Unable to locate this text (“The Ancient Kingdom of Paionia,” by Irwin L. Merker) in the public domain, I went to the library of the Society for Macedonian Studies and coppied it from the original publication in which it had originally appeared, the Balkan Studies number 6 of 1965.
M.E.B.
Greek translation to the introduction:
Πολύ λίγα έχουν γραφτεί για την Παίονες, αλλά και όσα έχουν γραφεί γράφηκαν ως επί το πλείστον χωρίς αποδεικτικά στοιχεία και παραμένουν θλιβερώς ανεπαρκή, αν όχι παντελώς λανθασμένα. Ορισμένοι τους θεώρησαν Θράκες, καί άλλοι τους απεκάλεσαν Ιλλυριούς, άλλοι πάλι επέμεναν πως οι Παίονες ήταν ένα μείγμα από Ιλλυριούς και Θράκες, χωρίς όμως καμία αναφορά σε βάθος καί δίχως αποδεικτικά στοιχεία. Οι Παίονες κάνουν τη ζωή του ιστορικού ακόμα πιο δύσκολη με το να μήν μας έχουν αφήσει επιγραφές γραμμένες στη γλώσσα τους, εκτός από τα νομίσματα, αλλά και τότε μας παραδίδουν μόνον κύρια ονόματα. Μετά τον Αλέξανδρο, μετά τον 4ο πΧ αιώνα, οι Παίονες μας δίδουν επιτέλους επιγραφές, αλλά πλέον εμφανίζονται πλήρως ελληνικές και όλες οι επιγραφές που σήμερα βρίσκονται σε αρχαίες πόλεις τους, μαρτυρούν μια πλήρως εξελληνισμένη κοινωνία. Οι Στώβοι δεν μπορούν να ξεχωρίσουν στη γλώσσα και τον πολιτισμό τους από οποιανδήποτε άλλη ελληνική πόλη της Ιωνίας, της νότιας Ιταλίας ή της νότια Ελλάδας. Ο Εξελληνισμός τους από την Ελληνιστική εποχή καί εντεύθεν είναι προφανής, αλλά ήταν όμως οι Παίονες Έλληνες, πριν από τον 4ο αιώνα πΧ; Ο καθηγητής Irwin L. Merker (Έρβιν Μέρκερ) έχει επιχειρήσει μιαν απάντηση, κάνοντας το αυτονόητο: έψαξε στις ιστορικές αναφορές και στίς αρχαιολογικές (ως επί το πλείστον νομισματικές και μερικές επιγραφικές) ενδείξεις και τις συνέκρινε υπό το πρίσμα των γλωσσικών συμπερασμάτων που συνάγονται από τα ονόματα των προσώπων και των γεωγραφικές τοπονυμίων που μας άφησαν οι Παίονες.
Αδυνατώντας να βρώ το παρών κείμενο («Το αρχαίο βασίλειο της Παιονίας," του Irwin L. Merker) στο διαδίκτυο, πήγα στη βιβλιοθήκη της Εταιρείας Mακεδονικών Σπουδών και το αντέγραψα (φωτοτύπησα) από την αρχική δημοσίευση στην οποία είχε πρωτοεμφανιστεί, στο περιοδικό Βαλκανικές Σπουδές, αριθμός 6, του 1965. Το κείμενο θα μεταφραστεί σχετικά σύντομα καί στην Ελληνική, με την ελπίδα πώς κάποιος από τους συγγραφείς των σχολικών βιβλίων Ιστορίας του ΟΕΣΒ ίσως να το διαβάσει καί να αλλάξει τις αναφορές των Παιόνων ως ¨Θράκες¨.
M.Η.Μπ.
But before we
can really draw any picture of the Paionians, we must settle one problem, and
that problem is, "Were the Paionians of Hellenic stock?" By the term
"Hellenic stock" I do not mean that they were Hellenes in the same
sense as the ancient Athenians or Korinthians were Hellenes. The Paionians
were far too backward to be considered Hellenes in this sense. Rather I ask,
"Did the ancestors of the Paionians and the ancestors of the Athenians and
Korinthians enter the Balkan peninsula
together from some common point of origin, speaking the same or a similar
language and sharing a similar culture?" Naturally in the course of time
each of these two groups would have developed along different lines. Finally
because the Paionians lived so far north they had common borders with Illyrian
and Thracian tribes. As a result, even if they were Hellenes, we must expect a
great deal of Illyrian and Thracian influence as a result of this proximity.
It is generally accepted now that the ancient
Macedonians were certainly Hellenes,1 but you can all see the
controversy which has arisen because of the lack of evidence, and there is much
less evidence for the Paionians than there is for the Macedonians. There has
been a great lack of scientific excavation in the area in which the Paionians
lived, and as a result we cannot define Paionian culture in archaeological
terms. How are we then to attack this problem of whether or not the Paionians
were of Hellenic stock? We can try to solve this problem through the language
of the Paionians. But I must warn you of the difficulties involved in this
procedure also. After several scholars had become involved in the controversy
concerning the Hellenism of the Paionians, N. Vuli£2 wrote an
article which showed how very inconclusive any of the available linguistic
evidence is, because the names of persons and places do not necessarily reflect
the language or nationality of their current owners. After all Korinth is
generally considered to be a pre-Greek name, but there is no doubt that the
ancient and modern Korinthians were and are Hellenes. Likewise there are many
people today named Pierre
who are not French. Nevertheless, let us look at some of this linguistic evidence,
always bearing in mind how inconclusive it can be.
Here as in
every other aspect of Paionian history, we are handicapped by our lack of
sources. Our knowledge of the Paionian language is woefully inadequate. The
evidence for the Paionian language consists of a few place-names, a few
personal names and one word. The first and most obvious is the place-name Παιονία. We are told by Pausanias3 that
Paion, the eponymous ancestor of the Paionians, was a brother of Epeios and
Aitolos, the eponymous ancestors of the Epeians of Elis and the Aitolians. This
is most important for us, because this genealogy shows that the ancient
Hellenes considered the Paionians to be Hellenes. The place-name itself has
several cognates with similar roots in Greece. One of them is Παιονίδαι, a deme of the tribe Leontis in Attica. A place in the Argolid has the same name.4
Bel-loch5 equated the name of the Paionian city of Stoboi with Στύβηρα in Pelagonia. The Paionian capital,
Bylazora, finds its cognate in the city of Azo-fos in Perrhaibia, which is surely Greek.
'Άστιβος, the name of
the river in which the Paionian king took a ritual bath at the time of his
coronation, as well as the name of a place mentioned in the Peutinger table is
purely Greek. "Αστιβος means
untrodden and is used by Antipater of Sidon in a poem preserved in the Greek
Anthology.6 Lake Prasias was the site of a Paionian lake-dwelling
settlement.7 One can compare it with Πρασιαι both a deme in Attika and a town on the east
coast of Lakonia.8 The name is to be derived in all probability from
πράσον or leak, or
perhaps πρασία meaning
garden plot. Beloch also points out that since we know that the Paionians lived
on Lake Prasias in houses built on stakes driven
into the lake in the fifth century, we must assume that such a primitive type
of highly developed settlement existed for sometime before the fifth century.
This would be much too early to speak of a hellenization of the name, as some
people who want to make the Paionians non-Hellenic do. This would not, however,
preclude a Hellenic name from being given to the lake by Hellenes who lived in
the area before the settlement of the Paionians. Mount Messapion
is the place where the Paionians hunt their wild bison. Of course I need not go
into detail as to the place-names in Greece that are cognates — Mt. Messapion
in Boiotia, and similar names in Lokris,9 Lakonia,10
Elis,11 Crete,12 and Aitolia.13 The Messapians
of southern Italy probably called themselves Kalabrians or Sollentines, while
the Hellenic settlers gave them the name Messapians. The main Paionian river,
the Axios, explains itself in the Macedonian dialect. According to Hesychios άξος means ϋλη or forest. The Axios appeals in Homer,14
and we find that the Paionians not the Macedonians lived along its banks;
therefore the word must also be Paionian. Further, if the Paionian territory
stretched along the Axios down to the sea, as Homer suggests, the purely Greek
names in this vicinity — Ido-mene, Gortyna, Atalante and Europos — may also be
Paionian names. The Paionian tribe of the Agrianes also has a good Hellenic
name. For cognates, we can point to the Agraioi who lived on the Acheloos and
the name of the month Agrianos.
In the time of
Alexander the Great the name of the king of the Agrianes was Langaros,[1]
a non-Hellenic name. This is to be explained by the closeness of the Agrianes
to the tribes of Illyrians, Dardanians, and Au-tariates. In the nineteenth
century two inscriptions were found at Prescovatz near Monastir (Bitolia) which
refer to a god called Apollo "Oteudanos" or "Eteudaniskos."[2]
It was suggested that this god was of Paionian origin. The inscriptions,
however, are of Roman date (2nd century A.D.), and from the very area of the
Paionian-Illyrian border. Both facts tend to weaken the alleged Paionian
character of this god.
What about the Paionian personal names? Most of the
names that we know from pre-Roman times are the names of the royal family. The
exceptions are Πίγρης and Μαντύης (or Μαστύης or Μαστίης) who appear in the fable about Xerxes and
the Paionian woman.[3]
Pigres is a Karian name which we encounter frequently in Asia
Minor. The problem of Mantyes, which is corrupt in our manuscripts
is insoluble. Another exception is Didas, mentioned in Livy, one of the royal
prefects who governed Paionia after its annexation to Macedonia.[4]
Didas, although he governed Paionia, need not necessarily have been a Paionian.
The first Paionian king who appears in our sources is Agis who died in 359.[5] The name is
quite clearly Greek. Ariston commanded
the Paionian contingent in the army of Alexander the Great,[6] and a son
of a later Paionian king bore the same name.[7] It is also a good
Greek name. Dropion, the name of a third century king, is likewise a Greek name
— the root of the name is found in different parts of Hellas, and as early as
the seventh century the brother of Solon was called Δρωπίδης.[8] Dropion' s
father Leon had a Greek name. The last element in Audoleon's name is Greek, and
it would be arbitrary to make the first part Illyrian, as some scholars wish to
do, on the analogy of Audata, the "Illyrian" wife of Philip II.
Benseler has
explained thi name as'Greek, "Lion-voiced."[9] We meet its root in
the month Audnaios or Audonnaios from both Macedonia
and Knossos.[10]
Patraos, another Paionian royal name can be Greek on analogy with Kranaos and
Oinomaos. The Greek word λύκος, wolf, can be
recognized in Lykpeios, another Paionian king. Thus, on the basis of the
Paionian names, we can say that there is no evidence that the Paionians did not
speak a dialect of Greek.
The sole
Paionian word preserved for us is μόναπος and it appears
in Aristotle.[11]
It seems that this is what the Paionians call the βόνασος or European bison. From Pausanias,[12]
we learn that a Paionian king dedicated the head of one of these bison at Delphi and we learn of the unusual way in which they were
hunted. It is probable that μόναπος is
etymologically related to the Old Indian word manya meaning neck,
the English word mane, and the Greek word μανιακής, necklace.[13] The name must
emphasize the shaggy mane of the European bison. This is the only word that the
ancient authors distinguish as distinctly Paionian. The main reason for this
after we take into account the extremely fragmentary nature of the sources is
probably the fact that most Paionian words were so like their Greek
counterparts that there was no need to notice them.
The next
question is, "What areas did the Paionians inhabit?" In the Iliad the Paionians
are mentioned in several places. They appear in the catalogue of Trojan allies
where they are led by Pyraichmes. I should at this point inclicate that the
Paionians mentioned by Homer, Pyraichmes and Asteropaios, both have Greek
names, the former meaning "whose spear is fire," and the latter
"gleam of the lightning bolt." In this passage of the catalogue and
elsewhere in the Iliad we learn that the Paionians come from Amydon
on the Axios river. Quite clearly therefore in the time of Homer the lower
basin of the Axios
River was held by the
Paionians, with their most important city at Amydon. Also, since Homer makes no
mention of the Macedonians, we can assume that at the time of the composition
of the Iliad, which most scholars would now like to place in the
eighth century, the Macedonians had not yet appeared in what later became Lower
Macedonia, the heartland of the Macedonian
Kingdom, and the Paionians
controlled this territory. A fragment of Strabo tells us that Amydon was
destroyed by the Argeads. the ruling family of the Macedonians.[14]
A fragment of Hesiod indicates that by his own time the Macedonians were
settled in the area where they lived in classical times — that is, lower Macedonia.[15]
Thus it would seem that sometime between Homer (ca. 750 B.C.) and Hesiod (the
first half of the seventh century), probably shortly before 700, the
Macedonians under the leadership of their Argead kings entered Lower Macedonia,
drove out the Paionians who already lived there, and settled on the conquered
land of Lower Macedonia.
Originally, therefore, the term Paionia was much
more inclusive than it later became in classical times. Strabo tells us that
the Paionians once inhabited a territory that extended as far as Pelagonia
(the area around Bito-lia) and Pieria east of the Strymon, and included much of
what was later Macedonia.[16]
Consequently, among the territories that the Paionians held were Macedonia, Emathia, Krestonia, Mygdonia,
Pelagonia, Pieria, and the land of the
Agrianes as far as Pangaion. We learn from Herodotos[17] that at some time before
510 the Paionians had attacked Perinthos on the Sea of
Marmara. This is probably to be explained as a result of the
pressure of the Macedonians in their homeland. In the fifth century we find
that the territory of the Paionians had been constricted by the Macedonians,
and that they are now confined to the interior of the country. Nevertheless
Herodotos shows us that they still control wide territories, and now for the
first time we find mention of other Paionian tribes than the Paionians proper.[18]
Thus at the end of the 6th century we know of Siriopaionians, Doberes, Paioplai
and Agrianes, and Thucydides adds the Laioi.[19] One of the
tributaries of the Danube, most probably the Iskar,
rises in the country of the Paionians.[20] Consequently, the
area of Mt. Rhodope where it rises, near the
headwaters of the Strymon and the Nestos, was inhabited by the Paionian
tribes. Mt. Orbelos
between the Strymon and Nestos
Rivers also was Paionian.[21]
Herodotos tells us of Paionians who lived on the Strymon river (οί από Στρυμόνος Παίονες.)[22] The Doberes
and the Paioplai were settled at the time of the Persian wars in the area north
of Mount
Pangaion.[23] To the west of the*
Paionians were the Lake-dwelling Paionians, whom I mentioned to you before. The
Paionians west of the valley of the Strymon were settled deep in the interior
of the country, for the Macedonians held the lower reaches of the Axios River.[24]
Here their territories extended as far as Mount
Kerkines,[25] now on the border of
Greece, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia,
where their boundaries met those of the Sintoi, and as far as Mt. Messapion,
where their territories met those of the Maidoi. We find the Paionians on the
uppecourse of the Axios
River where their
territory reached to Sto-boi, and Bylazora (Tito Veles) but not as far as
Skoupoi (Skoplje). In the south they extended as far as the area of the present
Greek-Yugoslav border. To the west of the Axios they held the valley of the
Erigon river and part of the basin
of Monastir. To the east
of the Axios they controlled the valleys of the Pontos (Stumnitza) and the
Astibos (Bregalnitza).[26]
The coins of the Paionian Kings have been found in extremely large numbers in
a hoard found during the nineteenth century in the neighborhood of Kyustendil.
Only last year another very large hoard of these coins came to light in Bulgaria.
Taking this into account would lead one to suspect that the area of control of
the Paionian Kings extended also into the Strymon valley near Kyustendil, and
perhaps further to the south.
Now let us.turn
to the history of the Paionians in the fifth century. Here our only two sources
are the two great historians of that century, Herodotos and Thucydides. Of
course, neither of them, nor for that matter any of our other literary sources,
are interested in the Paionians for themselves. It is only when the Paionians
happen to be involved in some episode of Greek history that we are given little
scraps of information about them. In the fifth century the Paionians are
involved in Greek history twice, once during the Persian Wars, and again during
the Peloponnesian War. About 510 B.C. Dareios sent his general Megabazos to
extend the Persian frontiers further to the west to include the Argead Kingdom
of Macedonia. This movement was a threat to those Paionian tribes who lived
between the Nestos and Strymon Rivers north of Mt. Pangaion.
In the course of this expedition Megabazos conquered the Paionians living east
of Lake Prasias,
and then proceeded to deport them to Asia Minor.
For the Greeks of the fifth century this was an extremely puzzling procedure,
although quite common for the Eastern empires. To explain this Herodotos found
a most charming story, and since it shows the versatility of Paionian women, I
shall repeat it now. There were two Paionians who wanted to become rulers of
their country by winning the favour of the Persian King. They went to Sardis where the King
was. There they dressed their sister, a tall, fair woman, in very fine clothes
and sent her to draw water, carrying a vessel on her head, leading a horse by
the bridle on her arm, and spinning flax at the same time. She paraded past the
King who became interested in this unusual sight and ordered his guards to
follow her. She watered the horse at the river, filled her vessel and walked
back leading the horse, carrying the water, and spinning. Dareios then
summoned her before him.Her brothers appeared and told him that they were
Paionians from the River Strymon. The King then asked if the other Paionian
women were as notable workers, and when they said "yes," he ordered
Megabazos to bring the Paionians to Asia. This
may not be quite historic, but it is a good story. Nevertheless, for whatever
reason, the Paionians, or as many as could be collected, were deported to
Asia.41 This disaster did not effect the Paionians who lived west of
the Strymon valley. Later, during the Ionian revolt, many of the deported
Paionians revolted and with the aid of the Greek islanders escaped back to
their homes.42 But obviously this collision weakened the Paionian
hold on the territory east of the Strymon. The next fifty years of Paionian
history is almost a complete blank, but it is clear that as a result of the
pressures of the Macedonians to the west and the Thracian tribes to the east,
the Paionians who lived east of the Strymon, and even those on the lower
Strymon itself, disappeared. We learn that Alexander I of Macedonia controlled a silver mine near Lake Prasias
which was formerly Paionian and which brought him an income of one talent per
day. We next find mention of the Paionians by Thucydides in connection with
the events in Thrace and Macedonia in
the early years of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides tells of the expedition,
during the third year of the war, of Sitalkes the Odrysian King of Thrake and
ally of Athens
against Perdikkas, the King of Macedonia. From the circumstances of this
expedition we learn a little about the Paionians. First of all, the Agrianes
andtheLaioi, as well as other Paionian tribes, acknowledged the sovereignty of
the King of Thrace, because they furnished contingents of troops for his army.
Then we learn that Sitalkes' western boundary was the Strymon River
which flows through the territory of the Agrianes and Laioi, and that west of
the Strymon lived Paionians who were independent. Thus we see that the eastern
Paionians — those living in the lower Strymon valley and north of Mt. Pangaion
— were, during the course of the fifth century, first weakened by the Persians,
and then ground between two millstones, the more powerful Thracian and Macedonian
Kingdoms, so that they disappear from the sources. We find that the Paionian
tribe of the Doberes, whom Herodotos still knows in the area of Mt. Pangaion,
has moved, and in Thucydides has its center in the Axios valley to the north of
Macedonia.43 From the time of the Peloponnesian War until the
accession of Philip II to the throne of Macedonia the Paionians again drop out
of our sources. There is no mention of them whatever. We must imagine that
they withdrew into their fastness along the upper Axios River
and in the mountainous regions around it, pressed by enemies on all sides —
Thracians, Illyrians, and Macedonians. Here they managed to create some sort of
unified state, for when our sources cause them to reappear we find that the
Paionian tribes no longer exist as such, but that there is a Kingdom of Paionia
in their place. This Kingdom is able to preserve its identity down to the third
century B.C. It is with this Kingdom that my own studies have especially
dealt, and now I should like to consider the history of that Kingdom.
As usual, we
learn about Paionia only in connection with Macedonia. Diodoros Sikeliotes
tells us that in the year 360-59 Philip II became ruler of Macedonia after
his brother Perdikkas was defeated in battle and killed by the Illyrians. Over
4.000 Macedonians were killed in that disaster and the country was in an
extremely weak condition. All of Macedonia's enemies decided to
seize the opportunity to obtain what advantages they could from this
situ-ationia. The Illyrians began to assemble armies and to prepare to invade
Mace-donia. The Thracians planned to install their candidate for the Macedonian
throne, a certain Pausanias who was related to the royal family of Macedonia. The
Athenians tried to restore Argaios, their candidate, to the throne, and the
Paionians who lived near by began to pillage Macedonian territory to show their
contempt for the Macedonians. Once again the Paionians are on the scene. But
Philip was able to hold his position in the face of all these enemies by a
judicious combination of force, diplomacy and bribery. He carried out a reform
of the Macedonian army, which gave him the force he needed. He bought off the
Athenians with the promise of Amphipolis, and thus was able to defeat Argaios
their candidate. He bribed the Thracian King who likewise abandoned his
protege, and he sent an embassy to the Paionians. Through the generous use of
bribery and persuasion, the embassy got an agreement from them to maintain
peace for the present. Thus Philip was able to get a breathing spell. In the
following year 359-8, Agis the king of Paionia died. Philip seized his
opportunity to attack the Paionians. He led an army into Paionia, defeated the
Paionians, and thus compelled them to obey the Macedonians.[27] Some historians have
taken this to mean that Philip took over the Paionian Kingdom
on the death of Agis. However the appearance a very short time later of Agis'
successor Lykpeios, leads me to believe that Philip only defeated the Paionians
and compelled them to recognize his suzerainty. That same year Philip defeated
the Illyrians, his greatest enemies, under Bardyllis, in a great battle near
Monastir. There is no need to continue with the history of Philip. The
Paionians have reapeared in our sources, this time with a well-defined Kingdom
to the north of Macedonia.
On the death of Agis, who is the first Paionian King we know, Lykpeios
(Lyppeios, Lykkeios) became King. Lykpeios was probably the son of Agis, though
we cannot be sure. In the summer of 356 Lykpeios, the Illyrian Grabos, and the
Thracian Ketriporis joined with Athens
in an alliance to try to check the advances of Philip.[28] This alliance-seems
to have had very little effect, for Philip was able to act before the allies
united their forces, and continued to move from one success to another. References
to the Paionians in the First Olynthian of Demosthenes
of 349,[29]
and in the Philippos of Isokrates of 346,[30] show that the
Paionians had been overthrown and made subject to Philip. This subjection did
not mean that Paionia was incorporated into the Macedonian Kingdom.
Since we find that Lykpeios issued silver coins bearing his own name, we can
assume that although Paionia was subject to Philip she continued to preserve
her own identity as a state with her own kings. Further, the fact that they had
the ability to issue silver coins argues for a good deal of independence on
their part. In all probability the Paionians were compelled to pay tribute to
Philip, and to serve in his armies. Apart from his coins, we learn no more of
Lykpeios, and perhaps we can assume that the final years of his reign were
quiet and peaceful.
From the numismatic evidence we discover that he
was succeded by Patraos who, like his predecessor, struck silver coins. This is
all we can say with any certainty about Patraos, as is the case with the end
of the reign of Lykpeios. We know that Patraos' successor was already on the
throne by 310 B.C., and this gives us the terminus ante
quern for the end of Patraos' reign. The coinage will, I think, help us to
find a terminus ante quern for its beginning. On the reverse of the
silver tetradrachms we find a battle scene represented. At first glance it is
only a horseman with a spear riding down an enemy on foot. On closer
examination of a number of different coins we soon realize that the man on foot
is wearing the national'costume of the Persians. The cavalryman, who wears a
helmet and cuirass, can with reasonable certainty be taken as a Paionian. Is
there any incident of which we know in which a Paionian cavalryman rides down a
Persian opponent? The answer comes quickly to mind. In Quin-tus Curtius Rufus' History of
Alexander it is reported that when Alexander the Great was
crossing the Tigris river with his army in 331, before the decisive battle of Gaugamela, his army was attacked by a detachment of
Persian cavalry. I now quote from Curtius IV. ix. 24-25. "Alexander.,
ordered Ariston, commander of the Paionian cavalry to charge the Persian at
full speed. Glorious on that day was the fighting of the cavalry and in
particular of Ariston; aiming his spear at the throat of Satropates leader of
the Persian horsemen he ran it through, then overtaking him as he fled through
the midst of the enemy, hurled him from his horse, and in spite of his
resistance cut off his head with a sword; brought it back, and amid great
applause laid it at the King's feet." Of course we must not take every single
word of this extremely rhetorical writer as the absolute truth. The picture of
Satropates making off through the ranks of the Persians with his throat run
through by a spear is, to say the least, extremely unlikely. Much more
probably, Ariston wounded the Persian, threw him from his horse, and then
killed him. A further confirmation of this incident is found in Plutarch's Life of
Alexander, from which I shall also quote.[31] "Ariston,
the leader of the Paionians, having slain an enemy brought his head and showed
it to Alexander, saying: Ίη my country, Ο King, such a gift as this is rewarded with a
golden beaker.' 'Yes,' said Alexander with a laugh, 'an empty one, but I will
pledge thy health with one which is full of pure wine." A little anecdote
which says something about the customs of the Paionians,and about Alexander's
graciousness. In any case, I think that we can consider the Paionian coin type
as a representation of the epic battle of Ariston and Satropates. The name
Ariston appears later as the name of a member of the royal family, and
probably our Ariston was likewise a member of the royal family — perhaps a
younger brother of Patraos. Patraos himself issued two types of silver
tetradrachms. The first issue, a very rare one, showed a horse's head on the
reverse; the second, much more common, is the one I described before. Therefore
one can say that Patraos came to the throne shortly before 331 and issued the
horse head type. After 331 he changed to the other which was rather flattering
to the royal family. He must have died before 310, and was probably succeeded
by his son Audoleon.
At this point,
let us consider the Paionian troops who were with Alexander on his Asiatic
expedition. It seems that there were originally about 200 soldiers. They were
used as light cavalry, as skirmishers, and as scouts. Probably they were
equipped with a long lance and short sword. They participated in all three of
Alexander's great battles against the Persians, but they disappear from the
sources after Gaugamela, the last of the
three. It seems that the original 200 were never reinforced and that after Gaugamela they were either allowed to go home or were
incorporated into other units.49
Patraos'
successor Audoleon, was already king in 310. But already great changes had
happened in the empire that Alexander created. On the death of Alexander
Antipatros continued in charge of Macedonia and naturally would have
had supervision over the Paionian vassal state. Surprisingly in the period
after Alexander's death which is extremely well documented in our sources,
there is no mention of the Paionians. Dexippos, the Athenian historian of the
third century A.D., tells us in a fragment of his history τά μετά Άλέξανδρον preserved in Photius, that Antipater was
appointed strategos autokrator in charge of
all the Macedonians, Hellenes, Illyrians, Triballi, and Agrianes.50 There
is no mention of the Paionians, and we can conjecture that soon after
Alexander's death the Paionians shook off Macedonian sovereignty. Having their
own kings and their own state, they were easily able to obtain complete
independence. For a number of years, as the successors of Alexander, the
dia-dochoi, struggled to control his empire, the Paionians slip into obscurity.
Then Diodoros Sikeliotes, who is here following the great contemporary
historian Hieronymos of Kardia, reports among the events of 310/309 that
Kassandros son of Antipatros and the ruler of Macedonia, went to the aid of
Audoleon, the king of the Paionians when he was fighting against the
Autariatai, and freed the king from danger. According to Justin, the Autariatai
were forced to leave their home by an infestation of frogs and mice, and so
Kassander settled them along with their families, 20,000 in all, beside Mt. Orbelos.51
From this, our first reference to Audoleon, we must conclude that the
Paionian ruler was on good terms with Kassandros, his powerful neighbor to the
south. In the year 306,
Demetrios,
later surnamed "Poliorketes" or the "Be-seiger" won a great
naval victory at Salamis in Kypros from Ptolemy
the ruler of Egypt.
As a result, Antigonos Monophthalmos, or "One-Eyed," "Demetrios'
father, assumed the royal diadem and the title of king. Alexander's son had
been executed in 310, but until 306 all the diadochoi ruled their territories
not as Kings, but as satraps or viceroys. As soon as Antigonos ended this
friction all the diadochoi, one after the other, likewise assumed the royal
dignities. If we look at the coinage of Audoleon we can see his response to
this activity. During the early part of his reign Audoleon struck silver tetradrachms
with the head of Athena on the obverse and a standing horse on the reverse.
These coins were issued on the same light standard that was used by his
predecessors Lykpeios and Patraos. Later, however, we find another type of
tetradrachm. This one is an imitation of the coinage of Alexander the Great. On
the obverse is the head of Herakles wearing a lion's skin. This head is often
considered to be a portait of Alexander in the guise of his ancestor Herakles.
But its appearance here on the coins of Audoleon would lead one to believe that
it is rather kist the head of Herakles. On the reverse is a seated Zeus holding
in one hand a staff; on the other hand an eagle is perched. On either side of
Zeus is the legend ΒΑΣΙΑΕΩΣ ΑΥΔΩΛΕΟΝΤΟΣ, "of king Audoleon." The coin
speaks as clearly as any other source. When the diadochoi assumed the diadem,
Audoleon did exactly the same thing; he responded by issuing his coins in
imitation of Alexander's, with his own royal title to proclaim to the world
that he, Audoleon, was independent, and also a king. Audoleon does not seem to
have minted very many of these coins, but they seem to have served their
purpose.52 Then again Paionia slips into the background, while in
the foreground is played out the fate of Alexander's empire. The empire of
Antigonos the One-eyed disappeared in the wake of the battle of Ip-sos in 301,
but his son Demetrios was able to supplant the heirs of Kasan-dros as ruler of Macedonia.
Pyrrhos the great king of Epiros, feeling himself threatened by the great
ambitions of Demetrios, around the year 292 embarked on a policy of making
alliances with Demetrios' neighbors. Pyrrhos, who quite clearly did not believe
in monogamy, married the daughter of Bardyl-lis the Illyrian, and at about the
same time, a daughter of Audoleon. It was part of a policy on the part of all
three rulers of seeking allies against the ambitions of Demetrios, king of Macedonia. At
least we can assume that Audoleon preserved a posture of defense against
Demetrios. But Demetrios' ambitions were considered too threatening by the
other powers of the eastern Mediterranean, and in the winter of 287/6 his
enemies struck; Pyrrhos and Lysimachos invaded Macedonia
from Epiros and Thrace,
while a Ptolemaic fleet swept up the Aegean from Egypt. Demetrios soon lost all
control of Macedonia,
which was divided between Pyrrhos and Lysimachos. Athens
revolted from Demetrios' control, and Demetrios himself, an inveterate gambler
to the end, staked all on an expedition to Asia Minor.
Demetrios lost, and spent the remaining years of his life in
confinement. In Greece,
Demetrios had left his son Antigonos Gonatas in charge of the few fortresses
that were left to him, and among these was the Piraeus. Athens, therefore, was free, but her harbor
was controlled by a hostile garrison. It is in these circumstances that we
find the allies trying to keep Athens
supplied with food. Athenian inscriptions are preserved which describe some of
these circumstances to us. One inscription, /. G. II2 650,
from the summer of 286, honors a Ptolemaic official who has taken care of the
provisioning of Athens.
With the Piraeus in enemy hands, grain for Athens must have been
imported through the smaller harbors along the Attic coast. A year and a half
later the Athenians, in I.G. II2 653, honored Spartakos, the
king of Bosporos (Krimea), for his benefactions to Athens, among which was a gift of 15,000
medimnoi of grain. A half year later, in the early summer of 284, the
Athenians, in I.G. II2 654, likewise honored Audoleon for a
gift of 6,500 medimnoi. Apparently Audoleon was still in the anti-Antigonid
coalition in 284 along with his son-in-law Pyrrhos and Lysimachos. This is the
last reference we have to Audoleon while he is alive. The next time we hear of
Paionia, Audoleon is dead. A stratagem from the collection of stratagems of
the Greek author Polyainos, a rhetorician of the 2nd century A.D., Book IV,
chapter 12, section 3, informs us of the condition of Paionia after the death
of Audoleon. I quote, "Lysimachos took measures to restore Ariston, son of
Audoleon, to Paionia, in order that the Paionians, recognizing their heir
apparent, might receive Lysimachos himself in a friendly spirit. But when they
proceeded to give Ariston the royal baptism in the river Astibos and set the
royal table before him according to the tradition of their tribe, Lysimachos
sounded the call to arms. Ariston fled to Dardania, and Lysimachos got
possession of Paeonia." Apparently on the death of Audoleon there was some
dispute in the succession and Ariston had fled the country and had called in
Lysimachos to help him. This dispute also explains why Lysimachos was so easily
able to seize Paionia. Lysimachos was a very ambitious and covetous ruler. He
had begun with the satrapy of Thrace.
After the downfall of Antigonos at Ipsos in 301 he added western Asia Minor to his possessions. The defeat of Demetrios in
286 gave him the eastern half of Macedonia. Shortly afterwards,
Lysimachos drove his former ally Pyrrhos out of western Macedonia, and took over the whole country of Macedonia.
Then, as seems clear from Polyainos, Lysimachos seized the neighboring Kingdom of Paionia. Since Lysimachos was killed
soon afterwards, in the summer of 281, at the battle of Koroupedion in Asia Minor, the death of Audoleon can be securely placed
between 284 and 282. It is a pity that we know so little about him, for he must
have really been a remarkable man. As long as he lived, he managed with the
support of his rather small and backward kingdom to maintain his position in an
age of really stupendous change, among the extremely able successors of
Alexander the Great. We find another version of the story of Lysimachos'
annexation of Paionia in a passage of Tzetzes which is attributed to Diodoros.53
Before his death Audoleon had tried to hide his treasures. He entrusted them to
his closest friend Xermodi-gestos, who caused captives to divert the waters of
the Sargentios river, and buried the treasure in its bed. Then he caused the
river to flow back into its original bed, and killed the captives. But
Xermodigestos revealed the hiding place to Lysimachos, apparently after his
seizure of the kingdom. Unfortunately the anecdote is considered suspect by
modern historians, who think Tzetzes has erred here. After the death of Lysimachos, Macedonia
underwent a period of anarchy. In the midst of this we hear nothing of the
Paionians. But in 279 the Galatians or Gauls (the Celtic tribes) appeared- in Macedonia, defeated the Macedonians and got as
far as Delphi and Thermopylai. It is certain
that Paionia was overrun and held for a time by Brennus the Celtic chieftain.
Finally, Antigonos Gonatas defeated the Galatians at Lysimacheia in 277, and
became King of Macedonia. The Galatians were no longer a threat to civilization
in the Balkan peninsula — many were dead, some had crossed to Asia Minor,
others withdrew to Serbia,
and still others settled in inland Thrace. We can read in W.W. Tarn's
book Antigonos Gonatas how Antigonos struggled to reestablish the Macedonian
state in the period after the Celtje invasion. The parallel struggle in Paionia
is absolutely lost — once again, there are no sources. To judge by what
happened in Macedonia,
Paionia must have been in a very confused condition. Stephanos the Byzantine
Geographer has preserved for us an honorary epigram from the city of Tlos in Lykia, Asia
Minor.54 It informs us that Neoptolemos the son of Kressos defeated
and repulsed the Galatians. Scholars attribute this event to the years 278-275
when the Galatians had reached Asia Minor and
were raiding the peninsula. The unusual thing about this epigram is the fact
that the Paionians are mentioned along with the Galatians. Apparently numbers
of Paionians were swept up in the Celtic hordes as they passed through Paionia
and were carried along voluntarily or involuntarily until they were finally
deposited in Asia Minor along with the
Galatians. Thus in addition to all their other problems the Paionians must have
faced a serious shortage of manpower. Nevertheless out of all this ruin and
desolation the Paionians were able to rebuild their state although not on
exactly the same lines as before. The fine silver coins minted by the kings
from Lykpeios to Audoleon were no longer issued. A few small and wretched
bronze coins are preserved in some collections, but that is all. The real
prosperity to which the silver coinage at one time attested no longer existed,
and the silver mines which once supplied the bullion were either no longer
producing, or were, producing for another government, probably Macedonia. We
do not know the fate of Ariston the son of Audoleon. After his escape into
Dardania he disappears completely from our sources. We do know of the next king
of the Paionians, and this is Leon, most probably another son of Audoleon. The
only evidence that we have for Leon's reign are bronze coins with the royal
name on the reverse.55 This, I think, quite clearly shows that Leon
was king of Paionia in the wake of the Celtic invasions, and that he was the
person responsible for the reestablish-ment of Paionian state. Once again, we
have a Paionian King who, judging from the circumstances known to us, must have
been a great constructive statesman, at least in his own sphere, and yet we
know almost nothing at all about him.
Leon was succeeded by
his son Dropion, and for him we have more evidence — a great deal, in
comparison to the evidence for -his father. It consists of two inscriptions,
one from Delphi and one from Olympia,
and a passage in Pausanias. The passage in Pausanias appears in X. 13.1. I
quote, "The bronze head of a bison or Paeonian bull was sent to Delphi by
Dropion, King of the Paeonians, son of Leon." This is the important
section, for it tells us Dropion's position, and establishes his relation to Leon. Pausanias
goes on to tell about the way in which these beasts were caught, and I shall
continue to quote, "These bison are the most difficult of all beasts to
take alive, and no nets could be made strong enough to resist their charge.
They are hunted as follows. When the hunters find a place sloping down to a
hollow, they first of all enclose it with a strong fence; next they cover the
slope and the fresh ground at the end of the slope with fresh skins, or if they
have no fresh skins they use dried hides lubricated with oil. Next the best
horsemen drive the bison together to the place I have described. The beasts
slip on the first skins they come to and roll down the slope til they reach the
flat. Here they are at first left lying. But by the fourth or fifth day when
hunger and exhaustion have mostly subdued their spirit, the professional tamers
bring them, where they lie, the fruit of the cultivated pine tree having first
peeled the husk off for at first the beasts will touch no other food. Lastly
the men fasten ropes round the animals and lead them away. That is how they
catch them." The inscription from Olympia, which is on the base of what
was once a bronze equestrian statue of Dropion, reads' as follows when it is
restored, "The Koinon (or league) of the Paeonians dedicated (this statue
of) Dropion, son of Leon, King of the Paionians and founder." The
inscription from Delphi is on the base of a
pedestrian statue of Audoleon. It is to be restored as follows, "Dropion,
the son of Leon, King of the Paionians, (dedicated this statue of) Audoleon
his grandfather(?) according to an oracle to Pythian Apollo." This
inscription is in an extremely worn condition, and there has been some controversy
over the reading of it. I myself have been to Delphi
where I examined the stone with M. Bousquet. It is quite clear that the above
restoration is certainly correct. Unfortunately these three references to
Dropion bear no dates, and it is thus quite impossible to date Dropion exactly.
The letter forms of the inscriptions quite clearly are of the third century.
But we must remember that Dropion was probably the grandson of Audoleon and
successor to Leon who ruled Paionia after the Celtic invasion, that is, after
278 B. C.There has been put forth another theory that Dropion succeeded to the
throne in 278, and that, he was called founder of the Koinon of the Paionians
because he restored and reformed the country after the Celtic devastation. But
the bronze coins of Leon
show that he was Dropion's predecessor, and the epithet "founder" on
the Delphic inscription must be explained in some other manner. Dropion
succeeded to the throne not in the 270's, but after the reign of his father
Leon — at a guess, perhaps in the 250's or 240's. The presence of Dropion
dedications at Delphi and at Olympia
must also be taken into account. For most of the third century Delphi was under the control of the Aitolian League.
There is preserved at Delphi no trace of the
Macedonian Kings Antigonos Gonatas and his son Demetrios II. This, I think, must
be attributed to two factors, the general hostility of the Aitolian League to Macedonia, and the great interest of the
Macedonian Kings in Delos, where they
dedicated many things. At Olympia also, there
are no dedications of Antigonos Gonatas and Demetrios II of Macedonia. This
is due, no doubt, to the general hostility of the democratic party at Elis, which dominated the
state during this period. But there are the three dedications of Dropion, the
King of the Paionians, at Delphi and Olympia.
The one at Olympia
was in a very conspicuous part of the sanctuary, and the bison's head was
conspicuous e-nough to be mentioned by Pausanias; we do not know where the
statue of Audoleon was placed. This must be the result of some policy of the
Aitolians, who are known to have been allied with Elis. It is, of course, impossible to know
definitely the foreign policy of Dropion yet on the basis of what we know about
the Paionians it would not be amiss to conjecture that his policy was basically
anti-Macedonian. This idea combined with the previously mentioned dedications
suggests an alliance with the Aitolians. After the 270's
Aitolia was at peace with
the Macedonian Kingdom of Antigonos. It was only during
the reign of Demetrios II (239-229) that Aitolia and Macedonia were at war, the
so-called War of Demetrios. I think that in this war Dro-pion was involved as
an ally of Aitolia. Now an attempt must be made to explain the meaning of the
inscription at Olympia
if Dropion did not as I think reign immediately after the Celtic invasion. We
know that in Macedonia
the royal title under Antigonos Gonatas was Antigonos King of the Macedonians.
Under Antigonos Doson who ruled from 229-221 the official style was King
Antigonos and the Macedonians. We also know that under the later Macedonians a
Koinon or League existed side by side with the Kingship, and the change in
official style is connected by scholars with the appearance of the Koinon. We
do not know the official style of Demetrios II but it is conjectured that the change
in the Macedonian constitution occured during his reign or immediately after
it. If this is so we can explain how Dropion's title of Founder is consistent
with a late date for his reign. When Demetrios or Antigonos Doson created the
Macedonian Koinon he was imitated by his northern neighbor Dropion who hoped in
this way both to modernize the constitution of his Kingdom and to increase the
support of his subjects. As in Makedonia the creation of the Koinon did not in
any way curtail the power of the King who continued to reign and rule as
before. In any case I believe that Dropion was involved in the War of
Demetrios, when the Aitolian and Achaean Leagues were united against Macedonia; the sanctuaries of Delphi and Olympia would thus have
been open to the Paionians, the traditional enemies of Makedonia.56
We do not know the circumstances of the end
of Dropion's reign. It is, like so much else in the history of Paionia, hidden
from us by our lack of sources. There is no mention whatever of Dropion's successor.
The argumentum ex silentio leads us to suppose that there was no
succesor, and there is a little evidence to support this supposition. The
Macedonians founded a city, Antigoneia on the Axios, a little to the south of
Stoboi, which helped control the northern invasion route into Macedonia along the Axios River.
This city is quite clearly in Paionian territory. Its very name, Antigoneia,
tells us that it was founded by a King named Antigonos, and quite clearly this
should be Antigonos Doson. These two little facts when put together lead to the
conclusion that Doson put an end to Paionian independence during or at the end
of the reign of Dropion. Doson's reign was fairly short, from 229 to 221. During
the last part of his reign he was at war with Kleomenes, King of Sparta.
This was preceded by an
expedition to Karia. The very beginning of his reign was spent trying to pick
up the pieces of Demetrios IPs disastrous reign. Therefore, in the first two
years of his reign, Doson was able to defeat all the enemies of Macedonia and
reestablish security on her frontiers. He probably annexed Paionia during this
time, and by 227 B.C. Antigoneia on the Axios had been built to overawe and
control the surrounding Paionian territory. Perhaps Doson was not able to
seize the whole of the Paionian
Kingdom at once. Bylazora
somehow managed to avoid his grasp. Perhaps it was held by the Dardanians with
whom Doson was at war in the early years of his reign. It is also possible that
Doson allowed the Dardanians to hold part of Paionia while he took the rest. In
any case, Philip V seized Bylazora in 217.57 Unfortunately we do
not know the circumstances, nor do we know from whom he seized the city. From
this point on, Paionia remained a part of the Macedonian monarchy. It was
ruled by a Macedonian strategos, who had his headquarters in the new city of Antigoneia,
which became the capital of the province. In this way, Paionia was able to
guard the northern frontiers of Macedonia
from invasion by the northern barbarians, particularly the Dardanians. The
Paionian cavalry stood alongside the Macedonian army in the last decisive
battles against the Romans. With the defeat of Perseus, Paionia was broken up-.
The portion of Paionia east of the Axios
River was assigned to the second
Macedonian region, and the portion west of the Axios was assigned to the third
region.58 Afterwards, Paionia became part of the Roman province of Macedonia, and the Paionians themselves
were amalgamated with the other inhabitants of the area.
My researches in the
coinages of the Paionian Kings are not completed, and until they are, I shall
be unable to make any really definitive statements about the coinage, and what
deductions we can glean from it. Nevertheless I can make some general
statements. The Paionian coinage first appeared under the reign of Lykpeios.
The standard on which the coins of Lykpeios were issued is an unusual one. It
is called by some a reduced Phoenician standard. In any case, the basic unit,
the drachm, weighed a little over 3 grams, and the tetradrachm weighed about 13 grams. The obverse of
the tetradrachm showed the head of Apollo facing left, and the reverse showed a
youthful He-rakles strangling the Nemean Lion. An unusual thing in connection
with this type of coin is the fact that an obverse die used to strike these
silver coins of the Paionian Kings was later used to strike coins of the city
of Damastion,
and testifies to the close connection between that city and Paionia. Lykpeios also
issued drachms with the head of Apollo on the obverse and a lion on the
reverse, and also tetrobols with Apollo on the obverse and a grazing horse on
the reverse. We have mentioned the tetradrachms of Patraos. He also issued
drachms with Apollo and a boar, and tetrobols with Apollo and an eagle. In his
first period, as I have mentioned, Audoleon issued tetradrachms on the reduced
Phoenician standard. He also issued didrachms with the profile head of Athena
on the obverse and a horse on the reverse, as well as drachms and tetrobols. As
we have said he then changed his tetradrachm type to imitate Alexander's
coinage, and at the same time changed their weights to the Attic standard, in
which a tetradrachm weighed about 17 grams. There does not seem to be any
corresponding issue of smaller coins.
What can the coins tell us of the economy of the Kingdom? I know of at
least two hoards of Paeonian coins with over 1,000 coins each. The first, found
in the 19th century, has been dispersed without any adequate record. The second
was found only last year in Bulgaria,59
and I have not yet seen it. Yet this does testify to large concentrations of
wealth in the Paionian state. The coins also show us the direction of Paionian
trade. There are in the National Museum in Athens
11 coins of the Paionian Kings. Quite clearly Paionia's trade was with the
north. An unusual aspect of this is the fact that much of Paionia's trade was
with the Celtic tribes. The Celts copied and imitated the coinage of Philip II
of Macedonia.
I think that for his commerce with the Celts Audoleon issued coins which
imitated, on their obverse, the Head of Zeus on Philip's coins, while he used
his own reverse types. Then the Celts themselves imitated these types. An
example of the popularity of these coins is the fact that one small coin
collection in Switzerland
has 26 of these Celtic imitations of Audoleon's coins, and no other Paeonian
coins. Obviously these are local finds and show the wide influence of the coin
type.
Rutgers,
The State University IRWIN
L. MERKER
*This is the text of a talk presented
at the Institute for Balkan Studies in Thessaloniki
on April 7, 1964. The printed text is substantially as it was originally
presented, but wherever possible documentation has been added. At the present
time I am preparing a corpus of the coins of the Kings of Paionia, and this is
to be considered as prolegomena to that corpus. I must acknowledge my gratitude
to Rutgers University for a University Fellowship
for the fall semester of 1963, and to the American Council of Learned Societies
for a grant-in-aid which enabled me to complete the research for this paper.
REFERENCES:
1. Jean N. Kalleris, Les anciens
Macidoniens, Τ (Athens,
1946), and Apostolos B. Daska-lakis, The Hellenism of the ancient
Macedonians (Thessaloniki,
1965) contain two of the most recent treatments in detail of this problem. Most
historians now believe that the Macedonians were Hellenes.
2. "La nationalite des
Peoniens," Musee Beige 30 (1926) 107-117.
3. V. 1. 4.
4. B. C. H., 33 (1909)
176.
5. Griechische Geschichte, P.
2. p. 58.
6. VII.745.
7. Herod. V. 16.
8. Thuc. II. 56.
9. Thuc. III. 101.
10. Steph. Byz. s.v. Μεσσαπέαι Paus. III. 20.3.
11. Inschr. v. Olympia 10=
Michel 2 = Schwyzer 414.
12. [Skylax] 47.
13. Polyb. v. 7. 8.
14. Iliad II. 849f.; XVI. 288; XXI 141, 157.
[1]5. Arrian, Anabasis, 1.5.2-5.
16. L. Heuzey, H. Daumet, Mission archeologique de Macedoine (Paris 1876), p. 319, nos. 125-126.
17. Herod. V. 12-14.
18. Livy XL. 21. 9ff; 22.15; 23-24; XLII. 51.6; 58.8. Didas is ex. praetoribus regiis unus, qui Paeoniae
praeerat, or Paeoniae praetor or Paeoniae prefectus. In one passage he is called Didas Paeon, but despite this reference it is possible that
he was not a Paionian. The name may be a form of Derdas, a common Macedonian
name (Niese, Geschichte der grie-chischen und makedonischen Staaten, III, 33 n. 6). Cf. also Bengston, Die Strategie in der hel-lenistischen Zeit, II, 340ff. and Meloni, Perseo e la fine della monarchia macedone, 48 n. 3.
19. Diod. XYI. 4.2.
20. Plut., Alex., 39; Arrian, Anabasis, 11.9.2; III. 12.3; 13.3.
21. Polyain. IV. 12. 3.
22. Cf. Hoffmann, Die Makedonen, ihre Sprache und ihr Volkstum, (Gottingen,
1906), 183 where a number of Greek names with the stem δρωπ- are collected.
23. W. Pape, G. Benseler, Worterbuch der griechischen Eeigennamen, s.v.
24. Hoffman, Makedonen, p. 109; I.G. XII 3 254.
25. Historia Animalium 630a. Also De Mirabilis Auscultationibus 830a where a variant, μόναιπος appears. Aelian, De Natura Animalium VII. 3 has μόνωψ.
26. X.13.1.
27. Hjalmar Frisk, Griechisches Etymologisches
worterbuch, Vol. II, p. 252.
28. II. 848ff. Also XVI. 287f. On the change from β to μ in Abydon - Amydon see Kre-tschmer, Gtotta, 24 (1935 - 36) 47. VII frg. 20.
29. Eoiae frg. 5. (Rzach2).
30. VII frgs. 38, 41.
31. V.l.
32. V. 15; 113.
33. II. 96. 3.
34 Herod. IV. 49 where it is called the Skios.
35. Herod. V.16.
36. V.l.
37. Herod. VII.113.
38. Thuc. II. 99.
39. Thuc. II. 98.
40. Strabo VII, 313,
316, 318, 329, frg. 4; Polyb. V. 97.1; Livy XXXIX. 53.14
41. Herod. V. 12-17.
42. Herod. V. 98.
Herod. V. 17
43. II. 96.3; 98
44. Diod. XVI. 2ff.
45.
I.G. IP 127.
46. 1.23.
47. V.21.
48. Chap. 39.
49. Arrian 1.14.1, 6;
II.7.5; 9.2; III.13.3-4
50. FGrH IIA 100 F8 2
51. Diod. XX19.I;
Justin XV.2.1-2
52. After this talk
was given, H. Seyrig published in Review Nomismatique, (1963) 2-14 a study of a small group of
regular tetradrachms of Alexander which were struck by the Paionian royal mint.
53.
Tzetzes, Hist. VI.53 (470-480) = Diod. XXI. 13.
54. s.v. Άγρίαι.
55. Die antiken Munzen Nord-Griechelands
III. Makedonia und
Paionia, 2. Abt. ed. H. Gaebler, p. 206.
56. Inschr. v. Olympia 303 ■= S.I.G?
394. J. Pouilloux, "Dropion, roi des Peones", B.C.H. 74
(1950) 22 - 32. J.
Bousquet, "Dropion roi des Peones", B.C.H. 76 (1952) 136-140.
57. Polyb.' V. 97.
58 Livy XLV. 29.
59. Bulletin de Vinstitut d'archeologie. Academie des sciences de
Bulgarie. Sofia 26 (1%3) 264. At Razinci
: 1446 tetradrachms of Philip II, 1208 of Patraos, 2 of Lykpeios and 1 of
Damastion.
