estratto - parthian-empire.comparthian-empire.com/articles/A-Revised-Parthian-Chronology-of-91...A...

parthicaINCONTRI DI CULTURE NEL MONDO ANTICO

8 · 2006

PISA · ROMA

ISTITUTI EDITORIALI E POLIGRAFICI INTERNAZIONALI

MMVII

reprint

Direttore / Editor in chiefAntonio Invernizzi

*

Comitato scientifi co / Scientifi c CommitteeMichael Alram, Wien · Paul Bernard, Paris · A. D. H. Bivar, London · Edward Dabrowa, KrakówHideo Fujii, Tokyo · †Bernard Goldman, Michigan · Ernie Haerinck, Gent · Dietrich Huff, Berlin

Gennadij A. Košelenko, Moskva · †Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg, UtrechtA. Schmidt-Colinet, Wien

*

Redazione scientifi ca / Editorial AssistantCarlo Lippolis

Si prega di inviare manoscritti, dattiloscritti e stampati e la posta redazionale al seguente indirizzo :dott. Carlo Lippolis, Dipartimento di Scienze Antropologiche, Archeologiche e Storico-Territoriali,

Via Giolitti 21/e, i 10123 Torino.I testi originali di contributi e/o recensioni sottoposti all’attenzione della Redazione scientifi ca

non saranno restituiti.Contributors are kindly requested to send manuscripts, typescripts, print-outs and correspondence to the

following address : dr. Carlo Lippolis, Dipartimento di Scienze Antropologiche, Archeologichee Storico-Territoriali, Via Giolitti 21/e, i 10123 Turin, Italy.

Please note that materials submitted for potential publication and/or critical review will not be returned.

*Per la migliore riuscita delle pubblicazioni, si invitano gli autori ad attenersi, nel predisporre i materialida consegnare alla Redazione ed alla Casa editrice, alle norme specifi cate nel volume Fabrizio Serra,

Regole editoriali, tipografi che & redazionali, Pisa-Roma, Istituti editoriali e poligrafi ci internazionali, 2004.(ordini a : [email protected]).

Il capitolo « Norme redazionali », estratto dalle Regole, cit., è consultabile Onlinealla pagina « Pubblicare con noi » di www.libraweb.net.

Registrazione presso il Tribunale di Pisa n. 12 del 21 luglio 1999Direttore responsabile : Fabrizio Serra

A REVISED PARTHIAN CHRONOLOGY

OF THE PERIOD 91-55 BC

Gholamreza F. Assar

There can be little doubt that David Sellwood’s labours have played a pivotal role in es-tablishing the study of coinage as an essential technique of Parthian historical research. Following the methodical and to a large extent fruitful investigations of his predecessors,

Sellwood’s erudite contributions in this branch of numismatics have set the highest standards of critical scholarship for over half a century and yet his infl uence has never been limited to his own writings and research. He has freely communicated his enthusiasm to many and as the world’s leading Parthian numismatist kept in touch with and guided the young scholars coming forward to make their impact on the subject with advice and encouragement of the greatest value.

Chief among Sellwood’s publications are those that appeared in 1967 and 1976. These repre-sented an important landmark in the study of Arsacid coinage of the periods ad 10-190 and 91-55 bc and provided for the fi rst time a chronological framework for the whole series. With such a fi rmly established sequence and chronology at their disposal, students and scholars have since been able to study the inherent problems of Parthian numismatics in far greater detail than was previously possible.

I am honoured to have been invited to submit an article to this Festschrift commemorating the eighty-fi rst birthday of a distinguished scholar, teacher and writer of considerable erudition, whose friendship I have prized for almost twenty years. And since the elucidation of the chro-nology and coinage of the Parthian ‘Dark Age’, i.e. the period 91-55 bc of Arsacid power, is gen-erally regarded as one the outstanding achievements of Sellwood as an acclaimed numismatist, it may not be thought inappropriate that I should try to correlate his fi ndings with the sketchy references in the contemporary Babylonian cuneiform records. It is hoped that this will make a contribution, however small and imperfect, to both explaining the complex numismatic aspects and solving some of the persisting chronological problems of this period.

I should, however, add that without generous help and advice from David Sellwood himself and such scholars as Professors Herman Hunger, Giuseppe Del Monte, Robartus Van der Spek Stephan Maul, and Mr. Christopher Walker of the British Museum I would not have been able to compile this note. To them, I off er my inestimable gratitude. They are, of course, not responsible for my errors. I am also indebted to Messrs Nader Rastegar and Samir Masri for their assistance and encouragement. This work was supported at the St. Catherine’s College, Oxford University, by a grant from the Maclaren Foundation and the Morteza Rastegar Endowment.

Arsaces XII-Sinatruces (93/92-69/68 bc)

The intentional omission by Justin 1 of the approximately thirty fi ve years between the reigns of Mithradates II and Orodes II has deprived us of what should have been one continuous account of a second Parthian ‘Dark Age’. 2 A sentence in Trogus (Prologue, 42) accords well with the numis-

1 Justin (Preface, 3-4) states that « all that the historians of Greece had undertaken separately, according to what was suitable to each, Trogus Pompeius, omitting only what was useless, has put together in one narration, everything being assigned to its proper period, and arranged in the regular order of events ». He then comments that « from these 44 volumes therefore – for such was the number that he pub-lished – I have extracted, during the leisure that I enjoyed in the city [of Rome], whatever was most worthy of being

known ; and, rejecting such parts as were neither attractive for the pleasure of reading, nor necessary by way of exam-ple, have formed, as it were, a small collection of fl owers, that those who are acquainted with the history of Greece might have something to refresh their memories, and those who are strangers to it something for their instruction ». For references to Justin throughout this work cf. Watson 1882, Ruehl 1886, and Yardley 1994.

2 Cf. Assar 2006, 112 for the fi rst Parthian ‘Dark Age’.

56 Gholamreza F. Assar

3 Ruehl 1886, 264 : « Ut varia conplurium regum in Parthis successione imperium accepit Orodes, … » ; Seel 1956, 180 ; Yardley 1994, 285.

4 Perrin 2001, 536-537, and 590-591, respectively.5 Simonetta 2001, 90-105 puts the issue in the period 65/64-

61/60 bc and attributes to Phraates III.6 Sellwood 1976, 18 (engraver « C »).7 Lindsay 1852, 142-144 (Mithradates II) ; de Longpéri-

er 1853-1882, pl. v :53-55 (Phraates II) ; Prokesch-Osten 1874-1875, 20 (Mithradates II) ; Gardner 1877, 33 (Artabanus II) ; Markoff 1889, 7-8 (Artaban II) ; Wroth 1900, 197, 201 and

matic evidence that many kings wore the diadem in fairly rapid succession 3 while two summaris-ing passages in Plutarch (Lucullus, 21.4 and 36.6) attest that it was a chaotic time of internal and frontier warfare that exhausted the imperial resources and seriously diminished Parthian power and prestige. 4 Beyond that we have a few other fl eeting literary references, most of them discon-nected and fragmentary, but enough additional information from both the cuneiform records and the coinage to confi rm that this was indeed a disastrous period of intra-dynastic strife. It would appear, however, that by careful correlation of what has survived we have just enough evidence to reconstruct a reasonable summary of all the reigns and some of the major events in the pe-riod 91-55 bc.

As the instigator of the internal confl icts that gradually but surely led to the disintegration of Parthian central authority and eventual downfall of the dynasty, Sinatruces carved out a portion of the Empire and ruled intermittently for over twenty years with mixed fortunes. But although we only hear of him after the demise of Mithradates II, his impact on Parthia’s domestic aff airs predates his accession year by over three decades. Regrettably our extant Babylonian texts remain silent about Sinatruces. It is possible that he had a hand in some confl icts that are now only par-tially preserved in a handful of cuneiform tablets. Consequently the fi rst step in reconstructing Sinatruces’ reign would be to identify his coinage as a solid basis for determining the extent of his domain and infl uence and his link with earlier kings.

The absence of a named reference to Sinatruces in our cuneiform documents strongly indicates that he never held Babylon. At the same time we note that of the fourteen diff erent emissions S29-S41 and S44 from the ‘Dark Age’, S33 alone is without parallel tetradrachms. It also lacks the normal mint monograms that appeared beneath the bow of the seated archer on the reverse of Parthian drachms from about 67 bc on. 5 These suggest that the issuer had no access to the royal mint at Seleucia on the Tigris and that he struck his S33 drachms before the inception of S36 coin-age (cf. below). Given the numismatic material and lack of Babylonian inscriptional evidence we may safely assign the S33 drachms to Sinatruces. These have on the obverse the bust of a visibly aged monarch wearing a crown much infl uenced in its design by the art of the steppe people. Its central ornament is a bull’s horn, perhaps an idealised quasi-divine characteristic, while its fore-and-aft ridge is ringed with a row of recumbent stags, the totem animal of the Scythian tribes living in the southeastern regions of the Caspian Sea and a prominent feature of their art. These appear both with and without a set of sweeping antlers (probably a seasonal headgear). The tiara therefore immediately and obviously diff ers in its design from those worn by Mithradates II and his successors, Gotarzes I, Mithradates III (son of Mithradates II), and Orodes I (cf. below).

The inscription of Sinatruces’ drachms from Ecbatana (S33.1-2) reads BASILEWS MEGALOU ARSAKOU QEOPATOROS NIKATOROS (Fig. 1) with the penultimate epithet occasionally given as QEOPATROS. Those from Rhagae (S33.3-6), on the other hand, consistently give 6 QE-OPATROU (Fig. 2) which is further corrupted to QEPATII and its meaningless derivatives on specimens from the eastern mint of Margiane (S33.7) and probably even of Areia and Traxiane (Fig. 3). However, this issue had previously been given by leading numismatists to Parthian kings other than Sinatruces. 7 The fi rst to identify the issuer and ascribe the coinage correctly was Sell-wood. 8 He argued that the combination of the aged portrait of the coins, wearing the same ti-ara as that adopted by Phraates III (S39), son of Sinatruces, and the epithets QEOPATOROS

pl. ix : 7 (Phraates III ?) ; 1903, 51-54 (Phraates III ?) ; de la Fuÿe 1904, 347-348 and pl. vii : 17 (Phraates III ?) ; Petrowicz 1904, 36-37 (Artaban I) ; de Morgan 1923-1936, 156 (Phraates III) ; Ars Classica-Naville 1926, 135 (Phraates III ?) ; Newell 1938, 30 and pl. 141.R (Phraates III) ; Simonetta 1957, 118-121 (Phraates III). Rawlinson 1873, 139, n. 4 comments that like Phraates II, Sinatruces employed on his coins the epithet QE-OPATOROS. Unfortunately he fails to identify the coins he ascribes to Sinatruces. We cannot therefore be sure whether he referred to S33 drachms or another issue from the ‘Dark Age’. QEOPATOROS also appears on S30 and S35 drachms.

A Revised Parthian Chronology of the Period 91-55 bc 57

and NIKATOROS in the royal titulature on S33 drachms, links the coinage to no other rul-er than Sinatruces.

It is evident that by styling himself QE-OPATOROS Sinatruces claimed descent from a divinized father. Combined with the gene-alogy of Phraates III in his accession record on Nisa ostracon 2640 (Nova 307) this epithet strongly suggests that Sinatruces was a son of Mithradates I. A better understanding of this link may be obtained by studying the relevant material and the scanty references in our Greco-Latin literature.

Although pertaining to the latter part of the reign of Sinatruces, Lucian (Makrobioi, 15) 9 re-ports that this prince was restored to his coun-try by the powerful Sacaraucae Scythians when he was already in his eightieth year, assumed the throne and held it for seven years. At the same time, Phlegon of Tralles (Fr. 12.7) 10 plac-es Sinatruces’ death in Olympiad 177.3 (70/69 bc) 11 and adds that he was succeeded by his son, Phraates III surnamed Theos. From these it follows that Sinatruces was born about 156 bc in the reign of Mithradates I and thus around 25 years old when Phraates II took the diadem in 132 bc. 12 We are further told by Trogus in the prologue to his book 41 on the history of Parthia and Bactria 13 that the establishment of the Parthian Empire by King Arsaces was « fol-lowed by his successors Artabanus and Tigranes, surnamed the Divine, by whom Media and Me-sopotamia were brought into subjection ». Ignoring the obvious confusion of Mithradates with Tigranes at this juncture, it is clear that the former had been deifi ed at some point in time either during his successful reign or shortly afterwards. 14 The inclusion in the royal titulature of the epi-thet QEOPATOROS on Sinatruces’ coinage can therefore be viewed as an attempt by him to em-phasise his paternal ties with Mithradates I and so legitimise his claim to the Parthian throne. 15 I

Fig. 3. S33.7 silver drachm of Sinatruces fromMargiane (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 2. S33.3 silver drachm of Sinatruces from Rhagae (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 1. S33.1 silver drachm of Sinatruces fromEcbatana (Author’s Collection).

8 Sellwood 1962, 81-82. Subsequent works give the issu-er of these coins as follows : Le Rider 1965, 96-97 and 398 (Phraates III) ; Sellwood 1965, 124-127 and 133 (Sinatruces) ; Simonetta 1966, 26 and 39 (Phraates III) ; Sellwood 1967, 293-294 (Sinatruces) ; 1971, 89-91 (Sinatruces) ; Dobbins 1974, 70 (Orodes I) ; Simonetta 1974, 124-125 (Sinatruces) ; Waggoner 1974, 17 and 25-26 (Phraates III as co-ruler with Sinatruces) ; Dobbins 1975, 32 and 42 (Orodes I) ; Simonetta 1975, 69-70 and 77 (Sinatruces) ; Sellwood 1976, 5 and 7 (Gotarzes I) ; Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 116 (Phraates III) ; Mørkholm 1980, 45 (Sinatruces) ; Sellwood 1980, 87-88 (Gotarzes I) ; Weiskopf 1981, 140 (Sinatruces, inferred from his reliance on the attributions in Mørkholm 1980) ; Bivar 1983, 45 ac-cepts attribution of S33 drachms to Sinatruces ; Sellwood 1983a, 268 (Gotarzes I) ; Dilmaghani 1986, 220 (Sinatruces) ; Shore 1993, 24 and 105-106 (Gotarzes I) ; Loginov, Nikitin 1996, 41, 44 and fi g. 6 : 49-51 (Sinatruces) ; Assar 2000, 16 (Si-natruces) ; Simonetta 2001, 84, fi g. 41, and 99-100 (Phraates

III) ; Assar 2003a, 383-389 (Sinatruces) ; 2004, 89 (Sinatruces) ; 2005a, 21-22 (Sinatruces) ; 2005b, 52-53 (Sinatruces) ; 2006, 145-148 (Sinatruces).

9 Harmon 1996, 232-235.10 Jacoby 1929, 1163-1164 ; 1930, 842 ; Henry 1960, 64.11 Samuel 1972, 224.12 Cf. Assar 2005, 44-45;;; ; 2006, 95-98 for the inception date

of the reign of Phraates II.13 Ruehl 1886, 264 omits the sentence : « Successores

deinde eius Artabanus et Tigranes cognomina Deus, … » ; Seel 1956, 178 ; Yardley 1994, 284.

14 The epithet QEOPATOROS on the S16 drachms of Phraates II attests to the posthumous divinization of Mith-radates I.

15 On the relationship between Mithradates I and Si-natruces cf. Lindsay 1852, 17 ; Rawlinson 1873, 139 and n. 4 ; Prokesch-Osten 1874-1875, 26 ; Sellwood 1976, 8 ; Assar 2005b, 53.


have shown elsewhere that irrespective of a biological link between Mithradates I and Sinatruces, numismatic material and genealogical records from Nisa leave little doubt about the ‘father-son’ relationship between the two (cf. below). 16 Yet Sinatruces failed to succeed his father perhaps be-cause of his mother’s subordinate status in the imperial court. Our Babylonian cuneiform records clearly show 17 that Phraates II acceded as a minor sometime in the period 3/4.4.-27/28.8.132 bc and shared the throne with his mother, Rınnu, for a short period. 18 The young Arsacid prince was probably born not much later than August/September 147 bc. As the daughter of a Median mag-nate (perhaps the head of the Karen family in Ecbatana or Nehavand) it is possible that Mithra-dates took Rınnu as his principal queen when Media Magna and Atropatene fell to the Parthians in late summer – early autumn 148 bc. Although the birth-date of Sinatruces suggests that he too was born after Mithradates I had taken the diadem, the superiority of Phraates’ maternal lineage probably led to his appointment as his father’s heir and successor. This may well have contrib-uted to the internecine confl icts that followed the death of Mithradates II in about September 91 bc, continued almost uninterruptedly for over three centuries and eventually led to the collapse of Arsacid power in about ad 224.

As for Sinatruces’ ‘exile’ among the nomads, our only source is Lucian who claims that the Sacaraucae helped the Parthian prince to secure the throne. But Lucian is silent about when and how Sinatruces ended up living among the Royal Sacae. One possibility is that he was captured after Phraates II was defeated and slain by the steppe invaders 19 in about autumn 127 bc. Alter-natively, he may have disputed the appointment of his younger brother, Phraates, as the heir to the throne and voluntarily gone into exile. If the latter were the case then considering himself a rightful successor of his father, Sinatruces would have played a major role in fomenting troubles around Parthia’s north-eastern frontiers during the reign and following the death of Phraates. A clay tablet from Uruk mentions King Arsaces (Phraates II) and his Queen ? Obolna in month i of year 184 seb (17/18.4.-16/17.5.128 bc). 20 As shown below, the inclusion of a royal consort in the colophon of the Babylonian records from the Parthian period attests to the presence of an active claimant to the throne. Although Obolna’s link with Phraates II remains uncertain because the corresponding text is now lost, her presence in the date-formula may herald the beginning of the Parthian dynastic strife as early as April/May 128 bc. In any case, it is clear that after crushing the king and prince of the « Guti », briefl y reported in a cuneiform text dated October/November 119 bc, 21 Mithradates II made no attempt to secure Sinatruces’ release. It is possible that the Arsac-id ruler viewed Sinatruces as a renegade and largely responsible for the destruction of Parthia’s manpower and resources in futile factional disputes. It may, after all, be due to such bitter rivalry between the two contenders that Sinatruces employs on his coinage neither of the two epithets EPIFANOUS and FILELLHNOS of Mithradates II.

Of the wars between Sinatruces and Mithradates II history records nothing. But the ‘annual’ Susian bronze emissions in Table 1 indicate that Sinatruces captured the city from his rival some-time in 93/92 bc. He may have accomplished his victories in Parthia, Media and Susiana with the aid of a large Saca contingent capable of confronting and defeating the Arsacid forces in several

16 Assar 2005a, 16-29. I have shown that although the Se-leucid usurper Alexander Balas (150-145 bc) was a man of ob-scure antecedents, he employed QEOPATOROS on his tet-radrachms to legitimise his claim as a son of Antiochus IV (175-164 bc). This agrees with the ‘father-son’ link between the two rulers in a lapidary inscription from Athens, list-ing the victors of the two consecutive Panathenaic games in 150/149 and 146/145 bc. A similar harmony between the re-lationship of Artabanus II (c. ad 10-38) and Gotarzes II (c. ad 40-51) is noted in the inscription of the S66.4 drachms and the rock carving at Sar-i Pol-i Zohab in Kirmanshah, Iran. They read « King of Kings Arsaces Gotarzes, called son of Artaba-nus » and « This is the very image of King Gotarzes, son of King Artabanus » respectively. Consequently Sinatruces’ allu-

sion on his S33 drachms to a divinized father must be to the son of Phriapatius in the genealogical record of Phraates III on Nisa ostracon 2640 (Nova 307). Cf. Haruta 1990, 58-59 on the inscription at Sar-i Pol-i Zohab.

17 Assar 2006, 95-98. I have shown that Mithradates I was still alive on 3/4.4.132 bc.

18 Assar 2005b, 44 ; 2006, 95.19 Rawlinson 1873, 139.20 Oelsner 1975, 32 ; 1986, 276, n. « u » ; Weisberg 1991, 16,

no. 43 = A3689 and pl. 107 (copy) ; Del Monte 1997, 248 ; As-sar 2006, 105.

21 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 326-327, no. -118A ; Del Monte 1997, 149-150 ; Assar 2006, 139-140.


22 Sarianidi, Koshelenko 1982, 309 ; Pugachenkova, Rempel 1991, 12 ; Loginov, Nikitin 1996, 51, n. 17. The coin weighs 3.35 grams. Countermarking has obliterated most

of its inscription. What remains reads : « BA »SILE[….] [M]EGA« L »[….] [….]« S »[….] QEP« A » « NI »KAT.

23 Loginov, Nikitin 1996, 51, n. 17.

Table 1. Arrangement of the ‘annual’ Susian Bronze Issues in the Period 93/92-58/57 bc.

Year sem

Yearseb

Yearbc

Ruler Le Riderno.

Sellwoodno.

Comments

220

221222223224225

226227228229230231232233

234235

236237238239240241242243244245246

247248249250251252253254255256

219/220

220/221221/222222/223223/224224/225

225/226226/227227/228228/229229/230230/231231/232232/233

233/234234/235

235/236236/237237/238238/239239/240240/241241/242242/243243/244244/245245/246

246/247247/248248/249249/250250/251251/252252/253253/254254/255255/256

93/92

92/9191/9090/8989/8888/87

87/8686/8585/8484/8383/8282/8181/8080/79

79/7878/77

77/7676/7575/7474/7373/7272/7171/7070/6969/6868/6767/66

66/6565/6464/6363/6262/6161/6060/5959/6858/5757/56

Mithradates IISinatruces

Mithradates III

Orodes I

Arsaces XVI

Phraates III

148170171172173174175161162163164165166167168169176177178149150151152153154155156157158159160184185186187188179180181182183—

28.2333.1333.1633.1733.1833.1533.1931.1631.1731.1831.1931.2031.2131.2231.2331.2434.1034.1134.1230.33

—30.3430.3530.3630.3730.3830.3930.4030.4130.4230.4336.2336.2436.2536.2636.2738.2438.2538.2638.2738.28

—

Mithradates II loses Susa andSinatruces begins his reign in Iran.Mithradates II dies and Gotarzes I begins his reign.

Sinatruces loses Susa to Gotarzes IMithradates III begins his reign.

Orodes I defeats Mithradates III.

Orodes I raids Elymais but loses Susa to Arsaces XVI.

Orodes I is eliminated.

Sinatruces is eliminated.Phraates III at Nisa (180 ae).Phraates III captures Susa.

Arsaces XVI fl ees to the East.

Arsaces XVI is eliminated.

Phraates III is murdered and‘annual’ Susian bronzes end.

combats. This may have required Sinatruces to strike a limited gold issue to pay the steppe troops in his army and fi nance his wars against Mithradates II and his successors.

The style and iconography of a countermarked S33.7 gold variant, unearthed in 1979 by the Sovi-et-Afghan archaeological expedition in Tillya-tepe, 22 indicate that the host coin was minted in the East. Some commentators consider this coin as a gold imitation of Sinatruces’ silver drachms. 23


But the countermark on the gold is identical with the one on S91.1 specimens whose undertype are S33.3 drachms from Rhagae. It also appears on the S33.7 variety from Margiane. 24 These sug-gest that the original silver was coined for Sinatruces in the Central and East Parthian mints. It is possible that an anonymous ruler subsequently applied the countermark to some of the surviving pieces and ensured that the punch with his frontal portrait did not obliterate the royal bust on the obverse of the host coins. Given that the gold and some of the original and countermarked silver specimens share the same style and iconography, it may not be impossible that Sinatruces struck a gold issue to pay the Saca soldiers who helped him secure the Arsacid throne in 93/92 bc.

My proposed date for Sinatruces’ victory against Mithradates II is close to that given to a rath-er vague statement in Josephus (ja, 13.371). Perhaps inspired by the dynastic feud in the Seleucid court, the Parthians are reported to have attacked a certain Laodice, queen of the unknown tribe Galihnw`n or Samhnw`n (Samenian Arabs ?). She appealed to Antiochus X Eusebes Philopator (94-92 bc and possibly 84-83 bc) 25 who went to her aid. Although the Seleucid king fought courageously he was defeated and slain on the fi eld of battle. 26 It is possible that Sinatruces found Mithradates and his fi eld army preoccupied in the West and moved against his opponent at this point in time. But Josephus’ account of the fate of Antiochus X is unfortunately contradicted by other classical sources. Appian (Syrian Wars, 8.49 and 11.69) reports no Parthian incursion into Northern Meso-potamia and states that Antiochus X was deposed by Tigranes II (96-55 bc) after the Armenian king annexed Syria in 83 bc. 27 Eusebius (Chron., i.40.25) too is silent about an Arsacid attack and relates that after contesting the kingdom with Philip I son of Antiochus VIII Grypus, Antiochus X was defeated and fl ed to the Parthians. Later he surrendered to the Roman general, Pompey, hoping to be restored to Syria. However, having received a gift from the inhabitants of Antioch, Pompey ignored Antiochus’ pleas and allowed the city to remain independent. 28 This agrees with Justin (40.2.2-4) who reports that after crushing Tigranes, Lucullus summoned « Antiochus, son of Cyzicenus » to the throne of Syria. However, soon after, Pompey took away what Lucullus had granted. He refused Antiochus’ request to be placed on the Syrian throne arguing that the Seleu-cid prince had simply lurked in a corner of Cilicia during the 18-year reign of Tigranes. He then began to reduce Syria to a Roman province.

It is clear that both Eusebius and Justin confused Antiochus X with his son, Antiochus XIII Eusebes Asiaticus who was negotiating with Pompey in 65/64 bc for his own return to Syria as king. 29 We cannot therefore be sure that Parthian involvements in Northern Mesopotamia around 93/92 bc led to Sinatruces’ victory over Mithradates II.

Sellwood’s systematic studies of the Parthian drachms from the ‘Dark Age’ 30 show that S28 of Mithradates II, S29 of Gotarzes I and S33.3-6 of Sinatruces share the same celator from Rhagae. This agrees with several published and recently discovered coin hoards establishing the proximity of these types while a S33/S28 ‘mule’ (Fig. 4) confi rms that S28 and S33 were contiguous. Com-bined with his silver drachms from the eastern mints and the western workshop in Ecbatana, the abundance and geographical distribution of Sinatruces’ coinage strongly implies that Mithradates II had ceded to him a substantial portion of the Parthian Empire before his own death. Hence Si-natruces’ adoption of the epithet NIKATOROS which, in line with its derivatives NIKHFOROU and NEIKHSAS on other Parthian coins, signifi es a momentous triumph over a great oppo-nent.

There is practically very little else on the reign of Sinatruces apart from the fact that his hold over Susa was tenuous and short-lived. Numismatic evidence and Babylonian records show that he was eventually supplanted in that city in 88/87 bc by Gotarzes I, son and heir of Mithradates II. As discussed below later successors of Mithradates II expelled Sinatruces from the greater part of

24 Ibidem, 41-42, 47 and fi g. 6 : 49-51.25 Grainger 1997, 33-34.26 Marcus 1998, 410-411 ; Bellinger 1949, 74-75.27 White 1999, 196-197 and 236-237. There is some uncer-

tainly over such an early date for the presence of Tigranes

in Syria. Cf. below under Mithradates III for a brief discus-sion.

28 Schoene 1866, 133-134 ; 1875, 261 ; Helm 1984, 150 ; Karst 1911, 123 and 207.

29 Grainger 1997, 34-35. 30 Sellwood 1976, 4.


his conquered territory and confi ned him to the remote north-eastern regions of Parthia. Phl-egon places the death of Sinatruces in 70/69 bc but the Babylonian records suggest that he may have died a few months later in 69/68 bc (cf. below).

Finally, there remains an important contem-porary document whose allocation to Sinatruc-es is no longer tenable. This is the earliest dated accession record from Nisa. It is registered on ostracon 2638 (1760) and inaugurates the enthronement of an Arsacid ruler in 91/90 bc. Given the above proposed descent, requiring a paternal link between Sinatruces and Mithradates I, I had argued elsewhere that King Arsaces of this record was none other than the octogenarian ruler. 31 Although my identifi cation agreed with Sinatruces’ lineage and accession in North-East Parthia sometime in 91/90 bc, it led to complications elsewhere.

The partially reconstructed Aramaic-script Parthian text of ostracon 2638 (1760) reads : 32

Aramaic transliteration :1 ŠNT I C XX XX X III III I ’ršk MLK’ BRY BR« Y(?) ZY(?) Pry »ptk2 BRY ’H_YBRY ZY(?) ’ršk

Parthian transcription :1 sard sad (ud) panïast (ud) haft Aršak šah puhr puh« r(?) če(?) Frya »patak2 puhr baradarza dag če( ?) Aršak

Translation1 Year 157 (ae = 91/90 bc), King Arsaces, son of son (?) of Phriapatius,2 son of the nephew of Arsaces.

As the son of Mithradates I, Sinatruces was indeed a grandson of Phriapatius who was him-self a grand-nephew of Arsaces I. 33 However, while the above text supports Sinatruces’ relation-ship with Phriapatius, its compilation date diff ers from his accession year in Parthia. According to the evidence of ‘annual’ issues in Table 1, Sinatruces held Susa in 93/92 bc and struck his fi rst bronze coinage there before 1 Dios 221 sem (5/6.10.92 bc). This implies that he initially conquered the North-East Parthian territories, including Nisa, then moved west to annex Rhagae and Ec-batana and fi nally turned south to capture Susa. Given that his fi rst Susian bronze corresponds to 93/92 bc, Sinatruces could not have been recognised in Nisa any later than 156 ae (92/91 bc), i.e. a year earlier than the date of the above accession record. Unless we assume that Sinatruces never went as far as Nisa in 93/92 bc and instead overran the central and southern satrapies of Media and Susiana fi rst and then marched north to Nisa, or that he captured Nisa fi rst but de-layed his inauguration until after the death of Mithradates II, 34 the above accession record may

Fig. 4. S33/S28 ‘mule’ silver drachm of Sinatruces-Mithradates II (Sellwood’s Collection).

31 Assar 2003a, 40-41.32 Diakonoff, Livshits 1960a, 20-21 and 113 ; 1960b, 38 ;

Bickerman 1966, 15-17 ; Diakonoff, Livshits 1966, 143-144, n. 28 ; Chaumont 1968, 15 ; 1971, 148 ; Koshelenko 1976, 33-34 ; 1982, 138-139 ; Lukonin 1983, 687-688 ; Bader 1996, 264 ; Dia-konoff, Livshits 1999, pl. 917 ; 2003, 174 ; Assar 2004, 74-75.

33 The reading ZY in lines 1 and 2 are doubtful. Cf. Haru-ta 2004, 141. It is possible that the link between king Ar-saces and Phriapatius in line 1 was given as BRY BRY BRY (son of son of son = great-grandson) rather than BRY npt (son of grandson = great-grandson) to emphasise the gen-der of both the child and grandchild of Phriapatius. Cf. Ger-shevitch 1973, 74-77. Alternatively, it may have been given as BRY followed by a 5- or 6-letters Parthian word for « great-grandson ». The photograph of ostracon 2638 (1760) in Di-akonoff, Livshits 1999, pl. 917 shows a partially preserved text after the fi rst BRY in line 1. It also reveals that there is

enough space for a longer word in the break before Pryptk. The reading « great-grandson » agrees with the genealogy of Gotarzes I. He was the eldest son of Mithradates II who him-self was a grandson of Phriapatius. As for the ZY in line 2, the remaining traces show at least one or possibly two let-ters between the Y in ZY and ’ršk. Haruta 2004, 141 reads a second BRY instead of ZY in this line and translates « son of son of brother of son of ’ršk ». But if BRY ’H_YBRY-BRY ’ršk is confi rmed in this line it may be interpreted as « son of the grandnephew of Arsaces ». This will render Phriapatius the great-grandnephew of Arsaces I.

34 Assar 2006, 146-149. I have shown that Mithradates II died before October 91 bc. It should be pointed out that building upon an earlier error in Minns who had failed to collate the original source and transliterated from a defective copy by Reisner, McDowell claimed that the reign of Mith-radates II ended about October 91 bc. However, the date of


not be ascribed to him. Instead it should be allocated to Gotarzes I who immediately succeeded his father, King of Kings Mithradates II in 91 bc. 35 Especially so if the genealogy on Nisa ostracon 2639 (Nova 366) discussed below turns out to be that of another great-grandson of Phriapatius. 36 This poorly preserved text records the accession of Arsaces XVI, the issuer of S30 coinage, who also styled himself QEOPATOROS and began to reign in 78/77 bc. We know that the achieve-ments of Mithradates II earned him the title SWTHROS « the Saviour/Deliverer » 37 and perhaps led to his posthumous deifi cation. As a son of Mithradates II and therefore a great-grandson of Phriapatius, Arsaces XVI may have adopted the epithet QEOPATOROS to confi rm his link with the Great King of Kings and so justify his own claim to the Parthian throne. Given the discrep-ancy between the date and royal genealogy of Nisa ostracon 2638 (1760) on the one hand and Si-natruces’ lineage and occupation of Susa as early as 93/92 bc on the other, he cannot be the King Arsaces who acceded in 91/90 bc.

Sinatruces’ long reign of about 23 years, 38 overlapping those of Mithradates II and four of his successors, is also supported by the fact that his coins represent the most common type from the ‘Dark Age’. Whether his opponents ever attempted to suppress his coinage systematically can-not be proven because of the absence of overstrikes. 39 Our numismatic evidence confi rms that during his occupation of the eastern satrapies and Media Sinatruces issued coinage on a massive scale and more often than not concurrently with those of his rivals. This gave rise to occasional ‘muling’ with adjacent types. I have presented a handful of such pieces throughout this note and briefl y discussed their historical and chronological implications.

Arsaces XIII-Gotarzes I (August/September 91-July/August 87 bc)

As the Parthian Satrap of Satraps 40 Gotarzes was hailed king in Babylon immediately after the death of his father Mithradates II in August/September 91 bc. At the same time Sinatruces re-mained in overall control of Susa and Central Parthia. With two Arsacid claimants separately but simultaneously on the throne a simple inclusion of the dynastic name Arsaces proved insuffi cient for dating requirements. As a result the Babylonian scribes employed a novel method whereby Gotarzes was named jointly with his royal consort in the colophons of the clay tablets to distin-guish him from Sinatruces. The earliest extant example of this date-formula is in a bilingual prayer text from Babylon dated 6.xii2.221 seb (25/26.3.90 bc). It reads : 41

9 [E]ki ituDIRIG.ŠE U4-6-KÁM MU-1-me-5«7 »-KÁM 10 [šá š]i-i MU-2-me-21-KÁM lAr-šá-ka LUGAL šá <iø>-øár-ri-du 11 [lGu-t]á-ár-za-a u fA-ši-’a-a-ba-tá-ar 12 šá AD DÙK TA A DAM-šú GAŠAN 42

the vat 245 (sbh 46) tablet was mistakenly quoted by Minns as « Tišri 157 (ae) = 221 (seb) », that is September/October 91 bc, and faithfully followed by McDowell. Its correct date is 3.iii.221 seb = 30/31 May 91 bc which is the latest in the series that begins in the second half of year 203 seb (109/108 bc) with the epithet LUGAL LUGALmeš = King of Kings. The original tablet has been collated by Professors Oelsner and Maul (Ruprect-Karls-Universität, Heidelberg) and the month name confi rmed as ituSIG (Simanu). This is clearly legible in the photograph of the tablet. Cf. Reisner 1896, 25 ; Minns 1915, 34, n. 21 and McDowell 1935, 207, n. 17 and 210. Cf. also Oelsner 1975, 44 ; Del Monte 1997, 169, n. 281 and 250-251 for the correct date.

35 Diakonoff, Livshits 1960a, 20-21 (Gotarzes I) and 113 ; 1966, 143-144, n. 28 (Gotarzes I) 38 ; Chaumont 1968, 15-19 (Gotarzes I) ; 1971, 145-159 (Gotarzes I) ; Koshelenko 1976, 33-34 (Gotarzes I) ; 1982, 138-139 (Gotarzes I grandson of Phri-apatius but not son of Mithradates II) ; Bivar 1983, 30-31 (Gotarzes I) ; Frye 1983, 208-210 (Gotarzes I) ; Lukonin 1983, 687-688 (Gotarzes I) ; Bader 1996, 264 (Gotarzes I) ; Lerner 1999, 26-28 (Gotarzes I) ; Haruta 2004, 141 (Gotarzes I).

36 For a possible fraternal link between Artabanus I (son of Phriapatius) and Mithradates II cf. Van der Spek 2001, 353-354. Cf. also Assar 2005b, 52 for a probable father-son rela-tionship between Phriapatius and Mithradates II.

37 Sellwood 1980, 72, S25.1 from Ecbatana and S25.1 var. from Rhagae ; Sellwood 1983a, 284-285.

38 Mørkholm 1980, 44, n. 40 mistakenly ascribes S30 coin-age to Sinatruces although he too concludes that the latter reigned for about 17 years.

39 A unique S33 drachm in Sellwood’s Collection has had the stags and the central horn decoration of the tiara re-moved manually to assimilate it to S29 or S31 drachms.

40 Rawlinson 1873, 260, n. 1, Dittenberger 1903, 641-642, No. 431 ; Herzfeld 1920, 35-40 ; 1932, 80 ; 1935, 54-55 ; Debevoise 1938, 44-45 ; Colledge 1967, 32-33 ; 1977, 89-91 ; Bivar 1983, 41 ; Frye 1983, 215 ; Assar 2006, 143-144.

41 Reisner 1896, ix, no. 51 (vath 265+1728 + two Fragments) and 93 (copy) wrongly gives 155 ae = 221 seb. Recent collation by Professor S. M. Maul (Ruprect-Karls-Universität, Heidel-berg) confi rms year 157 ae = 221 seb ; Minns 1915, 34, Text « h » and n. 22 ; Oelsner 1975, 40-42 ; 1986, 276-277 and n. « w » ; McE-wan 1986, 93 ; Del Monte 1997, 251, all give 157 ae = 221 seb.


9 [Babylon]. Month xii2, day 6, year 157, 10 [which i]s year 221, King Arsaces, who is called 11 Gotarzes and Ashiabatar, 12 « joyous-daughter ? », his wife, the Queen.

However the introduction of the unusual verb form iøøaridu in this and several later records pre-sented diffi culties for modern translators and led to a series of confl icting royal identifi cations in the period 91/90-80/79 bc. A thorough revision of the published literature 43 shows that most Parthian numismatists considered iøøaridu to derive from the verb øara du ‘to expel’. Others off ered several contradictory renditions using alternative verbal roots. 44 As remarked by McEwan,45 if we derive the form from the verb øaradu then iøøaridu would simply imply « (who) is driven out ». This is syntactically and grammatically impossible because iøøaridu precedes the personal names in the corresponding colophons and so renders them as agents of the passive verb. Even an ad sensum translation « (who) has expelled » would be inadmissible due to the anomalies it creates. Firstly it would lead to the highly unconventional expulsion of the associated queen whose name was included to identify the reign of the ruling king only. Secondly in more than one case the title ‘king’ would be given to the expelled ruler rather than the one responsible for the expulsion (cf. under Gotarzes year 225 seb and Orodes I year 232 seb). Thirdly it would defy the very purpose of the date-formula which was strictly to identify both the year of compilation and reign but not to record political events.

Given these diffi culties and the fact that homophonous verbal roots with diff erent meanings are not uncommon in Akkadian language, McEwan justifi ably concluded that the meaning of iøøaridu had to be determined from the context. In fact aside from misreading the word Strassmaier 46 had already remarked in 1891 that « Zur Bedeutung von ustarridu führt vielleicht eine andere Variante, Aršakâ ša šumu-šu Gutarzâ, ‘Arsaces, dessen Beinamen Gutarzâ ist’ ». In other words the form alter-nated in the same context with the phrase « Arsaces whose name is Gotarzes » (cf. below). Luck-ily we now have several records that are unconnected with the Parthian dynastic strife after Mi-thradates II but support McEwan’s proposed interpretation. The fi rst is from month i of 186 seb (28/29.3.-25/26.4.126 bc) and uses the feminine form of øara du to describe a river : 47

17 [x x x]-«si ?»-né-e šá ina ŠÀ ? šá taø-øa-ri-du-u’ ídNa-ag-ra-a E11meš ... ...

17 [.... x]-si ?-ne which is therein which is called river Nagra, they went up. ... ...

The second record, dated month i of 203 seb (17/18.4.-16/17.5.109 bc) concerns another water course whose name has survived only in uncertain traces : 48

B16 [.... šá taø-ø]ar-ri-du íd« x »-[x ....]B16 [.... which is] called river [x ....]

42 The correct interpretation of the uncertain signs at the beginning of this line has so far eluded the Assyriologists. Minns 1915, 34, Text « h » read [uf...]-ša-at amel( ?) tir( ?) and took it as the partial name of a second queen ; Hunger 1968, 56 read šá at LÚ( ?) si a( ?) but gave no translation ; Oelsner 1975, 42 gave šá AD KUR ( ?) UŠ( ?) A with an uncertain meaning ; Del Monte 1997, 251 read šá AD LÙ ? UŠ ? A without trans-lation. Having written to Professors J. Oelsner (in 1998), M. Geller (1998), S. Maul (1999), H. Hunger (1999), G. Del Monte (1999), R. Wallenfels (2000), J. Black (2000), and R. Van der Spek (2005), and received diff erent interpretations (all unfor-tunately uncertain), I suspected that the combined signs may represent a non-Akkadian phrase. As early as 1998, Profes-sor Oelsner had suggested that the third sign may be read as DÙK. Given that the sign before DAM-šú is A, it is possible that the one preceding the latter could have an -a ending. The logogram between DÙK and A very closely resembles TA. If this is correct the uncertain signs may be read as šá-at-dùk-ta-a, probably the Akkadian rendering of the Parthi-an š’t-duxt ‘joyous-daughter’, an appropriate cognomen for an Arsacid princess. Cf. Gignoux 1972, 49 and 64 for BRTY

(Parthian duxt ‘daughter’) and Parthian š’t ( joyous/happy).43 Simonetta 1966, 19, n. 2 (after Ch. Flugge) ; Simonet-

ta 1974, 126-128 ; Dobbins 1975, 20-21, n. 9 (after N. Weeks) ; Sellwood 1976, 24-25 (after M. J. Bottéro) ; Simonetta 2001, 73-74.

44 Oppert 1888, 467 ; Strassmaier 1888, 135 reads it-tar-ri-is with no translation ; Oppert 1889, 511-514 ; Schrader 1890, 1327-1329 ; 1891, 3 ; Minns 1915, 34-35 and 40, n. 53 (after L. W. King) ; Lewy 1944, 202, n. 59 ; Bickerman 1966, 17, n. 18 (after I. Mendelsohn) ; Chaumont 1971, 153-154, n. 1 (after J. A. De-launay) ; Oelsner 1975, 40-42, n. 48 ; 1986, 276-277, n. « w ».

45 McEwan 1986, 92-93.46 Epping, Strassmaier 1891, 222 and 226. For the inter-

pretation « called »/« named » cf. also Herzfeld 1932, 71 ; Debe-voise 1938, 50, n. 82 ; Sachs, Hunger 1996, 260, 262, and 456 ; Del Monte 1996, 4 ; 1997, 136, n. 239 ; Van der Spek 2000, 441-442.

47 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 260-262, no. -125A. Hunger com-ments that « The verb øara du here is probably the one mean-ing ‘to name, call’ ».

48 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 354-355, no. -108B.


The third example unequivocally proves that in late Akkadian vocabulary iøøaridu indeed had the meaning ‘whom they call, (which) is called’. This is found in a text dated 3.ii.131 seb (5/6.5.181 bc) in the reign of Seleucus IV (187-175 bc). It concerns the sale of a one-third share in a house plot which is the property of Anu and designated as « tenured land (bıt-ritti) » : 49

1 l.d60-ŠEŠ.MEŠ.MU A šá lÌR-d« MAŠ » A šá lIl-luø-d60 lúsi-pir NÌG-GA d60 ina hu-ud lìb-bi-« šú » [....] 2 HA-LA-šú gab-bi šá ina É ép-šú NÌG.GA d60 É rit-ti šá lÌR-dMAŠ AD-šú šá ina kap-« ri » 3 šá iø-øa-ri-du kap-ri šá d60 ina KI-tim KÁ.GAL dINANNA šá qé-reb UNUGki ... ...

1 Anu-ah he-iddin, son of Arad-Ninartu, son of Illuø-Anu, parchment scribe of the state of Anu, of his own free will [sold]

2 his entire share of a built-upon house plot, property of Anu, bıt-ritti of Arad-Ninartu, his father, in the village/quarter

3 which is called the village/quarter of Anu, in the district of the Ishtar-gate within Uruk … …

It can be seen that the meaning « (who/which) is called » is well borne out by the above examples that are unconnected with the expulsion of a rival Parthian king. Our list of supporting evidence is now augmented by two further texts from the Seleucid epoch. The fi rst is dated 15.xii.156 seb (1/2.3.155 bc) and subscribed to Demetrius I (162-150 bc). It gives : 50

1 l.d60-ŠEŠ.MEŠ.MU A šá lRi-h at-ki-it-ti-’i A šá l.d60-ŠEŠ.MEŠ.MU lúDÙ-uš-dul-lu IM.HI.A šá É.DINGIRmeš šá UNUKki

2 ina mil-ki šá fAn-tu4-DÙ-at AMA-šú DUMU.MÍ šá l.d60-ŠEŠ.AŠ ina hu-ud lìb-bi-šú É-šú ep-šú É šá imSI.SÁ 3 É.dul-ba-né-šú u É.ru-gu-bu-šú ép-šú NÍG.GA d60 É rit-ti-šú šá ina KI-tim É.IRI10.GAL 4 šá i-qab-bu-ú kap-ri šá É DINGIRmeš UNUGki ... ...

1 Anu-ahhe-iddin, son of Rihat-kittı, son of Anu-ahhe-iddin, a construction worker of the temple of gods of Uruk,

2 with the consent of Antu-banat, his mother, daughter of Anu-ahhe-apli, of his own free will (sold) his built house, the north room,

3 his passageway and his upper story, property of Anu, his bıt-ritti, in the Irigal district, 4 which is called the « quarter of the temple of the gods of Uruk », … …

The date of the second document is lost. But the partial royal name King Anti[ochus] places it before 150 seb (162/161 bc). The relevant text reads : 51

1 lKi-din-d60 A šá lKAR-d60 A šá lKi-din-d60 lúÌ.DU8 NÌG.GA d60 ina hu-ud lìb-bi-šú 2 É-sú ep-šú TÙR u mu-su-ú-šú NÌG.GA d60 É rit-ti-šú šá ina BÀD šá d60 3 šá É-ú « kap »-ri šá É.DINGIR.MEŠ šá qé-reb UNUGki ... ...

1 Kidin-Anu, son of Mušezib-Anu, son of Kidin-Anu, gate-keeper of the property of Anu, of his own free will (sold)

2 his built-upon house plot, yard, and its exit way, property of Anu, his bıt-ritti, which is within the wall of Anu,

3 which is called the « quarter of the temple of the gods », which is within Uruk, … …

The new examples clearly show that both iqabbu and the logogram É-ú in the corresponding texts alternated with iøøaridu in the parallel passage from 131 seb. These leave little doubt about McE-wan’s interpretation of iøøaridu. We can now safely assume that the above record from March 90 bc attests Gotarzes’ association with Queen Ashiabatar52 in Babylon rather than their overthrow.

As shown in Table 1, Gotarzes’ lack of ‘annual’ bronze coins suggests that Sinatruces was fi rmly in control of Susa during the period 93/92-88/87 bc.53 The former in turn inaugurated his reign

49 Weisberg 1991, pls. 48-49, no. 22 ; Doty 1993-1994, 114 transliteration without translation ; Del Monte 1996, 4 par-tial transliteration and translation.

50 Schroeder 1916, 34-35, no. 27 (vat 9171, hand-copy only) ; Del Monte 1996, 4 partial transliteration and translation. I am grateful to Professors Del Monte and R. Wallenfels for their comments on the transliteration and translation of the text.

51 Doty 1977, 41 (ncbt 1945) ; 2006 (in press).52 The name has an uncertain etymology but could well

be Iranian. Cf. Minns 1915, 39, n. 47.53 Le Rider 1965, pl. xv : 146.4 bronze has an obverse bust

resembling Gotarzes I on his silver coinage while its reverse inscription and symbol are identical with those on S28.20 of Mithradates II. This is either an issue of Mithradates II with a slightly diff erent obverse bust or one of Gotarzes when


by striking a series of tetradrachms at Seleucia on the Tigris (S32.1). 54 These are known from four examples that turned up in a huge hoard of Greek and Parthian coins unearthed around 1955 in North-East Iran. 55 They depict on their obverse (Fig. 5) the effi gy of a rather aged monarch in a tiara deco-rated with a central star similar to the one worn by Mithradates II (S28.3). But while copying his father’s earlier titles, Gotarzes introduces into his tit-ulature a new epithet, EUERGETOU. Hence the inscription BASILEWS MEGALOU ARSA-KOU EPIFANOUS FILELLHNOS EUERGETOU on his S32 tetradrachms.

Gotarzes’ drachms (S29.1-3) on the other hand employ the title « King of Kings ». 56 They also drop MEGALOU and add DIKAIOU to the string of honorifi c royal designations (Figs. 6-7). The latter was perhaps intended to justify Gotarzes’ claim to the Parthian throne.

The extant material shows that Gotarzes’ drachms almost exclusively emanated from the two major mints in Ecbatana and Rhagae although a small number of specimens from East Parthian workshops have also come to light (Fig. 8). These copy the obverse bust of the S32.1 tetradrachms while their inscriptions read BASILEWS BASILEWN ARSAKOU DIKAIOU EUERGETOU KAI FILELLH-NOS. The presence of the vainglorious title « King of Kings » on Gotarzes’ drachms had led the majority of previous authors to attribute them to Mithradates I, Mithradates II and Mi-thradates III (son of Mithradates II).57 Similarly his tetradrachms were ascribed to kings rang-ing from an « Unknown King I » to Mithradates II, « Arsaces Euergetes, 88/87 bc » and Mithra-dates III (son of Mithradates II). 58 Given the ev-idence of hoards and Sellwood’s sequence of Parthian die engravers there is little doubt that

he liberated Susa from Sinatruces in 87 bc. The bottom and left-hand side lines of the inscription on the reverse of this bronze have to be examined to ascertain whether or not they read MEGALOU and EPIFANOUS.

54 Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 116 suggest similar attribu-tion.

55 Thompson et alii 1973, 261-262, no. 1814 (Gombad) ; Mørkholm 1980, 35. It is known that a substantial portion of the hoard was melted down. The original fi nd may have included other types and more specimens of the currently rare issues. The reported fi gures must be treated with cau-tion.

56 Mørkholm 1980, 35 states that « while the drachms were struck in Iran, the tetradrachms were issued at Seleucia, and analogies from the Seleucid coinage exist in abundance to show that diff erent mints did not always follow the same lines as regards the royal titulature ». It is also noteworthy

that Gotarzes is consistently styled LUGAL (King) in the con-temporary Babylonian colophons.

57 Gardner 1877, 30, no. 28 (Mithradates I) ; Wroth 1903, 35-36, nos. 117-120 (Mithradates II) ; Petrowicz 1904, 31, nos. 77-79 (Mithradates I) ; Newell 1938, 480 and pl. 141.L (Mith-radates II) ; Sellwood 1971, 75 (Mithradates II) ; 1976, 6 (Mith-radates II) ; Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 116 (Gotarzes I) ; Sell-wood 1980, 84 (Mithradates II) ; 1983a, 285 (Mithradates II) ; Simonetta 2001, 95 (Mithradates III son of Mithradates II ?).

58 Sellwood 1971, 87-88 (« Unknown King I ») ; Thompson et alii 1973, 262 (Mithradates II) ; Simonetta 1974, 117 (Arsaces Euergetes, 88/87 bc) ; Dobbins 1975, 25-26 (Mithradates II) ; Simonetta 1975, 77 (Arsaces Euergetes, 88/87 bc) ; Sellwood 1976, 5 and 7 (« Unknown King I ») ; Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 116 (Gotarzes I) ; Mørkholm 1980, 35 (Mithradates II) ; Sell-wood 1980, 93-94 (« Unknown King I ») ; 1983a, 287 (« Unknown King I ») ; Dilmaghani 1986, 217-218 (Mithradates II) ; Simonet-ta 2001, 95 (Mithradates III, son of Mithradates II ?).

Fig. 5. S32.1 silver tetradrachm of Gotarzes Ifrom Seleucia on the Tigris.

Fig. 6. S29.1 silver drachm of Gotarzes Ifrom Ecbatana (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 7. S29.2 var. silver drachm of Gotarzes Ifrom Rhagae (Author’s Collection).


both denominations were issued by Gotarzes. 59 It is also noteworthy that the Characenean rul-er Tiraios I minted at least two consecutive tet-radrachms 60 in his own name in 222 and 223 sem (24/25.9.91 -6/7.4.89 bc). He had begun issuing coins under Mithradates II in 218 sem. 61 Perhaps Gotarzes allowed Tiraios to remain a Parthian vassal and continue his coinage for local use. This may explain the inclusion of « King of Kings » in Gotarzes’ titulature on his drachms.

Alternatively, it is likely that Gotarzes inherited this epithet from his father Mithradates II and used it in opposition to Sinatruces’ authority.

Our scanty cuneiform material gives patchy references to the political circumstances of the reign of Gotarzes. We have therefore no knowledge of his possible clashes with Sinatruces in Cen-tral and Eastern Parthia. But we do get glimpses of the situation in Babylonia and Susiana. These suggest a prolonged struggle between the two rivals. The earliest reference to military manoeu-vres in the southern satrapies is from month x in 221 seb (21/22.12.91-19/20.1.90 bc). It indicates a possible siege of the city of Susa : 62

48´ … … That month 49´ [I heard that Mitratu (Mithrates)] the chief of the troops, departed on the other side of the Tigris

as before.

The text then continues on the reverse of the tablet and gives :

1 [....] departed [to the] surroundings of Susa. A reduction of equivalent happened in this city Susa. That day I heard [that ….]

It is evident that apart from reporting certain troop movements in the vicinity of Susa, the above record also refers to « a reduction of equivalent » in that city. This term was explicitly used by the Babylonian scribes to record price rises of the basic commodities and the consequent drop in the buying power of a silver shekel (about two drachms but not a Parthian denomination). 63 Although causes other than war or long siege may have induced such fl uctuations, a connection in this par-ticular case between the presence of an army around Susa and the crisis in that city seems inevi-table. There is also a further incomplete report 64 on military activities under the same Parthian « chief of the troops » in month xi of 221 seb (20/21.1.-17/18.2.90 bc). This happened around the city of Kar-Aššur, 65 built by the Assyrian ruler Tiglath-Pileser III (744-727 bc) probably in the Diyala re-gion 66 northeast of present day Baghdad. These practically sum up the ‘historical notices’ in the Astronomical Diary fragments down to month xii in 224 seb (15/16.2.-15/16.3.87 bc). The extant col-ophons in this same period continue to mention Gotarzes and Ashiabatar in broken context, con-fi rming the on-going rivalry between Gotarzes and Sinatruces. 67 However, we now have enough

59 Sellwood 1976, 4 and 18-19 engravers C and E from Ecbatana and Rhagae. Several recent hoards containing S27, S28, S29, and S33 drachms exclusively, have confi rmed Sell-wood’s proposed sequence of types. Mørkholm 1980, 35 and 43-45 attributes the issue to Mithradates II but perceptively places it before the S31 coinage on stylistic and iconographi-cal grounds and also engravers’ sequence.

60 Hill 1922, cxcvii and pl. liv : 3 ; Le Rider 1959, 234 and 251.

61 Assar 2006, 141.62 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 438-439, no. -90. The restoration

of « Mitratu » in line 49 of the obverse text is secure since this « chief of the troops » is attested in month viii of the same Astronomical Diary and remains active until at least month iv of 228 seb (9/10.7.-7/8.8.84 bc). Cf. ibidem, 474-475, no. -83, Rev. 17 and 19.

63 Sachs, Hunger 1988, 34. The basic commodities report-

ed in the Astronomical Diaries are barley, dates, mustard, cress, sesame, and wool.

64 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 440-441, no. -90, Rev. 18.65 Van der Spek 1997-1998, 174.66 Adams 1965, 58-68.67 For a text dated 16.xii.221 seb cf. Kessler 2000, 223-224,

no. 17. For 223 seb cf. Epping, Strassmaier 1891, 226 (partial transliteration) and 235 (partial copy) ; Kugler 1924, 447, no. 22 ; McEwan 1986, 93 ; Sachs, Hunger 1996, 442-445, no. -88A ( joined by myself to BM 41479 = lbat 869) ; Del Monte 1997, 171. For the one dated 14.iv.224 seb cf. Epping, Strassmaier 1891, 226, Rm 844, and 230 (copy) ; Minns 1915, 35, no. « i » ; Ku-gler 1924, 447, no. 23 ; Del Monte 1997, 253, read i-ø[ár-ri-du] for MU-šú at the end of line 2 ; Oelsner 1971, 165 ; 1986, 195-196 ; Van der Spek 2000, 441-442. For 224 seb cf. Sachs, Hun-ger 1996, 450-457, no. -87C ; Del Monte 1997, 172.

Fig. 8. S29.1 var. silver drachm of Gotarzes I from an East Parthian mint (Author’s Collection).


evidence to show that before the end of his reign Gotarzes prevailed against Sinatruces and ex-pelled him from Susa and the greater part of his kingdom. The fi rst clue relates to Gotarzes’ con-nection with the Armenian Royal House as the son-in-law of Tigranes II. This can be gleaned from the opening lines of the oldest of the three parchments discovered in a stone jar about 1909 in the village of Avroman in Kurdistan, Iran. It reportedly contained many more texts from the Parthian period now lost.68 The relevant lines of Avroman I sale contract give :

1 basileuvonto~ basilevwn jArsavkou eujergevtou dikaivou ejpifa- 2 nou`~ kai; filevllhno~ kai; basilissw`n Siavkh~ tw th`~ oJmopatriva~ 3 aujtou` ajdelfh`~ kai; gunaiko;~ kai; Aruazavth~ th`~ ejpikaloumevnh[~] 4 Aujtoma; th`~ ejg basilevw~ megavlou Tigravnou kai; gunaiko;~ aujto[ou`] 5 kai; jAzavth~ th`~ oJmopatriva~ aujtou` ajdelfh`~ kai; gunaikov~ e[tou~ EKS 6 mhno;~ ÆApellaivou, ... ...

1 In the reign of the King of Kings, Arsaces, the Benefi cent, the Just, the Mani- 2 fest and the Philhellene, and of the Queens, Siake, his compaternal 3 sister and wife, and Aryazate surnamed 4 Automa, daughter of the Great King Tigranes, and his wife, 5 and of Azate, his compaternal sister and wife, in the year 225, 6 in the month Apellaios, ... ...

It should be emphasised that the single date of this and the other Greek documents of the Parthian period are according to the Macedonian version of the Seleucid Era. 69 Nevertheless some com-mentators have argued that Avroman parchment I was dated by Arsacid Era, that is 23/22 bc in the reign of Phraates IV. 70 I have shown elsewhere that single dates in both the Greek documents and the Babylonian cuneiform tablets of the Parthian epoch are always according to the Seleucid Era. 71 Given that the imperial designations in Avroman I text agree with no other Parthian king’s epithets prior to the reign of Orodes II except Gotarzes I it is possible that the contract was reg-istered under the latter.

The above date-formula unequivocally confi rms that Tigranes II was still an ally of the Parthian king as late as Apellaios 225 sem (19/20.10.-17/18.11.88 bc) ; his daughter, Queen Aryazate, is diplo-matically placed in the royal titulary between Gotarzes’ two sister-wives Siake and Azate. 72 Lu-cian (Makrobioi, 15) states that « Tigranes, King of Armenia, with whom Lucullus warred, died of illness at the age of eighty-fi ve ». 73 This places the birth of the Armenian ruler around 140 bc. He was thus fi fty-two years old in 88 bc and could have had a marriageable daughter for the son of his old ally Mithradates II « King of Kings » of Parthia. However, Gotarzes’ Queen Ashiabatar of the cuneiform records cannot be identifi ed with any of the names in this parchment. 74 While there is no proof for the geographical dispersal of the royal consorts in Parthian courts, it is possible that the three queens of the Avroman parchment I were resident in the imperial court at Ecbatana in Media while Ashiabatar was the principal queen of the royal palace at Babylon. 75

The last historical reference to Gotarzes in the extant records is dated 3.xii.224 seb (17/18.2.87 bc). It refers to a possible ambush on an unknown enemy : 76

30 U4-3 kušSARmeš šú-nu-tú ina É-IGI-DU8-A šá-su-ú ak-ka-’i-i šá lŠá-a-[....]31 lAr-šá-« ka » LUGAL šá MU-šú lGu-tár-za ŠUB-ut-šú-nu-tú u ina MÍ.KÚR NÍmeš-šú-[nu ....]32 DIB-u’ ana lAs-pa-as-ta-nu lúGAL ú-qa šá ina A-ŠÀ-šú-nu UD LUL ’ UD [....]

30 day 3, these leather documents were read in the House of Observation. According to Ša[….]

68 Minns 1915, 22, 28-29, and 30.69 Ibidem, 33 ; Tarn 1932, 586, n. 2 ; Debevoise 1938, 47, n.

70 ; Assar 2003, 176-177.70 Rostovtzeff 1931, 41-42.71 Assar 2003, 176-186.72 Appian (Mithradatic Wars, 3.15 and 3.17) reports that be-

fore the fi rst wars between Rome and Pontus in about Ol. 173 (88/87- 85/84 bc), Mithradates VI boasted of having Ti-granes of Armenia as his son-in-law and Arsaces of Parthia

as his ally. This suggests an amicable relationship between the three rulers at that juncture. Cf. White 1999, 264-265 and 268-269. Cf. also Samuel 1972, 224 on the Julian dates of Ol-ympiad years. 73 Harmon 1996, 235.

74 She was simply Gotarzes’ wife whereas, as well as be-ing his wives, Siake and Azate were his compaternal sisters while Aryazate was daughter of Tigranes.

75 Minns 1915, 39, n. 47.76 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 454-455, no. -87C.


31 King Arsaces, whose name is Gotarzes, fell on ? them, and in enmity among them-selves [….]32 they seized. To Aspastanu, the general, who in their fi elds, …. [….]

We then have, to the right of the mon-ument of Mithradates II at Bısitun, a scene of equestrian combat depicting a mounted page on the left, the victori-ous lance-wielding king crowned by a fl ying Nike in the centre, and a stum-bling and defeated knight to the right.

Above the royal fi gure and in a somewhat cursive Greek is an inscription 77 giving the name GW-TARSH� GEOPOQRO� « Gotarzes son of Gev ».

Having no knowledge of an earlier king Gotarzes, Herzfeld identifi ed the central fi gure with Gotarzes II (c. ad 40-51) celebrating a victory over his antagonist Meherdates. 78 However, a good deal of Parthian history is narrated by Firdousı in his Sha hna meh, ‘Epic of the Kings’ where ech-oes of combats between rival Arsacid magnates are frequently found. In one particular passage we note a battle between the two paladins Šunøarh and Gev. 79 The former has been correctly identi-fi ed with Sinatruces 80 and the latter taken to be the famous ‘son’ of a certain Gudarz (Gotarzes II) who succeeded Vardanes I (c. ad 40-45) on the throne. 81 This is hardly tenable since the in-scription is quite clear about the father-son relationship between Ge v and Gotarzes. Considering that apart from a personal name Gev and its probable derivatives ‘Gav’ and ‘Gav’ can also act as adjectives meaning ‘Great/Mighty’, an ad sensum translation of GWTARSH� GEOPOQRO� gives « Gotarzes son of the Great (One) ». This in turn leads to the identifi cation of Gotarzes with the son and successor of Mithradates II « the Great King of Kings » whose authority was indeed challenged by Sinatruces.82 The monument may therefore commemorate the victory of King Gotarzes I over his rival.

The latest Babylonian colophon mentioning Gotarzes and Queen Ashiabatar is dated 1.i.225 seb (15/16.4.87 bc) : 83

1 « U4 »-1-KÁM IGI-DU8-Ameš « DIB »-qameš u AN-KU10

meš šá MU-1-me-1-šù-1-KÁM2 šá ši-i MU-2-me-25-KÁM lAr-šá-ka-a šá iø-øár-ri-du3 lGu-« tár »-za-a LUGAL u fA- ši-’a-a-ba-tá-ar-a DAM-šú SAL-GAŠAN4 kun-nu-’u

1 Day 1 (of month i), appearances, passings, and eclipses for year 161,2 which is year 225, Arsaces, who is called3 King Gotarzes, and Ashiabatar, his wife, the Queen,4 have been established

We also have Gotarzes’ silver drachms from the mint of Margiane and perhaps even those in Areia and Traxiane (cf. above). These extend his authority as far as the North and East Parthian satrapies. Given the textual and numismatic evidence and Gotarzes’ association with Tigranes, it is possible that just before his reign ended in some unknown circumstances Gotarzes terminated Sinatruces’ hold over Susa and the central and eastern provinces of the Empire. It is therefore of

77 Rawlinson 1873, 260, n. 1 ; Dittenberger 1903, 642-643 ; Herzfeld 1920, 40-42 ; 1935, 56 ; Colledge 1977, 90-91 ; Bivar 1983, 41-44.

78 Herzfeld 1935, 56-57 ; Colledge 1977, 91.79 Aliev et alii 1965, 136.80 Shahbazi 1993, 155.81 Coyajee 1932, 211-212. The rock inscription at Sar-i Pol-i

Zohab in Kirmanshah, Iran, reads « This is the very image of King Gotarzes, son of King Artabanus ». It confi rms the fa-

ther-son relationship between Artabanus II (c. ad 10-38) and Gotarzes II and thus rules out the ascription of the Bısitun record to the same Gotarzes. Cf. Haruta 1990, 58-59.

82 Assar 2006, 145-147.83 Epping, Strassmaier. 1891, 222 partial copy and translit-

eration ; Schrader 1891, 3-6 ; Minns 1915, 35, no. « j » ; Kugler 1924, 447, no. 24 ; Sachs 1955, xxvi, lbat **1295 = cbs 17 (Goal-Year Text for 225 seb) ; McEwan 1986, 93. Cf. Sachs 1948, 282-285 on the Goal-Year Texts.

Fig. 9. S31.2 silver tetradrachm of Mithradates IIIfrom Seleucia on the Tigris.


little surprise that as the sole claimant to the dynastic title the next ruler dispensed with the dou-ble-naming in the royal titulary and styled himself King Arsaces.

Arsaces XIV-Mithradates III ( July/August 87-August/September 80 bc)

As a chronologically outstanding document the BM 41018 cuneiform fragment has retained the only extant reference to the enthronement of a Parthian king. 84 Originally this would have been a short Diary containing the astronomical elements and perhaps brief historical notices in the fi rst six months of the year 225 seb (15/16.4.-8/9.10.87 bc). But in spite of the loss of all its useful dates, enough lunar and planetary data remains to allow the text to be dated precisely. The month with most informa-tion is on the reverse of the fragment and includes a reference to the Halley’s Comet that, according to our modern computations, reached perihelion on 6 August 87 bc. 85 This has been identifi ed as the fi fth month and hence the one preceding it would be the fourth. Of the latter only four incomplete lines of text remain. The last two of these almost cer-tainly give the terminus post quem of the reign of Gotarzes I’s successor :

3 [.... ITU BI U4-x-KÁM al-te-me šá lMi-it-ra-a-øu lúGAL.GAL] « ú ? »-qa-an ina a-hu-ul-la-a4 [šá ídIDIGNA ? GIM IGI-ú TUH-ir U4 BI lAr-šá-ka-a LUGAL ina] gišGU.ZA-šú ú-šib

3 […. That month, on the xth day, I heard that Mitratu, the chief of] troops on the other side4 [of the Tigris ? departed as before. That day, King Arsaces] sat on his throne.

I should add that Mitratu (Mithrates), the Parthian army commander, can be securely restored in line 3 of this text. He is attested in the cuneiform material as early as month viii of 221 seb (23/4.10.-22/2.11.91 bc) and until at least month iv of 228 seb (9/10.7.-7/8.8.84 bc). 86 But my pro-posed amended text of the next line requires further clarifi cation.

The scanty cuneiform documents of the Achaemenid and Seleucid epochs show that the phrase sat on his throne indeed signifi es a royal accession. A generic form sat on the throne is given for the change of reign from Artaxerxes II (404-359 bc) to Artaxerxes III (359-338 bc) and also for the ac-cession of the latter’s son, Arses (338-336 bc). 87 The same term is later used in a Babylonian King List when Antiochus III (222-187 bc), Seleucus IV (187-175 bc) and Antiochus IV (175-164 bc) take the diadem. 88 Furthermore, a short text from month iii of 188 seb ( June 124 bc) reports that fol-lowing the death of Hyspaosines his wife made one small boy, his son, sit on the royal throne. 89 These strongly indicate that the statement at the end of line 4 in the above incomplete text too reports the inauguration of a new reign.

The sequence of the ‘annual’ issues in Table 1 shows that following the expulsion of Sinatruc-es in 88/87 bc the next Parthian ruler began minting his S31.16-24 bronzes in Susa. Given the nu-mismatic evidence and the attested Achaemenid, Seleucid and Characenean accession records, it is highly likely that the above fragmentary text from month iv of 225 seb registers the enthrone-ment in July/August 87 bc of the issuer of S31 coinage.

As for the restoration of King Arsaces in the same line, the extant records from years 226-229 and 231 seb show that the longer formula, giving the personal name of the ruler and his associated queen, ceased during the reign of Arsaces XIV. 90 It is possible that with the threat of Sinatruces

84 Hunger et alii 1985, 36-40 ; Sachs, Hunger 1996, 458-459, no. -86A ; Del Monte 1997, 173.

85 Yeomans, Kiang 1981, 643-644.86 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 434-435, no. -90 (221 seb), Obv. 15 ;

474-475, no. -83 (228 seb), Rev. 17 and 19.87 Hunger, Sachs 2001, 42 and 45.

88 Sachs, Wiseman 1954, 204 and 207-209.89 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 282-283, no. -123A (188 seb).90 For year 226 seb cf. Reisner 1896, ix, no. 55 (vath

294+586+2174+Fragment) and 155 (copy), who wrongly gives 163 ae = 226 seb ; Minns 1915, 35, no. « l » and n. 27 ; Oelsner 1975, 45 gives 162 ae = 226 seb ; collation by Professor S. M.

Fig. 10. S31.6 silver drachm of Mithradates III from Rhagae (Author’s Collection).


abated there was no serious opposition to the authority of the new king and hence a simple date-formula giving the throne name alone was suffi cient for royal identifi cation. We do, however, fi nd the personal name of Arsaces XIV in a passage by Josephus (ja, 13.384-386). 91 This pertains to the struggle between the two Seleucid contenders, Philip I Philadelphus (93-83 bc) and Demetrius III Eucaerus Philopator (96-87 bc). Josephus writes that when Demetrius III besieged his brother in Beroea (modern Aleppo in Syria) east of Antioch, the governor of that city summoned aid from an Arab phylarch called Azizus and the Parthian governor Mithradates Sinaces. 92 Demetrius then found his camp encircled and eventually surrendered. He was taken to the Parthian ruler called Mithradates who treated him with honour until his death from an illness. Although Josephus of-fers no specifi c date for the fi nal battle, Demetrius’ defeat and capture can be placed in 88/87 bc because his last coins were minted at Damascus in 225 sem. 93

Having no knowledge of the accession year of Gotarzes I after the death of his father Mithradates II about August/September 91 bc, previous authors 94 had argued that it was the Parthian King of Kings who received Demetrius III. However, with the date of the demise of Mithradates II now fi rmly decid-ed, we are assured that the hapless Seleucid mon-arch was delivered to a later King Mithradates who ascended the Arsacid throne in July/August 87 bc. 95 I have shown below that he too was probably a son

of Mithradates II and that he usurped the throne from Orodes I, son and heir of Gotarzes I and perhaps the grandson of Tigranes II of Armenia. This led to a further feud in the Arsacid court and ended with the overthrow of Mithradates III in Babylon in August/September 80 bc and his fi nal expulsion from Susa shortly afterwards.

The coinage of Mithradates III (S31) has on its obverse the bust of a middle-aged man in a ti-ara similar to that worn by Mithradates II (S28.3) and decorated in the centre with a six or eight pointed star (Figs. 9-11). Its reverse legend reads BASILEWS MEGALOU ARSAKOU AUTO-KRATOROS FILOPATOROS EPIFANOUS FILELLHNOS. Although the epithet AUTO-KRATOROS may signify Mithradates’ absolute and despotic reign it also suggests that he may not have been a natural successor of Gotarzes I. 96 The earliest attestation of the title « Autocrat » in the Parthian series is on the fi rst coinage of Arsaces I whose inscription reads ARSAKOU AUTOKRATOROS. It is now generally accepted that the founder of the Parthian dynasty struck his S1.1 and S2.1 drachms after invading Parthia in 238 bc and slaying the resident satrap Andra-goras. The latter had revolted from allegiance to his Seleucid overlords about 246 bc.97 The same title was adopted by the Seleucid usurper Diodotus Tryphon (142/141-139/138 bc). Having prob-ably murdered Antiochus VI (144-142 bc) son of Alexander Balas (150-145 bc) Tryphon took the di-

Maul (Ruprect-Karls-Universität, Heidelberg) confi rms year 162 ae = 226 seb. For a further colophon dated 226 seb cf. Re-isner 1896, viii, no. 27 (vath 573) who mistakenly gives year 162 ae = 206 seb, and 54 (copy) ; Minns 1915, 35, no. « l » and n. 27 ; Oelsner 1975, 44 ; collation by Professor S. M. Maul confi rms 226 seb. For 227 seb cf. Sachs 1955, 201, lbat 1300 (Goal-Year Text for 245 seb, lunar paragraph, 245 – 18 = 227 seb) ; and BM 32486, unpublished hemerology text. For 228 seb cf. Epping, Strassmaier 1890, 355-357 transliteration and translation of Venus paragraph ; 1891, 229 (copy) ; Kugler 1924, 447, no. 25 ; Sachs 1955, xxvi, lbat 1296+**1297 (Goal-Year Text for 236 seb, Venus paragraph, 236 – 8 = 228 seb). For 229 seb cf. Sachs, Hunger 1996, 474-477, no. -82A ; Del Monte 1997, 175-176. For 231 seb cf. Sachs 1955, 227, lbat 1444 report of lunar eclipse of 14.i.231 seb ; Hunger, Sachs 2001, 70-73, no. 24.

91 Marcus 1998, 418-421. As indicated in n. 34 above, hav-

ing used an erroneous date McDowell concluded that Mith-radates II died about October 91 bc. He then suggested that « King Mithradates » mentioned by Josephus may have been a son of Mithradates II. Cf. McDowell 1935, 206-210 and n. 18.

92 Strabo (16.1.23) refers to a place called Sinnaca in North-ern Mesopotamia where Crassus was slain after surrender-ing to Surena, the Parthian general under Orodes II. Cf. Jones 2000b, 230-231. It is possible that Mithradates Sinaces was stationed in the city Sinnaca.

93 Newell 1939, 82, nos. 130-131 ; Houghton, Spaer 1998, 378-382.

94 Gardner 1877, 7 ; Debevoise 1938, 49-50 ; Simonetta 1957, 115 ; Sellwood 1962, 73 ; Le Rider 1965, 391 ; Simonetta 1966, 20, n. 1 ; Sellwood 1976, 6 ; Bivar 1983, 42.

95 Assar 2000, 16-18 ; 2006, 145-149.96 Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 108.97 Abgarians, Sellwood 1971, 115-118.

Fig. 11. S31.9 silver drachm of Mithradates III from Margiane (Author’s Collection).


adem and styled himself BASILEWS TRUFWNOS AUTOKRATOROS on his coins struck at Antioch, Ake-Ptolemais, and Ascalon. 98 Over a century later the Parthian interloper Tiridates (c. 29-27 bc) temporarily deposed Phraates IV (c. 38-32 bc), took the crown and minted a series of tet-radrachms inscribed with BASILEWS BASILEWN ARSAKOU EUERGETOU EPIFANOUS FILELLHNOS FILORWMAIOU AUTOKRATWR (sic). 99 These Arsacid and Seleucid exam-ples clearly show that in each case the right to rule as king had been usurped by the coin issuer rather than inherited. It is therefore likely that as the son of Mithradates II King of Kings, Mi-thradates III too disputed the succession from Gotarzes I to his son Orodes I and arrogated the Parthian crown to himself.

As for the paternal relationship between Mithradates II and Mithradates III the epithet FILOPATOROS indicates that the latter had an illustrious father. Although there is nothing defi nitive on the link between Mithradates III and his immediate predecessors, it may be safe to assume that he was a son of Mithradates II 100 rather than Gotarzes I. He could therefore be the second fi gure among the four dignitaries paying homage to the King of Kings in the Bısitun monument. 101

The bulk of Mithradates’ drachms come from the two major Parthian mints of Ecbatana and Rhagae (S31.5-8). But examples from Margiane (S31.9) and perhaps Areia 102 have also turned up. Given the absence of long colophon dates naming the reigning Arsaces and his consort, Mithra-dates’ drachms from the northern and eastern provinces indicate that he held sway over the whole of the Empire from the outset of his reign. It should nonetheless be pointed out that ear-lier scholars had allocated his coinage to a variety of rulers notably Gotarzes I, Sinatruces, Orodes I, « Arsaces IX », and an « Unknown King ». 103 Thanks to Sellwood’s arrangement of the Parthian drachms of the ‘Dark Age’ 104 and Mørkholm’s sequence of the tetradrachms 105 from the same period the S31 series can now be placed immediately after the coinage of Gotarzes I and hence securely attributed to Mithradates III.

However, a S33/S31 ‘mule’ bronze drachm (Fig. 12) weighing 4.65 grams 106 suggests that the reigns of Sinatruces and Mithradates III overlapped at some point in time. But lack of Babylonian colophons naming Mithradates III and his queen in-dicates that he was not challenged by Sinatruces until probably the fi nal year of his reign. The ‘mule’ could simply have been struck in an East Parthian mint at the beginning of Mithradates’ reign and immediate-ly after Gotarzes’ crushing defeat of Sinatruces in 87 bc. On the other hand, it may have been minted in about 80 bc when Orodes I mounted an off en-sive against Mithradates III and ultimately overthrew him. As shown further, following the demise of Mi-thradates III the Babylonian scribes initially reverted to naming Orodes I and his sister-queen Ispubarza. They then dropped his personal name but re-tained his royal consort in their date-formulas during the remaining years of Orodes’ reign. This

98 Houghton 1983, 16, 79, 82 and pls. 15.245-263, 47.800 and 48.816-817 ; Houghton, Spaer 1998, 246-249.

99 Sellwood 1980, 179-181, S55.7-9.100 Assar 2000, 16-18 ; 2003a, 47-52.101 Rawlinson 1873, 260, n. 1 ; Dittenberger 1903, 641-642,

no. 431 ; Herzfeld 1920, 35-40 ; 1932, 80 ; 1935, 54-55 ; Debevoise 1938, 44-45 ; Colledge 1977, 89-91 ; Bivar 1983, 41 ; Assar 2003a, 48 ; 2006, 143-144.

102 Shore 1993, 108, no. 126.103 Gardner 1877, 35-36 (Sinatruces) ; Wroth 1903, 42-44

(Sinatruces) ; Petrowicz 1904, 45-46 (Sinatruces) ; Newell 1938, 481 (Sinatruces) ; Simonetta 1957, 118-121 (Sinatruces) ; Sellwood 1962, 80-81 (Orodes I) ; Le Rider 1965, 959-960 (Si-

natruces) ; Sellwood 1965, 133 (Orodes I) ; 1966, 22 and 39 (Si-natruces) ; 1971, 83-86 (Orodes I) ; Dobbins 1974, 65 and 68-69 (Gotarzes I) ; Simonetta 1974, 122 and 136 (Gotarzes I) ; Do-bbins 1975, 41-42 (Gotarzes I) ; Simonetta 1975, 77 (Gotarzes I) ; Sellwood 1976, 5 (Orodes I) ; Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 116 (Sinatruces) ; Mørkholm 1980, 40 and 45 (Arsaces IX) ; Sellwood 1980, 90-92 (Orodes I) ; 1983a, 286 (Orodes I) ; Dil-maghani 1986, 218 (« Unknown King ») ; Shore 1993, 107-108 (Orodes I) ; Simonetta 2001, 100 and 105 (Sinatruces).

104 Sellwood 1976, 4-9.105 Mørkholm 1980, 35.106 Loginov, Nikitin 1996, 41, 44 and fi g. 3 : 18.

Fig. 12. S33/S31 ‘mule’ bronze drachmof Sinatruces-Mithradates III from

an East Parthian mint (Author’s Collection).


strongly suggests that Sinatruces had taken advantage of the struggle between Mithradates and Orodes in the West, proclaimed himself king in the East and resumed his coinage. Assuming that Parthian mints continued to issue drachms for the Arsacid claimants simultaneously, it is possible that the S33/S31 ‘mule’ was struck from a mistakenly paired set of dies about 80 bc.

The cuneiform fragments from the reign of Mithradates III are quite uninformative. One of these probably refers to the departure of the satrap of Babylonia or the chief of troops to Me-dia in month vii of 225 seb (9/10.10.-6/7.11.87 bc). But there are no indications of the purpose of the journey. 107 We then have the mutilated historical section in month viii of the same year. It reports unhappiness in broken context although the reason for this is now entirely lost. However, the colophon text of a tablet from year 227 seb (23/24.3.85-10/11.4.84 bc) probably bears some his-torical signifi cance. It omits the conventional title LUGAL (Akkadian šarru, « King ») and instead uses Malek (prince ? or Aramaic MLK’, « King ») : 108

9 [... ... itux] U4-3-KÁM MU-1-me-1-šù-3-KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-27-KÁM 10 lAr-šá-ka-a ma-le-ke

9 [… … Month x,] day 3, year 163, which is year 227, 10 Arsaces (is) King.

Strabo (11.14.15) 109 writes that Tigranes II spent some time as a hostage among the Parthians (dur-ing the reign of Mithradates II). 110 He was later installed by them on the throne of Armenia af-ter his father died. For this he rewarded his ally with « seventy valleys ». However, having grown in power he attacked the Parthians and not only won back the ceded territory, but also annexed Atropatene, Gorduene, Adiabene (including the region around Nineveh), and the greater part of Northern Mesopotamia, advancing as far as Syria and Phoenicia. Plutarch (Lucullus, 14.5, 21.4, 26.1 and 36.6) goes further and reports that having begun his reign with small expectations, Tigranes subdued many nations, cut the Parthians off from Asia and humbled their power as no man be-fore had done. He then transplanted Greek cities into Media and fi lled Mesopotamia with large numbers of Greeks he had removed from Cilicia and Cappadocia and also the barbarians whose native cities he demolished. After defeating the neighbouring kings, he swayed Syria and Pales-tine, put to death the successors of Seleucus and carried off their wives and daughters into captiv-ity. 111 Appian (Syrian Wars, 11.8.48) too speaks of Tigranes’ victories over many of his neighbour-ing nations and comments that his exploits earned him the title King of Kings. 112 We then fi nd echoes of Tigranes’ incursions into North-West Parthian territories in Isidore of Charax (Parthi-an Station, 6) and Orosius (6.4.9). The former briefl y relates 113 that the Armenian king attacked and destroyed Adrapana, the royal residence in Ecbatana. Orosius on the other hand reports that having defeated Tigranes in the Battle of Nicopolis in 66 bc and pacifi ed Armenia, the Roman general Pompey moved from Pontus into Parthia and after a march of fi fteen days arrived at Ec-batana, the capital city of the Parthian kingdom. 114 This probably implies that the Armenian king had already annexed the northeast regions of Media including the provincial capital which then fell to the victorious Roman general. 115 Finally, Eutropius (6.8) informs us that Tigranes had fre-quently defeated the Persians and made himself master of Mesopotamia, Syria and part of Phoe-nicia. 116 These classical references unequivocally confi rm that major wars broke out between Parthia and Armenia at some point after the death of Mithradates II. Unfortunately none of our literary sources reports the date of the beginning of the Partho-Armenian feuds. But given the statement in the opening lines of the above quoted Avroman parchment dated Apellaios 225 sem, we can be reasonably confi dent that Tigranes did not attack his son-in-law, Gotarzes I, after Oc-

107 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 460-461, no. -86B, line 10.108 Unpublished BM 32486 (Hemerology) tablet.109 Jones 2000a, 336-339.110 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 418-419, no. -95C, Obv. 5-7 refers

to both the death of Tigranes’ father and his own stay in Ba-bylon ; Del Monte 1997, 165-167.

111 Perrin 2001, 512-513, 536-537, 552-553 and 590-591.

112 White 1999, 196-197.113 Schoff 1914, 7.114 Deferrari 1964, 238-239.115 It is highly unlikely that Tigranes held Ecbatana as late

as 67/66 bc. Parthian drachms strongly indicate that Arsacid rulers controlled the city and its mint throughout the ‘Dark Age’. 116 Watson 1882, 490.


tober/November 88 bc and before the accession of Mithradates III in July/August 87 bc. Indeed we do not know whether Tigranes directed his arms against Parthia immediately after the usur-pation of power by Mithradates III. However, we are told that a Parthian embassy was sent to Je-rusalem about 85 bc to seek alliance from the Jewish ruler Alexander Jannaeus (104-78 bc) against Tigranes. 117 This suggests that hostilities between the Arsacid and Armenian Kingdoms began as early as 85 bc during the reign of Mithradates III and ultimately led to substantial Parthian losses. In any case the incomplete and to a large extent unclear historical notices in the contemporary Astronomical Diaries imply turbulent times throughout the reign of this king. The one dated month ii of 228 seb (11/12.5.-8/9.6.84 bc) gives : 118

2 [….] That month, there was much coughing-disease in the land. That month Mi[tratu ….] 3 [….] …. as before …. [….] 4 [….] on the Tigris, attacked, and wailing …. [….] 5 when they sent [….] this [M]itratu [….] 6 [he]lp ? of these troops who had come to an agreement with Mitratu [….]

We then fi nd, in the section from month iii of the same year (9/10.6.-8/9.7.84 bc), a reference to Mitratu, the Parthian chief of troops, and the city of Seleucia. 119 The corresponding Diary fi nally ends with the following vague statements in month iv (9/10.7.-7/8.8.84 bc) : 120

16 on the other side of the river [….] 17 [….] the 10th, Mitra[tu ….] 18 [….] with many troops of the city of [….] 19 [….] …. and ? Mitra[tu ….] 20 [….] fear the city gates [….]

Unfortunately the sketchy texts on the political situation in year 229 seb fare no better. What is left of the ‘historical notices’ from month i (1/2-29/30.4.83 bc) reads : 121

20 [….] of the king from Uruk 21 [….] of revolt

The note at the end of month vii (25/26.9.-24/25.10.83 bc), perhaps mentioning the Jewish leader Alexander Jannaeus (Yannai), gives : 122

19 … … That month, the 7th, leather documents 20 [….] were read [to] the (Greek) citizens who are in Babylon. That month, I heard, 21 [….] he killed [….] among them. That <day ?>, sheep and 22 [….] he brought [….] on the Tigris ; they moved back to their cities 23 [….] That ? [day ?], the (Greek) citizens [….] for fear of Alexander to ?

24 [….] they went out [to] Seleucia which is on the Tigris.

The reference at the conclusion of month x (23/24.12.83-21/22.1.82 bc) reads : 123

18 […. the ge]neral ? of Babylonia from Seleucia which is on the Tigris [….] 19 [….] …. battle equipment the gates of the city I-[….] 20 […. abo]ve Babylon and below Babylon [….] 21 [….] in the House of Observation [….] 22 [….] …. [….] 23 [….] they provided. [That] mo[nth, ….]

Finally we get the following from month xii (20/21.2.-20/21.3.82 bc) :124

117 Neusner 1965, 25.118 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 470-471, no. -83 ; Del Monte 1997,

174.119 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 472-473, no. -83, Obv. 21-23 ; Del

Monte 1997, 174.120 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 474-475, no. -83 ; Del Monte 1997,

174-175.

121 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 476-477, no. -82A ; Del Monte 1997, 175.

122 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 476-477, no. -82A ; Del Monte 1997, 175.

123 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 478-479, no. -82B ; Del Monte 1997, 176.



2 […. they provided ….] 3 (sheep) sacrifi ces as off ering at the ‘Gate of the Son of the Prince’ of Esangil [….]

3 [….] the 16th of month IV in fear of the (Greek) citizens and of [….] 4 [….] they entered [….]. That day, this chief of the troops to the camp [….] 5 […. he kill]ed. The (Greek) citizens and Raznumitra, the [….] 6 [….] when they said this [….] and at the command of the chief of the troops and their judges [….] 7 […. as] before.

Whether all or some of the above patchy references relate to the Partho-Armenian confl icts can-not be ascertained. But given the combined contemporary and classical sources it is quite likely that Mithradates III bore the brunt of Tigranes’ attacks and was worsted in most of his encoun-ters with the Armenian ruler. This in turn throws into question the inception date of Tigranes’ reign in Syria which is generally taken as 83 bc. According to Justin (40.1.1-4) the mutual animosi-ties of the two Seleucid brothers, Antiochus VIII Grypus (128-96 bc) and Antiochus IX Cyzice-nus (114/113-96/95 bc) and then of their sons compelled the people of Syria to look for a foreign prince to take up the reins of power as their king. They ruled out Mithradates VI of Pontus and Ptolemy IX of Egypt and unanimously settled on Tigranes who, in addition to the strength of his own kingdom, was a relative of Mithradates VI and also supported by an alliance with Parthia. Tigranes occupied the Syrian throne and reigned peacefully for eighteen years without having to go to war with others or to defend himself. He was ultimately defeated by Lucullus and replaced with Antiochus XIII Asiaticus (66/65-64 bc). The latter was in turn deposed by Pompey who re-fused to reinstate him because the Seleucid prince had simply lurked in a corner of Cilicia dur-ing the eighteen-year reign of Tigranes. If counted backward from 65 bc, this places the begin-ning of the reign of Tigranes in Syria in 83 bc. But Appian (Syrian Wars, 11.11.70) gives Tigranes a fourteen-year reign. 125 Obviously this has to be reckoned retrospectively from 69 bc to yield the same inception date. Unfortunately both Justin and Appian are very poorly informed about Se-leucid rulers after Antiochus X who is confused by Justin (40.2.2) with Antiochus XIII. Given the evidence of Partho-Armenian quarrels which probably began with the usurpation of crown by Mithradates III in July/August 87 bc, this questions the veracity of Tigranes’ above given reign-length in Syria. However, it may just be possible to take Appian’s fi gure of fourteen years and count backward from 65/64 bc to arrive at 79/78 bc in the reign of Orodes I. 126 The latter was probably the son and heir of Gotarzes I from his Armenian queen Aryazate, daughter of Tigranes and so an ally of his Armenian grandfather. It may therefore not be impossible that Tigranes sup-ported Orodes I to depose Mithradates III in August/September 80 bc and begin his own reign as the next Parthian king.

The latest extant cuneiform document from the reign of Mithradates III is a lunar eclipse text dated 14.i.231 seb (21/22.4.81 bc). It opens with : 127

1 MU-1-me-1-šù-« 7 »-[KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-31-KÁM] 2 lAr-šá-ka-a [LUGAL] 3 ituBAR GE6 14 ... ...

1 Year 167, [which is year 231], 2 Arsaces (is) [King]. 3 Month I, night of the 14th, … …

We then have an unwelcome twelve-month gap during which Mithradates’ authority must have been challenged by Orodes I. A further lunar eclipse text dated 13.i.232 seb (10/11.4.80 bc) gives

125 White 1999, 236-237.126 Cf. Plutarch (Lucullus, 21.1-7) in Perrin 2001, 534-539 on

the date of Appius Clodius’ audience with Tigranes. The Roman demanded that because of his defeat Mithradates VI must be sent back to Lucullus as an ornament. Plutarch places this event in the 25th year of Tigranes (71/70 bc) and states that the Armenian king was still engaged in subduing some cities of Phoenicia. If Tigranes had taken the Syrian

crown in 83 bc it is inconceivable that he was still in the proc-ess of extending his sway over the Phoenician cities more than a decade later. Unless he had assumed power in Syria not long before 72 bc. It is likely that Tigranes ascended the Syrian throne in 76 bc and ruled for about eight years before being driven out by the Romans.

127 Sachs 1955, 227, lbat 1444 ; Hunger, Sachs 2001, 70-73, no. 24.


the following date-formula 128 and so confi rms that Babylon had been lost to Mithradates in ear-ly 80 bc :

1 MU-1-me-1-šù-8-[KÁM šá] ši-i 2 MU-2-me-32-[KÁM lA]r-šá-kám LUGAL 3 šá iø-øár-ri-« du l »Ú-ru-da-a LUGAL 4 ituBAR GE6 13 ... ...

1 Year 168, [which] is 2 year 232, King Arsaces, 3 who is called King Orodes. 4 Month I, night of the 13th, … …

On the other hand, the ‘annual’ bronze coinage in Table 1 shows that Mithradates III was still in control of Susa sometime in 233 sem (21/22.9.80-10/11.10.79 bc). Although the historical notes at the end of month vi of 232 seb (23/24.8.-20/21.9.80 bc) are very poorly preserved, the inclusion of a date formula at the beginning of the next month in the same record supports Orodes’ fi nal victory over Mithradates III in August/September 80 bc (cf. below). The latter may have taken refuge in Susa for a short period or retreated to Ecbatana and died in unknown circumstances. What is nevertheless clear is that the struggle between the two contenders lasted for at least half a year. This is probably summarised by Justin (42.4.1) who relates that following his war with Ar-menia, King Mithradates was charged with cruelty and banished by the Parthian senate from his kingdom.

I have allocated a small number of rare drachms (S31.7) to the fi nal phase of hostilities between Mithradates III and Orodes I (Fig. 13). These are struck from a single obverse with a somewhat neutral bust and two or possibly three reverse dies.

The royal portraiture and tiara on the S31.7 drachms very closely resemble those on S34.4 issue of Orodes I. But the characteristic ‘double pellet’ decoration round the crest of the head-dress of Orodes is conspicuously absent on this special coinage. On the other hand its reverse inscription is identical with that on the S31 of Mithradates III. I believe this rare issue was, to quote Sellwood, « a politic attempt by a mint offi cial to hedge his bets during the height of the civil strife ».129 Either of the two contenders could have claimed the coinage.

Arsaces XV-Orodes I (March/April 80-March/April 75 bc)

Although the above eclipse text acknowledges Orodes I in Babylon about the middle of month i of 232 seb, the scanty remarks in the Astronomical Diary of the same year suggests a continued factional dispute that lasted for several months. Of these the aforementioned incomplete histori-cal notes at the end of month vi in 232 seb read :

9 ... ... ITU BI U4-20 kušši-pir-tu4 šá « x » [....] 10 [....] « x »meš lAr-šá-kám šá iø-øár-ri-d[u lÚ-ru-da-a LUGAL ....]

128 Strassmaier 1888, 135, no. 9, and 147-148 copy of Rm iv 118A. The author erroneously reads « King of Kings Ar-saces ». Several collations of the same tablet have confi rmed « King Arsaces ». Cf. also Oppert 1888, 467 for « King of Kings Arsaces » and the year 232 seb as an ae date ; Strass-maier 1889, 78 reads « King of Kings Arsaces » ; Schrader 1890, 1325-1328 gives « King Arsaces » ; Strassmaier 1893, 112 gives « King of Kings Arsaces » ; Minns 1915, 35, no. « m » and

n. 28 gives « King Arsaces » ; Kugler 1924, 447, no. 26 gives « King of Kings Arsaces » ; Sachs 1955, xxxiii, lbat **1445 re-port of lunar eclipse of 13.i.232 seb ; Chaumont 1971, 153 gives « King of Kings Arsaces » ; Oelsner 1975, 41, n. 47 gives « King Arsaces » ; Del Monte 1997, 254 gives « King Arsaces » ; Hunger, Sachs 2001, 72-73, no. 25, give « King of Kings Ar-saces ».

129 Sellwood 1965, 115.

Fig. 13. S31.7 transitional silver drachmfrom Rhagae with obverse of Orodes I and reverse

of Mithradates III (Author’s Collection).


9 … … That month, the 20th, a message of …. [….] 10 [….] …. Arsaces, who is called [King Orodes ….]

It is possible that the original text registered a summary of the battle between the two warring camps with Orodes ultimately prevailing. Hence a new date-formula had to be included at the beginning of month vii (21/22.9.-20/21.10.80 bc) of the same record to herald the change of reign in Babylon : 130

12 [MU-1-me]-1-šù-8-KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-32-KÁM lAr-šá-kám šá i[ø-øár-ri-du lÚ-ru-da-a LUGAL ....]

12 [Year 1]68, which is year 232, Arsaces, who is c[alled King Orodes ….]

I should add that the reconstructed text in this line is modelled on a contemporary lunar eclipse tablet dated 4/5 October 80 bc whose opening lines read : 131

1 [MU-1-me-1-šù-8-KÁM šá š]« i-i » MU-2-me-32-<KÁM> 2 [lAr-šá-k]a-a « šá iø »-øár-ri-« du » 3 [lÚ-r]u-da-a LUGAL ù fIs-p[u-bar-za-a] 4 [NIN-šú] « GAŠAN » [DU6 GE6 14 ... ...]

1 [Year 168, which i]s year 232, 2 [Arsac]es, who is called 3 King [Or]odes and Isp[ubarza], 4 [his sister], the Queen. [(Month) vii, night of the 14th, … …]

In spite of its pitiful state this incomplete eclipse record contains two important historical and chronological points. First, the title LUGAL (King) is given to Orodes and not Arsaces. This ac-cords well with the above discussed interpretation of the verb form iøøaridu as ‘is called’ rather than ‘has expelled’ in some earlier publications. Second, Ispubarza is the sister-queen of Orodes I. This identifi es the latter with « King Arsaces » of some later texts who is consistently associated with the same royal consort and so extends the reign of Orodes to early 75 bc.

The fi rst of these records are the following two partial but complementary colophons from month i of year 234 seb (6/7.4.-4/5.5.78 bc) : 132

11 [meš-hi šá KUR-ádmeš šá dUD]U-IDIMmeš šá MU-1-me-1,10-KÁM šá ši-i « MU-2-me »-[3]4-KÁM 12 [lAr-šá-kám LUGAL u f]Is-pu-bar-za-a NIN-šú GAŠAN

11 [Measurements of the entries of the plan]ets (into zodiacal signs) for year 170, which is year 2[3]4, 12 [King Arsaces and] Ispubarza, his sister, the Queen.

and

12 « meš-hi šá KUR-ádmeš šá dUDU-IDIMmeš šá MU-1-me-1,10-KÁM šá » [ši-i MU-2-me-34-KÁM] 13 [l]Ar-šá-kám LUGAL u « fIs »-pu-« bar »-[za-a NIN-šú GAŠAN]

12 Measurements of the entries of the planets (into zodiacal signs) for year 170, which [is year 234], 13 King Arsaces and Ispubar[za, his sister, the Queen.]

Although Orodes’ personal name is excluded from both date-formulas the corresponding docu-ments were certainly compiled under him. But the reason for the omission in these and the sub-sequent records is not entirely clear. It may be that Orodes’ rival was not a potential threat or suffi ciently close to Babylon to confuse his identity as « King Arsaces ».

Unfortunately there are no references to the political circumstances of the reign of Orodes in our classical literature and the preserved information in a handful of cuneiform fragments is ex-

130 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 484-485, no. -79. For the inclusion of a date-formula at the beginning of the month following a change of reign cf. ibidem, 136-137, no. -140A, Rev. 10. It gives the fi rst full month of the reign of Mithradates I after expel-ling the Seleucid forces from Babylonia.

131 Sachs 1955, 227, lbat 1446 ; McEwan 1986, 93 ; Del Mon-

te 1997, 255 ; Hunger, Sachs 2001, 74-75, no. 26.132 For the fi rst text cf. Kugler 1924, 447, no. 28 and 487-

488 ; Schaumberger 1935, Taf. iv, Nr. 6 ; Sachs 1955, 175, lbat 1164+1165+*1166 (Almanac for 234 seb) ; McEwan 1986, 93. For the second record cf. Sachs 1955, xxiv, lbat **1167+**1168 (un-published Almanac for 234 seb).


tremely meagre. However, combining the inscriptional and numismatic evidence can shed some welcome light on the events of his short and turbulent reign.

Following his predecessors Orodes began an inaugural tetradrachm issue at Seleucia on the Tigris (Fig. 14). This may have lasted throughout his short reign (cf. below). The only known ex-ample 133 of this emission (S34.1) shows on its obverse the bust in a tiara of a king of uncertain age but not necessar-ily any older than that on the issues of his rival, Mithradates III (S31). Orodes’ tiara however diff ers from those worn by Mithradates II (S28), Sinatruces (S33), Gotarzes I (S29 and S32), and Mithradates III (S31). Its unique design includes a row of double pearls on stalk around the crest and a central fl eur-de-lys decoration. The latter probably symbol-ised the « Lily » associated with Susa. 134

The inscription of Orodes’ coinage (S34.1-12) runs BASILEWS MEGALOU ARSAKOU EUERGETOU EPIFANOUS FILELLHNOS with no allusion to his father. This practically replicates the titulature on the S32.1 tetradrachms of Gotarzes I and thus suggests that the latter fathered both Orodes and Ispubarza. But the extant material off ers nothing on the relationship between Orodes and his sister-queen Ispubarza on the one hand and Gotarzes’ Babylonian queen Ashiabatar, or Siake, Aryazate, and Azate in Ecbatana on the other. Given the above brief refer-ences to the hostilities between Mithradates III and Tigranes, it is possible that Orodes was the son and heir of Gotarzes I from his Armenian queen Aryazate.

An extremely rare drachm in Sellwood’s collection, struck at Rhagae with an obverse design similar to that of S34.1 tetradrachm and without the ‘anchor’ symbol, may be taken as a lim-ited early issue of Orodes from an Iranian mint (Fig. 15). Conversely the more common S34.2 drachms from Ecbatana, S34.3-4 from Rhagae (Figs. 16-17) and a small output from Margiane (S34.5) make up the bulk of his coinage. These all have the ‘an-chor’ on the obverse behind the royal bust and prob-ably belong to the period after Orodes’ victory over Kamnaskires II/III in Elymais (cf. below). They show that he kept Media and also temporarily held sway over at least some of the eastern satrapies by about the middle of his reign. It is possible that having lost the throne to Orodes in Babylon Mithradates III fl ed north and fought for awhile until he was fi nally elim-inated around a year later. This may explain the ex-treme rarity of Orodes’ early drachms with no ‘anchor’. Equally Sinatruces could have exploited the dynastic strife in Babylonia and once again pushed westward as far as Rhagae and Ecbatana suppressing Orodes’ coinage in the process at the corresponding mints. The persistent presence of Ispubarza in the Babylonian colophons from the period 80-75 bc indicates that the entire reign of Orodes was punctuated by confl ict with one or more rivals. This may also account for the altera-tions to some of his original dies and drachms (S34.5-8) to assimilate them to the S31 coinage of Mithradates III (cf. below). Although inconclusive, the numismatic evidence indicates that Orodes’ authority on the Iranian plateau was continuously challenged by diff erent claimants.

133 Waggoner 1974, 24. She was the fi rst to ascribe the entire coinage to Orodes I. Cf. also Dilmaghani 1986, 218-219.134 Romanoff 1944, 45-51.

Fig. 14. S34.1 silver tetradrachm of Orodes Ifrom Seleucia on the Tigris.

Fig. 15. S34.4 var. silver drachm of Orodes I from Rhagae without obverse anchor

(Sellwood’s Collection).


It is noteworthy that until fairly recently the whole of S34 series was attributed to several diff er-ent Arsacid rulers including Mithradates II, Artabanus II, Sinatruces, Phraates III, and Vonones I of the Scythian dynasty of Arachosia. 135 Given the relative rarity of the issue as a whole in com-parison with the rest of the Parthian emissions from the ‘Dark Age’ and that Orodes’ reign was the shortest in the same period, allocation of type S34 to him is secure.

Unfortunately the Babylonian records give no detailed accounts of Orodes’ military campaigns in Elymais and elsewhere in Parthia. What remains implies that some of these may have been prolonged expeditions. The one concerning his battle in Elymais alone appears to have taken half a year to complete. Our scanty information on this raid begins with the following notice from month vii of 234 seb (30.9./1.10.-29/30.10.78 bc) : 136

11 … … That month, I heard that King Arsaces together with his troops [departed] to the surroundings of the city [….]

Regrettably the name of the city in the above line is now lost. But given the severity of winter in the Iranian uplands and Media after October/November, Northern and Western Parthia may be precluded. It is possible that Orodes began his campaign a month earlier in Media and reached as far as Northern Mesopotamia by October. Support for this perhaps lies in the incomplete text from the next month (30/31.10.-27/28.11.78 bc) mentioning the city of Kar-Aššur in Central Meso-potamia : 137

27 [….] …. [….] turned towards the surroundings of Kar-Aššur.

With the historical notices in months ix and x completely destroyed we cannot follow the course of events from Babylonia to Elymais. But some details of the battle against the Elymaean ruler have survived in broken context in month xi (26/27.1.-23/24.2.77 bc). These leave little doubt about Orodes’ complete victory and pacifi cation of the province : 138

13 [.... KU]R NIM-MAki GIN-ma LÚ.[NE] KI lQa-bi-na-áš-ki-i-ri LUGAL KUR NIM-MAki

DÙ-ma « x x » [x] « x » ina lìb-bi-šú GAR-ma URUmeš [....] 14 [....] « x » A « x x x ERÍN-ni » i-su-ú-tú šá KI-šú ina IGI-šú BAL-ma ana KUR-ú i-te-el-lu [a]l ?-te-me šá ana tar-sa KUR-ú áš-šú [....] 15 [....] x ár U4-21 šá ? ak-ku-ú lúŠÀ-TAM É-sag-gíl u lúEki.meš [1-e]n GU4 ù 2 SISKURmeš

NID[BA ....]

Fig. 16. S34.3 silver drachm of Orodes Ifrom Rhagae (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 17. S34.4 silver drachm of Orodes Ifrom Rhagae.

135 Gardner 1877, 35 (Mithradates II) ; Wroth 1903, 54-55 (Phraates III or a contemporary) ; Petrowicz 1904, 44 (Artabanus II) ; Newell 1938, 482 (Phraates III) ; Simonet-ta 1957, 118 and 121 (Phraates III) ; Sellwood 1962, 83-84 (Phraates III) ; Le Rider 1965, 97-98 and 396-397 (Phraates III) ; Sellwood 1965, 133 (Phraates III) ; Simonetta 1966, 38-39 (Phraates III ?) ; Sellwood 1971, 92-94 (Phraates III) ; Simonet-ta 1974, 130 and 138 (Arsaces Euergetes Epiphanes) ; Waggon-er 1974, 24-26 (Orodes I) ; Dobbins 1975, 36 (Phraates III) ; Si-monetta 1975, 70, n. 8 and 77 (Arsaces Euergetes Epiphanes) ; Sellwood 1976, 5 (Sinatruces) ; Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 116 (Vonones I of the Scythian dynasty of Arachosia) ; Sell-wood 1980, 102-104 (Sinatruces) ; Mørkholm 1980, 43 and 45

(Arsaces X Euergetes) ; Sellwood 1983a, 287 (Sinatruces) ; Dilmaghani 1986, 218-219 (Orodes I) ; Shore 1993, 111 (Si-natruces) ; Simonetta 2001, 100 (Orodes I).



138 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 502-503, no. -77B ; Del Monte 1997, 180. For the Parthian campaign in Elymais cf. McEwan 1986, 91-92. The erroneous reading már-tam-man-diš which McEwan translates as Artavanta at the beginning of line 15 must be amended accordingly.


16 [....] « x » lúpu-li-te-e ú-nu-ut MÈ GIŠ-ú LÚ.NE ana IGI a-h a-[meš ina] li-mit É dAG šá ha-r[e-e ....]

13 [….] went [to] Elam and fought with Kamnaskires, the king of Elam, and put [….] in it, and the cities [….] 14 [….] …. the few troops which were with him, turned away from him and went up to the mountains. I heard that towards the mountains when [….]15 [….] …. The 21st, he who was representative of the administrator of Esangil and the Babylonians [provided] one bull and 2 (sheep) sacrifi ces as off ering [….]16 [….] the (Greek) citizens brought battle equipment (and) fought against each other in the area of the temple of Nabû-ša-harê [….]

The defeated Elymaean king is no doubt Kamnaskires II/III who appears on his coinage with Queen Anzaze (Fig. 18). Of the known examples of this type at least two are undated. These probably correspond to year 230 sem (83/82 bc). We then have a series of dated specimens from 231 and 233-240 sem (82/81 and 80/79-73/72 bc, respectively). 139 They indicate that although Kamnaskires was roundly defeated and put to fl ight by Orodes I in early 77 bc he returned, regained control of Susa before 1 Dios 237 sem (8/9.10.76 bc) and probably issued coins dated 236 sem.

After his victory in Elymais, Orodes struck both silver drachms and bronze fractions in Ecbatana and Rhagae (S34.2-9) with an obverse ‘anchor’ symbol. This had been the royal emblem of the Kam-naskirid dynasty. But for reasons un-known to us Orodes’ S34.10-12 ‘annual’ Susian bronzes omit from the obverse design both the ‘pearl-on-stalk’ decoration of the tiara and the ‘anchor’. The S34.5-8 drachms are on the other hand struck from altered dies while the crest decoration, the central fl eur-de-lys, the ‘anchor’ or a combi-nation of these elements have been manually removed from some normal specimens (Figs. 19-21). This was obviously an attempt to integrate them into the S31 coinage of Mithradates III. Consid-ering that any later ruler who found Orodes’ coins objectionable would have seized and restruck the entire issue, it is possible that a contemporary rival authorised the alterations for political rea-sons. As suggested above Mithradates III was probably not totally eliminated by Orodes in late 80 bc and forced to retreat to some remote regions of Parthia. With very limited resources at his disposal for striking a proper coinage he could have reworked Orodes’ coins and also modifi ed his captured or unused dies for his own issue. Hence the inclusion of Ispubarza in the Babylonian col-ophons to distinguish Orodes from his opponent. Evidence supporting this probably comes from a very small number of S34.5 drachms minted at Margiane with the ‘anchor’ erased from the dies. Assuming that the change took place in situ and not in a diff erent location or mint, a rival must have impounded but not destroyed Orodes’ dies and then modifi ed and used them for his own

139 For the undated variety cf. Dilmaghani 1986, 219 and pl. 24 : 4 ; Triton vii Auction Sale Catalogue, 13-14 January 2004, no. 520. For 231 sem cf. Petrowicz 1904, 197, no. 1 and Taf. xxv : 7 ; Ars Classica-Naville 1926, 158, no. 2526 and pl. 71 ; Hill 1922, 245 and pl. xxxviii : 1 ; Le Rider 1965, 190, 397, n. 7, 426-428 and pl. lxxii : 11 ; Sellwood 1983b, 308 ; Alram 1986, 144, no. 454 and Taf. 15 ; Potts 1997, 392. For 233 sem cf. Gorny und Mosch Giessner Münzhandlung, 138 (7/8 March 2005), no. 157. For 234 cf. Dr. Busso Peus Nachfolger Münzhandlung, 368 (25-28 April 2001), no. 332. For 235 sem cf. Le Rider 1965, 190, 397, n. 8, 426-427 and pl. lxxii : 12 ;

Triton vii Auction Sale Catalogue, 13-14 January 2004, no. 521. For 236 sem ( ?) cf. Classical Numismatic Group, Elec-tronic Auction 106, no. 60 (the date could be 232 sem since its fi rst letter resembles a poorly engraved B). For 237 sem cf. Pe trowicz 1904, 197, no. 3 and Taf, xxv : 8 ; Augé 1979, no. 2479 ; Alram 1986, 144, no. 455 and Taf. 15. At least one example dated 238 sem has been seen in commerce. For 239 sem cf. Giessener Münzhandlung-Dieter Gorny GmbH (Mu-nich), 101 (6 March 2000), no. 406. For 240 sem cf. Dr. Busso Peus Nachfolger Münzhandlung, 368 (25-28 April 2001), no. 331.

Fig. 18. Silver tetradrachm of Kamnaskires and Anzaze dated 240 sem (73/72 bc).


coinage. This suggests that as a result of years of internal dispute a remote workshop in Mar-giane may have been dormant for some time and only partially operational upon resumption of mint activities. It would naturally have uti-lised any unused or useable dies, with minimal modifi cations, for striking an emergency issue at times of civil strife to replenish a rival’s war chest. If so, Orodes’ opponent who found little objections to a stock of slightly reworked S34 obverse dies and drachms must have been ac-

tive after 78/77 bc since the appearance of ‘anchor’ most probably post-dated Orodes’ victory in Elymais in that same year. This however practically rules out both Mithradates III and Sinatruces as Orodes’ challengers for the following reasons. Firstly, as discussed below, Nisa 2639 (Nova 366) ostracon registers the accession of a new king in 78/77 bc and not the presence of an earlier ruler in North-East Parthia. Secondly, it is possible that rather than Mithradates III himself a brother (issuer of S30) or a later prince deliberately altered some of Orodes’ drachms to adapt them to the design of S31 coinage while restriking the rest with his own dies. Thirdly, and more impor-tantly, cuneiform texts show that following the overthrow of Orodes I the Babylonian colophons once again reverted to the simple wording using the dynastic name Arsaces without an accom-panying queen. If Sinatruces or Mithradates III had eliminated Orodes in Parthia and maintained his claim to the throne the subsequent date-formulas would have recorded, in addition to the dy-nastic appellation, either the personal name of the next king in Babylon and/or his associated queen. As shown below the successor of Orodes reigned unopposed for about a decade and was only challenged from 69/68 bc on. The extant material suggests, rather strongly, that whatever the situation around Parthia’s northern frontiers, the real threat to Orodes’ authority surfaced in Susa where the next prince mounted a serious move for power. Unfortunately we cannot deter-mine the precise terminal date of the reign of Orodes. The last record mentioning King Arsaces and his sister-queen Ispubarza in Babylon is a small Astronomical Diary fragment beginning with month ix in 236 seb (5/6.12.76-3/4.1.75 bc). 140 Its colophon is only partially legible and lack of de-tailed planetary data prevents its latest month from being positively identifi ed on astronomical grounds. Comparison with other short Diaries however suggests that the original text may have comprised months ix–xii with roughly two on each side of the tablet. But it could well have had no more than two or even a single month. 141 Assuming that this fragment belonged to a slightly larger tablet covering the last four months of 236 seb, the latest record from Orodes’ reign would correspond to month xii of 236 seb (3/4.3.-1/2.4.75 bc). In any case the next text, dated 4.i.237 seb (5/6.4.75 bc) mentions « King Arsaces » and no associated queen : 142

Fig. 19. S34.4 var. silver drachm of Orodes I from Ecbatana with anchor removed from coin

(Author’s Collection).

Fig. 20. S34.4 var. silver drachm of Orodes I from Rhagae with anchor and pellets on tiara removed

from coin (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 21. S34.3 var. silver drachm of Orodes I from Rhagae with anchor, pellets on tiara and fl eur-de-lys

removed from coin (Author’s Collection).

140 McEwan 1986, 93 ; Sachs, Hunger 1996, 506-507, no. -75 ; Del Monte 1997, 181.

141 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 236-239, no. -131B is a single month

Diary covering days 22-25 of month ix in year 180 seb.142 Sachs 1955, 201, lbat 1300 (Goal-Year Text for 245 seb,

Venus paragraph, 245 – 8 = 237 seb).


6 [MU-1-me-1,13-KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-37-KÁM] « lAr »-[šá-ka-a] « LUGAL » BAR 4 ... ...

6 [Year 173, which is year 237], Ar[saces] (is) King. (Month) I, the 4th, … …

This may be regarded as the terminus ante quem of the reign of Orodes I in Babylon.Yet the ‘annual’ bronze series in Table 1 shows that Orodes lost Susa to a rival sometime after

his victory over Kamnaskires II/III in January/February 77 bc (month xi of 234 seb = month v of 235 sem) and before 1 Dios 236 sem (19/20.9.77 bc). As commented above the next Arsacid prince, probably a younger son of Mithradates II, eliminated Orodes in Babylon in March/April 75 bc. The early coin portraiture of this prince shows him not much older than fi fteen when he issued his fi rst tetradrachms at Seleucia on the Tigris (cf. below). These are the S30.12 variety whose control mark SUM and reverse die engraver link them with the S34.1 tetradrachm of Orodes. 143 Assuming that the issuer of S30 coinage minted these tetradrachms immediately after his victory over Orodes in Babylon in March/April 75 bc, he must have been about two years younger when he captured Susa in the fi rst half of 77 bc. This however does not rule out the possibility that the successor of Orodes campaigned for the throne as a minor. The issuer of S49 coinage (prob-ably a son of Phraates IV) appears on his drachms quite youthful and unbearded and styles him-self « King of Kings ». Furthermore we know that Pacorus II (c. ad 78-105) was certainly young 144 when he disputed the throne with Vologases II (c. ad 77-80). He too turns up on his inaugural coinage (S73) with no beard and moustache. It is possible that the prince who minted the S30.12 tetradrachms was slightly older than the issuer of S49 drachms and also Pacorus II since he is vis-ibly lightly bearded with a meagre moustache on his inaugural emission. This then suggests that he must have been about 13-14 years old in 235 sem (78/77 bc) when he took Susa. However it is possible to show that the S30.12 tetradrachms too were issued at Seleucia on the Tigris in 235 sem and perhaps simultaneously with S34.1 of Orodes I.

Having no access to the extant material, Dilmaghani concluded that S30.12 tetradrachms had no corresponding drachms. 145 Yet such specimens are known together with a unique S30/S34 ‘mule’ drachm in Sellwood’s Collection, struck from an obverse die with an early royal portrait. On the other hand, a further unique S30/S33 ‘mule’ in Sellwood’s Collection shows an older portrait of the same prince. This was minted, most probably, after 70 bc when Sinatruces made a fi nal but unsuccessful dash for the throne (cf. below).

As noted further, the obverse bust on the inaugural S30.12 tetradrachms presents the hair in three concentric waves above the diadem. This is analogous with the hairstyle on the early S30 drachms but is absent on the later specimens. Also, part of the hair on the initial tetradrachms covers the royal forehead and temple below the diadem. This too is found on at least one of the parallel bronzes from Susa. 146 It is possible that the S30.12 tetradrachms as well as the early S30 drachms and Susian bronzes were minted in 235 sem either immediately after or concurrently with the S34.1 of Ordoes I. This is mirrored in some later series notably the S60 tetradrachms of Vonones I (c. ad 8-12) and S61 of Artabanus II (c. ad 10-38), S64.22-30 of Vardanes I (c. ad 40-45) and S65.1-3 of Gotarzes II (c. ad 40-51), S66.29 of Gotarzes II and S68.1 of Vologases I (c. ad 51-78), and the majority of S72 of Vologases II and S73 of Pacorus II. It now appears that shortly after pacifying Elymais in early 77 bc, Orodes lost the satrapy to a new Arsacid claimant.

Assuming that Orodes was indeed a grandson of Tigranes it seems he received little or no sup-port from his Armenian grandfather and King of Kings against his Parthian rivals. The reason for this may lie in the fact that Tigranes was preoccupied in Syria from about 79 bc on and then grad-ually but surely drawn into the Mithradatic wars against Rome. 147 It is even possible that Orodes’

143 Mørkholm 1980, 36-37.144 Sellwood 1980, 235 ; Hollis 1994, 205-207.145 Dilmaghani 1986, 219-220.146 Le Rider 1965, pl. xv, 191.1. Note the presence of some

concentric waves of hair above the diadem.147 Appian (Mithradatic Wars, 10.67) reports that following

the death of the Roman general Sulla (in 78 bc), Mithradates of Pontus ordered his son-in-law, Tigranes, to attack Cappa-

docia which he did and eventually carried off about 300,000 of its inhabitants to his capital Tigranocerta. Cf. White 1999, 364-365. Unfortunately there are no references to Tigranes’ association with Mithradates of Pontus after this date and before the arrival on the political scene in 74 bc of anoth-er able Roman general Lucullus. But we can be reasonably confi dent of Tigranes’ involvements in Mithradates’ aff airs in this period.


Armenian links eventually made him objectionable to the Parthian elite who then switched alle-giance and supported a son of the Arsacid King of Kings, Mithradates II.

Arsaces XVI (78/77-62/61 bc in Parthia, March/April 75-67/66 bc in Babylon)

As shown above this young prince established his authority in Susa in 235 sem (78/77 bc). This agrees with the date of the incomplete accession record on Nisa ostracon 2639 (Nova 366) whose pitiful text missing, almost certainly, the important dynastic links with both an earlier king and Arsaces I, reads : 148

Aramaic transliteration :1 « ŠNT I » C XX XX XX « X » ’ršk MLK’ « BRY( ?) »2 « BRY( ?) x x x x x x »

Parthian transcription :1 « sard sad » (ud) haftad Aršak šah « puhr( ?) »2 « puhr( ?) x x x x x x »

Translation1 « Year 1 »70 (ae = 78/77 bc), King Arsaces, « son of( ?) »2 « son of( ?) » (very faint traces of some signs)

Whether Arsaces XVI accomplished his victory with the aid of a Kamnaskirid ally cannot be de-termined with confi dence. Granted that Orodes I was a grandson of Tigranes, it is highly unlikely that the Armenian ruler assisted Arsaces XVI on the Parthian throne. But the possibility for an Ely-maean involvement may not be too remote. The extant coins of Kamnaskires II/III and Queen An-zaze from the period 83/82-73/72 bc and also of Kamnaskires IV (c. 73/72-56/55 bc) strongly imply that the young Arsacid prince too had approved an independent Elymaean coinage. This was prob-ably in return for military aid he had received against Orodes I. After all for reasons unknown to us Orodes routed the Elymaean army in early 77 bc and put Kamnaskires to fl ight. Naturally the lat-ter would have been conscious of the humiliating defeat some months earlier and only too eager to

reverse his fortunes by supporting an in-surrection against an erstwhile enemy.

The cuneiform historical notices from the reign of Arsaces XVI are unfortu-nately limited to two mutilated Astro-nomical Diary fragments from years 238 and 239 seb (74/73 and 73/72 bc respec-tively). The fi rst of these has lost all its useful notes while the second yields no more than a few lines of uncertain in-formation in month viii (3/4.11.-1/2.12.73 bc). Beyond these we have only a handful of dated colophons and a series of coins that may be utilised to reconstruct some of the events of the reign of Arsaces XVI. However since the earliest of the two cu-neiform records is from November/De-cember 73 bc, we are obliged to examine the numismatic evidence fi rst to clarify the circumstances of the period 78/77-74/73 bc.

As briefl y mentioned above an in-spection of the extant Parthian coinage

148 Diakonoff, Livshits 1966, 143-144, n. 28 and pls. ix and ixa ; Chaumont 1968, 15 ; 1971, 145 ; Lukonin 1983, 687-

688 ; Bader 1996, 264 (read no. 2639 for 2539) ; Diakonoff, Livshits 1999, pl. 918 ; 2003, 174 ; Assar 2004, 75.

Fig. 22. S30.12 silver tetradrachm of Arsaces XVIfrom Seleucia on the Tigris.



establishes a close link between S30.12-13 tet-radrachms of Arsaces XVI (Figs. 22-23) and S34.1 of Orodes I through their common exergual control mark SUM and also strong stylistic sim-ilarities. A S30/S34 ‘mule’ drachm in Sellwood’s Collection too suggests that the two issues were contiguous (Fig. 24). Coupled with the evidence of the ‘annual’ bronzes in Table 1 the portrai-ture of the earliest coinage of Arsaces XVI sug-gests that he was about 15-16 years old when he supplanted Orodes I in Susa and issued his S30.12-13 tetradrachms at Seleucia on the Tigris. These took place in the fi rst half of 77 bc.

An unwelcome lacuna in our Babylonian doc-uments unfortunately deprives us of an insight into the political situation in Mesopotamia dur-ing the period 77-75 bc. However, the presence of a series of long date-formulas from this pe-riod, all mentioning queen Ispubarza, signifi es an ongoing strife that preoccupied Orodes I throughout his short reign. Assuming that the latter was still in possession of the royal mint shortly before the compilation of the above quoted tablet from March/April 75 seb, Arsaces XVI must have captured both Seleucia on the Tigris and Babylon very soon after this date.

The inscription on S30 tetradrachms of this young monarch reads BASILEWS MEGALOU ARSAKOU QEOPATOROS EUERGETOU EPIFANOUS FILELLHNOS. Moreover, a single example (S30.11) replaces EPIFANOUS with EUSEBOUS « (of ) Devout or Pious ». 149 Omitting the two epithets EPIFANOUS and FILELLHNOS the S30 drachms of Arsaces XVI are inscribed with BASILEWS MEGA-LOU ARSAKOU QEOPATOROS EUER-GETOU. The majority of these (Figs. 25-27) are from Ecbatana (S30.14-15 and S30.26-27) and Rhagae (S30.16-17). They show that the western and central satrapies remained under Arsaces XVI throughout his reign. A few rare examples from Nisa (S30.23) and Margiane (S30.20) indicate that he also had a tenuous hold over the north-east-ern and eastern provinces of the Empire. Beside these and unlike the earlier rulers from Mithra-dates I to Orodes I, Arsaces XVI minted a series of silver drachms at Susa (Fig. 28). His succes-sors followed suit down to Phraataces (c. 2 bc-ad 2) and then only intermittently until Vardanes I terminated the practice about a century after its inception. It should nonetheless be added that S30 coinage too has been diff erently interpreted and ascribed to kings ranging from Phraates II to Gotarzes I, an « Unknown King II », Sinatruces, and Orodes I. 150

149 Petrowicz 1904, 33, no. 10 and 34 ; Ars Classica-Naville 1926, 133, no. 2179 and pl. 64.

150 Gardner 1887, 32-33 (Phraates II) ; Wroth 1903, 38 (Artabanus II) ; Petrowicz 1904, 32-34 (Phraates II) ; McDow-ell 1935, 208-210 (Gotarzes I, Mithradates III and Orodes I) ;

Newell 1938, 480-481 (Gotarzes I) ; Simonetta 1957, 117 and 121 (Orodes I) ; Sellwood 1962, 78-80 (Gotarzes I) ; Le Rider 1965, 92-95 and 394-395 (Arsaces Theopator Euergetes) ; Sellwood 1965, 132 (Gotarzes I) ; Simonetta 1966, 39 (Orodes I) ; Sell-wood 1971, 76-79 (Gotarzes I) ; Dobbins 1974, 71-74 (Orodes I

Fig. 24. S30/S34 ‘mule’ silver drachm of Arsaces XVI-Orodes I (Sellwood’s Collection).

Fig. 25. S30.26 silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Ecbatana (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 26. S30.16 (early) silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Rhagae (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 27. S30.16 (late) silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Rhagae (Author’s Collection).


The epithet QEOPATOROS on S30 coinage in-dicates that the issuer descended from an illustrious father. Given that his sheer youth precludes Arsac-es XVI from being a son of the deifi ed Mithradates I who had died over fi ve decades earlier, his father must necessarily be one of the latter’s successors. Of these only Mithradates II could have been di-vinized for his meritorious achievements during a thirty year long reign. It is possible that Arsaces XVI employed QEOPATOROS to promote his pater-

nal link with Mithradates II and legitimise his claim to the Parthian throne as a rightful heir of his father. However, it is noteworthy that this young prince abandoned the tiara worn by Mith-radates II and his immediate successors, Gotarzes I, Mithradates III, and Orodes I. This may be politically signifi cant.

Following his analysis of the Parthian series from Seleucia on the Tigris during c. 90-55 bc, Mørkholm concluded that S30 tetradrachms presented four distinctly diff erent portraitures.151 These depict the royal bust with individually fashioned hair above and below diadem and thus correspond to diff erent periods in the reign of Arsaces XVI. Perhaps the young prince abandoned the tiara of Mithradates II because it had by then become emblematic of Tigranes’ tyranny.

According to Mørkholm the S30 tetradrachms were minted over an eleven year period under diff erent controllers. 152 Although we know very little about the changeover frequency of the Parthian mint magistrates in Seleucia, Mørkholm’s proposed period of mintage for S30 in that city

agrees with the number of corresponding ‘annual’ Susian bronzes (LR149-160) in Table 1. These indi-cate a period of 10-11 years of uninterrupted output. Yet no more information can be gleaned from the evidence of tetradrachms regarding the political sit-uation in Babylonia and Sinatruces’ comeback. As quoted above, the joint statements of Lucian and Phlegon indicate that Sinatruces was on the throne about 77 bc. Our only reference, albeit quite vague, to some movements in Eastern Parthia involving the « Guti » (perhaps the Sacaraucae) is found in a

small cuneiform ‘fl ake’ dated month viii of 239 seb (3/4.11.-1/2.12.73 bc). It gives : 153

4 [….] they set …., seized ? each other …. [….] 5 [….] …. cattle and sheep [….] 6 [….] …. ships which …. [….] 7 [….] spoke [….] in the land …. [….] 8 [….] the rest of them [….] their possessions, their belongings and equipment …. [….] 9 [….] which is on the Euphrates, the (Greek) citizens …. [….] 10 [….] the chief bursar ? of the temples who …. in month VI the shandabakku-offi cial, the chief [….] 11 [….] the chief of troops from the remote cities of the Guti land towards [….]

But we cannot press for Sinatruces’ involvement here since the reference to both the « chief of troops » and « Guti » may be to an unrelated issue now lost. Nevertheless a S30/S33 ‘mule’ drachm

and Sinatruces) ; Simonetta 1974, 122 (Orodes I) ; Waggoner 1974, 24-25 (Gotarzes I) ; Dobbins 1975, 27-30, and 42-43 (Orodes I and Sinatruces) ; Simonetta 1975, 77 (Orodes I) ; Sellwood 1976, 5 (« Unknown King II ») ; Simonetta, Sellwood. 1978, 116 (Orodes I) ; Mørkholm 1980, 36-37, 43, n. 40 and 44-45 (Sinatruces) ; Sellwood 1980, 96-97 (« Unknown King II ») ; 1983a, 286-287 (« Unknown King II ») ; Dilmaghani 1986, 219-

Fig. 28. S30.19 silver drachm of Arsaces XVIfrom Susa (Author’s Collection).

220 (« Unknown King II ») ; Shore 1993, 108-111 (Orodes I) ; Si-monetta 2001, 105 (Gotarzes I).

151 Mørkholm 1980, 36-37.152 Mørkholm 1980, 36.153 Sachs, Hunger 1996, 508-511, no. -72.

Fig. 29. S30/S33 ‘mule’ silver drachm of Arsac-es XVI-Sinatruces (Sellwood’s Collection).


in Sellwood’s Collection (Fig. 29) suggests that the reigns of Arsaces XVI and Sinatruces over-lapped and hence both types were, at times, concurrently struck at the same mint.

There is virtually no allusion in the classical literature to the struggle between the two Arsacid claimants during the period 77/76-70/69 bc. The uninterrupted tetradrachm production at Seleu-cia on the Tigris as well as the ‘annual’ Susian bronzes under Arsaces XVI show that Sinatruces never went as far as Susiana and Babylonia after he was brought back to power by his Scythian allies in c. 77 bc. He was most probably confi ned to the regions east of the Caspian Gates. 154 In any case, lack of Babylonian colophons dated 75-69 bc and naming Arsaces XVI and/or his asso-ciated queen strongly implies that Sinatruces was not a serious threat until about 69 bc.

The following colophon from a ‘fable’ text implies that on 22.xii.242 seb (19/20.3.69 bc) Arsaces XVI was still unchallenged in Babylonia : 155

18 ... ... « Eki » ituŠE U4-22-[KÁM MU-1-me-1,18-KÁM šá ši-i]19 MU-2-me-42-KÁM lAr-<šá>-ka-a LUGAL

18 … … Babylon. Month xii, day 22, [year 178, which is]19 year 242, Arsaces (is) King.

The next record, a badly damaged colophon of an astronomical tablet from year 243 seb (27/28.3.69- 13/14.4.68 bc), introduces into the date-formula the name of a new royal consort, Piruztana, to separate Arsaces XVI from his contemporary : 156

6 [MU-1-me-1,19-KÁM] [Year 179,] 7 [šá ši-i M]U-2-m[e-4]3-KÁM [which is ye]ar 2[4]3, 8 [lA]r-šá-ka-a LUGAL [A]rsaces (is) King, 9 [u fP]i-ri-uz-ta-na-a [and P]iruztana, 10 [DAM-šú GAŠ]AN [his wife, the Que]en.

Left edge of tablet : 1 [ZI šá s]in šá 4[,3] [Velocity of the mo]on for year 24[3].

I had assigned elsewhere 157 this and the following tablets mentioning Queen Piruztana to the reign of Phraates III. However, a new text giving « King of Kings Arsaces » in association with his mother, Queen (...)-Ishtar attests that Phraates established his authority in Babylon about 67/66 bc (cf. below). He could therefore not be the Arsacid prince who ruled jointly with Piruztana during 69/67-66 bc. Given the scanty cuneiform records and ‘annual’ Susian bronzes, it is now possible to extend the reign of Arsaces XVI in Babylonia to 67 bc. Consequently, he could be identifi ed with the Parthian king mentioned in four classical sources on the events of c. 69 bc. These are the pas-sage in Appian (Mithradatic Wars, 13.87), 158 the famous letter of Mithradates VI Eupator of Pon-tus in Sallust (Histories, 4, Fr. 69), both soliciting the aid of a Parthian king against Rome, 159 the reference to Tigranes’ promise of returning to « Arsaces » the « disputed territory » in Dio (36.1.2) 160

and the Parthian king’s demand from Tigranes to relinquish Mesopotamia in Plutarch (Lucullus, 30.1-2) 161 just after the Battle of Tigranocerta 162 in 69 bc. It is possible that following the death of Sinatruces his son Phraates III contended for the throne with added determination and feroc-ity. The text of Nisa ostracon 2640 (Nova 307) presented further reveals that Phraates had already styled himself king and perhaps begun an invasion of Northern and Central Parthia as early as

154 Sellwood 1976, 4 and 19 has perceptively identifi ed the celators of the S33 coinage. The absence of engraver « F » clearly indicates that after his crushing defeat by Gotarzes I in 87 bc Sinatruces never regained the satrapy of Media and therefore issued no more drachms at Rhagae and Ecba-tana.

155 Walker 1972, pl. 32, no. 93 (BM 34654, fable concerning the duqduqu bird).

156 Neugebauer 1955a, 23 colophon Zkc (No. 194a = BM 45818+45838+46192) and 182. The author assigns the tablet to the reign of Phraates III ; 1955b, pl. 225 (copy) and pl. 239 (Photo) ; McEwan 1986, 93 ; Del Monte 1997, 256 allocates to Phraates III. 157 Assar 2000, 18-20.

158 White 1999, 404-405.159 McGushin 1994, 47-51.160 Cary 2001, 4-5. 161 Perrin 2001, 570-571.162 Syme 2002, 196. Cf. also Appian (Mithradatic Wars,

13.87) in White 1999, 404-405 on the events of 68 bc and fol-lowing the Battle of Tigranocerta. It relates that Mithradates of Pontus and Tigranes « traversed the country collecting a new army, the command of which was committed to Mi-thradates, because Tigranes thought that his disasters must have taught him some lessons. They also sent messengers to Parthia to solicit aid from that quarter ». Debevoise 1938, 70 and n. 3 erroneously assigns the letter of Mithradates VI to before the Battle which took place in 69 bc.


180 ae (68/67 bc). This required the insertion of a queen’s name in the Babylonian date-formulas to separate the two Arsacid opponents.

The latest cuneiform record from the reign of Arsaces XVI reports the lunar eclipse of 15.x.244 seb (19/20.1.67 bc) and confi rms the ongoing factional dispute in Parthia : 163

1 MU-1-me-1,20-KÁM šá ši-i2 MU-2-me- 44-KÁM lAr-šá-kám LUGAL3 u fPi-ir-uz-ta-na-a4 DAM-šú GAŠAN ituAB GE6 15

1 Year 180, which is 2 year 244, Arsaces (is) King, 3 and Piruztana,4 his wife, the Queen. Month X, night of the 15th, … …

We also have a series of rare drachms (S30.18, S30.21-22, S30.24-25, and, S30.28-30) 164 known as the ‘campaign coins’ (Figs. 30-35). Except for S30.30 which may carry the monogram of Mithradatkart, these bear the full mint names ENRAGAI� , NISAIA (or NICAIA), MARGIANH, TRAXIANH and AREIA. 165 This implies that Arsaces XVI had jurisdiction over the central regions as well as the northern and eastern provinces of Parthia. To these are also added the specimens from Ec-batana and Rhagae with the somewhat unconventional term KATA STRATEIA signifying the

Fig. 30. S30.18 silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Rhagae (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 31. S30.24 silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Nisa (Sellwood’s Collection).

Fig. 32. S30.21 silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Margiane (Sellwood’s Collection).

Fig. 33. S30.22 silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Traxiane (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 34. S30.25 silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Areia (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 35. S30.30 silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Mithradatkart (Sellwood’s Collection).

163 Kugler 1924, 447, no. 30 ; Sachs 1955, 227, lbat 1448 ; McEwan 1986, 93 ; Del Monte 1997, 256 ; Steele 2000, 56 ; Hunger, Sachs 2001, 74-77, no. 27. The authors read the queen’s name as Pi-ir-muš-ta-na-a (Pirwuštana).

164 Sellwood 1991, 24-25.165 Weiskopf 1981, 129 and pl. 23, no. 16 (currently in Sell-

wood’s Collection).


peripatetic mint attached to the royal court as it progressed through the Empire (Fig. 36). While some or all of the ‘campaign coins’ may have been struck when Arsaces XVI was still recog-nised in Babylonia, I have shown below that the majority of these drachms were minted after he was ousted by Phraates III and forced to fl ee to North-East Parthia.

Our next cuneiform record was undoubted-ly compiled under Phraates III on 14.ix.246 seb (28/29.12.66 bc) in Babylon (cf. below). In the absence of an earlier document from the interven-ing period we may take this date as the terminus ante quem of the authority of Arsaces XVI in the southern and central Parthian provinces. This agrees with Dio (36.45.3) who places the death of Arsaces XVI about the time of Pompey’s fi rst contact with Phraates III in 66 bc. 166 However, I have shown further that this prince contested the throne with Phraates III for a few more years until he was fi nally eliminated about 62 bc.

We have regrettably no reference to the personal name of Arsaces XVI in our extant cunei-form material. He is simply called Arsaces by the classical authors. According to Dio (36.1.2) Ti-granes and Mithradates VI sent an embassy to « Arsaces of Parthia » in 69 bc seeking his assistance against Lucullus in Asia Minor and Armenia. At that time « Arsaces » was hostile to Tigranes be-cause of some disputed territory. This they pledged to yield to him. Dio (36.3.1-2) further reports that learning of these negotiations Lucullus too sent an envoy to « Arsaces », threatening him with war but also making promises if the Parthian king aided the Romans instead. Since « Arsaces » was, at that time, still unhappy with Tigranes he received the Romans and entered into rapport and alliance with Lucullus.

We then have the aforementioned report of the death in 66 bc of « Arsaces, King of Parthia » in Dio (36.45.3) and that Pompey anticipated Mithradates VI by quickly establishing friendship with the succeeding ruler, Phraates III.

It is true that on ascending the throne the Parthian kings took the dynastic appellation Arsaces. However, Dio consistently registers the personal names of the successors of Arsaces XVI, notably Phraates III and his sons, Mithradates IV and Orodes II, throughout his 36th-40th books. It is there-fore not impossible that he also recorded the personal name of the young son of Mithradates II in the aforementioned passage. He was probably christened Arsaces in memory of the founder of the dynasty. This agrees with the unexpected appearance of the seated archer – representing the founder of the dynasty – on the earliest Susian bronze of Arsaces XVI alluded to above.

Finally it is noteworthy that Arsaces XVI was still disputing with Tigranes certain territories in Northern Mesopotamia as late as 69 bc. This may have involved the city of Nisibis which Dio (36.6.2-3) claims Tigranes had seized from the Parthians and installed his brother there to guard his treasures and most of other possessions. As indicated earlier the Armenian ruler annexed a large part of Media and Northern Mesopotamia in about 85 bc during the reign of Mithradates III. Dio’s statements clearly suggest that Tigranes held at least part of the captured Parthian ter-ritory for over ten years. This ultimately strained the Partho-Armenian ties and led to prolonged quarrels between the young Arsacid prince and Tigranes. Dio’s comments also imply that the Ar-menian ruler probably lent no help to Arsaces XVI to overthrow Orodes I in early 75 bc.

Arsaces XVII-Phraates III (70/69, in Parthia, 67/66-58/57 bc in Babylon)

As shown elsewhere, 167 one of the reasons for extending the end of the reign of Mithradates I from the traditional date 139/138 to 132 bc was a text mentioning his minor son Phraates II and the

Fig. 36. S30.28 silver drachm of Arsaces XVI from Court at Rhagae (Author’s Collection).

166 Cary 2001, 74-75. He could not be Sinatruces who died in 70/69 bc and was succeeded by his son Phraates III. The latter inaugurated his reign in Nisa in 69/68 bc. Cf. the same

work for other passages in Dio.167 Assar 2003a, 7-8 ; 2005b, 44-45 ; Dabrowa 2005, 73, n. 1 ;

Assar 2006, 95-96.


co-regent Rınnu in 180 seb ; the latter was Mithradates’ principal queen. The premise for that con-clusion was that an undisputed king on the throne for several years hardly requires the association of a co-ruler, albeit his mother, to legitimise his authority or identify his reign. As it turned out in that particular instance the joint kingship was due to Phraates’ young age and probably even a conscious attempt to stress that the throne had passed to the son of Mithradates I’s principal queen and not one born to a subordinate wife or concubine. I have also shown that in times of dynastic strife the inclusion in the Babylonian date-formulas of the name of a royal consort dis-tinguished the ruling king from his antagonist.

The accession record on Nisa ostracon 2640 (Nova 307) clearly indicates that Phraates III had been recognised in Northern Parthia sometime in 68/67 bc : 168

Aramaic transliteration : 1 ŠNT I C XX XX XX « XX » ’ršk MLK’ 2 [B]« RY npt Pry »ptk 3 [BRY ’H_YBRY ’rš]« k »

Parthian transcription : 1 sard sad (ud) haštad Aršak šah 2 puhr nab « Frya »patak 3 [puhr baradarzadag Arša]k

Translation : 1 Year 180, King Arsaces, 2 son of the grandson of Phriapatius, 3 [son of the nephew of Arsa]ces

This evidently alarmed Arsaces XVI and also compelled the scribes in Babylon to name his Queen Piruztana in their colophons.

In the above quoted lunar eclipse text dated 14.ix.246 SEB (28/29.12.66 BC) once again we fi nd a Parthian monarch associated with his mother, this time as his Queen : 169

1 MU-1-me-1,22-KÁM šá ši-i MU-« 2 »-[me-46-KÁM]2 lAr-šá-kám LUGAL LUGALmeš u « f »[....]-3 d15 AMA-šú GAŠAN GAN GE6 14 [....]

1 Year 182, which is year 2[46], 2 Arsaces (is) King of Kings and [….]3 -Ishtar, his mother, the Queen. Month ix, night of the 14th, [….]

This is an interesting document on several counts and so off ers a series of clues about the iden-tity of the « King of Kings Arsaces » and his coinage. Firstly, the inclusion of the name of Queen Mother (...)-Ishtar in the date-formula suggests that there may have been either a serious opposi-tion to her son’s authority or that he was still too young to rule independently or both. Secondly, it reveals the resurrection of the vaunting title « King of Kings » in the cuneiform colophons after the reign of Mithradates II. This immediately brings to mind the statement by Dio (36.6.1-3) that when Pompey wrote to Phraates III on the disputed territory of Gorduene in 65 bc he showed contempt for the latter’s title and addressed him merely as « King » rather than « King of Kings ». 170 It is highly likely that the above text was compiled under Phraates III a few months after his vic-tory over Arsaces XVI and so gives the terminus ante quem of his accession to the throne in Baby-lon.171 But the reason for the inclusion of his mother’s name in the date-formula is not entirely

168 Diakonoff, Livshits 1966, 143-144, n. 28 and pls. x and x :a ; Chaumont 1968, 16-18 ; 1971, 145-147 ; Lukonin 1983, 687-689 ; Bader 1996, 264 (read 2638 for 2538) ; Diakonoff, Liv-shits 1999, pl. 918 ; 2003, 174.

169 Sachs 1955, xxxiii, lbat *1450 ; Hunger, Sachs 2001, 787-789, no. 30.

170 Cary 2001, 109. Cf. also Plutarch (Pompey, 38.2) in Car-ry 1990, 214-215.

171 The bm 45729 unpublished ‘incomplete’ Almanac for year 246 seb should have been fi nalised by the end of 245 seb with its date formula added at the beginning of 246 seb. However, not only the astronomical computations in this record remain unfi nished, but also there are no signs of a dated colophon or even a single date on any of the edges or reverse of the tablet which is largely uninscribed. Since of all the extant astronomical tablets from the Achaemenid,


clear. Phraates may have lost his principal queen and yet the presence of an active opponent in Parthia called for the association of a royal consort to identify him as the ruling monarch. This probably led to a temporary joint reign with his mother.

Returning to the Parthian series from Seleucia on the Tigris we may recall that the early ex-amples of S30 tetradrachms have a youthful and lightly bearded portrait. The later specimens of this type naturally show a progressively older royal bust with a short but fully developed beard. Mørkholm perceptively remarks that the last tetradrachms of Arsaces XVI (Fig. 37) and the iso-lated S37.1 (Fig. 38) are linked by their common control mark B which is placed in the same posi-tion on the reverse of both types un-der the bow of the seated archer. 172 He also underlines the striking stylis-tic similarities between the two types with virtually similar facial features of the obverse busts and identical reverse designs and disposition of the inscrip-tions. These confi rm the same celator at work and place the S37 immediately after the fi nal S30 output.

Having fi xed the sequence of the is-sues from the ‘Dark Age’ Mørkholm allocates the S30 tetradrachms to Si-natruces and takes S37 as the initial coinage of Phraates III as his father’s co-regent. It should be pointed out that other numismatists have diff er-ently attributed the S37 tetradrachms. Their choice of the issuer varies from Gotarzes I to Darius (vassal king of Media Atropatene), Arsaces Philopa-tor, Mithradates III and Orodes II. 173 What is noteworthy about this isolated and rare coinage with no correspond-ing drachms and bronzes is the central bull’s horn and two concentric rows of pearl on the royal tiara. These are also noted on S39 te t-radrachms which are generally regarded as the terminal issue of Phraates III. A slightly diff erent headdress too is worn by Phraates’ father Sinatruces on his S33 drachms. Given the inscriptional, literary and numismatic evidence the S37 coinage may be taken as the inaugural issue of Phraates III marking his capture of Babylonia in 67/66 bc. Its extreme rarity implies that shortly after its in-ception S37 was superseded by a new issue. As shown below, beginning in 67/66 bc the S36 coin-age was minted throughout the Parthian Empire for about three to fi ve years. Although as early as 1877 Gardner had assigned this type to Phraates III, later numismatists gave it to a variety of rul-

Macedonian, Seleucid and Parthian epochs this text alone remains ‘incomplete’ and undated, it may be possible to in-fer that the chaotic state of aff airs before Phraates III’s entry into Babylon led to a temporary closure of the temples in that city. If so we could date the expulsion of Arsaces XVI and the inception of Phraates’ reign in Babylon to just be-fore the beginning of 246 seb (March/April 66 bc). Howev-er, in view of the diplomatic contacts between the Parthian king and Pompey regarding Tigranes the Elder of Armenia and his son, it is likely that Phraates’ successful assault on Babylon took place in about late summer – early autumn 67 bc.

172 Mørkholm 1980, 37.173 Newell 1938, 482 (Mithradates III) ; Simonetta 1957, 119

and 121 (Gotarzes I) ; Le Rider 1965, 403-404 (Orodes II) ; Sell-wood 1965, 133 (Darius ?) ; Simonetta 1966, (Mithradates III) ; Sellwood 1971, 102 (Darius ?) ; Dobbins 1975, 43 (Arsaces Phi-lopator Euergetes) ; Simonetta 1975, 77 (Arsaces Philopator) ; Sellwood 1976, 5 (Darius ?) ; Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 116 (Arsaces Philopator) ; Mørkholm 1980, 45 (Phraates III as co-regent with Sinatruces) ; Sellwood 1980 ; 110 (Darius ?) ; 1983a, 288-289 (Darius ?) ; Dilmaghani 1986, 221-222 (Phraates III) ; Si-monetta 2001, 101 and 105 (Vonones I of the Scythian dynasty of Arachosia).


Fig. 38. S37.1 silver tetradrachm of Phraates IIIfrom Seleucia on the Tigris.


ers including Gotarzes I, an « Unknown King », « Arsaces XI », Darius, Mithradates III, and Orodes II. It will be shown presently that Phraates III minted the S36 series after supplanting Arsaces XVI in Susiana and Babylonia in 67/66 bc. 174

The ‘annual’ Susian bronze emissions in Table 1 indicate that in 246 sem (67/66 bc) a new type (S36.23-27) superseded the S30 series of Arsaces XVI. According to Le Rider, of the fourteen ex-amples of S36 recovered at Susa, nine were defi nite and two remained possible overstrikes on ear-lier types. 175 In cases where the undertype was identifi able, it turned out to be a S30 variety of Arsaces XVI. This strongly suggests that the transition from S30 to S36 was immediate and un-interrupted. Given that the fi ve distinct S36 bronze varieties from Susa amount to three annual and two quasi-annual outputs, they would cover a minimum of three full years of mintage in the period 66/65-64/63 bc with one type assigned to the latter months of 67/66 and at least part of 63/62 bc taken up by the fi fth variety. Our classical sources inform us that Phraates III was in regular contact with Pompey during 66-64 bc, initially concerning co-operative action against Ti-granes II and later in a more hostile fashion after the Armenian king had insinuated himself into Pompey’s alliance. 176 Phraates’ authority in Babylon is further confi rmed by the following two colophons. The fi rst, dated 1.[i.247] seb (11/12.4.65 bc), reads : 177

11 U4-1-KÁM IGI-DU8-[Ameš DIB-qameš u AN-KU10

meš šá ana MU-1-me-1,23-KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-47-KÁM]12 lAr-šá-kám LUGAL LUGALmeš u fx-[.... .... GAŠAN kun-nu-’u]

11 Day 1 (of month i), appear[ances, passings, and eclipses which were established for year 183, which is year 247,]12 Arsaces (is) King of Kings and [.... ...., Queen].

The second, dated April 64 bc, gives : 178

13 meš-hi šá KUR-á[dmeš šá d]UDU-IDIMmeš šá MU-1-me-1,24-KÁM SA4 2-me-« 48 »-KÁM14 lAr-šá-kám LUGAL LUGALmeš

13 [Measurements of the entries of] the planets (into zodiacal signs) for year 184, which is 248,14 Arsaces (is) King of Kings.

As shown above, the S36 tetradrachms from Seleucia and the unimpeded drachm series (S36.4-18) from the mints throughout the Empire (Figs. 39-42) fall in the period 67/66-63/62 bc. If is-sued by a diff erent ruler, the fact that he had extended his sway over the whole of the kingdom at this juncture and not the Median province – the seat of the local governor Darius the Mede179 – would have naturally brought him into confl ict with Phraates III and prevented the latter from meddling in the Armenian aff airs unhindered and persistently antagonising Pompey. The com-bined cuneiform and numismatic evidence therefore removes the possibility of attributing S36 to a claimant other than Phraates III.

The inscription of both S37 and S36 tetradrachms runs BASILEWS MEGALOU ARSAKOU FILOPATOROS EUERGETOU EPIFANOUS FILELLHNOS. The epithet FILOPATOROS was almost certainly adopted by Phraates III to express his devotion for his recently deceased fa-

174 Gardner 1877, 36 (Phraates III) ; Wroth 1903, 56-60 (« Unknown King ») ; Petrowicz 1904, 54-55 (Mithradates III) ; Newell 1938, 482-484 (Mithradates III) ; Simonetta 1957, 119 and 121 (Gotarzes I) ; Le Rider 1965, 403-404 (Orodes II) ; Sellwood 1965, 133 (Darius ?) ; Simonetta 1966, 39 (Arsaces XI, Philopator) ; Sellwood 1971, 89-102 (Darius ?) ; Simonetta 1974, 122-123 and 138 (follows Wroth and Sellwood) ; Dobbins 1975, 43 (Arsaces Philopator Euergetes) ; Simonetta 1975, 77 (Arsaces Philopator) ; Sellwood 1976, 5 (Darius ?) ; Simonet-ta, Sellwood 1978, 116 (Arsaces Philopator) ; Sellwood 1980, 106-110 (Darius ?) ; Mørkholm 1980, 45 (Phraates III as co-regent with Sinatruces) ; Sellwood 1983a, 288-289 (Dar-ius ?) ; Dilmaghani 1986, 221-222 (Phraates III) ; Shore 1993, 112-114 (Phraates III) ; Simonetta 2001, 101 and 105 (Vonones I of the Scythian dynasty of Arachosia).

175 Le Rider 1965, 99-100 ; Simonetta 1966, 30-31 ; Sellwood 1967, 294 ; Dobbins 1975, 40 ; Mørkholm 1980, 44 ; Simonetta 2001, 91.

176 Dio Cassius (36.45.3 ; 36.51.1-3 ; 37.5.1-37.7.5). Cf. Cary 2001, 74-75, 86-87, 106-113, respectively. Cf. also Plutarch (Pom-pey, 33.5), in Perrin 1990, 204-205.

177 BM 33522+33569+33580+33814 unpublished Goal-Year Text.

178 Kugler 1924, 447, no. 31 ; Sachs 1955, 177, lbat 1183 (Al-manac for 248 seb) ; Del Monte 1997, 257.

179 On « Darius the Mede » cf. Appian (Mithradatic Wars, 16.106 and 17.117), in White 1999, 440-441 (events of 64 bc) and 468-469 (Pompey’s triumphant entry into Rome in 62/61 bc). Diodorus (40.4.1), in Walton 2001, 286-287, refers to him as « Darius king of the Medes ».


ther, Sinatruces. A similar inscription also appears on the S36 Susian bronz-es and silver drachms and copper de-nominations from the Parthian mints. Coupled with their close iconographi-cal and stylistic similarities, the iden-tical inscriptions on S37 and S36 tet-radrachms leave little doubt that they were both issued by Phraates III.

A Diary fragment with an astronomi-cally determined date off ers the follow-ing scanty information from month i of 249 seb (20/21.4.-18/19.5.63 bc) : 180

1 [... ... MU-1-me-1,25-KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-49-KÁM lAr-šá-kám LUGAL LUGALmeš] u fT_e-le-ú-ni-qé-e 2 [DAM ?-šú GAŠAN ... ...]

1 [… … year 185, which is year 249, Arsaces (is) King of Kings] and Teleonike, 2 [his wife ?, the Queen ... ...]

13 [.... še]-im ina SILAmeš Eki KUDmeš

13 […. trade in bar]ley was interrupted in the streets of Babylon,

Upper edge text 1 [EN-NUN šá gi-né-e šá TA ituBAR EN TIL ituKIN ? šá MU-1-me-1,25-KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-49-KÁM lA]r-šá-kám LUGAL LUGALmeš

1 [Diary from month I to the end of month vi ? of year 185, which is year 249, A]rsaces (is) King of Kings.

Although the above date-formula attests Phraates’ authority in Babylon, the incomplete line of histor-ical text in the same record implies a war or a ma-jor calamity that interrupted the sale of barley in that city. 181 This was probably due to the on-going struggle between Phraates III and Arsaces XVI.

The sequence of ‘annual’ Susian bronze issues in Table 1 shows that S36 coinage terminated in 250 sem (63/62 bc) and a new type (S38) began in 251 sem (62/61 bc). 182 Considering that the last of S36 bronze may have been minted in the fi rst month of 250 sem and the fi rst of S38 issued in the last month of 251 sem, we could theoretically have a period of nearly two years between the two types with no output from Susa.

As mentioned earlier, we have a series of rare drachms from the reign of Arsaces XVI termed the ‘campaign coins’. Except for the examples from Ec-batana and Rhagae these are struck from unprofes-


Fig. 40. S36.7 silver drachm of Phraates IIIfrom Ecbatana (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 41. S36.9 silver drachm of Phraates IIIfrom Rhagae (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 42. S36.12 silver drachm of Phraates IIIfrom Mithradatkart (Author’s Collection).

180 McEwan 1986, 93 ; Sachs, Hunger 1996, 512-515, no. -62 ; Del Monte 1997, 182 and 257.

181 Sachs, Hunger 1988, 34.182 Le Rider 1965, 99-100, 402-404 and pls. xvi-xvii, nos. 184-

188 (S36.23-27) all overstruck on earlier issues (probably S30

alone). No. 186 : 2 has [Q]EOPAT[OROS] [E]UERG[ETOU] on the obverse. No. 186 : 3 shows an almost complete bust of Arsaces XVI on the reverse and QEOPATO[ROS] EUERG[ETOU] on the obverse. These epithets are found ex-clusively on S30 coinage.


sionally executed dies and thus imply lack of bullion and skilful artisans. I believe that while some or all of these varieties may have been issued during the long Parthian campaigns of Arsaces XVI against Sinatruces and then his son and successor Phraates III during 69-66 bc, some were also minted later to fi nance his invasion of the Kingdom to reclaim the throne. To counter that threat Phraates may have left Babylonia to confront his rival in Parthia. To pay for his own operations he minted S35 drachms (Figs. 43-47) – generally regarded as the issue of an « Unknown King », Sinatru-ces, Darius, or Mithradates III 183 – with his facing bust at this juncture in response to the ‘cam-paign coins’ of Arsaces XVI. Perhaps one reason for the appearance of a frontal portrait was to separate S35 from S30 when Phraates introduced into his titulature the epithet QEOPATOROS. 184 Having fi nally eliminated his opponent in the East, I believe Phraates abandoned his S35 coinage in favour of the S39 drachms which he issued on his journey back to Babylonia (Fig. 48). Two ex-amples of this variety in my collection are struck from reverse dies cut by Sellwood’s artifi cer « F »

183 Gardner 1877, 36 (Phraates III) ; Wroth 1903, 56-58 (« Unknown King ») ; Petrowicz 1904, 54-55 (Mithradates III) ; Newell 1938, 483-484 (Mithradates III) ; Simonetta 1957, 119 and 121 (Gotarzes I) ; Sellwood 1962, 85 (Mithradates III) ; Le Rider 1965, 403-404 (Mithradates III ?) ; Sellwood 1965, 133 (Darius ?) ; Simonetta 1966, 39 (Arsaces XI, Philopator) ; Sell-wood 1971, 95-97 (Darius ?) ; Dobbins 1975, 43 (Sinatruces) ; Si-

monetta 1975, 77 (Arsaces Philopator or Darius ?) ; Sellwood 1976, 5 (Darius ?) ; Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 116 (Arsaces or Mithradates III) ; Mørkholm 1980, 45 (Sinatruces) ; Sellwood 1980, 111-113 (Darius ?) ; 1983a, 288-289 (Darius ?) ; Dilmaghani 1986, 221-222 (Phraates III) ; Shore 1993, 114 (Phraates III) ; Si-monetta 2001, 101 and 105 (Darius).

184 Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 108.



Fig. 45. S35.3 var. silver drachm of Phraates IIIfrom Court at Rhagae (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 46. S35.4 var. silver drachm of Phraates IIIfrom Margiane (Author’s Collection).




(Fig. 49). 185 It was thought that this celator had engraved dies for the earlier types S31, S34, S30, S35, 186 and S36 but not the S38 and S39 drachms of Phraates III. The new specimens naturally imply that of the two S38 and S39 series, the latter is anterior and therefore belongs to the period immediately after Phraates’ decisive vic-tory over Arsaces XVI. 187

A mutilated Babylonian colophon dated 251 seb (61/60 bc) apparently lacks an associated queen and thus suggests the absence of a rival king : 188

56 [itux1 U4-x2-KÁM MU]-1-me-1,27-KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-[51-KÁM] lA[r-šá-kám]57 L[UGAL] LUGAL[meš]

56 [Month x1, day x2, year] 187, which is year 2[51, Arsaces (is)]57 K[ing] of King[s].

Perhaps it took Phraates no more than a year in his campaign to eliminate Arsaces XVI. Having returned to Babylonia he celebrated his victory by striking the S39 tetradrachms with the epithet QEOU and showing on the reverse Phraates enthroned and holding an eagle in place of a fl ying Nike (Fig. 50). It is possible that following his earlier consecutive types S37 and S36 Phraates’ S38 coinage (Figs. 51-54) superseded his S39 emission with fi ve distinct ‘annual’ Susian bronzes (S38.24-28). 189 These were minted in the period 251-255 sem (62/61-58/57 bc).

The above scenario however fails to ex-plain why types S35 and S39 have no par-allel Susian bronzes. Plutarch (Pompey, 36.2) states that on his return through Lesser Armenia in 65 bc Pompey en-tertained ambassadors from Media and Elymais 190 who may have sought Ro-man assistance against Parthian domina-tion. Given the amicable relationship be-tween the House of Mithradates II and Kamnaskires II/III, it is possible that the latter’s successor, Kamnaskires IV, took advantage of Phraates’ preoccupation with fi ghting Arsac-es XVI in Parthia and recovered Susa. He then terminated Arsacid issues in that city and minted his own coinage during 250-251 sem (63/62-62/61 bc). 191

The resumption of Parthian issues after Phraates’ triumphant return from the East involved a limited silver emission from Susa, namely the S39.14-16 and S38.15-16 drachms. These bear on the reverse and beneath the bow of the seated archer the monograms GP/S, DP/S and BP/S and DP/S respectively (Figs. 55-57). Such composite symbols on Parthian drachms are quite rare and the ones on Phraates’ Susian silver have been diff erently interpreted by numismatists as either Seleucid Era dates or letter combinations with literal rather than numeral signifi cance. Initially and after the discovery of a S38.15 drachm during the extensive French excavations at



185 Sellwood 1976, 19.186 Jacobson, Mørkholm 1965, pl. 3.80 (not recorded by

Sellwood).187 A pair of drachms in Sellwood’s Collection, one with

a S38 and the other with a S39 obverse, share the same re-verse die. This suggests that the two types were either par-allel or contiguous. Cf. Simonetta 2001, 99-104 for references

to these ‘links’.188 George 1992, 71, Tablet i (BM 33491+33826), and pl. 4

(copy).189 Sellwood 1980, 118 (read 38.28 for 38.29).190 Perrin 1990, 208-209.191 Alram 1986, 144-145, no. 480 could have been minted

by Kamnaskires IV in 62/61 bc.


Susa, Le Rider considered the possibility of a date, i.e. 282 sem (31/30 bc) in the reign of Phraates IV. But for lack of epigraphical, stylistic and iconographical consistency between that coin and those fi rmly assigned to Phraates IV (S50-54) he abandoned his original conjecture and conceded that these ‘monograms’ must represent letters of control. 192 Later, having taken the letter pi in these symbols as a degenerated form of mu, 193 Waggoner read them inclusively as BPS, GPS, DPS, and concluded that they resolved into 242, 243, and 244 sem year dates (71/70, 70/69, and 69/68 bc, respectively). 194 However, this entailed serious implications in that it required a S40.16 drachm of Mithradates IV, son of Phraates III, with the BP/S symbol to be contemporary with S38.15 drachms ostensibly struck in 242 sem (71/70 bc) at the very beginning of Phraates’ reign. To resolve this complex situation in which two Parthian kings apparently struck three types of silver drachms (S38-39 and S40) contemporaneously, Waggoner argued for a co-regency between Phraates III and his son Mithradates as soon as the former acceded to the throne. 195 Nevertheless, given the uncommon and unprecedented disposition of these ‘dates’ under the bow of the seated archer, normally reserved for mint monograms, Sellwood suggested that by analogy with other monograms, the letter sigma stands for Susa while beta, gamma, and delta may have a sequential value. 196 Yet he conceded that the reason for the presence of the letter pi escaped him.

According to the arrangement of Susian bronzes in Table 1, S38 series may be securely placed after S36. The latter began in 246 sem (67/66 bc) by overstriking S30 and ended in 250 sem (63/62 bc). This places the inception of S38 in 251 sem (62/61 bc) and shows that putting the S38 in 242 sem requires S36 to start in 237 sem (76/75 bc) and thus coincide with the fi rst regnal year of Ar-saces XVI in Babylon. Given that Phraates III secured the Susian mint in 67/66 bc, we may safely preclude the above composite symbols from being Seleucid Era dates.





192 Le Rider 1965, 197, n. 481.193 Wroth 1903, lxxvii-lxxviii, and 49, no. 32, a S39.14

drachm attributed to Phraates III.194 Waggoner 1974, 19-20. Cf. also Simonetta 1975, 71-72 ;

Mørkholm 1980, 41-42 ; Weiskopf 1981, 145-146 who accept Waggoner’s interpretation.

195 Cf. Dio (36.14.2) in Cary 2001, 20-21 on « Mithradates

from Media, the son-in-law of Tigranes (II) » of Armenia who attacked a detachment of Roman soldiers in Lucul-lus’ army in 67 bc and « killed many of them ». He must have been Mithradates (IV) son of Phraates III, and his fa-ther’s governor of Media. This precludes Darius from hav-ing usurped the Arsacid throne and minted S35-37 coinages about 70 bc.


Accepting the chronological signifi cance of the fi rst letter in these monograms I have con-cluded that the second and third letters may represent PROS SOUSOIS. This probably implies ‘from’ or even ‘emanating from’ Susa. Perhaps, starting with letter alpha and to mark the re-im-position of Arsacid power in Susa after Phraates’ absence in Parthia, the S39 variety was minted fi rst for a few months followed by S38 before the resumption of the normal bronze types. In any case, the overall rarity of S39.14-16 and S38.15-16 drachms confi rms their brief period of mintage as special issues.

Of particular interest is also a ‘mule’ drachm in Sellwood’s Collection (Fig. 58) struck from a S38 obverse and a S30.18 reverse with ENRAGAIC. This indicates that Phraates’ last issue and the ‘campaign’ coinage of Arsaces XVI were either contemporary or contiguous. I had suggested else-where 197 that given the proximity of the two types the ‘mule’ may well have been struck from an unused S30.18 reverse die unintentionally paired with a S38 obverse of Phraates III. But the possibility of a last bid for power and minting of coins by Arsaces XVI cannot be entirely ruled out. The manual removal of both the stag decoration around the crest and the central horn of the tiara on a S39.3 drachm of Phraates III (Fig. 59) suggests that an active rival attempted to in-tegrate the issue into the S31 coinage of Mithradates III. The arrangement of the ‘annual’ Susian bronzes in Table 1 shows that this could have happened in 62/61 bc shortly before the inception of the S38 coinage of Phraates III. Assuming that Arsaces XVI was minting his ‘campaign’ coinage while fi ghting Phraates in the period 67/66-62/61 bc it is possible that the ‘mule’ was struck from a wrong set of S38 obverse and S30.18 reverse dies. This implies that Phraates III fi nally eliminat-ed Arsaces XVI in about 62/61 bc.

The latest extant cuneiform record from the reign of Phraates III is a broken colophon of an Almanac compiled in year 253 and dated in month i of 254 seb (25/26.3.-23/24.4.58 bc) : 198

5 meš-h i šá KUR-ádmeš šá dUDU-IDIMmeš šá MU-[1-me-1,30-KÁM šá ši-i MU-2-me-54-KÁM]6 1Ar-šá-kám LUGAL LUGALmeš

5 Measurements of the entries of the planets (into zodiacal signs) for year [190, which is year 254],6 Arsaces (is) King of Kings.

Fig. 55. S39.14 silver drachm of Phraates IIIfrom Susa.

Fig. 56. S38.15 silver drachm of Phraates IIIfrom Susa (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 57. S38.16 silver drachm of Phraates IIIfrom Susa (Author’s Collection).

Fig. 58. S38/S30.18 ‘mule’ silver drachmof Phraates III-Arsaces XVI from Rhagae

(Sellwood’s Collection).

196 Sellwood 1976, 15-16, and 23. Cf. also Dilmaghani 1986, 222-223 ; Simonetta 2001, 97-98 and 104 who take the

symbols as composite Susian mint monograms.197 Assar 2003, 65. 198 Sachs 1955, 177, lbat 1184.


On the other hand, Phraates’ ‘annual’ Susian bronzes indicate that his terminal type was minted in 255 sem (20/21.9.58-7/8.10.57 bc). Al-though somewhat inconclusive, when com-bined with the statement of Dio (39.56.2) 199 our cuneiform and numismatic evidence sug-gests that Phraates was murdered by his sons Mithradates IV and Orodes II sometime after late September 58 bc.

Arsaces XVIII-Mithradates IV(58-55 bc)

Having disposed of their father, Mithradates and Orodes soon found themselves at war over the succession. The sequence of drachms from the Parthian ‘Dark Age’ shows that the elder brother assumed the diadem fi rst. 200 However lack of cuneiform colophons and historical notices from the period 255-262 seb (57/56-50/49 bc) compels us to reconstruct the events of the reign of Mi-thradates IV from his coins and a small number of sketchy classical references. These will be re-viewed in some detail in a future publication. Nevertheless, I believe it is appropriate to end this note with a brief analysis of the reasons for attributing S44.1 tetradrachms to Mithradates IV. 201

With the exception of Petrowicz 202 who assigned the issue to Phraates III this type had gen-erally been taken as an early coinage of Orodes II. 203 It shows on its reverse an enthroned arch-er holding a bow in his out-stretched right hand and the inscription BASILEWS BASILEWN MEGALOU ARSAKOU KAI KTISTOU, « (the coin of the) Great King of Kings, Arsaces, and the Founder » (Fig. 60). The attribution to Orodes seemed secure until Simonetta 204 ascribed it to Pacorus I or an earlier issuer and then Mørkholm 205 took it as a « neutral coinage » struck by mint offi cials at Seleucia on the Tigris during the period of struggle between Mithradates IV and Orodes II. As already discussed elsewhere, 206 there is no evidence that a coinage was ever struck on behalf of the mint personnel at Seleucia on the Tigris. The genitive style of the royal titula-ture on Parthian issues strongly implies that they were minted at the behest of an Arsacid king on the throne.

The overall fabric and workmanship of the known examples of S44.1 tetradrachms, struck from a multitude of dies, 207 clearly link them with the S38.1 of Phraates III rather than the subsequent types (S45-S48) of Orodes II. 208 Furthermore, the latter never employs the epithet MEGALOU whereas it is found in the inscriptions of the S40 and S41 drachms of Mithradates IV. These read

Fig. 59. S39.3 var. silver drachm of Phraates III from Rhagae with the central horn and stags on tiara removed from coin (Author’s Collection).

199 Cary 2001, 391.200 Sellwood 1976, 4-5. Dio (39.56.2) reports that « Orodes

after succeeding to the kingdom had expelled Mithradates, his brother, from Media which he was governing ». This agrees with Dio (36.14.2), given in n. 195 above, that « Mi-thradates from Media » attacked the Romans in 67 bc. But numismatic evidence shows that Mithradates was not con-fi ned to Media. He issued coins and was acknowledged king in Nisa, Mithradatkart, Margiane, Traxiane and Aria in the north-eastern and eastern provinces as well the cen-tral, south-western and western satrapies with their mints at Rhagae, Susa, Kangavar, Laodicea and Seleucia on the Ti-gris. Cf. Sellwood 1980, 122-130. According to Justin (42.4.3-4), having taken refuge in Babylon Mithradates eventually surrendered to Orodes and was executed as an enemy of the Parthians. This may refer to Mithradates IV but cf. above (under Mithradates III) for a possible confusion with earlier kings called Mithradates and Orodes.

201 Assar 2000, 20-22.

202 Petrowicz 1904, 47.203 Gardner 1877, 39 (Orodes I) ; Wroth 1903, 68 (Orodes

I) ; Petrowicz 1904, 47 (Phraates III) ; Newell 1938, 485 (Orodes II) ; Simonetta 1957, 120-121 (Pacorus ?) ; Sellwood 1971, 124 (Orodes II) ; Simonetta, Sellwood 1978, 117 (Pa-corus) ; Sellwood 1980, 137 (Orodes II) ; Mørkholm 1980, 38 and 45 (« Neutral Coinage ») ; Sellwood 1983a, 290 (Orodes II).

204 Simonetta 1957, 120-121 suggests attribution to Mith-radates III (now IV) but tentatively ascribes the issue to Pa-corus I (struck in 40/39 bc) ; Simonetta 1978, 9-13.

205 Mørkholm 1980, 38 and 45.206 Assar 2001a, 25-26 ; 2001b, 17-18 and 20-22 ; 2003a, 66 ;

2005b, 47-48 ; 2006, 112-116.207 Compare with one obverse and possibly 2-3 reverse

dies for S31.7 drachms discussed above. These were proba-bly struck during the fi nal phase of confl ict between Mithra-dates III and Orodes I in 80 bc.

208 Sellwood 1980, 133-156.


BASILEWS MEGALOU ARSAK-OU DIKAIOU EPIFANOUS QEOU EUPATOROS KAI FILELLHNOS and BASILEWS BASILEWN MEG-ALOU ARSAKOU DIKAIOU EPI-FANOUS QEOU EUPATOROS KAI FILELLHNOS respectively. Giv-en the numismatic considerations I be-lieve that in 58 bc Mithradates IV em-ulated his predecessors and issued the S44 coinage to inaugurate his reign in Seleucia on the Tigris. We know that Orodes II seized and overstruck S41.1 tetradrachms of his brother (Fig. 61). 209 As their distinctive feature, these too had on their reverse a right-facing seat-ed archer although a fl ying Nike held a laurel wreath above his bow. Their inscription, reconstructed from a few overstrikes, reads BASILEWS AR-SAKOU TOU EPIKALOUMENOU MIQRADATOU FILELLHNOS. It is possible that the unprecedent-ed use of the personal name induced Orodes to suppress Mithradates’ S41.1 tetradrachms. On the other hand, there are no known S44 overstrikes. Sellwood argues that the epithet KTISTOU on S44 tetradrachms may be a reference to the re-establishment of Arsacid power by Orodes II after years of anarchy at home and dominance abroad by Rome and Arme-nia. 210 Yet the coinage may well have escaped Orodes’ attention because of its non-committal titulature. 211

Abbreviations

A Prefi x to registration number of tablets in The Oriental Institute (Chicago)act Astronomical Cuneiform Texts – Babylonian Ephemerides of the Seleucid Period for the Mo-

tions of the Sun, the Moon, and the Planetsae Arsacid Era, beginning 1 Nisanu (14/15 April) 247 bc (cf. Assar 2003b)adrtb Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia« AfO » « Archiv für Orientforschung »ja Jewish Antiquities ( Josephus)« aoat » « Alter Orient und Altes Testament - Veröff entlichungen zur Kultur und Geschichte des Alten

Orients und des Alten Testaments » (Münster)« AoF » « Altorientalische Forschungen »« bai » « Bulletin of the Asia Institute »« BibMes » « Bibliotheca Mesopotamica »bm British Museum« bo » « Bibliotheca Orientalis »« bor » « The Babylonian and Oriental Record : A Monthly Magazine of the Antiquities of the East »brm Babylonian Records in the Library of J. Pierpont Morgan (Yale University)cbs Catalogue of the Babylonian Section (University Museum, Pennsylvania University, Philadel-

phia)chir The Cambridge History of Iran

Fig. 60. S44.1 silver tetradrachm of Mithradates IVfrom Seleucia on the Tigris.

Fig. 61. S41.1 silver tetradrachm of Mithradates IV fromSeleucia on the Tigris, overstruck with S45 dies

of Orodes II.

209 Dressel 1922, 156-177 ; Sellwood 1971, 111. 210 Sellwood 1980, 131 ; 1983a, 290.211 Mørkholm 1980, 38.


« crai » « Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres »ct Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum (London)fgrh Die Fragmente der Griechischen HistorikerFr. Fragment« jcs » « Journal of Cuneiform Studies »lbat Late Babylonian Astronomical and Related Texts. Cf. Sachs 1955. Here the abbreviation is used

as a prefi x to the tablets in the same publication« lcl » « The Loeb Classical Library »lr Prefi x to the entries in Le Rider 1965mlc Morgan Library Collection (Yale University)« nc » « The Numismatic Chronicle »« n.a.b.u. » « Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires »pedn Parthian Economic Documents from Nisa. ciir, D. N. MacKenzie (ed.), part ii, Inscriptions of the Se-

leucid and Parthian Periods and of Eastern Iran and Central Asia, vol. ii, Parthian, London« rn » « Revue Numismatique »S Prefi x to Parthian coins types and varieties in Sellwood 1971 and 1980sbh Sumerisch-babylonisch Hymnen (cf. Reisner 1896)seb Seleucid Era of the Babylonian Calendar, beginning 1 Nisanu (2/3 April) 311 bc (cf. Assar

2003b)sem Seleucid Era of the Macedonian Calendar, beginning 1 Dios (6/7 October) 312 bc (cf. Assar

2003b)sh Shemtob Collection (British Museum)ssb Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel. – Assyriologische, Astronomische und Astralmythologische Unter-

suchungenvat/vath Vorderasiatische Abteilung Tontafeln - Vorderasiatischen Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Ber-

lin« ZfA » « Zeitschrift für Assyriologie »

Bibliography

Abgarians M. T., Sellwood D. G.– 1971, A Hoard of Early Parthian Drachms, « nc », 103-119.Adams R. McC.– 1965, Land Behind Baghdad – A History of Settlement on the Diyala Plain, Chicago.Aliev R. M., Bertel’s A. E., Osmanov M.-N. O.– 1965, Firdousı – Shahname, vol. 4, Moscow.Ars Classica-Naville – 1926, Catalogue de Monnaies Grecques et Romaines, Sale no. xii.Assar G. R. F.– 2000, Recent Studies in Parthian History : Part i, « The Celator », 14 : 12, 6-22.– 2001a, Recent Studies in Parthian History : Part ii, « The Celator », 15 : 1, 17-27 and 41.– 2001b, Recent Studies in Parthian History : Part iii, « The Celator », 15 : 2, 17-22.– 2003a, A Revised Parthian Chronology of the Period 141-54 bc, 1-94. Only available as a pdf fi le at http ://

groups.yahoo.com/group/Iranica-L/fi les/Parthians/CompositeRevised.doc– 2003b, Parthian Calendars at Babylon and Seleucia on the Tigris, « Iran », 41, 171-191.– 2004, Genealogy and Coinage of the Early Parthian Rulers. i, « Parthica », 6, 69-93.– 2005a, The Genealogy of the Parthian King Sinatruces (93/2-69/8 bc), « The Journal of the Classical and Me-

dieval Numismatic Society », 6 : 2, 16-33.– 2005b, Genealogy and Coinage of the Early Parthian Rulers. ii. A Revised Stemma, « Parthica », 7, 29-63.– 2006, A Revised Parthian Chronology of the Period 165-91 bc, « Electrum », 11, 87-158.Augé C.– 1979, Monnaies d’Élymaide de Bard-è Néchandeh et de Masjid-I Solaiman, in Terrasses sacrées de Bard-è Néchan-

deh et Masjid-I Solaiman ; Les trouvailles monétaires (« Mémoires de la delegation archéologique en Iran », 44). Paris.

Bader A.– 1996, Parthian Ostraca from Nisa : Some Historical Data, in La Persia e l’Asia Centrale da Alessandro al x secolo,

Roma, 9-12 novembre 1994 (« Atti dei Convegni Lincei », 127), Roma, 251-276.


Bellinger A. R.– 1949, The End of the Seleucids, « Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Science », 38, June,

51-102.Bickerman E. J.– 1966, The Parthian Ostracon No. 1760 from Nisa, « bo », 23, 15-17.Bivar A. D. H.– 1983, The Political History of Iran Under the Arsacids, in E. Yarshater (ed.), chir, 3 :1, The Seleucid, Parthian

and Sasanian Periods, Cambridge, 21-99.Cary E. (transl.)– 2001, Dio’s Roman History (« lcl », in 9 volumes), vol. 3, Cambridge (ma).Chaumont M.-L.– 1968, Les ostraca de Nisa. Nouvelle contribution à l’histoire des Arsacides, « Journal Asiatique », 256, 11-35.– 1971, Études d’histoire parthe. I. Documents royaux a Nisa, « Syria », 48, 143-164.Colledge M. A. R.– 1967, The Parthians, London.– 1977, Parthian Art, London.Coyajee J. C.– 1932, The House of Gotarzes : A Chapter of Parthian History in Shahnameh, « Journal and Proceedings of the

Asiatic Society of Bengal », 28, 207-224.Dabrowa E.– 2005, Les aspects politiques et militaires de la conquête parthe de la mésopotamie, « Electrum », 10, 73-88.Debevoise N. C.– 1938, A Political History of Parthia, Chicago.de la Fuÿe A.– 1904, Nouveau classement des monnaise Arsacides d’après le catalogue du British Museum, « rn », 317-371 and pls.

vii-viii.de Longpérier A.– 1853-1882, Mémoires sur la chronologie et l’iconographie des rois Parthes Arsacides, Paris.de Morgan J.– 1923-1936, Manuel de numismatique orientale de l’antiquité et du moyen age, tome 1, Paris.Del Monte G. F.– 1996, Ad BibMes 24 22, « n.a.b.u. », 1, 4, no. 3.– 1997, Testi dalla Babilonia Ellenistica, i, Testi Cronografi ci, Pisa.Diakonoff I. M., Livshits V. A.– 1960a, Dokumenty iz Nisy I veka do n.e. Predvaritel’nye itogi raboti, 25th International Congress of Oriental-

ists, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo vostocnoj literatury.– 1960b, Parfyanskoe tsarskoe khozyaystvo v Nise I veka do n.e., « Vestnik Drevney Istorii », 2, 14-38.– 1966, Novie Nakhodki Dokumentov v Staroy Nise (« Peredneaziatskiy Sbornik », 2), Moscow, 134-157, 169-173

and pls. ii-xvia.– 1999, pedn, plates v, London.– 2003, pedn, Text i, ed. by D. N. MacKenzie, A. N. Bader, N. Sims-Williams, London, pp. 161-215.Dilmaghani J.– 1986, Parthian Coins from Mithradates II to Orodes II, « nc », 216-224.Dittenberger W.– 1903, Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, vol. 1, Leipzig.Dobbins K. W.– 1974, Mithradates II and his Successors : A Study of the Parthian Crisis 90-70 B.C., « Antichthon », 8, 63-79.– 1975, The Successors of Mithradates II of Parthia, « nc », 19-45.Doty L. T.– 1977, Cuneiform Archives from Hellenistic Uruk, Ph.D. Dissertation, Yale.– 1993-1994, Rev. of David B. Weisberg, The Late Babylonian Texts of the Oriental Institute Collection, 88, Mal-

ibu, Undana Publication, 1991, pp., 131 pls. (= « BibMes », 24) // « AfO », 40-41, 111-116.– 2006 (title to be decided) (« Yale Oriental Series », 20), Yale.Dressel H.– 1922, Ein Tetradrachmon des Arsakiden Mithridates III, « Zeitschrift für Numismatik », 33, 156-177.Epping J., Strassmaier J. N.– 1890, Neue babylonische Planeten-Tafeln. ii. Ueberstzung der Planetentafel Rm 678, « ZfA », 5, 353-366.


– 1891, Neue babylonische Planeten-Tafeln. iv. Bemerkungen zur Planetentafel No. 9, 21-7-88 aus der Sammlung von Jos. Shemtob, jetzt in Philadelphia, University Museum, « ZfA », 6, 217-244.

Frye R. N.– 1983, The History of Ancient Iran, Munich.Gardner P.– 1877, The Parthian Coinage, London.George A. R.– 1992, Babylonian Topographical Texts, Leuven.Gershevitch I.– 1973, Genealogical Descent in Iranian, « Bulletin of the Iranian Culture Foundation », 1 :2, 71-86.Gignoux Ph.– 1972, Glossaire des Inscriptions Pehlevies et Parthes. Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum, Supplementary Series,

vol. 1, London.Grainger J. D.– 1997, A Seleukid Prosopography and Gazetteer, New York-Köln.Harmon A. M. (transl.)– 1996, Lucian (« lcl », in 8 volumes), vol. 1, 9th edn., Cambridge (ma).Haruta S.– 1990, Sar-e Pol-e Zohabhibun no sai-kentou (in Japanese), Sar-e Pol-e Zoha b Inscriptions : King Gotarzes Son of

King Artabanus and Spadak of the Great Karin Family, « Bulletin of the Society for Western and Southern Asiatic Studies », Kyoto University, 33, 56-68.

– 2004, Rev. of I. M. Diakonoff, V. A. Livshits, Parthian Economic Documents from Nisa, « The Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters Tokai University », 81, 137-143.

Helm R., Treu U.– 1984, Eusebius Werke, Die Chronik des Hieronymus (Hieronymi Chronicon), in Die Griechischen Christlichen

Schriftsteller der Ersten Drei Jahrhunderte, Bd. 7, Berlin.Henry R.– 1960, Photius Bibliothèque, tome 2, Codices 84-185, Paris.Herzfeld E.– 1920, Am Tor Von Asien – Felsdenkmale aus Irans Heldenzeit, Berlin.– 1932, Sakastan – Geschichtliche Untersuchungen zu den Ausgrabungen am Kuk ı Khwadja, « Archaeologische

Mitteilungen aus Iran », Bd. iv, Heft 2, January, 45-116.– 1935, Archaeological History of Iran, London.Hill F. G.– 1922, A Catalogue of Greek Coins in the British Museum, 28, Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Arabia, Mesopo-

tamia and Persia, London.Hollis A. S.– 1994, Statius’ Young Parthian King (Thebaid 8.286-93), « Greece and Rome », 41 : 2, October, 205-212.Houghton A.– 1983, Coins of the Seleucid Empire from the Collection of Arthur Houghton, New York, The American Numis-

matic SocietyHoughton A., Spaer A.– 1998, The Arnold Spaer Collection of Seleucid Coins, in Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum. Israel i, Jerusalem.Hunger H.– 1968, Babylonische und assyrische Kolophone (« aoat »), Neukirchen-Vluyn.Hunger H., Sachs A. J. – 2001, adrtb, vol. 5, Lunar and Planetary Texts, Vienna.Hunger H., Stephenson F. R., Walker C. B. F.– 1985, Halley’s Comet in History, London.Jacobson A., Mørkholm O.– 1965, The Royal Collection of Coins and Medals, Danish Museum., in Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum Parthia-

India, 39, Copenhagen.Jacoby F.– 1929, Die Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker, zweiter Teil, Zeitgeschichte. B, Spezialgeschichten, Autobiogra-

phien und Memoiren. Zeittafeln, Berlin.– 1930, Die Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker, zweiter Teil. Zeitgeschichte. D, Kommentar zu Nr. 106 – 261,

Berlin.


Jones H. L. (transl.)– 2000a, The Geography of Strabo, Books x-xii (« lcl », in 8 volumes), vol. 5, Cambridge (ma).– 2000b, The Geography of Strabo, Books xv-xvi (« lcl », in 8 volumes), vol. 7, Cambridge (ma).Karst J.– 1911, Eusebius Werke. Die Chronik aus dem Armenischen Übersetzt mit Textkritischem Commentar, in Die Grie-

chischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der Ersten Drei Jahrhunderte, Bd. 5 Leipzig, J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhan-dlung.

Kessler K.– 2000, Hellenistische Tempelverwaltungstexte. Eine Nachlese zu CT 49, in J. Marzahn, H. Neumann (eds.), As-

syriologica et Semitica – Festschrift für Joachim Oelsner (« aoat », 252), Münster, 213-241.Koshelenko G. A.– 1976, Genealogija Pervych Arsakidov (Eshche raz o Nisijskom Ostrake No. 1760), in B. G. Gafurov, B. A. Litvin-

sky (eds.), Istorija i Kul’tura Narodov Srednej Azii (Drevnost’ i Srednie Veka), Moscow, 31-37.– 1982, La Genealogia dei Primi Arsacidi (Ancora Sull’Ostrakon di Nisa N. 1760), « Mesopotamia », xvii, 133-146.Kugler F. X.– 1924, Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel. Assyriologische, Astronomische und Astralmythologische Untersuchun-

gen,2.2.2, Babylonische Zeitordnung und Altere Himmelskunde, Münster in Westfalen.Le Rider G.– 1959, Monnaies de characène, « Syria », 36, 229-253.– 1965, Suse sous les Séleucides et les Parthes, Paris.Lerner J.– 1999, The Impact of Seleucid Decline on the Eastern Iranian Plateau – The Foundations of Arsacid Parthia and

Greco-Bactria (« Historia », 123), Stuttgart, Franz Steiner Verlag.Lewy H.– 1944, The Genesis of the Faulty Persian Chronology, « Journal of the American Oriental Society », 64, 197-

214.Lindsay J. – 1852, A View of the History and Coinage of the Parthians, with Descriptive Catalogues and Tables Cork.Loginov S. D., Nikitin A. B.– 1996, Parthian Coins from Margiana : Numismatics and History, « bai », 10, 39-51.Lukonin V. G.– 1983, Political, Social and Administrative Institutions : Taxes and Trade, in E. Yarshater (ed.), « chir », vol. 3 :2,

The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods, Cambridge, 681-746.Marcus R. (transl.)– 1998, Josephus, (« lcl », in 9 volumes), vol. 7, Jewish Antiquities, Books xii-xiii, Cambridge, Harvard Univ.

Press (ma).McDowell R. H.– 1935, Coins from Seleucia on the Tigris, Ann Arbor.McEwan G. J. P.– 1986, A Parthian Campaign Against Elymais in 77 b.c., « Iran », 24, 91-94.McGushin P.– 1994, Sallust – The Histories, vol. 2, Oxford.Minns E. H.– 1915, Parchments of the Parthian Period from Avroman in Kurdistan, « The Journal of the Hellenic Studies »,

35, 22-65.Mørkholm O. – 1980, The Parthian Coinage of Seleucia on the Tigris, « nc », 33-47.Neugebauer O.– 1955a, Introduction – The Moon (« act », 1), London.– 1955b, Plates (« act », 3), London.Neusner J. – 1965, A History of the Jews in Babylonia, 1, The Parthian Period, Leiden.Newell E. T.– 1938, The Coinage of the Parthians, in A. U. Pope (ed.), A Survey of Persian Art : From Prehistoric Times to the

Present, vol. 1, London, 475-492, pls. 140-144.– 1939, Late Seleucid Mints in Ake-Ptolemais and Damascus, « American Numismatic Society Numismatic

Notes and Monographs », 84, 1-107, and pls. i–xvii.


Oelsner J.– 1971, Rev. of Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, part xlix, Late-Babylonian Eco-

nomic Texts, by D. A. Kennedy, London, The Trustees of the British Museum, 1968 // « ZfA », 61 (N. F. 27), 159-170.

– 1975, Randbemerkungen zur arsakidischen Geschichte anhand von babylonischen Keilschrifttexten, « AoF », 3, 25-45.

– 1986, Materialien zur Babylonischen Gesellschaft und Kultur in Hellenistischer Zeit (« Assyriologia », 7), Buda-pest, Eötvös University.

Oppert J.– 1888, Inscription donnant les dètails d’une èclipse du Lune, « Comptes Rendus des Séances de l’Académie des

Sciences », 107, 467-468.– 1889, Nouvelles et mélanges – Au procès-verbal de la séance du 10 Mai, « Journal Asiatique », 8 :13, 511-514.Perrin B. (transl.)– 1990, Plutarch’s Lives (« lcl », in 11 volumes), vol. 5, Cambridge (ma).– 2001, Plutarch’s Lives (« lcl », in 11 volumes), vol. 2, Cambridge (ma).Petrowicz A. von– 1904, Sammlung Petrowicz. Arsaciden Münzen, Wien ; reprinted Graz, 1968.Prokesch-Osten M. le comte– 1874-1875, Les monnaies des rois parthes. Mémoires de la société française de numismatique et d’archéologie, Par-

is.Pugachenkova G. A., Rempel L. I.– 1991, Gold from Tillia-tepe, « bai », 5, 11-25.Rawlinson G.– 1873, The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy ; or the Geography, History, and Antiquities of Parthia, London.Reisner G.– 1896, Sumerisch-babylonisch Hymnen nach Thontafeln Griechischer Zeit (Königliche Museen zu Berlin, « Mit-

teilungen aus den Orientalischen Sammlungen », Heft 10), Berlin.Romanoff P.– 1944, Jewish Symbols on Ancient Jewish Coins, Philadelphia.Rostovtzeff M. I., Welles C. B.– 1931, A Parchment Contract of Loan from Dura-Europus on the Euphrates, « Yale Classical Studies », 2, 1-78.Ruehl F.– 1886, M. Ivniani Ivstini – Epitoma Historiarvm Philippicarvm, Lipsiae.Sachs A. J.– 1948, A Classifi cation of the Babylonian Astronomical Tablets of the Seleucid Period, « jcs », 2, 271-290.– 1955, Late Babylonian Astronomical and Related Texts. Copied by T. G. Pinches, J. N. Strassmaier, Providence.Sachs A. J., Wiseman D. J.– 1954, A Babylonian King List of the Hellenistic Period, « Iraq », 16, 202-211, pl. 53.Sachs A. J., Hunger H.– 1988, adrtb, vol. 1, Diaries from 652 B.C. to 262 b.c., Vienna.– 1996, adrtb, vol. 3, Diaries from 164 B.C. to 61 b.c., Vienna.Samuel A. E.– 1972, Greek and Roman Chronology. Calendars and Years in Antiquity, München.Sarianidi V. A. and Koshelenko G. A.– 1982, Monety iz raskopok nekropolia, raspolozhennogo na gorodische Tillya-tepe (Severniy Afghanistan), in Drev-

niaia Indiia. Istoriko-kul’turnye svyazi, Moscow, 307-311.Schaumberger J.– 1935, ssb iii, Ergänzungsheft zum Ersten und Zweiten Buch, Münster in Westfalen.Schoene A.– 1866, Evsebi Chronicorum Libri Duo, vol. ii, Evsebi Chronicorum Canonvm Qvae Svpersvnt Armeniam Versionem

Latine Factam e Libris Manvscriptis Recensvit. H. Petermann. Hieronymi Versionem e Libris Manvscriptis Recens-vit. Syriam Epitomen Latine Factam e Libro Londinensi Recensvit E. Roedinger, Berolini, Apvd Weidmannos.

– 1875, Evsebi Chronicorum Libri Duo, vol. i, Evsebi Chronicorum Liber Prior. Armeniam Versionem Latine Factam ad Libros Manvscriptos Recensvit. H. Petermann. Graeca Fragmenta Collegit et Recognovit, Appendices Chrono-graphicas Sex Adiecit, Berolini, Apvd Weidmannos.

Schoff W. H.– 1914, Parthian Stations by Isodore of Charax – An Account of the Overland Trade Route Between the Levant and

India in the First Century B.C., Philadelphia.


Schrader Eb.– 1890, Die Datierung der babylonischen sogenannten Arsacideninschriften, « Sitzungsberichte der Königlich

Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin », 49, 1319-1332.– 1891, Die Datirung der babylonischen sogenannten Arsacideninschriften – Nachtrag, « Sitzungsberichte der

Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin », 1, 3-6.Schroeder O.– 1916, Kontrakte der Seleukidenzeit aus Warka. Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der Königlichen Museen zu Ber-

lin, Leipzig.Seel O.– 1956, Pompeius Trogus Fragmenta, Lipsiae.Sellwood D. G.– 1962, The Parthian Coins of Gotarzes I, Orodes I, and Sinatruces, « nc », 73-89.– 1965, Wroth’s Unknown Parthian King, « nc », 112-135.– 1967, The Parthian Dark Age in the Light of “Susa”, « Spink’s Numismatic Circular », 75, 293-294.– 1971, An Introduction to the Coinage of Parthia, 1st edn., London.– 1976, The Drachms of the Parthian “Dark Age”, « Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society », 2-25.– 1980, An Introduction to the Coinage of Parthia, 2nd edn., London.– 1983a, Parthian Coins, in E. Yarshater (ed.), chir, 3 :1, The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Cam-

bridge, 279-298, pls. 1-9.– 1983b, Minor States in Southern Iran, in E. Yarshater (ed.), chir, 3 : 1, The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian

Periods, Cambridge, 299-314.– 1991, Trade Routes Through Parthia, in Amal Kumar Jha (ed.), Coinage, Trade and Economy, January 8th-11

th, 1991, 3rd International Colloquium, Maharashtra (India), Indian Institute of Research in Numismatic Stud-ies, 23-27.

Shahbazi A. Sh.– 1993, The Parthian Origins of the House of Rustam, « Bulletin of the Asia Institute », 7, 155-163.Shore F. B.– 1993, Parthian Coins and History – Ten Dragons Against Rome, Quarryville (pa), Classical Numismatic

Group.Simonetta A. M.– 1957, Notes on the Parthian and Indo-Parthian Issues of First Century b.c., in Actes du Congrès international du

numismatique. Paris 6-11 Juillet 1953, tome 2e, 111-121.– 1966, Some Remarks on the Arsacid Coinage of the Period 90-57 b.c., « nc », 15-40.– 2001, A Proposed Revision of the Attributions of the Parthian Coins Struck During the So-called “Dark Age” and

Its Historical Signifi cance, « East and West », 51 :1-2, June, 69-108.Simonetta A. M., Sellwood D. G.– 1978, Again on the Parthian Coinage from Mithradates II to Orodes II, « Quaderni Ticinesi di Numismatica e

di Antichità Classiche », 7, 95-119.Simonetta B.– 1974, Problemi di numismatica partica : Tetradramma di Mitridate II o di ‘Re Ignoto’ ? Osservazioni sulle monete

coniate fra il 90 ed il 70 a.C., « Rivista Italiana di Numismatica », 22, 115-132.– 1975, Problemi di numismatica partica : Osservazioni sulle attribuzioni delle monete partiche coniate fra il 70 ed

il 57 a.C., « rn », 54, 65-78.– 1978, On Some Tetradrachms of Orodes II and the Probable Issues of Pacorus I, « nc », 7-13.Steele J. M.– 2000, Observations and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers, Dordrecht.Strassmaier J. N.– 1888, Arsaciden-Inschriften, « ZfA », 3, 129-158.– 1889, Aus einem Briefe des Herrn Professor J. Epping, « ZfA », 4, 76-82.– 1893, Zur Chronology der Seleuciden, « ZfA », 8, 106-113.Syme R.– 2002, Sallust, Berkeley (ca).Tarn W. W.– 1930, Seleucid–Parthian Studies, Proceedings of the British Academy, London, 105-135.– 1932, Parthia, in S. A. Cook, F. E. Adcock, M. P. Charlesworth (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History, vol.

ix, The Roman Republic 133-44 b.c. Cambridge, 574-613.Thompson M, Mørkholm O., Kraay C.


– 1973, An Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards, New York.Van der Spek R. J.– 1997-1998, New Evidence from the Babylonian Astronomical Diaries Concerning Seleucid and Arsacid History,

« AfO », 44-45, 167-175.– 2000, The Šatammus of Esagila in the Seleucid and Parthian Periods, in J. Marzahn, H. Neumann (eds.),

Festschrift für Joachim Oelsner (« aoat », 252), 437-446.– 2001, The Theatre of Babylon in Cuneiform, in W. H. van Soldt (ed.), Veenhof Anniversary Volume – Studies

Presented to Klaas R. Veenhof on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday, Leiden, 445-456.Waggoner N. M.– 1974, The Coinage of Phraates III of Parthia : Addenda, in D. K. Kouymajian (ed.), Near Eastern Numismatics,

Iconography, Epigraphy and History – Studies in Honor of George C. Miles, Beirut, 15-26.Walker C. B. F.– 1972, Miscellaneous Texts, « ct », 51, London.Walton F. R.– 2001, Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, Books xxxiii-xl (« lcl », in 12 volumes), vol. 12, Cambridge (ma)-

London, Harvard University Press.Watson J. S.– 1882, Justin, Cornelius Nepos and Eutropius, London.Weisberg D. B.– 1991, The Late Babylonian Texts of the Oriental Institute Collection (« BibMes », 24), Malibu.Weiskopf M.– 1981, The Kuh Dasht Hoard and the Parthian “Dark Age”, « The American Numismatic Society Museum

Notes », 26, 125-152.White H. (transl.)– 1999, Appian’s Roman History (« lcl », in 4 volumes), vol. 2, Cambridge (ma)-London, Harvard Univ.

Press.Wroth W.– 1900, On the Rearrangement of Parthian Coinage, « nc », 181-202, and pls. vii-ix.– 1903, A Catalogue of Greek Coins in the British Museum, 23, Catalogue of the Coins of Parthia, London.Yardley J. C. (transl.)– 1994, Justin – Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus, with Introduction and Notes by R. Deve-

lin ( J. J. Clauss ed., « American Philological Association, Classical Resources »), Atlanta (ga).Yeomans D. K., Kiang T.– 1981, The Long-Term Motion of Comet Halley, « Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society », 197,

633-646.

Amministrazione e abbonamenti / Administration & Subscriptions

Accademia editoriale®, Pisa · RomaCasella postale n. 1, Succursale n. 8, i 56123 Pisa

e-mail : [email protected]

Prezzi di abbonamento Italia :Privati : € 245,00 (brossura) ; € 295,00 (rilegato)

Enti (con edizione Online) : € 395,00 (brossura) ; € 545,00 (rilegato)Copia singola : € 420,00 (brossura) ; € 580,00 (rilegato)

Foreign subscription rates :Individuals : € 295,00 (paperback) ; € 395,00 (hardback)

Academic and Public Institutions, Libraries (with Online Edition) : € 445,00 (paperback) ;€ 595,00 (hardback) · Single issue: € 420,00 (paperback) ; € 580,00 (hardback)I pagamenti possono essere eff ettuati tramite versamento su c.c.p. n. 17154550

o tramite carta di credito (American Express, Visa, Eurocard, Mastercard, Carta Si)Uffi ci di Pisa : Via Santa Bibbiana 28, i 56127 Pisa

Tel. +39 050 542332 · Fax +39 050 574888e-mail : [email protected]

Uffi ci di Roma : Via Ruggiero Bonghi 11/b, i 00184 RomaTel. +39 06 70493456 · Fax +39 06 70476605

e-mail : [email protected]

www.libraweb.net

*La casa editrice garantisce la massima riservatezza dei dati forniti dagli abbonati e la possibilità di richiederne la rettifi ca o la cancellazione previa comunicazione alla medesima. Le informazioni custodite dalla casa editrice

verranno utilizzate al solo scopo di inviare agli abbonati nuove proposte (D. Lgs. 196/2003).Our Publishing House guarantees for absolute discretion about personal informations given by subscribers ; on written request, these data could be modifi ed or erased. These informations, looked after by our Publishing

House, will be used only to send the subscribers our new editorial enterprises (D. Lgs. 196/2003).

*Sono rigorosamente vietati la riproduzione, la traduzione, l’adattamento, anche parziale o per estratti, per qualsiasi uso e con qualsiasi mezzo eff ettuati, compresi la copia fotostatica, il microfi lm, la memorizzazione elettronica,

ecc., senza la preventiva autorizzazione scritta degli Istituti editoriali e poligrafi ci internazionali®,Pisa · Roma, un marchio della Accademia editoriale®, Pisa · Roma. Ogni abuso sarà perseguito a norma di legge.All forms of reproduction, translation, adaptation, whether partial or for off prints, for any use whatsoever and carried out by any means whatsoever, including photostatic copies, microfi lms, recording, electronic memoriza-tion or any other informations storage system, etc., are strictly forbidden, unless prior permission is obtained in

writing from the Istituti editoriali e poligrafi ci internazionali®, Pisa · Roma, an imprint of Accademia editoriale®, Pisa · Roma. Any breach of the law will be dealt with according to the legislation in force.

*Proprietà riservata · All rights reserved

© Copyright 2007 byIstituti editoriali e poligrafi ci internazionali®, Pisa · Roma,

an imprint of Accademia editoriale®, Pisa · Roma.Stampato in Italia · Printed in Italy

*issn 1128-6342

issn elettronico 1724-1928isbn 978-88-8147-453-0

SOMMARIO

Bernard Marvin Goldman 1922-2006 9

PAPERS PRESENTED TO DAVID SELLWOOD

A David Sellwood in occasione dei suoi 80 anni 13

Bibliography of David Sellwood, edited by Gholamreza F. Assar 15

Vito Messina, Nike on the clay sealings from Seleucia on the Tigris 17

Gholamreza F. Assar, Morteza Ghassem Bagloo, An Early Parthian ‘Victory’ Coin 25

Edward Dabrowa, The Conquests of Mithridates I and the Numismatic Evidence 37

Alberto M. Simonetta, Overstrikes, mules, modifi ed dies and retouched coins in the Arsacid coinage : a discussion of their signifi cance 41

Gholamreza F. Assar, A Revised Parthian Chronology of the Period 91-55 bc 55

Ruben Vardanyan, Some remarks on the arrangement of the Parthian ‘Dark Age’ coin series 105

Sylvia Winkelmann, Waff en und Waff enträger auf parthischen Münzen 131

Agnes Korn, Parthian Month Names and Calendars 153

Jérôme Gaslain, Jean-Yves Maleuvre, Auguste et les Arsacides, ou le prix des enseignes 169

Farhang Khademi Nadooshan, Faezeh Arkan, Ali Reza Arkan, Mohammad Saffari, Scythian in Eastern border of Parthia : a numismatic evidence 195

estratto - parthian-empire.comparthian-empire.com/articles/A-Revised-Parthian-Chronology-of-91...A...

Documents

Transcript of estratto - parthian-empire.comparthian-empire.com/articles/A-Revised-Parthian-Chronology-of-91...A...