THE ALEXANDER TETRADRACHMS OF TERMESSOS MAJOR 27

The Alexander Tetradrachms of Termessos MajorANDREW P. MCINTYRE

PLATES 9-10

TWO varieties of posthumous Alexander tetradrachms have been attributed to Termessos Major in Pisidia in southern Asia Minor, one thought to date to Year 1 of an era, the other to Year 13. In this article I aim to show that the notion of dates is based on a simple misreading, and that the whole issue was struck from a single obverse die. See the catalogue at the end for a corpus of the tetradrachms concerned, with notes indicating the successive changes in the obverse die.

The fi rst Alexander attributed to the mint occurred in Gordion Hoard I, a hoard of 114 tetradrachms discovered in a pot in 1951 during the University of Pennsylvania excavations at Gordion in Phrygia, and published in 1953.1 Gordion was abandoned around 189 BC after it was sacked by the Romans, and the hoard showed that a number of Pamphylian coins which were previously thought to have been minted after 189 BC were in fact minted some 40 years earlier.2 The hoard was dated by Dorothy Cox to around 210 BC on the basis of some Seleukid coins which it contained. She concluded that one particular Alexander tetradrachm (Pl. 10, 3c) belonged to Termessos because it had on the reverse the letter Τ and the symbol of the forepart of a horse which resembled the horse forepart types of bronze coins of Termessos from the fi rst century BC (Plate 9, C = Künker 94, 2004, 1319; 4.49g). She dated the Termessian Alexander to some time after 250 BC and speculated that the Pamphylian Alexander era, which she assumed was relevant to the Termessian Alexander, may have begun in 229 BC. Subsequent excavations at Gordion yielded further hoards, Gordion II – VII, several of which Cox published in 1966, including Gordion Hoard V which contained a second Alexander of Termessos (Pl. 10, 1). Cox believed that the obverse die of the second Alexander was different from that of the tetradrachm found in Gordion Hoard I, and read the markings on its reverse as ΙΓ, representing 13. She then re-examined the original Termessian Alexander and concluded that its reverse read not T, as she had previously thought, but ΙΓ. She connected the two coins to the Alexanders of Pamphylia (Aspendos, Perge, and Phaselis), which she dated in accordance with a schema worked out in 1963 by Henri Seyrig, who believed that those Alexanders were dated by an era beginning in 221BC.3 The two Termessian Alexanders would thus date around 209-208 BC.4 However, since Cox now read the reverse markings as ΙΓ not Τ, she was unsure if these two Alexanders were from Termessos after all.

In 1991, Martin Price accepted that the Alexanders found at Gordion belonged to Termessos and that they carried the date for Year 13. He published two similar coins in the

1 D. Cox, Gordion Hoard I, A Third Century Hoard of Tetradrachms from Gordion (Philadelphia, 1953).2 Gordion Hoard I, nos 24 – 26 (Alexanders of Perge) and 113 – 114 (civic coins of Perge). The hoard is particularly

important because the Alexanders of Pamphylia (those of Perge, Aspendos, Phaselis and Sillyon) are often used to date other coins found in hoards of the late 3rd and early 2nd century BC.

3 H. Seyrig, ‘Monnaies hellénistiques’, RN 1963, pp. 7-64, at 38-48.4 Cox also lowered the burial date of Gordion Hoard I to 207 BC or later because it contained a Year 14 Alexander

of Perge.

ANDREW P. MCINTYRE28

British Museum (Alexander 2986a (here Pl. 10, 7a) and 2986b),5 with no numerical letter on the reverse but with as ethnics what Price read as Τ cut over ΤΕ (but see below), and Τ, respectively. Price believed that the absence of numerical letters indicated that these coins represented the fi rst year of the era at Termessos. He suggested that the era was the same as that recorded on two series of bronze coins of Termessos with the numerical letters 2 - 32 and 1 - 29, previously assigned to the fi rst century BC. This connection appeared all the more attractive given that Price believed that the Alexanders of Perge (dated 1 - 33) started at the same time as the Alexanders of Termessos. However, in 2005 Richard Ashton pointed out that a date in the third and second centuries BC for the bronze coins of Termessos ran counter to the evidence of two hoards which indicated a fi rst century BC starting-date.6 He also published two new Termessian Alexanders, one a die-duplicate of Price 2869a with the ethnic shown clearly as ΤΕ ligatured in a monogram, the other with the ethnic ΤΕ and an unexplained Χ under the throne of Zeus (Cat. nos 8b and 10).7

Let us now take a closer look at the known Alexanders of Termessos, all of which have on the reverse the symbol of the horse forepart associated with the city.

A close examination of the Gordion Hoard I ‘Year 13’ tetradrachm reveals that the ‘numeral’ on the reverse is not ΙΓ, but Τ with to the left a vertical mark which is a die break in its later stages (Pl. 10, 3c, part enlarged at 9, B). An earlier stage of the fl aw can be seen on a die-duplicate specimen in Paris (Cat. 3a; part enlarged at Pl. 9, A).Thus, Cox’s original reading in 1953 of just Τ was correct. Similarly, the markings on the reverse of the Gordion V coin do not seem to be ΙΓ, but a die fl aw in the form of two dots to the left of what looks like a Γ (‘Year 3’ on the Cox-Price schema) or a deformed Τ (Pl. 10, 1, enlarged at 9, D). The possibility of a Γ can be ruled out by what follows.

Close examination of the obverses of the known Termessian Alexanders shows that the same obverse die was used for all specimens; note, for example, that all have the same incision mark and chunk missing from Herakles’ ear. The development of various fl aws and their repairs are noted in the Catalogue, which attempts a rough chronological order. In general, with each recutting of the obverse die, the hair of Herakles becomes thinner and the facial features more linear as the engraver’s tools cut deeper into the die in an attempt to create more relief: see, for example the faint original outline of the forehead and nose of Herakles still visible after drastic recutting on Plate 10, 9. Now, the condition of the obverse die indicates that the Gordion V example (Cat. no. 1; Pl. 10, 1, enlarged at 9, D) was among the fi rst, if not the fi rst, of the surviving specimens to be struck. The hair strands of Herakles are thicker and the facial features around the front of the forehead and the nose are more rounded than on other specimens. Compare, for example, the specimen in the ANS (Pl. 10, 2b, enlarged at 9, E) which has a reverse with a clear Τ (no date, therefore Year 1 on Price’s schema): the obverse die used for it had been re-cut (erasure of lock at top right of ear) after it had struck the Gordion V specimen. Hence if the Gordion V specimen was dated to Year 13 (or 3), it would have been impossible for its obverse die to be in an earlier state than that of most if not all the remaining coins including those regarded as Year 1. It seems clear that the marking on the Gordion V specimen is a poorly cut Τ. It is also of course most unlikely that a single obverse die would have lasted from a putative Year 1 to a putative Year 13.

The style of the Alexanders under discussion is very similar to that of the neighbouring Pamphylian Alexanders, and Cox and Price were clearly right to attribute them to Termessos. The latest datable coin from the Gordion I Hoard, Year 14 of Perge, is assigned by Price

5 On Price, Alexander, plate LXXXIII, the reverse of 2986a has in error been repeated for 2986b.6 RH.J. Ashton, ‘The Coinage of Oinoanda’, NC 2005, pp. 65-84 at 81.7 Ashton, ‘Oinoanda’, p. 80 n. 40 and Plate 5,C-D, the latter illustrated here at Pl. 10, 9.

THE ALEXANDER TETRADRACHMS OF TERMESSOS MAJOR 29

to 208/7 BC and by Boehringer to 206/205 BC,8 while the latest datable coin in Gordion Hoard V is a Seleukid tetradrachm of Antiochos III from Laodicea dated 210 – 205 BC by Boehringer.9 In the absence of any coins known to have been minted after 200 BC, a burial date for both hoards shortly before 200 BC, as proposed by these scholars, remains valid.10 The subject cannot be dealt with here, but I shall argue in a forthcoming study on the Pamphylian Alexanders that the dating of the latter suggest that the Alexanders of Termessos should date around 205-203 BC. The use of a single obverse die repeatedly re-cut and employed with a variety of reverse dies suggests a short-lived and perhaps hasty operation. Its purpose is unclear, but one might speculate that it was in response to a levy laid upon the cities of the area, including those in Pamphylia, to support the military campaigns of Antiochos III.

CATALOGUE All obverses have the same fl aw near the lower right ear lobe of Herakles. All die

combinations are illustrated on Pl. 10. Note that the order of minting proposed here means that the ethnic on the reverse developed consistently from Τ to ΤΕ ligatured in monogram to ΤΕ.Obv. Head of young Herakles r. in lionskin headdressRev. Zeus Nikephoros enthroned l.; to l., forepart of horse galloping l. with ethnic (Τ, ΤΕ ligatured in monogram, or ΤΕ) below; to r., ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ

1. A1/P1 15.90g 12h Gordion Hoard V, Plate X, 16.Obv. Flaw below eye. Rev. T

2. A1/P2 (a) 16.81g 12h CNG 61 (2002), 449 (b) 16.80g 12h ANS 1965.56.2 (c) 16.50g 1h Berlin, Imhoof-Blumer 1900

(d) 16.86g 12h BM 1979.1.1.955X = SNG von Aulock 6662 = Price 2986b. Obv. Same fl aw below eye; front lock erased above right ear.Rev. T

3. A1/P3 (a) 15.95g 12h Paris, Seyrig R4237 (b) 16.59g 1h Berlin, Prokesch-Osten 1875 (c) 15.66g 12h Gordion Hoard I, no. 44 Obv. Same fl aw below eye.Rev. T

4. A1/P4 16.83g Gorny & Mosch 121 (2003), 90.Obv. Same fl aw below eye.Rev. T

5. A1/P5 16.49g Southern Asia Minor Hoard 1963 (IGCH 1426); Boehringer, Chronologie, Pl. 25, 2.Obv. Eye fl aw repaired.Rev. T

8 Price, Alexander Vol 1, page 360. Chr. Boehringer, Zur Chronologie Mittelhellenistischer Munzserien 220 – 160 v.Chr. (AMUGS 5; Berlin, 1972), p. 62.

9 Boehringer, Chronologie, p. 69, Hoard 6.10 Price, Alexander Vol. 1, p. 61; Boehringer, Chronologie, p. 195.

ANDREW P. MCINTYRE30

6. A1/P6 (a) 16.93g Pisidia Hoard 1963 (IGCH 1426); Boehringer, Chronologie, Pl. 32, 7. (b) 16.50g 12h BM 2002.1.1.660 (Hersh bequest)Obv. Eye fl aw repaired but now fl aw on forehead.Rev. ΤΕ ligatured in monogram

7. A1/P7 (a) 16.98g 12h BM, Bank coll. = Price 2986a. (b) 16.96g 12h Ashton coll. NC 2005, p. 80 n. 40, pl. 5, C.

Obv. Same fl aw on forehead.Rev. ΤΕ ligatured in monogram

8. A1/P8 16.70g 12h Dr Wilson Guertin coll., USA.Obv. Same fl aw on forehead.Rev. TE11

9. A1/P9 16.58g 12h Ashton coll. NC 2005, p. 80 n. 40, pl. 5, D.Obv. Flaw on forehead repaired (?), but damage to mouth now visible.Rev. ΤΕ; Χ below throne12

11 At fi rst glance the sign looks like a Π, but the letter would have unusually long serifs on the horizontal bar, and it would be diffi cult to explain why it had replaced the usual Termessian ethnic. It is much more likely to be the letters ΤΕ in which the middle and lower horizontal hastae of the Ε had not been imprinted on the metal.

12 A letter M which appears above the type on the reverse of this coin is a graffi to and not a die-engraved letter.

PLATE 9

MCINTYRE, THE ALEXANDER TETRADRACHMS OF TERMESSOS MAJOR (1)

BA C

E

Lockerased

Eye

Re-cuton neck

Eardamage

D

Lockbefore

Eardamage

Eyedamage

Re-cuton neck

PLATE 10

1 2b2a

4 5 6a 7a

98

3c

MCINTYRE, THE ALEXANDER TETRADRACHMS OF TERMESSOS MAJOR (2)