LEUVEN - PARIS - WALPOLE, MA 2011
MORE THAN MEN, LESS THAN GODS
STUDIES ON ROYAL CULT AND IMPERIAL WORSHIPPROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL
COLLOQUIUM ORGANIZED BY THE BELGIAN SCHOOL AT ATHENS
(NOVEMBER 1-2, 2007)
Panagiotis P. IOSSIF, Andrzej S. CHANKOWSKI
and Catharine C. LORBER
Preface . . . IX List of Contributors . . . XI List of Abbreviations. . . XIII
Le culte des souverains aux époques hellénistique et impériale dans la partie orientale du monde méditerranéen: questions actuelles . . . 1
Andrzej S. CHANKOWSKI
I. THE PRE-HELLENISTIC DIVINE KINGSHIP By the Favor of Auramazda: Kingship and the Divine in the Early Achaemenid Period . . . 15
Mark B. GARRISON
Identities of the Indigenous Coinages of Palestine under Achae- menid Rule: the Dissemination of the Image of the Great King . 105
La contribution des Teucrides aux cultes royaux de l’époque hellé- nistique . . . 121
II. THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD:
ROYAL CULT AND DIVINE KINGSHIP
The Ithyphallic Hymn for Demetrios Poliorketes and Hellenistic Religious Mentality. . . 157
Never Mind the Bullocks: Taurine Imagery as a Multicultural Expression of Royal and Divine Power under Seleukos I Nikator. . 197
Oliver D. HOOVER
Apollo Toxotes and the Seleukids: Comme un air de famille . . . 229 Panagiotis P. IOSSIF
Theos Aigiochos: the Aegis in Ptolemaic Portraits of Divine Rulers 293 Catharine C. LORBER
Ptolémée III et Bérénice II, divinités cosmiques . . . 357 Hans HAUBEN
The Iconography of Assimilation. Isis and Royal Imagery on Ptolemaic Seal Impressions . . . 389
The Pattern of Royal Epithets on Hellenistic Coinages . . . 417 François DE CALLATAY & Catharine C. LORBER
III. THE EMPEROR WORSHIP:
ROMAN IMPERATORS AND EMPERORS
Des honneurs divins pour Marc Antoine à Thessalonique? . . . 457 Emmanuel VOUTIRAS
The Creation of Imperial Gods: Not only Imposition versus Spontaneity . . . 475
Étude comparative de l’introduction du culte impérial à Pergame, à Athènes et à Éphese . . . 521
Honorific and other Dedications to Emperors in the Greek East 553 Mika KAJAVA
Le culte impérial en Phénicie: culte civique ou culte provincial? . 593 Ziad SAWAYA
Celebrating Supermen: Divine Honors for Roman Emperors in Greek Papyri from Egypt . . . 619
Janneke DE JONG
IV. THE PERIPHERY OF THE GREEK AND ROMAN ROYAL CULT:
Royal Cult in Arsakid Parthia. . . 649 Antonio INVERNIZZI
More than Men, Less than Gods: Concluding Thoughts and New Perspectives . . . 691
Panagiotis P. IOSSIF & Catharine C. LORBER
Indices. . . 711
* Warm thanks to Bethany Isenberg who revised an earlier version of this paper.
1 All dates are B.C. unless otherwise indicated.
2 Green 1993, 402-3 (ruler cults); Shipley 2000, 65-6 (representations of kingship).
3 OGIS 383. For an English translation, see Burstein 1985, 63-5.
4 The title philometor is attested on an extremely rare issue (see Table I).
François DE CALLATAY and Catharine C. LORBER*
Any book on the Hellenistic period provides some comments about the royal epithets used by rulers of that time1. They are generally inserted in a chapter about ruler cults or representations of kingship2. These epi- thets can be found in both literary and epigraphic written sources, as well as on coins. The views and conclusions which may be drawn from each of the three sets of documents may prove to be very different.
Antiochos I of Kommagene struck bronze coins with only the sober legend [nomisma] basileos Antiochou (of King Antiochos), whereas inscriptions left at Nemrud Dag, on the back of the thrones of the seated colossal statues, proclaim that he is the “Great King Antiochos, divine, just, manifest (visible), friend of the Romans and the Greeks.”3 The same inscription adds that he is the grandson of Antiochos epiphanes philometor kallinikos, that is, the Seleucid Antiochos VIII, who is only epiphanes on his coinage4. Conversely, some grandiloquent legends on Parthian coins, which have easily four or five epithets, are not attested in our epigraphic record.
By definition, nicknames (sobriquets) are not to be confused with epi- thets, since this last word literally means êpíqeton (imposed, placed upon). Nicknames unofficially promoted by popular perception are found only in literary sources. Here is a (non-exhaustive) list of some nicknames placed in modern alphabetical order, excluding geographical names (e.g., Asiatikos or Sidetes): Auletes (flute-player, oboist) for
5 See Brown 1979.
6 Bikerman 1938, 236-7; Shipley 2000, 65. Tryphon is to be placed in another category since it was the name consciously taken by Diodotos (142-138) to reign. Literally, it means
“the licentious.” Modern historians have shown how the concept of tryphe (luxury) was promoted in these hard days of constant internal fighting.
7 von Gutschmid 1893.
8 Bouché-Leclercq 1914, 610-1.
9 The “Syrians” according to App. Syr. 45 (Antiochos V), 67 (Demetrios II), 69 (Antiochos X); the “army” for Antiochos I Kallinikos according to Lucian Zeuxis 11 (but Antiochos I is never presented as kallinikos elsewhere). See Bikerman 1938, 237.
Ptolemy XII; Doson (doubtful meaning: “the one who will give,” since he constantly promised and never gave?) for Antigonos III; Gonatas (doubtful meaning: “from Gonnoi” or “knock-kneed,” from a piece of armor covering the knee) for Antigonos II5, Grypos (hook-nose) for Antiochos VIII; Hierax (falcon) for Antiochos, the son of Antiochos II;
Keraunos (thunderbolt) for Ptolemy, stepson of Ptolemy I, and for Seleukos III; Lathyros (chickpea) for Ptolemy XI; Monophthalmos (one- eyed) for Antigonos I; Physkon (fat-belly) for Ptolemy VIII; or Pogon (bearded) for Seleukos II6. It is not surprising that these nicknames are completely absent from the epigraphic and numismatic records.
Royal epithets referred to in epigraphic inscriptions and on coins are presumed to reflect the official will of the kings, the way they chose to be qualified, as an important part of the way they wanted to be perceived (a view that may be disputed). Apart from numerous studies concerning specific epithets or cases, few historians have attempted to propose a general pattern of explanation for these royal epithets. Among those, Alfred von Gutschmid (1831-1887), a specialist of the Parthians and ancient Iran, built an ingenious theory in which each epithet was personally linked to the ruler for a specific and bio- graphical reason7. As was quickly recognized, we can accept that these epithets were chosen intentionally when they first occurred, but habits must have played a role thereafter, especially with the Parthians8. Another pivotal question addressed by Gutschmid was to investigate if kings were free to designate themselves as they wished or if this was left to a sacerdotal decree, as proposed by Gutschmid himself (an idea that never received strong support). Ancient authors are not very help- ful since some of them quite erroneously attribute both royal epithets and nicknames to the vox populi 9. For the Seleukid kingdom, Elias
10 App. Syr. 65.
11 App. Syr. 47.
12 Bikerman 1938, 238-41; also Préaux 1978, 251.
Joseph Bikerman (1897-1981) strongly advocated that there was no uni- form use of these royal epithets. In royal correspondence with cities, kings did not make use of the epithets they were given by civic com- munities. Yet there were clear instances where royal epithets were given by cities. The Milesians called Antiochos II theos because he delivered them from the tyrant Timarchos10. The Babylonians did the same with Demetrios I when they acclaimed him soter11. Moreover, the same king may have been designated differently on coins of various cities. Con- centrating on the coins of Antiochos IV, Bikerman noticed that leg- ends changed through his reign at Antioch and that these changes, which were consistent with the epigraphic record at Antioch, were not applied everywhere. In his view, royal epithets (both on coins and in epigraphic inscriptions) were very often given by cities to kings who never tried to make uniform the various names they were offered. In all cases, they were official epithets and not merely the result of some personal fantasy of the engravers. Consequently, epithets could differ from one city to another. In Bikerman’s view, epithets can be best understood as a civic phenomenon12.
The aim of this paper is to offer a broad view of the numismatic evi- dence for all of the Hellenistic kings ranging from Sicily to India. We must be reminded that this evidence may be deceptive and misleading:
(1) with few exceptions, royal epithets on coins began to appear only in the second quarter of the second century, thus more than a century later than what we know from literary and epigraphic sources (this is per se interesting); (2) although abundant on coins, these royal epithets are mute since they give no information about the reasons for their choice and use. On the other hand, traditional advantages of numismatic evi- dence are fully appreciated here: (1) coins are likely to be trustworthy documents since they seem to be the consequence of the highest level of power (they are the king’s first prerogative in the royal economy as described by the Pseudo-Aristotle); (2) having been massively produced, they give us nowadays a good chance to obtain an uninterrupted sequence of all types struck. Hence, the classic opposition between numismatics and epigraphy: a dry but continuous information here in
13 It would be useful — but beyond the scope of this paper — to give an up-to-date summary of all the royal epithets attested in epigraphic documents.
14 Breccia 1903, 95-8 and 126-31.
15 Bikerman 1938, 236-41; Mørkholm 1963, 68-74.
16 Alram 1986; Leschhorn and Franke 2002.
17 Mørkholm 1991, 30-1.
18 Mørkholm 1991, 31. See also Rebuffat 1996, 193; Chamoux 1985, 241 (“Avec le temps, le nombre des épithètes a crû, dans la mesure où le prestige réel du souverain décroisssait comme si l’un rachetait l’autre”). French children use to say: “C’est celui qui dit qui ne l’est pas.”
19 Carradice and Price 1988, 135.
contrast to a sophisticated but random information there13. Although in recent times the epigraphic material grew significantly for Parthian kings (and even for the Graeco-Baktrians and Indo-Greeks), numismatic evi- dence still forms the most informative record for these areas. What is more, coins almost certainly reached a wider audience in antiquity than either literature or inscriptions, so that they can be considered as a mass medium carrying the epithets of the rulers to the public.
Royal Hellenistic epithets on coins have not received much attention thus far. We do have an old but still applicable and useful list of all royal epithets by Evaristo Breccia, who put no special emphasis on numis- matic evidence14. We also have some studies with special attention placed on coins of the Seleukids, admittedly the most fascinating king- dom under consideration15. In addition, we also have two recent and fairly comprehensive records, one for all Persian names on coins and the other for all Greek coin inscriptions16.
As a general phenomenon most typical for the late Hellenistic period, royal epithets on coins have not been properly analyzed. Otto Mørk- holm gave a brief but informative sketch17. Like others, he noticed the extension of the phenomenon with Antiochos IV, from 172 onwards, and ironically added: “It is symptomatic that this practice was intro- duced at a time when the political power of the Hellenistic kingdoms was being undermined by Rome. Often one gets the impression that the more powerless a king felt, the more he tried to compensate by adopting a string of high-sounding epithets.”18 This proliferation of royal epithets, which continued under Roman rule, has been classified among the vari- ous fashions of the time19.
20 E.g., for Alexander I Balas, the British Museum keeps a hemidrachm with the legend Alexatoros instead of Alexandrou (Newell 1917, 53, no. 190), a possible reminiscence of the epithet theopatoros which is found on higher denominations.
The first aim of this paper was to create a table with all possible occurrences of epithets on the coins of Hellenistic rulers (Table 1). Such a table did not prove very easy to create. We decided not to take into account what must have been engraver’s errors or incorrect spellings20. In other respects the table is inclusive. It primarily lists epithets as they are normally understood, that is, descriptions of some quality inherent in the ruler. Such epithets often express godlike qualities and in some cases, especially with the Ptolemies, they correspond to cult titles attested in other documents. A few legends (epiphanous tou uiou and tou eggonos kamnaskirou) advertise a dynastic relationship that perhaps had cultic significance. Still other legends provide titles of office: of these, basileos basileon was venerable and probably had religious implications, whereas others, like archon Bosporou, are included just for the sake of complete- ness.
Like the epigraphic evidence, the numismatic corpus is not static;
several unknown legends appeared in recent years and have been dis- seminated in modern literature. Moreover, some monetary issues with fascinating legends no longer exist since all the coins were promptly melted down or overstruck, as is the case with Tiridates, a Parthian king (admittedly, a usurper) who (surely the only one of his kind!) qualified himself as philoromaios. However, some weak overstrikes fail to oblite- rate the original type whose legend is still visible under the new type of Phraates IV. First and foremost, we are all in need of up-to-date cata- logues for some major coinages. Chronologies for the Parthians and the Graeco-Baktrians/Indo-Greeks are notoriously difficult to establish. The standard catalogues have been revised on several points (more than enlarged) by modern research and the regnal years are still open to dis- cussion and debate.
Differences in our actual knowledge lead to unequal treatment: metal and denominations were thought to have been important for the Parthi- ans, as well as for the Graeco-Baktrians and for the Indo-Greeks. As a rule, Ptolemaic coinages made no use of royal epithets. Consequently,
21 Note for the reader: we are grateful to be informed should you note any omissions or inaccuracies in this table (email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org).
22 Exceptions to this rule are few and mainly concern the first Parthians with the sole mention of the dynastic name Arsakou (of Arsakes). For the sake of space, some Parthian legends have been abridged b.b.A.m., meaning basileos basileon Arsakou megalou (of the King of Kings Arsakes the Great).
the catalogue was restricted to the rare occurrences for which epithets were attested. Information about mints is only provided for the Seleu- kids and the Ptolemies. We hope that, for all its uncertainties, Table 1 will prove to be useful to researchers21. For each Hellenistic ruler, it gives the different epithets attested in our numismatic records. A ruler with- out an epithet is not a ruler without a name, the sole exception being the Lakedaimonian kings, whose names are missing on the reverse while their portraits are on the obverse. The generalized habit for Hellenistic rulers was to put the legend basileos + their names (in the genitive form) on their coins22. The word basileus is truly Hellenistic since it appeared for the first time after the death of Alexander the Great in June 323.
Three additional tables have been created from the evidence of Table 1.
These three tables generally concentrate on epithets in the classical sense, that is, epithets that express a kingly quality, associate the ruler with a deity or even imply his divinity. An index of the occurrences for each epithet, classified in chronological order, can be found in Table 2. This helps to visualize the first use and the dissemination of each epithet. The information is even more condensed in Table 3 which only states the first occurrence, while Table 4 is an attempt to classify these epithets thematically.
1. Several phases of innovation
Taking into account first occurrences only, several phases of innova- tion may be observed.
First phase. An Egyptian process (c. 270-198)
Royal epithets on coins remained rare during the third century and are only to be found on Ptolemaic coinage, with the unique exception
23 In some of the tables, and for purposes of the quantitative study, epithets com- posed of two words (e.g., theos epiphanes) are treated as separate words.
24 This date, used by Bopearachchi 1991, is Antimachos’ year of accession. For a study of these coins, see Holt 1984.
of the Parthian Arsakes I (see Table 3). With Ptolemy II Philadelphos came the titles theoi adelphoi 23, philadelphos and soter. It is worth notic- ing that the epithets philadelphos and soter were not used for living rulers but in order to commemorate a deceased king and queen. Coins with the epithet of Ptolemy IV and Arsinoe III, philopator, are usually attrib- uted to Ptolemy V, but very likely some were issued by Philopator him- self. Ptolemy V Epiphanes is the first king who undoubtedly placed his own epithet on his lifetime coinage.
The epithets theoi adelphoi and philadelphos were applied in Alexan- dria on extremely valuable coinage, leaving few chances for an Egyptian peasant to ever see any of them. The title soter was employed only briefly at the Alexandria mint but had a long life in the provinces. The other titles were only struck in Phoenicia — philopator (Sidon, Tyre and Ptolemais), epiphanes (Tyre) and theos philometor (Ptolemais) — and remain scarce to extremely rare. We may conjecture about the excep- tional circumstances which favored such issues, but, struck outside Egypt in such limited quantities, they never played any grand role in the propaganda ideals of the king. So far, the six Egyptian epithets only belong to two thematic categories: domestic/dynastic or divinizing (see Table 4).
Second phase: a) the Graeco-Baktrian innovations (c. 174?)
The first non-Ptolemaic rulers to innovate seem to have been Agath- okles (c. 185-170) and Antimachos (c. 174-165), the Graeco-Baktrian kings who, in 174 (?)24, struck fascinating commemorative tetradrachms to honor their predecessors, each of them with an appropriate epithet.
The Seleukid king Antiochos II (261-246) is thus nikator, Diodotos I (c. 250-230) is soter, Euthydemos I (c. 230-200) is theos and Demetrios I (c. 200-185) is aniketos. Leaving aside soter and theos, already used by the Ptolemies, the two new epithets are both military: nikator and aniketos.
On the obverse, Agathokles proclaimed himself dikaios, another novelty in our numismatic records. When put into perspective, this set of com- memorative issues is a most innovative and amazing enterprise. These
25 Mørkholm 1962, 408. At that time, the argument was used to militate against a high chronology for the Kappadokian king whose monetary legend is read: basileos Ari- arathou eusebous. Against Bono Simonetta, who gave it to Ariarathes IV, Mørkholm rightly attributed these issues to the last years of Ariarathes V, from 135 onwards.
26 Mørkholm 1963, 37 and 72.
27 Not taking into account the many uncertain mints we are unable to locate precisely.
28 Out of the 26 hoards recorded in the Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards, no less than 17 have an eastern provenance (Thompson, Mørkholm and Kraay 1973, 389).
tetradrachms, apparently produced on a fairly large scale and for which an updated study is eagerly awaited, never circulated in the west and, as such, remain an isolated case.
Second phase: b) a Seleukid process (c. 173/2-142)
In 173/2, the Seleukid Antiochos IV took a decisive step, producing a full range of silver denominations (tetradrachms, drachms, hemidrachms, diobols and bronzes) with the legend basileos Antiochou theou epiphanous (of King Antiochos, god manifest) at the mint of Antioch. Tetradrachms only required a minimum of 17 obverse dies (which may mean half a million pieces!). To be proclaimed alive theos epiphanes was in no way a timid move. It comes as no surprise that numismatists tend to give to Antiochos IV a prominent place in the whole phenomenon of the royal epithets. Things went fast: “About the middle of the second century the practice was quite common.”25 The elements of the epithet used in 173/2 were not new (theos appeared in the plural in theoi adelphoi, the title of Ptolemy II Philadelphos and Arsinoe II, attested in written documents from 273/2; and epiphanes appeared in c. 199/8 with Ptolemy V Epiphanes). A couple of years later, in c. 169/8, Antiochos IV extended the existing legend with nikephorou, a new epithet at that time, never found on epigraphic documents and likely to be related to his Egyptian victory26. This ultimate legend was used with three different types of tetradrachms (with the head of Zeus, the king and Apollo on the obverse [35 obverses]) and even one issue of gold staters (head of the king). We notice that these epithets were mainly used in Antioch (also in Ptole- mais, Seleukeia on the Tigris and Ekbatana) but were absent in Seleu- keia in Pieria, Tarsos, Mallos, Byblos, Berytos, Sidon, Tyre, Askalon, Susa and Antioch on the Persian Gulf 27. It is important to remember as well that coinage of Antiochos IV did not circulate west of the Tauros but went far to the east28.
29 It may be that the first occurrence of the epithet ktistes was made by the Parthian Pakoros I in c. 40-38 (see also Sellwood and Simonetta 2006). For a recent analysis of the notion of Patria and the use of the epithet in Hellenistic times, see Muccioli 2006.
Innovation remained Seleukid during the following decades (Table 3).
Out of the eight new epithets registered for the years c. 164–c. 142, six were promoted by a Seleukid king. The important part taken by usurp- ers or illegitimate kings in this process should be noticed: Timarchos (c. 162) is declared megas in his eastern mints (Seleukeia on the Tigris and Ekbatana). Alexander Balas was not afraid to be proclaimed for the first time on coins euergetes and theopator. Tryphon (142-138) system- atically put the title autokrator on his coins minted in Antioch and Phoenicia.
In these troubled years, Ptolemy VI introduced the domestic epithet philometor, which had a Ptolemaic flavor; and after the capture of Seleukeia on the Tigris in 141, Mithradates I of Parthia declared him- self philellen.
Third phase: Kappadokia and the lesser kingdoms (c. 134-36)
The epithet eusebes only appears in c. 134 with Ariarathes V. Kappa- dokia proved to be innovative at the end of the Hellenistic period.
Ariobarzanes I (95-63) was the first to put the title philoromaios on his drachms, while Archelaos (36 B.C. – A.D. 17) was first with the legend philopatridos tou ktistou29. At about the same time and not far from there, in Kilikia, Tarkondimotos (39-31) chose (im)prudently to appear as philantonios (the friend of Antony). Near to the east, in Kommagene, Samos (c. 130-100) was qualified as theosebes on his coinage (echoing the eusebes of Ariarathes V of Kappadokia) while Artavazdes, king of Arme- nia (55-34), was theios (not exactly god but still divine).
During the second half of the first century, Kappadokia, Kilikia, Kommagene and Armenia were not leading powers but fearful king- doms looking for protectors. Invention was no more the seal of the powerful but the avowal of the weak. That was the time for political epithets like philoromaios which also flourished on coins in Galatia (Brogitaros, c. 58-53), in Kommagene (Mithradates II, c. 36-20) and even — for a while — in Parthia (Tiridates I, c. 26). It is now easy to disapprove of the choice of being called philantonios as short-sighted.
30 Houghton 1983, 28, no. 414.
31 Shore 1993, 119, nos. 200-4.
Tarkondimotos (39-31) was not that wise and he died bravely on the battlefield at Actium.
To conclude, back to Baktriane, the epithet theotropos made its appearance with Queen Agathokleia at the end of the second century while the epithet kallinikos made a late and somehow incongruous appearance on some remote bronzes struck at Seleukeia in Pieria by Demetrios III, one of the last Seleukids, at the end of the 90s30, as well as — systematically — on rare bronze coins of the Kommagenian king Mithridates I (c. 100-70).
2. Frequency of use of the royal epithets Differences among kingdoms
Western rulers made no use of royal epithets on their coins. This is true for Sicily, for mainland Greece and for the areas of the Black Sea, where around the middle of the first century (55/54) the first to qualify himself was Pharnakes II (63-47), with a grandiloquent basileos basileon megalou, initially used by Mithradates II of Parthia (c. 123-88).
Conversely, Parthian kings made the most extensive use of royal epi- thets on their coins. This culminated in legends with no less than eight lines of text, as can be seen on the drachms of Mithradates III (58-55). The longest legend on record says: basileos basileon Arsakou megalou theou eupa- toros kai philellenos dikaiou epiphanous (of the King of Kings Arsakes the great, god, of noble descent and friend of the Greeks, just, manifest)31. This grand titulature for Mithradates III, with a total of six royal epithets, is paralleled by the inscription in Nemrud Dag for Antiochos I of Kom- magene (Great King Antiochos, divine, just, manifest (visible), friend of the Romans and the Greeks) already quoted in this paper. Also at about the same time, Artabazos of Charakene (49/8) decided to extend the royal legend to a point never seen before or after him in this kingdom: basileos Artabazou theopatoros autokratoros soteros philopatoros kai philellenos (of King Artabazes, [son] of a divine father, ruler by his own authority, savior, father-loving and friend of the Greeks). The middle of the first century can be seen as a climax for these lengthy titulatures. Interestingly enough, the only common epithet of the three cases quoted is philellen.
32 Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 103-7, nos. 1505-6 and 1513-5.
33 Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 183-8, nos. 1683-705.
34 Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 219-27 and 249-50, nos. 1780-96 and 1858-63.
In this general context, it is worth noticing that royal epithets remained rare on Ptolemaic coins, despite the fact that the Ptolemies first introduced such epithets and, for nearly a century (270-174), they remained the only ones to use them. As noted, the epithets philopator, epiphanes and philometor appear as curiosities in the Ptolemaic corpus, restricted to a few dies; in the case of philometor, the epithet is attested by a unique tetradrachm.
Differences within the Seleukid kingdom
For Bikerman, the use of royal epithets differed from one city to another. On coins, it was not dictated by the size of the denomination.
Both statements, intended to describe the Seleukid reality, cannot be applied to the entire Hellenistic world.
Indeed, taking into account all of the numismatic evidence for the Hellenistic world, it would be erroneous to state that, as a general rule, epithets varied from one city to another. Instead, the main practice we may observe implies a constant use of one or more epithets, whatever the number of mints in activity. Moreover, as is made clear by Table 1, differences between Seleukid mints existed but possibly not at the level attested by the epigraphic evidence.
On the other hand, size sometimes mattered, even for Seleukid coin- ages. Tetradrachms of Antiochos IV (175-164) from Seleukeia on the Tigris do not use his epithets, but on a bronze series almost certainly of Seleukeia we read theou epiphanous 32. During the reign of Demetrios I (161-150) the same mint proclaimed the king soter on his precious metal coinage, but rarely cited this epithet on his bronzes33. In the Antiochene coinage of Alexander I Balas (152-145), gold staters, tetradrachms and drachms include theopatoros euergetou in their legends, while smaller silver denominations and bronzes do not; the same contrast exists at Seleukeia on the Tigris34. Local specificities
Some epithets were extensively used in some places, while they were unknown in others. Table 5 gives the frequencies for the most docu-
35 On the introduction and meaning of the epithet under Mithradates I, see D∏browa 2009, especially 45-8.
mented kingdoms. Specifities have been noted in bold characters. Some kingdoms were clearly more innovative than others.
With only 12 different epithets (row A) for 37 kings (first row), the Graeco-Baktrian and Indo-Greek kings look rather repetitive in their way of qualifying themselves and, indeed, no less than 18 of them choose to call themselves soter and 9 dikaios. Interestingly too, the epithet ani- ketos was used only by these kings. With its Latin counterpart invictus, the word itself prompts us to suspect some Mithraic context. However, the catalogue leads us in a more political and military direction since the same kings also made an extensive use of the epithets nikator and nike- phoros (especially in the years 100-80, with three occurrences for anike- tos, two for nikephoros and one for nikator).
The last row (C) gives the average number of epithets used by kings who put at least one epithet on their coins. With a ratio of 4.6, the Parthians markedly differ from the others. They are the ones who made the most abundant use of royal epithets. On their drachms, the accumu- lation of words makes the legends difficult and sometimes illegible, all the more since the letters were engraved with dotted ends. Alone among the Hellenistic rulers, Parthian kings liked to be proclaimed on their coins as philellen (11 occurrences out of 12) or theopator (7 occurrences out of 9)35. And they liked to be qualified as megas as well (9 out of 15).
Other peculiarities may be observed. It turns out that the epithet eusebes has a strong Kappadokian flavor (4 out of 5 occurrences) while theos was primilarily used by the Seleukid kings (5 out of 9 occurrences).
With 15 different epithets on their coins, the Seleukid kings offer the most diversified gallery of royal adjectives, equal only to the Parthians.
The survey of royal epithets presented here inspired a few observa- tions, but fundamentally it is intended to aid future research. We emphasize that these epithets should be studied in their numismatic context, taking account of the entire epithet, the coin types with which it is associated, the mint(s) of origin and the circulation pattern of the
36 RPC 1, no. 3872.
coinage, etc. Only then can an epithet be situated in its proper political and religious context. The possibilities for the Graeco-Baktrian and Graeco-Indian kings are especially promising: many of these kings pro- duced parallel coinages with inscriptions in Indic languages, so that the coinage itself provides fertile ground for cross-cultural comparison.
It would be fascinating to produce a similar survey of epithets for the epigraphic material. Such a task may prove more difficult to achieve since the evidence is more disseminated and less coherent. Precisely speaking, the comparison of the two sets of data is likely to give a good idea of how these documents, both held by many as “official,” may diverge. Except for limited categories of material such as prostagmata, civic inscriptions dealing with kings reflect civic terminologies that were submitted for royal approval. This was not the case with coins whose legends normally originated with the Hellenistic rulers and their courts.
For now, we would like to conclude on what appears to be a final step and ultimate promotion for these royal epithets: the transformation of one epithet into a royal name as it occurred in Kilikia with the king Philopator, arguably the loving son of Tarkondimotos36.
Alram, M. 1986. Nomina propria iranica in nummis. Materialgrundlagen zu den iranischen Personennamen auf antiken Münzen. Wien: VÖAW.
Bergmann, M. 1998. Die Strahlen der Herrscher. Theomorphes Herrscherbild und politische Symbolik im Hellenismus und in der römischen Kaiserzeit. Mainz:
Bikerman, E. 1938. Institutions des Séleucides. Paris: P. Geuthner.
Blasius, A. Internet. “Die ägyptisierende Münzprägung Antiochos’ IV. Epiphanes im Kontext des 6. Syrischen Krieges.” Paper presented at Giessen University and published online at http://fb04prometheus8.geschichte.uni-giessen.de/
Bopearachchi, O. 1991. Monnaies gréco-bactriennes et indo-grecques. Catalogue raisonné. Paris: BnF.
Bopearachchi, O. 1998. Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. The Collection of the American Numismatic Society. Part 9, Graeco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek Coins.
New York: ANS.
Bouché-Leclerq, A. 1914. Histoire des Séleucides (323-64 avant J.-C.). Paris:
Breccia, E. 1903. Il diritto dinastico nelle monarchie dei successori di Alessandro Magno. Roma: Erma di Bretschneider.
Brown, E.L. 1979. “Antigonus Surnamed Gonatas.” In Arktouros: Hellenic Studies Presented to Bernard M.W. Knox on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, edited by G.L. Bowersock et al., 299-307. New York: De Gruyter.
Bunge, J.G. 1975. “Antiochos-Helios: Methoden und Ergebnisses der Reichs- politik Antiochos’ IV. Epiphanes von Syrien im Spiegel seiner Münzen.”
Historia 24: 164-88.
Burstein, S.M. 1985. The Hellenistic Age from the Battle of Ipsos to the Death of Kleopatra VII. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cabanes, P. 1995. Le monde hellénistique de la mort d’Alexandre à la paix d’Apamée 323-188. Paris: Seuil.
Callatay, F. de. 1996. “Abdissarès l’Adiabénien.” Irak 58: 135-42.
Carradice, I. and M.J. Price. 1988. Coinage in the Greek World. London:
Chamoux, F. 1985. La civilisation hellénistique. 2nd ed. Paris: Arthaud.
Chaniotis, A. 2003. “The Divinity of Hellenistic Rulers.” In A Companion to the Hellenistic World, edited by A. Erskine, 431-45. Oxford: Blackwell.
Chaniotis, A. 2004. “La divinité des souverains hellénistiques.” In Le monde hellénistique. Espaces, sociétés, cultures 323-31 av. J.-C., edited by A. Erskine et al., 541-56. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Criscuolo, L. 1990. “Philadelphos nella dinastia lagide.” Aegyptus 70: 89-96.
D∏browa, E. 2009. “Mithradates I and the Beginning of the Ruler–Cult in Parthia.” Electrum 15: 41-51.
Dieudonné, A. 1924. “Chronique.” RN 4/27: 134.
Facella, M. 2005. “Philellèn kai philorômaios. Roman Perception of Commage- nian Royalty.” In Imaginary Kings. Royal Images in the Ancient Near East, Greece and Rome, edited by O. Hekster and R. Fowler, 87-104. Oriens et Occidens 11. Stuttgart: Steiner.
Ferrary, J.-L. 1988. Philhellénisme et impérialisme. Aspects idéologiques de la conquête romaine du monde hellénistique. BEFAR 271. Paris/Roma: EFR & EFA.
Fleischer, R. 1996. “Kleopatra Philantonios.” MdAI 46: 237–40.
Fowler, R. 2005. “‘Most Fortunate Roots.’ Tradition and Legitimacy in Par- thian Royal Ideology.” In Imaginary Kings. Royal Images in the Ancient Near East, Greece and Rome, edited by O. Hekster and R. Fowler, 125-56. Oriens et Occidens 11. Stuttgart: Steiner.
Golenko, K.V. and P.J. Karyszkowski. 1972. “The Gold Coinage of King Phar- naces of the Bosporus.” NC 7(12): 25-38, pl. 2-3.
Green, P. 1990. Alexander to Actium. The Historical Evolution of the Hellenistic Age. Hellenistic Culture and Society 1. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Hazzard, R.A. 1995. Ptolemaic Coins. An Introduction for Collectors. Toronto:
Kirk & Bentley.
Holleaux, M. 1942. “Antiochos Mégas. Note sur une inscription de Délos.” In Études d’épigraphie et d’histoire grecques. Vol. 3: Lagides et Séleucides, 159-63.
Paris: De Boccard. Originally published in BCH 1908: 266-70.
Holt, F.L. 1984. “The So-called ‘Pedigree’ Coins of the Bactrian Greeks.” In Ancient Coins of the Graeco-Roman World. The Nickle Numismatic Papers, edited by W. Heckel and R. Sullivan, 69-91. Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier Uni- versity Press for the Calgary Institute for the Humanities.
Hoover, O.D. 2007. Coins of the Seleucid Empire from the Collection of Arthur Houghton, Part 2. ACNAC 9. New York: ANS.
Houghton, A. 1983. Coins of the Seleucid Empire from the Collection of Arthur Houghton. ACNAC 4. New York: ANS.
Houghton, A. and C. Lorber. 2002. Seleucid Coins. A Comprehensive Catalogue.
Part 1, Seleucus I through Antiochus III. New York/Lancaster/London: ANS
Houghton, A., C. Lorber and O. Hoover. 2008. Seleucid Coins. A Comprehen- sive Catalogue. Part 2, Seleucus IV through Antiochus XIII. New York/Lancas- ter/London: ANS & CNG.
Houghton, A. and A. Spaer. 1998. Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Israel. Vol. 1:
The Arnold Spaer Collection of Seleucid Coins. London: Italo Vecchi.
Iossif, P.P. and C. Lorber. 2009. “Celestial Imagery on the Eastern Coinage of Antiochus IV.” Mesopotamia 44: 129-46.
Koenen, L. 1993. “The Ptolemaic King as a Religious Figure.” In Images and Ideologies: Self-Definition in the Hellenistic World, edited by A.W. Bulloch et al., 25-115. Hellenistic Culture and Society 12. Berkeley/Los Angeles/
London: University of California Press.
Kyrieleis, H. 1973. “Die Porträtmünzen Ptolemaios’ V. und seiner Eltern. Zur Datierung und historischen Interpretation.” JDI 88: 213-46, figs. 1-2.
Le Rider, G. 1999a. Antioche de Syrie sous les Séleucides: Corpus des monnaies d’or et d’argent. Vol. 1: De Séleucos I à Antiochos V, c. 300-161. Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Nouvelle Série 19. Paris:
Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres.
Le Rider, G. 1999b. Études d’histoire monétaire et financière du monde grec. Ecrits 1958-1998. 3 vols. Athens/Genève: Greek Numismatic Society/Droz.
Leschhorn, W. and P.R. Franke. 2002. Lexicon der Aufschriften auf griechischen Münzen. Vol. 1, pt 1. Wien: VÖAW.
Lorber, C. 2006. “The Last Ptolemaic Bronze Emission of Tyre.” Israel Numis- matic Research 1: 15-20.
Mittag, P.F. 2006. Antiochos IV. Epiphanes: Eine politische Biographie. Klio Beiträge zur alten Geschichte Beihefte N.F. 11. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Mørkholm, O. 1962. “Some Cappadocian Problems.” NC 7/2: 407-11, pl. 20.
Mørkholm, O. 1963. Studies in the Coinage of Antiochus IV of Syria. København:
Mørkholm, O. 1991. Early Hellenistic Coinage. From the Accession of Alexander to the Peace of Apamea (336-188 B.C.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Muccioli, F. 1994. “Considerazioni generali sull’epiteto FILADELFOS nelle dinastie ellenistiche e sulla sua applicazione nella titolatura degli ultimi Seleucidi.” Historia 43/4: 402-22.
Muccioli, F. 1995. “Gli epiteti di Demetrio II, re di Siria.” Simblos 1: 41-55.
Muccioli, F. 1996. “Eupator nella titolatura ellenistica.” Historia 45/1: 21-35.
Muccioli, F. 2001. “La scelta delle titolature dei Seleucidi: il ruolo dei philoi e delle classi dirigenti cittadine.” Simblos 3: 295-318.
Muccioli, F. 2004. “La titolatura di Cleopatra VII in una nuova iscrizione cip- riota e la genesi dell epiteto Thea Neotera.” ZPE 146: 105-14.
Muccioli, F. 2006. “Philopatris e il concetto di Patria in età ellenistica.” Studi ellenistici 19: 365-98.
Nawotka, K. 1992. “Asander of the Bosporus: His Coinage and Chronology.”
AJN 3-4: 21-48, pl. 3-4.
Nercessian, Y.T. 2000. “A Newly Discovered Coin of Tigranes I.” Armenian Numismatic Journal 26/2: 25-8, pl. 2.
Nercessian, Y.T. 2006. Silver Coinage of the Artaxiad Dynasty of Armenia. Los Angeles: Armenian Numismatic Society.
Newell, E.T. 1917. “The Seleucid Mint of Antioch.” AJN 51: 1-151, pl. 1-13.
Parente, A. 2002. “Ritrattistica e simbologia sulle monete di Arsinoe II.” NAC 31: 259-78.
Peter, U. 1997. Die Münzen der thrakischen Dynasten (5-3. Jahrhundert v.Chr.).
Hintergründe ihrer Prägung. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Préaux, C. 1978. Le monde hellénistique. La Grèce et l’Orient de la mort d’Alexandre à la conquête romaine de la Grèce (323-146 av. J.-C.). Paris: PUF.
Rebuffat, F. 1996. La monnaie dans l’Antiquité. Paris: Picard.
Sellwood, D. 1980. An Introduction to the Coinage of Parthia. 2nd ed. London:
Sellwood, D. and A. M. Simonetta. 2006. “Notes on the Coinage and History of the Arsacids from the Advent of Orodes II to the End of the Reign of Phraates IV.” NAC 35: 283-315.
Shipley, G. 2000. The Greek World after Alexander 323-30 B.C. London/New York: Routledge.
Shore, F. 1993. Parthian Coins and History. Ten Dragons against Rome. Quarry- ville, PA: CNG.
Smith, R.R.R. 1988. Hellenistic Royal Portraits. Oxford/New York: Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press.
Svoronos, J.N. 1904-1908. Ta nomísmata tou Krátouv twn Ptolemaíwn. Athens:
Tarn, W. 1966. Hellenistic Civilisation. 3rd ed. London: Plume.
Thompson, D.B. 1979. “A Numismatic Commentary on the Ptolemaic Cult Oinochoai.” In Greek Numismatics and Archaeology. Essays in Honor of Mar- garet Thompson, edited by O. Mørkholm and N.M. Waggoner, 251-5, pls. 29-30, Wetteren: NR.
Thompson, M., O. Mørkholm and C.M. Kraay. 1973. An Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards. New York: ANS.
Van Nuffelen, P. 2001. “Un culte royal municipal de Séleucie du Tigre à l’époque séleucide.” EA 33: 85-7.
Van ’t Dack, ed. 1993. “L’epithète Eusebes/Pius dans la titulature officielle des empereurs romains jusqu’à la monarchie de Commode.” CE 68: 135-6 and 234-46.
von Gutschmid, A. 1893. “Über die Beinamen der hellenistischen Könige.” In Kleine Schriften 4: 107-22. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.
Walbank, F.W. 1993. The Hellenistic World. 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
List of Royal Hellenistic Epithets on Coinage (in geographical and chronological order)
Sicily Royal Epithets References
Agathokles (317-209) — Hiketas (288-279) — Pyrrhos (278-276) — Hieron II (c. 275-215) — Hieronymos (215-214) —
Macedon Royal Epithets References
Demetrios Poliorketes (294-288)
Antigonos II Gonatas (277-239)
Antigonos III Doson (229-221)
Philip V (221-170) — Perseus (179-168) —
Lakedaimonians Royal Epithets References
Areos I (c. 309-265) — (not even the name of the king) Kleomenes (c. 235-221) — (id.)
Nabis (c. 207-192) — (id.)
Scythians Royal Epithets References
Kanites (second c.) — Alram 1986, nos. 1-8
Charaspes (second c.) — Alram 1986, no. 9
Skilouros (second half of second c.)
— Alram 1986, nos. 10-3
Sarias (first c.) — Alram 1986, no. 14-8
Bosporos Royal Epithets References
Akes (start of second c.) — Alram 1986, no. 37
Pairisades (second c.) — Alram 1986, no. 38
Saumakos (c. 108-107) — Alram 1986, nos. 39-41
1 This unique stater is most likely a modern forgery.
Pharnakes II (63-47) b. b. megalou (from 55/4) Golenko & Karyszkowski 1972 Asander (c. 46-16/5) archontou Bosporou (title of office, years 1-4)
— (years 4-29)
Thrace Royal Epithets References
Seuthes III (c. 330-295) — Peter 1997, 3.1
Lysimachos (297-281) — Spartokos (first quarter of third c.)
— Peter 1997, 3.2
Rhoigos (first half of third c.)
— Peter 1997, 3.4
Skostokos (second quarter of third c.)
— Peter 1997, 3.5
Adaios (c. 275-225) — Peter 1997, 3.6
Orsoaltios (third c.) — Peter 1997, 3.7
Kersibaulos (third c.) — Peter 1997, 3.8
Pergamon Royal Epithets References
Philetairos (282-263) — Eumenes I (263-241) — Attalos I (241-197) — Eumenes II (197-160) — Eumenes III/
Aristonikos (c. 130)
Pontos Royal Epithets References
Mithradates III (c. 220-200)
Pharnakes (c. 200-169) — Mithradates IV
philopatoros kai philadelphou Mithradates IV &
Laodike (c. 160-150)
Laodike (c. 169-150) —
(epiphanou kai philadelphou)
Tkalec, 19 Feb. 2001, 971
Mithradates V (c. 150-119)
Mithradates VI (119-63)
Polemo (c. 37-8) eusebous RPC 1, nos. 3801-2
Paphlagonia Royal Epithets References
Pylaimenes (end second c.)
Deiotaros (c. 35-31) philadelphou
RPC 1, no. 3508 RPC 1, no. 3509
Bithynia Royal Epithets References
Nikomedes I (c. 279-255)
Prusias I (c. 228-185) — Prusias II (c. 185-149) —
Nikomedes II (149-128) epiphanous (from 148/7) Nikomedes III (128-94) epiphanous
Nikomedes IV (94-74) epiphanous
Galatia Royal Epithets References
Deiotaros (c. 64-40) —
Brogitaros (c. 58-53) philoromaiou
Amyntas (36-25) — RPC 1, nos. 3501-7
Kilikia Royal Epithets References
Tarkondimotos (39-31) philantoniou RPC 1, no. 3871
Kappadokia Royal Epithets References
Ariaramnes (c. 280-230)
— Alram 1986, nos. 127-31
Ariarathes III (c. 230-220)
— Alram 1986, nos. 132-7
Ariarathes IV (223-164) — Alram 1986, nos. 138-9, 141-50
Ariarathes V (163-130) eusebous (from 135) Orophernes (158-157) nikephorou
Ariarathes VI & Nysa (c. 130)
epiphanous tou uiou (unique drachm) Paris, BnF
Ariarathes VI (130-116) epiphanous
?philopatoros theou philopatoros
CNG 75, 23 May 2007, 451 Alram 1986, no. 140 Ariarathes VII (116-101) philometoros
Ariarathes VIII (101-100)
epiphanous or eusebous
Ariarathes IX (101-87) eusebous philopatoros (tetradrachm) eusebous (drachm)
Ariobarzanes I (95-63) philoromaiou Ariobarzanes II (63-52) philopatoros Ariobarzanes III
eusebous kai philoromaiou
Ariarathes X (42-36) eusebous kai philadelphou Archelaos
(36 B.C.–A.D. 17)
philopatridos tou ktistou
Kommagene Royal Epithets References
Arsamos (before 130) — Alram 1986, no. 239
Samos (c. 130-100) theosebous kai dikaiou Alram 1986, nos. 240-1 Mithradates I
Alram 1986, no. 246 Alram 1986, no. 242-5
Antiochos I (c. 69-40) — RPC 1, nos. 3845-7
Mithradates II (c. 36-20)
Alram 1986, no. 247 Alram 1986, no. 248
Sophene Royal Epithets References
Arsames (end of third c.)
— Alram 1986, nos. 170-3
Abdissares (start of second c.)
Alram 1986, nos. 174-8 Callatay 1996
Xerxes (c. 170) — Alram 1986, nos. 179-82
Arsakes (first c.) — Alram 1986, no. 184
Armenia Royal Epithets References
Tigranes I (c. 123-96) megas Alram 1986, no. 186
2 The date of these bronzes is debated: Tigranes I or Tigranes II? See Nercessian 2000.
3 Gold oktadrachms and silver tetradrachms, from a mint “near Antioch.”
4 Le Rider (1999a, 74-5) knows 34 tetradrachms (4 obverse dies) and one gold octadrachm (sharing its obverse with the tetradrachms). He leaves the chronology between 246-5 and 240 (1999a, 84).
5 There is a bronze coin with the legend Basileos Seleukou Philopatoros in the Fitz- megas philellenos (bronze, Nisibis)2 Alram 1986, nos. 187-9 Tigranes II (95-55) — (tetradr. & dr., Antioch & Damaskos) Nercessian 2006, 26-83
basileos basileon (4dr. & dr., Artaxata, 78–72)
Nercessian 2006, 85-103
Artavasdes II (c. 55-34) basileos basileon (drachms) Nercessian 2006, 109-11 basileos basileon theiou (tetradrachms) Nercessian 2006, 108-9 Artaxias I (c. 34-20) theiou (drachms) Nercessian 2006, 112-3
megalou Alram 1986, no. 185
Tigranes III (c. 20-8) megalou Alram 1986, nos. 212-5
megalou theou Alram 1986, nos. 216-9
m. philopatoros kai philellenos (drachms) Nercessian 2006, 113-4
Media Atropatene Royal Epithets References
Artavasdes (c. 30) basileos basileon megalou Alram 1986, no. 236-7
Seleukids Royal Epithets References
Seleukos I (312-280) — Antiochos I (280-261) —
soteros (posthumous, under Seleukos II)3 Le Rider 1999, 74-54 Antiochos II (261-246) —
Seleukos II (245-225) — Antiochos Hierax
Seleukos III (225/4-222) — Antiochos III (222-187) —
Molon (222-220) —
Achaios (220-214) — Seleukos IV (187-175)5 —
william Museum, attributed to Seleukos IV; Mørkholm expressed doubts about its authenticity, not about the reading (Mørkholm 1963, 73 n. 122). Hougton, Lorber and Hoover (2008, 34) suggest it is a modern confection based on an issue of Seleukos VI.
6 For Antioch, see Le Rider 1999a, 192-222 (Series 1: 4 obverse dies for 32 tet- radrachms, 1 obverse for 5 drachms); Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1407 (bronze).
Other mints include Seleukeia in Pieria, Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, Soloi, Tarsos, Mallos, Byblos, Berytos, Sidon, Tyre, Ptolemais (Mørkholm 1963, 1-3; Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1477-79, 1483-6 [bronze]), to the mint of the western goddess bronzes, Askalon, Egypt, Seleukeia on the Tigris, Antioch on the Persian Gulf, Antioch in Persis, Susa, Ekbatana, other eastern mints.
7 For Antioch, see Le Rider 1999a, 33-218 (Series 2: 18 obverse dies for 186 tet- radrachms, 4 obverse dies for 19 drachms, 1 obverse die for 15 hemidrachms, 1 obverse die for 2 diobols); Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1408-15 (bronze). The epithet also appears on Syrian bronze issues (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1434-39), at Seleu- keia on the Tigris on one series of bronze coins (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1513-5) and at Ekbatana (epithets added to one drachm reverse die, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1549).
8 For Antioch, see Le Rider 1999a, 1-3 (Series III: 3 obverse dies for 3 gold staters, 36 obverse dies for 343 tetradrachms); Ptolemais (Mørkholm 1963, 4-14).
9 Tetradrachms and drachm (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1539, 1541-2, 1547).
10 Berytos, Tyre, Ptolemais (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1581), Antioch on the Persian Gulf.
11 For Antioch, see Le Rider 1999a, 234-47 (1 obverse die for 1 gold oktadrachm [no.
209], 21 obverse dies for 261 tetradrachms, 2 obverse dies for 3 drachms). Other mints include Tarsos, Byblos, Ptolemais (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1582-3), and an uncertain mint in Media (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1585-6).
12 For Antioch, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1633-8 (tetradrachms), 1644-7 (bronze). Other mints include Soloi, Tarsos, Mallos, Sidon, Tyre, Ptolemais, Seleukeia on the Tigris (most bronze, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1691, Antiochos (c. 175-170) —
Antiochos IV (175-164) —6
theou epiphanous nikephorou8 theou (Ekbatana)9
epiphanous (posthumous, Antioch) Antiochos V (164-162) —10
Timarchos (162) megalou (Seleukeia on the Tigris, Ekbatana) Demetrios I (162-150) —12
1693-1702), Antioch on the Persian Gulf, Antioch in Persis, Susa, Ekbatana (some drachms and bronze, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1731-2, 1738-9).
13 For Antioch, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1627-32 (gold), 1639-41 (tetra drachms) 1642-3 (drachms and hemidrachms). Other mints include an uncertain Syrian mint (bronzes with animal heads), Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, Nisibis?
(Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1681-2), Seleukeia on the Tigris (gold oktadrachms, gold staters, tetradrachms, some bronze, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1692, 1703-5), Ekbatana (gold staters, tetradrachms, most drachms, most bronze).
14 Antioch (hemidrachms, diobol and bronze), Seleukeia in Pieria, Apameia, Eupatria, Byblos, Berytos, Sidon (Phoenician standard and bronze), Tyre, Ptolemais (Phoenician standard and bronze), Askalon, Marisa, Gaza, Seleukeia on the Tigris (bronze), Orchoi, Antioch on the Persian Gulf, Susa.
15 Antioch (gold stater, tetradrachms, drachms), Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, Soloi, Tarsos, Mallos, Sidon (Attic standard), Ptolemais (Attic standard), Seleukeia on the Tigris (silver), Ekbatana.
16 On the epithets of Demetrios II, see Muccioli 1995.
17 Antioch (diobol and bronze) and Syria, Berytos, Sidon (Phoenician standard and bronze), Tyre (Phoenician standard and bronze), Gaza, Nisibis (bronzes), Antioch on the Persian Gulf, Susa
18 Antioch, Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 208, 1888), Soloi, Mopsos, Sidon (Attic standard), many unidentified western mints.
19 Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1889, 1891), Soloi, Tarsos, Mallos, Tyre (Attic standard), many unidentified western mints, Seleukeia on the Tigris.
20 Drachm with affinities to Seleukeia on the Tigris (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1995B).
21 Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1890), Seleu- keia on the Tigris.
22 Nisibis (bronze), uncertain mints (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 1924-8, 1940-1, 1945-8).
23 Probably Apameia (hemidrachm, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 2013), Byblos, Ptolemais (Phoenician standard), Askalon, Marisa.
24 Antioch, Apameia, Chalkis by Belos, Tarsos, Mallos, probably Ptolemais (bronze).
Alexander I (150-145) —14
theopatoros (kai) euergetou15 Demetrios II16
first reign (145-140)
theou philadelphou nikatoros18 philadelphou nikatoros19 theopatoros philadelphou20 theou nikatoros21 nikatoros22 Antiochos VI
25 Antioch and Syria, Byblos, Ptolemais, Askalon.
26 Antioch (smallest bronze denomination), Byblos, Berytos, Sidon (Phoenician standard and bronze), Tyre (Phoenician standard and bronze), Ptolemais (Phoenician standard), Askalon, Marisa, Orchoi, Susa.
27 Antioch, Syria, Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, Soloi, Tarsos, Mallos, Damaskos, Sidon (Attic standard), Tyre (Attic standard), Ptolemais (Attic standard and bronze), Jerusalem, Seleukeia on the Tigris.
28 Berytos, Sidon (Phoenician standard), Tyre (Phoenician standard and bronze), Ptolemais (Phoenician standard), Askalon.
29 Antioch, Seleukeia in Pieria, Syria, Tarsos, Mallos, Damaskos, Sidon (Attic stand- ard), Tyre (Attic standard), Ptolemais (Attic standard).
30 Antioch, perhaps Apameia, Syria, Tarsos and Cilicia, Damaskos, Berytos, Askalon.
31 Antioch, Syria (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 2266), Tarsos, Kilikia (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 2261), Sidon (Phoenician standard), Ptolemais (Phoenician standard and bronze), Askalon.
32 Syria (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 2265), Kilikia (Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 2259), Damaskos, Sidon (Attic standard), Ptolemais (Attic standard).
33 Tarsos (civic workshop, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 2284, 2287), Berytos, Sidon (Phoenician standard), Ptolemais (Phoenician standard), Askalon.
34 Antioch, Seleukeia in Pieria, Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, Tarsos (royal work- shop), Tarsos (civic workshop, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 2285-6, 2288-9), Mallos, uncertain Kilikia, Damaskos, Sidon (Attic standard), Ptolemais (Attic standard).
35 Antioch (single bronze issue dated S.E. 202 = 111/0, see Houghton, Lorber and Hoover 2008, 2308).
Tryphon (141-138) autokratoros25 Antiochos VII (138-129) —26
megalou euergetou (gold stater) Hoover 2007, 633 Demetrios II
second reign (129-125)
theou nikatoros 29 Antiochus (128) epiphanous (Antioch) Alexander II (128-123) —30
epiphanous nikephorou (br., Seleukeia in Pieria)
theou epiphanous nikephorou (st., Antioch) Kleopatra (125) theas eueterias (Ptolemais)
Kleopatra & Antiochos VIII (125-121)
—31 theas 32 Antiochos VIII
—33 epiphanous 34 philometoros 35
36 Sidon (Phoenician standard), Ptolemais (Phoenician standard).
37 Antioch, Syria, Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, Tarsos, Mallos, Mopsos, Kilikia, Damaskos, Tripolis, Sidon (Attic standard), Phoenicia, Ptolemais (Attic standard), Sama- ria (where the epithet is abbreviated philo, phil, or phi), Askalon.
38 Antioch, Syria, Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, Elaeusa, Tarsos, Kilikia.
39 Antioch, Damaskos.
40 Bronze, Seleukeia in Pieria.
41 Antioch, Syria, Tarsos.
Antiochos IX (113-95) —36 philopatoros 37 Seleukos VI
(c. 96 - c. 94)
epiphanous nikatoros 38
nikatoros (drachm & hemidrachm, Antioch) Antiochos X
(c. 94 - probably c. 88)
eusebous philopatoros (Antioch, Syria)
Antiochos XI & Philip (c. 94-94/3)
Antiochos XI (c. 94/3) epiphanous philadelphou (Antioch) Demetrios III
philometoros euergetou (Tarsos) theou philopatoros soteros 39
philometoros euergetou kallinikou40 Houghton 1983, no. 414 Philip
(c. 94/3 - perhaps 76/5)
Antiochos XII (87/6-83/2)
epiphanous philopatoros kallinikou42 dionusou epiphanous philopatoros kallinikou43 Kleopatra Selene (with
Antiochos XIII, 83/2-before 75)
Selenes (probably Damaskos)
Antiochos XIII (with Kleopatra Selene, 83/2-before 75)
— (probably Damaskos) philometoros (probably Damaskos)
Antiochos XIII (sole reign, 69/8-7 or 65/4)
Chalkis Royal Epithets References
Ptolemaios (c. 85-40) tetrarchou kai archiier (titles of office)
Lysanias (40-36) tetrarchou kai archiereos (titles of office) RPC 1, nos. 4768-70 Zenodoros (30-20) tetrarchou kai archiereos (titles of office) RPC 1, nos. 4774-6
Judea Royal Epithets References
Herod (40-4) — RPC 1, no. 4901-11
Nabatea Royal Epithets References
Aretas (84-71) philellenos
Parthia Royal Epithets References
Arsakes (c. 238-211) Arsakou (drachm) Arsakou autokratoros
Shore 1993, no. 2 Shore 1993, no. 2 Arsakes II (c. 211-191) Arsakou (drachm) Shore 1993, nos. 3-4 Mithradates I
Arsakou (drachms & bronze) Shore 1993, nos. 5-6, 23
basileos Arsakou (drachms, obol) Shore 1993 nos. 7-11, 20 basileos Arsakou megalou (drachms) Shore 1993, nos. 12-7 basileos megalou Arsakou (dr., ob. & br.) Shore 1993, nos. 18, 24-34,
basileos theou Arsakou (drachm) Shore 1993, no. 18 basileos megalou Arsakou theopatoros (dr.) Shore 1993, no. 19 basileos megalou Arsakou philellenos (tetradr.) Shore 1993, nos. 35–7 Phraates II (c. 138-127) b. m. Arsakou theopatoros (dr., br.) Shore 1993, nos. 41-56 Artabanos I
b. m. Arsakou theopatoros (dr.) Shore 1993, nos. 57-8
b.m. Arsakou philadelphou (dr.) Shore 1993, nos. 59-62 b.m. Arsakou philadelphou philellenos (dr.) Shore 1993, no. 63 b. Arsakou philadelphou philellenos (dr.) Shore 1993, no. 64 Mithradates II
b. m. Arsakou epiphanou(s) (tetra., dr. & br.) Shore 1993, nos. 66-84, 91-2, 108-9
b. b. m. A. epiphanou (dr. & br.) Shore 1993, nos. 85-8, 93-101 b. b. A. dikaiou euergetou kai philellen (dr.) Shore 1993, nos. 102-7 Gotarzes I (c. 95-87) b. m. A. theopatoros nikatoros (dr. & br.) Shore 1993, nos. 110-9 Orodes I (c. 90-77) b. m. A. autokratoros philopatoros epiphanous
philellenos (tetra., dr. & br.)
Short 1993, nos. 120-30
b. m. A. theopatoros euergetou (dr.) Shore 1993, nos. 131-40 Sinatrukes (c. 77-70) b. m. A. epiphanous philellenos euergetou
Shore 1993, nos. 145-7
Phraates III (c. 70-58) b. m. A. epiphanous philellenos euergetou (dr.
Shore 1993, nos. 148, 168-88
b. m. A. epiphanous (tetra. & dr.) Shore 1993, nos. 66-76, 149 b. m. A. kai philellenos epiphanous
philopatoros euergetou (dr.)
Shore 1993, nos. 150-63
b. m. A. theopatoros euergetou epiphanous philellenos (dr., & br.)
Shore 1993, nos. 164, 167
b. m. A. kai philellenos epiphanous theopatoros euergetou (dr.)
Shore 1993, nos. 165-6
Mithradates III (c. 58-55)
b. m. A. theou eupatoros philellenos dikaiou epiphanous (dr.)
Shore 1993, nos. 189-99, 206–7
b. b. A. m. theou eupatoros kai philellenos dikaiou epiphanous (dr.)
Shore 1993, nos. 200-4, 208
b. b. A. theouiou theopatoros dikaiou epiphanous philellenos (dr.)
Shore 1993, no. 205
b. A. tou epikaloumenou Mithradatou philellenos (overstruck tetra.)
Sellwood & Simonetta 2006, 284
Orodes II (c. 58-37) b. b. A. euergetou dikaiou epiphanous philellenos (tetra. & dr.)
Shore 1993, nos. 209-13, 232
b. b. A. epiphanous philellenos philopatoros dikaou (dr.)
Shore 1993, nos. 214-31, 233-66
Pakoros I (c. 40-38) b. b. A. euergetou dikaiou epiphaous philellenos
Shore 1993, no. 267 (= Triton VII, 12 Jan. 2004, 455) b. b. m. A. kai ktistou (tetra.) Sellwood & Simonetta 2006,
289 Phraates IV (c. 38-2) b. b. A. euergetou dikaiou epiphanous
philellenos (tetra. & dr.)
Shore 1993, nos. 268-305
b. b. A. diou euergetou Phraatou epiphanous epikaloumenou philellenos (dr.)
Sellwood & Simonetta 2006, 293-4
Tiridates (c. 29–26) b. b. A. euergetou dikaiou epiphanous philellenos (tetra.)
Shore 1993, nos. 306–11
b. b. A. autokrator philoromaiou epiphanous philellenos (overstruck tetra.)
Sellwood 1980, no. 55.7
Elymais Royal Epithets References
Kamnaskires I (c. 147) megalou soteros Alram 1986, no. 429
— Alram 1986, no. 430