DOI issue:
Artikuły / Articles
DOI article:Wójcikowski, Robert S.: Zeus Aëtophoros in the coinage of Seleucus I Nicator
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.43282#0063
ZEUS AETOPHOROS...
must certainly have been due to his regard for local traditions and religions,1" as
demonstrated in his title leGAL.UKKIN KUR URIki, meaning the satrap of Akkad,
known from Babylonian documents.112
Seleucus’ marriage to Princess Apama,113 the daughter of Spitamenes of Sogdiana,
who had successfully opposed Alexander the Great in eastern Iran,"4 allowed him
to enter into family relations with members of the Iranian elite.115 This circumstance
seems to have been of great importance to Seleucus’ relations with his Iranian subjects
and to his attitude towards Iranian culture."6 Seleucus appointed his son Antiochus,
later known as Antiochus I Soter (281-261), as his co-ruler in the Iranian territories
called the Upper Satrapies. J. Wolski is of the opinion that the Iranian aristocracy could
have considered it a significant political gesture because Antiochus was half-Iranian
and they may not have treated him as a stranger due to his lineage.117
Support from Iranian nobility resulted in Iran’s enormous mobilization potential
passing into Seleucus’ hands.118 In the wars fought by this ruler, his army was mostly
composed of soldiers of Asian, especially Iranian, origin. It was the Iranian cavalry
that brought him victory in the Battle of Ipsos (301 BC).119 Iran was the military core
of the state he founded; its resources elevated him to the rank of the most powerful
among the Diadochi, permitting him to take up the struggle for the entire heritage of
Alexander the Great.120 The campaign fought in Asia Minor against Lysimachus,121
the result of which was the glorious victory of Corupedion in the year 281 BC,
would not have been possible without peace in the Iranian provinces.
opposed to the Greeks, which makes it elear that the Babylonians regarded him as a legitimate ruler (CAPDETREY
2007b: 208). J. D. Grainger goes even further, contrasting Babylonian loyalty to Seleucus with their revolts
against Achaemenid rule (GRAINGER 2014a: 28-29). Interestingly, in the Babylonians' eyes, the Seleucids fit in
with the pattem of successively ascending and falling dynasties. According to the “Umk Prophecy”, it was only
the reign of the ideal ruler, the fiiture “king of Umk,” extending his authority over the four quarters, that would
bring an end to such political upheavals (DE BREUCKER 2015: 89-90).
111 AUSTIN 2005: 121, 130; GRAINGER 2014a: 30-31; TARN 1930: 128.
112 CAPDETREY 2007b: note 58.
113 Plut. Demetr. XXXI, 3-4; Arr. An. VII, 4, 6. It has been argued that the political benefits resulting from
Seleucus' marriage to Apama would only have becorne evident to him after the year 312 (GRAINGER 2014a:
13-14; IDEM 2014b: 12).
114 OLBRYCHT 2004: 128-129; WÓJCIKOWSKI 2014: 133-134.
115 OLBRYCHT 2005: 232.
116 SHERWIN-WHITE and KUHRT 1993: 124; TUPLIN 2008: 110.
117 WOLSKI 1996: 33-34; IDEM 1999: 25.
118 OLBRYCHT 2013: 169-170.
119 IDEM 2005: 232-233. Diodoms of Sicily, when describing the forces which were brought by Seleucus to
Cappadocia against Antigonus and Demetrius, said the following: “Se 7ie£pńę uev eie öiopupiouq, i7nreię 8e erüv rolę
iTtTtoioęóiaię jix.pi pnpiouę Oio/p/.iouę, eLe(pavxaę Se öyöoq tcovia 7ipóę rolę TCipaKooioię, c/p pat a Se Spejravr|(pópa
7iZelco Tcov £Kaxóv” (D.S. XX, 113,4). Most of these warriors would have had to have been Asians and units, like
cavalry and particularly mounted archers and chariots, were typical of the Iranians (WÓJCIKOWSKI 2014: 145).
120 WATERFIELD 2011: 210-111.
121 App. Syr IX, 55; Iust. XVII, 1, 7-2.2.
must certainly have been due to his regard for local traditions and religions,1" as
demonstrated in his title leGAL.UKKIN KUR URIki, meaning the satrap of Akkad,
known from Babylonian documents.112
Seleucus’ marriage to Princess Apama,113 the daughter of Spitamenes of Sogdiana,
who had successfully opposed Alexander the Great in eastern Iran,"4 allowed him
to enter into family relations with members of the Iranian elite.115 This circumstance
seems to have been of great importance to Seleucus’ relations with his Iranian subjects
and to his attitude towards Iranian culture."6 Seleucus appointed his son Antiochus,
later known as Antiochus I Soter (281-261), as his co-ruler in the Iranian territories
called the Upper Satrapies. J. Wolski is of the opinion that the Iranian aristocracy could
have considered it a significant political gesture because Antiochus was half-Iranian
and they may not have treated him as a stranger due to his lineage.117
Support from Iranian nobility resulted in Iran’s enormous mobilization potential
passing into Seleucus’ hands.118 In the wars fought by this ruler, his army was mostly
composed of soldiers of Asian, especially Iranian, origin. It was the Iranian cavalry
that brought him victory in the Battle of Ipsos (301 BC).119 Iran was the military core
of the state he founded; its resources elevated him to the rank of the most powerful
among the Diadochi, permitting him to take up the struggle for the entire heritage of
Alexander the Great.120 The campaign fought in Asia Minor against Lysimachus,121
the result of which was the glorious victory of Corupedion in the year 281 BC,
would not have been possible without peace in the Iranian provinces.
opposed to the Greeks, which makes it elear that the Babylonians regarded him as a legitimate ruler (CAPDETREY
2007b: 208). J. D. Grainger goes even further, contrasting Babylonian loyalty to Seleucus with their revolts
against Achaemenid rule (GRAINGER 2014a: 28-29). Interestingly, in the Babylonians' eyes, the Seleucids fit in
with the pattem of successively ascending and falling dynasties. According to the “Umk Prophecy”, it was only
the reign of the ideal ruler, the fiiture “king of Umk,” extending his authority over the four quarters, that would
bring an end to such political upheavals (DE BREUCKER 2015: 89-90).
111 AUSTIN 2005: 121, 130; GRAINGER 2014a: 30-31; TARN 1930: 128.
112 CAPDETREY 2007b: note 58.
113 Plut. Demetr. XXXI, 3-4; Arr. An. VII, 4, 6. It has been argued that the political benefits resulting from
Seleucus' marriage to Apama would only have becorne evident to him after the year 312 (GRAINGER 2014a:
13-14; IDEM 2014b: 12).
114 OLBRYCHT 2004: 128-129; WÓJCIKOWSKI 2014: 133-134.
115 OLBRYCHT 2005: 232.
116 SHERWIN-WHITE and KUHRT 1993: 124; TUPLIN 2008: 110.
117 WOLSKI 1996: 33-34; IDEM 1999: 25.
118 OLBRYCHT 2013: 169-170.
119 IDEM 2005: 232-233. Diodoms of Sicily, when describing the forces which were brought by Seleucus to
Cappadocia against Antigonus and Demetrius, said the following: “Se 7ie£pńę uev eie öiopupiouq, i7nreię 8e erüv rolę
iTtTtoioęóiaię jix.pi pnpiouę Oio/p/.iouę, eLe(pavxaę Se öyöoq tcovia 7ipóę rolę TCipaKooioię, c/p pat a Se Spejravr|(pópa
7iZelco Tcov £Kaxóv” (D.S. XX, 113,4). Most of these warriors would have had to have been Asians and units, like
cavalry and particularly mounted archers and chariots, were typical of the Iranians (WÓJCIKOWSKI 2014: 145).
120 WATERFIELD 2011: 210-111.
121 App. Syr IX, 55; Iust. XVII, 1, 7-2.2.