VARIA ANATOLICA XXVIII

4TH CENTURY KARIA

DEFINING A KARIAN IDENTITY

UNDER THE HEKATOMNIDS

edited by

Olivier HENRY

INSTITUT FRANAIS DETUDES ANATOLIENNES GEORGES-DUMEZIL

CNRS USR 3131
DE BOCCARD
11, rue de Mdicis
75006 Paris
2013

Illustration de couverture :
Faade restitue de lAndron B de Labraunda
(Th. Thieme & F. Lfvenberg)

Ce volume a t compos et imprim par

AS&64 Ltd. ti. ataleme Sk. No: 15/1, 34410 Caalolu
et Acar Basm ve Cilt Sanayii, Istanbul, Turquie.
La publication a pu en tre ralise grce au concours financier du
Ministre des Affaires trangres et du CNRS.

Secrtaire aux publications : Aksel Tibet

2013, Institut Franais dEtudes Anatoliennes Georges-Dumezil - Istanbul

ISBN 978-2-36245-008-2

TABLE DES MATIERES

Olivier Henry, Introduction

Paavo Roos, Reflections on border and identity

Ignasi-Xavier Adiego, Carian identity and Carian language

15

Diether Schrr, Kaunisch-Karisches in Krya: Revision der Grabinschrift und Vergleiche

21

Poul pedersen, The 4th century BC Ionian Renaissance and Karian identity

33

Lars Karlsson, Combining architectural orders at Labraunda: a political statement

65

Olivier Henry, A Tribute to the Ionian Renaissance

81

Raymond DESCAT, Mylasa, les dieux et le village carien au 4 s. aC :

retour sur I. Mylasa 11.
e

91

Koray Konuk, Coinage and Identities under the Hekatomnids

101

Pierre Debord, Zeus Pigindenos

123

Gabriele Bockisch (), Peter Ruggendorfer and Lilli Zabrana, Temple and altars for
Greek and Carian gods. New evidence for religious life in Alinda during the late Classical
and Hellenistic Period

129

Francesca Curti, Alessandra Parrini, Iasos: importazioni di ceramica attica

figurata nel V e nel IV sec. aC.

163

Damien Aubriet, Mylasa et lidentit carienne

189

Anne Marie Carstens, Karian identity a Game of opportunistic politics or a

case of creolisation?

209

Coinage and identities under the hekatomnids

Koray KONUK*
Coinage may be regarded as the first mass-produced medium that allowed issuing authorities the
means to disseminate images among a large population group. These images were carefully selected
and reflected the way an issuing authority saw itself and, more subtly, the way it wanted to be seen
by others. These issuing authorities could be elected officials, as in the case of a civic coinage or,
more directly, the ruler himself, as with the Hekatomnids. Whoever they might be, they were to
decide what shape and purpose the intended coinage would take. Yet, features inherent to any
coinage such as the weight standard, the range of denominations and quantities struck, the choice of
the iconography and legend could simply not emerge ex nihilo but were mostly the product of a preexisting monetary milieu. Local deities and less so mythology (and foundations myths) were the
main subject matters displayed on coins, but besides these sacred and ancestral references, near or
distant influences could bring about new and unusual images. The dynastic coinage of the
Hekatomnids is no exception and its origins owe much to the earlier minting activity of their native
city, Mylasa, as well as to a number of external influences.
Hekatomnos paving tHe way for a dynastic coinage in mylasa
Much has been written about the unique and pioneering nature of the Hekatomnids who ruled
Caria and its neighbouring regions that were subjected to Persian authority1. Many of the remarkable
feats they accomplished in just over half a century (c. 392-334 BC) are the result of a multi-layered
syncretism. This rich cultural setting, engrained in traditional and local foundations, became
particularly open to outside influences, some of which had been at play for a long time, but which the
Hekatomnids encouraged and made more visible. As I have described elsewhere, in many ways, not
least in their coinage, the 4th century BC satraps of Caria were the forerunners of Hellenistic
kings2. They were unique in that period in issuing a regular and prolific dynastic coinage, which
remained practically unchanged until the arrival of Alexander the Great3. Other satraps struck coins,
but none was native, or more significant, hereditary, and there was no continuity of coinage from one
family member to another as was the case with the Hekatomnids4. Their coinage is often described
as satrapal, but it would be more appropriate to label it dynastic since it was not issued in the
framework of their official duties as satraps; the Hekatomnids wore a double hat as official satraps
and as hereditary dynasts. As a matter of fact, Mylasa, the ancestral seat of the dynasty, had been a
fairly active mint prior to Hekatomnos rule and struck large numbers of small silver denominations

*) CNRS - Ausonius, UMR 5607.

1) Hornblower 1982; Ruzicka 1992; Carstens 2009.
2) Konuk 2009.
3) For a detailed study of the coinage of the Hekatomnids, see Konuk 1998a.
4) The contemporay or earlier dynastic coinages of Lycia, Cilicia and Cyprus lack the continuity we see in the
Hekatomnid coinage.

102

Koray KONUK

throughout the 5th century BC5. A lion forepart was usually depicted on the obverse of these tiny
coins which weighed about half or a quarter of a gram. Mylasa is likely to have been among the first
mints to have issued silver in the second half of the 6th century BC6. On each issue the lion occupied
the pride of place, the earliest depiction representing its forepart in profile, the later electrum issues
showing a facing lion forepart with forelegs on either side.
the milesian standard issues
In a recent study, I have argued that Hekatomnos predecessor and father Hyssaldomos issued
fractional silver coins in Mylasa bearing the initial letter of his name in the Carian script7. It appears
that Hyssaldomos added his initial to hemiobols, tetartemoria and hemitetartemoria which Mylasa
had been striking before his rule. As a matter of fact earlier examples are either anepigraphic or
simply carry the initial of Mylasas ethnic in the Carian script (Pl. 1, 1). Beside the ethnic initial, two
Carian letters are attested: V and , the latter is certainly Hyssaldomos initial (Pl. 1, 3 and 4), the
former is found on slightly earlier issues and may be the initial of Hyssaldomos predecessor whose
name has not been preserved in ancient sources (Pl. 1, 2).
A common feature to all the light Milesian weight standard coinage of Hekatomnos and
Maussollos is the Milesian-type lion forepart used as the obverse type. It copies the obverse design
of regular Milesian obols of the archaic period which was the most plentiful silver coinage struck by
any city before the Ionian Revolt. For his denominations smaller than the obol, Hekatomnos
continued to mint under his name fractions that Mylasa had been issuing under his father Hyssaldomos
and perhaps his predecessor (Pl. 1, 5, 6 and 7). But for bigger denominations including the obol, the
diobol, the tetrobol and the stater (twelve obols), Hekatomnos not only copied the lion forepart of
Milesian obols, but also their reverse design depicting a starlike floral pattern (Pl. 1, 8).
In contrast to the coinage of his successors, Hekatomnos issues are remarkably varied. No fewer
than six, maybe seven, different coin types were designed during a relatively short reign of about
fifteen years. Hekatomnos used two distinct weight-standards for his silver coinage and neither he
nor any of his successors struck bronze. Hekatomnos monetary system was further complicated by
the many denominations struck in each standard, resulting in a medley of coins which must have
been difficult to use simultaneously. It looks as though he had been hesitant to establish a single and
unified system, and instead experimented with different coinages.
The Chian standard8, which by the second or third decade of the 4th century BC was adopted by
most Greek cities and rulers of Asia Minor, including the successors of Hekatomnos, had not yet
imposed itself as the main weight standard. Hekatomnos himself came to use the Chian standard for
his coinage, but for a fairly limited issue of tetradrachms (see below). The other standard which he
used was Milesian, but so reduced that a stater was equal to three Attic drachms. Let us first examine
the Milesian weight coinage of Hekatomnos.
Not all Milesian standard issues of Hekatomnos feature a Milesian type (lion forepart/rosette). A
range of silver fractions, some previously unattributed, others not even recorded, have surfaced over
the past few years, and a number of these can be securely attributed to Hekatomnos. The regular
Milesian standard (c. 14.20 g) was reduced by about 12 %. This deficit is, I believe, linked to the key
denomination which fulfilled a function of interface for the entire series: the obol or twelfth-stater.
Hekatomnos obols (with an E on the lions muzzle, Pl. 1, 9) derive from the regular obol of Miletos
which was one of the most common and long-lasting early silver fractions to circulate in Asia
5) Konuk 2007; Coin Hoards VIII, 54.
6) Konuk 2007.
7) Konuk 2009.
8) The so-called Chian standard, adopted by Rhodes in the late 5th century BC, is in fact a reduced version
(c. 15.25 g) of the original Chian standard (c. 15.60 g); see now Meadows 2011.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

103

Minor (Pl. 1, 8). Its theoretical weight was c. 1.18 g9. Long thought to have been issued only in the
years preceding the suppression of the Ionian revolt in 494 BC, recent evidence suggests that Miletos
continued minting obols through the 5th century BC10. This weight of c. 1.18g was not achieved by
Hekatomnos who aimed at c. 1g, or fractionally higher. This reduction of the theoretical Milesian
weight can be explained, I think, by the great number of obols which had been struck earlier and
were certainly still circulating in the time of Hekatomnos. Most of these coins would have been worn
by decades of circulation and as a result would have had lost some of their weight11. These extremely
common obols (twelfth-stater) would have formed the basis of Hekatomnos reduced Milesian
system, and determined the weights of its fractions and multiples. I believe that the Milesian-type
obol was the cornerstone of Hekatomnoss Milesian type system.
The question of whether or not Hekatomnos controlled Miletos is also of course relevant to the
debate. The assumption that he held the Ionian city is based solely on his Milesian type coinage12.
Examples of popular coinages or types imitated by other states and rulers abound, and thus there
should be no need to assume that any given city had to be taken over by a ruler in order for him to
mint coins of that citys type13. The evidence of some small 5th-century BC silver fractions is very
much to the point. Small silver change was used extensively from the 5th century BC onwards in the
area of the Halikarnassos peninsula and Mylasa to judge from the numerous local finds kept in the
Archaeological Museums of Bodrum and Milas14. Thus, even if Miletos came under Hekatomnos
rule, the phenomenon of his imitative coinage alone does not constitute in itself a sufficient
argument for it. We know that there was a separate satrapy of Ionia, most likely created simultaneously
with the Carian satrapy. Strouthas was the first incumbent and one does not see how he would have
tolerated a supposed incursion of Hekatomnos forces in Ionian territory. One further piece of
evidence against Hekatomnos control of Miletos is given by Polyainos, who reports that Maussollos
sent his general Polyainos to take Miletos but failed15. One would therefore assume that Miletos
could not have been under Hekatomnos rule. All in all, there is a better case for regarding
Hekatomnos Milesian type coins as an imitative coinage struck in Caria, most probably in Mylasa,
the ancestral capital of Hekatomnos. Contrary to the traditional view, Hekatomnos did not strictly
speaking revive an archaic type for his coinage16. Hoard evidence suggests that Miletos was still

9) BMC Ionia, 185, 14ff.; Pfeiler 1966, 5-7; Becker 1988, 32. The actual weight of most of these coins was closer to
1.10 g than 1.20 g.
10) See supra n. 5.
11) Becker 1988, 5-33.
12) That Hekatomnos might have controlled Miletos was first suggested in Waddington 1856, 61-62. Babelon was less
cautious and took Hekatomnos rule over Miletos for granted: Trait, 143-4. Hornblower 1982, 111 was also inclined to
entertain the idea of the city being controlled by Hekatomnos: These coins are more than merely good imitations of
Milesian or Halikarnassian imitations of Milesian types: they probably show that Miletos was a Hekatomnid possession.
Six 1890, 228-231 supposed that these issues were an imitative coinage struck outside the territory of Miletos on the basis
of what he regarded as their poor style. Although Head in BMC Ionia, xxxv-xxxvi followed Sixs suggestion that the coins
in question are merely imitations of the Milesian coinage struck by the Carian dynasts outside the territory of Miletus, he
catalogued under Miletos coins of Hekatomnos and Maussollos of Milesian type: 187-188; Regling 1918, 255; Kraay
1976, 275. Recently, Deppert-Lippitz 1984, 12ff. regards these coins as Milesian issues. In the opposite camp, ImhoofBlumer 1905, 260 considered the coins to have been minted in Caria imitating Milesian types. Kinns 1986, 249 states that
the hypothesis of Hecatomnid control is far from strong, depending largely on the EKA and MA coins, whose attribution
to Miletus is only conjectural. Debord 1999, 143 considers plausible the control and the minting at Miletos.
13) E.g. the owls of Athens imitated in the East and in Egypt; the colts of Corinth in southern Italy and Sicily, etc. A
good parallel to the Milesian type coinage of Hekatomnos are the issues of Datames who imitated the coinage of Sinope
and replaced the citys ethnic by .
14) Three (separate?) hoards containing exclusively fractions circulating in the Halikarnassos peninsula are kept in
Bodrum and were accessioned in the 1980s. Another two are preserved in Milas. It would appear that all these different
hoards were found by the same two metal-detectorists, but our information does not have all the guarantees of reliability.
15) Polyain., Strat., 6, 8.
16) Kraay 1976, 275.

104

Koray KONUK

striking in the 5th century BC, and maybe until the beginning of the 5th century BC lion head/rosette
obols17.
An array of fractions as well as multiples were issued, among which the so-called drachm (a
tetrobol in fact) is the most common. The extant denominations are as follows:
Hemitetartemorion (c. 0.12 g, Pl. 1, 7)
Tetartemorion (c. 0.25 g, Pl. 1, 5 and 6)
Obol (c. 1.05 g, Pl. 1, 9)
Diobol (c. 2.12 g, Pl. 1, 10)
Triobol (c. 3.10 g, Pl. 1, 13)
Tetrobol or third-stater (so-called drachm, c. 4.25 g, Pl. 1, 11)
Stater (so-called tridrachm, c. 12.70 g, Pl. 1, 12)
It may seem odd that Hekatomnos should have issued tetrobols, rather that six-obol coins
(drachms). It has been suggested that this denomination existed within the Milesian standard
because it equalled an Attic drachm18. But the full weight of the Attic drachm (c. 4.36 g) was not
achieved by Hekatomnos tetrobols at c. 4.25 g19. The reason for striking tetrobols could lie in the
purpose that they served. There are indeed examples of unusual denominations struck for making
specific payments such as those destined for troops or mercenaries.
The griffin slayer issue (Pl. 1, 13)
A unique coin in the British Museum may tentatively be attributed to Hekatomnos. It was first
published by Jenkins who suggested Hekatomnos as the most likely issuing authority20. The obverse
and reverse type combination is quite extraordinary. A typical Achaemenid design is used on the
obverse which depicts the Persian king slaying a winged griffin which stands facing him; he holds a
dagger (akinakes?) or some other weapon in his right hand21. There are traces of three Greek letters
behind the Kings crowned head, in the upper left field, but they are too worn to be conclusively
interpreted. The final letter, however, is very likely to be an omicron. Jenkins suggested that the
letters might be regarded as the last three letters of the name of Maussollos (spelt Maussollo), and
that the rest of the name would have been on the right side where the type is not preserved.
Personally, I would rather see in these, the last three letters of Hekatomnos name (spelt Hekatomno),
given that what is left of the preceding two letters could well be MN. The reverse of this coin
provides a conclusive clue as for the origin of the coin. Its type is almost identical with the reverse of
the Milesian type coinage of Hekatomnos. The same Milesian type rosette is depicted inside a round
circle. There can be little doubt that this coin was issued in a Hekatomnid context, most probably by
Hekatomnos himself.
What is the significance of the Persian imagery of the obverse? Was Hekatomnos trying to please
the Persian authorities at a time when his allegiance was in question? Advertising officially on a coin
the supremacy of the Great King slaying a griffin a potent and symbolic image that anyone could
understand would have been an effective and easy way for Hekatomnos to show that he was, after
all, prepared to recognise the authority of the King of Kings. Its reverse type with the Milesian
rosette suggests that it should be linked to the lion-head series, but its weight at 3.30 g differs from
17) For a detailed description of the hoard evidence see Konuk 1998a, 41-47.
18) Kraay 1976, 275.
19) Even the heaviest recorded specimen (4.29 g) does not come close to 4.35 g, the theoretical weight of the Attic
drachm.
20) Jenkins 1971, 97-98, 31. See also Konuk 1998b.
21) This scene, sometimes with a lion replacing the griffin, is popular in Achaemenid art and is found at Persepolis and
on other media such as engraved gems: e.g. Boardman 1970a, pls. 4, 82, 84, 86, 87, 93, 97, 98.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

105

the known denominations. It is very likely to be a triobol on the reduced Milesian standard.
However, this issue might also be connected to the tetradrachm coinage on the Chian weight, and
thus represent a drachm.
The Bovine type issues (Pl. 1, 14)
To the same light Milesian weight-standard belongs a series of bovine type diobols22. These
depict on both sides a forepart of an ox; their reverse has the legend EKA on the back of the ox, all
in a square or a round incuse. These three letters obviously stand for the beginning of the name of
Hekatomnos, in the same fashion as on the lion-head coinage previously discussed. There exists
another series of coins which are identical in every aspect (type, weight, fabric) save for the
legend, which is KIM instead of EKA, and the reverse incuse which is invariably round. Unless a
specimen with a square incuse is found, it would be reasonable to assume that the KIM series came
after the issues of Hekatomnos. If indeed a Greek name and not a Carian one, KIM may stand for
Kimon, who is otherwise unknown, and it seems difficult to find him a place in history given the
dynastic nature of this coinage.
Also with an incuse square is a similar series of diobols with Carian letters23. These issues with
Carian letters are of earlier style and are very likely to have preceded the KIM-EKA series. One
further noteworthy coin (private collection), unique and unpublished, depicts on the reverse a similar
ox forepart with an uncertain (Carian?) letter on its shoulder, and on the obverse a powerful bearded
head to the right which looks like the depiction of an individual.
I have often wondered whether all these bovine coins might not have been minted at Kaunos.
Being in the southern fringe of Caria, it was under Hekatomnos control. A particularly close
Hekatomnid relationship with Kaunos seems to have existed to judge from Kaunian dedications of
statues of Hekatomnos and of his son Maussollos, and later Pixodaros promotion of the local cult of
Basileus Kaunios at Xanthos24. As for the identity of KIM, he might have governed the city and its
region on behalf of Maussollos after the death of Hekatomnos. Kaunos is now known to have had a
substantial silver coinage until the 390s BC25. Furthermore, the city abandoned the use of the Carian
script on its coinage in the c. 380s-70s BC, which would be consistent with the introduction of the
Greek legend EKA in place of Carian letters at about the same time. A Kaunian issue of small
bronzes struck a little later has on its reverse a very similar forepart of an ox, with one leg bent and
the head slightly inclined. Other bronzes show a full depiction of the ox.
the chian standard issues
With the Chian weight tetradrachm series is inaugurated a type which will remain in use virtually
unchanged throughout the coinage of the Hekatomnids. It is the figure on the obverse of Zeus
Labraundos, bearded and laureate, standing to the right, wearing a himation, and holding a spear
pointing downward in one hand and a labrys (double-axe) in the other, a potent image, sacred to all
Carians by virtue of the importance of the sanctuary of Labraunda (Pl. 2, 15). The lifelong priests of
the god were chosen from the most distinguished citizens of Mylasa26, and the Hekatomnids most
probably held the priesthood in the 4th century BC27. Labraunda had indeed a special place in the
22) This series was briefly discussed by Wells 1984, 57-60. Wells lists three KIM specimens to which should now be
added another eight.
23) Trait, 1789, pl. 150, 12 (2.14 g); Imhoof-Blumer 1905, 166, pl. 10, 20 (2.08 g); a third specimen in Oxford
(2.18 g); Troxell 1984, pl. 40, 12a and 12b; Cancio 1989, 83; Konuk 2007.
24) Bean 1953, nos. 3 and 4; Ik & Marek 2005.
25) Konuk 1998b, 210-13.
26) Strabo, 14.2.23.
27) Ruzicka 1992, 30.

106

Koray KONUK

life of the Hekatomnids who successively developed and embellished the sanctuary. Hekatomnos
successors would perpetuate the same image, but on the reverse of their coinage. This image of Zeus
Labraundos, with a very Greek looking appearance, remained virtually unchanged throughout the
different issues that were minted over a period of about half a century28. This might suggest that the
coin design was modelled after the actual statue of Zeus at Labraunda29.
The reverse of these tetradrachms depicts a lion in an unusual posture. It is standing to the left,
roaring, its back legs straight and front legs bent, almost parallel to the ground line. Comparable lion
postures are found on some contemporary Cypriot issues, on the 5th century BC diobol coinage of
Miletos, and, perhaps not directly relevant, on the contemporary coinage of Velia in southern Italy30.
The similar lions on various coinages of the 5th and 4th century BC in Cyprus, brings to mind the
Cypriot expedition that took place soon after Hekatomnos accession to the satrapy of Caria, but I
believe that a more convincing parallel is to be found once again on a particular issue of Miletos.
One denomination only, a sixth-stater or diobol (c. 2.35 g), was struck with a very similar lion on the
obverse and a Milesian rosette on the reverse (Pl. 2, 16)31. This series is usually dated to the middle
of the 5th century BC, a date which is based mainly on stylistic grounds32. The style of the lion
provides an attractive possibility for the origin of Hekatomnos type. Only one reverse die has a
square incuse, all the other dies have a round incuse. Until the discovery of the Hecatomnus hoard
these coins were very rare and public collections contained only a handful of specimens33.
maussollos at mylasa: a transitional coinage
The introduction of the Chian weight coinage of Hekatomnos did not signal the end of Milesian
weight issues in Mylasa. When Maussollos succeeded his father in 377 BC he continued to strike
Milesian-type staters which must fall early in his reign (Pl. 2, 17). The style of the surviving dies is
very consistent and suggests that these must have been issued over a brief period of time, perhaps a
year or two. The lion head is stylistically more developed with a naturalistic rendering of the lions
mane and the reverse rosette has longer and leaner segments than earlier issues. The other Milesianweight denomination struck by Maussollos at Mylasa is a small series of hemiobols which carry the
usual lion head with tongue protruding and a head of a trident with the letters MA on the reverse
(Pl. 2, 18). The trident is surely the attribute of Zeus Osogollis, an important deity of Mylasa also
celebrated on the next issue34. These hemiobols are the only fractional coinage that can be securely
attributed to Maussollos and are clearly a continuation of his fathers system in which small silver
change seems to have played an important role.
To the same mint of Mylasa must belong another issue known to us only in two tetradrachms
from the Pixodarus hoard. The reverse is the standard Zeus Labraundos type introduced by
Hekatomnos with the letters MA placed vertically behind him. The obverse carries the exceptional
28) The only variation of the type is the spear of Zeus which changes into a sceptre terminated by a triple-head fleuron
on Idrieus didrachm coinage. Babelon, Trait, 142-153 wrongly describes the spear of Zeus as a sceptre for the coinage of
Hekatomnos, Maussollos and Idrieus.
29) It has been suggested that Hekatomnos introduced a new cult-statue of Zeus Labraundos. A statue base discovered
at the sanctuary records Hekatomnos dedication of a statue, probably of Zeus Labraundos: Crampa 1969, no. 27. Pace
Ruzicka 1992, 31 the image of Zeus on Hekatomnos tetradrachms does not have unemphatic breasts, nor does he carry
a sceptre but an inverted spear.
30) The comparison with Velian issues is worth mentioning for the closeness of the lion depiction: Williams 1992,
Period IV, pl. 11.
31) The conventional shape of the rosette suggests that these diobols are indeed from Miletos.
32) Head 1911; BMC Ionia, 185, 12-13; Trait, 1752; Rosen, 585; SNG von Aulock, 2086.
33) Waddington 1856, 61 listed only one specimen kept in Berlin whose authenticity he doubted. The Berlin specimen
was first published and illustrated in 1645 by Berger. Less than five percent of Hekatomnos tetradrachms are today in
public collections. See Ashton et al. 2002a for the Hecatomnus hoard
34) For Mylasas Zeus, see Debord 2001.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

107

depiction of Zeus Osogollis standing to the left and holding in one hand an eagle and in the other a
trident (Pl. 2, 19)35.
A further tetradrachm issue may be of Maussollos at Mylasa. Its obverse is quintessentially
Persian and provides a vivid reminder of the nature and origin of the Hekatomnids office. We see the
Great King as an archer crowned with a kidaris standing right and shooting an arrow (Pl. 2, 20). The
Paris specimen has been known since the late 19th century and was associated with the satraps of
Caria because of its distinct Hekatomnid obverse with the usual figure of Zeus Labraundos. But the
absence of a legend rendered a more precise attribution particularly difficult. The remaining two
extant specimens occurred in the Pixodarus hoard which did not include any issues of Hekatomnos,
the earliest Hekatomnid coins being the tetradrachms of Maussollos with Zeus Osogollis described
above. A further point that would favour an attribution to Maussollos is the fact that Zeus Labraundos
is always used as an obverse type on Hekatomnos tetradrachms, whereas it is exclusively a reverse
type on Maussollos issues. Since the archer tetradrachms display Zeus on the reverse, an attribution
to Maussollos is more likely.
The image of the Great King as a shooting archer is well attested in glyptic art36. The recently
discovered tomb of a noblewoman of the Hekatomnid period at Bodrum yielded a wealth of
jewellery among which was a gold swivel ring with a chalcedony gem engraved with the image of a
Persian soldier37. He is depicted standing to the right and holding his waist with his right hand and a
long inverted upright spear in the other38. His trousers and tunic, as well as the head covering with
side flaps are unmistakably Persian. Like the two coin types (griffin slayer type of Hekatomnos and
the archer type of Maussollos), this gem provides evidence of the use of Persian imagery in
Hekatomnid Caria.
Hekatomnos Milesian type issues struck in large numbers along with his Chian-weight
tetradrachms depicting a lion and Zeus Labraundos constituted important steps in establishing a
dynastic coinage, but his lesser known fractions followed the old practice of striking small
denominations at Mylasa which goes back several generations, including his father Hyssaldomos
and perhaps his predecessor.
maussollos and tHe advent of a dynastic coinage in Halikarnassos
Maussollos reign marks the apogee of the Hekatomnid dynasty and its establishment as the superpower of south western Asia Minor. Virtually free of Persian interference, his rule had a
profound impact on the social, political and economic life of greater Caria39. Furthering his fathers
conquests, Maussollos moved to Halikarnassos the seat of what was in effect an ever-expanding
pocket-empire encompassing the neighbouring regions and islands of Ionia and Lycia. This
strategic move to a harbour-city coincided with the introduction of a new Chian weight coinage with
35) Zeus Osogollis other attribute, the crab, has been tentatively linked by Debord 1999 to the conquest of Kos by
Maussollos, the crab being its civic type. This is difficult to accept since the coin featuring Zeus Osogollis was struck early
in the reign of Maussollos (perhaps during his first or second regnal year), and certainly before he moved the satrapal seat
to Halikarnassos. It seems much more likely that the conquest of Kos happened after Maussollos established Halikarnasssos
as a major naval base. An alternative explanation for the crab could be the crater lake of Denizcik where crabs are found in
numbers and which is situated about 6 km southwest of Milas.
36) Cf. Boardman 1970b, nos. 826, 826, 829.
37) zet 1994, 91, figs. 6 and 7.
38) zet compares the gem to a similar chalcedony scaraboid gem in the Hermitage. There is however a closer, if not
identical, parallel in the Fitzwilliam Museum: Boardman 1970b, no. 884 and Hening et al. 1994, 37, 60. It is made of the
same stone, has the same shape and treats the same subject-matter in the same matter. Indeed, so much similar is the
engraving technique that these two gems are likely to be from the same hand, or at least workshop.
39) As Hornblower 1982, 2 rightly points out in his opening lines that Hekatomnid Caria is a political, not a
geographical expression.

108

Koray KONUK

a three-quarter facing laureate head of Apollo type on the obverse, which continued a civic type
inaugurated by Halikarnassos a few decades earlier. The reverse of this new coinage carried the same
image of the Zeus of Labraunda used on the Chian weight tetradrachms of Hekatomnos (Pl. 2, 21).
As a matter of fact, this new coinage was not much of an innovation since it combined two already
existing coin types. As we have seen, Hekatomnos had already experimented with a three-quarter
facing head on his hemiobols that may have been first introduced before Hyssaldomos in the final
years of the 5th century BC. Unlike Maussollos coins, the three-quarter facing head on these earlier
fractions did not carry a laurel wreath and the source of inspiration for the Apollo type is more likely
to be found on the civic issues of Halikarnassos, c. 390-70 BC, showing a three-quarter facing and
wreathed head of Apollo40. These Chian weight issues of Halikarnassos with a standing eagle on the
reverse were modest in size, with only five obverse dies recorded for drachms, a single pair of dies
for hemidrachms, and another pair of dies for a unique tetradrachm (Pl. 2, 22)41. This civic coinage
of Halikarnassos should be regarded as an attempt to emulate the superb three-quarter facing heads
of Apollo-Helios on the coinage of the recently synoikized city of Rhodes introduced a couple of
decades earlier42. The only typological difference is the laurel wreath added to the Apollo heads of
Halikarnassos. Architectural remains and inscriptions indicate that a sanctuary of Apollo stood on
the summit of the Zephyrion peninsula where Maussollos had his palace built43. Besides the
attractiveness and the obvious defensive qualities of this spot, Maussollos may also have selected it
to fulfil a desire to reside near the sanctuary of Apollo and Hornblower has suggested that he may
have identified himself with Apollo-Helios44. But the head on his coins is of Apollo rather than
Helios. The two are often assimilated in the Hellenistic period, but Apollo in the 4th century BC is
always depicted on coins wearing a laurel wreath, whereas Helios, as the coinage of Rhodes
indicates, is either bare head, or is given a radiate crown45. Hence Hornblower is mistaken in calling
the facing head of the Hekatomnid coinage radiate Helios46.
There is further coin evidence for Apollos presence at Halikarnassos. The city struck some small
bronze coins which depict a young and laureate head of Apollo to the left. These bronzes fall into
two categories: an early issue with a reverse depicting a seven-cord lyre with the legend
(Pl. 2, 23)47. and a later issue with a standing eagle with wings spread and the same legend on the
reverse (Pl. 2, 24), a few of the later series were found in the Mausoleum excavations48. One would
naturally associate the standing eagle bronzes with the silver issues of the same type, but a closer
examination reveals a different treatment and style which suggests a date for the bronzes later than
c. 380 BC. There is nothing, apart from modern misconception, to prevent these civic bronzes from

40) Contrary to common belief, the three-quarter facing head of Apollo was not directly copied from the coins of
neighbouring Rhodes: pace Kraay 1976, 273; Hornblower 1982, 129 and 336; Zahle 1994, 86. Seltman 1955, 186 even
proposed the coinage of Klazomenai as the source of inspiration.
41) Many drachms were included in the Hecatomnus hoard (CH 5.17, 8.96, 9.387) and are published by Konuk in
Ashton et al. 2002a. The unique tetradrachm (13.98 g, some surface corrosion; in trade, last recorded appearance: The New
York Sale, 27, 04-06-2012, the Prospero collection, lot 533) was first published in Hurter 1966. Brett 1931 was wrong to
suggest, solely on the basis of stylistic considerations, that the civic coins of Halikarnassos of the facing Apollo type
succeeded the new coinage of Maussollos, which she believed to have been struck at Mylasa, and copied the coinage of the
satrap. The Hecatomnus hoard clearly indicates that the civic issues preceded the new coinage of Maussollos.
42) Ashton 1993, 13 and 2001.
43) Pedersen 2009, 331-332.
44) Hornblower 1982, 261, 336.
45) Examples of mints depicting a three-quarter facing head of Apollo wearing a laurel wreath are many. In Asia
Minor these include, Klazomenai, Halikarnassos, Kaunos and Miletos.
46) Hornblower 1982, 336, 340.
47) At least two specimens were part of the Phygela hoard of c. 400 BC. Ashton 2001, 4.
48) Jeppesen et al. 1981, 51, four bronze coins were found in the fill above the sacrificial layer, one may be two are of
the Apollo/eagle type, the two others are unrecognisable, though their module is the same as the other two suggesting they
all may be the same Apollo/eagle type; S. Hornblower, Classical Review, 32, 1982, 109; Hornblower 1982, 85, n. 56.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

109

being dated to the rule of the satraps49. Indeed, they were destined for local usage and the greatly
expanded population of Halikarnassos would have naturally required a provision of small change for
daily transactions at a time when a coin-based economy had firmly established itself in Greek cities.
In fact a fractional silver coinage with several denominations had already circulated on the peninsula
for several decades, and these bronzes of handy module may be considered as a replacement for
these impractically small silver. It is indeed difficult to imagine how the dynastic silver issues of the
Hekatomnids could have been used for petty transactions; they must have struck to make larger payments50.
To the civic depiction of the three-quarter facing head of Apollo wearing a laurel wreath,
Maussollos added a round chlamys fibula underneath the gods chin, a detail which is often off-flan.
By keeping as a reverse type the image of Zeus Labraundos introduced by his father, Maussollos
perhaps wanted to symbolically associate the old and sacred identity of the ancestral dynasty (the
dynastic sanctuary at Labraunda) to the new dynastic seat at Halikarnassos represented by a civic
type previously used at its mint. The new Halikarnassian coinage of Maussollos was struck in three
denominations: drachms and tetradrachms and a very limited issue of hemidrachms struck with the
earliest series.
Mention should be made here of the bearded Herakles head that is found on the obverse of contemporary issues of Kos51. The reverse depicts a crab above a club with the Koan ethnic and the
name of a magistrate. Six compared the bearded head on the obverse with the so-called statue of
Maussollos from the Maussolleion, and found similarities. Hill, apparently independently, arrived at
the same identification52. The comparison of course depends on identity of the statue, which is far
from certain. We know that the Maussolleion was decorated with dozens of free-standing statues of
which only the statue in question along with a female statue, and some fragments survive53. What is
extant is a very small sample of what originally adorned the tomb, and the so-called Maussollos
might depict another dignitary. Even if we accept that the statue represents the satrap, there are dies
which do not convey the same resemblance as the specimens selected by Six and Hill. As Moysey
observed, Hill chose a particularly close specimen and did not mention others which are not
similar54. I think that useful evidence can be gained by examining the dating of the type and how it
evolved. The Hecatomnus hoard and IGCH 1204 provide evidence that Kos struck a series of
tetradrachms with Herakles/crab in the opening decades of the 4th century BC (Pl. 2, 25)55. In other
words, the type that Hill and Six illustrated existed before the time of Maussollos. We may therefore
be confident that the obverse originally depicted Herakles and was not intended to depict an individual56.
While Idrieus continued to issue tetradrachms and drachms in his own name like his brother
Maussollos, he took the initiative of introducing simultaneously two new denominations: didrachms
on the one hand, which were struck on a lighter standard than the tetradrachms and drachms, and trihemiobols (quarter drachms) on the other. Their use was seemingly interconnected, the trihemiobol
49) Six 1877, 85 rules out a bronze coinage in Halikarnassos until the death of Pixodaros. See also Ashton 2001, 9,
n. 43.
50) The nature of these payments is discussed in the last chapter of Konuk 1998a.
51) Six 1899, 82-83.
52) Hill 1923, 208: the silky Oriental moustache, the treatment of the eye, the slight tinge of melancholy, all combine
to recall the likeness of the satrap. Scholars discussing the alleged portraiture of Maussollos on Koan coins credit Hill, as
he claims himself in his article, for being the first to call attention to the resemblance which the features of Heracles on
these coins bear to those of Maussollos, as represented in the statue from the Maussolleum. It was in fact Six who
proposed in 1899 the first comparison between the coins and the statue.
53) See Waywell 1978.
54) Moysey 1989, 128.
55) Ashton et al. 2002b; Ingvaldsen 2002, 84-90
56) Same conclusion in Ingvaldsen 2002, 66-68.

110

Koray KONUK

facilitating the conversion of a full weight tetradrachm with two light weight didrachms, the weight
of the trihemiobol (c. 0.90 g) filling the gap between the two bigger denominations57. The trihemiobol
retained the Apollo type on its obverse but saw the reintroduction of the Milesian type starlike floral
pattern on the reverse (Pl. 2, 26). Idrieuss didrachms (Pl. 3, 27) followed the Apollo/Zeus dynastic
type, but a small variation was introduced to the reverse in the shape of a sceptre terminated by a
triple-head fleuron instead of the usual downward pointing held by Zeus which Idrieus continued to
use on his tetradrachms (Pl. 3, 28) and drachms. How are we to interpret the switching of the spear
associated with Zeus Stratios for a sceptre which could be taken as a symbol of a ruler, or a dynastic
symbol? Could this be the sign that Idrieus associated himself with Zeus? We know that Idrieus had
the temple of Zeus at Labraunda rebuilt and enlarged and the cult statue might have undergone a
similar changeover.
On becoming satrap in 341 BC, Pixodaros struck a limited series of full Chian weight dynastic
type Apollo/Zeus tetradrachms (Pl. 3, 29), drachms and a small series of trihemiobols for about a
year or so. These rare tetradrachms and drachms depict the traditional spear attribute of Zeus; being
old denominations there may have been an intention to keep the traditional types unchanged.
Pixodaros, however, preferred instead to issue large amounts of light-weight didrachms of dynastic
type but with Zeus holding a sceptre (Pl. 3, 30). What makes Pixodaros coinage exceptional are his
gold emissions which are the only non-silver coins struck by the Hekatomnids. The only dating
evidence is the letter epsilon which appears on some issues and may be connected with Epsilon
silver series. On gold, the letter does not stand in its usual place between the foot and sceptre of Zeus,
but is placed prominently on the left field (Pl. 3, 31). If they are associated, gold must have been
introduced at the very beginning of Pixodaros rule, in 341/0 BC. The weight-standard was the
Persian daric at c. 8.44 g58. Pixodaros gold issues are sub-divisions of the daric: 1/2, 1/6, 1/8, 1/12,
and 1/24. By the time gold coinage was introduced, tetradrachms and perhaps drachms were no
longer struck and convertibility existed between gold and silver issues: a 1/12th gold stater was equal
to a silver didrachm according to the 1:10 ratio used in that period59.
On the introduction of gold coinage, the obverse type changes from a three-quarter facing to a
profile head of Apollo (Pls. 3, 31 and 32). Laureate Apollo heads in profile were a rather common
design on coins. But on some of Pixodaros coins, the style of Apollos head is mirrored on the contemporary coinage of Miletos. Yet again the Milesian connection is at work. The treatment and
rendering of Apollos head is so close, that the same engravers must have been commissioned to
produce dies at both mints.
On most denominations the reverse type of Zeus Labraundos is left unchanged. Two new types,
however, are introduced. The smallest denomination, 1/24 daric, has on the reverse the head of a
labrys which, on a surface of less than half a centimetre, was certainly easier to accommodate than a
full standing Zeus (Pl. 3, 32). The 1/8 daric is the only denomination to have a different obverse in
the form of a trident, a type used by Maussollos on his obols and certainly referring to the cult of
Zeus Osogollis (Pl. 3, 33). Its reverse is a labrys within an incuse square. A political meaning has
been in the past attached to the gold coinage of Pixodaros. The minting of gold has often been
considered the exclusive prerogative of the Great King, and any other coinage was believed to be insurrectional in character60. It is true that more often than not, gold was struck in times of crises to
respond to an emergency demand. Pixodaros introduction of a gold coinage might also be explained,
at least partly, by a shortage of silver which may already have begun under Idrieus. The striking of a
reduced weight didrachms by Idrieus and Pixodaros and the abandonment of tetradrachms might
both indicate that silver was more difficult to obtain.
57) For a detailed explanation, see Konuk 1991.
58) For a detailed study of the standard, see Konuk 1993.
59) Konuk 1998, 182.
60) For this question see Konuk 1998a, 179.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

111

Pixodaros daughter married a Persian by the name of Rhoontopates who ruled from 336/5 to
334 BC as the last satrap of Caria. The only coinage known for Rhoontopates as ruler of Caria is an
emission of full-weight Chian tetradrachms of the Apollo/Zeus type (Pl. 3, 34) which is perhaps
surprising for that denomination had been abandoned by his predecessor Pixodaros early in his reign
in c. 341/0 BC. During his two-year rule Rhoontopates principal concern would have been the
defence of Caria against Alexander, a task which must have entailed considerable logistical and
financial effort which is not reflected in his modest issues of tetradrachms which only comprise six
obverse dies.
This sense of dynastic continuity that permeates in the coinage of the Hekatomnids is also
apparent in their fondness to dedicating and erecting statues of themselves. They were among the
first to practice this form of dynastic self-assertion in the Greek cultural area. Inscribed bases and inscriptions mentioning statues have been found in a number of places besides the main sanctuaries of
Labraunda and Sinuri and as far as Erythrai, Tegea and Delphi61. A family portrait group was
dedicated by Idrieus at Iasos and another one might have existed at Labraunda62. A recently found
epigram belonging to this monument in Iasos underlines further the theme of dynastic continuity in
displaying hereditary power63.
I would like to conclude by briefly mentioning the outstanding but unfortunately looted grave
chamber recently discovered at Uzunyuva in Milas which provides yet another but more impressive
example of dynastic assertion64. It is in all probability that of Hekatomnos whose sarcophagus carved
with reliefs on four sides may be viewed, in my opinion, as a remarkable example of power
statement of the Hekatomnid ruling house65. The main side of the sarcophagus facing the entrance of
the burial chamber depicts a banquet scene where members of his family surround the deceased. He
may well be Hekatomnos reclining on a couch next to his seated wife (probably his sister Aba66) with
features of a middle-aged woman, behind her stand a boy and a girl in their teens; on the left, before
the deceased stand closer to him a bearded young man and behind him an older man with a more
furnished beard. On either side of the couch stand two children. Although the general composition of
this funerary banquet looks rather conventional67, the detailed treatment given to each character by
means of individual features makes it no ordinary scene. It is as though we were witnessing the birth
of portraiture, yet still imbued to some extant in ideal and character representation68. If this
sarcophagus does indeed belong to Hekatomnos, one would be tempted to put names on each of
these individuals and the three older males may well be Maussollos (perhaps the elder one standing
61) A useful list can be found in Carstens 2009, 146.
62) Berti et al. 2010.
63) Berti et al. 2010; Maddoli 2010.
64) Rumscheid 2010 argued that the podium monument at Uzunyuva was part of an unfinished proto-mausolleion
which had not served as burial. It is now apparent that the burial chamber was completed and used.
65) A view first mentioned in Konuk 2010. The other sides, which I will not discuss here, carry reliefs depicting on the
other long side the satrap on horseback hunting a lion and on the short sides, mourning scenes. Photographs were published
in several press articles and many can be viewed on the World Wide Web. The tomb and its contents are to be published by
Fahri and Cengiz Ik, Adnan Diler and Abuzer Kzl.
66) The statue base from Iasos inscribed Aba, daughter of Hekatomnos and belonging to a family group monument
erected by Idrieus supports the view that Aba could not have been depicted simply as the aunt of Idrieus, but more probably
as his mother: Berti et al. 2010, 177. In addition, an inscription found near the tomb has benefited from a new reading
whereby the couple Hekatomnos and Aba are rendered a cult as daimones agathoi: Descat 2011.
67) Totenmahl reliefs are very common in the Hellenistic period and a number have been found in the Halikarnassos
peninsula: Hansen 2008.
68) In addition, seven (out of eight) free-standing marble statuettes portraying members of the Hekatomnid dynasty
and originally placed as acroteria on the pediments angles of the sarcophagus lid have subsequently been confiscated in
Denizli and are now kept in the Milas archaeological museum. These along with other objects seemingly also from the
Uzunyuva tomb were presented to the press on January 16th 2011 by Erturul Gnay, Minister of Culture and Tourism.
Their number would conveniently match the eight characters depicted on the main relief.

112

Koray KONUK

on the far left), Idrieus (young man carrying a Persian rhyton) and Pixodaros depicted as a teenager
behind whom may be standing Artemisia in grief. The infant holding a bird and a doll by Abas side
is clearly a girl, the other looks like a boy. The girl may well be Ada, the sister-wife of Idrieus. The
boy cannot be identified and may be missing from ancient sources available to us at this time or he
might have died at an early age69. All in all, the entire dynasty is gathered around the deceased and
the long and well-established funerary banquet theme gave what appears to be Hekatomnos an
opportunity to make a forward statement of power through his progeny, all heirs to his ruling house.
Through their coinage and a variety of architectural and sculptural realisations, the Hekatomnids
underlined key ingredients of political legitimacy and authority: dynastic relationships, ancestry and
family.

69) If these infants were indeed Hekatomnos, the age difference between them and his older son, probably
Maussollos, would be in the range of about 20 to 25 years which seems excessively long for the same mother. Though this
is not entirely impossible in a context of childbearing starting at a very early age, we might also entertain the possibility of
them being half-siblings of their older brothers and sister.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

113

BiBliograpHy
Ashton, R.H.J., 1993 : A Revised Arrangement for the Earliest Coinage of Rhodes, in M. Price et al.
(ds.), Essays in Honour of Robert Carson and Kenneth Jenkins, London, 1993, 9-15.
2001 : The Coinage of Rhodes, 408-190, in A. Meadows & K. Shipton (ds.), Money and its Uses in
the Ancient Greek World, Oxford, 2001, 79-115.
2006 : The Beginning of Bronze Coinage in Karia and Lykia, NC 166, 2006, 1-14.
Ashton, R.H.J. et al., 2002a : The Hecatomnus Hoard (CH 5.17, 8.96, 9.387), in A. Meadows &
U. Wartenberg (ds.), Coin Hoards. Volume IX, Greek Hoards, London, 2002, 95-157.
2002b : The Pixodarus Hoard (CH 9.421), in A. Meadows & U. Wartenberg (ds.), Coins Hoards
Volume IX: Greek Hoards, London, 2002, 159-243.
Bean, G.E., 1953 : Notes and Inscriptions from Caunus, JHS 73, 1953, 10-35.
Becker, F., 1988 : Ein Fund von 75 milesischen Obolen, RSN 67, 1988, 5-41.
Berti, F., Fabiani, R., Kzltan, Z. & Nafissi, N. (ds.), 2010 : Marmi erranti. I marmi di Iasos presso i
musei archaologici di Istanbul, Istanbul, 2010.
BMC Ionia : Head, B.V., Catalogue of the Greek Coins in The British Museum, Greek Coins of Ionia,
London, 1892.
Boardman, J., 1970a : Pyramidal Stamp Seals in the Persian Empire, Iran 8, 1970, 19-45.
1970b : Greek Gems and Finger Rings. Early Bronze Age to Late Classical, London, 1970.
Brett, A.B., 1931 : Tetradrachm of Mausolus, Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts 29, 1931, 12.
Cancio, L., 1989 : A New Satrapal Coin of the KIM-EKA Series, SM 156, 1989, 83.
Carstens, A.M., 2009 : Karia and the Hekatomnids. The Creation of a Dynasty, BAR, Oxford, 2009.
Coin Hoards VIII : Wartenberg, U., Price, N.J. & McGregor, K.A., (ds.), Coin Hoards, VIII Greek
Hoards, London, 1994.
Crampa, J., 1969 : Labraunda, Swedish Excavations and Researches, III:2. The Greek Inscriptions,
Stockholm, 1969.
Debord, P., 1999 : LAsie Mineure au IVe sicle (412-323 a.C.). Pouvoirs et jeux politiques, Bordeaux,
1999.
2001 : Sur quelques Zeus cariens : religion et politique, Studi Ellenistici 13, 2001, 19-37.
Deppert-Lippitz, D., 1984 : Die Mnzprgung Milets vom vierten bis ersten Jahrhundert v. Chr., Typos 5,
Aarau-Francfort/M.-Salzbourg, 1984.
Descat, R., 2011 : Autour de la tombe dHkatomnos, nouvelle lecture dune inscription de Mylasa,
ZPE, 178, 2011, 195-202.
Gunter, A.C., 1985 : Looking at Hecatomnid Patronage from Labraunda, REA 87, 1985, 113-124.
Hansen, S.S., 2008 : Hellenistic Totenmahl Reliefs from the Halikarnassos peninsula, in P. Pedersen
(d.), Halicarnassian Studies V, Odense, 2008, 119-136.
Head, B.V., 1911 : Historia Numorum, A Manual of Greek Numismatics, Oxford, 1911.
Hening, M. et al., 1994 : Classical Gems. Ancient and Modern Intaglios and Gems in the Fitzwilliam
Museum, Cambridge, Cambridge, 1994.
Hill, G.F., 1923 : Some Coins of Southern Asia Minor, in W.H. Buckler & W.M. Calder (ds.), Anatolian
Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay, Manchester, 1923, 208-212, pl. 9-10
Hornblower, S., 1982 : Mausolus, Oxford, 1982.
Hurter, S., 1966 : 42 Tetradrachmen von Klazomenai. Ein Fundbericht, RSN 45, 1966, 26-35.
IGCH : Thompson, M., Mrkholm, O. & Kraay, C.M. (ds.), An Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards, New
York, 1973.
Imhoof-Blumer, F., 1905 : Zur griechischen und rmischen Mnzkunde, RSN 13, 1905, 162-272.
Ingvaldsen, H., 2002 : Cos Coinage and Society. The chronology and function of a city-state coinage in
the Classical and Hellenistic period, c. 390- c. 170 BC. (University of Oslo PhD.), Oslo, 2002.
Ik, C. & Marek, C., 2005 : Die Basen der Hekatomniden in Kaunos-Kbid, in Synergia, Festschrift fr
Friederich Krinzinger, Band 2, 2005, 239-247.
Jenkins, K., 1971 : Two Coins of Asia Minor, BM quarterly 36/3-4, 1971, 97-98, pl. 31.

114

Koray KONUK

Jeppensen, K. et al., 1981 : The Maussolleion at Halikarnassos, Reports of the Danish Archaeological
Expedition to Bodrum, vol. I, The Sacrificial Deposit, Copenhagen, 1981.
Kinns, P., 1986 : The Coinage of Miletus, NC, 146, 1986, 233-260.
Konuk, K., 1993 : Quelques rflexions sur le monnayage des satrapes hcatomnides de Carie, in
T. Hackens & G. Moucharte (ds.), Proceedings of the XIth International Numismatic Congress, Louvain-laNeuve, 1993, 237-242.
1998a : The Coinage of the Hekatomnids of Caria, unpublished D.Phil. dissertation, Oxford 1998.
1998b : The Early Coinage of Kaunos, in R. Ashton & S. Hurter (ds.), Studies in Greek Numismatics
in Memory of Martin Jessop Price, London, 1998, 197-223, pl. 47-50.
2000 : Influences et lments achmnides dans le monnayage de la Carie, in O. Casabonne (d.), Mcanismes et innovations montaires dans lAnatolie achmnide. Numismatique et histoire, Istanbul, 2000,
171-183.
2003 : From Kroisos to Karia. Early Anatolian Coins from the Muharrem Kayhan Collection, Istanbul,
2003.
2007 : Coin Legends in Carian, in I. J. Adiego, The Carian Language, Leiden, 2007, 71-92.
2009 : The Coinage of Hyssaldomos, Dynast of Mylasa, in R. Einicke, S. Lehmann, H. Lhr et al.
(ds.), Zurck zum Gegenstand. Festschrift fr Andreas E. Furtwngler, Langenweissbach, 2009, 145-152.
2010 : Trkiyenin Tutankhamon Mezar [The Tuthankhamun Tomb of Turkey], Habertrk (newspaper),
12 August 2010, 22.
Kraay, C.M., 1976 : Archaic and Classical Greek Coins, London, 1976.
Maddoli, G., 2010 : Du nouveau sur les Hkatomnides daprs les inscriptions de Iasos, in R. van
Bremen & J.-M Carbon (ds.), Hellenistic Karia . Proceedings of the First International Conference on
Hellenistic Karia. Oxford, 29 June - 2 July 2006, Bordeaux, 2010, 123-131.
Meadows, A., 2011 : The Chian Revolution: Changing Patterns of Hoarding in 4th-Century BC Western
Asia Minor, in Th. Faucher, M.-Chr. Marcellesi & O. Picard (ds.), Nomisma: La circulation montaire dans
le monde grec [BCH suppl., 53], 2011, 273-295.
Moysey, R.A., 1989 : Observations on the Numismatic Evidence Relating to the Great Satrapal Revolt of
362/1, REA 91, 1989, 107-139.
zet, M.A., 1994 : The Tomb of a Noble Woman from the Hekatomnid Period, in J. Isager (d.),
Hekatomnid Caria and the Ionian Renaissance. Halicarnassian Studies I, Odense, 1994, 88-96.
Pedersen, P., 2009 : The Palace of Maussollos in Halikarnassos, in F. Rumscheid (d.), Die Karer und
die Anderen. Internationales Kolloquium an der Freien Universitt Berlin 13. bis 15. Oktober 2005, Bonn,
2009, 315-348.
Pfeiler, B., 1966 : Die Silberprgung von Milet im 6 Jh. V. Chr., RSN 45, 1966, 21-22.
Regling, K., 1918 : Maussollos in Milet, Franfurter Mnzzeitung 198, 1918, 254-260.
Rosen : Waggoner, N., Early Greek Coins from the Collection of Jonathan P. Rosen, New York, 1983.
Rumscheid, F., 2010 : Maussollos and the Uzun Yuva in Mylasa: An Unfinished Proto-Maussolleion at
the Heart of a New Urban Centre?, in R. van Bremen & J.-M. Carbon (ds.), Hellenistic Karia . Proceedings
of the First International Conference on Hellenistic Karia. Oxford, 29 June - 2 July 2006, Bordeaux, 2010, 69102.
Ruzicka, S., 1992 : Politics of a Persian Dynasty. The Hecatomnids in the fourth century B.C., Norman &
London, 1992.
Seltman, C., 1955 : Greek Coins, London, 1955.
Six, J.P., 1877 : Monnaies des satrapes de Carie, NC, 1877, 81-89.
1890 : Monnaies grecques, indites et incertaines, NC, 1890, 185-259.
1899 : Maussollos Frst von Mylasa, Satrap von Karien, Mitteilungen Archologischen Institut,
Rmische Abteilung 14, 1899, 81-83.
SNG Kayhan : K. Konuk, Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Turkey 1, The Muharrem Kayhan Collection,
Bordeaux - Istanbul, 2002.
SNG von Aulock : SNG Collection Hans von Aulock, vol. 7 (Berlin, 1962) and vol. 17 (Berlin, 1968).
Trait : E. Babelon, Trait des monnaies grecques et romaines. Deuxime partie, description historique,
t. 2, Paris, 1910.
Troxell, H.A., 1984 : Carians in Miniature, in A. Houghton et al. (ds.), Festschrift fr/Studies in honor
of Leo Mildenberg, Wetteren, 1984, 249-257, pl. 40.
Waddington, W.H., 1856 : Mdailles frappes au Ve sicle en Carie et en Ionie, RN, 1856, 47-62.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

115

Waywell, G.B., 1978 : The Free-Standing Sculptures of the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus. A Catalogue,
London, 1978.
1993 : The Ada, Zeus and Idrieus Relief from Tegea in the British Museum, in O. Palagia &
W. Coulson (ds.), Sculpture from Arcadia and Laconia, Oxford, 1993, 79-86.
Wells, H.B., 1984 : Observations on the Signature KIM, SM 135, 1984, 57-60.
Williams, R.T., 1992 : The Silver Coinage of Velia, London, 1992.
Zahle, J., 1994 : Hekatomnid Caria, a province in Achaemenid Asia Minor, in J. Isager (d.), Hekatomnid
Caria and the Ionian Renaissance. Halicarnassian Studies I, Odense, 1994, 85-87.

116

Koray KONUK

1) mylasa, ar hemiobol, c. 430 Bc.

Bodrum, museum of underwater archaeology, 3-26-91.
2) predecessor of Hyssaldomos?, mylasa, ar hemiobol, c. 410 Bc.
european private collection.
3) Hyssaldomos, mylasa, ar hemiobol, c. 400 Bc.
european private collection.
4) Hyssaldomos, mylasa, ar tetartemorion, c. 400 Bc.
new york, american numismatic society.
5) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar tetartemorion, c. 390-380 Bc.
european private collection.
6) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar tetartemorion, c. 390-380 Bc.
cambridge, the fitzwilliam museum, cm.69-1995.
7) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar hemitetartemorion, c. 390-380 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, mk1629.
8) miletos, ar obol, c. 520-500 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, mk1416.
9) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar hemitetartemorion, c. 390-380 Bc.
ske, muharem kayhan collection, SNG Kayhan, 864.
10) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar diobol, c. 390-380 Bc.
ske, muharem kayhan collection, mk1564.
11) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar tetrobol, c. 390-380 Bc.
london, the British museum, 1979 1-1-485.
ex von aulock coll.
12) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar stater (12 obols), c. 390-380 Bc.
european private collection.
13) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar triobol, c. 390-380 Bc.
london, the British museum, 1971 6-14-1. ex leu.
14) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar diobol, c. 390-380 Bc.
oxford, the ashmolean museum.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

117
plate 1

118

Koray KONUK

15) Hekatomnos, mylasa, ar tetradrachm, c. 380 Bc.

auction, cng, triton Xv (03.01.2012), 1246.
16) miletos, ar diobol, c. 500 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, mk1526.
17) maussollos, mylasa, ar stater (12 obols), c. 377 Bc.
auction, gorny & mosch, giessener mnzhandlung, 169 (12.10.2008), 503.
18) maussollos, mylasa, ar hemiobol, c. 377 Bc.
new york, american numismatic society.
19) maussollos, mylasa, ar tetradrachm, c. 377 Bc.
london, the British museum, 1981 5-25-1. ex pixodarus hoard.
20) maussollos, mylasa, ar tetradrachm, c. 377 Bc.
paris, Bibliothque nationale, Trait, p. 159, 116, pl. 91, 6.
21) maussollos, Halikarnassos, ar tetradrachm, c. 370-60 Bc.
auction, cng, triton Xiv (04.01.2011), 326.
22) Halikarnassos, ar tetradrachm, c. 400-380, auction,
the new york sale, 27, 04-06-2012, 533. ex prospero coll.
23) Halikarnassos, ae chalkous, c. 400 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, SNG Kayhan, 761.
24) Halikarnassos, ae chalkous, c. 380-350 Bc.
oxford, the ashmolean museum.
25) kos, ar tetradrachm, c. 390-380 Bc.
auction, gerhard Hirsch nachfolger 263 (24.09.2009), 2425.
26) idrieus, Halikarnassos, ar trihemiobol, c. 350-340 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, SNG Kayhan, 885.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

119
plate 2

120

Koray KONUK

27) idrieus, Halikarnassos, ar didrachm, c. 350-340 Bc.

ske, muharrem kayhan collection, SNG Kayhan, 881.
28) idrieus, Halikarnassos, ar tetradrachm, c. 350-340 Bc.
auction, dr. Busso peus nachfolger 399 (04.11.2009), 165.
29) pixodaros, Halikarnassos, ar tetradrachm, 341 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, SNG Kayhan, 890.
30) pixodaros, Halikarnassos, ar didrachm, c. 340-336 Bc.
auction, numismatik lanz mnchen 146 (25.05.2009), 229.
31) pixodaros, Halikarnassos, av hemistater, c. 340-336 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, mk1706.
32) pixodaros, Halikarnassos, av 1/24th stater, c. 340-336 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, mk1383.
33) pixodaros, Halikarnassos, av 1/10th stater, c. 340-336 Bc.
auction, giessener mnzhandlung 60 (05-10-1992), 208.
34) rhoontopates, Halikarnassos, ar tetradrachm, c. 336-334 Bc.
ske, muharrem kayhan collection, SNG Kayhan, 899.

COiNAge ANd ideNtitieS UNdeR the heKAtOMNidS

121

plate 3