DOI issue:
Artykuły/Articles
DOI article:Bodzek, Jarosław: The Satraps of Caria and the Lycians in the Achaemenid Period: Where is the Numismatic Evidence?
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.57341#0027
THE SATRAPS OF CARIA AND THE LYCIANS...
do with the close stylistic similarity between the head of Athena from the reverse
and analogous images on the coins of the dynast Ddenewele.71 It is believed that
Ddenewele was active slightly before 390 BC, among other things due to the fact
that his name does not appear in an inscription dated to c. 400 BC on the “Xanthus
Stela”.72 However, in more recent works, it is held that Ddenewele began his period
of activity during the last decade of the 5th century BC and that the coin itself is dated
to c. 400 BC.73 In our opinion, we cannot rule out that the coin was struck even earlier
than this, between 407 and 401 BC, when Tissaphemes was satrap of Caria, or even
earlier than this, between 413 and 407 BC, when he was karanos.74 In particular,
the first dates would seem to be likely within the context of the above-mentioned
similarity to the coins of Ddenewele, who, in the light of current research, was active
between c. 410 and 390 BC. Nor is this contradicted by the date that “Tissaphemes
Hoard” is traditionally said to have been hidden, i.e. c. 390 BC. Although the stater
struck in his name is rather well preserved, it has signs of wear. Thus, with regard
to the issue under discussion here, what we are potentially dealing with is an issue
of the satrap of Caria within the lands of Lycia.
What remains, however, is the question as to why Tissaphemes struck his own
issue in Xanthos. Interpreting the reason for this is not, however, easy. The various
explanations that have been given as to why he struck the coinage under discussion -
that it was an issue in his honor;75 that it legitimized his authority in the region;
that it brought prestige to the issue itself or to its issuer76 - are not convincing.77
Tissaphemes’ name appears on the so-called “Xanthos Stela” (“Inscribed Pillar”)
within the context of the actions in lasos that were taken by him against Amorges,
in which he was aided by a Lycian contingent.78 This was sufficient legitimacy
for Tissaphemes’ authority. Nor am I entirely convinced by Wilhelm Miiseler’s
proposal, which ties the striking of the coinage to both Tissaphemes’ triumphant
172), Alram (1986: 105), Bodzek (1994: 116; 2010: 109), Mildenberg (1998: 270, no. 24), and Winzer (2005: 29,
nos. 6, 4). On W. Miiseler’s idea, which dates the stater to c. 400 BC, see below.
71 Cf. HURTER 1979: 101; ZAHLE 1989; MÜSELER 2015: 23.
72 Cf. ZAHLE 1989: 172, note 9.
73 Cf. MÜSELER 2015: 23; IDEM 2016; KOLB 2018: 39.
74 These dates have already been proposed elsewhere. C.M. Harrison (1982b: 394) leaned towards
the possibility that Tissaphemes minted coins in Xanthus during the entire period of his activity in western Asia
Minor. Another author who supports the widespread dates for the coin under discussion is P. Debord (1999: 1261).
A. Keen, in turn, sees a connection between the coin under discussion here and the span of time during which it
is confirmed that Tissaphemes worked with the Lycians during the first period of his rule as karanos. Keen above
all questions the dates that are given for the time that Ddenewele was active as basing on the fact that the dynast
name is missing from the “Xanthos Stela”. (1998: 137, footnote 8). Cf. also BODZEK 2011: 102ff.
75 HURTER 1979: 108; MILDENBERG 2000: 10.
76 Ibidem.
77 HARRISON 1982b: 394.
78 TAM I: 44, a53-a55; KEEN 1998: 136ff.
25
do with the close stylistic similarity between the head of Athena from the reverse
and analogous images on the coins of the dynast Ddenewele.71 It is believed that
Ddenewele was active slightly before 390 BC, among other things due to the fact
that his name does not appear in an inscription dated to c. 400 BC on the “Xanthus
Stela”.72 However, in more recent works, it is held that Ddenewele began his period
of activity during the last decade of the 5th century BC and that the coin itself is dated
to c. 400 BC.73 In our opinion, we cannot rule out that the coin was struck even earlier
than this, between 407 and 401 BC, when Tissaphemes was satrap of Caria, or even
earlier than this, between 413 and 407 BC, when he was karanos.74 In particular,
the first dates would seem to be likely within the context of the above-mentioned
similarity to the coins of Ddenewele, who, in the light of current research, was active
between c. 410 and 390 BC. Nor is this contradicted by the date that “Tissaphemes
Hoard” is traditionally said to have been hidden, i.e. c. 390 BC. Although the stater
struck in his name is rather well preserved, it has signs of wear. Thus, with regard
to the issue under discussion here, what we are potentially dealing with is an issue
of the satrap of Caria within the lands of Lycia.
What remains, however, is the question as to why Tissaphemes struck his own
issue in Xanthos. Interpreting the reason for this is not, however, easy. The various
explanations that have been given as to why he struck the coinage under discussion -
that it was an issue in his honor;75 that it legitimized his authority in the region;
that it brought prestige to the issue itself or to its issuer76 - are not convincing.77
Tissaphemes’ name appears on the so-called “Xanthos Stela” (“Inscribed Pillar”)
within the context of the actions in lasos that were taken by him against Amorges,
in which he was aided by a Lycian contingent.78 This was sufficient legitimacy
for Tissaphemes’ authority. Nor am I entirely convinced by Wilhelm Miiseler’s
proposal, which ties the striking of the coinage to both Tissaphemes’ triumphant
172), Alram (1986: 105), Bodzek (1994: 116; 2010: 109), Mildenberg (1998: 270, no. 24), and Winzer (2005: 29,
nos. 6, 4). On W. Miiseler’s idea, which dates the stater to c. 400 BC, see below.
71 Cf. HURTER 1979: 101; ZAHLE 1989; MÜSELER 2015: 23.
72 Cf. ZAHLE 1989: 172, note 9.
73 Cf. MÜSELER 2015: 23; IDEM 2016; KOLB 2018: 39.
74 These dates have already been proposed elsewhere. C.M. Harrison (1982b: 394) leaned towards
the possibility that Tissaphemes minted coins in Xanthus during the entire period of his activity in western Asia
Minor. Another author who supports the widespread dates for the coin under discussion is P. Debord (1999: 1261).
A. Keen, in turn, sees a connection between the coin under discussion here and the span of time during which it
is confirmed that Tissaphemes worked with the Lycians during the first period of his rule as karanos. Keen above
all questions the dates that are given for the time that Ddenewele was active as basing on the fact that the dynast
name is missing from the “Xanthos Stela”. (1998: 137, footnote 8). Cf. also BODZEK 2011: 102ff.
75 HURTER 1979: 108; MILDENBERG 2000: 10.
76 Ibidem.
77 HARRISON 1982b: 394.
78 TAM I: 44, a53-a55; KEEN 1998: 136ff.
25