issues  of  coins. 

Sometimes  groups  of  cities  merely  had  an  understanding 
in  regard  to  the  weights  of  their  coins  and  the  fabric.  Such 
uniformities  do  not  necessarily  prove  any  close  political 
relations,  though,  of  course,  they  do  not  disprove  it.  Two 
good  examples  in  the  time  before  the  invasion  of  Xerxes  are 
to  be  found  among  the  cities  of  Magna  Graecia  and  the 
Ionian  cities  of  Asia. 

A  number  of  the  Hellenic  foundations  in  South  Italy 
adopted  at  the  time  when  they  first  issued  coins,  about  the 
middle  of  the  sixth  century,  an  identical  standard  and 
fabric.  These  issues  I  consider  in  more  detail  in  Chapter  XI. 
The  standard  is  that  of  Corinth,  with  a  stater  of  130  grains 
(grm.  8-42)  and  a  drachm  of  43  grains  (grm.  2-80).  The  fabric 
is  notable  as  presenting  on  the  obverse  the  ordinary  civic 
device  of  the  issuing  city,  on  the  reverse  the  same  type 
incuse.  How  far  these  cities  had  a  political  union  is  a 
question  of  much  controversy ;  but  that  it  was  in  any  case 
not  at  all  close  is  shown  by  the  further  fact  that  we  have 
coins  belonging  to  the  class  which  testify  to  a  closer  alliance 
within  the  group  of  several  pairs  of  cities,  Siris  and  Pyxus, ; 
Croton  and  Sybaris,  Sybaris  and  Poseidonia,  and  the  like. 
These  alliances  would  seem  to  have  been  of  short  duration, 


MONETARY  ALLIANCES  43 

and  were  probably  entered  into  for  special  reasons,  as  when 
Croton  and  Sybaris  united  for  the  conquest  of  Siris. 

The  alliance  of  the  Ionian  cities  against  Persia  in  the 

ovement  called  the  Ionian  Revolt  was  certainly  closer, 

ce  these  cities  had  a  common  fleet,  and  Herodotus  ex- 
pressly applies  the  term  crv \i\iayia  to  their  confederation. 
They  also  struck  coins  of  uniform  weight  and  identical 
fabric  (see  Chapter  III),  while  retaining  the  civic  types. 

"When  we  find  at  Himera  in  Sicily,  in  the  early  fifth 
century,  the  crab,  the  civic  type  of  Agrigentum,  on  the 
reverse  of  the  coins  which  bear  on  the  obverse  the  ordinary 
Himeraean  type,1  the  cock,  we  cannot  hesitate  to  regard  this 
innovation  as  a  memorial  of  the  domination  at  Himera,  in 
480-472  b.  c,  of  Theron,  the  ruler  of  Agrigentum.  Such 
cases  are  not  rare,  and  indeed  they  furnish  us  with  one  of 
our  most  trustworthy  indications  for  the  dating  of  coins. 

A  close  alliance  of  cities  is  definitely  indicated  when  the 
coins,  in  addition  to  identity  of  coin-standard,  bear  a  common 
type  or  the  legend  Xvfina\iKov. 

The  term  ZvufiaxiKov  is  found  in  the  case  of  two  im- 
portant series  of  coins.  After  Conon's  victory  over  the 
Lacedaemonians  at  Cnidus  in  394  b.  c,  a  league  was  estab- 
lished, no  doubt  for  mutual  defence,  by  some  cities  of  Ionia 
which  threw  off  the  Spartan  yoke.  (See  Chap.  XVI.)  These 
cities  placed  on  the  reverse  of  their  coins  the  letters  £YN 
and  the  type  of  young  Heracles  strangling  the  serpents, 
which  seems  to  have  been  adopted  from  the  coinage  of 
Thebes,  at  that  time  the  most  prominent  enemy  of  Sparta. 
The}-  also  adopted  a  new  monetary  standard.  When 
Timoleon,  about  340  b.  c,  was  occupied  in  the  liberation  of 
the  cities  of  Sicily  from  Carthaginian  domination,  several 
of  those  cities  adopted  on  their  coins  the  legend  Xvnixa\iK6v ; 
and  these  coins,  largely  of  bronze,  are  of  uniform  size 
and  fabric. 

A  still  closer  union  is  indicated  by  the  coinages  of  the 
cities  which  composed  the  Leagues  of  later  Greece.  These 
belong  mostly  to  Macedonian  times,  but  some  are  earlier. 

1  Head,  H.  N.,  p.  144. 


44  INTRODUCTION 

As  early  as  the  sixth,  century  the  cities  of  Phocis  and  of 
Boeotia,  respectively,  struck  money  of  federal  type — that  of 
Phocis  bears  the  name  only  of  the  district,  $0  or  <t>OKI. 
That  of  the  Boeotian  towns  has  an  identical  type,  the 
Boeotian  shield ;  but  the  initial  of  the  striking  city  is 
usually  introduced  on  obverse  or  reverse,  A  for  Acraephia, 
0  for  Haliartus,  ©  for  Thebes,  T  for  Tanagra,  and  so  on. 
The  Chalcidian  League  in  Macedon,  of  which  Olynthus  was 
the  chief  city,  issued  early  in  the  fourth  century  very 
beautiful  coins  bearing  the  legend  Xa\Ki.8{a>v.  And  the 
Achaeans  seem,  even  before  the  formation  of  the  later 
league  about  280  b.  c,  to  have  struck  money  with  the 
legend  'A^aicov.1 

From  these  alliances  and  confederations  which  had  a 
political  bearing  we  must  distinguish  others  which  appear 
to  have  been  merely  commercial.  These  may  have  been 
common,  but  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  establish  their  existence 
only  on  the  evidence  of  the  coins.  Fortunately  one  inscrip- 
tion has  survived  which  gives  us  the  particulars  of  a  purely 
commercial  monetary  agreement.  In  the  latter  part  of  the 
fifth  century  Phocaea  and  Mytilene  agreed  to  issue  in  alter- 
nate years  hectae  of  electrum  of  identical  weight  and  alloy.5 
It  is  stipulated  that  the  coins  shall  circulate  indiscriminately 
at  the  two  cities.  Any  degradation  of  weight  or  fineness  is 
to  be  punished  by  the  death  of  the  moneyer  who  is  re- 
sponsible. "We  possess  a  great  series  of  these  coins,  proving 
their  wide  circulation. 

That  similar  conventions  existed  in  regard  to  the  issue  o: 
the  electrum  staters  of  Cyzicus,  Lampsacus,  and  other  cities 
is  clear ;  but  the  documents  have  unfortunately  disappeared,  j 

IX.     Mother-city  and  Colony. 

A  special  case  of  the  dominance  of  one  city  over  anothe:  i 
in  the  matter  of  coinage  is  that  of  mother-city  and  colony  J 
And  here  it  seems  that  a  few  observed  rules  can  be  laid 
down  with  some  confidence. 

1  Head,  H.  N.,  p.  416. 

2  Hicks  and  Hill,  Greek  hist,  inscr.,  p.  181. 


MOTHER-CITY  AND  COLONY  45 

Already  in  my  Types  of  Greek  Coins  (1883)  I  had  reached 
iews  on  this  subject  which  still  seem  to  me  valid 1 : 

*  Coin-types  and  coin-weights  are  the  two  matters  in 
irhich  we  may  look  for  signs  of  connexion  between  mother- 
ity  and  colony.  But  the  connexion  which  is  indicated  by 
dentity  of  type  considerably  differs  from  that  indicated 
)y  identity  of  monetary  standard.  When  a  colony  keeps 
he  types  of  its  mother-city  it  thereby  attaches  itself  to  the 
leities  of  its  home  and  their  temples.  On  the  other  hand, 
)y  retaining  the  monetary  system  of  the  mother-city,  the 
jolony  merely  shows  that  it  remains  in  close  commercial 
ntercourse  with  her,  and  is  one  of  the  depots  of  her  trade.' 

In  the  case  of  colonies  founded  before  the  invention  of 
coinage,  very  few  examples  can  be  found  in  which  a  colony 
las  the  same  types  as  the  mother-city.  Naxos,  the  earliest 
df  the  Greek  colonies  in  Sicily,  seems  to  be  an  exception, 
since  it  was  founded  before  coins  came  into  use  in  Greece ; 
md  yet  the  type  which  it  presents,  the  head  of  Dionysus, 
must  be  derived  from  that  island  of  Naxos  from  which  the 
ity  took  its  name,  and  which  was  specially  devoted  to  the 
God  of  wine.  The  coins  of  the  island  of  Naxos  also  have 
Dionysiac  types ;  but  it  is  not  from  them  but  from  some 
religious  connexion  that  the  Sicilian  city  takes  its  types. 
Croton  also  was  founded  before  the  Achaean  mother-cities 
had  any  coins.  Its  type,  the  tripod,  connects  it  with  Delphi 
and  Apollo,  and  we  observe  that  the  city  was  founded  at 
the  immediate  prompting  of  Delphi. 

But  such  cases  are  quite  exceptional.  The  Chalcidian 
and  Achaean  colonies  in  Italy  and  Sicily,  and  the  Aeolic 
and  Ionic  cities  of  the  Asiatic  coast,  usually  took  types 
referring  rather  to  deities  whom  they  found  in  possession 
of  the  sites  which  they  occupied  than  to  the  gods  of  the 
mother-city.  The  types  of  the  coins  founded  by  Chalcis  in 
Macedonian  Chalcidice  seem  to  have  no  relation  to  Euboea. 
If  in  many  cases  in  the  fifth  and  later  centuries  the  deities 
of  the  founding  city  appear  on  the  coins  of  the  colony,  as 
the  head  of  Apollo  at  the  Delphic  colony  of  Rhegium,  it 

1  Types,  p.  36. 


46  INTRODUCTION 


need  not  imply  any  political  influence  on  the  part  of  the 
metropolis,  but  rather  a  religious  veneration. 

The  case  is  somewhat  different  when  at  the  time  of  the 
founding  of  the  colony  the  mother-city  already  possessed 
a  coinage.  The  classical  example  is  Abdera,  which  was 
founded  by  the  people  of  Teos  in  Ionia  about  544  b.  c,  when 
they  were  flying  from  the  conquering  Persians.  Teos 
already  possessed  a  silver  coinage  bearing  the  type  of  the 
griffin,  which  was  probably  Apolline.  This  type  the 
colonists  took  with  them,  and  kept  on  their  money.  In 
fact,  if  they  had  not,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  changed  the 
standard  on  which  the  money  was  minted,  it  would  be  no 
easy  matter  to  distinguish  the  coins  of  Abdera  from  those 
of  Teos.  A  notable  instance  of  the  carrying  of  a  type  from 
Ionia  to  the  "West  is  to  be  found  at  Velia  or  Hyele  in  Italy, 
a  city  founded  by  the  people  of  Phocaea  in  Ionia,  when 
they  fled  from  the  Persian  conquerors  of  Asia  Minor. 
An  usual  type  at  Hyele  is  a  lion  tearing  the  prey,  which  is 
certainly  a  Phocaean  coin-type.  Somewhat  later,  after  the 
failure  of  the  Ionian  revolt,  a  body  of  Samians  fled  to  the 
straits  between  Italy  and  Sicily,  being  invited  by  Anaxilaus, 
Tyrant  of  Rhegium.  How  they  fared  there  and  what  they 
founded  is  hard  to  make  out,  as  the  accounts  of  the  ancient 
historians  are  contradictory.1  But  it  cannot  be  a  mere 
coincidence  that  at  just  this  period  there  appear  upon  the 
coins  of  Rhegium  and  the  neighbouring  Zancle  quite  new 
types,  a  lion's  scalp  and  a  calf  s  head,  which  seem  certainly 
derived  from  the  coinage  of  Samos. 

Another  example  may  be  found  in  the  case  of  Thurium, 
a  colony  established  on  the  site  of  Sybaris  by  Athens  in  the 
time  of  Pericles.  The  new  city  combined  on  its  money 
the  head  of  Athena  of  Athens  with  the  bull  (probably 
Poseidonian)  which  had  been  the  old  type  of  Sybaris. 

Some  of  the  colonies  of  Corinth,  notably  Leucas  and 
Anactorium  in  Acarnania,  struck  from  their  first  foundation 
(not  before  the  sixth  century)  coins  bearing  the  types  of  j 
the  mother-city ;  in  fact  differing  from  the  coins  of  Corinth 

1  See  a  paper  by  Mr.  Dodd  in  Journ.  Hell.  Stud.,  1908,  p.  56. 


MOTHER-CITY  AND  COLONY  47 

Inly  in  inscription.  In  the  same  way  the  Corcyrean 
:  olonies,  Apollonia  and  Dyrrhachinm,  struck  coins  only 
Afferent  from  those  of  Corcyra  in  inscription.  Corcyra 
.erself,  it  must  be  observed,  had  been  founded  by  Corinth 
•efore  that  city  had  any  coins,  and,  according  to  the  rule  we 
lave  already  mentioned,  the  types  are  purely  local,  not 
Corinthian.  Nor  does  Syracuse,  the  other  great  colony  of 
Corinth,  use  during  the  fifth  century  the  types  of  Corinth, 
>ut  such  as  were  connected  with  the  worship  of  Persephone 
,nd  Arethusa. 

TVhen  we  come  to  the  relationship  of  the  weight  or 
tandard  in  coinage  between  mother-city  and  colony,  we 
tannot  in  the  same  way  draw  a  line  at  the  existence  or 
ion-existence  of  coin  in  the  founding-city  at  the  time  of 
he  foundation.  For,  of  course,  before  actual  coin  was 
-truck  every  city  had  a  recognized  monetary  standard 
iccording  to  which  the  precious  metals  were  weighed. 
Presumably  the  colony  would  under  ordinary  circumstances 
ake  it  to  the  new  home.  But  it  seems  that  it  was  not 
ong  retained  if  the  colony  found  itself  in  new  trade 
surroundings  which  made  a  change  of  standard  expedient. 

Here  again  Abdera  and  Teos  offer  us  a  striking  example, 
rhe  standard  used  at  Teos  in  the  sixth  century  was  the 
A.eginetan,  at  that  time  universally  used  in  the  Cyclades, 
is  well  as  in  Caria,  but  by  scarcely  any  of  the  Ionian 
cities.  Abdera  from  the  first  did  not  continue  to  use  this 
standard,  but  adopted  instead  a  variety  of  the  standard  of 
Phoenicia,  midway  between  the  standard  used  by  Chios  in 
Northern  Ionia  and  that  used  by  Miletus,  Samos,  and 
Ephesus  in  Southern  Ionia.  The  facts  are  in  this  case 
clear  and  decided,  but  the  reasons  which  caused  the  people 
of  Abdera  to  take  the  particular  line  which  they  did  take 
are  anything  but  clear.  At  the  time  only  the  cities  of 
Chalcidice  and  the  island  of  Thasos,  in  the  whole  stretch  of 
the  coast  of  Thrace,  struck  coins,  and  in  neither  of  these 
places  was  the  standard  which  the  Abderites  adopted  in 
use.     This  matter  will  be  further  considered  in  Chapter  X. 

At  the  same  time  that  the  people  of  Teos  migrated  to 


48  INTRODUCTION 


Thrace,  those  of  Phocaea  sailed  for  the  far  West,  and  after 
many  adventures  came  to  stay  at  Massilia  in  Gaul  and 
Velia  (Hyele)  in  Italy.  They  took  with  them  the  Phocaean 
weight  standard,  stater,  256  grains  (grm.  16-6),  which  hitherto 
had  been  little  used  except  for  electrum.  A  few  silver 
coins  seem  to  have  been  struck  at  Phocaea  in  the  early 
part  of  the  sixth  century  on  the^Aeginetan  standard,  and 
apparently  also  a  few  on  the  Phocaean  standard.  The 
money  used  by  the  Phocaean  colonists  has  been  found  in  a 
great  hoard  at  Auriol  in  France,  as  well  as  in  Italy. 

The  colonists  from  Euboea  who  settled  in  Chalcidice  in 
Macedonia  naturally  took  with  them  the  Euboic  standard, 
according  to  which  their  silver  was  struck  :  it  bears  in  its 
types  no  traces  of  the  influence  of  Chalcis.  But  it  is  shown 
in  the  present  work1  that  the  inhabitants  of  Chalcidice, 
possibly  as  a  result  of  the  influence  of  Potidaea,  a  colony 
of  Corinth  which  was  in  their  midst,  divided  their  staters 
by  three,  on  the  Corinthian,  not  by  two,  on  the  Euboic 
plan.  The  small  coins  which  they  struck  belong  to  a 
system  in  which  the  unit  or  drachm  weighs  45  grains 
(grm.  2-91)  as  at  Corinth,  and  not  67  grains  (grm.  4-34)  as 
at  Athens  and  Euboea. 

The  same  combination  of  the  Attic  or  Euboic  and  the 
Corinthian  standards  took  place  more  evidently  and  on 
a  larger  scale  in  South  Italy  and  Sicily,  as  shown  below.2 

When  the  Athenians  founded  Thurii  in  Italy,  in  the 
time  of  Pericles,  the  coinage  of  Athens  was  not  only  well 
established  but  dominant  in  the  Aegean.  It  is  natural 
that  the  colonists  should  have  adhered  to  the  Attic  standard, 
which  differed  slightly  from  that  of  the  neighbouring  cities 
of  Magna  Graecia,  and  should  have  used  as  their  standard 
coin  the  tetradrachm,  instead  of  the  (debased)  Attic  di- 
drachm  (or  Corinthian  tridrachm),  which  was  the  usual 
currency  in  South  Italy.  The  influence  of  Thurii  caused 
the  neighbouring  city  of  Metapontum  exceptionally  to  issue 
tetradrachms. 

1  Chapter  X.  2  Chapter  XI. 


STANDARD  CURRENCIES  49 

X.    Standard  Currencies. 

The  question  of  the  existence  and  the  exercise  in  cities  of 
the  right  of  coinage  is  evidently  a  very  complicated  one, 
which  underlies  every  page  of  the  history  of  ancient  coins. 
But  equally  difficult  and  even  more  complicated  questions 
arise  from  the  fact  that  often  classes  of  coins  attained  what 
may  be  called  an  international  circulation,  not  from  any 
political  reason  of  overlordship,  but  as  a  mere  matter  of 
convenience  in  trade.  The  trapezitae,  or  money-changers, 
who  had  their  seats  in  the  Greek  market-places,  must  have 
usually  kept  in  stock  certain  kinds  of  specie  generally 
recognized  and  universally  appreciated,  to  form  a  basis  for 
their  trade.  What  these  were  it  is  hard  to  ascertain.  The 
historians  seldom  help  us:  we  have  usually  to  resort  to 
such  evidence  as  the  composition  of  hoards,  or  the  inscrip- 
tions which  are  the  financial  records  of  temples. 

Among  the  most  notable  of  these  cosmopolitan  issues 
were  the  electrum  staters  of  Cyzicus.  We  know,  alike  from 
the  financial  inscriptions  of  Athens  and  from  the  statements 
of  such  writers  as  Xenophon  and  Demosthenes,  that  these 
staters  had  a  wide  circulation  alike  in  Greece  and  in  Asia, 
and  especially  were  used  in  the  Pontic  trade  and  for  the 
payment  of  Greek  mercenaries.  Why  Cyzicus,  a  city  of 
moderate  importance,  should  have  possessed,  and  retained, 
for  at  least  a  century  and  a  half,  a  practical  monopoly  in 
the  issue  of  these  staters  (for  the  staters  of  Lampsacus 
and  Mytilene  are  comparatively  scarce)  we  do  not  know. 
Nor  do  we  know  how  far  Athens  officially  recognized  them. 
The  hectae,  or  sixths  of  an  electrum  stater,  struck  in 
alternate  years  at  Mytilene  and  Phocaea,  seem  also,  from 
their  great  abundance,  to  have  circulated  far  beyond  the 
limits  of  the  cities  which  issued  them. 

As  regards  silver  coin  we  have  a  few  instances  in  which 
we  can  trace  the  dominance  of  widely  circulated  issues. 
The  cities  of  Italy  and  Sicily,  in  the  later  sixth  and  fifth 
centuries,  used  the  coins  of  Athens  and  of  Corinth  in  great 
quantities  as  currency.     This  is  abundantly  proved  by  the 


50  INTRODUCTION 

finds  which  have  been  discovered  in  those  countries.  The 
cities  of  South  Italy,  notably  Metapontum,  sometimes  used 
Corinthian  staters  as  blanks  in  their  mints,  to  be  stamped 
with  the  local  dies.  In  the  fourth  century  we  have  less 
abundant  evidence  of  the  use  in  Italy  and  Sicily  of  the 
Athenian  coins.  But  the  Pegasus  staters  of  Corinth  constitute 
a  considerable  part  of  Sicilian  hoards  at  that  period.  They 
were  imitated  in  all  the  Corinthian  colonies  of  Epirus  and 
Acarnania,  and  even  in  cities  such  as  Leontini  and  Rhegium, 
which  do  not  seem  to  have  had  political  relations  with 
Corinth,  and  which  must  have  adopted  the  types  of  Corinth 
merely  because  Corinthian  money  was  the  most  ordinary 
currency  in  their  districts. 

At  a  later  time  the  coins  of  Rhodes  seem  to  have  attained 
wide  recognition.  And  later  still  the  cistophori,  so  called 
because  they  bear  as  type  a  Dionysiac  cista  or  chest,  issued 
by  Greek  cities  in  the  domains  of  the  kings  of  Pergamon 
and  in  the  Roman  Province  of  Asia,  were  the  main  currency 
of  Asia  Minor,  as  we  may  see  from  the  enormous  quantities 
of  them  carried  in  the  triumphal  procession  of  the  con- 
querors of  Antiochus  III  of  Syria.  They  seem  to  have  been 
first  struck  at  Ephesus. 

In  a  valuable  paper  contributed  to  the  Memoires  of  the 
French  Academic  des  Inscriptions1  M.  Theodore  Reinach 
has  put  together  such  extant  texts  and  inscriptions  as  give 
some  light  on  the  difficult  question  of  the  exchange  of  coins 
in  the  market.  The  comic  poet  Diphilus,  describing  the 
ways  of  the  Athenian  fish-market,2  says  that  the  dealers  in 
fish,  if  the  price  were  fixed  in  oboli,  were  apt  to  demand 
Aeginetan  oboli ;  but  if  they  had  to  give  change,  gave  it  in 
Attic  oboli,  the  Attic  obolus  being  little  more  than  two- 
thirds  of  the  value  of  the  Aeginetan.  "We  have  evidence 
that  at  Delphi  at  one  time  in  the  fourth  century  Attic 
money  passed  at  a  premium  of  5  per  cent. :  at  Tenos  in  the 
second  century  Rhodian  silver  commanded  the  same  pre- 


1  Memoires,  1911,  p.  851.     V Anarchie  monetaire. 

2  Keil,  Fragm.  com.,  ii.  563  ;  fragment  66. 


STANDARD  CURRENCIES  51 

mium.  And  we  have  a  decree  of  the  Amphictyons,  of  about 
95  b.  c,  ordering  that  the  Athenian  tetradrachms  are  to  be 
accepted  throughout  Greece  as  legal  tender. 

The  Treasurers  of  Delphi  in  the  fourth  century,  having 
frequent  dealings  with  coins  of  both  Attic  and  Aeginetan 
standard,  established  a  convention  that  the  Attic  mina, 
which  contained,  of  course,  100  Attic  drachms,  should  be 
regarded  also  as  equivalent  to  70  Aeginetan  drachms.1  This 
valuation  closely  conforms  to  the  actual  weights  of  the  re- 
spective issues,  and  therefore  we  are  not  surprised  to  find 
that  it  was  recognized  not  only  at  Delphi  but  in  other 
places.  Reinach  has  shown  that  it  was  accepted  also  at 
Orchomenus  in  Arcadia,  at  Gortyna  in  Crete,  and  at  Epi- 
daurus  in  Argolis.  At  an  earlier  time  a  similar  valuation 
lies  at  the  basis  of  the  Solonian  reform  of  the  Attic  coinage  ; 
in  fact  it  seems  to  have  been  generally  accepted,  much  as 
the  equation  of  an  English  sovereign  with  twenty-five 
francs  is  accepted  in  Latin  countries  now. 

Thucydides  -  tells  us  that  when  troops  were  raised  by  the 
Confederacy  formed  against  Sparta  by  Corinth  and  Argos  in 
421  b.c.  it  was  stipulated  by  treaty  that  the  foot-soldiers 
should  receive  half  an  Aeginetan  drachm  a  day,  and  the  horse- 
soldiers  a  drachm :  in  Attic  money  this  would  have  been 
equivalent  to  four  and  eight  obols  respectively;  in  Corinthian 
money  to  a  drachm  and  two  drachms  respectively,  or  a  little 
more. 

Proof  of  the  international  acceptance  of  a  class  of  coins  is 

to  be  found  if  there  exist  in  its  case  barbarous  imitations. 

Of  the  coins  of  Athens  such  imitations  are  common,  especially 

^  in  three  periods — first,  at  the  time  of  the  Persian  invasion 

(probably  struck  by  the  Persians) ;  secondly,  in  the  time  of 

Alexander  the  Great ;  thirdly,  in  the  later  age  when  the 

!  coinage  came  to  a  final  end  at  Athens,  and  the  trading 

;  tribes  of  Arabia,  used  to  that  currency,  issued  curious  imita- 

M  tions  of  it  to  fill  the  gap.3    The  gold  coins  of  Philip  of 

1  T.  Reinach,  L'Histoire  par  les  monnaUs,  p.  100.  *  v.  47. 

s  See  Numismatic  Chronicle,  1878,  p.  273  ;  also  a  paper  by  Mr.  Hill  in  the 
Proceedings  of  the  British  Academy  for  1915. 

E   2 


52  INTRODUCTION 

Macedon  were  imitated  from  tribe  to  tribe  across  Europe, 
even  to  remote  Britain.  And  the  silver  coins  of  Alexander 
were  copied,  not  only  by  remoter  peoples  of  Asia,  but  also  by 
the  Greek  cities  of  the  Ionian  coast  when,  after  the  victory 
of  the  Romans  at  Magnesia,  they  were  free  from  the 
dominion  of  Antiochus  III.  Such  imitation  was  sincere 
flattery,  proving  the  reputation  of  the  coins  copied. 

XI.     Monometallism  and  Bimetallism. 

Two  plans  are  possible  for  a  government  which  strikes 
both  gold  and  silver  coins.  The  one  plan  is  monometallic ; 
one  of  the  two  metals  is  made  the  official  standard,  the  legal 
tender;  and  the  other  metal  is  used  only  in  a  subsidiary 
way  in  relation  to  it.  England  is  monometallic  ;  gold  is 
the  legal  tender,  and  silver  is  only  used  in  subordination  to 
it  for  payments  of  small  amount.  The  English  shilling  is 
not  really  worth  a  twentieth  of  the  sovereign ;  it  is  a  money 
of  account.  India  is  monometallic;  the  silver  rupee  is  the 
standard  coin,  and  gold  is  only  a  matter  of  commerce. 

The  other  plan  is  bimetallic.  Two  metals,  usually  gold 
and  silver,  are  both  made  legal  tender ;  and  a  fixed  relation 
between  their  values  is  fixed  by  law.  A  man  who  has  to  pay 
a  debt  may  pay  it  in  coins  of  either  metal.  France  before 
1872  was  bimetallic,  the  proportionate  value  between  gold 
and  silver  being  fixed  at  15^  to  1. 

Both  the  monometallic  and  the  bimetallic  systems  are 
found  in  modern  days  to  have  great  disadvantages  in  conse- 
quence of  the  fluctuating  value  of  gold  and  silver.  But  no 
remedy  for  this  has  yet  been  found. 

In  ancient  times  commerce  was  less  active  than  with  us, 
and  custom  and  convention  were  far  more  powerful,  so  that 
the  troubles  arising  from  the  monometallic  and  the  bi- 
metallic systems  were  less  serious.  Both  systems  were  in 
use  at  various  times  and  places. 

"When  coinage  began  in  Asia, bimetallism  was  in  possession ; 
and  it  held  its  ground  in  Asia  as  long  as  the  Persian  empire 
existed.     The  daric  and  the  shekel  were  both  of  a  weight 


MONOMETALLISM  AND  BIMETALLISM        53 

which  did  not  vary,  and  one  daric  passed  as  of  the  value  of 
twenty  shekels.  Whether  the  shekel  was  accepted  in  large 
payments  we  do  not  know.  On  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor  the 
relations  between  silver  and  electrum,  the  electrum  being 
ten  times  the  value  of  silver,  appear  to  have  persisted,  at  all 
events  until  the  time  of  Croesus. 

In  Greece  Proper,  on  the  other  hand,  from  the  time  when 
silver  coins  superseded  the  ancient  bars  of  bronze,  that  is 
from  the  seventh  century  b.  c,  those  coins  were  the  standard 
of  value,  and  gold  and  electrum  coins  passed  only  as  metal 
of  fixed  weight.  Whereas  Asia  was  bimetallist,  Greece  was 
monometallist.  No  gold  coins  of  any  importance  were 
struck  in  the  West  until  the  fall  of  Athens,  which  city  had 
strongly  adhered  to  the  use  of  silver,  and  promoted  its 
dominance. 

Some  writers  have  been  disposed  to  find  traces  of  bi- 
metallism in  Greece.  For  example,  Ridgeway  has  suggested 
that  the  early  coins  of  Aegina  in  silver  were  originally  in- 
tended to  pass  at  the  rate  of  ten  staters  (1,950  grains)  for 
one  gold  shekel  of  130  grains,  giving  a  ratio  of  15  to  1  for  the 
proportionate  value  of  gold  to  silver.  This  view  I  have 
decidedly  rejected  (see  Chapter  V)  on  the  ground  that  the 
gold  shekel  (daric)  was  purely  xjjsiatic  and  had  no  dominance 
in  Greece  Proper.  A  more  plausible  suggestion  is  that  we 
may  trace  in  the  changes  of  monetary  standard  at  Abdera 
:  in  Thrace  in  the  fifth  century  an  attempt  at  bimetallism, 
a  purpose  so  to  regulate  the  weight  of  the  silver  staters  of 
the  city,  that  a  round  number  of  them  should  be  equivalent 
to  a  daric,  or  two  darics.  This  view  has  at  first  sight  some 
plausibility,  as  numismatically  Thrace  belonged,  at  all  events 
before  the  Persian  wars,  rather  to  Asia  than  to  Europe. 
Even  Mr.  Head  was  half  converted  to  the  view.  I  have 
below  (in  Chapter  XIV)  carefully  considered  it,  but  it  does 
not  bear  examination.  The  Thracian  coast  was  a  source  of 
gold,  as  Herodotus  was  aware ; 1  but  what  became  of  the 
gold  is  quite  unknown.  It  was  certainly  not  minted  into 
coin  at  Athens  or  at  Thasos.     It  may  have  passed  in  the 

1  Hdt.  vi.  46,  47. 


54  INTRODUCTION 

form  of  bars  of  bullion,  or  possibly  it  may  have  been  used 
for  the  issues  of  electrum  coins  at  Cyzicus  and  Lampsacus. 
In  any  case  it  is  clear  that  the  daric  exercised  no  influence 
on  the  coinage  of  Hellas,  and  that  it  had  no  fixed  value  at 
places  like  Athens  and  Corinth.  When  the  authorities  at 
Athens  wanted  gold  for  the  adornment  of  their  Goddess,  or 
for  any  other  purpose,  they  bought  it  with  silver  like  any 
other  merchandize. 

What  is  still  more  remarkable  is  that  the  silver  coinage 
of  cities  of  Asia  sometimes  followed  the  Aeginetan  or  the 
Attic  standard,  and  had  no  relation,  so  far  as  we  can  judge, 
to  the  value  of  the  daric.  We  can,  in  a  measure,  trace  the 
respective  supremacies  of  Persia  and  Athens  in  Asia  Minor 
in  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries  by  the  predominance  in 
the  coinages  of  cities  and  districts  of  the  Persian  daric  or 
the  Athenian  silver  stater.  How  devoted  the  Athenians 
were  to  their  silver,  and  how  completely  it  excluded  other 
metals  may  be  judged  from  Xenophon's  work  on  the 
Revenues  of  Athens.1  He  regards  it  as  the  first  duty  of  the 
city  to  exploit  the  mines  of  Laurium,  considering  silver  as 
the  only  commodity  of  which  one  can  never  have  enough. 
Even  gold  and  copper,  he  thinks,  may  be  superabundant, 
but  silver  never. 

The  silver  coin  issued  by  the  cities  of  Greece  was  ex- 
tremely pure,  even  the  small  amount  of  alloy  was  probably 
accidental.  In  the  paper  of  J.  Hammer  already  referred  to 
there  are  tables  of  the  proportion  of  alloy  in  the  silver  coins 
of  various  cities.  Only  two  or  three  cities,  Mytilene,  Phocaea, 
and  Cyzicus,  for  example,  which  had  been  in  the  habit  of 
issuing  electrum  coins,  struck  in  the  sixth  century  billon 
coins,  containing  about  40  per  cent,  of  silver,  and  so  bearing 
to  pure  silver  coins  the  same  relation  which  electrum  coins 
bore  to  pure  gold. 

The  reasons  for  the  purity  of  the  coin  are  obvious. 
Generally  speaking,  the  Greek  cities  had  no  way  for  pro- 
curing acceptance  of  their  coins  beyond  the  limits  of  the 
city,  save  by  making  it  good,  though  perhaps  beauty  might 

1  Chapter  IV. 


MONOMETALLISM  AND  BIMETALLISM         55 

help.  In  later  days,  under  the  rule  of  Greek  and  Parthian 
kings,  and  in  the  days  of  the  Romans,  those  in  authority 
tried,  like  the  rulers  in  the  Middle  Ages,  to  force  base  coin 
into  circulation.  It  is  to  the  credit  of  the  Athenians  that, 
even  in  the  days  of  their  somewhat  tyrannical  empire,  they 
made  no  such  attempt,  but  preserved  intact  the  high 
reputation  of  their  money. 

When  coins  of  gold  and  silver  were  struck  at  one  time  in 
a  city,  the  normal  rates  of  the  two  metals  would  naturally 
govern  their  weights.  We  can  scarcely  suppose  that  the 
gold  coins  would  belong  to  one  commercial  system  and  the 
silver  coins  to  another,  and  that  there  would  be  no  easy 
relation  between  them.  To  this  question  we  shall  return  on 
occasion  in  future  chapters. 

But  in  the  business  of  the  money-changers,  no  doubt, 
there  would  usually  be  an  agio.  Coins  in  demand,  because 
of  their  purity  and  wide  acceptance,  would  command  a 
premium.  Some  examples  of  the  practical  preference  for 
certain  kinds  of  coin  are  given  above.  The  agio  might 
greatly  vary  in  different  districts  owing  to  the  difficulty 
and  risk  of  conveying  gold  and  silver  from  one  place  to 
another.  This  held  also  in  more  modern  days  in  a  measure ; 
but  when  the  Mediterranean  Sea  was  bordered  by  nests  of 
pirates,  and  sea-voyage  was  attended  by  many  risks,  the 
difficulty  of  conveying  coin  might  cause  a  great  temporary 
appreciation  or  depreciation  of  particular  kinds  of  money. 

A  fact  which  has  caused  great  perplexity  to  modern 
writers  is  that  there  is  great  inexactness  in  the  weight  of 
the  gold  and  silver  coins  of  the  Greek  cities.  It  is  true  that 
the  divergency  may  be  partly  accounted  for  by  changes 
wrought  by  time,  by  the  oxidation  which  silver  undergoes 
when  buried  in  the  earth.  But  when  a  number  of  silver 
coins  are  found  together  in  exactly  the  same  state  of  pre- 
servation, these  variations  in  weight  still  exist.  And  they 
even  exist,  though  in  a  lesser  degree,  in  the  case  of  gold 
coins  which  are  not  liable  to  oxidation. 

It  is  probable  that  the  ancient  money ers  were  more 
successful  in  striking  so  many  coins  to  the  pound  weight 


56  INTRODUCTION 

than  in  keeping  their  blanks  all  of  one  size.  The  process 
of  forming  these  blanks  was  a  rough  one,  and  did  not  lend 
itself  to  exactness,  so  that  silver  coins  struck  at  the  same 
place  and  time  may  vary  in  weight  as  much  as  a  quarter  of 
a  gramme  (four  grains),  or  even  more.  Gold  coins  or  silver 
issues  of  the  standard  types,  such  as  the  staters  of  Athens  or 
of  Alexander,  vary  less ;  but  even  these  show  an  extra- 
ordinary variety,  from  the  modern  point  of  view.  We  find 
it  hard  to  understand  how  a  gold  coin  of  130  grains  and 
a  gold  coin  of  135  grains  can  have  passed,  when  struck  at 
the  same  time  and  mint,  as  of  identical  value ;  and  we  are 
disposed  to  suspect  that  the  scales  were  commonly  in  use, 
and  light  coins  taken  only  at  a  discount.  But  we  must  not 
project  our  strict  commercial  notions  into  antiquity.  It  is 
more  likely  that  coins  of  recognized  classes  passed  as  if  of 
standard  weight,  even  when  they  were  short  of  it.  As  we 
have  seen,  there  is  a  far  greater  difficulty  of  the  same  kind 
attaching  to  the  general  use  of  electrum  coins,  which  differed 
in  intrinsic  value  in  a  remarkable  degree. 

In  Sicily,  and  in  some  cities  of  Italy,  there  was  in  the 
fifth  century  some  attempt  at  a  double  standard  of  silver 
and  bronze.  At  Syracuse,  for  example,  the  silver  litra, 
weighing  13-5  grains (grm. 0-87),  was  struck  as  the  equivalent 
of  a  pound  of  bronze.  And  this  silver  coin  remained  for 
centuries  the  basis  of  the  Syracusan  coinage,  being  the  tenth 
part  of  the  Corinthian  silver  stater,  and  the  twentieth  part  of 
the  Syracusan  tetradrachm.  "Whether  a  parallel  currency  in 
actual  litrae  of  bronze  was  in  use  we  do  not  know :  the  bronze 
coins  of  Sicily  bearing  marks  of  value  diminish  rapidly  in 
weight,  and  evidently  passed  only  as  money  of  account. 
(See  Chapter  XX.) 

XII.     The  Dating  of  Greek  Coins. 

I  have  already  in  my  Types  of  Greek  Coins  (1883)  de- 
scribed the  way  in  which  numismatists  proceed  in  order  to 
arrange  the  coins  of  any  Greek  city  in  chronological  order. 
A  consideration  of  the  style  of  the  coins  is,  of  course,  funda- 


THE  DATING  OF  GREEK  COINS  57 

mental ;  and  their  weights  and  the  composition  of  hoards 
in  which  they  are  found  are  of  importance.  But  our  chief 
reliance  must  always  be  on  the  fixing  on  historic  grounds 
of  the  dates  of  certain  issues,  and  thus  gaining  fixed  points 
whence  we  may  work  upwards  and  downwards  in  the  series. 
For  example,  the  archaic  decadrachm  of  Syracuse  struck  by 
Gelon  in  479  B.C.,  and  named  after  his  wife  Damarete, 
furnishes  us  with  a  fixed  point  in  the  coinage  of  Syracuse : 
we  may  fairly  suppose  that  the  pieces  of  earlier  style  at 
Syracuse  may  be  dated  before  480,  and  the  pieces  of  later 
style  after  478.  In  the  same  way,  when  we  find  the  name 
Simos  on  a  coin  of  Larissa  in  Thessaly,1  and  with  reason 
identify  the  name  as  that  of  one  of  the  four  tetrarchs  set  up 
by  Philip  of  Macedon  in  Thessaly  ,352-344  B.C.,  we  may  regard 
this  coin  as  marking  a  fixed  point  in  the  coinage  of  Larissa. 
Or  at  a  later  time,  it  is  reasonable  to  follow  Evans 2  and 
attribute  the  coins  of  Tarentum,  which  bear  the  figure  of  an 
elephant,  to  the  time  of  Pyrrhus  in  Italy,  281-272  b.  c. ;  as 
Pyrrhus  first  brought  the  elephant  into  the  country.  The 
dates  of  the  destruction  of  the  cities  of  Sicily  at  the  time  of 
the  Carthaginian  invasion  of  409-405  give  us  fixed  dates  for 
the  latest  issues  of  such  cities  as  Gela  and  Camarina.  Other 
examples  abound. 

But  in  the  present  work  we  are  endeavouring  to  pass 
beyond  the  arrangement  of  coins  under  separate  cities  to 
their  classification  in  commercial  groups  or  geographical 
districts.  From  this  point  of  view  it  is  most  important  to 
point  out  how  the  arrangement  of  the  coins  of  any  city  in 
chronological  order,  with  definite  points  of  division,  helps 
us  to  arrange  in  the  same  way  the  series  of  all  cities  which 
had  any  connexion  with  it,  either  political,  commercial,  or 
even  artistic.  Thus  the  science  of  numismatics  becomes 
rapidly  progressive,  and  coinage  after  coinage  falls  into  its 
proper  place  and  time. 

To  return  to  an  instance  already  given,  the  Damareteion 
not  only  makes  a  dividing  point  in  the  series  of  coins  of 

1  Brit.  1/ms.  Cat,  Thessalrj,  PI.  VI.  9 :  cf.  ch.  xviii. 

'  Horsemen  of  Tarentum,  p.  136. 


58  INTRODUCTION 

Syracuse,  but  it  also  enables  us  to  divide  the  coins  of 
Leontini.  For  at  Leontini  was  issued  a  tetradrachm,  so 
closely  similar  in  style  to  the  Damareteion  (having  also  the 
same  figure  of  a  lion  in  the  exergue),  that  we  confidently 
give  it  to  exactly  the  same  period,  and  so  gain  a  fresh  fixed 
date  in  another  coinage.  Similarly,  the  occurrence  of 
coins  bearing  the  type  of  young  Heracles  strangling  the 
snakes,  in  several  of  the  cities  of  Asia,  just  after  the  Athenian 
victory  at  Cnidus  in  394  b.  c,  can  be  used  with  great  effect 
as  a  means  of  dating  coins.  Not  only  does  this  issue  of 
money  make  a  clear  dividing  line  in  the  coinages  of  Samos, 
Byzantium,  Ephesus,  and  Cnidus,  but  the  occurrence  of 
a  closely  similar  type  on  the  coins  of  Lampsacus,  and  even  of 
the  distant  Croton,  furnishes  us  with  a  means  for  dating 
some  of  the  issues  of  those  cities  also.  If  one  sets  side  by 
side  Mr.  Head's  scheme  for  the  arrangement  of  the  coins  of 
Ephesus  and  my  own  for  the  arrangement  of  the  money 
of  Samos,1  it  will  be  seen  how  each  of  these  arrangements 
helps  the  other.  Ephesus  appears  not  to  have  issued  coin  at 
all  during  the  period  of  the  first  Athenian  empire :  Samos, 
on  the  other  hand,  continued  its  coinage  all  that  time, 
though  the  conquest  of  Samos  by  Pericles  in  439  has  left 
unmistakable  traces  on  the  coin.  Both  cities  belonged  to 
the  Cnidian  League  (394),  and  accepted  the  Chian  or  Rhodian 
standard  about  that  time.  But  again  Samos  passes  through 
the  crisis  of  a  second  Athenian  conquest,  and  the  issue  of 
money  in  the  island  is  intermitted,  365-322  B.C.,  while 
Ephesus  has  a  continuous  coinage  during  the  fourth  century. 
On  the  other  hand,  while  at  Samos  after  322  there  is  an  un- 
disturbed period  of  coinage,  at  Ephesus  there  is  a  decided 
break  in  the  time  of  Lysimachus  (288-280  b.  c),  who 
renamed  the  city  after  his  wife  Arsinoe  and  changed  both 
the  types  and  the  standard  of  the  coin.  Each  city  has  crises, 
but  they  are  not  usually  the  same  crises ;  so  that  to  arrange 
the  successive  issues  of  the  two  cities  side  by  side  gives  one 


1  Ephesus,  by  B.  V.  Head,  1880  ;  Samos,  by  P.  Gardner,  1882.  Both  originally 
printed  in  the  Numismatic  Chronicle. 


THE  DATING  OF  GREEK  COINS  59 

much    more    information    than    either    city    can   furnish 
separately. 

There  is  no  district  of  the  Greek  world  where  changes 
in  the  coin  standards  were  more  frequent  than  in  Thrace. 
And  there  the  influence  of  city  upon  city  in  their  adoption 
and  abandonment  is  sometimes  clearly  to  be  traced,  but 
more  often  can  only  be  surmised  as  a  probability.  If  the 
cities  of  the  southern  coast  of  Thrace  be  taken  one  by  one, 
the  history  of  their  coinage  is  a  complicated  one,  and  a  clue 
to  the  labyrinth  is  scarcely  to  be  found.  If  they  are  con- 
sidered in  groups  in  connexion  with  the  commercial  history 
of  the  time,  this  history  can,  at  least  in  its  main  outlines,  be 
traced,  and  will  usually  be  found  to  be  not  inexplicable. 
(See  Chapters  X,  XIV,  and  XVI.) 

XIII.       HOAKDS. 

No  more  valuable  evidence  in  regard  to  the  dates  and  the 
circulation  of  coins  can  be  had  than  that  which  is  furnished 
by  finds  or  hoards.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  hoards  of 
coins  have  been  at  all  times  constantly  discovered  in  lands 
which  were  once  Hellenic.  But  in  the  great  majority  of 
cases,  and  in  fact  in  almost  every  case  until  lately,  the  coins 
so  found  were  either  at  once  melted  down  or  divided  among 
the  finders  and  sold  piecemeal.  In  such  cases  the  evidence 
is  of  course  destroyed.  "We  have  now  a  fairly  accurate 
account  of  a  certain  number  of  hoards,  but  the  misfortune  is 
that  the  evidence  which  they  furnish  must  be  used  with 
great  caution.  Such  evidence  is  in  the  nature  of  things 
cumulative  ;  a  series  of  finds  in  a  particular  district  may 
give  us  much  information;  but  each  taken  by  itself  is 
obviously  too  much  the  result  of  chance,  or  rather  of  un- 
known causes,  to  be  much  relied  on. 

It  is  very  natural  that,  when  an  enemy  advanced  into 
a  country,  or  other  danger  impended,  the  inhabitants  should 
bury  their  valuables,  and  especially  their  money.  Fre- 
quently, when  these  inhabitants  were  slain,  or  carried  into 
slavery,  the  hiding-place  was  never  revealed,  and  the  hoards 


60  INTRODUCTION 

remained  underground  to  our  day.  In  a  few  cases,  military 
chests  or  the  capital  of  bankers  have  thus  survived.  But, 
generally  speaking,  finds  consist  of  comparatively  few  coins. 
A  few  examples  may  be  cited. 

Archaic  period.  First  in  importance  and  interest  come 
the  finds  in  Egypt.  No  native  Egyptian  coins  were  issued 
until  the  time  of  the  Ptolemaic  kings.  Gold  and  silver 
seem  usually  to  have  gone  by  weight,  even  after  the  time 
of  the  Persian  conquest,  though  the  Persian  darics  and 
sigli  may  have  circulated  to  some  extent.  At  various  sites 
in  Lower  Egypt  a  quantity  of  archaic  Greek  coins  has  been 
found,  some  of  them  broken  and  some  defaced,  which  were 
almost  certainly  intended  for  the  melting-pot. 

These  coins  are  mostly  scattered  and  isolated  examples 
from  the  mints  of  many  cities  on  the  Aegean  Sea  and  the 
southern  coast  of  Asia  Minor.  At  Myt  Rahineh 1  was  found 
a  treasure  including  coins  of  Lete,  Maroneia,  Corinth,  Naxos, 
Chios,  Cos,  Cyprus,  and  Cyrene.  At  Sakha  was  discovered 
a  deposit,2  including  coins  of  Dieaea,  Lete,  Aegina,  Corinth, 
Naxos,  Paros,  Chios,  Clazomenae,  Ialysus  and  Lindus  in 
Rhodes,  and  Cyrene.  As  with  these  coins  were  found  frag- 
ments and  bars  of  silver,  the  destination  of  this  hoard  for 
the  melting-pot  has  been  conjectured.  The  coins  included 
in  it  belong  to  the  most  usual  currencies  of  the  eastern 
Mediterranean.  A  small  find  of  coins  of  Cyrene  from  near 
Ramleh  emphasizes  the  close  connexion  affirmed  in  historic 
records  between  Egypt  and  Cyrene. 

Another  hoard,  found  in  the  Delta,3  is  very  similar  in 
composition  to  those  above  mentioned.  It  included  a  few 
coins  of  Athens,  and  examples  of  the  coinages  of  Corinth, 
Thasos,  Lete,  Mende,  Miletus,  Chios,  Samos,  Cos,  Cyprus, 
Cyrene,  and  other  places  ;  the  date  being  seldom  later  than 
500  b.  c. 

Some  of  these  coins  are  rough,  and  appear  to  be  barbarous 
imitations.     M.  Babelon4  thinks  that  they  were  made  at 

1  Rev.  Numism.,  1861,  p.  414. 

8  Num.  Chron.,  1899,  p.  269;  Zeitschr.f.  Num.,  1900,  p.  231. 

s  Num.  Chron.,  1890,  p.  1.  *  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  1572. 


HOAEDS  61 

Naucratis  itself;  and  certainly  not  dissimilar  copies  of 
Egyptian  scarabs  were  made  by  the  Greeks  of  Naucratis. 
But  it  does  not  appear  why  the  people  should  have  taken 
the  trouble  to  make  copies  of  coins  only  in  order  that  they 
should  be  melted  down.  Barbarous  work  is  not  unusual  in 
many  series  of  archaic  coins,  and  they  may  often  be  most 
simply  explained  by  the  supposition  that  the  moneyers  at 
the  city  mints  were  often  careless  or  worked  under  pressure. 
At  Athens,  however,  we  seem  to  have  clear  proof  of  imita- 
tion by  the  Persians,  as  will  be  shown  in  its  place. 

The  site  of  Naucratis  has  yielded  a  small  hoard,1  supposed 
to  have  belonged  to  a  silversmith,  buried  about  439  b.  c,  in- 
cluding coins  of  Lycia,  Chios,  Samos,  Aegina,  Athens,  Cyrene, 
and — a  notable  fact — one  of  Syracuse  of  archaic  style.  Of 
the  other  early  coins  found  scattered  on  the  site  the  over- 
whelming majority  (86  out  of  97)  were  tetradrachms  of 
Athens,  struck  mostly  at  the  time  of  the  Athenian  empire, 
when  Athens  almost  monopolized  the  coinage  of  the  Aegean. 
Probably  at  that  time  the  Athenian  money  passed  by  tale 
and  not  by  weight  in  Egypt. 

Near  the  harbour  of  Tarentum  was  found  a  few  years  ago 2 
a  large  jar  containing  about  600  early  Greek  silver  coins, 
together  with  bars  of  silver,  indicating  that  the  whole  was 
intended  for  melting  down.  M.  Babelon  fixes  the  date  of 
burying  at  about  510  b.  c.  The  coins  came  from  almost 
every  part  of  the  Greek  world.  Some  cities  of  Italy  and 
Sicily  were  represented,  Selinus,  Himera,  Metapontum, 
Sybaris,  Croton,  Poseidonia,  Velia ;  but  more  abundant  were 
the  coins  of  Aegina,  Athens,  Eretria,  Potidaea,  Acanthus, 
Lete,  Thasos,  Peparethus,  Carthaea  in  Ceos,  Naxos,  Chios, 
and  other  places.  This  hoard  gives  us  most  valuable  in- 
formation as  to  the  dates  of  the  coins  comprised  in  it ;  but  it 
does  not  give  us  data  as  to  the  course  of  commerce  at 
Tarentum. 

A  celebrated  hoard  is  that  discovered  at  Thera  (Santorin) 


1  Naukratis,  i  (W.  M.  F.  Petrie  and  others),  p.  63. 
*  Rev.  Numism.,  1912, 1.     Babelon. 


62  INTRODUCTION 

in  1821,1  consisting  of  760  coins  of  the  Aegean  Islands  and 
the  coasts  of  Thrace  and  Asia  Minor.  Of  these,  541  were  of 
Aegina,  showing  how  in  the  seventh  and  sixth  centuries 
that  city  dominated  the  coinage  of  the  Aegean.  Among  the 
mints,  Naxos,  Paros,  Siphnos,  and  a  few  others  can  be  identi- 
fied ;  but  the  attribution  of  many  of  the  coins,  in  the  absence 
of  inscriptions,  is  doubtful. 

Another  similar  hoard,  found  about  1889  at  an  undeter- 
mined place,2  included  114  coins  of  Aegina,  and  a  few 
examples  of  Carthaea  in  Ceos,  Paros,  Siphnos,  Chios,  Cos, 
and  some  Ionian  mints. 

The  want  of  inscriptional  evidence  mars  the  value  of 
another  noted  find  made  at  Auriol,  near  Marseilles  in  France.3 
M.  Babelon,  in  describing  the  class  of  hoards,  of  which  this 
is  one,  writes  as  follows :  '  Besides  finds  of  isolated  pieces, 
several  hoards  all  of  one  character  have  come  to  light ;  at 
Velia  in  Lucania,  at  Volterra,  near  Rosas  and  Ampurias  in 
Spain,'  and  other  Spanish  sites.  '  The  examination  in  detail 
of  all  these  hoards  allows  us  to  discover  in  them  two  cate- 
gories of  coins ;  one  class,  generally  broken  and  worn  in 
circulation,  may  be  assigned  to  the  Greek  cities  where  they 
originated ;  the  most  numerous  coins  in  this  category  are 
of  Phocaea  and  Mytilene  in  Lesbos,  from  which  cities  origi- 
nally came  the  Phocaean  settlers  of  the  western  Mediter- 
ranean. The  other  category,  by  far  the  most  considerable, 
is  composed  of  silver  pieces  which  are  imitations  of  those 
already  mentioned,'  and  which  seem  to  have  been  struck  on 
the  spot. 

The  types  of  the  little  coins  composing  these  hoards  are 
very  various ;  and  it  seems  doubtful  whether,  even  when 
they  repeat  the  recognized  types  of  cities  in  Greece  and 
Asia  Minor,  they  really  come  from  those  cities.  "We  may 
compare  a  hoard  of  small  electrum  coins  found  by  Mr.  Hogarth 


1  Num.  Chron.,  1884,  p.  269,    Wroth.     Compare  Brit.  Mus.  Cat,  Crete,  &c, 
p.  xlii. 

8  Num.  Chron.,  1890,  p.  13. 

8  A  full  account  in  Babelon,  Traiie,  ii.  1,  p.  1571. 


HOAKDS  63 

at  Ephesus,1  which  also  bear  a  great  variety  of  types,  yet 
which  may  belong  to  one  district,  or  even  one  city. 

Later  period.  Of  somewhat  later  date  is  a  very  interesting 
hoard,  supposed  to  have  been  discovered  in  Cilicia,  and  pub- 
lished by  Mr.  E.  T.  Newell.2  Unfortunately  the  place  of  its 
discovery  is  not  recorded,  nor  can  we  be  sure  that  the  coins 
were  all  found  together.  The  date  of  burial  is  fixed  at  about 
380  b.  c. :  most  of  the  coins  are  defaced  with  gashes  on  one 
or  both  sides,  apparently  to  unfit  them  for  further  circula- 
tion, which  looks  as  if  they  had  been  destined  for  melting. 
Many  of  them  also  bear  small  stamps  or  counter-marks 
which  Mr.  Newell  regards  as  private  marks  of  certain 
bankers  or  traders:  we  know  that  such  marks  are  very 
common  on  the  Persian  silver  sigli  and  the  coins  of  several 
cities  of  southern  Asia  Minor.3  The  three  classes  of  coins 
most  common  in  this  hoard  are  :  first,  Persian  sigli ;  second, 
coins  of  Athens  of  the  fifth  century  ; 4  third,  coins  issued  in 
the  cities  of  Cilicia  by  Persian  Satraps,  especially  Tiribazus. 
Besides  these  there  are  coins  of  the  later  fifth  and  earlier 
fourth  centuries,  struck  at  Byzantium,  Calchedon,  Sinope, 
Miletus,  Samos,  Aspendus,  Side,  Teos,  Celenderis,  Soli, 
Mallus,  Issus,  Aradus,  Tyre,  and  the  kings  of  Salamis  and 
Citium  in  Cyprus.  The  collocation  of  these  coins  gives  us 
useful  information  as  to  the  dates  of  issues  in  all  the  cities 
represented;  and  by  carefully  recording  which  examples 
were  fresh-struck  and  which  had  been  worn  in  circulation, 
Mr.  Newell  makes  our  information  more  precise. 

It  is  mainly  by  the  evidence  furnished  by  hoards  found 
in  Sicily  that  Sir  Arthur  Evans5  has  succeeded  in  more 
accurately  dating  the  series  issued  at  Syracuse,  and  the 
money  issued  by  Phoenicians  in  Sicily.  These  data,  so  far 
as  they  concern  the  purposes  of  the  present  work,  are  con- 
sidered in  the  chapters  below  dealing  with  Sicilian  coins. 

1  Excavations  at  Ephesus,  1908,  p.  74.  *  Num.  Chron.,  1914,  p.  1. 

s  Compare  a  find  of  Persian  silver  sigli  published  by  Mr.  Milne  in  Num. 
Chron.,  1915,  p.  1. 

4  One  is  of  the  early  fourth  century,  with  the  later  type  of  the  head 
of  Athena. 

5  Num.  Chron.,  1890, 1891. 


64  INTRODUCTION 


In  the  following  pages,  it  is  needless  to  say,  the  evidence 
of  hoards  is  used  whenever  it  is  available. 

XIV.     Fabbic. 

As  regards  the  process  of  coining,  I  may  begin  with  a 
quotation  from  a  recent  traveller  in  the  native  states  of 
India,  where  ancient  ways  of  manufacture  still  survive * : 

'  Under  a  little,  open,  whitewashed  roof,  there  are  two  or 
three  tiny  furnaces,  two  or  three  small  anvils,  and  two  or 
three  nearly  naked  workmen.  Three  iron  pegs,  six  inches 
high,  with  flattened  heads,  looking  rather  like  exaggerated 
golf-tees,  spring  from  the  stone  floor.  The  workman  takes 
a  lump  of  bullion  in  his  hands,  heats  it  in  the  furnace,  cuts 
off  a  round  or  moderately  round  disk,  and  carries  it  with  his 
pincers  to  the  die,  and  hammers  on  it  until  he  has  got  a 
sufficient  impression ;  then  he  casts  it  aside  upon  a  little 
heap  to  get  cool,  and  to  be  conveyed  into  the  royal  treasury.' 

If  this,  or  anything  like  this,  was  the  method  by  which 
coins  were  commonly  struck  in  Greece,  we  need  not  be  sur- 
prised at  their  variations  in  fineness  and  in  weight. 

There  is,  however,  a  notable  distinction  between  the 
method  of  providing  blanks  at  Jodhpur,  by  cutting  slices 
from  a  bar,  and  the  method  generally  in  use  in  earlier 
Greece,  which  consisted  in  casting,  as  bullets  are  cast,  in 
a  mould.  By  this  means  certainly  more  exactness  would  be 
attained  than  by  the  Indian  method,  but  not  nearly  so  much 
exactness  as  is  attained  in  modern  days  by  the  use  of  a 
collar.  But  until  modern  writers  rid  themselves  of  our 
natural  presuppositions,  and  realize  more  completely  how 
rough  and  ready  were,  as  a  rule,  the  methods  of  the  ancient 
mints,  they  will  always  be  making  theories  far  too  exact  to 
fit  the  facts.  For  example,  numismatists  often  try  to  give 
the  standard  weights  of  particular  classes  of  coins  to  the 
third  decimal  place  in  grammes.  There  is  no  indication 
that  the  controllers  of  ancient  mints  worked  with  anything 
like  this  accuracy.     I  therefore  have  nowhere  made  any 

1  Sidney  Lee,  Vision  of  India,  p.  106.  The  mint  described  is  that  of 
Jodhpur. 


FABRIC  65 

attempt  to  give  more  than  an  approximate  statement  of  the 
weights  of  any  classes  of  coins.  Further  refinement  gives 
the  appearance  of  great  accuracy  without  its  reality,  and 
tends  only  to  mislead. 

It  has  been  shown  by  Dr.  Macdonald '  that  in  the  Middle 
Ages  '  Decrees  generally  prescribe,  not  that  coins  shall  be 
struck  of  such  and  such  a  weight,  but  that  so  many  coins 
shall  be  struck  out  of  such  and  such  a  quantity  of  metal'. 
"We  can  scarcely  doubt  that  this  was  the  case  also  in  ancient 
Greece.  This  would  explain  considerable  variation  in  the 
weights  of  individual  coins.  If  the  mint-master  found  that 
the  coins  he  was  producing  were  above  the  standard,  he 
would  at  once  take  measures  to  diminish  the  size  of  the 
blanks  :  if  he  found  that  the  coins  were  light,  he  would 
move  in  the  opposite  direction.  Except  in  the  case  of  gold 
coins  a  small  excess  or  deficiency  would  not  be  serious. 

At  the  beginning  of  coinage  it  would  seem  that  the  type 
was  engraved  on  the  head  of  the  anvil,  which  may  have 
been,  as  at  Jodhpur,  an  iron  peg  let  into  the  floor,  and  the 
rude  incuse  which  marks  the  other  side  of  the  coins  may 
have  been  produced  by  the  head  of  a  punch  which  by  a 
hammer  was  driven  into  the  round  or  oval  blank  which  was 
to  be  the  coin.  At  a  later  time  there  were  two  neatly  en- 
graved types,  let  the  one  into  the  anvil,  the  other  into  the 
punch.  But  it  is  impossible  by  a  mere  description  to  make 
clear  the  history  and  the  peculiarities  of  the  technique  of 
coin-striking.  Knowledge  on  the  subject  can  only  come 
from  practical  familiarity  with  coins.  In  assigning  a  mint 
and  a  date  to  coins  the  numismatist  is  necessarily  largely 
guided  by  peculiarities  of  technique,  often  so  minute  that 
he  is  scarcely  able  to  describe  them  in  words.  But  to  do 
justice  to  this  subject  would  require  a  technical  treatise 
fully  illustrated. 

One  innovation  recently  introduced  by  Mr.  Hill  in  the 
British  Museum  catalogues2  is  to  state  in  what  positions 
relatively  to  one  another  the  obverse  and  reverse  dies  of  a 

1  The  Evolution  of  Coinage,  p.  70. 

2  See  the  Preface  to  the  Brit.  Mus.  Catalogue  of  Coins  of  Phoenicia. 

1»67  F 


66  INTRODUCTION 

coin  stand.  No  doubt  such  statistics  give  us  valuable  in- 
formation. But  no  mere  statistical  information  can  ever  be 
used  mechanically,  and  without  common  sense.  Mechanical 
principles  of  arrangement  may  well  serve  to  give  us  sug- 
gestions, or  to  decide  doubtful  points,  but  one  must  be 
prepared  to  disregard  them  when  they  conflict  with  well- 
established  inductions.  The  respective  placing  of  obverse 
and  reverse  dies  may  in  some  cases  be  the  result  of  a  system., 
but  in  others  may  be  only  the  result  of  habit  in  a  particular 
workman. 


CHAPTER  I 

EAELY    ELECTRUM 

§  1.    Origin  of  Coinage. 

It  is  generally  thought,  alike  by  numismatists  and  his- 
torians, that  the  coinage  of  the  western  world  took  its  origin 
on  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor  in  the  eighth  or  at  latest  in 
the  seventh  century  B.C.,  in  those  primitive  and  rude  coins 
of  electrum,  which  are  now  abundant  in  our  museums.  Of 
this  coinage  I  do  not  propose  to  treat  in  detail,  as  it  has 
been  the  subject  of  able  papers  by  Head,  Babelon,  and  other 
writers,1  nor  is  it  possible  fully  to  discuss  it  without  taking 
into  account  a  multitude  of  small  numismatic  considerations, 
the  introduction  of  which  would  thwart  the  purpose  of  the 
present  treatise,  which  is  to  give  a  broad  historic  sketch. 
I  will,  however,  give  a  brief  summary  of  the  principal 
discussions  which  have  arisen  in  regard  to  it. 

In  the  first  place,  it  has  been  disputed  to  whom  belongs  ^y 
the  honour  of  the  first  invention  of  coins.  We  know  from 
Julius  Pollux  that  this  question  was  much  discussed  by  his 
learned  authorities.  He  writes 2  that  it  was  disputed 
1  whether  coins  were  first  issued  by  Pheidon  of  Argos,  or  by 
the  Cymaean  Demodice,  wife  of  the  Phrygian  Midas,  who 
was  daughter  of  Agamemnon,  King  of  Cyme,  or  by  the 
Athenians,  Erichthonius  and  Lycus,  or  by  the  Lydians,  as 
Xenophanes  asserts,  or  by  the  Naxians,  according  to  the 
view  of  Aglaosthenes '.  Some  of  these  views  are  now  out  of 
court,  especially  those  which  give  the  origination  of  coins  to 

1  Head  in  Numismatic  Chronicle,  1875  ;  Catalogue  of  Greek  Coins  in  the  British 
Museum  :  Ionia,  Introduction.  Babelon,  Traits'  des  Monnaies  grecques  et  romaines, 
Part  II,  vol.  i,  where  further  references  ;  also  Revue  Numismatique,  1894  and 
1895. 

1  Onom.  ix.  83. 

P   2 


68  EAELY  ELECTEUM 

Pheidon  of  Argos  or  to  Athens.  It  is  universally  allowed 
that  money  first  appears  on  the  western  coast  of  Asia  Minor. 
But  it  may  still  be  doubted  whether  it  originated  with  the 
wealthy  Mermnad  kings  of  Lydia  or  with  Miletus  and 
other  Ionian  cities  of  the  coast. 

In  favour  of  the  Lydians  it  may  be  argued  that  Herodotus 
supports  their  claim.  He  writes  of  the  Lydians,1  irp&TOL 
av6pa>Tra>v,  tcou  fjfitis  i'S/iev,  vofiiapa  ^pvcrov  Kal  dpyvpov  Koyjrd- 
p.zvoi  ky^prjaavro'  irpS>TOL  8\  Kal  KdrnjXoi  kytvovro.  There 
seems  to  be  some  connexion  between  the  clauses  of  the 
sentence  :  that  is,  the  fact  that  the  Lydians  were  pedlars  or 
hucksters  was  the  reason  for  their  invention  of  coin.  And 
here  it  may  be  allowed  that  we  can  cite  a  parallel :  the 
great  extension  of  the  Aeginetan  currency  is  explained  by 
the  fact  that  the  Aeginetans  were  the  pedlars  of  Greece 
Proper.  At  the  same  time  the  words  of  Herodotus  are  too 
ambiguous  to  be  pressed.  To  say  that  the  Lydians  first 
struck  coins  in  gold  and  silver  is  not  the  same  thing  as  to 
say  that  they  first  issued  money  of  mixed  gold  and  silver 
or  electrum.  There  is  thus  some  justification  for  those 
who,  with  J.  P.  Six,  take  the  words  of  Herodotus  to  mean 
that  the  Lydians  were  the  first  to  issue  coins,  not  of 
electrum,  but  of  gold  and  silver  separately.  This  separation 
was,  as  we  shall  see,  a  feature  of  the  coinage  of  Croesus ; 
and  it  is  possible  that  Herodotus  was  thinking  of  the  money 
issued  by  Croesus.  On  the  other  hand,  we  may  take  the 
words  xpvcrov  Kal  dpyvpov  closely  together,  as  implying 
a  coinage  of  mixed  gold  and  silver  or  electrum ;  and  if 
we  take  this  view,  the  authority  of  Herodotus  will  be  on 
the  side  of  the  origin  of  coinage  in  Lydia.  Xenophanes, 
according  to  Pollux,  takes  the  same  view,  and  Xenophanes 
was  probably  a  contemporary  of  Darius,  and  near  to  the 
time  of  the  origin  of  coinage. 

Another  ancient  authority  for  the  Lydian  origin  of  coins 
has  been  found  in  the  phrase  of  Julius  Pollux,2  who  speaks 
of  FvydSa?  xpvaos  in  the  same  breath  with  darics  and  staters 

1  i.  94.  2  Onomasticon,  iii.  87. 


ORIGIN  OF  COINAGE  69 

of  Croesus  ;  for  this  passage  has  been  taken  as  a  proof  that  I 
the  early  electrum  staters  were  issued  by  Gyges.  To  this  j 
argument,  however,  there  lies  an  insuperable  objection  in 
the  fact  that  in  another  passage l  Pollux  speaks  of  the  gold 
of  Gyges  as  notable  for  purity ;  it  could  not,  then,  have 
been  electrum.  Gyges,  as  we  are  told  by  Herodotus,2  dedi- 
cated at  Delphi  many  objects  in  gold,  and  it  was  from  this 
that  his  gold  had  its  reputation.  Certainly  no  coins  of  pure 
gold  of  the  time  of  Gyges  are  known. 

The  mere  fact  that  Lydia  possessed  in  great  abundance 
the  raw  material  of  the  electrum  coinage  can  scarcely 
weigh  very  heavily,  since  that  material  was  also  easily 
accessible  to  the  Ionians.  The  only  alleged  proof  of  an 
early  issue  of  coins  in  Lydia  is  furnished  by  the  legend 
FAAFEI  in  archaic  letters  read  (first  by  M.  Six)  on  some 
electrum  coins,  as  the  name  of  King  Alyattes  of  Lydia. 
To  these  coins  I  will  presently  return.  Meantime  it  is 
clear  that,  even  if  we  accept  M.  Six's  reading,  all  that  it 
would  prove  would  be  that  Lydian  coins  were  issued  in 
the  reign  of  Alyattes,  610-561  b.c,  not  that  coins  originated 
with  the  Lydians.  Quite  as  early  as  these  coins  is  the 
remarkable  stater  of  electrum  3  which  bears  the  name  of 
Phanes,  and  which  was  almost  certainly  struck  in  one  of 
the  cities  of  Ionia.     (PI.  I.  2,  B.  M.  I.  7.) 

Most  numismatists — Lenormant,  Six,  Head,  and  others — 
are  disposed  to  assign  the  earliest  electrum  coins  to  early 
Lydian  kings,  Gyges  and  his  successors.  But  the  most 
recent  writer  on  the  subject,  M.  Babelon,  prefers,  alike 
from  the  probabilities  of  the  case,  and  the  evidence  of 
extant  coins,  to  think  that  coinage  originated  with  the  Greeks  <4 
of  Asia.  I  am  disposed  to  support  this  view.  It  would  be 
strange  if  the  Lydian  horsemen  anticipated  the  quick-witted 
and  versatile  Ionians  in  so  remarkable  a  discovery  as  that 
of  striking  coins.  Moreover,  in  addition  to  the  intrinsic 
probability  of  Babelon's  view,  the  balance  of  evidence  to 
be  drawn  from  existing  coins  is  in  its  favour. 

1  Ibid.,  vii.  98.  J  i.  U. 

*  B.  if.  Cat.  Ionia,  PI.  III.  S. 


70  EAKLY  ELECTRUM 

It  may  well  seem  strange  that  the  Greek  world  contrived 
to  do  without  coins  until  the  eighth  century  b.  c.  We  now 
know  what  a  highly  developed  civilization  flourished  in 
Crete  and  in  Peloponnesus  at  a  much  earlier  time.  But 
there  are  abundant  examples  of  an  elaborate  civilization 
without  money.  The  great  empires  of  Egypt  and  Assyria 
had  no  coins.  The  Phoenicians  did  not  issue  money  for 
centuries  after  its  invention,  though  they  may  have  used 
the  coins  of  Persia  and  of  Greece.  It  is  conjectured  from 
a  survey  of  the  places  where  Persian  gold  coins  are  found, 
that  they  were  but  little  used  in  the  eastern  provinces  of 
the  Persian  Empire,  but  almost  exclusively  in  Asia  Minor. 
And  we  have  modern  parallels  for  indifference  to  the  use 
of  coin.  In  China,  down  to  our  own  days,  only  copper  and 
iron  coins  have  been  issued  by  authority,  gold  and  silver 
still  passing  by  weight,  whether  in  the  form  of  bars  or  of 
foreign  coin. 

§  2.    Ionia. 

The  early  electrum  coins  of  the  Ionic  coast  are  bean- 
shaped,  bearing  usually  on  one  side  a  type,  on  the  other 
punch-marks  enclosing   smaller   devices.      (B.  M.   I.   1-12. 
The  metal  is  hard ;   the  art  and  fabric  primitive.     The] 
present  us  with   a  series   of  problems,   which   cannot  at 
present  be  said  to  be  solved. 

The  stater  of  electrum  is  the  ordinary  large  unit.  It  is 
divided  according  to  Asiatic,  and  not  according  to  Greek 
customs.  In  Greece  the  unit  is  the  drachm,  larger  pieces 
are  didrachms  and  tetradrachms,  smaller  pieces  the  half- 
drachm,  and  so  on.  But  electrum  coins  are  quite  inde- 
pendent of  the  drachm.  Half-staters  were  not  unknown, 
but  the  ordinary  method  of  division  was  by  three.  There 
was  the  trite'  or  third,  the  hecte'  or  sixth,  the  twelfth,  the 
twenty-fourth,  and  so  on,  down  to  the  ninety-sixth.  But 
the  third  and  sixth  were  by  far  the  most  common  divisions  ; 
the  smaller  units  were  at  the  time  of  the  Ionian  revolt 
and  later  superseded  by  silver  coins. 

The  question  has  been   much   discussed   whether  these 


IONIA  71 

coins  were  issued  by  cities  or  by  temples  or  by  private 
persons.  It  was  perfectly  "  natural  that  numismatists, 
accustomed  to  the  fact  that  in  later  historic  times  every 
Greek  city  had  one  or  two  easily  recognized  devices  which 
stamped  its  coin  as  belonging  to  it  only,  should  have  begun 
by  trying  to  assign  the  early  electrum  also  to  city  mints, 
by  help  of  the  types  which  the  coins  bear.  The  lion  was 
held  to  be  the  mark  of  Miletus,  the  lion's  scalp  of  Samos, 
the  stag  of  Ephesus,  and  so  forth.  But  there  are  grave 
reasons  for  thinking  that  this  procedure  was  mistaken,  or 
at  least  was  carried  much  too  far.  Thus  the  lion,  the  lion's 
head  and  his  scalp,  appear  on  a  large  number  of  electrum  coins, 
which  differ  so  widely  in  style  and  in  monetary  standard 
that  they  can  scarcely  come  from  any  one  mint.  To  suppose 
that  the  lion  is  always  the  regal  sign  of  the  Lydian  kings 
is  a  view  which  cannot  be  maintained.  Again,  there  are 
on  electrum  coins  many  devices — the  cock,  the  chimaera, 
the  fox,  the  human  head,  and  others — which  cannot  be 
satisfactorily  assigned  to  any  known  mint.  It  therefore 
seems  probable  that  the  custom  of  issuing  money  by  state 
authority,  and  impressing  upon  all  coins  so  issued  the  civic 
badge  as  a  type,  had  not  yet  arisen,  or  at  all  events  had  not 
become  usual.  An  overwhelming  impression  that  the 
types  of  early  electrum  coins  are  not  civic  arises  from  a 
consideration  of  the  specimens  found  in  the  temple  of 
Artemis  at  Ephesus  in  1905.1  The  types  borne  by  these 
coins  were  the  lion,  the  goat,  the  cock,  the  stag ;  heads  of 
the  bull,  the  horse,  the  gryphon,  a  human  head  ;  the  seal, 
the  beetle.  Of  these  types  only  two  could  be  assigned  to 
a  mint-city  with  any  probability  (the  stag  to  Ephesus,  and 
the  seal  to  Phocaea).  It  seems  by  far  most  probable  that 
all  were  struck  at  Ephesus  or  in  the  neighbourhood. 

A  confirmation  of  this  view  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that 
even  in  the  case  of  the  later  issues  of  electrum  coins,  such 
as  those  of  Cyzicus  and  Mytilene,  there  is  no  uniform  type, 
as  on  the  coins  of  most  Greek  cities,  but  an  almost  unlimited 

1  British  Museum  Excavations  at  Ephesus.     The  Coins,  pp.  74-93  (Head). 


72  EARLY  ELECTRUM 

number  of  devices,  which  do  not  indicate  place  of  mintage, 
but  far  more  probably  belong  to  the  monetary  magistrates. 

Thus  the  types  of  early  electrum  coins  are  no  safe  indica- 
tion of  their  place  of  mintage.  And  since,  with  one  or  two 
exceptions,  they  are  uninscribed,  there  is  a  dearth  of  clues 
to  direct  us  to  their  place  of  origin. 

It  is  maintained  by  M.  Babelon  that  these  primitive  coins 
were  not  state-issues  at  all,  but  struck  by  the  bankers  of 
Ionia  and  Lydia  for  the  purposes  of  trade,  and  stamped 
with  their  private  signets.1  He  has  several  historic  parallels 
to  cite.  He  shows  that  among  the  Franks  of  the  Merovingian 
age  money  was  issued  by  private  coiners,  and  varies  re- 
markably in  alloy,  and  even  in  weight.  And  he  brings 
forward  examples  in  which  trading  companies  in  America 
in  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  centuries  issued  great 
quantities  of  coin  in  their  own  name,  and  on  their  own 
responsibility. 

It  must  also  be  noted  that  large  classes  of  coins  in  Persian 
times,  especially  the  Persian  silver  shekels  or  sigli,  and  the 
money  of  Aspendus  in  Pamphylia,  bear  a  multitude  of  small 
stamps  or  countermarks  which  seem  to  be  the  marks  of 
bankers,  or  possibly  of  local  financial  officers,  guaranteeing 
the  quality  of  the  coin.2  This  custom  might  well  be  the 
successor  of  a  system  of  private  coinage.  Terrien  de  la 
Couperie  observes3  that  on  early  coins  of  China  we  find 
many  private  marks.  '  The  exchange  being  generally  limited 
to  the  region  of  the  issuers,  they  used  on  their  currency  to 
put  as  their  marks  names  of  regions,  places,  families,  indi- 
viduals, or  things.'  In  early  India  also  small  ingots  circulated 
bearing  many  countermarks,  which  may  have  been  stamped 
on  them  either  by  financial  authorities  or  else  by  private 
capitalists.4 

I  cannot  examine  in  detail  the  theories  of  M.  Babelon  as 


1  Origines  de  la  Honnaie,  pp.  93-134. 

2  This  custom  may  be  well  studied  in  the  case  of  the  Cilician  find  published 
by  Mr.  Newell  {Num.  Chron.,  1914). 

•  B.  M.  Cat.  Chinese  Coins,  Introd.,  p.  4. 

4  E,  Thomas,  Ancient  Indian  Weights,  p.  52. 


IONIA  73 

to  the  way  in  which  the  Ionian  bankers  stamped  the 
coin ;  and  in  that  matter  I  do  not  think  his  particular 
views  can  be  maintained.  But  as  regards  the  probability 
that  many  of  the  types  of  early  coins  are  only  private 
marks,  I  agree  with  him.  Certainty  is  not  to  be  attained  ; 
it  is,  however,  at  the  least  quite  possible  that  private  issues 
made  their  appearance  before  the  rise  of  the  regular  civic 
coinages.  Long  ago  Professor  Ernst  Curtius  called  attention 
to  the  probability  that  in  some  cases,  at  all  events,  very 
early  issues  of  coins  may  have  taken  place  in  connexion 
with  the  wealthy  temples  of  Ionia,  where  specie  tended  to 
accumulate.  And  this  view  has  been  generally  accepted, 
even  by  Professor  Bidgeway,1  who  is  generally  disposed  to 
deny  the  religious  origin  of  coin- types. 

But  however  much  truth  there  may  be  in  the  view  that 
the  earliest  coins  belong  to  bankers  or  temples,  we  have 
good  reason  for  thinking  that  not  later  than  about  600  B.C. 
the  Greek  cities  of  Asia  were  beginning  to  take  the  issue  of 
electrum  into  their  own  hands,  and  to  stamp  it  with  an 
official  seal. 

Some  account  must  here  be  given  of  the  monetary 
systems  according  to  which  the  early  electrum  coins  were 
minted. 

The  basis  of  the  Asiatic  systems  was  bimetallic:  they 
started  from  the  gold  unit,  or  shekel,  and  assumed  a  fixed 
proportion  in  value  between  gold  and  silver.  As  to  electrum, 
it  has  been  clearly  made  out  that  it  was  always,  or  almost 
always,  minted  on  a  silver  and  not  on  a  gold  standard. 
We  must  therefore  start  from  the  gold  unit,  thence  to  reach 
the  standards  used  both  for  silver  and  for  electrum. 

We  may  fairly  consider  the  fixed  conventional  weight 
of  the  shekel  of  gold  as  130  grains  (grm.  8-42),  being  the 
sixtieth  of  a  Baby  Ionic  mina  of  505  grammes,2  or  the  double 
of  this  shekel,  which  also  was  in  use.  The  prevailing  view, 
started  by  Mommsen  and  Brandis,  and  satisfactorily  estab- 
lished, is  that  the  weights  of  silver  and  electrum  coins  were 

1  Origin  of  Currency,  p.  215. 

2  Head,  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  xxxvi. 


74  EARLY  ELECTRUM 

derived  from  this  stater,  the  proportionate  values  of  the 

metals  being — 

AT.  EL.  JR. 

1  |  13| 

|  1  10 

3  1  1 

715"  ro"  x 

Hence  we  derive — 
I.  From  the  double  or  heavy  gold  shekel  of  260  grains 
(grm.  16-84) : 
260  x  13|  =  3,466  grains  of  silver, 

=  15  silver  shekels  of  230  grains  (grm.  14-90), 
or  1^  of  electrum. 
Thus   is   derived   the   Phoenician   or    Graeco-Asiatic 
standard  for  silver  and  electrum. 


II.  From   the  single   or  light  gold  shekel  of  130  grains 
(grm.  8-42) : 
130  x  13£  =  1,733  grains  of  silver, 

=  10    silver    shekels    of    173    grains    (grm. 
11-20),    or    20    shekels    of   86    grains 
(grm.  5-60),  or  1  or  2  of  electrum. 
Thus  is  derived  the  Babylonic  or  Persian  standard  for 
silver  and  electrum. 

In  the  Introduction  I  have  briefly  considered  the  question 
of  these  relations  of  value,  which  certainly  suggest  some 
questions  at  present  unsolved.  The  weight-standards  which 
we  have  above  reached,  the  Phoenician  and  the  Persian  as 
we  may  perhaps  best  call  them,  are  the  commonest  in  use 
in  early  times  for  electrum  coins. 

The  classification  of  these  coins  is  at  present  difficult, 
and  very  tentative.  It  was  first  clearly  set  forth  by 
Mr.  Head1  that  certain  classes  of  electrum  coins  may  be 
distinguished  as  belonging  to  different  districts  of  Ionia, 
and  following  different  monetary  standards.  M.  Babelon 
has  further  developed  this  view,  and  shown  that  the  fabric 

1  Numismatic  Chronicle,  1875. 


IONIA  75 

of  the  various  classes,  with  the  form  of  incuse,  is  different 
and  characteristic.1     We  may  distinguish  four  classes : 

(1)  There  is  a  very  primitive  class  of  coins  following  the 
Phoenician  standard  of  weight  (stater,  grm.  14-90-14-40, 
grains  230-222).  Some  of  these  have  scarcely  any  type  ; 
and  the  fabric  of  the  earliest  of  them  is  rude.  Their  pale 
colour  indicates,  what  is  con  rmed  by  analysis,  that  they 
contain  but  a  small  proportion  of  gold.  They  belong  to 
cities  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Miletus  and  Ephesus  in 
the  south  of  Ionia.  (PI.  I.  1,  2 ;  B.  T.  I.  15-19 ;  B.  M.  I. 
2,  3,  6,  7.)  To  this  class  also  belong  the  numerous 
electrum  coins  found  by  Mr.  Hogarth  on  the  site  of  the 
Artemisium  at  Ephesus.2  These  bear  a  great  variety  of 
types,  as  we  have  above  seen,  but  the  types  seem  to  be  no 
indication  of  mint. 

It  is  highly  probable,  considering  the  political  and  com- 
mercial importance  of  Miletus  in  the  seventh  and  sixth 
centuries,  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  pale  electrum  coins 
were  minted  in  that  city.  On  this  subject  I  must  refer  to 
j  the  detailed  arguments  of  M.  Babelon.3  On  the  other  hand, 
I  can  by  no  means  accept  the  view  of  this  writer  that  the 
coins  belong  to  the  times  of  Croesus.  On  the  contrary,  it 
was  against  their  circulation,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  that 
the  royal  coinage  of  Croesus  was  directed.  In  another 
place 4  M.  Babelon  rightly  observes  that  if  the  people  of 
Phocaea  took  with  them  to  Massilia,  even  in  the  sixth 
century,  their  coins  of  silver,  as  seems  to  be  the  case,  the 
electrum  of  Phocaea,  being  earlier  than  the  silver,  must 
be  given  to  the  seventh  century.  But  it  is  certainly  not 
earlier  than  the  electrum  of  Miletus.  We  shall  speak  of  it 
presently. 

The  earliest  electrum  coins  of  Chios  are  of  this  class : 

Obv.    Sphinx   of   archaic  style.      Rev.    Small    incuse    square. 
(B.  T.  VIII,  6,  8.) 


1  Revue  Numismatique,  1894-5,  four  papers. 

*  British  Museum  Excavations  at  Ephesus,  pp.  74-93. 

3  Traite,  ii.  1,  pp.  11-54.  *  Ibid.,  p.  96. 


76  EARLY  ELECTRUM 

These  staters  are  of  Milesian  weight :  they  have  a  very 
archaic  look,  and  one  would  be  disposed  to  attribute  them 
to  the  earlier  part  of  the  sixth  century.  A  later  example 
was  in  the  Vourla  find,  which  belongs  mainly  to  the  time 
of  the  Ionic  revolt.1 

A  similar  uncertainty  prevails  in  regard  to  another  early 
electrum  coin  of  Milesian  standard,  that  which  bears  the 
inscription  of  which  the  best  reading  seems  to  be  (pdvo? 
ifil  a-fj/xa  (PI.  I.  2).  We  may  regard  it  as  having  been  issued, 
with  his  own  stamp,  by  some  Phanes.  If  so,  there  is  no 
reason  to  think  that  the  stag  indicates  the  mint  of  Ephesus. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  coin  is  too  early  to  have  been  issued 
by  the  Phanes  known  to  history  who  was  a  contemporary 
of  King  Cambyses  in  Egypt,  and  who  was  tyrant  of  Hali- 
carnassus.2  More  probably  Ephesian  is  a  third  of  a  stater 
bearing  the  type  of  a  bee,  with  two  rectangular  incuses  on 
the  other  side :  weight  72-68  grains 3  (grm.  4«64-4-37). 

That  the  Lydian  kings  at  their  capital  of  Sardes  issued 
electrum  coin  is  in  the  highest  degree  probable,  for  the 
Lydians  as  a  people  seem  to  have  possessed  the  commercial 
instinct.4  Yet  it  is  not  possible  with  certainty  to  assign 
to  any  of  the  Mermnad  kings  any  electrum  coin.  The 
classification  of  electrum  money  to  each  of  them  by  Francis 
Lenormant  is  little  more  than  a  work  of  imagination. 

M.  J.  P.  Six  has  indeed  read  on  some  pale  electrum  coins, 
bearing  as  type  a  lion's  head,5  the  name  of  King  Alyattes 
of  Lydia.  The  letters,  so  far  as  they  can  be  made  out,  seem  to 
be  FAAFEI.     Whether  these  letters  can  stand  for  the  name 


1  See  an  elaborate  paper  on  the  early  coins  of  Chios  by  J.  Mavrogordato  in 
the  Numismatic  Chronicle,  1915,  p.  29. 

2  The  coin,  however,  is  stated  by  Mr.  Borrell,  its  first  possessor,  to  have 
been  found  at  Halicarnassus. 

3  Babelon,  Traiie,  ii.  1,  p.  66. 

4  Babelon,  Rev.  Num.,  1895,  p.  20.  The  whole  of  M.  Babelon's  two  articles 
on  early  electrum  coins  in  this  volume  is  important. 

5  Numismatic  Chronicle,  1890,  p.  204 ;  B.  M.  Cat.  Lydia,  p.  xviii ;  Babelon, 
Traite,  p.  227.  In  his  most  recent  publication,  in  the  volume  published  by 
the  British  Museum  on  excavations  at  Ephesus  (p.  91),  Mr.  Head  allows  the 
probability  of  M.  Six's  reading.  Babelon,  however,  adduces  strong  reasons, 
mainly  philological,  against  it. 


IONIA  77 

of  the  king  is  a  problem  for  philologists.   At  the  same  time, 
e  fabric  of  the  coins  and  the  nature  of  their  incuse  con- 
ects  them  closely  with  the  coins  of  Croesus,  shortly  to  be 
entioned.  And,  as  M.  Six  observes,  the  use  of  the  digamma 
ems  to  exclude  the  notion  of  an  Ionian  mint.     We  may 
herefore  regard  the  attribution  to  Alyattes  as  not  impos- 
sible.   The  issue,  however,  was  not  important,  as  were  those 
of  Croesus. 

'The  reverse  of  primitive  electrum  coins  is  often  in 
a  measure  an  indication  of  the  mint.  At  Miletus  it  is 
a  rectangle  between  two  small  squares,  at  Teos  a  small 
square,  at  Smyrna  a  large  square,  at  Phocaea  a  larger 
and  smaller  square,  side  by  side.' l  These  observations  of 
M.  Babelon  are  valuable  as  suggestions,  but  they  must  not 
be  taken  as  final. 

(2)  There  is  another  class  of  early  coins,  also  of  pale 
electrum,  which  is  generally  referred  to  the  Euboic 
standard.2    The  principal  examples  are  as  follows : 

1.  Obv.   Two  lions'  heads,  back  to  back.8     Bev.    Two  oblong 

incuses.       Weight,    269    grains    (grm.    1743).       Paris.3 
(B.  T.  IX.  14.) 

2.  Obv.  Same  type.  Bev.  Incuse  square  and  oblong.  Weight, 
133-5  grains  (grm.  8-65).     Six.     (B.  T.  IX.  16.) 

3.  Obv.  Lion's  head  facing.  Bev.  Incuse  square  and  triangle. 
Same  weight.  Brit.  Museum.  Found  at  Priene.  (B.  M. 
1.5.) 

4.  Obv.  Lion's  head  facing.  Bev.  Incuse  square.  Weight,  66-2 
grains  (grm.  4-29).  Brit.  Museum.  Found  at  Mytilene. 
(B.  T.  IX.  19.) 

5.  Obv.  Head  of  lioness  1.  Bev.  Incuse  square.  Weight,  67-6 
grains  (grm.  4-37).     Brit.  Museum.     Found  in  Lydia. 

6.  Obv.  Bull's  head  r.  Bev.  Incuse  square.  Weight,  133-4 
grains  (grm.  8-62).     Berlin.     (B.  T.  IX.  26.) 


1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  132. 

*  See  Head,  Notes  on  Electrum  Coins,  Num.  Chron.,  N.  S.  xv.  p.  270  ;  Babelon, 
Rev.  Num.,  1894,  p.  253,  PL  X. 

3  This  type  is  obscure,  and  has  been  variously  interpreted  :  by  Miiller  as 
siiphium  ^and  given  to  Cyrene)  ;  by  Head  as  the  device  of  Corcyra. 


78  EARLY  ELECTRUM 

7.  Obv.  Bull's  head  r.     Rev.  Fylfot  in  incuse.     Weight,  129-5 

grains  (grm.  8-39).     Berlin.     (B.  T.  IX.  27.) 

8.  Obv.  Fylfot  among  globules.     Rev.  Incuse  square.     Weight, 

45  grains  (grm.  2-92).     Brit.  Museum.     (B.  T.  IX.  18.) 

The  provenience  of  these  coins,  so  far  as  I  know,  is  always 
the  neighbourhood  of  Samos.  M.  Babelon  proposes  to 
attribute  them  all  to  Samos.  And  as  a  hoard  containing 
several  of  them1  was  actually  found  on  the  island,  there 
is  much  to  be  said  for  this  attribution.  When,  however, 
M.  Babelon  gives  them  to  the  time  of  the  Tyrant  Polycrates, 
he  certainly  brings  them  too  low.  They  are  of  very  early 
fabric,  the  incuses  being  decidedly  of  the  kind  in  use  before 
the  time  of  Croesus.  Wealthy  tyrants  like  Polycrates  are 
usually  more  advanced  than  their  period  in  the  style  of 
their  coins :  compare,  for  example,  the  coinages  of  Gelon 
of  Syracuse  and  Peisistratus  of  Athens.  The  attribution 
to  Samos  is  further  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  some  of  the 
very  early  silver  coins  usually  given  to  Samos  are  struck  on 
exactly  the  same  standard : 

1.  Obv.  Forepart  of  bull.     Rev.  Incuse  square.     Weight,  135 

grains  (grm.  8-74).     Brit.  Museum.2 

2.  Obv.  Lion's  head  facing.     Rev.  Incuse  square.     Weight,  63 

grains  (grm.  4-08).     Brit.  Museum.     (B.  T.  XI.  9.) 

3.  Obv.    Lion's   scalp  facing.      Rev.    Incuse   square.     Weight, 

39-1  grains  (grm.  2-53).     Brit.  Museum.     (B.  T.  XI.  19.) 

4.  Obv.  Head  and  neck  of  bull.     Rev.  Incuse  square.     Weight, 

32-7  grains  (grm.  2-11).     Brit.  Museum.     (B.  T.  XI.  22.) 

This  standard  is  commonly  assumed  to  be  the  Euboic. 
But  here  there  is  a  difficulty,  which  has  been  passed  over 
by  numismatists. 

The  Euboic  standard,  as  used  in  the  seventh  and  early 
sixth  centuries  at  Chalcis  and  Eretria  in  Euboea,  Athens 
and   Corinth,   does   not  reach  for  the  stater    more   than 

1  See  Head,  I.  c. 

*  Cat.  Ionia,  p.  350.  Mr.  Head  observes  that  the  weight  and  the  style  of 
the  incuse  is  rather  Lycian  than  Saraian.  For  such  reasons  the  coin  was 
omitted  in  my  paper  on  Samian  Coins,  Num.  Chron.,  1882. 


IONIA  79 

1130  grains  at  most  (grm.  8-42).  The  Babylonic  gold 
ptandard,  with  which  Herodotus  equates  it,  also  reaches 
[130  grains  as  a  maximum,  and  is  almost  always  somewhat 
Ibelow  that.  But  the  standard  for  the  electrum  coins  which 
we  are  considering  is  quite  clearly  higher  than  this.  Its 
normal  full  weights  seem  to  be — 


Grains. 

Grammes. 

Double  stater 

.       269 

1743 

.       133 

861 

Half 

67 

4-37 

Third    . 

45 

292 

22 

1-46 

These  are  the  weights,  not  of  the  Euboic  standard,  but 
I  of  the  Attic  standard  introduced  by  Pisistratus,  as  I  try 
,  to  show  in  Chapter  VIII.  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth 
century,  and  adopted  from  Athens  by  Euboea  and  Corinth, 
and  in  Sicily.  As  these  electrum  coins  are  certainly  much 
earlier  than  any  coins  of  the  same  weights  in  Greece,  we 
must  needs  suppose  that  they  were  issued  on  the  standard 
of  the  city  which  struck  them,  whether  Samos  or  another, 
and  that  this  standard  was  imported  into  Greece  by 
Pisistratus. 

Some  numismatists  may  be  disposed  to  regard  this 
standard  as  one  handed  down  to  later  Greece  from  the 
Mycenaean  Age.  Thus  Professor  Bidgeway,1  in  drawing  up 
a  list  of  the  weights  of  some  gold  rings  found  at  Mycenae, 
regards  a  group  of  them  as  following  an  unit  of  135  grains, 
8-75  grammes.  Sir  A.  Evans2  regards  a  ball  or  ' dump'  of 
gold  from  Salamis  in  Cyprus  and  some  carnelian  duck 
weights  from  Palaikastro  as  evidencing  the  use  of  this 
standard  in  prehistoric  times.  It  will,  however,  be  found, 
on  examining  the  rings  of  Mycenae,  that  their  weights 
are  too  irregular  to  allow  of  any  satisfactory  deduction. 
And  Evans  regards  all  the  weights  used  at  Cnossus  as 
derived  from  Egypt,  so  that  in  any  case  the  derivation  of 
the  standard  we  are  considering  may  be  from  that  most 
ancient  empire,  whether  through  Crete  and  Argos  or  not. 

1  J.  H.  S.  x.  90.  *  Corolla  Numismatica,  p.  365. 


80  EARLY  ELECTRUM 

"When  we  reach  the  coins  of  Cyrene  we  shall  see  that  the 
same  monetary  standard  was  in  vogue  there  from  600  b.  o. 
onwards.  It  is  almost  certainly  derived  from  Egypt,  where 
a  Kedet  of  the  weight  of  139  grains  (grm.  9-0)  was  in  use  in 
the  Delta !  at  Heliopolis.  The  Samians,  who  were  among 
the  most  important  of  the  peoples  who  founded  Naucratis, 
seem  to  have  there  adopted  the  local  weight  for  silver,  and 
transferred  that  weight  to  electrum,  electrum  coinage  being, 
as  we  know,  usually  issued  on  a  silver  standard. 

(3)  Next  to  these  coins  of  Samian  weight  we  must  place 
a  few  very  early  staters  of  pale  electrum  which  follow  the 
standard  afterwards  called  Persian. 

Obv.  Irregular  transverse  furrows.  Rev.  Three  incuses  ;  in  the 
middle  one,  which  is  the  largest,  one  can  trace  the  figure 
of  a  fox.  Weight,  10-81  grm.,  167  grains.  B.  M.  Cat. 
Ionia,  p.  183,  PL  III.2     (B.  M.  I.  1.) 

Mr.  Head  doubts  whether  the  fox  in  the  incuse  can  really 
be  made  out.  He  attributes  the  coin,  doubtfully,  to  Miletus. 
But  this  attribution,  in  view  of  its  weight,  is  most  im- 
probable. It  is  of  the  same  weight  as  the  silver  coins,  and 
a  few  of  the  gold  coins  of  Croesus;  and  for  that  reason 
M.  Babelon3  would  give  it  to  the  time  of  Croesus.  But 
the  fabric  is  as  fatal  to  this  attribution  as  is  the  weight 
to  Mr.  Head's.  The  coin  contains  but  a  small  proportion 
of  gold  (according  to  its  specific  gravity  only  2  per  cent.), 
and  it  may  have  passed  as  silver,  in  which  case  it  would  be 
an  early  and  exceptional  prototype  of  the  silver  coinage  of 
Croesus.  Considering  the  coin  thus,  the  objection  to  the 
attribution  to  Miletus  would  be  lessened ;  but  it  is  much 
more  probable  that  it  was  struck  at  Sardis. 

(4)  There  is  a  somewhat  later  class  of  coins  which  follow 
the  lead  of  Phocaea.  These  coins  are  of  somewhat  darker 
colour,  and  contain  a  larger  proportion  of  gold.  (B.  M.  I. 
10,  11.)  Indeed,  Mr.  Head  has  suggested  that  they  were 
intended  to  pass  as  gold,  not  as  electrum.     Their  standard, 

1  Petrie,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Archaeol.,  xxxiii,  p.  378  and  foil. 

2  Corolla  Numismatica,  p.  365.  3  Traite,  ii.  I,  p.  19. 


IONIA  81 

which  in  common  with  other  numismatists  I  call  Phocaean, 
is  the  double  of  the  gold  stater  or  shekel  (260  grains; 
grm.  16-84).  It  is  partly  for  this  reason  that  Mr.  Head 
has  maintained  these  coins  to  be  really  intended  for  gold ; 
since  in  nearly  all  other  cases  electrum  coins  are  minted 
on  a  silver  standard.  They  can  be  assigned  in  some  cases 
to  mints  with  considerable  confidence.  I  mention  a  few 
staters ;  at  Phocaea  and  Cyzicus  there  are  also  smaller 
denominations. 

Phocaea. 

Obv.  O  (♦)  Seal  (phoca).  Rev.  Two  square  punch-marks.  Brit. 
Museum,  Munich.  Weight,  255  grains  (grm.  16-50). 
(PI.  I.  3.) 

Cyzicus. 

Obv.  Tunny  bound  with  fillet.  Rev.  Two  punch-marks ;  in 
one  a  scorpion.  Brit.  Museum.  Weight,  252  grains 
(grm.  1632).     (PI.  I.  4.) 

Dr.  von  Fritze,  in  an  elaborate  monograph  on  the  coins 
of  Cyzicus,1  denies,  on  account  of  the  character  of  the  incuse 
on  the  reverse,  that  this  coin  belongs  to  the  city.  The 
coins  which  he  attributes  to  Cyzicus  in  the  sixth  century 
ihave  on  the  reverse  a  single,  rather  rough,  incuse  square. 
They  will  be  found  on  PL  I  of  his  paper:  they  have  a 
variety  of  types,  part  of  which  is  always  a  tunny  or  the 
head  of  a  tunny.  Among  the  more  remarkable  devices  are 
la  winged  fish  and  a  male  or  female  winged  figure.  These 
coins,  dating  from  about  600  b.c,  are  regarded  by  von  Fritze 
as  the  earliest  examples  of  the  great  series  of  electrum  coins 
so  prominent  in  the  fifth  century.  He  thinks  that  the  issue 
was  uninterrupted ;  but  I  prefer  the  view  that  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  sixth  century  electrum  issues  came  to  a  stop 
until  the  Ionian  revolt. 

There  is  also  a  stater  of  this  weight  with  the  type  of  the 
grifiBn's  head  and  the  inscription  I50AA  (Z109?)  which  has 
been  given  with  some  probability  to  Teos.2     Other  attribu- 

1  Nomisma,  Part  VII. 

*  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  119 ;  PI.  V.  2. 

1M7  Q 


82  EARLY  ELECTRUM 

tions,  of  a  less  convincing  kind,  to  Methana  and  Mytilene 
in  Lesbos,  Smyrna,  Cyme,  and  other  cities  are  proposed  by 
M.  Babelon.  All  these  coins  belong,  so  far  as  we  can  judge, 
to  cities  to  the  north  of  Smyrna  ;  and  they  may  be  mostly 
assigned  to  the  period  mentioned  by  Eusebius  in  his  list  of 
thalassocracies  as  the  time  of  the  greatest  sea-power  of 
Phocaea,  578-534  b.c.  It  is  also  the  time  of  the  foundation 
of  the  Phocaean  colonies  Velia  and  Massilia. 

To  the  same  class  of  electrum  staters,  though  of  lower 
weight,  belong  the  early  staters  of  Lampsacus.  These  bear 
on  the  obverse  the  forepart  of  a  winged  horse,  usually 
with  traces  of  a  vine-wreath,  and  have  on  the  reverse  an 
incuse  square,  sometimes  quartered,  sometimes  having  only 
two  of  the  four  divisions  sunk.1  The  weight  is  15-15 
grammes  (234  grains)  or  less,  which  weight  is  also  in  use 
for  the  Lampsacene  staters  issued  in  the  fifth  century.  It 
is  very  remarkable  how  cities  in  Asia  preserved  their 
monetary  standard  unchanged  through  successive  periods. 

Such  are  the  principal  issues  of  electrum  coins  in  the 
seventh  and  sixth  centuries.  The  question  of  the  date  of 
their  cessation  will  be  considered  in  the  next  chapter. 

1  See  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  183,  PI.  VIII.  1-2 ;  Nos.  3-5  of  the  plate 
belong  to  later  issues. 


CHAPTER    II 
LYDIAN   AND   PERSIAN  COINAGE 
§  1.     Gold  of  Lydia. 

There  is  no  proof  that  the  earlier  Mermnad  kings  of  Lydia, 
whose  power  was  rapidly  increasing  in  the  seventh  and 
sixth  centuries,  showed  any  desire  to  interfere  with  Ionian 
issues  of  electrum.  If,  as  is  probable,  they  issued  electrum 
j  coin  of  their  own  at  Sardes,  they  seem  to  have  allowed  it  to 
take  its  chance  with  the  rest,  and  did  not  stamp  it  dis- 
!  tinctively  as  a  royal  issue.  But  when  Croesus  came  to  the 
j  throne  he  seems  to  have  determined  to  take  another  line. 
j  It  may  be  that  the  inherent  faults  in  the  electrum  coinage 
|  of  Ionia  were  unfitting  it  for  its  purpose.  It  may  be  that 
j  with  great  sagacity  he  grasped  the  notion  that  by  concen- 
:  trating  the  issue  of  coin  in  his  own  hands  he  could  strengthen 
his  political  power.  It  may  be  that  he  merely  wished,  with 
commercial  instinct,  to  make  the  most  of  his  great  stores  of 
gold.  Whatever  the  motive,  he  certainly  initiated  one  of 
the  greatest  of  all  the  political  movements  which  the  world 
has  known — the  issue  of  a  state  coinage. 

It  is  true  that  the  proofs  that  this  action  was  due  to 
Croesus  are  not  absolutely  conclusive.  Holm  is  even  dis- 
posed to  call  them  in  question.  They  are  circumstantial 
rather  than  direct.  But  in  my  opinion  they  are  ample. 
This  is  the  only  view  which  brings  consistency  and  order 
into  the  arrangement  of  facts.  And  since  Julius  Pollux 
|  talks  of  the  staters  of  Croesus  in  the  same  line  with  the 
I  noted  gold  staters  of  Philip  and  the  darics,  he  bears  testi- 
mony to  the  existence  of  well-known  gold  coins  named  after 
Croesus.  These  can  only  be  the  coins  long  attributed  by 
numismatists  to  the  king,  which  are  the  following  : 

a  2 


y 


/ 


/ 


84  LYDIAN  AND  PERSIAN  COINAGE 


Obv.  Foreparts  of  lion  and  bull  facing  each  other.  Rev.  Two 
incuses  side  by  side.  (PI.  I.  5,  6 ;  B.  M.  I.  13-16  ;  B.  T. 
X.  1-12.) 

These  coins  were  issued  in  gold  on  two  standards,  a  stater 

of  10-89  grm.  (168  grains),  with  its  fractions  of  a  half,  a 

y.  third,  a  sixth,  and  a  twelfth;    and  a  stater  of  8-17  grm. 

/    (126   grains),  with   corresponding    divisions,  and   on  one 

standard  in  silver  with  an  unit  of  10-89  grm.  (168  grains), 

again  with  corresponding  fractions.1 

*    The  gold  and  silver  employed  are  extremely  pure  :  the 
*■/  specific  gravity  of  the  gold  being  that  of  unmixed  gold. 

If  we  accept  the  current  view  as  to  the  proportionate 
value  of  gold  electrum  and  silver  as  13| :  10  :  1,  we  can 
easily  calculate  the  values  of  the  Croesean  coins  in  currency 
in  relation  to  the  existing  electrum.  The  gold  piece  of 
168  grains  (grm.  10-89)  would  be  equivalent  to  ten  silver 
pieces  or  one  electrum  piece  of  the  weight  of  224  grains. 
The  gold  piece  of  126  grains  (grm.  8-17)  would  be  equivalent 
to  ten  silver  pieces  or  one  electrum  piece  of  168  grains 
(grm.  10-89).  The  Phocaean  gold  or  electrum  coins  of 
260  grains  (grm.  16-84)  can  scarcely  have  been  regarded  as 
equivalent  to  two  Croesean  staters  of  126  grains  (grm.  8-17) 
since  the  gold  of  the  latter  is  far  purer. 

The  gold  of  Croesus,  and  of  the  Persian  kings  who 
\y  succeeded  him,  seems  to  have  superseded  the  electrum 
coinage.  It  is  not  easy  to  prove  this,  because  it  involves 
the  negative  proof,  that  of  the  electrum  coins  which  have 
come  down  to  us  none  belongs  to  the  second  half  of  the 
sixth  century.  This  would  scarcely  be  generally  conceded, 
and  it  is  of  course  quite  possible  that  the  Persian  kings 
may  have  in  the  sixth  century,  as  they  certainly  did  in  the 
Y  fifth,  allowed  to  a  few  Greek  cities  of  the  coast  the  privilege 
of  issuing  money  of  electrum.  All  that  we  can  do  is  to 
examine  the  electrum  coins  of  such  well-known  mints  as 
Chios,  Cyzicus,  Phocaea,  and  Lampsacus,  to  see  if  we  can 
there  discern   a  break  or  gap  in  the  series  which  might 

1  See  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  227. 


GOLD  OF  LYDIA  85 

correspond  to  the  period  540-500  b.  c.  This  may  easily  be 
done  by  the  help  of  the  earliest  plates  of  M.  Babelon's  great 
work.  The  identification  of  the  coins  of  the  Ionian  Revolt 
shows  us  the  state  of  monetary  art  in  Asia  Minor  in  500  b.c. 

Chios.  Mr.  Mavrogordato,  in  his  careful  paper  on  the 
coins  of  Chios,1  observes  that  the  coinage  of  electrum  must 
have  ceased  under  the  Persian  rule.  The  coins  are  quite 
consistent  with  that  view. 

Lampsacus.  There  certainly  seems  to  be  a  considerable 
interval  of  time  between  the  very  early  electrum  staters 
(Babelon,  PL  VIII.  1,  2)  and  Babelon,  PL  VIII.  5,  which  is 
of  the  time  of  the  revolt.  Nos.  3  and  4  of  this  plate,  where 
the  half-horse  is  surrounded  by  a  vine-wreath,  are  certainly 
of  the  fifth  century. 

Cyzicus.  Here,  if  anywhere,  we  should  expect  to  find  a 
continuous  and  uninterrupted  coinage  of  electrum.  And 
the  most  recent  writer  on  the  coins  of  Cyzicus,  Dr.  von 
Fritze,2  arranges  them  in  consecutive  series  from  600  b.c. 
onwards.  If,  however,  we  turn  to  von  Fritze's  plates,  we 
may  discern  a  distinct  gap  between  PL  I.  38  and  I.  39. 
Coins  1-38  on  that  plate  are  marine  in  character,  with  very 
few  exceptions.  The  tunny,  body  or  head,  appears  on  them 
all ;  and  fish  swimming  or  flying  appear  usually.  A  few 
winged  human  monsters  make  up  the  tale.  The  incuse  of 
the  reverse  is  rough  and  primitive.  Coins  I.  39  onwards 
are  of  quite  a  different  type  ;  the  tunny  comes  in  as  mint- 
mark,  but  the  types  are  very  varied,  animals  or  the  heads  of 
animals  being  usual.  The  incuse  has  become  a  mill-sail 
pattern.  It  is  true,  as  von  Fritze  points  out,  that  some  of 
the  human  heads  in  this  series  are  decidedly  archaic  in 
character,  such  heads  as  II.  13  and  19.  But  some  types,  of 
which  the  reverse  bears  the  same  mill-sail  incuse  as  these, 
must  be  dated  well  into  the  fifth  century.  I  am  disposed 
to  think  that  the  facts  of  the  coinage  of  Cyzicus  do  not 
compel  us  to  suppose  that  the  coinage  was  continuous 
through  the  sixth  century;  it  is  more  probable  that  it 
intermitted. 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  35.  3  Nomisma,  Part  VII. 


/ 


86  LYDIAN  AND  PERSIAN  COINAGE 

Phocaea.  The  early  electrum  of  Phocaea  must  almost 
certainly  have  come  to  an  end  when  the  bulk  of  the  in- 
habitants left  their  city  to  sail  westwards.  The  coinage 
was  resumed  under  the  Athenian  Empire. 

It  seems  then  that  the  electrum  coinage  of  Asia  Minor 
came  to  an  end  generally,  if  not  universally,  soon  after  the 
middle  of  the  sixth  century.  As  we  shall  see  later,  it  was 
revived  for  a  while  at  the  time  of  the  Ionian  Eevolt,  and 
continued  at  a  very  few  mints,  such  as  Cyzicus,  Phocaea, 
and  Lampsacus,  in  the  fifth  century ;  and  even,  at  Cyzicus, 
Phocaea,  and  Mytilene,  down  to  the  time  of  Alexander  the 
Great. 

§  2.     Gold  of  Pebsia. 

"When  the  kingdom  of  Croesus  fell,  about  546  b.c.,1  the 
royal  coinage  at  Sardes  probably  ceased.  Before  long,  its 
place  was  taken  by  the  royal  darics  and  sigli,  or  staters  of 
gold  and  drachms  of  silver,  issued  by  the  Persian  kings. 
The  daric  stater  was  a  few  grains  heavier  than  that  of 
Croesus,  following  the  Babylonic  standard,  also  a  little  less 
pure  in  metal.  It  was  current  until  the  fall  of  the  Persian 
empire,  and  governed  the  trade  of  Asia  Minor  for  ages. 
The  issue  of  gold  coin  was  the  exclusive  privilege  of  the 
Great  King,  a  privilege  jealously  guarded  and  enforced. 
Satraps  of  the  Persian  Empire  were  allowed  to  strike  silver 
coins  freely  for  the  needs  of  military  expeditions,  and  the 
Greek  cities  of  the  coast  struck  silver  for  ordinary  purposes 
of  trade.  But  no  issue  of  gold  coin  was  allowed,  save 
under  exceptional  circumstances. 

Although  this  view  is  generally  accepted,2  yet  it  is  not 
easy  to  establish  it  by  quotations  from  ancient  writers. 
Herodotus  seems  under  the  influence  of  such  a  view  when 

1  All  the  dates  in  early  Greek  and  Oriental  history  are  only  approximate. 
Winckler  prefers  for  the  date  of  Croesus'  fall  548  b.  c.  As  the  exact  year  in 
which  events  took  place  is  a  matter  of  small  importance  to  the  purpose  of 
the  present  work,  I  have  not  judged  it  necessary  to  enter  into  chronological 
discussions,  but  usually  accept  the  ordinary  view,  except  in  a  few  cases 
where  there  are  numismatic  data  to  come  in. 

1  M.  Babelon,  however,  does  not  allow  it.     Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  5. 


1/ 


GOLD  OF  PERSIA  87 

he  writes,1  '  Darius  wished  to  leave  such  a  memorial  of 
himself'  as  no  king  had  ever  left  before  :  therefore,  refining  \y^ 
his  gold  to  the  last  degree  of  purity,  he  issued  coins  of  it '. 
But  this  is,  of  course,  no  assertion  of  a  principle  of  state, 
that  no  one  else  should  issue  coin.  Nor  in  fact  is  it  likely 
that  the  issue  of  gold  coin  was  from  the  first  looked  upon 
as  something  quite  exceptional.  The  first  issue  of  pure 
gold  was  due  to  Croesus,  not  to  Darius.  It  seems  likely 
that  the  principle  that  the  issue  of  gold  coin  was  the  first 
privilege  of  authority  was  one  which  made  its  way  slowly 
and  perhaps  almost  unconsciously.  From  age  to  age  it 
became  more  solidly  fixed,  and  the  Roman  Empire  main- 
tained it  even  more  rigidly  than  did  that  of  Persia. 

The  type  of  the  darics  is  well  known.  It  is  a  figure  of 
the  king,  kneeling,  or  perhaps  rather  running,  holding 
spear  and  bow,  and  wearing  the  royal  crown,  the  kidaris. 
The  reverse  is  an  oblong  incuse,  in  which  occasionally  a  \yS 
device  may  be  made  out ;  but  more  often  the  search  for 
such  a  device  is  quite  fruitless.  (PI.  I.  7 ;  B.  M.  I.  17 ; 
B.  T.  X.  13-23.) 

Some  metrologists,  such  as  Lehmann-Haupt,  have  re- 
garded the  Croesean  and  daric  staters  as  of  different  origin, 
the  former  being  derived  from  the  common  gold  mina  of 
the  Babylonians,  the  latter  from  the  royal  gold  mina,  which 
was  heavier  by  one  thirty-sixth.  But  it  seems  that  in  fact 
the  two  were  nearly  equivalent,  since  the  Croesean  coin 
was  of  purer  metal  than  the  daric.  The  most  recent  investi-  ^T 
gation  of  the  specific  gravity  of  these  coins  (by  Mr.  Hunkin) 
shows  that  the  fineness  of  the  Croesean  staters  is  about  099, 
and  that  of  the  darics  about  0-98.  On  this  basis  the  daric 
would  be  slightly  more  valuable.2 

The  date  of  the  first  introduction  of  the  daric  is  a  matter 
of  some  uncertainty.  The  word  daric  is  a  Greek  adjective, 
formed  from  Darius,  and  it  is  expressly  associated  by  Julius 
Pollux  with  the  name  of  that  king,3  but  that  fact  does  not 

1  iv.  166. 

*  Num.  Chron.,  1887,  p.  303  ;  1916.  p.  258. 

s  Onom.  iii.  87  oi  Aaptiicol  ano  Aapdov. 


«/ 


88  LYDIAN  AND  PERSIAN  COINAGE 

necessarily  prove  that  darics  were  not  issued  before  the 
accession  of  Darius  in  521  b  c.  For  it  is  quite  maintainable 
that  the  Greeks  named  the  coin  after  the  Persian  king  best 
V  known  to  them,  even  if  they  were  issued  before  his  reign.1 
It  is  certainly  in  itself  improbable  that  Asia  Minor  had 
to  wait  until  the  reign  of  Darius  for  a  satisfactory  gold 
currency.  The  coinage  of  Persia  is  confessedly  modelled 
on  that  of  Lydia ;  and  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  25 
or  30  years  which  elapsed  between  the  overthrow  of 
Croesus  and  the  reforms  of  Darius  passed  without  the  issue 
by  Cyrus  and  Cambyses  of  coins  to  take  the  place  of  the 
Lydian  money.  Indeed,  so  improbable  does  this  seem,  that 
some  writers,  such  as  Francois  Lenormant  and  B.  V.  Head, 
have  supposed  that  the  Persian  governors  of  Sardes  con- 
tinued to  issue  money  of  the  types  and  the  standard  of 
Croesus.2  This  is  of  course  not  impossible,  and  parallels 
may  be  found  ;  but  it  is  improbable,  and  the  view  is  rightly 
rejected  by  M.  Babelon.3  Herodotus4  asserts  the  purity  of 
the  coin  issued  by  Darius,  but  does  not  at  all  imply  that 
he  was  the  first  to  issue  a  Persian  gold  coinage.  Thus  it 
seems  most  probable  that  the  Persian  darics  were  issued 
immediately  after  the  conquest  of  Lydia,  and  were  the 
institution  of  Cyrus  rather  than  of  Darius. 

It  has  been  supposed  that  half-darics  also  were  struck, 
because  Xenophon  records,  in  his  account  of  the  expedition 
of  the  younger  Cyrus,5  that  the  latter  promised  to  raise  the 
pay  of  his  soldiers  from  a  daric  a  month  to  a  daric  and 
a  half,  rpta  fjfuSapeiKd.  Since,  however,  no  half-darics  are 
known  to  exist,  it  is  probable  that  the  half-daric  was  a 

1  Attempts  have  been  made  to  show  that  similar  words  to  daric  were  used 
for  money  in  Assyria  in  pre-Persian  times.  In  any  case,  though  the  adjec- 
tive SaptiKos  is  regularly  formed  in  Greek  from  Aapeios,  it  may  be  what  is 
called  a  Volksetymologie,  and  really  have  nothing  to  do  with  that  king. 
Cf.  Harpocration  (Hultscb,  Metrol.  Script,  reliquiae,  p.  310),  tuKijOrjaav  5i  Aapeacol 
oi>x,  ws  oi  TrXiiaroi  vo/ii^ovcriv,  onb  Aapeiov  rov  Uip£ov  irarpos,  d\\'  dip'  iripov  nvbs 
iraXaiOTtpov  PaaiXtas. 

2  Lenormant,  Monn.  royales  de  la  Lydie,  p.  198  ;  Head,  Coinage  of  Lydia  and 
Persia,  p.  23. 

s  Babelon,  Traite,  p.  242.  *  Hdt.  iv.  166.  5  Anabasis,  i.  3.21. 


GOLD  OF  PERSIA  89 

money  of  account.  Double  darics  have  in  recent  years 
been  discovered  in  considerable  numbers,  especially  in  the 
Far  East.  They  certainly  belong  to  the  very  latest  time  of 
Persian  rule.  M.  Babelon  thinks  that  they  were  issued 
shortly  before  the  time  of  Alexander,  and  that  he  continued 
to  strike  them ;  but  numismatists  have  generally  been  more 
disposed  to  think  that  they  were  struck  only  by  Alexander 
and  his  generals. 

The  main  subsidiary  coins  to  the  daric  were  silver  coins 
of  the  same  type  and  form,  the  sigli  or  shekels  weighing  \^r 
about  86  grains  (grm.  5-57),  which,  as  we  know  from  the 
testimony  of  Xenophon,1  passed  at  the  rate  of  20  to  the 
daric.  It  is  strange  indeed  to  find  thus,  at  the  beginning 
of  consecutive  history,  the  primary  coinage  of  Asia  con- 
sisting of  gold  coins  of  nearly  the  weight  of  an  English 
sovereign,  divided  into  twenty  sigli,  each  nearly  of  the 
metal  weight  of  a  shilling,  or  a  German  mark. 

Very  rarely,  fractions  of  the  daric  and  the  siglos  seem  to 
have  been  struck,  of  the  same  types  as  the  larger  coins. 
Twelfths  of  the  daric  are  mentioned  by  M.  Babelon,2  \y/^ 
weighing  10-5  to  11-5  grains  (grm.  0-65  to  0-75).  Also  a  small 
fraction  weighing  grm.  0-155  (2-4  grains),  and  bearing  only 
the  head  of  the  king. 

Several  ancient  historians  bear  witness  to  the  enormous 
extent  of  the  daric  currency  of  the  Persian  Empire.  In 
,  the  reign  of  Xerxes,  as  Herodotus 3  informs  us,  a  wealthy 
Lydian  named  Pythius  had  amassed  four  millions  of  darics, 
lacking  seven  thousand.  The  Persian  archers,  as  the  darics 
were  called  because  they  bore  the  type  of  the  king  holding  *  / 
the  bow,  were  but  too  well  known  and  too  potent  in  the 
domestic  affairs  of  Greece.  The  vast  stores  of  them  found 
by  Alexander  at  Ecbatana  and  Susa  4  inundated  the  whole 
Greek  world  with  gold,  and  doubtless  formed  the  material 
out  of  which  many  of  Alexander's  own  coins  were  struck. 

1  Anabasis,  i.  7.  18,  where  the  talent  of  silver  (6,000  sigli)  is  equated  with 
300  darics. 

»  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  46.  »  Hdt.  vii.  28. 

1  At  Susa  Alexander  captured  9,000  talents  of  darics,  besides  unminted 
gold  and  silver.     Diodorus,  xvii.  66. 


90  LYDIAN  AND  PERSIAN  COINAGE 

A  century  ago  the  daric  was  a  comparatively  rare  coin 
in  our  museums,  the  obvious  reason  being  that  those  found 
were  concealed  by  the  finders,  and  at  once  melted  down. 
A  great  abundance  of  them  has  appeared  in  recent  years. 
To  determine  their  find-spots  is  almost  impossible ;  but  they 
certainly  range  over  a  great  part  of  western  Asia. 

Can  they  be  classified  as  regards  period?  Lenormant 
tried  to  find  on  them  the  portraits  of  the  successive  reigning 
monarchs  of  Persia.  Mr.  Head,  with  his  usual  sanity  and 
moderation,  writes  l :  'A  close  examination  of  the  gold 
darics  enables  us  to  perceive  that,  in  spite  of  their  general 
similarity,  there  are  differences  of  style.  Some  are  archaic, 
and  date  from  the  time  of  Darius  and  Xerxes,  while  others 
are  characterized  by  more  careful  work,  and  these  belong 
to  the  later  monarchs  of  the  Achaemenian  dynasty.'  More 
recently,  M.  Babelon 2  thinks  that  he  has  found  a  clue  in 
a  hoard  of  300  darics  discovered  in  the  canal  of  Xerxes  by 
Mount  Athos,  which  he  ventures  to  divide,  on  the  ground 
of  minute  differences  in  the  portrait  and  beard,  between 
Darius  and  Xerxes.  For  my  part  I  prefer  to  stop  at  the 
point  marked  by  Mr.  Head.3  An  exceptional  coin  has  as  type 
the  king  not  bearded  but  beardless.  M.  Babelon  proposes 
to  attribute  it  to  the  younger  Cyrus ;  but  there  appears  no 
sufficient  reason  for  such  assignment.  In  fact,  several  of 
the  Persian  kings  came  to  the  throne  young.  And  the 
extreme  rarity  of  the  coin  in  question  is  a  strong  reason 
against  supposing  that  it  was  issued  by  Cyrus,  who  must 
have  used  gold  coins  in  great  quantities  to  pay  his  Greek 
mercenaries,  who  received  a  daric  or  more  a  month.  More- 
over, the  weight  of  the  example  in  Paris  (grm.  8-46:  130-5 
grains)  seems  to  point  to  the  period  of  Alexander  the  Great. 

1  Lydia  and  Persia,  p.  28. 

2  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  51  :  PI.  LXXXVI,  16-18. 

3  The  arrangement  of  M.  Babelon  is  inconsistent  with  the  data  of  the  find 
in  Cilicia  published  by  Mr.  Newell  in  Num.  Chron.,  1914. 


CHAPTER    III 
THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT1 

In  a  paper  published  in  the  Proceedings  of  the  British 
Academy  2  I  tried  to  show  that  the  cities  of  Ionia  which 
took  part  in  the  revolt  against  Persia  in  the  years  500- 
494  b.  c.  issued  an  uniform  coinage  in  electrum.  So  far  as 
I  am  aware,  this  discovery  has  met  with  general  acceptance. 
I  propose  here  to  state  my  view  somewhat  more  in  detail, 
and  to  trace  certain  corollaries. 

I  need  not  go  through  the  story  of  the  Ionian  Revolt,  as 
narrated  by  Herodotus :  it  is  fair  to  assume  that  every 
scholar  is  familiar  with  it.  It  may,  however,  be  well  here 
to  mention  the  cities,  the  names  of  which  occur  in  this 
section  of  the  story  of  Herodotus,  with  the  definite  facts 
recorded  of  them,  as  the  issues  of  coins  would  probably  be 
civic  issues.  It  was  Miletus,  under  the  guidance  of  Arista- 
goras,  which  began  the  revolt  (Hdt.  v.  35).  It  spread  rapidly 
to  Mylasa  and  Termera  in  Caria,  as  well  as  to  Mytilene  and 
Cyme.  The  Ionian  cities  expelled  their  tyrants,  and  set  up 
o-TpctTTjyoi  in  their  place  (v.  37).  The  Athenians  and  Ere- 
trians,  at  the  invitation  of  Aristagoras,  land  at  Ephesus,  and 
burn  Sardes  (v.  101).  The  Ionians  compel  the  people  of 
Byzantium  and  the  Hellespont,  and  the  Carians,  including 
the  Caunians,  to  join  them  (v.  103).  The  Cyprians  join 
them  willingly  (v.  104),  but  are  reconquered  (v.  115). 
Daurises  the  Persian  reduces  Dardanus,  Abydus,  Percote, 

1  This  chapter  is  reprinted,  with  certain  omissions  and  modifications,  from 
the  Journal  of  Hellenic  Studies  for  1911.  It  is  somewhat  disproportionately 
long  :  my  excuse  must  be  the  importance  of  the  class  of  coins,  which  I  was 
the  first  to  identify. 

*  Vol.  iii,  1908. 


92      THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT 

Lampsacus,  and  Paesus  in  the  Troad  and  Mysia  (v.  117).  He 
attacks  the  Carians  unsuccessfully  (v.  121).  Hymeas  the 
Persian  reduces  Cius  and  Gergithus  and  other  places  in 
the  Troad  (v.  122).  The  Persians  take  Clazomenae  and 
Cyme  (v.  123).  Aristagoras  departs  in  despair  to  Thrace, 
where  he  dies,  leaving  the  government  of  Miletus  to 
Pythagoras  (v.  126).  The  Chians  capture  Histiaeus,  but 
afterwards  release  him,  and  he  goes  to  Lesbos,  thence  to 
Byzantium  (vi.  5).  The  battle  of  Lade,  in  which  Miletus 
has  80  ships,  Chios  100.  Samos  60,  Priene  12,  Myus  3, 
Teos  17,  Erythrae  8,  Phocaea  3,  Lesbos  70.  [Notably  absent 
are  Ephesus  and  Lebedus]  (vi.  8).  Flight  of  the  Samians 
and  Lesbians.  Desperate  resistance  of  the  Chians :  Persian 
victory  (vi.  15).  A  band  of  Chian  fugitives  cut  off  by 
Ephesians  (vi.  16).  Taking  of  Miletus  (vi.  19).  Samians  sail 
to  Sicily  (vi.  22) :  their  temples  spared  (vi.  25).  Histiaeus 
gains  possession  of  Chios  (vi.  26).  The  Persians  reduce 
Chios,  Lesbos,  and  Tenedos,  also  the  cities  of  the  Hellespont, 
Chersonesus,  Perinthus,  Selymbria,  and  Byzantium.  The 
people  of  Byzantium  and  Chalcedon  escape  to  Mesembria. 
The  people  of  Cyzicus  had  already  submitted  unattacked  to 
the  Persian  satrap  of  Dascylium  (vi.  33).  Mardonius  the 
Persian  comes  to  Ionia:  he  puts  down  the  tyrants,  and 
establishes  democracies  (vi.  43).  Artaphernes  having  already 
established  a  federal  system  among  the  cities,  so  that  their 
disputes  should  be  amicably  settled,  measured  out  their 
territories,  and  arranged  tribute  on  the  basis  of  that  which 
they  had  paid  before  the  revolt:  an  arrangement  which 
endured  (vi.  42). 

Such  being  the  facts  recorded  by  Herodotus,  let  us  next 
see  what  is  the  extant  numismatic  evidence.  There  is  a 
well-marked  and  homogeneous  set  of  coins  in  electrum, 
evidently  contemporary  one  with  another,  and  struck  on 
the  coast  of  Asia  Minor  about  500  b.  c.  Some  of  them  are 
of  certain,  or  almost  certain,  attribution :  others  are  of  quite 
uncertain  mint.  The  reverse  of  all  is  uniform  :  an  incuse 
square  divided  into  four  squares.  The  weight  is  also  uni- 
form :  they  are  staters  of  the  Milesian  standard,  weighing 


THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT       93 

from  216  to  218  grains,  grm.  13-98  to  14-09.     The  obverse 
types  are  as  follows : 1 

1.  Sphinx  seated  to  r. 

2.  Forepart  of  bull  r.,  looking  back. 

3.  Eagle  to  1.  looking  back,  standing  on  hare. 

4.  Eagle  to  1.  looking  back ;  in  front  a  dolphin. 

5.  Forepart  of  winged  boar  to  r. 

6.  Forepart  of  winged  horse  to  L  ;  above,  leaf-pattern. 

7.  Horse  galloping  to  1. ;  beneath,  leaf. 

8.  Sow  walking  to  r. 

9.  Cock  to  r. ;  above,  palmette. 

10.  Head  of  Athena  in  close-fitting  helmet.2 

The  similarity  of  these  coins  one  to  another  in  fabric  and 
art,  in  weight,  and  even  in  colour  had  long  ago  struck 
numismatists.  In  1890  M.  J.  P.  Six  maintained  that  they 
were  all  issued  from  the  mint  of  Chios.3  M.  Babelon4  did 
not  accept  this  view ;  but  he  held  that  the  coins,  in  view  of 
their  identical  fabric,  must  have  been  issued  either  from 
a  single  mint,  or  by  a  group  of  closely  allied  cities. 

As  to  their  date  the  authorities  differ  rather  widely. 
M.  Six  thinks  of  the  end  of  the  fifth  century :  M.  Babelon 
gives  them  to  '  une  epoque  assez  avancee  dans  le  cinquieme 
siecle'.  These  views  seem  to  me  impossible.  The  art, 
though  fine,  is  distinctly  archaic,  and  after  490  B.C.  there 
were  no  issues  of  electrum  staters  in  Asia,  except  at 
the  privileged  mints  of  Cyzicus,  Phocaea,  Lampsacus,  and 
Mytilene. 

Mr.  Head's  view  of  date  is  much  nearer  the  mark.  As 
early  as  1887 5  he  accepted  for  the  coins  of  this  class  the 
date  of  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century  b.c.  In  1892  he 
observed6  that  they  probably  began  to  be   struck   before 

1  PI.  I,  8-13.  It  does  not  seem  necessary  to  give  a  detailed  list  of 
examples  :  such  a  list  will  be  found  in  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  pp.  191-8 ; 
Head,  Cat. Ionia,  pp.  7-8  ;  Six,  Num.  Chron.,  1890,  pp.  215-18. 

1  Bevue  Xumism.,  1911,  p.  60.  *  Num.  Chron.,  1890,  p.  215. 

4  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  198. 

*  Num.  Chron.,  1887,  p.  281. 

•  B.  if.  Cat.  Ionia  ;  Introduction,  p.  xxv. 


94      THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT 

500  b.c.  But  if  we  accept,  as  I  think  we  must,  the  view 
that  this  group  of  coins  was  issued  on  the  Ionian  coast 
about  500  b.  c.  by  a  group  of  allied  cities,  that  is  tantamount 
to  saying  that  they  are  the  money  of  the  Ionian  Revolt. 
It  is  strange  that  numismatists  should  have  missed  so  obvious 
a  corollary. 

The  question  of  the  exchange  value  of  these  staters,  and 
their  relation  to  the  contemporary  silver  drachms,  is  one  of 
considerable  difficulty.  They  are  of  more  uniform  weight 
and  composition  than  the  early  electrum  of  Asia  Minor. 
They  contain  from  40  to  20  per  cent,  of  gold,  and  from  60 
to  80  per  cent,  of  silver.1  If  we  reckon  their  average  con- 
tents as  30  and  70  per  cent,  respectively,  and  compute  gold 
as  13§  times  more  valuable  than  silver,  we  shall  find  that 
the  staters  were  intrinsically  worth  about  76  grains  of  gold 
or  1,012  grains  of  silver,  which  is  nearly  twenty  silver 
drachms  of  the  Milesian  standard. 

If  these  equations  were  established,  we  should  have  a 
proof  of  the  view  maintained  in  the  Introduction  that  the 
convention  fixing  the  value  of  electrum  at  ten  times  that  of 
silver  did  not  outlast  the  sixth  century. 

It  is  very  probable  that  the  choice  of  electrum  as  the 
material  for  the  coinage  of  the  League  was  dictated  by 
a  determination  to  be  free  from  the  tyranny  of  Persian 
gold.  Electrum  was  the  ancient  currency  of  the  Ionian 
cities,  and  in  time  of  crisis  they  seem  to  have  reverted  to 
it.  At  an  earlier  time  the  stater  of  224  grains  had  probably 
passed  as  the  equivalent  of  the  gold  coins  of  Croesus ; 2  and 
it  is  not  impossible  that  the  revolting  cities  may  have  had 
a  hope  that  their  new  coins  would  attain  the  value  of  the 
daric :  but  it  is  very  improbable  that  this  hope  ever  came 
to  fruition. 

At  a  somewhat  later  time,  as  we  learn  from  the  Anabasis 
of  Xenophon,  a  daric  or  a  Cyzicene  stater  per  month  was 
the  ordinary  pay  of  a  mercenary  soldier.  Xenophon  tells 
us  that,  when  the  Greek  mercenaries  of  Cyrus  learned  that 

1  Six,  in  Num.  Chron.,  1890,  p.  218.  2  See  above,  p.  84. 


THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT      95 

they  were  to  march  against  the  Great  King,  they  demanded 
higher  pay ;  and  Cyrus  promised  them  a  daric  and  a  half 
a  month,  in  the  place  of  a  daric,  which  they  had  so  far 
received.1  Later  these  Greek  soldiers  were  offered,  by 
Timasion,  a  Cyzicene  stater  a  month ; 2  and  Seuthes  the 
Thracian  made  a  similar  offer.3  This  being  the  case,  it 
seems  not  unreasonable  to  think  that  the  coins  which  we 
are  considering,  of  somewhat  lower  value  than  the  daric 
and  the  Cyzicene,  represent  each  a  month's  pay  of  a  mer- 
cenary. No  doubt  the  sailors  and  soldiers  of  the  Ionian 
fleet  were  in  the  main  not  mercenaries,  but  citizens.  Yet 
the  poorer  would  require  pay. 

The  issue  of  an  uniform  coinage  by  a  set  of  allied  cities  is 
in  later  Greece  an  ordinary  phenomenon.  There  is  the  set 
of  coins  struck  by  Rhodes,  Samos,  Ephesus,  and  other  cities 
of  the  Ionian  coast  after  the  victory  of  Conon  at  Cnidus, 
and  the  expulsion  of  Spartan  governors  in  394.  In  that 
case  the  type  of  reverse  is  the  same,  young  Heracles 
strangling  the  snakes;  and  the  inscription  £YN  (a-vvfjLa\ia) 
records  the  alliance.  Later  we  have  the  coinage  of  the 
Achaean  League,  of  the  Lycian  League,  and  other  con- 
federacies. The  earliest  issue  of  the  kind  took  place  among 
the  Greek  cities  of  Southern  Italy  about  the  middle  of  the 
sixth  century :  each  of  the  cities  retaining  its  own  types, 
while  the  fabric  of  the  incuse  reverse  (obverse  type  reversed) 
is  identical  in  all,  as  is  usually  the  monetary  standard. 
Numismatists  suppose  that  the  appearance  of  this  uniform 
coinage  proves  some  kind  of  understanding  to  have  existed 
among  the  Greek  cities ;  but  the  nature  of  it  is  doubtful.4 
I  think  that  those  who  suppose  it  to  prove  the  existence 
of  some  sort  of  Pythagorean  brotherhood  throughout  Magna 
Graecia  go  beyond  the  evidence ;  for  we  do  not  know  that  the 
influence  of  Pythagoras  had  much  effect  on  politics.  It  is 
clear,  however,  that  this  Italian  coinage  might  serve  as  a 
precedent  to  the  Ionian  cities.  In  the  case  of  these  latter 
we  have  more  definite  proof  not  merely  of  a  confederation 

1  Anab.  i.  3.  21.  2  v.  6.  23.  3  vii.  3.  10. 

4  See  G.  Macdonald,  Coin-types,  p.  12. 


96      THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  EEVOLT 

of  cities,  but  even  of  a  federal  unity.  For  Herodotus  repre- 
sents the  envoys  sent  by  the  Ionians  to  stir  up  a  revolt  in 
Cyprus  as  saying  'ff/xeay  a7T€7re/z^/re  to  koivov  tcov  'Ia>v<av 
(v.  109) :  and  this  word  koivov  implies  a  close  union. 

The  assignment  of  the  coins  above  mentioned  to  particular 
cities  involves  some  difficulty.  No.  1  bears  the  ordinary 
type  of  Chios,  the  sphinx,  and  was  almost  certainly  struck 
in  that  city.  The  early  electrum  coinage  of  Chios  is  by  no 
means  easy  to  arrange ;  but  the  excellent  paper  of  J.  Mavro- 
gordato1  facilitates  matters.  A  Chian  stater  was  actually 
found  at  Vourla  in  company  with  other  coins  of  the  Revolt.2 
It  seems,  however,  almost  impossible  in  view  of  its  style 
and  fabric  to  assign  it  to  a  period  much  later  than  the 
middle  of  the  sixth  century.  It  seems  that  the  coins  of 
the  class  of  the  Vourla  stater  may  well  be  the  prototypes 
of  all  the  staters  of  the  League.  A  somewhat  later  and 
much  finer  stater  of  Chios  may  well  be  of  the  time  of  the 
League  (Num.  Chron.,  1915,  PL  II.  10).  I  must  mention  that 
the  stater  which  in  my  previous  paper  (J.  H.  S.  xxxi,  PL  VII.  1) 
I  selected  as  being  of  the  time  of  the  Revolt  is  now  regarded 
as  a  forgery,  and  I  wish  to  withdraw  it  in  favour  of  the 
stater  last  mentioned.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  these  pieces 
of  Chian  electrum  are  continuations  of  a  series  of  staters 
of  Milesian  weight  which  began  at  Chios  in  the  seventh 
century ;  it  is  at  once  suggested  to  us  that  it  is  Chios 
which  is  the  true  originator  of  the  whole  coinage,  other 
cities  merely  falling  into  line  and  adopting  the  Chian 
standard.  This  completely  accords  with  the  position  taken 
by  the  Chians  among  the  allies :  they  furnished  the  largest 
contingent  of  the  fleet,  and  were  the  last  to  fly  at  Lade. 
In  the  sixth  century  Chios  was  very  flourishing;  and  the 
works  of  the  Chian  sculptors  Archermus  and  his  sons  had 
influence  far  and  wide. 

Indeed,  some  numismatists  might  even  be  disposed,  in 
view  of  the  great  uniformity  of  the  coins,  to  give  them, 
as  did  M.  Six,  all  to  the  mint  of  Chios ;  to  hold  that  Chios 

i  Num.  Chron.,  1915.  2  Ibid.,  PI.  I.  7. 


THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  EEVOLT      97 

became  the  banker  of  the  League,  and  struck  money  for 
the  various  cities  with  their  own  types.  This  is  possible, 
but  improbable :  it  is  far  more  likely  that  each  city  issued 
its  own  coins.  To  take  the  nearest  parallel,  we  do  not 
suppose  that  the  early  incuse  coins  of  South  Italy  were 
issued  at  a  single  mint;  but  their  fabric  is  even  more 
notably  uniform  than  is  the  case  in  Ionia. 

No.  2  is  almost  certainly  Samian.  The  half-bull  is  the 
ordinary  type  of  Samos  in  later  times:  the  reversion  of 
the  head  is  according  to  the  fashion  of  art  at  the  time. 

No.  3  is  probably  of  Abydos,  the  type  of  which  city  is 
an  eagle.  No.  4  may  also  be  of  Abydos;  but  the  eagle 
standing  on  a  dolphin  is  the  ordinary  type  of  the  Pontic 
city  of  Sinope,  a  colony  of  Miletus,  which  may  have 
followed  the  fortunes  of  the  parent  city.  Abydos  joined 
the  Ionian  League,  but  was  soon  reduced  by  Daurises. 

No.  5  bears  the  type  of  Clazomenae,  which  city  was 
also  reconquered  by  the  Persians  before  the  battle  of 
Lade. 

No.  6  is  certainly  of  Lampsacus.  It  is  of  different 
standard  from  the  other  electrum  coins  of  Lampsacus,1 
which  are  of  Phocaean  weight,  and  was  evidently  struck 
on  a  special  occasion.  M.  Babelon  observes  that  it '  permet 
d'affirmer  que  Lampsaque  conclut,  a  un  moment  donne, 
avec  Chios  et,  sans  doute,  d'autres  villes,  un  traite  d' alliance 
monetaire '.  It  is  strange  that,  having  gone  so  far,  M.  Babelon 
should  not  have  thought  of  the  Ionian  Revolt ;  doubtless  he 
would  have  done  so  but  for  his  opinion  of  the  late  date 
of  the  coins. 

No.  7  may  be  of  Cyme  in  Aeolis,  the  usual  type  of  which 
city  is  in  later  times  the  forepart  of  a  horse.  Cyme  and 
Lampsacus  both  joined  the  Ionian  Revolt  at  first. 

No.  8  is  sometimes  attributed  to  Methymna  in  Lesbos. 
This  attribution  is,  however,  very  doubtful,  as  the  early  type 
of  the  city  is  a  boar  not  a  sow ;  and  in  relation  to  mythology 
the  distinction  of  gender  is  important. 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  187. 

1887  H 


98      THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT 

No.  9  is  given,  with  more  reason,  to  Dardanus.  Dardanus 
was  one  of  the  cities  reduced  by  Daurises.  Pollux  (ix.  84) 
states  that  the  monetary  type  of  Dardanus  was  the  cock ; 
and  this  statement  is  borne  out  by  the  coins  of  the  city. 
Not  impossibly,  however,  the  cock,  the  connexion  of  which 
with  the  sun-god  is  natural,  may  be  the  type  of  the  city  of 
Miletus.1 

No.  10  was  discovered,  after  my  paper  was  published, 
at  Vourla  (Clazomenae),  with  other  electrum  coins  of  the 
League,  and  was  published  by  M.  R.  Jameson  in  the  Revue 
Numismatique  for  1911.  It  was  almost  certainly  struck  at 
Priene,  which  city  contributed  twelve  ships  at  Lade.  In 
the  same  find  were  silver  coins  of  Clazomenae  of  the  class 
mentioned  below:  their  attribution  to  the  time  of  the 
League  is  thus  confirmed.  Hectae  of  electrum,  with  the 
type  of  a  bull's  head  and  neck,  were  also  found.  Samos  is 
their  probable  mint. 

It  thus  appears  that  all  the  coins  of  the  series  which  we 
are  considering  are  attributed  either  with  certainty,  or 
at  least  with  some  degree  of  probability,  to  cities  which 
joined  the  Revolt.  But  it  is  noteworthy  that  several  of 
these  cities  were  reconquered  by  the  Persians  some  time 
before  the  battle  of  Lade:  the  monetary  convention  then 
must  have  been  formed  quite  early.  And  the  notable 
phrase  in  which  Herodotus  speaks  of  the  Ionians  at  the 
beginning  of  the  revolt  as  to  kolvov  to>v  'Iebvow,  suggests  that 
there  was  formed  from  the  first  a  regular  federation;  the 
alliance  was  not  a  mere  collection  of  detached  cities,  but 
a  deliberate  attempt  to  create  an  Ionian  nationality.  It 
was  in  some  senses  an  anticipation  of  the  League  of  Delos. 
That  no  electrum  coins  have  yet  made  their  appearance  j 
which  we  can  attribute  with  confidence  to  Miletus,  Teos,  j 
or  Mytilene  may  of  course  be  merely  an  accident :  we  must  ( 
be  on  the  look-out  for  them. 

The  Ionian  coinage  was  in  a  manner  continued  after  the 
suppression  of  the  revolt.     The  well-known  and  beautiful 

1  See  above,  p.  75. 


THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT      99 


series  of  the  electrum  staters  of  Cyzicus  begins  just  at  the 
bime  when  the  Ionian  coinage  ceases,  and  goes  on  to  the 
middle  of  the  fourth  century.  The  Cyzicene  staters  do  not 
follow  the  Milesian  standard,  nor  do  they  stand  quite  alone  ; 
Lampsacus,  Mytilene,  Phocaea  all  issue  electrum  staters  or 
hectae  on  certain  occasions.  But  the  position  of  Cyzicus 
in  coinage  is  unique.  This  may  be  to  some  extent  explained 
by  the  fact  that  Cyzicus  alone  among  the  revolted  cities 
came  back  to  Persian  rule  without  resistance  and  without 
punishment.  Generally  speaking,  the  Ionian  cities  were 
treated  with  clemency,  an  exception  being  made  in  the 
case  of  Miletus.  Indeed,  the  Persians  treated  them  with 
far  more  leniency  than  they  would  have  shown  to  one 
another  in  case  of  capture,  and  the  coinage  of  Cyzicus  may 
be  regarded  as  at  first  a  general  Ionian  currency,  and  later 
as  a  coinage  specially  favoured  and  protected  by  Athens, 
especially  for  the  commerce  of  the  Euxine.1  The  King 
of  Persia  jealously  guarded  for  himself  the  issue  of  gold 
coin ;  and  the  Athenians  put  down  so  far  as  they  could 
the  issue  of  silver  money  by  the  cities  belonging  to  their 
Empire.  But  the  electrum  money  of  Cyzicus  seems  to  have 
been  tolerated  both  by  Persia  and  Athens. 

I  have  as  yet  spoken  only  of  the  electrum  staters  of  the 
Ionian  cities.  These  constituted  the  main  issues,  a  fact 
which  would  fit  in  well  with  my  conjecture  that  each  stater 
j  represents  a  month's  pay  of  a  sailor  or  a  marine.  Fractions 
in  electrum  are  published  by  M.  Babelon 2  as  belonging 
to  this  series  :  at  Chios  twelfths ;  at  Cyme  (?)  twelfths  and 
twenty-fourths  with  a  horse's  head  for  type;  at  Abydos 
forty-eighths.  In  my  opinion  these  coins  are  of  earlier 
date,  and  do  not  belong  to  the  group.  But  I  think  we  are 
able  to  identify  certain  silver  coins  as  having  been  struck 
as  fractions  of  the  staters. 

The  most  distinctive  of  these  are  certain  silver  coins  of 
Lampsacus — 

1  Demosthenes,  Against  Fhormio,  p.  914. 

2  Traite,  ii.  1,  pp.  190-8. 
H    2 


100    THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT 

Obv.  Forepart  of  winged  horse.     Bev.  Incuse  square. 

Weight,  103-105  grains  (grm.  6-67-6-80)  {J.  H.  S.,  191 

PL  VII.  8). 
Weight,  19-20  grains  (grm.  1.23-1-29)  (ibid.  11). 
B.  M.  Cat.  Mysia,  p.  78,  PI.  XVIII.  4-6. 

These  coins  are  given  in  the  catalogue  to  500  B.C.,  and 
their  fine  careful  archaic  style  well  suits  that  period.  But 
a  noteworthy  fact  is  that  they  follow  the  Milesian  standard, 
of  which  they  are  didrachms,  and  probably  diobols,  respec- 
tively. The  Milesian  standard  of  weight  is  usually  confined 
to  Southern  Ionia,  to  Samos,  Ephesus,  Rhodes,  &c.  This 
standard  is  not  used  for  other  coins  of  Lampsacus,  nor  by 
other  cities  of  the  Propontis.  There  is  only  one  period  at 
which  such  coins  are  likely  to  have  been  issued,  and  that  is 
the  time  of  the  Ionian  Revolt,  when  the  Milesian  standard 
was  for  a  time  accepted  as  national.  Closety  similar  to  these 
are  coins  of  Erythrae: — didrachms  and  tetrobols. 

Obv.  Horseman  on  horse  cantering  to  r.     Bet.  Incuse  square. 
Weight,    108-9   grains    (grm.    7-7-06)   (J.    H.    8.,    1911, 

PI.  VII.  9). 
Weight,  36  grains  (grm.  2-33)  (ibid.  12). 
B.  M.  Cat.  Ionia,  p.  118,  PI.  XV.  1. 

Clazomenae : — didrachms,  drachms,  and  diobols.   PI.  1. 14. 

Obv.  Forepart  of  winged  boar  flying  to  r.    Bev.  Incuse  square. 
Weight,   104-108  grains  (grm.  6-75-7)  (J.  H.  S.,  1911, 

PI.  VII.  14). 
Weight,  41-51  grains  (grm.  2-65-3-30)  (ibid.  13). 
Weight,  15-18  grains  (grm.  -97-1-16)  (ibid.  15). 
B.  M.  Cat.  Ionia,  p.  17,  PI.  VI.  1-3. 

These  coins  are  in  style  and  fabric  identical  with  the 
above-cited  coins  of  Lampsacus.  The  incuse  of  the  reverse 
at  first  sight  looks  somewhat  early.  But  the  types  are 
careful  and  highly  finished.  The  editors  of  the  British 
Museum  catalogues  give  them  to  the  time  500-480  B.C.,  and 
it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  this  is  right.  The  art  is 
just  like  that  of  the  Ionian  staters.  Erythrae  after  490  B.C. 
goes  over  to  the  Persian  monetary  standard.     Clazomenae 


THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT     101 

[either  ceases  to  coin,  or  strikes  small  divisions  of  Attic 
weight.1      Probably  20  silver  drachms  went  to  the  stater 

I  of  electrum. 

A  little  searching  brings  to  light  other  silver  coins  which 
seem  to  belong  to  the  same  time : 

Miletus.2    Tetrobols  and  diobols. 
Obv.  Lion  to  r.     Bev.  Star  in  incuse. 

Weight,    31-32    grains  (grm.   20-207)  (J.  H.  S.,  1911, 
PL  VII.  16). 
Obv.    Forepart  of  lion  with  head  turned  back.     Bev.  Star  in 
incuse. 
Weight,  16-19  grains  (grm.  1  03-1-23)  (ibid.  18). 

Mr.  Head  gives  these  coins  to  the  period  after  478  B.C. 
But  the  larger  denomination  corresponds  in  weight  (roughly) 
with  the  coin  of  Erythrae :  the  smaller  denomination  with 
the  coins  of  Clazomenae.  And  as  Miletus  was  utterly 
destroyed  in  494,  and  the  surviving  inhabitants  carried 
away  to  the  mouth  of  the  Tigris,  it  is  probable  that  the 
coinage  then  ceased,  and  indeed  was  not  renewed  until 
the  break-up  of  Athenian  domination  at  the  end  of  the  fifth 
century.3  The  coins  of  other  cities,  such  as  Ephesus,  which 
ordinarily  used  the  Milesian  standard,  are  not  easily  dated 
with  exactness. 

Chios.     Tetrobols. 

It  may  have  been  on  this  occasion  that  Chios  issued  the 
series  of  silver  coins  having  on  the  obverse  a  sphinx  and 
an  amphora,  and  on  the  reverse  an  incuse  square  quartered, 
which  have  the  weight  of  36-40  grains  (grm.  2-33-2-60). 
B.  M.  Cat.  Ionia,  p.  329,  PI.  XXXII.  5.  For  the  other 
coins  of  these  types,  belonging  to  the  middle  of  the  fifth 
century,  are  of  a  much  heavier  standard,  50-56  grains 
(grm.  3-24-3-62). 

Such  are  the  coins  of  electrum  and  of  silver  which  I  have 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Ionia,  pp.  18,  119. 
1  B.  M.  Cat.  Ionia,  pp.  185-6.     PI.  XXI.  3,  4. 

3  Several  of  these  coins  of  Miletus  oceur  in  a  find  of  coins  in  Egypt,  of 
which  few  are  later  than  about  500  b.  c.     Num.  Chron.,  1890,  p.  4. 


102    THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT 

up  to  the  present  been  able  to  connect  with  the  Ionian 
Revolt.  The  search  may  perhaps  be  carried  further.  In 
any  case  the  establishment  of  fixed  dates  for  coins  at  so 
many  cities  must  needs  help  us  considerably  in  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  monetary  issues  of  those  cities  in  chronological 
order.  Fixed  dates  are  the  first  necessity  of  the  historically 
minded  numismatist. 

A  certain  amount  of  objective  light  is  thrown  back  on 
the  character  of  the  Revolt.  Herodotus,  carried  on  by  his 
dramatic  genius,  is  naturally  disposed  to  exaggerate  the 
part  taken  in  the  history  of  the  Revolt  by  interesting 
personalities.  Nothing  could  be  more  impersonal  than  the 
coins.  They  bear  no  names  of  leaders,  nor  even  of  cities : 
they  belong  primarily  to  the  kolvov  t5>v  'I&vav  ;  and  they 
suggest  that  had  the  Revolt  succeeded,  other  things  than 
coins  would  have  been  held  in  common  by  the  cities, 
perhaps  even  a  powerful  State  might  have  arisen.  Indeed, 
we  have  in  Herodotus  a  hint  that,  though  the  attempt 
failed,  it  yet  had  some  result  in  counteracting  the  excessive 
autonomy  of  the  cities  of  Ionia.  He  records  to  our  surprise 
the  leniency  of  the  Persian  victors,  who,  in  place  of  selling 
the  people  as  slaves,  delivered  them  from  their  tyrants, 
established  something  like  a  federal  arrangement  among 
them,1  and  put  upon  them  no  heavier  tribute  than  they 
had  borne  before  the  Revolt.  It  may  be  that  this  leniency 
was  a  piece  of  Persian  policy,  in  view  of  the  contemplated 
invasion  of  Hellas.  If  so,  it  was  very  successful ;  for  a  great 
part  of  the  fleet  of  Xerxes  at  Salamis  consisted  of  Ionian  j 
ships  ;  and  some  of  them  were  zealous  in  the  Persian  service. 
Xerxes  is  said  to  have  treated  the  accusation  of  treason  , 
brought  by  the  Phoenicians  against  the  Ionians  as  a  vile 
calumny.  It  is  quite  in  accord  with  this  that  an  inter-  ! 
national  or  inter-civic  coinage  in  electrum  by  Cyzicus  was 
allowed  by  the  Satrap  of  Dascylium.  If  at  most  cities  of  J 
the  Ionian  coast  silver  coinage  is  rare  in  the  fifth  century,  \ 
the  fault  lies  not  in  Persian  oppression  but  in  the  jealousy 

1  Hdt.  vi.  42    ffvvdrjKas    a<f>iai    avroiai    rovs    "Icovas   r/vayKaae    iroiitoOai,  iwt  I 
SojolSiKoi  (lev,  ftal  /xi)  &Wr]\ovs  (pipoitv  re  ical  dyoitv. 


I  THE  COINAGE  OF  THE  IONIAN  REVOLT  103 
the  Athenians,  who  wherever  they  were  able  stopped 
tive  issues  of  coins  to  the  profit  of  their  own  silver  owls, 
abundant  materials  for  which  were  furnished  by  Thrace 
and  Laurium. 

Thucydides 1  tells  us  that  it  was  at  the  special  and  earnest 
request  of  the  Ionians  that  the  Athenians,  setting  aside  the 
hegemony  of  Pausanias,  founded  the  Delian  League,  which 
may  thus  in  a  sense  be  considered  the  political  outcome  of 
the  Ionian  Revolt,  just  as  the  coinage  of  the  Cyzicene  staters 
may  be  regarded  as  the  monetary  outcome  of  the  Revolt. 
That  the  Ionian  cities  so  readily  transferred  their  loyalty, 
first  to  Persia,  and  then  to  Athens,  may  be  explained  by 
the  fact  that  in  each  of  the  cities  there  was  a  Medizing 
party  and  an  Atticizing  party,  which  gained  power  in  turn 
accordingly  as  the  star  of  Persia  or  of  Athens  was  in  the 
1  ascendant.  But  after  the  crushing  defeat  of  Lade,  the  hope 
of  founding  an  Ionian  commonwealth  was  extinct.  Perhaps 
we  may  regard  the  alliance  proved  by  coins  to  have  existed 
between  Rhodes,  Ephesus,  Samos,  Cnidus,  Iasus,  and  other 
cities,  after  the  victory  of  Conon  at  Cnidus  in  394  B.C.,  as 
a  short-lived  attempt  to  galvanize  the  corpse. 

1  i.  95. 


CHAPTER   IV 

SUPPOSED   ELECTRUM   COINS   OF  EUROPEAN 

GREECE 

Since  the  earliest  coins  of  Asia  Minor  are  all  of  electrum, 
we  are  obliged  to  consider  the  question  whether  the  same 
may  not  have  been  the  case  in  Greece  also.  There  are 
various  electrum  coins  of  early  style  which  have  been 
attributed  to  cities  of  Hellas  on  a  variety  of  evidence,  which, 
however,  is  seldom  conclusive. 

If  there  be  any  district  west  of  the  Bosphorus  in  which 
we  should  be  disposed  to  look  for  electrum  coins,  it  is 
certainly  the  southern  coast  of  Thrace  and  Macedon,  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  island  of  Thasos.  On  the  mainland 
opposite  Thasos,  in  the  district  of  Mount  Pangaeus,  were 
gold  mines,  the  wealth  of  which  was  notorious  in  antiquity. 
And  in  the  seventh  and  sixth  centuries  B.C.  Thrace  had 
closer  relations  with  the  Asiatic  than  with  the  European 
shores  of  the  Aegean.  Along  that  coast  passed  the  armies 
of  Darius  and  Xerxes  on  their  way  to  European  conquests. 
The  earliest  Greek  colonies  on  the  coast  were  founded  from 
Ionia.  Maronea  was  settled  by  men  from  Chios,  Abdera  by 
men  from  Teos  ;  and  still  earlier  a  colony  from  Paros  had 
settled  at  Thasos  and  succeeded  to  the  wealth  of  the 
Phoenician  factory  there.  Histiaeus  of  Miletus,  late  in  the 
sixth  century,  occupied  and  enlarged  Myrcinus  in  the 
Pangaean  district ;  and  Aristagoras  tried  to  found  a  city  on 
the  site  where  later  stood  Amphipolis.  Thus  it  would  seem 
to  be  equally  probable  that  the  electrum  of  Miletus  circu- 
lated in  the  district,  and  that  electrum  coins  were  struck  in 
the  towns  of  Thrace. 

In  an  able  and  important  paper,1  Mr.  Svoronos  has  tried 

1  Journal  Internat.  de  VArcheohgie  Numism.,  xv. 


ELECTRUM  OF  EUROPEAN  GREECE         105 

to  establish  the  second  of  these  alternatives.  His  arguments 
are,  first,  that  electrum  eoins  are  often  found  on  the  Thraco- 
Macedonian  coast,  or,  as  he  would  prefer  to  say,  in  the 
district  of  Paeonia,  and  second,  that  their  types  seem  to 
show  that  they  were  local  issues. 

As  regards  the  first  point,  F.  Lenormant  mentioned  as 
found  on  the  coast  and  preserved  in  the  collection  of 
L.  Caftanzoglu  at  Salonica  several  small  electrum  coins  of 
the  type  of  an  ingot  of  metal,  a  fish's  head,  and  a  cock's 
head.1  (B.  T.  I.  1 ;  VI,  4-12.)  L.  Friedlander  mentioned 
that  electrum  coins  reached  him  from  Thrace  and  Macedon, 
having  as  type  a  rose  or  floral  type  {Stemblume) ;  and  one 
with  a  swan  and  a  lizard,  which  he  attributed  to  Eion  on 
the  Strymon. 

As  regards  the  second  point,  Mr.  Svoronos  picks  out 
several  types  which  he  regards  as  distinctively  Paeonian, 
the  rose  (Babelon  iii.  5,  7),  the  shield  (Babelon  iii.  4,  6), 
the  Gorgon  head  (Babelon  v.  20),  the  cow  and  calf  (Babelon 
iii.  1),  the  Centaur  carrying  a  nymph  (Babelon  v.  17). 
But  he  confesses  that  at  present  our  knowledge  of  the 
places  where  these  coins  are  found  is  so  imperfect  that  we 
cannot  make  any  confident  statement. 

Certainly  the  matter  is  at  present  undecided.  But  there 
are  weak  points  in  Svoronos's  arguments.  He  does  not  keep 
apart  the  pale  electrum  of  Milesian  standard  and  the  dark 
electrum  of  Phocaic  standard,  but  supposes  that  both 
standards  might  be  used  in  Paeonia.  This,  however,  is  im- 
probable. If  coins  on  both  standards  are  found  locally,  it 
is  more  likely  that  they  were  imported  than  that  they  were 
locally  struck-  And  some  of  the  coins  mentioned  were 
almost  certainly  imported.  For  example,  the  coins  bearing 
the  head  of  a  fish  were  probably  minted  at  Cyzicus  (Phocaic 
standard).  Coins  with  the  type  of  a  cock  were  found  at 
Ephesus,  and  belong  to  Southern  Ionia.  The  coin  bearing 
the  cow  and  calf  is  far  more  likely  to  have  been  minted  in 
Ionia  than  in  Paeonia. 

1  See  Svoronos,  I.  c,  pp.  274-5. 


106  SUPPOSED  ELECTEUM  COINS  OF 

The  coins  which  seem  to  have  the  best  claim  to  a 
Paeonian  origin  are  those  of  Milesian  standard  bearing 
the  type  of  a  flower  or  a  shield  (which  are  sometimes 
hardly  to  be  distinguished),  and  the  gold  stater  of  Phocaic 
standard  which  bears  on  the  obverse  the  type  of  a  Centaur 
carrying  off  a  woman,  and  on  the  reverse  a  square  incuse 
roughly  divided  into  four.1  It  contains  64  per  cent,  of 
gold.  Its  assignment  to  Thrace,  however,  rests  on  no  solid 
basis.  The  reason  for  such  assignment  is  that,  on  early 
silver  coins  of  the  people  of  the  Pangaean  range,  the 
Orrescii,  Zaeelii,  and  Letaei,  we  have  a  not  dissimilar  type 
of  a  Centaur  carrying  a  woman  in  his  arms.  But  a  com- 
parison of  the  electrum  with  the  silver  coins  shows  at  once 
differences  far  more  striking  than  the  general  likeness.  On 
all  the  Thracian  silver  coins  the  Centaur  runs  or  kneels  and 
bears  the  woman  lying  at  length  in  both  arms  so  that  her 
head  is  in  front  of  him.  On  the  electrum  coin  he  is  walking, 
and  turns  round  to  greet  the  woman,  who  is  seated  on  his 
back.  The  motive  is  thus  quite  different.  The  incuse  of 
the  reverse  also  is  quite  different  from  the  flat  mill-sail-like 
incuse  of  the  Thracian  silver  coins,  which  are  in  fact  quite 
a  century  later  than  the  electrum  coin.  M.  Babelon  regards 
this  coin  as  of  Ionic  origin.2  Whether  it  was  actually 
struck  in  Ionia  or  Thrace,  it  belongs  beyond  doubt  to  the 
Phocaean,  or  North  Asia  Minor,  circle  of  influence ;  and 
has  no  relation  to  the  coins  of  Greece  Proper.  Thrace, 
indeed,  at  that  time  was  more  exposed  to  the  influence  of 
Asia  than  that  of  Europe.  This  is  clearly  indicated  by  the 
fact  that  when  the  cities  of  Thasos  and  Lete  began  striking 
silver  coins,  they  struck  them  on  a  different  standard  from 
those  of  Euboea,  Aegina,  and  Corinth,  a  standard  peculiar 
to  Asia. 

Hectae  and  fractions  of  hectae  of  Phocaean  weight  have 
been  attributed  to  Eion  on  the  Strymon  3 : 

1  Weight,  252-5  grains  (grm.  16-35),  B.  M.  Cat.  Ionia,  p.  9,  PI.  II.  3  ;  B.  M. 
IV.  1,B.  T.  V.  17. 

2  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  134. 

3  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  139;  and  Friedlander  in  Zeitschr.f.  Num.,  vi.  p.  8. 


EUROPEAN  GREECE  107 

1.  Obv.    Goose  looking  back ;     behind,  lizard.      Rev.    Incuse 

square.     Weight,  39  grains  (grm.  2-55).     (B.  T.  V.  25.) 

2.  Obv.    Goose  looking  back.     Rev.    Incuse  square.     Weight, 

20  grains  (grm.  1-29). 

3.  Obv.  Head  of  goose.     Rev.  Incuse  square.     Weight,  5  grains 

(grm.  0-33). 
The  reason  of  the  attribution  is  the  type,  which  is  that  of 
a  class  of  silver  coins  given  to  Eion,  not  on  the  ground  of 
inscriptions,  but  only  because  they  are  found  on  the  site 
of  Eion.  Some  of  the  electrum  coins  also  have  come  from 
the  same  district ;  others  from  Smyrna.  The  chief  objection 
to  giving  them  to  Eion  lies  on  the  historic  side.  The  city 
:  does  not  appear  to  have  been  founded  before  the  time  of 
Darius,  which  is  after  the  time  of  the  early  electrum  issues. 
We  turn  next  to  the  electrum  coin  attributed  to  Aegina. 
It  is  an  unique  electrum  stater  weighing  207  grains  (grm. 
13-45)  at  Paris.  (B.  T.  III.  2.)  The  type  of  the  obverse  is 
a  tortoise :  on  the  reverse  are  two  deep  oblong  incuses  side 
by  side.  This  particular  form  of  incuse  is  rare  :  I  know  it 
only  for  Calymna,  Cos,  Rhodes,  and  other  Carian  mints,  in 
the  sixth  century.  This  electrum  coin  has  been  regarded  as 
the  earliest  coin  of  Aegina,  and  indeed  as  remains  of  the 
bridge  by  which  coinage  passed  from  Asia  to  Greece.  But 
the  type  is  not  the  sea-turtle,  as  on  the  earliest  Aeginetan 
money,  but  a  land  tortoise,  and  neither  the  incuse  nor  the 
weight  is  Aeginetan.  Its  attribution  is  therefore  very 
doubtful.  It  may  be  of  Asia  Minor ;  indeed,  it  is  more 
probable  that  it  is  Asiatic  than  that  it  is  European. 

Other  electrum  coins  of  the  Euboic  standard  have  been 
given  to  cities  of  Greece  : 

1.  Obv.  Owl  to  L     Rev.  Incuse.     Weight,  21  grains  (grm.  1-36). 

(B.  T.  V.  23.) 

2.  Obv.  Eagle  devouring  hare.      Rev.  Incuse.      Weight,  44-4 

grains  (grm.  2-87). 

3.  Obv.    Eagle   flying.      Rev.    Incuse.      Weight,    22-1   grains 

(grm.  1-43).     (B.  T.  IX.  17.) 

4.  Obv.  Wheel  of  four  spokes.      Rev.  Incuse.      Weight,  21-8 

grains  (grm.  1-41). 


108        ELECTEUM  OF  EUROPEAN  GREECE 

The  reverse  device  of  No.  1  is  in  some  examples  remark- 
able, consisting  of  two  rectangles  and  three  triangles. 
These  coins  have  sometimes  been  set  aside  as  modern 
forgeries.  U.  Koehler,  however,  has  maintained  their 
genuineness.1  He  mentions  several  examples,  one  of  which 
was  found  in  the  bed  of  the  Ilissus,  one  at  Piraeus,  others 
at  Athens. 

If  we  grant  the  genuineness  of  these  coins,  we  must 
regard  them  as  an  attempt  to  introduce  into  Athens  the 
electrum  coinage  of  the  Ionian  coast.  The  coins  are  sixths 
of  the  Euboic  stater  of  130  grains  ;  they  thus  follow  the 
Asiatic  system  of  division  by  thirds  and  sixths,  and  not 
the  European  system  of  division  by  halves  and  quarters. 
They  have  not  the  appearance  of  being  very  early ;  certainly 
they  are  not  as  archaic  as  the  earliest  silver  of  Aegina. 
They  stand  apart  from  the  silver  coinage  of  Athens,  and 
seem  to  have  exercised  no  influence  upon  it.  The  other 
coins  were  formerly  by  Mr.Head  given  to  Chalcis  in  Euboea,2 
mainly  on  account  of  silver  coins  of  Chalcis  :  Eagle  flying, 
with  serpent  in  beak:  S'AL  (XAA),  wheel.  Tetradrachms, 
tetrobols.  But  more  recently  he  has  retracted  that  attribu- 
tion,3 observing  that  they  are  found  in  Asia  Minor,  No.  2  at 
Priene.  The  recent  discovery  of  a  hoard  of  electrum  coins 
at  Ephesus  with  a  great  variety  of  types  has  decidedly 
increased  our  disinclination  to  regard  type  in  early  electrum 
coins  as  a  satisfactory  indication  of  mint.4  It  is  therefore 
far  more  probable  that  these  eagle  and  wheel  coins  belong 
to  Asia  than  to  Europe.  Thus  it  seems  that  any  electrum 
issue  in  Europe  is  more  than  doubtful,  or  if  any  such  took 
place  (at  Athens,  for  example)  it  was  rather  in  the  way  of 
a  tentative  issue  for  special  purposes  than  as  a  regular 
state  currency. 

1  Athen.  Mittheil.,  1884,  359. 

2  JS.  M.  Cat.  Central  Greece,  p.  lii ;  Num.  Chron.,  N.  S.  xv,  PI.  VIII,  16-18. 
Cf.  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  670. 

8  B.  M.  Cat.  Ionia,  p.  xxxi  ;  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  357. 
4  Compare  Macdonald,  Coin-types,  p.  49. 


CHAPTER   V 

PHEIDON  AND  PELOPONNESUS 

§  1.  Coinage  at  Aeglsa. 

The  problem  as  to  which  king  or  which  city  of  Hellas 
first  issued  coin  was  much  discussed  in  antiquity.  Before 
aonsidering  the  evidence  offered  by  extant  coins,  which 
is  of  course  by  far  our  most  valuable  source  of  knowledge, 
we  must  consider  the  testimony  bequeathed  to  us  on  the 
subject  by  ancient  historians,  and  such  historic  documents 
is  the  Parian  Chronicle. 

The  grammarian  Julius  Pollux,  though  he  wrote  in  the 
reign  of  Commodus,  and  can  have  had  no  direct  knowledge 
Df  early  Greek  coins  and  weights,  is  yet  of  value  to  us, 
because  he  had  access  to  a  considerable  range  of  literature, 
much  of  which  has  disappeared.  Only  such  of  Pollux's 
statements  as  refer  to  coins  of  Greece  Proper  concern  us 
here.  He  mentions  an  opinion  that  coins  were  first  struck 
at  Athens  by  Erichthonius  and  Lycus.  It  is,  however,  the 
universal  opinion  of  modern  numismatists  that  coins  did 
uot  make  their  appearance  at  Athens  until  the  sixth  cen- 
■ury,  and  that  the  money  of  various  other  cities  is  earlier 
rn  fabric.  And,  indeed,  the  very  fact  that  two  mythical 
leroes  like  Erichthonius  and  Lycus  were  credited  with  the 
irst  issue  of  coins  appears  to  be  in  itself  a  proof  that  there 
vas  no  tradition  connecting  the  earliest  issue  of  coins  in 
jreece  with  historic  persons  at  Athens.  We  are  told  by 
Plutarch  that  Theseus  issued  money  with  the  type  of 
i  bull ;  but  here  again  we  are  in  mythic  surroundings. 
The  laws  of  Draco  mention  oxen  as  the  measure  of  value 
n  case   of  fines,  which   clearly  shows   that   in   his  time 


110     PHEIDON  AND  PELOPONNESUS 

(620  B.C.)  the  Athenians  did  not  ordinarily  use  coins,  though 
at  that  time  they  were  certainly  in  use  at  Aegina  and 
Corinth.  Pollux  also  tells  us  that  Aglaosthenes  ascribed 
the  earliest  issue  of  coins  to  Naxos,  of  which  island  the 
writer  was  probably  an  inhabitant.  Early  coins  of  Naxos 
are  known  to  us ;  but  they  appear  to  be  imitations  of  those 
of  Aegina,  and  less  archaic.  Both  of  these  attributions 
are  probably  due  to  patriotic  feeling,  which  often  induced 
Greek  writers  to  attribute  to  their  own  city  the  origin 
of  great  inventions. 

A  more  serious  claim  to  the  origination  of  a  coinage  in 
Europe  is  put  forward  on  behalf  of  Pheidon  of  Argos.  The 
whole  question  of  the  position  of  Pheidon  in  early  Greek 
history  and  of  the  nature  of  his  policy  is  a  difficult  one. 
Here  we  need  only  consider  his  date,  and  his  connexion 
with  early  weights,  measures,  and  coins. 

In  reviewing  the  statements  of  ancient  writers  in  regard 
to  this  matter,  I  propose  first  to  mention  them  in  historic 
order,  and  afterwards  to  examine  them  briefly,  to  judge 
of  their  respective  value  and  their  truth.1  Herodotus,  oar 
earliest  authority  in  point  of  time,  makes  two  statements. 
He  says  that  Pheidon  established  the  measures  (to.  /xirpa 
Troirjo-as)  of  Peloponnesus ; 2  and  that  his  son  Leocedes  was 
one  of  the  suitors  of  Agariste,  daughter  of  Cleisthenes  of 
Sicyon  (about  595  B.C.).  The  next  authority  in  order  of 
date  is  Ephorus,  who  is  quoted  in  this  connexion  by  Strabo.3 
He  says  that  Pheidon  of  Argos,  who  was  tenth  in  descent 
from  Temenus,  invented  the  measures  and  the  weights 
called  Pheidonian,  and  struck  coins,  both  silver  and  other, 
that  is,  presumably,  gold  or  electrum. 

In  another  place 4  Strabo  cites  Ephorus  as  authority  for 
the  statement  that  silver  was  first  issued  by  Pheidon  at 
Aegina.      The  Etymologicum  Magnum5  makes   the   same 

1  This  has  already  been  done  by  M.  Theodore  Reinach  {VHistoire  par  les 
Monnaies,  p.  35  ;  Revue  Numismatique,  1894)  and  others.  I  have  preferred  to 
make  an  independent  investigation ;  but  my  results  are  much  like  those  of 
M.  Reinach. 

2  Hdt.  vi.  127.  »  p.  858. 

4  p.  376.  5  s.  v.  ufStXioKos ;  cf.  Orion,  s.  v.  6fJe\6t. 


COINAGE  AT  AEGINA  111 

assertion,  and  adds  that  Pheidon  dedicated  in  the  Argive 
eraeum  the  spits  (of  iron  or  bronze)  which  had  hitherto 
rved  as  a  currency,  but  were  now  demonetized.  Pausanias 
ives  us  a  valuable  statement  as  to  the  date  of  Pheidon 
hen  he  says  that  that  tyrant  in  conjunction  with  the 
pie  of  Pisa  celebrated  at  Olympia  the  eighth  occasion 
}f  the  festival :  748  b.  c.  The  Parian  Chronicle  says  that 
Pheidon  was  the  eleventh  in  descent  from  Herakles,  whereas 
Ephorus  makes  him  the  tenth  from  Temenus,  and  so  the 
fourteenth  from  Herakles.  The  Parian  Chronicle  would 
:hus  date  him  to  about  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century, 
according  to  the  ordinary  Greek  way  of  reckoning  by 
fenerations,  Ephorus  to  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century. 
(Thus  various  authorities  place  Pheidon  in  the  middle  of 
^he  ninth,  the  middle  of  the  eighth,  and  the  end  of  the 
seventh  centuries. 

Confused  by  these  conflicting  authorities,  modern  his- 
:orians  have  given  very  various  dates  to  Pheidon.  Some, 
following  Weissenborn  and  Curtius,  have  assigned  him  to 
the  twenty-eighth  Olympiad  (668  b.c.)  rather  than  the 
aighth.  Others  have  accepted  the  date  of  Herodotus,1  as 
determined  by  the  appearance  of  Pheidon's  son  among  the 
wooers  of  Agariste.  But  the  date  of  Weissenborn  is  an 
unsatisfactory  compromise,  a  mere  correction  of  the  text 
of  Pausanias.  and  the  whole  story  told  by  Herodotus  of  the 
wooing  of  Agariste  has  the  air  of  fable  rather  than  of  fact.2 
It  is  not  at  all  difficult  to  suppose  that  Herodotus  may  have 
missed  out  a  few  generations,  or  confused  an  earlier  with 
a  later  Pheidon.  On  the  other  hand,  the  date  given  by 
Pausanias,  748  b.c,  is  consistent  with  that  given  by  Ephorus, 
which  works  out  as  757  b.c.  And  it  is  almost  certain  that 
Pausanias  had  seen  at  Olympia  some  documentary  authority 
for  his  date ;  though  no  doubt  the  records  of  the  early 
Olympiads  were  of  no  great  historic  value.3  On  these 
grounds  we  may  regard  it  as  at  least  very  probable  that 

1  So  formerly  did  I.  See  Types  of  Greek  Coins,  p.  7. 
*  Compare  the  note  of  E.  Abbott  on  Hdt.  vi.  127. 
s  See  especially  Mahaffy  in  Journ.  Hell.  Stud.,  ii.  164. 


112  PHEIDON  AND  PELOPONNESUS 

Pheidon  belongs  to  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century  b.c. 
And  it  is  even  more  probable  that  he  had  to  do  with  a 
reform  or  regulation  of  the  measures  of  Peloponnesus.  Not 
only  Ephorus,  but  Aristotle !  and  the  Parian  Chronicle 
speak  of  certain  measures  as  fixed  by  and  named  after 
Pheidon.  So  much  then  we  may  regard  as  historic  fact. 
That  he  regulated  weights  as  well  as  measures  is  extremely 
probable,  since  there  is  a  close  connexion  between  the  two. 
We  are  justified  in  ascribing  to  him  the  weights  used  in 
commerce  for  a  long  time  not  only  in  Peloponnesus,  but 
in  Athens  also,  which  are  known  to  us  by  many  extant 
examples,2  following  the  so-called  Aeginetan  standard.  The 
phrase  of  the  Parian  Chronicle  is  iSrjfxevae  ra  fiirpa . . .  /cat 
aveaKevacrt.  This  regulation  would  naturally  take  the  form 
of  making  weights  and  liquid  measures  consistent  one  with 
the  other ;  that  is  to  say,  equating  his  standard  of  weight 
with  a  certain  cubic  measure  of  water.  This  sounds  a  some- 
what complicated  proceeding  for  so  early  a  time,  but  it  is 
the  readiest  way  of  producing  a  system  of  weights  and 
measures ;  and  it  was  probably  by  doing  this  that  Pheidon 
attained  his  fame  in  Greece.  It  is  probable  that  he  merely 
regularized  existing  measures  and  weights,  not  inventing 
them,  but  making  them  systematic  and  consistent. 

These   Pheidonian  weights   are    in    all  probability   the 
same  that  were  used  in  Greek  commerce,  until  the  time 
of  Alexander  the  Great  and  later,  in  Northern  Greece  and 
Peloponnesus.      Several  specimens  have  reached  us  from 
Athens.     And  they  were  no  doubt  used  by  Pheidon  for  j 
bronze  and  iron,  as  for  other  commodities.     According  to  ! 
them  were  regulated  the  old  ofitXoi  in  those  metals  which  j 
circulated  in  Greece  before  the  invention  of  silver  coin,  j 
And  when  silver  coin  came  into  existence  it  went  by  the 
same  standard,  though  probably  with  new  denominations. , 
This  standard  is  that  which  we   are  accustomed  to  call  j 
Aeginetan,  because  it  is  made  familiar  to  us  through  its ! 
adoption  by  the  people  of  Aegina. 

1  In  Pollux,  x.  170. 

2  Smith,  Diet.  o/Antiq.,  art.  Pondera,  p.  452. 


COINAGE  AT  AEGINA  113 

But  the  assertion  that  Pheidon  issued  coins  at  Aegina  is 
a  statement  which  we  cannot  accept.  In  the  first  place, 
no  coins  of  Greece  proper  seem  to  be  so  early  as  the  eighth 
century;  and  in  the  second  place,  Pheidon  never  had  any 
authority  in  Aegina.  Probably  the  Aeginetans  were  the 
first  people  in  Greece  to  strike  money;  and  their  money 
was  on  the  Pheidonian  standard :  hence  a  natural  confusion. 
It  was  the  weights,  not  the  coinage  of  Greece,  which  were 
due  to  Pheidon.  * 

We  turn  next  from  the  literary  to  the  archaeological 
evidence.     It  is  at  once  clear  that  the   compiler   of  the 
Etymofogicum  Magnum  would  scarcely  have  asserted  that 
dedicated  obeli  were  preserved  in  the  Heraeum  of  Argos, 
unless  one  of  his  authorities  had  seen  them  there.     The 
Heraeum,  as  we  know,  was  burned  in  423  B.C.,  when  there 
is  a  probability  that  dedications  of  bronze  would  be  melted 
and  disappear,  in  which  case  the  obeli  preserved  in  the  later 
temple  could  scarcely  be  genuine,  but  rather  restorations. 
However  that  may  be,  it  is  certain  that  the  excavations 
conducted  by  the  American  School  of  Athens  on  the  site 
}f  the  Heraeum  have  brought  to  light   a  great   quantity 
Df  votive  bronzes  of  early  date.     Many  of  these  were  spits, 
md  many  pins  for  the  hair  or  garments.1     Sir  C.  Waldstein 
suggests  that  these  were  the  original  bronze  currency ;  but 
here  is  no  record  of  their  weights  the  theory  is  hard  to 
,-erify.     On  the  other  hand,  a  mass  of  iron  was  discovered, 
.vhich  was  found  to  consist  of  numerous  rounded  bars  of 
netal   coming  to  a  point,  and  which  was  held  together 
it  either  end  by  an  iron  coil  tightly  twisted  round.     It  is 
lard  to  regard  these  iron  spits  as  anything  but  obeli  dedi- 
cated after  being  demonetized.     This  discovery  would  seem 
o  refute   the   suggestion   of  T.  Eeinach,2  that  the   obols 
xhibited  in  the  temple  were  really  standard-weights  kept 
n  the  temple  for  reference.    Mr.  Svoronos  has  made  diligent 
earch  for  these  iron  spits  in  the  Museum  at  Athens,  and 


1  The  Argite  Heraeum,  i.  61 ;  ii.  330. 
*  L'Hisioire  par  les  Monnaies,  p.  38. 

I 


114  PHEIDON  AND  PELOPONNESUS 

discovered  them.1  They  are  much  broken  and  decayed, 
so  that  their  present  weight  gives  us  little  information.  It 
is,  however,  desirable  to  record  that  in  Mr.  Svoronos'  opinion 
the  length  of  the  spits  was  about  1«29  metres  (four  feet) ; 
and  the  weight  495-302  grammes  (7,650-4,675  grains), 
a  Pheidonian  mina  being  about  622  grammes  (9,600  grains). 
Supposing  that  these  iron  bars  were  a  remnant  of  early 
currency,  that  currency,  being  dedicated  in  the  Heraeum 
of  Argos,  would  naturally  be  not  Aeginetan  but  Argive. 
If  I  have  rightly  assigned  the  date  of  Pheidon,  their  dedica- 
tion would  be  later  than  his  time.  For  it  appears  that 
until  the  seventh  century,  and  even  later,  the  currency  of 
Peloponnesus  consisted  of  literal  obeli  or  bars  of  metal. 
These  were  of  bronze  or  of  iron :  the  iron,  of  course,  being 
heavier  and  less  valuable.  This  currency  was  everywhere 
except  at  Sparta  replaced  later  by  the  Aeginetan  coins,  at 
all  events  for  large  payments.  The  dedication,  therefore, 
must  belong  to  the  seventh  or  sixth  century. 

The  Aeginetan  standard  as  known  to  us  from   extant 
weights  and  coins  is  as  follows : 

Talent        37,320  grammes      576,000  grains. 
Mina  622         „  9,600      „ 

Drachm  6-22   „  96      „ 

Obol  1-03    „  16      „ 

But  while  this  is  certainly  the  standard  which  passed  ir1 
later  times  as  Pheidonian,  and  must  have  been  connectec 
with  Pheidon,  it  is  a  system  based  upon  the  weight  of  th(  i 
silver  drachm.     In  discussing  its  origin,  we  had  best  tab 
our  start,  not  from  the  perplexing  traditions  as  to  Pheidor 
but  from  the  known  facts  as  to  the  earliest  coins. 

At  a  far  earlier  date  even  than  that  of  Pheidon,  regula! 
systems  of  weights  and  measures  had  been  in  use  in  th 
great  empires  of  the  East,  Babylon,  Assyria,  and  Egyp1 
That  they  were  in  use  also  in  prehistoric  times  in  Creti 
and  Mycenae  is  in  itself  very  probable,  and  is  maintaine 
by  Sir  A.  Evans  in  a  paper  contributed  to  Corolla  Numii] 

1  Journ.  Intern,  cle  Numism.,  ix,  p.  196. 


COINAGE  AT  AEGINA  115 

nation.*  He  examines  the  weights  in  use  at  Cnossos.  and 
hows  that  in  every  case  the  standard  used  was  taken  from 
Sgypt,  though  in  some  cases  it  may  be  traced  beyond 
3gypt  to  Babylon.  That  a  system  approximating  to  the 
ight  Babylonic  gold  standard  was  in  use  in  Egypt,  in 
>ete.  and  in  Argolis  in  the  second  millennium  b.c.  seems 
o  be  clearly  made  out.  The  use  of  a  standard  correspond - 
ng  to  that  of  Aegina  is,  however,  not  proved  for  prehistoric 
imes.  What  Evans  has  called  the  heavy  Egyptian  gold 
tandard  is  certainly  followed  in  Crete  in  the  case  of  several 
veights  which  bear  marks  of  value,  showing  an  unit  of 
.2-30  to  13-98  grammes  (188  to  215  grains).  At  first  sight 
his  may  seem  a  probable  source  for  the  weight  known  as 
\eginetan,  with  a  drachm  of  96  grains  (6-22  grammes),  and 
L  didrachm  of  192  grains  (12-44  grammes).  But  it  is  very 
loubtful  whether  there  is  here  any  line  of  connexion.  In 
Ihe  first  place,  the  weights  generally  are  much  nearer  to 
»he  higher  than  to  the  lower  limit,  and  so  are  not  at  all 
;lose  to  the  Aeginetan  standard.  And  in  the  second  place 
he  break  between  Mycenaean  and  historic  Greece  is  so  com- 
plete, it  is  so  clear  that  a  period  of  barbarism  and  poverty 
;eparates  one  from  the  other,  that  we  may  well  doubt 
whether  so  civilized  an  institution  as  a  weight-standard 
.vould  survive. 

Mr.  Head 2  is  disposed  to  regard  a  group  of  weights 
:bund  at  Naucratis,  which  seems  to  follow  the  Aeginetan 
standard,  as  indicating  that  that  standard  may  have  come 
?rom  Egypt.  But  Naucratis  was  not  of  very  early  founda- 
;ion ;  and  there  is  no  reason  for  thinking  that  the  weights 
n  question  are  earlier  than  the  date  of  Pheidon,  or  even 
:han  the  first  issue  of  coins  at  Aegina. 

Talents  and  minas  of  gold  and  silver  and  electrum, 
"Ogether  with  the  stater  of  electrum,  which  was  a  fraction 
bf  the  mina,  and  its  divisions  |,  |,  y1^,  -fa,  had  long  been 
inown  in  Asia,  and  used  by  the  Ionians  of  the  coast  of 


1  Minoan  Weights  and  Currency,  pp.  336-7. 

2  Hist.  Num.,  2nd  edition,  xliv :  cf.  Petrie,  Naukratis,  i,  p.  78. 

i  2 


116  PHEIDON  AND  PELOPONNESUS 

Asia  Minor.  But  the  comparatively  rude  inhabitants  of 
Peloponnesus  had  been  content  with  a  currency  of  bronze 
pieces,  sometimes  round,  in  the  shape  of  a  ireXavop,  but 
more  often  long,  in  the  form  of  a  bar  or  spit  (o/SeAoy).1 
Originally,  it  may  be,  these  bars  were  real  spits,  used  for 
roasting  meat ;  but  by  degrees  their  weight  became  fixed, 
and  their  value  conventional.  A  handful  (six)  of  these  bars 
made  up  a  drachm  (Spaxpv)-  I*1  larger  payments  bronze  was 
probably  weighed  out,  as  was  the  aes  rude  of  Italy. 

It  was  this  rude  currency  which  Pheidon  regulated, 
without,  so  far  as  we  can  judge,  superseding  it.  But  later, 
in  the  seventh  century,  this  primitive  system  was  out  of 
date.  Probably  the  bars  of  bronze  were  very  irregular  in 
shape,  and  perhaps  in  weight.  They  were  not  suited  to 
the  growing  commerce  of  the  Greek  islands.  The  people 
of  Aegina,  at  that  time  in  the  front  ranks  of  commerce, 
must  have  known  all  about  the  electrum  coins  of  Ionia. 
Electrum,  however,  was  not  native  to  Greece.  Silver,  on 
the  other  hand,  was  procurable  from  Spain,  Thrace,  and 
elsewhere.  The  Aeginetans  decided  to  strike  in  silver 
coins  which  should  represent  the  bronze  obeli  which  were 
current.  The  silver  obol  would  stand  for  one  such  bar  ; 
the  silver  drachm  for  a  handful  of  such  bars,  that  is  for  six ; 
the  silver  didrachm  would  stand  for  twelve. 

Setting  aside  the  notion  that  Pheidon  was  connected 
with  the  earliest  coinage  of  Aegina,  we  may  claim  for 
Aegina  the  precedence  in  European  coinage,  on  the  ground 
of  the  extremely  rude  and  primitive  character  of  the  oldest 
examples  of  Aeginetan  coinage,  and  because  they  seem  to 
have  served  as  models  for  all  the  coins  of  the  islands 
of  the  Aegean.  In  the  noteworthy  find  at  Santorin,  in 
1821,  760  early  coins  of  the  Greek  coast  and  islands  were 
found,  and  of  these  541  were  of  Aegina,  while  many  other 
coins  showed  in  fabric  and  type  signs  of  an  attempt  to 
conform  to  the  Aeginetan  pattern.2  To  this  find  we  will 
presently  return. 

1  So  Etym.  Magn.,  s.  v.  Spaxpr)  and  6fit\iaKos. 

2  Num.  Chron.,  1884,  pp.  269-80  (Wroth). 


1 


COINAGE  AT  AEGINA  117 

Though  the  question  of  the  origin  of  the  standard  used 
at  Aegina  for  silver  coin  has  been  a  subject  of  much  dis- 
cussion, the  discussion  has  not  been  fruitful,  mainly  because 
it  has  not  proceeded  on  scientific  lines.  It  has  been  carried 
on  by  numismatists  solely  in  relation  to  coins :  the  inquiry 
has  been  why  the  Aeginetans  struck  coins  weighing  192  or 
194  grains,  when  no  people  used  that  standard  for  money 
before.  The  question,  however,  is  really  a  much  wider  one, 
including  the  whole  question  of  the  origin  of  currency  and 
weights  in  Peloponnesus. 

We  may  begin  by  dismissing  the  current  views  as  to  the 
origin  of  the  silver  weight  of  Aegina.  One  view a  is  that  it 
is  the  weight  of  the  South  Ionian  stater  (224  grains),  some- 
what reduced.  And  in  support  of  this  theory  the  fact  has 
been  brought  forward  that  one  of  the  very  early  Aeginetan 
silver  coins  weighs  as  much  as  211  grains.  That  coin, 
however,  stands  quite  by  itself  and,  as  Mr.  Head  suggests, 
may  be  a  mere  accident.  No  explanation  of  the  degradation 
of  weight-standard  by  twenty  grains  has  been  given,  nor 
any  reason  why  the  South  Ionian  standard  should  have  been 
adopted  at  Aegina  when  it  was  not  adopted  at  any  other 
European  mint.  It  is  a  mere  guess,  without  any  evidence 
to  justify  it.  The  same  may  be  said  of  Prof.  Ridgeway's 
view  that  the  object  of  issuing  coins  of  the  Aeginetan 
weight  was  that  ten  of  them  should  be  of  the  value  of 
a  Homeric  talent  or  Euboic  gold  coin  of  130  grains.  He 
suggests  that  130  grains  of  gold,  at  the  rate  of  15  to  1, 
would  be  equivalent  to  ten  silver  coins  weighing  195  grains. 
This  view  is  based  upon  two  assumptions,  both  of  which 
are  arbitrary.  It  is  assumed  that  the  standard  of  value  in 
Aegina  was  a  gold  coin  or  talent.  This  was  not  the  case  ; 
the  standard  of  value  was,  according  to  our  authorities, 
a  bar  of  bronze  or  of  iron.  And  it  is  assumed  that  gold 
and  silver  passed  in  the  proportion  of  15  to  1.  This  is 
unlikely  to  have  been  the  case.  "When  the  Athenians 
needed  gold  for  the  Parthenos  statue  of  Pheidias,   they 

1  So  Head,  Hist.  Num.,  p.  xxxviii.     In  the  second  edition  of  his  great  work, 
however,  Mr.  Head  takes  another  view. 


118  PHEIDON  AND  PELOPONNESUS 

bought  it  with  silver  at  the  rate  of  14  to  1 ;  but  this  is  the 
highest  rate  of  exchange  of  which  we  hear  in  Greece  Proper : 
the  rate  usual  in  the  Persian  Empire  was  13  or  13|  to  l.1 
A  more  probable  view  is  that  adopted  by  Flinders-Petrie, 
that  the  Aeginetan  standard  is  derived  from  a  somewhat 
heavier  standard  in  use  in  Egypt.  He  mentions  a  weight 
found  in  Egypt,  bearing  the  name  of  Amenhotep  I 
(seventeenth  century  B.C.),  marked  as  'gold  5  ',  which  gives 
a  standard  of  207-6  grains  (grm.  13-45).  Other  Egyptian 
weights  with  marks  of  value  give  a  somewhat  lower  standard 
than  this.  The  chief  difficulty  in  the  way  of  this  derivation 
is  the  fact  that  this  seems  to  be  a  gold  standard  :  and  what 
we  are  in  search  of  is  a  silver  standard ;  and  gold  and  silver 
standards  were  in  antiquity  usually  distinct.2 

One  more  suggestion  is  that  the  Aeginetan  stater  is 
derived  from  the  Euboic  mina 8  of  6,700  grains  (grm.  434), 
of  which  it  is  in  fact  one  thirty-fifth.  This  equation  can 
be  but  fortuitous.  Passing  these  conjectures,  let  us  consider 
the  real  circumstances  of  the  case. 

In  adjusting  the  new  silver  currency  to  the  existing 
currency  of  bronze,  two  courses  were  possible.  The 
Aeginetans  either  could  strike  coins  of  such  a  weight  that 
a  round  number  of  the  bronze  obeli,  say  ten  or  twenty, 
would  go  for  one  of  them.  In  that  case  they  might  have 
originated  a  new  standard  of  weight  for  coinage,  other  than 
the  Pheidonian.  Or  they  could  strike  silver  coin  on  the 
Pheidonian  standard,  leaving  the  question  of  the  number  of 
bronze  bars  which  would  exchange  for  each  to  settle  itself. 

We  know  that  other  states  when  they  issued  coins  in 
a  fresh  metal,  say  in  silver  or  in  gold,  sometimes,  like  the 
kings  of  Lydia  and  Persia,  used  different  standards  for  the 
two  metals,  in  order  that  a  round  number,  ten  or  twenty, 
of  the  silver  coins  should  pass  for  one  of  the  gold.  And 
sometimes,  like  the  Athenians  and  like  Alexander  the 
Great,  they  used  one  standard  for  the  two  metals. 

1  See  T.  Reinach's  paper  in  L'Hist.  par  Us  Monnaies,  pp.  41-78. 

2  Encycl.  Brit.,  ed.  11,  xxviii.  487. 

3  Beloch,  Oriech.  Geschichte,  i,  p.  294. 


COINAGE  AT  AEGINA  119 

It  was  the  latter  of  these  systems  which  was  adopted  by 
the  people  of  Aegina.  They  issued  their  silver  money  on 
the  already  familiar  Pheidonian  standard.  The  weight  of 
these  early  silver  staters  is  well  known  to  us.  The  didrachm 
weighed  about  192  grains  (grm.  12-44),  the  drachm  96  grains 
(grm.  6-22),  the  obol,  which  was  the  sixth  of  the  drachm, 
16  grains  (grm.  1-03).  These  weights  correspond  with  the 
standard  of  numerous  weights  of  Pheidonian  type  which 
have  come  down  to  us. 

At  the  same  time  the  Aeginetans  fitted  the  new  coins 
into  the  old  currency  by  equating  the  new  obol  of  silver 
with  the  old  obelus  or  spit  of  bronze.  In  primitive  societies 
it  is  easy  and  usual  to  find  some  simple  proportion  between 
various  objects  used  as  measures  of  value  ;  for  example, 
a  slave  may  be  equated  with  three  oxen,  an  ox  with  ten 
sheep,  and  so  on.  We  have  reason  to  think  that  the 
relation  established  between  the  values  of  silver  and 
bronze  at  Aegina  was  120  to  1.  We  have  an  indication 
of  this  in  the  facts  of  the  regular  currency  of  Sparta.  At 
Sparta  the  current  obeli  were  not  of  bronze  ;  the  currency 
consisted  of  iron  bars,  the  so-called  ireXavop,  which  were  of 
the  weight  of  an  Aeginetan  mina,  9,600  grains.1  According 
to  Plutarch  and  Hesychius,  these  minae  of  iron  were  worth 
only  half  an  obol  of  silver.  In  that  case  iron  would  be  in 
relation  to  silver  only  as  1  to  1,200.  Hultsch,  however, 
gives  reasons  for  thinking  that  the  original  value  of  these 
bars  was  an  obol,  giving  a  relation  of  1  to  600.  Now  brorize 
was  in  Greece  about  five  times  as  valuable  as  iron. 
Haeberlin 2  has  given  reasons  for  thinking  that  in  Italy  in 
the  third  century  the  relations  of  value  between  silver  and 
bronze  were  120  to  1.  If  the  same  proportion  held  in 
Greece  in  earlier  times,  the  silver  obol  of  16  grains  would 
be  equivalent  to  an  obol  of  bronze  weighing  1 ,920  grains 
(grm.  124),  or  twenty  Aeginetan  drachms.  This  corresponds 
to  the  reason  and  probability  of  the  matter.  The  bronze 
bars  would   in  that   case  have   weighed  about  a  quarter 


1  Hultsch,  Metrologie,  p.  535. 

*  Systematik  des  alL  rom.  Miinzicesens  (1905). 


120  PHEIDON  AND  PELOPONNESUS 

of  a  pound  ;  a  drachm  or  handful  of  six  of  them  would 
weigh  about  ]  §  pounds,  somewhat  less  than  a  kilogram. 

The  early  currency  of  Peloponnesus  seems  to  have  con- 
sisted of  bars  both  of  bronze  and  iron,  bronze  for  larger, 
and  iron  for  smaller  payments.  At  Sparta  iron  only  was 
allowed.  But  it  would  appear  that  this  regulation  was  not 
a  primitive  one,  but  introduced  in  the  course  of  Spartan 
history  :  for  in  the  Homeric  age,  as  we  know,  iron  was 
very  valuable ;  and  its  value  could  not  have  become 
despicable  until  well  on  in  the  Iron  Age.  At  Byzantium, 
and  in  Peloponnesus,  iron  bars  or  coins  were  retained  for 
small  payments  until  the  fourth  century  B.C.  In  other 
places,  as  at  Clazomenae,  we  hear  of  iron  coins  as  a  merely 
fiduciary  issue. 

The  Aeginetan  talent,  consisting  of  60  minae,  or  6,000 
drachms,  or  36,000  obols,  must  have  reference  to  minae, 
drachms,  and  obols  of  silver,  not  of  bronze.  For  36,000  x  16 
grains  weighs  about  82  pounds,  or  37  kilograms,  which 
would  be  about  what  a  man  might  easily  lift.  If  a  talent 
had  been  formed  from  the  bronze  obelus  of  1,920  grains, 
it  would  be  a  weight  120  times  as  great,  which  would  be 
quite  out  of  proportion  to  a  man's  capacity  for  lifting.  So 
the  drachm  which  was  in  weight  the  hundredth  of  a  mina, 
and  the  obol  which  was  in  weight  the  sixth  of  a  drachm, 
only  came  into  existence  when  silver  began  to  be  coined. 
The  drachm  and  the  obol  as  coins  appear  to  have  been 
invented  by  the  Aeginetans.  They  were  borrowed  by  all 
the  systems  of  silver  coinage  which  came  into  use  in  Hellas. 
This  is  abundantly  proved  by  the  marks  of  value  which  the 
coins  of  Peloponnese  bear  in  the  fifth  century.1  And  even 
in  Asia  it  became  usual  to  strike  drachms  or  obols  of  Persian 
or  Phoenician  standard.  But  originally,  as  the  Aeginetans 
from  the  first  went  by  the  drachm  and  the  obol,  so  the 
Ionians  of  Asia  used  the  stater  and  its  parts. 

A  difficulty  remains.  Why  in  that  case  should  the 
Aeginetans  have  struck  at  first,  not  the  drachm  of  96  grains, 
but  the  didrachm  of  192  grains  ?     The  answer,  I  think,  is 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Peloponnesus,  p.  xvii. 


COINAGE  AT  AEGINA  121 

ultimately  this,  that  man  has  two  hands  and  not  one  only.  ' 
A  didrachm  is  the  equivalent  of  the  bars  of  bronze  which 
a  man  carries  when  he  has  both  his  hands  full  of  bars,  six 
in  each.     It  stands  for  a  man,  while  a  drachm  represents 
only  half  a  man. 

We  may  observe  a  parallel  phenomenon  in  regard  to  the 
talent.  Students  of  metrology  are  puzzled  at  finding  that 
the  various  talents  in  use  in  Asia,  and  even  in  Europe, 
have  two  forms,  light  and  heavy;  and  the  heavy  is  of 
exactly  double  the  weight  of  the  light.  Now  a  talent, 
usually  weighing  some  60  or  80  of  our  pounds,  is  what  a 
man  can  lift :  the  root  of  the  word  is  r\a :  rXdco  meaning 
I  bear.  But  a  man  can  lift  in  two  hands  double  as  much 
as  he  can  lift  in  one.  What  a  man  can  carry  in  one  hand 
is  a  light  talent:  what  he  can  carry  in  two  hands  is  a 
heavy  talent. 

At  Aegina  the  mina  is  an  arbitrary  division,  fa  of  the 
talent,  or  100  silver  drachms.  The  name  shows  it  to  be  of 
Asiatic  origin :  it  is  a  stepping-stone  in  European  systems 
of  weight  between  talent  and  drachm.  But  the  talent  is 
a  natural  weight,  almost  as  natural  as  a  weight  as  the  foot 
and  the  fathom  are  as  measures  of  length.  And  like  them  it 
varies  in  various  countries  between  certain  limits,  following 
the  local  notion  as  to  what  a  man  can  be  expected  to  lift. 
As  the  yard  represents  the  length  of  the  King's  arm, 
measured  from  the  breast-bone,  so  the  royal  talents  of 
Assyria  represented  what  the  King  could  comfortably  lift 
in  one  hand  or  in  two.  In  a  sense  the  drachm  also  is  a 
natural  measure,  for  given  the  usual  size  of  a  bar  of  metal, 
it  would  not  be  convenient  to  carry  more  than  a  certain 
number  of  them  in  the  hand.  The  bars  of  Peloponnese 
were  of  such  a  size  that  six  could  be  conveniently  carried. 

The  early  coins  of  Aegina  are  well  known.  (PI.  II.  1.) 
Their  type  is  the  sea-tortoise,  which  probably  refers  to  the 
worship  of  Aphrodite  as  sea- goddess.  Pheidias  made  for  the 
people  of  Elis  a  statue  of  Aphrodite  Urania,  resting  her 
foot  on  a  tortoise.1 

1  Pausanias,  vi.  25.  1. 


122  PHEIDON  AND  PELOPONNESUS 

§  2.  Influence  of  Aegina. 

The  Aeginetan  standard  for  coin  spread  in  several 
directions  before  480  B.C.  It  spread  to  the  south  of  Asia 
Minor,  to  Cnidus,  Rhodes,  and  some  of  the  Greek  cities  of 
the  south  coast,  as  well  as  to  the  cities  of  the  Euxine  Sea. 
It  was  adopted  by  most  of  the  Aegean  islands  between 
Europe  and  Asia.  It  spread  through  Greece  Proper  as  far 
north  as  North  Thessaly.  And  it  spread  southward  to 
Crete.  The  reason  for  this  wide  and  rapid  diffusion  was 
doubtless  the  fact  that  the  Aeginetans  were  the  hucksters 
(KaTTTjXoi)  of  Greece,  and  took  with  them  their  native 
currency  for  the  purpose  of  bargaining.  We  may  observe 
that  Aegina  was  the  only  city  of  Greece  Proper  which  took 
part  in  the  foundation  of  Naucratis. 

An  especially  noteworthy  fact  is  the  issue,  in  the  sixth 
century  or  even  earlier,  by  most  of  the  larger  islands  of  the 
Aegean,  of  an  abundant  coinage,  which  not  only  follows 
the  Aeginetan  weight,  but  also  in  its  types  shows  an  intention 
of  imitating  the  tortoise  of  Aegina.  This  fact  was  proved 
by  the  discovery  at  Santorin  in  1821  of  a  large  hoard  of 
coins.1  It  comprised  in  all  760  pieces,  of  which  541  were  of 
Aegina.  Others  were  almost  certainly  minted  at  Naxos, 
Paros,  and  Siphnos.2  As  the  coins  have  no  inscriptions,  it 
is  not  possible  to  identify  all  the  mints  with  certainty ;  but 
it  is  probable  that  Andros,  Ceos,  Tenos,  and  other  islands 
issued  money  on  the  Aeginetan  standard.  In  another 
island  find,  described  in  the  Numismatic  Chronicle  for  1890, 
the  mass  of  the  coins  was  of  the  mint  of  Aegina,  but  there 
were  also  a  few  pieces  of  Andros,  Paros,  and  Siphnos ;  as 
well  as  of  some  of  the  islands  of  the  Ionian  coast,  Chios, 
Cos,  Lindus  in  Rhodes,  and  Poseidion.  These  latter  coins 
are  further  considered  under  the  head  of  Silver  of  Asia. 

Since  it  was  the  weights  and  measures  of  Peloponnesus, 
not  of  Argos  only,  that  Pheidon  regulated,  we  cannot  be 
surprised  that  all  the  cities  of  Peloponnesus,  with  a  few 

1  See  Num.  Chron.,  1884,  pp.  269-80. 

2  B.  M.  Cat.  Crete,  &c,  Pis.  XXV,  7-8  ;  XXVI,  1  ;  XXVII,  9. 


INFLUENCE  OF  AEGINA  123 

exceptions,  used  the  Aeginetan  or  Pheidonian  standard  for 
their  coins,  when  they  issued  any,  down  to  a  late  period. 
The  most  notable  exception  is  of  course  Corinth,  which 
city,  with  its  colonies,  formed  a  distinct  commercial 
confederacy. 

These  facts  seem  to  lead  to  a  very  interesting  conclusion. 
The  coinage  of  Aegina  seems  to  have  been  the  earliest 
silver  coinage  ever  issued.  It  was  from  Aegina  that  the 
invention  spread,  first  to  other  islands  of  the  Aegean,  later 
to  some  of  the  cities  of  Asia  Minor.  At  first,  as  was 
natural,  the  weight  went  with  the  coinage.  And  as  the 
Aeginetan  weight-standard  was  entirely  independent  of  all 
Asiatic  systems,  it  seems  to  follow  that  some  of  the  Asiatic 
cities  at  first  issued  coins  which  bore  no  proportional  value 
to  the  electrum  which  was  current  in  Asia  Minor. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  some  cities  used  in  their  early 
coinage  not  the  didrachm  of  Aeginetan  scale,  but  the 
drachm  or  half-drachm.  The  cities  of  Thessaly  used  the 
drachm,  Argos  the  drachm  and  hemidrachm,  Heraea 
the  hemidrachm.  This  question  was  no  doubt  determined 
by  the  circumstances  of  the  local  commerce. 

As  the  talent  and  the  mina  passed  from  Asia  to  Europe, 
so  in  return  the  drachm  and  the  obol  passed  from  Europe 
to  Asia,  superseding,  at  least  in  Greek  cities,  the  older 
shekel  or  siglos.  This  we  shall  see  when  we  treat  of  the 
silver  coinage  of  Asia  in  the  sixth  ceDtury  in  Chapter  IX. 


CHAPTER    VI 
EAELY  COINS   OF  EUBOEA 

The  cities  of  Chalcis,  Eretria,  and  Cyme  in  Euboea  were 
among  the  great  colonizing  cities  of  Greece  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Olympiads.  Cumae  in  Italy  was  a  foundation  of  the 
people  of  Chalcis  and  Cyme,1  and  the  earliest  of  all  Greek 
settlements  in  Italy;  and  Italy,  Sicily,  and  Chalcidice  in 
Macedon  were  dotted  with  Euboean  colonies.  The  Euboeans 
would  not  be  likely  to  be  far  behind  the  Aeginetans  in  the 
issue  of  coin.  And  being  more  detached  from  the  Greek 
mainland,  and  in  closer  relations  with  the  people  of  Ionia, 
where  Cyme  in  Aeolis  was  a  colony  of  Euboea,  it  is  probable 
that  their  earliest  issues  would  have  a  closer  resemblance  to 
those  of  Asia  Minor. 

The  standard  which  was  derived  from  Babylon  and  was 
largely  used  for  gold  coins  in  Asia,  was  known  to  the 
Greeks,  including  Herodotus,  as  the  Euboic  standard.  This 
does  not,  of  course,  imply  that  the  Babylonic  standard  was 
adopted  from  Euboea.  The  opposite  line  of  derivation  is 
the  only  one  probable  or  indeed  possible.  It  does,  however, 
prove  that  it  was  through  Euboea  that  the  Greeks  gained 
knowledge  of  the  standard  of  Babylon. 

The  issue  of  silver  coins  on  a  gold  standard  is  a  remark- 
able phenomenon.  In  Asia,  gold  and  silver  were  in  the 
sixth  century,  and  earlier,  minted  on  different  standards,  in 
order  that  a  round  number  of  the  silver  coins  should 
exchange  against  one  or  two  of  the  gold  coins.  The  issues 
of  Croesus  and  of  the  Persian  kings,  for  example,  were  so 
arranged  that  twenty  of  the  silver  pieces  passed  for  one  of 
the  gold  pieces.     And  this  custom  has  generally  prevailed, 

1  Modern  historians  are  generally  agreed  that  it  was  Euboean  Cyme,  and 
not  Cyme  in  Aeolis,  which  took  part  in  this  settlement. 


EARLY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA  125 

down  to  our  days.  The  Euboeans  took  another  line,  which 
was  later  adopted  by  the  Athenians  and  by  Alexander  the 
Great.  They  issued  silver  money  of  the  same  weight  as 
the  gold  which  was  current.  Not  much  gold  would  pass  in 
Greece,  but  such  as  there  was  would  no  doubt  pass  by  the 
Babylonic  weight,  which  indeed  had  struck  such  deep  roots 
that  no  gold  coins  (with  insignificant  exceptions)  were 
struck  on  any  other  standard  than  the  Euboic  and  its  Attic 
variant  down  to  Roman  times.  The  price  of  the  gold  stater 
in  silver  coins  of  the  same  weight  was  left  to  be  determined, 
not  by  any  authority,  but  by  the  demand,  and  the  circum- 
stances of  the  time.  It  is  a  characteristic  difference  between 
Asia,  where  the  will  of  kings  regulated  all  things,  and 
Europe,  with  its  free  cities. 

But  though  the  Euboeans  accepted  the  Babylonic  weight 
for  their  stater,  they  did  not  divide  it,  on  the  Asiatic  plan, 
into  thirds  and  sixths  and  twelfths,  but  into  halves  and 
twelfths,  drachms  and  obols.  This  was  the  Pheidonian 
system  of  division.  Herein,  as  we  shall  see,  they  differed 
from  the  Corinthians.1  And  they  succeeded  in  making 
their  coinage  thoroughly  European  and  national. 

This  is  the  simplest,  and  I  think  the  true,  view  of  the 
origin  of  the  Euboic  weight.  It  is  not,  however,  wholly 
free  from  difficulty.  That  it  was  bronze,  not  gold,  which 
was  the  early  standard  of  value  in  Greece  I  have  insisted  in 
speaking  of  the  early  coins  of  Aegina.  And  the  Aeginetans 
adapted  their  issues  of  silver  to  a  bronze  and  not  to  a  gold 
currency.  "Why  should  the  Euboeans  have  taken  another 
course  ?  Dr.  Lehmann-Haupt 2  has  maintained  that  the 
Euboeans  also  adapted  their  silver  to  bronze  ;  but  in  my 
opinion  he  does  not  prove  this  satisfactorily.  He  supposes 
that  Chalcis,  being  as  its  name  implies  a  city  abounding  in 
copper,  and  commanding  copper  mines,  was  able  to  force 
copper  to  a  higher  comparative  value  than  it  had  elsewhere. 

1  In  the  trinal  divisions  of  the  silver  coins  of  Chalcidice,  I  should  see  not 
Euboean  influence,  as  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer,  but  Corinthian.  See  below,  Ch.  X. 

*  Hermes,  1892,  p.  549  ;  Zeitschr.f.  Numism.,  27,  12-5.  This  writer  does  not 
clearly  distinguish  copper  and  bronze. 


126  EAELY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA 

The  ordinary  relation  between  copper  and  silver  in  the 
Levant  being  120  to  1,  a  mina  of  silver  would  ordinarily  pass, 
he  says,  where  the  Babylonic  silver  weight  was  used,  for  two 
talents  (120  minae)  of  copper.  But  if  the  Chalcidians  were 
able  to  force  copper  up  to  a  value  of  1  to  96  in  comparison 
with  silver,  then  these  two  talents  of  copper  would  be 
equivalent  only  to  -^q  or  f-  of  a  Babylonic  mina  of  silver. 
Now  f-  of  a  Babylonic  mina  of  silver  is  nearly  an  Euboic 
mina  of  436-6  grm.  (6,750  grains).1  Thus  the  writer 
supposes  that  the  greater  value  given  to  copper  resulted  in 
the  invention  of  a  new  and  lighter  standard  for  silver. 
It  will  however  be  observed  that  Dr.  Lehmann-Haupt's 
theory  is  entirely  conjectural;  and  is  built  upon  the 
astonishing  assumption  that,  when  you  have  a  greater 
quantity  of  goods  to  dispose  of,  you  can  raise  the  price  of 
the  goods,  which  is  entirely  contrary  to  economic  experience. 
Of  course,  if  Chalcis  had  a  monopoly  of  copper,  it  would  be 
somewhat  different ;  but  even  then,  why  should  the  people 
who  bought  copper  at  a  high  price  in  Euboea  sell  it  at  a  lower 
price  in  Asia  Minor  ?  Moreover,  Chalcis  had  no  monopoly, 
but  only  valuable  mines.  The  theory  in  question  therefore 
is  utterly  baseless  and  inacceptable.  Only  one  plausible 
argument  can  be  urged  in  its  favour,  that  at  Athens  the 
XccXkov?  was  one  ninety-sixth  of  the  didrachm,  since  eight 
chalci  went  to  the  obol  and  six  obols  to  the  drachm.  But 
this  argument  has  no  weight.  The  chalcus  was  probably 
a  late-invented  fraction  of  the  obolus :  in  some  places  six 
went  to  the  obol,  in  other  places  eight :  there  is  no  indica- 
tion that  at  Chalcis  the  obol  in  bronze  was  originally  of 
the  weight  of  a  didrachm,  as  the  theory  requires. 

Mr.  Head 2  is  disposed  to  think  that  the  Euboic  standard 
came  to  Euboea  from  Samos,  where  it  had  already  been 
used  in  early  times  for  electrum  ;  and  the  use  for  electrum 
would  be  a  natural  stage  on  the  way  to  its  use  for  silver. 
The  chief  objection  to  this  view  is  that  the  early  electrum 

1  This  is  a  false  value  for  the  Euboic  mina,  which  really  weighed  421  grm. 
(6,500  grains). 

'  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  xlvi. 


EARLY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA  127 

coins  in  question,  attributed  by  Mr.  Head  to  Samos,  are  not 
really  struck  on  the  Babylonic  gold  standard,  but  on  a 
somewhat  heavier  standard,  stater  135  or  270  grains  (grm. 
8-75  or  17-50),  which  was  in  use  later  at  Cyrene  and  was 
introduced  at  Athens  by  Peisistratus.  This  standard  I 
regard  as  of  Egyptian  origin :  I  consider  it  below,  under 
Athens.  Thus  a  Babylonic  origin  of  the  Euboic  standard  is 
by  far  the  most  probable. 

I  have  already  discussed,  and  dismissed,  the  view  that 
the  earliest  coins  of  Euboea  were  struck  in  electrum. 

The  earliest  silver  coins  which  can  be  attributed  with 
certainty  to  Chalcis  are  the  tetradrachms,  didrachms,  and 
smaller  divisions  bearing  as  type  on  one  side  a  flying  eagle, 
on  the  other  a  wheel  in  a  triangular  incuse.1  The  weight 
of  the  tetradrachm  is  258-7  grains  (grm.  16-76) ;  that  of  the 
didrachm  just  half  this.  The  attribution  of  these  coins  to 
Chalcis  is  guaranteed  by  the  appearance  on  them  of  the 
letters  VAS'  (XAA  in  some  later  specimens).  These  certain 
examples,  however,  can  scarcely  be  given  to  an  earlier  date 
than  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century ;  and  the  uninscribed 
coins,  some  of  which  probably  belong  to  Chalcis,  must  begin 
at  least  half  a  century  earlier. 

The  earliest  coins  which  can  with  certainty  be  attributed 
to  Eretria  are  tetradrachms  and  lesser  coins  bearing  on  one 
side  a  cow  scratching  her  head  with  a  hind  foot  and  the 
letter  E  ;  on  the  other  side  a  cuttlefish  in  an  incuse.  The 
weight  of  the  tetradrachms  varies  from  260  to  267  grains 
(grm.  16-84-17-27):  their  date  would  begin  probably  when 
Eretria  was  rebuilt  after  the  Persian  destruction  of  490  b.c, 
say  about  485  b.c.2  These  coins  show  the  raising  of  the 
standard  which  is  so  general  in  Greek  cities  about  the 
middle  of  the  sixth  century.  Carystus  issued  coins  at  the 
same  period. 

It  is,  however,  almost  certain  that  the  coins  which  I  have 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  p.  667. 

2  As  Mr.  Head  points  out,  Cat.  Central  Greece,  Introd.  p.  lviii,  Eretria  must 
have  been  speedily  rebuilt,  as  Eretrian  ships  were  present  at  the  battle  of 
Artemisium,  480  b.  c. 


128  EAELY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA 

mentioned  were  not  the  earliest  issues  of  Chalcis  and 
Eretria.  A  large  and  varied  series  of  uninscribed  silver 
coins  was  first  attributed  to  the  cities  of  Euboea  by  F.  Imhoof- 
Blumer  and  E.  Curtius.1  It  consists  of  what  have  been 
called  in  Germany  Wappenmiinzen  (heraldic  coins),  didrachms 
of  Euboic  weight  (130  grains,  grm.  8-42),  bearing  on  one  side 
a  very  simple  type,  often  enclosed  in  a  linear  circle,  on  the 
other  side  an  incuse  square  divided  into  four  triangles 
by  crossing  lines. 

The  types  are  as  follows : 2 

1.  Gorgon-head — Didrachm,  obol,  tetartemorion. 

2.  Ox -head,  facing — Didrachm,  hemiobol. 

3.  Owl  to  1.— Didrachm,  obol.     (PL  II.  6.) 

4.  Horse,  standing,  unbridled — Didrachm. 

5.  Forepart  of  bridled  horse  r.  or  1. — Didrachm. 

6.  Hinder  part  of  horse  to  r. — Didrachm,  drachm. 

7.  Amphora — Didrachm,  obol. 

8.  Astragalus — Didrachm. 

9.  Wheel.  Sometimes  of  archaic  type,  one  transverse 
crossed  by  two  supports  ;  sometimes  with  four  spokes,  with 
or  without  supports — Didrachm,  drachm,  obol.     (PI.  II.  4.) 

10.  Triskeles  of  human  legs — Didrachm,  drachm,  triobol. 

11.  Scarabaeus — Didrachm,  obol. 

12.  Frog— Obol. 

These  types  are  by  Mr.  Head  conjecturally  assigned  as 
follows  to  the  cities  of  Euboea  : 8 
Chalcis — Wheel,  triskeles. 
Eretria — Gorgon-head,  ox-head. 
Cyme— Horse  ;  fore-  or  hind-part  of  horse. 
Athenae  Diades — Owl,  astragalus. 
Histiaea  — Amphora. 

These  attributions,  however,  are  anything  but  certain ; 
and  the  whole  question  must  be  seriously  considered. 

We  begin  by  identifying  the   coins   of  Eretria,  which 

1  Hermes,  x.  215  ;  Monatsber.  der  Pr.  Akad.,  1881. 

a  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  pp.  674-723,  Pis.  XXXI-III. 

3  B.  M.  Cat  Central  Greece,  p.  xlix. 


EARLY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA  129 

form  the  most  important  class  of  early  Euboean  money. 
They  form  a  series  thus  : 

Didrachms. 

Obv.  Gorgon-head.     Rev.  Incuse  (in   one   case,  lion's  head  in 

incuse).     (PI.  II.  3.) 
Obv.  Bull's  head.     Rev.  Incuse. 

Tetradrachms. 
Obv.  Gorgon-head.     Rev.  Bull's  head.     (PL  II.  5.) 
Obv.  Gorgon-head.     Rev.  Face  and  forepaws  of  panther. 

Later  Coinage,  after  Persian  wars. 
Obv.  Cow  scratching  herself.     Rev.  Cuttle-fish  in  incuse  square. 

As  regards  this  later  coinage,  it  can  be  given  with  con- 
fidence to  Eretria,  as  we  have  seen.  But  the  earlier  series, 
between  which  and  the  later  there  is  no  point  of  direct 
contact,  presents  more  difficulty.  It  stretches  over  a  con- 
siderable period  of  time,  the  style  showing  gradual  develop- 
ment, and  the  incuse  giving  way  to  a  second  type.  Only 
two  attributions  are  suggested  for  the  series,  Athens  and 
Eretria.  And  the  conclusive  reason  for  assigning  it  to 
Eretria  rather  than  to  Athens  is  that  many  of  the  coins  are 
certainly  later  than  the  earliest  coins  bearing  the  head  of 
Athena  and  certainly  of  Athenian  origin,  and  that  it  is  not  to 
be  supposed  that  two  sets  of  coins  of  quite  different  types 
and  fabric  would  be  issued  contemporaneously  from  the 
Athenian  mint. 

This  argument  may  be  enforced  and  made  more  definite 
by  a  careful  consideration  of  the  weights  of  the  coins.  The 
earliest  didrachms  above  mentioned  seldom  exceed  130 
grains  in  weight.  The  specimens  in  the  British  Museum 
average  129-5  grains  (grm.  8-39).  The  tetradrachms  bearing 
the  Gorgon-head  and  another  type,  the  head  of  a  panther, 
are  heavier,  the  average  of  six  examples  being  2  x  130*6,  or 
if  we  omit  one  abnormal  example,  2x  131*4  ;  these  latter, 
then,  constitute  the  coinage  of  Eretria  contemporary  with 
the  early  Athena  type  at  Athens. 

In  treating  of  the  coins  of  Athens  I  shall  try  to  show 


130  EARLY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA 

that  these  two -type  pieces  were  first  struck  in  the  time  of 
Peisistratus,  who  raised  the  monetary  standard  from  the 
Euboic  level  (130  grains  for  the  didrachm)  to  the  Attic 
level  (135  x  2  grains  for  the  tetradrachm).  If  that  view  be 
correct,  it  will  follow  that  the  tetradrachms  of  Eretria  are 
later  than  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century,  and  the  didrachms 
which  preceded  them  presumably  earlier  than  that  date. 
We  shall  find  in  dealing  with  the  coins  of  Corinth  that  in 
the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  Attic  influence  in  that  city 
also  appreciably  raised  the  weight  of  the  coins.  Thus  the 
Peisistratid  issue  of  tetradrachms  turns  out  to  be  of  great 
value  as  evidence  for  the  arranging  and  dating  of  the  coins 
of  Greece  proper. 

On  some  of  the  tetradrachms  given  to  Eretria  there  are 
two  globules  in  the  field.1  These  can  scarcely  be  taken  for 
anything  but  marks  of  value.  M.  Six  and  M.  Babelon 
regard  their  presence  as  proving  that  the  coins  in  question 
were  issued  as  didrachms — double,  that  is  to  say,  of  the 
drachm  of  130  grains  which  they  regard  as  used  at  Athens 
between  the  time  of  Solon  and  that  of  Hippias.  M.  Six 
draws  the  further  conclusion  that  they  were  struck  at 
Athens,  there  being  no  evidence  for  the  existence  of  so 
heavy  a  drachm  elsewhere.  In  my  opinion,  however,  there 
is  no  satisfactory  evidence  for  the  currency,  even  at  Athens, 
of  a  drachm  of  the  weight  mentioned.  I  regard  the  globules 
on  the  Eretrian  coins  as  merely  showing  that  they  were  of 
double  the  value  of  the  coins  which  had  up  to  that  time 
circulated  at  Eretria,  and  which  were  without  doubt  Euboic 
didrachms.  The  people  of  Eretria  in  the  archaic  period, 
just  like  the  people  of  Aegina,  thought  not  in  drachms,  but 
in  staters  or  didrachms.  At  Delphi,  at  a  much  later  date, 
and  at  other  places,  expenses  were  ordinarily  reckoned  in 
staters. 

Another  series,  that  of  the  owl,  has  been  attributed, 
not  without  reason,  to  Athens.  As  M.  Babelon  has  well 
observed,  if  a  numismatist  were  asked  what  coinage  would 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Central  Greece,  p.  121  ;  Babelon,  Traite,  PI.  XXXI.  14,  16. 


EARLY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA  131 

naturally  at  Athens  precede  the  Athena- type,  the  only  reply 
he  could  make,  remembering  the  analogy  of  other  series 
would  be,  a  coinage  with  owl  for  type.1  Examples  have 
been  found  both  in  Attica  and  Euboea.  The  amphora  type 
would  also  be  very  appropriate  to  Athens.  On  the  later 
issues  of  the  city  the  owl  stands  on  an  amphora ;  and  the 
amphora  naturally  would  represent  the  oil  which  was  the 
great  gift  which  Athena  had  bestowed  upon  men.  The 
olive-spray  marks  the  Athenian  coinage  almost  throughout, 
and  the  amphora  would  have  the  same  significance.  The 
astragalus  might  also  be  Athenian,  as  the  device  occurs 
frequently  on  the  well-known  weights  and  tesserae  of 
Athens. 

M.  Babelon  tries  to  show  the  appropriateness  to  Athens 
of  some  of  the  other  types.  He  would  connect  the  horse- 
type  and  the  wheel,  as  shorthand  for  a  chariot,  with  the 
legend  which  narrated  that  Erechtheus  was  the  inventor  of 
chariots.  It  might  have  been  better  to  seek  in  these  types 
some  allusion  to  the  great  festival  of  Athena,  with  its  pro- 
cessions of  chariots.  But,  in  any  case,  little  weight  can  be 
assigned  to  what  may  be  called  literary  or  mythological  argu- 
ments. If  a  type  is  actually  used  on  Athenian  monuments, 
as  are  the  owl  and  the  amphora,  there  is  some  reason  to 
expect  it  on  the  early  coins.  But  the  mere  fact  that  a  type 
has  a  legendary  connexion  with  the  city  goes  for  very  little. 
I  would  therefore  regard  the  horse  coins  as  rather  Euboean 
than  Attic. 

The  wheel  series  has  been  given  by  M.  Svoronos  to 
Megara.2  For  this  also  there  is  some  show  of  reason.  The 
type  of  Mesembria,  a  Megarian  colony  in  Thrace,  is  a  radiate 
wheel,  apparently  a  symbol  of  the  sun-god.  The  types  at 
Megara  would  certainly  be  Apolline ;  on  the  coins  of  the 
fourth  century  they  are  the  head  of  Apollo  and  the  lyre ; 
but  it  is  possible  that  the  wheel  may  have  been  an  earlier 
type  at  Megara.  It  is  scarcely  to  be  supposed  that  Megara, 
the  outpost  of  the   Dorians  against  Athens,  and  a  great 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  705. 

2  Journ.  int.  d'Archeol.  numism.,  1S98,  p.  273. 

K    2 


132  EARLY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA 

colonizing  city  in  the  seventh  century  B.C.,  should  have 
been  without  coins  when  Aegina,  Corinth,  and  Athens,  her 
three  neighbours,  were  all  issuing  them. 

In  view  of  the  occurrence  of  the  wheel  on  coins  given 
with  certaintj7,  to  Chalcis  one  might  be  disposed  to  give 
these  wheel  coins  to  that  city.  But  they  are  scarcely  earlier 
than  the  coins  of  Chalcis  of  which  I  have  spoken ;  and  it 
is  improbable  that  the  city  would  issue  at  the  same  time 
two  dissimilar  sets  of  coins.  The  claim  of  Megara  would 
therefore  seem  to  be  stronger  than  that  of  Chalcis,  but 
not  without  difficulty,  as  Megara  was  not  on  good  terms 
with  her  Ionic  neighbours,  and  would  not  be  very  likely 
to  form  a  monetary  convention  with  them. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  in  the  case  of  these  series,  just 
as  in  the  case  of  the  early  electrum  of  Asia,  we  are  justified 
in  regarding  the  types  as  regular  civic  stamps.  Indeed, 
the  variety  of  types  is  so  considerable,  and  the  similarity 
of  fabric  so  great,  that  Beule*  declared  they  must  all  of 
them,  or  none,  come  from  the  mint  of  Athens.  They  seem 
from  the  evidence  of  finds  to  have  circulated  together  with 
the  regular  early  tetradrachms  of  Athens  and  Euboea.  For 
example,  a  hoard  found  at  Eleusis1  consisted  of  an  early 
triobol  of  Athens,  a  didrachm  and  triobol  of  the  recognized 
coinage  of  Eretria,  three  obols  bearing  the  wheel,  one  the 
Gorgon-head,  and  a  half-obol  bearing  the  bull's  head. 
A  hoard  found  near  Cyme  in  Euboea  consisted  of  tetra- 
drachms and  lesser  coins  of  Eretria,  many  archaic  tetra- 
drachms of  Athens,  and  the  following  Wappenmiinzen : 
wheel  (1),  owl  (1),  hind-part  of  horse  (1),  fore-part  of  horse 
(1),  standing  horse  (1),  Gorgon-head  (2).  Another  hoard 
found  at  Eretria  contained  tetradrachms  and  didrachms  of 
Eretria,  early  Athenian  tetradrachms,  a  tetradrachm  with 
Gorgon-head,  and  several  examples  of  Wappenmiinzen  (types 
not  stated).2 

1  K&hler,  Athen.  Mitth.,  1884,  p.  357. 

2  K5hler,  I.  c.  It  is  noteworthy  that  in  these  hoards  there  were  found  no 
coins  of  Chalcis.  Eretria  and  Athens  stood  together:  Chalcis  stood  apart 
from  them,  with  Corinth. 


EARLY  COINS  OF  EUBOEA  133 

It  is  thus  clear  that  these  coins  had  a  wide  and  general 
circulation ;  and  it  seems  almost  certain  that  they  point 
to  a  monetary  convention  of  some  kind.  In  the  sixth 
century  Athens  and  Eretria  were  closely  associated.  But 
on  the  other  hand  there  was  hostility  between  Athens  and 
Megara. 

To  Euboea  and  Athens  therefore  I  would  attribute  the 
series,  though  certainty  is  impossible.  We  can  separate 
one  class  as  Euboean,  and  another  as  probably  Attic ;  but 
such  types  as  the  horse,  the  wheel,  the  frog  must  remain  of 
doubtful  attribution. 

The  coins  of  Euboea,  of  the  time  of  the  Persian  wars,  are 
dealt  with  in  Chapter  XIV. 

An  extremely  interesting  numismatic  discovery  of  recent 
years  is  that  of  the  early  coins  of  Peparethus,  an  island 
situated  near  the  coast  of  Thessaly,  a  little  to  the  north 
of  Euboea.  These  coins  were  put  together  by  Mr.  Wroth 
in  the  Corolla  Numismatica.1  They  are  tetradrachms  of 
Attic  weight,  having  on  one  side  a  bunch  of  grapes,  on 
the  other  various  types,  Dionysus  seated,  the  head  of 
Herakles,  &c.  The  class  of  coins  which  stands  nearest  to 
them  is  the  tetradrachms  of  Eretria  and  Carystus,  which 
have  types  on  obverse  and  reverse.  Their  date  is  between 
the  latter  part  of  the  sixth  century  and  the  rise  of  the 
Athenian  Empire,  when  the  coinage  of  Peparethus  ceases. 
That  the  island  should  have  adhered  to  the  Attic  standard, 
when  Thessaly  on  one  side,  and  the  Aegean  islands  on  the 
other,  adopted  the  Aeginetan  standard,  is  an  interesting- 
historical  indication.  Peparethus  is  small  and  produces 
little  save  wine,  which  must  have  been  exported  to  Athens 
or  Euboea. 

1  p.  90. 


CHAPTER    VII 

EARLY  COINS   OF  CORINTH   AND   CORCYRA 
§  1.      Corinth. 

That  the  coinage  of  Corinth  began  very  early  is  sufficiently 
proved  by  its  extremely  early  art  and  fabric.  It  is  easy  to 
prove  that  it  began  at  an  earlier  time  than  that  of  Athens. 
For  the  earliest  tetrad rachms  of  Athens  are  almost  on  the 
same  level  of  art  as  the  coins  of  Corinth  on  which  the  head 
of  Athena  appears  on  the  reverse ;  and  these  are  preceded 
at  Corinth  by  at  least  two  regular  series  of  coins,  stretching 
over  a  considerable  space  of  time,  as  is  shown  by  their 
variety  and  abundance. 

But  these  coins  of  Athens  can  be  dated  with  reasonable 
certainty  to  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century.  The  coins  of 
Corinth  then  must  reach  back  to  the  seventh  century, 
probably  to  the  reign  of  Cypselus.  They  can  scarcely, 
however,  be  so  early  as  the  time  of  the  foundation  of 
Corcyra,  or  the  Corcyrean  coin  would  have  probably  started 
under  their  influence. 

Mr.  Head's  assignment  of  the  early  coins  of  Corinth  is 
as  follows  : 

Time  of  Cypselus,  657-625  b.  c. 

1.  9  Pegasus  with  curled  wing  =  incuse  square,  of  similar 
pattern  to  that  on  coins  of  Aegina.  Stater  (130  grains; 
grm.  8-42.)     (PI.  II.  7.) 

It  is  curious  that  some  of  the  very  earliest  coins  of  Corinth, 
found  in  Egypt,1  are  of  very  light  weight  (102-104  grains, 
grm.  6-60-6-70).  There  must  have  been  some  loss  of  weight 
by  chemical  process. 

1  ftWm.  Chron.,  1899,  p.  274. 


CORINTH  135 

Time  of  Periander  and  later,  625-500  B.C. 

2.  9  As  last  =  incuse  developing  into  the  mill-sail 
pattern.  Stater  and  drachm  (43  grains;  grm.  2-78).  (PI. 
II.  8.) 

On  the  hemidrachm  of  this  class  a  half  Pegasus  occurs, 
on  the  obols  a  Pegasus,  on  the  hemiobol  the  head  of 
Pegasus. 

After  500  b.  c. 

3.  An  archaic  head  of  Athena  appears  on  the  reverse  of 
the  staters ;  an  archaic  head  of  Aphrodite  on  the  drachm. 
The  diobol  bears  the  mark  of  value  A,  the  trihemiobol  the 
letters  TPIH,  the  hemiobol  H. 

It  appears  to  me  that  as  Mr.  Head  has  placed  the  archaic 
coins  of  Athens  bearing  the  head  of  Athena  too  early,  so 
he  has  placed  the  earliest  staters  of  Corinth  bearing  the 
same  head  too  late.  Von  Fritze  *  has  well  pointed  out  that 
there  cannot  be  much  difference  in  date  between  the  two 
series,  as  the  style  of  art  is  closely  similar.  We  cannot 
place  the  Athenian  series  much  earlier  than,  nor  the 
Corinthian  series  much  later  than,  the  middle  of  the  sixth 
century. 

Some  of  the  earliest  flat  coins  of  Metapontum  (Br.  Mus. 
Cat.  Italy,  p.  239)  are  restruck  on  coins  of  Corinth  of  the 
second  tj'pe.  These  Metapontine  coins  belong  to  the  second 
half  of  the  sixth  century.  Somewhat  later  coins  of  Meta- 
pontum of  thicker  fabric,  and  belonging  to  the  early  years 
of  the  fifth  century,  are  restruck  on  coins  of  Corinth  of  the 
third  type,  bearing  the  head  of  Athena.2  This  evidence  is, 
however,  indefinite ;  it  only  shows  the  coins  of  Corinth  in 
each  case  to  be  older  than  the  Metapontine  restriking; 
but  does  not  tell  us  how  much  older. 

I  should  modify  Mr.  Head's  dates,  which  in  any  case  are 
too  precise,  in  the  following  way : 

1  Von  Fritze,  Zeitschr.f.  Numism.,  xx.  p.  143. 
*  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  1405. 


136   EARLY  COINS  OF  CORIN'.TH  AND  CORCYRA 

Class  1       (about)  650-600  b.c. 
Class  2  „       600-550    „ 

Class  3  „       550-         „ 

As  we  have  no  reason  for  connecting  a  change  of  fabric 
with  any  special  events  in  the  history  of  Corinth,  any 
attempt  at  great  accuracy  cannot  be  successful. 

There  is  however  one  indication,  that  of  weight,  which 
Mr.  Head  does  not  seem  to  have  used.  If  we  compare  the 
coins  of  Class  2  with  those  of  Class  3  we  shall  find  that 
the  latter  are  distinctly  the  heavier.  From  the  collection 
in  the  British  Museum,  which  contains  only  coins  in  good 
condition,  we  reach  the  following  results  : 

Of  21  staters  of  Class  2  the  average  weight  is  127  grains. 

Of  28  staters  of  Class  3  the  average  weight  is  132  grains. 
That  proves  that  at  about  the  time  when  Class  3  came  in, 
the  standard  of  the  stater  was  raised  by  about  five  grains. 
A  precisely  similar  rise  in  the  standard  from  130  grains  to  J 
135  x  2  grains  took  place  at  Athens  in  the  time  of  Peisis- 
tratus,  as  I  shall  presently  try  to  prove.  I  conjecture  that 
the  occasion  of  raising  the  standard  at  Athens  was  the 
acquisition  by  Peisistratus  of  the  silver  mines  on  the 
Strymon  and  at  Laurium.  Corinth  seems  to  have  followed 
the  lead  of  Athens,  probably  because  she  could  not  help 
herself.  This  little  investigation  of  weights  strongly  con- 
firms the  fixing  of  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  at  Corinth 
as  the  time  of  the  introduction  of  the  head  of  Athena  as 
reverse  type.  One  may  even  suspect  that  the  type  itself 
was  borrowed  from  the  fine  coinage  of  Peisistratus. 

To  go  back.  It  is  safe  to  attribute  the  origin  of  coinage 
at  Corinth  to  Cypselus.  Generally  speaking,  we  find  the 
wealthy  and  art-loving  tyrants  of  Greece  responsible  for 
such  innovations.  We  have  next  to  consider  the  monetae 
standard,  and  the  reason  for  selecting  it. 

The  Corinthian  stater  of  130  grains  is  of  the  weight 
of  the  Daric  or  gold  shekel  of  Persia,  and  of  pre- Persian 
times.  Like  the  people  of  Euboea,  those  of  Corinth 
transferred  a  gold  standard  directly  to  silver,  as  the 
people   of  Phocaea  had  transferred  it  to  electrum.      But  . 


CORINTH  137 

they  did  so  with  a  difference.  The  Euboeans,  as  we  have 
seen,  took  the  stater  as  a  didrachm,  and  divided  it  into  two 
drachms  of  sixty-five  grains  or  twelve  obols  of  eleven  grains. 
They  thus  completely  Europeanized  it,  following  the  system 
of  Pheidon.  The  Corinthians  retained  the  Asiatic  system 
of  division  by  three.  They  divided  their  stater  into  three 
drachms  of  forty-three  grains,  and  eighteen  obols  of  seven 
grains.  This  fact  was  already  known  from  the  statements 
of  ancient  metrologists,  and  received  final  confirmation 
when  inscriptions  on  the  coins  were  read  as  marks  of  value,1 
A  or  A 10  standing  for  diobol,  TPIH  for  trihemiobol,  and  H 
for  hemiobol.  As  the  weights  of  these  diobols,  trihemiobols, 
and  hemiobols  are  just  what  they  should  be  when  the 
drachm  weighs  forty-three  grains,  the  proof  that  this  was 
the  standard  is  beyond  doubt. 

If  we  seek  a  reason  for  this  system,  one  may  easily  be 
found.  The  object  of  Cypselus  seems  to  have  been  to  make 
terms  with  the  two  systems  of  weight  in  use  in  Greece, 
the  Euboic 2  and  the  Aeginetan.  The  Corinthian  stater  of 
130  grains  would  pass  not  only  as  an  Euboic  stater,  but  as 
two-thirds  of  the  Aeginetan  stater  of  192  grains.  The 
Corinthian  drachm  of  forty-three  grains  would  be  equivalent 
to  two-thirds  of  the  Euboic  drachm  of  sixty-five  grains, 
and  four-ninths  of  the  Aeginetan  drachm  of  ninety-six 
grains.  Mr.  Head3  has  suggested  that  the  Corinthian 
drachms  may  have  been  regarded  as  practically  the 
equivalent  of  an  Aeginetan  hemidrachm  of  forty-eight 
grains.  It  is,  however,  difficult  to  believe  that  the  drachm 
when  equated  with  Aeginetan  currency  would  pass  at 
a  higher  rate  than  the  stater  or  tridrachm ;  and  this  is 
implied  in  Mr.  Head's  view.  It  is,  however,  quite  probable 
that  in  some  places  in  later  periods  of  Greek  history, 
the   Corinthian   drachm   and   the   Aeginetan  hemidrachm 

1  First  by  myself,  in  Num.  Chron.,  1871. 

2  The  coins  of  Cypselus  seem  to  be  earlier  than  any  extant  coins  of 
Euboea  ;  but  we  may  well  suppose  the  Euboic  standard  to  have  been  already 
in  existence. 

3  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  399. 


138  EARLY  COINS  OF  CORINTH  AND  CORCYRA 

were  equated.  The  fact  is  that  we  know  very  little  indeed 
as  to  the  way  in  which  Greek  coins  of  various  systems  were 
related  in  value  on  the  tables  of  the  money-changers  :  there 
may  have  been  a  fixed  convention  in  the  matter,  or  there 
may  have  been  continual  fluctuations  according  to  demand 
and  supply.    This  is  a  matter  for  further  investigation. 

The  trinal  division  of  the  Corinthian  stater  is  valuable  to 
the  numismatist,  as  it  enables  him  to  discern,  in  the  Greek 
colonies  of  Italy,  Sicily,  and  Chalcidice  in  Macedonia,  the 
influence  of  Corinthian  commerce.  There  is  a  natural 
presumption  that  when  cities  which  adhere  to  the  Attic 
standard  divide  their  stater  of  135  grains  by  two  they  belong 
to  the  sphere  of  Euboean  or  Athenian  commerce  ;  when  they 
divide  it  by  three,  they  seem  rather  to  be  under  Corinthian 
influence.  This  reasonable  view,  however,  has  not  been 
accepted  by  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer,  who  sees  in  the  trinal 
division  of  the  stater  in  Chalcidice  a  trace  of  Asiatic 
influence.  The  point  is  a  fine  one,  but  not  unimportant. 
I  prefer  to  consider  the  actual  facts  of  exchange  and  com- 
merce as  more  important  to  the  people  of  Chalcidice  than 
mere  traditions  of  Asiatic  procedure.  That  some  of  the 
cities  of  Chalcidice  and  of  South  Italy  use  a  drachm  of  43-45 
grains  is  therefore  an  important  fact  in  the  history  of 
commerce.  We  shall  later  return  to  this  subject  of 
investigation. 

§  2.    Coecyra. 

In  the  case  of  Corcyra  also  there  is  an  interesting  clashing 
between  the  Aeginetan,  the  Corinthian,  and  the  Euboic 
systems.  We  might  naturally  have  expected  the  city, 
when  it  first  issued  coins,  to  take  as  its  model  the  Corinthian 
coinage,  which  was  then  in  existence.  But  the  relations  of 
Corcyra  to  the  mother-city  were  never  from  the  first  cordial ; 
and  the  first  issue  of  coin  probably  took  place  at  the  time 
when  the  people  of  Corcyra  asserted  their  independence 
about  585  B.C.,  after  the  death  of  Periander.  (PI.  II.  13.) 
The  type  of  the  obverse,  a  cow  suckling  a  calf,  seems  to 
refer  to  the  early  settlement  of  the  island  from  Euboea, 


CORCYRA  139 

that  being  an  ordinary  type  of  Carystus,  and  referring 
probably  to  the  worship  of  the  Mother-Goddess.1  The 
reverse  type,  a  stellar  pattern,  is  unlike  anything  in  Greece 
proper,  and  bears  a  nearer  likeness  to  devices  used  in  Ionia. 
The  weight  is  the  Aeginetan,  but  somewhat  light ;  probably 
through  the  influence  of  the  Corinthian  standard,  which 
was  in  use  at  Anactorium  and  about  the  mouth  of  the 
Corinthian  gulf.  The  Corinthian  drachm,  it  must  be 
remembered,  43-45  grains,  is  distinctly  lighter  than  the 
Aeginetan  hemidrachm  of  forty- eight  grains.  The  coins  of 
Corcyra  do  not  from  the  beginning  exceed  180  grains 
(grm.  11-66)  for  the  stater,  and  90  grains  (grm.  5-83)  for  the 
drachm.  If  the  above  conjecture  is  correct,  these  would 
pass  as  four  and  two  drachms  of  Corinth.2  As  the  coinage 
of  Corinth  was  closely  copied  by  the  cities  of  Acarnania, 
Anactorium,  Leucas,  and  the  rest,  so  the  cities  founded  by 
Corcyra  in  the  north,  on  the  coast  of  the  Adriatic,  notably 
Dyrrhachium  and  Apollonia,  closely  copied  the  coins  of 
Corcyra,  from  which  their  money  only  differs  in  virtue  of 
the  inscriptions  which  it  bears.  The  coins  give  us  a  vivid 
impression  of  the  clear  geographical  line  which  separated 
the  commercial  sphere  of  Corcyra  from  that  of  Corinth. 
That  the  Corcyrean  standard  had  no  influence  in  Italy  or 
Sicily,  but  only  in  the  Adriatic  is  an  important  fact, 
indicating  that  the  course  of  Corcyrean  trade  ran  north- 
wards only. 

It  has  been  suggested  3  that  the  coin-standard  of  Corcyra 
might  not  be  connected  with  that  of  Aegina,  but  directly 
derived  from  some  of  the  cities  of  Asia,  Miletus,  or  Camirus. 
But  all  likelihood  is  taken  from  this  conjecture  by  the  fact 
that  it  does  not  correspond  with  any  Asiatic  standard.  It 
is  too  heavy  for  the  official  standard  of  Persia ;  too  light 
for   that  of  Miletus.      It  is  therefore  better  to  derive  it 


1  B.  M.  Cat.  Thessaly  to  Aetolia,  p.  xlvii.    There  are,  however,  doubts  whether 
this  story  of  Euboean  colonization  is  historic. 

2  I  have  established  this  equation  in  B.  if.  Cat.  Thessaly,  Ac,  p.  xv  of  the 
Introduction. 

8  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  326. 


140    EARLY  COINS  OF  CORINTH  AND  CORCYRA 

from  the  Pheidonian  standard    which   had   course  in  all 
Greece  Proper,  from  Thessaly  to  Sparta. 

It  is  possible,  as  I  have  suggested  in  a  later  chapter,  that 
the  lowness  of  the  Corcyrean  standard  may  have  some 
relation  to  the  silver  standard  in  use  in  Etruria  and  central 
Italy.1 


i  Below,  Ch.  XI. 


CHAPTER    VIII 
EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

There  is  no  subject  in  Greek  Numismatics  which  has 
been  so  fully  discussed  as  the  earliest  coinage  of  Athens ; 
and  there  are  few  subjects  in  regard  to  which  a  greater 
variety  of  opinion  prevails.  The  discussion  has  not  been 
confined  to  numismatists,  but  has  been  taken  up  by  philo- 
logists and  historians.  "Without  going  into  all  the  by-ways 
of  the  subject,  I  shall  try  briefly  to  portray  its  main 
features. 

§  1.     The  Earliest  Coinage. 

There  are  three  views  as  to  what  were  the  earliest  coins 
of  Athens.  If  we  could  settle  this  question,  which  is  a 
purely  numismatic  one,  we  could  with  more  confidence 
approach  the  other  questions,  philological,  economic,  and 
historic,  which  are  involved. 

The  first  claimants  are  certain  coins  of  electrum,  small 
pieces  of  the  weight  of  about  twenty-one  grains,  having 
on  one  side  an  owl,  and  on  the  other  side  an  incuse.  These 
we  have  already  discussed  and  shown  that  they  lie  outside 
the  regular  Athenian  coinage. 

The  next  claimant  is  the  silver  coins  of  various  types, 
the  so-called  Wappenmiinzen,  of  the  weight  of  130  grains, 
which  are  found  in  Euboea,  Attica,  and  Boeotia.  I  have 
spoken  of  them  already  under  Euboea,  and  claimed  them 
mostly  for  Chalcis,  Eretria,  and  other  cities  of  that  island. 
Bat  it  is  probable  that  some  of  them  may  belong  to  Athens, 
and  that  Athens,  early  in  the  sixth  century,  may  have 
issued  coin  closely  like  that  of  the  cities  of  Euboea. 

As  we  have  seen,  the  coins  of  this  class  which  can  best 


142  .       EAKLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

claim  Athenian  parentage  are  those  of  the  type  of  the  owl. 
M.  Babelon  mentions 1  the  following  examples : 

Didrachms  124-1  grains  (8-04  grm.),  British  Museum. 

130-8      „       (8-47     „     ),  DeLuynes. 

130         „       (8-42     „     ), 
Obols  11-9-6  grains  (0-72  to  0-60  grm.).    Several  examples. 

The  best  indication  whether  early  uninscribed  coins  belong  ] 
to  a  city  is  to  be  found  by  comparing  the  types  with  those 
of  the  later  and  recognized  coins  of  that  city.  As  the 
acknowledged  coins  of  Athens  are  stamped  with  an  owl, 
we  may  claim  the  uninscribed  coins  with  that  type  for 
Athenian.  As  the  later  tetradrachms  of  Athens  have  an 
amphora,  on  which  the  owl  stands,  for  type,  and  many 
weights  have  an  amphora  as  type,  we  may  fairly  claim 
for  Athens  also  the  uninscribed  coins  stamped  with  an 
amphora. 

While  we  may  attribute  the  owl  coins  and  the  amphora 
coins  to  Athens,  I  should  stop  there.  I  think  M.  Babelon's 2 
attempts  to  find  mythological  justification  for  the  assign- 
ment of  such  types  as  the  horse  and  the  wheel  to  Athens 
are  fanciful.  The  bull's-head  type,  which  some  writers 
would  assign  to  Athens,  is  so  closely  connected  with  the 
Gorgon-head,  which  almost  certainly  belongs  to  Eretria, 
that  we  must  refuse  it  to  Athens. 

Some  numismatists  attach  value  to  the  statement  of 
Plutarch  that  Theseus  struck  coins  bearing  the  type  of 
a  bull.  Pollux  also  says  that  the  didrachm  was  of  old  the 
coin  of  the  Athenians,  and  was  called  a  bull,  because  it  had 
a  bull  stamped  on  it.3  In  consequence  of  these  statements, 
those  coins  have  been  attributed  to  Athens  which  have  as 
type  a  bull's  head.  It  is,  however,  very  probable  that  the 
statements  arose  from  a  misunderstanding  of  the  laws  of 
Draco,  in  which  fines  were  stated  in  oxen.  Later  writers 
fancied  that  by  oxen  Draco  must  have  meant  some  kind 
of  coin,  knowing  that  the  coins  of  Aegina  were  called 
tortoises,  those  of  Corinth  horses,  and  those  of  Athens  owls. 

1  Traitt,  ii.  1,  p.  701.  *  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  707.  3  ix.  60. 


THE  EARLIEST  COINAGE  143 

But  we  know  that  Draco  was  speaking  of  real  oxen.  And 
it  may  be  added  that  the  head  of  an  ox  is  a  very  different 
thing  from  an  ox. 

The  earliest  coins,  then,  of  Athens,  appear  to  be  silver 
didrachms  of  Euboic  weight,  bearing  as  type  the  owl  or 
the  amphora.  These  may  be  safely  given  to  the  time  of 
Solon,  and  connected  with  his  reforms.  The  tetradrachms 
bearing  the  head  of  Athena  were  almost  certainly,  as  I  shall 
try  to  show,  first  issued  in  the  time  of  Peisistratus.  Thus 
the  coinage  of  Athens,  during  the  first  half  of  the  sixth 
century,  seems  to  exhibit  the  city  as  closely  related  to 
Eretria  in  Euboea,  and  a  member  of  a  monetary  union 
including  a  group  of  cities  in  the  region.  The  fact  is 
not  uninstructive.  In  the  time  of  Solon,  Athens  was  still 
struggling  with  Megara  for  the  possession  of  Salamis,  and 
dreams  of  the  headship  of  Hellas,  whether  in  letters,  in 
commerce,  or  in  arms,  had  not  yet  risen  above  the  horizon. 
It  was  the  legislation  of  Solon,  and  still  more  the  ambition 
of  Peisistratus,  which  turned  Athens  from  a  small  city  into 
a  great  one. 

§  2.    The  Refoems  op  Solon. 

The  question  of  the  Solonic  reform  of  the  Athenian 
coinage  is  one  which  has  aroused  more  controversy  than 
any  other  in  Greek  numismatic  history.  Numismatists 
used  to  think  that  they  had  a  satisfactory  account  of  the 
matter  in  a  passage  of  Androtion  (probably  from  his  AtOis) 
quoted  by  Plutarch  in  his  Life  of  Solon  (xv).  But  certain 
statements  in  Aristotle's  Constitution  of  Athens,  since  brought 
'  to  light,  have  been  held  to  be  quite  irreconcilable  with  those 
of  Androtion.  Some  writers,  such  as  "W.  Christ,1  still  regard 
Androtion  as  the  preferable  authority,  thinking  an  archaeo- 
logist more  likely  to  be  accurate  in  such  matters  than  a 
1  philosopher.  But  the  great  majority  of  the  commentators 
on  the  work  of  Aristotle2  maintain  that  his  authority  is 

1  Miinchener  Sitzungsber.,  1900,  118. 

2  The  literature  of  the  subject,  which  is  extensive,  is  given  in  Head's 
!  Historia  Numorum,  ed.  2,  p.  365. 


144  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

final.  In  my  opinion  it  is  possible  to  reconcile  the  state- 
ments of  the  two  authorities,  except  in  one  or  two  points. 
This  I  shall  proceed  to  do. 

The  text  of  Plutarch  runs  as  follows :  KairoL  tiv\$  typa-^av, 
fip  kariv  'AvBpoTicov,  ovk  aTTOKOTrfj  xpeeov,  dXXa  tokcov  p-erpto- 
tt]ti  KOvfyHjBkvTas  dya7rfj<rai  tovs  7revr)Ta?,  Kal  aeLO-dyOeiav 
6vop.daat  to  (f>iXav6pdi-mvp.a  tovto,  Kal  rrfv  dp.a  tovtco  yevo- 
likvt)v  to>v  re  fiirpcou  kirav^aiv  Kal  tov  vo/iio-fiaros  ripr\v. 
'EKaTov  yap  k-noir)<j(.  8pa\p.5>v  ttju  pvdv  -rrporepou  £(38ofxrJKOvTa 
Kal  rpiwv  ovcrav'  &<tt  dpiOp.(o  p,\v  i<rov,  8vi>dp.ei  5'  iXarrov 
aTToSiSoi/Tcov  dxfxXeTo-Oai  p\v  tovs  kKrivovras  paydXa,  p.-q8\v  8e 
(3Xa7rT€cr0ai  rods  Kop.i£op:kvov$. 

According  to  Androtion,  then,  the  alteration  in  the 
coinage  was  part  of  Solon's  Seisachtheia  or  relief  of  debtors. 
Solon,  says  Androtion,  did  not  cancel  the  debts  but 
moderated  the  interest.  He  caused  the  mina,  which  before 
had  been  of  the  weight  of  73  drachms,  to  be  equivalent 
to  100,  so  that  debtors  paid  the  same  number  of  drachms 
which  they  had  borrowed,  but  in  drachms  of  less  weight ; 
thus  those  who  had  sums  to  pay  were  gainers,  while  those 
who  received  them  were  no  losers.  It  was  this  operation 
which  gained  for  Solon  and  his  friends  the  name  of  xp^<»>ko- 
iri8ai  or  debt-cutters.  Androtion,  however,  adds  that  at  the 
same  time  Solon  made  an  increase  of  measures,  that  is,  no 
doubt,  measures  of  capacity.  Apart  from  this  phrase,  to 
which  we  will  return  later,  the  passage  seems  quite  clear. 
As  the  proportion  of  73  to  100  is  nearly  the  proportion  in 
weight  between  the  mina  and  drachm  of  the  Athenian 
coinage  and  those  of  Aegina,  numismatists  naturally  con- 
cluded that  the  Aeginetan  standard  was  before  Solon's  time 
in  use  at  Athens,  and  that  he  lowered  the  standard  from 
Aeginetan  to  what  may  be  called  Solonic  or  Attic  level, 
in  order  that  debtors  should  save  27  per  cent,  in  their  re- 
payments. To  say  that  the  creditors  would  lose  nothing  is 
of  course  absurd :  whatever  the  debtors  would  gain  they 
would  lose ;  but  it  is  very  natural  that  Solon  should  not 
have  realized  this  fact.  M.  Babelon  has  no  difficulty  in 
showing  that  the  measure  attributed  to  Solon  was  financially 


THE  REFORMS  OF  SOLON  145 

unsound;1  but  that  is  scarcely  to  the  point.  It  is  quite 
certain  that,  all  through  the  course  of  history,  coinage  has 
been  debased  in  order  to  accommodate  debtors  or  to  relieve 
the  financial  straits  of  governments ;  and  we  have  no  reason 
to  think  that  Solon  would  be  too  wise  to  attempt  such 
things. 

We  must  next  turn  to  the  passage  bearing  on  the  ques- 
tion in  the  recently  discovered  work  by  Aristotle  on  The 
Constitution  of  Athens. 

The  text  of  Aristotle,  as  determined  by  Blass  and  Kenyon, 
runs  - :  'Ev  pev  ovv  tois  vopois  Tavra  Sokci  Otivai  SrjfiOTiied, 
trpb  81  tt}$  vopodtaia?  Troifjcra[i}  ttjv  tcov  x[p]€co[v  diro]K07rr}v, 
Kal  pzrd  Tavra  Ttjv  T€  tg>v  peTpcov  Kal  VTadpcov  Kal  tt)v  tov 
vo filer fiar oy  avgrjariv.  kif  tKeivov  yap  kykvtTO  Kal  rd  fxirpa 
ptifa  to>v  $€i8<ovcia>v  Kal  r)  p.va  trpoTtpov  [dyo^aa  o~ra[6p]bv 
i(38oprJKovTa  8pa\pds  dv€7r\r)p(o0r]  rais  tKarov.  r)v  8  6  ap^aio? 
\apaKTrjp  8l8pa\pov.  knoi^ae  8k  Kal  o~Ta6pd  trpb?  t[o]  vopiapa 
r[p]€is  Kal  igrJKovTa  p.vds  to  rdXavrov  dyovaas,  Kal  imSitve- 
p.r\Qr\aav  \ai  ripely  p.vai  tcd  crTarfjpi  Kal  rofy  dWois  <TTa$fioi$. 

The  only  serious  question  as  to  the  reading  arises  over 
the  phrase  beginning  ttjv  re  tcov  phpcov  with  the  repetition 
of  the  article  rf\v  before  tov  vop.icrpaTos.  Hill  had  already 
remarked  on  the  oddness  of  the  phrase,  and  suggested  as 
a  possible  emendation  ttjv  re  tg>v  perpcov  Kal  o-TaOptov 
(avg-qaiv),  Kal  tt)v  tov  vop.iap.aTos  (jji€icoo~iv).  This  may  be 
the  original  reading;  but  in  any  case  the  word  avgrjais 
if  applied  to  coin  need  not  mean  its  increase  in  weight, 
but  may,  as  some  commentators  have  pointed  out,  only 
imply  a  greater  abundance.  I  shall  presently,  however, 
suggest  a  better  explanation,  namely,  that  Aristotle  some- 
what misread  his  authority. 

Let  me,  however,  give  a  paraphrase  to  show  how  I  would 
interpret  the  passage : 

Such  were   the   democratic   features   of  his  lawgiving; 

1  Journ.  Intern,  de  Numism.,  vii.  228. 

2  Quoted  from  Hill  in  Num.  Chron.,  1897,  285,  'A0.  noA.  c.  10.  I  have  not 
thought  it  necessary  to  mark  the  editors'  restorations  where  they  are  certain. 

196"  L 


146 


EAELY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 


before  which  lie  arranged  (1)  the  cutting-down1  of  the 
debts ;  and  after  it  (2)  the  increase  in  weights  and  measures 
and  the  multiplication 2  of  the  coins.  For  under  him  the 
measures  became  greater  than  those  of  Pheidon;  (3)  and 
the  mina  which  formerly  weighed  seventy  drachms  was 
filled  up  with  the  hundred  drachms.  (4)  The  early  stater 
was  a  didrachm.  (5)  He  made  also  weights  to  go  with  the 
coinage,  a  talent  weighing  63  minae,  which  extra  three 
minae  were  distributed  over  the  stater  and  other  weights. 

I  am  not  at  all  convinced  that  Aristotle  means  to  say 
anything  very  different  from  what  Androtion  says.  If  we 
put  the  two  sets  of  statements  in  parallel  columns  there  will 
appear  a  remarkable  likeness  between  them. 


Androtion. 

(1)  He  favoured  the  poor  and 
lightened  their  burden,  not  by 
cutting  down  the  debts,  but  by 
moderating  the  interest :  this 
benevolence  they  called  Seisach- 
theia. 

(2)  It  was  accompanied  by  an 
increase  of  the  measures,  and 
a  change  in  the  value  of  the 
coins. 

(8)  He  made  the  mina  which 
before  had  contained  73  drachms 
consist  of  100  drachms, 
so  that,  when  men  repaid  coins 
equal  in  number  but  less  in 
weight,  they  were  greatly  advan- 
taged, while  those  who  received 
were  not  injured. 

(4) 


Aristotle. 
He  arranged  the  cutting  down 
of  the  debts ; 


after  that,  an  increase  in  weights 
and  measures,  and  increase  (?)  of 
coin,  the  measures  becoming 
greater  than  those  of  Pheidon. 

The  mina  which  formerly 
weighed  70  drachms  was  filled 
up  with  the  hundred  drachms. 


The   early   stater  was  a   di- 
drachm. 


1  dnoKoiry  means  mutilation  rather  than  destruction. 

2  Or  decrease,  fiuwatv,  as  above  suggested. 


THE  REFORMS  OF  SOLON  147 

(5)  He  also  made  weights  to  go 

with  the  coinage,  a  talent  weigh- 
ing 63  minae,  which  extra  3 
minae  were  distributed  over  the 
stater  and  other  weights. 

In  passage  (1)  no  doubt  there  seems  a  formal  contradiction 
)etween  the  authorities  ;  but  it  is  not  deep,  since  the  pro- 
ceeding of  Solon  might  be  regarded  equally  well  in  either 
aspect,  as  a  diminution  of  the  debt,  or  as  a  lightening  of 
the  interest.  A  reduction  in  the  value  of  the  coin  would 
serve  both  purposes,  since  interest  as  well  as  principal 
would  be  paid  in  the  reduced  coinage.  (2)  Here  both 
authorities  are  confused.  Both  are  clear  that  the  measures 
of  capacity  were  increased,  so  as  to  become,  as  Aristotle  says, 
larger  than  those  of  Pheidon,  but  as  to  what  happened  to 
the  coin  they  are  less  explicit.  The  phrase  in  Plutarch  is 
yevofievTjv  to>v  t€  fiirpcov  kirav^rjaiv  kcu  tov  vojiio~fJ.aTos  ri\ir\v. 
The  phrase  in  Aristotle  is  tt\v  tc  tgov  fxirpcou  /cat  araOp-cov  <al 
t^v  tov  voftio-fiaTos  avgrjaiv.  The  phrases  sound  as  if  the 
writers  were  following  the  same  authority,  but  did  not 
understand  precisely  what  happened  to  the  coins.  But 
Plutarch  (or  Androtion)  goes  on  to  show  clearly  what  he 
supposed  to  have  taken  place,  and  we  have  no  reason  for 
thinking  that  Aristotle  would  have  rejected  his  explanation, 
which  obviously  implies  that  the  value  of  the  coins  was 
lessened.  (3)  Commentators  have  commonly  supposed  that 
here  there  is  no  real  conflict  of  the  two  authorities,  but 
that  while  Aristotle  uses  the  round  number  70,  Plutarch 
gives  the  more  precise  figure  of  73.  But  the  difference  is 
in  my  view  important.  The  proportion  between  70  and 
100  is  nearly  that  between  the  Euboic  mina  and  the 
Aeginetan ;  the  proportion  between  73  and  100  is  nearly 
that  between  the  Attic  mina  and  the  Aeginetan.1     Metro- 

1  As  we  have  seen  above  (p.  124),  the  Euboic  drachm  weighed  66  grains 
(4-21  grm.)  ;  the  Attic,  67-5  grains  (.4-37  grm.).  The  difference  between 
them  is  3-6  per  cent.  Taking  the  Aeginetan  drachm  at  94  grains  (609  grm.), 
a  mina  weighing  70  such  drachms  would  give  100  drachms  weighing  65-8 
grains,  and  a  mina  weighing  73  such  drachms  100  drachms  of  68-6  grains. 

L   2 


148  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

logists  have  not  usually  distinguished  between  the  Euboic 
and  the  Attic  mina,  calling  it  the  Euboic-Attic.  But  if  we 
discriminate  between  the  two,  as  I  think  we  are  bound  by 
undeniable  facts  to  do,  then  we  must  consider  Aristotle's 
statement  as  the  more  correct.  It  is  very  natural  that 
Plutarch's  authority,  writing  at  a  time  when  the  Attic 
standard  was  in  universal  use,  should  have  supposed  that  it 
was  that  which  was  introduced  by  Solon.  But  we  have  in 
Aristotle  a  valuable  record  of  the  real  facts  of  the  case  :  if 
we  may  believe  him,  it  was  not  the  later  Attic  standard 
which  Solon  introduced,  but  the  real  Euboic.  which  was 
appreciably  lighter.     The  coins  bear  out  this  view. 

Turning  to  the  coins  themselves,  as  the  only  safe  test 
where  authorities  differ,  we  are  justified  in  saying  that 
there  were  at  Athens  none  at  all  before  the  time  of  Solon. 
The  fines  in  the  laws  of  Draco  are  given  in  oxen  ;  and  as  in 
the  time  of  Draco  the  coins  of  Aegina  were  widely  circulated, 
we  may  be  sure  that  Athens  was  dilatory  in  the  introduction 
of  coinage.  As  we  are  expressly  told  that  the  measures 
which  Solon  introduced  superseded  the  Pheidonian,  we 
may  fairly  assume  the  same  in  regard  to  the  coins,  and 
conclude  that  the  Aeginetan  mina  and  drachm  were  in  use 
at  Athens  in  600  B.C.  For  the  current  didrachms  of  Aegina, 
Solon  substituted  coins  weighing  130  grains,  that  is  staters 
of  the  Euboic  standard,  which  was  already  accepted  at 
Chalcis  and  Eretria,  and  (with  a  different  system  of  division) 
at  Corinth.  The  whole  question  then  narrows  itself  down 
to  this,  were  these  staters,  as  Androtion  asserted,  didrachms 
intended  to  pass  in  place  of  the  heavier  Aeginetan  di- 
drachms, or  were  they  drachms,  as  Aristotle  is  supposed  by 
some  recent  authorities,  such  as  Six,  Head,  Hill,  Babelon, 
and  others  to  assert?  They  suppose  that  for  some  reason 
Solon  introduced  a  mina  not  of  the  Euboic  weight,  but  of 
double  that  weight,  which  mina  was  again  lowered  by  the 
half  by  Hippias.  They  allow  that  at  the  end  of  the  sixth 
century  a  coin  of  130  (or  135)  grains  was  a  didrachm,  but 
they  think  that  for  the  first  three-quarters  of  that  century 
it  was  called  a  drachm. 


THE  REFORMS  OF  SOLON  149 

Their  reasons  are  twofold.  In  the  first  place,  they  insist 
Jon  interpreting  the  word  avgrjo-is  as  implying  an  addition 
to  the  weight  of  the  coins.  In  the  second  place,  they  appeal 
to  the  testimony  of  extant  Athenian  weights.1  They  cite 
one  of  archaic  style,  bearing  the  inscription  tffiio-v  Upbv 
Srjuoo-tov  'AOrjvamv,  weighing  426-6  grammes  (6,585  grains), 
which  yields  a  mina  of  13,170  grains  and  a  drachm  of  131 
grains,  and  another  inscribed  SeKaaTaTijpov,  weighing  177-52 
grammes  (2,738  grains),  yielding  a  stater  (or  didrachm?)  of 
273  grains.  The  second  of  these,  however,  proves  little,  as 
the  familiar  tetradrachm  of  Athens  of  the  usual  type,  and 
weighing  270  grains,  might  well  be  called  a  stater.  And 
the  first  in  fact  only  confirms  what  we  knew  before,  that 
there  was  in  use  at  Athens,  for  some  unknown  purposes, 

mina  and  drachm  of  double  the  weight  of  those  ordinarily 
used  for  coins.  But  the  use  of  this  double  mina  was  by 
no  means  confined  to  the  period  between  Solon  and  Hippias, 
as  it  should  be  to  give  it  any  value  in  the  present  connexion. 
On  the  contrary,  it  was  used  contemporaneously  with  the 
ordinary  Solonic  weights  in  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries.2 
It  can,  therefore,  have  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  Solonic 
reform  of  the  coinage. 

There  is  then  no  argument  to  be  drawn  from  existing 
coins  or  weights  to  overthrow  the  view  which  I  read  in  our 
ancient  authorities.  Let  us  next  turn  to  the  historic 
probabilities  of  the  case. 

These  seem  to  me  entirely  on  the  side  of  the  reduction  of 
weight.  Solon  was  essentially  a  moderate,  wishing  to 
destroy  neither  rich  nor  poor,  but  to  find  for  them  a  way 
of  living  together.  But  the  poor  were  overwhelmed  with 
debt,  and  had  largely  mortgaged  their  land.  In  such  a 
case,  to  reduce  the  debt  without  abolishing  it  would  be  the 
natural  plan  for  a  mediator.  And  although  Solon  was, 
doubtless,  a  very  great  and  wise  man,  I  cannot  see  why  he 
should  not  have  thought  that  he  could  most  fairly  accom- 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1895,  177  ;  1897,  288 ;  Pernice,  Griech.  Geicichte,  pp.  81,  82. 
*  Murray,  Greek  Weights,  in  Num.  Chron.,  1868,  68,  69  ;  cf.  article  Pondera  in 
Smith's  Did.  of  Antiquities. 


150  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

plish  this  by  reducing  the  weight  of  the  coinage.  It  is 
a  process  which  has  been  resorted  to  by  financial  reformers 
in  all  ages,  until  the  English  pound  in  silver  weighs  a  third 
of  a  pound,  while  the  French  Uvre  weighs  but  a  fraction  of 
an  ounce.  We  have  no  reason  to  think  that  Solon's  wisdom 
lifted  him  above  all  the  ways  of  thought  of  the  time. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  hard  to  imagine  any  reason  which 
Solon  could  have  had  for  raising  the  standard  of  the  coin.] 
The  only  suggestion  I  find  as  to  a  motive  is  given  by 
M.  Babelon,  who  observes *  that  he  would  by  this  means 
give  an  advantage  to  Athenian  coin,  and  promote  its 
circulation.  This  will  scarcely  stand.  In  the  first  place, 
in  the  time  of  Solon  the  Athenians  had  not  discovered  the 
mines  of  Laurium,  which  were  first  worked  in  the  time  of 
Peisistratus,  and  so  had  no  particular  motive  for  pushing 
their  coin.  In  the  second  place,  if  the  Athenians  were 
prepared  to  exchange  their  own  coin  of  130  grains  for  the 
Aeginetan  drachm  of  96  grains  they  must  have  been  very 
bad  men  of  business.  A  slight  addition  to  the  weight  of 
the  drachm  would  bring  the  coinage  of  Athens  into  request  I 
but  an  addition  of  40  per  cent,  would  not  have  had  this! 
effect  at  all :  it  would  be  simply  introducing  a  new  monetary' 
standard  without  any  visible  reason. 

We  come  now  to  statement  No.  4,  that  the  old  standard 
coin  was  a  didrachm.  I  have  translated  xaPaKT1lP  °y 
'  standard  coin ' ;  for,  though  the  word  properly  means  the 
type  stamped  on  a  coin,  it  may  also  stand  for  the  coin 
which  bore  the  type.  Six,  Babelon,  and  Hill  have  taken 
the  phrase  as  proving  that  the  early  Athenian  tetradrachms 
really  passed  as  didrachms.  But  if  in  Solon's  time,  as 
I  have  maintained,  only  didrachms  of  the  ordinary  Euboic 
weight  of  130  grains  were  issued,  then  Aristotle's  assertion 
exactly  corresponds  with  the  fact.  Indeed,  it  entirely 
confirms  my  contention. 

We  return  to  paragraph  No.  2,  in  which  we  have  again 
a  valuable  historic  record  which  modern  commentators  have 

1  Journ.  Int.  de  Num.,  vii.  226. 


THE  REFORMS  OF  SOLON  151 

misunderstood.  We  can  scarcely  suppose  the  statement  of 
Aristotle  that  Solon  increased  the  measures  and  weights  of 
Pheidon  to  be  quite  baseless.  This  is  in  itself  unlikely, 
and  is  rendered  less  so  by  the  fact  that  even  Androtion  also 
speaks  of  an  enlargement  of  measures,  at  the  same  time 
that  he  speaks  of  the  lightening  of  the  coinage.  Aristotle 
calls  the  enlargement  of  the  measures  a  democratic  measure, 
and  it  is  clear  that  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  man  in  the 
street  the  enlargement  of  measures  was  as  much  in  his 
favour  as  the  depreciation  of  the  coin,  in  which  he  had  to 
pay  for  such  measures.1 

The  measures  and  weights  of  Pheidon  being  in  use  at 
Athens  at  the  time,  it  would  seem  that  Solon  somewhat 
augmented  them  at  the  same  time  that  he  lowered  the 
weight  of  the  coins.  That  Pheidonian  weights  for  goods 
were  in  use  in  later  times  we  already  knew ;  but  Solon, 
perhaps  temporarily,  raised  them  in  a  small  degree. 

The  probable  nature  of  his  proceeding  is  made  clear  by 
comparison  with  an  Attic  decree  of  some  centuries  later 
(C.LG.  i.  123,  I.G.  ii.  476)  which  runs  as  follows:  'The 
mina  of  commerce  shall  weigh  138  drachms  of  the 
Stephanephoros '  (i.e.  Attic  drachms,  and  so  be  of  the 
Pheidonian  standard), £  and  there  shall  be  added  (thrown  in) 
12  drachms.'  It  goes  on  to  say  that  in  every  5  minae,  one 
mina  shall  be  thrown  in  in  like  manner,  and  in  every  talent 
5  minae.  Thus  in  case  of  the  talent,  by  this  extraordinary 
decree,  every  seller  was  bound  to  add  y1^,  in  case  of  5  minae 
!•,  in  case  of  a  mina  ^.  The  date  of  the  decree  is  the 
second  or  first  century  b.c. 

Though  it  is  difficult  to  understand  the  procedure  in 
case  of  the  5  mina  weight,  which  seems  exceptional,  it  is 
impossible  to  regard  this  decree  as  anything  but  a  deliberate 
attempt  to  make  the  sellers  in  the  market  give  more  than 
full  weight.  Probably  a  custom  had  arisen  of  adding  a 
little  beyond  the  exact  weight,  as  indeed  often  happens 
among  ourselves,  and  this  is  made  compulsory,  by  a  really 

1  This  has  already  been  pointed  out  by  Prof.  v.  Wilamowitz-Mollendorff, 
Aristoteles  und  Athen,  i.  p.  43. 


152  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

democratic  law,  a  law  which  would  have  satisfied  Shake- 
speare's Jack  Cade.  Of  course  it  was  futile  ;  but  the  mere 
fact  that  it  was  passed  throws  a  remarkable  light  on  the 
nature  of  the  later  democracy  of  Athens.  If  such  laws 
could  be  made  in  the  Hellenistic  age,  after  centuries  of 
successful  Athenian  trading,  we  can  scarcely  be  surprised 
that  in  the  simple  and  unpractised  sixth  century  b.  a,  even 
a  wise  lawgiver  who  wished  to  conciliate  the  people  should 
legislate  to  a  similar  effect,  and  ordain  that  the  seller  should 
give  the  buyer  full  weight  and  a  little  more. 

And  this  may  explain  a  fact  which  I  have  elsewhere  l 
noted,  that  it  is  quite  usual  in  the  case  of  Greek  weights, 
and  especially  in  the  case  of  the  numerous  Athenian 
weights  which  have  come  down  to  us,  that  they  should  be 
appreciably  heavier  than  the  standard.  A  people  so  fond 
of  bargaining  as  the  Greeks,  whether  ancient  or  modern, 
would  greatly  appreciate  a  liberal  measure ;  and  by  using 
such  weights  and  measures  a  dealer  in  the  market  would 
be  sure  to  increase  his  clientele.  We  must  not  hastily  apply 
modern  scientific  notions  on  such  subjects  in  the  case  of  the 
ancient  world. 

All  through  the  course  of  history  the  tendency  of  coins 
is  to  deteriorate  in  weight  and  quality,  unless  when  some 
fully  organized  State  with  a  commercial  instinct  makes  it 
a  part  of  its  policy  to  keep  up  the  standard,  and  in  so  doing 
perhaps  to  keep  up  the  standard  of  its  neighbours.  But  the 
tendency  in  weights  and  measures  for  goods  is  quite  different ; 
competition  keeps  them  up  or  even  raises  them.  This 
may  explain  how  it  was  that  Solon,  while  he  increased  the 
measures  and  the  commercial  weights,  lowered  the  standard 
of  the  coin.  Formerly  I  supposed  that  his  standard  was 
slightly  heavier  than  the  Euboic,  67-5  grains  for  the  drachm, 
in  place  of  65.  But  I  am  now  convinced  that  this  slight 
increase  in  the  weight  came  in  the  time,  not  of  Solon,  but  of 
Peisistratus,  as  shall  be  presently  shown. 

Paragraph  (5)  is  made  somewhat  obscure  by  the  addition 


1  Article  Pondera,  in  Smith's  Diet,  of  Antiquities. 


THE  REFORMS  OF  SOLON  153 

of  the  phrase  npbs  to  vofiio-fia.  Apart  from  that,  we  might 
naturally  have  supposed  that  it  gives  one  the  exact  per- 
centage by  which  the  Pheidonian  weights  were  increased, 
namely  three  minae  to  the  talent,  or  5  per  cent.  And  this 
must,  in  spite  of  the  additional  words,  be  what  is  meant. 
"We  must  therefore  take  the  phrase  npb?  to  vdyno-\ia  to  imply 
not  that  the  coin- weights  were  raised,  which  is  clearly  not 
the  fact,  but  that  the  weight  of  commodities  which  were 
bought  and  sold  for  money  was  raised.  It  seems  to  me 
that  these  interpretations  give  us  for  the  first  time  a 
reasonable  and  probable  view  of  the  monetary  reform  of 
Solon. 

§  3.     The  Coinage  of  Peisistratus. 

The  date  of  the  first  issue  of  the  well-known  tetradrachms 
of  Athens,  which  bear  on  one  side  the  head  of  Athena,  on 
the  other  an  owl  and  an  olive-twig,  has  been  much  disputed. 
The  opinion  of  Mr.  Head,  an  opinion  always  entitled  to 
great  weight,  assigns  this  issue  to  the  early  years  of  the 
sixth  century,  and  to  the  reform  of  Solon.  He  observes 
that 1  '  among  them  are  the  oldest  and  rudest  examples  of 
a  human  head  on  any  ancient  coins  . .  .  and  I  take  these  to 
be  quite  the  earliest  Greek  coins  which  were  struck  with 
both  obverse  and  reverse  types  '.     (PI.  II.  9-1L) 

On  the  other  hand,  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer  and  M.  J.  P.  Six 
regard  it  as  impossible  that  coins  with  two  types  on  obverse 
and  reverse  should  make  their  appearance  so  early.  These 
excellent  authorities  think  that  this  coinage  did  not  arise 
until  the  time  of  Hippias,  520-514  B.C.  The  coins  which 
appear  to  Head  so  rude,  and  which  are  indeed  of  very 
careless  and  primitive  style,  are  regarded  by  them  as 
barbarous  copies,  or  coins  issued  at  a  time  of  stress,  and 
not  really  very  archaic.  Imhoof  regards  them  as  struck 
during  the  democracy  which  followed  the  fall  of  Hippias : 
Six  prefers  to  suppose  that  they  were  struck  when  Hippias 
was  besieged  in  the  Acropolis. 

«  Hist.  Kuth.,  ed.  2,  p.  369. 


154  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

1  have  no  hesitation  in  a  partial  acceptance  of  this  view. 
It  seems  to  me  clear  that  a  great  proportion  of  the  extant 
early  tetradrachms  is  really  of  barbarous  and  imitative 
character.  Such  coins  are  Babelon  PI.  XXXIV,  Nos.  2-11  ; 
B.  M.  Cat.,  PI.  I,  3,  5,  6;  and  (our  PI.  II.  11).  These 
must  be  distinguished  from  the  really  fine  archaic  coins 
of  Athens,  which  certainly  preceded  them.  The  fabric 
of  the  two  classes  of  coins  is  very  different ;  in  the  one 
case  we  have  fine  and  careful  work,  in  the  other  great 
carelessness  and  irregularity. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  theta  with  crossed  bar  © , 
which  is  a  really  archaic  form,  is  found,  so  far  as  I  am 
aware,  only  on  coins  of  the  finer  and  more  careful  type,1 
which  I  regard  as  struck  at  Athens  itself.  The  other  form 
of  O  is  found  invariably  on  the  ruder  coins,  which  may  be 
barbarous  copies.  Although  archaic  forms  of  letters  often 
reappear  at  a  time  when  one  would  suppose  them  obsolete, 
and  so  are  not  a  very  trustworthy  guide  in  the  assignment 
of  dates  by  inscriptions,  yet  the  facts  which  I  have  noted 
fall  in  rather  with  the  theory  that  these  rude  coins  are  late 
in  date  than  with  the  view  that  they  belong  to  the  time  of 
Solon. 

The  barbarous  class  may  very  possibly  have  been  struck 
by  the  Persian  army  when  in  Greece.  The  troops  of 
Xerxes  would  need  silver  money  as  well  as  the  gold  darics 
to  pay  for  such  necessaries  as  they  could  not  procure  without 
payment.  And  this  view  is  actually  confirmed  by  the 
discovery  of  coins  of  the  class  in  the  canal  of  Xerxes  by 
Mount  Athos,2  and  on  the  Acropolis  itself  between  the 
Erechtheum  and  the  northern  wall,  where  were  also  heaped 
up  the  remains  of  the  Persian  destruction.3  This  theory 
had  already  occurred  to  Beuld  and  F.  Lenormant.  Such 
coins  as  I  am  considering  may  then  fairly  be  given  to  the 
end  of  the  sixth  or  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century. 

*  Such  as  B.  M.  Cat.,  PI.  II,  5-7  ;  Babelon,  Traite,  PI.  XXXIV,  15-17.  This 
©  is  found  in  the  very  early  inscriptions  of  Athens,  down  to  the  time  of 
Euphronius.     See  Droysen,  Preuss.  Akad.  der  Wiss.,  Sitzungsber.,  1882,  p.  8 

2  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  765. 

3  Babelon,  PI.  XXXIV,  2-8,  10,  11. 


THE  COINAGE  OF  PEISISTRATUS  155 

But  what  is  the  date  of  the  really  earliest  coins  of  Athena 
type,  those  pieces  of  fine  archaic  type  the  style  of  which  is 
so  distinctive  that  we  can  venture  with  confidence  to  give 
them  a  date  ?  I  refer  to  such  coins  as  Babelon  PL  XXXIV, 
14-18  ;  XXXV,  1,  2  ;  B.  31.  Cat.  PL  I,  11,  PL  II,  2,7;  and 
our  PL  II,  9, 10.  We  must  briefly  consider  their  fabric  and 
style.  In  regard  to  fabric,  the  most  noteworthy  fact  is  that 
they  have  a  reverse — as  well  as  an  obverse — type.  This  is 
a  rare  phenomenon  in  the  sixth  century,  east  of  the  Adriatic. 
But  double  types  were  in  use  in  Italy  at  the  middle  of  the 
sixth  century ;  and  some  coins  of  Samos,  which  must  be 
given  to  the  same  date,  have  a  reverse  type  enclosed  in  an 
incuse  square.1  But  we  know  of  no  coins  earlier  than  about 
550  b.c.  which  have  two  types.  In  regard  to  style,  we  have 
a  great  range  of  Athenian  sculpture  in  the  sixth  century 
for  comparison.  The  coins  do  not  exhibit  the  so-called 
island  style,  notable  in  the  case  of  the  dedicated  Corae  ; 
but  they  may  well  be  set  beside  the  head  of  Athena  from 
the  pedimental  Gigantomachy,  which  may  date  from  about 
530-520  B.c,  the  head  of  the  Calf-bearer,  and  the  heads  of 
the  bronze  statuettes  of  Athena  from  the  early  strata. 

I  therefore  accept  the  view  of  several  authorities,  perhaps 
best  defended  by  von  Fritze,2  that  the  earliest  tetradrachms 
of  Athens  belong  to  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century 
Von  Fritze  shows  that  the  head  of  Athena  on  them  is  about 
contemporary  with  that  on  the  coins  of  Corinth  of  550- 
500  b.c3  There  can  I  think  be  little  doubt  that  this 
coinage  was  initiated  by  Peisistratus.  That  Tyrant  had,  as 
every  one  knows,  a  special  cult  of  Athena.  He  obtained 
possession  of  extensive  mines  of  silver,  both  at  Laurium 
and  in  the  valley  of  the  Strymon,4  and  required  large  issues 
of  silver  for  the  payment  of  his  mercenaries.  He  filled 
Athens  with  artists,  brought  from  Ionia  and  the  Islands, 
and  employed  them  on  great  works.  He  made  the  Pan- 
athenaic  festival  more  splendid.     In  short,  he  was  precisely 

1  Gardner,  Samos,  PI.  I,  8-12. 

8  Zeitschr.f.  Num.,  xx.  143.    So  also  Perrot,  Babelon,  and  Lermann. 

s  See  above,  p.  136.  *  Hdt.  i.  64. 


156  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 


the  man  to  initiate  a  great  coinage.  It  is  possible  that 
a  great  celebration  of  the  Panathenaea  by  Peisistratus  was 
the  occasion  of  its  first  appearance. 

The  Athena  coinage  of  Athens,  from  its  first  appearance, 
is  regulated  by  a  standard  somewhat  heavier  than  the 
Euboic — drachm  67-5  grains  (grin.  4-37),  instead  of  65  grains 
Cgrm.  4-20).  This  is  easily  explicable  if  they  were  issued 
by  a  tyrant  of  magnificent  ideas,  anxious  to  make  his 
city,  his  temple,  his  coins,  the  best  in  the  world.  The 
coins  were  of  fine  silver,  almost  without  alloy;  and  they 
very  speedily  gained  a  reputation  which  they  never  lost. 
They  seem  to  have  given  rise,  almost  at  once,  to  bar- 
barous imitations ;  and  barbarous  imitations  existed  until 
Hellenistic  times,  when  the  mint  of  Athens  took  careful 
measures  to  exclude  such.  Indeed,  they  were  remarkably 
easy  to  copy;  and  there  was  no  reason  why  they  should 
not  be  copied  by  any  tyrant  or  state  which  wished  to  put 
silver  into  circulation. 

The  raising  of  the  monetary  standard  by  Peisistratus  is 
one  of  the  landmarks  of  the  early  coinage  of  Hellas.  We 
have  seen,  in  dealing  with  coins  of  Euboea,  Corinth,  and 
other  cities,  that  the  action  of  Athens  compelled  them  also 
to  raise  the  weight  of  their  coins,  which  otherwise  would 
have  stood  in  an  unfavourable  position  in  the  neutral 
markets.  And  thus  we  are  furnished  with  a  date  in 
arranging  the  early  series  of  coins  which  is  as  valuable  for 
the  money  of  the  sixth  century  as  is  the  introduction  of 
the  Chian  or  Rhodian  standard  for  the  classification  of  the 
money  of  the  early  fourth  century.  Numismatists  generally 
have  missed  this  clue,  because  they  have  identified  the 
Euboic  and  Attic  standards,  whereas  the  evidence  of  the 
coins  themselves  proves  them  to  have  been  perceptibly 
different. 

The  standard  introduced  by  Peisistratus  was  used  in  the 
earliest  times  of  coinage,  the  sixth  or  even  the  seventh 
century,  at  Samos  or  some  neighbouring  city,  for  electrum 
and  for  silver.1     It  was  also  used  at  Cyrene  for  silver  from 

1  Head,  Num.  Chron.,  1875,  273  ;  Cat.  Ionia,  pp.  xxiii,  xli. 


THE  COINAGE  OF  PEISISTRATUS  157 

600  b.c.  It  appears  to  have  been  derived  from  Egypt, 
where  a  Jcedet  of  the  weight  of  135-140  grains  (grm.  8-74— 
9-07)  was  in  use  in  the  Delta.  Through  Naueratis  this 
weight  spread  in  one  direction  to  Cyrene,  in  another  to 
Samos.  Peisistratus  adopted  it  partly  perhaps  with  a  view 
to  trade  with  Egypt.  It  is  a  suggestive  fact  that  large 
numbers  of  early  Athenian  tetradrachms  have  been  found 
in  Egypt,  on  the  site  of  Naueratis  and  elsewhere. 

Another  explanation  of  the  raising  of  the  standard  by 
Peisistratus  may  be  found  in  the  fact  of  his  working  mines 
of  silver  in  Thrace.  We  see  in  examining  the  coins  of 
Thasos  and  the  neighbouring  coast,  that  the  stater  in 
ordinary  use  there  in  the  sixth  century  weighed  from  140 
grains  (grm.  9*07)  upwards.  Whence  this  standard  was 
derived  is  uncertain  ;  but  the  source  may  very  possibly  be 
Egyptian. 

Whencesoever  Peisistratus  derived  his  coin-standard,  it 
is  certain  that  its  adoption  at  Athens  was  the  beginning 
and  foundation  of  Attic  commercial  supremacy.  Thence- 
forward the  Attic  silver  coin  dominated  more  and  more  the 
trade  of  the  Aegean.  The  pure  and  heavy  coins  of  Athens 
tended  to  drive  out  inferior  issues.  When  the  reign  of  the 
tyrants  at  Athens  gave  way  to  that  of  the  democracy,  the 
determination  of  the  people  to  force  the  circulation  of  their 
money  grew  stronger.  Recently  published  inscriptions 
have  proved  to  what  a  degree  the  Athenian  Demos  hindered 
and  prohibited  the  issue  of  coins  by  the  subject  allies  in  the 
time  of  the  Delian  League.1  In  a  well-known  passage  in 
the  Frogs  (405  B.C.)  Aristophanes  speaks  of  the  Athenian 
coinage  as  everywhere  dominant,  received  both  by  Greeks 
and  barbarians.  Even  after  the  political  fall  of  Athens, 
Xenophon  could  write  2  that  foreign  merchants  who  carried 
away  from  Athens  not  goods  but  the  silver  owls  did  good 
business,  for  they  could  anywhere  part  with  them  at 
a  premium. 


1  Weil,  in  Zeitschr.f.  Nnmism.,  xxv.  p.  52.     Below,  Ch.  XIV. 

2  De  Vectigal  iii.  2. 


158  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

The  roots  of  the  flourishing  Athenian  Empire  were  fed 
largely  by  the  silver  of  Laurium.  The  Peisistratid  coinage 
presents  a  striking  contrast  to  the  modest  issues  of  Solon, 
scarcely  to  be  distinguished  from  those  of  Euboea.  It  marks 
what  Shakespeare  calls  '  the  tide  in  the  affairs  of  men,  which 
taken  at  the  flood  leads  on  to  fortune'.  None  of  the 
triumphs  of  the  Athenian  tetradrachms  was  greater  than 
that  which  they  won  when  the  powerful  tyrants  of  Sicily, 
Gelon  and  Hieron  and  Theron  accepted  their  lead  and 
initiated  the  splendid  coinage  of  Sicily,  consisting  mainly 
of  tetradrachms  of  Attic  weight. 

In  the  time  of  the  Tyrant  Hippias  (527-511  b.c.)  a  fresh 
crisis  took  place  in  the  Athenian  coinage,  if  we  may  trust 
an  obscure  passage  in  the  Oeconomica  attributed  to  Aristotle, 
which  runs  'he  made  the  current  money  of  Athens  no 
longer  legal  tender,  and  fixing  a  rate  of  purchase  ordered 
the  people  to  bring  it  in  to  him,  but  when  they  were 
assembled  in  expectation  of  the  issue  of  a  new  type  he  gave 
back  the  same  money  '.* 

The  natural  way  of  taking  this  passage  is  as  a  statement 
that  Hippias  called  in  the  current  money,  valuing  it  at 
a  certain  rate  of  discount,  and  crediting  at  that  rate  those 
who  brought  it  in;  but  afterwards  he  paid  these  persons 
not  in  a  new  and  full-weighted  coinage,  but  in  the  old 
currency.  This,  of  course,  is  a  procedure  the  first  part  of 
which  has  been  followed  from  time  to  time  in  all  countries, 
when  a  coinage  has  become  outworn  or  debased,  though 
more  usually  in  modern  times  it  is  the  state  and  not  the 
individual  which  bears  the  loss.  But  there  are  difficulties 
in  supposing  that  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  writer,  or  at 
all  events  in  supposing  that  this  really  took  place  at  Athens. 
For  the  early  money  of  Athens  is  of  full  weight  and  great 
purity,  so  that  there  could  be  no  excuse  for  calling  it  in  as 
debased,  and  it  is  difficult  to  see  what  could  have  been  the 
motive  of  the  Tyrant. 

1  To  r(  v6fitO)MX  to  ov  'A0t)vaiois  aSuKi/xov  tiroirjof,  ra£as  Si  nuty  tKtktvat  -npls 
ai/ruv  avaKOfii^tW  <Tvv(\$6vtojv  Si  inl  rw  Kuifat  'irtpov  \apaKTripa,  h£iSa)Kt  to  avrH 
Apyvptov,  Oecon.  ii.  4. 


THE  COINAGE  OF  PEISISTRATUS  159 

M.  Six,  followed  by  Mr.  Hill,  has  supposed  that  though 
Hippias  gave  back  the  same  coin,  he  did  not  give  it  back  at 
the  same  rate ;  but  that  he  reduced  the  standard  of  the 
drachm  from  the  earlier  level  of  135  grains  to  the  later 
level  of  67-5  grains,  thus  halving  its  weight ;  and  while  he 
had  accepted  the  ordinary  Athena  and  owl  coins  as  di- 
drachms  he  returned  them  as  tetradrachms,  thus  making 
a  gain  of  50  per  cent.1  We  have,  however,  seen  that  there 
is  no  valid  reason  for  supposing  the  drachm  between  the 
times  of  Solon  and  Hippias  to  have  been  of  double  the 
weight  of  the  later  Athenian  drachm :  the  view  of  M.  Six 
therefore  lacks  foundation. 

Mr.  Head  has  suggested  2  that  Hippias  may  have  im- 
proved and  modernized  the  types  of  the  coinage  ;  although 
to  the  people  who  were  expecting  something  quite  different 
it  might  well  seem  the  same  coin  over  again.  Perhaps  this 
suggestion  is  the  best.  If  we  are  to  accept  the  statement  of 
the  Oeconomica  as  historic,  the  best  plan  is  to  take  it  quite 
literally  and  simply.  Hippias,  on  some  pretext,  called  in 
the  money  of  the  Athenians  at  a  discount,  and  then,  instead 
of  issuing  an  entirely  fresh  coinage,  gave  out  coins  of  the 
old  types  at  full  value.  A  possibility  which  occurs  to  us  is 
that  his  object  may  have  been  to  exclude  from  the  coinage 
the  barbarous  imitations  which  seem  to  have  been  so 
abundant.  In  any  case  the  extant  coins  sufficiently  prove 
that  no  great  change  took  place  at  that  time  in  the  Athenian 
issues. 

M.  Babelon  and  M.  Six  have  been  successful  in  showing 
that  the  fortunes  of  the  house  of  Peisistratus  have  left 
decided  traces  on  the  coinage  of  Athens.  The  alliances 
and  projects  of  the  Tyrants  are  reflected  in  it. 

They  cite  the  following  coins  3 : 


1  Num.  Chron.,  1895,  p.  178  ;  cf.  Num.  Chron.,  1897,  p.  292.  So  M.  Babelon, 
Traitc,  p.  742. 

*  Num.  Chron.,  1893,  p.  249. 

s  I  cannot  accept  the  reading  of  Mr.  Seltman,  who  finds  the  inscription 

HI   on  an  early  tetradrachm  of  Athens  (Num.  Chron.,  1908,  p.  278).     The 

-d  letters  seem  to  me  to  be  accidental  marks,  and  the  omission  of  the 


160  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

1.  Helmeted  head  of  Athena.      Rev.  HIP.     Owl  and  ear  of  cot 

(Corolla  Num.,  p.  1).     Obol.    Weight  grm.  0-65  (10  grains). 

2.  Janiform  heads,  both  beardless.    Rev.  AGE.    Head  of  Athena 

helmeted   to    r.     B.   M.    Cat.   II.    10 ;    Babelon,    Traite, 
PI.  XXXIV,  19  ;  Trihemiobol. 

3.  Head  of  Athena  r.  helmeted.    Rev.  A0E.     Female  head  1.  hair 

turned  up  behind.     B.  M.  Cat.   II.   9 ;    Babelon,  Traite, 
XXXIV.  20 ;  Trihemiobol. 

Of  these  coins  the  first,  bearing  the  name  of  Hip(pias), 
must  almost  certainly  have  been  issued  by  the  Tyrant,  on 
some  occasion.  As  the  name  of  Athens  is  absent,  one  may 
with  great  probability  conjecture  that  it  was  struck  not 
in  that  city,  but  at  some  other  place  in  which  the  Tyrant 
took  refuge.  If  it  were  a  city  of  the  Persian  Empire,  the 
Great  King  might  well  allow  Hippias  to  place  his  name 
on  the  coin,  as  he  allowed  Themistocles  to  do  at  Magnesia, 
half  a  century  later.  The  city  of  Sigeium  has  the  best 
claim  from  the  historic  point  of  view;  since  Hippias 
certainly  repaired  to  that  place,  and  from  thence  conspired 
against  Athens.  M.  Babelon,  however,  observes *  that  the 
later  coins  of  Sigeium  never  have  an  ear  of  corn  as  type, 
but  the  purely  Athenian  types  of  the  head  of  Athena  and 
the  owl.  He  is  therefore  disposed  rather  to  think  of  the 
Thracian  Chersonese,  where  the  ear  of  corn  is  frequent  on 
the  coins,  although  the  historians  do  not  inform  us  that 
Hippias  had  partisans  in  that  district,  which  was  in  the 
power  of  Miltiades.  The  mint  of  the  coin  must  therefore 
be  left  doubtful. 

No.  2  is  by  M.  Six2  regarded  as  a  memorial  of  the 
alliance  between  Hippias  and  Hippolochus,  Tyrant  of  Lam- 
psacus,  and  a  favourite  of  Darius,  whose  son  Aeantides  took 
in  marriage  a  daughter  of  Hippias ;  and  this  conjecture 
has  numismatic  probability,  as  the  janiform  head  is  a  fre- 
quent feature  of  the  early  coins  of  Lampsacus,  and  scarcely 

aspirate  cannot  be  explained.     The  coin  is  very  rnde — probably  a  barbarous 
imitation. 

1  Corolla  Num.,  p.  5. 

2  Num.  Chron.,  1895,  p.  172. 


THE  COINAGE  OF  PEISISTRATUS  161 

of  other  places.  We  have  a  coin  of  Lampsacus  of  Attic 
weight,  perhaps  struck  on  the  same  occasion  (see  p.  174). 

No.  3  is  of  more  doubtful  assignment.  M.  Six  compares 
with  the  female  head  of  the  reverse  that  of  Hera  on  coins 
of  Heraea,  and  thinks  that  the  coin  may  be  a  memorial  of 
the  alliance  of  Hippias  with  the  Spartans;  the  Spartans 
having  no  coinage,  Hippias  might  regard  that  of  Heraea 
as  the  most  characteristically  Peloponnesian.  This,  how- 
ever, is  fanciful.  Unless  the  alliance  was  under  the  special 
patronage  of  Hera,  her  effigy  would  scarcely  be  borrowed 
for  the  coin ;  we  might  rather  expect  on  the  coin  under  the 
circumstances  the  head  or  figure  of  the  Zeus  of  Olympia. 
M.  Babelon  is  disposed  l  rather  to  regard  the  head  on  the 
coin  as  that  of  the  Nymph  Larissa,  and  to  consider  it  as 
a  record  of  an  alliance  of  Hippias  with  the  powerful 
Aleuadae  of  Larissa.  In  fact,  a  Thessalian  alliance  of  the 
Tyrant  is  mentioned  by  Herodotus  (v.  63),  the  Thessalians 
sending  him  a  force  of  1,000  horse. 

There  is  perhaps  a  weak  point  in  these  conjectures  in 
the  fact  that  coins  (2)  and  (3)  are  both  trihemiobols,  that 
is,  coins  of  an  unusual  denomination ;  and  for  such  denomi- 
nations at  Athens  special  types  were  chosen.2  Nor  is  there 
any  inscription  on  them  to  indicate  that  they  are  other 
than  usual  coins  of  Atheus. 


§  4.    The  Olive- Wee ath  of  Athena. 

On  the  earliest  tetradrachms  of  Athens  the  helmet  of  the 
goddess  bears  no  wreath.  But  the  later  archaic  types 
(PI.  II.  12)  regularly  have  the  wreath.  The  question 
naturally  arises,  on  what  occasion  the  change  was  made, 
and  what  it  means.  To  this  question  a  fairly  satisfactory 
answer  can  be  given.  The  suggestion  was  made  by  M.  Six 3 
that  it  has  reference  to  the  victory  of  Marathon,  in  490  b.c, 


1  Tiaite,  ii.  1,  p.  757.  »  See  below,  Ch.  XIV. 

3  Xum.  Chron.,  1895,  p.  176. 
7  M 


162  EARLY  COINS  OF  ATHENS 

and  M.  Babelon l  has  been  able  to  contribute  numismatic 
evidence  which  seems  almost  conclusive  in  favour  of  that 
view. 

About  1839  there  was  found  in  the  canal  of  Xerxes  at 
Mount  Athos  a  treasure  of  300  darics  and  100  Athenian 
tetradrachms.2  This  treasure  was  almost  certainly  buried 
at  the  time  of  the  Persian  invasion  in  480  b.c.  One  of  the 
tetradrachms  has  been  figured.  It  is  of  barbarous  fabric, 
probably  an  imitation,  but  the  helmet  of  the  goddess  bears 
a  wreath,  thus  conclusively  proving  that  the  wreath  was 
introduced  on  the  coins  some  time  before  480  b.c. 

In  1886  there  was  found  on  the  Acropolis  of  Athens, 
between  the  outer  wall  and  the  Erechtheum,  just  where 
the  dedicated  Corae  were  discovered,  a  treasure  of  Athenian 
coins,  consisting  of  35  tetradrachms,  2  drachms  and  23  obols. 
These  coins 3  were  probably  buried  about  480  b.  c.  They 
are  nearly  all  of  barbarous  fabric,  and  without  the  wreath. 
One  only  (which  seems  not  to  belong  to  the  find  4)  is  of 
careful  work,  and  has  the  wreath.  Thus  it  would  seem 
that  it  was  very  shortly  before  480  b.c  that  the  olive-wreath 
made  its  appearance. 

Among  the  earliest  in  type  of  the  coins  which  bear  it  are 
the  great  Athenian  decadrachms.  These  are  rare  and 
exceptional  coins.  It  seems  almost  certain  that  they  are 
contemporary  with  the  Damareteia  of  ten  drachms  struck 
in  Sicily  by  Gelon  after  his  defeat  of  the  Carthaginians. 
As  to  the  date  and  occasion  of  these  latter  there  is  no 
dispute. 

Thus  the  victory  of  Marathon  seems  to  have  left  its  mark, 
not  only  in  great  dedications  at  Delphi  and  works  of  art  at 
Athens,  but  also  on  the  issues  of  the  Athenian  mint.  Hence- 
forward Athena  bears  constantly  on  the  coins  the  olive- 
wreath  of  victory.      Decadrachms  seem  in  Greece  only  to 


1  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  765. 

2  Beul£,  Monn.  d'Athenes,  p.  44. 

3  Some  of  them  in  Babelon's  Traite,  PI.  XXXIV,  2-11. 

4  Mr.  Kampanes  has  proved  (Bull.  Corr.  Hell.,  1906,  p.  89)  that  the  coin  with 
the  olive-wreath  is  a  later  insertion  in  the  find. 


THE  OLIVE- WREATH  OF  ATHENA  163 

lave  been  issued  on  the  occasion  of  some  great  national 
triumph.1 

If  we  may  synchronize  the  decadrachm  with  Marathon, 
we  obtain  a  valuable  fixed  point  in  the  Athenian  series. 
For  the  decadrachm  is  the  latest  of  the  true  archaic  coins, 
and  the  type  thus  fixed  is  perpetuated  on  the  tetradrachms 

br  a  century.     It  is  true  that  the  stereotyping  of  the  style 
is  not  complete.      "We  may  trace  first  an  excessive  and 

ifeless  convention  in  the  copying,  and  then,  in  the  fourth 
century,  greater  irregularity  and  carelessness.  But  speak- 
ing generally,  the  type  of  the  normal  Athenian  coinage 
during  the  greatness  of  Athens  is  thus  given.  Just  as  the 
ctory  of  Marathon  fixed  for  the  future  the  Athenian 
ideas  of  patriotism  and  glory,  so  the  coinage  of  Marathon 
fixed  for  the  future  the  character  of  the  Athenian  coin. 


1  The  only  decadrachms  issued  in  Greece  were  the  following 
Syracuse — after  Gelon's  victory. 
Athens — after  Marathon. 
Syracuse — after  the  defeat  of  the  Athenians. 
Agrigentum — after  the  defeat  of  the  Athenians. 
Alexander  the  Great — after  his  victories. 


M    .^ 


CHAPTER    IX 

EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

§  1.     Earliest  Issues. 

It  appears  that  the  silver  coins  issued  by  Croesus  and 
the  Persians  were  the  earliest  silver  issues  of  Asia  of  wide 
circulation.  But  they  were  certainly  not  the  very  earliest 
in  use.  Silver  coins  of  primitive  aspect,  with  rough  incuse 
reverses,  had  already  been  struck  by  some  of  the  Greek 
cities  of  the  coast  and  the  islands.  This  we  may  conclude 
on  various  grounds. 

(1)  A  few  silver  coins  of  Asia  are  of  extremely  early 
fabric,  and  closely  resemble  the  Ionian  electrum.  I  would 
take  as  examples  the  following : 

(A)  Obv.  Rude  female  head.  Rev.  Two  incuse  squares,  one 
much  larger  than  the  other.  Weight  153-1  (grm.  9-92). 
Much  worn  and  reduced  in  weight.  Brit.  Mus.  (B.  T. 
XVIII.  9.)  The  coin  is  probably  of  Aeginetan  standard. 
It  is  attributed  with  probability  to  Cnidus. 

(B)  Coin  of  Cos  (British  Museum).  Obv.  Crab.  Rev.  Two 
incuse  squares,  one  much  smaller  than  the  other.  Weight 
189-5  (grm.  12-33).  PI.  III.  1.  Stater  of  Aeginetan 
standard. 

(2)  The  coins  of  Phocaea  appear  to  cease  (for  a  long 
while)  after  the  abandonment  of  the  city  by  its  inhabitants 
about  544  b.c.  There  are  known  many  small  silver  coins  of 
Phocaea  which  must  have  been  struck  before  this  time. 
(See  Babelon,  Traite  ii.  1,  pp.  323-330.)  The  standard 
of  these  coins  is  uncertain,  but  there  exist,  as  we  shall 
presently  see,  larger  coins  of  Phocaea  of  Aeginetan  weight, 
which  also  precede  the  migration.  The  coinage  of  Phocaea 
is  further  discussed  under  South  Italy  (Ch.  XI). 


EARLIEST  ISSUES  165 

The  people  of  Teos  also  migrated  about  544  b.  c.  to  Abdera 
on  the  Thracian  coast.  The  coinage  of  the  city  is  not  how- 
ever in  this  case  brought  to  an  end,  but  continues.  The 
Barliest  coins  (type,  griffin  with  one  paw  raised)  (B.  M.  II.  24) 
bllow  the  Aeginetan  standard,  and  are  certainly  earlier 
than  the  migration  to  Abdera. 

(3)  Definite  evidence  of  the  issue  of  silver  coins  in  Asia 
Minor,  and  of  the  source  whence  the  suggestion  of  them 
3am  e,  is  furnished  by  the  important  Island  finds  of  staters, 
ostly  of  Aeginetan  weight,  which  have  been  already  dis- 
3ussed  in  Chapter  V.  In  these  finds  the  great  mass  of  the 
oins  was  from  the  mint  of  Aegina.  But  there  were  many 
oins,  of  Aeginetan  weight,  and  similar  in  type  and  appear- 
ance to  Aeginetan  coins,  which  were  struck  at  other  islands 
of  the  Aegean.  In  describing  these  finds  I  observed  that 
some  of  the  coins  seemed  to  belong  to  the  earliest  issues  in 
iilver  of  the  cities  of  Ionia  and  the  islands  of  the  Ionian 
md  Carian  coasts.  This  observation  requires  expansion 
d  comment. 

The  coins  in  question,  almost  all  from  the  Island  finds, 
are  as  follows : 

L.  Cyme  in  Aeolis. 
Obv.  Fore-part  of  horse,  to  r.  or  1.     Rev.  Two  incuse  squares, 
one   large   and   one   small,    enclosing  patterns.     Weight, 
181-6  grains  (grm.  11-70-1204).     (B.  T.  XIII.  22-24.) 
5.  Miletus. 
Obv.  Fore-part  of  lion  looking  back,  with  paw.     Rev.  Square 
incuse,   sometimes   enclosing  a  pattern.     Weight,   181-6 
grains  (grm.  1 1-70-1204).     (B.  T.  XIX.  11-14.) 
Chios. 

Obv.  Sphinx  seated,  body  nearly  parallel  to  ground.  Rev. 
Incuse  square,  beside  which  a  smaller  incuse.  Weight, 
184-92  grains  (grm.  11-97-12-44).  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1, 
p.  630. 

Teos. 

Obv.  Griffin  seated  with  curled  wing,  1.  fore-paw  raised.  Rev. 
Eough  incuse  square.  Weight,  90-4  grains  (grm.  5-85). 
(B.  T.  XIII.  2.) 


166  EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

5.  Phocaea. 

Obv.  Fore  part  of  griffin.  Rev.  Incuse  square  in  four  compart- 
ments. Weight,  96  grains  (grm.  6-26).  Babelon,  Traite, 
ii.  1,  p.  327. 

6.  Iasus. 

Obv.  Youth  riding  on  dolphin.  Rev.  Incuse  square.  Weight, 
92  grains  (grm.  5-98).     (B.  T.  XVIII.  1-2.) 

7.  Lindus  in  Rhodes. 
Obv.  Head  of  lion,  mouth  open.     Rev.  Incuse  square,  divided 

into   four.      Weight,    167-72    grains   (grm.    10-80-1110). 
(B.  T.  XX.  16-18.) 

8.  Poseidion  in  Carpathos. 

Obv.  Two  dolphins  passing  one  another.  Rev.  Incuse  square 
in  eight  sections,  as  on  the  earliest  coins  of  Aegina. 
Weight,  188-93  grains  (grm.  12-18-12-50).  (B.  T.  LXII. 
16-17.) 

9.  Cos. 

Obv.  Crab.  Rev.  Larger  and  smaller  incuses,  the  larger  divided 
into  triangles.  Weight,  188-90  grains  (grm.  12-15-12-33). 
(B.  T.  XIX.  1.) 

These  coins  require  a  few  comments. 

(1)  Cyme.  M.  J.  P.  Six  has  proposed  for  these  coins  the 
attribution  to  Mylasa  in  Caria,  partly  on  the  ground  of 
fabric,  and  partly  because  a  stater  of  electrum  with  the 
type  of  a  half-horse  is  of  the  Milesian  class,  and  should 
belong  to  the  south  of  Asia  Minor.  This  electrum  stater, 
however,  belongs  to  the  Ionian  Revolt,  and  may  very  prob- 
ably have  been  struck  at  Cyme.  The  silver  also  are  best 
attributed  to  that  city,  which  was  near  to  Smyrna. 

(2)  Miletus.  The  chief  difficulty  in  assigning  these  coins 
to  Miletus  is  the  inscription  OVA  which  occurs  on  some  of 
them,  and  has  hitherto  defied  interpretation.  But  the  type 
is  practically  identical  with  that  in  use  in  Miletus  at  a  later 
time  (lion  looking  back  at  a  star),  and  the  Milesian  origin 
is  most  probable.  It  seems  very  unlikely  that  Miletus, 
being  at  the  height  of  her  power  in  the  sixth  century, 
would  not  issue  silver  coins. 


EAKLIEST  ISSUES  167 

(3)  Chios.  No  silver  coins  of  Asia  are  more  archaic  in 
appearance  than  some  which  bear  the  type  of  the  sphinx, 
and  have  usually  been  attributed  to  Chios.  A  recent  excel- 
lent paper  on  the  coins  of  Chios,  by  Mr.  J.  Mavrogordato,1 
enables  us  satisfactorily  to  deal  with  these  coins. 

1.  The  earliest  class  consists  of  didrachms  of  Aeginetan 
standard : 

Obv.  Archaic  sphinx  seated,  body  almost  parallel  to  ground. 
Rev.  Incuse  square,  beside  which  smaller  incuse.  Weight, 
184-92  grains  (grm.  11-97-1244).     (PI.  III.  3.) 

2.  Next  comes  a  rare  didrachm  of  Euboic  weight : 

Obv.  Sphinx  in  form  similar,  but  a  little  more  advanced ;  in 
front  rosette.  Rev.  Incuse  square,  quartered.  Weight, 
130  grains  (grm.  842). 

3.  Next  are  didrachms  of  a  lighter  weight : 

Obv.  Sphinx  resembling  the  last,  with  separate  lock  falling 
from  head,  but  the  body  slopes  more.  Rev.  Incuse  square, 
quartered.  Weight,  113-20  grains  (grm.  7-32-7-78).  One 
weighs  105  grains  (grm.  6-80,  but  this  is  quite  exceptional). 

Three  specimens  of  No.  1  were  found  in  a  hoard  con- 
taining mostly  coins  of  the  islands  of  the  Aegean  Sea.2 
Some  writers,  without  adequate  reasons,  have  regarded  it 
as  improbable  that  this  coin  is  of  Chios.  The  rare  Chian 
coin  of  Euboic  or  Attic  weight  must  have  been  struck 
on  the  occasion  of  some  convention  with  Athens  or  Euboea. 
After  this  come  the  didrachms  of  the  ordinary  Chian 
standard,  though  at  first  they  are  somewhat  light. 

(4)  It  is  noteworthy  that  at  Teos,  Iasus,  and  Phocaea  the 
drachm,  and  not  the  didrachm,  of  Aeginetan  weight  is 
in  use. 

(5)  The  Aeginetan  standard  of  this  coin,  as  well  as  its 
mint,  seems  certain.  But  the  coin  of  Phocaea,  which 
succeeds  it, 

Obv.  Griffin  walking,  raising  fore-foot.  Rev.  Incuse  square 
quartered.     Weight,  193  grains  (grm.  12-51), 

1  Num.  Ghron.,  1915,  p.  1. 

2  Oreenwell  in  Num.  Chron.,  1890,  p.  18. 


168  EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

is  somewhat  later  in  fabric.  Mr.  Head  *  observes  that  it  j 
has  lost  20  grains  through  corrosion;  it  must  therefore 
follow  the  Phoenician  standard,  rather  than  the  Aeginetan. 
(7  and  8)  The  authorities  have  been  greatly  exercised 
as  to  the  attribution  of  these  coins.  No.  7  they  have  given 
to  a  great  variety  of  places :  no.  8  to  Argos,  Delos,  and 
Thera.  The  whole  difficulty  has  arisen  because  numis- 
matists did  not  observe  that  shortly  after  coinage  was 
started  at  Aegina  many  of  the  cities  of  Asia  Minor  and 
the  islands  of  the  coast  issued  money  on  the  same  standard ; 
and  then  before  long  gave  up  the  Aeginetan  for  Asiatic 
standards,  retaining  the  types.  If  this  is  borne  in  mind, 
it  will  be  most  natural  to  regard  the  lion's  head  coin, 
(no.  7)  as  belonging  to  Lindus,  since  the  type  is  almost 
identical  with  that  of  later  coins  of  Lindus,  and  the  coin 
with  the  dolphins  (no.  8)  as  belonging  to  Carpathos,  which 
city  is  naturally  indicated  by  the  type. 

10.  Dardanus  in  Troas  (?) 

Obv.  Cock  1.  Rev.  Incuse  formed  of  eight  triangles.  Weight, 
190  grains  (grm.  12-31).  Montagu  Collection.  (B.  T.  XVI. 
10.) 

This  coin  also  belonged  to  the  Santorin  find.  The  attribu- 
tion to  Dardanus  was  suggested  by  Mr.  Head ; 2  but  here 
again  the  evidence  of  the  electrum  points  in  another 
direction.  There  are  many  early  electrum  coins  with  the 
type  of  the  cock,  some  of  them  found  by  Mr.  Hogarth 3  on 
the  site  of  the  temple  of  Artemis  at  Ephesus,  and  belonging 
almost  certainly  to  Southern  Ionia.  The  electrum  stater 
of  the  time  of  the  Ionian  revolt,  bearing  the  cock  as  type, 
is  of  uncertain  attribution ;  but  Miletus  has  as  good  a  claim 
to  it  as  any  city.  As  we  have  seen,  Miletus  did,  in  all  prob- 
ability, strike  silver  staters  of  Aeginetan  weight ;  and  it 
is  possible  that  the  coin  above  mentioned  may  belong  to 
Miletus.  The  best  plan  is  to  leave  its  place  of  mint 
undetermined. 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Coins  Ionia,  p.  214.  a  B.  M.  Cat.  Ionia,  p.  xxxiii. 

3  Excavations  at  Ephesus,  p.  81. 


EARLIEST  ISSUES  169 

The  dominance  of  the  Aeginetan  coinage  is  conspicuous. 
It  seems  even  to  have  been  used  at  Athens  till  the  time 
of  Solon.     Westwards  it  did  not  spread ;  for  it  is  a  mistake 
to  regard  as  of  Aeginetan  standard  either  the  staters  of 
Corcyra  or  the  earliest  issues  of  Sicily  at  Naxos  and  Himera. 
In  both  these  cases  the  standard  was  really  that  of  Corinth : 
the  Corcyrean  staters  being  tetradrachms  of  that  standard, 
and  the  early  coins  of  Sicily  didrachms.     But  on  all  shores 
of  the  Aegean  and  the  Euxine  the  Aeginetan  standard  was 
victorious.     It  was  not  only  that  the  Aeginetan  was  the 
earliest  silver  coinage,  and  held  for  a  time  a  monopoly, 
but   that  the  Aeginetans   were   the   most  successful   and 
wealthiest  of  merchants,  though  they  founded  no  colonies. 
The  invasion  of  Ionia  by  the  Aeginetan  standard  is  a 
very  interesting  phenomenon.     How  coins  minted  on  this 
standard  fitted   in  with   the  electrum  issues  which  were 
there  in  possession,  we  have  no  means  of  knowing.     All 
these  coins  are  very  early,  earlier  than  the  time  of  Croesus. 
And  it  would    seem  that   as  soon  as  the   state   issues  of 
Croesus   and  Cyrus  in  pure  gold  made  their  appearance, 
and  the  Ionian  electrum  was  superseded,  most  of  the  cities 
which  had  for  a  time  adopted  the  Aeginetan  standard  gave 
it  up  for  some  silver  standard  (Phoenician  or  Persian)  more 
in  accord  with  the  Croesean  and  daric  currency. 

There  were,  however,  three  districts  in  which  the 
Aeginetan  standard  was  retained  after  the  time  of  Croesus. 
The  first  is  the  cities  of  S.W.  Asia  Minor,  Cnidus,  Iasus, 
Cos.  Camirus.  The  Carian  cities  had  a  Dorian  origin,  and 
probably  retained  a  connexion  with  Peloponnesus.  They 
had  an  union  centring  in  the  temple  of  Apollo  Triopius 
near  Cnidus.  Herodotus1  gives  the  names  of  the  cities 
belonging  to  the  league  as  Cnidus,  Halicarnassus,  Cos,  and 
the  three  Ehodian  cities,  Lindus,  Ialysus,  and  Camirus.  It 
is  interesting  to  observe  that  this  religious  league  does  not 
include  all  the  Carian  cities  which  used  the  Aeginetan 
standard;  but  five  of  the  cities  above  mentioned,  Cnidus, 
Halicarnassus,  Cos,  Lindus.  and  Camirus,  used  this  standard. 

<  i.  144. 


170  EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 


So  did  Chersonesus,  that  is  the  Tripolis  of  Chersonesus 1  in 
the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  Cnidus,  and  Iasus  farther 
to  the  north. 

Some  of  the  most  noteworthy  coins  of  the  Carian  district 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  sixth  century  are — 

Cnidus. 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  lion.  Rev.  KNIAION  (usually  abbreviated) 
Archaic  head  of  Aphrodite.  Weight,  94-9  grains  (grm. 
6  10-646).      (PI.  III.  6.) 

Cos. 

Obv.  Crab.  Rev.  Incuse  squares.  Weight,  189-5  grains  (grm. 
12-28).     British  Museum.     (PL  III.  1.) 

Camirus  in  Rhodes. 

Obv.  Fig-leaf.  Rev.  Incuse  divided  by  band.  Weight,  183-86 
grains  (grm.  11-89-12-03).     (PI.  III.  7.) 

Chersonesus  of  Caria. 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  lion,  with  paw.  Rev.  XEP  Fore-part  of  bull. 
Weight,  183  grains  (grm.  11-83).     (PI.  III.  5.) 

Iasus  in  Caria. 

Obv.  Youth  riding  on  dolphin.  Rev.  Incuse  square.  Weight, 
92-3  grains  (grm.  5-97-5-99).     (B.  T.  XVIII.  1,  2.) 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  cities  of  this  district  of  Asia 
Minor  are  cut  off  by  mountains  from  the  interior,  so  that 
island  influence  would,  in  their  case,  be  considerable. 

The  second  group  consists  of  a  single  Ionian  city,  Teos, 
which  kept  to  the  Aeginetan  weight  when  the  other  cities 
of  Ionia  gave  it  up.  The  reason  for  this  anomaly  may 
probably  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Aeginetan  standard 
for  silver  coin  was  dominant  in  the  Black  Sea,  and  the 
relations  between  Teos  and  the  Black  Sea  are  indicated 
by  the  foundation  of  Phanagoria  on  the  Asiatic  side  by  the 
people  of  Teos. 

It  was  the  Phoenician  standard,  not  the  Aeginetan,  which 
the  people  of  Teos  carried  with  them  to  their  new  home  at 
Abdera  in  Thrace.  Phocaea,  as  we  have  seen,  seems  to 
have  issued  a  few  coins  on  the  Aeginetan  standard.     But 

1  See  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  433. 


EARLIEST  ISSUES  171 

in  the  case  of  Phocaea,  as  in  that  of  Teos,  it  was  not  the 
Aeginetan  standard  but  an  Asiatic  standard  which  the 
people  who  emigrated  took  with  them  to  their  new  home. 
The  base  silver  issued  by  Phocaea  is  discussed  later. 

The  third  group  comprises  some  cities  on  the  Black  Sea, 
of  which  Sinope  and  Panticapaeum  struck  money  before 
500  b.c.  These,  it  is  probable,  in  the  great  time  of  Miletus 
used  the  Milesian  electrum.  They  seem  to  have  been 
unaffected  by  the  coinages  of  Croesus  and  the  Persians. 
After  the  fall  of  Miletus  there  came  a  time  when  the 
trade  of  the  Black  Sea  fell  partially  into  the  hands  of  the 
Aeginetans.  Xerxes  at  the  Hellespont1  saw  ships  sailing 
out  of  the  Euxine  laden  with  corn  for  Aegina  and  Pelopon- 
nese.  The  silver  coinage  of  Sinope2  begins  just  at  this 
time,  and  it  seems  to  follow  the  Aeginetan  standard,  only 
issuing  the  drachm  instead  of  the  didrachm.  The  earliest 
coins  of  Sinope  are  very  heavy. 

Sinope. 

Obv.  Eagle's  head :  beneath,  dolphin.  Rev.  Incuse  square  in 
four  compartments.  Weight,  100-92  grains  (grm.  6-45- 
5-98).     (B.  T.  XVII.  1-8.) 

Panticapaeum. 

Obv.  Lion's  scalp,  facing.  Rev.  Rough  incuse  square.  Weight, 
91  grains  (grm.  5-89).     (B.  T.  XVII.  9.) 

The  facts  thus  put  together  seem  to  indicate  that  the 
Aeginetan  standard  was  an  exotic  in  Pontus,  but  that 
several  cities  and  districts  passed  on  to  it  from  the  Milesian 
standard.  The  Milesian  stater  only  weighing  222  grains, 
(grm.  14-40),  the  fall  to  the  Aeginetan  stater  of  192  grains 
(grm.  12-44)  was  not  great,  and  may  have  been  gradual. 
Nevertheless  the  adoption  of  the  Aeginetan  stater  marks 
not  only  a  slight  lowering  of  standard,  but  also  the  intro- 
duction of  the  drachm  in  place  of  the  trinal  division,  the 
adoption  of  silver  instead  of  electrum  as  the  standard,  and 

1  Hdt.  vii.  147.  Though  the  speech  of  Xerxes  on  this  occasion  may  be  an 
invention,  we  may  accept  the  testimony  of  Herodotus  as  to  facts  of  com- 
merce. 

2  Six  and  Wroth  (B.  M.  Cat.)  give  it  to  the  time  after  480  b.  c. 


172  EARLY  SILVEE  OF  ASIA 

the  passing  over  to  an  essentially  European  way  of  reckoning. 
And  the  change  must  have  taken  place  early  in  the  sixth 
century,  certainly  before  the  destruction  of  Miletus  by  the 
Persians. 

There  is  another  region,  that  of  Cilicia  and  Cyprus,  in 
which  early  coins  of  Aeginetan  standard  are  usually  sup- 
posed to  have  been  struck.  But  this  opinion  appears  to  be 
erroneous. 

M.  Babelon  gives  the  following  attributions : 

Celenderis  in  Cilicia. 

Obv.  Goat  kneeling,  liev.  Kude  incuse.  Weight,  93-90  grains 
(grm.  605-5-85).     (B.  T.  XXV.  1-3.) 

Mallus  in  Cilicia. 

Obv.  Winged  figure  running.  Rev.  Conical  stone  in  rude 
incuse.  Weight,  185-178  grains  (grm.  11-98-1 1-50).  (B.  T. 
XXV.  5-17.) 

Both  of  these  assignments  are  more  than  doubtful.  The 
coin  given  to  Celenderis  probably  belongs  to  the  island  of 
Andros.  The  coin  given  to  Mallus  was  assigned  to  that 
city  by  the  high  authority  of  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer  ;  but  the 
latter  has  since  retracted  his  attribution.1  He  now  gives 
the  coin  to  Aphrodisias  in  Cilicia;  but  there  does  not 
appear  to  be  any  better  reason  in  this  case  than  in  the 
other.  In  the  absence  of  any  other  coins  of  Aeginetan 
weight  belonging  to  cities  on  this  part  of  the  coast,  we  may 
best  regard  the  coin  as  belonging  to  some  other  region. 
The  weight  would  best  suit  Caria.  It  has  commonly  been 
supposed — and  the  view  is  even  accepted  by  Head — that  the 
archaic  coins  of  Cyprus  follow  the  Aeginetan  standard  ; 
but  Mr.  Hill  in  the  B.  M.  Cat.  Cilicia 2  states  the  matter 
exactly.  '  For  all  practical  purposes  the  coins  (of  Cyprus) 
were  of  the  Persic  standard.'  I  do  not  think  that  there  are 
any  grounds  for  holding  that  the  Aeginetan  standard  gained 
even  theoretic  sway  in  Cyprus. 

It  is  interesting  to  see  that  the  Aeginetan  silver  standard, 

1  Kleinasiat.  Mi'mzen,  ii.  p.  435.  2  p.  xxii. 


EARLIEST  ISSUES  173 

like  the  power  of  the  Athenian  Empire,  does  not  extend  as 
far  west  as  Cilicia  and  Cyprus. 

§  2.     The  Attic  Standard. 

There  are  very  few  certain  examples  of  silver  coins  being 
minted  in  Asia  at  this  period  on  the  Euboic,  Corinthian,  or 
Attic  standards.  The  coins  commonly  given  to  Samos,  and 
regarded  as  of  Attic  weight,  with  types  of  the  fore-part  of 
a  bull,  and  a  lion's  head  facing,  have  already  been  considered 
in  Chapter  I,  where  it  is  suggested  that  they  follow  a 
standard  different  from  the  Euboic  and  of  earlier  origin 
than  the  Attic.  The  archaic  coin  bearing  as  type  a  lyre, 
attributed  to  Colophon  in  the  Historia  Numorum  (ed.  1),  is 
withdrawn  from  that  city  in  the  British  Museum  Catalogue 
of  Ionia,  and  assigned,  in  the  second  edition  of  the  Historia, 
to  Delos.  The  remarkable  archaic  coin  (Obv.  Lion  tearing 
prey :  Rev.  Forepart  of  winged  boar  in  incuse  :  Weight, 
266  grains  (grm.  17-23) :  (B.  M.  II.  23) )  was  formerly 
attributed  to  Clazomenae,  but  is  now  reckoned  among  the 
uncertain.  The  weight  is  certainly  Attic  (or  Cyrenaic),  not 
Euboic.  It  seems  very  improbable  that  it  can  belong  to 
Ionia.  A  few  of  the  coins  of  Chios,  as  we  have  seen, 
were  minted  on  the  Euboic  standard ;  but  it  soon  gives 
way  to  the  standard  called  Chian.  There  remains  only  the 
beautiful  coin  of  Methymna,  which  is  certainly  of  Attic 
weight : 

Obv.  MAOYMNAIOS.  Boar  to  r.  scratching  himself.  Rev. 
Inscr.  repeated.  Head  of  Athena  r.,  Pegasus  on  her 
helmet.  Weight,  132-126  grains  (grm.  8-55-8-15).  (PL 
VI.  11.) 

M.  Six1  assigns  it  to  the  period  523—513  B.C.,  between 
the  death  of  Polycrates  and  the  institution  of  Coes  as  ruler 
of  Lesbos  by  the  Persians.  I  do  not  think  that  it  can  be 
so  early,  and  I  would  assign  it  to  the  period  480-460  b.c. 
It  must  have  been  struck  on  the  occasion  of  some  alliance 
or  understanding  with  Athens.     An  alliance  with  Athens 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1895,  191. 


174  EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

suggests  itself  in  the  case  of  a  coin   struck   probably  at 
Lanipsacus x : 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  winged  horse.     Rev.  Incuse  square,  quartered. 
Weight,  33  grains  (grm.  2-16). 

This  is  clearly  a  hemidrachm  of  Attic  standard  :  in  fabric 
it  is  earlier  than  the  silver  of  Lampsacus  struck  at  the 
time  of  the  Ionian  Revolt.  It  may  well  be  a  memorial  of 
an  alliance  between  Lampsacus  and  Hippias  of  Athens,  as 
M.  Six  has  suggested.2 

We  have  above  (p.  167)  met  with  a  coin  of  Chios  of 
Attic  weight,  perhaps  recording  a  similar  alliance. 


§  3.     Phoenician  Standard. 

Although  the  Asiatic  cities  in  the  half-century  pre- 
ceding 480  B.C.,  setting  aside  the  exceptions  which 
I  have  mentioned,  are  usually  said  to  have  issued 
silver  money  on  either  the  Babylonic  (Persian)  or  the 
Phoenician  (Graeco-Asiatic)  standard,  yet  as  a  matter 
of  fact  there  prevails  a  great  irregularity  in  the  weights 
of  such  coins.  Strictly  speaking,  every  city  seems 
to  have  used  a  standard  of  its  own,  which  (a  remark- 
able fact)  seems,  when  once  fairly  established,  to  have  held 
its  own  for  long  periods.  We  can,  however,  distinguish 
a  heavier  standard  with  a  stater  of  about  240  grains  (grm. 
15-50),  or  the  half  of  this,  120  grains  (grm.  7-75),  and  a 
lighter  standard  with  a  stater  of  about  216  grains  (grm.  14), 
or  the  half  of  this,  108  grains  (grm.  7),  and  we  can  distinguish 
between  the  heavier  Persian  standard,  with  a  stater  of 
about  168  grains  (grm.  10-88),  or  its  half,  84  grains  (grm. 
5-44),  and  the  lighter  Babylonic  standard  with  a  stater  of 
152-142  grains  (grm.  9-84  -9-20). 

We  have  seen,  in  treating  of  the  electrum  coins  of  Asia, 
that  cities  to  the  north  of  Smyrna  and  the  Hermus  valley, 


1  Babel  on,  Traite,  ii.  1.  p.  878. 

2  Babelnn  in  Corolla  Numismatica,  p.  3. 


PHOENICIAN  STANDARD  175 

such  cities  as  Lampsacus,  Cyzicus,  and  Phocaea,  minted 
electrum  on  the  Phocaean  standard,  which  is  the  same 
as  that  above  called  heavy  Phoenician.  At  the  same 
period,  the  cities  to  the  south  of  the  Hermus,  such  as 
Miletus  and  Ephesus,  used  the  Milesian  standard,  which  is 
identical  with  that  above  called  the  light  Phoenician.  The 
same  division  applies  in  the  case  of  the  silver  coin.  The 
cities  to  the  north  of  the  Hermus  still  use  the  heavier,  and 
those  to  the  south  of  the  Hermus  the  lighter  standard.  We 
may  well  then  retain  the  names  Phocaean  and  Milesian 
standards  in  preference  to  the  more  cumbrous  names  of 
heavy  and  light  Phoenician  or  Graeco-Asiatic. 

We  begin  with  the  cities  which  struck  silver  on  the 
Phocaean  standard : 

Phocaea. 

Obv.  Seal.  Bev.  Incuse  square.  Weight,  57-60  grains  (grm. 
368-3-85).     (B.  T.  XIII.  12.) 

Tenedos. 

Obv.  Janiforni  heads,  male  and  female.  Bev.  TENEAION. 
Bipennis ;  amphora  attached  to  it  Weight,  239-43 
grains  (grm.  1548-15-73).  (PL  III.  8  ;  B.  M.  H.  19.) 
Also  the  half  of  this :  the  didrachm.1 

Parium. 

Obv.  Gorgon  head.  Bev.  Pattern  in  incuse  square.  Weight, 
50-61  grains  (grm.  3-24-3-95).  (B.  T.  XVL  22,  23.)  Also 
the  half  and  the  quarter. 

The  attribution  to  Parium  of  these  coins  is  probable  but 
not  certain.  It  is  notable  that  Tenedos  and  Parium  are  close 
to  the  Hellespont,  and  in  the  line  of  commerce. 

Chios  also  may  be  classed  as  using  the  Phocaean  standard, 
though  some  of  its  coins,  up  to  122  grains  (grm.  7-90) 
(B.  T.  XII),  exceed  the  limit  usual  with  this  standard.  We 
shall  see  in  a  later  chapter  -  that  in  the  fifth  century  the 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  367. 
•  Ch.  XIV. 


176  EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

Chian  tetradrachm  was  regarded  as  a  fortieth  of  the  mina 
of  Aegiria ;  and  it  is  quite  possible  that  from  the  beginning 
it  had  a  recognized  relation  to  the  island  coinage.  In 
that  case  the  Chians,  after  beginning,  as  we  have  seen,  with 
a  stater  which  was  a  fiftieth  part  of  the  Aeginetan  mina 
(p.  167),  went  on  to  a  stater  which  was  the  fortieth  part  of 
that  mina. 

Some  cities,  Phocaea,  Mytilene,  and  Cyzicus,  also  issued, 
on  the  Phocaean  standard,  coins  of  base  quality,  bearing  the 
same  relation  to  silver  which  electrum  bears  to  gold.  At  a 
later  period,  as  we  know  from  the  excellent  testimony  of  an 
inscription,  Phocaea  and  Mytilene  made  a  convention  by 
which  they  issued  alternately  hectae  of  electrum  struck 
on  the  Phocaean  standard,  hectae  of  poor  quality  of 
metal,  though  good  as  works  of  art.  The  base  silver  issued 
earlier  by  Phocaea  and  Mytilene  is  of  metal  called  billon, 
being  silver  adulterated  with  copper  and  lead.  It  is 
interesting  to  observe  that  the  chief  cities  which  issued 
electrum  also  struck  in  base  silver.  Mr.  Head  long  ago 
conjectured  that  whereas  the  Milesian  electrum  was  intended 
to  pass  as  a  special  metal,  the  Phocaean  electrum  was 
intended  to  pass  as  gold 1 ;  and  we  may  best  accept  this  view. 
The  Phocaean  electrum  contains,  according  to  the  experi- 
ments of  Mr.  Head,  from  51  to  64  per  cent,  of  gold ;  the 
billon  of  Mytilene,  according  to  Lenormant,  contains  about 
40  per  cent,  of  pure  silver.2  It  may  be  suggested  that  the 
people  of  Cyzicus,  Phocaea,  and  Lesbos,  having  found  their 
issues  of  electrum  exceedingly  profitable,  tried  a  similar 
experiment  with  silver.  There  is  no  pure  silver  at  Mytilene 
contemporary  with  the  billon.  The  billon  begins  about 
550  b.c.  and  continues  till  about  440.  Silver  begins  at 
Mytilene  about  440.3  The  exceptional  silver  coin  issued  at 
Methymna  about  480  b.  c.  conforms,  as  we  have  seen,  to  the 
Attic  standard. 


1  Cat.  Or.  Coins,  Ionia,  p.  xxvi  ;  above,  p.  81. 

2  Cat.  Troas,  &c,  p.  lxiv. 
5  Ibid. 


PHOENICIAN  STANDARD  177 

The  principal  early  coins  in  billon  are  the  following  (all 
have  incuse  reverse) : 

Weight. 


Lesbos. 

grtn. 

grains. 

Babelon. 

Four-leaf  device  (on  shield) 

15-24-15-30 

235-6 

p.  344 

pi.  xrv. 

1 

Head  of  lion  to  1. 

15-10-1519 

233-4 

p.  345 

»» 

2 

Lion's  scalp  facing 

14-85 

229 

M 

>» 

3 

Gorgon-mask 

14-28-14.45 

220-3 

l> 

n 

5 

Fore -part  of  boar 

685 

106 

p.  347 

» 

6 

Two  calves'  heads 

10-50-11.22 

162-73 

p.  359 

PI.  XV 

U 

Calf  s  head 

5-40-5-52 

84-5 

» 

»> 

17 

Calf  kneeling  ;  above,  cock 

3-88 

601 

Cyzicus. 

Head  and  tail  of  tunny 

1422-14-70 

220-7 

p.  390 

PI.  XVI. 

25 

The  coins  of  Parium,  above  described  as  being  of  silver, 
are  not  of  quite  pure  metal. 

A  quantity  of  smaller  divisions  was  issued ;  but,  as 
M.  Babelon  observes,  they  are  not  to  be  trusted  for  the 
determination  of  standards ;  they  vary  considerably  in 
weight,  and  a  little  added  or  subtracted  takes  them  over 
apparently  from  one  standard  to  another. 

If  we  examine  the  above-mentioned  larger  coins,  they 
present  simple  phenomena.  M.  Babelon,  losing  as  I  think 
the  wood  in  the  trees,  assigns  the  base  silver  coins  of 
Phocaea  and  Mytilene  to  a  number  of  standards,  the  Euboic, 
Aeginetan,  Persian,  and  Phocaean.  All,  however,  except 
6  and  7,  may  be  reasonably  assigned  to  the  standard  which 
we  may  call  Phocaean,  with  a  tetradrachm  of  236  grains 
(grm.  15-30)  and  a  didrachm  of  118  grains  (grm.  7-65). 
Numbers  6  and  7  of  the  list,  however,  follow  the  Persian 
standard.  They  are  certainly  later  than  the  others,  and  it 
would  be  natural  to  assign  them  to  the  period  of  the 
expeditions  of  Darius  and  Xerxes. 

The  principal  issues  of  silver,  according  to  the  lighter 
Phoenician  or  Milesian  standard,  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
sixth  century,  are : 
Samos. 

Obv.  Lion's  scalp,  facing.    Rev.  £A.  Fore-part  of  bull.    "Weight, 

198-202  grains  (grm.  1280-1305).     (PL  III.  10 ;  B.  T. 

XI.  23-30.) 

1  Num.  Citron.,  1899,  p.  276. 

'•  ■>  N 


178  EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

Ephesus. 

Obv.  Bee.  Rev.  Incuse  square,  quartered.  Weight,  50-56 
grains  (grm.  3-20-3-60).     (PI.  III.  9 ;  B.  T.  XI.  13-16.) 

Poseidion  in  Carpathos. 

Obv.  Two  dolphins  passing  one  another ;  beneath,  a  smaller 
dolphin  ;  in  square.  Rev.  Incuse  square  divided  by  band. 
Weight,  209-214  grains  (grm.  13-50-13-90).  (PI.  III.  11 ; 
B.  M.  III.  22 ;  B.  T.  XIX.  8-10.) 

Ialysus  in  Rhodes. 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  winged  boar.  Rev.  IEAY£ION.  Eagle's  head; 
in  square.  Weight,  223-30  grains  (grm.  14-42-14-86). 
(PI.  III.  12 ;  B.  M.  III.  31 ;  B.  T.  XX.  14.) 

Lindus  in  Rhodes. 

Obv.  Lion's  head.  Rev.  Inscr.  Incuse  square  divided  by  band  ; 
sometimes  inscr.  AINAI.  Weight,  210-213  grains  (grm. 
13-60-13-80).     (B.  T.  XX.  16-20.) 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  standards  of  these  coins  vary 
notably. 

A  coin  of  Milesian  weight  has  been,  in  the  B.  M.  Cat. 
Troas  (no.  1,  p.  42),  given  to  Cebren — 

Obv.  Head  of  ram  r.  Rev.  Quadripartite  incuse  square.  Weight, 
217  grains  (grm.  14-06). 

Here  again  we  may  follow  the  lead  of  the  electrum  coins 
on  which  a  ram  and  a  ram's  head  are  frequent  devices ; l 
but  in  all  cases  they  are  of  Milesian  weight  and  South 
Ionian  character.  It  seems  clear  that  the  coin  we  are 
considering  cannot  belong  to  the  Troad.  Clazomenae  has 
been  suggested  as  an  alternative,  and  to  this  there  is  not 
the  same  objection. 

Other  silver  coins  of  Milesian  weight,  mostly  didrachms, 
struck  at  Lampsacus,  Erythrae,  Clazomenae,  Miletus,  and 
Chios,  at  the  time  of  the  Ionian  Revolt,  have  been  discussed 
already  in  Ch.  III. 

It  is  noteworthy  that,  whereas  the  electrum  of  Ionia  is 
divided  into  thirds,  sixths,  and  twelfths,  the  silver  coinage 
of  the  cities  of  Asia  from  the  first  divides  by  two  and  four. 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  30. 


PHOENICIAN  STANDARD  179 

We  have  the  tetradrachm,  the  drachm,  the  obol,  and  their 
divisions  and  multiples.  We  must  suppose  that  it  was  the 
influence  of  Hellas,  and  mainly  of  Aegina,  which  introduced 
into  Asia  the  drachmal  division.  But  this  division,  while 
thoroughly  adopted  by  the  Greek  cities,  does  not  seem  to 
have  passed  into  the  state  coinage  of  Persia.  The  silver 
coin  there  is  properly  the  siglos  or  shekel;  and  if  it  is 
sometimes  spoken  of  as  the  Persian  drachm,  this  way  of 
speaking  is  only  derived ;  nor  does  the  shekel  divide  in 
currency :  there  are  no  Persian  state  hemidrachms  or  obols 
of  silver ;  only  among  the  later  issues  we  find  thirds  of  the 
shekel,  which  might,  no  doubt,  be  called  diobols.1 

If  there  were  a  serious  attempt  to  keep  the  silver  coins 
in  a  certain  ratio  of  value  to  the  gold,  it  might  seem  to 
account  for  considerable  fluctuations  in  their  standard. 
When  or  where  gold  was  at  a  premium,  the  silver  standard 
might  rise,  as  at  Chios,  to  240  grains :  where  gold  was  at 
a  discount  the  silver  standard  might  fall,  as  at  Ephesus 
and  Samos,  to  near  200  grains.  This  explanation,  however, 
does  not  satisfactorily  account  for  the  varieties  of  the 
Ionian  silver  standards,  and  there  remains  to  be  accounted 
for  the  fact  that  when  once  a  silver  standard  has  gained 
acceptance  in  a  city,  it  remains  fixed  there  for  centuries. 
Gold  could  not  be  permanently  at  a  lower  value  in  the 
northern  cities  of  Ionia  than  in  the  southern,  distant  only 
a  few  hours'  sail.  This  view  must  therefore  be  definitely 
rejected. 

§  4.     Pebsian  Stand aed. 

It  was  on  this  standard  that  the  main  currency  of  Asia  in 
early  times  was  based.  The  Persian  silver  sigli  or  shekels 
of  86  grains  (grm.  5-57)  circulated  in  immense  quantities  / 
in  the  interior  of  Asia  Minor  and  are  now  found  in  hoards. 
A  great  proportion  of  them  bear  countermarks,  small  devices 
stamped  upon  them,  probably  by  the  collectors  of  the  king's 
taxes,  or  by  the  local  authorities  in  the  different  satrapies  2 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2;  PI.  lxxxvii.  5,  13. 
*  See  Num.  Ohron.,  1916,  p.  1. 
H  2 


180  EAELY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

The  countermarks  may  have  been  intended  to  guarantee 
them  for  currency  in  particular  districts.  The  sigli  do 
not  appear,  however,  to  have  been  the  normal  currency 
in  all  parts  of  Asia  Minor.  In  the  south  of  that  region  they 
were  dominant,  and  the  Greek  cities  of  Pamphylia,  Cilicia, 
and  Cyprus  conformed  the  coins  of  their  civic  issues  to  this 
standard.  In  the  cities  of  the  Ionian  and  Mysian  coast, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  Persian  sigli  were  less  frequent,  and 
the  standard  used  for  the  civic  issues  was,  as  we  have  seen, 
usually  some  variety  of  the  Phoenician. 

As  I  have  already  observed,  in  the  civic  coinages  which 
followed  the  Persian  standard,  the  weight  of  the  siglos  was 
treated  as  a  drachm,  and  multiplied  or  divided  after  the 
manner  of  the  Greek  silver  coinage. 

Didrachms  of  this  standard,  172-176  grains  (grm.  11-14- 
10*50)  were  minted  at  many  cities  of  the  south  coast  as 
early  as  or  earlier  than  500.  But  in  no  case  can  they  be 
given  to  an  earlier  date  than  the  Persian  Conquest. 

Among  these  cities  are : 

Phaselis. 

Obv.  Prow  of  galley  in  the  form  of  a  boar's  head.     Rev.  So 
times  inscr.     Incuse  square ;   or  stern  of  ship  in  incuse. 
Weight,  167-172  grains  (grm.  10-80-11.15).     (PI.  III.  13  ; 
B.  M.  III.  36 ;  B.  T.  XXIII.) 

Aspendus  and  Selge. 

Obv.    Warrior    advancing.      Rev.    Inscr.      Triquetra    of    legs. 
Weight,  164-170  grains  (grm.  10-60-11).     (B.  T.  XXIII.) 

Side. 

Obv.  Pomegranate.     Rev.  Head  of  Athena.     Weight,  158-172 
grains  (grm.  10-20-11-10).     (B.  T.  XXIV.  6-9.) 

These  cities  lie  near  together  in  Pamphylia  on  the 
southern  shore  of  Asia  Minor.  Opposite  is  the  island  of 
Cyprus,  where  most  of  the  cities  used  the  same  standard, 
Salamis,  Citium,  Idalium,  and  Paphos.  Outside  this  region 
we  cannot  find  cities  which  have  used  it.  The  cities  of 
Cilicia  would  no  doubt  have  used  it,  had  they  struck  coins 
in  the  sixth  century.     But  this  does  not  seem  to  have  been 


PERSIAN  STANDARD  181 

the  case ;  and  other  coins  of  the  Persian  standard,  given  to 
the  sixth  century  and  to  Asia  Minor  mints,  seem  to  be 
wrongly  assigned. 

J.  P.  Six,1  followed  with  much  hesitation  by  M.  Babelon, 
proposes  to  give  to  the  Cilician  city  of  Issus  a  series  of 
archaic  coins  having  on  the  obverse  the  head  of  a  roaring 
lion  with  paw  advanced,  on  the  reverse  an  incuse  square 
made  up  of  four  triangles.  Weight  168-158  grains  (grm. 
10-86-10-23).  For  this  attribution,  however,  the  only 
evidence  is  a  very  doubtful  reading  by  M.  Six  of  I  £  £  A I O  N 
on  a  satrapal  coin  at  The  Hague  which  bears  on  the  obverse 
a  lion's  head  and  two  paws.  The  legend  certainly  cannot 
be  read  on  a  photograph  of  the  coin,2  and  M.  Babelon  rejects 
it.  Mr.  Hill  is  disposed  to  give  these  coins  to  Selge3  in 
Pamphylia. 

There  is  a  very  remarkable  stater  given  to  the  island  of 
Calymnos : 4 

Obv.  Rude  head  of  warrior  in  a  crested  helmet.  Rev.  Seven- 
stringed  lyre  fitted  into  an  incuse.  Curious  flat  fabric. 
Weight,  162-156  grains  (grm.  10-50-1010).  (PI.  III.  14 ; 
B.  M.  III.  29.) 

The  coin  is  carefully  struck :  it  vis  quite  a  mistake  to 
suppose  the  exaggerated  and  absurd  features  of  the  head 
of  the  obverse  to  be  the  result  of  clumsy  archaism :  they 
are  intentionally  made  so.  Nor  is  the  fitting  of  the  reverse- 
type  into  the  incuse  really  archaic.  Almost  the  nearest 
parallel  is  to  be  found  on  the  early  coins  of  Parium  and 
of  Zancle  in  Sicily ;  also  on  a  coin  of  Eretria  in  Euboea,5 
where  the  sepia  on  the  reverse  is  similarly  fitted  into  an 
incuse.  This  coin  of  Eretria  is  given  in  the  B.  M.  Cata- 
logue to  480-445  b.c.  ;  I  do  not  think  that  the  coin  before 
us  is  much  earlier.  Closely  similar  also  are  the  earliest 
coins  of  Tyre,  of  about  450  b.  c,  bearing  on  the  reverse  an 

1  Xum.  Chron.,  1888,  p.  115  ;  cf.  Babelon,  Traiti,  ii.  1,  p.  567. 
1  Traite,  PI.  xxv.  20. 

3  B.  M.  Cat  Lycia,  p.  cxv. 

4  B.  M.  Cat  Caria,  PI.  xxix.  8 ;  Traiti,  PI.  xviii.  22. 
s  B.  M.  CaL  Central  Greece,  p.  121,  25 ;  PI.  xariii.  4. 


182  EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

owl  fitted  into  an  incuse  (B.  M.  Cat  Phoenicia,  PL  XXVIII. 
9).  It  is  true  that  the  two  types  of  a  helmeted  head  and 
a  lyre  are  found  together  on  later  coins  of  Calymnos.  Yet 
the  fabric  of  our  coin,  which  is  quite  different  from  that 
of  Caria,  and  the  weight,  which  is  unknown  west  of  Lycia,  ' 
make  us  hesitate  to  give  the  coin  to  Calymnos,  and  we  must 
certainly  withdraw  it  from  the  very  early  period. 

Several  Greek  cities  on  the  Asiatic  side,  situated  near 
the  entrance  to  the  Euxine,  or  on  the  shores  of  the  Pro- 
pontis,  struck  coins  on  the  Persian  standard  before  or  during 
the  Persian  wars. 

Antandros. 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  lion.     Rev.  Goat  and  pine-tree.     Weight,  171 
grains  (grm.  11-10).     Didrachm.     (B.  T.  CLXIII.  1.) 

Abydos. 

Obv.  ABYAHNON.     Eagle.     Rev.  Gorgon-head.     Weight,  84- 
80  grains  (grm.  541-5-21).    Drachm.    (B.  T.  CLXVII.  29.) 

Lampsacus. 

Obv.  Janiform  female  head.     Rev.  Head  of  Athena.     Weight, 
85-72  grains  (grm.  5-50-4-65).     (B.  T.  XVI.  18.) 

Astacus. 

Obv.  Lobster.     Rev.  A£.  Head  of  Nymph.     Weight,  76  grains 
(grm.  4-90).     (B.  T.  CLXXXI.  1-5.) 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  M.  Babelon  gives  these  coins  of 
Antandros,  Abydos,  and  Astacus  to  the  time  after  480  B.C. 
It  is  rather  on  the  ground  of  historic  probability  than  on  any 
other  ground  that  I  place  them  earlier. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  there  is  no  corresponding  coinage 
of  Persian  weight  before  480  b.c.  on  the  European  side. 
Cardia  in  the  Thracian  Chersonese  issued,  as  we  have  seen, 
money  on  the  Attic  standard.  The  coins  of  Salymbria  are 
almost  undistinguishable  from  those  of  Dicaea,  and  follow, 
like  them,  the  standard  of  Abdera. 

The  coins  of  the  Lycian  cities  certainly  do  not  follow  the 
royal  Persian  standard,  but  one  20  grains  lighter. 


PERSIAN  STANDARD  183 

The  Lycian  coins  struck  before  480  b.c.  seem  to  have  the 
following  weights : l 

Stater 148-136  grains  .  .  grm.  9-60-8-80 

(some  lighter) 

Third  or  tetrobol  .     .       46-38  grains    .  .  grm.  3      -2-46 

Sixth  or  diobol .     .     .       22-18  grains    .  .  grm.  140-116 

The  only  other  district  which  struck  on  a  similar  standard 
is  that  of  the  minting  tribes  of  the  Thraco-Macedonian 
coast.  But  their  stater  is  half  a  gramme  heavier,  and  they 
divide  it  by  two  and  do  not  strike  any  coin  equivalent  to  the 
Lycian  thirds. 

This  standard  is  difficult  to  explain.  It  cannot  be  the 
Attic,  being  decidedly  too  heavy.  "What  is  clear  is  that 
it  is  a  system  of  thirds  and  sixths  like  that  of  the  electrum 
coins  or  that  of  Corinth,  and  that  the  weight  of  the  coins 
varies  in  a  remarkable  and  inexplicable  way  (see  p.  188). 

Six  and  Head  have  called  it  Babylonic.  But  it  cannot  be 
the  silver  standard  adopted  by  the  Persians  from  Babylon. 
If  we  could  with  any  confidence  accept  the  statement  of 
Herodotus  that  there  was  a  talent  in  use  for  silver  in  the  Per- 
sian Empire  equal  to  70  Euboic  minae,2  this  would  about 
give  us  the  required  weight.  But  Mommsen,  with  the 
general  approval  of  numismatists,  has  corrected  Herodotus's 
70  to  78 ;  and  it  is  certain  that  if  the  Lydian  and  royal 
Persian  silver  coinage  was  minted  on  the  Babylonic 
standard,  78 :  60  rather  than  70 :  60  represents  the  true 
proportion  of  that  standard  to  the  Euboic.  The  fact  that 
the  stater  in  Lycia  is  divided  into  thirds  and  sixths,  not 
into  halves,  is  a  strong  reason  for  supposing  that,  whence- 
soever  the  standard  may  be  derived,  it  is  of  Asiatic 
character. 

The  natural  supposition  would  be  that  the  heavier  coins 
were  the  earlier,  and  that  the  lighter  coins,  which  are 
practically  of  Attic    standard,   were    struck   towards  the 


1  B.  M.  Cat.  Lycia,  pp.  1-10. 

2  Hdt.   iii.  89.      Julius  Pollux  (Onom.  ix.  85)  gives  the  same  proportion 
as  Herodotus.     It  is  uncertain  whether  Herodotus  is  his  authority  or  not. 


184  EARLY  SILVER  OF  ASIA 

middle  of  the  fifth  century,  in  the  time  of  the  Athenian 
Empire.  Such  an  effect  seems  to  have  been  produced  in 
TLirace  towards  440  B.C.,  by  the  spread  of  the  Athenian 
sea-power,  on  the  coins  of  Thasos  and  Neapolis.1  But  the 
misfortune  is  that  the  fabric  of  the  Lycian  coins  does 
not  bear  out  the  theory.  Coins  of  less  than  140  grains 
weight  were  issued  in  the  sixth  century  ;  indeed,  some  of 
the  earliest  we  have  are  among  the  light  specimens: 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  boar.  Rev.  Rude  incuse  square  (Brit.  Mus.). 
Weights,  136-2  grains  (grm.  8-83),  143  grains  (grm.  9-26). 
(B.  T.  XXI.  1.) 

Thus  the  Lycian  standard  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
originally  the  same  as  that  of  Persia ;  but  it  is  exceptional. 

It  may  be  well  briefly  to  sum  up  the  conclusions  of  this 
chapter.  Silver  coinage  appears  in  Asia  at  some  of  the 
Greek  cities  in  the  sixth  century.  The  weight  of  it,  the 
Aeginetan,  and  the  drachmal  system  according  to  which 
it  is  divided,  alike  indicate  an  European  influence ;  silver 
coinage  seems  to  have  spread  from  the  Cyclades  to  the 
cities  of  the  mainland.  After  the  introduction  of  the  gold 
staters  of  Croesus  and  the  darics,  these  dominated  the  silver 
issues  of  Asia,  and  the  Aeginetan  weights  survived  only  in 
a  few  districts,  as  stated  above.  The  electrum  coinage  of 
the  coast  disappears ;  and  in  place  of  it  the  Greek  cities 
strike  silver  coins  on  the  two  systems  which  work  in  with 
the  daric  and  the  gold  bars  or  pellets  of  130  grains  (grm. 
8-42)  which  preceded  the  daric,  the  systems  called  Persian 
and  Phoenician.  The  properly  European  systems,  the 
Euboic,  Corinthian  and  Attic,  get  no  footing  in  Asia. 
Whether  any  silver  coins  of  Asia  are  earlier  than  the 
time  of  Croesus,  excepting  only  those  of  Aeginetan  weight, 
is  improbable.  It  would  simplify  matters,  from  the  his- 
torical point  of  view,  if  we  could  make  the  silver  issues 
of  the  Asiatic  standards  subsequent  in  every  case  to  the 
electrum  issues;  but  we  are  scarcely  at  present  able  to 
affirm  this  with  confidence. 

1  See  Ch.  XIV. 


PERSIAN  STANDARD  185 

The  districts  dominated  by  the  four  systems,  heavy 
Phoenician,  light  Phoenician,  heavy  Persian,  and  light 
Persian,  may  be  mapped  out  clearly.  Heavy  Phoenician 
(Phocaean)  dominates  the  coast  north  of  the  Hermus  river, 
light  Phoenician  (Milesian)  from  the  Hermus  southward  to 
Caria.  Caria.  with  the  Pontic  region,  retains  the  Aeginetan 
standard.  The  light  Persian  system  prevails  in  Lycia,  and  / 
the  heavy  Persian  in  Pamphylia  and  Cyprus.  Thus  what 
seems  at  first  sight  to  be  a  chaos  of  weights  is  reduced 
by  a  careful  scrutiny  to  a  reasonable  system.  The  wild 
assertion  of  Lenormant  that  Greek  cities  regulated  the 
weight  of  their  coins  without  regard  to  any  external 
authority,  or  the  customs  even  of  their  neighbours,  turns 
out  to  be  as  inconsistent  with  the  facts  of  the  surviving 
coins  as  it  is  contrary  to  probability  and  reason.  They 
were  guided,  as  we  should  be,  by  considerations  of  com- 
mercial utility ;  though  no  doubt  the  force  of  tradition  was 
stronger  with  them  than  with  us. 


CHAPTER    X 

EARLY  COINS  OF   THRACE   AND  MACEDON 

The  region  comprising  Southern  Thrace  and  Eastern 
Macedon l  must  be  regarded  as  one  from  the  numismatic 
point  of  view.  It  was  a  region  in  which  various  streams 
of  influence  contended  for  the  mastery,  with  the  result 
that  the  variations  of  standard  are  many  and  frequent. 
It  may  be  regarded  as  a  meeting-point  of  European  and 
Asiatic  influences,  the  latter  being  in  early  times  more 
powerful.  We  may  discern  five  lines  upon  which  various 
influences  moved  : 

(1)  The  island  of  Thasos  was  a  great  source  of  precious 
metals,  especially  gold ;  and  the  neighbouring  coast  of 
Thrace,  which  was  unequalled  for  richness  in  the  precious 
metals,  was  much  under  its  hegemony. 

(2)  The  region  of  Chalcidice,  including  Mount  Athos, 
was  from  a  very  early  period  fringed  with  colonies  from 
Hellas,  sent  out  principally  from  the  great  colonizing  cities 
of  Chalcis  in  Euboea  and  Corinth.  Athens  was  also  active 
in  this  district,  and  Neapolis,  somewhat  farther  to  the  east, 
was  regarded  as  a  colony  of  Athens. 

(3)  The  cities  farther  to  the  east,  notably  Abdera  and 
Maronea,  were  colonized,  not  by  the  Greeks  of  Europe,  but 
by  those  of  Asia,  and  their  relations  were  rather  with  Ionia 
than  with  Europe. 

(4)  The  Kingdom  of  Macedon  had  a  powerful  inland 
influence.  The  Kings  of  Macedon  boasted  of  Argive 
descent,  and  imported  some  Greek  culture  into  the  moun- 
tain valleys  to  the  west  of  the  Strymon,  where  the  mass 
of  the   people  were   of  Thracian   and    Paeonian   descent. 

1  I  use  the  current  names  :  Mr.  Svoronos,  with  some  reason,  suggests 
Paeonia  as  a  more  satisfactory  name. 


THASIAN  STANDARD  187 

From  500  b.c.  onwards  the  power  of  the  kings  gradually 
extended  eastward.  It  is  their  coins,  bearing  the  names 
of  kings  and  so  to  be  dated,  which  enable  us  to  reduce  to 
some  order  the  mass  of  coins  struck  in  the  silver-producing 
districts  of  Mounts  Pangaeus  and  Bertiscus. 

(5)  In  the  days  of  Darius  and  Xerxes  Persian  armies 
crossed  the  Hellespont,  and  made  their  way  along  the 
Thracian  coast.  These  armies  needed  abundant  supplies, 
and  must  have  increased  the  demand  for  a  coinage. 

I.  Thasian  Standard. 

The  coins  of  Thasos  must  be  regarded  as  giving  the  key 
to  the  coinages  of  the  neighbouring  districts  of  Thrace. 
Thasos  was  in  very  early  times  used  by  the  Phoenicians 
as  a  source  of  gold.  At  some  early  but  unassigned  period 
they  were  succeeded  by  colonists  from  Paros,  who  are  said 
by  Herodotus1  to  have  made  a  great  revenue  from  gold 
mines  on  the  island  and  on  the  neighbouring  coast  shortly 
before  the  invasion  of  Xerxes.  "We  have,  however,  with 
the  doubtful  exception  of  rare  coins  in  electrum,2  no  early 
gold  coins  of  Thasos.  But  the  produce  of  the  silver  mines  on 
the  coast  adjoining  Thasos  and  under  Thasian  dominion  was 
issued  as  coin  during  most  of  the  sixth  century — abundant 
silver  coins,  notable  for  their  type  and  style.  The  type  is 
a  satyr  carrying  off  a  woman.  (PI.  IV.  1 ;  B.  M.  IV.  3.)  The 
style  is  so  massive  and  vigorous,  though  somewhat  rude, 
that  Brunn  made  it  one  of  the  corner-stones  to  support  his 
theory  of  a  north  Greek  style  of  art  mainly  Ionic  in  ten- 
dency. "We  may  distinguish  a  rounder  and  more  lumpish 
fabric  which  belongs  to  the  earlier  part,  from  a  flat  fabric 
which  belongs  to  the  later  part,  of  the  sixth  century. 

It  was  doubtless  in  imitation  of  the  coins  of  Thasos  that 
certain  of  the  tribes  of  the  mainland  took  to  minting.  The 
influence  of  Thasos  may  be  observed  alike  in  the  monetary 
standard  used  and  in  the  types  chosen.  The  latter  are 
taken  from   the  circle  of  Dionysus,  a  satyr  pursuing  or 

1  VI.  46.  »  See  Ch.  IV. 


188    EARLY  COINS  OF  THRACE  AND  MACEDON 

carrying  a  nymph,  or  a  centaur  bearing  a  woman  in  his 
arms.  Sometimes  the  type  is  a  horseman  beside  his  horse. 
In  the  Pangaean  district  the  moneying  tribes  were  the 
Orrescii  and  Zaeelii :  we  know  hardly  anything  about 
them;  not  even  their  exact  geographical  location.  In  the 
Emathian  district  coins  of  the  same  weight  and  types  were 
issued  by  the  Letaei. 

It  has  been  the  custom  to  suppose  that  these  tribes  were 
in  a  very  backward  state  of  civilization,  and  that  their  com- 
paratively early  entry  into  the  list  of  peoples  who  issued 
coins  must  be  attributed  partly  to  the  abundance  of  silver 
in  their  country,  and  partly  to  the  influence  of  Hellenic 
cities  founded  on  the  coast.  But  in  a  remarkable  article 1 
Mr.  Svoronos  has  claimed  for  them  a  higher  state  of  culture ; 
and  certainly,  so  far  as  the  coins  go,  they  testify  to  the 
existence  of  a  robust  and  vigorous,  if  somewhat  coarse, 
school  of  art  in  the  district. 

Whether  the  coins  of  the  same  class,  and  usually  attributed 
to  the  cities  of  Aegae  and  Ichnae  in  Macedon,  really  belong 
to  those  cities  is  not  certain.  Dr.  Svoronos  maintains  that 
in  Macedon  coinage  was  only  issued  by  the  kings ;  that  the 
coins  given  to  Aegae  are  wrongly  attributed,  and  that  the 
Ichnae  which  struck  coins  was  not  the  city  in  Macedon, 
but  one  farther  to  the  west  on  the  river  Angites. 

The  standard  on  which  the  Thasian  coins  were  issued 
is  noteworthy.  The  staters  weigh  152-140  grains  (grm. 
9-84-9-07),  and  sometimes  nearly  reach  160  grains;  the 
drachms  are  of  rather  lower  standard,  not  exceeding  70 
grains  (grm.  4-53) ;  there  are  also  obols  (type  two  dolphins) 
weighing  10-7  grains  (grm.  0-65-0-45),  and  half  obols  (type 
one  dolphin)  weighing  5  grains  (grm.  0-32).2  This  standard 
has  been  by  numismatists  regarded  as  a  light  variety  of 
the  Perso-Babylonic  standard,  of  which  the  drachm  weighs 


1  Numismatique  de  la  Pionie  et  de  la  Macedoine  (Joum.  Internat.  de  Numism. 
archeol.,  vol.  xv). 

2  We  should  naturally  expect  the  coin  with  two  dolphins  for  type  to  be  a 
diobol,  and  the  coin  with  one  dolphin  to  be  the  obol.  But  an  obol  of  only 
5  grains  is  unknown. 


THASIAN  STANDARD  189 

86  grains  (grm.  5-57),  which  was  adopted  by  Croesus  and 
the  Persians.  It  seems,  however,  absurd  to  suppose  that 
a  Thasian  drachm  of  a  gramme  less  weight  would  be  in 
currency  accepted  as  the  equivalent  of  the  Persian  siglos  : 
we  know  that  provincial  issues  in  relation  to  standard  coins 
were  tariffed  not  above,  but  below,  their  metal  value.  Thus 
it  seems  best  to  speak  of  the  Thasian  standard  as  one  apart. 
The  remarkable  fluctuations  in  the  weight  of  the  coins  is 
also  difficult  to  explain.  It  is  indeed  probable  that  the 
coins  of  Thasos  issued  at  the  time  of  Athenian  supremacy 
(465-424  B.C.)  were  adapted  to  the  Attic  standard,  since 
they  fall  to  its  level.  But  in  the  case  of  earlier  coins  it 
does  not  seem  possible  to  find  any  reasonable  explanation 
for  their  variation.  A  similar  problem  met  us  in  Lycia.1 
But  though  the  Lycian  stater  in  weight  approximates  to 
that  of  Thasos,  it  is  divided  not  into  drachms  but  into 
thirds,  which  seems  to  show  that  the  two  standards  cannot 
be  identical. 

In  the  field,  on  the  coins  of  the  Letaei,  there  appear  often 
a  number  of  globules  or  pellets,  which  should,  one  would 
think,  be  marks  of  value. 

Before  500  b.c. 
Didrachm,  six  pellets,  three  pellets.     (B.  M.  IV.  4 ; 

B.  T.  L.) 
Diobol,  three  pellets. 

After  500  b.c 
Didrachm,  three  pellets. 
Diobol,  two  pellets. 

On  some  coins  of  each  kind  the  number  of  pellets  is 
smaller ;  but  it  is  in  such  cases  impossible  to  be  sure  that 
some  pellets  cut  in  the  die  were  not  outside  the  area  of  the 
coin  as  struck.  It  seems  impossible  to  recover  the  meaning 
of  these  pellets.  Apparently  they  would  give  an  unit  of 
25  grains  (grm.  1-62),  afterwards  raised  (not  lowered)  to 
50  grains  (grm    3-24).     This  unit  cannot  be  the  pound  of 

1  Ch.  IX,  p.  183. 


190    EARLY  COINS  OF  THRACE  AND  MACEDON 

bronze  or  copper,  as  bronze  was  not  a  measure  of  value 
in  this  region. 

The  early  coins  bearing  as  type  a  Gorgon's  head  (PI.  IV.  5  ; 
B.  M.  IV.  6),  and  corresponding  in  weight  and  fabric  to 
those  of  Thasos,  have  usually  been  attributed  to  Neapolis, 
which  is  described  in  the  Athenian  tribute-lists  as  situated 
rrap'  'AvTiadpav.  It  is  not  certain  that  Neapolis  was  a  colony 
of  Athens,  though  at  a  later  time  it  was  closely  connected 
with  that  city.]  Svoronos,2  however,  tries  to  show  that 
the  Gorgon-head  coins,  some  of  which  are  marked  with 
the  letter  A  and  some  with  £.,  were  issued  by  the  two  cities 
of  Scabala  and  Antisara,  both  on  the  sea-coast  of  the  rich 
district  belonging  to  Daton,  and  not  far  from  Thasos. 
Theopompus B  mentions  Scabala  as  a  place  belonging  to 
the  Eretrians,  which  would  account  for  the  Gorgon  type, 
since  the  Gorgon  is  on  the  early  coins  of  Eretria.  Neapolis 
was  apparently  a  later  foundation. 

II.  Abdeeite  Standard. 

We  can  date  back  the  beginning  of  the  coinage  of  Abdera 
to  the  time  of  the  foundation  of  the  city  about  544  B.C. 
For  before  that  time  the  people  of  Teos,  the  mother-city 
of  Abdera,  had  issued  coins,  with  the  same  type  as  that 
used  at  Abdera,  the  griffin,  but  of  a  different  weight,  the 
Aeginetan.  The  colonists  who  settled  at  Abdera  carried 
with  them  the  type  of  the  griffin,  probably  Apolline,  but 
did  not  preserve  the  monetary  standard.  It  is  in  fact  only 
by  considering  the  standard  used  that  we  can  distinguish 
the  early  coins  of  Teos  from  those  of  Abdera. 

This  change  of  standard  is  a  very  remarkable  fact,  and 
one  requiring  explanation.  When  Abdera  was  founded, 
few  coins  were  struck  in  Thrace  or  Macedon,  except  in 
Chalcidice.  "We  may,  however,  assign  to  this  early  age 
the  earliest  coins  of  Thasos  and  those  of  the  neighbouring 
mainland,  of  thick  and  rounded  fabric,  which  follow  the 

1  See  an  inscription  of  356  b.  c.  :  SchOne,  Oriech.  Reliefs,  No.  48,  p.  28. 

2  I.  c,  p.  232.  s  Quoted  by  Stephanus,  ,s.  v.  2*d#aAa. 


ABDERITE  STANDARD  191 

Thasian  standard.  The  large  coins  of  the  tribes  of  the 
valley  of  the  Strymon  were  certainly  later,  and  in  all  prob- 
ability took  their  standard  from  Abdera,  as  did  in  later 
times  the  Macedonian  Kings.  Thus  there  was  not,  so  far 
as  we  know,  any  precedent  for  the  Abderite  standard  to 
be  found  in  Thrace.  It  would  be  most  natural  to  seek  for 
a  commercial  reason  for  it.  The  reason  which  naturally 
suggests  itself  is  that  on  leaving  their  city  and  settling  in 
Thrace,  the  people  of  Teos  found  themselves  in  a  different 
commercial  connexion.  The  Aeginetan  standard,  which 
they  had  hitherto  used,  was  isolated  in  the  midst  of  Ionia, 
though  both  in  Pontus  and  in  Caria  it  was  in  general  vogue : 
at  least  this  was  the  case  after  such  cities  as  Cyme,  Miletus, 
and  Chios  had  given  up  their  early  sixth-century  issues  on 
the  Aeginetan  standard.  Why  the  Abderites  chose  the 
particular  variety  of  standard,  which  as  a  matter  of  fact 
they  did  select  is  less  evident.  We  should  have  expected 
them  to  adopt  either  the  standard  of  Thasos,  the  wealthiest 
city  of  Thrace ;  or  if  they  preferred  an  Ionian  connexion, 
to  adopt  the  North  Ionian  standard  of  Phocaea,  or  the  South 
Ionian  standard  of  Miletus.  The  people  who  remained  at 
Teos  still  kept  to  the  Aeginetan  standard  :  we  may  well 
suppose  that  there  was  a  sharp  collision  between  the  con- 
servatives who  were  willing  to  submit  to  Persian  rule 
and  the  more  nationalist  and  freedom-loving  citizens  who 
preferred  expatriation  to  submission. 

The  standard  which  the  Abderites  actually  adopted,  and 
fully  naturalized  in  Thrace,  was  half-way  between  the 
Phocaean  and  Milesian.  The  stater  weighed  about  230 
grains  (grm.  14-90),  and  most  nearly  corresponds  to  the 
coins  issued  at  a  later  time  in  Phoenicia.  We  can,  however, 
scarcely  regard  its  introduction  as  a  proof  of  Phoenician 
influence,  since  it  was  the  domination  of  Persia  and  the 
Phoenician  allies  of  Persia  which  the  people  of  Abdera 
were  most  anxious  to  avoid. 

The  Abderite  coin-standard,  whencesoever  derived,  being 
thus  planted  on  the  Thracian  coast,  spread  both  towards 
the  east  and  towards  the  west.     On  the  east  it  was  used 


192    EARLY  COINS  OF  THEACE  AND  MACEDON 


by  the  cities  of  Dicaea  and  Maronea  in  the  sixth  century. 
Dicaea  in  Thrace,  which  must  be  distinguished  from  the 
Dicaea  in  Chalcidice,  a  colony  of  Eretria,  is  called  in  the 
Athenian  tribute-lists  Dicaea  near  Abdera.  To  this  city 
are  given  very  early  coins  with  a  head  of  Heracles  on  the 
obverse  and  an  incuse  on  the  reverse,  of  Thasian  weight, 
150  grains,  or  the  double *  (grm.  9-72  or  19-40).  These  are 
succeeded  by  coins  with  a  very  similar  head  of  Heracles  on 
one  side,  and  on  the  other  the  letters  A I K  and  the  head 
and  shoulders  of  an  ox,  in  an  incuse  :  weight  112-110  grains 
(grm.  7-25-7-12).  These  coins  are  of  Abderite  weight. 
Mr.  Head 2  gives  them  to  the  time  of  Darius :  I  think  them 
somewhat  earlier.  The  type  of  the  reverse  seems  to  be 
taken  from  the  coins  of  Samos,  which  island  was  about 
530-520  b.  c.  at  the  height  of  its  power  under  Polycrates. 
The  Samians  at  this  time  were  predominant  on  the  north 
shore  of  the  Propontis,  where  were  their  colonies  Perinthus 
and  Bisanthe.  It  is  therefore  reasonable  to  regard  Samos 
as  probably  in  close  relations  with  Abdera  and  Dicaea. 
Very  possibly  indeed  Dicaea  may  have  been  a  Samian 
colony.  Some  of  the  late  coins  of  Perinthus  have  as  type 
a  head  of  Heracles  with  the  inscriptions  TON  KTICTHN 
IHNHN  on  the  obverse,  and  FIEPING I HN  AIC  NEHKOPHN- 
Heracles  then  may  have  been  regarded  as  oekist  alike  at 
Perinthus  and  Dicaea ;  and  his  head  on  coins  of  the  latter 
city  would  be  quite  in  place. 

The  coinage  of  Maronea,  which  was  almost  certainly  an 
Ionian  colon}'',  follows  the  same  lines  as  that  of  Dicaea. 
Before  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  Maronea  also  used 
the  Thasian  weight,  and  afterwards  went  over  to  that  of 
Abdera.  We  have  staters  of  150-132  grains  (grm.  9-72-8-54) 
and  obols  of  14-5  grains  (grm.  0-94).  Coins  of  later  fabric, 
and  bearing  the  name  of  the  city,  weigh,  for  the  stater, 
118-114  grains  (grm.  7-63-7-36),  and  for  the  half- stater 
56-50  grains  (grm.  3-62-3-24).     There  was  a  tradition,  cited 

1  Head,  H.  N.,  ed.  2,  p.  252.  This  is  the  only  known  tetradrachm  of  this 
standard. 

2  B.  M.  Cat.  Thrace,  p.  115. 


ABDERITE  STANDARD  193 

by  Scymnus,  of  a  Chian  colony  about  540  b.  c.  ;  and  this 
might  account  for  the  somewhat  high  weight  of  the 
staters  of  Maronea,  as  the  standard  of  Chios  is  nearer  to 
the  Phocaean  than  to  the  Abderite  weight. 

It  is  clear  that  in  the  early  days  of  Persian  dominion  the 
southern  shore  of  Thrace  served  as  a  place  of  refuge  for 
the  Ionians  who  would  not  accept  the  Persian  yoke,  and 
thus  it  became  in  all  respects  largely  Ionized. 

"We  have  next  to  trace  the  westward  course  of  the 
standard  of  Abdera.  It  was  not  adopted  at  Thasos  nor 
at  Lete.  But  of  the  mining  tribes,  the  Orrescii  appear  to 
have  adopted  it.  Their  earliest  coins,  of  lumpy  fabric,  are 
on  the  Thasian  standard :  the  later  and  larger  coins,  of  flat 
fabric  with  a  neat  incuse  square  on  the  reverse,  are  of 
Abderite  weight.1  Whether  the  latter  weight  wholly 
superseded  the  former,  or  whether  the  tribes  used  both 
standards  at  once,  is  not  an  easy  question  to  settle :  in  any 
case  there  must  have  been  some  recognized  connexion 
between  the  coins  struck  on  the  two  standards.  To  this 
question  I  will  return. 

About  500  b.c.  there  appear  on  the  southern  shore  of 
Thrace  a  number  of  coins  of  great  size,  almost  the  largest 
which  have  come  down  to  us.  It  is  reasonable  to  think 
that  these  coins  were  the  result  of  Persian  influence,  and 
issued  at  the  time  when  the  great  Persian  armies  of  Darius 
and  Xerxes  passed  that  way.  War,  even  in  those  days, 
necessitated  a  great  store  of  specie ;  and  if  the  tribes  of 
Paeonia  had  to  pay  tribute  to  the  Persians,  or  to  buy 
supplies  of  food  for  their  armies,  they  would  greatly  need 
an  abundance  of  coin.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  issues 
of  decadrachms  by  Gelon  at  Syracuse,  and  by  the  Athenians, 
took  place  about  480  b.c,  also  as  a  result  of  Persian  or 
Carthaginian  invasion. 

Notable  among  these  great  coins  are  those  of  the  Derrones. 
They  bear  the  inscription  JeppoviKos  or  deppoviKov,  and  were 
formerly  attributed   to    a  king  called   Derronikos.      But 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Macedon,  pp.  145-9. 

1»«7  O 


194    EARLY  COINS  OF  THRACE  AND  MACEDON 

Graebler1  lias  shown  that  the  inscription  is  an  ethnic. 
What  was  the  seat  of  the  Derrones  is  somewhat  doubtful ; 
but  the  coins  come  from  Istip  near  the  river  Axius  : 

Obv.  Draped  personage  seated  in  a  car  drawn  by  an  ox  :  above, 
helmet ;  beneath,  flower.  Rev.  Triquetra  of  legs,  and 
acanthus  ornaments.  Weight,  624  grains  (grm.  4043). 
Brit.  Mus.     (B.  M.  V.  17.) 

On  another  coin  of  similar  type,  weight  610  grains 
(grm.  39-48),  Mr.  Svoronos 2  has  read  the  legend  Euergetes, 
the  name  probably  of  a  Paeonian  chief.  With  these  coins 
go  others  issued  by  the  Laeaei  of  similar  type  and  weight,3 
but  with  a  figure  of  Pegasus  on  the  reverse. 

Of  lesser  size  and  weight  are  the  coins  issued  at  the  same 
period  by  other  tribes,  the  Bisaltae,  Edoni,  Orrescii,  Ichnaei, 
and  Sapaei.  A  type  adopted  by  the  Bisaltae  was  a  herds- 
man accompanying  two  bulls  (B.  M.  V.  16 ;  PI.  IV.  7) :  that 
adopted  by  the  Edoni  was  the  same  ;  on  the  coins  appear 
the  name  of  the  King  Getas.  The  Orrescii  and  Bisaltae 
adopted  the  type  of  a  spearman  walking  beside  a  horse. 
(PI.  IV.  8.)  The  weight  of  all  these  coins  is  420-440  grains 
(grm.  27-20-28-50).  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  as  the 
coins  of  the  Derrones  were  12  drachm  pieces  of  Abderite 
standard,  so  these  are  8  drachm  pieces  of  that  standard. 

A  fixed  landmark  in  the  history  of  the  early  coins  of  Thrace 
is  given  us  by  the  earliest  of  the  money  of  Alexander  I, 
King  of  Macedon,  which  bears  his  name,  and  can  be  definitely 
assigned  to  him. 

Obv.  Warrior  carrying  two  spears  standing  on  the  farther  side 
of  a  bridled  horse  r.  Rev.  AAEZANAPO  round  a  shallow 
incuse  square,  within  which  a  raised  linear  square.  Weight, 
450-400  grains  (grm.  29-26).     (PI.  IV.  9.) 

This  coin,  alike  in  type  and  in  weight,  is  almost  identical 
with  the  coins  of  the  Bisaltae :   one  was  found  in  Egypt 

1  Zeitschr.  f.  Num.,  xx.  289.  2  Journ.  Intern.,  xv,  p.  200. 

3  B.  M.  Cat.  Mticedon,  p.  151. 


ABDERITE  STANDARD  195 

with  early  coins  of  Terone  and  the  Bisaltae.  "When 
Alexander  acquired  the  territory  of  the  Bisaltae,  which  he 
did  shortly  after  the  Persian  wars,  he  continued  the  coinage 
in  his  own  name,  maintaining  the  same  types  and  standard. 
His  coins  are,  however,  somewhat  more  advanced  in  style 
than  those  of  the  Bisaltae,  the  incuse  of  the  reverse  being 
surrounded  with  an  inscription.  The  weight  is  clearly 
Abderite. 

The  early  silver  coins  of  Thasian  standard  are  so  irregular 
in  weight  that  it  is  almost  impossible  to  determine  what 
amount  of  silver  they  were  intended  to  contain.  They  seem 
to  grow  lighter  with  time  until  they  approximate  to  the 
Attic  standard,  about  450  b.c. 

There  must  have  been  some  means  of  relating  one  to  the 
other  the  coins  of  the  Abderite  and  Thasian  standards.  The 
Orrescii  struck  on  both  standards,  and  if  the  two  issues 
were  not  actually  contemporary,  they  were  so  nearly  con- 
temporary that  there  must  have  been  some  understanding 
as  to  their  respective  values.  According  to  Brandis  the 
coins  of  the  Babylonic  and  Phoenician  standards  stood  thus 
related  : 

Babylonic  stater  =  ^  gold  Daric. 

Phoenician  stater  =  -£$  two  Danes. 

Babylonic  :  Phoenician  :  :  ~i\  :  10  :  :  3  :  4. 
But  this  applies  to  the  Babylonic  stater  weighing  168 
grains :  in  Thrace  the  Thasian  standard  is  ten  or  more 
grains  lighter  than  the  Babylonic,  whereas  the  Abderite 
standard  is  on  a  level  with  the  Phoenician.  Thus  two- 
thirds  would  be  much  nearer  to  the  actual  proportion 
of  value  between  the  staters  than  three-fourths.  And  that 
this  relation  held  in  practice  seems  to  be  indicated  by  the 
facts  of  some  of  the  coinages.  The  Bisaltae.  for  example, 
issue  at  the  same  time  coins  of  440-445  grains  (grm.  28-50— 
28-30)  and  coins  of  61-68  grains  (grm.  4-4-40).  The  larger 
coins  may  well  be  octadrachms  of  Abderite  weight.  The 
smaller  coins  can  scarcely  be  drachms  of  that  weight ;  but 
must  rather  be  drachms  or  half-staters  of  Thasian  weight, 
and  must  have  passed  as  octobols  or  sixths  of  the  octa- 

o  2 


196    EARLY  COINS  OF  THRACE  AND  MACEDON 

drachm  of  Abderite  weight.  Thus  the  octadrachms  of 
Abderite  weight  struck  by  the  Bisaltae  are  very  nearly 
of  thrice  the  weight  of  the  Thasian  staters  issued  by  the 
same  tribe.  The  relations  between  the  standards  being 
thus  simple,  coins  struck  on  either  might  well  circulate 
together,  just  as  did  the  coins  of  Corinth  and  Athens,  which 
bore  a  similarly  simple  relation  to  one  another. 

A  few  words  must  be  added  in  regard  to  M.  Svoronos' 
important  paper  already  cited.  This  writer,  in  opposition 
to  Head  and  other  numismatists,  denies  that  there  was  any 
clashing  of  monetary  standards  in  the  Thraco-Macedonian 
district,  which  he  calls  Paeonia.  He  regards  all  the  coins 
as  belonging  to  a  standard  which  he  calls  Paeonian. 
8  drachms  40-80  grm.  630  grains. 
6       „  30-60     „  472       „ 

2       „  10-20     „  158       „ 

1        N  5-10     „  79       „ 

Such  a  view  might  seem  plausible,  if  we  left  out  of  account 
the  influence  of  Abdera,  which  was  certainly  great  in  those 
parts.  At  Abdera,  in  the  sixth  century,  besides  the  tetra- 
drachm  of  230  grains  (grm.  14-90),  there  were  current  coins 
of  double  the  weight,  460  grains  (grm.  29-80) ;  and  these 
must  certainly  have  passed  as  octadrachms  of  the  local 
standard.  "When  then  we  find  that  the  Bisaltae,  Orrescii, 
Edoni,  Ichnaei,  and  Sapaei  issued  coins  of  exactly  this 
weight,  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  disconnect  them  from  the 
influence  of  Abdera. 

Mr.  Svoronos  makes  an  exception  from  his  Paeonian 
standard  for  one  set  of  coins,  having  the  type  of  Pegasus 
(B.  M.  IV.  12,  13),  which  he  gives  conjecturally  to  the 
Crestonians.1  These  coins  are  found  at  Salonica,  and 
weigh  14-30  grm.  (220  grains)  or  less.  Svoronos  and 
Babelon  call  the  standard  the  Milesian,  but  it  must  clearly 
be  that  of  Abdera.  And  if  these  coins  are  of  Abderite 
weight,  it  is  reasonable  to  think  that  other  coins  of  the 
region  follow  the  same  standard.     Abdera  clearly  set  the 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  p.  1239,  PL  LVIII  ;  p.  803,  PI.  XXXVI. 


ABDERITE  STANDARD  197 

fashion  iu  striking  coins  of  unusual  size;  and  the  other 
cities  or  tribes,  in  following  that  fashion,  kept  the  Abderite 
weight. 


III.  Chalcidice. 

The  cities  of  Chalcidice,  such  as  Acanthus,Terone,01ynthus, 
Scione,  Mende,  Potidaea,  Dicaea,  Aeneia,  all  follow  the  same 
course.  They  strike  tetradrachms  according  to  the  Attic 
standard  (270  grains ;  grm.  17-50) ;  but  the  divisions  are 
not  Attic  drachms,  but  Corinthian,  of  45-38  grains  (grm. 
2-91-2-46).  Mr.  Head  in  the  Historia  Numorum  calls  these 
latter  tetrobols ;  and  of  course  they  would  pass  as  tetrobols 
of  Attic  standard.  But  proof  that  they  were  intended 
rather  for  drachms  is  not  wanting.  At  Olynthus1  was 
struck  a  coin  of  double  the  weight  (86-3  grains) ;  and 
Mr.  Head  consistently  calls  it  an  octobol ;  but  since  the 
type  is  a  horseman  leading  a  second  horse,  which  in  Sicily 
is  the  usual  type  for  the  didrachm,  it  is  fair  to  judge  that 
it  at  Olynthus  also  indicates  the  didrachm  (Corinthian). 
Thus  the  ordinary  coins  of  half  this  weight,  bearing  as  type 
a  single  horseman,  would  be  Corinthian  drachms.  Hemi- 
drachms  of  Corinthian  weight  occur  at  Acanthus  and 
Potidaea,  and  in  the  case  of  the  latter  city  again  the  type 
suggests  that  the  coin  is  not  an  Attic  diobol  but  a  Corinthian 
hemidrachm ;  it  is  a  naked  horseman  on  the  fore-part  of 
a  prancing  horse.2  These  facts  indicate  that,  whereas  the 
stater  was  intended  to  pass  as  equivalent  to  the  ordinary- 
silver  tetradrachm  of  Athens,  the  divisions  follow  the 
Corinthian  standard.  Probably  the  chief  seat  of  Corinthian 
influence  was  Potidaea.  We  know  that  that  city  was  a 
Corinthian  colony,  and  received  yearly  magistrates  called 
epidamiurgi  from  Corinth. 

I  know  of  only  one  set  of  coins  attributed  to  a  city  of 
Chalcidice  which  is  of  the  weight  of  an  Attic  drachm. 
This  is  given  to  Acanthus. 

1  Hist.  Nuyn.,  ed.  2,  p.  208.  2  Hist.  Nnn.,  ed.  2,  p.  212. 


198    EARLY  COINS  OF  THRACE  AND  MACEDON 

Obv.  Bull  kneeling,  head  turned  back ;  above  or  in  exergue, 
flower.  Rev.  Incuse  square.  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  205. 
Weight,  62  grains  (grm.  4). 

This  coin,  however,  is  not  inscribed,  and  its  attribution  is 
very  doubtful.  It  must  be  placed  among  the  uncertain 
coins  of  Macedon,  and  probably  is  a  light  example  of  a 
drachm  of  Thasian  standard. 

The  standard,  then,  in  use  in  Chalcidice  is  the  Attic, 
with  Corinthian  divisions.  It  would  be  natural  to  expect 
the  Euboic  weight  in  any  coins  issued  before  550  B.C.,  when 
in  the  time  of  Peisistratus  the  true  Attic  standard  first 
appears  at  Athens,  and  influences  the  issues  of  Euboea  and 
Corinth.  We  have  therefore  to  consider  the  question 
whether  all  the  extant  coins  of  the  district  are  later  than 
that  date.  Those  of  Acanthus,  Terone,  Aeneia,  and  most 
of  the  cities  certainly  are.  The  fabric  at  Acanthus  and 
Terone  is  flat  and  akin  to  that  of  the  coins  of  Lete  and 
Thasos  in  their  second,  not  their  earliest  form.  The  date 
of  this  fabric  is  given  us  by  the  coins  of  Alexander  I  of 
Macedon  as  belonging  to  about  500  b.c.  But  there  are 
coins  of  the  district  of  an  earlier  style,  such  as : 

Fotidaea. 

Obv.  Poseidon  on  horse.     Rev.  Incuse  square. 
Weight,  266-271  grains  (grm.  17-20-17-57). 

Mende. 

Obv.  Ass  standing,  crow  perched  on  his  back.     Rev.  Incuse  of 

eight  triangles. 
Weight,  262  grains  (grm.  16-97).    Brussels. 

Scione. 

Obv.  Helmet.     Rev.  Incuse  of  eight  triangles. 

Weight,    263-262    grains  (grm.     17-16-97).      Paris.1      (B.  T. 
LII.  I.) 
Olynthus. 

Obv.  Quadriga  facing.     Rev.  Incuse  of  eight  triangles. 

Weight,  259  grains  (grm.  16-78).     Sandeman  Collection. 

1  B.  M.  IV.  8.  Of  the  same  period  is  an  early  drachm  of  Mende  (Num. 
Chron.,  1900,  p.  6)  :  weight,  42  grains  (grm.  2-72). 


CHALCIDICE  199 

These  certainly  precede  in  date  the  coins  of  flat  fabric,  bnt 
not  by  many  years.  They  do  not  appear  to  be  in  any  case 
earlier  than  the  coins  of  Abdera,  which  cannot  precede 
543  b.  c.  There  is,  therefore,  no  reason  why  they  should 
not  be  of  later  date  than  the  Peisistratid  tetradrachms  of 
Athens,  which  began  about  560  B.C.  At  the  same  time  the 
standard  used  by  Peisistratus  does  occur  earlier  at  Samos, 
Cyrene,  and  other  places.     (See  Chaps.  I,  XIII.) 

IV.  The  Thbacian  Chebsonese. 

The  Thracian  Chersonese  stands  by  itself  in  regard  to 
coinage.  The  early  money  of  the  district  consists  of  tetra- 
drachms and  smaller  denominations  of  Attic  weight,  with 
Corinthian  sub- divisions,  as  in  Chalcidice. 

Obv.  Lion  advancing  to  r.,  head  turned  to  L,  paw  raised.     Rev. 

XEP  (sometimes).       Head   of  Athena  in   incuse  square. 

Weight,  264  grains  (grm.  17-10). 
Obv.  Fore-part  of  lion  looking  back,  paw  raised.     Rev.  Incuse 

square  divided  into  four.      Weight,  43-38  grains  (2-75- 

2-40)  * :  also  the  half  of  this. 

This  district,  as  is  well  known,  was  a  hereditary  kingdom 
or  appanage  under  the  rule  of  the  wealthy  Athenian  family 
of  the  Philaidae.  Miltiades  I,  son  of  Cypselus,  was  the 
first  ruler,  about  550  b.c.  :  he  founded  a  colony  at  Cardia, 
and  cut  off  the  Chersonese  from  the  incursions  of  the 
Thracian  barbarians  by  a  wall,  thus  making  it  almost  an 
island.  The  type  of  Athena  has  reference  to  the  native 
city  of  Miltiades :  the  lion  type  probably  belongs  to  Miletus, 
for  somewhat  earlier  the  Chersonese  had  been  within  the 
circle  of  Milesian  influence.  It  is,  however,  only  the  type 
of  the  coin  which  reminds  us  of  Miletus.  The  weight 
of  the  stater,  and  the  manner  of  its  division,  corresponds 
to  the  coinage  of  Chalcidice.  We  have  seen  that  the 
smaller  coin  in  that  district  must  be  a  Corinthian 
drachm  rather   than   an  Attic   tetrobol.      It   is   therefore 

1  Babelon,  TraiU,  ii.  1,  p.  1228,  PL  LVII,  15,  16. 


200    EARLY  COINS  OF  THRACE  AND  MACEDON 

probable  that  the  conditions  of  trade  were  the  same  in 
Chalcidice  and  in  the  Chersonesus.  On  the  map,  the 
Corintho-Attic  standard  looks  out  of  place  among  the 
Babylonic  and  Abderite  weights  of  Southern  Thrace.  But 
the  Chersonese  of  Thrace  was  on  the  high  road  from  Athens, 
Aegina,  and  Corinth  to  the  Pontus,  whence  those  thickly 
populated  cities  obtained  their  supplies  of  dried  fish,  corn, 
hides,  timber,  and  other  necessaries  of  life  and  materials 
for  manufacture. 

It  is  natural  that  each  city  of  Greece  should  have  its 
special  port  of  call  at  the  entrance  to  the  Pontus.  Aegina 
appears  to  have  had  some  connexion  with  Sinope.  Megara 
was  the  mother  city  of  Byzantium  and  Chalcedon,  and 
doubtless  kept  up  a  connexion  with  them :  neither  of  them 
struck  coins  until  late  in  the  fifth  century.  Cardia  in 
the  Thracian  Chersonese  would  be  the  natural  entrepot  of 
Athens,  as  its  ruler  was  an  Athenian  citizen.  Sigeum 
was  also  a  stronghold  of  Athens.  The  distant  Panticapaeum 
in  the  Crimea  appears  like  Sinope  in  its  early  issues  of  coins 
to  adhere  to  the  Aeginetan  standard.1 

To  sum  up :  the  key  to  the  coin-standards  of  Southern 
Thrace  is  to  be  found  in  the  action  and  counter- action  of 
the  commercial  influences  radiating  from  Thasos  on  one 
side  and  Abdera  on  the  other.  Chalcidice  stands  apart, 
and  with  it  goes  the  Thrasian  Chersonese.  The  influence 
of  the  expeditions  of  Darius  and  Xerxes  does  not  seem  to 
have  resulted  in  a  change  of  standard,  but  it  may  be  con- 
jectured in  the  issue  of  coins  of  unusually  large  denomina- 
tion. 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  401. 


CHAPTER    XI 
COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,   600-480  b.c. 

The  earliest  Greek  coins  struck  in  Italy  are  those  issued 
by  several  cities,  of  uniform  flat  fabric,  bearing  on  one  side 
as  type  the  arms  of  the  city,  and  on  the  other  side  the 
same  type  reversed  and  incuse.  The  cities  and  types  are 
as  follows : 

Tarentum.     Apollo  kneeling;  Taras  on  dolphin.     (B.  M. 

VII.  3,  4.) 
Metapontum.     Ear  of  barley.     (B.  M.  VII.  10.) 
Siris  and  Pyxus.     Bull  with  head  turned  back.     (B.  M. 

VIII.  14.) 
Sybaris.     Bull  with  head  turned  back.     (B.  M.  VIII.  15.) 
Laiis.     Man-headed  bull  looking  back.     (B.  M.  VII.  8.) 
Poseidonia.     Poseidon   thrusting  with  trident.     (B.  M. 

VII.  12.) 

Croton.     Tripod.     (B.  M.  VIII.  19.) 

Caulonia.  Apollo  with  winged  genius  on  arm,  and  stag 
before  him.     (B.  M.  VIII.  17;  PI.  V.  1.) 

Rhegium.     Man-headed  bull,  kneeling. 

Zancle  in  Sicily.     Dolphin  in  harbour. 

Only  a  few  years  later  we  find  at  some  cities  a  variety, 
the  incuse  device  of  the  reverse  becomes  different  from  the 
type  of  the  obverse.  Thus  at  Tarentum  we  have  as  obverse 
type  Apollo  kneeling;  as  reverse  type,  Taras  on  dolphin. 
(PI.  V.  2.)  Later  still,  but  before  480,  we  have  two  types 
in  relief,  Taras  on  dolphin ;  hippocamp.  (PL  V.  3.)  At 
Metapontum  we  have  as  obverse,  ear  of  barley ;  as  reverse, 
bucranium  (sixths  of  stater  only).  At  Croton  we  have  as 
obverse,  tripod  ;  as  reverse,  flying  eagle. 

These  coins  are  by  no  means  of  rude  or  primitive  make, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  of  careful  and  masterly  work;  and 


202        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.c. 

the  types  are  some  of  the  finest  examples  we  possess  of 
fully-formed  Greek  archaic  art.  Thus  it  would  seem  that 
coinage  was  introduced  into  Italy  fully  developed ;  and 
many  questions  are  suggested  as  to  the  occasion  when  it 
was  introduced,  the  reasons  for  the  peculiar  fabric,  the 
meaning  of  the  uniformity,  and  the  like.  "We  will  consider 
in  regard  to  this  whole  class  of  coins  (1)  date,  (2)  fabric 
and  the  reasons  for  it,  (3)  monetary  standards. 

(1)  The  date  of  the  earliest  Greek  coins  of  Italy  can  be 
only  approximately  determined.  Siris  issued  coins  before 
its  destruction  by  the  people  of  Metapontum,  Croton,  and 
Sybaris ;  but  the  date  of  this  destruction  is  unknown  to  us, 
except  that  obviously  it  must  precede  the  destruction  of 
Sybaris.  Fynes  Clinton,  on  reasonable  evidence,  fixes  the 
date  of  the  foundation  of  Sybaris  to  720  b.c,  and  its  destruc- 
tion to  5 10  b.  c.  The  coins  of  Sybaris  show  some  development 
in  style,  and  are  found  in  abundance;  their  beginning 
therefore  can  scarcely  be  placed  later  than  550  b.c. 

The  same  date  is  suggested  by  the  facts  of  the  coinage 
of  Zancle  in  Sicily.  Zancle,  with  its  close  neighbour 
Rhegium,  forms  a  group  apart,  transitional  between  the 
coins  of  Italy  and  those  of  Sicily,  at  some  periods  more 
closely  conforming  to  the  Italian  type  of  coin,  at  other 
periods  to  the  Sicilian.  Before  500  b.  c.  the  Italian  influences 
prevail,  and  the  coinage  at  Zancle  is  of  the  peculiar  fabric 
introduced  in  Italy.  Sir  A.  Evans,  discussing  a  find  of 
coins  at  Zancle,1  points  out  that  previous  to  494  b.c.  there 
were  several  successive  issues  of  coins  there,  passing  from  the 
types  above  mentioned  to  the  type  in  relief  on  the  reverse, 
a  succession  implying  a  period  of  at  least  half  a  century. 

Valuable  evidence  as  to  the  date  of  the  early  incuse 
issues  of  Italy  is  furnished  by  the  restrikings  of  coins  at 
Metapontum.  For  some  unknown  reason  that  city  appears 
to  have  been  especially  addicted  to  the  custom  of  using  the 
coins  of  other  cities  as  blanks,  whereon  to  impress  her  own 
types.     Coins  of  this  class  are  sometimes  restruck  on  pieces 


Num.  Chron.,  1896,  p.  105. 


COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.c.         203 

of  Corinth  which  have  a  mill-sail  incuse  on  the  reverse 
(PI.  V.  5),  a  class  of  money  which  precedes  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  head  of  Athena,  and  must  be  dated  as  early 
as  550  b.c.  And  it  must  be  observed  that  this  coin  of 
Metapontum  is  not  of  the  earliest  flat  fabric:  this  may, 
however,  be  the  result  of  using  a  Corinthian  coin  as  a  blank. 
Metapontine  incuse  coins  of  the  later  and  thicker  class  are 
restruck  on  pieces  of  Syracuse  of  the  time  of  Hiero  I 
(obverse,  head  of  Persephone  amid  dolphins ;  reverse, 
horseman)  and  on  pieces  of  Gela  of  the  same  date  (obverse, 
head  of  river-god ;  reverse,  horseman)  and  of  Agrigentum.1 
Thus  it  would  seem  that  at  Metapontum  the  issue  of  the 
incuse  series  of  coins  lasted  more  than  half  a  century,  until 
470  b.c.  or  later.  At  some  other  cities  it  cannot  have  come 
down  to  so  late  a  date.  At  Rhegium  and  Zancle,  for  instance, 
it  is  superseded  by  coins  with  an  ordinary  type  on  both 
sides  before  the  arrival  of  the  Samian  exiles  about  494. 
As  regards  Tarentum  Sir  A.  Evans  writes 2 :  '  At  Tarentum 
the  issue  of  the  incuse  pieces  must  have  been  of  but  short 
duration.  From  the  evidence  of  finds  there  can  be  but 
little  doubt  that  the  first  Tarentine  coins  of  double  relief, 
those,  namely,  which  exhibit  a  wheel  on  one  side,  were 
in  existence  some  years  before  the  destruction  of  Sybaris 
in  510,  and  that  the  first  issues  of  the  succeeding  class 
on  which  a  hippocamp  appears  must  have  been  more  or 
less  contemporary  with  that  event '  (PI.  V.  3).  Evans  adds 
in  regard  to  other  cities,  '  In  the  Cittanova  finds,  buried 
at  latest  before  the  end  of  the  sixth  century,  we  find  the 
relief  coinage  of  Kroton,  Kaulonia,  and  Laos  already  begin- 
ning.' At  Sybaris  down  to  the  time  of  its  destruction  none 
but  incuse  coin  was  issued,  if  we  except  some  obols  which 
have  on  the  reverse  the  letters  MY.  Thus  it  would  appear 
that  the  incuse  coinage  of  South  Italy  begins  about  550  b.  c, 
continuing  at  most  cities  until  the  end  of  the  century,  and 
at  Metapontum  for  thirty  years  later. 

1  As  to  these  restrikings  see  B.  M.  Cat.  Italy,  pp.  23&-40 ;  Babelon,  Traite, 
ii.  1,  1403-6,  PI.  LXVI. 

2  The  Horsemen  of  Tarentum,  p.  2,  where  the  evidence  of  finds  is  set  forth. 


204        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  B.o. 

(2)  The  fabric  and  its  meaning.  As  a  matter  of  develop- 
ment, the  prototype  of  the  coins  of  Italy  would  seem  to 
be  the  early  coins  of  Corinth,  having  on  the  obverse  an 
archaic  Pegasus,  and  on  the  reverse  an  incuse  maeander 
pattern  or  swastika.  These  latter  belong  to  the  first  half 
of  the  sixth  century.  In  fabric  they  are  flat  and  spread, 
offering  a  remarkable  contrast  to  the  contemporary  coins 
of  Athens,  Euboea,  and  Aegina ;  beyond  doubt  they 
furnished  in  great  part  the  currency  of  South  Italy  in 
the  middle  of  the  sixth  century:  some  of  the  coins  of 
Metapontum,  as  we  have  seen,  were  restruck  on  them ;  and 
they  are  of  the  same  weight  (Euboic  not  Attic)  as  the 
earliest  Italian  coins. 

But  the  peculiar  arrangement  of  placing  on  the  reverse 
the  same  type  as  on  the  obverse,  only  incuse  and  retrograde, 
is  the  invention  of  some  notable  Greek  of  South  Italy. 
Probably  he  was  merely  imitating  the  repousse  bronze 
work  which  was  at  the  time  largely  used  for  the  decora- 
tion of  the  person,  chests,  tripods  and  the  like,1  and  which 
seems  to  have  been  distinctive  of  Argos  and  Corinth.  The 
peculiar  pattern,  called  a  cable  border,  with  which  the  type 
is  encircled  on  the  coins,  is  characteristic  of  this  bronze 
work.  A  Corinthian  bronze  mould  in  the  Ashmolean 
Museum2  presents  us  with  a  whole  series  of  figures  cut 
in  it  which  might  almost  have  served  as  the  dies  for  coins : 
all  that  would  be  necessary  would  be  to  make  a  punch  to 
fit  roughly  into  such  die ;  then  a  thin  round  blank  would 
be  placed  between  the  two  and  stamped. 

It  has  been  suggested  as  a  reason  for  the  introduction 
of  the  fabric  that  it  would  make  forgery  more  difficult. 
But  a  little  consideration  will  make  us  reject  this  notion. 
The  fabric  was  usual  in  the  case  of  decorative  bronze  plates : 
it  was  in  fact  more  in  use  for  bronze  than  for  silver,  and 
nothing  would  be  easier  than  by  this  method  to  produce 
coins  of  bronze,  and  then  to  wash  them  with  silver.  A  con- 
siderable number  of  the  specimens  in   our  museums  are 

1  See  De  Ridder,  De  eciypis  aeneis. 
*  2  Journ.  Hell.  Stud.,  xvi,  p.  323. 


COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.c.         205 

bronze  coins  thus  washed.  Thus  the  fabric  in  fact  offered 
unusual  facilities  to  forgers.  Some  other  reason  must  be 
sought  for  its  introduction:  at  present  I  have  none  to 
suggest,  except  the  above-mentioned  commonness  of  repousse' 
work. 

By  degrees  the  coins  of  South  Italy  grow  thicker  and 
less  spread.  Then  at  some  cities,  as  we  have  seen,  comes 
a  transitional  stage,  in  which  the  incuse  fabric  is  retained, 
but  the  reverse  type  is  different  from  that  of  the  obverse. 
At  other  cities  the  change  of  reverse  type  from  incuse  to 
relief  takes  place  without  this  intermediate  stage. 

Some  writers  have  seen  in  the  uniformity  of  the  fabric 
of  South  Italian  coins  proofs  of  the  existence  of  an  alliance, 
not  merely  monetary  but  political ;  and  much  has  been 
written  as  to  the  efficacy  of  the  working  of  Pythagoras 
and  his  followers  in  the  formation  of  a  close  federation 
among  Greek  cities  in  Italy.  This,  however,  is  play  of 
imagination.  Pythagoras  does  appear  to  have  founded 
something  like  an  order,  and  through  his  followers  he 
exercised  great  influence  at  Croton ;  but  his  working  was 
not  in  the  direction  of  politics.  The  date  of  his  migration 
to  Italy,  moreover,  not  earlier  than  540  B.C.,  is  too  late  to 
affect  the  earliest  Italian  coinage.  That  there  were  in 
early  times  frequent  conventions  of  a  monetary  kind 
between  Greek  cities  of  Italy  probably  indicating  political 
co-operation,  we  know  from  the  inscriptions  of  extant  coins. 
We  have  money  struck  in  common  by  Croton  and  Sybaris, 
by  Siris  and  Pyxus,  by  Sybaris  and  Poseidonia,  by  Meta- 
pontum  and  Poseidonia,  by  Croton  and  Pandosia,  by  Croton 
and  Temesa,  by  Croton  and  Zancle.  We  may  with  prob- 
ability conjecture  that  the  occasions  of  these  alliances  were 
usually  offered  by  the  necessity  to  make  head  against  the 
warlike  tribes  of  the  interior,  Samnites  and  others,  the  same 
pressure  which  in  later  times  caused  the  Greek  cities  to 
call  in  the  Epirote  Alexander,  son  of  Neoptolemus.  But 
the  very  existence  of  these  more  special  alliances  disproves 
the  existence  of  any  general  federation  of  the  Greek  cities. 
Very  probably  the  occasion  of  the  issue  was  mere  commercial 


206        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.c. 

convenience,  especially  in  the  case  where  Croton  and  Zancle 
strike  in  conjunction. 

(3)  In  Southern  Italy,  during  the  period  550-480  b.c, 
Corinthian  influence  is  predominant.  The  great  majority 
of  the  Greek  cities,  Laiis,  Terina,  Caulonia,  Croton,  Sybaris, 
Metapontum,  all  in  early  times  struck  coins  on  a  system, 
in  which  the  stater  weighed  128  grains  (grm.  8-29)  or 
somewhat  less,  and  the  chief  lesser  coin,  the  third  of  this, 
42-40  grains  (grm.  2-72-2-59).  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
these  lesser  coins  were  reckoned  as  drachms :  the  proof  of 
this  is  to  be  found  in  the  marks  of  value  on  certain  coins 
of  Croton  and  Metapontum. 

Croton. 

Obv.  QPO  (retrogr.).  Tripod-lebes.  Rev.  00.  Fore-part  of 
Pegasus  flying  1.  Weight,  12-7  grains  (grm.  0-82).  B.  M. 
Cat,  348,  58. 

O 

Obv.   QP.  Tripod-lebes;    in  field  ivy  leaf.      Rev.    O.  Hare  r. 

Weight,  10-2  grains  (grm.  0*66) ;  another,  11-9  grains  (grm. 
0-76).     Ibid.  60-61. 

Metapontum. 

Obv.  00.  Ear  of  barley.  Rev.  00.  Barleycorn,  incuse. 
Weight,  12-2  grains  (grm.  0-80).     B.  M.  Cat,  242,  44. 

These  coins  are  clearly  diobols,  and  being  such  must  be  of 
Corinthian  standard.  The  hemidrachm  of  20  grains,  and 
the  obol  of  6-7  grains  occur  at  several  of  these  cities. 

The  difference  between  the  system  of  Chalcidice  and  that 
of  Greek  Italy  is  that  in  the  latter  country  not  only  the 
divisions  but  also  the  staters  follow  the  Corinthian  standard. 
The  stater  in  South  Italy  is  somewhat  low  in  weight,  below 
the  level  even  of  the  Euboic  standard.  It  by  no  means 
rises  to  the  level  of  the  Sicilian  coinages.  The  reason  of 
this  must  be  local,  in  the  equation  to  the  bronze  litrae  of 
Italy. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  whereas  Sybaris  stood,  as  Herodotus 
tells  us,  in  the  closest  relations  with  Miletus,  the  coinage 
of  Sybaris  shows  no  trace  of  such  connexion,  but  is  uniform 
with  that  of  the  neighbouring  cities. 


COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.c.        207 

In  discussing  the  coins  of  Corinth,  I  have  shown  that 
there  takes  place  at  that  city,  about  550  b.  c,  a  raising  of 
the  monetary  standard,  following  the  example  of  Athens, 
from  127  to  132  grains  (grm.  8-22  to  8-55),  that  is,  in  effect, 
from  Euboic  to  Attic  weight.  This  change  does  not  take 
place  in  Italy;  but  the  lower  standard  of  127  grains  or 
thereabouts  is  retained,  and  in  fact  the  coinage  soon  falls 
almost  everywhere  to  a  lower  level  still. 

In  regard  to  Tarentum,  Sir  A.  Evans  l  observes  that  in 
the  incuse  coinage  the  silver  stater  alone  was  issued.  In 
the  earliest  coinage  with  double  relief,  fractions  were  indeed 
struck,  but  'on  a  different  system  from  that  of  the  other 
cities.  Whilst  in  the  Achaean  colonies  the  monetary 
unit  was  divided  on  the  Corinthian  system  into  thirds 
and  sixths,  the  early  Tarentine  divisions  are  by  halves  and 
again  by  fifths,  combining  thus  the  Attic  drachm  and  the 
Syracusan  litra.'  The  Syracusan  litra  equated  with  the 
tenth  of  the  Attic  didrachm  or  Corinthian  tridrachm,  seems 
to  have  been  current  in  South  Italy  as  well  as  in  Sicily, 
possibly  as  far  north  as  Cumae,  though  later  in  Campania 
the  heavier  Romano-Oscan  libra  was  the  standard.-  The 
types  of  the  early  litrae  of  Tarentum  are,  obverse,  cockle- 
shell ;  reverse,  wheeL   Weights  12-5-11  grains  (grm.  0-8-0-7). 

There  are  two  cities  which  we  should  expect  to  be  among 
the  earliest  to  strike  coins,  but  they  do  not  appear  in  the 
list  above  given.  These  are  Cumae,  founded  from  Euboea 
at  a  very  early  time;  and  Velia  or  Hyele,  which  was  a 
Phocaean  colony  of  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century. 

It  is  certainly  remarkable  that  Cumae,  the  great  source 
of  Greek  influence  in  Central  Italy,  should  have  struck  no 
very  early  coins.  Of  those  which  have  come  down  to  us, 
the  earliest,  struck  about  500  b.  o,  in  the  time  of  the  tyrant 
Aristodemus,  resemble  the  coins  of  Sicily  rather  than  those 
of  South  Italy.     They  are  as  follows : 

1 .  Obv.  Head  of  Nymph ,  hair  in  archaic  style.     Bev.  K  Y  M  A I O  N 

1  Horsemen  of  Tarentum,  p.  11. 

2  Haeberlin  ;  cf.  Hill,  Historical  Roman  Coins,  p.  5. 


208        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.o. 

(retrograde).  Mussel-shell ;  above  it,  drinking  cup.  Weight, 
130  grains  (grm.  8 42).  * 

2.  Obv.  Lion's  scalp  between  two  boars'  heads.     Rev.  KYME. 

Mussel.     Weight,  84  grains  (grm.  5-42).2 

3.  Obv.  Lion's  scalp  between  two  boars'  heads.   Rev.  K  YM  A I O  N . 

Mussel.     Weight,  62  grains  (grm.  4-02).3 

The  weights  of  these  coins  are  remarkable  and  suggestive. 
We  have  the  Attic  didrachm,  or  Corinthian  tridrachm,  the 
Attic  octobol  or  Corinthian  didrachm,  and  the  Attic  drachm 
or  Corinthian  drachm  and  a  half.  There  thus  appears  at 
Cumae,  as  in  Chalcidice  and  in  South  Italy  generally,  a 
wavering  between  Attic  and  Corinthian  standards.  The 
second  coin  cited  appears,  like  coins  of  the  same  weight 
in  Sicily,4  to  be  intended  for  a  Corinthian  didrachm ; 
while  the  third  is  primarily  Attic.  The  second  coin 
connects  Cumae  closely  with  the  Chalcidic  cities  of  the 
straits  of  Messina,  Rhegium,  and  Zancle,  which  also  issued 
Corinthian  didrachms  at  this  time,  and  indicates  that  the 
line  of  its  commerce  passed  directly  by  them.  Later, 
about  480  b.c,  Cumae  adopted  the  so-called  Campanian 
standard. 

An  unique  phenomenon  in  the  coinage  of  Italy  is  the 
striking  at  Cumae,  about  480  B.C.,  of  certain  small  coins  of 
gold: 

1.  Obv.  Archaic  female  head  wearing  sphendone.     Rev.   KYME. 

Mussel-shell.     Weight,  22  grains  (grm.  1-43).     Paris. 

2.  Obv.  Corinthian  helmet.    Rev.  KYME.  Mussel-shell.  Weight, 

5-5  grains  (grm.  0-35).     Brit.  Mus. 

The  authenticity  of  these  coins  has  been  disputed,  but  is 
maintained  by  the  officials  of  the  museums  to  which  they 
respectively  belong.  If  genuine,  the  first  will  be  a  diobol 
and  the  second  a  hemiobol  of  Attic  weight.     M.  Babelon 6 

1  Santangelo  Coll.  Naples  :  another  example,  much  oxidized,  8-10  grm. 
See  Sambon,  Monn.  Ant.  de  Vltalie,  p.  152,  pi.  II.  252  ;  also  Num.  Chron.,  1896, 
p.  1. 

2  Paris,  Sambon,  p.  150,  no.  244. 

8  Sambon,  p.  150,  no.  245,  Berlin. 

4  See  next  chapter.  s  Traite,  ii.  1,  1439. 


COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.c.        209 

observes  that  the  second  coin  is  of  later  date  than  the  first : 
he  assigns  it  to  about  470  B.C.,  while  the  first  belongs  to 
about  490  b.c.  They  present  a  perfectly  unique  phenomenon 
in  the  history  of  Italian  coinage.  Mr.  Head 1  attempts  to 
account  for  the  striking  of  no.  2  by  observing  that,  if  gold 
be  reckoned  at  fifteen  times  the  value  of  silver,  it  would 
be  the  equivalent  of  the  silver  coins  of  the  time  which 
weigh  84-  grains,  and  which  he  regards  as  Aeginetan 
drachms.  But  these  silver  coins  appear  to  have  been  in 
fact  Corinthian  didrachms  or  Attic  octobols.  This  equi- 
valence then  (gold  hemiobol  =  8  silver  obols)  would  give 
a  relation  between  gold  and  silver  of  16  to  1,  which  is 
higher  than  any  ratio  of  which  we  have  evidence.  If, 
therefore,  these  gold  coins  are  really  antique,  they  must 
have  been  struck  on  some  quite  unusual  occasion,  when 
a  supply  of  gold  was  available,  under  some  such  circum- 
stances as  produced  the  gold  coins  of  Agrigentum  about 
406  b.c,  or  those  of  Pisa  near  Elis  about  364  b.c 

A  certain  amount  of  confusion  has  arisen  from  the  notion 
that  the  foundation  of  Cumae  was  a  joint  enterprise  of  the 
Chalcidians  of  Euboea  and  the  Aeolians  of  Cyme  in  Asia 
Minor.  But  the  participation  of  the  latter  rests  only  on 
a  statement  of  Ephorus,  who,  being  a  native  of  Cyme,  was 
anxious  to  give  the  city  all  the  credit  he  could.  Most 
modern  writers  think  that  if  any  Cyme  had  a  share  in 
the  settling  of  Cumae  it  was  the  small  town  of  Cyme 
in  Euboea  (a  place  the  existence  of  which  is  not  well 
attested).  We  must  therefore  regard  Cumae  as  exclusively 
Euboean,  and  be  still  more  surprised  at  the  appearance 
there  of  gold  coins,  which  were  not  ever  issued  in  Euboea 
in  early  times. 

The  earliest  coins  of  Velia  are  not  of  Italian  fabric,  but 
resemble  rather  the  coins  of  Asia  Minor ;  indeed  it  has 
been  thought  by  some  numismatists  that  they  were  struck 
in  Asia,  and  brought  to  Velia  by  the  colonists  who  came 
from  Phocaea  about  544  b.c 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  36. 

1957  P 


210        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.c. 

1.  Obv.  Phoca   or  seal.      Rev.  Incuse  square.      Weight,   15-4 

grains  (grm.  1). 

2.  Obv.  Fore-part  of  lion  tearing  the  prey.     Rev.  Incuse  square 

divided  into  four.  Weight,  60-58  grains  (grm.  3-88-3-75) ; 
division,  18  grains  (grm.  1-16)  or  less  :  the  half  and  smaller 
fractions  of  this  were  also  struck. 

Coins  of  this  class  were  found  in  numbers  in  the  hoard 
discovered  at  Auriol  near  Marseille,1  together  with  a  hemi- 
obol  of  Aegina,  and  a  large  number  of  small  coins  bearing 
as  types  griffin,  half  winged  horse,  winged  boar,  lion's  head, 
calf  s  head,  boar's  head,  dog's  head,  ram's  head,  head  of 
Heracles,  female  head,  and  other  types.  Of  these,  some 
are  of  barbarous  work ;  some  are  of  excellent  early  fabric : 
nearly  all  have  an  incuse  square  on  the  reverse. 

The  weights  of  these  coins  being  irregular  and  puzzling, 
it  is  hard  to  draw  inferences  from  the  smaller  ones,  which 
may  be  of  almost  any  standard.     Of  the  larger  coins — 

Types.  Grains.       Grammes. 

Half  winged  horse,2  weigh  .         .         .     43-42         2-78-2-73 

Lion's  head  and  head  of  Heracles,  weigh    .     42-41         2-73-2-65 

Barbarous  copies  of  these  coins  are  of  the  same  or  slightly 
greater  weight. 

Most  numismatists  have  regarded  the  standard  of  these 
coins  as  being  that  of  Phocaea.3  The  standard  of  Phocaea 
both  for  electrum  and  silver  coins  is  practically  the  Euboic, 
though  the  coins  are  a  little  below  the  Euboic  standard, 
the  drachm  not  usually  exceeding  60  grains,  and  the  hecte 
40  grains.  Mommsen,  however,  regarded  the  Phocaean 
standard  imported  into  Italy  as  a  form  of  the  Phoenician. 
The  standard  on  which  the  staters  used  at  Velia,  and  the  small 
coins  of  the  Auriol  find,  were  struck  seems  to  be  almost 
identical  with  that  used  by  the  Achaean  cities  of  South 

1  See  Babelon,  Traits,  ii.  1,  p.  1571. 

2  M.  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  1587,  calls  this  a  hippocamp.  It  is  the 
regular  type  of  Lampsacus ;  and  in  the  B.  M.  Cat.  it  is  rightly  described  as 
merely  the  fore-part  of  a  winged  horse,  both  wings  showing,  in  archaic 
fashion. 

8  See  Babelon,  I.e.  ^ 


COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  600-480  b.o.        211 

Italy,  with  a  drachm  of  42  grains,  which  I  have  above  called 
Corinthian.  And  a  Phocaean  third  or  trite  was  nearly- 
equivalent  to  a  Corinthian  drachm.  But  there  is  an  appre- 
ciable difference  in  weight  between  the  coins  of  Velia  which 
succeed  those  above  cited  and  the  coins  of  the  Achaean 
cities.1  The  stater  of  the  latter  weighs  up  to  128  grains 
(grm.  8-30),  the  stater  of  Velia  only  up  to  118  grains  (grm. 
7-64).  And  this  lighter  standard  is  used  at  Cumae  after 
480,  and  at  Poseidonia  from  the  beginning  in  550  b.c. 
onwards. 

The  ordinary  view,  accepted  by  Head,2  is  that  the 
Phocaean  standard  spread  from  Velia  to  Poseidonia  and 
Cumae  and  afterwards  to  other  cities,  being  in  fact  what 
is  later  called  the  Campanian  standard.  The  difficulty 
is  that  the  earliest  coins  of  Velia  and  Cumae  are  not 
regulated  by  it ;  but  only  those  after  480  b.c.  But  if 
the  origin  of  the  Campanian  standard  be  doubtful,  its 
existence  and  prevalence  is  certain. 

In  regard  to  Ehegium  we  shall  have  more  to  say  in  the 
next  chapter. 

1  One  coin  of  Velia.  however,  weighs  126  grains  (grm.  8'16)  ;  it  is  early, 
contemporary  with  coins  of  the  same  weight  struck  at  Cumae  (see  above). 
*  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  36. 


P   2 


CHAPTER    XII 

COINS  OF  SICILY,  550-480  b.c. 

In  the  earliest  coinages  of  the  cities  of  Sicily,  as  in  those 
of  the  Italian  cities,  we  may  trace  the  influence  of  the 
coinage  of  Corinth. 

The  earliest  of  all  appear  to  be  the  coins  of  Zancle  of 
exactly  the  same  fabric  as  those  of  the  Italian  cities,  that  is, 
with  the  type  of  the  obverse  incuse  on  the  reverse,  namely 
a  dolphin  within  sickle-shaped  harbour.  These  were  pub- 
lished by  Sir  A.  Evans 1  from  a  hoard  found  near  Messina. 
He  rightly  observes  that  as  there  were  two  or  three  later 
series  in  the  coinage  before  Zancle  in  494  b.  c.  changed  its 
name  to  Messana,  the  coins  in  question  cannot  be  much 
later  than  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  b.  c,  and  must  be 
contemporary  with  the  Italian  coins  which  they  so  closely 
resemble.  Their  weight  is  90-79  grains  (grm.  5-83-5-12). 
There  are  coins  of  this  weight,  not  quite  so  early,  at  Himera 
and  Naxos. 

Zancle. 

Obv.  DANKVE.  Dolphin  within  sickle-shaped  bar  of  harbour. 
Rev.  Same  type  incuse ;  or  Rev.  Dolphin  incuse  ;  or  Rev. 
Scallop-shell  in  relief,  in  the  midst  of  an  incuse  pattern. 
(PI.  V.  6.)  Weights,  90  grains  (grm.  5-83),  16  grains  (grm. 
1-02),  11-5  grains  (grm.  0-75). 

Himera. 

Obv.  HI.  Cock.  Rev.  Flat  incuse  square,  with  eight  compart- 
ments, four  in  relief.  Weights,  90  grains  (grm.  5-83) 
(B.  M.  IX.  27),  13-5  grains  (grm.  0-87). 

Naxos. 

Obv.    Head   of  Dionysus  with  ivy  wreath.      Rev.  N  AX  ION. 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1896,  pi.  VIII.  1,  2,  p.  104. 


COINS  OF  SICILY,  550-480  b.c.  213 

Bunch  of  grapes.      Weights,  90  grains  (grm.  5-83)  (B.  M. 
IX.  31),  13  grains  (grm.  0-87),  12  grains  (grm.  0-78). 

With  these  coins  we  may  class  for  weight  the  coin  of  Cumae 
above  cited,  and  the  coins  of  Rhegium, — RECIN0N  retro- 
grade :  Bull  with  human  head :  Rev.  Same  type  incuse. 
Weight,  87  grains  (grm.  5-63).  This  coinage  seems  to  have 
been  imitated  from  that  of  Rhegium  by  the  neighbouring 
Zancle.  The  Rhegine  coin  is  of  the  same  fabric  as  prevails 
in  other  Italian  cities,  though  the  standard  of  weight  is 
different.  The  coins  of  Zancle  are  of  the  same  weight  and 
the  same  period,  550-500  b.c. 

The  standard  (90  grains)  on  which  these  coins  are  struck 
is  remarkable.  Head  calls  it  Aeginetan.  But  historically 
it  is  improbable  that  the  Aeginetan  standard  would  find  its 
way  to  Sicily.  It  has  been  suggested  that  this  standard 
may  have  come  to  the  Sicilian  Naxos  from  the  Aegean 
island  of  that  name,  whence  the  Sicilian  city  was  founded. 
But  in  fabric  the  coins  show  the  influence  not  of  Aegina 
but  of  Corinth.  And  the  standard  makes  its  first  appearance, 
not  at  Naxos,  but  in  the  cities  on  either  side  of  the  straits 
of  Messina,  Rhegium,  and  Zancle. 

The  coins  of  Macedonian  Chalcidice  give  us  a  hint.  At 
Olynthus  coins  of  90  grains  were  issued  which  can  be  shown 
to  be  Corinthian  didrachms.1  And  at  other  cities  of  Chalci- 
dice we  find  Corinthian  drachms  and  half-drachms.  On 
this  analogy  we  should  naturally  suppose  the  early  coins  of 
Rhegium  and  the  Chalcidian  cities  of  Sicily  also  to  be  of 
Corinthian  standard,  in  fact  didrachms  and  diobols.  It  is 
not,  however,  easy  to  explain  why  the  curious  weight  of  the 
didrachm  was  chosen,  while  all  the  other  cities  of  Italy 
issued  the  Corinthian  tridrachm  of  130  grains,  which  was 
also  (nearly)  the  Attic  didrachm. 

These  90-grain  coins  would  pass  naturally  as  thirds  of 
the  Attic  tetradrachm  of  270  grains ;  and  early  Attic  tetra- 
drachms  were  no  doubt  current  in  great  quantities  in  Italy 
and  Sicily  at  the  time.     But  they  were  not  contemporary 

1  Above,  Chap.  X. 


214  COINS  OF  SICILY,  550-480  b.c 

with  the  Sicilian  tetradrachms  of  later  style  and  Attic  weight, 
as  they  ceased  to  be  issued  when  the  regular  Sicilian  coinage 
of  Attic  weight  came  into  existence. 

It  is  a  good  rule,  speaking  generally,  not  to  insist  on  the 
testimony  of  the  small  divisions  of  silver  money  as  regards 
the  standard  employed,  since  they  are  far  more  irregular  in 
weight  than  larger  coins,  and  were  probably  little  more 
than  money  of  account,  struck  for  local  use.  But  sometimes 
it  is  necessary  to  make  exceptions  to  the  rule.  Small  coins 
were  issued  at  the  same  time  as  the  larger  ones  under  con- 
sideration, and  they  must  help  us  to  decide  whether  the 
standard  was  really  Aeginetan  or  Corinthian.  If  it  were 
Aeginetan,  they  should  be  obols  of  the  weight  of  16  grains 
(grm.  1-03)  or  15  grains  at  least.  But  among  all  the 
early  coins  of  the  class  belonging  to  Naxos,  Himera,  and 
Zancle,  published  by  M.  Babelon,  or  appearing  in  the  British 
Museum  Catalogue,  only  one  (of  Zancle)  weighs  16  grains ; 
the  rest  vary  from  13-6  to  11  grains  (grm.  0-88-0-72).  They 
seem  thus  not  to  be  Aeginetan  obols  nor  Corinthian  diobols, 
which  would  be  of  nearly  the  same  weight,  but  litrae  of 
Sicilian  standard.  This  issue  of  the  litra,  or  equivalent  of 
the  pound  of  bronze  beside  the  drachm  and  its  fractions, 
is  common  in  Sicily  in  the  fifth  century :  it  is  interesting 
to  be  able  to  trace  it  back  into  the  sixth  century.  Curiously 
the  litra,  the  normal  weight  of  which  is  13-5  grains,  is 
no  exact  part  of  the  Corinthian  didrachm,  but  -gG  of  it, 
being  z\  of  the  tridrachm  or  Corinthian  stater.  There  was 
thus  evidently  an  attempt  to  conform  the  coinage  to  a  variety 
of  needs.  The  litra  seems  also  to  have  been  struck  at  Zancle 
under  its  new  name  of  Messana  about  490  b.  c.  :  Obv. 
lion's  scalp  ;  Rev.  MES  ;  weight,  14  grains  (grm.  0-90). l 

The  earliest  Sicilian  tetradrachms  of  Attic  weight  are 
those  of  Syracuse,  bearing  the  type  of  a  chariot,  but  without 
the  figure  of  Victory  floating  over  it ;  on  the  reverse  is  an 
incuse  or  a  female  head  in  an  incuse.  (PI.  V.  9  ;  B.  M.  IX.  34.) 
These  coins  were  by  Mr.  Head  given  to  the  Geomori,  magis- 

1  Evans  regards  this  as  an  Aeginetan  obol,  Num.  Chron.,  1896,  p.  112. 


COINS  OF  SICILY,  550-480  b.c.  215 

trates  who  governed  at  Syracuse  until  about  500  b.  c. : 1 
some  other  writers  have  preferred  to  give  them  to  the 
democracy  which  succeeded  the  expulsion  of  the  Geomori. 
This  last  view  is  rendered  improbable  by  the  fact  that  we 
have  two  successive  issues  of  these  tetradrachms,  in  one  of 
which  the  reverse  is  occupied  only  by  an  incuse  square, 
whereas  in  the  other  there  is  a  female  head  also :  it  is 
difficult  to  suppose  that  both  of  these  issues  were  struck  in 
the  brief  period  which  intervened  between  the  expulsion  of 
the  Geomori  and  the  conquest  of  Syracuse  by  Gelon,  Tyrant 
of  Gela.  The  coinage  of  Syracuse  must  have  begun  at  least 
as  early  as  520  b.  c.  "With  Gelon  comes  the  Victory  which 
hovers  over  the  chariot,  as  a  result  of  the  victory  at  Olympia 
in  the  chariot-race  won  by  Gelon  in  488  b.  c.  (PL  V.  10 ; 
B.  M.  IX.  35) :  it  appears  not  only  on  the  coins  of  Syracuse 
but  also  on  those  of  Gela  and  Leontini,  which  cities  were 
under  the  rule  of  Gelon.  (B.  M.  IX.  26,  28.)  A  little  later 
the  well-known  decadrachms,  the  Damareteia  (PI.  V.  11; 
B.  M.  XVII.  33),  give  us  a  fixed  point  in  chronology  (479  B.C.) ; 
and  the  great  superiority  of  the  style  of  the  Damareteia  over 
the  earlier  coins  of  Gelon  proves  that  art  was  in  a  rapidly 
progressive  stage  at  the  time,  so  that  we  need  not  put  back 
the  very  earliest  issues  of  Syracuse  far  into  the  sixth 
century. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  while  the  cities  of  the  east  coast  of 
Sicily,  Syracuse,  Leontini,  Catana,  and  Gela  made  the  tetra- 
drachm  of  Attic  standard  their  chief  coin,  the  cities  of  the 
west,  Selinus,  Segesta,  Agrigentum,  Himera,  struck  instead 
the  Attic  didrachm  or  Corinthian  tridrachm.  The  weight 
of  this  stater  is  considerably  greater  than  that  of  the  con- 
temporary coins  of  the  cities  of  Magna  Graecia.  Never- 
theless we  are  probably  justified  in  seeing  here  Corinthian 
influence,  the  cities  being  Doric.  And  we  may  fairly  account 
for  the  inferiority  in  weight  in  the  issues  of  the  cities  of 
South  Italy  as  compared  with  those  of  Western  Sicily  by 
supposing  that  the  Italian  cities  took  as  their  model  the 

1  The  time  of  their  supersession  is  uncertain. 


216  COINS  OF  SICILY,  550-480  b.c. 

early  Corinthian  tridrachms  of  Euboic  weight  (130  grains, 
grm.  8-42),  while  the  Sicilian  cities  took  as  their  model  the 
later  Corinthian  tridrachms  of  Attic  weight  (135  grains, 
grm.  8-74). 

In  the  early  coinage  of  Syracuse  there  is,  as  in  Magna 
Graecia,  an  adaptation  of  the  silver  coinage  of  Greek  type 
to  the  value  of  the  litra  or  pound  of  bronze  which  was 
probably  the  standard  of  value  among  the  native  inhabitants 
of  Sicily,  as  well  as  in  South  Italy.  A  litra  in  silver  was 
issued  at  Syracuse ;  it  is  distinguished  from  the  obol  not 
only  by  its  greater  weight  but  by  the  type.  The  type  of 
the  obol  is  the  sepia ;  that  of  the  litra  is  the  wheel.  The 
silver  litra  is  of  the  weight  of  13-5  grains  (grm.  0-87).  If 
the  weight  of  the  litra  in  bronze  was  3,375  grains  (grm. 
218-6),1  this  gives  a  proportion  between  the  values  of  silver 
and  bronze  of  250  to  1. 

But  here  we  come  to  a  considerable  difficulty.  Haeberlin 2 
has  maintained  that  in  the  third  century  b.  c.  the  propor- 
tional value  of  silver  to  bronze  was  120  to  1,  and  the 
majority  of  archaeologists  agree  with  him.  And  we  have 
already  seen  (Chap.  V)  that  such  a  proportion  well  suits  the 
facts  of  the  early  Aeginetan  coinage.  But  it  is  scarcely 
possible  that  silver  should  have  been  in  Sicily  twice  as 
valuable  in  proportion  to  bronze  as  in  Greece  and  Italy. 
The  question  is  a  vexed  one,  and  I  cannot  here  attempt  its 
solution:  it  is  important  rather  in  connexion  with  the 
heavy  bronze  issues  of  Rome  in  the  third  century  than  in 
connexion  with  earlier  Greek  coinage. 

The  Corinthian  stater  (the  SeKaXirpos  aTarrjp)  was  equiva- 
lent to  ten  pounds  of  bronze,  and  the  Syracusan  tetradrachm 
to  twenty.  We  have  already  seen  that  the  Tarentines  also 
issued  a  litra  in  silver  with  the  type  of  a  wheel. 

Another  fixed  date  in  the  early  coinage  of  Sicily  is  fur- 

1  This  is  the  weight  generally  accepted  for  the  litra.  See  Head,  Coinage  of 
Syracuse,  p.  12.  It  is  just  half  the  weight  of  the  Attic  mina  ;  but  it  is  hard 
to  say  whether  this  proves  derivation  or  merely  adaptation. 

2  Systematik  des  alt.  rom.  Miinzwesens,  1905.  Compare  Hill,  Historical  Roman 
Coins,  p.  30. 


COINS  OF  SICILY,  550-480  b.c.  217 

nished  us  by  the  change  of  name  of  the  city  Zancle,  which 
took  the  name  Messana  soon  after  494  b.c.  The  earliest 
coins  bearing  that  name  are — 

Obv.    Lion's    head   facing.      Rev.    MESSENION.   Calfs  head 

(Attic  tetradrachm).     (PL  V.  8  ;  B.  M.  IX.  30.) 
Obv.  Lion's  head  facing.     Rev.  MES  in  incuse  circle  (litra). 

These  coins  bear  the  types  of  Samos,  and  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt  that  their  occasion  was  the  arrival  in 
Sicily  of  Samian  fugitives,  after  the  collapse  of  the  Ionian 
revolt.  As  regards  the  history  of  these  fugitives,  their 
connexion  with  Anaxilaus,  and  their  final  settlement,  there 
are  many  historic  difficulties ! ;  but  the  broad  fact  that 
Zancle  took  a  new  name,  and  issued  coins  with  Samian 
types  and  of  Attic  weight  on  their  arrival,  seems  to  be 
beyond  dispute.  Valuable  historical  evidence  is  furnished 
by  a  small  hoard  of  coins 2  found  at  Messana  and  containing 
some  twenty  archaic  tetradrachms  of  Athens,  four  tetra- 
drachms  of  Acanthus  in  Macedonia,  coins  of  Rhegium  and 
Messene  with  the  above-mentioned  types,  and  some  coins  of 
Attic  weight  (PI.  V.  7)  bearing  the  thoroughly  Samian  types 
of  a  lion's  scalp  on  one  side  and  the  prow  of  a  galley  on  the 
other,  but  without  inscription.  It  has  been  suggested  that 
by  these  coins  we  seem  to  be  able  to  trace  the  course  of  the 
Samian  immigrants.  They  started  bearing  with  them,  as  it 
would  seem,  coins  with  their  native  types  but  specially  struck 
on  the  Attic  standard  ;  they  tarried  at  Acanthus,  possibly 
also  at  Athens ;  and  the  Ehegine  and  Messanian  coins  of 
the  hoard  show  the  result  of  their  arrival  in  Sicily.  These 
are  the  chief  landmarks  in  the  coinage  of  Sicily  before  the 
time  of  the  Persian  wars. 

1  Discussed  by  Mr.  C.  H.  Dodd  in  Jmarn.  Hell.  Stud.,  xxviii,  p.  56. 
'  Zeitschr.  f.  Numismaiik,  iii.  135,  v.  103.     Cf.  also  Babelon,   Traite,  ii.  1, 
p.  1489. 


CHAPTER    XIII 

COINS  OF  CYRENE,  630-480  b.  c. 

The  archaic  coinage  of  Cyrene  is  remarkably  varied  and 
abundant.1  The  richness  of  the  country,  and  the  trade  in 
wool  and  silphium  which  Cyrene  carried  on  with  Greece 
and  with  Egypt,  will  fully  account  for  this.  The  coinage 
must  have  begun  soon  after  the  foundation  of  the  city  about 
630  b.  c,  and  become  abundant  in  the  prosperous  reign  of 
Battus  the  Fortunate,  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century. 
Coins  of  Cyrene  were  in  the  remarkable  find  at  Myt-Rahineh2 
in  Egypt,  a  hoard  of  coins  from  several  parts  of  the  Greek 
world.  Arcesilas  III,  king  about  528  b.  c,  had  to  fly  from 
his  kingdom  to  Samos,  whence  he  returned  with  an  army  of 
Samians  to  re-establish  his  power.  It  has  been  held  that  at 
this  time  the  remarkable  tetradrachm  in  the  British  Museum 
was  issued — 

Obv.  Lion's  head  in  profile  J  silphium  plant  and  seed.  Rev. 
Eagle's  head,  holding  serpent  in  beak.  Weight,  266 
grains  (grm.  17-23). 

If  we  could  insist  on  this  date,  it  would  be  a  valuable  asset 
to  us.  But,  unfortunately,  it  is  anything  but  certain.  The 
lion's  head  in  profile  and  the  eagle's  head  remind  us  of  the 
types  of  Lindus  and  Ialysus  in  Rhodes.  The  lion's  head  in 
profile  has  been  set  down  as  a  Samian  type  (which  at  the 
time  it  is  not) ;  and  it  has  been  assumed  (without  warrant) 
that  Rhodians  as  well  as  Samians  took  part  in  the  expedi- 
tion which  replaced  Arcesilas  on  the  throne.  But  when  it 
is  recognized  that  there  is  no  trace  of  Samian  influence  on 
the  coin,  and  that  Arcesilas  had  no  connexion  with  Rhodes,3 

1  See  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  pp.  1335-64 ;  also  a  paper  by  Mr.  E.  S.  Q. 
Robinson  in  Num.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  53. 

2  LongpSrier  in  Rev.  Num.,  1861,  pi.  XVIII.     See  below 
s  Hdt.  iv.  163. 


, 


COINS  OF  CYRENE,  630-480  b.c.  219 

the  occasion  of  the  striking  of  the  coin  becomes  quite  uncer- 
tain. Its  style  points  rather  to  the  end  of  the  sixth  century 
than  to  528  b.  c.  Probably,  however,  the  coin  was  struck  at 
Cyrene. 

A  very  noteworthy  fact  is  that,  from  the  first,  Cyrenaean 
coins  are  issued  on  a  standard  of  which  the  full  weight  is  as 
much  as  17-23  grammes,  266  grains :  M.  Babelon  calls  this 
the  Euboic  standard,  but  the  Euboic  standard,  as  we  have 
seen,  does  not  rise  above  260  grains.  The  standard  at  Cyrene 
is  the  same  as  the  Attic,  according  to  which  the  tetradrachm 
weighs  up  to  270  grains  (grm.  17-50).  But  the  Attic  standard 
did  not  come  into  use  at  Athens  until  the  time  of  Peisistratus, 
and  the  earliest  coins  of  Cyrene  are  of  so  archaic  a  character 
that  they  must  be  given  to  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  cen- 
tury. Nor  does  there  appear  any  reason  why  the  people  of 
Cyrene  should  have  adopted  the  Attic  standard.  It  was  not 
in  use  in  the  islands  of  the  Aegean  and  of  the  Asiatic  coast, 
with  which  Cyrene,  as  we  know  from  the  history  of  Arcesilas 
III,  was  in  closest  relations. 

It  is  clear  that  we  have  here  an  interesting  historic 
problem.  It  would  seem  that  the  people  of  Cyrene  and 
those  of  Athens  independently  adopted  the  standard,  the 
former  as  early  as  600  b.  c,  the  latter  half  a  century  later. 
We  are  taken  some  distance  towards  the  solution  of  it  by 
the  facts  of  the  find  at  Myt-Rahineh,1  which  may  have  been 
a  silversmith's  hoard,  consisting  partly  of  bars  of  silver, 
partly  of  very  archaic  Greek  coins,  none  apparently  later 
than  550  b.  c.  Many  of  these  coins  were  broken.  Amongst 
them  were  coins  of  the  Thracian  coast  (Lete,  Maroneia)  and 
of  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor  (Ephesus,  Chios,  Naxos,  Cos).  It 
is  noteworthy  that  there  were  no  coins  of  Athens  of  the 
Athena  type ;  and  since  the  early  tetradrachms  of  Athens 
have  been  found  in  numbers  in  Egypt,  this  seems  to  furnish 
a  proof  that  they  were  not  yet  circulated  at  the  time  of  the 
burial  of  the  hoard.  Coins  of  Corinth  were  present,  one 
weighing  129-5  grains  (grm.  8-40),  the  other  weighing 
137-5  grains  (grm.  8-90) ;  but  M.  Longpe'rier  observes  that 

1  Berne  Numism.,  1861,  p.  425,  pi.  XVIII.     Article  by  Longpener. 


220  COINS  OF  CYRENE,  630-480  b.c. 

the  latter  was  considerably  oxidized  and  had  gained  in 
weight.  We  may  therefore  assume  that  these  coins  we^e 
of  the  ordinary  early  Corinthian  standard  of  130  grains. 
Coins  of  Cyrene  also  were  present,  but  so  much  broken  up 
that  their  original  weight  could  not  be  ascertained  ;  but 
they  doubtless  followed  the  ordinary  standard  of  Cyrene. 
It  seems  clear,  first,  that  the  standard  of  Cyrene  was  not 
that  of  Corinth  (or  the  Euboic) ;  and  second,  that  coins  of 
Cyrene  were  well  known  in  Egypt  at  a  very  early  time. 
In  fact,  the  geographical  position  of  the  countries  is  such 
that  there  must  always  have  been  communication  between 
them.  History  confirms  this  inference :  we  read  of  inter- 
ference by  the  kings  of  Egypt  in  the  affairs  of  Cyrene  from 
the  days  of  Apries  and  Amasis  at  the  beginning  of  the  sixth 
century  to  those  of  the  Ptolemies. 

We  may,  therefore,  fairly  look  to  Egypt  for  the  source  of 
the  standard  of  Cyrene ;  and  we  find  it  at  once.  The  kedet l 
of  Egypt  seems  to  have  been  of  various  weights  at  different 
times  and  in  different  parts  of  the  country.  A  large  number 
of  weights  attributed  to  this  standard  were  found  at  Nau- 
cratis,  and  have  been  published  by  Prof.  Petrie.2  They  give 
a  unit  of  136-8-153  grains  (grm.  8-85-9-91).  On  the  next 
page  Prof.  Petrie  gives  a  list  of  weights  also  from  Naucratis 
of  Attic  drachm  standard  giving  127-80-148-8  grains  (grm. 
8-27"-9-63)  for  the  didrachm.  As  all  these  weights  are  un- 
inscribed,  there  is  difficulty  in  determining  to  which  series 
they  really  belong ;  but  supposing  Petrie  to  be  right  in  his 
attributions,  it  is  evident  that  the  Attic  didrachm  is  equiva- 
lent to  a  light  kedet  weight.  Petrie  shows 3  that  the  kedet 
at  Heliopolis  in  Egypt  was  of  a  somewhat  low  standard,  of 
139  grains  (grm.  9*0).  There  is,  he  observes,  a  well-known 
weight  inscribed  '  5  Kat  of  Heliopolis ',  which  gives  this 
standard,  and  it  is  confirmed  by  other  weights  found  in  the 
locality.  Thus  we  come  still  nearer  to  the  ordinary  Attic 
weight.  Heliopolis  was  one  of  the  cities  of  Egypt  most  readily 

1  This  word  is  spelt  in  a  great  variety  of  ways. 

2  Naukrads,  i.  pp.  75-6.     Compare  Encycl.  Brit,  ed.  11,  xxviii.  485. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  84. 


COINS  OF  CYRENE,  630-480  b.c.  221 

accessible  to  the  Greeks,  lying  in  the  south  of  the  Delta,  and 
it  was  to  Heliopolis  that  Herodotus  and  Plato  repaired  for 
information  from  the  learned  priests  of  the  temple  of  the  Sun- 
god.  The  kedet  of  Heliopolis  is  of  almost  exactly  the  weight 
of  the  standard  of  Cyrene.  There  can  be  little  doubt  but 
that  the  people  of  Cyrene  adopted  the  weight  not  later  than 
the  days  of  Apries  and  Amasis,  when  the  relations  between 
Egypt  and  Cyrene  were  intimate.  The  latter  king  made  a 
durable  peace  with  Battus  of  Cyrene,  and  even  married 
a  lady  of  his  family.  The  adoption  of  the  same  standard  at 
Athens  was  somewhat  later.  "We  have,  however,  traces  of 
its  use  at  Samos  and  elsewhere  for  electrum  coins,  as  early 
as  at  Cyrene  (Chap.  I). 

Concurrently  with  the  money  struck  on  this  standard  at 
Cyrene,  we  find,  towards  the  end  of  the  sixth  century,  coins 
weighing  approximately  52  and  26  grains  (grm.  3*36  and 
1-68).1  These  can  be  nothing  but  drachms  and  hemidrachms 
of  the  Phoenician  (or  Milesian)  standard.  The  drachms 
must  have  borne  some  relation  to  the  tetradrachms  of  the 
ordinary  standard,  and  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that  that 
relation  would  be  1  to  5.  We  should  thus  have  a  decimal 
and  a  duodecimal  coinage  concurrently  at  Cyrene.  It  is 
noteworthy  that  Mr.  Head  takes  these  coins  as  drachms  of 
the  Phoenician,  and  M.  Babelon  as  pentoboli  of  the  Attic 
standard.8  Situated  between  Egypt  and  Carthage,  both  of 
which  used  the  Phoenician  standard  for  silver,  Cyrene  must 
have  come  to  terms  with  it ;  while  for  trade  with  Sicily,  with 
Athens,  and  with  Corinth,  and  the  places  within  the  spheres 
of  their  influence,  the  Attic  standard  would  be  most  useful. 
The  issue  of  money  at  the  other  cities  of  Cyrenaica,  Barce, 
and  Euesperides,  does  not  begin  so  early  as  at  Cyrene ;  but 
it  begins  in  the  sixth  century.  It  follows  the  same  standards. 
The  monetary  types  of  Cyrene  are  mostly  derived  from 
the  silphium  plant,  which  was  in  all  the  Mediterranean 
world  regarded  as  a  most  valuable  medicine,  and  which 
grew  in  the  district  of  Cyrene. 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  61. 

*  Head,  HisU  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  867.     Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  1347. 


CHAPTER    XIV 

COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

I.   Athens,  Silver. 

The  ordinary  silver  coinage  of  Athens  from  480  to 
400  b.o.  is  almost  unvaried.  By  the  former  date  a  head  of 
Athena  and  an  owl  of  fixed  and  conventional  archaic  type 
had  been  adopted  for  the  coin.  The  olive-wreath  which 
adorns  the  helmet  of  the  goddess  seems  to  have  been  adopted 
during  the  glow  of  triumph  after  Marathon.  At  the  end 
of  the  century  there  were  certain  issues  of  gold  coins,  of 
which  we  shall  speak  later.  But  the  great  mass  of  the 
coinage  was  in  silver.  The  Athenians  obtained  silver  in 
abundance  from  the  mines  of  Laurium  and  those  of  Thrace, 
and  it  was  part  of  Athenian  policy  to  circulate  the  coins  as 
widely  as  possible,  and  to  make  them  the  standard  currency 
of  the  Aegean.  Silver  was  to  Athens  what  gold  was  to 
Persia,  the  backbone  of  the  finance  of  the  state,  and,  together 
of  course  with  the  tribute  of  the  allies,  the  source  whence 
came  the  plentiful  wealth  which  Athens  used  for  great 
building-works  at  home  and  for  expeditions  abroad.  The 
early  silver  coins  of  Athens  are  found  on  many  shores,  in 
Egypt,  in  Italy,  in  Sicily,  in  Greece  and  Asia.  There  is 
a  well-known  passage  in  the  Frogs  of  Aristophanes  in  which 
their  vogue  is  described.1  Aristophanes  speaks  of  the  Athe- 
nian staters  as  not  alloyed,  as  the  most  beautiful  of  coins, 
the  only  ones  rightly  struck,  and  ringing  truly,  accepted 
among  Greeks  and  barbarians  everywhere.  The  poet  is 
somewhat  carried  away  by  patriotic  fervour.  The  coins  are 
indeed  of  pure  metal,  but  their  beauty  is  to  say  the  least 
somewhat  antiquated,  and  their  striking  careless.     If  we 

1  Frogs,  line  780. 


ATHENS,  SILVER  223 

want  to  see  what  dies  bearing  the  head  of  Athena  could  be 
produced  by  Athenian  artists  in  the  fifth  century,  we  must 
turn  to  the  money  of  the  Athenian  colony  of  Thurium, 
where  most  beautiful  heads  of  the  goddess  make  their 
appearance.  Several  writers  have  dwelt  on  the  artistic 
influence  exercised  in  Italy  and  Sicily  by  the  die-cutters  of 
Thurium.1  This  is,  however,  a  subject  on  which  we  cannot 
here  dwell:  it  is  more  in  place  in  speaking  of  the  coins 
of  Italy. 

"Why  the  Athenians  should  in  this  case  have  taken  a  line 
so  much  opposed  to  all  their  artistic  instincts  it  is  not 
hard  to  see.  The  reason  was  commercial  convenience.  It 
is  a  familiar  fact  to  all  students  of  the  history  of  coins  that 
when  a  particular  type  of  money  has  taken  root,  and  gained 
a  wide  commercial  vogue,  it  becomes  stereotyped  and  no 
longer  varies.  Thus  the  coins  bearing  the  name  and  types 
of  Alexander  the  Great  were  widely  current  in  Greece  and 
Asia  until  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  The  staters  of 
Cyzicus  retained  the  archaic  incuse  on  the  reverse  until 
they  ceased  to  be  issued.  Among  ourselves  the  retention 
of  Pistrucci's  type  of  George  and  the  Dragon  for  the  reverse 
of  the  sovereign  is  in  part  at  least  the  result  of  a  similar 
conservatism.  But  other  Greek  cities,  such  as  Corinth  and 
Sicyon,  while  they  kept  to  their  early  types,  modified  the 
style  of  their  coins  in  response  to  the  growth  of  art. 

It  might  well  seem  that  nothing  could  be  easier  than  to 
copy  the  Athenian  silver  of  the  fifth  century.  It  bore  no 
magistrates'  names  and  had  no  subsidiary  devices,  and  it 
was  rudely  struck.  Probably,  however,  the  mere  archaism 
of  the  types  made  them  hard  to  copy  in  an  age  of  astonish- 
ing vitality  in  art.  And  it  is  certain  that  the  Athenians 
would  keep  a  sharp  eye  on  all  attempts  at  forgery.  Imita- 
tions of  the  money  were,  as  I  have  already  shown,  abundant 
down  to  480  b.  c.  From  that  time  until  400  they  are 
scarcely  to  be  found. 

In  the  time  of  the  Second  Empire,  about  393  b.  c,  the 

1  Poole  in  Num.  CJiron.,  1883 ;    Furtwangler,  Masterpieces,  p.  104  ;  Evans, 
Num.  Chron.,  1912,  p.  21,  and  elsewhere. 


224 


COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 


Athenians  modified  the  types  of  their  coins.  The  money 
struck  between  that  year  and  the  date  of  Alexander  betrays, 
as  Mr.  Head  observes,1  an  ■  endeavour  on  the  part  of  the 
engraver  to  cast  off  the  trammels  of  archaism,  which  is 
manifested  chiefly  in  the  more  correct  treatment  of  the  eye 
of  the  goddess,  which  is  henceforth  shown  in  profile'.  The 
dies,  however,  are  executed  in  a  careless  way,  and  so  ill 
adapted  to  the  blanks  used  that  often  both  of  the  types  are 
only  partly  to  be  found  on  the  coins.  This  coinage  seems 
to  have  been  continued  until  the  days  of  Alexander,  or  later. 
Perhaps  some  of  the  worst  examples  may  be  money  struck 
in  military  camps  or  in  other  cities. 

In  the  last  years  of  the  Empire,  when  in  great  need,  the 
Athenians  did  begin  a  coinage  both  in  gold  and  in  bronze.  Of 
this  we  shall  speak  later.  They  also  used  money  of  electrum 
for  dealings  with  Asia.  But  in  Greece  and  the  Aegean,  and 
to  the  west  in  Italy  and  Sicily,  it  is  only  silver  coin  which 
comes  in.  The  Athenians  issued  coins  of  all  sizes  and  all 
denominations,  slightly  varying  the  types  to  indicate  value. 


Denomination 


1.  Decadrachm 

2.  Tetradrachm 

3.  Didrachm  . 

4.  Drachm 

5.  Triobol  .     . 

6.  Diobol     .     . 

7.  „         .     . 

8.  Trihemiobol 

9.  Obol  .     .     . 

10.  „      .     .     . 

11.  Tritartemorion 

12.  Hemiobol  .     . 

13.  Trihemitartemorion 

14.  Tetartemorion     .     . 

15.  Hemitetartemorion 


Noof 
drac  ms 


10 
4 
2 

1 
1/2 
1/3 
1/3 
1/4 
1/6 
1/6 
1/8 
1/12 
1/16 
1/24 
1/48 


B.  M.  Cat. 


PI.  III.  1 
PI.  III.  2-8 
PI.  IV.  4 
PI.  IV.  5,  6 
PI.  IV.  7,  8 
PI.  IV.  9 
PI.  V.  16 
PI.  IV.  10 
PI.  IV.  II 
PI.  V.  17 
PI.  V.  18 
PI.  IV.  12, 13 
PI.  V.  20 
PI.  V.  21 
PI.  V.  22 


Reverse- type 


Owl  facing  :  olive  twig 
Owl  to  r.  :  h 


Owl  facing :  two  olive  twigs 

Two  owls  :  olive  twig 

Two  owls  with  one  head 

Owl  facing  :  olive  twig 

Owl  to  r.  :  „ 

Four  crescents 

Three  crescents 

Owl  to  r.  :  olive  twig 

Calathos 

Crescent 

Owl  facing :  two  olive  twigs 


Weight, 

Grains 

Grr 

675 

4B-', 

270 

n-4 

135 

8-5 

67-5 

4-J 

33-7 

2-1 

22-5 

H 

22-5 

H 

16-8 

H 

11-2 

11-2 

8-4 

5-6 

4-2 

2-8 

1-4 

•i 

These  coins  are  probably  not  all  of  the  same  time.  In  the 
B.  M.  Cat,  as  will  be  seen  from  the  references  given  above, 
Mr.  Head  assigns  coins  1-6,  8,  9,   12  to  a  period  before 


1  B.  M.  Cat.  Attica,  p.  xxiii,  pi.  V. 


ATHENS,  SILVER  225 

430  B.C.:  coins  7,  10,  11,  13-15  to  a  period  after  that  date. 
It  is  difficult  to  judge  of  the  style  of  the  head  of  Athena, 
which  is  our  only  means  of  assigning  period,  on  coins  so 
small.  But  in  general  I  should  be  willing  to  accept 
Mr.  Head's  assignment  of  date.  Thedidrachm  is  of  extreme 
rarity,  and,  as  M.  Babelon  observes,1  was  only  struck  about 
480  b.  c.  The  reason  for  this  procedure  is  unknown.  The 
Corinthian  staters  would  fill  the  gap  ;  but  considering  the 
hostility  between  Athens  and  Corinth  there  is  not  likely  to 
have  been  an  understanding  between  the  two  cities  as  to  the 
use  of  their  respective  coins. 

Some  confusion  has  been  introduced  into  the  silver  coin- 
age of  Athens  by  mixing  up  those  coins  which  bear  a  head 
of  Athena  of  the  fixed  type,  wearing  Attic  helmet  adorned 
with  olive- wreath,  with  some  pieces  of  distinctly  later  style, 
in  which  the  goddess  wears  a  helmet  without  olive-wreath 
and  of  another  character,  and  even  with  coins  of  the  fourth 
century  in  which  she  wears  a  helmet  of  Corinthian  form. 
These  coins  may  be  thus  described  : 

On  obverse,  Head  of  Athena,  in  helmet  without  olive-leaves. 

Tetrobol :  Rev.  Two  owls :  45  grains  (grm.   2-91)  {B.  M.  Cat., 

PL  V.  12). 
Triobol :  Rev.  Owl  facing:  33-5  grains  (grm.  2- 18)  (B.  M.  Cat, 

PI.  V.  15). 

The  former  of  these  coins  fits  in  with  the  Corinthian 
system  :  the  tetrobol  being  the  equivalent  of  the  Corinthian 
drachm.  This  gives  us  a  clue:  the  coins  may  well  belong  to 
the  time  of  the  Corinthian  alliance  of  Athens  394  b.  c.  Later 
there  is  a  Pentobol,  on  obverse  Head  of  Athena,  in  Corinthian 
helmet :  on  rev.  Owl  to  r.  with  wings  open ;  in  front,  an 
amphora:  weight,  56-2  grains  (grm.  3-64)  (B.M.  Cat.,  PI.  V. 
11).  This  coin  is  certainly  later  than  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century. 

The  careful  discrimination  of  denominations  is  character- 
istic alike  of  the  love  of  the  Athenians  for  their  silver  coins 
— the  yXavK€?  AavpmriKai  of  which  Aristophanes  speaks  so 

1  TraiU,  ii.  3,  p.  77. 

1967  Q 


226         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

fondly1 — and  of  the  fine  perfection  of  their  intellectual 
faculties.  A  dull-witted  people  could  never  have  used  or 
invented  such  a  coinage,  which  stands  in  history  as  unique 
as  the  drama  or  the  sculpture  of  Athens. 

A  good  reason  for  the  fondness  of  the  people  for  small 
coins  of  silver,  at  a  time  when  in  some  places,  as  in  Sicily, 
a  beautiful  bronze  coinage  was  coming  in,  is  to  be  found  in 
the  Athenian  custom  of  carrying  small  change  in  the  mouth. 
Occasionally,  no  doubt,  these  minute  coins  were  swallowed ; 
but  this  risk  weighed  less  heavily  than  the  unpleasantness 
of  the  taste  of  bronze  in  the  mouth. 

The  smaller  coins  do  not  appear  to  have  had  much  circula 
tion  outside  Athens :  they  were  merely  local  small  change. 
Many  of  the  cities  of  Asia,  as  we  shall  see,  while  they  used 
the  silver  staters  of  Athens,  or  the  Cyzicenes,  for  larger 
payments,  struck  small  coins  of  their  own  for  the  local 
markets.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  didrachm  at  Athens 
is  of  great  rarity,  and  even  the  drachm  scarce,  in  contrast  to 
the  immense  abundance  of  the  tetradrachm. 

Some  time  after  480  b.  c.  Athens  begins  to  exercise  a  policy 
which  remains  fixed  with  her  until  the  fall  of  her  empire, 
the  policy  of  prohibiting  the  issue  of  silver  coin  by  any  city 
which  might  come  fully  under  her  power.  This  policy  had 
already  been  suspected  by  numismatists  in  consequence  of 
the  non-appearance  of  money  in  the  Athenian  colonies  and 
wherever  Athens  was  dominant.  It  is  conclusively  proved 
to  have  prevailed  by  certain  inscriptions  put  together,  in 
the  Inscriptiones  Maris  Aegaei,  by  Hiller  von  Gartringen.2 
They  are  two  copies  of  an  Athenian  decree  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury, one  from  Siphnos,  the  other  copied  by  Baumeister  at 
Smyrna  in  1855.3  They  mention  a  decree,  which  was  pro- 
posed by  one  Olearchus,  by  which  the  Athenians  definitely 

i  Birds,  1106. 

2  I.  G.  xii.  5,  No.  480,  p.  123  ;  R.  Weil,  Miinsmonopol  Athens  im  ersten  attiscfien 
Seebund  in  the  Zeitschrift fur  Numismatik,  xxv.  p.  52. 

8  The  editor  of  the  Corpus  writes  •  fuit  inter  marmora  Arundeliana  sicut 
chronlcon  Parium '.  But  certainly  this  marble  was  never  among  the  Arundel 
marbles,  whieh  have  been  at  Oxford  since  1667,  including  the  Parian 
Chronicle. 


ATHENS,  SILVER  227 

forbid  in  the  cities  subject  to  them  the  use  of  any  silver 
money  save  the  Attic,  as  well  as  any  other  weights  and 
measures  than  Attic. 

It  appears  that  this  decree  was  not  in  all  cases  obeyed  ; 
for  it  is  further  ordered  by  a  second  decree  that  a  copy 
of  it  shall  be  set  up  in  the  agora  of  each  city.  A  second 
copy  is  to  be  set  up  before  the  mint  of  each  city.  In  case 
of  non-compliance  a  heavy  penalty  of  10,000  drachms  is 
threatened.  The  sending  of  a  herald  (Kfjpvg)  or  commis- 
sioner from  Athens  is  also  threatened.  The  people  are 
ordered  to  bring  to  the  civic  mints  foreign  coins  and  those 
locally  issued :  these  are  to  be  recorded  in  a  public  register, 
and  presumably  (for  here  the  fragments  come  to  an  end) 
Attic  coin  will  be  issued  in  exchange. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  decrees  relate  not  only  to  the 
use  of  Athenian  coin,  but  also  to  the  use  of  Athenian 
weights  and  measures,  no  doubt  with  the  object  of  facili- 
tating commercial  intercourse.  The  editor  of  the  Corpus 
cites  the  passage  in  the  Birds  of  Aristophanes  (line  1040) 
which  runs,  with  the  emendations  of  Cobet  and  Bergk, 
as  follows:  xprjaOai  NefeXoKOKKvyta?  tois  aurois  fiirpoia-i 
Kal  (rraBfioca-i  kcu  vo\ii<T\La<ri  Ka.6a.ntp  'OXotyvgioi.1 

Aristophanes  puts  this  proclamation  in  the  mouth  of 
a  hawker  of  decrees,  and  is  clearly  alluding  to  the  passing 
of  the  very  decrees  under  discussion.  The  date  of  the 
Birds  is  414  B.C.:  that  of  the  decrees  would  be  earlier; 
they  appear  to  express  a  policy  on  which  the  Athenians 
had  been  acting  at  all  events  since  the  transfer  of  the 
Delian  Fund  to  Athens  in  454  b.  c. 

Weil  observes  also  that,  whereas  in  the  Treasurer's  lists 
at  Athens  of  434  b.  c.  we  have  separate  mention  of  silver 
coins  of  Boeotia,  Chalcis,  and  Phocis,  after  418  foreign 
silver  is  reckoned  only  by  weight,  in  talents  and  fractions, 
indicating  that  it  was  regarded  only  as  material  to  be 
melted  down  and  re-issued;  thus  the  only  silver  coin 
regarded  as  legal  tender  at  Athens  is  the  owl  coinage. 

1  Olophyxus  was  a  small  town  in  Chalcidice.  Why  it  is  chosen  for  the 
present  context  is  unknown.  * 

Q  2 


228         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

It  would  be  very  satisfactory,  if  it  were  possible,  to  fix 
precisely  the  date  of  these  two  decrees.  The  most  probable 
view  is  that  of  Weil  that  the  earlier  decree  is  before,  and 
the  later  decree  after,  the  expedition  to  Syracuse. 

Looking  broadly  at  the  numismatic  evidence,  it  would 
seem  that  the  policy  of  Athens  in  the  matter  was  fixed 
from  the  earlier  days  of  the  Delian  League,  at  all  events 
after  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  but  insistence  upon 
it  became  more  and  more  stringent  as  difficulties  arose 
with  the  allied  cities. 

It  is  difficult  to  over-estimate  the  importance  of  the 
discovery  of  these  decrees  in  regard  to  the  monetary  and 
financial  history  of  Greece.  It  definitely  proves  that  some 
Greek  cities  made  deliberate  efforts  to  spread  their  systems 
of  weights  and  measures  as  well  as  the  vogue  of  their  coins. 
To  numismatists  it  is  quite  a  revelation ;  for  they  have 
been  accustomed  to  think  that  the  kind  of  weights  and 
measures  and  of  coins  used  by  a  city  was  a  purely  internal 
concern.  They  have  accepted  the  great  variety  which  pre- 
vailed in  this  matter  as  a  pathless  morass.  M.  Babelon1 
doubts  whether  even  the  King  of  Persia  tried  to  control 
the  gold  issues  of  Greek  cities  within  his  dominions.  And 
the  ablest  writers  on  coins  think  it  sufficient  to  label 
issues  of  money  with  the  name  'Baby Ionic  Standard'  or 
'  Aeginetan  Standard ',  or '  Attic  Standard  ',  and  to  accept  the 
weights  as  ultimate  facts.  But  we  want  explanations  of  these 
facts.  No  city  can  have  altered  its  standards  without  good 
reason,  political  and  commercial.  The  business  relations 
of  Greek  cities  spread  like  a  network  over  the  lands,  and 
dictated  the  customs  of  coinage.  The  new  decrees  encourage 
us  to  hope  that,  with  time  and  patience,  we  may  be  able 
to  unravel  the  whole  twisted  skein,  and  to  give  some  kind 
of  reason  for  all  the  varieties  of  standard. 

In  regard  to  the  history  of  the  Athenian  Empire,  in 
particular,  great  use  can  be  made  of  coins.  The  cessation 
of  intermission   of  coinage   by   a   city   belonging  to    the 

1  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  18. 


ATHENS,  SILVER  229 

Athenian  confederacy  becomes  prima  facie  evidence  that 
the  power  of  Athens  over  that  city  is  being  more  severely 
exerted,  and  the  numismatic  data  must  be  carefully  com- 
pared with  another  great  series  of  records,  the  inscriptions l 
which  state  the  tribute  levied  year  by  year  on  the  members 
of  the  Delian  Confederacy,  which  tribute  after  about  454  b.  c. 
was  laid  up  in  the  Acropolis  of  Athens.  These  inscriptions 
cover  the  period  01.  81,  3  to  88,  4:  454-425  b.c.  We  have 
to  compare  the  data  which  they  give  us  with  the  testimony 
of  the  coins. 

How  necessary  to  the  maintenance  of  the  Athenian 
Empire  an  ample  supply  of  coined  silver  was,  we  may 
judge  from  the  well-known  speech  of  Pericles  in  Thucydides 
ii.  13.  He  reminds  the  Athenians  that  not  only  do  they 
receive  600  talents  a  year  from  the  allies,  but  they  also 
have  6,000  talents  of  coined  silver  laid  up  in  the  Acropolis, 
besides  all  the  gold  and  silver  offerings  in  the  temples,  and 
the  resources  in  private  hands.  Cavaignac 2  gives  a  budget 
of  the  receipts  and  expenditure  of  Athens  in  the  fifth 
century.  The  expenses  were  very  great:  the  pay  of  the 
jurors  in  the  law  courts,  the  provision  of  theatre- money, 
and  contributions  towards  the  splendid  temples  then  rising 
on  the  Acropolis  were  a  constant  drain.  But  a  greater 
drain  occurred  in  connexion  with  the  military  expeditions 
on  a  great  scale,  which  were  constantly  taking  place.  It 
seems  that  from  the  time  of  Pericles,  the  troops,  even  though 
consisting  of  Athenian  citizens,  were  paid,  at  first  a  drachm 
a  day,  out  of  which  the  soldier  provided  his  own  food,  and 
later  three  obols,  besides  his  food. 

The  revenue  came  mainly  from  three  sources,  the  tribute 
of  the  allies,  customs  duties,  and  the  mines  of  Laurium 
and  Thrace,  in  addition  to  the  voluntary  contributions  of 
the  wealthy.  It  was  not  until  the  last  years  of  the 
Peloponnesian   War   that   the   city   was   in   actual   straits 


1  I.  G.,  vol.  i  ;    U.  Kdhler,  Delisch-attischer  Bund  ;  Cavaignac,  Hist.financiere 
d'Athenes. 

3  Op.  cit.,  pp.  49  and  foil. 


230         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

for  want  of  money:  the  reserve  of  a  thousand  talents  of 
silver  was  not  used  until  the  revolt  of  Chios. 

From  the  financial  point  of  view  the  policy  of  Athens 
in  regard  to  the  coinage  raises  interesting  questions. 
Cavaignac  suggests  that  difficulties  of  exchange  were  the 
cause  which  made  Athens  forbid  moneying  in  subject 
cities :  '  Les  matelots  n'acceptaient  comme  solde  que  des 
pieces  ayant  un  cours  international,  et  reclamerent  de  plus 
en  plus  exclusivement  des  chouettes  d'Athenes.  L'autorite 
federale  dut  done  chercher  tout  de  suite  a  decourager  les 
monnayages  locaux,  au  moins  ceux  qui  n'etaient  pas 
etalonnes  suivant  le  systeme  attique.' *  This  explanation 
does  not  seem  to  me  sufficient.  The  Greek  bankers  must 
at  all  times  have  been  accustomed  to  deal  with  a  great 
variety  of  coins,  struck  on  many  standards.  If  the  sailors 
wanted  their  pay  in  Attic  money,  there  could  not  be  at 
any  time  any  difficulty  in  finding  it  for  them.  But  that 
does  not  account  for  the  unwillingness  of  the  Athenians 
to  allow  money  other  than  their  own  to  pass  in  the  markets 
of  the  allied  states. 

It  is  clear  that  we  must  take  together  the  prohibition  of 
coinage  and  the  prohibition  of  using  other  weights  and 
measures  than  the  Attic,  since  both  prohibitions  are  men- 
tioned in  the  same  decrees.  It  seems  very  likely  that  in 
this  fashion  the  Athenians  meant  to  gain  a  commercial 
advantage.  We  know  from  the  facts  of  modern  commerce 
that  trade  is  facilitated  when  the  trading  countries  have 
the  same  monetary  standard  and  the  same  measures.  And, 
of  course,  the  Athenians  may  have  estimated  this  advantage 
at  a  higher  rate  than  actual  experience  would  justify. 

This  notion  of  gaining  a  commercial  advantage  certainly 
in  other  cases  inspired  Athenian  policy.  There  exists  an 
inscription  of  the  time  of  the  second  league,  whereby  the 
export  of  ruddle  from  Ceos  to  any  other  place  than  Athens 
is  forbidden.2  The  best  ruddle  came  from  Ceos,  and  it  was 
necessary  for  the  manufacture  of  Athenian  pottery,  the 

1  Cavaignac,  p.  184.  2  C.  I.  ii.  546. 


ATHENS,  SILVER  231 

bright  red  surface  of  which  was  regarded  as  one  of  its 
chief  attractions.  Pottery  was  one  of  the  chief  exports 
of  Athens  in  the  fifth  century,  and  even  in  the  earlier 
part  of  the  fourth.  If  another  city  could  imitate  this 
pleasing  appearance  by  securing  the  proper  ruddle,  it  might 
interfere  with  Athenian  trade. 

It  must  of  course  have  been  impossible  for  Athens  to  force 
her  money  into  circulation  at  a  fictitious  value.  This  could 
only  have  been  done  by  securing  a  monopoly  of  silver;  and 
this  in  the  case  of  so  common  a  metal  as  silver  would  have 
been  impossible.  The  Greek  cities  which  minted  silver  had 
no  difficulty  in  procuring  the  metal ;  and  the  owls  of  Athens 
could  only  hold  their  own  by  means  of  the  purity  of  their 
composition. 

We  may  suspect  that  after  all  it  was  mainly  a  matter  of 
national  pride.  Athens  was  fond  of  dictating  to  the  subject 
allies  whenever  she  could.  She  made  them  bring  their  legal 
cases  to  Athens  for  settlement,  partly  to  find  work  for 
Athenian  dicasts,  and  partly  out  of  arrogance.  We  have 
only  to  consider  the  policy  of  states  at  the  present  day  to 
see  how  great  a  force  national  pride  may  exert  in  public 
politics.  When  nations  make  war,  other  motives  than  those 
of  mere  commercial  advantage  are  usually  involved.  And  it 
is  well  known  how  strong  motives  pride  and  the  love  of 
dominance  were  at  Athens. 

Another  difficult  financial  question  is  why  the  Athenians, 
when  in  possession  of  the  rich  gold  mines  of  the  Pangaean 
district,  did  not  themselves  issue  gold  coin.  It  is  probable 
that  they  might  have  done  so  had  they  been  earlier  in 
possession  of  the  mines.  But  by  the  time.  463  b.  c,  when 
they  wrested  them  from  Thasos,  their  policy  was  already 
fixed  and  their  silver  in  possession  of  the  field.  Hence  the 
Thracian  gold  was  kept  in  bars,  or  carried  to  Cyzicus  to  be 
minted  as  electrum  coin. 

In  the  last  days  of  the  Empire,  when  Deceleia  was  occu- 
pied by  the  Spartans,  the  winning  of  silver  from  Laurium 
was  partly  interrupted.1    Many  of  the  slaves  who  worked 

1  Thuc.  vii.  91. 


232         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

there  made  their  escape.  At  the  same  time  Athenian  power 
in  Thrace  was  greatly  diminished.  These  causes,  with  the 
disastrous  results  of  the  Sicilian  expedition,  led  to  that 
impoverishment  of  Athens  which  is  marked  by  an  issue  of 
gold  coins  of  necessity,  of  which  we  shall  speak  later. 

As  I  shall  have,  in  the  following  pages,  frequently  to 
mention  the  standards  of  weight  for  coins  in  cities  belong- 
ing to  the  Athenian  League,  it  may  be  convenient  to  give 
in  concise  form  the  ordinary  weights  of  denominations 
under  the  principal  standards. 

Attic  standard.    See  above. 

Chian  (Phocaean)  standard. 

Tetradrachm  (stater) :  240  grains  (grm.  15-55). 
Drachm :  60  grains  (grm.  3-88). 

Persian  standard. 

Drachm  (siglos) :  86  grains  (grm.  5-57). 

Aeginetan  standard. 

Drachm  :  96  grains  (grm.  6-22). 

Standard  of  Thasos  and  Erythrae. 

Didrachm  (stater) :  144  grains  (grm.  9-32). 

Milesian  standard  (Samos,  &c). 

Tetradrachm  (stater) :  204  grains  (grm.  13-21). 

Phoenician  standard  (Melos  and  Abdera). 

Tetradrachm  (stater) :  224  grains  (grm.  14-50). 

II.     Electeum  op  Asia  Minoe. 

But  though  her  owls  were  everything  to  Athens,  she  could 
not  at  a  stroke  substitute  in  Asia  her  silver  for  the  gold  and 
electrum  coins  to  which  the  people  of  the  coasts  of  Asia 
Minor  had  been  accustomed  for  centuries.  Gold  came  largely 
from  the  eastern  shores  of  the  Black  Sea,  from  Colchis  and 
the  Crimea.  The  gold,  for  which  the  Arimaspians  waged 
a  constant  war  with  griffins,  filtered  down  to  the  Greek 
cities  of  the  coast,  in  exchange  for  manufactured  goods,  and 


ELECTRUM  OF  ASIA  MINOR  233 

the  corn  and  timber  of  the  Pontic  region  had  to  be  pur- 
chased with  gold.  In  this  region  the  Athenians  had  to 
provide  a  substitute  for  their  silver.  And  there  can  be  no 
doubt  as  to  what  the  substitute  was :  it  was  the  electrum 
money  of  Cyzicus,  Lampsacus,  Phocaea.  and  Mytilene. 

The  standard  of  weight  adopted  for  these  coins  is  that  of 
Phocaea  : 

Stater,  254-248  grains  (grm.  16-45-16). 
Hecte,  42-40  grains  (grm.  2-72-2-59). 
Half  hecte,  21-20  grains  (grm.  1 -36-1-29). 

The  staters  and  hectae  of  Cyzicus  may  be  regarded  as 
a  continuation  or  revival  of  the  electrum  coinage  issued  by 
cities  of  Ionia  during  the  Ionian  revolt  of  500  b.  c.  The 
coinage  would  seem  to  have  begun  afresh  with  the  formation 
of  the  Delian  Confederacy,  and  to  have  been  from  the  first 
an  international  or  federal  issue.  It  is  noteworthy  that  it 
never  bears  the  name  of  Cyzicus ;  only  the  tunny,  the  well- 
known  type  of  the  city,  serves  to  mark  the  place  of  mintage. 
For  a  century  and  a  half  it  represented  Hellas,  as  the  daric 
represented  Persia,  on  the  Ionian  and  Pontic  coasts,  and 
only  came  to  an  end  with  the  establishment  of  Macedonian 
supremacy,  when  the  gold  Philips  and  Alexanders  ousted  it. 

In  determining  the  periods  of  issue  of  these  coins,  three 
kinds  of  consideration  have  to  be  taken  into  account :  (1) 
historic  probability,  (2)  the  evidence  of  ancient  historians 
and  inscriptions,  and  (3)  the  evidence  of  the  coins  themselves. 

(1)  The  indications  of  historic  probability  are  clear.  If 
the  King  of  Persia  jealously  guarded  his  monopoly  of  the 
issue  of  gold  coin,  and  if  he,  in  accordance  with  the  general 
view  of  antiquity,  regarded  electrum  as  a  species  of  gold, 
then  it  is  improbable  that  he  would  permit  any  of  the  cities 
of  Asia  under  his  immediate  lordship  to  begin  an  issue  ot 
electrum  coins.  Such  issues  must  almost  necessarily  have 
begun  at  a  time  when  the  Persian  power  on  the  coast  was 
destroyed,  or  at  least  greatly  weakened.  Now  it  is  well  known 
that  Persian  lordship  did  thus  suffer  a  check  in  the  days 
following  the  repulse  of  Xerxes  from  Greece.  The  Greek 
victory  of  Mycale  in  479  did  much  to  drive  back  the  Persian 


234         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

power.  Herodotus  (ix.  106)  tells  us  that  immediately  the 
people  of  Samos,  Chios,  Lesbos,  and  other  islands  joined  the 
Greek  league,  and  after  Cimon  had  in  466  won  the  great 
battle  on  the  Eurymedon,  Persia  was  still  further  repulsed. 
"Whether  this  battle  was  followed  by  a  peace  humiliating  to 
Persia  is  a  matter  much  discussed  by  historians.  But  in  any 
case  it  is  certain  that  the  result  of  it  was  to  secure  autonomy 
to  the  Hellenic  cities  of  Asia.  And  we  learn  on  excellent 
authority  that  there  was  a  definite  agreement  that  Persian 
war-fleets  should  not  appear  in  the  Aegean.  From  this 
time,  for  a  while,  the  Greek  cities  suffered  little  interference 
from  Persia.  At  first  they  were  subject  to  Athens ;  but 
after  the  disaster  in  Sicily  the  power  of  Sparta  also  largely 
prevailed  on  the  Asiatic  coast. 

That  Cyzicus  and  the  other  cities  began  their  issues  of 
electrum  after  Mycale  and  under  Athenian  protection  seems 
very  probable.  The  Cyzicene  staters,  as  we  know,  were 
largely  used  by  the  Athenians,  especially  for  their  trade  in 
the  Black  Sea.  But  the  date  of  their  cessation  is  less  easy 
to  determine ;  the  evidence  of  the  coins  themselves  must 
decide.  We  can,  however,  easily  suppose  that  the  Persian 
king  might  be  willing  to  allow  in  the  fourth  century  the 
continuance  of  what  had  by  the  end  of  the  fifth  century 
become  quite  an  institution. 

(2)  Let  us  next  make  a  brief  survey  of  the  inscriptional 
and  literary  evidence. 

Various  writers  have  given  a  list  of  the  mentions  in 
inscriptions  of  Cyzicene  electrum  staters.1  One  of  the  earliest 
appears  to  be  in  the  Lygdamis  inscription  found  by  Sir  C. 
Newton  at  Halicarnassus,  and  dated  about  445  b.c.  The 
mention  here,  however,  is  only  of  staters,  and  the  staters 
need  not  have  been  Cyzicene.  Cyzicene  staters  occur  in 
a  fragment  of  the  building-records  of  the  Parthenon  of  the 
years  447  b.c.  onwards  (twenty-seven  staters  and  one  hecte) ; 
and  as  the  same  sum  recurs  year  after  year,  we  may  conclude 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1876,  295  (Head)  ;  Lenormant,  Revue  Numismatique,  1867. 
Recently  Mr.  Woodward  has  gone  carefully  into  the  matter.  J.  H.  S.,  xxxiv. 
p.  276. 


ELECTRUM  OF  ASIA  MINOR  235 

that  they  could  not  well  be  used  for  current  expenses.1 
During  the  Peloponnesian  War  Cyzicenes  were  used  with 
Attic  coins  for  official  payments  in  the  years  418,  416,  415, 
and  down  to  the  taking  of  Athens.  That  they  are  spoken 
of  as  gold  is  an  important  point,  as  it  seems  to  show  that 
the  mercantile  world  was  accustomed  to  regard  them 
as  coins  of  a  special  variety  of  gold  rather  than  of 
mixed  metal. 

Lysias  in  his  orations  against  Eratosthenes  (403  b.  a)  and 
Diogeiton  at  the  end  of  the  fifth  century  speak  of  them 
in  a  way  which  shows  that  at  that  time  they  constituted, 
with  the  darics.  the  main  gold  coinage  of  Greece.  Cyrus 
the  younger  promised  his  mercenaries  a  Cyzicene  stater  a 
month  as  pay.  The  gold  tetradrachm  (sic)  preserved  in  the 
Parthenon,  and  mentioned  in  the  inventories  of  01.  89,  3 
and  subsequent  years  (C.  L,  i,  p.  74),  was  doubtless  a  double 
stater  of  Cyzicus  or  Lampsacus.  Its  weight  was  7  drachms 
2|  obols  Attic,  that  is  500  grains  (grm.  32-40). 

At  a  considerably  later  time,  just  in  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century,  we  learn  from  the  oration  of  Demosthenes 
against  Phormio 2  that  then  Cyzicene  staters  were  current 
coin  on  the  shores  of  the  Black  Sea.  This  does  not,  how- 
ever, positively  prove  that  they  were  then  issued,  for  they 
might  naturally  continue  in  use  in  remote  districts  even 
when  the  mint  was  closed. 

Lampsacene  staters  (70  in  number)  are  mentioned  in 
an  Attic  inscription  of  434,  and  in  other  inscriptions  of 
the  same  period.  These  may  be  with  certainty  identified 
as  electrum  staters  of  Lampsacus,  not  the  gold  coins  issued 
from  that  mint,  as  we  shall  see,  at  a  somewhat  later  time. 

The  staters  and  hectae  of  Phocaea  are  mentioned  in 
several  Attic  inscriptions  dating  from  429-384  b.c.3  Staters 
of  Phocaea  are  also  mentioned  by  Thucydides  (iv.  52 
Sia^iXiov?  oTCLTTJpas  $a>/cafray,  of  the  year  424  b.  c.)  and 
by  Demosthenes,4  who  speaks  of  a  sum  of  300  Phocaic 


1  J.  E.  S.,  1914,  p.  277.  »  p.  914. 

C.  I.  A.,  i.  196,  649,  660.  «  n>&  BwornSr,  1019. 


236         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

staters  as  procured  at  Mytilene.  The  text  of  a  remarkable 
convention  between  Phocaea  and  Mytilene  for  the  common 
issue  of  electrum,  dating  from  about  the  end  of  the  fifth 
century,  was  published  by  Sir  C.  Newton.1  The  two  cities 
were  in  alternate  years  to  undertake  the  minting  of  the 
coins;  and  if  the  mint-master  debases  the  coin  beyond 
a  certain  point,  the  penalty  of  death  is  assigned.  It  is 
remarkable  that  so  important  a  detail  should  be  decided, 
not  by  the  city,  but  by  a  single  official. 

(3)  Turning  from  the  literary  and  inscriptional  evidence 
to  that  of  the  coins  themselves,  we  have  much  material 
to  deal  with.     And  first  of  Cyzicus. 

Every  one  accustomed  to  study  the  coins  of  the  ancient 
world  is  astonished  at  the  abundance,  the  variety,  and 
the  artistic  beauty  of  the  Cyzicene  staters2  (PI.  VI.  2). 
172  different  types  were  mentioned  by  Mr.  Green  well  in 
1887 ;  and  more  are  now  known.  The  inscriptional  and 
literary  evidence  makes  it  clear  that  the  staters  of  Cyzicus, 
together  with  the  darics,  constituted  the  main  gold  coinage 
of  the  Greek  world  from  the  time  of  Thucydides  to  that 
of  Demosthenes.  Yet  Cyzicus  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
a  great  or  wealthy  city.  It  belonged  to  the  Satrapy  of 
which  the  chief  resided  at  Dascylium.  It  had  great  natural 
advantages,  being  built  on  a  peninsula,  united  with  the 
mainland  of  Mysia  only  by  a  narrow  neck  of  land,3  and 
having  two  good  harbours.  But  we  are  told  by  Thucydides 
(viii.  107)  that  as  late  as  411  b.c.  the  city  was  unfortified, 
and  was  occupied  almost  without  resistance  by  the  Athenian 
fleet.  It  seems  to  have  been  in  the  Roman  age  that  it  grew, 
and  covered  much  ground.  Why  a  city  comparatively 
unimportant  should  have  possessed  so  remarkable  a  privi- 
lege  presents   an    interesting    historic    problem.      In    my 

1  Roy.  Soc.  Lit.,  viii.  549.     Michel,  Recueil,  No.  8. 

2  ATw»w.  Chron.,  1887  :  a  more  complete  account  by  von  Fritze,  Nomisma, 
Part  VII. 

3  Originally  it  seems  to  have  been  an  island,  but  the  passage  between  it 
and  the  mainland  was  silted  up  by  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  who  cut 
a  fresh  canal  across  the  isthmus.  Plans  of  the  site  are  given  in  Journ.  Hell. 
Stud.,  1902,  pi.  XI ;  1904,  pi.  VI. 


ELECTEUM  OF  ASIA  MINOR  237 

opinion  the  secret  must  be  the  patronage  of  Athens,  which 
was  at  the  height  of  its  power  in  the  time  of  Cimon,  and 
down  to  the  disaster  in  Sicily.  Some  of  the  types  of 
the  staters  of  Cyzicus,  the  Tyrannicides  Harmodius  and 
Aristogeiton,  Cecrops,  Ge  holding  the  young  Erichthonius, 
Triptolemus  in  his  winged  car,  are  quite  Attic.  One, 
the  young  Heracles  strangling  serpents,  commemorates 
the  victory  of  Conon  over  the  Spartans  in  394  B.C.,  and 
cannot  have  been  struck  much  later  than  that  year. 


As  regards  the  dates  of  the  Cyzicene  coins,  numismatic 
authorities  are  not  altogether  agreed.  Mr.  Greenwell,  on 
the  evidence  of  style,  gives  them  to  the  period  500-360  b.c. 
Mr.  Head  in  1876  was  disposed  to  think  that  their  issue 
ceased  early  in  the  fourth  century.  French  and  German 
numismatists1  had,  on  the  other  hand,  brought  the  latest 
of  them  down  to  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great  (331). 
In  the  Historia  Numorum  Mr.  Head  accepts  the  date 
500-350.  And  in  the  British  Museum  Catalogue  of 
Mysia  the  latest  date  is  fixed  at  350,  the  cessation  of  the 
Cyzicenes  being  regarded  as  the  result  of  the  great  issues 
of  gold  coin  by  Philip  of  Macedon. 

One  of  the  latest  of  the  staters  of  Cyzicus  is  a  coin  pub- 
lished by  Millingen,2  bearing  the  inscription  EAEYOEPIA, 
which  has  been  regarded  as  a  reference  to  Alexander's 
victory  at  the  Granicus.  It  is,  however,  more  than  doubt- 
ful whether  the  people  of  Cyzicus,  who  had  already  enjoyed 
freedom,  would  look  on  the  Macedonian  conquest  in  this 
light.  Mr.  Head  suggests  that  the  reference  is  rather  to 
the  victory  of  Conon  at  Cnidus  in  394  B.C.,  and  he  finds 
nothing  in  the  style  of  the  coin  to  conflict  with  the 
supposition.3  But  a  far  more  suitable  occasion  for  the 
boast  of  freedom  is  suggested  by  the  assertion  of  Marquardt4 

1  F.  Lenormant,  in  Revue  Numistnatique,  1864,  1867 ;  Brandis,  p.  177. 
*  Anc.  Greek  Coins,  pL  V.  11. 

3  Head,  in  Num.  Chron.,  1876,  p.  292. 

4  Kyzikos  und  sein  Gebiet,  p.  65. 


238         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

that  the  people  of  Cyzicus  expelled  the  Persian  garrison 
in  365,  twenty-two  years  after  the  peace  of  Antalcidas. 
Marquardt's  ancient  authorities1  only  say  that  Timotheus 
liberated  Cyzicus  when  besieged ;  but  the  inference  of 
Marquardt  that  until  the  city  had  expelled  the  Persians 
it  could  hardly  have  been  besieged  by  them  seems  a 
reasonable  one.  It  was  after  this  time  that  Cyzicus  pos- 
sessed an  important  arsenal,  and  two  hundred  ship-sheds. 
As  the  Cyzicenes  repulsed  Memnon,  the  Rhodian  general 
of  Darius,  they  seem  to  have  preserved  their  autonomy 
until  the  time  of  Alexander.  As  the  Cyzicene  staters 
were  a  common  currency  till  beyond  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century,  there  does  not  appear  to  be  any  reason  why 
we  should  suppose  that  their  issue  ceased  before  Alexander's 
time,  or  at  all  events  before  the  taking  of  Athens  by  Philip. 

The  fifth-century  electrum  staters  of  Lampsacus,  the 
obverses  of  which  bear  the  type  of  half  a  winged  horse 
(PI.  VI.  1),  are  far  rarer  than  those  of  Cyzicus,  and  belong 
to  a  briefer  period.  What  that  period  was  seems  to  be 
decided  alike  by  the  style  of  the  coins,  and  by  the  fact 
that  several  of  them  were  found  with  a  number  of  Cyzicene 
staters  which  are  neither  archaic  nor  late  in  style.2  "We 
have  seen  that  Lampsacene  staters  are  mentioned  in  Attic 
inscriptions  from  447  B.C.  on,  and  this  date  admirably  suits 
the  extant  examples  of  the  coinage. 

The  small  hectae  or  sixths  issued  by  Mytilene  and 
Phocaea  in  conjunction,  in  accordance  with  the  above- 
mentioned  treaty,  the  text  of  which  has  come  down  to 
us,  are  extant  in  great  abundance.  There  is  but  one  stater 
of  Mytilene  known,  and  as  yet  none  of  Phocaea.  "We  have, 
however,  seen  that  staters  and  hectae  of  Phocaea  are  fre- 
quently mentioned  in  Attic  inscriptions. 

Some  of  the  hectae  of  Phocaea  are  distinctly  archaic 
in  style.     M.  Babelon 3  does  not  hesitate  to  attribute  them 

1  Diodorus,  xv.  80 ;  Cornelius  Nepos,  Timotheus,  1. 

2  This  find  is  published  in  the  Numismatic  Chronicle,  1876,  p.  277. 
8  Revue  Numismatique,  1895,  p.  12. 


ELECTRUM  OF  ASIA  MINOR  239 

to  a  time  before  the  Persian  War.  Mr.  Head  gives  them  to 
the  end  of  the  sixth  century.1  But  the  weakness  of  the 
city  at  that  time  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  it  contributed 
only  three  ships  to  the  Ionian  fleet.  Most  of  the  inhabitants 
had  abandoned  the  city  to  sail  to  the  west.  It  is  unlikely 
that  at  such  a  time  it  would  begin  an  issue  of  electrum 
coins.  I  should  therefore  regard  them  as  issued  just  after 
480  b.c.  And  Mr.  Wroth  gives  the  corresponding  coins 
of  Lesbos  to  480-350  b.c,  in  the  B.  M.  Cat.  Troas,  <Lc 

The  only  existing  electrum  stater  of  Chios  of  a  period 
later  than  the  Persian  wars  is  at  Berlin  (B.  T.  VIII.  9). 
Its  fabric  is  like  that  of  the  Cyzicene  staters,  and  the  type, 
the  Sphinx,  is  enclosed  in  a  vine-wreath,  just  like  that 
on  the  already  mentioned  staters  of  Lampsacus.  There  can 
be  little  doubt  that  it  is  contemporary  with  these  latter, 
dating  from  the  time  of  the  Peloponnesian  War.2 


Such  are  our  data.  What  are  the  historic  results  to  be 
drawn  from  them  ? 

It  seems  abundantly  clear  that  at  some  date  not  long 
after  480  b.  c.  three  or  four  of  the  cities  of  the  coast  resumed 
their  issues  of  electrum.  The  chief  of  these  cities  were 
Cyzicus,  Mytilene,  and  Phocaea;  Lampsacus  and  Chios 
joining  them  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century.  It 
is  impossible  to  tell  with  certainty  when  the  issues  of 
Cyzicus,  Lesbos,  and  Phocaea  began,  since  we  have  only 
the  evidence  of  style  to  go  by.  But  the  incuse  reverses 
of  the  earliest  examples  are  distinctly  later  than  those  of 
the  group  of  coins  which  I  have  given  to  500-494  b.c. 
The  incuses  of  Cyzicus  and  Phocaea  are  of  mill-sail  type ; 
those  of  Lesbos  are  in  the  form  of  a  second  type.  Thus 
the  examination  of  the  coins  themselves  confirms  the  view 
which  is  in  itself  far  the  most  probable,  that  these  issues 
of  electrum  were  not  sanctioned  by  Persia,  but  were  begun 

1  Cat.  Ionia,  p.  xxii. 

2  I  leave  this  paragraph  as  I  published  it  in  1913  :  it  is  satisfactory  to  find 
that  Mr.  Mavrogordato  {Num.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  367)  accepts  this  date. 


240         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

at  the  time  after  the  battles  of  Plataea  and  Mycale,  when 
Greek  fleets  sailed  the  Aegean,  and  the  power  of  Persia 
was  being  driven  steadily  westward  by  the  arms  of  Athens. 
They  are  a  sign  of  the  Ionic  independence  of  Persia  which 
had  been  lost  for  half  a  century,  except  during  the  stormy 
years  of  the  Ionian  revolt. 

It  would  be  natural  to  expect  that  in  the  early  years 
of  the  fourth  century,  when  the  mutual  hostilities  of  Sparta 
and  Athens  had  allowed  the  Persian  power  to  reassert 
itself  on  the  shores  of  the  Aegean,  and  especially  after 
the  peace  of  Antalcidas  had  acknowledged  the  suzerainty 
of  the  Persian  king  over  the  Ionian  cities,  the  electrum 
issues  of  Cyzicus  and  the  other  cities  would  come  to  an  end. 
This  appears,  from  the  evidence  of  the  coins  and  of  the 
orations  of  Demosthenes,  not  to  have  been  the  case.  For 
some  reason  or  other  the  Great  King  allowed  the  invasion 
of  his  prerogative  of  issuing  gold  coin  to  go  on.  "Why  he 
did  so  we  cannot  with  certainty  say.  We  must,  however, 
remember  that  though  the  power  of  Persia  seemed  to  be 
increasing  in  the  early  part  of  the  fourth  century  it  was 
less  centralized.  The  Satraps  of  Asia  Minor  were  often 
in  revolt,  and  maintained  something  like  independence. 
And  the  long  reign  of  Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  405-359  B.C., 
was  not  one  in  which  the  privileges  of  royalty  were  strongly 
asserted. 

The  electrum  issues  seem  to  have  persisted  at  Cyzicus 
until  the  appearance  of  the  gold  coins  of  Alexander  the 
Great.  Mr.  Head  has  suggested  as  a  reason  for  their 
ceasing  the  abundant  issues  of  gold  coins  by  Philip  II  of 
Macedon.  This,  however,  appears  to  be  a  less  likely 
occasion.  Philip  had  little  authority  on  the  Asiatic  side 
of  the  Bosporus ;  and  one  does  not  see  why  the  cities  of 
Asia  should  forgo  their  own  commercial  advantage  in 
order  to  further  the  circulation  of  his  money.  It  seems 
likely  that  the  popularity  of  the  gold  Philippi  would  rather 
decrease  the  volume  of  the  issue  of  electrum  than  bring  it 
to  an  end. 


ELECTRUM  OF  ASIA  MINOR  241 

We  have  next  to  consider  how  the  Cyzicene  stater  was 
related  in  value  to  other  current  coins.  No  doubt  in  Greece, 
as  in  the  modern  world,  there  would  usually  be  an  agio,  and 
the  rate  of  exchange  would  fluctuate  accordingly  as  gold, 
electrum  or  silver  was  in  greater  demand  in  the  market. 
Yet  there  would  probably  be  a  normal  equivalence. 

This  Mr.  "Woodward  has  tried  to  fix  by  means  of  Attic 
inscriptions  ; *  but  unfortunately  these  are  so  imperfect  in 
preservation  that  they  do  not  give  him  the  means  to  solve 
the  problem  with  certainty.  He  shows,  however,  that 
electrum  staters  of  Cyzicus  were  used  at  Athens  in  418-414 
b.  c.  in  payment  to  strategi.  The  ratio  to  the  Attic  drachm 
is  fixed  approximately  to  24  to  1  by  possible  restorations  of 
the  inscriptions. 

It  is  almost  certain  that  the  Cyzicene  and  the  daric  were 
regarded  as  equivalent.  This  I  have  tried  to  show  else- 
where, by  three  or  four  lines  of  argument.2  Mercenaries  in 
Asia  were  sometimes  paid  a  daric  a  month,  and  sometimes 
a  Cyzicene  a  month.  The  soldiers  of  Cyrus  the  younger 
received  a  daric  a  month,  which  pay,  in  consideration  of  the 
serious  nature  of  his  expedition,  he  increased  to  a  daric  and 
a  half.3  Later  on,  the  same  troops  are  promised  by  Timasion 
a  Cyzicene  a  month ;  *  and  Seuthes  of  Thrace  promises  them 
the  same  pay.5  And  the  equivalence  is  confirmed  by  analysis. 
A  fair  average  proportion  of  gold  and  silver  in  a  Cyzicene 
of  254  grains  is  117  grains  of  gold  and  137  of  silver,  the 
latter  being  equal  to  10  more  grains  of  gold.  Thus  the 
whole  coin  is  about  of  the  value  of  127  grains  of  gold,  and 
127  grains  is  just  the  weight  of  the  daric,  which  is  almost 
pure  gold.  Further,  it  is  noteworthy  that  the  silver  coins 
of  Cyzicus,  dating  from  400  B.C.,  are  struck  on  the  Phoenician 
standard  of  about  232  grains  :  of  these  pieces  15  at  the  rate 
of  1  :  13§  are  the  equivalent  of  two  darics.  The  system  of 
silver  is  clearly  adapted  to  a  currency  of  darics;  but  we 
must  also  in  reason  believe  that  it  was  also  adapted  to  a 

1  J.  H.  S.,  1914,  p.  278.  *  Num.  Chron.,  1887,  p.  186. 

8  Anab.  i.  3.  21.  *  Anab.  v.  6.  23. 

8  Anab.  vii.  3.  10. 

1*7  B. 


242         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

currency  of  electrum  staters ;    that  is,  that  the  daric  and 
the  electrum  stater  were  equivalent. 

The  daric,  we  know,  was  equivalent  to  20  Persian  sigli  or 
shekels ;  and  as  the  value  of  the  Persian  siglos  was  in 
Xenophon's  time  regarded  in  Asia  as  equal  to  1\  Attic 
obols,  or  1^-  Attic  drachms,1  the  daric  must  have  been  there 
equivalent  to  25  Attic  silver  drachms.  We  have,  it  is  true, 
another  statement  in  Hesychius,  that  the  Persian  siglos  was 
equivalent  to  8  Attic  obols,  and  therefore  the  daric  to  26§ 
Attic  drachms;  and  this  value  may  have  held  in  some 
places ;  but  the  statement  of  Xenophon,  based  on  his  per- 
sonal experience  in  Asia,  is  to  be  preferred. 

With  regard  to  the  value  of  the  Oyzicene  in  Attic  silver, 
we  have  a  number  of  conflicting  statements.  It  is  probable 
that  24-25  drachms  was  the  ordinary  or  standard  value. 
But  in  the  works  of  the  great  orators,  whose  testimony  is 
apt  to  be  warped  by  the  interests  of  their  clients,  there  is 
considerable  divergency.  Very  instructive  is  the  oration 
against  Phormio  by  Demosthenes.  The  question  raised  in 
it  is,  whether  Phormio  has  or  has  not  paid  to  one  Lampis 
in  Bosporus  a  debt  of  2,600  Attic  drachms.  Phormio 
declares  that  he  has  paid  it  with  120  Cyzicene  staters,  to 
which  Demosthenes  replies  that  this  is  on  the  face  of  the 
thing  absurd,  since  a  Cyzicene  stater  is  worth  28  drachms,  and 
so  120  staters  are  worth  3,360  drachms,  and  not  2,600.  Thus 
Phormio  reckoned  the  value  of  a  Cyzicene  at  21 1  Attic 
drachms,  and  Demosthenes  at  28.  We  have  no  means  of 
deciding  between  them ;  but  if  we  regard  the  two  valua- 
tions as  representing  the  extreme  fluctuations  of  value, 
25  drachms  is  just  midway  between  them.  All  these  dis- 
tinct lines  of  reasoning  seem  to  point  to  a  normal  or  ideal 
equivalence  of  the  daric  and  the  Cyzicene. 

The  value  in  currency  of  the  hectae  of  Phocaea  is  not 
easy  to  fix  definitely.  They  weigh  about  40  grains  (grm. 
2-60)  and  their  pale  colour  suggests  that  they  contain  but 
a  small  proportion  of  gold,  a  suspicion  which  analysis  has 

1  Anab.  i.  5.  6. 


ELECTRUM  OF  ASIA  MINOR  243 

confirmed.  J.  Hammer  has  submitted  the  composition  of 
the  hectae  of  Phocaea  and  Mytilene  to  a  careful  examina- 
tion.1 The  result  is  to  show  that  they  are  regular  and 
uniform  in  mixture.  They  contain  40  per  cent,  of  gold, 
52  of  silver,  and  8  of  copper ;  they  are  thus  rather  less  than 
half  of  pure  gold  in  value.  This  would  give  us  16  grains 
of  gold  and  21  grains  of  silver  for  the  hecte.  If  then  gold 
were  to  silver  as  14  to  1,  we  should  have  a  value  of  grm. 
15-87,  245  grains  of  silver;  if  of  13  to  1  of  grm.  14-83, 
229  grains  of  silver ;  if  of  12  to  1  of  grm.  13-80,  213  grains 
of  silver.  A  natural  supposition  would  be  that  they  passed 
as  the  equivalent  of  a  Cyzicene  silver  tetradrachm  (232 
grains) ;  but  the  only  mention  of  them  in  literature  scarcely 
confirms  this  equivalence.  Crates,  the  Athenian  comic  poet, 
is  quoted  by  Julius  Pollux2  as  saying  in  his  Lamia  that 
a  half-hecte  of  gold  was  equivalent  to  eight  obols  (of  silver). 
One  would  naturally  suppose  that  Crates  was  speaking  of 
Attic  obols;  in  which  case  he  would  equate  the  hecte 
of  gold  (electrum)  with  16  obols,  2|  drachms,  180  grains 
of  silver  (11-66  grm.).  As  Hesychius  gives  the  value  of 
a  Persian  silver  siglos  or  shekel  as  eight  Attic  obols,  the 
hecte  would  seem  to  have  been  equivalent  to  two  shekels. 
The  difficulty  is  that  this  fixes  the  value  of  electrum  so 
very  low.  at  only  four  and  a  half  times  the  value  of  silver ; 
and  we  are  accustomed  to  higher  exchange  values  for 
electrum. 

III.     The  Islands. 

In  the  Introduction  to  the  British  Museum  Catalogue 
of  Coins  of  the  Aegean  Islands,  Mr.  Wroth  observes,3  'The 
troubles  of  the  Persian  Wars,  and  the  long  period  during 
which  the  Aegean  Islands  were  in  more  or  less  complete 
subjection  to  Athens,  seem  to  have  been  unfavourable  to 
the   appearance   of   currencies   in  the    islands,    and   coins 

1  Zeit.  f.  Num.  26,  p  47. 

1  Onomasticon,  ix.  62.     The  half- hecte  mentioned  must  be  of  Mytilene  or  of 
Cyzicus. 
*  p.  xliv. 

E2 


244         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

belonging  to  the  fifth  century,  and,  in  a  less  degree,  to 
the  earlier  part  of  the  fourth,  are  rare.'  But  the  rarity 
or  abundance  of  such  coins  is  less  to  our  present  purpose 
than  the  concession  or  withholding  by  the  Athenians  of 
the  right  to  strike  money  at  all.  As  a  general  rule  the 
issue  of  coins  by  Aegean  Islands,  which  had  been  a  marked 
feature  of  the  sixth  century,1  entirely  ceases  at  the  Persian 
wars. 

Dr.  R.  Weil  has,  however,  published  an  important  paper, 
in  the  Zeitschrift  fur  NumismatiJc  for  1910,  in  which  he 
tries  to  show  that  at  first  Athens  did  not  interfere  much 
with  the  island  issues;  but  that  as  her  hold  on  members 
of  the  Confederacy  tightened,  one  island  after  another 
ceased  to  issue  money ;  but  a  contributing  cause  was  the 
impoverishment  of  the  island  world  in  the  fifth  century. 
The  large  island  of  Naxos  certainly  issued  no  coins  for 
a  long  time  after  the  island  was  conquered  by  the  Athenians 
in  470  b.c.  and  a  colony  settled  there.  We  must  briefly 
consider  the  island  coinages  which  persisted  into  the  fifth 
century.  Notable  among  them  is  the  money  of  Peparethus, 
dealt  with  by  Mr.  Wroth.2  Mr.  Wroth  thinks  that  the 
most  striking  specimens  belong  to  the  beginning  of  the 
fifth  century;  he  adds,  'Between  circ.  470  and  400  b.c. 
there  is  a  broad  gap  in  the  coinage  of  Peparethus  '. 

More  important,  and  coming  down  to  a  later  time,  is 
the  coinage  of  Melos.  Melos  is  said  to  have  been  peopled 
by  Minyae  from  Lemnos  and  Imbros ;  but  for  practical  pur- 
poses it  was  Dorian.  Already,  in  the  sixth  century,  Melos 
struck  coins  on  a  different  standard  from  that  of  most  of 
the  other  islands  of  the  Aegean,  the  stater  weighing  about 
224  grains  (grm.  14*50).  Certain  coins  of  the  Santorin  find 
(p.  122)  are  not  of  Aeginetan  but  of  this  Phoenician  weight. 
Their  types  are — head  and  tail  of  fish,  head  of  boar,  head  oi 
satyr  with  pointed  ear :  in  each  case  the  reverse  bears  ai 
incuse  square  without  definite  divisions.  These  coins  can 
hardly  be  assigned  to  cities  by  their  types ;  and  they  are 

1  See  especially  Num.  Chron.,  1884,  PI.  XII,  p.  269. 
a  Journ.  HeU.  Stud.,  1907. 


THE  ISLANDS  245 

uniiiscribed.  But  some  of  them  at  all  events  may  belong  to 
a  group  of  islands  which  use  from  the  first  the  Phoenician 
standard  :  the  southern  Cyclades,  including  Melos  Thera 
and  Carpathos.  Though  the  coins  of  these  places  are  mostly 
later  than  the  find  of  Santorin,  they  begin  in  the  sixth  cen- 
tury.    Among  the  earliest  issues  are  the  following : 

Melos. 

Obv.  MAAI  (archaic).  Ewer.     Rev.  Incuse  square,  divided  into 
four  by  two  diagonals.     Weight,  223  grains  (grm.  1445). 
(B.  T.  LXII.  8,  9.) 
Poseidion  in  Carpathos. 

Obv.  Two  dolphins  passing  one  another  within  a  linear  square. 
Rev.  Incuse  square  divided  by  a  bar  into  two  oblongs. 
Weight,  217-210  grains  (grm.  1406-13-60).  (B.  T.  XIX. 
8-10.) 

If  one  looks  at  the  map  of  the  Aegean,1  the  facts  may  almost 
be  said  to  '  leap  to  the  eyes '.  Melos  belongs  to  a  line  of 
Dorian  islands  running  across  the  sea  from  Laconia  to  Caria  : 
Melos,  Thera,  Astypalaea,  Carpathos,  Rhodes.  The  cities  of 
Poseidion  in  Carpathos,  and  Ialysus  and  Lindus  in  Rhodes, 
use  the  same  standard ;  whereas  Cos,  and  Camirus  in 
Rhodes,  like  Cnidus  and  the  cities  of  the  mainland  of 
Caria,  use  the  Aeginetan  standard.  There  was  at  Melos 
a  tradition  of  a  Phoenician  colony  from  Byblus;  and  it 
is  likely  that  the  monetary  standard  of  this  kindred  group 
of  cities  was  in  origin  Phoenician.  Some  of  the  letters  of 
the  Melian  alphabet  are  also  strikingly  like  those  of 
Phoenicia.  The  Laconian  settlement  was  very  early ;  but 
it  does  not  seem  to  have  brought  with  it  the  Pheidonian 
weights;  whereas  the  islands  to  the  north  of  Melos — Paros, 
Naxos,  Siphnos,  and  the  rest — strike  staters  of  Aeginetan 
weight  freely  in  the  sixth  century,  Melos,  Carpathos,  and 
Rhodes  adhere  to  the  Phoenician  standard.  In  this  con- 
nexion it  is  important  to  observe  that  the  finds  in  Rhodes 
belonging  to  the  archaic  period  contain  many  objects  of 
Phoenician  character. 

1  Kiepert's  Format  Orbis  antiqui  PI.  XII. 


246         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

This  coinage  was  continued  at  Melos  into  the  fifth 
century.  Recent  finds  show  that  it  was  abundant  and 
marked  with  a  great  variety  of  types  on  the  reverse,  the 
obverse  being  occupied  by  the  pomegranate,  inscriptions 
rendering  the  attribution  certain  (PI.  VI.  3,  4).  Among 
the  reverse  types  we  may  note  a  triquetra,  a  wheel,  a  flower, 
three  dolphins,  a  crescent,  a  ram's  head,  a  helmeted  head,  &C.1 
This  is  the  only  important  coinage  of  the  Aegean  in  the 
time  of  the  Delian  League.  Its  existence  helps  us  to 
understand  the  bitter  feelings  towards  the  Melians  in  the 
minds  of  the  people  of  Athens,  which  led  to  the  massacre 
of  416  b.o.  Until  425  b.c,  the  year  of  the  deepest  humilia- 
tion of  Sparta  and  the  greatest  triumph  of  Athens,  Melos 
does  not  figure  in  the  Athenian  tribute  lists,  but  in  the 
list  of  increased  payments,  rage?  <f>6pov,  of  that  year  Melos 
is  assessed  at  15  talents,  the  same  as  Andros  and  Naxos. 
Whether  this  tribute  was  ever  actually  paid  we  cannot  tell. 
But  Thucydides  tells  us  that  the  demand  made  to  the 
Melians  in  427  that  they  should  accede  to  the  League  of 
Delos  was  rejected  by  the  islanders,  and  that  Nicias  failed 
in  his  attempt  to  coerce  them,  though  he  sailed  to  Melos 
with  a  fleet  of  60  triremes  and  ravaged  it.  Thucydides 
adds  that  in  fact  the  Melians  had  never  been  allies  of 
Athens.  The  importance  of  their  issues  of  coins  shows 
that  the  island  was  wealthy  and  prosperous.  Unfortunately 
we  cannot  venture  to  decide  whether  these  issues  ceased 
in  425  or  416. 

After  the  fall  of  Athens,  a  remnant  of  the  Melians  were 
restored  to  their  island  by  Lysander.  They  recommenced 
a  coinage  on  the  Chian  or  Rhodian  standard,  which  in  the 
early  years  of  the  fourth  century  was  rapidly  making  way. 

The  group  of  islands  to  the  south  of  Delos,  comprising 
Paros  and  Siphnos,  seems  to  have  passed  through  similar 
vicissitudes.  Paros  and  Siphnos  continued  into  the  fifth 
century  their  early  coinage  of  Aeginetan  weight.  This 
coinage  may  have  lasted  until  450  b.c,  up  to  which  time 

1  See  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  486  ;  Rev.  Num.,  1908,  pp.  301  and  foil,  and  1909 ; 
Traitd,  ii.  3,  PI.  CCXLI-II. 


THE  ISLANDS  247 

the  three  islands  do  not  appear  in  the  Attic  tribute  lists. 
After  that  year  they  pay  heavy  tribute,  and  cease  to  strike 
coins  until  the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  when  Naxos  and 
Paros  resume  the  issue  of  money  on  the  Chian  standard. 
Of  the  three  islands,  Siphnos  is  nearest  to  Attica,  and 
hence  we  are  not  surprised  to  find  there  more  traces  of 
the  influence  of  Athenian  commerce.  The  stater  in  the 
early  fifth  century  is  of  Aeginetic  weight  (186-4  grains) 
(PI.  VI.  5),  but  it  is  divided  into  three  drachms  of  Attic 
standard,  60-61  grains  (grm.  3-88-3-95).    (See  Chap.  XVIII.) 

Coming  next  to  the  islands  close  to  Attica  we  find,  as 
we  should  expect,  clear  traces  of  the  Athenian  monopoly. 
Aegina  became  tributary  to  Athens  in  456  b.c.  j1  and  it 
is  probable  that  after  that  date  the  coinage  of  Aegina 
ceases,  though  M.  Babelon  attributes  some  small  coins 
(drachms  and  obols)  to  a  later  date.  At  any  rate  we  must 
regard  the  coinage  as  coming  to  an  end  in  431  B.C.,  when 
the  island  was  finally  conquered  and  the  people  ejected. 
After  the  conquest  of  Athens  by  Lysander,  the  inhabitants 
of  Aegina  were  reinstated,  and  resumed  their  coinage  on 
the  old  standard. 

In  the  island  of  Euboea,  Athenian  dominance  makes 
a  clear  breach  in  the  coinage.  Mr.  Head  observes  that 
after  the  Persian  wars  the  coinage  of  Euboea  undergoes 
three  changes:  (1)  the  coins  become  thinner,  and  flatter; 
(2)  reverse  types  appear;  (3)  inscriptions  come  in.  Such 
coins  are  issued  at  Chalcis  (types,  flying  eagle  with  serpent 
in  beak ;  wheel)  (B.  T.  XXXI.  1-6) ; 2  at  Eretria  (types,  cow 
scratching  itself;  and  sepia)  (B.  T .  XXXII.  1-6) ;  and  at 
Carystus  (types,  cow  suckling  calf;  and  cock)  (B.  T. 
XXXII.  14-15).  How  long  these  issues  lasted  we  cannot 
be  sure;  but  they  would  certainly  cease  in  445  b.c,  when 
the  island  was  conquered  by  Pericles.  After  the  Sicilian 
disaster  in  41 1  b.  c,  Euboea  recovered  her  autonomy. 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  397  ;  cf.  Rev.  Num.,  1913,  p.  470. 

2  Cat.  Central  Greece,  p.  Iv. 


248         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

IV.     Ionia  and  Caria. 

As  regards  the  cessation  of  coinage  in  the  cities  of  Asia, 
our  evidence  is  of  course  negative.  We  know  that  we  have 
no  coins  of  certain  cities  at  given  periods ;  but  at  any  time 
a  fresh  find  may  furnish  us  with  the  missing  coins.  Also, 
it  is  not  easy,  in  the  absence  of  definite  evidence,  to  assign 
an  exact  date  to  the  issues  of  many  of  the  cities  of  Asia 
Minor. 

The  facts,  however,  appear  to  be  these  :  The  three  great 
islands  of  the  Ionian  coast,  Chios,  Samos,  and  Lesbos,  which 
were  admitted  to  the  Delian  League  on  terms  of  equality 
with  Athens,  seem  to  have  issued  coins  almost  uninter- 
ruptedly during  the  fifth  century;  but  with  differences. 
We  will  begin  with  Samos,  the  history  of  which  island  is 
well  known  to  us.1  After  the  suppression  of  the  Ionian 
Revolt,  during  which  Samos  had  issued  electrum  staters, 
the  city  struck  an  abundant  coinage  in  silver  on  a  standard 
used  also  at  Ephesus  and  other  Ionian  cities,  which  I  call 
the  standard  of  Miletus,  and  which  is  generally  regarded  as 
a  light  variety  of  the  Phoenician  standard.  The  stater  or 
tetradrachm  weighs  about  204  grains  (grm.  13-22).  It  is 
noteworthy  that  three  Attic  drachms  would  be  almost 
equivalent,  202-5  grains  (grm.  13-12).  The  results  at  Samos 
of  the  revolt  and  the  Athenian  conquest  of  439  b.  c.  are  very 
apparent.  For  a  short  time  the  Milesian  standard  is 
abandoned  for  the  Attic,  tetradrachms  and  drachms  of  Attic 
weight  being  issued.  The  style  of  these  coins  is  different 
from,  and  superior  to,  that  of  the  Samian  issues,  so  that  the 
die  was  probably  made  by  an  Athenian  artist.2  Afterwards, 
when  the  coinage  of  Milesian  weight  is  resumed,  the  olive- 
branch  of  Athens  regularly  takes  its  place  on  the  coin 
behind  the  half-bull,  thus  testifying  to  Athenian  supremacy.3 
The  Samians,  however,  were  not  expelled,  nor  were  their 
lands  given  to  Athenian  settlers :  they  were  only  compelled 

1  I  have  written  a  treatise  on  Samos  and  its  coinage  :  Samos  and  Samian 
Coins,  Macmillan,  1882.     (Reprint  from  the  Numismatic  Chronicle.) 

2  Samos  and  Samian  Coins,  PI.  II,  1,  2.  s  Ibid.,  Pis.  II,  III. 


IONIA  AND  CARIA  249 

to  surrender  their  fleet  and  raze  their  fortifications:  they 
still  remained,  at  least  in  name,  allies  rather  than  subjects. 
It  is  satisfactory  to  find  an  instance  of  clemency  after  con- 
quest by  Athens,  and  in  fact  after  conquest  long  and  pain- 
fully delayed,  to  set  against  the  well-known  examples  of 
Athenian  harshness  in  the  cases  of  Mytilene  and  Melos. 
The  reason  of  the  difference  may  be  the  nearness  in  blood 
between  Athens  and  Samos. 

The  metrological  relief  from  Samos,  in  the  Ashmolean 
Museum,1  is  also  an  interesting  monument  of  the  Athenian 
conquest.  It  records  the  measures  of  the  foot  and  the 
fathom  used  at  Samos  at  just  the  period  in  question,  and 
those  measures  are,  as  Michaelis  has  proved,  the  Attic. 
This  fact  is  very  interesting,  as  we  have  already  seen  from 
the  decrees  that  Athens  was  anxious  to  impose  her  weights 
and  measures  on  the  subject  states :  the  relief  confirms  this, 
being  evidently  a  standard  set  up  by  authority.  And  it 
proves  that  the  policy  of  Athens  was  fixed  at  least  as  early 
as  439  b.  c. 

What  happened  at  Samos  between  439  and  the  end  of 
the  century  is  not  easily  to  be  made  out.  Doubtless  the 
Athenians  set  up  a  democracy  in  the  island ;  and  since 
we  read  in  Thucydides 2  of  Samian  exiles  at  Anaea  on  the 
coast  of  Asia  opposite  Samos,  who  in  the  earlier  years  of 
the  Peloponnesian  War  sided  with  the  Spartans,  we  may 
be  sure  that  these  exiles  were  of  the  aristocratic  party. 
But  curiously,  when  the  island  again  emerges  into  the 
light  of  history  in  412  B.C.,  we  are  told  by  Thucydides 
that  the  party  in  power  was  the  aristocratic,  that  of  the 
gamori  or  landowners.  Against  these,  in  412,  the  demos 
revolted,  and  being  victorious,  with  the  help  of  some 
Athenian  ships,  was  accepted  by  Athens  as  an  equal  ally. 
Thucydides's  3  phrase  is  'Adrjvcu'cov  re  <r<f>i<ru>  avrovofiiav  /xera 
ravra  a>?  fieftacois  r]8rj  ^^Kraiikvaav,  ra  Xonra  Skokovv  t^v 
iroXiv.  This  implies  that  whereas,  until  412,  the  rule  at 
Samos  had  been  aristocratic,  and  the  Athenians  had  kept 

1  J.  H.  S.,  iv.  335  (Michaelis). 

2  iv.  75.  »  viii.  21. 


250         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

the  island  in  dependence,  after  that  date  they  felt  sure 
of  it  and  allowed  it  full  liberty.  But  on  what  occasion 
did  the  aristocratic  party  gain  the  upper  hand?  and  why 
did  Athens  allow  them  to  do  so  ? 

The  coins  from  439  onwards  fall  into  two  classes:  first, 
the  rare  coins  of  Attic  weight  (PL  VI.  6)  ;  second,  the  coins 
of  Samian  weight,  bearing  an  olive-twig  as  the  mark  of 
Athenian  supremacy.  These  are  usually  marked  in  the 
field  with  a  letter  of  the  alphabet,  the  earliest  being  B 
and  the  latest  H  (PL  VI.  7).  If  these  letters  mark  suc- 
cessive years,  they  imply  a  space  of  fourteen  years.  We 
may  suppose  that  Athens  prohibited  coinage,  save  on  the 
Attic  standard,  for  some  years  after  439;  but  that  the 
aristocratic  party,  coming  into  power  about  428,  at  the  time, 
we  may  suppose,  of  the  revolt  of  Lesbos,  issued  coins  for 
fourteen  years  or  more  on  the  old  Samian  standard,  but 
retaining  the  olive-branch  as  a  mark  of  loyalty. 

A  remarkable  and  quite  exceptional  silver  tetradrachm  ot 
Athens  (B.  T.  CLXXXVII.  7)  has  in  the  field  of  the  obverse 
a  bull's  head.  It  has  been  reasonably  supposed  that  this 
coin  records  some*  conjunction  between  Athens  and  Samos, 
of  which  island  the  bull's  head  is  a  frequent  type.  The  coin 
seems  to  be  in  style  too  late  for  the  time  of  the  Athenian 
conquest :  it  seems  more  reasonable,  with  Koehler,  to  assign 
it  to  the  time  of  Alcibiades,  when  the  Athenian  fleet  had  its 
head- quarters  at  Samos. 

The  silver  coinage  of  the  island  of  Chios  is  fairly  con- 
tinuous from  480  b.c.  to  the  time  of  Alexander,1  for  Chios 
was  never,  like  Samos  and  Lesbos,  completely  conquered 
by  Athens.  The  type  was  a  sphinx  and  an  amphora, 
above  which  are  grapes  (PL  VI.  8) :  in  these  we  may  find 
an  allusion  to  the  wine  of  Chios,  which  has  always  been 
celebrated.  The  stater  or  tetradrachm  weighed  240  grains 
(grm.  15-55)  and  the  more  usual  didrachm  120  grains  (grm. 
7-77).    This  is  clearly  the  old  standard  of  Phocaea,  used  for 

1  See  Mavrogordato  in  Num.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  364. 


IONIA  AND  CARIA  251 

gold  and  electrum  from  a  very  early  time.  I  shall  have  to 
dwell  on  the  importance  of  the  Chian  standard  in  the 
fifth  century,  an  importance  which  hitherto  no  one  has 
recognized. 

At  the  time  of  the  Ionian  Revolt  the  silver  stater  was 
divided  into  six,  and  coins  of  about  40  grains  (grm.  2-60) 
were  struck.1  Later  the  more  truly  Hellenic  division  by 
four  came  in,  and  drachms  of  60  grains  (grm.  3-90)  or  less 
made  their  appearance.  Such  a  collision  between  the 
customs  of  dividing  by  3  and  multiples,  and  dividing  by 
multiples  of  2,  meets  us  elsewhere,  in  Chalcidice  of  Macedonia 
and  in  South  Italy.  There  it  seems  to  result  from  a  collision 
of  Attic  and  Corinthian  influences.  At  Chios,  however,  we 
should  probably  regard  the  trinal  division  as  the  old  Asiatic 
custom,  and  the  dual  division  as  the  result  of  the  rapidly 
growing  Athenian  influence  of  the  fifth  century. 

Fortunately  for  us,  the  Chian  staters  are  mentioned  both 
by  Thucydides  and  Xenophon  in  a  way  which  gives  us 
valuable  information,  though  this  testimony  has  been 
usually  misunderstood.  At  the  end  of  the  Peloponnesian 
war,  the  Spartan  admiral  Mindarus,  sailing  from  Chios, 
in  411  b.c,  procured  as  pay  for  each  of  his  men  three 
Chian  fortieths,  rpefy  Tea-arapaKoa-Ta?  Xia?.2  Since  the 
tetradrachms  of  Chios,  reckoned  at  240  grains,  were  exactly 
one-fortieth  of  the  Aeginetan  mina  of  9,600  grains,  and 
as  it  was  quite  natural  for  the  sailors  of  Peloponnese  to 
look  at  them  in  relation  to  the  standard  to  which  they 
were  accustomed,  this  statement  exactly  tits  in  with  our 
knowledge.  What  each  sailor  received  was  clearly  three 
Chian  silver  tetradrachms.3  Xenophon,4  speaking  of  a  time 
a  little  later,  406  b.c,  narrates  that  Callicratidas,  the  Spartan 
admiral,  procured  for  each  of  his  sailors  from  Chios  a 
pentadrachmia.  Reading  this  statement  in  close  relation 
with  the  last,  we  may  conclude  that  each  soldier  received  two 
Chian  tetradrachms,  which  together  were  the  exact  equiva- 

1  J.  H.  S.,  1911,  p.  158 ;  1913,  p.  105.  2  Thuc.  viii.  101. 

8  Hultsch  rightly  identified  these  fortieths  :  Metrologie,  p.  554. 
*  Hellen.  i.  6.  12. 


252         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIftE 


. 


lent  of  five  Aeginetan  drachms  of  96  grains.  M.  Babelon 
and  Mr.  Head2  are,  I  think,  mistaken  in  supposing  that 
the  Chian  coin  is  equated  by  Xenophon  with  five  'south 
Ionian '  drachms  of  48  grains,  a  species  of  coin  which  I  do  . 
not  recognize.  Xenophon,  it  is  to  be  observed,  avoids  the 
word  7r€VTaSpaxfioj/,  which  would  imply  that  he  was  speak- 
ing of  coins  each  singly  of  the  value  of  five  drachms,  and 
uses  the  vaguer  term  irtvTaSpaxiita,  which  need  not  bear 
that  meaning.  If,  however,  we  prefer  to  regard  the  irtvTa- 
8pax/xia  as  a  coin,  the  Chian  silver  stater  of  the  time  is 
nearly  equivalent  to  five  drachms  of  Corinth,  which  are 
of  about  the  same  weight  as  Aeginetan  hemidrachms.  The 
view  of  M.  Six,  who  regarded  the  Chian  pentadrachms  as 
electrum  coins,  has  not  persuaded  numismatists;  nor  are 
there  electrum  staters  of  Chios  of  this  period. 

Prom  such  testimony  we  see  that  the  Chians  in  the! 
regulation  of  their  coinage  had  regard,  not  only  to  the  old 
Phocaean  standard,  but  also  to  that  of  Aegina.  The  Chian 
drachm  was  regarded  as  five-eighths  of  the  value  of  an 
Aeginetan  drachm ;  the  evidence  that  this  was  the  accepted 
valuation  is  conclusive.  Here  again  we  have  a  numis- 
matic and  indeed  a  political  fact  of  the  greatest  importance. 
The  Aeginetan  standard  had  been  before  the  Persian  wars 
dominant  in  the  Aegean  ;  but  the  growing  predominance 
of  Athens,  and  her  determination  that  her  dependent  allies 
should  use  her  measures,  weights,  and  coins,  had  swept  it 
aside.  But  with  the  Chian  revolt  of  412  B.C.,  and  the 
appearance  of  Laconian  fleets  in  the  Aegean,  the  balance 
of  power  was  altered.  We  learn  from  Thucydides  viii 
with  what  a  tempest  of  despair  and  rage  the  Athenians 
heard  of  the  revolt  of  Chios  and  her  allies.  They  at  once 
repealed  the  law  which  punished  with  death  any  one  who 
proposed  to  encroach  on  the  reserve  of  1,000  talents  set 
aside  to  be  used  only  in  case  of  dire  necessity.  It  was  the 
beginning  of  the  end.  It  was  at  that  time  that  Chios 
evidently   made    an    effort    to   come   to    terms  with  the 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  1184.  2  Head,  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  600. 


IONIA  AND  CAEIA  253 

Aeginetan  standard,  which  was  still  of  universal  use  in 
Greece  south  of  the  Isthmus  and  west  of  Attica. 

The  fortunes  of  Lesbos  were  more  varied.  The  Lesbians, 
like  the  people  of  Samos  and  Chios,  did  not  pay  tribute 
to  Athens,  but  contributed  ships  to  the  navy.  Athens 
could  have  no  claim  to  proscribe  their  coinage,  though 
she  doubtless  had  a  convention  with  them  in  regard  to 
the  hectae  of  electrum.  But  in  428  b.c.  Mytilene  and  the 
other  cities,  except  Methymna,  revolted  against  Athens. 
Every  reader  of  Thucydides  will  remember  how  after 
a  siege  the  people  of  Mytilene  were  obliged  to  surrender ; 
and  how  the  inhabitants  of  Lesbos  by  a  very  narrow 
margin  escaped  a  general  massacre.  As  it  was,  a  thousand 
of  the  most  distinguished  inhabitants  were  put  to  death, 
and  the  lands  of  all  the  cities  except  Methymna  were 
divided  among  Athenian  proprietors.  I  say  proprietors 
rather  than  settlers,  because  it  is  doubtful  how  many 
Athenians  really  settled  in  the  island  and  how  many  were 
absentee  landlords. 

We  next  turn  to  the  extant  coinage  of  Lesbos.  The 
earlier  coins  were  of  base  metal,  billon,  struck  on  the 
standard  of  Phocaea  (above,  p.  177).  About  480  b.c.  begins 
the  issue  of  hectae  of  electrum,  with  a  few  staters,  by  the 
mints  of  Mytilene  and  Phocaea  in  common,  of  which  I  have 
already  spoken.  It  lasted,  according  to  Mr.  Head  and  other 
authorities,  until  about  350  b.  c. 

To  the  period  shortly  after  480  b.c.  I  would  assign  the 
remarkable  coin  of  Methymna,  already  mentioned  (p.  173), 
with  the  types  of  the  boar  and  the  head  of  Athena.  This 
coin  must  have  been  struck  on  the  occasion  of  some  alliance 
or  understanding  with  Athens,  with  which  city  Methymna 
always  remained  on  good  terms. 

We  cannot  of  course  assign  to  the  coins  a  date  so  exact 
that  we  can  tell  whether  the  events  of  429-427  b.c,  so 
disastrous  for  the  people  of  Mytilene,  caused  an  interrup- 
tion of  these  issues.     M.  Babelon 1  observes  that  it  is  from 

1  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  1194. 


254         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 


about  400  onwards  that  they  become  most  abundant.  The 
hectae  struck  at  Phocaea  bear  the  mint  mark  of  the  seal 
(phoca),  and  it  has  been  observed  first  by  Mr.  Wroth x  that 
the  obverse  types  of  the  Lesbian  sixths  are  almost  invariably 
turned  to  the  right,  while  the  types  of  the  Phocaean  sixths 
face  to  the  left. 

Towards  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  a  few  silver 
coins  make  their  appearance  at  Mytilene  and  Methymna  : 

Mytilene. 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo,  laureate.     Rev.  MYTIAHNAON.     Head 

of  Sappho,   in  incuse.      Weight,  3-94  grm.   (61  grains). 

(B.  T.  CLXII.  8.) 
Obv.  Head  of  Sappho  or  nymph,  three-quarter  face.     Rev.  MYTI. 

Lion's   head  in   incuse.      Weight,  0*96  grm.  (15  grains). 

(B.  T.  CLXII.  4.) 
Obv.  Head  of  Apollo,  laureate.     Rev.  MYTI.  Head  of  bull  in 

incuse.     Weight,    1-97  grm.  (31  grains).     (B.  T.  CLXII. 

2.) 

Methymna. 

Obv.    Head   of  Athena.      Rev.    MA&YMNAION.    Lyre  on  a 

square   field   in   excuse.     Weight,  6-43  grm.  (99  grains). 

(B.  T.  CLXII.  30). 
Obv.    Head    of  Athena.     Rev.     MA®.    Kantharos    in    incuse. 

Weight,  3- 18  grm.  (49  grains).     (B.  T.  CLXII.  31.) 
Obv.  Head  of  Athena.    Rev.  MA.   Lion's  face  in  incuse.  Weight, 

1-57  grm.  (24  grains).     (B.  T.  CLXII.  28.) 

It  is  clear  that  these  two  neighbouring  cities  struck  on 
different  standards;  and  this  is  readily  to  be  understood. 
Methymna  was  democratically  governed,  and  in  close 
connexion  with  Athens  ;  Mytilene  was  an  aristocracy  some- 
times hostile  to  Athens.  The  standard  in  use  at  Mytilene 
is  clearly  the  old  Phocaean  standard,  still  in  use  at  Chios, 
Cyzicus,  and  elsewhere.  The  standard  in  use  at  Methymna 
is  of  doubtful  origin.  Babelon  calls  it  the  Samian,  with 
the  weight  of  which  it  certainly  nearly  agrees.  '  Samos, 
colonie  Athenienne,'  he  writes,  '  etait  en  rapports  constants 
avec  Methymne.' 2    This  explanation  is  not  altogether  satis- 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Troas,  &c,  p.  xviii.  a  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  1241. 


IONIA  AND  CARIA  255 

factory,  since,  if  my  account  of  the  Samian  coinage  be 
correct,  the  use  of  the  old  standard  in  the  island  is  rather 
a  sign  of  disaffection  towards  Athens  than  of  loyalty  to 
her.  What  we  might  a  priori  have  expected  would  be 
that  Methymna  would  strike,  after,  as  before  480,  on  the 
Attic  standard. 

It  is  not  probable  that  any  coins  were  struck  in  Lesbos 
between  the  Athenian  conquest  in  427  B.C.  and  the  end  of 
the  Athenian  Empire. 

The  coinage  of  the  large  islands  of  Caria,  Cos  and  Rhodes, 
offers  interesting  phenomena.  They  were  not,  like  the 
great  islands  of  Ionia,  admitted  to  the  League  on  terms 
of  equality ;  nevertheless  their  size  and  power  might  seem 
to  entitle  them  to  preferential  treatment.  Such  treatment 
Cos  received. 

Previous  to  the  Persian  wars  the  island  had  issued  coins 
on  the  Aeginetan  standard.  After  them  it  strikes  on  the 
Attic  standard,  issuing  tetradrachms  between  479  and  400. 
The  type  is  on  one  side  a  Discobulus  and  a  prize  tripod, 
on  the  other  a  crab  (PL  VI.  10).  As  the  successive  issues 
of  these  coins  bear  first  the  legend  KO£,  then  Kfl£,  and 
finally  KHION,  it  would  seem  that  the  right  of  coinage  was 
exercised  continuously,  and  the  use  of  the  Attic  standard 
seems  to  testify  to  a  special  understanding  with  Athens. 
The  types  of  the  coins  probably  refer  to  the  festival  of 
Apollo  held  on  the  Triopian  promontory:  they  may  have 
been  struck  only  on  the  occasion  of  the  festival,  as  seems 
to  have  been  the  case  at  Elis :  this  would  give  the  Athenians 
a  reason  for  exceptional  treatment. 

Rhodes  was  less  favoured.  But  we  must  observe  that, 
until  the  foundation  of  the  city  of  Rhodes  in  409,  Rhodes 
does  not  appear  to  have  been  under  a  single  or  even  a 
federal  government ;  and  so  it  was  easily  dealt  with.  The 
three  chief  cities  all  issued  silver  coins  before  the  Persian 
wars,  but  not  on  the  same  standard.  Camirus  had  issued 
abundant  didrachms  and  drachms  on  the  Aeginetan  standard. 
These  ceased  when,  after  the  battle  of  the  Eurymedon  in 


256  COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 


465  b.  c,  the  Persian  power  gave  way  to  that  of  Athens : 
after  that  Camirus  issued  no  more  money.  Lindus  struck 
in  the  sixth  century  staters  of  Phoenician  weight :  under 
the  Attic  supremacy  she  issued  only  what  seem  to  be 
hemidrachms  and  obols  of  Attic  weight. 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  horse.     Bev.  Lion's  head.1     "Weight,  32-2-31-6 
(grm.  215-205) ;  7-9  (grm.  0-50).     (B.  T.  CXLVI.  34.) 

Ialysus  struck  in  the  sixth  century  also  on  the  Phoenician 
standard.  It  is  doubtful  whether  any  of  the  staters  extant 
are  later  than  465 :  their  style  is  quite  early,  their  inscrip- 
tion IAAYCION.  Head  and  Babelon  give  some  of  them 
to  a  later  time ;  but  analogy  is  against  this  view.  Thus 
the  coinage  of  the  island  during  the  time  of  the  Athenian 
Empire  is  very  small. 

Of  the  Greek  cities  in  Western  Asia  Minor,  none  issued 
coins  uninterruptedly  during  the  fifth  century.  Some 
intermitted  their  coinage  during  the  time  of  the  Delian 
confederacy :  some  issued  a  few  coins  of  Attic  weight ;  but 
most  of  these  struck  only  small  denominations :  some,  as 
we  shall  presently  see,  adopted  the  standard  of  Chios,  which 
was  clearly  a  rival  of  that  of  Athens. 

Coins  of  the  Attic  standard  are  after,  as  before,  480  b.c. 
exceptional  in  Asia.  Themistocles,  while  tyrant  of  Magnesia, 
about  465  to  450  b.c,  struck  remarkable  didrachms  of  Attic 
weight,  having  as  obverse  type  a  standing  Apollo,  as  reverse 
type  a  flying  eagle.  Their  weight  is  8-56-8-59  grm.  (132-133 
grains).  (PI.  VI.  11.)  Even  in  exile  Themistocles  regards 
Athens  as  his  mother  city,  or  else  wishes  to  remain  on 
terms  with  the  Attic  coinage.  It  is  one  of  the  revenges 
of  time  that  Themistocles  should  appear  in  our  coin- 
cabinets  only  as  a  vassal  of  Persia.  Another  point  to  be 
noted  is  that  of  the  few  coins  of  Themistocles  which  have 
come  down  to  us,  two  are  only  plated  with  silver ;  and  it 

1  M.  Babelon  calls  these  coins  Aeginetan  diobols,  Mr.  Head  Phoenician 
tetrobols.  The  analogy  of  Cos  would  lead  us  rather  to  regard  them  as  coins 
of  Attic  weight,  used  only  for  small  currency. 


IONIA  AND  CARIA  257 

is  very  probable  that  these  debased  specimens  were  issued 
from  the  mint  with  the  others,  for  we  have  definite  evidence 
that  the  issue  of  a  proportion  of  plated  coins  among  those 
of  full  value  was  a  proceeding  known  to  some  ancient 
mints,  notably  that  of  Rome.  And  we  suspect  that  the 
dangerous  cleverness  of  Themistocles  might  dispose  him 
to  adopt  such  a  plan. 

The  cities  of  Ionia  seem  during  the  fifth  century  to  have 
almost  universally  ceased  to  issue  money.  An  exception 
is  Miletus,  which  issued  small  coins  on  the  Attic  standard, 
probably  intended  to  pass  locally  as  fractions  of  the  Attic 
stater: 

Obv.  Lion  to  right.     Bev.  Stellar  pattern  in  incuse.     Weight, 

32  grains  (grm.  2-10).     Attic  triobol. 
Obv.  Head  and  paw  of  lion.     Bev.  Stellar  pattern  in  incuse. 

Weight,  19-3-16-3  grains  (grm.  1-25-1-05).    (B.  T.  CXLIX. 

1-4.) 

M.  Babelon 1  sets  down  these  last  coins  as  diobols  of  the 
old  Milesian  standard  ;  and  in  fact  they  do  more  nearly 
conform  to  that  standard  than  to  that  of  Attica.  They 
are  in  fact  a  continuation  or  revival  of  an  issue  of  the  sixth 
century. 

Of  Ephesus  Mr.  Head  remarks,  '  whether  coins  continued 
to  be  struck  during  the  Athenian  hegemony  469-415  b.c. 
is  doubtful '.  There  are  in  fact  no  coins  of  Ephesus  which 
can  be  safely  given  to  this  period.  But  about  415  the  city 
revolted,  and  apparently  went  over  to  the  Persians.  In 
408  the  Athenian  general  Thrasylus  made  an  attempt  to 
reduce  it,  but  he  was  driven  off  by  the  troops  of  the  city, 
who  were  aided  by  Tissaphernes  the  Persian  and  the 
Syracusans.'2  It  must  have  been  about  this  time  that  the 
Ephesians  resumed  their  interrupted  coinage.  And  it  is 
noteworthy  that  the  standard  which  they  use  is  that  of  Chios : 
didrachm  116-118  grains  (grm.  7-51-7-64).      M.  Babelon3 

1  Traiie,  ii.  2,  p.  1060. 

2  Xenophon,  HeUen.  i.  2  ;  cf.  Head,  Coinage  of  Ephesus,  p.  21. 
•  Rev.  Num.,  1913,  p.  474. 

1917  S 


258         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

thinks  that  probably  some  of  the  staters  of  Ephesus  belong 
to  the  period  of  Attic  domination ;  he  also  allows  staters 
of  Teos.  At  Clazomenae  there  is  a  noteworthy  break  in 
the  silver  coinage,  after  the  time  of  the  Ionian  Revolt,  until 
the  early  part  of  the  fourth  century.  There  are,  however, 
a  few  small  coins  of  Attic  standard,  which  Mr.  Head 
attributes  to  this  period : 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  winged  boar.  Rev.  Gorgon-head  in  incuse 
square.  Weight,  30  grains  (grm.  1-94) ;  18  grains  (grm. 
1-16). 

It  seems  to  me  not  improbable  that  these  coins  may 
precede  the  Persian  wars;  if  not,  they  would  belong  to 
the  time  immediately  after.  Coinage  is  also  intermitted 
at  Phocaea,  Teos,  and  Cyme  in  Aeolis.  Of  Priene  we  have 
no  early  coins.  The  coinage  of  Colophon  and  Erythrae 
will  be  presently  considered ;  it  is  probable  that,  at  all 
events  in  the  former  city,  the  issue  of  coin  in  the  latter 
half  of  the  fifth  century  was  due  to  Persian  preponderance. 
In  two  of  the  Carian  cities  which  paid  tribute  to  Athens, 
Cnidus  and  Astyra,  we  find  a  notable  cessation  of  coin  in 
the  middle  and  end  of  the  fifth  century.  Cnidus,  however, 
in  the  opinion  of  M.  Babelon,  struck  drachms  and  diobols 
during  Athenian  domination.  The  city  resumed  silver 
coinage  after  412.  The  earliest  known  coin  of  Iasus  is  of 
the  time  of  the  Cnidian  league,  394  b.  c.  "We  find,  however, 
at  Idyma  a  few  coins  which  seem  to  belong  to  the  latter 
half  of  the  fifth  century : 

Obv.  Head  of  Pan  facing.  Rev.  IAYMION  Fig-leaf.  Weight, 
58-50  grains  (grm.  3-75-3-25).     (B.  T.  CXLVI.  8-10.) 

In  445  b.c.  Idyma  was  ruled  by  a  tyrant  named  Pactyes.1 
It  does  not  appear  in  the  tribute  lists  after  440  b.o.  It  is 
therefore  highly  probable  that  the  coins  were  struck  at 
a  time  when  Persian  influence  prevailed.  They  are  of  the 
Chian  standard. 

On  the  Persian  standard  was  of  course  issued  the  official 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Caria,  p.  lxi. 


IONIA  AND  CAEIA  259 

coinage  of  the  Persian  Empire,  the  silver  sigli.  It  does  not, 
however,  appear  that  these  ever  circulated  freely  beyond 
the  limits  of  Asia  Minor,  within  which  they  have  been 
usually  found.  Even  the  gold  darics  were  limited  in  their 
range.  Indeed,  the  people  of  the  interior  even  of  Asia 
Minor,  as  well  as  those  of  Persia  and  Mesopotamia,  used 
coins  but  little,  and  continued  to  use  bars  of  the  precious 
metals  in  exchange.  It  is  true  that  when  Alexander  cap- 
tured the  great  cities  of  Persia,  such  as  Ecbatana  and  Susa, 
he  found  in  them  great  hoards  of  darics,  as  well  as  of 
uncoined  gold  and  silver ;  but  this  does  not  prove  that  the 
darics  circulated  in  those  cities.  They  may  have  come  as 
tribute  from  the  west.  The  chief  use  of  the  Persian  coins 
was  for  payment  of  mercenaries  in  military  expeditions  in 
Asia  Minor ;  and  it  appears  that  it  was  only  on  the  occasion 
of  military  expeditions  that  the  satraps  of  the  Great  King 
issued  coins  from  the  mints  of  Greek  cities,  bearing  their 
own  names. 

Among  the  old  cities  of  Ionia,  only  one  keeps  to 
the  Persian  standard  during  the  time  of  the  Athenian 
Empire : 

Colophon:  Inscription,  KOAOcpHNinN  or -ON. 
Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.     Rev.  Lyre  in  incuse  square.     Drachm. 
Weight,  84-3  grains  (grm.  5.46-5-35).     (PL  VI.  12.) 

Also  hemiobols  of  7-5-6-5  grains  (0-49-0-40  grm.)  and 
tetartemoria  of  4-5-3-5  grains  (0-29-0-23  grm.).1  These  coins 
can  scarcely  be  so  late  as  the  Peloponnesian  War :  the  style 
is  archaic  or  transitional. 

There  must  be  reasons  for  the  unusual  course  taken  by 
this  city.  We  learn  from  Thucydides  2  that  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Peloponnesian  war,  the  Persians  gained  possession  of 
Colophon ;  while  in  the  harbour-city  of  Colophon,  Notium, 
two  miles  distant  from  it,  the  party  opposed  to  the  Persians, 
having  gained  the  upper  hand  through  the  help  of  Paches, 

1  These  coins  bear  marks  of  value  HM  and  TE  (half  and  quarter  obol). 
This  fact  is  important  as  proving  that  the  coins  are  really  of  Persian  weight. 
The  obol  they  give  is  somewhat  heavy  in  proportion  to  the  drachm. 

*  iii.  34. 

S  2 


260         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

the  Athenian  admiral,  set  up  a  hostile  power.  How  long 
this  division  between  Colophon  and  Notium  lasted  we  do 
not  know.  In  the  Athenian  tribute  lists  after  this  Colophon, 
which  had  previously  paid  three  talents  and  then  one  and 
a  half,  only  makes  the  nominal  payment  of  500  drachms,1 
the  twelfth  of  a  talent.  It  seems  likely  that  this  tribute 
was  from  Notium,  not  from  old  Colophon. 

These  events,  it  is  true,  do  not  directly  account  for  the  use 
of  the  Persian  standard  at  Colophon,  since  that  standard 
comes  into  use  early  in  the  fifth  century.  But  they  suggest 
that  Colophon,  which  was  not  exactly  on  the  coast,  was 
more  under  Persian  influence  than  the  cities  which  could 
be  directly  reached  by  the  Athenian  fleet. 

Another  Ionian  city  which  is  usually  regarded  as  having 
struck  coins  on  the  Persian  standard  is  Erythrae. 

Obv.  Horseman  running  beside  his  horse.     Rev.  EPYO  Flower. 

Weight,    72-67   grains   (grm.    4-69-4-35) ;    17-13    grains 

(grm.  110-0-80).     (B.  T.  CL1V.  24-31.) 
Obv.  Pegasus    flying.      Rev.  EPYO  Flower.      Weight,   22-13 

grains  (grm.  1-40-0-80).     (B.  T.  CLV.  4.) 

This  weight  offers  us  a  difficult  problem.  Babelon 
suggests  that  it  is  Persian,  and  observes  that  if  the  smaller 
coin  of  the  first  series  is  an  obol,  it  will  give  a  drachm  of 
5-40  grm.  (84  grains).  But  it  is  more  likely  that  the  smaller 
coin  is  a  fourth  of  the  larger :  the  only  safe  plan  is  to  go 
by  the  weight  of  the  larger  coins  of  a  city,  for  the  weight 
of  small  denominations  varies  greatly,  and  cannot  be  relied 
on.  We  must  therefore  regard  the  normal  weight  of  the 
drachm  of  Erythrae  as  72  grains  (grm.  4-69). 

Before  480  b.  c.  Erythrae  had  issued  coins  on  the  Milesian 
standard,  while  Chios,  her  powerful  neighbour,  had  adhered 
to  the  standard  of  Phocaea.  This  makes  one  suspect  that 
the  relations  of  the  two  states  were  not  cordial,  although 
Herodotus  tells  us  that  they  were  of  kindred  race  and  spoke 
the  same  dialect ; 2  and  in  fact  we  know  that  they  were  at 
war  in  the  seventh  century.3    Indeed,  nearness  of  blood  was 

1  Koehler,  Del.-attisch.  Bund,  p.  156.  2  Hdt.  i.  142.  3  Hdt.  i.  18. 


IONIA  AND  CARIA  261 

no  conclusive  reason  why  neighbouring  Greek  cities  should 
agree  together.  So  it  is  not  surprising  that  after  480  B.C., 
while  Chios  adhered  to  her  standard,  Erythrae  should  adopt 
a  different  one.  We  may  judge  that  the  mere  fact  that 
Erythrae  struck  coins  at  all  was  the  result  of  an  anti- 
Athenian  tendency.  An  inscription1  proves  that  in  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  century  there  was  a  Persian  party  at 
Erythrae :  it  is  likely  that  that  party  became  dominant, 
and  that  the  issue  of  coins  was  the  result  of  such  domina- 
tion.    But  what  is  the  standard  ? 

The  same  standard  recurs  about  450  B.C.  at  Termera  in 
Caria,  in  the  unique  coin  of  the  British  Museum,  issued  by 
the  Tyrant  Tymnes. 

Obv.  TVMNO.  Bearded  Herakles  kneeling.  Eev.  TEPMEPIKON. 
Head  of  lion.  Weight,  724  grains  (grm.  4-68).  (PL  VII.  1.) 

This  coin  is  given  by  Babelon  to  the  period  about  500  b.  c.  : 
I  agree  with  Mr.  Head  in  assigning  it  to  a  later  time. 
Tymnes  was  probably  a  tyrant  owing  allegiance  to  Persia ; 
and  his  coin  may  have  been  struck  at  a  time  when  the  city 
was  free  from  the  yoke  of  Athens. 

The  weight  of  the  drachm  of  Erythrae  requires  some 
explanation.  That  its  adoption  shows  Persian  and  anti- 
Athenian  influence  seems  clear.  At  first  sight  it  would 
seem  that  a  city  on  a  peninsula  lying  opposite  to  the  island 
of  Chios  and  connected  with  the  mainland  of  Asia  only  by 
a  narrow  neck  of  land,  must  follow  the  fortunes  of  the 
islands  of  the  Aegean,  and  be  closely  under  the  dominion 
of  Athens.  But  if  we  look  again  at  the  district  in  the  map 
we  note  the  strength  of  Asiatic  influence  in  the  neighbour- 
hood. Erythrae  is  quite  near  to  Sardes,  a  centre  of  Persian 
power.  Smyrna,  after  it  had  been  destroyed  by  Sadyattes 
of  Lydia,  was  not  allowed  for  400  years  to  rise  again,  in 
spite  of  a  splendid  commercial  position.  Colophon  was 
largely  in  Persian  hands,  and  Ephesus  was  the  most  fully 
Oriental  in  religion  and  manners  of  the  cities  of  Ionia. 

1  c.  I.  i.  9-11. 


262         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

Clazomenae  was  friendly  to  Athens ;  but  it  was  an  island- 
city,  and  the  inhabitants  were  mainly  people  of  Cleonae 
and  Phlius,  of  Peloponnesian  stock.  One  of  the  most 
remarkable  clauses  of  the  treaty  of  Antalcidas  was  that 
which  secured  to  the  King  of  Persia  '  The  islands  of  Clazo- 
menae and  Cyprus'.  The  juxtaposition  of  the  great  island 
of  Cyprus  and  the  tiny  islet  of  Clazomenae  is  almost 
ludicrous;  but  it  certainly  shows  that  the  king  attached 
great  importance  to  his  predominance  in  the  coast  district 
between  the  mouths  of  the  Hermus  and  the  Cayster. 

It  is,  however,  almost  impossible  to  suppose  that  drachms 
of  72  grains  can  have  passed  as  equivalents  of  the  Persian 
drachm  or  siglos  of  86  grains ;  or  of  such  coins  on  the  Persian 
standard  as  those  of  Colophon :  there  is  a  difference  of 
almost  a  gramme  between  the  two ;  and  small  local  issues 
were  tariffed  rather  below  than  above  their  true  value  in 
international  currencies. 

The  drachm  of  72  grains  was,  however,  normal  in  the 
fifth  century  at  Thasos  and  other  cities  of  Thrace,  and  we 
find  it,  as  will  presently  be  seen,  at  several  cities  of  the 
Propontis — Selymbria,  Cyzicus,  Lampsacus,  Astacus,Abydus, 
and  Dardanus.  This  coincidence  can  scarcely  be  accidental : 
we  will  return  to  the  subject. 

Passing  farther  to  the  East  we  reach  a  region  where 
Persian  power  was  never  seriously  shaken,  and  the  Athenian 
tribute  was  not  exacted. 

The  cities  of  Cilicia — Issus,  Nagidus,  Mallus,  Soli  and 
others — adhere  from  their  first  issues  to  the  Persian  standard. 
As  the  expeditions  of  the  Persian  admirals  were  mostly  fitted 
out  in  the  harbours  of  Cilicia,  this  is  not  to  be  wondered  at. 

The  district  of  Lycia  and  the  island  of  Cyprus  do  not 
show  in  the  weight  of  their  coins  any  Athenian  influence : 
they  go  on  uninterruptedly  until  the  age  of  Alexander. 
Phaselis  only,  a  Greek  city  on  the  Lycian  coast,  paid 
tribute  to  Athens,  and  intermitted  its  coinage  after  470  b.o. 


PONTUS  AND  PROPONTIS  263 


V.      PONTUS   AND   PROPONTIS. 

The  cities  of  the  next  group,  that  of  the  Euxine  Sea, 
adhere  through  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries  to  the 
Aeginetan  drachm.  Sinope,  Trapezus,  Amisus,  and  Hera- 
clea,  retain  this  standard,  though  the  weight  of  the  drachm 
slowly  falls.  We  may  conjecture  that  the  obstinacy  with 
which  Sinope  adheres  to  her  numismatic  customs  is  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  barbarous  tribes,  Scythians  and  others 
with  whom  she  dealt,  could  not  easily  be  persuaded  to 
recognize  another  kind  of  money. 

The  cities  to  the  south  and  east  of  the  Black  Sea  were, 
when  not  autonomous,  mostly  under  Persian  domination. 
Shortly  after  440  b.c.  Pericles  led  an  Athenian  armament 
to  Sinope.  The  Tyrant  Timesilaus  who  bore  rule  there  was 
expelled,  and  the  estates  of  his  followers  made  over  to 
a  body  of  600  Athenian  colonists.  But  this  interference 
led  to  little  result:  Sinope  never  paid  tribute  to  Athens. 
That  city  continued  down  to  the  time  of  Alexander  to 
issue  coins  on  its  original  standard,  drachms  seldom  ex- 
ceeding 94  grains  (grm.  6-10).  It  is  hard  to  see  how  these 
can  have  been  reckoned  except  as  equivalent  to  Persian 
drachms,  though  they  usually  decidedly  exceed  them  in 
weight  "We  find  at  Panticapaeum  a  parallel  fact.  The 
gold  money  there  issued  in  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century 
weighs  as  much  as  140-5  grains  (grm.  9-10);  but  must  have 
passed  as  gold  didrachms  of  Attic  standard  (135  grains ;  grm. 
842).  It  is  not  unnatural  that  remote  places  where  the 
precious  metals  are  abundant  should  make  their  issues 
acceptable,  by  slightly  over- weighting  them. 

A  new  type  is  introduced  at  Sinope,  probably,  as  M.Babelon 
suggests,  at  the  time  of  the  Athenian  expedition,  and  the 
institution  of  democracy. 

Obv.  Head  of  the  Nymph  Sinope.  Rev.  Sea  eagle  standing  on 
dolphin.  Weight,  93-80  grains  (grm.  602-5.18).  (PL 
VII.  2.) 

Historically  it  would  be  probable  that  the  heavy  weight 


264         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

of  the  Aeginetan  standard  at  Sinope  arose  originally  because 
it  was  inherited  from  the  somewhat  heavier  Milesian  standard, 
which  had  earlier  been  current,  when  Miletus  was  dominant 
on  the  Euxine. 

Generally  speaking,  we  may  trace  in  the  region  of  the 
Euxine  a  gradual  fall  in  the  weight  of  the  drachm  from 
Aeginetan  to  Persian.  Probably  the  cities  of  the  coast, 
finding  that  their  money  was  tariffed  at  the  Persian  rate, 
did  not  see  any  advantage  to  be  gained  by  greatly  exceed- 
ing the  Persian  standard.  At  the  same  time  it  must  be 
allowed  that  there  is  no  regular  and  uniform  decline  in 
weight,  some  of  the  coins  of  the  fourth  century  being 
heavier  than  some  which  are  quite  archaic.  In  fact,  the 
irregularity  of  the  weights  of  the  coins  of  Sinope,  when 
they  are  of  uniform  type  and  general  appearance,  is  a 
remarkable  phenomenon,  for  which  it  is  not  easy  to  account. 

Of  the  same  irregular  weight  as  the  coins  of  Sinope, 
and  of  similar  type,  are  the  drachms  of  Istrus,  on  the 
European  side  of  the  Black  Sea.  Somewhat  lighter  in 
weight,  but  probably  of  the  same  standard,  are  the  drachms 
of  Trapezus. 

Amisus,  at  the  time  of  Pericles'  expedition  to  Sinope, 
also  received  Athenian  colonists,  and  the  name  Peiraeus 
appears  upon  its  coins,  drachms  similar  to  those  of  Sinope, 
but  bearing  the  Athenian  type  of  an  owl  standing  on 
a  shield,  in  place  of  the  eagle  standing  on  a  fish  (PI.  VII.  3). 

Coming  from  the  Pontus  to  the  Propontis,  we  reach  the 
region  of  Athenian  domination,  or  rather  of  the  clashing 
of  Persian  and  Athenian  power.  We  have  already  seen, 
in  the  Introduction,  that  the  Pontic  region  was  more 
important  than  any  other  to  Greek  trade,  as  all  Greece 
depended  upon  it  for  the  supply  of  food,  and  for  the 
materials  for  shipbuilding.  Athens  was  constantly  on 
the  watch  to  dominate  the  gate  of  the  Euxine  between 
Byzantium  and  Calchedon.  Byzantium  at  one  period 
paid  a  tribute  of  more  than  twenty  talents,  and  Calchedon 
as  much  as  nine  talents.  At  two  periods,  411-405  and 
390-387  b.  c,  Athens  endeavoured  to  occupy  the  gate  herself, 


PONTUS  AND  PROPONTIS  265 

and  to  compel  ships  passing  through  to  pay  a  tribute  of  ten 

per  cent.     This  right  of  demanding  toll  was  exercised  by 

the  people  of  Byzantium  from  time  to  time.      We  cannot 

therefore  be  surprised  to  find  that  in  the  whole  region  from 

Byzantium  to  Abydos  no  large  or  abundant  coinage  can 

be  traced  at  the  time  of  the  Athenian  Empire.     But  at  the 

same  time  the  Persian  satraps  at  Dascylium,  on  the  southern 

shore  of  the  Propontis,  near  Cyzicus,  were  very  powerful, 

alike  by  means  of  arms  and  through  control  of  resources. 

1  The  Persian  standard  would  therefore  be  likely  to  come  in 

importance  next  to  that  of  Athens.      From  the  monetary 

point  of  view  the  most  important  cities  of  this  district  were 

Cyzicus  and  Lampsacus,  whose   coinage  of  electrum  may 

,  almost  be   regarded   as   the   official   money  of  Athens  for 

Pontic  trade.1     Of  silver  at  Cyzicus  before  405  b.c.  there 

!  is  very  little ;  M.  Babelon,  however,  attributes  to  the  city 

small  pieces,  sometimes  marked  with  the  letter  K,  a  drachm 

I  of  75  grains  (grm.  4-83)  and  smaller  divisions.2     We  may 

;  be  almost   sure   that   there   was   a   monetary   convention, 

according   to   which   Athens   supplied   silver   coin,  except 

perhaps  small  divisions,  and  Cyzicus  staters  and  hectae  of 

electrum.     With   Lampsacus  also  Athens  had  probably  a 

similar  arrangement.     During  the  first  half  of  the  fourth 

century  Lampsacus  gave   up  her  issues   of  electrum   and 

began  a  beautiful  series  of  gold  staters,  others  being  at  the 

same  time  struck  at  Abydos ;    and  these  coins  also  seem 

to  have  been  meant  for  Athens  and  Athenian  trade.     But 

silver  drachms  seem  to  have  been  freely  issued  at  Lampsacus 

in  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries.     The  types  are 

Obv.  Janiform  female  head.     Rev.  Head  of  Athena.     Weight, 
72  grains  (grm.  4  66).     (B.  T.  CLXX.  25.) 

We  have  then  at  these  two  important  cities  a  coinage  in 
silver  which  conforms  to  the  standard  of  Thasos,  commonly 
called  Babylonian  and  sometimes  Persian,  but  which  is 
really   distinct   from   both.      We   have    already  met  this 

1  As  to  this  see  above,  p.  232. 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  1458.     Types,  Fore-part  of  boar ;  Lion's  head. 


266         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

standard  at  Erythrae,  and  decided  that  in  that  city  it 
seems  a  sign  of  Persian  influence. 

Other  cities  of  the  Propontic  region,  however,  strike  on 
a  standard  which  seems  nearer  to  the  ordinary  Persian 
weight. 

The  following  are  of  the  period  480-450  : 

Cardia  (Thracian  Chersonese). 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  lion  with  head  reverted.     Rev.  Incuse  square, 
two  sections  deeper  and  two  shallower.     Weight,  36-40 
grains  (grm.  2-33-2-60). 
Astacus. 

Obv.  Lobster.  Rev.  Head  of  Nymph.  Weight,  76  grains 
(grm.  4  90) ;  23-5  grains  (grm.  1-52).  (B.  T.  CLXXXI. 
4-6.) 

Abydos. 

Obv.  ABYAHNON.  Eagle  standing.  Rev.  Gorgoneion.  Weight, 
79-84  grains  (grm.  5- 12-541);  48  grains  (grm.  3-08). 
(B.  T.  CLXVII.     9-33.) 

Dardanus. 

Obv.  Horseman.  Rev.  AAP.  Cock.  Weight,  72-75  grains 
(grm.  4-65-4-86).     (PI.  VII.  4.) 

It  will  be  observed  that  these  coins  are  all  of  small 
denomination,  drachms,  hemidrachms,  tetrobols,  and  tri- 
obols :  all  the  mints  except  Astacus  are  on  the  Hellespont. 

In  other  cities  of  the  same  region  we  find  a  different 
standard  at  the  same  period : 

Parium. 

Obv.  Gorgoneion.  Rev.  Incuse  square,  within  which  a  pattern. 
Weight,  47-60  grains  (grm.  3-3-88) ;  25-26  grains  (grm. 
1-62-1-68).     (B.  T.  XVI.  22-23.) 

Assos. 

Obv.  Griffin  lying.  Rev.  Lion's  head  in  incuse.  Weight, 
55*8  grains  (grm.  3*59-5'78);  24  grains  (grm.  155). 
(B.  T.  CLXIII.  25-27.) 

In  these  examples,  while  the  drachm  appears  to  follow ; 
the  Chian  standard,  the  smaller  coin  is  of  the  same  weight 


PONTUS  AND  PBOPONTIS  267 

as  the  smaller  coin  at  Astacus.     Evidently  we  have  to  do 
with  issues  of  small  coins  to  meet  local  needs. 

At  a  somewhat  later  time,  other  cities  come  in  on  what 
seems  to  be  the  Chian  standard. 

450-400  B.C. 
Antandros. 

Obv.  Head  of  Artemis.  Rev.  AN  TAN.  Goat  standing.  Weight, 
50-58  grains  (grm.  3-23-3-67).     (B.  T.  CLXIII.  3-5.) 

Gargara. 
Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.      Rev.  TAPI".  Bull  feeding.      Weight, 

42-49  grains  (grm.  2-74-3- 14).     (B.  T.  CLXIII.  13-15.) 
Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.     Rev.  TAP.  Horse  galloping.     Weight, 

22  grains  (grm.  1-44). 

Lamponeia. 

Obv.  Head  of  bearded  Dionysus.  Rev.  A  AM.  Bull's  head. 
Weights,  53-59  grains  (grm.  3-41-3-81) ;  27-29  grains 
(grm.  1-72-1-88).     (B.  T.  CLXIII.  22-24.) 

Neandria. 
Obv.    Head   of  Apollo.      Rev.    NEAN.    Altai-,    horse    or   ram. 
Weight,  29  grains  (grm.  1-85-1-86).     (B.  T.  CLXVI.  1-4.) 

Proconnesus. 
Obv.  Female  head.     Rev.  riPOKON.  Oenochoe.     Weight,  38-8 
grains  (grm.  2-50).     (B.  T.  CLXXIX.  18.) 

All  these  small  coins  seem  to  follow  the  Chian  standard, 
of  which  they  are  mostly  drachms  or  half-drachms. 

Scepsis  is  somewhat  exceptional.  Being  an  inland  town, 
on  the  head-waters  of  the  Scamander,  it  was  less  completely 
at  the  mercy  of  the  Athenians  than  other  cities  of  Troas. 
It  paid  from  time  to  time  a  tribute  of  a  talent.  Its 
coinage,  however,  is  fairly  continuous,  and  evidently  of 
some  importance.  It  follows  the  Chian  standard,  didrachm 
118  grains  (7*68  grm.)  and  drachm  59  grains  (3-84  grm.). 
Types.  Half  galloping  horse  ;  Fir-tree. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  city  of  Sigeium,  at  the  entrance 
to  the  Propontis,  a  city  connected  with  Athens  from  the 
time   of  Solon   downwards,   issued  no   coins  in  the   fifth 


268         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

century,  using  doubtless  those  of  Athens.  When  Sigeium 
does  issue  coins,  in  the  fourth  century,  her  types  are 
thoroughly  Athenian,  the  head  of  Athena  and  the  owl. 

The  coinage  of  Byzantium  and  Calchedon  belongs  mainly 
to  the  fourth  century,  but  a  few  coins  of  both  cities  are  of 
the  fifth  century.  Both  Byzantium  and  Calchedon  paid 
heavy  tribute  to  Athens.  The  money  of  Calchedon,  of 
which  I  speak,  consists  of  drachms  of  61  grains  (grm.  3-95) 
and  hemidrachms  of  30  grains  (grm.  1-94).  These  appear 
to  follow  the  standard  of  Chios : 

Obv.    Bearded   male  head.      Rev.    Wheel.      Weight,   37-5-30 

grains  (grm.  2-42-1-94).     (PL  VII.  5.) 
Obv.  Same  head.     Rev.  KAAX.  Wheel.     Weight,  61-58  grains 

(grm.  3-95-3-78).     (B.  T.  CLXXXI.  7-13.) 
Obv.    Beardless  head.      Rev.    KAA.    Wheel.      Weight,  33-30 

grains  (grm.  2-10-1-97). 
Obv.    Round  shield.      Rev.  Same.      Weight,    16   grains  (grm. 

1-05). 

Their  date  is  not  much  later  than  the  middle  of  the  fifth 
century.  Perhaps  they  were  intended  as  fractions  of  the 
electrum  staters  of  Cyzicus  and  the  hectae  of  Mytilene. 

At  Byzantium  drachms  of  Persian  weight  were  issued 
(84  grains,  grm.  5-44)  with  the  type  of  a  bull  standing 
on  a  dolphin,  and  a  somewhat  primitive  incuse  on  the 
reverse.  It  is  hard  to  determine  their  date  on  stylistic 
grounds,  as  the  incuse  is  obviously  a  mere  survival, 
as  it  is  at  Cyzicus  and  Cardia ;  but  I  think  that  Mr.  Head, 
in  assigning  it  to  415  b.o.',  comes  down  too  late.  The  date 
of  the  coins  being  doubtful,  and  the  history  of  Byzantium 
full  of  vicissitudes,  it  is  impossible  to  assign  them  to  any 
particular  phase  of  the  history  of  the  city.  They  seem 
to  have  continued  for  a  considerable  time,  and  to  be  the 
most  noteworthy  sign  of  Persian  influence  in  the  region. 
After  the  fall  of  Athens,  or  possibly  before  it,  Byzantium 
and  Calchedon  both  issued  tetradrachms  on  the  standard  of 
Chios. 

On  the  coins  of  Selymbria,  a  city  on  the  European  shore 


PONT  US  AND  PROPONTIS  269 

[of  the  Propontis,  we  can  trace  with  unusual  distinctness 
[the  progress  of  Athenian  domination  in  the  fifth  century. 
[Early  in  that  century,  the  city  had  issued  coins  on  that 
|Thasian  standard  which  was  in  use  in  Thrace  : 

Obv.    ?A.    Cock.      Rev.  Incuse  square.     Weight,   76*4   grains 
(grm.  4-96)  (Br.  Mus.). 

After  450  b.c.  she  strikes  rare  coins  on  the  Attic  standard. 

Obv.  Cock.      Rev.  SAAY.  Ear  of  corn  (Berlin).     Weight,  67 

grains  (grm.  434). 
Obv.  Head  of  Heracles.      Rev.  Cock  in  incuse.      Weight,  57 

grains  (grm.  3-70). 

This  is  a  clear  example  of  the  process  which  at  this  time 
was  going  on  along  the  Thracian  coast.1 

A  city  on  the  west  coast  of  the  Euxine,  which  seems  to 
nave  belonged  to  the  Propontic  group,  is  Apollonia,  a 
Milesian  colony  near  Mount  Haemus.  It  is  supposed  to 
have  struck 2  about  450-400  b.c. 

Obv.  Anchor  with  crayfish.     Rev.  Gorgoneion.     Weight,  58-44 
grains  (grm.  3-75-285). 

VI.    The  ace  and  Macedon. 

The  changes  in  monetary  standard  in  Thrace  and 
Macedon  during  the  period  480--400  b.c  are  many,  and 
not  always  easy  to  explain.  The  less  explicable  they 
seem  the  more  important  they  become,  as  showing  the 
working  of  tendencies  and  forces  not  at  present  understood. 
In  science  it  is  to  residuary  phenomena  that  we  look  for 
clues. 

At  the  time  of  the  Persian  Wars  there  were  three 
standards  in  ordinary  use  in  the  district.  Starting  from 
Thasos,  a  standard  commonly  called  Babylonic,  with  a  stater 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  271. 

2  Reasons  for  this  attribution  are  given  by  Tacchella  (Rev.  Num.,  1898, 
p.  210) ;  the  alternative  attribution  to  Apollonia  ad  Rhyndacum  in  Mysia, 
once  held  by  Imhoof-Blumer  (jB.  M.  Cat.  Mysia,  p.  8)  and  J.  Six,  is  now  given 

!up.     See  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  278. 


270         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

of  144-152  grains  (grm.  9-33-9-84),  Lad  spread  to  the 
Thracian  mining  tribes  through  the  seaport  of  Neapolis, 
opposite  Thasos.  Concurrently  the  so-called  Phoenician 
standard  had  spread  westward  from  Abdera,  and  been 
adopted  by  many  tribes,  as  well  as  by  the  Kings  of 
Macedon.  The  coins  of  Chalcidice  used  from  the  first  the 
Attic  standard,  combined  with  the  Corinthian  divisions  of 
the  stater.    (See  above,  p.  186.) 

"When  we  realize  the  standing  policy  of  Athens  as  regards 
coins,  the  fixed   determination   to  monopolize  the  silver 
currency  of  the  Aegean,  we  understand  the  great  impor- 
tance which  she  attached  to  the  possession  of  the  southern 
shore  of  Thrace.     For  the  silver  mines  of  the  Pangaean 
Mountains  and  that  district  were  the  most  important  source 
of  silver  in  the  Aegean,  together  with  the  mines  of  Laurium. 
In  days  before  the  Persian  Wars  the  local  tribes  had  issued 
silver  coin  in  great  abundance,  long  before  it  could  have 
been  expected  of  such  rude  peoples.      The  inhabitants  of 
Thasos  had  acquired  riches  and  importance  by  their  posses- 
sion of  mines  on  the  mainland  opposite,  as  well  as  in  their 
own  island.    Herodotus,1  as  is  natural,  speaks  more  of  their  j 
gold  mines  than  of  those  of  silver :  the  more  valuable  metal  J 
naturally  attracting  most  attention.    But  the  gold  of  Thrace  i 
and  Thasos  seems  never  to  have  been  in  any  considerable j 
quantity  turned  into  coin  on  the  spot  until  the  days  of  J 
Philip  of  Macedon.     The  silver  from  very  early  times  had  j 
been  so  struck,  and  the  Athenians  might  well  hope  that; 
if  they  secured  this  rich  source  of  silver  they  might  almost  I 
make  a  corner  in  the  metal,  and  control  the  market  for  it.  i 
Hence,  the  Athenians  were  determined  to  gain  the  mastery  j 
of  Thasos.     They  fell  out  with  the  islanders  over  the  con-; 
tinental  mines;  and  in  465  an  Athenian  armament  under  j 
Cimon  first  shut  up   the  Thasians   into  their  city,   thenj 
reduced  them  by  siege,  and  compelled  them  to  surrender' 
their  ships  and  their   continental  possessions.      The   sue-; 
cessive  foundations  by  the  Athenians  at  the  Nine  Ways! 

1  vi.  46. 


THRACE  AND  MACEDON  271 

[and  at  Amphipolis  show  with  what  determination  they 
■adhered  to  the  control  of  the  district,  which  they  regarded 
las  the  citadel  of  their  power. 

To  turn  to  the  coins.  The  coinage  of  the  local  tribes, 
khe  Letaei,  Bisaltae,  Orreskii  and  the  rest,  seems  not  to 
Ihave  lasted  after  the  Persian  "Wars.  These  tribes  were 
Ipressed  on  all  sides.  The  powerful  and  wealthy  city  of 
Thasos  was  close  to  them  for  attack,  but  being  on  an  island 
jwas  not  liable  to  counter-attacks.  The  power  of  the  Kings 
of  Macedon,  who  boasted  of  a  certain  Hellenic  culture,  was 
steadily  growing.  And  the  rich  coinage  of  Abdera  shows 
the  dominant  position  which  that  city  assumed  in  regard 
to  the  trade  of  Thrace.  The  appearance  of  the  names  of 
magistrates  on  the  coins  of  Abdera  from  a  very  early  time 
seems  to  show  that  the  city  was  under  a  more  compact  and 
aristocratic  rule  than  most  Greek  cities.  Thus  it  is  natural 
that  the  weaker  tribes  who  worshipped  Dionysus  on  the 
Pangaean  mountains  were  deprived  alike  of  their  wealth 
and  their  independence.  But  the  Thasian  domination  soon 
came  to  an  end,  and  the  Athenian  took  its  place.  After 
the  expedition  of  Cimon,  Neapolis,  which  was  then  the 
Athenian  factory,  ceased  to  issue  coin  until  421.  And  the 
Thasians  struck  but  little  coin  in  the  second  half  of  the 
century,  that  which  they  did  strike  following  the  standard 
of  Athens,  and  later  that  of  Chios,  which  was  usual  in  the 
district  after  the  time  of  Brasidas. 

Coins  of  Thasos. 

1.  Obv.  Satyr  carrying  nymph.     Rev.  Incuse  square.     Weight, 

135-130  grains  (grm.  8-74-8-42).     (PI.  VII.  6.) 

2.  Obv.  Head  of  bearded  Dionysus.     Rev.   OA^ION.  Heracles 

shooting  arrow,  in  incuse.     Weight,  230  grains  (gr.  1490). 
(PI.  VII.  7.) 

Coins  of  class  1  belong  mostly  to  the  first  half  of  the  fifth 
century :  those  of  class  2  to  the  time  after  Brasidas. 

Coins  of  Neapolis. 

1.   Obv.  Gorgon  head.     Rev.  Incuse  square.    Weight,  150-140 
grains  (grm.  9- 72-9  07). 


272  COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

2.  Obv.  Gorgon  head.     Rev.  NEOP.  Head  of  Nike.1     Weight, 
58-55  grains  (grm.  3-75-3-56). 

In  the  time  of  Brasidas  a  change  of  standard  takes  place : 
see  below. 

Although,  however,  the  coinage  of  the  Thracian  tribes 
disappears,  we  have  a  few  coins  struck  by  Thracian  dynasts 
in  the  time  of  the  Athenian  Empire.  The  Odrysae,  in 
particular,  under  their  king  Sitalces,  dominated  a  great 
region,  from  Abdera  to  the  Euxine  Sea,  at  the  time  of 
the  Peloponnesian  War ;  and  that  dominion  lasted  in  part 
until  the  time  of  Philip  of  Macedon.  The  Thracian  chiefs 
do  not  appear  to  have  issued  coins  except  at  Greek  cities, 
which,  from  time  to  time  they  either  occupied  or  controlled. 
Some  of  the  most  notable  of  these  coins  are  as  follows : 

Sparadocus,  brother  of  Sitalces. 

Obv.  Horseman  bearing  spears.  Rev.  ^fTAPAAOKO.  Eagle 
devouring  serpent,  in  incuse.     Attic  tetradrachm. 

Drachms  and  diobols  of  the  same  ruler  are  known.  The 
types  and  the  weight  alike  seem  suitable  to  Olynthus,  and 
Head2  conjectures  that  the  coins  were  struck  in  that  city; 
but  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  suppose  that  the  power  of 
Sparadocus  spread  so  far  to  the  west:  Aenus  is  far  more 
probable. 

Seuthes  I,  son  of  Sparadocus. 

Obv.  Armed  horseman.  Rev.  SEYOA  KOMMAor  CEYOA 
APTYPION.     No  type.     Attic  didrachm  and  drachm. 

The  mint  of  these  coins  cannot  be  determined. 

Eminacus. 

Obv.  EMINAKO.  Heracles  kneeling,  stringing  his  bow.  Rev. 
Wheel,  around  which  dolphins,  in  incuse.  Weight,  181 
grains  (grm.  11-73). 

In  the  time  of  the  Peloponnesian  War  the  Aeginetan 
standard  was  used  at  Abdera.    Eminacus,  a  person  unknown 

1  So  B.  M.  Cat.  Parthenos  is  a  better  identification.  Cf.  Schone,  Oriech. 
Reliefs,  PI.  VII,  where  Parthenos  appears  as  the  representative  of  Neapolis. 

2  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  282. 


THRACE  AND  MACEDON  273 

to  history,  would  seem  at  that  time  to  have  adopted  it. 
The  coin  was  found  near  Olbia.1 

Bergaeus. 

Obv.    Silenus   carrying   Nymph.       Rev.     BEPPAIOY;    incuse 
square.     Weight,  50  grains  (grm.  3-24). 

This  is  obviously  an  imitation  of  the  coins  of  Thasos. 

It  is  not  easy  to  explain  the  facts  in  regard  to  the  Thasian 
tribute  to  Athens.  From  454  to  447  the  island  is  entered 
in  the  lists  as  paying  only  three  talents,  after  that  year  the 
quota  is  raised  to  thirty  talents.  Historians  have  supposed 
that  the  higher  rate  of  contribution  was  consequent  on  the 
retrocession  of  the  control  of  the  mines  by  Athens  to  Thasos. 
This  is  a  plausible  conjecture,  but  it  does  not  seem  to  be 
supported  by  definite  evidence.  Undoubtedly  the  raising 
of  the  tax  was  often  an  arbitrary  proceeding  on  the  part  of 
the  Athenian  democracy. 

The  most  important  coinage  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth 
century,  besides  that  of  Thasos,  is  that  of  Abdera : 

1.  Obv.  Griffin  rampant.     Rev.  i-n-i  with  name  of  magistrate  in 

incuse.     Weight,  230-236  grains  (grm.  14-90-15-30). 

2.  Obv.  Griffin  of  later  style.     Rev.  Magistrate's  name  round 

type.      Weight,    215-216   grains  (grm.    13-93-14).      (PI. 
VII.  8.) 

3.  Obv.    Similar  griffin.      Rev.    Magistrate's   name  and   type. 

Weight,  193-198  grains  (grm.  12-50-12-80). 

4.  Obv.  Magistrate's  name ;  Griffin  recumbent  or  rearing.    Rev. 

Head  of  Apollo,  laureate.     Weight,  170-175  grains  (grm. 
11-11-33). 

To  the  question  of  the  weights  of  these  coins  we  will  soon 
return.  Coin  No.  1  follows  the  old  Abderite  standard,  while 
No.  2  shows  a  reduced  weight  which  is  also  found  at 
Maroneia  at  this  time. 

Obv.  Prancing  horse.     Rev.  bn,  with  magistrate's  name,  round 
vine.     Weight,  210-220  grains  (grm.  13-60-14-25). 

The  crucial  point  in  the  history  of  the  coins  of  Thrace 

1  Head,  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  283. 

19B7  T 


274         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

and  Macedon  is  to  be  found  in  the  expedition  of  Brasidas, 
424  B.C.,  together  with  the  peace  of  Nicias,  which  followec 
the  death  of  Brasidas  and  Cleon  in  421. 

During  the  hegemony  of  Athens,  465-424  B.C.,  the  coins 
of  so-called  Babylonic  standard,  struck  at  Thasos  and 
Neapolis,  do  not  in  fact  exceed  the  Attic  weight,  or  very 
slightly  exceed  it.1  If  Attic  coin  were  at  the  time  largely 
current  in  the  markets  of  Thrace,  as  is  almost  certain,  and 
if  the  coins  of  Thasian  standard  were  regarded  only  as 
equivalent  to  Attic  didrachms,  there  would  be  a  valid  reason 
for  gradually  reducing  their  weight.  To  maintain  it  would 
have  been  a  sheer  waste  of  silver. 

Thus  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  the  standards  in 
use  were  in  effect  but  two,  the  Attic  and  the  Abderite.  And 
the  Attic  was  encroaching.  Aenus,  which  began  to  strike 
money  about  460  B.C.,  used  the  Attic  standard,  in  a  rather 
light  form  (PI.  VII.  9) :  an  exactly  similar  standard  comes 
in  for  a  time,  probably  just  before  the  time  of  Brasidas,  at 
Maroneia.2  Afterwards,  towards  the  end  of  the  century, 
these  two  cities  take  divergent  courses.  At  Aenus  the 
Chian  standard  comes  in ;  whereas  Maroneia,  no  doubt 
under  the  influence  of  her  powerful  neighbour  Abdera, 
accepts  the  Persian  standard. 

"With  the  Thracian  campaign  of  Brasidas  the  whole 
matter  becomes  far  more  complicated.  The  sway  of  Athens 
on  the  Thracian  coast,  which  had  long  been  almost  unques- 
tioned, and  which  was  strongly  confirmed  by  the  foundation 
of  Amphipolis  in  437  B.C.,  was  greatly  shaken,  and  thence- 
forward most  of  the  cities  became  autonomous.  It  does  not 
appear  that  the  cities  of  Thrace  had,  like  those  of  Ionia  and 
the  Cyclades,  generally  given  up  the  issue  of  coins  during 
the  time  of  Athenian  preponderance  ;  but  it  is  noteworthy 
that  we  have  no  coin  that  we  can  with  confidence  give  to 
Ei'on  on  the  Strymon  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century, 
and  that  Amphipolis  struck  no  coins  until  its  autonomy  was 
secured  after  421  b.c     And  further,  at  certain  cities,  such 

1  Cf.  B.  M.  Cat.  Thrace,  p.  218.  2  Hist.  Num. ,  ed.  2,  p.  250. 


THRACE  AND  MACEDON  275 

as  Acanthus,  Aeneia,  Mende,  and  Terone  in  Chalcidice,  there 
appears  to  be  a  decided  break  between  the  coinage  of  the 
early  fifth  century  and  that  of  the  time  after  Brasidas. 
Even  the  Kings  of  Macedon,  who  of  course  did  not  renounce 
coinage  rights  in  favour  of  Athens,  issued  very  little  coin. 
The  money  of  Alexander  I  is  abundant ;  but  of  his  successor 
Perdiccas  II,  who  reigned  about  454-413  B.C.,  we  have  only 
rare  diobols  and  tetrobols :  at  least  these  are  the  only  coins 
bearing  his  name.  In  the  early  part  of  his  reign  Perdiccas 
was  on  very  friendly  terms  with  the  Athenians,  but  later 
he  fell  out  with  them.  Archelaus,  who  succeeded  in  413, 
struck  money  on  the  Persian  standard,  which,  as  we  shall 
see  later,  came  in  at  Abdera  and  elsewhere  towards  the  end 
of  the  fifth  century. 

After  421  b.c.  there  is  a  great  outbreak  of  coinage  on  the 
part  of  the  cities  of  Thrace  and  Macedon,  and  in  nearly 
every  case  they  strike  not  on  the  Attic  standard  but  on  the 
'  Phoenician '  standard  hitherto  in  use  at  Abdera.  Among 
these  cities  are  Amphipolis,  the  cities  of  Chalcidice,  and 
Neapolis.  The  weight  of  the  stater  is  about  230-220  grains 
(grm.  14-90-14-25).  It  is  practically  at  this  period  identical 
with  the  Rhodian  standard,  which  had  become  of  almost 
universal  use  in  Asia  Minor. 

Strange  to  say,  Abdera  seems  to  choose  this  very  time  for 
altering  her  own  standard.  For  some  time  during  the  last 
quarter  of  the  fifth  century  she  gives  up  the  '  Phoenician ' 
standard  which  she  had  used  since  the  foundation  of  the 
city,  and  adopts  another  of  which  the  stater  weighs  about 
196  grains  (grm.  12-75).  Mr.  Head  calls  this  standard  the 
Aeginetic,  but  observes  that  probably  the  change  in  weight 
was  gradual  rather  than  sudden.1  I  must,  however,  dispute 
the  latter  view. 

Mr.  Head,2  taking  the  coinage  of  Abdera  in  an  isolated 
way,  suggests  that  the  changes  of  standard,  which  are  so 
noteworthy  in  that  city,  may  result  from  a  constant  striving 
after  bimetallism,  that  is  to  say,  an  attempt  to  secure  the 

1  Hist  Num.,  ed.  2,  pp.  254-5.  *  Ibid.,  ed.  2,  p.  xliii. 

T~2 


276         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

equivalence  of  a  round  number  of  silver  staters  with,  a  gold 
unit,  which  would  naturally  be  the  daric.  I  very  seldom 
find  myself  at  issue  with  Mr.  Head,  but  on  this  occasion 
I  am  driven  to  this  attitude.  And  the  controversy  is 
important,  as  the  coinage  of  Abdera  may  well  give  the  key 
to  that  of  all  the  Thracian  cities. 

At  Abdera,  he  writes,  '  between  the  Persian  wars  and  the 
time  of  Philip,  when  its  autonomous  coinage  came  to  an 
end,  the  tetradrachm  or  stater  falls  in  weight,  successively, 
from  240  to  224  grains,  then  from  198  to  190  grains,  and 
lastly  from  176  to  160  grains  or  less.  It  is  hard  to  account 
for  these  reductions,  usually  regarded  as  inexplicable  changes 
of  standard,  from  (1)  Ehodian1  to  (2)  Phoenician,  from 
Phoenician  to  (3)  Aeginetic,  and  from  Aeginetic  to  Persic 
(4),  except  on  the  theory  that  the  rapid  fall  of  the  silver 
value  of  gold,  which  we  know  took  place  in  Europe  between 
500  and  356  B.C.,  influenced  the  silver  coinage.  In  other 
words,  Abdera,  though  it  is  not  known  to  have  struck  gold, 
seems  to  have  been  striving  after  a  bimetallic  system  of 
exchange.  .  .  .  The  gold  unit  from  first  to  last  would  be 
equivalent  to  eight  silver  staters,  the  weight  of  which,  as 
time  went  on,  would  be  reduced  as  follows  : 

128  grains  of  gold  at  15    to  1  =  8  silver  staters  of  240  grains 

(cl.  1). 
14£  to  1  =  8  of  232  grains  (cl.  1). 
to  1  =  8  of  228  grains  (cl.  2). 
to  1  =  8  of  208  grains  (cl.  2). 
to  1  =  8  of  192  grains  (cl.  3). 
to  1  =  8  of  176  grains  (cl.  3). 
to  1  =  8  of  160  grains  (cl.  4).' 

Mr.  Head  then  thinks  that  the  changes  in  standard  were 
gradual  rather  than  sudden;  and  that  the  legal  change 
registered  a  fact  that  had  taken  place  rather  than  produced 
a  cataclysm.     Mr.  Head's  argument  is  plausible,  and  it  is 

1  This  is  a  slip  :  naturally  the  Bhodian  standard  did  not  exist  in  the  fifth 
century,  before  the  city  of  Rhodes  was  founded.  It  is  really  the  standard  of 
Phocaea  and  Chios  that  Mr.  Head  means. 


51 

55 

5! 

14 

55 
55 

13 
12 

55 

11 

55 

10 

THRACE  AND  MACEDON  277 

necessary  to  examine  it  with  care,  as,  if  established,  it  will 
have  far-reaching  consequences. 

We  ought  to  begin  by  fixing  the  date  of  the  actual 
changes  of  standard,  though  this  can  only  be  done  approxi- 
mately. Mr.  Head  places  the  transition  to  the  Aeginetic 
standard  (3)  about  430  b.c.  and  to  the  Persian  standard  (4) 
about  408  b.c.  The  last  date  must  be  not  far  from  right, 
though  a  few  years  too  early;  for  the  transition  to  the 
Persian  standard  was  probably  the  result  of  the  fall  of 
Athens,  and  took  place  in  the  neighbouring  kingdom  of 
Macedon  in  the  reign  of  Archelaus  1, 413-399  b.c.  (PI.  VII.  10). 
The  former  date  is  less  easily  fixed ;  and  in  the  absence  of 
knowledge  of  the  history  of  Abdera  must  remain  doubtful, 
as  well  as  the  meaning  of  the  modification  of  standard 
which  then  took  place.  The  really  important  landmark  is, 
of  course,  the  expedition  of  Brasidas.  Von  Fritze's  dates, 
after  a  most  minute  examination  of  the  coinage  (Nomisma, 
No.  3),  are  425  b.c.  for  the  first  change  of  standard,  and  400 
for  the  second. 

Two  preliminary  objections  to  Head's  view  occur.  In  the 
first  place,  his  theory  assumes  that  Abdera  acted  in  the 
issue  of  coins  quite  independently  of  the  other  cities  of 
Thrace  and  Ionia,  which  is  exceedingly  improbable.  In  the 
second  place,  it  assumes  that  the  commerce  of  the  district 
was  dominated  by  the  gold  darics  of  Persia,  whereas  in  fact 
it  was  dominated  by  the  silver  coinage  of  Athens.  It  is  to 
be  observed  that  when  the  Thracian  cities  of  Thasos,  Aenus, 
Maroneia,  and  Amphipolis  strike  gold  coins,  as  they  do 
occasionally  between  411  b.c  and  356  b.c,  they  follow  the 
standard,  not  of  the  daric,  but  of  the  somewhat  heavier  gold 
coinage  of  Athens.  But  apart  from  these  objections,  I  do 
not  think  that  Mr.  Head  accurately  states  the  facts.  It  does 
not  appear  to  me  that  the  coinage  falls  gradually  from  240 
!  to  224  grains,  from  198  to  190,  and  so  on ;  but  that  the 
heavier  coins  in  each  series  are  in  many  cases  later  than 
the  light  ones.  This  may  easily  be  seen  on  consulting  the 
British  Museum  catalogue.  The  coins  are  there  arranged 
in  chronological  order  as  indicated  by  style,  and  the  weights 


278         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 


vary,  within  the  limits  of  the  standard,  upwards  and  down 
wards.  The  two  tetradrachms  put  in  that  catalogue  in  the 
first  place  as  the  most  archaic,  dating  from  the  sixth  century, 
weigh  224  and  228-5  grains  respectively:  coins  24  to  26, 
dating  from  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  weigh  230-4, 
236-7,  224-7  grains  respectively.  There  can  thus  be  no 
question  of  a  gradual  fall  of  standard,  down  to  the  time 
of  Brasidas.  Also  of  the  coins  following  the  supposed 
Aeginetan  standard  the  weight  does  not  fall  in  any  marked 
or  distinct  way  with  time. 

Moreover,  the  dates  of  the  reductions  of  the  exchange 
value  of  gold  do  not  correspond  with  the  changes  of  standard 
at  Abdera.  The  fall  from  fourteen  to  one  to  twelve  to  one 
should,  according  to  Mr.  Head's  table,  take  place  about  430. 
In  fact  it  does  not  occur  until  the  end  of  the  fifth  century  ; 
perhaps,  as  M.  T.  Eeinach  suggests,  in  consequence  of  the 
influx  of  darics  into  Greece.  '  Cette  proportion  de  14:1', 
writes  M.  Reinach,1  '  se  maintint  probablement  en  Grece 
j  usque  dans  les  dernieres  annees  de  la  guerre  du  Pelopon- 
nese.' 

Thus,  while  we  do  find  at  Abdera  an  unusual  number  of 
changes  of  standard,  and  the  weight  of  the  coins  does  fall, 
there  does  not  seem  to  be  any  ground  for  supposing  that  the 
motive  of  those  changes  was  a  pursuit  of  a  bimetallic 
standard.  And  since  Abdera  is  the  example  most  favourable 
to  such  an  explanation,  we  may  fairly  dismiss  it  as  fanciful 
in  the  case  of  other  cities.  The  early  issues  of  Asia  were 
based  upon  a  desire  to  make  a  certain  number  of  coins  of  ' 
silver  or  of  electrum  equivalent  to  one  or  two  gold  staters. 
But  this  plan  was  never  adopted  at  Athens,  where,  as 
Xenophon  implies,2  and  as  clearly  appears  from  inscriptions, 
silver  was  the  standard  of  value,  and  gold  was  regarded  only 
as  an  article  of  commerce.  Nor  was  it  adopted  in  any  cities 
of  European  Greece.  We  have,  however,  evidence,  as  will 
appear  below,  that  the  cities  of  Sicily  resorted  to  bimetallism 
for  a  few  years  before  400  b.  c. 

We  have  still  to  consider  the  curious  and  unexpected 

1  VRUttaire  par  les  monnaies,  p.  60.  '  De  Vectig.  iv.  10. 


THRACE  AND  MACEDON  279 

appearance  of  the  Aeginetan  standard  at  Abdera.  That  it 
is  the  Aeginetan,  though  the  coins  in  some  cases  slightly 
exceed  that  weight,  seems  to  be  undeniable ;  for  the  weight 
suits  no  other  standard.  This  phenomenon  may  best  be 
accounted  for  on  political  rather  than  financial  grounds. 
After  the  disaster  at  Syracuse  we  know  that  many  of  the 
allies  of  Athens  revolted.  "We  have  an  indication  that 
Abdera  was  among  these  in  a  passage  of  Diodorus. 
Describing  the  events  of  the  year  408  B.C.,  he  writes,1 
'  After  this  '  Thrasybulus,  with  fifteen  Attic  ships  '  sailed  to 
Abdera,  and  brought  over  the  city,  which  was  then  one  of 
the  most  powerful  cities  of  Thrace '.  That  so  much  was 
accomplished  by  so  small  a  force  need  not  surprise  us,  if  we 
remember  that  in  most  of  these  Greek  cities  political  power 
was  divided  between  the  partisans  of  Athens  and  those  of 
Sparta,  and  a  small  armament  might  turn  the  scale.  But 
the  passage  definitely  indicates  that  at  the  time  Abdera  had 
fallen  away  from  Athens.  At  such  a  time  we  can  scarcely 
be  surprised  if  she  tried  to  introduce  a  coinage  of  Pelopon- 
nesian  weight.  The  Spartan  fleets  were  constantly  in  that 
region,  and  the  sailors  reckoned,  as  we  can  prove  from  the 
dealings  of  the  Peloponnesian  admirals  with  Chios,  by  the 
Peloponnesian  standard.  But  the  attempt  of  Abdera  can 
scarcely  have  been  successful  or  of  long  duration.  Very 
soon  it  was  abandoned,  and  the  Persian  standard  took  its 
place. 

The  Editor  of  the  Berlin  Corpus  of  coins  of  Thrace  2  has 
pointed  out  that  while  the  people  of  Abdera  were  issuing 
staters  of  full  Aeginetan  weight,  they  were  also  issuing 
hemidrachms  on  a  different  standard.  "While  the  didrachm 
weighs  196  grains  or  thereabouts  (grm.  12-70),  half  drachms 
bearing  the  same  names  of  magistrates,  and  so  certainly 
contemporary,  weigh  only  44  grains  or  less  (grm.  2-85). 
These  smaller  coins  already  seem  to  follow  the  Persian 
standard,  which  at  the  end  of  the  fifth  century  comes  in  also 

1  xiii.  72. 

*  Die  ant.  Mumen  N.  Qriechenlands,  ii.  86.  This  writer  (Dr.  M.  L.  Strack) 
does  not  call  the  standard  of  these  coins  the  Aeginetan. 


280  COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

for  the  staters.  We  are  of  course  used  to  the  phenomenon 
that  small  and  fractional  coins,  intended  for  use  only  in  the 
home  market,  are  often  not  struck  of  full  weight.  But  the 
weight  of  the  hemidrachms  under  discussion  is  so  uniform 
that  it  would  seem  to  be  purposeful.  Dr.  Strack  thinks  that 
this  issue  of  coins  indicates  that  the  Persian  standard  was  in 
the  last  half  of  the  fifth  century  coming  in  on  certain  lines 
of  trade,  especially  the  trade  with  Cardia,  and  the  cities  of 
the  Hellespont ;  and  that  this  line  of  trade  became  more 
important  about  400,  so  as  then  to  conquer  the  whole  coinage 
of  Abdera. 

Amphipolis  does  not  issue  any  coin  before  the  time  of 
Brasidas :  after  that,  the  city  strikes  most  beautiful  coins 
on  the  Abderite  standard.  (PI.  VII.  11.)  But  the  type  of 
these  coins  is  a  full-face  head  of  Apollo,  which  we  can 
scarcely  venture  to  place  earlier  than  the  full-face  head  of 
Arethusa  at  Syracuse  by  Kimon.  This  latter  head  is  attri- 
buted by  Sir  A.  Evans l  to  409  b.  c.  ;  the  coinage  of  Amphi- 
polis must  therefore  be  given  to  the  very  last  years  of  the 
fifth  century. 

The  coins  of  the  district  of  Chalcidice  furnish  interesting 
phenomena.  The  largest  city  of  the  region,  Acanthus, 
appears  to  have  issued  coins  uninterruptedly  during  the 
period  of  Athenian  hegemony :  until  the  time  of  Brasidas 
(424  b.  c.)  they  were  struck  on  the  Attic  standard  (PI.  VII.  12) ; 
after  Brasidas  on  the  Abderite  standard.  That  there  was 
no  interval  between  the  latest  coins  of  the  former  class  and  the 
earliest  coins  of  the  latter  class  may  be  seen  from  a  compari- 
son of  Nos.  6  and  22  in  the  Brit  Mus.  Cat  of  Macedon,  the 
reverses  of  which  are  almost  identical,  though  the  standard 
is  changed.  Mende  also  seems  to  have  struck  tetradrachms 
of  Attic  standard  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century. 
Potidaea  does  not  appear  to  have  issued  any  silver  money 
after  the  Athenian  siege  of  432 ;  and  in  fact  all  the  extant 
silver  seems  to  belong  to  a  time  before  the  middle  of  the 
fifth  century.     Other  cities  of  Chalcidice  either  intermit 

1  Syracusan  Medallions,  p.  70 


THRACE  AND  MACEDON  281 

coinage  altogether  between  450  and  424,  or  else  strike  only 
coins  of  small  denominations,  usually  the  Attic  tetrobol  or 
Corinthian  drachm,  for  local  use.  This  is  the  case  with 
Olynthus,  Dicaea,  Terone,  and  other  cities. 

"We  may  observe  that  Acanthus,  being  a  wealthy  and 
powerful  city,  situated  not  actually  on  any  of  the  rocky 
peninsulas,  but  with  access  to  the  interior,  was  almost  in 
the  same  position  in  regard  to  Athens  as  Abdera  and 
Maroneia.  The  smaller  cities,  situate  among  the  mountains 
of  the  promontories,  were  at  the  mercy  of  an  Athenian 
fleet,  and  in  much  the  same  position  as  the  islanders. 
Hence  Athenian  pressure  would  be  more  likely  to  bear  upon 
them  than  upon  Acanthus. 

In  an  important  paper  published  in  the  American  Classical 
Philology  for  1914 l  Mr.  Allen  B.  West  gives  reasons  for 
thinking  that  the  Chalcidian  League  was  not  founded,  as 
has  been  supposed,  in  394  B.C.;  but  had  existed  as  early  as 
the  time  of  Xerxes,  and  was  organized  on  a  closer  footing 
in  432  b.c.2  Mr.  West  suggests  that  some  of  the  coins 
inscribed  XakKiSicov,  and  struck  at  Olynthus,  belong  to  the 
latter  part  of  the  fifth  century.  The  weight,  that  of  Abdera, 
is  quite  suitable  for  the  time  after  Brasidas.  It  is  most 
probable  that  the  gold  staters  of  the  class  {Obv.  Head  of 
Apollo,  Rev.  Lyre  and  name  of  magistrate)  (B.  M.  XXI.  9) 
were  issued  soon  after  394,  following  the  lead  of  Athens. 
Some  of  the  silver  coins,  being  of  a  somewhat  severe  style, 
and  showing  remains  of  an  incuse  square  (B.M.  XXI.  10),  may 
well  have  been  struck  before  400  B.C.  The  striking  of  civic 
staters  in  silver  by  the  cities  of  Chalcidice,  except  Acanthus, 
which  did  not  belong  to  the  League,  would  probably  cease  at 
the  same  time ;  but  some  cities,  such  as  Terone  and  Aeneia, 
seem  to  have  continued  their  issues  of  smaller  coins  on  the 
standard  of  Abdera. 

Terone. 

Obv.  Naked  Satyr  looking  into  an  oenochoe.     Rev.  TE.  Goat 
in  incuse.     Tetrobol.     Weight,  36  grains  (grm.  2-33). 

1  pp.  24-34.  2  Compare  Thucyd.  i.  68. 


282         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

Aeneia. 

Obv.    Head  of  Athena.      Rev.    Bull  looking  back  in  incuse. 
Tetrobol.     Weight,  36  grains  (grm.  2-33). 

Contemporary  with  these  are  the  coins  of  Olynthus. 

Obv.  OAYNO.  Head  of  Apollo.     Rev.  XAAKIAEniM.  Lyre  in 
incuse.     Weight,  35  grains  (grm.  2-26). 

Mr.  West  has  not  cited  one  coin  which  tells  strongly  in 
favour  of  his  view. 

Obv.  Free  horse  cantering.      Rev.  XALK.  Eagle  carrying  ser- 
pent in  incuse  square.1     Weight,  41  grains  (grm.  2-65). 

As  this  coin  is  precisely  similar,  save  for  the  inscription, 
to  one  of  Olynthus,2  we  must  suppose  it  struck  in  that  city. 
But  it  bears  the  inscription  Xa\<  ...  in  decidedly  archaic 
letters,  and  must  have  been  issued  by  Chalcidian  moneyers 
before  the  end  of  the  fifth  century. 


VII.    Italy  and  Sicily. 

The  cities  of  Italy  and  Sicily  at  no  time  formed  part  of 
the  Athenian  Empire.  In  fact  it  was  the  attempt  of  Athens 
to  extend  the  bounds  of  her  empire  in  this  direction  which 
was  the  cause  of  her  fall.  But  it  may  be  well,  in  the 
present  connexion,  to  consider  what  are  the  results  of 
Athenian  influence  to  be  traced  on  the  coins  of  Italy  and 
Sicily.  The  Athenians  had  a  claim,  the  exact  nature  of 
which  is  doubtful,  on  the  territory  of  Siris,  a  city  of  Italy 
destroyed  by  its  neighbours  after  the  middle  of  the  sixth 
century.  This  may  have  been  a  reason  for  the  choice  of 
the  site  of  Sybaris,  near  by,  as  a  place  for  the  foundation 
of  an  Athenian  colony  by  Pericles,  about  443  B.C.  This 
colony  by  no  means  consisted  entirely  of  Athenians,  it 
included  the  descendants  of  the  old  inhabitants  of  Sybaris, 
destroyed  about  510  b.c,  as  well  as  a  number  of  people  from 
Peloponnese,  North  Greece,  and  the  Islands.     This  colony 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  208.     Compare  Num.  Chron.,  1897,  p.  276. 
*  B.  M.  Cat.  Macedon,  p.  87,  2. 


ITALY  AND  SICILY  283 

is  interesting  to  lovers  of  Greek  literature,  because  among 
the  colonists  were  Herodotus  and  Lysias  the  orator.  And 
it  is  interesting  to  the  numismatist,  because  the  coins  of 
the  new  colony,  in  their  types,  give  us  information  as  to 
the  history  of  the  colony.  On  the  earliest  coins  we  find  the 
name,  not  of  Thurii  but  of  Sybaris,  and  the  olive  with 
which  the  helmet  of  Athena  is  bound  seems  to  indicate  an 
Athenian  connexion. 

Obv.  Head  of  Athena,  helmet  bound  with  olive. 

Rev.  £YBAPI.  Bull  with  head  reverted  or  lowered.     Weight, 

42-40  grains  (grm.  2-72-2-60). 
Rev.  SYBA.  Same  type.      Weight,  18-16  grains  (grm.  116- 

103). 
Rev.  £  YBA.  Head  of  bull.     Weight,  6  grains  (grm.  0-38). 

The  attempt  to  combine  the  old  inhabitants  of  Sybaris 
with  the  new  colonists  was  not  successful.  The  former 
expected  to  take  the  lead ; *  and  being  frustrated,  withdrew 
to  a  settlement  apart.  Some  authorities  would  attribute  to 
this  separate  town  the  coins  above  cited ;  others  think  that 
the  colony  at  first  bore  the  name  Sybaris.  Before  long  the 
old  Sybarites  were  destroyed ;  and  it  cannot  in  any  case 
have  been  long  after  the  foundation  that  the  regular  issue 
of  coins  in  the  name  of  Thurii  began. 

Obv.  Head  of  Athena,  helmet  bound  with  olive  wreath.  Rev. 
OOYPIftN.  Bull  butting.  Weight,  230  grains  (grm. 
14-90) ;  123-119  grains  (grm.  7-97-7-71) ;  40  grains  (grm. 
2-59) ;  18-16  grains  (grm.  1- 16-1-03). 

But  Thurii  was  never  a  dependent  ally  of  Athens.  The 
people  were  a  mixed  race,  as  we  have  seen.  In  the  war 
between  Athens  and  Syracuse  Thurii  was,  as  a  rule,  neutral. 
Only  the  head  of  Athena  seems  to  bear  witness  to  Athenian 
influence ;  and  even  there  the  figure  of  Scylla,  which  the 
helmet  of  the  goddess  after  the  first  usually  bears,  shows 
that  it  was  rather  as  a  local  deity  than  as  a  protrectress  of 

1  Diodorus,  xii.  11. 


284         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

Athens  that  Athena  was   chosen  for  the   obverse  of  the 
coins. 

The  artistic  influence  of  the  Athenian  settlers  of  Thurii 
in  Italy  and  Sicily  appears  to  have  been  considerable.  This 
subject  was  first  treated  by  R.  S.  Poole,1  whose  views  have 
been  accepted  and  expanded  by  Furtwangler,2  Evans,  and 
other  writers. 

But  this  artistic  influence  seems  the  only  kind  of  influence 
in  Italy  that  the  foundation  of  Thurii  brought  to  Athens. 
"We  cannot  doubt  that  Athens  had  intended  by  the  founda- 
tion to  acquire  political  and  commercial  power;  and  here 
she  was  foiled.  A  crucial  test  lies  in  the  consideration  that 
the  coins  of  Thurii  were  not  minted  on  the  Attic  standard, 
but  on  that  of  other  cities  of  South  Italy,  such  as  Croton 
and  Metapontum.  This  standard,  being  almost  exactly  the 
same  as  the  Chian,  would  favour  the  coinage  of  Aeginetan 
rather  than  that  of  Attic  weight.  At  the  same  time  we 
may  observe  that  the  issue  of  the  tetradrachm  in  place  of 
the  didrachm,  almost  universal  in  South  Italy  at  the  time, 
may  be  a  result  of  Athenian  traditions. 

The  figure  of  Athena  is  also  prominent  on  certain  coins 
of  Camarina  in  Sicily.  She  appears  in  a  quadriga  on  coins 
of  the  middle  and  latter  part  of  the  fifth  century.  As  about 
427  b.c.  we  find  Camarina  allied  with  Leontini  and  Athens 
against  Syracuse,3  we  might  be  at  first  disposed  to  see 
a  phil-Attic  allusion  on  these  coins.  But  Camarina  soon 
gave  up  her  alliance  with  Athens,  and  since  the  early  coins 
of  the  city  also  bear  a  figure  of  Athena,  we  may  best  suppose 
the  type  to  be  purely  local. 

"We  may  therefore  say  with  confidence  that  the  influence 
of  Athens  is  scarcely  to  be  traced  on  the  coins  of  Italy  and 
Sicily  in  the  fifth  century,  save  as  regards  art. 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1883,  p.  269.  2  Meisterwerke,  p.  148. 

s  Thuc.  iii.  86. 


HISTORIC  RESULTS  285 


VIII.     Historic  Results. 

We  proceed  to  consider  how  the  data  thus  gained  from 
a  study  of  the  coins  fit  in  with  received  notions  as  to  the 
history  of  Athens  and  her  allies  during  the  seventy  years 
of  Athenian  domination.  We  took  our  start  from  the 
claim  of  Athens  to  a  complete  monopoly  of  the  issue  of 
coins  where  she  was  strong  enough  to  enforce  it.  She 
certainly  succeeded  in  enforcing  it  firstly  in  the  case  of 
her  own  colonies,  secondly  in  the  case  of  the  Aegean 
Islands  (at  all  events  in  the  period  after  450  b.  c),  and 
thirdly  at  most  of  the  cities  of  Asia  Minor  excluding  the 
great  islands  of  Chios,  Samos,  Lesbos,  and  Cos. 

Negative  evidence  is  proverbially  untrustworthy.  The 
fact  that  we  have  no  coins  of  a  city  during  a  certain  period 
does  not  prove  that  no  coins  were  struck  there.  But  when 
city  after  city  is  drawn  blank,  and  that  at  a  time  when 
commerce  was  very  active,  we  cannot  escape  from  a  con- 
clusion. Nor  is  it  only  the  gaps  in  the  coinages  of  the 
islands  and  the  cities  of  Ionia  which  testify  to  the  domi- 
nance of  the  Athenian  owls,  but  other  indications  may  be 
cited.1  The  fact  that  at  Naucratis  in  Egypt  out  of  ninety- 
seven  coins  of  early  period  found  on  the  site  eighty-six  were 
Athenian  tetradrachms.  in  the  great  majority  of  cases  dating 
from  the  period  480-394  b.  c,  is  sufficient  proof  that  Athens 
served  the  Greeks  in  Egypt  as  their  mint.  In  the  same 
way,  that  the  Messenians  settled  at  Naupactus  by  the 
Athenians,  460  B.C.,  did  not  issue  any  coins  on  their  own 
account,  must  be  regarded  as  a  proof  that  they  used  the 
Athenian  money. 

In  some  of  the  cities  where  Athens  was  not  able  to 
impose  her  own  coinage  she  caused  a  change  to  the  Attic 
standard  in  the  currency.  This  is  the  case  in  Samos  and  in 
Rhodes,  where  however  the  supremacy  of  the  Athenian 
standard  was  very  brief.  At  Cos  it  for  many  years  replaced 
the  Aeginetan  standard. 

1  Xaukratis,  i,  p.  63. 


286  COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

In  some  cities  of  Asia,  while  Athens  appears  to  have 
supplied  the  bulk  of  the  coin,  there  were  local  issues  of 
small  denominations.  At  Miletus  these  fractions  were 
of  Attic  weight.  But  in  the  district  of  the  Propontis  they 
were  often  of  the  standard  of  Chios  or  of  Persia.  At  Cardia. 
Abydus,  and  Dardanus  they  were  of  Persian  weight;  at 
Parium  and  Assos  they  were  of  Chian  weight. 

In  500-480  b.o.  the  influence  of  Aegina  had  been  marked 
by  the  use  of  the  Aeginetan  standard  in  Pontus,  at  Teos  in 
Ionia,  and  more  especially  on  the  southern  shores  of  Asia 
Minor,  in  Cos,  Cnidus,  and  Camirus.  It  is  instructive  to 
see  how,  as  Aegina  sinks  beneath  the  yoke  of  Athens,  the 
Aeginetan  monetary  standard  drops  away  in  the  cities  of 
Asia.  At  Cos  it  gives  way  to  the  Attic  standard.  At 
Cnidus  and  Teos  coinage  seems  entirely  to  have  inter- 
mitted. In  the  district  of  Pontus  the  weight  of  the  drachm 
falls  from  Aeginetan  to  Persian  level.  The  Aeginetan 
standard  holds  its  own  in  Greece  Proper,  and  in  the  large 
island  of  Crete  ;  elsewhere  it  is  everywhere  recessive. 

In  Thrace,  Thasos,  and  Lycia,  where  the  'Babylonic' 
drachm  was  in  use,  it  shows  towards  the  middle  of  the 
fifth  century  a  marked  tendency  to  fall  in  weight,  and  to 
conform  to  the  Attic  standard.  In  Thrace  especially  this 
result  is  completely  reached  by  the  time  when  Amphipolis 
was  founded.  Aenus,  which  began  to  issue  coins  about 
460  b.c,  starts  with  the  Attic  standard. 

The  rivals  in  Asia  of  the  Attic  standard  were  those  of 
Persia  and  of  Chios.  It  seems  that  the  spread  and  the 
recession  of  these  standards  is  sometimes  a  reflection  of 
the  advance  or  retrogression  of  the  influence  of  the  states 
to  which  the  standards  respectively  belong. 

In  districts  to  the  east  of  the  Bosporus  and  Rhodes,  the 
power  of  Persia  seems  steadily  to  increase  during  the  latter 
part  of  the  fifth  century  in  the  Greek  cities.  The  hold  of 
Persia  on  the  cities  of  the  coast  tightens;  and  we  are 
prepared  for  the  revival  of  Persian  preponderance  which 
is  so  marked  a  feature  of  the  early  fourth  century.  On 
the  other  hand  there  is  but  one  city  of  the  Ionian  coast, 


HISTORIC  RESULTS  287 

Colophon,  which  actually  uses  the  Persian  standard,  though 
in  other  cities,  such  as  Erythrae  and  Termera,  we  find  a 
weight  scarcely  to  be  distinguished  from  it. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  features  of  the  coinage  of 
Asia  Minor  in  the  fifth  century  is  the  tenacity  with  which 
the  Chian  standard  kept  its  place,  and,  towards  the  end 
of  the  century,  rapidly  extended  its  influence.  This  was 
the  old  standard  originally  used  for  dark  electrum  (or  gold) 
coins  of  the  northern  part  of  the  west  coast  of  Asia  Minor. 
It  was  applied  to  silver  in  the  sixth  century  at  Tenedos, 
Parium,  and  Chios ;  and  to  billon  or  base  metal  at  Mytilene, 

!Phocaea,  and  Cyzicus. 
At  the  time  of  the  Ionian  revolt,  though  the  people  of 

I  Chios  were  foremost  in  the  rebellion  against  Persia  and 

I  at  the  battle  of  Lade,  Miletus  remained  the  head-quarters 
of  the  Ionian  League ;  and  the  coins  of  electrum  and  of 
silver  issued  by  the  cities  of  the  League  were  minted  on  the 

:  standard  of  Miletus. 

After  the  suppression  of  the  revolt,  Miletus  suffers  eclipse. 

'  The  Chians,  though  they  had  to  suffer  the  rigours  of  Persian 
conquest,  probably  remained  the  most  powerful  state  of  the 
Ionian  coast.  They  did  not  issue  electrum  or  gold  ;  but 
the  striking  of  silver  on  the  old  North  Ionian  standard 
went  on.  About  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  this 
standard  was  adopted  at  Parium  and  Assos.  Towards  the 
end  of  the  Athenian  domination,  it  spread  from  Chios 
to  several  cities  of  the  Propontis.  Towards  the  end  of 
the  century  it  was  adopted  at  Byzantium,  Antandros, 
Scepsis.  Lamponeia,  and  Apollonia  and  Mesembria  on  the 
Euxine.  But  its  chief  success  was  at  the  newly  founded 
city  of  Rhodes,  about  400  b.c.  The  Chian  standard  after 
that  spreads  in  the  early  part  of  the  fourth  century  all  along 
the  coast  of  Asia  Minor. 

By  the  choice  between  the  Attic  and  the  Chian  standards 
by  the  cities  which  issued  coins  late  in  the  fifth  century, 
we  may  perhaps  judge  whether  they  preferred  the  alliance 
of  Athens  or  that  of  Sparta,  though  the  slight  difference 
of  the  standards  in  normal  weight  makes  the  test  difficult 


288         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

to  apply  practically.  "When  dealing  with  the  coinage  of 
Chios,  I  have  shown  that  there  was  a  well-known  and 
acknowledged  relation  between  the  coinage  of  Chios  and 
that  of  Peloponnese.  The  Chian  tetradrachm  was  regarded 
as  the  fortieth  of  the  Aeginetan  mina,  or  as  equivalent  to 
two  and  a  half  Aeginetan  drachms.  The  Chian  drachm  was 
thus  one  hundred  and  sixtieth  of  the  Aeginetan  mina  or 
five-eighths  of  the  Aeginetan  drachm.  This  was  an  official 
tariff;  and  the  sailors  and  soldiers  of  the  Peloponnesian 
fleet  were  paid  in  Chian  money  at  this  rate.  It  is  clear 
that  we  must  connect  these  facts,  so  clearly  established, 
with  the  spread  of  the  Chian  standard  at  the  very  time 
when  Peloponnesian  fleets  preponderated  in  the  Aegean, 
and  in  the  very  district  which  they  made  their  head- 
quarters. 

The  political  importance  of  this  fact  seems  to  me  to  be 
considerable,  and  it  has  not  been  hitherto  appreciated  by 
numismatists.  The  mere  facts  recorded  by  Thucydides 
and  Xenophon  show  that  the  Peloponnesian  fleets  looked 
to  Chios  for  their  resources  in  money,  as  the  Athenians 
looked  to  the  silver  mines  of  Thrace  and  Laurium.  But 
the  study  of  the  coins  carries  us  further.  For  it  proves 
that,  precisely  at  this  time,  the  standard  or  coin-weight 
of  Chios  began  to  spread  rapidly  among  the  cities  of  the 
coast.  I  think  that  most  numismatists  have  missed  this 
clue,  because  they  have  been  accustomed  to  regard  this 
standard  as  belonging  to  the  island  of  Rhodes,  and  its 
spread  as  due  to  the  commerce  of  Rhodes.  In  fact  Rhodes 
merely  adopted  it  from  Chios,  and  was  by  no  means  the 
earliest  city  of  Asia  to  do  so,  although  no  doubt  its  rapid 
spread  in  the  fourth  century  was  favoured  by  the  rise  of 
Rhodian  commerce. 

The  misfortunes  of  Athens,  even  before  the  capture  of 
the  city  by  Lysander,  had  greatly  shaken  the  Athenian 
Empire ;  and  the  people  of  Asia  Minor,  especially  those 
of  the  Bosporic  region,  were  no  longer  under  any  necessity 
to  accept  the  Athenian  weights  and  the  Athenian  coins. 
Persia  had  not  yet  fully  used  the  opportunity  to  recover 


HISTORIC  RESULTS  289 

predominance  on  the  coast  of  the  Aegean.  Thus  there  was 
an  open  field ;  and  at  the  time  Chios  was  probably  the 
wealthiest  and  most  powerful  state  on  the  coast.  At  the 
same  time,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Chian  money  was  on 
recognized  terms  with  that  of  Peloponnesus. 

It  appears  also  to  have  had  a  recognized  relation  to  the 
silver  coinage  of  Persia.  For  the  Chian  drachm  of  56  to 
60  grains  (grm.  3-62-3-88)  was  almost  exactly  of  the  weight 
of  two-thirds  of  the  Persian  drachm  of  84-86  grains 
(grm.  5-44-5-57).  It  is  to  be  observed  that  at  this  time 
several  cities  of  north  Asia  Minor  issued  drachms  of  the 
weight  of  3-60  grammes,  which  probably  belonged  equally 
to  the  Chian  and  the  Persian  standard. 

It  would  be  a  gain  of  great  historic  importance  if  we 
could  trace  chronologically  the  spread  of  the  Chian  standard. 
Unfortunately,  we  can  at  present  only  do  so  tentatively : 
with  time  we  may  attain  to  more  complete  knowledge. 

Perhaps  the  most  archaic  in  appearance  of  the  coins  on 
the  Chian  standard,  save  those  of  Chios  itself,  are  those  of 
Ephesus : 

Obv.  E<t>.  Bee.     Rev.  Incuse  square,  quartered  by  two  broad  or 
narrow  bands.     (Head,  Ephesus,  PL  I,  15-21.) 

The  tetradrachm  of  this  series,  inscribed  with  the  name 
MENTHP,1  seems  to  have  disappeared  and  its  weight  is  not 
recorded.  Two  didrachms  in  the  British  Museum  weigh 
116-117  grains  (grm.  7-51-7-58):  one  bears  the  name  of 
Timarchus.  Smaller  coins  in  the  same  Museum  weigh 
42-47  grains  (grm.  2-72-3-04) :  one  bears  the  name 
Timesianax.2 

These  coins  are  certainly  earlier  than  the  coins  of  the 
Cnidian  League  at  Ephesus,  394  B.C.:  therefore  the  name 
Mentor  cannot  be  that  of  the  well-known  Satrap  of  the 
time  of  Philip  of  Macedon.  Mr.  Head  assigns  the  coins  to 
415-394  b.c.     As  Ephesus  had  become  by  410  b.  c.  not  only 

1  Mionnet,  Suppl.  vi,  No.  183. 

2  There  are  also  published  gold  coins  of  similar  fabric  and  Attic  weight : 
according  to  Mr.  Head  they  are  forgeries.    {Ephesus,  p.  22.) 

1957  U 


290         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

detached  from  Athens,  but  even  the  head-quarters  of  the 
anti- Athenian  party  in  Ionia,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  issue  of  these  coins  marked  the  defection  from 
Athens  about  415  ;  and  the  use  of  the  Chian  weight  is 
instructive :  the  old  standard  at  Ephesus  had  been  quite 
different. 

The  coins  of  Calchedon  of  which  I  have  spoken  as  of 
Chian  weight  are  certainly  early,  not  later  than  420  B.C.; 
and  if  it  seem  at  first  sight  uncertain  that  their  weight  is 
Chian  rather  than  Attic,  this  is  rendered  at  least  very 
probable  by  comparison  with  the  coins  of  Mesembria  and 
of  Apollonia  on  the  western  shore  of  the  Euxine.  These 
cities  certainly  struck  on  the  Chian  standard  considerably 
before  400  B.C.  The  same  holds  of  Parium,  Assos,  and 
Scepsis,  all  cities  near  the  Sea  of  Marmora. 

It  was  about  the  time  of  the  fall  of  Athens  that  the  Chian 
standard  became  rapidly  more  widely  diffused.  It  is,  how- 
ever, impossible  from  the  coins  to  trace  the  course  of  its 
diffusion  so  exactly  as  to  determine  what  was  due  to  the 
political  events  of  the  end  of  the  fifth  century,  and  what 
was  due  to  the  rapid  growth  of  Rhodian  commerce  and 
wealth  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century.  It  will  be 
better  therefore  to  avoid  here  any  further  discussion  of  the 
matter. 

Thucydides l  records  an  interesting  fact  in  regard  to  the 
comparative  vogue  of  the  Athenian  and  Aeginetan  standards 
in  Peloponnese.  When  in  420  Athens  concluded  an  alliance 
with  Argos,  Elis,  and  Mantinea,  it  was  arranged  that  the 
foot- soldiers  in  the  service  of  the  league  should  receive  half 
an  Aeginetan  drachm  a  day,  and  the  horse-soldiers  a  whole  j 
Aeginetan  drachm.  It  is  clear  that  the  soldiery  of  Pelo-  ! 
ponnesus  always  adhered  to  the  native  standard. 

IX.    Gold  at  Athens. 

Gold  coins  were  first  struck  at  Athens,  as  has  been  con-  I 
clusively  shown  by  Dr.  U.  Kohler,2  in  407  b.c     It  was  a 

1  v.  47.  2  All.  Goldpragung ;  Z.f.  N.  1898. 


GOLD  AT  ATHENS  291 

time  of  great  need :  the  Athenian  fleet  had  been  defeated 
at  Notium,  and  the  city  was  nerving  itself  for  a  final  effort 
which,  as  every  one  knows,  only  led  to  the  decisive  defeat 
at  Aegospotami.  The  golden  Victories  of  the  Acropolis 
were  melted  down,  and  from  the  proceeds  coins  were  struck 
in  gold.  These  gold  coins  are  apparently  alluded  to  in  the 
Frogs  of  Aristophanes  exhibited  in  405  B.C.,  where  he  con- 
trasts the  good  old-fashioned  citizens  of  Athens  with  the 
new  favourites  of  the  people,  likening  the  former  to  the  old 
silver,  not  alloyed,  the  most  beautiful  and  well-struck  of 
coins,  received  everywhere  among  Greeks  and  barbarians, 
and  to  the  gold  coins  recently  struck  (to  kclivov  \pva(ov) ; 
while  he  compares  the  latter  to  base  copper  coins  (Trovrjpa 
\a\Kta)  lately  struck  in  clumsy  fashion.1 

This  passage  in  Aristophanes  is  very  difficult,  and  has 
been  much  discussed.  I  am  disposed  to  accept  the  inter- 
pretation of  it  above  given,  which  is  due  to  M.  Six.  But 
a  further  consideration  of  it  is  unnecessary  for  our  present 
purpose.  Its  chief  importance  for  us  is  that  it  has  elicited 
definite  statements  by  the  Scholiast  as  to  the  dates  of  the 
first  issues  of  gold  and  bronze  money.  The  Scholiast  gives 
the  authority  of  Hellanicus  for  the  assertion  that  gold  was 
issued  in  the  archonship  of  Antigenes  (407  B.C.)  and  the 
authority  of  Philochorus  for  the  assertion  that  the  gold  was 
procured  by  melting  down  the  golden  Victories.  He  also 
says  that  the  bronze  coin  was  issued  in  the  next  year,  that 
of  the  archonship  of  Callias. 

These  gold  coins  have  been  satisfactorily  identified  by 
Kohler. 

1.  Obv.  Head  of  Athena,  early  style.     Rev.  AOE.  Incuse  square, 

in  which  owl  on  olive  branch :  behind,  olive-spray.  Drachm. 

2.  Obv.  The  same.     Rev.  AOE.  Incuse  circle,  in  which  owl  to 

front,  wings  closed,  in  an  olive-wreath.     Hemidrachm. 

3.  Obv.  The  same.      Rev.  AGE.  Incuse  square,  in  which  two 

owls  face  to  face :  olive-branch  between  them.     Diobol. 

4.  Obv.  The  same.     Rev.  AOE.  Incuse  square,  in  which  owl  r. 

on  olive-branch.     Obol.     (B.  T.  CLXXXIX.  1-8.) 
1  Frogs,  line  730  and  foil,  and  Scholiast. 

u  2 


292         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

The  types  of  2  and  3  are  the  same  as  those  on  silver  coins 
of  the  same  denominations,  an  important  fact,  as  showing 
that  this  coinage  was  meant  only  to  be  subsidiary  to,  or  in 
place  of,  the  ordinary  money. 

This  issue  of  gold  coin  had  far-reaching  effects.  Hitherto 
the  only  coins  of  pure  gold  in  use  in  the  world  had  been 
the  Persian  darics.  But  there  were  struck  at  just  this  time 
a  few  small  coins  of  Agrigentum  (issued  just  before  the 
destruction  in  406),  of  Camarina  and  of  Grela  (issued  just 
before  405),  and  of  Syracuse  (about  413  b.c.) — all  of  which 
coins  seem  to  have  been  money  of  necessity,  struck  from 
golden  images  and  dedications  melted  down  during  great 
stress.  The  weights  of  these  Sicilian  coins  are  27,  20,  18, 13, 
and  9  grains.  According  to  Mr.  Head,  the  ratio  given  by 
these  coins  between  gold  and  silver  is  fifteen  to  one ;  in 
which  case  the  coin  of  18  grains  would  be  equivalent  to 
a  tetradrachm  in  silver.  But  this  cannot  be  regarded  as  by 
any  means  a  certainty.  It  is,  however,  in  any  case  probable 
that  the  gold  was  regulated  in  weight  so  as  to  pass  for 
a  certain  number  of  litrae  in  silver  or  bronze :  in  a  word  it 
was  bimetallic. 

But  the  Athenian  issue  of  gold  marks  a  great  and 
important  new  departure  in  the  matter  of  finance ;  the 
same  weight  was  used  for  gold  and  silver ;  and  the  silver 
being  the  standard  coin,  the  value  of  the  gold  conformed  to 
it.  The  weights  of  the  gold  coins  make  one  feel  sure  that 
at  the  time  at  Athens  gold  was  tariffed  at  twelve  to  one ; 
in  which  case  the  four  denominations  issued  would  be  valued 
as  follows : 

Gold  drachm  =12  silver  drachms. 

„     hemidrachm  =    6      „  „ 

„    third  =    4      „  „ 

„     sixth  =    2     „ 

If  this  were  so,  the  accident  that  the  relation  of  the 
metals  at  the  time  stood  at  twelve  to  one  would  bridge  the 
chasm  between  a  monometallic  and  a  bimetallic  system. 

At  a  later  time  the  Athenians  issued  didrachms,  hemi- 
drachms,  and  diobols  in  gold,  bearing  a  head  of  Athena 


GOLD  AT  ATHENS  293 

executed  in  a  later  style.  The  weight  of  the  stater  or 
didrachm  does  not  exceed  133  grains  (grm.  8-60)  (PI.  X.  7). 
In  regard  to  these  Head  writes,1  'At  what  precise  date 
Athens  was  again  compelled  to  have  recourse  to  an  issue 
of  gold  coin  is  doubtful.  One  point  is,  however,  quite  clear, 
and  that  is  that  the  gold  coins  of  the  second  issue  are 
identical  in  style  and  fabric  with  the  tetradrachms  issued 
from  393  onwards'  (PI.  X.  8).2  To  the  time  immediately 
after  394  I  would  boldly  give  them.  This  view  conflicts 
with  that  of  Kohler,  who  thinks  that  the  gold  coins  in 
question  were  issued  in  the  time  of  stress  of  339  B.C.,  when 
Philip  was  marching  on  Athens.  Kohler  points  out  that, 
according  to  the  Attic  inscriptions,  great  dedications  of 
gold  figures  of  Victory  and  of  vessels  were  made  in  the 
years  334-330  B.C.,  which  suggests  that  these  dedications 
had  been  melted  down  shortly  before. 

However,  a  decisive  proof  that  the  Athenian  gold  coins 
of  the  second  issue  must  be  given  to  an  earlier  time  than 
the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  is  furnished  by  Kohler 
himself.3  He  cites  an  Attic  inscription  of  'about  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  century '  in  which  mention  is  made 
of  Attic  staters,  and,  as  appears  from  the  context,  Attic 
gold  staters.  Now  no  staters  are  known  of  the  issue 
of  407  b.c,  but  only  drachms  and  lesser  denominations. 
Of  course,  it  does  not  follow  that  because  at  present  no 
didrachms  are  known,  none  were  struck.  We  can  reach 
only  probability,  not  certainty.  But  in  archaeology  we  can 
seldom  reach  complete  certainty :  we  have  to  walk  by  the 
light  which  we  possess. 

A  further  proof  of  this  view  is  furnished  by  an  Attic 
inscription  published  by  Mr.   Woodward,4  which  records 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  375. 

8  Mr.  Head's  date  for  this  class  of  tetradrachms  is  confirmed  by  the 
occurrence  of  an  example  in  the  Cilician  find,  buried  about  380,  published 
by  Mr.  Newell  in  the  Num.  Ckron.,  1914. 

3  Z./.N.,  1898  (p.  13  of  reprint),  I.G.  ii.  843.  The  inscription  cannot, 
unfortunately,  be  exactly  dated.  Mr.  Woodward  (J.H.S.,  1914,  p.  286)  thinks 
it  possible  that  it  may  be  earlier  than  400. 

*  J.H.S.,  xxix  (1909),  p.  172.     Cf.  Num.  Citron.,    1911.     The  reading  roi>s 


294         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

the  dedication  of  certain  dies  which  had  been  used  for 
gold  coin — ol  \apaKTrjpe9  kcii  o\k\lovl(tkol,  oh  tovs  \pvcrb$ 
zkotttov.  The  inscription  dates  from  between  385  and 
375  b.c.  Mr.  Woodward  supposes  that  the  dies  had  been 
used  for  the  first  issue  of  gold  coin  in  407.  But  this 
interpretation  will  not  stand,  as  the  \pvaol  must  be  staters 
of  gold,  not  drachms,  which  might  be  \pvaia,  but  could  not 
be  xpvo-ol.  This  proves  that  an  issue  of  staters  or  didrachms 
must  have  taken  place  before  375  b.  c.1 

It  is  in  some  measure  a  confirmation  of  these  views  that 
Conon,  when  he  died  in  Cyprus  in  389  B.C.,  bequeathed  to 
Athena  at  Athens  and  Apollo  at  Delphi  a  sum  of  5,000 
staters.2  As  the  nature  of  the  staters  is  not  mentioned,  it 
may  be  disputed  of  what  kind  they  were.  M.  T.  Reinach 3 
thinks  that  they  were  Lampsacene  or  Daric  staters ;  but 
it  seems  far  more  probable  that  they  were  of  the  new 
Athenian  issues.  M.  Reinach  shows  the  stater  mentioned 
to  have  been  worth  24-22  silver  drachms;  there  can, 
I  think,  be  little  doubt  that  24  drachms  was  at  the  time 
the  normal  value. 

This  dating  is  satisfactory  and  removes  difficulties.  The 
first  issue  of  small  denominations  was  a  money  of  necessity 
struck  at  the  time  of  deepest  need.  The  second  issue  is 
of  another  character,  more  plentiful  and  varied,  and 
deliberately  intended  for  currency.  The  monopoly  of 
the  Attic  silver  having  departed,  and  its  place  in  the 
commerce  of  the  Aegean  being  taken  by  the  darics  and 
the  staters  of  Cyzicus,  there  was  no  longer  any  reason  to 
abstain  from  issuing  gold,  in  competition  with  these. 

The  first  abundant  issue  of  gold  coin  by  Athens  comes 
naturally  at  a  time  when  the  great  victory  of  Conon  at 

Xpvaoi  (or  rus  \pvaovs)  is  conjectural ;  but  it  seems  to  be  fairly  certain,  as  the 
number  of  letters  fills  a  gap. 

1  Mr.  Woodward  (I.  c),  while  allowing  the  force  of  my  remarks  as  to  the 
use  of  the  word  xpm°h  yet  thinks  that  a  dedication  was  much  more  likely  in    I 
the  case  of  dies  used  at  a  time  of  necessity  and  then  thrown  aside.     If  it  be   ! 
so,  yet  I  think  my  argument  more  weighty  than  a  mere  probability. 

2  Lysias,  De  bonis  Aristophanis,  c.  39. 
8  VHist.  par  les  Monnaies  p.  50. 


GOLD  AT  ATHENS  295 

Cnidus  had  laid  the  foundation  for  a  new  period  of  expan- 
sion and  empire.  The  staters  became  the  models  on  which 
were  framed  the  issues  of  Thebes  and  Olynthus  and  many- 
cities  in  Asia,  of  Tarentum  in  the  west,  and  Cyrene  in  the 
south.  This  subject  I  further  discuss  in  my  account  of 
the  gold  coinage  of  Asia. 


X.     Bronze  at  Athens. 

As  regards  the  date  of  the  earliest  issues  of  bronze  coins 
at  Athens  we  have  definite  information.  The  Scholiast  on 
.  Aristophanes'  Frogs  (1.  730)  says  that  bronze  was  first 
struck  in  the  archonship  of  Callias  (406  b.c).  And  in 
the  Ecclesiazusae,  Aristophanes  narrates  how  they  were 
demonetized  in  393  b.c.  The  town-crier  announced  (1.  821) 
that  they  were  no  longer  to  be  current:  avkKpay  6  Krjpvg 
pf]  Si^adai  pTjSiua  \a\Kovv  to  Xoittov,  dpyvpa>  yap  ^pwpzOa. 
It  seems  that  the  unfortunates,  who  at  that  moment  pos- 
sessed the  bronze  coin,  had  to  submit  to  the  loss.  The 
coins  were  thus  current  only  for  thirteen  years.  Clearly 
they  were  a  money  of  necessity,  struck  at  the  time  of 
Athens'  deepest  need,  and  withdrawn  after  the  victory 
of  Conon  at  Cnidus,  when  the  gold  staters  began  to  be 
struck. 

According  to  Mr.  Earle  Fox1  they  were  only  the 
following : 

Obv.  Head  of  Athena  to  left  of  fine  style,  in  close  fitting  helmet. 
Rev.  A  OH.  Owl  facing,  wings  closed,  standing  on  a  grain 
of  corn,  between  two  olive-branches  (B.  M.  Cat.,  PI.  VI.  5). 
Also  a  smaller  coin,  on  which  the  olive-branches  are 
wanting. 

The  unusual  character  of  the  head  of  Athena  and  the  H 
in  the  inscription  seem  to  me  to  be  in  conflict  with  the 
ascription  of  these  coins  to  so  early  a  date. 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1905,  p.  3,  PL  I. 


296         COINS  OF  THE  ATHENIAN  EMPIRE 

I  am  disposed  to  regard  as  the  coins  mentioned  by- 
Aristophanes  the  following : 

1.  Obv.  Head  of  Athena,  helmet  bound  with  olive.     Rev.  AO. 

Two  owls  within  olive- wreath  (B.  M.  Cat,  VI.  2). 

2.  Obi\  Similar  head.     Rev.  AOE.  Two  owls  with  one  head  : 

olive  spray  on  either  side  (B.  M.  Cat.,  VI.  6). 

The  close  resemblance  of  No.  1  to  the  silver  tetrobols  and 
of  No.  2  to  the  silver  diobols  appears  to  show  that  these 
bronze  coins  were  issued  at  a  time  of  stress  to  take  the 
place  of  the  silver. 

On  the  use  of  bronze  coins,  as  money  of  necessity,  in  the 
place  of  silver  of  the  same  types,  light  is  thrown  by  an 
interesting  inscription  of  Thebes  of  the  second  century  b.  c.1 
This  inscription  shows  that  bronze  coins  of  the  same  size 
and  types  as  the  silver  drachms  of  the  same  period  were 
issued  at  Thebes  as  legal  tender,  but  in  fact  passed  at  25  per 
cent,  discount.  The  hipparch  was,  however,  obliged  to  pay 
his  soldiers  in  silver,  which  he  had  to  buy  at  a  premium. 

Later  in  the  fourth  century  there  was  no  doubt  a  regular 
issue  of  bronze  money.  Julius  Pollux 2  mentions  bronze 
coins  as  in  use  in  the  time  of  Philemon,  that  is,  the  age 
of  Alexander.  They  seem  to  have  varied  in  value  from 
three-quarters  of  an  obol  (six  chalci)  to  the  single  chalcus. 
The  fact  that  Aristophon,  a  poet  of  the  Middle  Comedy, 
living  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  speaks  of 
a  five  chalcus  piece,3  seems  to  show  that  the  issue  of  regular 
bronze  money  began  in  the  time  of  the  second  Athenian 
Empire. 

Another  view  has  recently  been  set  forth  with  much 
learning  by  Mr.  Svoronos.4  He  maintains  that  the  only 
bronze  coin  issued  at  Athens  in  the  fifth  century  was  the 
KoWvfio?,  a  small  piece  introduced  by  Demetrius  surnamed 
6  XccXkos  about  430  b.c.     Such  small  pieces  of  bronze  have 


1  Hermes,  1874,  p.  431  ;  C.  I.  vii.  2426. 

i  Onom.  ix.  65.  3  Pollux,  I.  c. 

*  Journal  intern,  (farcheologie  numismatique,  1912,  p.  123. 


BRONZE  AT  ATHENS  297 

long  been  known  at  Athens ;  Mr.  Svoronos  publishes  a  long 
list.  I  am  by  no  means  convinced  by  his  arguments,  but 
I  have  not  space  to  discuss  them.  I  adhere  to  the  usual 
view  that  these  pieces  were  not  currency,  but  tesserae. 

Bronze  coins  had  before  this  been  issued  in  many  Greek 
cities,  notably  in  those  of  Sicily.  It  was  natural  that  their 
use  should  spread  eastward  from  Italy  and  Sicily  where  in 
early  times  bronze  was  the  standard  of  value,  as  was  silver 
in  Greece  and  gold  in  Asia. 


CHAPTER   XV 

SILVEE   OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 

§  1.    Spread  op  the  Chian  Standard. 

In  treating  of  the  coinage  of  the  Athenian  Empire  we 
have  seen  how  the  Chian  standard  of  weight  for  coins 
spread  from  city  to  city,  during  the  period  after  the 
disastrous  Athenian  expedition  against  Syracuse.  After 
the  taking  of  Athens  by  Lysander  in  404  b.c,  that  spread 
became  more  marked.  The  tetradrachm  of  Chios,  it  will 
be  remembered,  weighed  about  240  grains  (grm.  15-55)  and 
the  didrachm  120  grains  (grm.  7-77).  The  substitution  of 
the  Chian  standard  for  that  of  Athens  at  any  city  would 
seem  to  mark  a  revolt  against  the  influence  of  Athens. 
This  course  of  matters  is  not  surprising.  The  Aeginetan 
standard  which  was  in  use  in  victorious  Peloponnesus  had 
no  longer  any  currency  outside  Greece  proper,  nor  was 
there  in  Peloponnesus  any  important  commercial  city,  if 
we  except  Corinth,  which  city  had  a  standard  of  its  own. 
"We  can  therefore  understand  why  the  Aeginetan  standard 
did  not  at  this  time  spread  to  Asia. 

We  may  also  observe  that  the  Chian  standard  worked  in 
easily  with  those  of  Aegina  and  Persia.  It  has  been  shown 
by  documentary  evidence,1  statements  of  Thucydides  and 
Xenophon,  that  at  the  end  of  the  fifth  century  the  admirals 
of  Sparta  procured  from  Chios  money  for  payment  of  their 
sailors,  and  that  in  such  payments  the  tetradrachm  of  Chios 
was  reckoned  as  equivalent  to  a  fortieth  of  the  Aeginetan 
mina  (240  grains  x  40  =  9,600  grains).  There  was  also  an 
easy  modus  vivendi  between  the  Chian  standard  and  that  of 
Persia  in  the  equation  of  the  Chian  drachm  (56-60  grains, 

1  Above,  Chap.  XIV. 


i 


SPREAD  OF  THE  CHIAN  STANDARD        299 

|  grm.  3-62-3-88)  with  the  Persian  tetrobol,  or  two-thirds  of 
a  drachm  (56-58  grains,  grm.  3-62-3-75).  At  many  cities 
there  were  issued  coins  of  about  56  grains  (grm.  3-62)  which 
served  as  either  of  these  denominations. 

But  perhaps  the  event  which  most  of  all  contributed  to 
the  spread  of  the  Chian  standard  was  its  adoption  by  the 
rising  commercial  city  of  Rhodus.  Attention  has  often 
been  paid  by  numismatists  to  the  rapid  rise  of  Rhodes,  and 
the  vogue  of  its  standard.  Mr.  Head,1  however,  rightly  saw 
that  the  Rhodian  standard  was  in  fact  that  of  Chios.  When 
about  408  b.c.  the  ancient  cities  of  the  island  of  Rhodes, 
Lindus,  Camirus,  and  Ialysus,  combined  to  found  the  new 
city  of  Rhodus,  the  new  foundation  rose  almost  immediately 
to  a  great  height  of  prosperity,  and  for  centuries  was  a 
dominant  factor  in  the  commerce  of  the  Aegean  Sea.  For 
a  few  years  after  the  foundation  Rhodus  used  the  Attic 
standard,  as  was  not  wonderful,  considering  that  until  the 
fatal  battle  of  Aegospotami  Athens  was  very  powerful  on 
the  coast  of  Asia  Minor,  and  the  Attic  weight  was  used  in 
the  neighbouring  island  of  Cos.  These  pieces  of  Attic 
standard  are,  however,  very  rare,  and  probably  the  issue  of 
them  ceased  with  the  fall  of  Athens  in  404.  Rhodus  then 
adopted  the  Chian  standard,  and,  as  we  have  already 
observed,  helped  greatly  in  its  extension  among  the  islands 
and  cities  of  Asia  and  Thrace.  The  smaller  islands  on  the 
Carian  coast,  Calymna  and  Megista,  followed  suit.  Ephesus 
also  took  to  the  Chian  weight  before  the  end  of  the  fifth 
century. 

In  tracing  the  spread  of  the  Chian  or  Rhodian  standard 
in  the  early  fourth  century,  we  may  best  begin  with  one  of 
those  fixed  points  which  are  of  inestimable  value  to  the 
historian  of  coinage. 

M.  Waddington  first  set  forth  the  view  of  the  establish- 
ment in  Asia  of  a  defensive  league  of  cities,  after  the  victory 
of  the  Athenian  admiral  Conon  at  Cnidus  in  394  b.c.  Some 
recent  historians  have  preferred  the  date  387,  which  seems 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  pp.  600,  604. 


300  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.o. 

to  me  far  less  probable ;  that  is  rather  the  time  of  the  end 
than  of  the  beginning  of  the  League.  The  cities  known  to 
have  belonged  to  the  league  are  Samos,  Rhodus,  Ephesus, 
Iasus,  Cnidus,  and  Byzantium.1  These  cities  issued  an 
almost  uniform  coinage,  of  which  the  peculiarity  is  that 
each  of  the  cities  belonging  to  the  alliance,  while  placing 
on  one  side  of  the  coin  its  own  device,  places  on  the  other 
the  type  of  young  Heracles  strangling  the  serpents.  This 
type  is  usually  accompanied  by  the  legend  £YN,  which 
probably  stands  for  avvfia-^iKov,  a  word  which  is  found  on 
the  coins  issued  by  the  federated  cities  of  Sicily  in  the  time 
of  Timoleon.     Only  at  Rhodes  is  this  legend  wanting. 

Samos. 

1.  Obv.  £A.  Lion's  scalp.       Rev.  £YN.  Young  Heracles  and 

serpents.     Weights,  263  grains  (grm.  17)  ;  173-178  grains 
(grm.  11-20-1 1-55).     (PI.  VIII.  7.) 

Rhodus. 

2.  Obv.    PO.    Kose.       Rev.    Young    Heracles     and    serpents. 

Weight,  175  grains  (grm.  11-35).    (B.  T.  CXLVII.  5.) 

Ephesus. 

3.  Obv.  E<t>.  Bee.     Rev.  CYN.  Young  Heracles  and  serpents. 

Weight,  172-177  grains  (grm.  11-12-11-44).     (B.  T.  CLII. 
23  ;  B.  M.  XIX.  29.) 

Iasus. 

4.  Obv.  I  A.  Head  of  Apollo.     Rev.  £YN.  Young  Heracles  and 

serpents.   Weight,  166  grains  (grm.  10-73).   (B.  T.  CXLVI. 
25.) 

Cnidus. 

5.  Obv.    KNIAIHN.    Head  of  Aphrodite:   prow.      Rev.  £YN. 

Young  Heracles  and  serpents.     Weight,  165-167  grains 
(grm.  10-67-10-83).     (B.  T.  CXLV.  20.) 

Byzantium. 

6.  Obv.   BY.  Cow   on    Dolphin.      Rev.  £YN.  Young   Heracles 

and  serpents.     Weight,  174  grains  (grm.  11-30). 


1  Byzantium,  however,  was  not  liberated  by  the  Athenians  until  389  B.C. 
Zeit.f.  Numism.,  xxv.  207. 


SPREAD  OF  THE  CHIAN  STANDARD        301 

The  first  coin  in  this  list,  that  of  Samos,  weighing  263 
grains,  is  restruck  on  a  tetrad  rachm  of  Athens,  which  looks 
as  if  the  allied  cities  hesitated  at  first  what  standard  they 
should  adopt ;  but  they  soon  decided  on  that  of  Chios. 

Other  cities  adopt  the  type,  but  not  the  weight,  nor  the 
inscription  £YN.  Such  are  Lampsacus,  Cyzicus,  and  even 
the  distant  Croton  and  Zacynthus.  The  type  seems  to  be 
taken  from  the  coinage  of  Thebes,  where  an  infant  Heracles 
strangling  the  serpents  appears  on  the  formation  of  an 
anti-Spartan  alliance  between  Thebes,  Athens,  Corinth,  and 
Argos  in  395  b.c.1  The  political  bearing  of  the  type  is 
indeed  obvious;  Heracles  was  the  hero  of  Thebes,  and  his 
victory  over  the  serpents  is  an  emblem  of  the  success  for 
which  the  newly-arisen  power  of  Thebes  hoped  in  its 
struggle  with  the  overmastering  power  of  Sparta.  Xeno- 
phon  and  Diodorus  tell  us  that  after  the  victory  of  Conon  at 
Cnidus  most  of  the  cities  of  Asia  and  the  islands  threw  ofF 
the  Spartan  yoke.  The  coins  enable  us  to  be  sure  that  an 
actual  alliance  was  concluded  between  some  of  the  cities. 

To  what  standard  these  coins  belong  is  an  interesting 
question.  Mr.  Head 2  has  suggested  that  they  are  tridrachms 
of  Chian  or  Rhodian  standard,  and  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
Cnidus  issued  at  the  same  time  what  can  scarcely  be  other 
than  Rhodian  drachms — Obv.  Forepart  of  lion ;  Rev.  Head  of 
Aphrodite  Euploia  (weight,  grm.  3-62-3-74 ;  56-58  grains). 
But  why  the  allied  cities  should  have  issued  tridrachms 
instead  of  tetradrachms,  when  the  tetradrachm  was  the 
ordinary  Rhodian  coin,  and  was  coming  in  at  many  points 
of  the  Ionian  coast,  has  not  been  explained.  It  is  to  be 
observed  that  precisely  the  same  combination  of  tridrachms 
of  170-180  grains  and  drachms  of  56-58  grains  had  been 
usual  in  one  island,  Zacynthus,  ever  since  coins  were  first 
struck  there,  early  in  the  fifth  century  b.  c,  and  Zacynthus 
adopted  the  type  of  Heracles  and  the  serpents  when  it  was 
introduced  in  Asia.  In  fact,  the  treatment  of  the  subject  on 
Zacynthian  coins  is  closer  to  that  usual  in  Asia  than  to  that 

1  See  Grote,  Chap.  74. 

2  So  also  Six,  and  Holm,  Griech.  Gesch.  iii.  55. 


302  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.  c. 

used  at  Thebes.  Such  is  the  fact,  but  we  are  inclined  to  I 
regard  the  coincidence  as  fortuitous,  for  the  weight  of  the  I 
tridrachms  could  not  have  been  adopted  in  order  to  conform  I 
to  a  standard  used  in  distant  Zacynthus.  No  doubt  these  I 
Rhodian  tridrachms  were  also  regarded  as  didrachms  of  I 
Persian  standard ;  and  a  hint  is  given  that  the  allied  cities  I 
were  probably  not  without  reliance  upon  Persian  support  ' 
against  Sparta. 

I  have  above  pointed  out  that  this  League  of  the  fourth 
century  may  fairly  be  regarded  as  an  echo  or  temporary 
revival  of  the  old  Ionian  League  of  500  B.C.,  which  was 
broken  up  after  the  battle  of  Lade. 

At  Athens  at  this  time  a  relation  of  twelve  to  one  existed 
between  the  value  of  gold  and  that  of  silver.    If  we  suppose 
the  same  ratio  to  have  held  in  Asia,  the  gold  didrachm  or 
stater   of  133  grains  (grm.  8-60)  would  be  equivalent  to 
1,596  grains  of  silver  (grm.  103-4).  somewhat  less  than  ten 
pieces  of  170  grains   (grm.  11-0).     But  if  the  old  Asiatic 
relation  of  thirteen  and  a  third  to  one  still  persisted,  the 
gold  didrachm  would  be  equivalent  to  1,800  grains  of  silver 
or  rather  more  than  ten  of  the  new  silver  staters.    And  that 
it  did  persist  we  have  good  reason  for  thinking,  since  the 
weights  of  the  Persian  daric  and  siglos  seem  in  some  places 
to  have  persisted  to  the  end  of  the  Persian  Empire,  and  one 
daric  remained  equal  to  twenty  sigli.    If  this  view  be  sound 
we  have  some  interesting  equivalences.     It  seems  that  the 
Chian  or  Rhodian  drachm  was  regarded  as  the  thirtieth 
part,  alike  of  the  daric  and  of  the  rare  gold  staters  of  the 
Greek  cities,  which  thus  were  regarded  as  equivalent,  though 
the  daric  is  some  three  grains  or  a  fifth  of  a  gramme  lighter.1  j 
And  the  Aeginetan  mina  of  silver,  which  was,  as  we  have  ! 
seen,  equal  to  160  Rhodian  drachms,  would  be  equivalent  | 
to  5§  Persian  darics.     Of  course,  these  mutual  values  are  all  i 
approximate  and  liable  to  vary  in  one  direction  or  another  j 
according  to  the  rate  of  exchange  or  agio  ;  but  they  are  not  I 
without  importance. 

1  Harpocration  definitely  states  this  equivalence,  s.  v.  AaptinSs. 


SPREAD  OF  THE  CHIAN  STANDARD        303 

We  can  trace  the  adoption  of  the  Chian  or  Rhodian 
standard  for  coin  northwards  along  the  coast  of  Asia.  Its 
progress  seems  to  be  largely  due  to  its  acceptance  by  the 
powerful  Satraps  of  Caria,  Hecatomnus  and  Mausolus.  As 
we  can  date  the  coins  of  these  dynasts,  the  information 
which  they  give  us  is  precise. 

Hecatomnus,  whose  rule  lasted  from  395  to  377  b.  c,  struck 
coins  of  two  different  classes : 

1.  Obv.  Zeus   Stratius   standing,  holding  the  bipennis.      Rev. 

EKATOM.  Lion  to  r.  Weight,  221-234  grains  (grm. 
1432-1517).     (PI.  VIII.  8.) 

2.  Obv.  EKA.    Lion's   head   and   paw.      Rev.    Starlike   flower. 

Weight,  1915  and  65  grains  (grm.  1240  and  4 20-4-25). 
(B.  T.  LXXXIX.  17.) 

The  capital  of  Hecatomnus  was  Mylasa,  and  it  is  probable 
that  he  there  struck  No.  1 ,  the  types  of  which  combine  the 
worship  of  the  Carian  Zeus,  Osogo,  with  the  lion,  not 
specially  connected  with  him,  but  rather  with  the  Apollo 
of  Miletus.  Coin  No.  2  was  doubtless  issued  at  Miletus. 
We  have  no  historic  record  that  Hecatomnus  was  ruler 
of  Miletus ;  but  if  we  consider  the  geographical  situation 
of  Mylasa,  which  lay  in  the  high  lands  behind  Miletus, 
we  shall  regard  an  extension  of  the  power  of  this  Satrap 
of  Caria  down  to  the  coast  as  probable.  Mausolus  removed 
the  seat  of  his  power  to  Halicarnassus.  His  rule  and 
influence  were  more  widely  extended  than  his  father's, 
including  not  only  Miletus,  but  also  the  island  of  Rhodes, 
which  was  in  the  power  of  his  oligarchic  partisans.1 

The  coins  of  Mausolus  are  of  the  same  two  classes  as  those 
of  Hecatomnus  : 

1.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo  facing,  laureate.     Rev.   MAYSSHAAO. 

Zeus  Stratius  standing,  with  bipennis.  Weights,  228-249 
grains  (grm.  14-75-16-13) ;  50-57  grains  (grm.  3-21-3-72). 
(PI.  vin.  9.) 

2.  Obv.    MA.    Lion's    head    and   paw.     Rev.    Starlike  flower. 

Weight,  196-202  grains  (grm.  12-68-13-07).     (P..  T.  XC.  1.) 

1  Demosthenes,  De  Rhod.  Lib.,  pp.  191,  198. 


304  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.  c. 

We  will  begin  with  considering  the  coins  of  class  1  of 
both  rulers.  Between  the  money  of  this  class  issued  by 
Hecatomnus  and  that  issued  by  Mausolus  there  is  not  only 
a  change  of  type,  but  a  distinct  raising  of  the  standard.  In  j 
both  these  particulars  we  may  trace  the  influence  of  Rhodes. 
The  full-face  head  of  Apollo  on  coins  of  Mausolus  is  a  clear 
imitation  of  the  Rhodian  type.  And  the  weight  also  is 
raised  to  conform  to  the  Rhodian  standard.  Hecatomnus 
seems  to  have  adhered  to  the  (Phoenician  or  Milesian) 
standard  used  at  Miletus.  Mausolus,  having  moved  his 
capital  to  the  sea-coast  opposite  Cos,  and  entering  fully 
into  the  sphere  of  Rhodian  commerce,  naturally  raised 
the  standard  so  that  his  coins  should  pass  with  those  of 
that  commercial  city. 

The  sets  of  coins  No.  2  under  the  two  rulers  bear  the 
recognized  types  of  Miletus,  and  were  almost  certainly 
struck  in  that  city.  Their  weights  are  interesting  and  sug- 
gestive. The  larger  denomination,  under  both  Hecatomnus 
and  Mausolus,  seems  to  be  a  tetradrachm  of  the  old  Milesian 
standard,  which  was  used  at  Samos  and  Ephesus  in  the 
fifth  century,  but  was  there  abandoned  for  the  Chian  or 
Rhodian  late  in  the  fifth  or  early  in  the  fourth  century. 
This  would  seem  to  be  an  example  of  the  vitality  of  local 
coin  standards,  which  often  persist  in  an  almost  inexplicable 
way.  Under  Hecatomnus  the  third  of  this  piece  was  also 
struck,  weighing  65  grains  (4*20  grm.).  This  must  have 
passed  as  an  Attic  drachm,  and  we  are  reminded  that, 
before  this,  hemidrachms  and  diobols  of  the  Attic  standard 
had  been  current  at  Miletus,1  locally  issued  as  fractions  of 
the  Athenian  tetradrachms,  which  doubtless  made  up  the 
main  currency. 

In  366  the  people  of  Cos  imitated  those  of  Rhodes  in 
forming  a  fresh  city  which  they  built  at  the  eastern  end 
of  the  island,  and  in  migrating  thither.2  All  the  coins 
issued  at  this  new  capital  are  of  Rhodian  weight,  which 
therefore  was  adopted  at  Cos  in  the  lifetime  of  Mausolus. 

1  Chap.  XIV,  p.  257.  8  Diodorus,  xv.  76. 


SPREAD  OF  THE  CHIAN  STANDARD         305 

Quite  as  early  as  this  it  was  accepted  at  Cnidus,  where  we 
have  very  fine  tetradrachms,  bearing  on  the  obverse  the 
head  of  Aphrodite.  Previously,  as  we  have  seen,  Cnidus 
kept  to  the  standard  of  Aegina,  as  Cos  had  adhered  to  that 
of  Athens. 

At  Saraos  the  Rhodian  (or  Chian)  standard  must  have 
found  admission  quite  near  the  beginning  of  the  fourth 
century.  For  we  have  a  long  series  of  coins  struck  in 
accordance  with  it,  tetradrachms,  drachms,  hemidrachms 
and  diobols,  before  the  Samians  were  conquered  and 
expelled  from  their  island  by  the  Athenians  in  365  b.  c. 

At  Ephesus  the  introduction  of  the  Chian  standard  must 
have  taken  place  earlier  (PI.  VIII.  10).  Mr.  Head  in  his 
work  on  the  coinage  of  Ephesus  puts  it  at  415.  But  the 
coins  of  Ephesus  are  very  hard  to  date,  as  we  have  only 
the  style  of  the  bee  and  the  incuse  square  to  go  by.  If 
we  could  be  sure  of  the  date  415,  it  would  be  a  valuable 
fact,  showing  that  Ephesus  at  that  time  fell  away  from 
the  Athenian  alliance.  It  is  almost  certain  that  Ephesus 
accepted  the  standard  before  Rhodes  did,  and  before  the 
end  of  the  fifth  century  (see  p.  257). 

We  possess  also  a  tetradrachm  of  Chian  standard  struck 
at  Smyrna  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century. 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo,  laureate.  Rev.  SMYPNAinN.  Lyre  in 
concave  field.     Weight,  232  grains  (grm.  1503).1 

This  coin  seems  to  prove  that,  though  we  hear  nothing 
of  Smyrna  between  the  destruction  of  the  city  by  Alyattes 
and  its  rebuilding  by  Antigonus  and  Lysimachus,  yet  it 
existed  in  the  interval. 

A  tetradrachm  of  Cnidus  of  the  same  standard  was  found 
by  Gell  on  the  site  of  the  city. 

Obv.  Head  of  Aphrodite.  Rev.  Fore-part  of  lion  in  incuse 
square,  EOBHAOS.  Weight,  233  grains  (grm.  15-09).* 
(PL  VIII.  11.) 

1  Hist,  yum.,  ed.  2,  p.  592 ;  cf.  Corolla  Numism.,  PI.  XV.  6,  p.  299.     M.  Six 
thinks  that  the  coin  was  minted  at  Colophon.     Babelon  omits  it. 
»  B.  M.  Cat  Carta,  p.  87. 

1*7  X 


306  SILVEE  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 

To  the  time  of  Mausolus,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  style 
belong  some  interesting  coins  of  Miletus. 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo,  facing.     Rev.  ErAI  AYMONIEPH.     Lion 
looking  back  at  star.     Weight,  27  grains  (grm.  1-70-1 -76). 

This  is  evidently  a  sacred  coin  struck  on  the  occasion  of 
a  festival  at  the  Didymaean  temple.  The  word  Uprj  is 
puzzling;  but  as  the  coin  is  evidently  a  hemidrachm  of 
the  Rhodian  standard,  we  may  supply  rj/xiSpax^a,  which 
seems  a  not  impossible  form,  though  fifii8paxfioi>  would  be 
more  usual. 

At  Erythrae  the  Chian  standard  came  in  early  in  the 
fourth  century.     (Tetradrachm  and  drachm.) 

Obv.  Head  of  young  Heracles.     Rev.  Club  and  bow  in  case. 

These  coins  are  given  by  M.  Babelon1  to  the  period  of 
Alexander.  But  the  character  of  the  head  of  Heracles 
seems  to  me  to  indicate  an  earlier  date,  and  the  parallel 
coins  of  Samos  and  Ephesus  date  from  the  first  half  of  the 
fourth  century.  At  Colophon,  early  in  the  fourth  century, 
we  have  tetradrachms,  drachms,  hemidrachms,  and  diobols 
of  Chian  weight : 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo,  laureate.  Rev.  Lyre,  and  name  of  magis- 
trate. Weights,  200  grains  (grm.  12-93),  much  used; 
54-51  grains  (grm.  3-50-3-30) ;  16  grains  (grm.  103). 
(B.  T.  CLIII.  6-26.) 

Obv.  Same  type.  Rev.  Tripod,  and  name  of  magistrate.  Weight, 
24  grains  (grm.  1-55).     Hemidrachm. 

Passing  farther  to  the  north,  we  find  the  same  monetary 
standard  in  use  in  the  Troad  and  the  Hellespont.  "We 
begin  with  Byzantium  and  Calchedon,  cities  which  in  thej 
ordinary  numismatic  arrangement  stand  far  apart,  one 
being  in  Europe  and  the  other  in  Asia,  but  which  have 
a  common  history  and  were  closely  connected  together, 
divided  only  by  the  narrow  Bosporus.  These  cities  in  thei 
fifth  century  used  the  Persian  standard,2  but  they  exchange  j 
it  for  that  of  Chios  on  the  occasion  of  the  formation  of  thf 


1  TraiU,  ii.  2,  p.  1045.  2  Above,  Chap.  XIV,  p.  268. 


SPREAD  OF  THE  CHIAN  STANDARD        307 

League  of  Cnidus.     Byzantium  begins  with  tridrachms  in 
394  b.c,  but  soon  goes  on  to  tetradrachms. 

Byzantium,  411-394  b.c. 

Obv.  BY.  Cow  on  dolphin.  Bev.  Mill-sail  incuse.  Weight, 
80-84  grains  (grm.  5-18-544).     (PI.  VIII.  12.) 

After  389  b.  c. 

Obv.    BY.    Cow  on   dolphin.      Bev.  Incuse  square.     Weights, 

229-232     grains    (grm.    14-84-1503)  (PI.     VIII.   13); 

50-54  grains  (grm.  3-24-3-50) ;  35-38  grains  (grm.  2-26- 

2-46).     Hemidrachm  (Persian). 

Obv.  BY.  Fore-part   of  cow.     Bev.   Incuse  square.      Weight, 

22-26  grains  (grm.  1-42-1-68).     Hemidrachm  (Chian). 

Calchedon,  411-394  b.c. 

Obv.  KAAX.  Cow  on  ear  of  corn.  Bev.  Mill-sail  incuse.  Weights, 
81-2  grains  (grm.  5-24-5-31) ;  35-40  grains  (grm.  2-26- 
2-58) ;  16-18  grains  (grm.  105-1-17).  (B.  T.  CLXXXI. 
14-22.) 

After  394  b.  c. 

Obv.  KAAX.  Cow  on  ear  of  corn.    Bev.  Incuse  square.  Weight, 

228-235  grains  (grm.    14.75-15-23) ;    52-58  grains  (grm. 

3-40-3-79).     (B.  T.  CLXXXI.  23-26.) 
Obv.  KAA.  Fore- part  of  cow.    Bev.  Three  ears  of  corn.  Weight, 

28  grains  (grm.  1-83).     Hemidrachm.      (B.  T.  CLXXXII. 

5-7.) 

Mesembria,  a  colony  of  Megara,  on  the  west  shore  of  the 
Euxine,  issues  about  380  b.c.  coins  of  Chian  weight. 

Obv.  Crested  helmet,  Bev.  META(MESSA)  ANOESTHPIOS. 
Kadiate  wheel.  Weights,  239  grains  (grm.  15-48) ;  19 
grains  (grm.  1-23). 

The   magistrate's  name  is  written  at  length,  as   on   con- 
temporary coins  of  Samos  and  Ephesus. 

That  the  Persian  standard  should  have  made  its  way 
on  the  Bosporus  when  Athens  declined  is  quite  natural. 
It  rules  until  394  b.c.  And  at  Byzantium  at  all  events, 
after  that  date,  Persian  drachms  and  hemidrachms  circulate 
concurrently  with  Rhodian  denominations. 

x  2 


308  SILVEE  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 

Byzantium  and  Calchedon  are  closely  connected  in  their 
history.  Both  were  early  colonies  of  Megara.  Mesembria 
was  founded  by  them ;  and  at  the  time  of  the  Persian 
invasion  their  inhabitants  took  refuge  in  that  city.  The 
tetradrachm  of  Mesembria  is  cited  by  Mr.  Head,  and  was 
in  the  Hirsch  sale.1  We  can  scarcely  give  it  to  an 
earlier  period  than  about  400  b.  c.  The  H  in  the  name  of 
Anthesterios  shows  a  somewhat  late  date ;  the  name  seems 
to  be  Attic,  and  was  probably  that  of  a  local  tyrant.  The 
same  change  of  standard  takes  place  at  Abydos.  This  city 
as  well  as  Assos  and  Cyzicus  issues  money  on  the  Rhodian 
standard  early  in  the  fourth  century. 

Abydos. 

Obv.  Laureate  head  of  Apollo.  Rev.  A  BY.  Eagle.  Weight, 
228-232  grains  (grm.  14-79-15).     (B.  T.  CLXVIII.  3.) 

Assos. 

Obv.  Helmeted  head  of  Athena.  Rev.  ACTION.  Archaic 
statue  of  Athena.  Weight,  231  grains  (grm.  14-95). 
Paris.     (CLXIII.  28.) 

M.  Babelon 2  gives  the  coin  of  Assos,  on  grounds  of  style, 
to  430-411  b.c.  But  a  copy  on  coins  of  an  archaic  statue 
is  scarcely  possible  in  the  fifth  century.  The  style  of  the 
head  of  Athena  is  much  like  that  of  the  head  of  Heracles  at 
Cos  already  cited. 

An  abundant  and  important  series  of  silver  coins  was 
issued  in  the  fourth  century  at  Cyzicus.  This  has  been 
discussed  in  great  detail  by  Dr.  von  Fritze,3  and  his  views 
as  to  chronology  are  carefully  worked  out. 

Obv.  ^nTEIPA.'  Head  of  Cora,  corn-crowned  and  veiled.  Rev. 
KYII  or  KYIIKHNHN.  Lion's  head:  beneath,  tunny. 
Average  weight,  229  grains  (grm.  14-83) ;  72  grains  (grm. 
4-68) ;  48  grains  (grm.  3-10).     (PI.  VIII.  14.) 

These  coins  Dr.  von  Fritze  divides  into  two  sets.  The 
earlier  group,  put  together  on  grounds  of  style,  he  gives 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  278;  Hirsch  Sale  Cat.,  PI.  VIII. 

J  Traite,  ii.  2,  1269.  s  Nomisma,  Heft  IX  (1914). 


SPREAD  OF  THE  CHIAN  STANDARD        309 

to  the  period  405-363  B.C.,  when  Cyzicus  was  sometimes 
under  Spartan,  and  sometimes  under  Athenian  influence. 
He  raises  the  question  whether  the  second  Athenian  domi- 
nation was  as  fatal  to  the  issue  of  an  autonomous  coinage 
in  the  subject  cities  as  had  been  the  first,  at  all  events  in 
its  later  years.  But  in  any  case,  as  the  rule  of  Athens  over 
the  city  was  quite  transient,  we  cannot  expect  to  identify 
traces  of  it  on  the  coins. 

The  second  group  von  Fritze  would  give  to  the  period 
362  down  to  the  days  of  the  kingdom  of  Seleucus,  when 
the  seated  Apollo  comes  in  on  the  coins  in  the  place  of  the 
lion's  head. 

I  agree  with  the  writer  as  to  the  time  of  commencement 
of  this  coinage.  The  adoption  of  the  Chian  standard  could 
scarcely  have  taken  place  before  the  Athenian  expedition 
against  Syracuse,  and  may  have  first  occurred  after  the  fall 
of  Athens.  But  I  cannot  think  that  the  beautiful  coins 
with  the  seated  Apollo  were  contemporary  with  the  early 
money  of  the  Seleucidae,  and  think  rather  that  the  expedi- 
tion of  Alexander  here  put  an  end  to  the  autonomous 
coinage.  Von  Fritze's  second  group,  therefore,  should  be 
given  to  36.2-330.  The  division  of  the  stater  into  thirds 
as  well  as  into  four  drachms  is  noteworthy,  and  may, 
perhaps,  be  accounted  for  by  the  custom  long  established 
at  Cyzicus  of  dividing  the  electrum  staters  by  three.  These 
thirds,  according  to  von  Fritze,  are  issued  only  about 
I  400  b.c. 

It  is   a   testimony  to   the   force   of  Rhodian   or  Chian 

:  commerce  that   the   Chian   standard   early  in  the  fourth 

century  comes  into  the  coinages  of  some  cities  which  had 

been  very  conservative  of  their   own  weight.      Thus  we 

have — 

Teos  in  Ionia. 

Obv.  Griffin  seated.  Rev.  Name  of  city  and  magistrate  on  the 
bars  of  an  incuse  square.  "Weight,  55  grains  (grm.  3-56). 
(B.  T.  CLIV.  11.) 

Teos  had  been  very  tenacious  of  the  Aeginetan  standard. 


310  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 

Tenedos. 

Obv.  Janiform  male  and  female  head.  Rev.  TENEAION. 
Double  axe.  Weight,  218-226  grains  (grm.  14-10-14-61) ; 
50-56  grains  (grm.  3-24-3-62).  (B.  T.  CLXVI.  22-24; 
B.  M.  XVIII.  20,  21.) 

The  earliest  coins  of  Tenedos  follow  the  Phocaean  standard. 
The  coinage  appears  to  cease  during  the  time  of  the  Athenian 
domination,  and  to  be  resumed  on  a  slightly  reduced  scale, 
probably  the  Chian  standard,  in  the  later  fifth  or  early 
fourth  century. 

To  the  east  of  Caria  the  Chian  standard  scarcely  penetrates. 
Cilicia  was  fully  in  the  power  of  the  Great  King ;  and  the 
Persian  Satraps  who,  as  we  shall  see,  minted  there  freely, 
naturally  adhered  to  the  Persian  weight.  But  in  the 
island  of  Cyprus  we  find  some  influence  of  the  Chian 
weight.  The  great  Evagoras  I  strikes  his  larger  silver 
pieces  on  the  Persian  standard : 

Obv.  Head  of  Heracles.  Rev.  Goat  lying.  "Weight,  171  grains 
(grm.  11-10); 

but  he  seems,  perhaps  later  in  his  reign,  to  have  issued 
drachms  of  Rhodian  weight : 

Obv.  Heracles  seated.     Rev.  Goat  lying  to  r.     Weight,  51-48 

grains  (grm.  3-30-3-11). 

His  successor,  Evagoras  II,  strikes  didrachms  on  the  same 

scale : 

Obv.  Bust  of  Athena.  Rev.  Bust  of  Aphrodite.  Weight,  109- 
104  grains  (grm.  7-10-6.73).  (B.  T.  CXXVIII.  10.) 
There  are  also  didrachms  of  Rhodian  weight  conjecturally 
attributed  to  Amathus,1  which  weigh  103  to  96  grains 
(grm.  6-67-6-22).  The  relations  of  the  silver  of  the  Kings 
of  Salamis  to  the  gold  coins  which  they  issued  will  be 
considered  in  the  next  chapter. 

There  are  certain  staters  of  Rhodian  weight  struck  by 
Persian  satraps : 

Obv.  King,  half-kneeling,  holding  spear  and  bow.  Rev.  Bough 
incuse. 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Cyprus,  p.  xxiii. 


SPREAD  OF  THE  CHIAN  STANDARD        311 

Sometimes  these  coins  bear  the  name  Pythagores ;  bnt  who 
he  may  have  been  is  uncertain : 

Obv.  King,  half-kneeling,  drawing  bow.     Rev.  Satrap  galloping, 
wielding  spear. 

These  staters  were  probably  struck  in  some  city  of  south- 
western Asia  Minor,  as  the  Rhodian  standard  does  not 
carry  so  far  as  Cilicia.  Some  specimens,  however,  bear 
(perhaps)  Phoenician  characters ;  and  Head  is  disposed  to 
regard  them  as  money  issued  by  some  Persian  commandant 
at  a  Phoenician  mint.1     Metrologically  this  is  very  unlikely. 


§  2.    Attic  Standard. 

Early  in  the  fourth  century,  in  consequence  of  the 
misfortunes  of  Athens,  the  monetary  standard  of  that  city 
was  recessive.  In  394  B.C.,  however,  after  the  victory  of 
Conon  at  Cnidus,  Attic  power  revived.  We  shall  see  in 
the  next  chapter  how  the  gold  coinage  of  staters,  which 
appears  then  to  have  begun  at  Athens,  was  copied  in  several 
cities  of  Asia.  In  one  city  there  seems  to  have  been  a  con- 
temporary coinage  of  silver  on  the  Attic  standard.  That 
one  city  was  Clazomenae.  I  have  above  observed  that  the 
special  clause  in  the  treaty  of  Antalcidas,  which  places 
Clazomenae  under  the  Persian  Empire,  precludes  us  from 
giving  the  beautiful  gold  coins  of  Clazomenae  to  a  time 
after  387  b.c.  To  the  time  394-387  b.c.  then  belong  also 
the  silver  staters  of  Attic  weight : 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo  facing.  Rev.  KAA  or  KAAIO  with 
magistrate's  name.  Swan.  Weight,  250-262  grains  (grm. 
16-20-16-96) ;  55-63  grains  (grm.  3-56-4-08).  (B.T.  CLV. 
22,  23  ;  B.  M.  XIX.  25,  26.) 

M.  Babelon  gives  these  coins  to  the  time  after  374  b.c.; 
but  M.  Babelon  does  not  think  that  the  Persian  king 
prohibited  the  issue  of  gold  in  Greek  cities. 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  831. 


312  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 

§  3.     The  Persian  Region. 

The   standard  of  Chios   did  not  spread  to   the   east  of 

Caria.1     On   the   south   coast   of  Asia   Minor  the  Persian 

\s     power  was  firmly  established ;    and  the  Persian  monetary 

standard,  which  followed  the  flag,  had  long  been  dominant. 

In  a  few  cities  of  the  Ionian  coast  the  Persian  standard 
/comes  in,  apparently  towards  the  middle  of  the  fourth 
century.  At  the  same  time  that  Cius  issued  gold  staters 2 
the  city  also  struck  drachms  of  Persian  weight,  80-83  grains 
(grm.  5-20-5 -33).  Apparently  contemporary  are  the  coins 
of  Mytilene : 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.      Bev.  MYTI.  Lyre.     Weight,  161-168 
grains  (grm.  1045-10-90).     (B.  T.  CLXII.  17,  18.) 

M.  Babelon  gives  these  coins  to  350-300  B.C.,  which  time 
their  style  well  suits.  At  about  the  same  time  Lampsacus 
struck  coins  weighing  39-40  grains  (grm.  2-52-2-58).  They 
seem  to  be  Persian  hemidrachms. 

Obv.  Janiform   beardless  head.     Bev.  A  AM.  Head  of  Athena. 
(B.  T.  CLXXII.  10.) 

M.  Babelon  calls  these  coins  tetrobols,  apparently  of  the 
Chian  standard ;  and  of  course  they  may  very  well  have 
passed  as  such.  Contemporary  are  the  coins  of  Parium  of 
the  same  weight. 

Seeing  that  the  Persian  standard  was  adopted  at  this 
time  by  Abdera  and  the  kings  of  Macedon,  it  is  not 
strange  to  find  it  in  use  exceptionally  among  the  cities  of 
North  Ionia  and  the  Propontis. 

These  coins  are  exceptional.  But  in  the  cities  of  the 
Pamphylian  and  Cilician  coasts  the  Persian  standard  was 
normal.  Phaselis,  which  paid  tribute  to  Athens,  seems  to 
have  intermitted  coinage  after  465  b.c.  But  the  mints 
of  Aspen  dus,  Side,  and  Selge  were  active  in  the  fifth  and 
fourth  centuries.  Between  Side  in  Pamphylia  and  Holmi 
in  Cilicia  in  the  fourth  century,  and  probably  earlier,  there 

1  Except  to  Salamis  in  Cyprus.  2  Discussed  in  the  next  chapter. 


/ 


■j 


THE  PERSIAN  REGION  813 

must  have  existed  some  monetary  convention,  indicated  by 
an  identity  of  type,  the  subsidiary  symbol  (a  dolphin  on  the 
coins  of  Holmi  and  a  pomegranate  on  those  of  Side)  being 
distinctive  of  the  two  places.1 

Mr.  Head's  dates  for  the  beginnings  of  coinage  on  the 
Persian  standard  in  cities  of  Cilicia  are  as  follows :  Celen- 
deris,  Soli,  Tarsus,  450  B.C.;  Mallus,  425  B.C.;  Nagidus, 
420  b.c;  Issus,  400  b.  c.  These  dates,  being  based  only  on 
slight  varieties  of  style,  are  not  to  be  insisted  upon.  But 
we  may  fairly  say  that  towards  the  end  of  the  fifth  century 
several  of  the  more  important  cities  of  Cilicia  were  freely  * 

striking  coins.    There  was  nothing  to  prevent  them  ;  as  the  j/^ 
Persian  king  freely  allowed  the  striking  of  silver  by  the 
Greek  cities,  and  the  arm  of  Athens  could  not  reach  so  far. 

"With  regard  to  the  issues  of  coins  by  Persian  Satraps  in 
Cilicia,  I  largely  follow  M.  Babelon,  who  has  made  a  special 
study  of  them.  He  is  in  most  cases  responsible  for  the 
dates  in  the  following  paragraphs,  which  are  only  approxi- 
mate.2 

In  386-384  b.c.  the  Satrap  of  Sardes, Tiribazus,  was  placed 
at  the  head  of  the  expedition  organized  against  Evagoras, 
the  revolted  king  of  Salamis  in  Cyprus.  In  order  to  pay 
the  mercenaries,  and  to  buy  munitions  of  war,  he  issued  an  / 
abundant  coinage  in  the  cities  of  Cilicia.  This  coinage 
bears  his  name  in  Aramaic  characters  (PI.  IX.  1) :  the  types 
are,  Ormuzd,  Baal  of  Tarsus,  Heracles ;  and  sometimes  what 
appears  to  be  an  idealized  portrait  of  himself.  "We  can 
identify  with  certainty  the  mint  of  Issus,  from  the  inscrip- 
tion l££IKON,  and  with  great  probability  the  mints  of 
Mallus  (MAP),  Soli  (£0),  Tarsus  (T).  All  these  coins  are 
of  full  Persian  weight,  164-159  grains  (grm.  10-65-10-30). 

Pharnabazus,  the  well-known  Satrap  of  Dascylium,  also 
struck  fleet-money  in  Cilicia.     The  date  of  it  can  scarcely"*/ 
be  fixed  with  certainty,  as  on  three  occasions  he  might  well 
have  issued  it.     In  398-394  b.c.  he  received  from  Artaxerxes 
Mnemon  five  hundred  talents  for  the  equipment  of  a  fleet 

1  B.M.CaL  Lycia,  p.  lxxxL 

*  Perses  Ackemtnides.     Also  Traite,  ii.  2. 


/ 


314  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  B.C. 

to  co-operate  with  the  Athenian  Conon.1  Later,  in  391- 
389  b.c,  he  prepared  in  concert  with  Abrocomas  and 
Tithraustes  an  expedition  against  Egypt,  then  in  revolt. 
And  again,  in  379-374  b.c,  he  equipped  a  fleet  in  conjunc- 
tion with  Datames,  who  succeeded  him.  It  is  probable  that 
we  must  assign  to  the  last  of  these  periods  the  coins  bearing 
the  name  of  Pharnabazus,  and  struck  at  Nagidus,  Tarsus, 
and  elsewhere  in  Cilicia.2  The  most  curious  type  of  them 
is  a  full-face  female  head,  evidently  copied  from  the  Arethusa 
of  the  coins  of  Syracuse  of  the  end  of  the  fifth  century 
(PI.  IX.  2).  The  weight  of  these  pieces  is  165-155  grains 
(grm.  10-70-10-0),  the  full  Persian  weight.  Divisions 
weighing  52-50  grains  (grm.  3-37-3-25)  and  13-11  grains 
(grm.  0-87-0-66)  are  evidently  thirds  of  stater  (tetrobols) 
and  obols  respectively. 

Datames,  378-372  b.c,  and  Mazaeus,  361-334  b.c,  con- 
tinued this  Cilician  coinage,  on  the  occasions  when  they 
had  to  raise  troops  or  equip  fleets.  Thus  we  cannot  be 
surprised  that  all  the  cities  of  the  south  of  Asia  Minor 
retained  the  Persian  standard,  Aspendus,  Etenna,  Side, 
Selge,  Celenderis,  Issus,  Mallus,  Nagidus,  Soli,  Tarsus.  So 
did  the  cities  of  Cyprus,  Citium,  Marium,  Paphos,  and 
Salamis;  all  save,  perhaps,  Amathus.  Mazaeus  occupies 
an  important  place  in  the  coinage  of  Asia  in  the  fourth 
century.3     M.  Babelon  divides  his  coins  as  follows : 

1.  Struck  in  Cilicia,  361-334  b.c 

2.  Struck  when  he  was  Satrap  of  the  Transeuphratic 
country  and  Cilicia,  351-334. 

3.  Struck  when  he  governed  Sidon,  after  359. 

4.  Struck  in  Syria  and  Babylon,  when  he  governed  for 
Darius,  334-331. 

5.  Struck  at  Babylon,  when  he  was  Governor  for 
Alexander,  331-328. 

Coins  of  Class  5  are  of  the  Attic  standard :  they  still  bear 
the  Cilician  types  of  Baal  of  Tarsus  and  the  lion.     There 

1  Diodorus,  xiv.  39.  2  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  394. 

3  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  443. 


THE  PERSIAN  REGION  315 

are  also  barbarous  imitations  of  the  coins  of  Athens  and 
others  which  bear  the  name  of  Mazaeus. 

It  is  remarkable  that  a  man  who  occupies  so  small  a  place 
in  history  should  be  so  dominant  in  relation  to  issues  of 
coins. 

Certain  coins  issued  by  Satraps  or  Dynasts,  in  north-west  yS 
Asia  Minor,  appear  to  follow  the  Persian  weight.  The 
descendants  of  Damaratus,  the  exiled  Spartan  king,  had  a 
small  principality  which  included  the  strong  city  of  Perga- 
mon.  As  the  coins  of  Teuthrania  and  Pergamon,  about 
400  b.  c,  bear  as  type  heads  clad  in  the  Persian  tiara,  it  is 
probable  that  they  were  issued  under  rulers  of  this  dynasty. 
And  the  name  of  Gorgion,  another  ruler  of  Greek  extrac- 
tion, is  to  be  found  on  the  contemporary  coins  of  Gambrium 
in  Mysia.1  All  these  rulers  issued  the  Persian  third  of  a 
stater  (grm.  3-38,  grains  52)  or  half  of  this,  which  we  may**^ 
fairly  call  a  Persian  diobol,  25-23  grains  (grm  1*60-1 -SO).2 
This  is  evidently  a  small  coinage  suited  to  go  with  the 
regal  money  of  Persia.  As  these  towns  were  not  on  the 
sea,  they  probably  entered  but  little  into  the  circle  of  Greek 
commerce. 

There  is  another  notable  series  of  coins,  apparently  issued 
by  Persian  Satraps,  or  under  their  influence,  which  seems  to  \r 
combine  the  Chian  (Rhodian)  standard,  used  for  the  larger 
coins,  with  the  Persian  standard,  the  influence  of  which  is 
to  be  traced  in  the  lower  denominations.  The  mints  of 
these  coins  cannot  be  with  certainty  determined :  but  they 
are  not  Cilician ;  probably  they  were  struck  in  the  cities  of 
north-west  Asia  Minor  on  some  occasions  when  the  influence  \/ 
of  Persia  was  exceptionally  strong. 

The  following  are  attributed  by  M.  Babelon  to  Tissa- 
phernes  ;  but  as  they  do  not  bear  his  name,  the  assignment 
is  uncertain. 

Obv.  Head  of  a   Satrap  in  Persian   tiara.     Rev.  BA^IAEHC. 
The  king  advancing,  holding  bow  and  javelin  :  galley  in 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  94. 

2  Tltese  would,  however,  serve  as  Rhodian  drachms  and  hemidrachms. 


316  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  B.C. 

field.     Weight,  230  grains  (grm.  14-90).     Ehodian  tetra- 

drachm.     (PI.  IX.  4.) 
Do.     Rev.  BA£I    and   the  king,  but  no   galley.     Weight,   51 

grains  (grm.  3.30).     Khodian  drachm? 
Do.     Rev.  BA.  The  king,  but  no   galley.     Weight,  29  grains 

(grm.  1-85).     Rhodian  hemidrachm. 

The  place  of  issue  of  this  money  is  uncertain;  Babelon  l 
fixes  on  Caria  (Iasus),  Six  on  Aspendus.  The  coins  can 
scarcely  be  earlier  than  the  foundation  of  Rhodus,  or  even 
than  the  adoption  of  the  Rhodian  weight  by  Hecatomnus 
of  Caria.  The  interesting  point  is  that  the  two  lesser 
/denominations  may  just  as  well,  or  better,  be  considered  as 
Persian  tetrobols  and  diobols. 

Orontes  (362  B.C.)  struck  coins  at  Lampsacus  bearing  his 
name  and  his  portrait :  these  were  Persian  tetrobols  of 
48  grains  (grm.  3-13).  He  also  issued  coins  at  Clazomenae 
of  the  weight  of  43  grains  (grm.  2-78),  which  may  possibly 
have  been  Persian  hemidrachms.    The  very  beautiful  coin — 

Obv.  Head  of  a  Satrap  in  Persian  tiara.  Rev.  BA£IA.  Lyre. 
Weight,  232  grains  (grm.  15).     (PI.  IX.  5.) 

is  attributed  by  M.  Babelon  to  Orontes,  and  to  the  mint  of 
Colophon.  As  we  have  already  seen,  Persian  influence  was 
strong  at  Colophon ;  but  it  is  exceptional  that  money 
bearing  the  portrait  of  a  Satrap  should  be  struck  in  a  Greek 
city.  Some  Greek  cities,  it  is  true,  Lampsacus,  Phocaea, 
and  others,  issue  coins  bearing  the  portraits  of  Persians. 
These,  however,  mostly  appear  on  gold  or  electrum  money, 
which  was  a  sort  of  international  coinage,  and  very  eclectic 
in  its  types :  so  that  I  should  prefer  to  see  in  such  cases 
a  mere  compliment  paid  to  some  neighbouring  grandee, 
who  was  very  probably  elected  to  some  magistracy  in 
honorary  fashion,  as  Antiochus  IV  of  Syria  was  at  Athens. 
There  is  a  silver  coin  issued  at  Cyzicus  by  Pharnabazus  and 
bearing  his  name : 

Obv.  <t>APNABA.  Head  of  Satrap  in  tiara.  Rev.  Prow  and 
dolphins :  beneath,  tunny.  Weight,  229  grains  (grm. 
12-84).     (B.  T.  CVIII.  1.) 


THE  PERSIAN  REGION  317 

Here,  again,  since  the  weight  conforms  to  that  used  by  the 
people  of  Cyzicus  after  400  B.C.  (the  Rhodian),  I  should  be 
disposed  to  see  a  merely  honorary  intention. 

There  are  Persian  tetrobols,  weight  45-38  grains  (grm. 
2-88-2-50),  issued  by  Spithridates  at  Lampsacus : 

Obv.  Head  of  Persian  Satrap  in  tiara.     Bev.  £PIOPI.     Fore- 
part of  Pegasus.     (B.  T.  LXXXIX.  1-2.) 

Spithridates  was  Satrap  of  Sardis  at  the  time  of  the 
Macedonian  invasion. 

The  silver  coinage  of  Cyprus,  in  the  fifth  and  fourth 
centuries,  runs  on  somewhat  exceptional  lines.  The  coins, 
excepting  a  few  struck  at  Salamis  and  mentioned  above, 
are  all  minted  on  the  Persian  standard ;  but  the  stater 
or  didrachm  is  not  divided  by  two  into  drachms:  the 
denominations  struck  are  the  third  or  tetrobol,  the  sixth, 
and  the  twelfth.1  I  cannot  here  consider  in  detail  the 
issues  of  the  various  cities,  a  subject  still  obscure,  in  spite 
of  the  admirable  labours  of  M.  Six,  M.  Babelon,  and  Mr.  Hill.2 
In  Mr.  Hill's  catalogue  all  that  can  be  regarded  as  established 
in  regard  to  it  is  set  forth  with  excellent  judgement. 

§  4.     Pontus. 

The  drachms  issued  by  Persian  Satraps  at  Sinope  conform 
to  the  standard,  originally  Aeginetan  and  always  somewhat 
above  the  normal  Persian  weight,  of  the  autonomous  coins 
struck  in  that  mint. 

I-sued  by  Datames,  about  370  b.c.  : 
Obv.  Head  of  the  Nymph  Sinope.     Bev.  A  AT  A  MA.  Eagle  on 
dolphin.     Weight,  93-91  grains  (grm.  6-06-5-89).     (B.  T. 
CX.  1.) 

Issued  by  Abrocomas,  about  360  b.c.  : 

Same  types  with  name  of  Abrocomas.     Weight,  89-76  grains 
(grm.  5-72-4-90).     (B.T.CI4) 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Cyprus,  p.  xxiii. 

*  Six,  Revue  Numism.,  1883  ;  Babelon,  Les  Perses  Achemenides,  1893 ;  Hill, 
B.  it.  Cat.  Cyprus,  1904  ;  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  pp.  691-842. 


318  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 

Issued  by  Ariarathes,  after  350  b.c.  : 

Same  types  with  name  of  Ariarathes.     Weight,  91-67  grains 
(grm.  5-87-4-38). 

The  name  of  Ariarathes  also  occurs  on  coins  of  Gaziura 
in  Pontus: 

Obv.  Baal  of  Gaziura.     Rev.  Griffin  devouring  stag.     Weight, 
84-75  grains  (grm.  5-42-4-87).     (B.  T.  CXI.  9.) 

At  Panticapaeum,  in  the  fourth  century,  we  find  Persian 
didrachms,  weighing  182  grains  (grm.  11-79),  as  well  as  coins 
weighing  52  grains  (grm.  3-36).  And  this  latter  weight, 
55-52  grains,  is  usual  for  the  rather  common  coins  of 
Cromna  and  Sesamus  in  the  fourth  century.  We  find  this 
denomination  of  coin  also  in  Cilicia  and  Mysia  in  the  fourth 
century,  and  in  Phoenicia.  It  seems  to  have  been  a  Persian 
tetrobol  (normal  weight  56  grains;  grm.  3-62)  or  a  Rhodian 
drachm  (normal  weight  55-60  grains ;  grm.  3-56-3-88).  It 
may  be  said  that  if  the  Persian  standard  were  adopted  for 
money  in  the  district  of  Pontus  by  Sinope,  Panticapaeum, 
and  other  cities,  it  would  not  be  consistent  to  strike  drachms 
of  94  grains  and  tetrobols  of  56  grains  at  the  same  time ; 
the  latter  should  weigh  62  grains.  But  in  fact  the  drachms 
of  Sinope  in  the  fourth  century  are  very  irregular  in  their 
weight,  and  seldom  rise  above  90  grains.  The  fractions 
also,  being  intended  only  for  local  circulation,  were  not 
obliged  to  reach  the  same  standard  as  the  drachms  which 
had  a  wider  circulation.  And  thus  it  is  a  general  rule  in 
the  coins  of  Greece  that  the  staters  are  heavier  in  proportion 
than  the  divisions. 

The  coinage  of  the  Pontic  Heracleia  in  Bithynia  is 
abundant,  and  very  important.  As  the  city  from  345  b.c. 
was  governed  by  tyrants,  who  placed  their  names  on  the 
coins,  we  can  date  some  of  its  issues  within  narrow  limits. 

The  coinage  begins  early  in  the  fourth  century.  The 
following  seems  to  precede  the  time  of  the  above-mentioned 
rulers : 

Obv.  Head  of  bearded   Heracles.      Rev.  HPAKAEIA.  Rushing 
bull.     (B.  T.  CLXXXIII.) 


PONTUS  319 

An   earlier   issue   weighs   74-76  grains   (grm.   4- 79-4-92) : 
a  later  issue  is  more  than  ten  grains  lighter. 
Later  than  these  coins  we  have  : 

Obv.  Head  of  young  Heracles,  slightly  bearded.  Rev.  HPAKAEIA. 
Head  of  the  city  turreted.  Weight,  171-181  grains  (grm. 
1105-11-72). 

There  are  also  drachms  of  both  these  classes,  the  weight 
of  which  varies  from  60  to  84  grains  (grm.  3-88-5-44),  and 
smaller  divisions.  The  letters  K  and  £.,  which  are  to  be 
found  on  some  of  the  smaller  coins  of  the  second  type,  may 
be  the  initials  of  the  Tyrants  Clearchus  and  Satyrus,  who 
ruled  364-345  b.c. 

The  Tyrants  Timotheus  and  Dionysius,  who  succeeded 
about  345  b.c,  write  their  names  on  the  coins  at  length  : 

Obv.  Head  of  young  Dionysus,  ivy-crowned,  with  thyrsus. 
Rev.  TIMOOEOY  AIONYSIOY.  Heracles  erecting  trophy. 
Weight,  149-151  grains  (grm.  9-65-9-80).  Also  the  quarter 
(half-drachm). 

The  weights  of  the  coins  of  Heracleia  are  very  varied : 
they  seem  to  fall  gradually  during  the  fourth  century, 
but  not  in  any  regular  way ;  and  the  staters  keep  their 
weight  better  than  the  smaller  divisions.  We  must  suppose 
that  these  divisions  were  in  use  only  for  local  trade.  The 
staters  must  have  passed  for  two  of  the  drachms  of  Sinope 
or  Amisus.  It  has  been  observed,  in  a  previous  chapter  (XIV), 
that  this  striking  irregularity  in  weight  is  a  feature  of  all 
the  issues  of  the  Pontic  cities. 

Istrus,  a  Milesian  colony  near  the  mouths  of  the  Danube, 
began  about  400  b.c.  to  issue  coins  of  the  same  weight  as 
those  of  Sinope.1 

Obv.  Two  young  male  heads,  one  erect,  one  inverted.  Rev. 
Eagle  on  dolphin.  Inscr.  I  £TPI  H.  Weight,  109-73  grains 
(grm.  7-02-4-72). 

According  to  Dr.  Pick,  all  the  coins  of  the  earlier  half  of 
the  fourth  century  exceed  100  grains  in  weight,  and  belong 

1  B.  Pick,  Die  antiken  Munzen  von  Nord-Griechenland,  i,  p.  177. 


320  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 

to  the  Phoenician  standard,  which  standard  the  people 
about  350  b.c.  give  up  for  that  of  Aegina.  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  satisfactory  proof  of  any  change  of  standard,  and 
some  quite  late  coins  of  the  city  are  among  the  heaviest. 
We  have  in  fact  the  same  curious  phenomena  here  as  at 
Sinope :  under  this  latter  city  we  discuss  them  (Chap.  XIV). 

The  Propontine  region,  with  the  neighbouring  shores  of 
the  Euxine  and  the  Aegean,  is  the  most  important  of  all 
districts  in  the  history  of  Greek  commerce,  and  in  the 
matter  of  the  clashing  of  Europe  and  Asia,  of  Greece  and 
Persia.  It  may  be  well,  therefore,  to  recapitulate  the 
monetary  history  of  the  district  in  the  successive  periods 
of  Greek  history. 

In  the  dawn  of  history,  in  the  seventh  and  sixth  centuries, 
the  Ionic  Miletus  appears  to  have  been  dominant  in  the 
region  of  the  Euxine.  Many  of  the  cities  of  the  Propontis, 
such  as  Abydos,  Cyzicus,  Lampsacus,  Parium ;  and  cities 
of  the  Euxine,  such  as  Sinope,  Amisus,  Panticapaeum,  were 
regarded  as  Milesian  colonies,  though  other  Ionian  cities 
such  as  Phocaea  and  Erythrae  were  said  to  have  had  a  hand 
in  them.  The  only  serious  rivals  of  the  Ionians  in  the 
seventh  century  were  the  people  of  Megara,  who  founded, 
first  Calchedon,  then  Byzantium,  then  the  Pontic  Heracleia. 
So  far  as  I  know,  finds  of  the  electrum  coins  of  Ionia  have 
not  been  made  in  the  Euxine  district. 

In  the  sixth  century,  long  before  the  fall  of  Miletus,  some 
of  the  cities  of  the  Euxine  began  to  issue  silver  coins ;  the 
most  notable  of  them  being  Sinope  on  the  northern  coast 
of  Asia  Minor,  and  Panticapaeum  in  the  Tauric  Chersonese. 
These  cities  follow  the  Aeginetan  standard,  though  at 
Sinope  the  drachm  sometimes  rises  as  high  as  100  grains. 
We  know  that  the  commerce  of  Aegina  stretched  to  the 
Euxine,  as  Herodotus  gives  us  the  precious  information 
that  in  the  time  of  Xerxes  Aeginetan  ships  laden  with 
corn  passed  through  the  Straits.  The  Pontic  cities  adhere 
to  this  standard  with  greater  tenacity  than  do  most  districts, 
but  their  adoption  of  it  is  quite  according  to  precedent. 
We  have  seen  (Chap.  IX)  how  in  Asia  almost  invariably  the 


PONTUS  321 

introduction  of  silver  currency  brings  with  it  the  use  of 
the  Aeginetan  standard,  however  ill  it  may  agree  with  the 
standards  already  in  use. 

About  the  time  of  the  Persian  wars,  several  cities  of 
the  Propontis,  Abydos,  Antandros,  Astacus,  and  Lampsacus, 
issued  drachms  of  Persian  weight.  This  may  well  have 
taken  place  at  the  time  of  the  passing  of  the  Persian  armies. 
There  are  three  crossings  from  Asia  to  Europe — (1)  across 
the  Bosporus,  from  Calchedon  to  Byzantium ;  (2)  across 
the  Hellespont,  from  Lampsacus  to  Callipolis ;  (3)  across  the 
Hellespont,  from  Abydos  to  Sestos.  The  first  of  these  ways 
was  taken  by  Darius  in  his  expedition  against  the  Scythians ; 
the  third  by  Xerxes. 

The  above-mentioned  coins  of  Persian  weight  were  all, 
it  will  be  observed,  issued  on  the  Asiatic  side.  The  opposite 
shore  of  the  Hellespont,  the  Thracian  Chersonesus,  struck, 
as  we  have  seen,  at  that  time  on  the  Attic  standard,  no 
doubt  in  consequence  of  the  influence  of  Miltiades. 

In  the  time  of  the  Athenian  Empire,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  but  that  the  Athenian  silver  money,  with  the  electrum 
of  Cyzicus,  Lampsacus,  Phocaea,  and  Mytilene,  constituted 
the  bulk  of  the  currency.  But  small  coins  for  local  circula- 
tion were  struck  on  the  Persian  standard  at  Byzantium,  at 
Cardia  in  the  Thracian  Chersonese,  and  on  the  Asiatic  side 
at  Astacus,  Abydos,  and  Dardanus.  There  were  small  coins 
!  on  the  Chian  standard  before  450  b.  c.  at  Parium  and  Assos ; 
and  after  450  at  Calchedon,  Antandros,  Gargara,  Lamponeia, 
Neandria,  and  Proconnesus.  Scepsis,  in  the  fifth  century, 
issued  didrachms  on  the  Chian  standard.  Selymbria,  on 
the  Thracian  shore  of  the  Propontis,  seems  to  have  gone 
over  from  the  Persian  standard  to  the  Attic  about  450  B.C. 
Sinope  and  other  Pontic  cities  continued  their  issues,  but 
the  weight  had  a  tendency  to  fall  from  the  standard  of 
Aegina  to  that  of  Persia. 

Early  in  the  fourth  century,  Byzantium  and  Calchedon 
fully  adopt  the  Chian  standard,  issuing  an  abundant  coinage. 
The  Persian  Satraps  who  strike  coins  at  Sinope  adhere,  no 
doubt  for  commercial  reasons,  to  the  Aeginetan  standard. 


322  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 

But  at  Gaziura  they  use  the  Persian  weight.  At  other 
cities,  such  as  Cromna  and  Sesamus,  coins'  are  struck  of 
about  56  grains,  either  Rhodian  drachms  or  Persian  tetro- 
bols.  The  important  Pontic  Heracleia  also  at  this  time 
uses  the  Persian  standard.  Small  silver  coins  were  issuod 
by  the  Sindi,  a  tribe  who  dwelt  to  the  east  of  the  Palus 
Maeotis,  at  their  port  of  Sinde. 

§  5.     The  ace  and  Macedon. 

The  Rhodian  or  Chian  standard  spread  rapidly  to  the 
North  in  the  later  fifth  and  early  fourth  centuries.  We 
have  already  seen  it  at  Byzantium  and  Calchedon.  Of  the 
cities  of  the  Thracian  coast,  Aenus  seems  to  have  adopted 
it  before  400  b.c,  the  tetradrachms  reaching  a  maximum 
of  240  grains  (grm.  15-55).  Thasos  at  the  same  time  strikes 
very  beautiful  coins,  already  mentioned : 

Obv.    Head   of  bearded   Dionysus  wearing   ivy-wreath.      Rev, 
OASIOIM.     Heracles  shooting.     (PI.  VII.  7.) 

These  also  rise  to  236  grains  (grm.  15-30),  and  the  didrachm 
and  drachm  are  struck  as  well  as  the  tetradrachm.  The 
cities  of  Chalcidice,  notably  Acanthus  and  Olynthus,  at 
the  same  time  go  over  to  the  standard  of  Abdera,  which 
at  this  time  is  nearly  the  same  as  that  of  Chios,  as  does 
Amphipolis  at  the  mouth  of  the  Strymon.  These  changes 
one  naturally  associates  with  the  changed  political  con- 
ditions which  followed  the  expedition  of  Brasidas.1 

We  will  follow  the  safe  plan  of  beginning  with  the 
known,  or  at  all  events  the  ascertainable.  The  Kings  of 
Macedon  place  their  names  on  their  coins,  and  their  dates 
are  approximately  known ;  their  coins  then  will  serve  as 
a  clue  for  fixing  the  dates  of  coins  of  cities.  With  Archelaus, 
413-399  b.c,  the  money  of  the  Macedonian  Kingdom  ceased 
to  be  regulated  by  the  old  Abderite  standard :  in  place  of 
that  we  find,  not  the  so-called  Babylonic  standard  of  Thasos, 
which  at  this  time  is  scarcely  to  be   distinguished  from 

1  See  above,  Chap.  XIV. 


THRACE  AND  MACEDON  323 

the    Attic,    but    the    Persian    standard.      The    staters    of 
Archelaus  are : 

1.  Obv.  Horseman.  Rev.  APXEAAO.  Fore-part  of  goat  Weight, 

160  grains  (grm.  10-36). 

2.  Obv.  Young  male  head  (Apollo  or  Ares).      Rev.  Same  inscr. 

Horse  standing,  with  loose  rein.     Same  weight.     (PL  VII. 
10.) 

He  also  issued  diobols,  obols,  and  hemiobols  of  Persian 
standard. 

The  successors  of  Archelaus,  Aeropus,  396-392  B.C.,  and 
Pausanias,  390-389  b.c,  issued  staters  of  the  same  types 
as  No.  2,  together  with  smaller  denominations.  Under 
Amyntas  III,  389-369  b.c,  and  Perdiccas  III,  364-359  B.C., 
the  type  of  the  horse  is  retained,  but  the  head  of  Heracles 
displaces  that  of  Apollo  on  the  obverse  ;  the  weight  remains 
the  same. 

This  brings  us  to  the  reign  of  Philip  II,  359-336  b.c. 
(Chap.  XXI). 

It  appears  that  in  all  their  issues  of  money,  the  Kings 
of  Macedon,  who  had  little  commerce  to  provide  for, 
accepted  the  lead  of  the  commercial  Greek  cities  of  the 
coast  in  their  monetary  issues :  among  these  cities  the  most 
important  was  Abdera.  It  was  from  Abdera  that  Alexander  I 
borrowed  his  monetary  standard.  At  the  time  of  the  fall 
of  Athens,  late  in  the  fifth  century,  the  people  of  Abdera 
adopted  the  Persian  standard.  This  is  an  interesting  fact, 
but  by  no  means  inexplicable.  With  the  fall  of  Athens 
the  Athenian  monetary  system,  imposed  on  the  Athenian 
allies,  fell  also.  And  at  the  time  the  power  of  Persia  was 
rapidly  increasing.  The  generals  of  Sparta  trusted  largely 
to  Persian  subsidies.  Great  issues  of  money,  consisting  of 
didrachms  of  Persian  weight,  for  supporting  naval  warfare, 
began  to  be  made  by  the  Satraps  of  the  Great  King,  at  first 
with  the  usual  Persian  types,  later,  in  the  fourth  century, 
with  their  own  names.  Thus  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
the  staters  of  Archelaus  and  his  successors  were  intended 
to  pass  as  the  equivalent  of  two  sigli  or  the  tenth  of  a  daric. 

y  2 


324  SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.o. 

Other  cities  of  Thrace  followed  the  lead  of  Abdera,  notably 
Maroneia,  which  issued  during  the  first  half  of  the  fourth 
century  abundant  coins  weighing  about  175  grains  (grm. 
11-33).  Aenus,  however,  took  another  course  and,  like 
Byzantium  and  Thasos,  accepted  the  rapidly  spreading 
Chian  standard.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  Aenus  is  the 
furthest  to  the  East  of  the  cities  of  the  Thracian  coast. 

The  coinage  of  Philip  of  Macedon  did  not  bring  to  an 
end  the  coinage  of  the  kings  who  reigned  in  Paeonia,  to 
the  north  of  Macedon.  We  have  a  considerable  coinage 
issued  by  Lycceius,  who  ruled  about  359-340  B.C. 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.1     Bev.  AYKKEIOY.  Heracles  strangling 
lion.     Weight,  214-188  grains  (grm.  13-86-12- 18). 

His  successor  Patraiis  issued  money  with  another  type. 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.       Bev.  PATPAOY.  Horseman  spearing 
foe.     Weight,  200-188  grains  (grm.  12-96-12-18). 

The  Kings  of  Paeonia  notably  depart  from  Macedonian 
precedents  in  their  types:  the  Heracles  type  suggests 
Tarentum  and  Heracleia  in  Italy ;  the  horseman  type  sug- 
gests Thessaly:  but  we  are  not  justified  in  drawing  any 
inference  as  regards  the  course  of  trade.  The  weight  is 
regarded  by  Mr.  Head  as  a  degradation  of  the  standard 
of  Philip  II  of  Macedon,  224  grains  (grm.  14-51);  but  it 
seems  scarcely  possible  that  these  coins  can  have  passed 
as  equivalent  to  those  of  Philip.  On  the  other  hand,  it 
is  a  familiar  fact  that  the  barbarous  imitations  of  standard 
coinages  rapidly  decline  in  weight.  The  Paeonian  coins 
were  in  turn  imitated  by  barbarous  neighbours  on  the 
north  and  west. 

The  conquest  by  Philip,  as  a  rule,  marks  the  end  of  the 
autonomous  coinage  of  the  cities  of  Thrace  and  Macedon. 
Abdera,  Aenus,  Maroneia,  and  the  island  of  Thasos  cease 
their  issues  about  350  B.C.      One  city,  however,  Philippi, 

1  One  of  the  staters  of  Lycceius  has  on  the  obverse  the  legend  AEPP.Q- 
NAIO^  :  this  seems  to  be  an  epithet  of  Apollo,  and  it  shows  that  the 
Derrones  were  near  his  dominions. 


THRACE  AND  MACEDON  325 

was  allowed  then  to  begin  an  autonomous  coinage,  striking 
gold  staters,  and  silver  coins,  from  the  tetradrachm  down- 
wards, on  the  standards  of  Philip.  They  bear  as  types  the 
head  of  Heracles  and  the  Tripod. 

Coins  struck  about  350  b.c.  at  Orthagoreia   offer  us  a 
problem : 

Obv.  Head  of  Artemis.  Bev.  OPOAPOPEniM.  Macedonian 
helmet  surmounted  by  star.  Weight,  168  grains  (grm. 
10-88) :  also  the  quarter  of  this. 

Orthagoreia  is  by  one  ancient  authority  stated  to  be  a 
variant  name  of  Stageira ;  but  Pliny *  says  that  it  was 
an  older  name  of  Maroneia.  The  former  of  these  state- 
ments is  unsatisfactory,  for  it  is  extremely  improbable 
that  a  city  of  Chalcidice,  where  Stageira  was  situated, 
would  in  the  fourth  century  use  the  Persian  standard. 
On  the  other  hand,  that  standard  is  used  at  Maroneia :  if 
that  city  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  took  the 
name  of  Orthagoreia,  it  might  have  been  allowed  to  make 
a  temporary  issue  of  coins. 


The  complexity  and  irregularity  of  the  coin  standards  in 
use  in  Asia  for  silver  in  the  fourth  century  appears  on 
examination  to  be  less  than  might  appear  at  first  sight. 
The  Chian  standard  during  the  first  years  of  the  century 
rapidly  makes  its  way,  and  is  all  but  universally  adopted, 
from  Caria  in  the  south  to  Byzantium  and  Aenus  in  the 
north,  along  the  western  shore  of  Asia  Minor.  The  standard 
adopted  by  the  people,  of  Chalcidice,  and  from  them  by 
Philip  of  Macedon,  is  somewhat  lighter  than  that  of  Chios, 
but  not  very  different.  It  is  either  the  old  standard  of 
Abdera,  or  may  perhaps  be  an  adaptation  to  the  weight 
of  the  gold  (Chap.  XXI).  The  Attic  standard  is  found  only 
at  Clazomenae,  the  Aeginetan  only  in  the  Pontic  region. 

1  IV.  11,  18. 


326 


SILVER  OF  ASIA,  400-330  b.c. 


The  Persian  standard  is  altogether  dominant  to  the  east  of 
Caria,  and  aggressive  farther  to  the  west.  In  some  cities 
of  the  west  coast  of  Asia  Minor,  and  at  Byzantium,  it  works 
in  with  the  Chian.  In  Abdera  it  triumphs,  and  from 
Abdera  passes  to  the  Kings  of  Macedon,  Archelaus  and  his 
successors  until  Philip.  Even  in  Pontus  the  old-established 
standard  of  Aegina  is  modified  and  lowered  by  Persian 
influence. 


CHAPTER    XVI 

GOLD  OF  ASIA  MINOR,  &c. 

§  1.   407-394  b.c. 

I  do  not  propose  in  this  chapter  to  treat  of  the  issues 
of  electrum  coins  at  Cyzicus,  Lampsacus,  Mytilene,  and 
Phocaea,  as  I  have  already  dealt  with  those  issues  in 
Chapter  XIV,  which  treats  of  the  coinage  of  the  Athenian 
Empire.  But  there  were  important  issues  of  pure  gold  in 
Asia  and  Thrace. 

The  earlier  gold  coins  of  Athens,  which  were  contem- 
porary with  similar  issues  of  gold  by  the  cities  of  Sicily, 
when  pressed  by  the  Carthaginian  invasion,  seem  to  have 
been  imitated  by  several  cities  of  Thrace,  of  Cyprus,  and 
other  districts.  These  cities  did  not  issue  any  higher 
denomination  than  the  drachm:  whereas  in  the  period 
succeeding  394  b.c,  and  especially  in  the  years  between 
394  and  the  peace  of  Antalcidas,  387  b.c,  gold  staters  or 
didrachms  make  their  appearance  in  several  cities  from 
Panticapaeum  in  the  north  to  Cyprus  and  Cyrene  in  the 
south. 

It  is  not  claimed  that  all  gold  coins  of  smaller  denomina- 
tions belong  to  the  period  407-394  b.c:  many  of  them 
belong  to  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century.  The  claim  is 
that  in  nearly  all  cases  the  issues  of  small  gold  coins  are 
suggested  by  the  Athenian  issues  of  407  b.  c  ;  and  that  in 
nearly,  if  not  quite,  all  cases  the  issues  of  gold  staters  are 
an  echo  of  the  Athenian  striking  of  gold  didrachms  in  394. 
And  this  contention  seems  to  be  borne  out  by  a  considera- 
tion of  the  dates  of  the  kings  and  dynasts  who  struck  coins 
in  the  fourth  century.  Evidently  the  coins  struck  by  kings 
can  be  more  closely  dated  than  those  which  bear  the  names 
of  cities  only. 


328  GOLD  OF  ASIA  MINOR,  &o. 

We  have  the  following  approximate  dates :  Evagoras  I  ot 
Salamis  in  Cyprus,  411-373  ;  Nicocles,  371-361 ;  Evagoras  II, 
361-351;  Pnytagoras,  351-332 ;  Nicocreon,  331-310 ;  Mele- 
kiathon  of  Citium  in  Cyprus,  391-361 ;  Pumiathon,  361-312; 
Pixodarus  of  Caria,  340-334  ;  Philip  II  of  Macedon,  359-336. 
Of  these  rulers,  Evagoras  I  issued  the  half-drachm  (31-4 
grains,  grm.  2-02)  and  smaller  divisions ;  Nicocles  two- 
thirds  of  the  drachm  (42-5  grains,  grm.  2-75) ;  Evagoras  II, 
Pnytagoras,  and  Nicocreon  didrachms  or  staters.  Mele- 
kiathon  and  Pumiathon  struck  the  drachm ;  Pixodarus  the 
drachm ;  Philip  of  Macedon  issued  didrachms  in  abundance. 
All  of  these  were  of  Attic  standard.  This  list  proves  at 
least  that,  as  we  approach  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century, 
staters  tend  to  take  the  place  of  smaller  coins  in  gold. 

In  his  Catalogue  of  the  Coins  of  Cyprus,1  Mr.  Hill  observes 
that  Evagoras  I  in  his  coinage  probably  preserves  the 
traditional  relation  of  gold  to  silver  at  13§  to  1,  so  that 
his  half-drachm  in  gold  would  be  equivalent  to  2f  of  his 
silver  staters.  The  smaller  denominations  struck  by  Evagoras 
are  in  Mr.  Hill's  opinion  tenths  and  twentieths  of  the  stater 
of  gold.  This  would  be  a  novelty  in  coinage,  as  elsewhere 
the  smaller  gold  coins  follow  the  divisions  into  drachms  and 
obols ;  and  I  am  not  sure  that  Mr.  Hill  is  right,  but  his 
view  has  much  in  its  favour. 

The  kings  of  Cyprus  seem  to  stand  in  a  separate  class. 
Evagoras  I  was  a  ruler  of  great  power  and  audacity,  who 
by  force  of  arms  asserted  his  independence  of  the  Great 
King,  and  was  never  subdued,  but  at  last  made  a  compact 
with  him  '  as  a  king  with  a  king '.  That  this  high-spirited 
monarch  should  have  broken  through  the  tradition,  and 
issued  gold  coins  on  his  own  account,  need  not  surprise  us, 
nor  that  his  standard  should  be  rather  that  of  the  Athenian 
gold  money  than  that  of  the  daric.  It  is  more  remarkable 
that  all  his  successors  on  the  throne  of  Salamis  should  have 
continued  the  issues  down  to  the  time  of  Alexander  the 
Great,  and  that  the  rival  Phoenician  kings  of  Citium  should 


p.  cm. 


407-394  b.c.  329 

have  followed  their  example.  Brandis  suggests J  that  this 
must  have  been  the  result  of  special  favour  of  the  Persian 
king.  In  any  case  Cyprus  is  quite  exceptional  in  thus 
coining  gold  all  through  the  fourth  century. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  powerful  Hausolus  of  Caria, 
who  was  almost  an  independent  sovereign,  issued  no  gold 
coin,  though  he  struck  abundant  silver :  only  his  successor 
Pixodarus  at  a  later  time,  when  the  Persian  Empire  was 
obviously  breaking  up,  struck  a  few  small  gold  coins. 

We  take  next  the  issues  of  small  gold  coins  by  some  of 
the  cities  of  Thrace  and  Macedon,  on  the  Attic  standard. 

Aenus. 

Obv.  Head  of  Hermes.  Bev.  AINION.  Terminal  figure  of 
Hermes  on  throne.  Weight,  32  grains  (grm.  2-10).  (PI. 
VIII.  1.) 

Maroneia. 

Obv.  Head  of  bearded  Dionysus.     Bev.   MAPHNITEHN.  Vine. 

Weight,  62  grains  (grm.  4-01). 
Obv.  Prancing  horse.      Bev.  Same  inscr.    Vine.     Weight,   48 

grains  (grm.  3-11). 

Thasos. 

Obv.  Head  of  Dionysus,  bearded  or  young.  Bev.  0ACION. 
Bearded  Heracles  kneeling,  shooting  with  bow.  Weight, 
60  grains  (grm..  3-88) ;  43  grains  (grm.  2-78). 

Amphipolis. 

Obv.  Young  male  head  bound  with  taenia.  Bev.  AM<t>IPOAI- 
TEHN.     Torch.     Weight,  63  grains  (grm,  4-08). 

The  above  coins  are  all  rare,  and  seem  to  have  been  experi- 
mental. 

These  cities,  while  striking  gold  on  the  Attic  system  of 
weight,  did  not  use  that  system  for  silver.  But  the  mass 
of  the  currency  in  all  the  region  at  the  time  consisted  of 
the  silver  coins  of  Athens.  It  seems,  therefore,  most  likely 
that  the  gold  coins  were  issued  in  reference  to  these  rather 
than  in  reference  to  the  autonomous  silver  coins  of  the 

1  Mum-,  Mass-  und  Geurichtstcesen,  p.  256. 


330  GOLD  OF  ASIA  MINOR,  &c. 

cities  of  Thrace.  No  doubt  some  terms  would  have  to  be 
made  with  the  latter ;  and  this  would  have  been  easy  if  on 
the  coast  of  Thrace  the  old  Asiatic  relation  of  the  two 
metals,  13|  to  1,  had  persisted.  Then  a  gold  drachm  of 
Attic  weight  would  have  been  equivalent  to  five  silver 
didrachms  of  Persian  weight,  or  about  fifteen  Rhodian 
drachms.  But  it  is  far  more  likely  that  the  Athenian 
proportion  of  12  to  1  was  accepted  in  Thrace,  and  that  the 
gold  coins  were  left  to  make  their  own  terms  with  the 
contemporary  civic  issues. 

With  these  coins  of  Thrace  go  small  coins  of  Teos  in 
Ionia,  the  mother-city  of  Abdera.1 

Obv.  Griffin  seated.  Rev.  Circular  incuse,  divided  by  a  cross, 
on  the  limbs  of  which  is  inscribed  THI  and  magistrate's 
name.  Weight,  28-7  grains  (grm.  1-85) ;  14-6  grains 
(grm.  0-94). 

The  weight  of  these  coins  is  a  difficulty.  They  are  light 
for  Attic  triobols  and  trihemiobols :  they  are  nearer  to  the 
weight  of  Aeginetan  diobols  and  obols.  And  as  Teos  clings 
with  great  tenacity,  almost  alone  among  Ionian  cities,  to 
the  Aeginetan  weight  for  silver  coins,  at  all  events  down 
to  394  (Head)  or  even  later  (Babelon),  we  may  well  suppose 
that,  like  Thebes,  the  city  adopted  it  also  for  small  pieces 
in  gold.  The  gold  or  electrum  coins  of  Thebes,  and  other 
cities  of  Greece  proper,  are  considered  in  Chapter  XVIII. 

§  2.    394-330  b.c. 

The  striking  of  gold  staters  or  didrachms  at  Abydos.i 
Rhodes,  Lampsacus,  and  other  cities  was  later;  and  whati 
suggested  them  was  probably  not  the  Athenian  money; 
of  necessity  of  407,  but  the  abundant  issue  of  Athenian  j 
staters  after  395.  Mr.  Wroth  had  already  assigned  the 
staters  of  Lampsacus  to  the  time  after  394,  because  on< 
of  the  earliest  of  them  bears  the  type  of  young  Heracles 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  595.     Babelon  omits  these  coins,  and  their  genuine j 
ness  is  not  above  suspicion. 


394-330  B.C.  331 

Strangling  the  serpents,  the  well-known  device  of  the 
3nidian  League.1  There  are  also  small  gold  or  electrum 
joins  of  Thebes,  which  can  be  dated  to  this  time,  bearing 
••he  same  type. 

It  seems  almost  certain  that  the  coins  of  Lampsacus, 
AJbydos,  and  Clazomenae  must  all  have  been  issued  at  the 
lame  period.  But  if  we  turn  to  the  British  Museum 
Catalogue  we  shall  find  considerable  variety  in  their  dating, 
|khich  stands  as  follows :  Lampsacus,  394-350 ;  Abydos, 
rl  1-387;  Clazomenae,  387-300.  This  loose  and  incon- 
listent  dating  has  arisen  from  the  fact  that  numismatists 
lave  considered  each  city  separately — on  its  own  merits, 
10  to  say — and  have  not  taken  up  the  general  question 
vhy  the  cities  in  question  should  have  struck  gold  at  all, 
Lnd  why  if  they  struck  gold  they  should  have  minted  it 
m  that  particular  standard.  In  fact,  they  have  made  the 
nistake  of  detaching  numismatics  from  the  broad  flow  of 
listory. 

Cyzicus  in  the  fourth  century  continues  her  electrum 
ssues.  But  Lampsacus  with  the  century  begins  to  issue 
;hose  very  beautiful  gold  staters  which  have  reached 
lis  in  great  variety  (PI.  VIII.  2,  3).  The  type  of  their 
reverse  is  always  the  fore-part  of  a  winged  horse ;  but 
in  the  obverse  are  various  types.  Some  of  these  types 
ieem  to  have  no  special  meaning,2  but  to  be  mere  imita- 
lions  of  well-known  coins  or  works  of  art.  But  a  few 
jonvey  more  exact  information.  On  one  coin  is  the  head 
•f  a  Persian  satrap :  unfortunately  he  cannot  be  with  any 
ertainty  identified.  M.  Babelon,  following  M.  Six,  takes 
dm  to  be  Orontes,  and  thinks  that  the  coin  belongs  to 
he  time,  about  360  B.C.,  when  Orontes  was  in  revolt  against 
he  Great  King.  This  identification,  however,  is  very 
loubtful.  Considering  the  imitative  character  of  the  coins, 
he  appearance  of  the  head  of  a  Persian  noble,  very  possibly 

1  Cat.  Mysia,  p.  xxv. 

2  A  list  of  thirty-one  types  in  B.  M.  Cat.  Mysia,  pp.  xxi-xxv.  In  the 
'■urnal  internat.  d'Arch.  mrniism.,  v,  p.  1,  Miss  Agnes  Baldwin  increases  the 
number  to  tliirty-seven.     It  has  since  been  still  further  increased. 


332  GOLD  OF  ASIA  MINOE,  &o. 

Copied  from  some  silver  satrapal  coinage,  cannot  surprise 
us.  A  head  of  Pan  on  one  coin  is  copied  from  the  gold 
of  Panticapaeum.  Another  interesting  copy  is  a  head  of 
Athena,  imitated  from  the  silver  money  of  Athens.  The 
type  of  young  Heracles  strangling  serpents  is  copied  from 
the  silver  issued  by  the  allied  cities  of  Asia  after  the 
victory  of  Conon.  We  have  seen  that  Lampsacus  issued 
staters  of  electrum  for  a  short  period  towards  the  middle 
of  the  fifth  century.  Why  she  should  have  resumed  coinage 
about  394  b.  c.  we  cannot  of  course  tell  without  a  more  exact 
knowledge  than  we  possess  of  the  history  of  the  city.  But 
we  must  not  forget  the  celebrity  of  the  wine  of  the  district, 
nor  the  position  of  the  city  on  the  Propontis  near  the 
stations  of  the  Athenian  and  Spartan  fleets,  which  might 
produce  a  need  for  a  coinage.1 

It  is  natural  to  think  that  the  number  of  types  on  these 
staters  (more  than  thirty-seven)  indicates  a  considerable 
duration  of  the  period  during  which  they  were  struck. 
We  should  naturally  suppose  that  the  type  would  be 
changed  once  a  year.  And  it  is  unlikely  that  we  have 
recovered  more  than  (at  most)  half  of  the  varieties  issued. 
In  this  case,  if  the  coinage  began  about  394,  it  would  have 
lasted  down  to  the  time  of  Alexander.  This  hypothesis 
of  an  annual  change  of  type  is  not,  however,  a  certainty. 
Mr.  Head  has  made  it  probable  that  the  type  of  the  later 
coins  of  Athens  was  changed  every  year.  But  of  the 
Cyzicene  staters  of  electrum  more  than  170  types  are 
actually  known,  and  their  issue  can  scarcely  have  lasted 
more  than  150  years:  at  Cyzicus  then  there  must  have 
been  more  frequent  changes.  In  any  case  it  seems 
impossible  to  confine  the  varied  staters  of  Lampsacus  to 
the  period  before  the  Peace  of  Antalcidas :  they  must  have 
gone  on  later. 

The  gold  coins  of  Abydos  are  somewhat  early  in  character : 
they  seem  to  have  been  contemporary  with  the  earliest  of 

1  Mention  of  eighty-four  gold  staters  of  Lampsacus  as  contributed  by  the    ) 
Byzantians  to  the  cost  of  the  war  of  the  Boeotians  with  Phocis,  355-346  b.  c. 
Dittenberger,  Syll.,  ed.  2,  120,  10. 


394-330  b.c.  333 

the  Lampsacene  staters.  One  bears  the  types  of  Victory 
slaying  a  ram,  and  a  standing  eagle  (Brit.  Museum). 

The  gold  coins  of  Rhodes  (B.  M.  XX.  37)  do  not  belong 
quite  to  the  earliest  issues  of  the  city  (409  B.C.).  In  the 
B.  M.  Cat.  they  are  placed  after  400  b.c  They  are 
doubtless  contemporary  with  the  coins  already  mentioned. 
Their  issue  makes  certain  some  easy  and  conventional 
relation  between  gold  coins  of  Attic  and  silver  coins  ot 
Rhodian  standard. 

It  is  a  suggestive  fact  that  Lampsacus  and  Abydos,  as 
well  as  Cyzicus  and  Cius  (of  the  coins  of  which  last  city 
I  shall  speak  presently),  are  all  on  the  Propontis  in  the 
direct  line  of  the  chief  Athenian  trade-route,  that  which 
led  to  the  Black  Sea.  It  would  seem  that  the  strength 
of  Athens  in  this  quarter,  together  with  the  influx  of  gold 
from  Colchis  and  Scythia,  produced  abnormal  conditions  as 
regards  the  issue  of  gold  coins. 

It  is  necessary  to  consider  the  relations  of  these  Greek 
cities  to  the  Persian  satraps  in  their  neighbourhood. 
Almost  in  the  midst  of  them  was  situated  Dascyleium,  the 
head- quarters  of  the  Persian  satrapy  of  Mysia.  Xenophon1 
describes  the  city  as  a  luxurious  residence.  '  Here ',  he  says, 
1  was  the  palace  of  Pharnabazus  with  many  villages  round 
it,  great  and  rich  in  resources:  wild  beasts  for  hunting 
abounded  in  the  parks  and  the  country  round — a  river 
flowed  by  full  of  fish  of  all  sorts ;  and  there  were  also 
abundant  birds  for  such  as  had  skill  in  fowling.'  The 
description  would  be  attractive  to  many  an  Englishman 
in  India. 

The  view  generally  accepted  by  numismatists2  is  that 
the  Persian  satraps  did  not  as  such  issue  coins,  but  used 
the  darics  and  sigli  of  the  Empire.  But  on  the  occasion 
of  military  expeditions  they  sometimes  issued  silver  coin 
at  the  Greek  cities  which  they  made  their  head- quarters. 
Thus  Tiribazus,  satrap  of  "Western  Armenia,  struck  silver 
money  in  some  of  the  cities  of  Cilicia,  Issus,  and  Mallus, 

1  HeUen.  iv.  1,  15. 

1  Babelou.  Perses  Achemenides,  Introd.,  p.  xxiii. 


334  GOLD  OF  ASIA  MINOR,  &c. 

on  the  occasion  of  the  war  with  Evagoras.1  Datames  also 
issued  silver  coins  in  Cilicia  at  the  time  of  an  expedition 
against  Egypt,  about  378  B.C.2  Tissaphernes  issued  silver 
coins,  which  are  supposed  to  have  been  struck  at  the  mint 
of  Aspendus 3 ;  and  other  examples  are  cited  in  the  last 
chapter. 

Among  the  satraps  who  had  head-quarters  at  Dascyleium, 
Pharnabazus,  when  in  command  of  the  Persian  fleet,  issued 
silver  coins  in  Cilicia.  He  also  seems  on  some  unknown 
occasion  to  have  issued  silver  coins  at  Cyzicus,4  which  we 
have  already  cited.  Mr.  Head  is  of  opinion  that  a  gold 
coin  was  also  struck  by  Pharnabazus  at  Cyzicus ;  it  is  the 
following  5 : 

Obv.  Persian  king  as  an  archer,  kneeling.     Bev.  Prow  of  ship 
to  left.     Weight,  127-5  grains  (grm.  8-25). 

M.  Babelon,  however,  attributes  the  coin  to  Darius  III 
of  Persia,  and  to  some  mint  in  Caria.  M.  Six  gives  it  to 
Salmacis,  and  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great.6  It  is,  in 
fact,  of  uncertain  origin;  and  the  reasons  for  attributing 
it  to  Pharnabazus  are  not  strong  enough  to  induce  us  to 
make  this  coin  the  one  solitary  gold  issue  by  any  Persian 
satrap.  The  continued  loyalty  of  Pharnabazus  to  his  master 
would  make  it  very  unlikely  that  he  alone  would  infringe 
the  royal  prerogative. 

It  would  seem  then  that  so  far  as  our  evidence,  which  is 
certainly  very  fragmentary,  goes,  the  satraps  of  Mysia  had 
little  to  do  with  the  issues  of  coins  on  the  coast  of  the 
Propontis.  No  doubt  they  must  have  had  frequent  relations 
with  these  Greek  cities.  But  if  we  adhere  to  the  view  that 
it  was  only  on  the  occasion  of  military  expeditions  that  the 
Persian  satraps  struck  coins,  we  shall  be  slow  in  attributing 
to  their  influence  coins  so  evidently  commercial  as  the  gold 
money  of  Lampsacus  and  Abydos.     The  available  evidence, 

1  Babelon,  Perses  Achemenides,  Introd.,  p.  xxix. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  xxxix.  s  Ibid.,  p.  xxxii. 

4  Babelon,  Perses,  p.  23,  PI.  IV,  5.  It  is  the  presence  of  the  tunny  on  the 
coins  which  makes  the  attribution  to  Cyzicus  probable. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  15,  PI.  II,  22.  6  Num.  Chron.,  1890,  p.  245. 


394-330  B.C.  335 

then,  seems  to  indicate  that  it  was  rather  the  influence 
of  Athens  than  that  of  the  Persian  satraps  of  Mysia  which 
gave  rise  to  the  gold  coins  of  the  shore  of  the  Propontis  in 
the  early  fourth  century. 

I  may  briefly  summarize  the  historic  situation  as  follows. 
It  is  very  difficult  to  trace  in  detail  the  history  of  the  Greek 
cities  of  the  Propontis  during  the  period  412-311  B.C.,  that 
is,  between  the  Athenian  disaster  in  Sicily  and  the  rise  of 
the  Greek  kingdom  of  Syria.  They  passed  with  bewildering 
rapidity  from  Athenian  to  Lacedaemonian  hegemony  and 
back  again.  Sometimes  they  seem  to  have  had  Persian 
garrisons  and  to  have  been  subject  to  the  king,  sometimes 
they  were  in  the  hands  of  revolted  satraps,  sometimes  they 
appear  to  have  enjoyed  almost  complete  independence. 
The  facts  are  only  to  be  occasionally  gathered  from  slight 
references  in  surviving  history.  We  are  able,  however,  to 
discern  three  periods  in  the  history  of  Asia  Minor  at  this 
time — (1) :  412-387.  The  constant  hostilities  between  Sparta 
and  Athens,  of  which  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor  was  the 
cock-pit,  caused  constant  commotion  in  the  cities,  until 
by  the  Peace  of  Antalcidas  they  were  recognized  by  the 
Greeks  as  the  property  of  the  Great  King.  (2) :  387-334. 
Under  the  incompetent  rule  of  Artaxerxes  Mnemon.  there 
were  perpetual  revolts  of  satraps  in  Asia  Minor,  and  of 
these  satraps  some  achieved  an  almost  unqualified  indepen- 
dence. We  know  that  they  depended  largely  upon  the 
help  of  Greek  mercenaries ;  but  in  regard  to  their  relations 
to  the  Greek  cities  we  have  scarcely  any  information.  (3) : 
334-311.  From  the  landing  of  Alexander  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Seleucid  dominion  there  was  a  time  of  great 
unrest,  the  military  occupation  of  the  country  by  the 
Macedonians  not  precluding  the  autonomy  of  the  cities. 
It  is  to  the  first  of  these  periods,  even  apart  from  the 
testimony  of  artistic  style,  that  we  should  naturally 
attribute  the  origin  of  the  gold  coins  of  Lampsacus  and 
Abydos.  It  is  very  improbable  that  any  Greek  cities  would 
after  the  Peace  of  Antalcidas  begin  such  issues.  But  the 
evidence   seems   to   show   that  as  Cyzicus   continued  her 


336  GOLD  OF  ASIA  MINOR,  &c. 

electrum  issues  down  through  the  fourth  century,  so 
Lampsacus  continued  issues  in  gold.  The  reasons  of  this 
very  exceptional  privilege,  which  the  Great  King  must  at 
least  have  tolerated,  can  only  be  matter  of  conjecture. 

Passing  from  the  Propontis  to  the  Ionian  coast,  we  have 
to  speak  of  the  very  exceptional  issue  of  gold  coins  by 
Clazomenae. 

The  coin  of  Clazomenae — types,  Facing  head  of  Apollo 
and  swan  (PI.  VIII.  4) — is  remarkable  for  its  peculiar  weight 
(grains  87«8 ;  grm.  5-70).  It  is  not  a  stater  of  the  Attic 
standard,  but  exactly  two-thirds  of  a  stater.  Clazomenae 
is  almost  alone  among  the  cities  of  Asia  at  this  period 
in  using  the  Attic  standard  for  silver.  If  the  relation  of 
value  between  gold  and  silver  as  accepted  at  Clazomenae 
was  twelve  to  one,  then  this  gold  coin  would  be  worth 
four  of  the  tetradrachms  of  Attic  standard,  alike  the  tetra- 
drachms  of  Clazomenae  and  those  of  Athens  herself;  this 
seems  a  natural  relation.  The  gold  of  Clazomenae  is  very 
beautiful,  bearing  a  full-face  head  of  Apollo  which  may 
be  compared  with  the  head  of  the  Sun-god  on  the  coins 
of  Rhodes,  or  that  of  Arethusa  on  the  coins  of  Syracuse. 
The  British  Museum  Catalogue  gives  for  it  the  date 
387-300  B.C.,  a  wide  date,  which  shows  that  Mr.  Head 
did  not  feel  sure  of  its  exact  time.  But  we  must  not 
overlook  the  remarkable  fact  that  in  the  text  of  the  king's 
peace,  or  the  treaty  of  Antalcidas,  as  given  by  Xenophon, 
the  Persian  king  expressly  reserves  to  himself,  besides 
the  cities  of  the  mainland,  the  islands  of  Clazomenae  and 
Cyprus.  To  couple  thus  together  the  little  island  on  which 
Clazomenae  was  built,  and  the  great  land  of  Cyprus,  seems 
very  strange ;  and  it  is  to  be  observed  that  mention  is  not 
made  of  Cyzicus  and  other  cities  built  on  islands  close  to 
the  coast.  But  since  Clazomenae  came  definitely  under 
Persian  rule  in  387,  it  would  seem  far  more  probable  that 
the  city  struck  its  gold  just  before,  and  not  after,  that  date. 
In  the  style  of  the  coin  there  is  nothing  conflicting  with 
this  supposition ;  indeed  the  full-face  head  of  a  deity  is  as  a 
coin  type  quite  usual  in  the  early  years  of  the  fourth  century. 


394-330  B.C.  337 

The  ordinary  opinion  of  numismatists  in  regard  to  the 
gold  staters  of  Asiatic  cities  is  that  they  were  issued  as 
rivals  to  the  daric.  As  M.  Babelon  puts  it,  '  L'or  des  Grecs, 
sur  le  terrain  commercial  et  economique,  vient  declarer  la 
guerre  a  l'or  des  Perses ;  la  lampsacene  est  creee  pour  lutter 
contre  la  darique.' *  And  on  this  ground  numismatists  have 
tried  to  explain  the  fact  that  these  gold  pieces  are  heavier 
than  the  daric.  They  suppose  that  this  extra  weight  was 
introduced  purposely  in  order  to  force  them  into  circulation. 
What  the  cities  would  gain  by  such  a  course  no  one  has 
explained.  When  Germany  introduced  its  new  gold 
coinage,  it  made  the  standard  not  heavier  but  somewhat 
lighter  than  that  of  the  English  sovereign,  and  the  German 
traders  have  greatly  profited,  by  assuming  the  English 
sovereign  and  their  own  twenty-mark  piece  to  be  equivalent. 

Athens  used  the  same  standard  for  her  gold  coins  which 
she  had  long  used  for  silver.  And  the  reason  seems  obvious. 
If  the  gold  and  silver  coins  had  the  same  weight,  then, 
whatever  proportion  in  value  gold  had  to  silver,  at  that 
rate  the  gold  and  silver  coins  would  exchange.  That  is 
to  say,  wherever  the  silver  money  of  Athens  was  used  as 
the  regular  medium  of  exchange,  gold  minted  on  the  same 
standard  would  pass  with  ease  and  convenience. 

But  we  know  from  the  well-known  lines  of  the  Frogs,2 
as  well  as  from  the  testimony  of  finds,  that  about  the  year 
490  b.c,  even  after  the  fall  of  Athens,  Athenian  silver  was 
the  regular  currency  of  the  shores  of  the  Aegean,  as  well 
as  largely  current  as  far  as  Sicily  and  Egypt:  received, 
as  Aristophanes  says,  everywhere  alike  by  Greeks  and 
barbarians. 

It  seems  then  that  the  readiest  way  of  explaining  the 
adoption  of  the  Attic  standard  for  gold  by  the  cities  of 
Asia  is  to  suppose  that  it  was  not  minted  in  rivalry  of  the 
darics,  but  with  direct  reference  to  the  monetary  issues  of 
Athens.  Athens  set  the  fashion  as  regards  both  metal  and 
standard,  and  several  cities  of  Asia  followed  it. 

1  Perses  Acheme'nides,  p.  lxxiii.  *  720  and  foil. 

1887  Z 


338  GOLD  OF  ASIA  MINOR,  &o. 

There  are  in  existence  gold  coins  bearing  the  types  of 
Ephesus,1  which,  if  genuine,  would  be  contemporary  with 
those  of  Lampsacus  and  Abydos.  They  are  the  stater, 
drachm,  and  diobol,  having  on  the  obverse  the  type  of 
the  bee  and  the  name  of  the  city,  and  on  the  reverse 
a  quartered  incuse.  If  they  be  genuine  they  will  belong 
to  394-387.  But  their  genuineness  has  been  called  in 
question,  and  it  is  unsafe  to  base  any  argument  upon 
them. 

The  gold  staters  of  Cius  in  Bithynia  (PI.  VIII.  5)  are 
certainly  of  later  date  than  those  of  Lampsacus  and  Abydos. 
Their  style  is  considerably  later  than  that  of  the  coins  of 
Chalcidice  and  of  Philip  of  Macedon ;  it  more  nearly 
resembles  that  of  the  money  of  Pixodarus  of  Caria 
(340-334  b.c).  All  the  known  examples  come  from  the 
two  Sidon  hoards,2  which  consist  of  coins  dating  from 
the  middle  to  the  end  of  the  fourth  century.  Perhaps 
the  issue  of  these  coins  was  allowed  by  Philip  or  Alexander 
for  some  reason  which  is  lost  to  us,  as  for  services  in  con- 
nexion with  the  shipment  to  Asia,  since  Cius  was  a  landing- 
place  for  Phrygia.  A  parallel  may  perhaps  be  found  in  the 
issue  of  gold  staters  at  Philippi  in  Macedon,  apparently  by 
special  licence  of  Philip  II.  Contemporary  with  these  gold 
coins  of  Cius  are  small  silver  coins  with  the  same  types, 
weighing  81-83  grains  (5-20-5-33  grm.),  that  is  to  say, 
drachms  of  Persian  standard. 

Another  remarkable  gold  stater,  probably  from  the  Sidon 
finds,  bears  on  the  obverse  a  head  of  young  Heracles,  and 
on  the  reverse  a  Palladium.3  This  is  no  doubt  a  coin  of 
Pergamon ;  a  third  of  a  stater  with  the  same  reverse,  but 
with  the  head  of  Athena  on  the  obverse,  is  also  known.4 
M.  Six  is  probably  right 5  in  assigning  these  coins  to  the 
period  when  Heracles,  the  young  son  of  Alexander,  and  his 
mother  Barsine  established  themselves  at  Pergamon,  after 

1  Head,  Coinage  of  Ephesus,  p.  22.     In  the  Hist  Num.  they  are  omitted. 

2  Bevue  Numism.,  1865,  8  (Waddington). 

8  Revue  Numism.,  1865,  PI.  I,  8.  4  B.  M.  Cat.  Mysia,  p.  110,  No.  4. 

6  Numism.  Chron.,  1890,  p.  200. 


394-330  B.C.  339 

the  death  of  Alexander.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  coin 
in  the  Sidon  finds  which  has  been  most  worn,  and  so 
had  probably  been  longest  in  circulation,  is  a  stater  of 
Panticapaeum,  issued  about  390  b.  c. 

In  order  to  justify  us  for  thus  fixing  the  dates  of  the 
coins  of  Lampsacus,  and  other  Greek  cities  of  the  coast, 
and  the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  issued,  it 
will  be  well  to  consider  some  of  the  contemporaneous  gold 
issues  in  Greece  proper,  and  the  Islands  of  the  Aegean. 

The  gold  coins  of  Panticapaeum,  in  the  Tauric  Chersonese, 
stand  by  themselves  (B.  M.  XXI.  1,  2).  They  are  of  very 
fine  fourth-century  work,  types  Head  of  Pan  and  Griffin, 
and  weigh  as  much  as  140  grains  (grm.  9-07).  The  high 
weight  may  be  the  result  of  an  abundance  of  gold  on  the 
spot,  to  which  the  modern  excavations  in  the  Crimea  have 
borne  ample  testimony.  The  contemporary  silver  coins, 
bearing  as  types  the  head  of  a  satyr,  and  a  bull's  head,  are 
didrachms  of  Persian  weight,  182  grains  (grm.  11*80),  ten 
of  which  probably  passed  as  equivalent  to  the  gold  stater. 

The  city  of  Olynthus  in  Chalcidice  issued  gold  didrachms 
of  Attic  standard  in  the  flourishing  time  of  the  Chalcidian 
League. 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.     Rev.    XAAKIAEHN.    Lyre:    names  of 
magistrates.     (PL  VIII.  6.) 

It  seems  to  have  been  from  Olynthus  that  Philip  of 
Macedon  derived  his  coin  standards,  both  for  gold  and 
silver.  His  issues  are  treated  in  Chap.  XXI,  where  the 
exchange  value  between  gold  and  silver  in  the  fourth 
century  is  also  considered. 


z  Z 


CHAPTER    XVII 

COINS  OF  PHOENICIA  AND  AFRICA,  480-330  b.c. 
§  1.     Phoenicia. 

A  new  and  important  feature  of  the  period  with  which 
we  are  dealing  is  the  earliest  appearance  of  coins  of  the 
cities  of  Phoenicia.  Strange  as  it  may  seem,  until  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  century,  the  wealthy  trading  cities  of 
Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Aradus  had  no  coinage  of  their  own.  In 
like  manner  the  great  city  of  Carthage  had  no  coins  until 
nearly  the  end  of  the  fifth  century.  Yet  Phoenicians  and 
Carthaginians  alike  must  have  been  perfectly  familiar  with 
Greek  coins,  which  circulated  in  great  quantities  in  the 
sixth  century.  And  Cyprus,  which  was  half  Phoenician, 
issued  money  in  all  the  great  cities  early  in  the  fifth  century 
or  before  that.  Such  facts  show  that  we  should  be  mistaken 
if  we  supposed  either  Phoenicians  or  Greeks  to  be  animated 
by  the  keen  business  spirit,  the  result  of  many  decades  of 
unbridled  competition,  which  is  the  ruling  factor  in  modern 
commercial  life. 

The  occasion  of  the  first  issues  of  money  in  Phoenicia 
may  have  been  the  collapse  of  the  Athenian  Empire.  In 
another  chapter  I  adduce  evidence  of  the  determined,  and 
somewhat  shameless,  way  in  which  Athens  insisted  on  her 
coins  being  made  the  standard  of  value  and  the  staple  of 
the  circulation  throughout  her  empire,  and  more  especially 
in  the  islands  of  the  Aegean.  The  owls  of  Athens  had 
a  wide  vogue,  and  when  after  the  Lamian  war  they  ceased 
to  be  produced,  imitations  took  their  place  inland  from 
Phoenicia.  It  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  at  an  earlier 
time,  when  Athens  had  been  captured  by  Lysander,  and 
the  Persian  Satraps  began  to  issue  abundant  coins  in  the 


PHOENICIA  341 

cities  of*  Cilicia,  the  maritime  towns  of  Phoenicia  began 
also  to  feel  more  keenly  the  need  of  a  coinage.  It  is, 
however,  the  opinion  of  the  best  authorities  on  the  coins 
of  Phoenicia,  that  the  fall  of  Athens  was  rather  the  occasion 
of  a  greater  plenty  in  the  issue  of  Phoenician  coins  than  of 
their  first  inception.  M.  Babelon,  following  M.  Rouvier, 
gives  the  first  issue  of  coins  at  Sidon  to  475  B.C.,  Mr.  G.  F. 
Hill  makes  coinage  begin  at  Tyre  about  450.1  The  style 
of  some  of  the  coins,  which  have  on  their  reverse  modified 
incuses,  would  seem  to  justify  these,  or  even  earlier,  attribu- 
tions. But  when  one  passes  away  from  Greek  territory 
style  ceases  to  be  a  trustworthy  index  of  date ;  and  certainly 
the  style  of  coins  in  Phoenicia  is  much  more  archaic  than 
is  that  of  contemporary  issues  in  Greek  cities. 

It  is  a  suggestive  fact  that  the  early  coinage  of  Aradus, 
in  North  Syria,  is  of  a  different  class  from  the  coinages  of 
the  cities  of  Southern  Phoenicia. 

The  city  of  Aradus,  built  on  an  island  two  or  three  miles 
from  the  coast,  began  a  little  before  400  b.c.  to  issue  coin. 
The  ordinary  types  are — 

1.  Obv.  Phoenician  letters  {Ex  Arado).     Phoenician  fish-god, 

holding  dolphin  in  each  hand.  Rev.  Galley  with  dolphin 
or  sea-horse  beneath.  Weight,  50-47  grains  (grm.  3-25- 
3-05) ;  25  grains  (grm.  1-63).     (B.  T.  CXVI.) 

2.  Obv.   Same   letters.     Torso  of  fish-god.      Bev.  Prow  with 

dolphin  beneath.     Weight,  11  grains  (grm.  0-68). 

One  coin  is  published  by  Babelon,  of  the  types  of  No.  1, 
but  weighing  166  grains  (grm.  10-77).  This  is  very  impor- 
tant, as  it  makes  it  clear  that  the  standard  is  really  the 
Persian,  the  same  as  that  used  in  Cyprus  and  by  the  Satraps 
in  Cilicia.  We  have  already  seen  that  the  Persian  stater 
was  often  in  practice  divided  into  three  pieces,  which  may 
best  be  called  tetrobols,  and  which  seem  to  have  circulated 
somewhat  above  their  real  value  as  Chian  or  Rhodian 
drachms.  We  must  not  press  the  fact  that  the  coin  No.  2 
would  seem  from  its  type  to  be  the  half  of  some  unit,  for 

'  B.  M.  Cat.  Phoenicia,  p.  cxxiii. 


342         COINS  OF  PHOENICIA  AND  AFEICA 

the  torso  of  the  fish-god  may  be  only  a  substitute  for  his 
head,  which  would  well  suit  the  obol. 

Early  in  the  fourth  century  the  obverse  type  is  changed ; 
we  have  a  bearded  laureate  head,  possibly  of  Mel-Karth,  in 
the  place  of  the  fish-god  (PI.  IX.  6).  But  the  denomina- 
tions, stater,  tetrobol,  and  obol,  still  go  on  at  the  same 
weight.  The  stater  sometimes  reaches  the  weight  of  165 
grains  (grm.  10-68),  the  tetrobol  52  grains  (grm.  3-35),  and 
the  obol  13  grains  (grm.  0-86).  There  is  one  exceptional 
stater1  which  reaches  the  weight  of  258  grains  (grm.  16-70), 
and  thus  appears  to  follow  the  Attic  standard.  It  is 
possible  that  this  coin  may  date  from  the  time  of  Alexander. 
It  is  indeed  quite  archaic  in  style ;  but  in  a  Phoenician 
coin  this  is  not  a  conclusive  indication. 

I  have  placed  these  two  series  of  coins  in  the  order 
which  seems  to  me  undoubtedly  the  true  one,  as  it  does  to 
Mr.  Hill.2  M.  Eouvier  and  M.  Six  had  transposed  them, 
placing  the  series  with  the  bearded  head  first.  To  assign 
more  exact  dates,  under  these  conditions,  would  be  too 
bold.  What  is  clear  is  that  the  coinage  of  Aradus  is  under 
the  influence  of  the  Persian  Satraps  of  Cilicia. 

The  other  cities  of  Phoenicia  used  the  (so-called)  Phoe- 
nician standard. 

Gebal  (Byblus)  is  the  next  city  of  Phoenicia,  issuing  coins 
before  the  age  of  Alexander,  to  which  we  come  in  moving 
southwards.  The  earliest  coin  appears  to  be  the  follow- 
ing: 

Obv.  Galley,  containing  warriors  ;  beneath,  hippocanip.  Rev. 
Vulture  standing  on  body  of  ram  (incuse).  Weight,  214-5 
grains  (grm.  13-89),  Athens  (P..  T.  CXVII) ;  53-3  grains 
(grm.  3-45),  Brit.  Mus. 

M.  Babelon 3  sees  in  the  reverse  type  a  possible  allusion  to 
the  overthrow  of  Evagoras  I  of  Cyprus,  on  whose  coins 
a  ram  figures :  this,  however,  is  very  doubtful.  The  coin 
must  be  given  to  the  first  half  of  the  fourth  century. 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  521,  No.  832. 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Phoenicia,  p.  xviii.  s  Perses  Achem.,  p.  clxvi. 


PHOENICIA  343 

Next  we  have  the  money  of  a  succession  of  kings,  Elpaal, 
Azbaal,  Ainel,  of  whom  only  the  last  can  be  dated ;  he  was 
a  contemporary  of  Alexander,  if  we  may  regard  him  as  the 
same  as  the  Enylus  of  Arrian.1  He  was  succeeded,  as 
Mr.  Hill  has  shown,2  by  Adramelek.  We  may  put  the  full 
weight  of  the  stater  of  Byblus  at  220  grains  (grm.  14-25), 
and  of  the  quarter  stater  or  Phoenician  drachm  at  55  grains 
(grm.  3-58)  or  less.  Smaller  coins  also  occur,  notably  the 
trihemiobol  of  13  grains  (grm.  0-86).  There  must  have  been 
some  simple  scheme  of  relations  of  value  between  the  coins 
of  Byblus  and  those  of  Aradus.  The  drachm  of  Byblus 
would  naturally  be  equated  with  the  tetrobol  of  Aradus,  and 
the  trihemiobol  of  Byblus  with  the  obol  of  Aradus. 

The  initial  dates  of  the  great  coinages  of  Sidon  and  Tyre 
are  in  dispute.  Nor  have  we  any  means  of  determining 
them,  except  by  a  consideration  of  style,  which  in  cities 
which  were  not  Greek  is  apt  to  mislead.  The  coins  of 
Sidon  which  bear  the  names  of  kings  who  may  be  with 
some  probability  identified,  belong  to  the  fourth  century ; 
but  coins  having  a  much  earlier  appearance  are  known  (PI. 
IX.  7).  M.  Babelon  makes  the  series  of  Sidon  begin  about 
475  b.c,  that  of  T}'re  about  470  b.c.  Mr.  Head  places  the 
coins  about  half  a  century  later.  Until  more  definite  data 
are  procured,  by  the  discovery  of  restrikings,  or  the  com- 
position of  hoards,  it  will  not  be  safe  to  base  arguments 
upon  the  supposed  dates  of  the  early  Sidonian  coins. 

There  is,  however,  one  important  line  of  connexion, 
if  it  can  be  established,  between  Sidon  and  Salamis  in 
Cyprus,  in  the  time  of  Evagoras  II,  king  of  the  latter  city. 
M.  Babelon  has  tried  to  show3  that  this  king  after  being 
defeated  in  Cyprus  was  awarded  the  kingship  of  Sidon  by 
the  Persian  king  Artaxerxes  Ochus  for  the  period  349-346, 
and  there  struck  coins  of  the  usual  Sidonian  types.4  These 
coins  are  of  a  comparatively  late  style ;  and  they  might 
fairly  be  used  as  an  argument  that  the  series  of  Sidon  must 


1  Anab.  ii.  20,  1.  *  B.  M.  Cat.  Phoenicia,  p.  lxvi. 

s  Tfaite,  ii.  2,  p.  590.  4  Compare  B.  if.  Cat.  Phoenicia,  p.  151. 


344 


COINS  OF  PHOENICIA  AND  AFRICA 


have  begun  a  century  earlier.  For  an  attempt  to  assign 
other  coins  to  known  kings  of  Sidon  I  must  refer  to  the 
above-mentioned  work  of  M.  Babelon. 

At  a  period  which  M.  Babelon  places  at  362  B.C.,  the  end 
of  the  reign  of  Strato  (Abdastoret)  II,  the  weight  of  the 
coins  falls  decidedly.     The  earlier  series  weigh : 


Two  shekels '  (4  drachms) 
Shekel  .... 
Half  shekel  .         .         . 
Quarter  shekel 
Sixteenth  of  shekel 


Coins  of  the  later  series  weigh 


Grains. 

Grammes. 

440 

28-32 

220 

14-16 

110 

7-08 

55 

3-54 

14 

0-88 

Grains. 

Grammes. 

400 

25-76 

200 

12-88 

100 

6-44 

50 

3-22 

12-5 

0-80 

Two  shekels . 
Shekel  . 
Half  shekel  . 
Quarter  shekel 
Sixteenth  of  shekel 


Mr.  Hill  makes  the  suggestion,2  which  is  by  no  means 
improbable,  that  this  fall  of  the  standard  may  have  been 
due  to  a  fall  in  the  comparative  value  of  gold,  a  fall  which 
was  in  fact  in  progress  in  the  Aegean  region  at  the  time. 
Taking  the  weights  as  above  (Mr.  Hill  places  them  some- 
what higher,  but  he  takes  exceptional  coins  as  the  standard), 
we  have  the  following  equations:  440  grains  of  silver  at 
13|  to  1  are  equivalent  to  33  grains  (grm.  2-14)  of  gold; 
400  grains  of  silver  at  12  to  1  are  equivalent  also  to 
33  grains  of  gold.  As  the  Phoenician  silver  standard  was 
originally  based  on  the  relation  of  the  bar  or  stater  of  silver 
to  the  bar  or  stater  of  gold,  and  as  gold  seems  to  have  been 
the  measure  of  value  in  Phoenicia,  these  equations  are  very 
probable.  If  we  accept  them,  four  of  the  double  shekels 
would  be  equivalent  roughly  to  the  daric  or  the  Athenian 


1  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  2,  p.  547.     Babelon  calls  the  drachm  the  shekel ;  Hill 
the  didrachm. 

2  B.  M.  Cat.  Phoenicia,  p.  cii. 


Chains. 

Grammes. 

214 

13-90 

54 

3-48 

11-10 

•70--60 

PHOENICIA  345 

gold  stater.  They  would  better  fit  in  with  the  Athenian 
gold  stater  of  135  grains  (in  fact  it  seldom  exceeds  133 
grains)  than  with  the  daric  of  130-128  grains;  but  no 
doubt  the  daric  was  the  governing  coin  in  Syria  at  the 
time.  There  is,  however,  some  difficulty  in  seeing  how 
a  fall  in  the  relation  of  gold  to  silver  could  take  place  in 
Phoenicia,  while  the  Persian  Empire  went  on  striking  gold 
and  silver  at  the  traditional  rates.  Mr.  Hill  also  observes 
that  six  drachms,  in  the  Athenian  silver  coinage,  would 
weigh  very  nearly  the  same  as  two  shekels  of  the  reduced 
standard. 

The  beginning  of  the  coinage  of  Tyre  is  assigned  by 
Mr.  Hill '  to  450  b.  c.  ;  by  M.  Babelon  to  470.  The  deno- 
minations are  : 

Shekel  (didrachm).     (PL  IX.  8) 
Quarter  shekel  ..... 
Twenty-fourth  of  shekel    . 

The  owl  which  figures  prominently  on  the  early  coins 
may  well  be  derived  from  the  owl  coins  of  Athens,  at  the 
time  in  the  zenith  of  their  fame ;  but  the  rest  of  the  types 
are  very  markedly  Egyptian  in  character. 

With  the  conquest  by  Alexander  the  issue  of  autonomous 
coins  by  the  cities  of  Phoenicia  comes  to  an  end;  but 
certain  classes  of  imitative  coins,  copies  of  Asiatic  or  Greek 
prototypes,  for  a  time  go  on.    (See  Chap.  XXI.) 

While  Aradus  and  Gebal,  in  the  north  of  Phoenicia,  are 
clearly  within  the  circle  of  Persian  influence,  Tyre  and 
Sidon  use  the  old  Phoenician  standard.  As  to  the  exact 
history  and  antiquity  of  this  standard  we  are  imperfectly 
informed.  Brandis  maintained,  with  considerable  proba- 
bility, that  it  corresponded  as  a  silver  standard  with  the 
ordinary  Babylonic  gold  standard.  I  have  above 2  set  forth 
the  equation,  260  grains  of  gold  (grm.  16-84),  at  the  rate  of 
13§  to  1,  are  equivalent  to  3,458  grains  of  silver,  or  15  shekels 
of  230  grains  (grm.  14-90).     This  silver  unit  of  230  grains 

1  B.  if.  Cat.  Phoenicia,  p.  cxxvi.  8  Chap.  I. 


346         COINS  OF  PHOENICIA  AND  AFRICA 

stands  midway  between  the  Phocaean  or  Chian  unit,  which 
is  somewhat  heavier,  and  the  Milesian  unit,  which  is  some- 
what lighter.  We  have  evidence  of  its  use  in  Phoenicia  in 
quite  early  times.  The  numismatic  evidence  fully  confirms 
its  antiquity.  It  was,  for  example,  in  use  in  the  islands  of 
Melos,  Carpathos,  and  Rhodes  in  the  sixth  century,  and  the 
results  of  excavation  at  Cameirus  in  Rhodes  show  that  this 
was  an  early  course  of  Phoenician  commerce.  Whether 
the  standard  of  Miletus  and  Ephesus  was  derived  from  it  is 
doubtful.  Its  adoption  at  Abdera  in  the  sixth  century  is 
a  striking  fact.1 

It  is  almost  certain  that  when  so  conservative  peoples  as 
those  of  Tyre  and  Sidon  issued  coins  they  would  strike 
them  on  an  ancient  standard. 

That  the  same  standard  was  also  ancient  in  Egypt  seems 
to  be  proved  by  the  issues  of  King  Ptolemy  I.  He  adopted 
for  his  silver  three  standards,  one  after  the  other ;  first  the 
Attic,  in  imitation  of  the  coinage  of  Alexander ;  second  the 
Rhodian,  with  a  view  no  doubt  to  convenience  in  commerce ; 
third,  the  old  Phoenician.  And  it  was  the  last  which  pre- 
vailed and  survived,  superseding  the  others,  down  to  the 
end  of  the  Ptolemaic  regime.  An  identical  standard  seems 
to  have  been  in  use  in  Egypt  even  under  the  Old  Empire ; 
for  we  have  records  of  bronze  rings  weighing  about  15 
grammes,  232  grains.2 

Dr.  Regling  has  shown,3  on  the  evidence  of  certain  gold 
coins  of  Demetrius  I  of  Syria,  which  bear  marks  of  value, 
that  in  the  second  century  b.c.  the  Ptolemaic  or  Phoenician 
drachm  was  equated  with  §  of  the  Attic  drachm.  And 
taking  the  Phoenician  drachm  at  56  grains,  and  the  Attic 
at  67  grains,  this  exactly  corresponds  to  the  proportional 
weights  of  the  two.  We  cannot,  however,  be  sure  how  far 
this  equation  was  generally  accepted,  or  how  far  it  ruled  at 
an  earlier  time  than  the  second  century. 

The  above  considerations  affect  the  attribution  of  some 

1  Above,  p.  191. 

2  E.  Meyer,  Kleine  Schriflen,  p.  95.  8  Klio,  1905,  p.  124. 


PHOENICIA  347 

coins  given  by  M.  Babelon  to  the  district  of  Gaza.     Among 

these  are  : 

1.  Obv.    Phoenician  fish-god.      Rev.   Lion   at  bay.      Weight, 

162-5  grains  (grm.  10-53).     (B.  T.  CXXIII.  7.) 

2.  Obv.  Winged  goat.      Rev.   Owl  facing.      Weight,   172-162 

grains  (grm.  1111-1046).     (B.  T.  CXXIII.  8.) 

Gaza  is  known  to  have  issued  many  imitations  of  Attic 
coins,  at  the  time  when  their  issue  ceased  at  Athens.1 
Their  weight  (like  their  types)  imitates  that  of  Athens. 
And  the  name  of  Gaza  appears,  according  to  the  reading  of 
M.  Six,  on  drachms  of  Attic  weight,  which  combine  the 
types  of  a  janiform  head  and  an  owl.2  But  the  staters 
above  mentioned  are  of  Persian  standard,  and  can  scarcely 
be  attributed  to  any  city  south  of  Aradus,  such  as  was  Gaza. 
Possibly,  as  M.  Six  held,  they  may  be  of  Cilicia. 

§  2.     Cakthage. 

Strange  to  say,  the  earliest  coins  which  can  be  attributed 
to  Carthage  belong  to  the  last  decade  of  the  fifth  century. 
It  was  on  the  occasion  of  the  great  invasion  of  Sicily  in 
410  that  the  Carthaginians  first  discovered  the  necessity  of 
a  coinage,  no  doubt  in  order  to  meet  the  demands  of  the 
numerous  mercenaries  then  employed.  It  is  characteristic 
of  the  race  that  they  met  this  demand,  not  by  striking  some 
fresh  and  distinctive  coins,  but  by  making  copies  more  or 
less  faithful  of  the  money  already  in  use  in  Sicily.  Mixed 
with  these,  however,  some  more  distinctive  types  make  their 
appearance,  the  horse's  head,  the  palm-tree,  and  a  female 
head  in  a  Persian  tiara  (PI.  IX.  9).  All  these  silver  coins 
followed  the  Attic  standard,  then  in  universal  use  in  Sicily ; 
and  the  great  mass  of  them  consisted  of  tetradrachms, 
though  the  didrachm,  the  drachm,  and  the  obol  appear  as 
well  as  the  litra  with  its  divisions.  They  were  struck 
without  doubt  largely  out  of  the  spoil  of  Selinus,  Gela,  and 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Phoenicia,  p.  cxliv ;  Babelon,  Perses  Achem.,  pp.  46,  47  ;  Traite, 
ii.  2,  pp.  642-3. 

s  Babelon,  Traite,  pp.  670,  &c. ;  cf.  Head,  Num.  Chron.,  1878,  p.  273. 


348         COINS  OF  PHOENICIA  AND  AFRICA 

other  Greek  cities.  The  date  of  these  imitative  coins  can 
be  fixed  with  certainty  by  means  of  hoards  of  money  found  in 
Sicily.  For  example,  the  West  Sicilian  hoard,  examined  by 
Professor  Salinas  and  Sir  A.  Evans,1  which  was  buried  at 
the  time  of  the  Carthaginian  invasion,  about  406  B.C.,  con- 
tained many  tetradrachms  of  this  class  which  were  fresh 
from  the  die,  together  with  the  coins  of  the  Sicilian  cities 
which  were  destroyed  in  the  course  of  the  invasion. 

Combined  with  these  silver  coins,  however,  were  issued 
gold  pieces  of  a  less  purely  imitative  kind.  The  earliest  of 
these  are : 

1.  Obv.  Head  of  Persephone.     Rev.  Prancing  horse.     Weight, 

118  grains  (grm.  7-64) ;  24  grains  (grin.  1-55).    (PI.  IX.  10.) 

These  coins  are  given  by  Evans  to  the  same  period  as  the 
imitative  silver.  Somewhat  later  are  the  following  gold 
coins : 

2.  Obv.    Head   of  Persephone.       Eev.    Palm-tree.      Weight, 

36  grains  (grm.  2-33). 

3.  Obv.  Palm-tree.      Rev.  Horse's  head.     Weight,  15-3  grains 

(grm.  0-99). 

The  gold  coins  of  Syracuse,  after  the  repulse  of  the 
Athenians,  were  of  the  weight  of  90,  45,  and  20  grains, 
equivalent  to  20,  10,  and  4  or  4^  silver  drachms.  But  the 
gold  coins  of  Carthage  do  not  seem  to  have  had  any  satisfac- 
tory relation  to  the  silver.  They  follow  an  entirely  different 
standard  from  that  of  Sicily,  or  indeed  from  any  Greek  gold 
standard.  What  that  standard  is,  it  is  hard  to  say ;  but  it 
is  used  for  the  later  gold  and  silver  coins  of  the  city. 
Mr.  Head  calls  it  the  Phoenician  standard,  with  a  drachm 
of  59  grains.2  But  if  we  turn  to  the  coins  of  Sidon  and 
Tyre  we  find  that  they  are  minted  on  a  standard  not  exceed- 
ing 55  grains  to  the  drachm.  The  Carthaginian  standard 
may,  however,  be  a  somewhat  heavier  variety  of  this,  in  use 
in  Africa  since   the   foundation   of  Carthage.      In  actual 

1  Syracusan  Medallions,  p.  160.  2  Historia  Numorum,  ed.  2,  p.  879. 


CARTHAGE  349 

weight  this  standard  closely  corresponds  with  the  Chian  or 
Rhodian. 

At  a  somewhat  later  time,  fixed  by  Mr.  Head  to  340  b.  c, 
Carthage  strikes  at  once  gold  and  electrum  coins  as 
follows : 

Obv.    Head  of  Persephone.      Bev.  Horse  standing.      Weight, 

145  grains  (grm.  9-39).     Gold. 
Obv.  Head  of  Persephone.     Bev.  Horse  and  palm-tree.   Weight, 

73  grains  (grm.  4-72).     Gold. 
Obv.    Head  of  Persephone.      Bev.  Horse  standing.      Weight, 

118  grains  (grm.  7-64).     Electrum. 
Obv.  Head  of  Persephone.     Bev.  Horse  and  palm-tree.  Weight, 

58  grains  (grm.  3*75).     Electrum. 
Obv.  Head  of  Persephone.     Bev.  Horse  looking  back.    Weight, 

27  grains  (grm.  1-74).     Electrum. 

Here  the  electrum  coins  are  of  the  same  weights  as  the 
earlier  gold,  and  belong  to  the  Phoenician  rather  than  the 
Greek  circle  of  commerce.  They  may  well  have  been 
equivalent  to  ten  or  twelve  times  their  weight  in  silver, 
whether  coined  or  uncoined.  The  later  gold  coins  are  in 
weight  £  of  the  electrum,  and  quite  unique  in  the  coinage 
of  the  period.  At  the  ratio  of  15  to  1,  they  would  be  equiva- 
lent to  10  silver  units  of  217  grains  ;  but  this  ratio  seems 
very  unlikely. 

It  would  thus  seem  that  Carthage  struck  on  two  different 
systems  at  the  same  time.  The  silver  money  struck  in  or 
for  Sicily  followed  the  Attic  standard ;  that  in  gold  or 
electrum,  struck  in  all  probability  mainly  for  home  use, 
followed  a  variety  of  the  Phoenician  standard.  The  rates 
of  exchange  of  the  two  series  against  one  another  remain  to 
be  determined.  The  large  silver  coins  bearing  the  name 
and  types  of  Carthage  are  later,  and  are  the  fruit  of  the 
silver  mines  of  Spain,  where  in  all  likelihood  they  were 
struck. 

I  shall  not  further  examine  the  coinage  of  Carthage.  It 
is  unfortunate  that  there  is  no  systematic  account  of  it  since 
Miiller's  Numism.  de  Vane.  Afrique  (1861).     It  would  be  a 


350         COINS  OF  PHOENICIA  AND  AFRICA 

fruitful  task  to  investigate  the  series  in  relation  to  the  con- 
temporary coins  of  Italy  and  Sicily. 

§  3.    Cyrene. 

"We  have  seen  in  a  previous  chapter  (XIII)  that  the  early 
silver  coinage  of  Cyrene  follows  a  standard  practically 
equivalent  to  that  of  Athens,  but  of  independent  and  of 
earlier  origin.  Some  of  the  smaller  coins,  however,  are 
regulated  by  the  drachm  of  Phoenicia. 

According  to  Mr.  Head,  it  was  at  the  time  of  the  expul- 
sion of  the  Battiad  kings  and  the  establishment  of  a  re- 
public, about  431  b.c,  that  a  light  variety  of  the  Phoenician 
standard  was,  in  the  case  of  the  larger  coins,  substituted  for 
the  Attic ;  and  gold  coins  were  issued  on  the  Attic  standard 
about  400  b.  c.  But  the  expulsion  of  the  Battiadae  cannot 
well  have  been  so  late  as  431,  seeing  that  the  last  of  the 
kings,  Arcesilaus  IV,  won  the  chariot-race  at  Delphi  in 
466  b.c.  The  date  of  450  is  more  probable.  Whether  the 
change  in  standard  of  the  silver  coins  took  place  then  can 
only  be  determined  by  a  consideration  of  the  style  of  the 
coins  themselves.  Mr.  E.  S.  G.  Robinson,  after  a  careful 
discussion,  is  disposed  to  date  the  transition  to  the  new 
standard  about  435  b.c.1  It  is  not  strange  that  the  new 
standard  adopted  at  Cyrene  should  be  practically  that  of 
Samos  (stater,  210  grains;  grm.  13-60)  for  two  reasons.  In 
the  first  place,  this  very  standard  had  long  been  in  use  for 
the  divisions  of  the  stater— drachms,  and  lesser  units.  And 
in  the  second  place,  there  had  always  been  a  close  connexion 
between  Cyrene  and  Samos,  as  is  shown  by  the  history  of 
Arcesilaus  III,  who  fled  to  Samos  when  he  was  expelled  from 
Cyrene,  and  in  that  island  collected  an  army  which  restored 
him  to  his  throne.  At  Samos  the  Samian  weight  for  coins, 
which  was  for  a  short  period  given  up  at  the  time  of  the 
Athenian  Conquest  of  439  b.c,  was  resumed  about  430  ;  and 
it  is  possible  that  on  that  occasion  the  people  of  Cyrene 
adopted  it  for  all  their  silver. 

1  Nam.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  87. 


CYRENE  351 

Contemporary  with  these  issues  of  silver  are  gold  coins  on 
the  same  standard.  The  earliest  of  these  is  a  drachm l  of 
somewhat  archaic  style.  (Obv.  Silphium  plant.  Rev.  Head  of 
bearded  Ammon :  weight,  53  grains  (grm.  3-43),  Paris.)  The 
half  or  hemidrachm,  and  the  quarter  or  trihemiobol  were 
issued  certainly  before  the  end  of  the  fifth  century.  The 
half  drachm  has  the  same  types  as  the  drachm  ;  the  quarter 
drachm  has  various  types,  especially  the  heads  of  Ammon 
and  Cyrene.  In  the  weight  of  the  quarter  drachm  (13-5 
grains,  grm.  0-87)  Sir  A.  Evans  sees  the  influence  of  Sicily, 
where  the  silver  litra  is  of  this  weight.  But  as  13-5  grains 
of  gold,  at  the  exchange  of  15  to  1.  are  equivalent  to  three 
Attic  drachms  of  silver  or  a  Samian  tetradrachm  in  silver, 
it  does  not  seem  necessary  to  go  further  to  justify  the 
weight. 

It  would  seem  then  that  Cyrene  was  the  first  of  all  cities 
outside  Persia  to  produce  a  regular  issue  of  gold  coins,  as 
distinguished  from  a  few  coins  issued  by  some  cities  in 
time  of  stress.  This  is  very  natural,  as  Egypt  was  one  of 
the  chief  sources  of  gold  in  the  ancient  world.  We  have 
already  seen  -  that  Cyrene  was  also  very  early  in  the  use  of 
a  silver  coinage. 

Besides  these  smaller  gold  coins,  we  find  at  Cyrene  an 
abundance  of  staters  of  Attic  weight.     (PL  IX.  11.) 

Opinions  as  to  the  date  of  these  gold  staters  differ  widely. 
Sir  A.  Evans,3  in  agreement  with  Dr.  L.  Miiller,  assigned 
them  to  a  period  before  415  B.C.,  and  regarded  them  as 
having  influenced  the  coinage  of  Syracuse  before  the  time 
of  Dionysius.  M.  J.  P.  Six,4  on  the  other  hand,  with  whom 
Holm  agrees,  gives  them  to  the  time  of  Magas,  280  b.  c,  and 
finds  in  the  enthroned  figure  of  Zeus  Ammon,  which  some 
of  them  bear,  a  copy  of  the  seated  Zeus  of  the  coins  of 
Alexander.  M.  Babelon,  also,  is  strongly  of  opinion  that  the 
gold  staters  are  later  than  Alexander.5    The  question  is  not 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  86.     Mr.  Robinson  would  date  this  coin  before  435. 

2  Above,  p.  218. 

3  Syracusan  Medallions,  p.  63. 

4  Num.  Chron,,  1897,  p.  223 ;  cf.  Holm,  Gesch.  Sic.,  iii,  p.  609. 
8  Traitt,  iii,  p.  1085. 


352         COINS  OF  PHOENICIA  AND  AFRICA 

one  to  be  easily  decided.  But  my  own  view  coincides  with 
that  of  Head  and  Mr.  Robinson,  that  the  coins  belong 
to  the  early  part  of  the  fourth  century,  and  are  contem- 
porary with  the  gold  staters  of  Athens.  Rhodes,  and  Lamp- 
sacus.  The  type  of  the  seated  Zeus  does  at  first  sight  remind 
us  of  the  silver  coins  of  Alexander ;  but  in  fact  that  type 
more  nearly  resembles  the  seated  Zeus  of  the  coins  of  the 
Persian  satraps  of  Cilicia,  which  belong  to  the  early  fourth 
century.  The  chariot  also,  which  is  a  common  type,  is 
nearer  to  the  chariots  on  the  fifth-century  coins  of  Sicily 
than  to  that  on  the  coins  of  Philip  of  Macedon. 

Contemporary  with  the  gold  staters  are  their  fractions, 
the  drachm,  and  hemidrachm  of  Attic  weight.  And  the 
older  gold  coinage  of  Samian  weight  seems  to  have  been 
continued.  M.  Babelon  publishes  one  gold  stater  of  this 
weight,1  110-5  grains  (grm.  7-16),  which  is  quite  exceptional. 
But  coins  of  lesser  denomination  are  common ;  and  as  the 
same  magistrates'  names  occur  on  them  which  we  find  on 
the  staters,  the  two  classes  of  coins  seem  to  have  been  con- 
temporary. We  have  the  eighth  of  a  stater  of  Samian 
standard  weighing  13-5  grains  (grm.  0-87). 

M.  Babelon  calls  the  standard  for  silver  in  use  in  the  fifth 
century  Milesian  (which  is  the  same  as  the  Samian),  and 
that  in  use  in  the  fourth  century  Rhodian.  But  in  fact  the 
coins  of  the  two  periods  are  in  weight  identical,  as  M.  Babelon 
himself  allows.2 

We  thus  have  at  Cyrene  precisely  the  opposite  arrange- 
ment to  that  at  Carthage.  At  Carthage  silver  was  struck 
on  the  Attic  standard,  gold  on  the  Phoenician.3  At  Cyrene 
gold  was  struck  on  the  Attic  standard,  silver  on  that  of 
Phoenicia.  Silver  didrachms  and  drachms  of  Attic  weight 
were,  however,  exceptionally  issued  before  the  middle  of 
the  fourth  century;  and  the  magistrates'  names  on  these 
are  in  some  cases  (OEY<t>EI  AEYS,  nOAl  AN OEYI)  identical 
with  those  which  occur  on  the  gold. 

»  Ibid.,  p.  1079. 

2  Compare  his  table  on  p.  1058  with  his  table  on  p.  1080. 

3  Syracusan  Medallions,  p.  63. 


CHAPTER    XVIII 

COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 
§  1.    Northern  Greece. 

In  a  previous  chapter  we  have  considered  the  origins  of 
coinage  in  Greece  Proper,  and  carried  down  its  history  to 
the  end  of  the  sixth  century  in  the  case  of  a  few  important 
cities,  Aegina,  Chalcis,  Eretria,  Corinth,  Athens,  Corcyra. 
But  the  Persian  War  did  not  make  a  clear  line  of  division 
in  the  coins  of  Greece  Proper,  as  it  did  in  Asia  and  Thrace. 
Nor  were  the  cities  of  Greece  Proper  subject,  as  were  those 
of  Asia,  to  the  domination  of  the  Athenian  Empire  and 
the  Athenian  coinage.  There  is  thus  usually  no  marked 
break  in  their  issues,  at  all  events  in  the  fifth  century. 
And  it  will  be  best  to  treat  in  the  present  chapter  of  the 
whole  of  the  issues  of  the  cities  of  Northern  Greece  and 
Peloponnesus  down  to  the  time  of  Alexander,  except  in  the 
case  of  the  great  cities  above  mentioned.  The  coins  of 
most  parts  of  Greece  Proper  give  few  data  for  metro- 
logical  inquiries.  From  Thessaly  to  Messene  they  follow, 
with  few  exceptions,  the  Aeginetan  standard.  But  there 
are  many  indications  of  historic  value  to  be  gained  from 
the  study  of  some  classes  of  these  coins. 

Thessaly  and  Epirus.  I  begin  with  Thessaly.  The  first 
city  of  Thessaly  to  issue  coin  was  Larissa,  the  city  of 
the  Aleuadae,  who  seem  to  have  obtained  a  primacy  in 
the  region  at  the  time  of  the  Persian  wars.1  It  was  about 
500  B.c.  when  these  issues  began.  They  were  followed  in 
the  fifth  century  by  those  of  many  other  cities,  Pharsalus, 
Pherae.  Scotussa,  Tricca,  and  others.  The  only  landmark 
in  the  Thessalian  series  is  furnished  by  the  occurrence  at 

1  Hdt.  vii.  6. 

1967  a  a 


354  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  B.C. 

Larissa  on  some  coins  of  the  name  Simus,  in  small  letters. 
It  seems  reasonable  to  regard  this  Simus  as  the  Aleuad 
who  was  made  Tetrarch  of  part  of  Thessaly  by  Philip  of 
Macedon  352-344  B.C.1  It  is,  however,  possible  that  the 
name  may  be  only  that  of  the  artist  who  made  the  die ; 
and  in  fact  we  hear  of  a  sculptor  named  Simus  at  Olynthus 
at  this  period.2  The  autonomous  silver  coins  of  Thessaly 
ceased  when  Thessaly  was  incorporated  with  Macedon  in 
344  B.C. 

Alexander  of  Epirus,  who  went  to  Italy  in  332  B.C.,  to 
aid  the  Greek  cities  against  the  Italians,  issued  gold  staters, 
which  take  their  place  among  the  coins  of  Tarentum,  and 
silver  didrachms : 

Obv.  Head  of  Zeus  crowned  with  oak.  Rev.  AAEZANAPOY 
TOY  NEOriTOAEMOY.  Thunderbolt,  Weight,  165 
grains  (grm.  10-69). 3     (B.  M.  XXII.  23.) 

As  the  weight  of  these  coins  is  the  same  as  that  of  con- 
temporary coins  of  Corcyra,  it  is  probable  that  they  were 
issued  in  Epirus. 

Of  the  same  weight  as  the  coins  of  the  Kings  of  Paeonia 
(p.  324)  are  the  barbarous  imitations  of  the  coins  of  Zacynthus 
struck  at  Damastium,  Pelagia,  and  other  Illyrian  cities  in 
the  middle  of  the  fourth  century : 4 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.  Rev.  AAMASTINHN.  Tripod-lebes. 
Weight,  206-188  grains  (grm.  13-34-12- 18). 

Of  these  coins,  rude  as  they  are,  still  more  barbarous 
imitations  were  current.  Strabo  mentions  silver  mines  at 
Damastium. 

It  may  be  doubted  whether  these  copies  are  due  to  the 
uncivilized  Thracian  and  Illyrian  peoples  of  the  district, 
or  to  the  Gauls,  who  took  advantage  of  the  removal  of 
the  Macedonian  armies  to  Asia  by  Alexander  to  occupy 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Thessaly  (Gardner),  p.  xxvi.  M.  Waddington  told  me  that  he 
accepted  this  attribution. 

2  Bull.  Corr.  Hell.,  xiv.  276.  s  B.  M.  Cat.  Thessaly,  p.  110. 
4  B.  M.  Cat.  Thessaly,  PI.  XVI,  p.  xlii. 


NORTHERN  GREECE  355 

most  of  the  country  to  the  north  and  west  of  the 
Macedonian  Kingdom. 

Very  exceptionally,  the  island  of  Pharos  on  the  Illyrian 
coast  struck  autonomous  silver  in  the  fourth  century : 

Obv.  Head  of  Zeus.     Rev.  Goat  standing.     Br.  Mus.     Weight, 
41  grains  (grm.  2-65). 1 

The  weight  is  that  of  the  coins  of  Corcyra  and  Dyrrhachium. 
The  type  of  the  goat  seems  to  be  derived  from  the  coins 
of  Paros.  A  colony  of  Parians  was  settled  in  the  island 
by  Dionysius  of  Syracuse  about  385  b.c.  ;  and  the  silver 
coin,  with  others  in  bronze,  was  probably  minted  at  that 
time. 

Boeotia.  Among  the  most  important  series  of  Greek 
coins,  from  the  historic  point  of  view,  is  that  of  Boeotia. 
The  coinage  of  Boeotia  throughout  reflects  the  history  of 
the  cities  of  the  district,  their  mutual  relationships,  their 
rise  and  fall.  The  series  has  received  much  attention  from 
numismatists,  having  been  carefully  worked  out,  first  by 
Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer,  then  by  Mr.  Head,  and  most  recently 
by  M.  Babelon.2 

It  is  unnecessary,  in  giving  a  resume  of  the  numismatic 
history  of  Boeotia,  to  specify  the  weights  of  the  several 
coins,  as  all  follow  the  Aeginetan  standard,  and  are  of 
full  weight. 

The  Boeotian  coins  bear  throughout,  on  the  obverse,  the 
shield  with  inlets  at  the  sides,  which  seems  to  be  derived 
from  a  Mycenaean  prototype,  and  is  commonly  called 
Boeotian.  This  uniformity  of  type  indicates  that  all 
through  their  history  the  Boeotian  cities  formed  a  monetary 
confederation.  The  cities,  however,  began  with  the  issue  of 
drachms  of  Aeginetan  standard,  bearing  the  league  type  of 
the  shield,  the  first  letter  of  the  name  of  the  issuing  city  being 
inserted  in  the  side-openings.  Thus  we  find  the  aspirate 
on  the  money  of  Haliartus,  and  T  or  TA  on  the  money  of 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Thesaaly,  p.  83. 

1  Imhoof-Blumer,  Nutnism.  Zeitschr.,  vols,  iii  and  ix  ;  Head,  Num.  Ckron., 
1881 ;  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  pp.  933-76,  ii.  3,  pp.  211-312. 

a  a  2 


356  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.o. 

Tanagra.  Thebes  seems  to  have  struck  coins  of  this  weight 
and  type,  but  uninscribed.  Somewhat  later,  perhaps  about 
550  b.c,  some  cities  struck  staters  or  didrachms,  with  the 
initial  of  the  city,  not  on  the  obverse,  but  on  the  reverse, 
in  the  midst  of  the  incuse.  In  this  series  A  represents 
Acraephium,  Q  Coroneia,  0  Haliartus,  M  Mycalessus, 
©  Pharae,  T  Tanagra,  ©  Thebes  (PI.  II.  14).  Divisions 
of  the  stater  were  also  struck. 

It  is  a  somewhat  further  development,  when  Thebes 
places  on  the  reverse  of  its  coins  the  letters  OEBA 
(archaic),  and  Tanagra  issues  staters  as  follows: 

1.  Obv.  TA.  Boeotian  shield.     Rev.  B  in  the  midst  of  an  incuse. 

{B.  M.  Cat.  Central  Greece,  PI.  IX.  17.) 

2.  Obv.   T  or  TA.    Boeotian  shield.      Rev.  B  O  I  in  the  com- 

partments of  a  wheel.     (PI.  X.  1.) 

3.  Obv.  T.  Boeotian  shield.     Rev.  T  A  in  the  compartments  of 

a  wheel.     {B.  M.  Cat,  PI.  IX.  14.) 

Nos.  1  and  2  prove  that  at  an  early  time  Tanagra  claimed 
to  represent  the  League.  The  occasion  has  been  disputed. 
Mr.  Head  thought  that  it  was  after  the  Persian  wars,  when 
Thebes  was  for  a  time  by  the  confederated  Greeks  debased 
from  its  predominant  position.  But  it  is  very  difficult  to 
bring  down  No.  1  at  all  events  as  late  as  480  b.  c. ;  and 
therefore  the  view  of  M.  Babelon  is  preferable.  He  con- 
siders the  date  of  coins  1-3  to  be  about  507  b.c.  He 
cites  tetradrachms  of  Attic  standard,  struck  at  Chalcis  in 
Euboea. 

1.  Obv.    f  (X)  on  Boeotian   shield.     Rev.  Wheel  in  incuse — 

square.     (Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  973.) 

2.  Obv.  Eagle  flying  holding  serpent  in  beak.     Rev.   t  A  A  in  the 

compartments  of  a  wheel.     {Ibid.,  p.  670.) 

Chalcis,  M.  Babelon  observes,  was  destroyed  by  the 
Athenians  in  507  b.c;  whence  both  these  coins  must 
precede  that  date.  And  the  occurrence  of  the  shield  on 
No.  1  and  the  precise  correspondence  of  the  reverse  of 
No.  2  with  the  coin  of  Tanagra,  proves  an  alliance  between 
the  Boeotian  and  the  Euboean  city.     Herodotus  does  not 


NORTHERN  GREECE  357 

say  that  the  Athenians  destroyed  the  city ; x  but  they  con- 
fiscated its  territory  and  so  far  dominated  it,  that  an 
alliance  with  the  Boeotians  after  that  date  is  improbable, 
whereas  there  was  an  alliance  before  it.  It  must  be 
observed  that  the  distance  between  Tanagra  and  Chalcis 
is  only  twelve  miles. 

There  is  also  an  early  coinage  of  Orchomenus  ;  but  as 
the  money  of  this  city  bears  a  different  type,  a  grain  of 
wheat,  and  as  it  is  only  of  the  denomination  of  an  obol,  or 
a  half  obol,  it  stands  apart.  This  coinage  may  go  on  until 
the  destruction  of  Orchomenus  by  Thebes  in  368  b.c.  It 
is  noteworthy  that  the  incuse  on  the  reverse  of  the  coins 
of  Orchomenus  copies  the  Aeginetan  incuse  closely,  and 
evidently  on  purpose. 

At  the  time  of  the  invasion  of  Xerxes  Thebes  medized ; 
and  when  the  Persian  army  was  repulsed,  the  city  had 
to  pay  for  its  frailty.  For  about  twenty  years  we  have 
no  coins  which  bear  the  name  of  Thebes.  It  is  a  difficult 
question  which  city  or  cities  took  its  place.  Tanagra 
between  479  and  its  destruction  by  Myronides  in  456 
would  seem  to  have  held  a  leading  position.  And  it  may 
well  be  that  some  of  the  coins  above  cited,  bearing  the 
joint  names  of  the  Boeotians  and  Tanagra,  may  belong  to 
this  period.  After  456  b.c,  the  Athenians  set  up  demo- 
cracies in  several  of  the  Boeotian  cities,  and  we  should 
have  expected  that  these  would  strike  coins.  We  find  such 
coins  at  Acraephium,  Coroneia,  Haliartus,  Tanagra,  and 
Thebes.    The  reverses  are : 2 

Acraephium.     AK.  Wine-cup. 
Coroneia.     KOPO.  Head  of  Medusa. 
Haliartus.     ARI.  Amphora. 
Tanagra.     T  A.  Fore-part  of  horse. 
Thebes.     ©E.  Amphora. 

About  the  middle  of  the  century  Thebes  begins  to 
recover  her  ascendancy;  and  after  her  victory  over  the 
Athenians   at   Coroneia  in  446,  entirely  monopolizes  the 

1  HtU-  v.  77,  vi.  100.  *  Num.  Chron.,  1881,  pp.  201-5. 


358  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

coinage  of  Boeotia  until  the  Peace  of  Antalcidas  in  387. 
The  staters,  which  are  numerous  and  in  a  fine  style  of  art, 
bear  the  name  of  Thebes  only,  not  that  of  the  Boeotians. 
The  types  are  usually  taken  from  the  legend  of  Heracles : 
one  of  them,  the  infant  Heracles  strangling  the  serpents, 
was  copied  in  the  cities  of  Asia  which  revolted  against 
Sparta  in  394  b.c,  a  fact  which  confirms  the  date  of  the 
Theban  coin  (PL  X.  3).  Some  of  the  Heracles  types  are, 
as  we  should  have  expected,  more  archaic  in  type  than  this, 
a  few  contemporary  or  later.  The  head  of  Dionysus  also 
occurs  (PI.  X.  2). 

Of  exactly  the  same  period,  394  b.c,  are  certain  small 
coins  of  pale  gold  or  electrum  : 

Obv.  Head  of  bearded  Dionysus,  ivy-crowned.  Rev.  OE.  Young 
Heracles  strangling  serpents.  Weight,  46-3  grains  (grm.  3) ; 
15-8  grains  (grm.  102).     (B.  T.  CCI.  1-5.) 

This  period  is  that  which  I  have  already  accepted  as  the 
date  of  the  earliest  issue  of  gold  staters  or  didrachms  at 
Athens,  the  earlier  issue  having  been  of  drachms  and 
smaller  denominations  only.  Mr.  Head  has  connected  this 
gold  issue  with  the  visit  to  Thebes  of  the  Ehodian  envoy 
Timocrates,  who  expended  the  equivalent  of  fifty  talents  of 
silver  on  behalf  of  the  Persian  Satrap  Tithraustes,  at  Thebes 
and  elsewhere,  in  the  promotion  of  an  anti-Spartan  alliance.1 
If  so,  the  gold  of  which  these  coins  were  made  was  Persian. 
But  considering  the  smallness  of  the  issue  we  may  well 
consider  it  as  money  of  necessity. 

Thebes  followed  the  Athenian  lead,  and  like  Athens 
struck  gold  on  her  accepted  silver  standard,  as  did  Pisa 
and  Sicyon  and  other  cities  which  used  the  Aeginetan 
weight.  As  the  coins  are  of  electrum,  it  is  probable  that 
the  old  Asiatic  relation  of  value  was  preserved,  electrum 
being  regarded  as  ten  times  as  valuable  as  silver. 

The  Peace  of  Antalcidas  seems  to  have  had  as  important 
effects  in  Boeotia  as  anywhere.  Many  of  the  cities  recom- 
menced their  coinage,  sometimes  with  types  more  distinctive 

1  Xenophon,  Hellenica,  iii.  5.  1. 


NORTHERN  GREECE  359 

than  of  old.  Haliartus  introduced  as  type  Poseidon  striking 
with  the  trident  (PI.  X.  4) ;  Orchomenus,  a  galloping  horse 
or  an  amphora ;  Tanagra,  the  fore-part  of  a  horse ;  Thespiae, 
a  head  of  Aphrodite.  The  above  cities  issued  didrachms, 
but  several  other  cities,  includiDg  Plataea,  were  content 
with  striking  fractional  money. 

The  League  or  Confederation  was  reconstituted  by 
Pelopidas  and  his  friends  about  379  B.C.,  and  not  long 
after  this  begins  the  series  of  staters  which  have  not  on 
them  the  name  either  of  the  Boeotians  or  of  any  city,  but 
only  that  of  a  magistrate ;  the  types,  Boeotian  shield  and 
amphora,  sufficiently  identifying  the  district  of  mintage. 
Perhaps  these  names  were  those  of  Boeotarchs,  some  of 
them,  such  as  Charopinus,  Androcleidas,  Epaminondas,  and 
(the  younger)  Ismenias,  being  well  known  to  history. 
Bronze  coins  are  contemporary  with  these  issues  in  silver, 
and  bear  the  same  names. 

After  the  victory  of  Philip  of  Macedon  over  Thebes  in 
338  b.  c,  the  city  naturally  lost  its  pre-eminence.  It  was 
the  policy  of  Philip  to  restore  the  cities  which  Thebes  had 
destroyed,  Orchomenus,  Thespiae  and  Plataea.  A  fresh 
Boeotian  confederation  was  formed,  probably  under  the 
leadership  of  Thespiae.  The  federal  staters  and  hemi- 
drachms  are  continued,  but  in  the  place  of  the  name  of  a 
Boeotarch,  they  have  only  the  inscription  BO  in.  The 
cities  of  the  League  also  issue  bronze  coins  of  uniform 
pattern,  bearing  on  one  side  the  shield,  on  the  other  the 
first  letters  of  the  name  of  the  issuing  city,  API  for  Haliartus, 
OE£  for  Thespiae,  AEB  for  Lebadeia.  OPX  for  Orchomenus, 
flAA  for  Plataea,  TAN  for  Tanagra.  The  absence  of  the 
name  of  Thebes  is  noteworthy.  This  coinage  may  have 
continued  until  315  b.  c,  when  coins  began  to  be  issued  at 
Thebes  by  Cassander  with  the  types  of  Alexander. 

'  It  is  interesting ',  Mr.  Head  remarks,1  '  to  observe  how, 
as  history  repeats  itself,  the  coinage  reflects  the  history. 
There  are  three  distinct  periods  in  which  the  influence  and 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1881,  p.  250. 


360  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

importance  of  Thebes  had  sunk  to  the  lowest  point :  first, 
after  the  battle  of  Plataea,  479  b.c.  ;  second,  after  the  Peace 
of  Antalcidas,  387  b.c.  ;  and  third,  after  the  battle  of  Chae- 
roneia,  338  b.c  On  each  of  these  three  several  occasions 
a  considerable  portion  of  the  currency  appears  to  have  been 
issued  in  the  name  of  the  Boeotians,  while  the  coinage  of 
Thebes  itself  either  sank  for  the  time  being  into  insignifi- 
cance or  ceased  to  be  issued  altogether.' 

Locris.  The  inhabitants  of  the  district  of  Locris  were  not 
homogeneous.  The  people  of  Western  Locris,  the  Ozolian 
Locrians,  whose  capital  was  Amphissa,  seem  to  have  been 
not  far  removed  from  barbarism.1  They  struck  no  coins 
before  the  second  century.  Eastern  Locris  consisted  of  two 
districts:  the  northernmost  was  called  Hypocnemidian, 
because  it  lay  under  Mount  Cnemis ;  its  chief  places  were 
Scarphea  and  Thronium ;  the  southernmost  was  dominated 
by  the  city  of  Opus,  which  sometimes  dominated  the  whole 
of  Eastern  Locris. 

In  Locris  we  may  trace,  if  not  quite  so  clearly,  the  out- 
lines of  a  similar  history  to  that  of  Boeotia.  The  earliest 
coins  of  the  district  which  we  possess  are  the  obols  and 
trihemiobols  bearing  only  the  letter  O  with  an  amphora, 
and  the  half  obols  bearing  as  type  half  an  amphora,  and  on 
the  reverse  the  letter  A.  These  were  struck  at  Opus  :  they 
are  given  by  M.  Babelon  to  the  time  before  456  b.c,  when 
the  people  of  Opus,  with  the  Corinthians  and  Thebans,  were 
allies  of  Aegina.  There  are  also  small  coins  of  the  fifth 
century  struck  at  Thronium.  After  the  Peace  of  Antalcidas, 
387  b.c,  when  federal  issues  ceased  generally,  and  their 
place  was  taken  by  the  coins  of  separate  cities,  we  find 
didrachms  or  staters  of  Aeginetan  standard  issued  by  the 
city  of  Opus,  and  bearing  the  inscription  OPONTinN 
(PI.  X.  5).  Their  reverse  type  is  Ajax,  the  son  of  Oileus, 
in  attitude  of  combat. 

After  the  battle  of  Chaeroneia,  338  B.C.,  this  inscription 
gives  place  to  AOKPHN  with  a  monogram  which  may  be 

1  Thuc.  i.  5. 


NORTHERN  GREECE  361 

resolved  into  YPO  (Hypocnemidian).  Here,  as  in  Boeotia, 
the  name  of  the  tribe  takes  the  place  of  that  of  a  city  after 
Chaeroneia,  though  our  historic  evidence  is  not  so  clear  as 
in  the  case  of  Thebes.  The  coins  which  bear  the  name  of 
Opus,  we  may  observe,  have  a  close  resemblance  to  those  of 
Syracuse,  especially  to  the  types  of  the  engraver  Evaenetus 
(compare  PL  X.  5  with  XI.  9).  The  figure  of  Ajax  seems 
to  be  a  copy  of  that  of  Leucaspis  on  the  Syracusan  money. 

Phocis.  The  coins  of  Phocis  and  Delphi  bear  traces  of 
the  age-long  dispute  between  the  two  communities  for  the 
control  of  the  Delphic  sanctuary  and  festival. 

The  earliest  coins  of  Phocis  which  bear  the  name  of  the 
tribe,  for  there  are  earlier  uninscribed  coins  (B.  M.  V.  19), 
seem  to  begin  about  480  b.  c. 

Obv.  <t>0  oi-<t>OKI.  Bull's  head.  Rev.  Head  of  Nymph.  Triobols, 
obols,  and  hemiobols  of  Aeginetan  standard.  (B.  T.  CCV. 
1-9.) 

Early  in  the  fifth  century,  on  some  unknown  occasion,  the 
Phocian  city  of  Neon  issued  obols : 

Obv.  4>0.  Bull's  head  facing.  Rev.  NE.  Fore-part  of  boar. 
(B.  T.  CCVI.  11.) 

When  this  coin  was  struck,  Neon  must  have  claimed  the 
hegemony  in  Phocis.  Lilaea  also  struck  triobols  of  the 
regular  Phocian  types,  but  bearing  the  letters  A I  instead 
of  <D0. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  Phocian  coins  may  have 
been  struck  in  connexion  with  the  recurring  festival  of  the 
tribe  at  Daulis.  But  the  Delphic  festival,  of  which  the 
Phocians  exercised  control  from  448  until  the  Peace  of 
Nicias  in  421  b.  c,  would  seem  a  more  likely  occasion.  In 
that  case  we  should  have  a  parallel  to  the  coins  issued  in 
connexion  with  the  Olympic  festival,  and  bearing  the  name 
of  the  people  of  Elis.  This  view  seems  to  be  corroborated 
by  the  cessation  of  the  coins  (to  judge  by  their  style)  about 
421  b.  c,  when  a  full  autonomy  was  secured  to  the  people 
of  Delphi.1      In  the  fourth  century  coinage  bearing  the 

1  Thue.  v.  18. 


362  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

name  of  the  people  of  Phocis  is  resumed,  but  the  occa- 
sion is  not  certain.  In  the  years  357-346  b.c.  the  sacred 
site  of  Delphi  was  occupied  by  the  Phocians  under  their 
successive  generals,  Philomelus,  Onymarchus,  Phayllus,  and 
Phalaecus.  Diodorus '  tells  us  that  Philomelus  did  not  at 
first  seize  the  treasures  laid  up  on  the  sacred  site ;  but  later, 
being  hard  pressed  by  the  Boeotians,  he  did  so.  Onymarchus 
continued  the  process,  and  struck  abundant  coins  in  gold 
and  silver  to  pay  troops  and  bribe  neighbouring  states,  as 
did  his  successor,  Phayllus,  by  whom  the  magnificent  gifts 
of  Croesus  in  gold  and  electrum  were  melted  down.  We 
should  have  expected  gold  and  silver  coins  belonging  to 
the  Phocian  occupation  of  Delphi  to  have  been  abundant, 
especially  as  the  statements  of  Diodorus  are  confirmed  by 
Plutarch,  who  says  that  the  Phocian  gold  and  silver  was 
dispersed  through  all  Greece.  Thus  to  conjecture  what  be- 
came of  the  Phocian  Delphic  money  is  a  difficult  problem. 
No  doubt,  as  being  the  fruit  of  sacrilege,  the  Greeks  would 
melt  it  down  whenever  they  could.  Plutarch  tells  us 2  that 
the  Opuntians  collected  some  of  the  silver  and  made  of  it 
a  hydria,  which  they  dedicated  to  Apollo.  Notwithstanding 
such  considerations,  the  total  disappearance  of  the  money 
of  Onymarchus  and  Phayllus  is  one  of  the  puzzles  of  numis- 
matics. In  fact,  the  only  coins  which  we  can  with  certainty 
connect  with  the  Phocian  generals  are  small  pieces  of 
bronze,  bearing  the  names  of  Onymarchus  and  Phalaecus. 
Besides,  there  are  known  small  silver  coins  : 

Obv.   Laureate  head    of  Apollo.       Rev.    <t>H.    Lyre  in  laurel 

wreath.     Weight,  74  grains  (grm.  4-77) :  with  hole  in  it. 

(B.  T.  CCV.  11,  12.) 
Obv.  Bull's  head  facing.    Rev.  <J>fl.  Head  of  Apollo,  laureate. 

Weight,  43-40  grains  (grm.  2-80-2-60) ;    14  grains  (grm. 

0-90).     (B.  T.  CCV.  13,  14.) 

These  coins  are  attributed  by  M.  Babelon 3  to  the  time  of 
the  occupation  of  Delphi  by  the  Phocians,  but  it  is  difficult 

1  Diod.  xvi.  24-36. 

2  De  Pythiae  oraculis,  xvi.  s  Traite,  iii,  p.  827. 


NORTHERN  GREECE  363 

to  believe  that  these  violators  would  have  had  the  effrontery 
to  use  as  type  the  head  of  the  deity  whom  they  had  so 
scandalously  robbed.  One  is  rather  disposed  to  attribute 
them  to  339  b.  c,  when  Athens  and  Thebes  reconstituted 
the  Phocian  League  and  rebuilt  some  of  the  cities. 

Contemporary  with  these  coins  are  the  notable  didrachms 
and  drachms  which  bear  the  names  of  the  Amphictions : 

Obv.  Head  of  Demeter,  veiled.  Rev.  AM0IKTIONX1N.  Apollo 
seated  with  lyre  and  laurel-branch.  Weight,  184-190 
grains  (grm.  11-92-12-35) ;  also  the  drachm.     (PL  X.  6.) 

Obv.  Head  of  Demeter,  veiled.  Rev.  Omphalos  entwined  by 
serpent.     Weight,  44  grains  (grm.  2-82).     (B.  T.  CCVI.  6.) 

M.  Bourguet  has  shown  that  there  was  exactly  at  this  time 
a  renovation  of  the  coinage.1  The  financial  Board  of  the 
temple  in  338  b.c.  introduces  a  distinction  between  the  old 
coinage,  iraXaiov,  and  the  new,  kcllvov  or  tcaivbv  'AfMpiKTvo- 
vikov.  The  standard  of  both  coinages  is  the  Aeginetan. 
The  Amphictionic  coin  was  struck  out  of  the  tribute  which 
the  people  of  Phocis  after  their  defeat  were  compelled  to 
pay  to  the  Delphic  sanctuary.  In  338  they  had  already  paid 
270  talents  in  the  old  money,  which  was  no  doubt  melted 
down  and  reissued. 

Delphi  is  disappointing.  We  should  have  expected  that, 
as  on  the  occasion  of  the  Olympic  festival  abundant  coins 
were  struck  by  the  people  of  Elis,  so  at  Delphi  large  coins 
would  be  abundant.  But  we  have  only  small  pieces,  with 
two  exceptions,  which  will  presently  be  considered.  These 
small  pieces  work  in  with  those  of  Phocis  in  a  curious  way : 
the  triobol,  obol,  and  hemiobol  being  Phocian,  while  the  tri- 
hemiobol  (1§  obol), the  tritartemorion  {%  obol),  and  the  quarter 
obol  are  Delphic.2  All  are  of  Aeginetan  weight.  Their 
date  is  not  certain,  but  they  have  an  archaic  air.  A  few  may 
be  later  than  421,  but  most  of  them  would  be  previous  to 
448,  when  Athens  placed  the  presidency  of  the  festival  in 
the  hands  of  the  Phocians. 

1  Administration  financiere  du  sanctuaire  pythique,  p.  90. 
8  B.  M.  Cat.  Central  Greece,  p.  xxxii. 


364  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

The  exceptions  are : 

1.  Obv.  AAA<PlKON  (archaic).  Two  rams'  heads  and  two  dol- 

phins.      Rev.    Four   deep   incuses,   in    each   a    dolphin.1 
Weight,  276  grains  (grm.  17-88).     (B.  T.  XLII.  16.) 

2.  Obv.  No  inscription.     Eam's  head  ;  beneath,  dolphin.    Rev. 

Incuse  square,  quartered  ;  in  each  quarter,  cross.    Weight, 
186-5  grains  (grm.  1208).     (B.  T.  XLII.  19.) 

These  coins  are  of  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century,  or  little 
later.  The  second  is,  naturally,  an  Aeginetan  didrachm. 
The  first  is  too  heavy  to  be  an  Attic  tetradrachm :  can  it 
be  an  Aeginetan  tridrachm,  a  denomination  elsewhere  un- 
known? It  is  noteworthy  that  this  coin  must  have  been 
issued  at  about  the  time  when  Peisistratus  raised  the  weight 
of  the  Attic  tetradrachm. 

As  a  compensation  for  the  jejuneness  of  the  coinage  of 
Delphi,  the  Delphic  inscriptions  furnish  us  with  valuable 
information  as  to  the  relations  in  exchange  of  the  Aeginetan 
and  Attic  standards  in  Phocis.  In  the  temple  accounts  of 
the  fourth  century  the  sums  of  money  acquired  in  Attic  and 
in  Aeginetan  coin  are  kept  apart.  Yet  they  must  sometimes 
have  been  added  together ;  and  the  officials  made  this  easy 
by  the  adoption  of  the  Attic  mina,  which  consisted,  of  course, 
of  100  Attic  drachms,  and  which  was  regarded  as  consisting 
of  70  Aeginetan  drachms.2 

It  would  seem  then  that  at  Delphi  an  Attic  drachm  was 
regarded  as  normally  equivalent  to  T7&  of  an  Aeginetan 
drachm/5  This  fairly  agrees  with  the  respective  weights  of 
the  two.  We  have  here  definite  inscriptional  evidence  of 
such  adjustments  in  the  normal  values  of  coins  of  different 
kinds  as  I  have  supposed  to  exist  in  many  places.  There 
must  everywhere  have  been  some  generally  accepted  relation 
between  the  staters  dominant  in  the  district  and  other  coins 


1  Rev.  numismalique,  1869,  p.  150  ;  cf.  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  993.  M.  Babelon, 
by  an  oversight,  gives  No.  2  the  same  inscription  as  No.  1. 

2  T.  Reinach,  VHistoire  par  ks  monnaies,  p.  100.  This  equation  recognized  in 
the  time  of  Aristotle  may  account  for  what  he  says  as  to  the  Solonic  reform 
(p.  147). 

3  Bourguet,  Administr.  financiere  du  sanduaire  pythique,  p.  18. 


NORTHERN  GREECE  365 

which  circulated  there.  In  Delphi  the  local  standard  was 
that  of  Aegina,  but  Attic  money  also  was  largely  used. 

But  this  normal  equivalence  was  of  course  subject  every- 
where to  an  agio  or  commission  on  exchange,  according  to 
the  temporary  demand  for  one  class  of  coin  or  the  other. 
Of  this  agio  we  find  examples  in  the  Delphic  accounts.1  In 
certain  transactions  recorded  a  commission,  iTriKaraXXayrj, 
is  mentioned.  In  some  cases  the  Attic  drachm  was  regarded 
as  equal  to  |  of  an  Aeginetan  drachm;  sometimes,  but 
apparently  only  in  small  transactions,  as  §  of  it. 

The  Delphic  treasurers  on  one  occasion  borrow  190  darics, 
in  order  to  make  gold  crowns,  and  they  record  a  profit  on  the 
transaction  of  95  staters,  that  is,  one  Aeginetan  drachm 
per  daric2:  this  is  curious,  because  in  this  purchase  the 
treasurers  were  the  seekers,  not  the  sought,  so  that  their 
profit  is  the  more  notable.  On  another  occasion,  when 
the  treasurers  had  to  pay  to  the  executive  20  Aeginetan 
talents,  they  enter  in  their  accounts  only  a  payment  of 
18|  talents,  making  a  profit  (emKaTaXXayrj)  of  1^  talents. 

Euboea.  Euboea  recovered  its  liberty  in  411  b.  c,  after 
which  for  some  years  a  federal  coinage  was  issued,  the  types 
of  which  indicate  Eretria  as  the  mint-city  : 

Obv.  Cow  reclining.  Rev.  EYB.  Head  of  nymph  Euboea. 
Weight,  177-184  grains  (grm.  1145-11-94).  (B.  T. 
CXCVII.  17,  18.) 

These  are  didrachms  of  Aeginetan  standard,  the  adoption 
of  which  in  Euboea  is  a  notable  fact,  though,  as  the  neigh- 
bouring Boeotia  used  this  standard,  it  is  not  contrary  to  all 
probability. 

The  confederacy,  however,  recurred  to  the  Attic  standard, 
probably  about  394  B.C.,  the  date  of  Conon's  victory  at 
Cnidus: 

Obv.  Head  of  Nymph.  Rev.  Cow  standing :  inscription  EYB 
or  EYBOI.  Weight,  249-264  grains  (grm.  16-10-17-7). 
(B.  T.  CXCVII.  20-22.) 

1  Bourguet,  op.  cii.,  p.  20.  *  Bull.  Corr.  Hell.,  xx,  p.  464. 


366  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

Obv.  EYB  or  EYBOI.    Head  of  Nymph.     Bev.  Head  of  cow.  ; 
Weight,  61-65  grains  (grm.  3-98-4-21).     (B.  T.  CXCVII. 
24.) 

These  are  clearly  tetradrachms  and  drachms  of  full  Attic 
weight,  and  show  the  revival  of  Athenian  influence.  But 
after  a  few  years,  either  at  the  time  of  the  Peace  of  Antal- 
cidas  (387  b.  c.)  or  at  that  of  the  congress  at  Delphi  (369  b.  a), 
the  cities  of  Chalcis,  Carystus,  and  Histiaea  resumed  the 
issue  of  civic  coins,  drachms  of  a  somewhat  reduced  Attic 
weight,  about  56-59  grains  (grm.  3-60-3-80).  Carystus  also 
struck  didrachms  on  the  same  standard.  That  the  lowering 
of  the  standard  was  due  to  the  influence  of  Philip  of  Macedon 
who  used  the  Phoenician  (Abderite)  standard  is  improbable, 
as  the  coins  seem  earlier  than  his  time. 

A.  Chalcidian  drachm  of  this  period  bears  a  very  interest- 
ing counter-mark,  the  letters  l  +  N  ('I\p)  and  a  lyre.1  We 
cannot  hesitate  to  regard  this  coin,  as  does  M.  Babelon,  as 
marked  for  circulation  at  Ichnae  in  Chalcidice,  probably  in 
the  dearth  of  the  usual  civic  coins,  when  Philip  of  Macedon 
was  at  war  with  the  Chalcidian  League. 

Athens.  There  is  not  much  to  be  said  as  to  the  coinage 
of  Athens  in  the  fourth  century.  I  have  already  given  some 
account  of  the  issue  of  gold  staters  and  fractions  about 
394  b.  c.  The  silver  coinage  of  the  period  after  394  is  in 
style  very  similar  to  the  gold.  It  went  on  to  the  time  of 
Alexander  and  the  Lamian  war.  Head  assigns  a  special 
class  of  tetradrachms  which  have  on  the  reverse  a  subsidiary 
type  beside  the  owl  (abucranium,prow,  rudder,  trident,  &c.) 
to  the  period  339-322 ;  but  this  is  a  mere  division  for  con- 
venience, for  there  is  no  reason  to  connect  the  introduction 
of  a  subsidiary  type  with  the  battle  of  Chaeroneia. 

What  is  quite  clear  is  that  Athens  did  not  in  the  time  of 
the  Second  Confederacy,  after  378  b.  c,  make  any  attempt  to| 
stop  the  coinage  of  the  allied  cities,  or  to  substitute  herj 
coins  for  theirs.  The  allies  had  been  taught  by  experience, 
not  to  submit  to  any  dictation  from  Athens ;  and  though! 

1  Traite,  iii,  p.  186. 


NORTHERN  GREECE  367 

the  city  after  400  b.  c.  rapidly  recovered  its  power,  it  did 
not  again  acquire  a  dominating  position. 

"When  the  Athenian  coinage  of  the  older  style  came  to  an 
end,  we  find  in  several  districts  of  Asia  imitations  intended 
to  take  its  place  and  continue  its  vogue.  Some  of  these, 
struck  at  an  uncertain  mint,  bear  the  name  of  the  Persian 
Satrap  Mazaeus,  and  must  have  been  issued  during  the  cam- 
paigns of  Alexander.  Others  seem  to  be  later,  and  reach  us 
from  Egypt,  Persia,  and  even  India.  As  the  weight  of  the 
Attic  tetradrachms  and  of  those  of  Alexander  was  the 
same,  the  two  species  of  coins  could  conveniently  circulate 
together. 

After  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  the  issues  of 
bronze,  which  has  been  intermitted  after  the  experiment  of 
the  fifth  century  (above,  p.  295),  were  resumed.  Bronze  money 
was  also  struck  at  Eleusis. 

Aegina.  The  coinage  of  Aegina  does  not  give  us  very  clear 
indications  of  date.  We  know  the  history  of  the  island,  and 
have  to  fit  the  coins  to  that  history  by  their  style.  But  the 
conservative  types,  the  tortoise  and  the  incuse-square,  do 
not  give  clear  stylistic  data.  It  is,  however,  probable  that 
numismatists  generally  are  right  in  supposing  that  the 
change  of  type  from  a  turtle  to  a  land  tortoise  (B.  M.  VI.  29, 
XIII.  24)  took  place  about  480  b.  c.  And  M.  Babelon  is 
probably  right  in  maintaining  that  after  the  Athenian  con- 
quest of  Aegina  in  456  b.  c.  the  people  of  the  island  issued 
no  more  staters,  but  only  drachms  and  triobols,  the  staple  of 
the  currency  being  supplied  by  the  owls  of  Athens. 

In  431  b.  c.  the  Aeginetans,  having  revolted  against 
Athenian  domination,  were  expelled  from  their  island  by 
Pericles,  and  struck  no  more  coin  until  they  were  restored 
to  it  by  Lysander,  after  which  they  resumed  the  issue  of 
staters  and  fractions  of  the  stater  on  their  old  standard. 
The  bronze  coins  of  Aegina  (type,  two  dolphins)  belong  to 
this  latter  period  only.  The  whole  coinage  seems  to  have 
come  to  an  end  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century, 
perhaps  in  consequence  of  fresh  pressure  from  Athens. 
Megara.   The  next  place  which  presents  us  with  problems 


368  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

is  Megara.  Strangely  enough,  unless,  as  M.  Svoronos  sug- 
gests, some  of  the  early  didrachms  of  Attic  weight  assigned 
to  Euboea  are  really  of  Megara,  that  city  strikes  no  coins 
until  early  in  the  fourth  century  (B.  T.  CXCIV.  6-10). 

1.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.     Rev.  Lyre.     Weight,  122  grains  (grm. 

7-90). 

2.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.  Rev.  Five  crescents.    Weight,  50  grains 

(grm.  3-24)  ;  another,  46  grains  (grm.  2-96). 

3.  Obv.    Head    of    Apollo.     Rev.     Three    crescents    with    H. 

Weight,  23  grains  (grm.  1-49). 

4.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.      Rev.  Lyre.      Weights,    18-2  grains 

(grm.   1-18) ;    10-2  grains  (grm.   0-66) ;    4-2  grains  (grm. 
0-27). 

Mr.  Head  gives  up  the  question  to  what  standard  these 
coins  belong.  According  to  all  analogy,  the  five  crescents 
should  indicate  five  units,  and  the  three  crescents  three 
units.  If  the  coins  are  somewhat  under  normal  weight 
(and  they  are  indeed  somewhat  worn  down),  No.  1  might 
be  an  Attic  didrachm,  and  No.  2  a  pentobol  (normal, 
56  grains) ;  could  No.  3  be  a  triobol  of  the  same  standard 
and  the  coins  under  No.  4  be  the  diobol,  obol  and  hemiobol  ? 

This  seems  to  me  the  most  reasonable  view.  The  staters 
of  Athens  would  be  used  in  all  large  payments.  But  for 
small  transactions,  local  coins  might  be  from  time  to  time 
struck ;  and  there  is  no  reason  why  they  should  be  of  full 
weight,  being  intended  only  for  local  use. 

Coin  No.  2  seems  to  have  double  marks  of  value,  the  five 
crescents  indicating  that  it  is  a  pentobol,  and  the  H  that 
it  is  a  half  drachm  of  another  standard.  An  Attic  pentobol 
should  weigh  55  grains,  and  an  Aeginetan  hemidrachm 
48  grains.  The  coin  is  actually  between  these  limits  ;  but 
that  the  intention  was  that  it  should  pass  for  one  or  the 
other  of  these  does  not  appear  probable.  Coin  No.  3 
should  be  a  triobol ;  and  it  is  actually  almost  of  the  weight 
of  a  Corinthian  triobol  (22-5  grains).  It  is,  however,  to  be 
noted  that  there  is  no  definite  evidence  that  either  the 
Aeginetan  or  the  Corinthian  standard  was  ever  in  use  at 


CORINTH  AND  COLONIES  369 

Megara :  hence  the  best  view  on  the  whole  is  that  the  coins 
of  the  city  follow  the  Attic  standard. 


§  2.     Corinth  and  Colonies. 

The  history  of  Corinth  during  the  period  480-330  b.c. 
consists  of  a  constant  struggle,  not  always  successful,  with 
Athens  on  one  side  and  Corcyra  on  the  other.  Before  480 
the  predominance  of  Aegina  had  driven  Corinth  into 
friendliness  towards  Athens.  But  after  the  Persian  wars, 
and  especially  after  the  fall  of  Aegina,  the  Corinthians 
came  more  and  more  to  see  that  the  commercial  supremacy 
in  Greece  lay  between  them  and  Athens.  Of  Corinthian 
commerce  towards  the  east  we  hear  very  little ;  probably 
it  scarcely  existed  in  the  time  of  the  Athenian  Empire. 
And  Corinthian  influence  towards  the  west  seems  to  have 
been  in  a  diminishing  course  until  the  time  of  the  fatal 
Athenian  expedition  against  Syracuse,  after  which  it  again 
increases. 

The  restrikings  of  early  coins  of  Corinth  in  the  cities 
of  South  Italy,  of  which  I  have  above  spoken  (Chap.  XI), 
sufficiently  show  that  the  money  of  Corinth  was  familiar 
there  down  to  480  b.c.  or  later.  But  the  case  seems  to  have 
been  different  in  Sicily.  For  Riccio,  in  describing  finds 
of  fine  fifth-century  coins  of  Sicily  made  near  Rhegium,1 
speaks  of  coins  of  Athens  of  the  old  style  as  found  with 
them,  but  not  of  coins  of  Corinth.  Sir  A.  Evans  gives 
an  account  of  a  hoard  found  in  West  Sicily  and  buried 
about  400  b.c.,2  in  which  he  records  that  two  tetradrachms 
of  Athens  (of  fine  archaic  style)  were  found  with  the 
hoard,  and  no  coins  of  Corinth,  but  several  pegasi  of 
Leucas  of  early  class,  that  is,  probably,  belonging  to  the 
time  500-450  b.c.  In  the  Santa  Maria  hoard,  buried  about 
380  b.c,  there  were  two  Athenian  tetradrachms,  but  no 
Corinthian  coins.3 

1  Ann.  delV  Inst,  1854,  p.  xl. 

2  Syracusan  Medallions  and  their  Engravers,  p.  167. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  18. 

1957  B  b 


370  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

Thus  is  established  a  fact  of  some  importance,  the  pre- 
dominance of  the  Athenian  coinage  in  Sicily  and  of  the 
Corinthian  coinage  in  South  Italy  in  the  period  550- 
420  b.c.  The  exceptions  may  be  held  to  prove  the  rule. 
The  only  coins  of  Sicily  which  seem  to  show  Corinthian 
influence,  the  didrachms  of  that  standard  struck  at  Zancle, 
Himera,  and  Naxos  in  the  latter  part  of  the  sixth  century, 
are,  as  has  been  shown,  really  offshoots  from  the  South 
Italian  coinage,  and  the  result  of  the  influence  of  Cumae. 
And  the  only  Italian  coins  which  belong  to  the  Attic 
sphere  of  influence  are  those  of  Thurii,  which  city  was 
one  of  the  Periclean  colonies,  and  those  of  Rhegium,  which 
city  was  almost  Sicilian.  The  line  of  conflict  between  the 
two  influences  passes  through  the  straits  of  Messina ;  to  the 
north  of  that  line  we  have  a  predominance  of  Corinthian, 
and  to  the  south  of  it  of  Athenian  influence. 

At  a  later  period,  in  the  fourth  century,  Corinthian  coins 
and  imitations  of  Corinthian  coins  had  considerable  vogue 
in  Sicily. 

Now  that  we  are  aware  of  the  Athenian  policy  in  the 
fifth  century,  to  force  upon  the  allies  the  use  of  Athenian 
money,  and  to  prevent  them  from  issuing  any  of  their  own, 
we  naturally  inquire  whether  such  a  policy  was  adopted 
by  other  powerful  cities.  I  think  it  can  be  traced  in  the 
monetary  issues  of  Corinth  and  her  colonies. 

Since  no  detailed  record  exists  of  the  finds  of  '  Pegasi ' 
in  Italy  and  Sicily,  and  since  the  coins  of  Corinth  and  the 
colonies  of  Corinth  are  very  hard  to  date  in  consequence 
of  the  uniformity  and  conventionality  of  their  types,  it  is 
difficult  to  be  sure  of  the  facts  in  regard  to  the  monetary 
issues  of  Corinth.1     But  these  facts  seem  to  be  as  follows : 

From  550  b.c  or  thereabouts  down  to  243  B.C.,  when 
Corinth  joined  the  Achaean  League,  there  was  struck  a 
series  of  coins  of  almost  uniform  types  and  weight. 
Accurately  to  arrange  it  by  date  is  impossible :  there 
are  no  fixed  points,  and  the  style  changes  by  imperceptible 

1  There  is  a  paper  by  Professor  Oman  in  Corolla  Numismaiica  which  deals 
with  the  issues  of  460-390  b.  c. 


: 


CORINTH  AND  COLONIES  371 

gradations.  Professor  Oman  has,  however,  shown  that  a 
somewhat  abrupt  transition  from  the  archaic  to  the  early 
fine  style  takes  place  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century.1 


We  must  next  consider  the  coins  of  the  so-called 
•  Colonies  of  Corinth  '.  The  view  of  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer, 
long  ago  expressed,2  that  this  coinage  was  purely  com- 
mercial in  character,  and  had  little  political  significance, 
has  been  generally  accepted,  and  doubtless  it  represents 
at  least  a  side  of  the  truth :  it  may,  however,  require  some 
modification  in  view  of  recent  discovery. 

Of  the  many  colonies  of  Corinth  which  dotted  the  coasts 
of  Acarnania  and  Epirus,  one  only,  Leucas,  issues  coins 
from  550  b.c.  onwards,  of  the  same  weight  as  the  mother- 
city's  and  showing  the  same  succession  of  styles.  The  coins 
of  Leucas  only  differ  from  those  of  Corinth  by  having  on 
the  reverse,  under  the  Pegasus,  the  letter  A  instead  of  9. 
Down  to  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  these  are  staters 
only,  not  smaller  coins.  Two  other  colonies,  Ambracia  and 
Anactorium,  strike  a  few  (rare)  staters  of  archaic  style  with 
Corinthian  types  :  they  may  be  dated  about  520-480  b.c. 
A  stater  has  been  published  as  belonging  to  Dyrrhachium 
or  Epidamnus,  and  to  the  early  period,  having  Corinthian 
types  and  the  archaic  letter  P  under  the  Pegasus.3  As  the 
coin  has  not  been  seen  for  the  last  half- century,  and  as 
the  style  of  the  head  of  Athena  is  quite  inconsistent  with 
the  form  of  the  F,  not  being  of  archaic  style,  there  can 
be  little  doubt  but  that  this  is  a  false  attribution.  The 
coin  is  probably  of  Anactorium,  with  a  F  not  an  E  under 
the  Pegasus.  The  certain  coins  of  Dyrrhachium  bear 
the  inscription  AYP;  though  an  E  on  the  reverse  might 
stand  for  the  old  name  of  the  city,  Epidamnus. 

A  very  noteworthy  fact  is  that  after  the  early  staters 

1  Ibid.,  p.  210. 

2  Die  Munsen  Akarnaniens,  1878. 

3  B.  ZI.  Cat.  Corinth,  p.  liii  ;  cf.  Lagoy,  Melanges  de  Numismatique,  PI.  II,  3. 
(1845). 

Bb2 


372  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

of  Ambracia  and  Anactorium  there  is  a  great  break  in  the 
coinage  of  those  cities,  which  do  not  resume  the  issue  of 
pegasi  until  the  end  of  the  fifth  century.  At  some  period, 
the  time  of  which  we  shall  presently  consider,  not  only 
these  two  cities,  but  also  other  cities  of  Acarnania,  of 
Illyria,  of  Italy  and  Sicily  begin  abundant  issues  of  staters 
imitating  those  of  Corinth.  It  is  difficult  to  account  for 
the  intermission  of  all  imitative  Corinthian  coin,  save  only 
at  two  or  three  cities,  for  nearly  a  century,  except  by  sup- 
posing that  during  that  time,  covering  most  of  the  fifth 
century,  the  Corinthians  reserved  to  themselves  all  striking 
of  coin,  and  forbade  it  to  their  colonies,  following  the 
notable  example  of  Athens. 

To  determine  the  date  of  the  later  outbreak  of  imitative 
Corinthian  coins  is  not  easy.  We  must  successively  con- 
sider four  groups  of  cities,  those  in  Sicily,  those  in  Italy, 
those  in  Illyria,  and  those  in  Epirus  and  Acarnania. 

Syracuse  should  furnish  us  with  a  clue,  since  the  coins 
of  Syracuse  have  been  examined  with  greater  closeness 
and  acumen  than  those  of  most  cities.1  The  coins  of 
Syracuse  are  examined  in  the  chapter  (XX)  on  Sicily, 
where  I  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Pegasus  staters 
bearing  the  name  of  the  Syracusans  were  issued  at  intervals 
between  380  and  330.  The  earliest  issues  appear  to  be 
due  to  the  tyrant  Dionysius.  Other  issues  were  made  by 
Timoleon,  346  b.c,  and  later. 

Of  the  coins  of  Corinthian  types  struck  at  Locri  in 
Italian  Bruttii  some  are  of  decidedly  early  style,  and  bear 
the  legends  AO  or  AOK.2  I  should  be  disposed  to  give 
these  to  the  time  of  Dionysius,  whose  close  relation  to 
Locri  is  well  known.  Most  of  the  Locrian  coins  with 
Corinthian  types,  however,  are  of  the  time  of  Timoleon 
and  later.  Mr.  Head 3  suggests  for  the  issues  at  Terina, 
Rhegium,  Locri  (and  Medma)  the  date  of  325  B.C.,  whon 
Alexander  of  Epirus  for  a  short  time  released  the  cities   • 

1  See  especially  the  monographs  of  Head  and  Evans. 

2  B.  M.  Cat.  Corinth,  PI.  XXIV,  1,  2. 

3  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  114. 


CORINTH  AND  COLONIES  373 

of  the  extreme  south  of  Italy  from  the  yoke  of  the  Bruttian 
Italians.     This  view  is  very  reasonable. 

If  the  coins  of  Corinthian  types  struck  in  Illyria  and 
Acarnania  could  be  accurately  dated,  it  would  be  a  very 
interesting  task  to  consider  under  what  political  circum- 
stances they  were  issued  ;  and  in  what  relation  they  stood 
to  the  civic  issues  of  Corcyra,  Apollonia,  Dyrrhachium,  and 
the  Acarnanians.  As  it  is,  we  can  ascertain  but  little. 
Many  years  ago,  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer  wrote :  '  If  one  goes 
through  the  different  series  of  the  Pegasus  coins  (of 
Acarnania),  one  finds  among  them  but  few  the  date  of 
which  can  be  placed  back  before  the  Peloponnesian  War: 
besides  the  metropolis  Corinth  herself,  only  the  cities  of 
Anactorium,  Leucas,  and  Ambracia  struck  coins  with 
archaic  fabric.  Next  we  may  place  a  few  coins  of  Epi- 
damnus,  the  Amphilochian  Argos  and  Alyzia  which  may 
have  been  struck  before  the  end  of  the  fifth  century  B.C. 
All  the  rest  of  the  staters  known  at  present  must  be  assigned 
to  the  two  following  centuries.' x 

As  regards  the  archaic  issues  of  Leucas,  Ambracia  and 
Anactorium  I  have  already  expressed  a  similar  view.  But 
as  regards  the  dates  here  assigned  to  the  issues  of  other 
cities  I  am  doubtful.  It  seems  that  a  number  of  cities, 
Corcyra  with  its  colonies  Dyrrhachium  (Epidamnus)  and 
Apollonia,  and  the  Acarnanian  towns  of  Alyzia,  Argos, 
Astacus,  Coronta,  and  Thyrrheium,  all  began  to  issue 
Pegasus  coins  at  about  the  same  time. 

What  was  the  period  or  the  occasion  of  that  issue  we  can 
only  conjecture.  As  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer  has  observed,  the 
adoption  of  the  types  of  Corinth  by  the  cities  of  the 
Acarnanian  League  must  have  been  caused  by  the  fact 
that  the  Pegasus  coins  passed  freely  in  the  commerce  of 
Sicily,  Italy,  and  the  West.2  It  is  not  possible  to  bring 
the  beginning  of  the  issue  later  than  400  b.c,  and  the  first 
city  to  attempt  it  was  Ambracia,  the  coins  of  which  city 
show  the   remains   of  an   incuse   square,  while   on   many 

1  Die  Munzen  Akarnaniens,  p.  11.  *  Ibid.,  p.  11. 


374  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

of  them  there  appears  the  backward  curled  wing  of 
Pegasus,1  which  seems  to  belong  almost  entirely  to  the 
fifth  century  b.c.  One  is  tempted  to  date  the  revival  of 
what  may  fairly  be  called  autonomous  coinage,  as  com- 
pared with  the  adopted  coinage  of  Corinth,  at  Ambracia, 
from  its  defection  from  Corinth,  and  its  joining  the 
Acarnanian  League  about  425  b.  c,  after  the  terrible  defeat 
the  city  had  suffered  from  the  Athenian  Demosthenes.  As 
early  as  400  b.c.  the  example  was  copied  by  Anactorium 
and  Dyrrhachium,2  and  (according  to  Imhoof)  by  Alyzia 
and  Argos.  Before  long,  even  Corcyra  so  far  forgot  her 
secular  enmity  against  Corinth  as  to  issue  money  of 
Corinthian  types,  though  perhaps  this  may  not  have  taken 
place  until  the  occupation  of  Corinth  by  a  Macedonian 
garrison  in  346  b.c 

The  abundant  issues  of  pegasi  early  in  the  fourth  century, 
alike  by  the  mother-city  of  Corinth  and  the  Corinthian 
colonies  on  the  Adriatic,  accounts  for  the  fact  that  in  Italy 
and  Sicily  large  hoards  of  these  coins  are  found.  In  Sicily, 
after  the  almost  complete  cessation  of  the  issue  of  tetra- 
drachms  about  400  b.c,  they  must  have  formed  a  great  part 
of  the  money  in  circulation.  And  it  is  very  probable,  as  I  try 
to  show  (Chap.  XX),  that  the  earliest  imitations  at  Syracuse 
and  Leontini  were  issued  in  the  time  of  Dionysius  himself. 
After  the  great  Athenian  defeat  at  Syracuse,  the  commerce 
and  the  coins  of  Athens  must  have  steadily  receded  before 
those  of  Corinth. 

It  would  appear,  then,  that  from  480  b.  c  to  a  time  after 
the  middle  of  the  fifth  century  Corinth  succeeded  in  making 
her  issues  the  main  currency  of  Acarnania,  and,  in  a  less 
degree,  of  Epirus  and  the  east  coast  of  Italy.  The  first 
city  of  Acarnania  to  resume  a  local  Pegasus  coinage  was 
Ambracia.  Early  in  the  fourth  century  this  example  was 
widely  copied  on  the  west  coast  of  Greece,  as  well  as  by 
Syracuse,  Locri,  and  other  Italian  and  Sicilian  cities.   After 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Corinth,  PI.  XXVII ;  cf.  Oman,  I.  c. 

2  A  coin  of  Dyrrhachium  in  the  British  Museum  has  remains  of  an  incuse 
square.     Cat.  Corinth,  PI.  XXVI,  2. 


CORINTH  AND  COLONIES  375 

the  occupation  of  the  citadel  of  Corinth  by  a  Macedonian 
garrison  (346  B.C.),  we  should  naturally  expect  a  diminution 
of  Corinthian  influence  and  commerce ;  and  as  a  result 
a  further  outbreak  of  imitative  issues  in  Acarnania  and 
the  West ;  an  expectation  confirmed  by  the  facts. 

M.  Babelon  mentions  obols  in  gold  as  struck  at  Corinth 
about  338  B.C.:1 

Obv.  9  Pegasus  flying.  Rev.  Trident.  Weight,  7  grains 
(grm.  0-44). 
He  maintains  their  genuineness ;  but  in  the  case  of  small 
gold  coins  that  is  always  difficult  to  establish.  The  date 
also,  if  they  are  genuine,  must  be  regarded  as  doubtful : 
Corinth  is  far  more  likely  to  have  struck  gold  coins,  in 
imitation  of  Athens,  early  in  the  fourth  century,  than 
in  the  time  of  Philip.  There  was  in  the  fourth  century 
at  Corinth  an  abundant  coinage  in  bronze. 

Corcyra.  The  coins  of  Corcyra,  like  those  of  Corinth  and 
Athens,  give  little  indication,  in  type  or  inscription,  of  any 
events  of  internal  or  external  politics.  They  are  essentially  a 
commercial  coinage.  The  two  colonies  of  Corcyra,  Apollonia 
and  Dyrrhachium,  after  a  while  begin  the  issue  of  staters 
identical  in  weight  and  type  with  those  of  the  mother-city, 
but  differing  in  inscription,  APO  or  AYP  standing  in  the 
place  of  KOP.  In  the  British  Museum  Catalogue,  these 
coins,  with  those  of  the  same  style  issued  by  Corcyra  itself, 
are  given  to  the  fourth  century.  '  It  is  probable  that  their 
issue  began  at  some  period  when  the  political  troubles  into 
which  the  mother-city  fell  gave  her  colonies  greater  freedom 
of  action,  and  threw  them  on  their  own  resources.  This 
may  have  been  when  Corcyra  was  successively  overrun 
by  the  Athenian  Timotheus  (375  B.C.)  and  the  Laconian 
Mnasippus  (373  b.c.).'2  It  is  probable  that  Corcyra  like 
Corinth  may  have  taken  a  leaf  from  the  book  of  Athenian 
legislation,  and  forcibly  prevented  the  striking  of  autonomous 
coins  by  the  two  colonies,  so  long  as  she  was  able  to  do  so. 

1  Babelon,  Traiti,  ii.  3,  p.  439. 

*  Cat.  Thessaly  to  Aetolia  (Gardner),  p.  xxxix. 


376  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

A  century  later  Dyrrhachium  also  issued  copies  of  the 
staters  of  Corinth.  It  is  probable  that  the  imitations  of 
coins  of  Corcyra  were  made  for  the  trade  with  the  north 
of  the  Adriatic,  where  Corinthian  ships  did  not  venture, 
and  the  imitations  of  Corinth  for  the  trade  with  South 
Italy  and  Sicily.  If  a  conjecture  already  stated,  that  at 
Corcyra  the  local  stater  was  regarded  as  a  tetradrachm  of 
the  Corinthian  standard,  be  correct,  there  would  be  no 
difficulty  in  adjusting  the  exchange  of  the  two  kinds 
of  money  in  the  commerce  of  the  Greek  cities  of  the 
Adriatic,  or  in  the  neutral  markets. 

There  is  in  fact  definite  evidence,  clear  if  not  conclusive,1 
that  the  coins  of  Corcyra  issued  about  300  b.c.  were  intended 
to  conform  to  the  two  standards.     The  types  are : 

1.  Obv.  KOPKYPAI.  Fore-part  of  cow.     Rev.  Two  squares  con- 

taining floral  pattern.     Weight,  80  grains  (grm.  5-18). 

2.  Obv.    Cow  with  calf.      Rev.  KOP.  Square  containing   floral 

pattern.     Weight,  40  grains  (grm.  2-59). 

No.  1  is  indicated  by  the  obverse  type  to  be  the  half  of 
something,  probably  the  stater  of  Corcyra,  and  by  the 
reverse  type  to  be  the  double  of  something,  probably  the 
Corinthian  drachm.  No.  2  is  shown  by  both  types  to  be 
a  standard  unit,  probably  a  Corinthian  drachm.  Of  course, 
arguments  like  these  can  only  establish  a  probability,  not 
a  certainty,  but  they  are  quite  worthy  of  consideration. 

The  weight  of  the  coins  of  Corcyra  tends  to  fall  in  the 
fourth  century  from  180  grains  (grm.  11-66)  to  160  grains 
(grm.  10-36).  It  is  an  indication  how  the  earlier  metro- 
logists  neglected  geographical  and  commercial  indications, 
that  Brandis  regards  these  later  coins  as  following  the 
Persian  rather  than  the  Aeginetan  standard.2  The  extreme 
improbability  of  the  Persian  standard  working  so  far  to 
the  West  did  not  convince  him.  But  a  much  more  satis- 
factory explanation  of  the  fall  of  standard  will  be  found 
in  the  fact  that  the  Corinthian  coin  also  became  lighter 
at  this  time,  though  in  a  spasmodic  and  irregular  fashion, 

1  Cat.  Thessaly,  &c,  p.  xv.  2  Munzwesen,  p.  129. 


CORINTH  AND  COLONIES  377 

while  the  Italian  drachm  derived  from  it  sank  still  faster 
in  weight.1  If  there  was  a  conventional  proportion  of  value 
between  the  staters  of  Corinth  and  Corcyra,  it  would  be  to 
the  interest  of  both  cities  to  reduce  the  weight  of  the 
stater  as  far  as  could  be  done  safely,  and  without  fear  of 
its  losing  its  reputation. 

Acarnania.  The  coins  of  Acarnania  raise  interesting  pro- 
blems. For  we  find  that  in  the  fifth  century  some  of  them 
bear  the  name  of  the  Acarnanians  as  a  confederacy,  while 
others  bear  the  names  of  cities  which  probably  belonged  to 
that  confederacy.  The  fact  that  Aristotle  wrote  a  treatise 
on  the  Constitution  of  the  Acarnanians  proves  that  there  was 
an  organized  union  of  cities.  But  of  the  history  of  that 
organized  union  we  know  very  little.  And  sometimes  the 
coins  bearing  the  name  of  the  tribe  and  those  bearing 
the  names  of  cities  are  almost  identical  in  type  and  style. 
Without  more  knowledge  of  the  history  of  Acarnania  it 
is  impossible  to  discover  the  relations  as  regards  rights  of 
coinage  between  the  tribe  and  the  cities. 

We  have  the  following  from  the  middle  of  the  fifth 
century  (B.  M.  Cat.  Thessaly,  p.  li) : 

1.  Obv.  Bearded  head  of  Achelous  as  a  river-god.     Rev.  AK. 

Female  head.     Weight,  30-29  grains  (grm.  1-97-1-87). 

2.  Obv.  Head  of  Achelous.     Rev.  ZTPA.  Female  head.  Weight, 

36-35  grains  (grm.  2-34-2-30). 

3.  Obv.  Head  of  Achelous.     Rev.  F  in  incuse.     Weight,  38-33 

grains  (grm.  248-2-15). 

4.  Obv.  Head  of  Achelous.     Rev.  T  in  incuse.     Weight,  18-16 

grains  (grm.  1-15-101). 

No.  1  is  a  coin  of  the  Acarnanian  Confederacy  struck 
at  Stratus ;  No.  2  is  a  similar  coin  struck  by  the  city  of 
Stratus  on  its  own  account;  No.  3  is  a  coin  of  Oeniadae. 
All  are  of  the  same  standard,  the  specimens  under  (1) 
having  lost  weight  in  circulation;  the  normal  weight  is 
about  36  grains  (grm.  2-33).  No.  4  is  of  doubtful  attribu- 
tion.   The  same  obverse  occurs  on  a  variety  of  coins  which 

1  See  Chap.  XIX. 


378  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

have  on  the  reverse  the  letter  T  accompanied  by  other 
letters,  KO,  TO,  KAA,  IR.  These  coins  seem  to  be  halves 
of  those  previously  mentioned.  Dr.  Imhoof-Blumer l  leaves 
the  standard  and  denomination  undetermined.  But  since 
the  district  was  entirely  under  the  influence  of  Corinthian 
commerce,  we  must  seek  in  that  direction  for  an  explana- 
tion. The  smaller  coins  (4)  seem  obviously  Corinthian 
hemidrachms,  being  of  the  same  weight  as  the  hemidrachms 
issued  in  the  fifth  century  at  Corinth ; 2  and  we  may  fairly 
regard  the  letter  T  as  standing  for  TpLa>fto\ov.  Coins  1  to  3, 
being  of  double  the  weight,  will  then  probably  be  Corinthian 
drachms.  They  are  only  a  little  lighter  than  the  Corinthian 
drachms  struck  at  Corinth.  The  contemporary  tridrachms  at 
Corinth  weigh  about  132-128  grains  (grm.  8-55-8-30),  though 
they  are  not  very  uniform.  No  doubt  these  staters  were  used 
in  the  larger  commerce  in  Acarnania ;  and  the  local  drachms 
and  hemidrachms,  being  used  only  for  small  trade,  might 
well  be  somewhat  under  weight. 


§  3.     Peloponnesus. 

The  cities  of  Peloponnesus  were  late  in  starting  coinage. 
Numismatists  are  disposed,  no  doubt  rightly,  to  attribute 
this  backwardness  to  the  general  use  of  the  coins  of  Aegina, 
which  the  Aeginetan  pedlars  took  with  them,  and  which 
formed  a  general  or  standard  currency  for  most  of  Greece 
Proper.  Before  the  Persian  wars,  it  would  seem  that  coins 
were  struck  only  at  Phlius,  Sicyon,  Aegae,  Argos,  Heraea, 
Mantineia,  Psophis,  Cleitor,  and  Elis :  to  which  cities  are 
added,  in  the  early  part  of  the  fifth  century,  Cleonae  and 
Troezen,  and  in  the  later  part,  Pheneus,  Stymphalus,  Tegea, 
Alea,  and  Pallantium. 

In  the  history  of  the  coinage  of  Peloponnesus  between 
the  Persian  wars  and  the  time  of  Alexander  there  are  two 
decided    landmarks.      One    is   the   alliance    between   Elis, 

1  Miinzen  Akarnaniens,  reprinted  from  Numism.  Zeitschr.  for  1878,  p.  166. 
1  B.  M.  Cat,  Corinth,  p.  19. 


PELOPONNESUS  379 

Mantineia,  and  Argos  of  421  b.  a  The  other  is  the  inva- 
sion of  Peloponnesus  by  Epaminondas  in  371  B.C.,  and  the 
foundation  by  him  of  Messene  and  Megalopolis.  The 
first  of  these  events  is  mirrored  in  the  coinages  of  Elis 
and  Argos :  with  the  second  event  begins  the  issue  of  the 
notable  staters  of  the  new-founded  cities.  These  events 
do  not  introduce  any  change  in  the  standards  used ;  but 
they  serve  as  excellent  fixed  points  for  the  arrangement  of 
the  coins. 

In  4.21  b.c.  the  people  of  Argos,  whose  type  had  hitherto 
been  the  wolf,  give  it  up  and  adopt  instead  the  head  of 
their  great  goddess  Hera,  crowned  with  a  round  polos,  with 
two  dolphins  for  a  reverse  type  (PL  X.  10).1  Some  of  these 
staters,  it  is  true,  have  a  somewhat  early  appearance,  and 
the  early  form  R  appears  on  them ;  we  cannot  be  sure  that 
they  may  not  anticipate  the  year  421.  But  the  date  is 
safe  for  the  coins  of  Elis.  The  people  of  Elis  give  up  then 
their  old  agonistic  types  of  Nike  and  the  eagle,  and  take 
instead  a  head  of  Hera  closely  resembling  that  on  the 
Argive  coins,  but  executed  in  a  far  more  beautiful  style. 
We  may  give  to  the  same  period  the  drachm  of  Mantineia, 
which  city  also  belonged  to  the  League  : 

Obv.  Bearded  male  head  in  Corinthian  helmet.  Rev.  MANTI. 
Head  of  nymph  Callisto  ?  2  Weight,  87  grains  (grm.  5-63). 
(B.  T.  CCXXVX  34), 

as  Mantineia  also  until  that  time  had  used  the  simple  type 
of  the  bear,  and  now  substitutes  human  heads. 

The  staters  of  the  period  of  Epaminondas  have  long  been 
known  and  admired : 

Messene. 

Obv.  Head  of  Demeter,  corn-crowned.  Rev.  ME^CANIHN. 
Zeus  Ithomatas  striding.     (B.  M.  XXIII.  35.) 

Megalopolis. 

Obc.  Head  of  Zeus.  Rev.  APK  in  monogram,  Pan  seated  on 
rock.     (PL  X.  11.) 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Peloponnesus  (Gardner),  p.  xxxvii. 

2  B.  M.  Cat.  Peloponnesus  p.  185,  PI.  XXXIV,  29. 


380  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.o. 

Pheneus. 

Obv.  Head  of  Demeter.     Rev.  <!>ENEnN.  Hermes  carrying  the 
boy  Areas.     (B.  T.  CCXXV.  6.) 

Stymphalus. 

Obv.  Head  of  Artemis.    Rev.  STYM<t>AAinN.  Heracles  striking 
with  club.     (PI.  X.  12.) 

M.  Babelon  observes  that  with  the  foundation  of  Megalopolis, 
Pheneus  and  Stymphalus  cease  for  a  time  to  issue  coins.1 
Contemporary  with  these  are  : 

Tegea. 

Obv.  Head  of  Athena.      Rev.  TETEATAN.  Warrior  charging 
(Hemidrachm).     (B.  T.  CCXXVII.  28.) 

The  reverse  type  seems  to  be  copied  from  the  charging 
Ajax  of  the  coins  of  the  Locrians,  which  belong  to  the 
same  period. 

Hermione. 

Obv.  Head  of  Demeter.     Rev.  EP  in  monogram,  within  wreath 
(Hemidrachm).     (B.  T.  OCX VIII.  13.) 

Pellene. 

Obv.  Head  of   Apollo,  laureate.     Rev.  TEA  in  wreath  (Hemi- 
drachm).    (B.  T.  CCXXII.  22.) 

Epidaurus. 

Obv.  Head  of  Asclepius.     Rev.   E  P  in  monogram,  within  laurel 
wreath  (Hemidrachm).     (B.  T.  CCXVII.  10.) 

It  may,  however,  be  that  the  occasion  of  some  of  these 
issues  was  rather  earlier  than  370,  the  Peace  of  Antalcidas, 
when  the  several  cities  of  Greece  and  Asia  were  recognized 
as  autonomous,  and  when  many  of  them  began  to  issue  coins. 

The  chief  place  is  taken  in  Western  Peloponnesus  by  the 
coinage  of  Elis,  in  Eastern  Peloponnesus  by  the  money  of 
Argos,  and  in  Northern  Peloponnesus  by  that  of  Sicyon. 
In  South  Peloponnesus,  as  Sparta  did  not  issue  silver  coin 
until  the  time  of  Areus,  nor  Messene  until  the  time  of 
Epaminondas,  any  silver  coin  current  would  have  to  be 
borrowed  from  one  of  the  wealthier  neighbours. 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  iii,  p.  567. 


PELOPONNESUS  381 

Arcadia.  We  begin  with  Arcadia.  It  is  a  rugged  and 
mountainous  district ;  the  cities,  in  their  little  valleys,  stood 
apart,  and  the  level  of  civilization  was  very  low.  It  is  natural 
that  Arcadia  should  never  have  formed  a  federal  unit  like 
Boeotia  or  Phocis.  Various  towns,  at  different  periods 
of  history,  claimed  not  supremacy  but  hegemony;  but 
none  of  them  held  it  for  long.  Generally  the  Arcadians 
followed  the  fortunes  of  Sparta,  and  furnished  troops  to  her. 

Most  remarkable  among  the  early  coins  of  Arcadia  are 
the  hemidrachms  of  Aeginetan  standard  issued  by  the 
Heraeans  and  bearing  their  name.  They  were  probably 
struck  in  connexion  with  the  festival  of  Zeus  Lycaeus  at 
Lycosura,  and  passed  among  the  Arcadians  as  a  sort  of 
religious  coinage.  The  earliest  issues  are  inscribed  EPA  ; 
they  have  as  type  the  head  of  Demeter  or  Despoena.  They 
are  succeeded  about  the  time  of  the  Persian  wars  by  the 
hemidrachms  which  bear,  on  the  obverse,  a  seated  figure 
of  Zeus  Lycaeus,  on  the  reverse  the  head  of  Despoena,  with 
the  inscription  APKAAIKON.  These  coins  seem  to  show 
that  Heraea  was  regarded  at  the  time  as  the  leading  city 
of  Arcadia.  This  issue  is  conjecturally  supposed  to  have 
come  to  an  end  about  418  B.C.,  when  the  Spartan  hegemony 
in  Peloponnesus  was  strengthened.  Then  the  name  of  the 
Heraeans  reappears  on  an  unimportant  series  of  small  coins. 

The  type  of  the  coins  bearing  the  name  of  the  Arcadians 
bears  a  striking  likeness  to  that  of  some  of  the  early  coins 
of  Elis ;  the  representation  is  of  Zeus  Aphesius,  sending 
out  the  eagle.  In  the  British  Museum  is  an  archaic  inscrip- 
tion recording  an  alliance  between  the  people  of  Elis  and 
those  of  Heraea.  As  the  early  coins  of  Elis  are  nearly  all 
didrachms,  and  those  of  Heraea  hemidrachms,  it  may  fairly 
be  conjectured  that  they  together  constituted  the  main 
coinage  of  Western  Peloponnese,  which  was  decidedly  of 
religious  character. 

Psophis  in  Arcadia  issues  in  the  sixth  century  the 
following  coins,  among  others: 

Ob  v.  Stag  springing   to  r.      Rev.  Fish  placed  transversely  in 


382  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

incuse.     Weight,  61  grains  (grin.  3-95) ;  21  grains  (grm. 

140).     (B.  T.  XXXVIII.  29.) 
Obv.    Fore-part  of  stag.      Rev.  OV.  Fish   transversely   placed. 

Weight,  13-9-13-5  grains  (grm.  0-90-0-86).  (B.T.  CCXX  VI. 

3,4.) 
Obv.  Stag  springing  to  r.       Rev.  E  within  incuse.      Weight, 

6-3  grains  (grm.  040).     (B.  T.  CCXXVI.  6.) 

The  last  of  these  coins  is  certainly  a  hemiobol,  as  is  shown 
by  the  mark  of  value  E  : *  the  coins  of  twice  the  weight 
are  probably  obols,  though  the  O  may  not  be  a  mark  of 
value,  but  the  second  letter  of  the  city's  name.  If  so,  the 
standard  used  at  Psophis  is  certainly  the  Aeginetan  ;  and 
the  coin  of  61  grains  which  looks  like  an  Attic  drachm 
must  be  an  Aeginetan  tetrobol.  At  the  same  time  it  must 
be  observed  that  in  the  island  of  Zacynthus,  not  very  far 
distant  from  Psophis,  we  have  traces  of  the  Attic  standard 
in  the  early  fifth  century,  though  the  larger  coins  range 
in  weight  with  those  of  Corcyra. 

It  would  seem  that  at  some  periods  Mantineia,  and  at 
other  periods  Tegea,  claimed  some  sort  of  hegemony  among 
the  Arcadians.  But  their  money  bears  only  the  name  of 
the  city.  A  definitely  organized  League  of  the  Arcadians 
was  only  formed  in  the  time  of  Epaminondas's  invasion 
of  Peloponnese.  Then  a  new  city  was  built  to  serve  as 
a  federal  capital,  and  received  the  ambitious  name  of 
Megalopolis.  To  it  were  transported  the  inhabitants  of 
several  of  the  townships ;  and  the  Arcadians  sent  deputies 
to  meet  in  the  Thersilion,  which  has  now  been  excavated.2 
Some  towns,  such  as  Alea,  Thelpusa,  and  Pallantium,  dis- 
appear from  the  numismatic  record  ;  others,  like  Stymphalus 
and  Pheneus,  suspend  their  coinage.  Only  Mantineia  and 
Tegea  continue  uninterruptedly. 

The  staters  struck  at  Megalopolis  are  very  beautiful  : 

Obv.  APK  in  monogram;  head  of  Zeus.     Rev.  Pan  seated  on 
rock.     (B.  M.  XXIII.  35.) 

1  The  omission  of  the  aspirate,  at  a  time  when  the  Ionic  alphabet  was 
coming  in,  need  not  surprise  us. 

2  E.  A.  Gardner  and  others,  Excavations  at  Megalopolis,  1892. 


PELOPONNESUS  383 

But  Megalopolis  soon  fell  into  decay,  and  issued  only  hemi- 
drachms  of  careless  workmanship. 

Elis.  From  about  500  b.c.  onwards  we  have  the  very  in- 
teresting and  beautiful  series  of  staters  of  Aeginetan  weight 
which  bear  the  name  of  the  people  of  Elis,  and  were  probably 
issued  by  them  on  the  successive  occasions  of  the  Olympian 
Festival.  The  types,  Zeus,  the  eagle,  the  thunderbolt, 
Victory,  and  the  heads  of  Zeus  and  Hera,  all  obviously 
allude  to  the  sacred  rites  and  games  of  the  precinct  of 
Zeus.  There  is  no  variety  of  monetary  standard  in  the 
coins  of  Elis ;  but  in  the  types  we  may  detect  a  few  land- 
marks, which  are  of  the  greater  value  because  of  the  rarity 
of  such  landmarks  in  the  series  of  Peloponnesus. 

The  earliest  is  furnished  by  the  staters  which  bear  the 
type  of  Zeus  striding  and  hurling  the  thunderbolt  with 

jthe  inscription  OAYMPIKON   (B.  T.  XXXIX.  1-2).      They 

I  belong  to  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century ;   E.  Curtius 
conjectured  that  the  occasion  of  them  was  the  imposition 

I  by  the   people  of  Elis  on  the  Lepreates  of  Triphylia  of 

>!  an   annual  tribute   to   the   Olympic   Zeus,  the   inscription 
'OXvfjLnLKov  (v6fiL<Tjxa)  marking  the  coin  as  belonging  to  Zeus 

.  himself.     This  conjecture  is  confirmed  by  the  discovery, 
based  on  the  inscriptions  at  Delphi,  that  it  was  out  of  the 

;  tribute  paid  to  the  sanctuary  by  the  Phocians  who  had 
violated  it,  that  the  coins  were  issued  marked  with  the 

■•  inscription  'A^lktiovcov.1     This  seems  an  exact  parallel. 

The  earliest  introduction  of  the  head  of  Hera  (and  that 
of  Zeus)  on  the  coins  of  Elis  must  be  referred  to  the 
occasion  of  the  political  alliance  between  Elis  and  Argos 

I  in  421  b.c,  when  Argos  gave  up  the  wolf  type,  and  Elis 

i  the  eagle-and- serpent  type,  in  honour  of  the  goddess  common 

,  to  the  two  states. 

A  brief  interruption  of  the  issues  of  Elean  coins  took 
place  in  364-362  b.c,  when  the  Arcadians,  after  driving 

I  the  troops  of  Elis  out  of  the  sacred  enclosure,  melted  down 
some  of  the  treasures  to  pay  their  mercenaries,  and  trans- 

1  Bourguet,  Administr.  financiere  du  sanduaire  pythique,  p.  18. 


384  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

ferred  the  presidency  of  the  games  to  the  people  of  Pisa, 
who  had  a  very  ancient  claim  to  it.  It  must  have  been 
on  this  occasion  that  certain  small  gold  coins  were  struck : 

Obv.  Laureate  head  of  Zeus.  Bev.  TIC  A.  Three  half-thunder- 
bolts.    Weight,  24  grains  (grm.  1-55). 

Obv.  As  last.  Bev.  PISA.  Thunderbolt,  not  winged.  Weight, 
16  grains  (grm.  1-04).     (B.  T.  CCXXXV.  13,  14.) 

These  are  evidently  a  trihemiobol  and  an  obol  of  Aeginetan 
weight,  struck  as  money  of  necessity.  The  Eleans  in  a  very 
short  time  recovered  the  control  of  the  games. 

The  head  of  Zeus  on  the  Pisatan  coins  is  of  somewhat 
noteworthy  style,  and  helps  us  to  assign  to  the  period 
immediately  before  or  after  364  b.c.  coins  of  Elis  which 
bear  a  Zeus  head  of  similar  character.1 

Zacynthus.  The  coinage  of  Zacynthus,  and  of  the  neigh- 
bouring cities  of  Same  and  Pale  in  Cephallenia,  presents 
peculiar  features.  The  stater  of  Zacynthus,  in  the  fifth  and 
fourth  centuries,  is  of  the  weight  of  180  grains  normal  (grm. 
11-66),  and  so  is  of  Aeginetan  standard.  But  the  system  of 
division  is  not  into  Aeginetan  drachms  and  obols  as  else- 
where. The  stater  is  divided  into  three,  the  next  denomina- 
tion weighing  60  grains  (grm.  3-88).  Of  this  lesser  unit,  we 
have  the  half  weighing  some  30  grains  (grm.  1-94),  and  the 
sixth  weighing  up  to  10  or  11  grains  (grm.  0-71-0-64).  These 
denominations  are  clearly  the  Attic  drachm,  half-drachm, 
and  obol.  This  interpretation  of  the  weights  is  not  a  con- 
jecture but  a  certainty,  as  we  have  a  coin  of  8-3  grains 
(grm.  0-54)  marked  with  O  as  an  obol,  and  a  coin  of  4  grains 
(grm.  0-26)  marked  with  an  H  as  a  hemiobol.  Zacynthus 
was  in  the  Athenian  alliance  at  the  time  of  the  Pelopon- 
nesian  War,  having  been  conquered  by  the  admiral  Tolmides2 
in  455  b.c.  The  island  was  in  the  circle  of  Corinthian 
commerce,  and  in  the  third  century  copies  the  Corinthian 
types,  but  politically  it  was  anti-Spartan,    and  furnished 

1  For  the  coins  of  Elis  see  my  paper  in  the  Num.  Chron.  for  1879  ;  Seltman, 
Nomisma,  part  ix  ;  and  Babelon,  Traite,  vol.  iii. 

2  Diodorus,  xi.  84.  Diodorus  says  that  Tolmides  conquered  Zacynthus,  but 
brought  in  the  cities  of  Cephallenia  without  force. 


PELOPONNESUS  385 

a  refuge  to  Spartan  exiles ; l  we  are  therefore  not  surprised 
to  find  traces  of  Attic  influence  in  the  coinage.  Zacynthus 
was  also  in  close  relations  with  Sicily,  where  the  Attic 
standard  was  in  general  use. 

The  coinage  of  Zacynthus  offers  us  two  clear  landmarks. 
The  type  adopted  by  the  cities  of  Samos,  Ephesus,  Rhodes, 
and  other  places  in  394  b.  c,  young  Heracles  strangling  the 
snakes  (PI.  X.  9),  makes  its  appearance  quite  unexpectedly 
on  the  money  of  Zacynthus,  which  may  therefore  at  once 
be  divided  into  coins  earlier  than  394  B.C.,  and  coins  later 
than  that  year.  In  357,  Dion,  then  organizing  his  expedi- 
tion against  the  younger  Dionysius  of  Syracuse,  made 
Zacynthus  his  head- quarters,  and  struck  there,  no  doubt  to 
pay  his  troops,  a  notable  coin : 

Obv.  Laureate  head  of  Apollo.  Rev.  I  A.  AlftNOS.  Tripod. 
Weight,  174-169  grains  (grm.  11-25-10-95).  (B.  T. 
CCXXXVI.  18.) 

The  drachm  and  hemidrachm  were  struck  of  Attic  weight 
in  Same  and  Pale  in  Cephallenia  at  the  time  of  the  Pelopon- 
nesian  War.  The  city  of  Cranium,  on  the  other  hand,  adhered 
in  all  denominations  to  the  standard  of  Aegina,  or  perhaps 
rather  that  of  Corcyra,  which  was  somewhat  lower. 

Argos.  There  are  few  places  of  which  the  monetary  issues 
are  smaller  in  proportion  to  the  age,  the  wealth,  and  the 
artistic  reputation  of  the  city  than  Argos.  Until  the 
alliance  with  Elis  in  421  B.C.,  the  city  issued  only  small 
coins — drachms,  hemidrachms,  obols,  and  hemiobols — 
bearing  on  one  side  the  fore -part  or  the  head  of  a  wolf,  on 
the  other  side  the  letter  A  in  an  incuse.  This  coinage  prob- 
ably began  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century ;  but  it  is 
obviously  incomplete ;  for  all  larger  payments  the  staters 
of  Aegina  must  have  been  used.  This  may  explain  the 
confused  notion,  common  among  ancient  historians,  that 
the  Aeginetan  coinage  began  under  the  rule  of  Pheidon 
of  Argos. 


1  Hdt.  vi.  70,  iv.  37. 
C  C 


386  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

In  421  b.c.  the  head  of  Hera  comes  in  on  the  coins : 

Obv.  APTEION  orflN.  Head  of  Hera,  wearing  round  crown. 
Rev.  Two  dolphins:  between  them  various  devices,  the 
wolf,  the  tripod,  &c.     Stater.     (PI.  X.  10.) 

Obv.  As  last.  Rev.  APTEinN.  Diomedes  carrying  the  Palla- 
dium.    Drachm.     (Ibid.  18-20.)     Also  smaller  divisions. 

As  this  time  is  exactly  that  at  which  the  great  statue  of 
Hera  was  set  up  by  Polycleitus,  it  is  reasonable  to  see  in 
the  coins  a  reminiscence  of  the  head  of  that  statue ;  but 
the  style  is  poor,  greatly  inferior  to  that  of  the  contem- 
porary coins  of  Elis.  The  issue  of  the  staters  and  drachms 
soon  ceased,  and  the  city  again  reverted  to  the  issue  of 
small  coins  only.  M.  Babelon  speaks  of  these  as  Rhodian  f 
drachms  or  Attic  tetrobols ; x  there  can,  I  think,  be  no 
doubt  but  that  they  are  hemidrachms  of  a  somewhat  reduced 
Aeginetan  standard.  The  usual  weight  is  about  36-42  grains 
(grm.  2-33-2-72). 

At  Argos  and  at  Tegea  were  issued  early  in  the  fourth 
century  a  few  coins  of  iron.2  It  is  not  clear  whether  they 
were  coins  of  necessity  or  deliberately  fraudulent  issues. 
The  bad  state  of  preservation  in  which  they  are  found 
makes  assertions  in  regard  to  them  risky ;  but  it  may 
safely  be  said  that  they  can  have  had  nothing  to  do  with 
a  regular  iron  currency,  which  would  be  far  more  bulky. 

Phlius.  Argos  dominated  the  valley  of  the  Inachus,  but 
the  cities  of  the  north  coast,  which  are  conventionally  placed 
in  Argolis,  were  in  no  way  subordinate  to  Argos.  They 
struck  coins  quite  independently,  but  only  the  issues  of 
Sicyon  are  of  much  importance.  The  lesser  cities  must 
have  generally  used  the  coins  of  Aegina,  of  Argos,  and  of 
Sicyon. 

The  coins  given  by  Six  and  Babelon3  to  Phlius  which 
bear  on  the  obverse  the  letter  CD  and  a  three-legged  symbol, 
and  on  the  reverse  an  incuse  of  eight  triangles  like  that 

1  Traite,  ii.  3,  p.  463.  2  Ibid.,  pp.  465,  655. 

3  Ibid.,  ii.  1,  p.  813  ;  Six,  Num.  Chron.,  1888,  p.  97.  One  of  these  coins  is 
said  to  have  been  found  in  Arcadia. 


PELOPONNESUS  387 

of  Aegina,  can  scarcely  be  Peloponnesian,  considering  the 
fabric  and  the  weight,  110-112  grains  (grm.  7-16-7-21). 
There  are,  however,  coins  of  Phlius,  issued  towards  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  century,  bearing  as  types  a  bull  walking 
and  a  wheel :  drachms  and  hemidrachms  of  Aeginetan 
standard.  They  are  continued  into  the  fourth  century. 
Cleonae,  on  the  road  between  Corinth  and  Argos,  struck 
a  few  obols  in  the  fifth  century,  Epidaurus  hemidrachms 
and  obols  in  the  fourth  century. 

Sicyon.  The  extensive  series  of  silver  coins  issued  by 
Sicyon  unfortunately  offers  us  no  landmarks,  but  runs  on 
without  a  break.  We  may,  however,  conjecturally  regard 
the  letters  EY  on  the  coins  as  standing  for  Euphron,  tyrant 
360  b.c,  and  KAE  as  standing  for  Oleander,  who  also 
exercised  a  tyranny  in  the  city.1 

Troezen.  Alone  among  the  cities  of  Peloponnesus,  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  fifth  century,  Troezen  struck  money  on 
the  Attic  standard,  drachms  of  67-56 2  grains  (grm.  4«34-3-62) 
and  hemidrachms  of  31-30  grains  (grm.  2*0-1 -94).  This 
remarkable  exception  may  be  accounted  for  partly  by  the 
position  of  Troezen,  over  against  Attica,  and  partly  by 
the  traditional  friendship  between  the  two  cities.  The 
head  of  Athena  and  the  trident  of  Poseidon  are  the  types 
of  the  coins.  At  the  time  of  the  Persian  wars  it  was  at 
Troezen  that  the  people  of  Athens  took  refuge,  leaving 
their  city  to  the  mercy  of  the  Persians.  Theseus  was  said 
to  have  been  born  at  Troezen.  In  the  Peloponnesian  War, 
as  we  learn,  Troezen  was  on  the  side  of  Sparta ;  but  probably 
the  sympathies  of  the  people  were  divided,  those  who  con- 
trolled the  coinage  being  Attic  in  sympathy. 

Achaea.  Between  Patrae  on  the  west  and  Sicyon  on  the 
east  lay  the  cities  of  Achaea,  each  possessing  a  small  territory 
between  the  Corinthian  Gulf  and  the  mountains  of  Arcadia. 
None  of  these  cities  was  of  great  importance,  and  none  in 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Peloponnesus,  p.  xxxiv. 

s  Ibid.,  p.  165.  Two  coins  from  the  same  die  weigh,  one  67-4  grains,  the 
other  56-7  grains.  This  fact  illustrates  the  absurdity  of  basing  theories  on  any 
minute  weighings  of  single  Greek  silver  coins. 

cc2 


388  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

the  fifth  century  made  large  issues  of  coins.  The  Achaean 
cities  had  a  religious  league,  of  which  the  centre  was  the 
sanctuary  of  Poseidon  at  Helice.  But  this  religious  unity 
did  not,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Arcadians,  lead  to  the  institu- 
tion of  a  coinage.  On  the  destruction  of  Helice  in  373  b.c. 
the  religious  centre  of  the  district  was  shifted  to  Aegium, 
the  sacred  seat  of  Zeus  Homagyrius  and  Demeter  Panachaea. 
Then  began  the  earliest  federal  issues  of  the  Achaeans, 
who  seem  to  have  set  up  a  federal  system  at  the  same  time 
as  the  Arcadians,  the  Achaeans  meeting  at  Aegium,  and 
the  Arcadians  at  Megalopolis. 

The  types  of  the  Achaean  coins  are : 

Obv.  Head  of  Artemis.     Rev.  Zeus  seated  on  throne.     Stater. 

(B.  T.  CCXXII.  19.) 
Obv.  Same  head.     Rev.  Athena  charging.     Drachm  and  Hemi- 

drachm.1     (B.  T.  CCXXII.  20,  21.) 

In  the  third  century  the  Achaean  League  extended  to  all 
the  cities  of  Peloponnesus.  The  above  coins  seem  to  show 
that  the  origins  of  the  League  go  back  to  the  period  of 
Epaminondas : — an  important  fact  in  history ;  they  closely 
resemble  the  coins  of  Pheneus  and  Messene,  struck  at  that 
time. 

Messene.  When  the  Messenians,  under  the  protection 
of  Epaminondas,  rebuilt  and  reoccupied  their  city,  they 
struck,  for  the  first  time,  silver  coins : 

Obv.    Head    of  Demeter,    corn-crowned.      Rev.    Zeus  striding, 
eagle  on  outstretched  arm.    Stater.    (B.  T.  CCXXVII.  29.) 

We  may  almost  regard  these  coins,  with  those  of  Megalo- 
polis, Pheneus,  Stymphalus,  and  Achaea,  as  belonging  to 
an  anti-Spartan  League.     Their  period  of  issue  was  short. 

A  remarkable  stater  at  Paris,  struck  at  Messene,  bears 
witness  to  the  influence  of  Philip  of  Macedon  (weight 
227-5  grains ;  grm.  14-73).  This  coin  follows  the  Abderite 
weight.     That  weight  had  been  adopted  by  the  Chalcidian 


1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  416.     The  smaller  coin  had  been  attributed  by  various 
authorities  to  the  Thessalian  Achaea,  but  this  attribution  is  now  given  up. 


PELOPONNESUS  389 

League ;  then  by  Philip  of  Macedon.  M.  Babelon 1  sees  in  it 
the  direct  influence  of  Philip,  whose  alliance  was  accepted 
by  the  Messenians  and  who  rewarded  them  after  the 
victory  of  Chaeroneia  by  assigning  them  territory  in  dis- 
pute between  Sparta  and  Messene.2  If  Babelon  is  right, 
this  will  be  an  almost  unique  instance  of  the  acceptance 
of  a  monetary  standard  on  purely  political  grounds,  and 
with  no  regard  to  commercial  convenience.  In  the  time 
of  Alexander,  the  Messenians  adopted  for  their  staters  the 
Attic  weight. 

There  is  not  in  Peloponnesus  any  phenomenon  corre- 
sponding to  the  attempt  of  Athens  to  monopolize  the 
coinage  of  the  Delian  Confederacy.  The  reason  is  obvious. 
The  Peloponnesian  League  was  dominated  by  Sparta,  and 
the  Spartans  not  only  had  no  notions  in  the  matter  of 
commerce,  but  had  not  even  any  coinage,  save  of  iron  bars, 
until  the  time  of  Alexander.  Spartan  generals,  it  is  true, 
highly  appreciated  the  gold  of  Persia,  but  it  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  in  any  way  officially  recognized.  Thus  the 
cities  and  confederations  of  Peloponnesus  followed  their 
own  courses. 

§  4.     The  Islands. 

In  Chapter  V  I  have  dealt  with  the  sixth-century  coinages 
of  the  Greek  islands,  which  were  nearly  all  more  or  less  close 
imitations  of  that  of  Aegina.  Only  of  the  earliest  issues  of 
Delos  I  may  here  say  a  few  words. 

The  island  of  Delos,  the  religious  centre  of  the  Ionian 
League,  and  for  a  time  the  political  centre  of  the  Athenian 
Confederacy,  appears  to  have  struck  in  the  sixth  century : 3 

Obv.  A.  Lyre.     Rev.  Incuse  square.     Weight,  122-126  grains 

(grm.  790-816).     (B.  T.  LXI.  16.) 
Obv.  Lyre.       Rev.  AHAI.  Wheel.      Weight,  5-7  grains  (grm. 

0-33-0-45).     (B.  T.  LXI.  20.) 

These  coins  are  of  Euboic  weight,  forming  an  exception 

1  Babelon,  Traite,  iii,  p.  693.  2  Polybius,  ix.  28  ;  Strabo,  viii.  4.  6. 

s  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  485. 


390  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  b.c. 

among  all  the  coins  of  the  Aegean.  Probably  they  were 
minted  on  the  occasion  of  some  Ionian  festival,  and  not 
only  for  purposes  of  trade. 

The  Cyclades,  as  we  have  seen  above  (Chap.  XIV),  inter- 
mitted their  coinage  at  the  time  of  the  Athenian  Empire, 
with  the  notable  exception  of  Melos.  Towards  the  middle 
of  the  fourth  century  some  of  them  resume  coinage : 

Andros. 

1.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.     Bev.  AN.  Young  Dionysus  standing. 

Weight,  217  grains  (grm.  14-08).     (B.  T.  CCXXXIX.  13.) 

2.  Obv.  Head  of  young  Dionysus.     Bev.  ANAPIHN.  Panther. 

Weight,  55-52  grains  (grm.  3-60-3-37).     {Ibid.  15.) 

Tenos. 

3.  Obv.  Head  of  Zeus  Ammon.      Bev.    TH.    Poseidon  seated. 

Weight,  260-253  grains  (grm.  16-80-16-43).     (Ibid.  21.) 

4.  Obv.  Similar.     Bev.  TH.  Bunch  of  grapes.     Weight,  63-54 

grains  (grm.  4-12-3-46).     (Ibid.  22.) 

Delos. 

5.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.     Bev.  AH.  Lyre.     Weight,  51  grains 

(grm.  3-30).     (B.  T.  CCXL.  14.) 

Naxos. 

6.  Obv.  Bearded  head  of  Dionysus.     Bev.  N  AZ 1 12 N.  Wine-cup. 

Weight,  58-56  grains  (grm.  3-72-3-65).     (Ibid.  23.) 

Paros. 

7.  Obv.  Goat  standing.     Bev.  PA.  Ear  of  corn.    Weight,  32-30 

grains  (grm.  2-05-1-90).     (B.  T.  CCXL.  29.) 

8.  Obv.  PAP.  Goat.     Bev.  Wreath  of  corn.     Weight,  29  grains 

(grm.  1-85).     (Ibid.  32.) 

Siphnos. 

9.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.      Bev.    ZI<J>.    Eagle  bearing  serpent. 

Weight,  58  grains  (grm.  3-72).     (B.  T.  CCXLI.  5.) 

Melos. 

10.  Obv.  Pomegranate.      Bev.  MAAI.  Drinking-cup.      Weight, 

123-115  grains  (grm.  7-97-7-44).     (B.  T.  CCXLIII.  7.) 

11.  Obv.  Similar.     Bev.  Lance  head  (or  Eagle).     Weight,  60-54 
grains  (grm.  3-85 -3' 48).     (Ibid.  8,  9.) 


THE  ISLANDS  391 

Thera. 

12.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo,  facing.     Bev.  OHPAI.     Bull  butting  : 
dolphin.     Weight,  95  grains  (grm.  615:  worn).    {Ibid.  24.) 

It  is  not  easy  exactly  to  fix  the  dates  of  these  issues. 
They  were  probably  made  either  after  the  Peace  of  Antal- 
cidas  (387  B.C.),  or  else  a  few  years  later  (378  b.c.)1  when 
a  league  of  the  islands  was  formed,  under  the  patronage 
of  Athens,  in  opposition  to  Spartan  supremacy.  At  this 
time  Athens  had  renounced  all  attempt  at  imposing  her 
coins  on  her  allies.  All  the  islands  except  Tenos  seem 
to  have  adopted  the  Chian  or  Rhodian  standard,  at  that 
time  dominant  on  the  coast  of  Ionia,  rather  than  the  Attic 
standard,  or  the  Aeginetan  standard,  which  they  had  used 
in  the  sixth  century,  and  which  was  in  use  in  the  Pelopon- 
nese  and  at  Thebes.  The  tetradrachm  of  Tenos,  of  Attic 
standard,  is  by  Babelon  assigned  to  the  time  of  the  Lamian 
War ; 2  and  in  fact  the  coin  is  obviously  a  copy  of  the  money 
of  Alexander.  The  coin  of  Thera  is  of  base  metal :  as  it 
has  lost  weight,  it  may  be  of  Rhodian  standard. 

Crete.  In  Crete,  coins  make  their  first  appearance  at 
Cnossus  (in  the  sixth  century),  Gortyna,  and  Phaestus. 
Other  cities  strike  abundantly  in  the  fifth  and  fourth  cen- 
turies. They  all  use  the  Aeginetan  standard  ;  and  we 
have  scarcely  any  means  of  assigning  dates  to  Cretan 
coins  since  we  know  almost  nothing  of  the  history  of  the 
island ;  and  a  certain  barbarism  which  is  common  in  their 
execution  prevents  us  even  from  dating  them  by  style. 
Thus  little  is  to  be  made  of  them  from  the  historic  point 
of  view,  though  many  of  them  are  interesting  from  the 
mythologic  and  epigraphic  points  of  view,  as  well  as  from 
that  of  art.3 

One  point,  however,  requires  a  brief  mention.  In  early 
Cretan  laws  fines  are  stated  not  in  cattle  as  in  the  laws  of 
Draco,  but  in  Xe^rjre?  (bowls)  and  rptrroSes.  It  is  difficult  to 
suppose  that  before  the  use  of  money  so   inconvenient  a 

1  Cavaignac,  Hist,  de  VanHquite,  ii,  p.  356.  *  Traite,  iii,  p.  826. 

3  See  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  3,  pp.  876-1046;    Wroth,  Num.  Chron.,  1884,  p.  1, 
and  B.  M.  Cat.  Crete  ;  P.  Gardner,  Types  of  Greek  Coins,  p.  160. 


392  COINS  OF  HELLAS,  480-330  B.C. 

measure  of  value  as  the  tripod  can  have  actually  been  in 
use.  One  is  tempted  to  think  that  in  Crete  pieces  of 
bronze  roughly  in  the  shape  of  the  tripod  or  the  lebes 
were  in  circulation,  just  as  in  China  were  pieces  of  bronze 
cast  roughly  in  the  shape  of  a  shirt  or  a  hoe.1  Such  objects, 
however,  do  not  seem  to  have  been  as  yet  discovered. 
Mr.  Svoronos 2  thinks  that  traces  of  this  primitive  currency 
may  be  found  on  Cretan  coins  of  the  fifth  and  fourth  cen- 
turies. There  are  silver  staters  (didrachms)  of  Cnossus, 
G-ortyna,  and  several  other  cities,  which  are  stamped  with 
a  countermark  appearing  to  represent  a  circular  lebes. 
A  stater  of  Cnossus  also  is  stamped  with  a  tripod,  and 
the  inscription  NOM,  of  which  the  meaning  is  doubtful. 
Svoronos's  view  is  that  these  coins  are  thus  marked  to  carry 
on  an  old  tradition,  and  that  they  take  in  circulation  the 
place  which  had  been  occupied  in  earlier  times  by  the 
actual  tripod  and  lebes.  It  seems  clear,  in  fact,  that  some 
at  least  of  the  inscriptions  mentioning  the  tripod  and  the 
lebes  are  as  late  as  the  latter  part  of  the  fifth  century, 
and  that  the  tripod  and  the  lebes  must  have  had  some 
definite  value  in  the  documents  of  that  period.  Numis- 
matists are  divided  as  to  the  admissibility  of  Svoronos's 
view.3  Dr.  Macdonald  suggests  (Coin-types,  p.  34)  that 
it  was  rather  the  bowl  full  of  meal  or  grain  which  was 
the  unit  of  value,  not  the  bowl  itself.  He  cites  Scottish 
analogies,  and  this  view  seems  very  reasonable. 

1  Ridgeway,  Origin  of  Currency,  p.  22.  a  Bull.  Corr.  Hell,  1888,  p.  405. 

3  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  3,  p.  875. 


CHAPTER    XIX 

COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  480-330  b.c. 
§  1.    Greek   Cities. 

It  is  impossible  here  to  discuss  the  coinage  of  South 
Italy  in  480-330  b.c.  in  full  detail.  It  has  not  yet  been 
carefully  worked  out  by  numismatists.  Sir  Arthur  Evans's 
monograph  on  the  coins  of  Tarentum  is  a  masterpiece  ; 
but  we  require  similar  detailed  investigations  of  the  numis- 
matics of  other  cities  of  South  Italy  before  we  can  survey 
the  region  as  a  whole.  Holm,  in  his  History  of  Greece,1 
has  devoted  a  few  pages  to  the  subject,  from  which  I  may 
cite  a  few  general  observations :  '  Two  currents  are  visible 
in  Western  Greece  (Magna  Graecia)  during  the  first  half 
of  the  fourth  century,  one  of  which,  of  an  autocratic 
character,  has  its  centre  in  Syracuse,  and  the  other,  allied 
to  freedom,  in  the  league  of  cities  which  extends  from  Thurii 
to  Tarentum.  We  may  further  maintain  that  Heracles,  who 
appears  on  the  coins  in  the  twofold  character  of  a  serpent- 
strangling  and  lion-slaying  hero  is  the  tutelary  deity  of 
the  league,  and  that  the  league,  while  it  certainly  has 
a  political  connexion  with  Thebes,  from  an  artistic  point 
of  view  seems  to  have  cultivated  closer  relations  with 
Athens.' 

Undoubtedly  the  political  history  of  the  Greek  cities  of 
Italy  is  dominated  by  the  relations  which  those  cities  held 
with  one  another,  with  the  barbarous  tribes  of  Italy,  such 
as  the  Samnites  and  Messapians,  and  with  the  powerful 
rulers  of  Syracuse.  In  this  light  their  coinages  should  be 
investigated.  But  it  would  not  answer  to  close  these 
investigations  with  the  date  of  Alexander  the  Great,  at 


1  Eng.  Trans.,  iii,  pp.  143-51. 


394         COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  480-330  B.C. 

which  their  history  becomes  more  interesting,  being  inter- 
laced with  the  story  of  the  growth  of  Roman  power.  I  may 
cite  another  interesting  generalization  of  Holm.  '  The  cities 
of  Bruttium  were  checked  in  their  development  by  Dionysius, 
as  were  the  cities  of  Sicily,  and  hence  their  coinage  ceases 
in  388,  Rhegium,  Croton,  Terina,  Temesa,  Caulonia ;  Locri 
and  Hipponium  had  not  yet  begun.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  cities  of  Lucania  were  no  doubt  hard  pressed  by  the 
Lucanians,  but  they  retained  their  independent  existence. 
Thurii  was  not  conquered  by  the  Brettii  till  356,  and  even 
then  was  not  permanently  subdued.'  These  dates,  however, 
are  not  accepted  in  the  Historia  Numorum ;  and  it  is  clear 
that  further  investigation  is  required.  Owing  to  the  unfor- 
tunate fact  that  the  British  Museum  Catalogue  of  Italy 
was  published  too  early,  the  chronological  relations  of  the 
Italian  coins  are  in  a  more  obscure  condition  than  those 
of  other  districts.  In  fact  the  coinage  of  Italy  must  be 
treated  as  a  whole,  and  as  a  continued  development;  but 
this  cannot  be  done  in  the  present  work. 

Most  of  the  cities  of  South  Italy  in  480-330  merely 
continue  the  coinage  in  use  at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth 
century,  until  they  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  Samnites  or 
the  Romans,  showing  progress  or  decay  in  art,  but  no  great 
change  in  other  matters.  There  are,  however,  a  few  points 
for  remark : 

(1)  The  introduction  of  gold  and  its  relation  in  value  to 
silver. 

(2)  Exceptional  coinages  of  a  few  cities,  such  as  Meta- 
pontum,  Thurii,  and  Locri. 

(1)  According  to  the  most  recent  view  of  Sir  A.  Evans,1 
the  earliest  gold  coins  of  Tarentum  were  struck  as  early 
as  375  B.C.:  they  are  the  beautiful  gold  staters  of  Attic 
weight.  (Obv.  Head  of  Demeter  veiled.  Rev.  Poseidon 
on  a  throne  welcoming  the  child  Taras.)  In  the  head  of 
these  coins  Evans  sees  the  work  of  the  Syracusan  engraver 
Evaenetus.     If  so,  the  date  can  hardly  be  later  than  he 

1  Horsemen  of  Tarentum,  1889.     More  recent  views  in  Num.  Chron.,  1912. 


GREEK  CITIES  395 

■supposes.  We  have  seen  that  at  this  time  several  of  the 
■cities  of  Asia  were  striking  gold  staters  on  this  standard ; 
land  it  seems  rather  in  reference  to  them  and  their  Attic 
■prototypes  of  the  period  beginning  in  394  b.c.  than  in 
■reference  to  any  western  issues  that  the  coinage  was  regu- 
llated.  The  gold  coins  of  Dionysius  at  the  time  weighed 
■90  and  45  grains  (grm.  5-83  and  2-91),  and  though  these 
■would  work  in  very  well  with  the  Tarentine  gold  coins, 
■they  are  scarcely  likely  to  have  suggested  them.  The  gold 
■coins  of  Carthage,  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century, 
[weigh  118  and  36  grains  (grm.  7-64  and  2-33).  and  so  belong 
■to  a  different  monetary  system.  But  the  gold  money  of 
■  Cyrene  consists  partly  of  staters  of  Attic  weight,  and  in 
|  them  also  I  would  trace  the  direct  influence  of  Athens  and 
I  Rhodes. 

Succeeding  gold  coins  of  Tarentum  (PI.  XI.  1)  appear  to 

have  been  issued  almost  exclusively  on  the  occasions  when 

i  soldiers  from  Greece  came  to  aid  the  people  of  Tarentum 

I  in  their  resistance  to  their  Italic  neighbours.     Archidamus 

S|was  summoned  from  Sparta  about  340  B.C.,  Alexander  the 

')  Molossian  from  Epirus  in  334-330  B.C.,  the  Spartan  Cleo- 

nymus  in  302,  Pyrrhus  in  281.     There  is   a  small  piece 

in  gold  which  can  be  definitely  assigned  to  the  time  of 

Alexander  the  Molossian,  since  the  types  which  it  bears 

I  are  identical  with  those  on  his  coins : 

Obv.    Head    of    Helios    radiate.      Rev.    A  A  EI.    Thunderbolt. 
Weight,  6-6  grains  (grm.  0-42).1 

Among  Tarentine  gold  coins  there  are  not  only  didrachms 

,;  or  staters,  drachms,  tetrobols,  triobols,  diobols,  and  obols  of 

:  Attic  standard,  but  there  are  also  pieces  which  follow  the 

i  weight  of  the  silver  litra  and  half-litra,  13-5  grains  (grm.  0-87) 

and  6-7  grains  (grm.  0-43).    The  weights  are  preserved  with 

noteworthy  exactness. 

In  a  find  discovered  at  Taranto  some  of  these  coins, 
though  not  the  earliest  of  them,  were  mingled  with  gold 
staters  of  Philip  and  Alexander  of  Macedon. 


1  Evans,  ibid.,  PI.  V.  5. 


396        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  480-330  b.c. 

Excluding  the   doubtful   archaic  gold   coins   of  Cumae, 
of  which  I  have  already  spoken,1  only  Metapontum  and 
Heracleia  in  Italy  besides  Tarentum   issued  gold  in   the 
fourth  century. 
Metapontum. 

1.  Obv.  Head  of  Leucippus.     Rev.  Two  ears  of  corn.     Weight, 

44  grains  (grm.  2-85).     Tetrobol.     (PI.  XI.  2.) 

2.  Obv.  Female  head.     Rev.  Ear  of  corn.     Same  weight. 
Heracleia. 

Obv.    Head  of  Athena.      Rev.  Heracles  seated.      Weight,  33 
grains  (grm.  2-13).     Triobol. 

These  coins  are  contemporary  with  those  of  Tarentum, 
and  probably  arose  from  the  same  temporary  needs. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  at  this  time  the  silver  didrachms 
of  Tarentum  still  weighed  123-120  grains  (grm.  7-97-7-77). 
How  these  silver  coins  exchanged  against  the  gold   is  a 
difficult  question.     It  appears  that  until  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century,  both  in  Sicily  and  in  Etruria,  gold  was 
fifteen  times  as  valuable  as  silver.     At  this  rate  the  gold 
stater  would  be  worth  nearly,  but  not  exactly,  sixteen  of  j 
the  silver  didrachms :    at  the  rate  of  twelve   to  one  the  j 
stater  would  be  worth  about  thirteen  of  the  didrachms. ! 
A  further  complication  arises  from  the  fact,  which  seems ! 
to  be  proved  by  the  contents  of  the  hoard  of  Benevento,2 
that    in    circulation  the    silver    didrachms    of   Tarentum,  I 
weighing    123-120    grains   (grm.  7-97-7'77),   were   closely 
mixed  up  with  the  silver  coins  of  Nola  (1 10-106  grains), 
Neapolis  (114-110  grains),  Velia  (112  grains),  and  Meta- 
pontum (119-118  grains).     The  irregularity  in  the  weights 
of  the   coins   of  Magna   Graecia   is   in  any  case   a   most 
puzzling  phenomenon,  and  one  of  which  no   satisfactory 
explanation  has  been  found. 

(2)  In  the   fourth    century   Metapontum  places    on   the 
bronze  coins  an  inscription  indicating  value  : 

1.    Obv.    Hermes   sacrificing.      Rev.   Ear  of  corn.     OBOAOC. 
Weight,  130  grains  (grm.  842). 

1  Above,  p.  208.  2  Horsemen  of  Tarmtum,  Appendix  A. 


GREEK  CITIES  397 

2.  Obv.  Head  of  Demeter.      Rev.  Same.     Weight,  127  grains 
(grm.  8-22).' 

These  coins  are  merely  money  of  account,  not  of  intrinsic 
value ;  but  the  inscription  is  important  as  showing  that 
the  people  of  Metapontum  did  not,  like  those  of  Sicily, 
reckon  by  litrae  of  bronze,  but  in  silver,  dividing  the 
drachm  into  oboli. 

Thurii  was  an  Athenian  colony  founded  when  Athens  was 

at  the  height  of  her  power,  443  b.  a    It  is  not  unnatural  that 

the  colonists  should  have  taken  with  them  the  full  Attic 

standard,  and,  almost  alone  among  cities  of  Italy,  should 

I  have   issued  the  tetradrachm  of  270   grains   (grm.   17-50) 

(PI.  XI.  4).     The  art  also  of  the  money  of  Thurii,  which 

v.  does  no  discredit  to  the  Athens  of  Pericles,  influences  the 

|i  issues   of  other   cities.    We   find  at   Neapolis,  Velia,  and 

:  elsewhere  imitations  of  the  head  of  Athena  of  Thurii. 

It  is  a  curious  fact  that  Locri  in  Bruttii,  though  a  flourish- 
ing city  from  the  time  of  its  foundation,  struck  no  coins 

I  until  the  fourth  century  b.c.     The  earliest  money  of  the 

1  city  is  a  series  of  staters  of  Corinthian  type  and  weight,  and 
differing  from  the  coins  of  Corinth  only  through  bearing 
the  inscription  AO  or  A  OK.  Locri  was  usually  on  very  good 
terms  with  the  Syracusans,  the  cement  of  friendship  being 
the  hostility  which  both  cities  felt  towards  the  intervening 
towns  of  Rhegium  and  Messana.  In  the  time  of  Dionysius 
this  friendship  became  closer,  the  Tyrant  making  over  to  the 

!  Locrians  the  territory  of  conquered  Caulonia,  and  taking 
a  wife  from  among  the  inhabitants.     If  we  are  right  in 

:  supposing  that  the  earliest  issue  of  Corinthian  imitations  at 
Syracuse  took  place  in  the  time  of  Dionysius,  we  shall 
naturally  give  to  the  same  period  the  earliest  of  the  Corin- 
thian issues  of  Locri.  These  issues  went  on  into  the  third 
century.  Mr.  Head  reasonably  suggests  that  they  were  the 
main  currency  of  the  city  for  external  trade.  Contemporary 
with  them,  but  not  earlier  than  the  middle  of  the  fourth 

1  B.  M.  Cat  Italy,  p.  259. 


398        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  480-330  B.C. 

century,  are  the  regular  issues  of  money  with  Locrian  type 
{Obv.  Head  of  Zeus  ;  Rev.  Eirene  seated),  perhaps  intended 
for  the  local  trade  in  Italy. 


§  2.    Etruria. 

The  coinage  of  Etruria  may  best  be  treated  in  the  present 
chapter.  The  treatment  must  be  necessarily  very  summary. 
To  go  into  the  question  of  the  aes  grave  of  Etruria  and 
Central  Italy  would  involve  an  investigation  of  the  metro- 
logical  views  of  such  writers  as  Haeberlin  and  Lehmann- 
Haupt,  and  of  the  whole  question  of  the  standards  used 
in  Italy  and  Sicily  for  bronze.  This  would  pass  outside 
the  limits  of  the  present  work.  I  will  therefore  only  treat 
of  the  gold  and  silver  coins.  Some  of  the  silver  coins  of 
Populonia  and  other  cities  have  a  decidedly  archaic  appear- 
ance, bearing  a  type  only  on  one  side,  while  the  other  is 
blank.  The  art  of  them  also  is  archaic.  But  it  is  doubtful 
if  any  of  them  can  be  given  to  an  earlier  date  than  480  b.  c. 

In  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries  the  coins  of  Etruria  show 
a  close  relation  to  those  of  Sicily,  in  fact  a  much  closer 
relation  than  they  exhibit  to  those  of  Magna  Graecia.  They 
are  based  upon  a  silver  unit  of  13-5  grains  (grm. 0-875).  This  is 
clearly  the  Sicilian  silver  litra,  the  equivalent  of  a  pound  of 
bronze.  It  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  the  pound  of 
bronze  in  Etruria  was  of  exactly  the  same  weight  as  the 
bronze  litra  of  Sicily,  since  the  relations  of  the  metals  in  the 
two  regions  may  not  have  been  identical ;  but  the  difference 
cannot  have  been  great. 

We  know  that  Etruria  and  Sicily  clashed  in  the  early 
part  of  the  fifth  century.  Anaxilaus  of  Rhegium  fortified 
the  straits  of  Messina  against  the  Tyrrhenian  pirates,  and 
the  great  defeat  inflicted  by  Hiero  I  of  Syracuse  in  474  b.o. 
on  the  combined  fleet  of  Carthaginians  and  Etruscans  seems 
to  have  put  an  end  to  the  thalassocracy  of  the  latter.  The 
coins  of  Etruria,  as  well  as  the  Greek  vases  so  common  in 
Etruscan  tombs,  tell  of  a  more  friendly  relation. 

The  facts  of  the  Etruscan  coinage  are  simple.     The  gold 


ETRURIA  399 

land  silver  coins  bear  marks  which  precisely  determine  their 
[value  in  exchange.  There  takes  place,  early  in  the  fourth 
[century,  a  reduction  of  standard,  by  which  coins  of  the 
Insual  weights  become  worth  twice  as  many  litrae  as  before. 
[Sir  A.  Evans,  with  great  probability,  has  connected  this 
[depreciation  with  a  parallel  one  introduced  at  Syracuse  by 
Dionysius  I.  Dionysius,  in  his  financial  extremity,  caused 
the  didrachm  of  Syracuse  to  pass  as  a  tetradrachm ;  that  is, 
he  caused  the  stater  of  135  grains  (grm.  8-74),  which  had 
I  hitherto  passed  as  worth  10  litrae  of  bronze,  to  pass  as  the 
I  equivalent  of  20  litrae  of  bronze.  And  since  no  mere  edict 
i  could  alter  the  relations  of  silver  to  bronze,  this  amounted 
to  decreasing  the  weight  of  the  bronze  litra  by  50  per  cent. 
Exactly  the  same  reduction  is  shown  by  the  marks  of  value 
to  have  taken  place  in  Etruria,  and  probably  at  the  same 
time.  In  Etruria  the  change  would  not  be  the  result  of  any 
financial  difficulty.  But  if  the  weight  of  the  Sicilian  litra 
of  bronze  fell,  it  would  be  convenient  for  the  maritime 
cities  of  Etruria  to  follow  suit. 

Gold  before  380  b.  c.   (about) :    proportion   of  gold  to   silver 
15  to  1. 

Lion's  head  :  plain  reverse  : 

Weight,  44  grains  (grm.  2-85)  f  =50  litrae. 

„       22       „      (grm.  1-42)  AXX  25    „ 

„       11       „      (grm.  0-71)  XIK  12*  „ 

Young  male  head  :  plain  reverse  : 

Weight,  22  grains  (grm.  1-42)  AXX        25     „ 
9       „      (grm.  0-58)  X  10     „ 

Silver  before  380  b.  c.  (about) :  with  plain  reverses  : 
Gorgon-head. 

Weight,  130  grains  (grm.  8-42)  X        =10  litrae. 
64       „      (grm.  4-14)  A  5     „ 

Head  of  Hermes. 

Weight,  64  grains  (grm.  4- 14)  A  5     ,, 

Gorgon-head. 

Weight,  32  grains  (grm.  2-07)  IK  2\  „ 


400        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  480-330  B.C. 

Young  male  head. 

Weight,  14  grains  (grm.  0-90)  I  ==  1  litra. 

Wheel. 

Weight,  13  grains  (grm.  0-84)  I  1     „ 


Silver,  after  380  b.  c.  (about) :  reverse  plair 

l  : 

Gorgon-head. 

Weight,  131  grains  (grm.  8-48)  XX  = 

20  litrae 

Head  of  Heracles. 

Weight,  130  grains  (grm.  8-42)  XX 

20 

n 

Male  head. 

Weight,  66  grains  (grm.  4-27)  X 

10 

>> 

„       32       „      (grm.  2-07)  A 

5 

tt 

Head  of  Apollo. 

Weight,  66  grains  (grm.  4-27)  X 

10 

n 

„        29       „      (grm.  1-87)  A 

5 

ii 

Head  of  Hermes. 

Weight,  31  grains  (grm.  2-0 )  A 

5 

ii 

Female  head. 

Weight,  60  grains  (grm.  3-88)  X 

10 

ii 

I  have  mentioned  only  coins  bearing  marks  of  value. 
There  are  many  other  coins  not  bearing  marks  of  value,  but 
clearly  belonging  to  the  same  series.  In  silver  we  have, 
before  380,  coins  with  the  respective  types  of  the  Chimaera 
and  the  Boar  which  are  of  the  weight  of  Attic  tetradrachms 
and  so  must  have  passed  as  20-litrae  pieces.  We  have  also 
drachms  with  such  types  as  the  Hippocamp  and  the  Hare 
which  must  have  passed  as  5-litrae  pieces. 

So  far  all  is  clear,  and  the  coinage  of  Etruria  is  parallel 
to  that  of  Sicily.  But  a  complication  is  introduced  by  the 
existence  of  another  series  of  coins  of  different  standard,  and 
clearly  regulated  by  another  unit  of  value  than  the  litra. 
As  we  have  in  this  series  the  same  reduction  of  the  value  of 
the  unit  to  half  what  it  had  previously  been,  which  we  find 
in  the  series  already  mentioned,  Mr.  Head  suggests l  that  in 
this  class  of  coins  also  a  change  took  place  about  380  b.  c. 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  14. 


ETRURIA  401 

And  as  the  style  of  the  coins  agrees  with  this  hypothesis, 
we  may  regard  it  as  more  than  probable. 

Silver  before  380  b.  c.  : 

Head  of  Apollo :  Reverse  plain. 
„  „  „        wheel. 

Weight,  175  grains  (grm.  11-34) :  mark  of  value  V,  five  units  of 
35  grains  (grm.  2-26). 

Other  coins  of  the  same  weight,  but  without  the  mark  of 
value,  are : 

Head  of  Zeus  :  Reverse  plain. 

Chimaera :  „ 

Running  Gorgon  :  ©Elk.  Wheel. 

OEILE.  Bull's  head  :  Hippocamp. 
[This  coin  weighs  only  145  grains  (grm.  9-40).] 
Also  coins  of  half  the  weight,  about  86  grains  (grm.  5-57). 

Gorgon-head :  Crescent. 

©Elk.  Male  head  facing :  Sphinx. 

Silver  after  380  b.c: 

Sepia  emerging  from  amphora :  Reverse  plain. 
Weight,  350  grains  (grm.  22-67):  mark  of  value  XX,  20  units 
of  17-5  grains  (grm.  1-13).     Also  weight,  178  grains  (grm.  11-53), 
mark  X. 

Hippocamp  :  around  dolphins.     Rev.  Cerberus  :  mark  V. 
Weight,  83  grains  (grm.  5-37). 

The  unit  in  these  coins  is  no  longer  the  litra  of  Sicily,  but 
corresponds  in  weight,  in  the  earlier  class,  to  two  Roman 
scruples  of  17-5  grains  (grm.  1-13) ;  in  the  latter  class  to  one 
such  scruple. 

An  interesting  and  complicated  problem  is  thus  set  us. 
In  the  first  place,  we  must  needs  suppose  that,  if  the  two 
series  of  coins  run  contemporaneously,  they  must  have  been 
minted  by  cities  in  different  districts  and  in  different  com- 
mercial circles.  The  first  class  belong,  in  part  at  least,  to 
the  maritime  city  of  Populonia,  which  was  the  chief  mart 
of  Etruscan  oversea  commerce.  It  was  in  close  contact  with 
the  island  of  Ilva,  noted  for  its  valuable  iron  mines,  and 
must  have  had  constant  intercourse  with  Sicily,  as  well  as 

1»B7  d  d 


402        COINS  OF  SOUTH  ITALY,  480-330  B.C. 


Corsica,  Sardinia,  and  Africa.  The  second  class  belonged 
probably  to  the  interior.  The  inscription  0EILE  cannot 
be  interpreted  with  certainty ;  it  was  formerly  read  as 
Faesulae,  but  this  reading  is  given  up.  The  coins  probably 
were  struck  at  cities  having  intercourse  with  the  east  coast 
of  Italy.  And  as  the  commerce  of  that  coast  was  domi- 
nated by  Corcyra,  it  is  natural  to  see  in  the  Etruscan  staters 
and  drachms  of  175  and  87  grains,  money  meant  to  match 
the  Corcyrean  staters  and  drachms,  which  are  of  exactly  the 
same  weight.  The  coincidence  of  weight  with  the  Roman 
and  Italic  scrupulum  would  be  an  adjustment.  And  indeed 
it  is  possible  that  we  may  here  have  a  reason  for  a  thing 
which  is  hard  to  explain,  the  fact  that  the  Corcyrean  coin- 
weight,  from  the  very  earliest  time,  never  exceeds  180  grains 
(grm.  11-66)  for  the  stater,  and  so  is  below  the  level  of  the 
Aeginetan  stater.  I  have  above  (Ch.  VII)  accepted  the 
view  that  the  Corcyrean  stater  is  in  fact  the  equivalent  of 
three  drachms  of  Corinth.  But  it  is  quite  possible  that 
some  adjustment  to  the  copper  units  dominant  in  Italy  may 
have  also  had  its  influence. 

The  Roman  coinage  does  not  come  within  the  scope  of 
this  work,  since  it  is  doubtful  if  any  Roman  bronze  coins 
were  issued  before  335  b.c.  :  the  silver  denarii  were  not 
struck  until  268. 

§  3.  Spain  and  Gaul. 

A  few  words  must  be  said  as  to  the  coins  issued  by  the 
Greek  cities  in  the  far  "West.  These,  Massalia,  Emporiae, 
Rhoda,  were  founded  by  Phocaean  colonists,  perhaps  at 
quite  an  early  time  ;  though  Massalia  received  fresh  colonists 
when  the  mother- city  was  taken  by  the  Persians,  in  the 
middle  of  the  sixth  century.  The  earliest  currency  of 
Massalia  is  the  Phocaean  coins,  uninscribed  and  of  a  great 
variety  of  types,  which  have  been  found  in  hoards  at  Auriol 
in  France 1  and  at  Cumae.  The  earliest  issues  of  Massalia, 
about  400  b.c,  are  small  obols,  bearing  the  heads  of  Apollo 

'  I  have  spoken  of  this  find  in  Chap.  XI :  see  Babelon,  Traite,  ii.  1,  p.  1571.  i 


SPAIN  AND  GAUL  403 

or  Artemis,  which  seem  to  continue  the  line  of  the  small 
Phocaean  coins.  But  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, Massalia  issued  drachms  of  a  type  which  long  per- 
sisted, and  served  as  a  model  for  the  rude  coins  struck  by 
the  Gauls  in  Southern  France : 

Obv.  Head  of  Artemis.      Bev.  MASS  A.  Lion.     Weight,  58-55 
grains  (grm.  3-75-3-56). 

The  standard  of  these  drachms  is  identical  with  that  used 
at  the  Phocaean  colony  of  Cumae,  and  in  other  Greek  cities 
of  South  Italy.  It  is  also  the  standard  used  for  silver  at 
this  period  at  Carthage,  and  hardly  to  be  distinguished 
from  that  of  Chios  and  Rhodes,  which  was  widely  used 
on  the  shores  of  the  Aegean,  or  the  standard  used  in 
Phoenicia. 

At  Emporiae  in  Spain  also  hoards  of  the  little  Phocaean 
coins  have  been  found,  some  of  them  rather  later  in  style. 
They  are  succeeded  by  little  pieces  bearing  the  head  of 
Athena  or  Persephone,  and  sometimes  the  letters  EM  or 
EM  P.  In  the  third  century  both  at  Massalia  and  at 
Emporiae  coinage  becomes  more  abundant. 


Dd2 


CHAPTER   XX 

COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  b.o. 

§  1.     480-406  b.c. 

The  plan  of  this  work  does  not  include  an  account  of 
the  history  of  the  cities  and  leagues  of  Greece,  except  so 
far  as  that  history  affects  their  coinage  and  their  commerce. 
And  as  regards  the  coins  themselves,  by  far  the  most 
important  facts  for  our  purpose  are  those  in  regard  to 
metal,  weights,  and  denomination.  The  types,  being 
usually  religious  in  character,  are  less  to  our  present  pur- 
pose. Thus  there  is  not  much  to  be  here  said  in  regard 
to  the  silver  coins  of  Sicily  in  the  fifth  century,  interesting 
and  beautiful  as  they  are.  They  adhere  strictly  to  the 
Attic  standard  and  mostly  continue  their  old  denomi- 
nations. 

One  issue  claims  a  special  mention.  The  well-known 
decadrachms  or  pieces  of  fifty  litrae1  issued  at  Syracuse 
by  Gelon  after  his  great  victory  over  the  Carthaginians 
at  Himera,  and  called  after  his  wife  Damareteia,  are  a  land- 
mark in  numismatic  history,  because  they  can  be  closely 
dated  to  the  year  479  b.c.  or  soon  after.  In  days  when 
medals,  properly  so  called,  did  not  exist,  it  was  not 
unnatural  that  at  a  great  time  of  national  triumph  the 
mint  of  a  city  should  strike  coins  of  unusual  size,  fashioned 
with  special  care.  We  have  seen  that  Athens  issued  deca- 
drachms in  memory  of  Marathon.  At  about  the  same  time 
some  of  the  cities  of  Thrace  and  Macedon  struck  coins  of 
unusual  size,  octadrachms  and  decadrachms,  which  may 
best  be  regarded  as  made  in  imitation  of  the  Athenian 
decadrachms,  and  used  on  the  occasion  of  the  passing  of 

1  As  to  the  litra  see  above,  p.  216. 


480-406  B.C.  405 

the  army  of  Xerxes.  Certainly  they  were  earlier  than  the 
large  coins  struck  by  Alexander  I  of  Macedon.  That  Gelon 
should  have  followed  the  precedent  set  by  Athens  in 
489  b.c.  is  not  a  matter  for  surprise. 

The  silver  coinage  of  all  the  cities  of  Sicily,  excepting 
Syracuse,  continues  through  most  of  the  fifth  century 
unchanged  in  weight  and  character,  though  showing  marked 
progress  in  style.  But  stirring  political  events  marked  the 
end  of  the  century,  first,  the  Athenian  invasion  of  415- 
413  b.c.  ;  next,  the  Carthaginian  invasion  of  409-405  b.c.  ; 
and  finally,  the  destructive  tyranny  of  Dionysius.  These 
great  events  have  left  noteworthy  marks  on  the  coinage. 

It  is  probably  to  the  siege  of  Syracuse  by  the  Athenians 
that  we  must  attribute  the  first  issue  of  Syracusan  gold 
coins.  Holm  indeed  suggests l  that  these  were  struck  after 
the  victory  over  Athens ;  but  this  is  improbable.  At  the 
time  gold  coinage  was  almost  unknown  in  the  West,2  or 
indeed  anywhere,  if  we  except  the  darics  of  Persia.  There 
must  have  been  some  strong  reason  for  the  innovation.  The 
most  likely  reason  is  financial  pressure.  Silver  might  well 
in  the  stress  of  the  siege  be  running  short :  to  melt  down 
some  of  the  gold  plate  of  the  wealthy  or  the  donaria  in  the 
temples  of  the  Gods,  and  to  strike  gold  coins  with  the  pro- 
ceeds would  be  a  most  natural  course.  We  know  that  the 
earliest  issue  of  gold  coins  at  Athens  took  place  a  little 
later,  in  the  extreme  stress  of  the  contest  with  Lysander. 
These  Syracusan  gold  coins  were  of  small  denomination : 

1.  Obv.  £YP.    Head  of  young  Heracles  in  lion's  skin.     Rev. 

£YPA.  Female  head  in  incuse  square.     Weight,  18  grains 
(grm.  116).     (PL  XI.  5.) 

2.  Obv.  CYPA.  Head  of  Athena.     Rev.  Gorgon's  head  on  aegis. 

Weight,  11-10  grains  (grm.  0-71-0-64). 

3.  Obv.  £YP.  Head  of  Athena.      Rev.  £YPA.  Wheel  in  incuse. 

Weight,  9  grains  (grm.  0-58). 
These  coins  are  of  somewhat  archaic  fabric,  remains  of 

1  Geschichte  Siciliens,  iii.  618. 

2  The  only  exceptions  are  the  early  gold  coins  given  to  Cumae,  as  to  the 
authenticity  of  which  there  is  grave  doubt ;  and  small  coins  of  Cyrene. 


406  COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  b.c. 

the  old  incuse  square  being  preserved ;  but  the  heads  on  the 
obverse  are  not  earlier  than  the  last  quarter  of  the  fifth 
century.  If  at  the  time  the  relation  of  gold  to  silver  stood 
at  fifteen  to  one,  as  we  have  reason  to  think,  we  have  the 
following  equations : 

18  grains  of  gold  =  270  grains  of  silver  =  4  drachms. 
II     »         »  «*»        ,,  „  2^      „ 

»     »         >>  135        ,,  „  2        „ 

The  notion  of  a  gold  coinage  having  been  once  started, 
we  cannot  be  surprised  that  other  cities  of  Sicily,  at  the 
time  of  the  Carthaginian  invasion,  followed  the  lead.  We 
have  gold  coins  of  the  period  struck  at  Agrigentum,  Gela, 
and  Catana,  or  more  probably  Camarina. 

Agrigentum. 

Obv.  AKP.  Eagle  on  serpent :  two  globules.  Rev.  £IAANO£. 
Crab.  Weight,  20-5-19-5  grains  (grm.  1-32-1-26).  (PL 
XI.  6.) 

Gela. 

1.  Obv.  TEAA£.  Fore-part  of  man-headed  bull.     Rev.  Armed 

horseman.      Weight,  27  grains  (grm.  1-74).     (PI.  XI.  7.) 

2.  Obv.  Similar.     Rev.  SHSIPOAIS.  Female  head.     Weight, 

18  grains  (grm.  1-16). 

3.  Obv.  Fore-part  of  bridled  horse.     Rev.   Z.ClZ\PO\\t.  Head 

of  Cora.     Weight,  13-5  grains  (grm.  0-87). 

Camarina. 

Obv.  Head  of  Athena,  sea-horse  on  helmet.  Rev.  KA.  Two 
olive-leaves  and  berries.  Weight,  18  grains  (grm.  1-16). 
(PI.  XI.  8.) 

All  these  appear  to  be  money  of  necessity.  Taking  the 
value  of  gold  compared  to  silver  at  fifteen  to  one,  we  have 
the  equations  : 

27  grains  of  gold  =  405  grains  of  silver  =  6  drachms. 
18        „         »  270        „  „  4       „ 

13-5     „         „  202-5      „  „  3       „ 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  two  olive  berries  on  the 
coin  of  Camarina  may  mark  it  as  the  equivalent  of  two 
Corinthian  staters  of  135  grains,  and  this  seems  probable. 


480-406  B.C.  407 

The  two  globules  on  the  coin  of  Agrigentum  are  a  clearer 
indication  of  value ;  it  also  was  probably  equivalent  to  two 
staters  of  Corinth.  It  is  somewhat  over  weight,  but  this 
may  be  an  accident :  of  Silanus  (a  Greek  name)  we  know 
nothing. 

At  an  earlier  time  than  the  issue  of  gold  coins,  some  of 
the  cities  of  Sicily  had  begun  to  issue  money  of  bronze. 
The  dates,  succession,  and  occasions  of  these  bronze  coins 
are  very  difficult  to  determine.  The  litra  of  bronze  was 
the  local  standard  of  value  in  Sicily ;  and  we  might  fairly 
have  expected  to  find  in  the  island,  as  in  Italy,  bronze  coins 
struck  of  fall  weight  at  first,  and  gradually  diminishing 
with  successive  reductions  of  the  litra.  There  were  issued, 
as  we  shall  see,  at  a  few  places,  notably  at  Himera  in  the 
fifth  century,  bronze  coins  of  substantial  weight,  though 
not  nearly  of  the  full  weight.  But  generally  speaking, 
the  bronze  coins  of  the  fifth  century,  which  bear  marks 
of  value,  are  of  so  trifling  a  weight  that  it  is  clear  that  they 
were  only  money  of  account.  These  Sicilian  coins  seem 
to  have  been  the  earliest  bronze  issues  in  Greek  cities  : 
Hellas  followed  their  lead.  This  is  quite  natural,  as  bronze 
was  at  the  basis  of  the  coinages  of  Sicily  and  of  Italy, 
though  the  basis  is  usually  hidden  from  sight. 

The  bronze  money  of  Himera  has  been  discussed  by 
F.  Imhoof-Blumer : *  an  inscribed  example  proves  that  the 
coins  belong  to  Himera,  and  not,  as  earlier  authorities 2 
supposed,  to  Camarina.  The  obverse  type  of  all  of  them 
is  a  Gorgon-head :  on  the  reverse  is  usually  only  the  mark 
of  value.  They  fall  into  two  classes :  for  the  earlier,  Imhoof 
gives  the  following  weights : 

Two  ounces  (Hexas),  grm.  12-05,  grains  186. 
Three  ounces  (Trias),  grm.  1640,  grains  253. 
Four  ounces  (Tetras),  grm.  21-30,  grains  330. 
Five  ounces  (Pentonkion),  grm.  26-52,  grains  410. 
Six  ounces  (Hemilitron),  grm.  34-80,  grains  538. 


1  Zur  Munekunde  GrossgriecJienlands,  Siciliens,  &c,  Vienna,  1887. 
*  Including  B.  M.  Cat.  Sicily. 


408  COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  b.c. 

He  observes  that  we  thus  arrive  at  a  litra  of  72  grammes 
(1,110  grains),  which,  is  about  a  third  of  the  full  weight  of 
the  Sicilian  litra  of  218  grammes,  3,375  grains.  The  later 
series  is  lighter  and  less  regular : 

Two  ounces  (Hexas),  grm.  740,  grains  115. 
Three  ounces  (Trias),  grm.  10-70,  grains  165. 
Six  ounces  (Hemilitron),  grm.  29,  grains  450. 

The  date  assigned  to  these  coins  is  from  the  middle  of 
the  fifth  century  to  the  destruction  of  Himera  in  409  b.  c. 

There  is  another  series  having  on  the  obverse  the  type 
of  a  cock,  with  the  Phoenician  letters  ZIZ  and  certainly 
struck  under  Carthaginian  rule : 

One  ounce  (Uncia),  grm.  3-85,  grains  59. 

Two  ounces  (Hexas),  grm.  2-60,  grains  40. 

Three  ounces  (Trias),  grm.  11-20-5- 10,  grains  173-79. 

Six  ounces  (Hemilitron),  grm.  1410-8-70,  grains  218-134. 

Imhoof  regards  these  coins  as  in  part  contemporary  with 
the  last-mentioned  issue,  and  therefore  not  struck  at  Himera, 
perhaps  rather  at  Solus.  But  none  of  the  Carthaginian 
adaptations  of  Greek  coins  can  safely  be  given  to  a  time 
before  the  great  invasion  of  409  b.  c.  ;  we  should  therefore 
prefer,  if  they  were  struck  at  Solus,  to  assign  them  to  the 
last  years  of  the  century. 

Lipara.  In  the  neighbouring  island  of  Lipara  coins  of 
greater  weight  were  issued  at  some  time  in  the  fourth 
century. 

Obv.  Head  of  Hephaestus.     Rev.  Stern  of  Galley. 

Litra,  grm.  108,  grains  1667. 

Hemilitron,  grm.  51-6-35-7,  grains  798-551. 

Trias,  grm.  25-6-23-6,  grains  397-363. 

Hexas,  grm.  17-81-14-32,  grains  275-221. 

Uncia,  grm.  11-08-8-35,  grains  171-129. 

Here  the  litra  is  somewhat  heavier,  about  half  the  normal 
weight  of  3,375  grains. 

Thus  the  highest  weight  which  we  find  for  the  litra  in 
Sicily  in  the  fifth  and  fourth  centuries  is  only  half  of  the 
normal  weight.     But  coins  so  heavy  are  exceptional ;   and 


480-406  B.C.  409 

we  find  in  the  fifth  century  at  many  or  most  of  the  cities 
of  Sicily  small  bronze  coins  bearing  marks  of  value,  but  of 
quite  irregular  and  merely  conventional  weight.  Among 
the  earliest  of  these  appear  to  be  the  coins  of  Rhegium.1 

Obv.  Lion's  scalp.     Rev.  RECINON.  One  globule. 

Obv.  ,,  Rev.  RE.  „  „ 

These  appear  to  be  unciae  :  the  letters  of  the  inscriptions 
appear  to  show  that  they  were  struck  before  415  b.  c. 
A  few  years  later  we  have  at  Syracuse — 
Obv.  ZYPA.  Female  head.     Rev.  Cuttle-fish  :  marks  of  value. 
Trias.     Weight,  62-44  grains  (grm.  4-01-2-85). 

The  date  of  these  coins  is  about  the  time  of  the  Athenian 
expedition ;  and  it  is  not  unnatural  to  connect  them  with  it. 

In  search  of  an  explanation  we  turn  to  the  coins  of 
Athens,  and  we  find  that  at  that  city,  as  already  shown,2 
there  were  current  at  the  time  of  the  capture  of  the  city, 
406-393  B.C.,  bronze  coins  issued  to  take  the  place  of  the 
silver,  each  bronze  coin  corresponding  in  type  to  a  denomi- 
nation of  the  silver,  and  evidently  passing  as  '  money  of 
necessity '.  It  would  be  natural  to  suppose  that  the  same 
thing  may  have  happened  in  Sicily  at  the  time  of  the 
Athenian  invasion.  Syracuse,  however,  does  not  stand 
alone :  a  number  of  the  cities  of  Sicily  issued  bronze  coins 
of  light  weight,  bearing  marks  of  value,  towards  the  end  of 
the  fifth  century.     I  add  a  list  of  some  of  these  : 

Agrigentum.  The  types  are :  on  the  obverse,  Eagle  holding 
hare  or  fish  ;  on  the  reverse,  Crab. 

Hemilitron.     Weight,  359-205  grains  (grm.  23'26-13'28). 

Trias  (three  ounces).     Weight,  165-60  grains  (grm.  10-69-3'88). 

Hexas  (two  ounces).     Weight,  132-103  grains  (grm.  8*55-6-67). 

Uncia.     Weight,  64-53  grains  (grm.  4'14-3*43). 

Camarina.  Types :  on  the  obverse,  Gorgon's  head  ;  on  the 
reverse,  Owl  with  lizard. 

Trias.     Weight,  65-49  grains  (grm.  4'21-317). 
Uncia.     Weight,  20-14  grains  (grm.  T29-0-90). 

1  B.  M.  Cat.  Italy,  p.  376  ;  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  110. 
a  Above,  p.  296. 


410  COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  B.C. 

Gela.     Types:  on  obverse,  Head  of  river-god  ;  on  reverse,  Bull. 
Trias.     Weight,  73-48  grains  (grm.  4*72-8*11). 
Uncia.     Weight,  15  grains  (grm.  0-97). 

Himera.  Types  :  on  the  obverse,  Male  figure  on  goat ;  on  the 
reverse,  Nike  holding  aplustre. 

Hemilitron.     Weight,  102-91  grains  (grm.  6*60-5-89). 
Trias.     Weight,  36  grains  (grm.  2 -33). 
Hexas.     Weight,  35  grains  (grm.  2  "26). 

Selinus.  Types :  on  the  obverse,  Head  of  river-god  ;  on  the 
reverse,  Selinon  leaf. 

Trias.     Weight,  138  grains  (grm.  8'94). 

The  natural  supposition  would  be  that  most  of  these  coins 
were  struck  at  the  time  of  the  Carthaginian  invasion,  during 
which  the  issuing  cities  perished.  The  example,  however, 
was  followed  by  cities  which  did  not  fall  into  the  hands  of 
the  Carthaginians : 

Segesta.  Types :  on  the  obverse,  Head  of  Segesta ;  on  the 
reverse,  Hound. 

Tetras.     Weight,  132-97  grains  (grm.  8'55-6'28). 
Hexas.     Weight,  113-43  grains  (grm.  7-32-278). 

And  the  Carthaginians  themselves  seem  to  have  imitated 
the  procedure  : 

Solus.  Types :  on  the  obverse,  Head  of  Heracles  ;  on  the 
reverse,  Crayfish. 

Hemilitron.     Weight,  116-114  grains  (grm.  7'51-7'38). 

Trias.     Weight,  69  grains  (grm.  4*47). 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  some  of  the  Sicilian  cities  had 
been   in  the  habit  of  issuing  very  small  coins  in  silver, 
bearing  marks  of  value ;  for  example,  we  find 
Leontini. 

Obv.  Lion's  head.     Rev.  Barleycorn. 

Hemilitron.     Weight,  5-8  grains  (grm.  0"37). 
Pentonkion.     Weight,  4  grains  (grm.  0'26). 
Hexas.     Weight,  1'4  grains  (grm.  0*09). 

Messana. 

Obv.  Hare  running.     Rev.  ME  in  wreath. 

Hemilitron.     Weight,  4'2  grains  (grm.  0*27). 


480-406  B.C.  411 

Segesta. 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  hound.     Rev.  £ETE. 

Hemilitron.     Weight,  45  grains  (grm.  0-29). 
Obv.  Head  of  hound.    Rev.  ErESTA. 

Hexas.     Weight,  2*1  grains  (grm.  0*13). 

Eryx.1 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  hound.     Rev.  EPY  and  H. 

Hemilitron.     Weight,  6*6  grains  (grm.  0*42). 

Rhegium. 

Obv.  Fore-part  of  hare.     Rev.  Two  globules. 

Hexas.     Weight,  2'8  grains  (grm.  0'18). 

Syracuse. 

Obv.  Female  head.     Rev.  Cuttle-fish. 

Trias.     Weight,  28  grains  (grm.  0'18). 

These  coins  are  parallel  to  the  small  silver  pieces  of  Athens, 
where,  however,  we  have  distinctive  types  and  not  marks  of 
value  to  indicate  the  denominations.  Athens  substituted 
for  these,  bronze  coins  of  the  same  types  in  the  last  years  of 
the  Peloponnesian  War :  the  cities  of  Sicily  substituted  for 
their  silver,  bronze  coins  with  similar  marks  of  value,  but  of 
very  small  intrinsic  worth,  in  the  stress  which  came  on  them 
in  the  last  years  of  the  fifth  century.  , 


§  2.     406-330  b.c. 

The  coinage  issued  for  Syracuse  by  the  Tyrant  Dionysius 
is  interesting  for  many  reasons.  It  is  of  great  beauty,  and 
of  an  unusual  character ;  and  since  we  are  able  to  determine 
many  points  in  regard  to  it,  it  throws  light  on  the  whole 
system  of  coinage  among  the  Greeks.  It  has  been  made  the 
subject  of  careful  study,  first  by  Mr.  Head2  and  then  by 
Sir  Arthur  Evans.3  Evans's  treatment  is  marked  by  full 
knowledge  and  historic  method,  and  is  a  model  of  successful 
research. 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1896,  p.  10. 
*  Coinage  o/  Syracuse,  1874. 

3  Freeman's  History  of  Sicily,  iv,  p.  230  ;  Syracusan  Medallions,  1892  ;  Num. 
Chron.,  1894,  p.  216 ;  cf.  Holm,  Geschichte  Siciliens,  iii,  601. 


412  COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  B.C. 

As  all  the  great  cities  of  Sicily,  except  Syracuse,  had  been 
either  destroyed  or  much  impoverished  by  the  military 
expeditions  of  the  Carthaginians  and  Dionysius,  before 
395  b.c,  it  would  be  natural  to  expect  that  after  that  date 
Dionysius's  rule  would  be  marked  by  a  great  issue  of  Syra- 
cusan  money.  Until  Evans  wrote,  numismatists  had  supposed 
this  to  be  the  case,  but  this  opinion  must  now  be  modified. 
Undoubtedly  Dionysius  required  for  his  fleet  and  the  mer- 
cenaries whom  he  collected  from  Greece,  Italy,  and  Spain, 
a  great  deal  of  currency  of  some  sort ;  but  he  seems  largely 
to  have  used  existing  coin. 

The  years  immediately  after  the  Athenian  repulse  from 
Syracuse  had  been  years  of  extraordinary  activity  in  the 
mints  of  Sicily.  At  all  the  great  cities,  Syracuse,  Agri- 
gentum,  Gela,  Selinus,  JVtessana,  and  the  rest,  we  find  a 
plentiful  issue  of  beautiful  tetradrachms,  the  style  of  which 
matures  with  extraordinary  rapidity.  At  Syracuse  we  have 
in  addition  two  new  phenomena.  The  great  decadrachms 
by  Kimon  and  Evaenetus  were  in  a  special  sense  a  trophy 
of  the  victory  over  Athens.  (PI.  XI.  9.)  They  were  prob- 
ably given  as  prizes  at  the  Assinarian  games,  established 
in  memory  of  the  capture  of  the  Athenian  army  near  the 
river  Assinarus.  Syracuse  also  began  to  issue  gold  coins. 
The  earliest  of  these,  almost  contemporary  with  the  gold 
coins  of  Gela  and  Agrigentum,  have  already  been  mentioned. 
Not  much  later,  and  certainly  contemporary  with  the  deca- 
drachms, were  the  following  gold  coins : 

1.  Obv.    Head   of  Arethusa.      Rev.    Heracles  strangling  lion. 

Probably  by  Kimon.1     Weight,  90  grains  (grm.  5*83). 

2.  Obv.    Young   male  head  (perhaps  Assinarus).      Rev.    Free 

horse.     Weight,  45  grains  (grm.  2*91). 

3.  Obv.  Female  head.  Rev.  Trident  between  dolphins.  Weight, 

20'5  grains  (grm.  1*33). 

Mr.  Head,  considering  that  at  the  time  gold  was  fifteen 
times  as  valuable  as  silver,  equates  coins  1  and  2  respec- 
tively with  1,350  and  675  grains  of  silver  (grm.  87-47,  43-73), 

1  Head,  Coinage  of  Syracuse,  p.  20. 


406-330  B.C.  413 

that  is  with  two  and  one  silver  decadrachms.  This  relation 
may  be  regarded  as  proved  by  the  fact  that  a  gold  coin  of 
the  first  kind  in  the  Greau  Collection 1  bears  two  globules  as 
a  mark  of  value.  This  also  confirms  the  value  above  given 
to  the  small  gold  coins  of  Sicily.  Coin  No.  3  is  probably 
equivalent  to  a  tetradrachm. 

Dionysius,  when  he  came  into  power,  no  doubt  continued 
the  issue  of  the  gold  coins  and  of  the  decadrachms.  But  it 
is  a  remarkable  fact,  first  established  by  Evans,  that  he 
struck  very  few  tetradrachms ;  indeed,  Evans  maintains  that 
he  struck  none  at  all  after  400  b.c.  '  The  prolific  tetradrachm 
coinage  of  Syracuse  suddenly  breaks  off  about  the  end  of  the 
fifth  century.  It  may  indeed  be  confidently  stated,  extra- 
ordinary as  the  phenomenon  may  appear,  that  no  tetra- 
drachms or  silver  pieces  of  smaller  denomination  are  known 
of  this  period  as  late  in  style  as  the  pentekontalitra  of 
Evaenetos,  which  seem  to  have  formed  the  sole  silver 
coinage  of  Dionysius  during  a  great  part  of  his  reign.  In 
the  great  hoards  of  the  period  that  from  time  to  time  have 
come  to  light  on  Sicilian  soil,  freshly  struck  pentekontalitra 
or  "  medallions  "  have  been  found  in  association  with  Syra- 
cusan  tetradrachms  of  earlier  style,  and  showing  traces  of 
wear,  though  newly  coined  pegasi  of  Corinth  and  her 
colonies,  and  brilliant  tetradrachms  of  the  Carthaginian 
I  camp-coinage,  accompanied  the  same  deposits.' 2  I  think, 
with  Holm,  that  this  statement  is  slightly  beyond  the 
mark,  and  that  some  tetradrachms  of  as  late  a  date  as 
385  b.  c.  are  known ;  but  broadly  put  the  assertion  seems 
incontestable. 

Dionysius  is  credited  by  ancient  historians,  notably  by 
Aristotle  and  Diodorus,  with  extreme  cruelty  and  effrontery 
in  his  methods  of  extorting  from  the  people  of  Syracuse  the 
great  sums  of  money  which  he  required  to  maintain  his 
army  and  his  fleet.  As  a  palliation  we  must  observe  that  if 
Dionysius  had  not  in  one  way  or  another  procured  the 
means  to  pay  his  mercenaries,  the   Carthaginians  would 

1  Annuaire  de  Numismatique,  1868,  PI.  IIL 
*  Evans,  in  Freeman's  Sicily,  iv,  p.  235. 


414  COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  B.C. 

certainly  have  sacked  Syracuse,  as  they  sacked  Selinus  and 
Agrigentum.  Of  the  various  operations  of  fraud  and  force 
with  which  he  is  credited,  I  need  refer  only  to  two,  which 
may  probably  have  left  traces  on  the  coins.  In  the  first 
place  we  have  extant  evidence  that  he  debased  the  currency, 
in  the  form  of  a  bronze  coin  of  the  exact  type  of  a  deca- 
drachm,  and  plated  with  tin,  which  has  been  published  by 
Evans,1  who  brings  this  official  forgery  into  connexion 
with  the  statements  of  Aristotle 2  and  Julius  Pollux 3  that 
Dionysius,  being  in  a  strait  for  money,  forced  upon  his 
creditors  tin  coins  of  the  nominal  value  of  four  drachmae, 
but  really  only  worth  one.  No  coins  of  this  time  in  tin  are 
known,  but  in  the  coin  cited  we  have  a  bronze  coin  plated 
with  tin.  Two  difficulties,  however,  beset  the  proposed 
explanation.  In  the  first  place,  the  coin  is  not  a  tetra- 
drachm  but  a  decadrachm ;  and  in  the  second  place,  it  is 
not  worth  so  much  as  a  drachm.  It  is  therefore  better  to 
regard  Evans's  coin  as  a  base  official  imitation  of  a  silver 
decadrachm.  The  expedient  of  issuing  a  certain  number  of 
plated  coins,  mixed  in  with  the  ordinary  productions  of  the 
mint,  was  not  unknown  to  the  Roman  moneyers.  And  we 
have  an  earlier  example  of  it  in  the  coinage  struck  by 
Themistocles  at  Magnesia.4 

Aristotle  in  his  Oeconomica  (ii.  20)  also  says  that  on  one 
occasion  Dionysius,  having  borrowed  money  from  the 
citizens,  countermarked  the  coins  in  such  a  way  as  to 
double  their  value  as  currency,  and  repaid  the  debt  with 
such  coins,  thus  actually  paying  only  half  what  he  borrowed. 
As  the  extant  coins  of  Syracuse  bear  no  mark  of  such 
restriking  or  countermarking,  we  may  be  almost  sure  that 
Aristotle  or  his  authority  has  somewhat  misunderstood  the 
transaction.  I  think  that  Evans  is  right  in  bringing  into 
connexion  with  it  another  passage  of  Aristotle  preserved  by 
Julius  Pollux,5  which  states  that,  whereas  the  earlier  talent 
of  Sicily  was  equal  to  24  nummi,  the  later  talent  was  equal 

1  Num.  Ckron,  1894,  p.  219 ;   PI.  VIII,  1. 

2  Oecon.  ii.  20.  8  Onom.  ix.  79. 
*  Above,  Chap.  XIV,  p.  256.  •  ix.  87. 


406-330  b.c.  415 

only  to  12  nummi.  This  shows  that  at  some  time,  which 
time  is  very  likely  to  be  the  reign  of  Dionysius,  the  value 
of  the  talent  was  diminished  by  half.  Originally,  as  we 
know  from  the  inscription  of  Tauromenium,1  the  talent  was 
of  120  litrae  ;  and  Evans  has  shown  that  the  nummus  was  of 
5  litrae,  or  of  the  value  of  an  Attic  drachm,  and  not,  as  had 
been  supposed  on  the  authority  of  Pollux,  of  the  value  of 
a  litra. 

The  hoards  of  coins,  buried  during  the  reign  of  Dionysius, 
which  have  been  discovered  explain  in  some  degree  the 
gaps  in  his  own  coinage.  From  these  '  it  appears  that  the 
silver  currency  of  the  Sicilian  cities  was  at  this  time  sup- 
plied more  and  more  by  imported  pegasi  of  Corinth  and  her 
Adriatic  colonies.  In  the  West  Sicilian  hoard '  (of  about 
400  b.  c.), '  the  early  didrachms  (tridrachms)  of  Leukas  were 
numerously  represented.  In  the  great  Naxos  hoard'  (of 
about  410  b.  a),  '  these  pegasi  already  occurred  in  consider- 
able abundance.  Add  to  these  a  copious  supply  of  Athenian 
tetradrachms  of  early  style,  and,  later,  the  abundant  Siculo- 
Punic  coinage,  and  it  will  be  seen  that,  without  drawing  on 
native  Hellenic  sources,  there  was  no  dearth  of  silver  cur- 
rency at  this  time  in  Sicily.' 2  In  these  same  finds  are  also 
many  Syracusan  deeadrachms,  and  abundant  tetradrachms 
issued  by  the  other  cities  of  Sicily  before  their  destruction. 

If.  as  is  probable,  the  reduction  in  the  value  of  the  talent 
to  half  took  place  in  the  time  of  Dionysius,  that  talent, 
having  before  been  of  the  value  of  six  tetradrachms,  would 
later  be  only  of  the  value  of  three  tetradrachms  or  six  Corin- 
thian pegasi.  If  Dionysius  borrowed  talents  of  the  former 
value,  and  repaid  them  with  talents  of  the  reduced  value, 
it  would  account  for  the  statement  of  Aristotle.  And  the 
obscure  statement  as  to  the  fresh  type  or  countermark  may 
be  readily  explained  if  the  Corinthian  pegasi  became  the 
main  coinage  in  place  of  the  old  tetradrachms.  It  even 
appears  probable  that  Dionysius  did  not  content  himself 
with  using  the  pegasi  of  Corinth,  but  struck  imitations  of 
them  himself. 

1  C.  7.  G.  5640,  41.  *  Evans,  Syracusan  Medallions,  p.  151. 


416  COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  b.c. 

The  earliest  coins  of  Corinthian  types  struck  at  Syracuse 
are  the  following : 

Obv.  Pegasus  to  left.     Rev.  SYPAKOSION.  Helmeted  head  of 
Athena  to  right.     Stater. 

Little  later  in  style  are  another  series  in  which  the  inscrip- 
tion ends  with  ON  instead  of  ON  (PL  XI.  10). 

The  Padre  Romano  long  ago  suggested  that  the  former 
class  of  these  coins  was  issued  in  the  time  of  Dion.  357  b.c.1 
Mr.  Head,  Mr.  Hill,  and  Sir  A.  Evans  all  assign  the  former 
class  to  the  time  of  Dion,  the  latter  to  the  time  of  Timoleon, 
346  b.c.2  M.  Six,  however,  preferred  for  class  I  an  earlier 
date,  that  of  Dionysius  I,  and  found  their  occasion  in  the 
foundation  by  that  tyrant  of  the  cities  of  Issa  and  Lissus 
on  the  Illyrian  coast,  which  might  bring  Syracuse  into  the 
circle  of  Corinthian  commerce. 

To  this  last  argument  we  cannot  attach  very  much  value, 
since  the  coast  of  Illyria  was  more  dominated  by  the  com- 
merce and  the  coins  of  Corcyra  than  by  those  of  Corinth. 
The  colonies  of  Dyrrhachium  and  Apollonia  made  their 
issues  of  coins  at  this  time  uniform  with  those  of  the 
former,  not  those  of  the  latter,  city.  But  there  are  serious 
reasons  for  thinking  that  after  all  Six  was  right,  and  that 
Dionysius  may  have  struck  the  earliest  Pegasus  coins. 

It  is  difficult  to  find  a  reason  for  which  Dionysius  should 
be  supposed  to  have  imported  coins  from  Corinth  instead 
of  striking  them  himself.  Nor  is  it  any  argument  against 
the  attribution  to  Dionysius  that  the  coins  under  considera- 
tion do  not  bear  his  name  or  signet;  for  the  same  thing 
is  to  be  observed  in  case  of  the  decadrachms,  which  were 
confessedly  issued  by  Dionysius. 

Sir  A.  Evans,  as  we  have  seen,  does  not  give  these  coins 
to  Dionysius  but  to  Dion.  The  chief  reason  which  he 
adduces  for  this  attribution  is  the  existence  of  closely 
parallel  coins  also  of  Corinthian  types,  bearing  the  inscrip- 

1  Alcune  monete  scoperte  in  Sicilia,  p.  23. 

2  Head,  Hist  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  179  ;  Hill,  Coins  of  Sicily,  pp.  117,  150  ;  Evans, 
Syracvsan  Medallions,  p.  156 


406-330  B.C.  417 

tion  AEONTINON,  Dion  having  been  closely  connected  with 
Leontini.  But  it  may  be  replied  that  Dionysius  was  still 
more  closely  connected  with  that  city,  which,  in  fact,  he 
refounded  and  peopled  with  his  mercenaries.  Contem- 
porary with  these  pegasi  struck  at  Syracuse  and  Leontini 
are  the  rare  Corinthian  staters  of  Terina,1  having  on  the 
obverse  the  monogram  t.  Terina  was  closely  connected 
with  Dionysius  and  dependent  on  him.2  Dion  had  no 
special  connexion  with  Corinth,  and  I  know  of  no  reason 
why  he  should  have  used  the  types  of  that  city.  The  only 
coins  known  to  have  been  issued  under  his  authority  bear 
the  types  of  Zacynthus.  I  am  therefore  disposed  to  prefer 
the  attribution  to  Dionysius. 

The  somewhat  later  Pegasus  coins  with  the  inscription 
£YPAKO£lflN  are  universally  attributed  to  the  time  of 
Timoleon.  And  this  is  most  reasonable :  Timoleon  was 
a  citizen  of  Corinth,  sent  by  that  city  to  the  help  of  the 
people  of  Syracuse  when  they  were  in  great  straits.  In 
other  coins  of  the  time  of  Timoleon  Corinthian  influence 
may  be  traced.  But  it  is  unlikely  that  the  Corinthian 
influence  began  in  his  time.  From  the  time  of  the  dis- 
astrous Athenian  expedition  against  Syracuse,  the  influence 
of  Athens  and  the  Athenian  owls  came  to  an  end  in  Sicily- 
Corinth,  as  the  chief  commercial  city  of  the  Peloponnesian 
allies,  would  naturally  take  her  place.  The  tetradrachm 
ceased  to  be  struck.  The  silver  decadrachm,  and  experi- 
mental coins  in  gold,  silver,  and  bronze,  arranged  on  the 
basis  of  the  litra  of  13-5  grains,  took  the  place  of  the  regular 
4,  2,  and  1  drachm  issues.  The  very  fact  that  in  the  time 
of  their  distress  the  Syracusans  applied  to  Corinth  for  aid 
is  in  itself  eloquent. 

A  coin  has  been  published  of  Corinthian  types,  having 
beneath  the  Pegasus  Carthaginian  letters  which  appear  to 
stand  for  the  name  of  Eryx.3      As  most  of  these  Punic 

1  Evans  in  Num.  Chron.,  1912,  p.  56;  PI.  IV.  26. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  53. 

3  Imhoof-Blumer,  Lie  Miinzen  Akarnaniens,  p.  6.  The  present  locality  of 
the  coin  is  unknown. 

1967  E   6 


418  COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  B.C. 

imitations  of  Greek  issues  belong  to  the  time  of  Dionysius, 
a  fresh  argument  is  furnished  for  the  Dionysian  date  of  the 
earliest  Sicilian  coins  of  these  types. 


The  abundant  and  remarkable  coinage  of  pale  gold  or 
electrum  which  in  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  makes 
its  appearance  at  Syracuse,  has  been  given  by  Romano,  Six, 
and  Holm  to  the  time  of  Dion.  It  presents  us  with  an 
entirely  fresh  set  of  types,  among  which  the  head  and 
attributes  of  Apollo  are  conspicuous : 

1.  Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.     Bev.  Head  of  Artemis.     (PI.  XI.  11.) 

2.  Obv.         „         „  Bev.  Tripod. 

3.  Obv.        „         „  Bev.  Lyre. 

4.  Obv.  Female  head.     Bev.  Cuttle-fish. 

The  weights  are  as  follows : 

1.  112*5  grains  (grm.  7*28)  =  100  silver  litrae  of  13*5  grains 

(grm.  0*86). 

2.  56*2  grains   (grm.  3*64)  =  50   silver   litrae  of   13  5   grains 

(grm.  0-86). 

3.  28*0  grains  (grm.   1*82)  =  25  silver  litrae  of  13*5   grains 

(grm.  0-86). 

4.  11*2   grains   (grm.  0*72)  =  10  silver  litrae    of  13*5   grains 

(grm.  0-86). 

This  gives  a  proportionate  value  of  electrum  to  silver  of 
twelve  to  one.  It  appears  that  in  the  time  of  Dion,  and 
down  to  the  great  issues  of  gold  coins  by  Philip  of  Macedon, 
gold  in  Sicily  was  fifteen  times  as  valuable  as  silver.  These 
electrum  coins,  therefore,  would  seem  to  have  been  reckoned 
as  of  four-fifths  the  value  of  gold. 

A  comparison  with  coins  struck  by  Dion  at  Zacynthus — 
Obv.  Head  of  Apollo.  Bev.  I A  AinNO*  Tripod— and  with 
the  fact  that  Dion  regarded  himself  as  in  a  special  degree 
under  the  protection  of  Apollo,  seems  to  furnish  conclusive 
reasons  for  assigning  these  coins  to  his  influence.  Mr.  Head, 
who  in  the  first  edition  of  the  Historia  Numorum  assigned 
them  to  the  time  of  Timoleon,  in  the  second  edition 
transfers  them  to  Dion. 


406-330  B.C.  419 

Besides  the  imitations  of  Corinthian  money,  the  attribu- 
tion of  which  to  Timoleon  I  have  justified,  there  are  coins 
in  gold  and  bronze  which  may  with  confidence  be  given 
to  his  time. 

Obv.  Head  (and  name)  of  Zeus  Eleutherius.  Bev.  £YPAK. 
Pegasus :  three  pellets.  Weight,  33  grains  (grm.  2*15- 
212). 
This  coin  was  formerly  mixed  up  with  the  electrum  of 
Apolline  types,  but  it  is  really  of  pure  gold.  The  marks 
of  value  show  that  it  was  equivalent  to  three  staters  of 
Corinthian  type,  403  grains  of  silver,  giving  us  a  relation 
between  gold  and  silver  of  12  to  1  instead  of  15  to  1.  And 
such  an  increase  in  the  value  of  rsilver,  or  such  a  fall  in 
the  value  of  gold,  actually  took  place  in  Europe  about 
350  B.C.,  in  consequence  of  the  acquisition  and  develop- 
ment of  the  gold  mines  of  Thrace  by  Philip  of  Macedon. 
In  Macedon,  and  in  the  Aegean  district  generally,  the  fall 
went  beyond  12  to  1,  as  far  as  10  to  1 ;  but  the  change  in 
value  would  probably  be  less  rapid  in  Sicily. 

The  alliance  coinage,  issued  by  the  cities  of  Sicily  in 
the  time  of  Timoleon,  mostly  in  bronze,  and  bearing  such 
inscriptions  as  ZYMMAXIKON  and  O  MO  NO  I  A,  is  of  great 
interest.  It  was  first  identified  by  Head,  and  is  fully 
discussed  by  Evans  in  Freeman's  History  of  Sicily,  vol.  iv, 
p.  349.  Timoleon  succeeded  in  establishing  something  like 
a  free  Commonwealth  of  Sicily,  which,  had  it  but  lasted, 
might  have  greatly  affected  the  history  of  Italy  and  the 
West. 

Mostly  of  the  time  of  Timoleon,  though  some  of  them 
may  have  been  struck  by  Dion,  are  some  bronze  coins  of 
substantial  weight,  belonging  to  Syracuse  and  to  other 
cities. 

Obv.  £YPA.  Head  of  Athena.  Bev.  Star-fish  between  dolphins. 
Some  of  these  are  marked  with  a  pellet,  showing  them  to 
be  litrae.     Weight,  630-420  grains  (grm.  40-27). 

Obv.  iYPA.  Head  of  Athena.     Bev.  Hippocamp.     These  bear 
no  mark   of  value  ;   but   they  were   probably  the   trias. 
Weight,  139-78  grains  (grm.  9-5). 
Ee2 


J 


420  COINS  OF  SICILY,  480-330  B.C. 

Obv.  £YPA.  Female  head.  Rev.  Dolphin  and  mussel.  A  pellet 
on  the  reverse  marks  this  coin  as  an  uncia.  Weight,  62-47 
grains  (grm.  4-3). 

The  weight  of  these  coins  is  somewhat  more  carefully 
regulated  than  is  that  of  those  above  mentioned :  they 
constitute  a  real  bronze  coinage.  In  the  fourth  century 
they  are  extensively  used  by  the  other  cities  of  Sicily 
as  blanks  whereon  to  restrike  their  own  types.  Contem- 
porary, and  indeed  sometimes  restruck  on  coins  of  Syracuse, 
are  the  following  of  Mytistratus  : 

Obv.  Head  of  Hephaestus.     Rev.  MY  in  wreath. 

Hemilitron.     Weight,  448-427  grains  (grm.  29-27). 
Uncia.     Weight,  103  grains  (grm.  6*67). 

It  is  noteworthy  that  this  hemilitron  is  restruck  on  the 
litra  of  Syracuse.  This  shows  how  little  importance  was 
attached,  even  in  the  case  of  these  more  weighty  issues, 
to  the  intrinsic  value  of  the  coins.  On  the  whole  it  is 
quite  clear  that  though  bronze  may  have  passed  by  weight 
in  Sicily,  yet  when  it  was  in  the  form  of  struck  coins,  the 
size  and  weight  of  these  had  little  relation  to  their  value. 
The  coinage  follows  the  analogies  of  Greece,  and  not  those 
of  Italy,  where  bronze  coins  of  full  value  were  issued, 
though  not  before  the  fourth  century.  Thus  the  coins  of 
Sicily  do  not  help  us  to  solve  the  vexed  question  of  the 
successive  reductions  of  the  litra. 

Besides  the  electrum  coins,  the  silver  Pegasi,  and  the 
large  bronze  coins  struck  at  Syracuse,  a  variety  of  interest- 
ing coins  struck  in  several  cities  bear  witness  to  the 
influence  of  Timoleon.  Agrigentum  and  Gela  resumed  their 
issues  of  silver,  though  they  only  struck  small  denomina- 
tions. We  find  inscriptions  on  coins  commemorating  Zeus 
Eleutherius  at  Syracuse  and  Agyrium,  commemorating 
Apollo  Archegetes  at  Alaesa  and  Tauromenium,  commemo- 
rating Demeter  at  Enna,  and  testifying  to  an  adoration  of 
Sicilia  at  Adranum.  One  city  stamps  its  coinage  with  the 
word  K  AINON,  new.  In  fact  it  seemed  that  Sicily  was  born 
anew,  and  a  fresh  devotion  to  the  chief  deities  of  the  island 


406-330  B.C. 


421 


arose  in  many  places.  But  in  twenty  years  the  enthusiasm 
had  vanished,  and  before  long  Sicily  fell  under  the  sway  of 
a  tyrant  as  bad  as  Dionysius,  Agathocles.  The  coinage  of 
Agathocles  also  is  characteristic,  and  Evans  devotes  some 
interesting  pages  to  it.  But  it  falls  outside  the  period 
treated  of  in  this  book. 


CHAPTER    XXI 
COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 

The  accession  to  the  throne  of  Macedon  of  Philip  II,  in 
359  b.c,  is  one  of  the  most  important  dates  in  the  history 
of  the  world.  The  Macedonian  kingdom  had  hitherto 
counted  for  little  in  that  history ;  the  reigns  of  its  rulers 
had  been  short  and  turbulent,  and  it  was  surrounded  by 
powerful  enemies.  But  the  population,  mainly  of  Thracian 
and  Illyrian  blood,  was  numerous  and  hardy ;  and  when 
Philip  had  secured  the  gold  mines  of  Pangaeum,  which 
brought  him  in  a  great  revenue,  and  had  imported  Greek 
science  and  culture  to  bear  on  his  rude  people,  and  had 
especially  developed  the  art  of  war,  the  greatness  of  Macedon 
was  assured. 

The  coinages  of  Philip  and  Alexander  reflect  the  political 
expansion  of  Macedon.  They  are  of  enormous  extent,  and 
soon  assumed  a  dominant  position  in  relation  to  money  in 
the  whole  ancient  world. 

The  chief  types  of  Philip's  coins  are  : 

Gold. 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo,  laureate.      Rev.  <t>IAirPOY.  Two-horse 

chariot.     Stater  of  about  133  grains  (grm.  8-6). 
Obv.  Head  of  young  Heracles  in  lion's  skin.     liev.  0IAIPPOY. 

Fore-part   of  lion.      Half-stater.      Also   the  quarter,  the 

eighth,  and  the  twelfth  of  the  stater. 

Silver. 

Obv.  Head  of  Zeus,  laureate.     Rev.  <t>IAIPPOY.  Boy-rider  on 
horse,  carrying  palm  or  crowning  horse.     Tetradrachm  of 
about  224  grains  (grm.  14*5). 
Obv.  Head  of  young   Heracles.      Rev.  0IAIPPOY.  Youth  on 
horse.     Didrachm,  octobol,  drachm. 
Also  smaller  divisions  and  bronze  coins. 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER       423 

The  most  noteworthy  and  abundant  of  these  coins  are 
the  gold  staters  with  chariot  type,  and  the  silver  tetra- 
drachms  with  the  victorious  horse.  Plutarch  tells  us  that 
Philip  was  very  proud  of  his  victories  at  Olympia,  and 
placed  the  chariot  on  his  coins  in  memory  of  them.1 

It  is  probable  that  the  gold  staters  (a  complete  innovation 
in  the  Macedonian  coinage)  were  first  struck  when  Philip 
gained  possession  of  the  Thracian  gold  mines.  It  does  not 
appear  likely  that  the  silver  tetradrachms  were  issued  before 
the  victory  with  the  race-horse  (k£\t}$)  at  Olympia  which 
coincided  with  the  birth  of  Alexander,  356  b.  c.  And  in  fact 
there  are  other  tetradrachms  of  Philip  which  may  be  earlier, 
and  fill  the  gap  359-356 : 

Obv.  Head  of  Zeus,  laureate.     Rev.  Bearded  Macedonian  horse- 
man, hand  raised. 
This  type  Philip  may  have  given  up  in  356  in  favour  of  the 
jockey  type. 

The  head  of  Zeus  on  the  silver  tetradrachms  clearly 
represents  the  Olympian  form  of  the  God.  Philip's  close 
connexion  with  Olympia  is  also  indicated  by  his  setting  up 
a  circular  building  there  containing  his  portrait  and  those 
of  his  family.  Evidently  he  regarded  the  great  Father  of 
the  Greek  race  as  his  especial  patron. 

The  head  on  the  obverse  of  the  gold  staters  is  commonly 
regarded  as  an  Apollo ;  and  in  some  cases  it  certainly  is 
Apollo,  with  long  hair  falling  over  the  neck.  But  more 
usually  it  is  a  head  with  short  hair  and  bull  neck,  and  very 
different  in  character  from  the  Apollo  of  the  Olympian 
coins.  As,  on  the  money  of  the  Mamertines  of  Sicily,  an 
imitation  of  the  head  on  the  Philippi  is  inscribed  APEO£, 
one  may  suspect  that  the  type  of  Philip  was  really  Ares,  the 
war-god  of  Thracian  and  Macedonian.  It  was  very  natural 
that  Alexander  should  substitute  the  head  of  Athena  for 
that  of  Ares. 

Philip  seems  to  have  taken  the  standard  alike  of  his  gold 
and  silver  coins   from  Olynthus.     The   gold   coins   follow 

1  Vita  Alexandri,  3,  4. 


424        COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 

the  Attic  standard,  which  had  since  394  b.c.  been  almost 
universally  dominant  for  gold.  The  silver  coins  are  nearest 
to  the  old  standard  of  Abdera,  which  had  been  powerful  in 
Thrace  early  in  the  fifth  century,  but  which  Abdera  had 
herself  abandoned  towards  the  end  of  that  century.  One 
would  naturally  have  expected  Philip  to  use  the  Chian  or 
Rhodian  standard  for  silver,  which  in  his  time  had  great 
vogue,  and  was  followed  by  the  powerful  Mausolus  of  Caria. 
The  reason  for  the  preference  of  a  somewhat  lighter  weight 
may  have  been  the  desire  to  make  gold  and  silver  better 
correspond  together.  It  would  seem  that  in  the  middle  of 
the  century,  at  all  events  in  Macedon,  gold  had  fallen  as  low 
as  10  to  1.  At  this  rate  a  gold  stater  of  133  grains  would 
be  equivalent  to  1,330  grains  of  silver,  that  is,  to  six  tetra- 
drachms  of  224  grains  (nearly)  or  twenty-four  drachms  of 
56  grains  (grm.  3-62).  This  drachm  may  well  have  been 
equated  with  the  Persian  tetrobol,  or  two-thirds  of  a  drachm, 
as  the  Rhodian  drachm  was  equated  in  Asia.  The  kings 
who  preceded  Philip  had  probably  reckoned  the  daric, 
which  was  their  standard  gold  coin,  as  equivalent  to  130 
x  12  or  1,560  grains  of  silver,  that  is,  to  ten  of  their  staters 
of  about  160  grains  or  20  drachms  of  Persian  weight.  That 
Philip  did  not  reckon  20  of  his  silver  drachms  to 
the  gold  stater,  but  24,  seems  to  be  proved  con- 
clusively by  the  fact  that  he  issued  fourths,  eighths,  and 
twelfths  of  the  gold  stater.  Reckoning  24  drachms  to  the 
stater,  these  would  be  equivalent  to  6,  3,  and  2  silver 
drachms;  reckoning  20  drachms  to  the  gold  stater,  they 
would  be  equivalent  to  5,  2|,  and  1|  silver  drachms,  which  is 
far  less  likely. 

It  would  have  been  simpler  had  Philip,  like  his  successor 
Alexander,  struck  gold  and  silver  on  the  same  standard,  as 
did  Athens,  where,  the  ratio  between  gold  and  silver  being 
12  to  1,  and  both  metals  being  struck  on  the  same  standard, 
24  silver  drachms  went  to  the  gold  stater.  Had  Philip 
taken  this  line,  any  fall  or  rise  in  the  value  of  gold  would 
not  have  been  of  any  practical  inconvenience.  The  gold 
stater  would  have  been  the  standard  coin,  and  24  or  22  or 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER       425 

20  silver  drachms  would  have  exchanged  for  it  as  the  value 
of  gold  fell.  That  would  have  been  the  adoption  of  a  mono- 
metallic currency.  For  this  apparently  Philip  was  not 
prepared ;  he  remained  a  bimetallist,  and  it  was  left  to 
Alexander  boldly  to  accept  monometallism. 

The  fall  in  the  value  of  gold  about  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century  may  be  proved  by  the  evidence  of  the 
accounts  of  the  Treasurers  at  Delphi.1  In  331  b.c.  the  value 
of  the  daric  is  there  stated  as  15  Aeginetan  silver  drachms, 
which  according  to  the  current  reckoning  were  equivalent 
to  20  Attic  drachms,  which  gives  nearly  the  ratio  of  10  to  1. 
The  value  of  the  gold  Philippi  is  given  in  the  same  series 
of  records  as  7  Aeginetan  staters  or  14  drachms.2  No  doubt 
Philippi  were  regarded  as  of  the  same  value  as  the  daric, 
the  difference  between  15  and  14  drachms  being  accounted 
for  by  the  agio  of  the  moment.  The  Philippi  are  a  few 
grains  heavier  than  the  daric. 

These  records  raise  a  curious  point.  It  seems  scarcely 
possible  that  in  the  last  years  of  the  Persian  Empire  the 
daric  should  at  Delphi  have  been  equivalent  to  20  Attic 
drachms  while  on  the  continent  of  Asia  Persian  drachms 
(sigli)  of  86  grains  (grm.  5-57)  should  still  have  been,  as  in 
the  fifth  and  early  fourth  centuries,  passing  at  20  to  the 
daric.  But  we  must  remember  the  immobility  of  the 
Persian  Empire,  of  the  'law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians 
which  altereth  not'.  A  commercial  empire  would  have 
lowered  the  weight  of  the  siglos;  but  probably,  as  the 
value  of  silver  rose,  all  payments  in  Persia  would  be  made 
in  gold  except  in  the  case  of  small  amounts. 

Two  cities  founded  by  Philip,  or  at  all  events  renamed 
by  him,  Philippi  in  Macedon  and  Philippopolis  (Gromphi) 
in  Thessaly,  were  allowed  by  the  founder  to  issue  coin  for 
a  time.  The  coins  of  Philippi  are  gold  staters,  with  the 
types  of  the  head  of  Heracles  and  a  tripod,  and  silver  coins 
with  the  same  types,  but  of  the  weight  of  Philip's  silver 
tetradrachms.     The  coins  of  Philippopolis  are : 

1  Bourguet,  Administration  financiere  du  sanctuaire  pyfhique,  p.  25. 

2  Bull.  Con.  Hell.,  xxiv,  p.  136. 


426        COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 

Obv.  Head  of  Hera.  Rev.  Zeus  Acraeus  seated.  Weight,  183 
grains  (grm.  11 -85). 

This  is  a  didrachm  of  Aeginetan  standard :  the  drachm 
was  also  struck.  These  coins  are  remarkable,  since  the 
weight  does  not  conform  to  the  Macedonian  but  to  the 
Thessalian  standard.  Probably  they  were  issued  before 
Philip  incorporated  Thessaly,  and  brought  the  Thessalian 
coinage  to  an  end. 

Alexander  adopted  the  Attic  standard,  both  for  gold  and 
silver.  The  acquisition  of  enormous  supplies  of  gold  from 
Ecbatana  and  other  fortified  cities  of  Asia  conquered  by 
Alexander  must  have  tended  to  keep  down  the  propor- 
tionate value  of  gold  to  silver  to  10  to  1. 

The  chief  types  of  Alexander  are : 

Gold. 

Obv.    Head  of  Athena,  helmeted.      Rev.    AAEIANAPOY   or 
AAEIANAPOY   BASIAEHS.      Winged  Victory,  holding 
naval  mast  and  spai\     Distater,  stater,  and  fractions. 
Silver. 

Obv.  Head  of  young  Heracles  in  lion's  skin.  Rev.  Inscr.  as  the 
gold.  Olympian  Zeus  seated  on  throne,  holding  eagle. 
Decadrachm,  tetradrachm,  didrachm,  drachm,  and  fractions. 

Bronze. 

Obv.  Head  of  young  Heracles.  Rev.  AAEIANAPOY.  Club  and 
bow. 

Alexander's  types  carry  on  the  Zeus  of  his  father  Philip, 
and  the  Heracles  of  his  ancestors.  The  introduction  of  the 
head  of  Athena  is  a  personal  innovation ;  probably  a  result 
of  Alexander's  Homeric  proclivities,  Athena  having  been 
the  guardian  goddess  of  the  Greeks  at  Troy.  Victory  is 
also  an  innovation:  the  mast  must  refer  to  some  victory 
at  sea. 

We  reach  next  a  question  which  is  very  difficult.  In 
337  b.c.  Philip  convened  a  congress  of  the  Greek  cities  at 
Corinth,  when  he  was  proclaimed  chief  and  leader  of  an 
anti-Persian  confederacy,  Philip  taking  the  place  of  Athens 
as  head  of  the  island-league.     In  the  next  year  Philip  was 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER       427 

assassinated  ;  but  Alexander,  soon  after  his  accession,  again 
called  together  a  congress  of  deputies  from  the  cities  of 
Greece  at  Corinth,  and  received  the  same  appointment  as 
his  father.  Each  Hellenic  city  was  to  be  free  and  auto- 
nomous, and  was  guaranteed  against  hostile  attack  and 
the  intrigues  of  would-be  tyrants.  But  certainly  Alexander 
claimed  not  only  the  command  of  the  Creek  army  in  Asia, 
but  also  a  general  headship  in  Europe. 

The  question  is  whether  these  arrangements  involved  anjr 
change  in  the  free  striking  of  coins  by  the  Greek  cities. 
The  immense  abundance  of  the  gold  and  silver  coins  of 
Philip  and  Alexander  shows  that  in  practice  they  were 
everywhere  dominant ;  but  what  was  their  legal  status  ? 
Was  the  coinage  Macedonian  or  imperial  ? 

To  begin  with  Philip.  Though  he  brought  to  an  end 
the  coinage  of  the  cities  of  Macedon,  and  of  Thessaly  when 
it  was  incorporated  with  Macedon,  he  does  not  appear  to 
have  interfered  with  that  of  Greece  south  of  Thermopylae. 
We  have  in  Boeotia  a  fresh  and  distinctive  coinage  (see 
p.  359  above),  which  begins  with  the  fall  of  Thebes  in 
338  b.  c. ;  and  in  Locris  a  similar  phenomenon  occurs.  Athens 
certainly  did  not  cease  to  strike  coins  after  the  battle  of 
Chaeroneia,  nor  after  the  congress  at  Corinth  in  337. 
Philip  could  no  doubt  have  stopped  the  issues  of  money 
in  Boeotia,  Locris,  and  Athens,  had  he  chosen  to  do  so ; 
and  the  fact  that  he  did  not  choose  is  notable.  He  had 
lived  as  a  hostage  in  Thebes,  and  must  have  been  aware 
that  when  Thebes  dominated  the  Boeotian  League  in 
446-387  b.c.  all  the  coinage  of  Boeotia  had  been  Theban, 
and  there  had  been  no  local  issues  at  the  other  cities.  He 
must  also  have  been  aware  of  the  monetary  policy  of  the 
Athenian  Empire  of  the  fifth  century.  But  if  Philip  did 
not  interfere  with  the  issues  of  Northern  Greece,  it  is  highly 
improbable  that  the  coinages  either  of  Peloponnesus  or  of 
Asia  would  be  at  all  affected  by  his  financial  measures. 
And  the  coins  themselves  furnish  no  evidence  of  any 
marked  change.  We  may  therefore  confidently  say  that 
Philip's  coins  are  Macedonian  only. 


428        COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDEE 

The  problem  in  regard  to  Alexander  is  more  intricate. 
The  power  of  Alexander  was  both  wider  and  more  despotic. 
He  must  have  been  well  aware  of  the  monopoly  claimed  in 
Asia  by  the  Kings  of  Persia  for  the  gold  daric :  a  privilege 
he  would  be  unlikely  to  give  up.  And  he  must  have  known 
of  the  financial  policy  of  the  Athenian  Empire  in  its 
flourishing  days.  Had  Alexander  lived  a  few  years  longer, 
he  might  have  established  a  world-coinage  like  that  of  the 
Roman  Emperors,  and  forbidden  all  other  mintage  in 
Europe,  Asia,  and  Egypt.  But  his  ceaseless  campaigns 
left  him  little  time  or  opportunity  to  attend  to  matters 
of  finance. 

The  gold  and  silver  coinages  of  Alexander,  like  those 
of  his  father  Philip  (which  seem  to  have  been  continued 
after  Philip's  death  in  certain  districts),  were  immense. 
Alexander's  mint  cities  extended  from  Pella  to  the  Far 
East;  and  finds  of  his  coins  have  been  constantly  made 
over  a  great  part  of  Asia  and  Europe.  The  subject  of  his 
mints  from  which  coins  were  issued  has  not  yet  been 
systematically  attacked  since  L.  Miiller  wrote,  half  a  cen- 
tury ago.  Miiller's  classification  is  quite  out  of  date,  and 
would  not  now  be  accepted  by  anj7  one.  The  editors  of 
the  Coin-Catalogues  of  the  British  Museum  when  the 
volume  of  the  Catalogue  including  Macedon  was  issued 
(by  Head,  1879)  set  aside  the  coinages  of  Philip  II, 
Alexander  III,  and  Philip  III  of  Macedon  and  their  suc- 
cessors for  future  treatment ;  and  the  pledge  then  given 
of  a  separate  volume  on  the  subject  has  not  yet  been 
redeemed.  Mr.  Newell  is  working  on  the  coins  of  Alex- 
ander,1 and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  he  may  succeed  in 
ordering  them  satisfactorily. 

Meantime  any  attempt  to  make  a  final  classification  of 
the  coins  which  bear  Alexander's  name  would  be  prema- 
ture. We  can  only  feel  our  way  towards  a  few  conclusions 
in  regard  to  them. 

Alexander's  gold  staters  succeeded  and  superseded  the 

1  Num.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  294,  and  Amer.  Journ.  of  Num.,  1911,  1912. 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER      429 

daric,  though  it  is  possible,  as  M.  Babelon  suggests,  that 
for  a  short  time  he  struck  darics  himself.  Almost  certainly 
some  of  the  double  darics  which  reach  us  from  the  Far  East 
(B.  M.  XXVII.  1)  were  struck  during  his  lifetime,  and  by 
his  authority.  But  no  other  gold  appears  to  have  been 
permitted,  except  in  the  case  of  the  Kings  of  Cyprus 
(above,  Chap.  XVI),  who  seem  to  have  continued  their 
coinages.  The  city  of  Cius  may  also  have  been  specially 
privileged. 

But  while  Alexander,  according  to  all  probability,  pre- 
served the  prerogative  of  the  Persian  Kings  as  regards 
the  coinage  of  gold,  he  seems  not  to  have  interfered  with 
issues  of  silver,  but  to  have  left  his  tetradrachms  to  make 
their  way  rather  by  their  own  merits  than  by  legislation. 

"We  may  summarize  the  situation  as  follows.  In  the  last 
third  of  the  fourth  century,  we  find  many  competing 
coinages  : 

(1)  The  gold  and  silver  of  Alexander  himself,  whether 
struck  under  his  direction  or  in  civic  mints  by  his 
permission,  or  after  his  death. 

(2)  The  gold  and  silver  of  Philip  III,  Alexander's  brother, 
who  succeeded  him  in  parts  of  his  dominions;  and  (in 
Egypt)  the  coins  of  Alexander  IV,  his  son  by  Barsine. 

(3)  The  gold  and  silver  of  the  Greek  Kings  of  Macedon, 
Syria,  and  Egypt :  several  of  these  rulers  assumed  the  title 
King  about  306  b.c.  ;  after  which  they  issued  abundant 
coins,  in  their  own  names,  in  many  of  the  cities  of  their 
dominions. 

(4)  The  continued  coinages  of  the  Greek  cities  which 
preserved  their  autonomy:  the  issue  of  gold  was  confined 
to  the  Kings  of  Cyprus,  and  the  city  of  Cius ;  but  many 
cities  continued  to  mint  silver,  and  on  various  standards. 
Also  in  some  districts  of  Persia  the  old  coinage  seems  to 
have  persisted. 

(5)  Coins  issued,  apparently  as  a  special  privilege  in 
some  of  the  cities  founded  by  the  Diadochi  and  others. 

We  had  best  begin  by  citing  a  few  series  of  coins  of 


430        COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 

classes  (4)  and  (5)  which  can  be  definitely  dated,  as  such 
coins  give  us  fixed  points  for  the  comparison  of  other  series. 
Paeonia.  Audoleon,  son  of  Patraus,  continued  in  Paeonia 
to  the  north  of  Macedon  the  coinage  of  his  predecessors. 
He  is  known,  from  an  inscription,1  to  have  been  reigning 
about  286  b.c.  :  the  reign  may  have  begun  about  315.  His 
earlier  coinage  is  as  follows  : 

Obv.  Head  of  Athena.  Rev.  AYAnAEONTOS.  Free  horse. 
Weight,  200-188  grains  (grm.  12-96-12'18). 

Also  the  half,  the  quarter,  and  the  sixth  of  this  stater.  At 
a  later  time  (after  306  b.c.)  we  have  staters  of  Attic  weight 
with  the  types  of  Alexander,  but  the  name  of  Audoleon. 
The  standard  of  the  former  set  of  coins  may  be  that  of 
Philip  II,  decidedly  lowered. 

Samothrace.  A  mint  which  issued  silver  coin  for  the  first 
time  in  the  period  330-280  b.c.  is  that  of  the  island  of 
Samothrace : 

Obv.  Head  of  Athena.  Eev.  1AMO.  Kybele  seated  on  throne. 
Weight,  125  grains  (grm.  8*10).  Br.  Mus.  Probably  a 
didrachm  of  Attic  standard  which  has  lost  weight. 

The  head  on  the  obverse  is  certainly  copied  from  the  gold 
of  Alexander,  which  gives  the  date.  The  issue  is  probably 
connected  with  the  festival  of  the  Cabeiri,  which  increased 
in  reputation  in  Hellenistic  times,  to  which  times  also  belongs 
the  temple  at  Samothrace  excavated  by  A.  Conze  and 
his  party. 

Uranopolis  in  Chalcidice  was  founded  about  300  b.c.  by 
Alexarchus,  brother  of  Cassander,  who  is  described  by 
Athenaeus2  as  a  notorious  euphuist  and  eccentric.  This 
man  issued  silver  coins  on  the  standard  used  by  Philip  II 
of  Macedon : 

Obv.  Sun,  moon,  and  stars.  Rev.  OYPANIAHN.  Aphrodite 
Urania.  Weight,  209  grains  (grm.  13*54).  Also  the  half 
and  quarter. 

1  C.  I.  ii.  312;  where  a   convention   between  Athens  and  this  king  is 
recorded. 
3  iii.  98  E. 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER       431 

His  coins,  however,  are  rare,  and  were  probably  regarded  as 
curiosities. 

Lysimachia,  earlier  Cardia,  in  the  Thracian  Chersonese, 
struck  a  few  silver  coins,  no  doubt  during  the  lifetime  of 
its  founder,  Lysimachus. 

Obi:  Head  of  young  Heracles.  Rev.  Victory  holding  wreath 
and  palm.     Weight,  82  grains  (grm.  5-31). 

The  obverse  type  is  taken  from  the  silver  of  Alexander,  the 
reverse  type  from  his  gold.  The  weight  is  that  of  a  Persian 
drachm  or  Attic  octobol. 

Demetrias,  in  Thessaly,  founded  by  Demetrius  Poliorcetes, 
struck  hemidrachms  or  tetrobols  of  the  same  standard. 

Obv.  Bust  of  Artemis.  Rev.  AHMHTPIEHN.  Prow  of  ship. 
Weight,  36  grains  (grm.  2*33). 

Lamia,  in  Thessaly,  struck  coins  at  the  same  time. 

Obv.  Female  head  wearing  fillet.  Rev.  Heracles  seated. 
Weight,  86  grains  (grm.  5'57). 

The  head  is  conjectured  to  be  that  of  Lamia,  queen  or 
mistress  (for  at  the  time  the  two  were  scarcely  distinguished) 
of  Demetrius  Poliorcetes,  to  whom  the  Athenians  raised  a 
temple.  We  have  a  similar  commemoration  of  Arsinoe,  wife 
of  Lysimachus,  at  Ephesus. 

Euboea.  A  district  in  Central  Greece  where  we  find  a 
fresh  departure  in  coinage  is  Euboea.  Histiaea,  in  the 
north  of  the  island,  seems  to  have  struck  coins  for  a  short 
time,  probably  when  the  cities  of  Euboea  had  revolted 
against  the  Macedonian  supremacy  after  Alexander's  death.1 

Obi:  Head  of  Maenad,  vine-crowned.  Rev.  ICTIAEHN.  Nymph 
Histiaea  seated  on  a  Galley,  holding  mast  or  trophy-stand. 
Weights.  89  grains  (grm.  5*76),  42  grains  (grm.  2'72). 

Head  calls  these  coins  octobols  and  tetrobols  of  Attic  standard ; 
and  as  they  had  to  work  in  with  the  money  of  Athens  and  of 
Macedon  this  seems  likely.  On  the  other  hand,  they  might 
well  pass  as  drachms  and  hemidrachms  of  Aeginetan  weight ; 

1  B.  J/.  Cat.  Central  Greece,  p.  lxiii. 


432        COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 

and  this  standard  was  in  use  in  the  neighbouring  Boeotia 
until  the  Lamian  War  or  later. 

Carystus  at  the  same  period,  if  we  may  judge  by  style, 
issued  the  following : 

Obv.  Cow  suckling  calf.      Bev.  KAPYSTIHN.  Cock.     Weight, 

119  grains  (grm.  771). 
Obv.  Head    of   bearded    Heracles.      Bev.    KAPY.    Bull    lying. 

Weight,  27  grains  (grm.  1*74). 

These  coins  seem  to  be  of  Attic  standard.     The  Carystians 
fought  on  the  side  of  Athens  in  the  Lamian  War.1 

In  Greece  proper,  the  end  of  the  Lamian  War  is  a  clearer 
landmark  than  the  battle  of  Chaeroneia,  or  the  destruction 
of  Thebes  by  Alexander.  After  that  war  the  grip  of  Mace- 
don  on  Greece  grew  tighter ;  and  it  is  probable  that  in  many 
cities  the  silver  coins  with  the  name  and  types  of  Alexander 
took  the  place  of  the  old  civic  issues.  This  may  have 
happened  in  Boeotia  and  Thebes ;  there  is,  as  we  shall  see  J 
directly,  some  evidence  that  it  took  place  at  Sicyon2  and 
other  cities.   But  on  this  question  further  research  is  needed. 


Several  of  the  cities  of  Peloponnesus  continued  their 
issues  at  this  period,  probably  not  regularly  but  spasmodi- 
cally, when  they  could  recover  autonomy.  At  other  times 
they  struck  tetradrachms  with  the  types  of  Alexander  or 
his  successors.  In  1850  there  was  discovered  near  Patras3 
a  large  hoard  of  Alexanders,  of  noteworthy  fabric,  which 
seem  to  have  been  in  great  part  minted  at  Sicyon,  as  the 
accessory  types  in  the  field — Apollo  holding  a  long  fillet, 
and  the  Chimaera — belong  to  that  city.  A  notable  feature 
of  these  coins  is  that  two  small  figures  of  Nike  are  placed  on 
the  back  of  the  throne  of  Zeus.  Other  cities  beside  Sicyon 
may  have  struck  some  of  these  coins. 

Among  the  continued  issues  of  Peloponnesian  cities  about 
300  b.  c.  we  may  note  the  following :  Elis,  Zacynthus,  Argos, 

1  Diodorus,  xviii.  11. 

2  Head,  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  411. 

3  Newton  in  Num.  Chron.,  1853,  p.  29. 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER       433 

Arcadia  (Megalopolis)  continue  their  previous  issues,  with- 
out change  of  type  or  weight,  though  the  latter  tends 
to  fall 

Messene,  retaining  the  type  of  the  thundering  Zeus,  passes 
from  the  Aeginetan  to  the  Attic  standard.  The  date  of  this 
transition  we  are  unable  to  fix  exactly;  it  may  be 
about  280. 

Lacedaemon  issues  silver  coins,  for  the  first  time  in  its 
history.  Areus,  king  309-265  B.C.,  struck  coins  bearing 
the  types  of  Alexander  but  his  own  name.  It  is  probable 
that  the  tetradrachms  of  Attic  weight,  having  on  one  side 
a  king's  head  and  on  the  other  the  archaic  Apollo  of 
Amyclae,  were  also  struck  by  Areus,  though  the  coins  bear 
only  the  inscription  A  A,  and  the  portrait  has  been  variously 
identified. 

Epidaurus,  not  earlier  than  330  B.C.,  issues  remarkable 
coins. 

Obv.  Head  of  Apollo..     Rev.  E.  The  seated  Asclepius  of  Thrasy- 
medes.     Weight,  61  grains  (grm.  3*95).  * 

The  type,  evidently  suggested  by  the  seated  Zeus  of  Alex- 
ander's coins,  and  the  weight,  both  agree  with  the  date 
above  assigned. 

The  cities  of  Crete  seem  to  have  been  little  affected  by 
the  expedition  of  Alexander,  though  Crete  no  doubt  supplied 
many  mercenary  soldiers  to  his  army.  They  continue  the 
old  types  and  standard,  though  the  issue  of  coins  is  far  less 
abundant,  until  the  second  century,  when  imitations  of  the 
later  coinage  of  Athens,  minted  on  the  Attic  standard, 
come  in. 

Most  of  the  islands  of  the  Aegean  continue  their  coinages 
into  the  third  century.  We  have  silver  coins  of  early 
Hellenistic  style  at  Amorgos.  Andros,  Ceos,  Delos,  Melos, 
Naxos,  Paros,  and  Tenos.  But  in  all  cases  the  standard  is 
no  longer  the  Aeginetan,  but  the  light  Rhodian.    They  also 

1  Mr.  Head  suggests  (Hist.  Num.,  ed.   2,   p.  441)   that  this    may   be   an, 
Aeginetan  drachm  of  light  weight,  but  this  is  improbable. 
1M7  F  f 


i 


434        COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 


issue  bronze  money.  In  the  standard  adopted  we  may  see  the 
influence  of  the  Ptolemies  of  Egypt,  whose  wealth  was  great 
and  whose  commerce  extensive.  The  islands  were  frequent 
subjects  of  contention  between  the  Kings  of  Egypt,  Syria, 
and  Macedon,  and  we  have  scanty  materials  for  following 
their  destinies  in  detail. 

We  hear,  however,  from  the  writers  on  metrology  of  an 
island  drachm,  8pa\fir)  vqcricoTiKri,1  and  this  may  well  be  the 
drachm  used  in  the  islands  in  the  Hellenistic  age,  when 
there  existed  a  confederation  of  islands,  Koivov  tg>v  Nrja-icoTaov,2 
having  its  centre  in  Tenos. 

We  pass  northwards  to  the  Propontis.  There  occurs,  in 
the  time  of  Alexander,  an  unusual  separation  between  the 
coinages  of  the  twin  cities  Byzantium  and  Calchedon. 
Byzantium  does  not  appear  to  have  struck  silver  coins  after 
the  memorable  siege  by  Philip  of  Macedon  (340  b.  c.)  until 
the  death  of  Lysimachus  (280  b.  a).  Probably  it  was  attached 
at  that  time  to  the  Macedonian  Kingdom.  We  find,  how- 
ever,-the  initial  letter  of  the  city's  name,  P'in  countermark, 
on  some  of  the  coins  of  Ptolemy  I  of  Egypt,3  which  were 
struck  at  Sidon  and  Tyre,  and  adopted  at  Byzantium.  As 
Byzantium  in  the  fourth  century  went  over  to  the  Rhodian 
standard,  there  is  nothing  to  surprise  us  in  this ;  the  coins 
of  Ptolemy  would  run  very  well  with  the  civic  issues  ;  but  it 
seems  to  indicate  a  poverty,  which  may  easily  be  accounted 
for  by  the  plundering  invasions  of  the  Gauls  at  that  time. 
Calchedon,  on  the  other  hand,  seems  to  have  continued, 
during  Alexander's  time,  the  previous  coinage.  In  the 
days  of  Lysimachus  tetradrachms  and  drachms  with  his 
types  were  struck  in  the  city.4 

In  Asia  Minor  the  best  proof  that  Alexander's  coinage  did 
not  bring  to  an  end  the  local  issues  will  be  found  in  the   I 

1  Hultsch,  Metrologici  scriplores,  i.  301  ;  ii.  143. 

2  C.  I.  xii.  5,  Nos.  817,  824.  s  B.  M.  Cat.  Thrace,  p.  110. 
*  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  512. 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER        435 

coins    bearing  the  names  of  rulers   and  founders.     The 
following  are  noteworthy  : 

Heracleia  Pontica.     Dionysius  337-305  b.  c. 

Obv.  Head  of  young  Dionysus,  holding  thyrsus.  Rev. 
AlONYttlOY.  Young  Heracles,  setting  up  trophy.  Weight, 
148-150  grains  (grm.  9*59-9' 72).    Also  the  half  and  quarter. 

Amastris  in  Paphlagonia.  The  city  was  named  after 
Amastris,  wife  of  Dionysius  of  Heracleia. 

Obv.  Male  head  in  tiara.     Rev.  AMA*£TPIEflN.  Goddess  seated 

on  throne,  holding  Victory. 
Obv.    As  last.      Rev.    AMA*£TPIO*fc    BA*£IAI££H:£.    Goddess 

seated  on  throne,  holding  Victory  or  Eros.     Weight,  144- 

148  grains  (grm.  9 -33-9-59). 

These  coins  belong  clearly  to  a  light  variety  of  the  Persian 
standard. 

We  may  trace  the  course  of  the  coinage  after  the  invasion 
of  Alexander  in  a  few  other  Asiatic  cities.  Sinope  and  Amisus, 
the  chief  mints  (with  Heracleia)  on  the  Asiatic  coasts  of  the 
Black  Sea,  continue  to  strike  coins  after  Alexander ;  but 
Amisus  changes  its  standard.  Up  to  the  end  of  the  fourth 
century  the  city  adhered  to  the  Persian  (or  Aeginetan,  for 
the  weights  fluctuate) ;  in  the  early  third  century  it  goes 
t  over  to  the  Rhodian. 

Sinope. 

Obv.  Head  of  Sinope,  turreted.  Rev.  *£INft.  Prow.  Weight, 
36-38  grains  (grm.  2  33-2  46). 

Amisus.  . 

Obv.  Head  of  city,  turreted.  Rev.  Name  of  magistrate,  not  of 
the  city.  Owl  standing  on  shield.  Weight,  22-27  grains 
(grm.  1-42-1 74  \ 

Perhaps  the  coins  of  Sinope  may  have  been  regarded  as 
Rhodian  tetrobols  :  the  coins  of  Amisus  were  probably  light 
hemidrachms  of  that  standard. 

Cyzicus,  Lampsacus,  and  Parium  in  the  Propontis  do  not 
seem  to  have  struck  civic  coins,  at  all  events  in  silver, 
between  330  and  200. 

Ff2 


436        COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 

In  speaking  of  the  land- ways  from  Europe  to  Asia  in  the 
time  of  Alexander,  we  must  free  ourselves  from  the  notion, 
natural  to  a  modern,  that  they  lay  through  Byzantium  and 
the  opposite  Calchedon.  The  sea-way  to  the  Euxine 
necessarily  lay  between  these  two  cities,  and  gave  them 
their  importance  ;  but  the  ordinary  route  from  Macedon  to 
the  East  lay  through  the  Thracian  Chersonese,  and  the 
crossing  between  Sestos  and  Abydos.  This  had  been  the 
route  of  Xerxes,  and  it  was  that  of  Alexander.  Thus  the 
districts  of  Bithynia  and  Mysia  to  the  east  and  south  of  the 
Propontis  were  somewhat  out  of  the  way  of  military  forces. 
Some  of  the  cities  of  these  districts,  Cius,  Elaea,  and  Aegae, 
for  instance,  seem  to  have  kept  their  autonomous  coinage ; 
Cius  until  it  was  occupied  by  the  kings  of  Bithynia ;  Elaea, 
and  Aegae  until  the  rise  of  the  Kings  of  Pergamon.  At  the 
same  time  Lesbos  issued  some  remarkable  coins : 

Obv.  Head  of  Athena.      Rev.  AIOAE.  Thunderbolt.     Weight, 
35  grains  (grm.  2 "26). 

These  are  supposed  by  Imhoof-Blumer 1  to  have  been  struck 
at  Methymna  for  the  people  of  Lesbos. 

At  Ephesus  the  civic  coinage  is  continuous,  until  Lysi- 
machus  (about  288  b.c.)  altered  the  name  of  the  city  to 
Arsinoeia,  and  struck  octobols  bearing  that  name.  But  at 
the  same  time  he  seems  to  have  struck  in  the  city  gold 
staters  and  silver  tetradrachms  bearing  his  own  name :  at 
least  they  bear  the  subsidiary  type  of  the  bee,  which  points 
to  Ephesus. 

At  Samos,  after  the  restoration  of  the  people  to  their 
island  by  Lysimachus,  in  322  b.c,  there  appears  an  abundant 
civic  coinage  on  the  debased  Chian  or  Rhodian  standard, 
which  goes  on  into  the  third  century.  The  coins  with 
Alexander's  name,  marked  with  a  galley,  and  probably 
struck  at  Samos,  appear  from  the  fabric  to  belong  to  the 
second  century. 

It  would  seem  that  the  only  regular  coinages  in  Caria,  of 

1  Zeit.f.  Num.,  iii,  p.  312. 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER       437 

the  beginning  of  the  third  century,  are  those  of  the  islands 
Cos,  Calymna,  Rhodus,  and  Cnidus,  the  latter  city  being 
practically  on  an  island,  as  the  long  peninsula  on  which  it 
stands  is  almost  free  of  the  mainland.  These  islands,  being 
subjects  of  contention  among  the  successors  of  Alexander, 
enjoyed  periods  of  autonomy.  Rhodes,  in  particular,  was 
a  powerful  state,  and  its  coins  give  us  the  best  indication  of 
date,  for  the  head  of  Helios,  which  is  their  regular  type, 
appears  radiate  after  the  time  of  Alexander ;  and  Head l  is 
probably  right  in  supposing  that  the  occasion  of  the  change 
was  the  setting  up  by  Chares  of  the  colossal  figure  of  Helios 
beside  the  harbour  of  Rhodes.  This  occurred  after  the  un- 
successful siege  of  Rhodes  by  Demetrius  Poliorcetes,  about 
292-280  b.c. 

Certain  bronze  coins,  struck  by  Eupolemus,  a  general  of 
Cassander — 

Obv.  Three  Macedonian  shields.      Rev.  EYPOAEMOY.  Sword 
in  sheath, 

are  supposed  to  have  been  issued  in  Caria  in  314  b.c,2  as 
they  are  found  in  that  region,  and  are  conjecturally  ascribed 
to  Mylasa. 

Several  of  the  cities  on  the  southern  coast  of  Asia  Minor 
continued  their  autonomous  coinages  into  the  third  century. 

Aspendus  continues  the  issue  of  the  staters  of  Persian 
standard,  of  the  types  of  the  wrestlers  and  the  slingers,  coins 
of  which  many  barbarous  copies  have  come  down  to  us, 
struck  probably  by  the  barbarous  Pisidian  tribes  of  the 
interior  of  Asia  Minor.  Also  at  Etenna  in  Pisidia  there 
appear  copies  of  these  coins,  with  the  wrestling  group  on  the 
obverse,  and  on  the  reverse  a  warrior  with  a  dagger  and  the 
legend  ETENNEHN.3  Selge,  as  in  earlier  times,  issues 
coins  of  the  same  types  as  those  of  Aspendus,  but  with  the 
inscription  £EATEnN. 

The  important  cities  of  Cilicia — Issus,  Mallus,  Soli,  and 

1  Hist.  Num.,  ed.  2,  p.  639. 

8  Num.  Chron.,  1891,  p.  135  (Wroth) ;  B.  it.  Cat.  Caria,  p.  lxiii. 

8  Imhoof-Blumer,  Kleinas.  Munzen.  PI.  XIII.  1. 


438        COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 

Tarsus — whence  had  been  issued  great  quantities  of  silver 
staters  of  Persian  standard  by  the  authority  of  Persian 
satraps,  seem  to  have,  into  the  third  century,  continued 
their  civic  issues.  These  bear,  on  the  obverse,  the  name  of 
Baal  of  Tarsus,  with  his  figure  seated  ;  on  the  reverse,  Lion 
killing  bull,  above  city- wall,  or,  Bust  of  Athena  facing.  The 
initials  of  the  four  cities,  I  M  Z  and  T,  appear  on  the 
separate  issues.  From  the  destruction  of  the  Persian  Empire, 
places  like  Mallus  and  Soli  decayed.  Alexander  fined  the 
people  of  Soli  200  talents  for  their  attachment  to  Persia : l 
probably  the  city  was  almost  ruined. 

Phoenicia,  unlike  Cilicia,  seems  with  Alexander  to  have 
come  more  into  the  stream  of  the  world's  commercial 
activity.  At  Sidon,  according  to  M.  Rouvier,2  dated  coins 
both  of  gold  and  silver  were  issued  as  early  as  327  b.c 
bearing  the  name  of  Alexander.  We  are  told  that  when 
Alexander  took  Sidon,  in  333  b.c,  he  deposed  the  reigning 
King  Strato  II  and  set  up  in  his  place  one  Abdolonymus. 
After  that,  history  fails,  and  we  cannot  say  whether  Abdo- 
lonymus continued  in  the  kingdom ;  but  we  hear  of  later 
kings.  The  dated  coins  of  Sidon  seem  to  take  the  place  of 
the  abundant  earlier  coinage  of  the  city;  and  we  should 
suppose  that  the  silver,  at  all  events,  was  locally  controlled. 
Certainly  the  bronze  coins  with  the  types  of  Alexander, 
which  were  struck  in  many  cities,  would  be  merely  local 
issues.  Mr.  Newell3  maintains  that  the  Alexander  coins 
struck  in  Cyprus  were  issued  by  the  local  rulers,  in  the  place 
of  the  previous  abundant  silver.  But  the  Cypriote  kings 
also,  as  we  have  seen  (Ch.  XVI),  went  on  with  their  issues, 
even  of  gold  coins,  after  the  expedition  of  Alexander. 

After  this  brief  survey,  we  must  endeavour  sum  up 
the  evidence,  though  any  conclusions  can  be  only  tentative. 

1  Anab.  ii.  5.  5. 

1  Journ.  Int.  d' arched,  numism.,  1902  :  cf.  Nomisma,  iv.  6. 

3  Num.  Chron.,  1915,  p.  299. 


COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER       439 

The  cities  of  Greece  Proper,  when  they  continued  to  issue 
coins,  used  their  accustomed  standards,  with  some  tendency 
to  fall ;  and  this  was  the  case  also  generally  in  Asia.  The 
light  Rhodian  or  Ptolemaic  drachm  is  aggressive  among 
the  islands.  But  we  do  not  find,  at  all  events  until  the 
third  century,  any  general  disposition  among  the  cities  to 
conform  to  the  new  monetary  conditions  established  by 
Alexander. 

Generally  speaking,  the  ceasing  of  the  current  coinages 
in  Europe  and  Asia  appears  to  have  been  gradual  and  not 
sudden.  The  local  coinages  went  on  in  most  places  until 
they  gradually  stopped,  not  as  illegal,  but  as  superfluous. 
"When,  after  the  defeat  of  Antiochus  III  by  the  Romans, 
some  of  the  cities  of  Asia  regained  their  liberty,  they  took 
to  issuing  tetradrachms  with  the  types,  and  of  the  weight, 
of  those  of  Alexander,  from  which,  however,  they  are  easily 
distinguished  by  their  peculiar  flat  fabric. 

Thus  the  coinage  of  Alexander  lasts  over  two  centuries, 
and  has  to  be  studied  in  connexion  with  the  civic  issues  of 
the  third  and  second  centuries,  as  well  as  with  the  coinages 
of  the  kings  of  Macedon,  Syria,  Egypt,  and  other  realms. 

The  coins  of  Philip  belong  to  a  definite  geographical 
area,  and  no  doubt  are  the  state  coinage  of  the  enlarged 
kingdom  of  Macedon.  Within  that  kingdom  only  a  few 
privileged  cities,  like  Philippi  and  Gomphi,  were  allowed 
to  strike  money.  But,  outside  it,  Philip  does  not  seem  to 
have  exercised  any  power  over  issues.  But  the  coins  bearing 
the  name  and  types  of  Alexander  seem  sometimes  to  be 
imperial,  and  sometimes  merely  civic  or  local. 

To  disentangle  the  whole  confusion,  and  to  separate  the 
occasions  of  the  Alexander  coins,  the  coins  bearing  the 
names  of  his  successors,  and  the  civic  issues,  would  be  a 
great  task,  and  unfortunately  a  task  for  the  satisfactory 
fulfilment  of  which  the  materials  at  present  hardly  exist. 

There  was  a  great  outbreak  of  barbarous  or  semi-barbarous 
copies  of  the  gold  coins  of  Philip  and  Alexander.  The 
coinage  of  Philip  worked  westward  :  it  was  copied  from  tribe 
to  tribe  as  far  as  Britain.     It  is  probable  that  the  Gauls, 


440       COINS  OF  PHILIP  AND  ALEXANDER 

when  they  invaded  Greece  in  279  B.C.,  acquired  a  quantity 
of  Philippi  as  spoil ;  and  that  it  was  from  that  beginning 
that  the  use  of  imitations  spread  among  the  Celts,  though 
there  was  another  line  of  influence  through  Massilia.  The 
imitations  of  Alexander's  coins,  both  in  silver  and  gold,  reach 
us  from  the  Oxus  valley  and  North  India. 


GENERAL  INDEX 


I  Abdera,  relations  of,  with  mother- 
city,  46,  47  ;  migration  to,  165  ; 
standard  of,  170,  190-192;  how 
colonized,  186;  beginning  of 
coinage  of,  199  ;  westward  course 
of  standard  of,  193,  270  ;  double 
weight  coinage  of,  196 ;  com- 
mercial influence  of,  200 ;  signi- 
ficance of  rich  coinage  of,  271  ; 
fifth-century  coinage  of, 273, 275; 
changes  of  standard  at,  276-280, 
312,  326,  346  ;  cessation  of  coin- 
age of,  324  ;  old  standard  of,  424. 

Abrocomas,  coins  issued  by,  317. 

Abydos  (Abydus),  type  of,  97 ; 
electrum  coins  of,  99 ;  coins  of, 
on  Persian  standard,  182 ;  drachm 
of,  262,  321 ;  local  issues  of,  286  ; 
I  coin  of,  266 ;  issue  of,  on  Rhodian 
standard,  308 ;  gold  coins  of,  330- 
335. 
•  Acanthus,  coinage  of,  197,  198 ; 
historical  evidence  of  coins  of, 
217  ;  breach  between  early  and 
later  coinage  of,  275  ;  changes  of 
standard  at,  280  ;  relation  of,  to 
Athens,  281  ;  standard  adopted 
by,  322. 

Acarnania,  standard  of,  139  ;  main 
currency  of,  Corinthian,  374 ; 
coinage  of,  377,  378. 

Achaea,  coinage  of,  387,  388. 

Acraephium,  distinctive  letters  on 
coins  of,  356,  357. 

Acropolis  of  Athens,  coins  found 
on,  154, 162. 

Adranum,  inscriptions  on  coins  of. 
420. 

Aegae,  struck  coins  before  Persian 
wars,  378  ;  retained  own  coinage 
until  rise  of  Pergamon,  436. 

Aegean  Islands,  Aeginetan  standard 
adopted  by,  122;  cessation  of 
coin  issues" in  the,  244,  285. 

Aegina,  electrum  coin  attributed 
to,  107;    coinage    of,    110-123, 


367;  comparison  of,  with  Eretria, 
130 ;  worth  of  mina  of,  176  ; 
influence  of,  179 ;  connected  with 
Sinope,  200;  coinage  of,  con- 
trasted with  that  of  Italy,  204  ; 
tributary  to  Athens,  effect  on 
coinage  of,  247 ;  standard  of, 
contrasted  with  that  of  Chios, 
252  ;  fluctuation  of  influence  of, 
286. 

Aeneia,  coinage  of,  197  ;  date  of 
extant  coins  of,  198 ;  intermission 
of  coinage  of,  275 ;  uses  Abderite 
standard,  281  ;  coin  of,  282. 

Aenus,  standard  of,  274,  286,  322, 
324 ;  gold  coins  of,  277,  329. 

Aeropus,  date  and  coins  of,  323. 

Aglaosthenes,  on  early  issues  of 
coins,  67,  110. 

Agrigentum,  coins  restruck  on 
pieces  of,  203;  gold  coins  of, 
209,  292,  412;  Attic  or  Corin- 
thian coins  struck  at.  215 ;  coin 
of,  with  globules,  406, 407;  types 
of,  409 ;  resumes  silver  issue, 
420. 

Agyrium,  inscriptions  on  coins  of, 
420. 

Alaesa,  inscriptions  on  coins  of, 
420. 

Alea,  beginning  of  coinage  of,  378  ; 
cessation  of  coinage  of,  382. 

Alexander  I,  coinage  of,  194,  195, 
275;  standard  adopted  by,  323. 

Alexander  III  (the  Great),  double 
darics  of,  89 ;  capture  of  dark 
hoards  by,  89,  259 ;  standard  of, 
118, 125  ;  wide  currency  of  coins 
of,  223;  gold  coins  of,  240; 
coinage  of,  422-429. 

Alexander  of  Epirus  (the  Molos- 
sian),  coins  of,  354,  395. 

Alexander  coins,  hoard  of,  432. 

Alexarchus,  issued  silver  coins,  430. 

Alyattes,  coins  attributed  to,  69, 
76,  77. 


442 


GENERAL  INDEX 


Alyzia,  revival  of  coinage  of,  374. 
Amastris,  coin  of,  435. 
Amathus,  coins  attributed  to,  310. 
Ambracia,  staters  of,  371  ;  revival 

of  coinage  of,  374. 
Amenhotep  I,  gold  weight  of,  118. 
America,  issue  of  coins  by  trading 

companies  of,  72. 
Amisus,  retains  Aeginetan  standard, 

263  ;   coinage  of,  after  invasion 

of  Alexander,  435. 
Amorgos,  silver  coins  of,  433. 
Amphictyonic    coins,    struck    by 

Delphi,  38,  363. 
Amphipolis,   founded    by   Athens, 

271,274;  gold  coins  of,  277,  329; 

coinage  of,  280;  standard  adopted 

by,  322. 
Amphissa,  late  rise  of  coinage  at, 

360. 
Amyntas  III,  alters  type,  323. 
Anactorium,     copied      Corinthian 

coinage,   139 ;    staters  of,   371 ; 

revival  of  coinage  of,  374. 
Andros,  coinage  of,  122  ;  coin  attri- 
buted to,  172;  assessment  of,  by 

Athens,    246  ;      resumption    of 

coinage  of,  390 ;  silver  coins  of, 

433. 
Androtion,  evidence  of,  compared 

with  that  of  Aristotle,  on  Solon's 

reforms,  143-148. 
Antalcidas,  treaty  of,  262. 
Antandros,    coins     of,    182,    267 ; 

adopted  North  Ionian  standard, 

287 ;  issued  drachms  of  Persian 

weight,  321  ;  small  coins  of,  321. 
Antisara,  coins  attributed  to,  190. 
Aphrodisias,  coin  attributed  to,  172. 
Apollonia,  standard  of,  139,  287, 

290 ;   date   of  coinage   of,  269  ; 

staters  of,  375  ;  issues  of,  uniform 

with  those  of  Corcyra,  416. 
Aradus,  late  beginning  of  coinage 

of,  340;   coinage  of,  341,  342; 

relation  of  coinage  with  that  of 

Byblus,  343 ;    Persian  influence 

upon,  345. 
Arcadia,  coinage  of,  381,  382. 
Arcesilas  III,  king  of  Cyrene,  218. 
Archelaus,  standard  of,  275,  326 ; 

coinage  of,  322,  323. 
Argolis,  standard  used  in,  115. 
Argos,  bars  found  in  Heraeum  of, 

113,  114;    coins  used  at,  123; 


repousse  bronze  work  of,  204  ; 
revival  of  coinage  of,  374  ;  struck 
coins  before  Persian  wars,  378 ; 
coinage  of,  where  dominant,  380 ; 
effect  on  coins  of  alliance  with 
Elis,  383  ;  continued  issues  of, 
432,  433. 

Ariarathes,  coins  issued  by,  "318. 

Aristodemus,  coins  of  Cumae  in 
time  of,  207. 

Aristophanes,  on  coinage  of  Athens, 
157,  222,  291;  quotation  from 
Birds  of,  227  ;  on  bronze  coins 
of  Athens,  295,  296 ;  on  Athenian 
silver,  337. 

Aristophon,  on  a  bronze  coin,  296. 

Aristotle,  on  origin  of  metallic 
currency,  20 ;  on  Pheidonian 
measures,  112;  statements  of, 
compared  with  those  of  Andro- 
tion, 143-153  ;  on  debasement 
of  coins  by  Dionysius,  414. 

Arsinoe  (Arsinoeia),  name  given  to 
Ephesus,  431,436. 

Asia,  early  gold  and  silver  standards 
in,  124 ;  comparison  of,  with 
Europe,  125  ;  division  of  coins 
of,  178,  179. 

Asia  Minor,  coinage  originates  on 
coast  of,  67, 68  ;  Persian  coinage 
used  in,  70,  86,  88,  89,  179; 
monetary  art  in,  85,  92,  93  ;  end 
of  electrum  coinage  of,  86  ;  ear- 
liest coins  of,  104 ;  Aeginetan 
standard  in,  122,  123,  168,  169; 
Rhodian  standard  in,  275. 

Aspendus,  countermarks  on  money 
of,  72  ;  coin  of,  180  ;  mint  active 
at,  312  ;  standard  of,  314  ;  silver 
mint  of,  334 ;  staters  and  types 
of,  437. 

Assos,  coins  of,  266 ;  standard  of 
local  issues  at,  286;  adopted 
North  Ionian  standard,  287 ; 
struck  on  Chian  standard,  290, 
308  ;  small  coins  of,  321. 

Assyria,  weights  and  measures  in, 
114. 

Astacus,  coin  of,  182 ;  drachm  of, 
262 ;  issued  drachms  of  Persian 
weight,  321. 

Astypalaea,  a  Dorian  island,  245. 

Astyra,  cessation  of  coinage  at,  258. 

Athenae  Diades,  type  attributed  to, 
190. 


GENERAL  INDEX 


443 


Athenian  Empire,  chief  currency 
in  time  of,  321. 

Athens,  value  of  gold  of,  36 ; 
monetary  policy  of,  40,  252, 270  ; 
favours  coinage  of  Cyzicus,  99 ; 
question  of  electrum  coinage  at, 
108 ;  Pheidonian  weights  of,  112; 
\o\kovs  at,  126 ;  standard  at,  127 ; 
issues  of,  129-133  ;  archaic  coins 
of,  134,  135 ;  standard  raised  at, 
136 ;  early  coinage  of,  141-143  ; 
Solon's  reforms  of  coinage  of, 
143-153 ;  type  of,  153 ;  coinage 
of  Peisistratus  at,  153-161 ;  coins 
of,  in  memory  of  Marathon,  161— 
163,  404  ;  colonizing  activity  of, 
186;  connexion  of,  with  Neapolis, 
190 ;  coins  of,  their  relation  to 
those  of  Corinth,  196,  197  ;  tetra- 
drachms  of,  199  ;  standard  raised 
at,  207  ;  silver  coinage  of,  222- 
232  ;  influence  of,  on  coinage  of 
Cyzicus,  237  ;  stater  of  Cyzicus 
used  in,  241 ;  influence  of,  on 
Islands,  244,  246,  249,  250,  340  ; 
exceptional  coin  of,  250  ;  special 
understanding  with  Cos,  255  ; 
coinage  of,  dominates  commerce, 
277;  silver  standard  of,  278; 
history  of,  as  shown  by  study  of 
coinage,  285-290;  gold  coinage 
of,  290-295 ;  bronze  coinage  of, 
295-297,  409,  411 ;  fluctuating 
standard  of,  311  ;  fall  of,  effect 
on  monetary  system.  323  ;  silver 
coins  of,  current  in  Thrace,  329  ; 
annual  change  of  coin  type  at, 
332  ;  gold  standard  of,  337,  424  ; 
date  of  earliest  gold  staters  at, 
358,  405  ;  fourth-century  coinage 
of,  366  ;  decline  of  influence  of, 
417  ;  continued  issues  after 
Chaeroneia,  427. 

Athos  (Mount),  hoard  of  darics  and 
tetradrachms  near,  90,  154,  162; 
colonized  from  Hellas,  186. 

Audoleon,  coinage  of,  430. 

Auriol,  hoard  found  at,  210. 

'  Babelon,  E.,  passim. 
Babylon,  weight  standards  of,  114, 

115 ;  standard  derived  from,  124. 
Barce,  coin  issue  begins  at,  221. 
Battus,  abundant  coinage  of,  218  ; 

relation  of,  to  Egypt,  221. 


Benevento  hoard,  396. 

Bergaeus,  coin  of,  273. 

Bertiscus  (Mount),  silver-producing 
district  of,  187. 

Beule,  on  early  coin  series,  135 ; 
ascribes  rude  coins  to  Persian 
army,  154. 

Billon,  debased  silver  coins,  54. 

Bisaltae  (tribe),  type  of  the,  194 ; 
coinage  of  the,  under  Alexander, 
195 ;  octadrachms  of  the,  195, 
196. 

Bisanthe,  colony  of  Samos,  192. 

Blass,  see  Kenyon. 

Boeotia,  coins  of,  in  Athenian  lists, 
227  ;  coinage  of,  355  ff. ;  coinage 
and  types  of,  after  peace  of 
Antalcidas,  358,  359  ;  later  coin- 
age of,  427. 

Bosporus,  Persian  standard  on  the, 
307. 

Bourguet,  E.,  on  Delphi,  363. 

Brandis,  on  weights  of  silver  and 
electrum  coins,  73,  74 ;  on  Baby- 
Ionic  and  Phoenician  standards, 
195,  345  ;  on  coinage  of  Cyprus, 
329 ;  on  coins  of  Corcyra,  376. 

Brasidas,  change  of  standard  in 
time  of,  272;  effect  on  coinage 
of  campaign  of,  274.  277,  322. 

Britain,  coinage  of  Philip  extended 
to,  439. 

Bruttium,  development  and  coinage 
of,  checked,  394. 

Biichsenschutz,  on  Greek  mer- 
chants, 11,  12  ;  on  mortgage,  14. 

Byblus,  see  Gebal. 

Byzantium,  use  of  iron  bars  at, 
120 ;  first  struck  coins,  200 ;  re- 
lation of,  to  Athens,  264,  265  ; 
drachms  of,  268;  standard  of, 
287,  321-326;  coinage  of,  as 
member  of  Cnidian  League,  300, 
307 ;  connexion  of,  with  Cal- 
chedon,  306,  308;  founded  by 
Megara,  320;  later  coinage  of, 
434. 

Caftanzoglu,  L.,  electrum  coins  in 
collection  of,  105. 

Calchedon  (Chalcedon),  founded  by 
Megara,  200,  320 ;  paid  tribute 
to  Athens,  264 ;  coinage  of,  268, 
290 ;  connexion  of,  with  Byzan- 
tium, 306,  308;    standards  and 


444 


GENERAL  INDEX 


coins  of,  306,  307,  321,  322; 
coinage  of,  during  time  of  Alex- 
ander, 434. 

Callicratidas,  pay  of  sailors  of,  251. 

Calymna  (Calymnos),  incuse  on 
coins  of,  107  ;  coin  attributed  to, 
181,  182 ;  adopted  Chian  stan- 
dard, 299  ;  autonomy  of,  437. 

Camarina,  coinage  of,  284 ;  gold 
coins  of,  292,  406 ;  types  of, 
409. 

Cambyses,  did  he  issue  coin  ?  88. 

Camirus,  retained  Aeginetan  stan- 
dard, 169  ;  coin  of,  170  ;  standard 
of,  245,  255,  286 ;  cessation  of 
coinage  of,  256  ;  took  part  in  the 
founding  of  Rhodus,  299. 

Campania,  standard  of,  207. 

Cardia,    standard    of,    182,    286 
founded    by    Miltiades    I,   199 
connexion  of,  with  Athens,  200 
coin  of,  266  ;  incuse  on  coins  of, 
268;  local  issue  of,  321. 

Caria,  standard  of,  185,  191. 

Carpathos,  coin  attributed  to,  168  ; 
coins  and  standard  of,  245,  346. 

Carthage,  standard  of,  221 ;  late 
beginning  of  coinage  of,  347- 
349 ;  silver  standard  of,  352 ; 
gold  coins  of,  395. 

Carystus,  tetradrachms  of,  133; 
type  of,  139  ;  changes  in  coins 
of,  247 ;  resumes  issue  of  civic 
coins,  366  ;  coins  of,  432. 

Catana,  tetradrachms  of,  215. 

Caulonia,  type  of,  201 ;  coin  system 
of,  206  ;  cessation  of  coinage  of, 
394. 

Cavaignac,  on  Athens,  229,  230. 

Cebren,  coin  attributed  to,  178. 

Celenderis,  coin  attributed  to,  172 ; 
Persian  standard  of,  313,  314. 

Ceos,  standard  of,  122 ;  ruddle  from, 
230 ;  silver  coins  of,  433. 

Chalcis,  a  colonizing  city,  124, 186  ; 
abounding  in  copper,  125,  126 ; 
early  coins  of,  127;  wheel  coins 
ascribed  to,  128,  132, 141 ;  stan- 
dard of,  148;  coins  of,  in  Athenian 
treasure-lists,  227 ;  changes  in 
coins  of,  247 ;  tetradrachms  of, 
356 ;  resumes  civic  issue,  366. 

Chalcidice,  colonies  in,  124,  186 ; 
Corinthian  influence  on,  125, 
138 ;  standard  of,  197-200,  206, 


270;  trinal  division  in,  251 ;  in-  I 
termission  of  coinage  in  certain 
cities  of,  275  ;  coinage  of,  280. 

Chersonese  (Chersonesus),  type  of, 
160 ;   coin  of,  170 ;    coinage  of,  < 
182,  199,  200  ;  standard  of,  321. 

Chios,  early  electrum  of,  75  ;  cessa- 
tion of  electrum  coinage  of,  85  ;  j 
coins  attributed  to,  93 ;   type  of,  , 
96,  167  ;  fractional  coins  of,  99  ;  ! 
tetrobols  of,  101 ;   coin  of,  165 ;  1 
silver  standard  of,  179  ;  standard 
of,  173,  175,  191,  193,  254,  256,  j 
257,  260,  271,  286,  287,  298 if.; 
later    electrum    issue    of,   239 ; 
coinage  of,  in  fifth  century,  248, 
250-253 ;   coinage  of,  compared  ! 
with  that  of  Peloponnese,  288, 
289. 

Cilicia,  coin  attributed  to,  172 ; 
standard  of,  180,  310,  318. 

Cimon  (Kimon)  (engraver),  head 
of  Arethusa  on  coin  by,  280; 
decadrachms  by,  412. 

Cistophori  (coins),  main  currency 
of  Asia  Minor,  50. 

Citium,  standard  of,  180,  314. 

Cittanova  hoards,  203. 

Cius,  coinage  of,  312  ;  situated  on 
trade  route,  333  ;  gold  staters  of, 
338  ;  allowed  to  issue  gold,  429 ; 
retained  autonomous  coinage, 
436. 

Clazomenae,  coins  of,  97,  98  ;  iron 
coins  of,  120  ;  coins  doubtfully 
ascribed  to,  173, 178;  breach  in 
coinage  of,  258 ;  an  island-city, 
262;  coinage  of,  311 ;  coins  of, 
by  Orontes,  316 ;  standard  of, 
325  ;  gold  issue  of,  331,  336. 

Cleander,  Tyrant  of  Sicyon,  387. 

Clearchus,  decree  of,  on  silver 
money,  226,  227. 

Cleitor,  struck  coins  before  Persian 
wars,  378. 

Cleonae,  beginning  of  coinage  of, 
378  ;  obols  of,  387. 

Clinton,  Fynes,  on  Sybaris,  202. 

Cnidus,  alliance  of,  with  other 
cities,  103  ;  standard  of,  122, 169, 
170,  286;  coin  attributed  to, 
164 ;  breach  and  resumption  of 
coinage  of,  258,  286 ;  effect  of 
victory  of  Conon  at,  295,  299; 
coinage  of,  as  member  of  League, 


GENERAL  INDEX 


445 


300,301;  coin  of,  305;  autonomy 
of,  437. 

Cnossus,  weights  of.  75,  115  :  sixth 
century  coins  of,  391 ;  staters  of. 
392. 

Colchis,  influx  of  gold  from,  333. 

Colophon.  Persian  influence  on, 
259-261,316;  standard  of,  287; 
fourth-century  coinage  of,  306. 

Conon,  effect  en  coinage  of  victory 
of,  237,  311 ;  bequest  of,  294. 

Corcyra,  coinage  of,  138-140,  169, 
375-377;  issues  coins  with  Corin- 
thian types,  374 ;  standard  of, 
385  ;  influence  on  Illyria,  416. 

Corinth,  commercial  importance 
of,  4;  standard  adopted  by,  79, 
130,  220  ;  employed  coins  earlier 
than  Athens,  110 ;  early  coins 
of,  134-138;  staters  of,  148; 
head  of  Athena  on  coins  of,  155 ; 
coin  divisions  of,  183 ;  coins  of, 
their  relation  to  those  of  Athens, 
196,  198 ;  influence  of  standard 
of,  197;  coins  of,  restruck,  203; 
early  coins  of,  their  effect  on 
Italy,  204;  standard  of,  raised, 
207 ;  influence  of, on  Sicilian  coin- 
age, 212,  213,  417  ;  modification 
of  coin  types  of,  223 ;  political 
relations  with  Athens  of,  225 ; 
drachms  of,  compared  with  coins 
of  Chios  and  Aegina,  252;  history 
and  coinage  of,  369-371 ;  gold 
and  bronze  coins  of,  375 ;  reduced 
weight  of  coins  of,  376,  377. 

Coroneia, distinctive  letters  on  coins 
of,  356,  357. 

Cos,  form  of  incuse  at,  107 ;  coins 
of,  166, 170  ;  Aeginetan  standard 
at,  169,  245  ;  coinage  of,  255 ; 
adopted  Attic  standard.  285, 286, 
299;  new  capital  of,  304;  au- 
tonomy of,  437. 
Couperie  (Terrien  de  la), on  Chinese 

coins,  72. 
Cranium,  standard  of,  385. 
Crates,  on   proportional   value   of 

gold  and  silver,  243. 
Crete,  civilization  of,  70 ;  standards 
used  in,  114,  115,  286;  coinage 
of.  391,  392;   later  coinage  of, 
"433. 

Crimea,  gold  from,  232. 
Croesus,  coinage  of,  68,  75,  84,  87, 


94,  124 ;  issues  a  state  coinage, 
83,  169 ;  fall  of  kingdom  of,  86. 
Cromna,  weight  of  coins  of,  318 ; 

coins  o*f,  322. 
Croton,  types  of,  201,  301 ;  coins 
of,  in  hoard,  203 ;  coins  struck 
in  alliance,  205 ;  coins  of,  206 ; 
standard  of,  284;    cessation  of 
coinage  of,  394. 
Cumae,  how  founded,  124  ;   early 
coinage  of,  207,  208,  209 ;  stan- 
dard of,  211 ;  coin  of,  213  ;  influ- 
ence of,  on  Sicilian  coinage,  370. 
Curtius,  Ernst,  on  coins  connected 
with  temples,  37,  73  ;  on  date  of 
Pheidon;     attributes    coins    to 
Euboea,  128  ;  on  staters  of  Elis, 
383. 
Cyclades  (islands),  silver  coinage 
in  the,    184 :    intermission  and 
resumption  of  coinage  of  the, 
390. 
Cyme  (in  Aeolis),  type  of,  97,  99 ; 

breach  of  coinage  at,  258. 

Cyme  (in  Euboea),  a  colonizing  city, 

124 ;  type  of,  128 ;  hoard  found 

near,  132. 

Cyprus,    incited    to   join    Ionian 

revolt,  96  ;    standard    of,    172, 

180,  185, 310, 314 ;  mentioned  in 

Treaty  of  Antalcidas,  262 ;  silver 

coinage  of,  317 ;  gold  issues  of, 

327-329;    kings  of,   328;    fifth 

century  issues  of,  340 ;  Alexander 

coins  of,  438. 

Cypselus,    originates    coinage    at 

Corinth,    136;    his  standard   of 

weight,  137. 

Cyrene,  standard  of,  80,  127,  156, 

157,  199;    coinage  of,  218-221, 

350-352  ;  influence  of  Athens  on, 

295 ;  gold  coins  of,  327,  395. 

Cyrus,  the  Younger,  coins  of,  88 ; 

pay  of  soldiers  of,  88,  90, 95, 235, 

241. 

Cyzicus,  varied  types  of,  71,  105, 

301,  332;    early  coins  ascribed 

to,  81 ;  coinage  of,  85,  86,  233, 

243,  265;   late  electrum  staters 

of,  93,  99  ;  inter-civic  coinage  of, 

102 ;  standard  of,  175,  176,  254, 

308  ;  electrum  of,  how  obtained, 

231 ;  drachm  of,  262 ;  incuse  on 

coins  of,  223, 268;  billon  standard 

of,  287;  coins  of,  used  in  com- 


446 


GENERAL  INDEX 


merce,  294 ;  silver  coins  of,  308, 
309,  316. 

Damastium,  coins  of,  354. 

Dardanus,  type  of,  98 ;  coin  as- 
cribed to,  168  ;  drachm  of,  262  ; 
coin  of,  266  ;  standard  of,  286  ; 
local  issues  of,  321. 

Darius,  coinage  of,  39,  87,  88 ; 
hoard  of  darics  of,  90 ;  influence 
on  coinage  of  expeditions  of, 
200. 

Dascylium,  satrap  of,  allows  inter- 
civic  coinage,  102;  description 
Of,  333. 

Datames,  continued  Cilician  coin- 
age, 314 ;  coins  issued  by,  317 ; 
silver  coins  of,  334. 

Daurises,  reduces  Abydos  and  Dar- 
danus, 77,  78. 

Decadrachms  issued  in  Greece,  163. 

Deceleia,  effect  of  Spartan  occupa- 
tion of,  231. 

Delos,  coin  attributed  to,  173; 
eariy  issues  of,  389 ;  coin  of, 
390  ;  silver  coins  of,  433. 

Delphi,  gold  objects  dedicated  at, 
69  ;  expenses  reckoned  in  staters 
at,  130 ;  historical  bearing  of 
coins  of,  361-363 ;  coins  and  in- 
scriptions of,  363,  364  ;  accounts 
of  Treasurers  at,  425. 

Delta,  use  of  Kedet  in  the,  80,  157. 

Demareteion,  demai'eteia  (deca- 
drachms), historical  importance 
of,  57,  58  ;  issued  by  Gelon,  162, 
193,  215,  404. 

Demetrias,  tetrobols  of,  431. 

Demodice,  reputed  originator  of 
coinage,  67. 

Demosthenes,  on  Cyzicene  staters, 
235,242. 

Derrones  (tribe),  coins  of  the,  193, 
194. 

Dicaea  (in  Chalcidice),  colony  of 
Eretria,  192 ;  standard  of,  197 ; 
local  coinage  of,  281. 

Dicaea  (in  Thrace),  standard  of, 
182 ;  in  Athenian  tribute-lists, 
192 ;  early  coinage  of.  192. 

Diodorus,  on  Abdera,  279  ;  on  effect 
of  victory  of  Conon,  301 ;  on  the 
Phocian  occupation  of  Delphi, 
362. 

Dion,  struck  coin  of  Zacynthus,  385 ; 


influence  of,  on  coins  of  Syra- 
cuse, 418. 

Dionysius,  see  Timotheus,  319. 

Dionysius  of  Syracuse,  gold  coins 
of,  395 ;  altered  value  of  di- 
drachm  of  Syracuse,  399  ;  issued 
coinage  at  Syracuse,  411-418. 

Draco,  laws  of,  109,  142,  143,  148. 

Dyrrachium  (Epidamnus),  copies 
coins  of  Corcyra,  139 ;  coin  of, 
371 ;  revival  of  autonomous  coin- 
age of,  374 ;  issue  of  staters  of, 
375, 376  ;  issues  of,  uniform  with 
those  of  Corcyra,  41 6. 


Ecbatana,  darics  found  in,  89,  259; 
gold  from,  426. 

Edom  (tribe),  coinage  of  the,  194, 
196. 

Egypt,  possible  source  of  Attic 
standard,  79,  156,  157  ;  use  of 
weights  and  measures  in,  114, 
115  ;  connexion  of,  with  Cyrene, 
220,  221 ;  ancient  standard  of, 
346. 

Eion  (on  the  Strymon),  coins  attri- 
buted to,  105,  106,  107. 

Elaea,  retained  autonomous  coin- 
age, 436. 

Electrum,  value  of,  33,  34,  35. 

Eleusis,  coin  found  at,  132. 

Elis,  coins  of,  connected  with  festi- 
val, 255 ;  struck  coins  before 
Persian  wars,  378  ;  new  type  of, 
379 ;  coinage  of,  where  domi- 
nant, 380 ;  coins  and  types  of, 
383 ;  continued  issues  of,  432, 
433. 

Eminacus,  coin  of,  272. 

Emporiae,  Phocaean  coins  found 
at,  403. 

Enna,  coin  of,  420. 

Ephesus,  types  of  coins  found  at, 
71,  75,  168  ;  coins  struck  by,  95  ; 
standards  of,  100,  101,  175,  248; 
adopted  Chian  standard,  299, 
300,  304,  305 ;  alliance  of,  with 
other  cities,  103  ;  coins  found  at, 
105  ;  coin  of,  178 ;  fall  of  silver 
standard  at,  179;  history  and 
coinage  of,  58,  257,  258;  Asiatic 
influence  on,  261  ;  coins  and 
standard  of,  289,  290;  coinage 
of,  as  member  of  League,  300 ; 


GENERAL  INDEX 


447 


gold  coins  of,  338 ;  type  of,  385 ; 
civic  coinage  of,  436. 

Ephorus,  on  Pheidon,  110-112. 

Epidaurus,  coins  of,  380;  later 
coins  of,  433. 

Epirus,  Corinthian  influence  on, 
374. 

Erechtheus,  legend  of,  131. 

Eretria,  sent  out  colonies,  124 
coinage  of,  127-130,  132 ;  asso 
ciation  of,  with  Athens,  133,  143 
Wappenmunzen  of,  141  ;  type  of, 
142, 190,  247  ;  standard  of,  148 
coin  of,  181. 

Erichthonius  and  Lycus,  credited 
with  first  issue  of  coins,  109. 

Erythrae,  coins  of,  100 ;  standards 
and  coins  of,  100,  260,  261,  267, 
306 ;  coins  struck  at,  178  ;  Per- 
sian influence  on,  266. 

Eryx,  coin  of,  411 ;  coin  of  possible 
attribution  to,  417. 

Etenna,  standard  of,  314  ;  coins  of, 
437. 

Etruria,  value  of  gold  in,  396 ; 
coinage  of,  398-402. 

Euboea,  standard  of,  79, 198  ;  early 
coinage  of,  124-133  ;  coinage  of, 
contrasted  with  Peisistratid,  158  ; 
coins  of,  contrasted  with  those 
of  Corinth,  204 ;  changes  in 
coinage  of,  247  ;  federal  coinage 
of,  365,  366 ;  later  coinage  of, 
431,432. 

Euergetes,  coin  attributed  to,  194. 

Euesperides,  date  of  earliest  issue 
at,  221. 

Euphron,  Tyrant  of  Sicyon,  387. 

Eupolemus,  coins  struck  by,  437. 

Eusebius,  on  Phocaea,  82. 

Evaenetus,  Syracusan  engraver,361, 
394 ;  coins  by,  412,  413. 

Evagoras  I,  silver  coins  of,  310 ; 
history  and  coinage  of,  328. 

Evagoras  II,  silver  coins  of,  310; 
coins  of,  328  ;  history  of,  343. 

Evans,  A.,  on  ancient  standards  of 
weight,  27,  79,  114,  115  ;  on 
coinage  of  Tarentum,  57,  207, 
394  ;  on  coins  ofZancle,  202,212; 
on  relief  coinage  of  certain  cities, 
203  ;  on  coin  of  Syracuse,  280  ; 
on  West  Sicilian  hoard,  348,  369  ; 
on  the  quarter  drachm  of  Cyrene, 
351 ;  on  reduction  of  standard  in 


Etruria,  399 ;  on  coinage  of 
Dionysiu8,399,411  ff.;  on  alliance 
coinage,  419. 

Fox,  Earle,  on  bronze  coins  of 
Athens,  295. 

Friedlander,  L.,  on  electrum  coins, 
105. 

Fritze  (H.  von),  on  coins  of  Cyzicus, 
81,  85,  308,  309;  on  archaic 
coins  of  Athens  and  Corinth,  135, 
155  ;  on  coinage  of  Abdera,  277. 

Gaebler,  BL,  on  coins  of  the  Der- 

rones,  194. 
Gambrium,   coins   of,   ascribed  to 

Gorgion,  315. 
Gargara,  coin  of,  267  ;  small  coins 

of,  321. 
Gartringen,    Hiller    von,    lnscrip- 

tiones  Maris  Aegaei,  collected  by, 

226. 
Gaza,  coins  of,  347. 
Gaziura,  coins  of,  318  ;  standard  of, 

322. 
Gebal  (Byblus),  early  coin  of,  342  ; 

kings  of,  343  ;    coinage  of,  343 ; 

under  Persian  influence,  345. 
Gela,  tetradrachms  of,  215;    gold 

coins  of,  292,  406  ;  bronze  coins 

of,  410  ;  resumes  silver  issue,  420. 
Gell,  coin  found  by,  305. 
Gelon,  Demareteia   (decadrachms) 

of,  162,  193,  215,  404  ;  effect  on 

coinage  of  victory  of,  at  Olympia, 

215. 
Geomori  (magistrates),  coins  attri- 
buted to  the,  214. 
Getas,  name  of,  on  coins,  194. 
Gortyna,  beginning  of  coinage  of, 

391. 
Greau  Collection,  gold  coin  in,  413. 
Greece,  coin  unit  of,  70  ;  electrum 

coins     of    European,    104-108 ; 

value  of  bronze  in,  119. 
Greenwell,  W.,  on  Cyzicene  coins, 

237. 
Gyges,  gold  of,  69. 

Haeberlin,  on  proportional  value  of 
silver  to  bronze,  119,  216. 

Haliartus,  aspirate  on  coins  of,  355 ; 
distinctive  letters  on  coins  of, 
356,  357,  359. 

Halicarnassus,  member  of  Cnidian 


448 


GENERAL  INDEX 


League,  169;  Lygdamis  inscrip- 
tion found  at,  234. 

Hammer,  J.,  on  hectae,  243. 

Head,  B.  V.,  passim. 

Hecatomnus,  coinage  of,  303,  304  ; 
standard  of,  316. 

Heliopolis,  Kedet  of,  80,  221. 

Hellanicus,  on  gold  issue  at  Athens, 
291. 

Heracleia  in  Italy,  gold  coin  of, 
396. 

Heracleia  Pontica,  standard  of,  263, 
322;  coinage  of,  318,  319; 
founded  by  Megara,  320  ;  coin 
of,  435. 

Heraea,  hemidrachm  of,  123 ; 
struck  coins  before  Persian  wars, 
378 ;  history  and  early  coins  of, 
381. 

Hermione,  coin  of,  380. 

Hermus  (river),  boundary  of  various 
weight  standards,  185. 

Herodotus,  on  the  Lydians,68;  on 
Gyges,  69  ;  on  coinage  of  Darius, 
87,  88 ;  on  Pythius,  89  ;  on  the 
Ionian  revolt,  91,  92,  96,  98,  102  ; 
on  Pheidon,  110  ;  on  Hippias, 
161 ;  on  cities  retaining  Aeginetan 
standard,  169 ;  on  the  Persian 
talent,  183;  on  gold  mines  in 
Thasos,  187,  270;  on  Sybaris, 
206 ;  on  repulse  of  Persia,  234 ; 
on  Erythrae  and  Chios,  260; 
emigrated  to  Sybaris,  283 ;  on 
commerce  of  Aegina,  320. 

Hesychius,  on  iron  bars  of  Sparta, 

119  ;  on  the  Persian  siglos,  242. 

Hiero  I,  coins  of  period  of,  restruck, 

203. 
Hill,  G.  F.,  on  passage  of  Aristotle, 
145, 150  ;  on  coins  of  Cyprus,  172  ; 
on  coins  of  Selge,  181 ;  on  coinage 
of  Evagoras  I,  328 ;  on  coinage 
of  Tyre,  341,  345  ;  on  coinage  of 
Phoenicia,  344,   345 ;    on   Dion, 
416. 
Himera,   Corinthian    standard    of, 
169 ;  coins  of,  212,  214;  didrachms 
of,  215  ;  didrachms  struck  at,  370; 
bronze  money  of,  407,  408,  410. 
Hippias,   lowers    the    mina,    148 ; 

coinage  of,  158-161,  174. 
Histiaea,   type   of,    128 ;    resumes 
issue  of  civic  coins,  366  ;  coin  of, 
431. 


Histiaeus,  occupies  Myrcinus,  104. 

Hogarth,  coins  found  by,  75,  168. 

Holm,  on  Croesus,  83  ;  on  staters  of 
Cyrene,  351 ;  on  league  of  cities 
and  coins  of  Magna  Graecia,  393, 
394 ;  on  Syracusan  coins,  405, 
418. 

Holmi,  monetary  convention  of, 
with  Side,  312,  313. 

Hultsch,  on  iron  bars  of  Sparta, 
119. 

Hunkin,  on  Croesean  staters,  87. 

Hyele,  see  Velia. 

Ialysus,  member  of  Cnidian  League,  j 
169  ;  coin  of,  178;   type  of,  218  ; 
standard  of,  245,  256. 
Iasus,  alliance  of,  with  other  cities, 
103;    coins    of,  166,   167,    170; 
standard  of,  169;  earliest  known 
coin    of,    258 ;    coinage    of,    as 
member  of  League,  300. 
Ichnae,  coins  doubtfully  attributed 
to,  188  ;   countermarked  coin  for 
use  at,  366. 
Ichnaei  (tribe),  coins  of  the,  194 ; 

standard  of  the,  196. 
Idalium,  standard  of,  180. 
Idyma,  coins  of,  258. 
Ilissus  (river),   coin  found  in  the, 

108. 
Illyria,  connexion  of,  with  Corcyra, 

416. 
Imhoof-Blumer,    F.,    on    coins    of 
Chalcidice,  125, 138  ;  on  Wappen- 
munzen,  128;     on  tetradrachms 
of  Athens,  153  ;   on  coinage  of 
Corinthian    colonies,    371,    374, 
378 ;     on    bronze      coinage    of 
Himera,  407,  408 ;   on  coins  of 
Lesbos,  436. 
India  (North),  imitations  of  Alex- 
ander's coins  in,  440. 
Ionia,  early  stater  of,  69 ;  coinage 
of,    70-82;      uniform    electrum 
coinage  of  revolting  cities    in, 
91-103. 
Ionian  revolt,  91,  92. 
Islands,  finds  in  the,  165. 
I8sus,     coins     ascribed     to,     181  ; 
standard  of,  262, 314;  beginnings 
of  coinage  at,  313 ;  silver  coins 
of,  333 ;   continued  civic  issues, 
437,  438. 
Istip,  coins  from,  194. 


GENERAL  INDEX 


449 


Istrus,  drachms  of,  264 ;  coinage 
of,  319. 

Italy,  issue  by  Greek  cities  of,  95 ; 
early  incuse  coins  of,  97 ;  pro- 
portional value  of  silver  and 
bronze  in,  119  ;  colonies  in,  124  ; 
double  types  in  use  in,  155. 

Jameson,  R.,  on  coin  found  at 
Vourla,  98. 

Kenyon  and  Blass,  on  text  of  Aris- 
totle, 145. 

Koehler,  on  genuineness  of  electrum 
coins,  108;  on  a  silver  coin  of 
Athens,  250 ;  on  gold  coins  of 
Athens,  290,291,293. 


Lacedaemon,  coins  of,  433. 

Lade,  battle  of,  92,  96,  98. 

Laeaei,  coins  of,  194. 

Lamia,  coins  of,  431. 

Lamponeia,  coin  of,  267  ;  standard 
of,  287 ;  small  coins  of,  321. 

Lampsacus,  staters  of,  82,  85,  238, 
330,  331  ;  revival  of  electrum 
coinage  at,  86,  239 ;  privileged 
mint  of,  93 ;  coins  of,  97,  161, 
174 ;  issue  of  hectae  at,  99  ;  jani- 
form  head  on  coins  of,  160; 
standard  of,  175 ;  drachm  of, 
262 ;  coinage  of,  in  fifth  and 
fourth  centuries,  265,  312,  316; 
type  of,  301 ;  tetrobols  of,  317 ; 
drachms  and  electrum  of,  321  ; 
situated  on  Athenian  trade  route, 
333  ;  gold  issues  of,  335,  336. 

Larissa,  coinage  of,  353,  354. 

Laurium,  silver  of,  used  by  Athens, 
103,  158 ;  silver  mines  of,  136, 
150, 155,  222,  229  ;  mine-working 
of,  interrupted,  231. 

Laus,  tvpe  of,  201 ;  early  coinage 
I      of,  206. 

i  Lebadeia,    distinctive    letters    on 
coins  of,  359. 

Lehmann-Haupt,  on  Croesean  and 
daric  staters,  87 ;  on  Chalcis 
and  the  Euboic  weight,  125, 126. 

Lenormant,  F.,  passim. 

Leontini,  victory  on  coins  of,  215 ; 
imitations  of  pegasi  at,  374,  417 ; 
coins  of,  410. 

Lesbos,  billon  issue  at,  176;  coins 


of,  239,  436  ;  history  and  coinage 

of,  in  fifth  century,  208,  253. 
Letaei  (tribe,  Lete),  188  ;  standard 

of,  106 ;  type  on  early  coins  of 

the,  106  ;  pellets  on  coins  of  the, 

189  ;  flat  coins  of,  198 ;    coins  of, 

in  Myt-Rahineh  find,  219 ;  cessa- 
tion of  coinage  of,  271. 
Leucas,  copies  coinage  of  Corinth, 

139 ;  pegasi  of,  369  ;  coinage  of, 

371. 
Lilaea,  triobols  of,  361. 
Lindus,  coins  of,  166, 168, 178,256  ; 

member  of  Cnidian  League,  169  ; 

standard  of,  245. 
Lipara,  coins  of,  408. 
Locri,    pegasus    coinage    of,   374 ; 

history  and  coinage  of,  397. 
Locris  (district),  coinage   of,   360, 

361. 
Longperier,   on  coin    of  Corinth, 

219. 
Lyceius,  coinage  issued  by,  324. 
Lycia,   coinage  of,  183 ;   standard 

of,    185;     'Babylonic'    drachm 

used  in,  286. 
Lycosura,    coins    connected    with 

festival  of,  381. 
Lydia,    claim     of,    for    origin    of 

coinage    in,   68,   69;     primitive 

coins   of,   72;    gold    of,   83-86; 

Persian  coinage  modelled  on  that 

of,  88. 
Lygdamis  (Tyrant),  inscription  of, 

234. 
Lysander,  capture    of  Athens  by, 

288,  298. 
Lysias,  on   Cyzicene  staters,  235 ; 

emigrated  to  Sybaris,  283. 
Lysimachia  (formerly  Cardia),  coins 

of,  431. 

Macdonald,G/.,  on  Cretan  law  as  to 
fines,  392. 

Macedon,  electrum  coins  of,  104, 
105 ;  numismatic  interest  of, 
186;  coinage  only  issued  by 
kings  of,  188 ;  history  of  coinage 
of,  269-282 ;  standard  of,  312  ; 
silver  of,  322  ff. 

Magna  Graecia,  two  currents  of 
feeling  in,  393;  irregularity  in 
weights  of,  396. 

Magnesia,  coins  of,  struck  by 
Themistocles,  41,  160,  256. 


«g 


450 


GENERAL  INDEX 


Mallus,  coin  of,  172;  standard  of, 
262,  313,  314  ;  silver  coins  struck 
in,  333  ;  continued  civic  issues, 
437,  438. 

Mamertines,  money  of  the,  423. 

Mantineia,  struck  coins  before 
Persian  wars,  378 ;  claimed 
hegemony,  382. 

Marathon  (victory  of),  effect  of, 
on  coinage  of  Athens,  161-163, 
222. 

Marium,  standard  of,  314. 

Maroneia,  how  colonized,  186 ; 
standard  of,  191,  192,  273,  274, 
277,  325  ;  staters  of,  193 ;  coins 
of,  in  Myt-Rahineh  find,  219; 
coins  of,324;  cessation  of  coinage 
of,  324  ;  gold  coin  of,  329. 

Marquardt,  on  Cyzicus,  237,  238. 

Massilia,  foundation  and  coinage 
of,  82,  402,  403. 

Mausolus  (Satrap  of  Caria),  coins 
of,  303,  304;  standard  followed 
by,  424. 

Mavrogordato,  on  coins  of  Chios, 
86,  96,  167. 

Mazaeus,  issues  of,  314,315;  imita- 
tion coins  of,  367. 

Megalopolis,  foundation  of,  379 ; 
coinage  of,  379,  382,  383  ;  con- 
tinued issues  of,  432,  433. 

Megara,  wheel-coins  attributed  to, 
131-133  ;  hostility  of,  to  Athens, 
143  ;  founded  cities,  200,  320  ; 
coinage  of,  368,  369. 

Megista,  standard  of,  299. 

Melos,  coinage  of,  244-246 ;  standard 
of,  346  ;  coin  of,  390  ;  silver  coins 
of,  433. 

Mende,  coinage  of,  197,  280  ;  coin 
of,  198 ;  breach  between  early 
and  later  coinage  of,  275. 

Mesembria,  type  of,  131  ;  standard 
of,  287,  290  ;  coins  of,  307,  308. 

Messana  (Messene),  earlier  Zancle, 
212,  217;  coins  of,  214,  217; 
staters  of,  379 ;  silver  issue  of, 
380,  388  ;  silver  coins  of,  410  ; 
tetradrachms  of,  412  ;  changes 
standard,  433. 

Metapontum,  coins  of,  135;  type 
of,  201  ;  coinage  of,  203,  206  ; 
alliance  coins  of,  205  ;  gold  coin 
of,  396 ;  bronze  coins  of,  397. 

Methymna,  early  type  of,  97 ;  coin 


of,  173,  176,  253  ;  silver  coins  of, 
254. 

Michaelis,  on  relief  in  Ashmolean, 
Oxford,  249. 

Miletus,  type  of,  71,  199;  early 
importance  of,  75,  320 ;  reverse 
of  coins  of,  77  ;  coin  ascribed  to, 
80 ;  began  Ionian  revolt,  91  ; 
treatment  of,  after  revolt,  99  ; 
coins  of,  101,  165,  166,  168; 
electrum  of,  104 ;  standard  of, 
175,  191  ;  relations  of,  with 
Sybaris,  206 ;  local  issues  of, 
257, 286  ;  coins  of,  under  Satraps, 
303,  304,  306. 

Millingen,  J.  van,  coin  published 
by,  237. 

Miltiades  I,  ruler  of  Chersonese, 
199. 

Mindarus,  pay  of  sailors  of,  251. 

Mints,  number  of,  38. 

Mommsen,  T.,  on  weights  of  silver 
and  electrum  coins,  73 ;  emends 
Herodotus,  183  ;  on  the  Phocaean 
standard,  210. 

Miiller,  L.,  on  coinage  of  Carthage, 
349 ;  on  staters  of  Cyrene,  351. 

Museum  (Ashmolean),  bronze  mould 
in,  204 ;  metrological  relief  in, 
249. 

Museum  (British),  passim. 

Mycale  (victory  of),  effect  of,  233, 
234. 

Mycalessus,  distinctive  letters  on 
coins  of,  356. 

Mycenae,  rings  found  at,  79 ;  use 
of  weights  and  measures  by,  114, 
115. 

Mylasa,  capital  of  Hecatomnus, 
303  ;  coins  ascribed  to,  437. 

Mysia,  coinage  of,  318. 

Mytilene,  many  types  of,  71,  72; 
electrum  coinage  revived  at,  86  ; 
privileged  mint  of,  93;  base  silver 
issue  of,  176;  electrum  of,  99, 
233,  239,  243,  321 ;  money  con- 
vention with  Phocaea,  236,  238 ; 
revolt  of,  against  Athens,  253 ; 
silver  coins  of,  254 ;  billon 
standard  of,  289  ;  fourth  century 
coins  of,  312. 

Mytistratus,  coins  of,  420. 

Myt-Rahineh  hoard,  60,  218,  219. 

Nagidus,  standard  of,  262,  313,  314. 


GENERAL  INDEX 


451 


Naucratis,  standard  at,  80,  157 ; 
foundation  of,  115,  122;  weights 
found  at,  220 ;  Athenian  coins 
found  at,  285. 

Naupactus,  Athenian  coinage  used 
_  at.  285. 

Naxos  (Island),  early  coins  of,  110; 
breach  in  coinage  of,  244 ;  assess- 
ment of,  by  Athens,  246  ;  re- 
sumption of  coinage  of,  247, 433  ; 
standard  of,  169,  213,  245  ;  coins 
of,  212,  390. 

Naxos  in  Sicily,  didrachms  of,  370  ; 
hoard  of,  415. 

Neandria,  coin  of,  267 :  small  coins 
of,  321. 

Neapolis,  Athenian  influence  on 
coins  of,  184 ;  coins  ascribed  to, 
190;  coins  of,  271,  272,  396; 
standard  of,  274,  275 ;  coins  of, 
imitating  those  of  Thurii,  397. 

Neon,  obols  of,  361. 

Newell,  on  Alexander  coins,  438. 

Newton,  C.  T.,  inscription  found  by, 
234 ;  text  of  convention  published 
by,  236. 

Nola,  silver  coins  of,  396. 

Notium,  division  between  Colophon 
and,  259,  260. 

Odrysae  (tribe),  dominated  large 
part  of  Thrace,  272. 

Oeniadae,  coin  of,  377. 

Olbia,  coin  found  at,  273. 

Olympia,  festival  coins  of,  37,  38, 
363 ;  coins  connected  with  vic- 
tory at,  423. 

Olynthus,  head  of  Chalcidian 
League,  44 ;  coinage  of,  197, 198, 
213,  281  ;  coins  attributed  to, 
272 ;  coinage  of,  modelled  on 
that  of  Athens,  295  ;  standard  of, 
322 ;  gold  didrachms  of,  339. 

Oman,  C.  W.,  on  coins  of  Corinth, 
371. 

Onymarchus,  history  and  coinage 
of,  362. 

Opus,  staters  of,  360,  361. 

Orchomenus,  coinage  of,  357  ;  type 
of,  359.  ^ 

Orrescii  (tribe),  type  on  early  coins 
of  the,  106 ;  in  Pangaean  district, 
188  ;  standard  of,  193,  195,  196  ; 
type  of,  194 ;  cessation  of  coinage 
of,  271. 


Orontes,  coins  of,  316. 

Orthagoreia,  problem  of  coinage  of, 
325. 

Oxus  valley,  imitations  of  Alex- 
ander's coins  in  the,  440. 

Faeonia,  electrum  coins  found  in, 
105 ;  standard  used  in,  196 ; 
types  adopted  by  kings  of,  324 ; 
later  coinage  of,  430. 

Pale,  coinage  of,  384. 

Pallantium,  late  beginning  of 
coinage  in,  378 ;  cessation  of 
coinage  of,  382. 

Pamphylia.  cities  of,  182 ;  standard 
of,  185. 

Pandosia,  coins  of,  struck  in 
alliance,  205. 

Pangaeus  (Pangaeum),  gold  mines 
of,  104,  422 ;  silver  producing 
district  of,  187. 

Panticapaeum,  early  issues  of,  171, 
200;  gold  coinage  of,  263,  327, 
339  ;  fourth-century  coins  of, 
318  ;  silver  issue  of,  320. 

Paphos,  standard  of,  180,  314. 

Parian  Chronicle,  historic  docu- 
ment, 109 ;  on  Pheidon,  111, 
112. 

Parium,  coins  of,  175,  177,  266; 
local  issues  of,  286  ;  standard  of, 
266,  287,  290,  312  ;  small  coins 
of,  321. 

Paros,  coins  minted  at,  122  ;  Hero- 
dotus on  colonists  from,  187; 
standard  of,  245  ;  early  and  later 
issues  of,  246,  247  ;  coin  of,  390  ; 
silver  coins  of,  433. 

Pasion,  moneychanger,  15. 

Patras  hoard  of  Alexanders,  432. 

Patraiis,  coin  of,  324. 

Pausanias,  on  date  of  Pheidon,  111. 

Pausanias  (King  of  Macedon),  coins 
of,  323. 

Pegasus,  pegasi  (coins  of  Corinth), 
type  of,  134,  135;  abundant 
issues  of,  374 ;  in  gold,  375 ; 
current  in  Sicily,  415,  416. 

Peisistratus,  standard  of,  79,  130, 
136,  198,  199  ;  standard  raised 
by,  136,  364;  tetradrachms  of, 
143 ;  silver  mines  of,  150;  coinage 
of,  155-161. 

Pelagia,  imitation .  coins  struck  at, 
354. 


°g 


x 


452 


GENEEAL  INDEX 


Pella,  mint  city  of  Alexander,  428. 

Pellene,  coin  of,  380. 

Pelopidas,  League  reconstituted  by, 
359. 

Peloponnesus  (Peloponnese),  Hero- 
dotus on  measures  of,  110  ;  origin 
of  weights  in,  112;  metal  bars 
of,  121 ;  relation  between 
coinages  of  Chios  and,  288 ; 
standard  of,  290,  298  ;  coinage 
of  cities  of,  378-389. 

Peparethus,  gap  in  coinage  of,  244. 

Perdiccas  II,  coins  of,  275. 

Perdiccas  III,  alters  type,  323. 

Pergamon,  type  of,  315. 

Pericles,  speech  of,  on  Athenian 
resources,  229 ;  effect  of  his  con- 
quest of  Euboea,  247 ;  con- 
quered Sinope,  263;  colony 
founded  by,  282. 

Perinthus,  colony  of  Samos,  192. 

Persia,  gold  bf,  86-90,  222; 
tolerated  money  of  Cyzicus,  99; 
standards  used  in,  118  ;  oppo- 
sition of  Abdera  to,  191 ;  power 
of,  286,  323 ;  relation  of  Chian 
money  to  silver  of,  289. 

Petrie,  Flinders,  on  derivation  of 
Aeginetan  standard,  118;  on 
ancient  weights,  220. 

Phaestus,  coins  in  Crete  appear 
first  at,  391. 

Phalaecus,  coins  of,  362. 

Phanagoria,  founded  by  Teos,  170. 

Phanes,  stater  of,  69. 

Pharnabazus,  coins  issued  by,  334. 

Pharos,  autonomous  silver  of,  355. 

Pharsalus,  beginning  of  coinage  at, 
353. 

Phaselis,  coin  of,  180  ;  intermitted 
coinage,  262,  312. 

Phayllus,  histoiy  and  coinage  of, 
362. 

Pheidon,  origin  of  coinage  ascribed 
to,  67  ;  date,  weights  and  coins 
of,  110-116;  wide  use  of  standard 
of,  122, 123 ;  measures  and  weights 
of,  altered  by  Solon,  151. 

Pheneus,  late  beginning  of  coinage 
in,  378  ;  stater  of,  380 ;  suspends 
coinage,  382. 

Pherae  (Pharae),  beginning  of  coin- 
age in,  353 ;  distinctive  letters 
on  coins  of,  356. 

Philip  II  of  Macedon,  gold  coinage 


of,  83,  237,  270,  338;    date  of 
323 ;    issued     didrachms,     328 ; 
standard  of,  388,  389 ;    acquisi- 
tion   of   gold    mines    by,    419 
coinage  of,  422  ff. 

Philippi,  begins  autonomous  coii 
age,  324,  325,  425  ;  gold  statei 
of,  338. 

Philippi  (coin),  423 ;  value  of,  425  : 
acquired  by  Gauls,  440. 

Philippopolis  (Gomphi),  coinage 
of,  425,  426. 

Philochorus,  on  melting  gold  Vic 
tories,  291. 

Phlius,  struck  coins  before  Persiar 
wars,  378 ;  coins  of,  386,  387. 

Phocaea,  type  of,  46  ;  standard  of 
48, 71, 170,171, 175, 176, 191, 21C 
250,  287  ;  electrum  of,  75,  86, 93, 
99,  233,  321  ;  later  electrur 
coinage  of,  239  ;  reverse  of  coins 
of,  77  ;  coins  following  lead  of 
80-82  ;  value  of  coins  of,  84 ; 
suspension  of  coinage  of,  164 ; 
coins  of,  166,  167  ;  connexion  of, 
with  coins  of  Velia,  209,  210; 
historical  references  to  coinage 
of,  235,  236,  238  ;  hectae  of,  242, 
243,  253,  254 ;  coinage  inter- 
mitted at,  258  ;  coins  of,  bearing 
portraits,  316. 

Phocis,  coins  of,  in  Treasurer's 
lists,  227 ;  historical  bearing  of 
coins  of,  361-363  ;  small  coins  of, 
363 ;  larger  coins  of,  364 ;  Del- 
phic inscriptions  on,  364. 

Phormio,  history  of,  in  relation  to 
coinage,  242. 

Pick,  on  fourth-century  coins,  319. 

Pi6a  (near  Elis),  gold  coins  of,  209  ; 
struck  gold  on  silver  standard, 
358. 

Plataea,  fractional  money  of,  359  ; 
coins  of,  as  member  of  League, 
359. 

Plutarch,  on  currency  of  Sparta, 
119  ;  on  coins  of  Theseus,  142  ; 
Androtion  quoted  by,  143,  144 ; 
on  results  of  Phocian  occupation 
of  Delphi,  362. 

Pollux,  Julius,  on  origin  of  coinage, 
67,  68,  109,  110;  on  gold  of 
Gyges,  69 ;  on  gold  coins  of 
Croesus,  83 ;  on  the  word  daric, 
87 ;    on  type  of  Dardanus,  98 ; 


GENEKAL  INDEX 


453 


on  the  didrachni,   142;    quotes 

Crates,   243 ;    on    bronze   coins, 

296;    on    Sicilian   talents,  414, 

415. 
Polycrates,  the  Tyrant,  78 ;  date  of, 

173. 
Pontus,  Pontic  region,  standard  of, 

171, 191,  286,  325,  326;  coinage 

of,  263,  264  ff. 
Populonia,  coins  of,  398,  401. 
Poseidion  (in  Carpathos),  coins  of, 

166,  178,  245. 
Poseidonia,  type  of,  201  ;  coins  of, 

struck  in  alliance,  205  ;  standard 

of,  211. 
Potidaea,    coinage    of,   197,    198; 

cessation  of  silver  issue  at,  280. 
Priene,  coin  found  at,  77  ;  electruin 

coin  of,  98. 
Proconnesus,   coin  of,  267;    small 

coins  of,  321. 
Propontis,  standard  on  shores  of, 

182  ;    Samian  colonies  on,  192  ; 

coinage  of,  264-269  ;  local  issues 

of,  286  ;   standard   used  in  the, 

312  ;  historic  sketch  of  the,  335. 
Psophis,  struck  coins   before  Per- 
sian wars,   378;    coins  of,  381, 

382. 
Ptolemy  I,  three  standards  of,  346  ; 

coins  of,  434. 
Pythagoras,  influence  of,  205. 
Pyxus,  type  of,  201  ;    coinage  of, 

struck  in  alliance,  205. 

Regling,  K.,  on  the  Ptolemaic 
drachm,  346. 

Reinach,  T.,  on  obols,  113;  on  ex- 
change of  coins,  50 ;  on  exchange 
value  of  gold,  278. 

Rhegium,  type  of,  201 ;  coinage  of, 
in  connexion  with  Zancle,  202, 
203,  208,  213  ;  coins  of,  found  at 
Messana,  217  ;  coins  found  near, 
369  ;  Athenian  influence  on,  370 ; 
cessation  of  coinage  of,  394 ; 
bronze  coins  of,  409  ;  silver  coin 
of,  411. 

Rhoda,  foundation  of,  402. 

Rhodes  (Rhodus),  rise  of,  5  ;  coins 
struck  by,  95 ;  standard  of,  100, 
122,  285,  288,  346;  incuse  on 
coins  of,  107 ;  a  Dorian  island, 
245  ;  condition  during  Athenian 
Empire,  255,  256 ;   built  a  new 


city,  299,  304;  standard  and 
coinage  of  city,  287,  300 ;  gold 
coins  of,  330,  333 ;  types  of,  385, 
437. 

Riccio,  on  finds  near  Rhegium, 
369. 

Ridgeway,  on  religious  origin  of 
coin-types,  73;  on  gold  rings 
found  at  Mycenae,  79  ;  on  coins 
of  Aeginetan  weight,  117. 

Robinson,  E.  S.  G.,  on  new  standard 
of  Cyrene,  350;  on  gold  staters 
ofCyrene,  352. 

Romano,  Padre,  on  electrum  of 
Syracuse,  416. 

Rome,  bronze  issues  of,  216 ;  minted 
plated  coins,  257. 

Rouvier,  on  coins  of  Sidon,  438. 


Sakha  hoard,  60. 

Salamis  (in  Cyprus),  standard  of, 
314. 

Salmacis,  coin  attributed  to,  335. 

Salonica,  coins  found  at,  196. 

Same,  coinage  of,  384. 

Samo3,  type  of,  71,  97,  217,  385  ; 
coins  found  on,  78  ;  special  coins 
struck  by,  95 ;  hectae  probably 
minted  at,  98  ;  standard  of,  100, 
126,  156,  199,  221,  304,  305,  350  ; 
coin  of,  1 77 ;  fall  of  silver  standard 
at,  179 ;  height  of  power  of,  192  ; 
history  of  coinage  of,  58  ;  coinage 
of,  248,  250,  436 ;  relations  of, 
with  Athens,  249,  250,  285; 
coinage  of,  as  member  of  League, 
300,  301. 

Samothrace,  silver  issue  of,  430. 

Santa  Maria  hoard,  369. 

Santorin  (Thera).  coins  found  in, 
116,  122,  168;  weight  and  types 
of  coins  of,  244. 

Sapaei  (tribe),  coins  of  the,  194; 
standard  of  the,  196. 

Sardes,  coin  issued  at,  76,  83  ;  cessa- 
tion of  coinage  at,  86  ;  theory  as 
to  money  issues  of,  88. 

Scarphea,  in  Eastern  Locris,  360. 

Scepsis,  history  and  coinage  of, 
267  ;  standard  of,  287,  290  ; 
issues  didrachms,  321. 

Scione,  coinage  of,  197,  198. 

Scotussa,  beginning  of  coinage  at, 
353. 


454 


GENERAL  INDEX 


Scythia,  influx  of  gold  from,  333. 

Segesta,  didrachms  of,  215;  coins 
of,  410,411. 

Selge,  coin  of,  180 ;  archaic  coins 
attributed  to,  181 ;  active  mint 
of,  312  ;  standard  of,  314 ;  later 
coinage  and  types  of,  437. 

Selinus,  didrachms  of,  215  ;  coins 
of,  410,  412. 

Seltmann,  on  an  early  coin  of 
Athens,  159. 

Selymbria  (Salymbria),  coins  of, 
182 ;  drachm  of,  262  ;  inference 
from  coinage  of,  269;  changes 
standard,  321. 

Sesamus,  standard  of,  318 ;  coins 
of,  322. 

Seuthes,  pay  of  troops  of,  95,  241 ; 
coin  of,  272. 

Sicily,  weights  adopted  by,  79 ; 
Euboean  coloniesin,  124;  splendid 
coinage  of,  158 ;  Demareteia  of, 
162 ;  litra  current  in,  207  ;  Corin- 
thian influence  on  coinage  of, 
212,  213  ;  early  coins  of  Athens 
current  in,  222  ;  bronze  coinage 
of,  226,  297;  bimetallism  in, 
278 ;  standard  of,  347  ;  hoards 
found  in,  348, 369,  374  ;  Athenian 
coinage  predominant  in,  370; 
pegasi  circulated  in,  374  ;  pro- 
portional value  of  gold  to  silver 
in,  396,  418  ;  bronze  of,  397,  407, 
409,  420  ;  silver  coins  of,  404. 

Sicyon,  modification  of  style  of 
coins  of,  223 ;  struck  gold  on 
silver  standard,  358 ;  struck  coins 
before  Persian  wars,  378  ;  coinage 
of,  where  dominant,  380;  silver 
coins  of,  387 ;  Alexanders  with 
types  of,  432. 

Side,  coin  of,  182 ;  active  mint  of, 
312;  type  of,  313;  standard  of, 
314. 

Sidon,  beginning  of  coinage  of, 
340,  343 ;  date  of  coinage  of, 
353  ;  standard  of,  345,  346 ;  later 
coinage  of,  438. 

Sigeium,  coin  attributed  to,  160; 
connexion  of,  with  Athens,  267  ; 
Athenian  types  of,  268. 

Sindi,  silver  coins  of,  322. 

Sinope,  type  of,  97  ;  early  coinage 
of,  171 ;  history  and  coinage  of, 
263,264;  drachms  of,  317,  318; 


standard  of,  falls,  321 ;  coins  of, 
435. 

Siphnos,  coins  minted  at,  122 ; 
Athenian  decree  from,  226 ;  coin- 
age of,  245,  246  ;  influenced  by 
Athenian  commerce,  247 ;  coin 
of,  390. 

Siris,  type  of,  201 ;  coinage  of, 
struck  in  alliance,  205. 

Six,  J.  P.,  on  coins  from  Sidon  finds, 
338 ;  on  coins  of  Attic  weight, 
347  ;  on  staters  of  Cyrene,  351 ; 
ascribes  coins  of  Phlius,  386 ; 
ascribes  coins  to  Dionysius,  416 ; 
on  electrum  of  Syracuse,  418. 

Smyrna,  reverse  of  coins  of,  77 ; 
Athenian  decree  from,  226 ;  de- 
stroyed, 261  ;  rebuilding  of,  305. 

Soli,  standard  of,  262 ;  date  of  early 
coinage  of,  313  ;  continued  civic 
issues,  437,  438. 

Solon,  reforms  of,  143-153,  169; 
coinage  of,  compared  with  that 
of  Peisistratus,  158. 

Solus,  coins  attributed  to,  408 ; 
coin  of,  410. 

Spain,  silver  from,  116. 

Sparadocus,  coin  of,  272. 

Sparta,  iron  currency  of,  119,  120, 
389  ;  date  of  silver  issue,  380. 

Spithridates,  coins  issued  by,  317. 

Stageira,  see  Orthagoreia. 

Stephanephorus,  standard  of,  151. 

Strabo,  quotes  Ephorus,  110. 

Strack,  on  coins  of  Thrace,  280. 

Strato,  King  of  Sidon,  344. 

Stratus,  coin  struck  at,  377. 

Strymon  (river),  silver  mines  on  the, 
136,  155  ;  later  coins  of  valley  of 
the,  191. 

Stymphalus,  beginning  of  coinage 
of,  378  ;  coin  of,  380  ;  suspends 
coinage,  382. 

Susa,  darics  of,  89. 

Svoronos,  on  early  electrum  coins, 
104,  105 ;  on  iron  spits  in  Athens 
Museum,  113,  114;  on  wheel 
coins,  131 ;  on  tribes  of  the  Pan- 
gaean  district,  188 ;  on  coinage 
in  Macedon,  188 ;  on  Gorgon- 
head  coins,  190;  on  coin  of 
Euergetes,  194 ;  on  standards  in 
Paeonia,  196 ;  on  bronze  coinage 
of  Athens,  296  ;  on  Cretan  coins, 
392. 


GENERAL  INDEX 


455 


Sybaris,  type  of,  201 ;  coinage  before 
destruction  of,  202,  203,  206 ; 
coinage  of,  struck  in  alliance, 
205  ;  site  of,  for  new  foundation, 
282  ;  coins  of  new  foundation, 
283. 

Syracuse,  double  standard  of,  56 ; 
early  coinage  of,  214-216;  Are- 
thusa  coin  of*  280,  314;  gold 
issue  of,  348,  405,  406;  earliest 
imitations  at,  374;  Demareteia 
of,  404 ;  bronze  coins  of,  409  ; 
silver  coins  of,  411  ;  coinage  of, 
under  Dionysius,  411-420. 


Tanagra,  distinctive  letters  on  coins 
of,  356;  relations  between  Chalcis 
and,  356,  357 ;  coinage  of,  as 
member  of  League,  359. 

Taranto,  coins  found  at,  395. 

Tarentum,  types  of,  57,  201 ;  coin- 
age of,  203,  207;  issues  of, 
modelled  on  gold  staters  of 
Athens,  295  ;  member  of  League, 
393;  gold  coins  of,  394,  395; 
silver  coins  of,  396. 

Tarsus,  date  of  early  coinage  of, 
313;  coins  of,  314;  continued 
civic  issues,  438. 

Tauromenium,  inscription  of,  415, 
420. 

Tegea,  late  beginning  of  coinage 
of,  378;  coin  of,  380;  claimed 
hegemony,  382 ;  iron  coins  of, 
386. 

Temesa,  coins  of,  struck  in  alliance, 
205  ;  cessation  of  coinage  of,  394. 

Tenedos,  coins  of,  175,  310 ;  stan- 
dard of,  287. 

Tenos,  standard  of,  122;  coin  of, 
390,  391 ;  silver  coins  of,  433. 

Teos,  reverse  of  coins  at,  77  ;  stater 
attributed  to,  81 ;  migration  from, 
165  ;  coins  of,  165,  309,  330 ;  use 
of  drachm  at,  167  ;  standard  of, 
170,  286,  309  ;  early  coinage  of, 
190 ;    coinage    of,    intermitted, 

.  258. 

Terina,  coinage  of,  206,  417 ;  cessa- 
tion of  coinage  of,  394. 

Termera,  coin  of,  261 ;  standard  of, 
261,  287.^ 

Terone,  coins  of,  found  in  Egypt, 
195  ;  coinage  of,  197  ;  flat  coins 


of,  198 ;  breach  in  coinage  of, 
275 ;  local  issue  at,  281. 

Teuthrania,  type  of,  315. 

Thasos,  Parian  colony  in,  104 ; 
standard  of,  106,  157,  265,  269, 
270,  274,  324 ;  effect  of  Athens 
on  coins  of,  184  ;  metals  of,  186 ; 
early  coinage  of,  187-190;  flat 
coins  of,  198 ;  commercial  in- 
fluence of,  200 ;  deprived  of 
gold  mines,  231,  270 ;  drachm 
of,  262,  286 ;  gold  coins  of,  277, 
329 ;  later  issue  of,  322. 

Thebes,  inscription  of,  296 ;  type 
of,  301 ;  monopolized  coinage, 
40 ;  standard  of,  330 ;  gold  coins 
of,  295,  331 ;  distinctive  letters 
on  coins  of,  356,  357 ;  staters 
and  electrum  coins  of,  358. 

Thelpusa,  cessation  of  coinage  of, 
382. 

Themistocles,  coins  of,  41, 160, 256, 
414. 

Theopompus,  on  Scabala,  190. 

Thera  (Santorin),  coin  attributed 
to,  168  ;  coin  of,  391. 

Theseus,  money  of,  109,  142. 

Thespiae,  coinage  of,  as  member  of 
League,  359. 

Thessaly,  didrachm  used  in,  123; 
standard  of,  133. 

Thrace,  silver' mines  of,  103,  116, 
157 ;  Asiatic  relations  of,  104 ; 
electrum  coins  of,  104, 105  ;  silver 
coins  of,  106 ;  coinage  of,  affected 
by  Athens,  184  ;  varied  influences 
on  coinage  of,  186, 187  ;  Abderite 
standard  in,  191-197;  relation  of 
gold  to  silver  in,  320. 

Thronium,  small  coins  of,  360. 

Thucydides,  on  pay  of  soldiers,  51 ; 
on  the  Delian  League,  103;  on 
staters  of  Phocaea,  235  ;  on  Cyzi- 
cus,  236 ;  on  Melos,  246 ;  on 
Samos,  249 ;  on  Chian  staters, 
251,  298 ;  on  Athens  and  Chios, 
252  ;  on  Mytilene,  253  ;  on  Colo- 
phon, 259  ;  on  payment  in  Chian 
coin,  285,  298 ;  on  standards  in 
Peloponnese,  290. 

Thurii  (Thurium),  history  and  coin- 
age of,  282-284;  under  Attic 
influence,  370 ;  conquered  by 
Brettii,  394;  coinage  of,  as  an 
Athenian  colony,  397. 


456 


GENERAL  INDEX 


Timarchus,  coin  bearing  name  of, 

289. 
Timasion,  pay  of  troops  of,  95,  241. 
Timesianax,  coin  bearing  name  of, 

289. 
Timoleon,  Sicilian  coins  in  time  of, 

300 ;  history  and  coinage  of  time 

of,  417,  419,  420. 
Timotheus  and  Dionysius,  coins  of, 

319. 
Tiribazus,  coinage  of,  313;    silver 

money  of,  333. 
Tissaphernes,  coins  attributed  to, 

315,  316  ;  silver  coins  of,  334. 
Trapezitae,  money-changers,  14,15, 

49. 
Trapezus,  standard  of,  263 ;  drachms 

of,  264. 
Tricca,  beginning  of  coinage  at, 

353. 
Troad,  standard  of,  306. 
Troezen,  late  beginning  of  coinage 

of,  378 ;  history  and  coinage  of, 

387. 
Tymnes,  coin  of,  261. 
Tyre,  earliest  coins  of,  181,  182  ; 

late    beginning   of   coinage   of, 

340,  343  ;  standard  of,  345,  346. 

Uranopolis,  coin  of,  by  Alexarchus, 
430. 

Velia  (Hyele),  type  of,  how  derived, 
46  ;  a  Phocaean  colony,  82,  207  ; 
early  coinage  of,  209-211  ;  silver 
coins  of,  396  ;  imitates  type  of 
Thurii,  397. 

Vourla,  Chian  stater  found  at,  76, 
77  ;  electrum  coins  found  at,  98. 

Waldstein,  C,  on  votive  bronzes  of 
Heraeum  of  Argos,  113. 

Wappenmunzen,  heraldic  coins  and 
their  types,  128 ;  hoard  contain- 
ing, 132  ;  provenance  of,  141, 
142. 

Weil,  R.,  on  Treasurer's   lists  at 


Athens,  227  ;    on  two  Athenian 

decrees,  228 ;    on    Athens    and 

island  issues,  244. 
Weissenborn,  on  date  of  Pheidon, 

111. 
West,  Allen  B.,  on  the  Chalcidian 

League  and  coins,  281. 
Woodward,  on  coinage  of  Cyzicus, 

241 ;  on  an  Attic  inscription,  293, 

294. 
Wroth,  on  coins  of  Peparethus,  133, 

244 ;    on  coins   of  Lesbos,   239, 

254 ;  on  Athens  and  island  issues, 

243,  244 ;    on  staters  of  Lamp- 

sacus,  330. 

Xenophanes,  on  origin  of  coinage, 
67,  68. 

Xenophon,  on  Revenues  of  Athens, 
54  ;  on  pay  of  Cyrus's  soldiers,  88, 
94,  95  ;  on  Asian  coinage,  89 ; 
on  silver  '  owls '  of  Athens,  157  ; 
on  value  of  siglos,  242  ;  on  Chian 
staters,  251,  252,  298;  on  the 
silver  standard  of  value,  278  ;  on 
effect  of  victory  of  Conon,  301  ; 
on  Dascylium,  333  ;  on  Treaty  of 
Antalcidas,  336. 

Xerxes,  daric  currency  of,  89,  90  ; 
pay  of  troops  of,  154 ;  at  the 
Hellespont,  171  ;  influence  of 
expeditions  of,  200. 

Zacynthus,  coinage  of,  301,  302, 
384, 385  ;  standard  of,  382  ;  coins 
of,  struck  by  Dion,  418  ;  later 
issues  of,  432,  433. 

Zaeelii  (tribe),  type  on  early  coins 
of  the,  106 ;  lived  in  Pangaean 
district,  188. 

Zancle,  type  of,  201  ;  coinage  of, 
202,  203,  208,  212  ;  money  of, 
struck  in  alliance,  205 ;  con- 
nexion of,  with  Cumae,  208 ; 
changes  name,  212,217  ;  standard 
of,  213 ;  early  coins  of,  181,  214 ; 
didrachms  of,  370. 


INDEX  TO   PLATES 

Plate  I.     Electbum  and  Gold  of  Asia,  700-480. 

1.  Uncertain    mint.      Fore-part    of    lion.      =  Oblong    sinking 

between  two  squares. 

2.  Uncertain  mint     4>ANO£  EMI   £HM A  (retrograde).1    =  As 

last 

3.  Phocaea.     <t>.  Seal.     =  Two  incuse  squares. 

4.  Cyzicus.      Tunny-fish    bound    with    fillet     =  Two    incuse 

squares. 

5.  Croesus  of  Lydia :  gold.     Fore-parts  of  lion  and  bull  face  to 

face.     =  Two  incuse  squares. 

6.  As  last :  silver. 

7.  Persia :  gold.     The  King  advancing  :    holds  javelin  and  bow. 

=  Oblong  incuse. 

8.  Chios.     Sphinx  seated.     =  Incuse  square. 

9.  Lampsacus.      Half    of    winged    horse.      =  Incuse    square, 

quartered. 

10.  Uncertain  mint.     Sow.     =  As  last 

11.  Samos.     Fore-part  of  bull  looking  back.     =  As  last 

12.  Uncertain  mint.     Cock  ;  above  it,  palmette.     =  As  last 

13.  Uncertain  mint     Horse  prancing.     =  As  last 

14.  Clazomenae.     Half  of  winged  boar.     =  As  last :  silver. 

Plate  II.     Silvee  of  Gbeece,  700-480. 

1 .  Aegina.     Sea-tortoise.     =  Incuse. 

2.  Naxos.      Wine-cup,  ivy-leaf,  bunches  of  grapes.      =  Incuse 

square,  quartered. 

3.  Eretria.      Gorgon-head.     =  Incuse   square  ;    in   one  section 

lion's  head. 

4.  Eretria.     Gorgon-head.     =  Bull's  head. 

5.  Chalcis.     Wheel.     =  Incuse  square. 

1  In  this  and  other  cases  it  is  not  thought  necessary  to  reproduce  exactly 
the  archaic  lettering,  which  is  better  seen  in  the  plate. 


6. 

Athens. 

7. 

Corinth. 

8. 

Corinth. 

9. 

Athens. 

spray 

10. 

Athens. 

11. 

Athens. 

12. 

Athens. 

13. 

Corcyra. 

458  INDEX  TO  PLATES 

Owl.     =  As  last. 
p.  Pegasus.     =  Incuse  square. 
p.  Pegasus.     —  Mill-sail  incuse. 
Head  of  Athena  helmeted.  =  AOE.  Owl  and  olive- 

As  last. 

As  last,  barbarous. 
As  last,  fixed  type. 

Cow  suckling  calf.     =  Two  oblong  incuses :   in 
each  a  pattern. 
14.  Thebes.     Boeotian  shield.     =  O  in  incuse. 


Plate  III.     Silver  op  Asia,  700-480. 

1.  Cos.     Crab.     =  Larger  and  smaller  incuse. 

2.  Cyme.      Fore-part   of  horse.      =  Two  incuses ;    in  each  a 

pattern. 

3.  Chios.    Sphinx  seated.  =  Larger  and  smaller  incuse  squares. 

4.  Teos.     Griffin  seated.  =  Incuse  square,  quartered. 

5.  Chersonesus  in  Caria.  Head  and  paw  of  lion.     =  XEP.  Fore- 

part of  bull  in  incuse. 

6.  Cnidus.     Head  and  paw  of  lion.     =  Head  of  Aphrodite  in 

incuse. 

7.  Camirus  in  Khodes.     Fig-leaf.     =  Two  oblong  incuses. 

8.  Tenedos.     Janiform  head.     =  TENE.  Bipennis. 

9.  Ephesus.     Bee.     =  Incuse  square. 

10.  Samos.     Lion's  scalp.     =  £A.  Bull's  head. 

11.  Poseidion  in  Carpathos.     Two  larger  and  one  smaller  dolphin. 

=  Two  oblong  incuses. 

12.  Ialysus  in  Khodes.     Half  of  winged  boar.     =  IEAY£ION. 

Eagle's  head  and  palmette. 

13.  Phaselis  in  Lycia.     Fore-part  of  galley.     =  0A£.     Stern  of 

galley. 

14.  Calymna.     Head  of  bearded  warrior.     =  Lyre  in  incuse. 


Plate  IV.     Thrace  and  Macedon,  600-480. 

1.  Thasos.     Satyr  carrying  nymph.     =  Incuse  square. 

2.  Lete.     Satyr  pursuing  nymph.     =  As  last. 

3.  Lete.     As  last. 


INDEX  TO  PLATES  459 

4.  Zacelii.     IAIEAEHN.     Centaur  carrying  nymph.     =  Incuse 

square. 

5.  Neapolis.     Gorgon-head.     =  Incuse  square. 

6.  Abdera.     HPAK.     Griffin  seated;   locust.      =  Incuse  square, 

quartered. 

7.  Edoni.     Man   leading   two    oxen.     =  TETAS    HAONEftN 

BACIAEY^  around  a  square. 

8.  Bisaltae.      BI^AATIKON.      Horseman   walking   beside    his 

horse.     =  Incuse  square,  quartered. 

9.  Macedon,  Alexander  I.     Horseman  walking  beside  his  horse. 

=  AAEZANAPO  around  square. 

10.  Acanthus.    Lion  slaying  bull.    [=  Incuse  square,  quartered.] 

11.  Potidaea.     Poseidon  on  horseback,  star.     =  Incuse  square. 

FTerone.    Amphora  and  bunches  of  grapes.   [=  Incuse  square.  ] 
(Restruck  on  coin  of  Acanthus.) 

Plate  V.     Italy  and  Sicily,  600-480. 

1.  Caulonia.      KAYA.      Apollo,    striking   with   bough,    winged 
figure  on  arm :  stag.     =  Obverse  type,  incuse  and  reversed. 
J  2.  Tarentum.     TAPA£.     Taras  on  dolphin;  shell.     =  Obverse 
type,  incuse  and  reversed. 

3.  Tarentum.     TAPA£.     Taras   on   dolphin,    holds    cuttle-fish. 

=  Sea-horse  ;  pecten  shell. 

4.  Croton  and  Sybaris.     QPO.     Tripod.     =  £Y.     Bull  looking 

back,  incuse. 

|  5.  Metapontum.  Ear  of  corn.  =  Same,  incuse.  (Restruck  on 
a  coin  of  Corinth.) 

!  6.  Zancle.  AANKAE.  Dolphin  in  harbour.  =  Pecten  in  in- 
cuse pattern. 

7.  Rhegium.     Lion's  scalp.     =  PEHON.     Calf's  head. 

8.  Messana.     Lion's  scalp.     =  ME££ENION.     Calf 's  head. 

9.  Syracuse.     ZYPA.     Four-horse  chariot.     =  Female  head  in 

incuse. 

10.  Syracuse.     SYPAKOSION.     Female   head   in  the  midst  of 

four  dolphins.     Four-horse  chariot  crowned  by  Victory. 

11.  Syracuse.     Same  inscr.     Female   head,  wearing  wreath,  in 

the  midst  of  four  dolphins.     =  Four-horse  chariot  crowned 
by  Victory ;  lion. 


460  INDEX  TO  PLATES 

Plate  VI.     Athenian  Empire.     I, 

1.  Electrum  of  Lampsacus.    Fore-part  of  winged  horse  in  wreath. 

=  Incuse  square. 

2.  Electrum  of  Cyzicus.     Heracles  kneeling,  holding  club  and 

bow ;  tunny.     =  Incuse  square. 

3.  Melos.     Pomegranate.     =  MAAI.     Incuse  device. 

4.  Melos.     Pomegranate.      =  MAAI.     Crescent. 

5.  Siphnos.    Head  of  Apollo.     =  £l<t>.    Eagle  flying;  barleycorn. 

6.  Samos.     Lion's  scalp.     =  1AM.     Fore-part  of  bull;    olive- 

spray  ;  monogram. 

7.  Samos.     As  last.     =  £A.     Fore-part  of  bull ;  olive-spray. 

8.  Chios.    Sphinx  seated  ;  amphora.    =  Incuse  square,  quartered. 

9.  Methymna.     Boar.     =  MAOYMNAIOS.     Helmeted  head  of 

Athena. 

10.  Cos.     KO£.     Discobolus;  tripod.     =  Crab  in  incuse  square. 

11.  Themistocles,  Magnesia.     OEMI£TOKAEO£.     Apollo  stand- 

ing.    =  MA.     Eagle  flying. 

12.  Colophon.     KOAOtDHNinN.     Head  of  Apollo.     =  Lyre  in 

incuse. 


Plate  VII.     Athenian  Empire.     II. 

.  1.  Termera,  Tymnes.     TYMNO.     Heracles  kneeling.      =  TEP- 
MEPIKON.     Lion's  head  in  incuse.        . 

2.  Sinope.     Head  of  nymph.     =^INH.     Sea-eagle  on  dolphin. 

3.  Amisus.     Turreted   female   head.     =  PEIPA,    AIOI".     Owl 

facing,  on  shield. 

4.  Dardanus.     Male  figure   on  horse.     =  AAP.     Cock;   mono- 

gram. 

5.  Calchedon.     Bearded  head.     =  KAAX.     Wheel. 

6.  Thasos.'    Satyr  carrying  nymph.  .   =  Incuse  square. 

7.  Thasos.  Head  of  bearded  Dionysus,  ivy-crowned .   =  O  A  £  1 0  N . 

Heracles  shooting ;  shield. 

8.  Abdera.      ABAHPI.      Griffin.      =  MHTPOtDHN.     Vines,   in 

incuse. 
9..  Aenus.     Head   of  Hermes.     =  AINI.     Goat;    crescent,  ivy- 
leaf. 
10.  Macedon,  Archelaus  I.     Male  head.     =  APXEAAO.     Horse 
with  loose  rein. 


INDEX  TO  PLATES  461 

1 1 .  Amphipolis.     Head  of  Apollo  facing.     =  AM<t>IPOAITEnN, 

A.     Torch  in  square. 

12.  Acanthus.     Lion  devouring  bull.     =  AKANOION.     Square 

pattern,  quartered. 

Plate  VIII.    Asia  Minor,  400-330. 

1.  Aenus,  gold.     Head  of  Hermes.     =  AINION.     Archaic  figure 
on  throne  ;  caduceus. 
j  2.  Lampsacus,    gold.      Young    Heracles    strangling    serpents. 

=  Fore-part  of  winged  horse. 
I  3.  Lampsacus,  gold.     Head  of  Athena.     =  As  last. 

4.  Clazomenae,  gold.     Head  of  Apollo,  facing.     =  KAAI  AOH- 

N  ATOP  AC     Swan;  fore-part  of  winged  boar. 

5.  Cius,  gold.     Head  of  Apollo.     =ArNnNIAH£.     Prow  of 

ship  ;  eagle. 

j  6.  Chalcidice,  gold.  Head  of  Apollo.  =  XAAKIAEHN  EPI 
EYAftPIAA.     Lyre. 

j  7.  Samos.  £A.  Lion's  scalp.  =  £YN.  Young  Heracles  strang- 
ling serpents. 

8.  Hecatomnus  of  Caria.     Carian  Zeus.     =  EKATOM.     Lion. 

9.  Mausolus.     Head  of  Apollo  facing.    =  MAY^HAAO.    Carian 

Zeus. 

10.  Ephesus.    E<t>.    Bee.    =API£TOAHMO£.    Fore-part  of  stag ; 

palm  tree. 

11.  Cnidus.     Head  of  Aphrodite ;    prow.     =  EOBHAO.     Head 

and  paw  of  lion. 

12.  Byzantium.     BY.     Ox  on  tunny.     =  Incuse. 

13.  Byzantium.     As  last ;  monogram.     =  Incuse. 

14.  Cyzicus.    SHTEIPA.    Head  of  Persephone.    =  KYI  I.    Lion's 

head,  tunny. 

Plate  IX.     Asia,  Africa,  480-330. 

1.  Tiribazus.     AMI.     Ormuzd.     =  Aramaic   inscr.   (Tiribazou). 

Zeus  standing. 

2.  Pharnabazus.  '  Female  head  facing.     =  Aramaic  inscr.  (Phar- 

nabazou).     Bearded  helmeted  head. 

3.  Datames,  Tarsus.    Aramaic  inscr.  (Baaltars).    Baal  of  Tarsus. 

=  Aramaic   inscr.   (of  Datames).     Persian   satrap   seated, 
solar  symbol. 


462  INDEX  TO  PLATES 

4.  Persian  Satrap.    BA.    Bearded  Persian  head.    =  BA£IAEn£. 

King  as  on  the  darics  ;  galley. 

5.  Persian  Satrap.     Bearded  Persian  head.     =  BA£IA.     Lyre. 

6.  Aradus.     Head  of  Melkart.    =  Aramaic  inscr.  (from  Aradus). 

Galley  on  waves. 

7.  Sidon.     Galley   before   fortress ;    below,   lions.     =  King  in 

chariot ;  goat  incuse. 

8.  Tyre.      Deity    on    winged    hippocamp ;    dolphin.     =  Owl ; 

sceptre  and  flail. 

9.  Carthage.    Female  head  in  tiara.    =  Inscr.  (Sham  machanat). 

Lion  and  palm  tree. 

10.  Carthage,  gold.     Head  of  Persephone.     =  Horse. 

1 1 .  Cyrene,  gold.     Nike  in  quadriga.     POAIANOEYS.     =KY- 

P  A  N  A I O  N .     Zeus  Ammon ,  incuse  altar. 

12.  Cyrene,  silver.  Head  of  Zeus  Ammon.    =KYPANA.  Silphiunv 

plant. 

Plate  X.     Hellas,  408-330. 

1.  Boeotia,  Tanagra.     Shield.     =  BO  I  in  wheel. 

2.  Thebes.     Shield.     =  OE.     Head  of  bearded  Dionysus,  ivy 

crowned. 

3.  Thebes.     Shield.     =  OE.     Young   Heracles  strangling  ser- 

pents. 

4.  Haliartus.   Shield  :  on  it  trident.    =APIAPTION.   Poseidon 

striking  with  trident. 

5.  Opus.     Head  of  Persephone.     =OPONTinNAIA£.     Ajax 

charging. 

6.  Amphictiones.      Head    of    Demeter.      =AM<t>IKTIONnN. 

Apollo  seated  with  his  lyre ;   tripod. 

7.  Athens,  gold.     Head  of  Athena.     AOE.     Owl,  olive-spray, 

calathus. 

8.  Athens.     Head  of  Athena.     =  AOE.     Owl,  olive-spray. 

9.  Zacynthus.      Head    of   Apollo.     =  IAKYNOinN.      Young 

Heracles  strangling  serpents. 

10.  Argos.     Head   of   Hera  with   crown.     =  APTEinN.     Two 

dolphins ;  wolf. 

11.  Arcadia.     Head  of  Zeus.     =  Monogram,  OAY.     Pan  seated 

on  rocks. 

12.  Stymphalus.     Head    of    Artemis.     =  STYM<t>AAinN    tO. 

Heracles  striking  with  club. 


INDEX  TO  PLATES  463 

Plate  XI.     Italy,  Sicily,  480-330. 

1.  Tarentum,    gold.     Head    of    Hera,    veiled.     =TA.KYAIK. 

Young  rider  crowning  horse,  rudder,  buccinuin. 

2.  Metapontum, gold.  AEYKIPPO?.   Head  of  Leucippus.   =  ME 

£.  I .     Two  ears  of  barley. 

3.  Sybaris.     Head  of  Athena.     =  SYBAPI.     Bull  looking  back. 

4.  Thurii.     Head  of  Athena,  Scylla  on  helmet.     =  OOYPinN. 

Bull  butting ;  fish. 

5.  Syracuse,  gold.    Head  of  young  Heracles.    =  £YPA.    Female 

head  in  incuse. 

6.  Agrigentum,  gold.     AKP.     Eagle    devouring    serpent;    two 

pellets.     =  SIAANOS.     Crab. 

7.  Gela,  gold.     TEAA2.     Bull,  barleycorn.     =  Horseman. 

8.  Camarina,  gold.     Head   of  Athena,    hippocamp   on   helmet. 

=  KA.     Olive  leaves  and  berries. 

9.  Syracuse.     SYPAKOSIHN   A.     Head  of  Persephone  amid 

dolphins.   =  Quadriga  crowned  by  Victory  :  beneath,  arms, 
AOAA. 

10.  Syracuse.     Same  inscr.     Head  of  Athena.     =  Pegasus. 

11.  Syracuse,    electrum.     Same    inscr.     Head    of    Apollo,    bow. 
=  SHTEIPA.     Head  of  Artemis,  bow. 


I 


Plate  I 


A%* 


\  «£ 


^  J^ 


11 


II 


^frLti*^ 


T 


*rf^ 


12 


14 


® 


Electrum  and  Gold  of  Asia.     700-480 


Plate  II 


k  € 


11 


13 


>t*N* 


4 


^ 
♦. 


Silver  of  Greece.     700-480 


Plate  III 


.3 


£>"iY* 


Silver  of  Asia.     700-480 


Plate  IV 


10 


qHl  I 


n 


i 


12 


Thrace  and  Macedon.     600-480 


Plate  V 


\     J 


A 


fr 


Italy  and  Sicily.     600-480 


Plate  VI 


sa>\ 


I 


12 


Athenian  Empire.     I 


Plate  VII 


•  • 


^- 


1 

\     is 


\-8 


^■P 


10 


11 


u 


Athenian  Empire.     II 


Plate  VIII 


/T*E.* 


V      » 


J.J, 


■-A- 


i  IV 


■*. 


> 


Asia  Minor.     400-330 


Plate  IX 


•  V 


if 


— ^sS 


\x^f 


I   i 


\*B^ 


^B 


IS 


Asia,  Africa.     480-330 


Plate  X 


v 


V 


rv. 


s£& 


v   -\ 


^ 


12 


Hellas.     480-330 


Plate    XI 


wV*-* 


MS 


I 


ifC 


i 


vWV***  .*• 


11 


Italy,  Sicily.     480-330 


(r\ 


* 

# 


4/60  ^/>r 

GJ      Gardner,  Percy 

335       A  history  of  anaient  coinage 

G3 


PLEASE  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
CARDS  OR  SLIPS  FROM  THIS  POCKET 

UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO  LIBRARY