THE EDONIANS

Peter DELEV

The Edonians, or in Greek texts, 1 were a Thracian people on the lower Strymon. 2 Their name was probably the best known among the many tribal names of the region, and Greek and Latin poets would sometimes use it as a loose synonym for the Thracians in general. 3 Their history was never written, and the scattered pieces of information that have been passed down to us by various ancient authors do not permit its full reconstruction and refer mainly to a rather brief period of time in the fifth century B. C. Greek tradition gave most Thracian tribes eponymous mythological ancestors, but we remain in the dark as to whether this reiterates local Thracian beliefs or was mainly a creation of the Greek colonists in the archaic age, when mythological constructions seem to have

Schol. in Lycophron. 418 suggests a difference in the usage of the two names, implying that although they belonged to the same tribe, the Edones lived near the sea and the Edonoi in the interior: , ' , . 2 The Edonians are qualified as Thracians by Herodotus (7.11) and many other ancient authors. Cf. E. Oberhummer. Edones. RE 5.2, 1905, 1974; . . . , 1976, 62-65; F. Papazoglou. Les villes de Macdoine l'poque romaine. Paris, 1988 (= BCH suppl. 16), 385-413. 3 W. Smith (Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, London, 1854, 807, s. v. Edones) quotes as examples of such usage Aesch. Pers. 493; Soph. Ant. 955; Eurip. Hec. 1153; Ov. Met. 11.69; Trist. 4.1.42; Propert. 1.3.5; Hor. Carm. 2.7.27; I do not however find it equally evident in all these instances.
1

been a popular addiction in the Greek world. Edonos () is said to have been a son of Ares and Callirhoe the daughter of Nestos, and a brother of Biston and Odomas; 4 other versions make him the son of Paionos and grandson of Ares, 5 or a brother of Mygdonos. 6 It is doubtful whether these mythological links may have any value beyond the mere reflection of the geographical proximity of the Edonians with their neighbours the Bistonians, Odomanti, and Mygdonians, with the Paeonians of the Strymon, and with the river Nestos. A loose idea of common ancestry and therefore the eventual appurtenance of the Edonians, Bistonians, Odomanti and Mygdonians to a larger tribal group could eventually (but very insecurely) be extrapolated from these mythological stemmata; this however is not feasible in the case of the Paeonians who were not of Thracian stock. The belief that all these peoples were descendants of Ares should probably be interpreted as an acknowledgement of their warlike character. Several other mythological figures bear some conjectural relevance to the shadowy early history of the Edonians. The story of Lycurgus, the son of Dryas and offender of Dionysos, briefly mentioned by Homer in the Iliad, 7 was developed by Aeschylus into a full tetralogy, of which only fragments have survived; the first tragedy significantly bears the name of . 8 Sophocles calls Lycurgus a king of the Edonians ( ). 9 In the version of Apollodorus Lycurgus, the son of Dryas, was the king of the Edonians living near the river Strymon, and the first man to defy and drive away Dionysos. The god took refuge in the depth of the sea with Thetis, daughter of Nereus, while his train of attendants, the Bacchantes and Satyrs, were all taken hostage. Then suddenly all the captives were miraculously set free, and Lycurgus was seized
Herodian. de prosod. cathol. p. 37, 185; Steph. Byz. s. v. . Ibid. 6 Steph. Byz. s. v. . 7 Hom. Il. 6.130-140. Homer makes no mention of the Edonians in this text. 8 K. Deichgrber. Die Lykurgie des Aischylos, Gttingen, 1939. 9 Soph. Ant. 955-964. Cf. Strabo 10.3.16 (C 471).
4 5

with insanity by the will of Dionysos. In his madness he killed his own son Dryas, thinking he was trimming a wine and chopping on him with an axe; only when he had cut off all his limbs did he regain his consciousness. As the land refused thenceforth to give crop, the god gave an oracle that only the death of Lycurgus would restore its fertility. On hearing this the Edonians brought him to Mt. Pangaeum and left him there tied, to meet his end torn into pieces by horses. 10 Thamyris the son of Philamon, the mythical singer who dared to invite the Muses to a musical competition and was blinded for his audacity, 11 was also sometimes associated with the Edonians 12 or with Mt. Pangaeum, where the event would have taken place according to some authorities. 13 A different version makes Thamyris a king in the Athos peninsula. 14 Another mythological story eventually connected with the Edonians was that of king Rhesus, best known from the description in the Iliad of his untimely death in the Trojan war, on the very night after his late arrival. 15 Homer does not specify the tribal affiliation of Rhesus and his Thracians, but calls his father by the name Eioneus, 16 an ancient name of the river Strymon. 17 Later authors make Rhesus a son of Strymon and one of the Muses (differently identified, sometimes as Euterpe or Clio). 18 The name of
Apollod. bibl. 3.5.1 (3.34-35). The earliest mention of this popular story is in Hom. Il. 594-600. 12 Suda s. v. : , , , ' . 13 Aeschyl. fr. 84; Euripid. Rhes. 915-925; most ancient authors however follow Homer in placing the musical competition in Messenian Dorion, retaining the Thracian (sometimes Odrysian) origin of Thamyris. 14 Strabo 7 fr. 35; Eustath. ad Hom. Il. 1.462: . 15 Hom. Il. 10.434-441, 470-525. 16 Ibid. 435. 17 Schol. Hom. Il. 10.435; Phot. bibl. cod. 186 p. 131b; Eustath. ad Hom. Il. 3.107. 18 Euripid. Rhes. 279, 349-352, 393-394; Schol. Euripid. Rhes. 346, 393; Apollod. bibl. 1.3.4.
10 11

Rhesus reappears in connection with the Athenian foundation of Amphipolis in 437 B. C. on Edonian land. Polyaenus describes in a stratagem how the founder Hagnon had his remains transferred from Troy in a red mantle and buried on the site in order to fulfill an oracle; 19 the tomb of Rhesus was situated on a hill inside the city, opposite a shrine dedicated to his mother, 20 and presumably received a heroic cult in later times. According to Strabo Rhesus was king of those among the Odomanti, Edonians and Bisalti, who had come to the lower Strymon and the region called Daton from Macedonia. 21 Although Rhesus is usually characterized more generally as a "king of (the) Thracians", he seems topographically connected with the territory which later belonged to the Edonians. None of these mythological stories could be taken as direct evidence for the earlier history of the Edonians; it is no mere coincidence that their tribal name is never mentioned in the oldest variants of the myths, namely those in the Homeric poems. In some cases the later association with the Edonians could be attributed to their dominant position in the area in the age when classical Athenian drama elaborated actively on the inherited mythological tradition; in other cases (namely that of Rhesus) the avoidance of such an association could eventually reflect a notion of chronological discrepancy based on the assumption that the Edonians were a newer population which was not present there at the time of the Trojan war (taken here as a general chronological notion of the mythological past rather than as a definite date). The idea of manifold migratory movements affecting the Lower Strymon area can be deduced from a number of ancient texts. The story of Rhesus in the tenth song of the Iliad (which seems to belong to a later stratum of evidence compared with the main body of

Polyaen. strat. 6.53. Schol. Euripid. Rhes. 346: . 21 Strabo 7 fr. 36. Herodotus 9.75 implies indirectly that Daton was in Edonian land.
19 20

Homeric information) 22 could eventually be linked with the migration of a large group of Thracians from the lower Strymon to Asia Minor as mentioned by Herodotus; known previously as Strymonians, these were later called Bithynians. 23 Herodotus affirms as well that the Strymonians had been driven from their previous territory by the Mysians and Teucrians ( ) from Asia who had invaded Europe before the Trojan war ( ) and had subdued all the Thracians, reaching as far as the Ionian Sea in the west and the river Peneus in the south; 24 some of them settled on the Strymon and were later known as Paeonians (). 25 As has been demonstrated elsewhere, 26 these informations of Herodotus can be split effectively into two chronological independent sets: the eventual invasion of the Mysians and Teucrians from Asia into Europe, which (if veritable at all, which is doubtful) would probably be of really early date, and the migration of the Bithynians (or Strymonians, and probably equal to the Thracians of Rhesus) from the Strymon to Asia, 27 which would post-date the time of Homer or at least the main part of Homeric evidence. 28 The earliest mention of the name of the Edonians, if we take into account the date of the described events and not that of their documented fixation in writing, 29 would be in a fragment of Aristotle preserved in Pliny the Elder and Stephanus Byzantinus. 30 The two
. . . , 1972, 44. Hdt. 7.75.2. 24 Hdt. 7.20.2. 25 Hdt. 5.13.2. 26 P. Delev. Stratifying Herodotus: Local Tribes between the Lower Axios and the Nestos. Thracia 16, 2005, 106-107. 27 It is mentioned briefly also by late authors like Hesychius (s. v. ) and Stephanus Byzantinus (s. v. ) who might eventually draw on the authority of Herodotus. 28 The Bithynians are ignored completely in the Homeric poems. 29 The procedure is outlined in P. Delev, Op. cit. 30 Aristot. Fragmenta varia, fr. 478 (= Steph. Byz. s. v. : , ; Plin. n. h.
22 23

parallel texts impart that the Aeolian city of Antandros in Asia Minor was once called Edonis, being inhabited by Edonian Thracians, and later Cimmeris, when it was occupied by the Cimmerians for a hundred years. The order is explicitly mentioned by Pliny (Edonis prius vocata, dein Cimmeris), so the Edonian presence in Antandros should be dated before the Cimmerian invasion of Asia Minor, probably in the eighth century B. C. To this singular piece of information, implying the participation of a part of the Edonians in a migratory movement to North-Western Anatolia, should be added the more ample evidence on the presence of Mygdonians in Asia, notably in an area adjacent to Bithynia and Mysia on the southern coast of the Propontis,31 in Greater Phrygia 32 and eventually also in Northern Mesopotamia. 33 The first of these various localizations is particularly interesting because of its geographical proximity to Antandros, 34 hence the possibility to think that the Edonians and Mygdonians would have migrated to Asia together and in one and the same age. As to the probable definition of the time of that migration, the association of the Mygdonians with Phrygia and the Phrygians seems more relevant and significantly appears very early, being mentioned by Homer.35 Pausanias would even presume that the names Phrygians and Mygdonians were interchangeable. 36 It seems reasonable therefore to suggest that the migration of the Edonians
5.123: rursus in litore Antandros Edonis prius vocata, dein Cimmeris; cf. Herodian. de prosod. cathol. p. 96). 31 Strabo 12.3.22; 12.4.4; 12.8.10-11; Salust. hist. 3 fr. 70. 32 Plin. n. h. 5.145; Solin. 40.9; Steph. Byz. s. v. . 33 Polyb. 5.51.1; Strabo 11.14.2; 16.1.1, 23; Plin. n. h. 6.42; Plut. Lucul. 32.4; Steph. Byz. s. v. . Strabo and Pliny suggest that Mygdonia in Mesopotamia got its name only after the Macedonian conquest of Asia, because its landscape resembled European Mygdonia. 34 The distance from the bay of Adramyteion on the Aegean coast, on which lay Antandros, to the mouth of the river Rhyndacus on the Propontis, mentioned by Strabo as the western frontier of Mygdonia, measures about 150 km, and the distance to the middle course of the same river less than 100 km. 35 Hom. Il. 3.185-186. 36 Paus. 10.27.1; cf. Hor. carm. 2.12.22; 3.16.41; Ovid. met. 6.45; Hygin. fab. 191.1.

and Mygdonians from Europe to Asia would have taken place together with that of the Phrygians, for which a date as late as 800 B. C. is considered possible. 37 N. G. L. Hammond has suggested another option, namely that the Edonians migrated to Asia Minor in the first half of the seventh century B. C. together with the Cimmerians and Treres. 38 But the assumption of a wide impact of the Cimmerian invasion in the Balkans reaching as far as Macedonia and Epirus 39 seems to contradict the well-grounded idea of their penetration into Asia Minor from the east, through the Caucasus and Urartu. 40 In the seventh and sixth century B. C. the European Edonians must have passed through some of the most interesting and brilliant phases of their history, yet the remaining traces are so meagre that even the determination of their definite geographical position remains impossible. Hammond has brought forward a consistent theory of Edonian expansion in this age, suggesting they conquered Mygdonia and much adjacent territory in the Chalcidic peninsula and in the interior as far west as the lower Axios 41 and possibly pushed some of the Paeonians to the upper and middle Axios. 42 Thracian presence in the area in this age and into the fifth century B. C. is attested both archaeologically, in a number of rich grave finds
N. G. L. Hammond. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, Historical Geography and Prehistory. Oxford, 1972, 410-411. 38 Ibid. 427-429. 39 Ibid.; cf. N. G. L. Hammond. Epirus. Oxford, 1966, 428. The theory is based on archaeological material, the ethnic identification of which according to me is not conclusive. 40 In 714 B. C. the Cimmerians were the allies of the Assyrian king Sargon II against Urartu, and in 705 B. C. his enemies; in 696-695 B. C. they invaded Phrygia, in 679 Cilicia, and were defeated by Asarhaddon probably in Cappadocia; only about 654 or 652 B. C. did they reach Lydia, capturing Sardis some ten years later. It is in the time of this last events that the presumably Thracian Treres appear together with the Cimmerians as a menace for the Greek cities in Anatolia, notably in the verses of Archilochus and Callinus. Cf. also Hdt. 4.12, 7.20. 41 N. G. L. Hammond. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, 427. 42 Ibid. 428.
37

from various locations, notably at Sindos, Ayia Paraskevi, Chauchitsa, Ayios Vasilios and Zeitenlik, 43 and by the evidence of a number of ancient texts.44 In a modified version of his theory, Hammond later linked the Edonian expansion to the Axios, where he suggested Lete and Sindos were among the seats of their royal power, to the Persian invasion of the area under Megabazus in the late sixth century B. C.45 But the question remains open whether the Edonians and other related Thracians were moving (or expanding) from east to west in the seventh or sixth century, as Hammond has suggested, or were the original settlers of these more western parts, and also whether they already inhabited in this age their later territory on the lower Strymon and in the vicinity of Mt. Pangaeum, or only moved there in the course of the same migration which made them abandon the more western area. Even the time of that movement is not definitely attested; despite the often quoted passage in Thucydides which links their (final ?) expulsion with the advance of the Macedonians across the Axios, easily placed in the later reign of Alexander I, 46 it remains open to speculation in what ways the earlier movements of large masses of population in a west-to-east direction across the lower Axios, presumably in the seventh and sixth centuries B. C. (including the Bottiaei and the Pierian Thracians) had

. . . , 1985; . . . . . , , 1987, 787-811; N. G. L. Hammond. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, 348, 352, 428-429; idem. The Macedonian State. Origins, Institutions, and History. Oxford, 1989, 43; E. Borza. In the Shadow of Olympus. The Emergence of Macedon. Princeton, 1990, 88-89. Among the notable features of these graves are the golden face masks or gold plaques laid as mouth-pieces. 44 Thuc. 2.99.4; Strabo 7 fr. 11, fr. 36; Etymolog. Magn. s. v. : , . 45 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 550-336 B.C. Oxford, 1979, 57-58; N. G. L. Hammond. The Macedonian State, 43. 46 Thuc. 2.99.4. Cf. N. G. L. Hammond. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, 436.
43

affected the Edonian presence in the west. 47 Another unsettled problem is posed by the appearance, presumably somewhere in the same area, of the Thracian Brygi who attacked Megabazus in 492 B. C., 48 and who should have represented a formidable force to dare the whole Persian army. All these are questions without ready answers; the eventual discovery of archaeological proofs for the ethnic and tribal (?!) attribution of the rich necropoleis at Sindos and Ayia Paraskevi or of some of the still unlocalized major mints in the area could perhaps one day bring in more clarity. The eventual participation of the Edonians in the often troubled relations of the early Greek settlers with the local population also remains ambiguous due to the lack of any precise information. The ancient name of Thasos, Odonis, 49 suggests the initial inhabitants of the island might have been of Edonian or related stock; their fate after the establishment of the Parians in the seventh century B. C. is unknown. Archilochus, who was among the seventh century settlers of the island, mentions in a famous fragment fights with the Saioi (presumably equal to the Sapaioi), but that would rather have been on the continent across where the Parians were also trying to establish a presence. 50 The Edonians, if we assume that they already occupied the more eastern reaches of their later territories, could also have been active participants in the events near the mouth of the Nestos somewhat further east, where the seventh century Clazomenian settlers under Timesios were expelled by unnamed Thracians, 51 and later the Teians re-established Abdera in the middle of the sixth century. It is also very unfortunate that we do not possess a more detailed account of the activities of the Athenian tyrant Peisistratus in the
The finds from pre-Persian Olynthos suggest a date of about 650 B. C. for the migration of the Bottiaei from the Macedonian plain to the Chalcidic peninsula, cf. N. G. L. Hammond. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, 433-434. 48 Hdt. 6.45.1-2. 49 Hesych. s. v. . 50 Archil. fr. 6 Diehl. Cf. Strabo 12.3.20; Herodian. de prosod. cathol. p. 62; Hesych. s. v. ; Steph. Byz. s. v. . 51 Hdt. 1.168.
47

Pangaeum area, briefly remarked by Herodotus and Aristotle. 52 The Edonians are never mentioned by name in connection with these events, and their eventual role can only be suggested on the insecure basis of the assumption that the later attempts at settling in Edonian territory by Histiaeus, Aristagoras and the Athenians were in some way ensuing from the successful operation of Peisistratus. The earliest mention of the name of the Edonians in Europe in a certain chronological context is connected with events which followed the return of king Darius from his Scythian expedition, presumably around or shortly before 510 B. C. Upon his arrival in Sardis Darius offered Histiaeus of Miletus a choice of reward for having guarded the Danube bridge; being already tyrant of Miletus and therefore not craving more power, Histiaeus asked for Myrcinus in the lands of the Edonians so that he might build a city there. The request was granted immediately and Histiaeus departed without delay for Thrace. 53 Herodotus explicitly places Myrcinus in the lands of the Edonians ( ) 54 and near the Strymon ( ); 55 a plausible modern localization puts it to the north of Amphipolis, near the place where the Angites flows into the Strymon. 56 It could be inferred that at the time of the settlement of Histiaeus the Edonians were in control of at least a part of the lower Strymon valley; it remains however uncertain how far to the east, west or south their territory went at the time. It would be pertinent to ask ourselves about the eventual sources of the information on which Histiaeus based his demand and the subsequent expedition. Rumours about the Pangaeum silver which had made the fortune of Peisistratus several decades earlier would have been circulating in the Greek world, and real Pangaean silver coined by Abdera, Thasos or some of the earlier tribal mints in the area could actually have appeared already by that time on markets
Aristot. Ath. pol. 15.2; Hdt. 1.64. Hdt. 5.11.1-2. 54 Hdt. 5.11.2, 124.2. Cf. Thuc. 4.107.3; Diod. 12.68.4. 55 Hdt. 5.23.1. 56 . . Op. cit., 140-141; cf. F. Papazoglu. Op. cit., 390-391.
52 53

10

in the Persian Empire. Or perhaps Hecataeus, the Milesian erudite and geographer who counselled Aristagoras later 57 and whose extensive knowledge on Thrace is beyond any doubt,58 being already in possession of precise information on the Pangaeum area gained through personal travel or diligently collected from other sources, could have passed this on to Histiaeus. It is most annoying that Herodotus omits the Edonians from his account of the expedition of Megabazus against the Strymonian Paeonians, 59 which followed shortly after the departure of Histiaeus for Myrcinus. 60 A number of other tribes are mentioned in his text, both Paeonian and Thracian, but not the Edonians, and the geography of the area makes it impossible for them to have escaped the events unaffected. One suggested reconstruction of the stratagem of Megabazus 61 sends the Paeonians defending the pass of Akontisma to the east of Neapolis (Kavala), while the Persian army would have surrounded them along the pass between the mountains Bozdag (Falakro) and Chaldag (Lekani), following the direction taken by the modern road from Xanti to Drama via Stavroupolis and Paranestion rather than going as far inland as to reach the river Arda, as sugHdt. 5.36, 125. . . . . 66, 1975 [1972/1973], . 3 , 17-34; V. Velkov. Thracian Tribal Names by Hecateus. Terra Antiqua Balcanica 6, 1991, 21-24. 59 Hdt. 5.12-17, 23-24. 60 The order of events is definite in the text of Herodotus: on his very arrival in Sardis Darius awarded Histiaeus with Myrcinus and he departed right away (5.11.1-2); then the Paeonian brothers Pigres and Mantyes incited in Darius the wish to deport the Paeonians and he sent to Megabazus his orders (5.12-14.1); during his action on the Strymon (5.14.2-17.1) Megabazus found that Histiaeus was already fortifying his settlement at Myrcinus (5.23.1). 61 Hdt. 5.15.1-3: the Paeonians gathered in arms and marched towards the sea ( ) to defend their territory at a coastal pass ( ); lead by Thracian guides, the Persians of Megabazus surrounded their position by an inland route ( ) and attacked their cities which were left without protection; thereafter the Paeonians scattered and gave themselves up.
57 58

11

gested by Katsarov. 62 This disposition presumes that the Paeonians would have marched across the main territory of the Edonians, 63 who could have been their active or passive allies in the defensive operation; then the Persians having surrounded their position would in their turn also have passed through Edonian territory along the Angites River to reach the Strymon. It fits well with the geography of the region and the topographic details mentioned by Herodotus, but disregards one important circumstance namely the evident assumption of Herodotus that Myrcinus was a possession for which Histiaeus had to ask the Persian king, and which Darius had the power to give him as a gift. 64 This could not possibly be a result of the expedition of Megabazus against the Paeonians, which was not even conceived by Darius until after Histiaeus had left for Thrace. 65 And it doesnt seem very convincing to think that what Histiaeus asked for (and received) was just permission to attempt a settlement in foreign country, not really a gift of something Darius was already in real possession of. 66 We are led therefore to suppose that Persian authority must have been established already as far as the Strymon, and that the Edonians had been subjected to Persian power. This would have been among the previous achievements of Megabazus, whose activities in Thrace prior to the Paeonian expedition are briefly, but emphatically characterized by Herodotus. 67 We

. . . . , 1921, 44, notes 15 and 16; P. Delev. Op. cit., 109, note 28. 63 Assuming this was already comprising in this age the territory stretching from the lower Strymon along the Angites valley and the northern foothills of Mt. Pangaeum to the plain of Philippi. 64 Hdt. 5.11.2, 23.1, 124.2. 65 Note 60 supra. 66 Herodotus qualifies twice the transaction as the giving of a present or reward (, 5.23.1, 124.2). 67 Hdt. 5.2.2: After Perinthus had been brought under, Megabazus led his army through Thrace, subduing to the dominion of the king all the towns and all the tribes of those parts ( ). For the king's orders to him were that he should conquer Thrace.
62

12

remain ignorant whether he had effectively reached the lower Strymon with his army, or the Edonians had not waited for his arrival and had sent themselves the tokens of their submission, but the result must have been there, and already known to both Histiaeus and Darius in Sardis, so that the one could ask for, and the other bestow as his royal property Myrcinus, a territory (probably with an existing settlement) on Edonian land. The idea that the expedition of Megabazus against the Paeonians must have been a continuation of previous Persian advance in the area which would already have brought the limits of Achaemenid power very close to their tribal territory, practically contiguous with that of the Edonians in the Strymon valley, and that the Edonians would have been Persian subjects or allies in this conflict, makes us rethink the interpretation of the whole campaign. It seems possible in view of these circumstances to suggest that the Paeonians would have gathered to a defensive position at the south-eastern end of their own territory, in the Strymon valley upstream from the mouth of the Angites and the site of Myrcinus;68 then Megabazus would have passed through the plain of Philippi and across the interconnected mountainous ridges to the northwest of the Angites, the Zmiynitsa (Menikion), Sharliya (Vrondu) and Ali Botush (Orvilos), to enter the Strymon valley either near Seres or eventually even near Demirhisar (Siderokastron). The notice of Herodotus about the Thracian guides of Megabazus 69 might then refer to his eventual Edonian (or possibly Odomantian ?) allies in the operation. This suggestion has the further benefit of explaining why Herodotus omits the Edonians from the list of tribes that escaped deportation; as Persian subjects and allies they would not have been mentioned among the hitherto unconquered enemy tribes in the area. According to Herodotus, at the time of the deportation of the Paeonians Histiaeus had already started fortifying Myrcinus; 70 it
The area was close enough to the sea (the confluence of the Strumon and Angites at less than 20 km.) to warrant its mention in the text of Herodotus. 69 Hdt. 5.14.2. 70 Hdt. 5.23.1: .
68

13

remains unknown whether his activities were in any way affected directly by the military actions in the vicinity. But Megabazus who had discovered what he was doing, upon his return to Sardis with the abducted Paeonians counselled Darius to prevent the accomplishment of the project, pointing out the inherent dangers in letting the untrustworthy Greek build a fortified city in a region abundant in wood and silver and heavily populated.71 Darius listened to the advice and called Histiaeus to him under the pretext of making him a royal counsellor, and subsequently took him along to Susa. 72 Herodotus says nothing of the fate of the establishment at Myrcinus; it might have been abandoned for good, or could have gone on without Histiaeus, left in the hands of his Ionian companions, but the latter seems less probable in view of the hostile attitude of Megabazus and its approval by the king. Persian presence in the lower Strymon area must have been permanent henceforth, although Herodotus does not dwell particularly on the subject. Bubares the son of Megabazus who married the daughter of the Macedonian king Amyntas and later oversaw the construction of the Athos canal for king Xerxes, seems to have remained in the area for some time after the Paeonian campaign, possibly as its Persian governor; 73 his seat of residence might have been at Eion on the Strymon mouth or further west in Acanthus. The Myrcinus episode of Histiaeus had a continuation 15 years later when his successor and son-in-law Aristagoras attempted to revive his establishment in Thrace, 74 escaping from Miletus with all who chose to follow him some time after the Sardis campaign, at a time when the counter-attacks of the Persians had gained momentum and a number of rebellious Ionian cities had already fallen in their hands, probably in 497 or 496 B. C. 75 Though at first successful
Hdt. 5.23.1-3. Hdt. 5.24.1-4. 73 On Bubares: Hdt. 5.21; 7.22.2; 8.136.1; Justin. 7.5.1; cf. N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 59-60. 74 Hdt. 5.124.2. 75 Cf. Thuc. 4.102.2, who counts 32 years from the death of Aristagoras to the
71 72

14

in occupying the area, Aristagoras then ventured on an expedition and was routed with his whole army by the Thracians ( ) while besieging a city ( ). 76 Thucydides who also mentions briefly the episode (placing however the establishment of Aristagoras at the site of the future Amphipolis), says that Aristagoras was expelled by the Edonians ( ), 77 while Diodorus is even more specific when he asserts that after the death of Aristagoras the colonists were driven out by the Thracians who are called Edonians ( ). 78 The anonymous city mentioned by Herodotus is here of some interest; it must have belonged to the Edonians and was evidently a fortified place, able to withstand a siege. The two Myrcinus episodes with Histiaeus and Aristagoras attest, in the late sixth and early fifth century B. C., the Edonians present in a key area of the Lower Strymon region. Their position was both strategically and economically important, and their ability to withstand attempts at settlement speaks of political strength. The Edonians are again omitted from the brief narrative of Herodotus about the expedition of Mardonius in 492 B. C. 79 The Persian army would have marched both ways, in its advance and subsequent retreat, through their territory, presumably crossing the Strymon at the Ennea Hodoi ford near the site of the future Amphipolis. Two details in the brief narrative of Herodotus deserve particular mention. In 6.45 Herodotus describes the attack of the Thracian Brygi ( ) on the land army of Mardonius. Hammond argues for a differentiation between the Thracian Brygi and the Bryges who migrated long ago from Lower Mace-

defeat of Sophanes and Leagros at Drabescus, another 29 years to the foundation of Amphipolis by Hagnon. Hammond 1955, 386, 389 opts for 496 B.C. 76 Hdt. 5.126.2. 77 Thuc. 4.102.2. 78 Diod. 12.68.2. 79 Hdt. 6.43-45.

15

donia to Phrygia. 80 His remark that in 492 B. C. the Brygi would have been out of the then Macedonian territory, despite the double statement to the opposite effect in Herodotus, 81 seems perfectly sound, but I think he is wrong in placing them far to the north, where they would have been out of the way of the army of Mardonius. 82 At Thermopylae Herodotus lists them between the Bottiaei and Chalcidians on one side and the Pierians on the other, 83 so a position in the eastern parts of the Chalcidic peninsula, presumably somewhere in the vicinity of Lake Bolbe, seems a reasonable suggestion. This however fits badly with the assumption that in this age the Edonians controlled a continuous territory between the Strymon and the Axios; 84 the rich contemporary centres of western Mygdonia and Amphaxitis (Sindos, Lete, etc.), if Edonian at all, would in such case belong to separate and politically independent divisions of the tribal group. The other point concerns the extent of territory effectively dominated by the Persians. Herodotus states that Mardonius subjugated
N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 60-61. Cf. however Strabo 12.3.20: . The Brygoi of 492 B. C. could have been a remnant of the Phrygians left in Ematia and later expelled by the Macedonians, possibly together with the Bottiaei. They could not have been the Bottiaei themselves (although this would have furnished a good explanation for the extermination of the population of Olynthus by Artabazus in 480 B. C., Hdt. 8.127), for Herodotus lists the Bottiaei and Brygi separately at Thermopylae (Hdt. 7.185). 81 Once in 6.44 where Herodotus implies that all the peoples to the east of the Macedonians had already been conquered by the Persians prior to the expedition of Mardonius (the Brygi evidently were not), and then in 6.45 where their night attack on Mardonius is explicitely placed in Macedonia ( ). 82 Hammond (N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 61) suggests an identification with the anonymous Thracians beyond the Crestonians mentioned by Herodotus in 5.3 and 5.5, and an eventual localization in the area between Lake Doiran and the Strumitsa valley, on the slopes of Mt. Orbelus (Belasitsa). 83 Hdt. 7.185. 84 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 550-336 B.C. Oxford, 1979, 57-58; N. G. L. Hammond. The Macedonian State, 43.
80

16

the Macedonians during the campaign of 492 B. C., while all the tribes to the east of Macedonia had already been enslaved previously. 85 The latter must have been true since the campaigns of Megabazus for the Strymonian Edonians and all the tribes to the east of them with few exceptions, 86 but the appearance of the warlike Brygi in 492 suggests that the territories to the west of the Strymon had not previously been thoroughly reduced. Even at that stage, the extent of territory which Mardonius subdued before his ignominious retreat should not be overestimated and probably did not exceed the territory of the Brygi; the independent behaviour of the anonymous king of the neighbouring Bisalti and Crestonians in 480 B. C. could be brought forward as an argument. 87 As regards the Macedonians, their position would have remained practically independent; both Amyntas in 512/510 and Alexander in 492 could have acknowledged a formal obedience, but no more a situation which evidently left the latter enough freedom to trade in strategic shipwood with the Athenians, the official Achaemenid enemy, on the eve of Xerxes invasion. 88 All this leaves enough free space for an independent position also of the tribes to the east of the Axios, where the community using the necropolis at Sindos was still living through a flourishing age in the early fifth century B. C. Describing the march Xerxes along the Aegean coast of Thrace in 480 B. C., Herodotus offers a list of the Thracian tribes through the territory of which the great army passed: the Paeti, the Ciconians, the Bistonians, the Sapaeans, the Dersaeans, the Edonians, and the Satrae; he adds that they all joined the land army of Xerxes except
Hdt. 6.44.1. Hdt. 7.111 mentions the Satrae who were never subject to anybody. 87 Hdt. 8.116. 88 Cf. the conflicting views of Nicholas Hammond (N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 58-60) and Eugene Borza (In the Shadow of Olympus, 102, 104-105). For the timber trade R. Meiggs. Trees and Timber in the Ancient Mediterranean World. Oxford, 1982, 123-126; E. Borza. Timber and Politics in the Ancient World: Macedon and the Greeks. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 131, 1987, 34-45; idem. The Natural Resources of Early Macedonia. In: W. L. Adams and E. N. Borza (eds.). Philip II, Alexander the Great and the Macedonian Heritage, Washington D. C., 1982, 2-8; idem. In the Shadow of Olympus, 109.
85 86

17

the Satrae. 89 The following chapter contains a brief digression on the Satrae: they had never been subjected to any man, dwelled on high mountains, were warlike and possessed a famous sanctuary of Dionysos, where the clan of the Bessi served as prophets. 90 Returning then to the march of Xerxes, Herodotus mentions his passing through the lands of the Pierians past the fortresses of Phagres and Pergamus, keeping Mt. Pangaeum on his right. 91 The Paeonians, Doberes and Paeoplae who dwelled to the north of Mt. Pangaeum remained aside from the main route of Xerxes, who reached the Strymon at Ennea Hodoi near Eion in the land of the Edonians, where bridges had been prepared in advance. There the Magi sacrificed white horses and 18 local boys and girls who were buried alive; Herodotus mentions that the region stretching from the Pangaeum to the river Angites and to the Strymon was called Phyllis. 92 Heading then into the Chalcidic peninsula through Argilus, Stagirus and Acanthus, Xerxes had Bisaltia on his right; the tribes of the Pangaeum and Chalcidice were also forced to join the Persian army. 93 It is usually presumed that the enumeration of the tribes in the text of Herodotus follows more or less strictly their geographical order, in an east to west sequence. The position of the Ciconians to the west of the lower Hebros is pinpointed by the site of Maroneia, and that of the Bistonians by the Bistonian Lake at Porto Lagos, so it could be presumed that the Paeti lived to the east of the Ciconians, across the Hebros, and the Sapaeans to the west of the Bistonians, eventually on both sides of the mouth of the Strymon. 94 Of the remaining tribes the position of the Pierians, along the coastal range of Mt. Symbolon and on the southern slopes of Mt. Pangaeum, beHdt. 7.110: ' , , , , , , . 90 Hdt. 7.111. 91 Hdt. 7.112. The Pieres are easily localized in and around the coastal ridge Symbolon south of Mt. Pangaeum, and probably on the southern slopes of the latter. 92 Hdt. 7.113-114. 93 Hdt. 7.115. 94 . . Op. cit., 68-69.
89

18

tween the Thasian establishment of Neapolis (Kavala) in the east and the mouth of the Strymon in the west, seems perfectly clear in the text of Herodotus and is confirmed elsewhere. 95 The name of the Satrae disappears from ancient texts after Herodotus, but was known to Hecataeus. 96 Although Herodotus places them explicitly as one of the tribes working the silver mines on Mt. Pangaeum, his digression in 7.111 creates a definite impression that they were a numerous population spreading over high mountains in the deeper interior. This, and the association with the Bessi whom Herodotus mentions rather enigmatically as prophets in the Bacchic sanctuary of the Satrae, has prompted modern science to extend their territory to the north of Mt. Pangaeum, sometimes to the nearer mountain ridges of Bozdag (Falakro), Sharlia (Vrondou) and Ali Botush (Orbelos), sometimes also to the whole of Mt. Pirin, and some authors have even included the Rila and Vitosha further north. 97 Later T. Sarafov suggested the idea that the territory of the Satrae should also be extended to the east across the Nestos to include most or all of the Rhodope massif. 98 Whatever the case, it seems certain that in the list of the tribes along the route of Xerxes Herodotus mentions the Satrae as inhabitants of Mt. Pangaeum and thus their place in the enumeration just before the Pierians is appropriate; this becomes the more evident with the very specific notice that while passing the lands of the Pierians the Persian army had on its right Mt. Pangaeum where the Pierians, Odomanti (mentioned only here in the enumeration) and Satrae had mines for gold and silver. 99
Cf. Thuc. 2.99.3. Steph. Byz. s. vv. , . 97 Cf. the detailed review of these different localizations in . . . . 67/1, 1974, 123-137. 98 Ibid., 149-176. 99 Hdt. 7.112: , , , . It is interesting to notice that Herodotus does not include the Edonians in this list of the tribes working the mines on Mt. Pangaeum.
95 96

19

The tribes of the Dersaeans and Edonians must therefore be placed in the remaining space between the Sapaeans to the east and the Satrae and Pieres to the west. It cannot escape notice that the name of the Edonians appears once more in the text of Herodotus: Ennea Hodoi (The Nine Roads) where the Strymon was bridged in advance, was according to Herodotus also in Edonian land. 100 Ennea Hodoi was near the site of the future Amphipolis, probably on the so-called Hill 133, where the presence of a considerable Early Iron Age settlement has been established archaeologically; 101 together with the evidence about Myrcinus further upstream this piece of testimony marks the southern end of the lower Strymon valley firmly as Edonian territory in this age, and Herodotus even supplies a name for it, mentioning that the tract of land around Mt. Pangaeum surrounded by the Angites and the Strymon was called Phyllis. 102 It could be assumed that the territory of the Edonians surrounded the northern slopes of Mt. Pangaeum, comprising most of the valley of the Angites, opening to the east into the plain of Philippi and probably reaching near the coastal area of the Thasian Peraea along the bay of Neapolis (Kavala). 103 It is in this area, called Datos or Daton and famous for its natural wealth, that according to Herodotus the Edonians annihilated the ten thousand Athenian colonists in 465 B. C. 104 There remains little space for the Dersaeans, whom Thucydides qualifies as plain dwellers; 105 the region between the plain of Philippi and that of the Nestos, roughly between modern Kavala and Hrissoupoli and towards the interior, is not at all a plain, but contains small pieces of lowland between the modest
Hdt. 7.114.1: . B. Isaac. The Greek Settlements in Thrace until the Macedonian Conquest. Leiden, 1986, 6; Z. H. Archibald. The Odrysian Kingdom of Thrace. Orpheus Unmasked. Oxford, 1998, 75. 102 Hdt. 7.113.2. Cf. Steph. Byz. s. v. ; Herodian. de prosod. cathol. p. 89; Eistath. ad Hom. Il. p. 565; Schol. Aeschin. 2.31. 103 Cl. Ptolemaeus (3.12.7, 28) places in Edonis, besides Amphipolis, Philippi, Oesyme and Neapolis. 104 Hdt. 9.75. On Datos cf. A. Philippson in RE 4, 2229-2230 (s. v. Daton). 105 Thuc. 2.101.3.
100 101

20

ridges of the Lekani, Halkero, Stegno and Marouska. This could have been the country of the Dersaeans, whose name disappears completely after the casual notice of Thucydides. Edonian contingents should have been present among the Thracian levies in the Persian army both at Thermopylae and at Plataea, but Herodotus does not mention them particularly. 106 Hammond offers a plausible interpretation of a passage of Aeschylus Persians describing the retreat of the army of Xerxes to demonstrate that at the time Edonis comprised land on both sides of the lower Strymon, between Lake Bolbe to Mt. Pangaeum; 107 the text however is elusive and should not be taken as a conclusive piece of evidence. Herodotus mentions briefly that in 479 B. C. the retreating army of Artabazus sustained heavy losses through hunger, fatigue and the attacks of the Thracians; 108 but the inland road followed by Artabazus is not reliably identifiable and it remains questionable whether the Edonians were taking any part in these skirmishes. The Persian garrison at Eion on the Strymon mouth remained in position under its valiant commander Boges until 476 B. C., 109 and that was very close to the main territory of the Edonians. Plutarch mentions the presence in Eion of Achaemenid notables, and of adequate military forces, for they were able to molest the neighbouring Greek cities. 110 The Persians at Eion received help, notably food, from the Thracians living across the Strymon ( ), against whom Cimon had to take action during the siege of the city. 111 The identification of these Strymonian Thracians in the vicinity of Eion with the Edonians, although not explicit, seems quite probable, and the events in 476 must have set a bad start to

Hdt. 7.185.2, 9.32. Aeschyl. Pers. 494-495: ' , ' , ' ; N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 61-62. 108 Hdt. 9.89.4. 109 Hdt. 7.107; Thuc. 1.98.1; Diod. 11.60.6; Schol. Aeschin. 2.31. 110 Plut. Cimon 7.2. 111 Ibid.
106 107

21

their subsequent relations with the Athenians. A scholion to Aeschines mentions the defeat of an Athenian force at that same time from unnamed Thracians in action which was presumably directed against Ennea Hodoi. 112 Another obscure event of these years could have affected the Edonians on the Strymon. The Letter of Philip published among the works of Demosthenes contains the otherwise unattested information that the Macedonian king Alexander had occupied the site of the future Amphipolis (Ennea Hodoi), taking Persian captives, and dedicated a golden statue at Delphi from the booty.113 Hammond seems to accept the event as real and argues for its dating before the Athenian siege of Eion in 476 B. C. 114 But there are strong grounds to doubt the veracity of this piece of information. It cannot be reconciled with the mentioned Athenian action against Ennea Hodoi during the siege of Eion, which would have followed the campaign of Alexander; the Athenians met there neither Persians, nor the Macedonian king, but were routed by the unnamed local Thracians ( ), who should in all probability be identified with the Edonians. 115 The whole conception of the eastern territorial expansion of Alexander in the years immediately following the defeat of the Persians, 116 based mainly on the later and unspecific evidence of Thucydides 117 and Strabo, 118 must now be reviewed in the light of the new dates suggested for some of the local tribal coinages by the important numismatic finds from Asyut 119

Schol. Aeschin. 2.31, mentioning the names of Lysistratos, Lycurgos and Cratinos; such details add to the credibility of the story. Cf. J. D. Smart. Kimons capture of Eion. JHS 87, 1967, 136-137. 113 Demosth. 12.21. The golden satue is also mentioned by Herodotus (8.121.2). 114 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 102. 115 Schol. Aeschin. 2.31. 116 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 84, 102; E. Borza. In the Shadow of Olympus, 119-123. 117 Thuc. 2.99.4, 6. 118 Strabo 7 fr. 11. 119 M. Price, N. Waggoner. Archaic Greek Coinage. The Asyut Hoard. London, 1975.
112

22

and Lycia. 120 The coins of the Bisalti in particular, who are among the tribes definitely attested as having been conquered by the Macedonians, are now to be dated entirely in the period after the defeat of the Persians, in the seventies and sixties of the fifth century; 121 the Bisalti enjoyed then a span of particular prosperity and were evidently independent. Next we come to what might be considered the most noteworthy event in the known history of the Edonians the rout, in 465 B. C., of the ten thousand Athenian colonists who had settled at Ennea Hodoi. The story is told, with little variations of detail, by several ancient authors, 122 and deserves full credibility. The Athenian expedition was undertaken simultaneously with the suppression of the Thasian uprising and was lead by the strategi Sophanes the son of Eutychides and Leagros the son of Glaucon; the ten thousand colonists gathered among the Athenian citizens and the allies 123 advanced inland from Eion and settled on the site of Ennea Hodoi, near the future Amphipolis. 124 The new settlers portioned the surrounding territory in allotments,125 then venturing further inland 126 were defeated and presumably perished to the man, together with
The so-called Decadrachm hoard (alternatively known as the Elmali, Antalia, or Lycian hoard), cf. S. Fried. The Decadrachm hoard: an introduction. In: I. Carradice (ed). Coinage and Administration in the Athenian and Persian Empires. Oxford, 1987 (BAR Int. Series 343), 1-10; J. H. Kagan. The Decadrachm Hoard: Chronology and Consequences. ibid., 21-28; M. J. Price. The Coinages of the Northern Aegean. ibid., 43-47. 121 S. Fried. Op. cit., 1-2; J. H. Kagan. Op. cit., 24-25; M. J. Price. Op. cit., 44-45. 122 Hdt. 9.75; Thuc. 1.100; 4.102; Diod. 11.70.5; 12.68.2; Paus. 1.29.4-5. 123 Thuc. 1.100.3: . 124 The sites of Ennea Hodoi and Amphipolis might have been different, but were evidently so close to warrant their equation by ancient authors, e. g. Thuc. 1.100. Ennea Hodoi and Amphipolis were easily identified even with Myrcinus, although this was further north, cf. Thuc. 4.102.2; Diod. 12.68.1. Cf. B. Isaac. Op. cit., 24-30. 125 Diod. 11.70.5. Thucydides (1.100.3) mentions explicitly that the occupied territory had belonged to the Edonians, . 126 Thuc. 1.100.3: ; Diod. 11.70.5: .
120

23

their generals; with this the whole foundation at Ennea Hodoi collapsed. Herodotus says that the disaster took place at Daton in a battle for the gold mines there,127 while Thucydides and Diodorus place the battle at Drabescus; 128 there is a further discrepancy in the indication of the victorious enemy, the Edonians alone according to Herodotus, 129 and a coalition, the united Thracians according to Thucydides. 130 Pausanias adds the plausible detail that the Athenians were surprised by the enemy, and the incredible one that they were struck by lightning. 131 A coalition including some of the neighbouring tribes and headed by the Edonians who were the main victim of the Athenian expansion seems probable in this war, especially in view of the considerable number of the Athenians, and would give a reasonable explanation to the various definitions in the extant sources. The two differently attested locations of the battle are however more difficult to explain. Drabescus, which Thucydides names as the place of the battle, has formerly been identified with modern Drama; 132 together with the traditional identification of Daton with Philippi 133 or Neapolis 134 or rather the whole plain of Philippi, 135 this gave a reasonable solution to the problem, including the gold mines mentioned by Herodotus. However, Drabescus has alternatively been identified with Zdravik (now renamed Draviskos) near Amphipolis,
Hdt. 9.75: . Cf. Isocr. 8.86: . 128 Thuc. 1.100.3: ; Diod. 12.68.2: . 129 Hdt. 9.75: . Cf. Diod. 11.70.5: ; Pausan 1.29.4: . 130 Thuc. 1.100.3: ; 4.102.2: . Cf. Diod. 12.68.2: . 131 Pausan 1.29.4: . 132 W. Smith. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, London, 1854, 1.787 s. v. Drabescus. 133 Cf. App. civ. 4.105, 439; Harpocr. s. v. . 134 W. Smith. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, London, 1854, 2.411 s. v. Neapolis No 5. 135 A. Philippson in RE 4, 2229-2230 (s. v. Daton).
127

24

above the left bank of the Angites at the entrance of the gorge which the river cuts between the Pangaeum and Menikion mountains; this more recent identification seems also better founded and more consistent with the data in the extant sources. 136 A way out of the apparent contradiction between the localizations of Daton and Drabescus, alternatively given by Herodotus and Thucydides as the site of the battle, has been proposed long ago by Stein, who suggested that Herodotus would have confounded the objective of the expedition (Daton) with the scene of the battle (Drabescus) which is conveniently placed at a difficult section of the road between Amphipolis and Philippi. 137 Another possible solution however is suggested by a fragment of Strabo mentioning Daton alongside Argilus, Myrcinus and Drabescus as a place-name in the vicinity of the , 138 and thus evidently different from the better attested synonymous region to the north-east and east of Mt. Pangaeum. 139 Wherever the battle really took place, the main events of 465 B. C. seem out of question: the Athenians had attempted a major advance in the Strymon area, and this was dramatically thwarted by the Edonians, costing the life of most or all of the ten thousand Greek colonists. In a recent development of our knowledge on one important source of information the silver coins abundantly minted in the region in the late sixth and earlier fifth century B. C., it now seems possible to identify the king of the Edonians who won this great battle. This would have been Getas, known from a series of heavy silver coins bearing different versions of the inscription Getas king of the Edonians. 140 This claim results from the analysis of
. . Op. cit., 141-143 ; F. Papazoglou. Op. cit., 391-392; cf. Strabo 7 fr. 33; App. civ. 4.105. 137 R. W. Macan. Herodotus: The Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Books with Introduction and Commentary. London, 1908, 754-755. 138 Strabo 7.33. 139 App. bell. civ. 4.13.105; cf. Philippson. Daton. RE 4.2, 1901, 2229-2230; . . . , 1976, 146-149. 140 On the coins of Getas cf. J. N. Svoronos. L'hellnisme primitif de la Macdoine
136

25

datable coin hoards. There were no Getas coins in the Asyut hoard, closing around 475 B. C., and for that matter in all the coin hoards that can be dated with some certainty before Asyut. 141 On the contrary, there were three Getas coins in the later Decadrachm hoard, 142 the closing date of the non-Lycian part of which is placed now around 465-462 B. C. 143 All three are reported in a very fresh condition, and all three belong to the later type of the coins of Getas, with the inscription on the reverse, around the four sides of a shallow, linear quadripartite incuse square. 144 It could be presumed that the coinage of Getas falls in the period immediately preceding the closing date of the hoard, thus around and before the mid-sixties of the fifth century B. C. The coins of Getas are tristaters by the weight system used in the North Aegean tribal coinage, having a weight of about 29 grams and usually measuring between 31 and 34 millimetres. The common obverse type displays a naked herdsman capped with a petasos leading a couple of bulls usually to the right. The reverse types are two a shallow quadripartite incuse square and a cross-spoked wheel in a rectangular incuse; both evolve from presumably earlier variants
prouv par la numismatique et l'or du Pange. Paris-Athnes, 1919 (extrait de JIAN 19), 49-52; . . . , 1992, 22-25; M. Tatscheva. . In: Stephanos nomismatikos. Edith Schnert-Geiss zum 65. Geburtstag, Berlin, 1998, 613-626; . . 1, , 2000, 29, 120-121. 141 M. Price, N. Waggoner. Op. cit., 14-15. 142 S. Fried. Op. cit., 2, pl. I/5; M. J. Price. Op. cit., 44, pl. VIII/2. 143 J. H. Kagan. Op. cit., 21-24. 144 S. Fried. Loc. cit.

26

where the inscription is on the obverse to later variants with inscriptions placed on the reverse, along the sides of the incuse square. Similar obverse types appear on coins of the Orresci, Derroni, Ichnae, and on uninscribed coins, and the cross-spoked wheel as a reverse type on coins of the Ichnae and on numerous anepigraphic coins, including fractions, some of which by their obverse types (e. g. a single bull) could well belong to the coinage of Getas. In 437 B. C., the Athenians at last succeeded in their repeated attempt to establish a strong outpost up the Strymon from their base at Eion. Following the failure in 465 B. C., this time the operation ended in success, the merit belonging to the talented strategus Hagnon. The foundation of Amphipolis is briefly noted in the written sources, 145 while the later history of the city is known from a combination of ancient texts with epigraphical, numismatical and archaeological data. 146 The population of the new establishment was to a large extent drawn from the neighbouring Greek cities, the Athenian element being small; this was in part the cause for the later easy change of sides, when Amphipolis defected to Brasidas. According to the stratagem of Polyaenus, the Athenians met with strong resistance from the barbarians, who could be no other than the Edonians, but Hagnon outwitted them and put in place the fortifications of the city, which occupied a strategic and easily defendable position. 147
Cf. Thuc. 4.102.3-4; Diod. 12.68.2; Polyaen. strat. 6.53. 146 On the history and archaeology of Amphipolis cf. O. Hirschfeld. Amphipolis. RE 1, 1894, 1949-1952; J. Papastavru. Amphipolis. RE Suppl. X, 1965, 17-19; P. Perdrizet. tudes amphipolitaines. BCH 46, 1922, 36-57; J. Papastavru. Amphipolis. Geschichte und Prosopographie. Leipzig, 1936 [= Klio, Beiheft 37]; J. Roger. Le monument de lion l'Amphipole. BCH 63, 1939, 4-42 ; O. Broneer. The Lion of Amphipolis. Cambridge, 1941; F. Papazoglou. Eion Amfipol Hrisopol. ZRVI 36/2, 1953, 7-24; C. Danoff. Amphipolis. Der Kleine Pauly 1, 314-315; J. Cormack. Greek Inscriptions from Amphipolis. University of London, Inst. of Class. Studies Bull. No 10, 1963; . . . , 1972 (= 13); . . Op. cit., 136-138; F. Papazoglu. Op. cit. 392-397. 147 Polyaen. strat. 6.53.
145

27

The expedition of the Odrysian king Sitalces in 429 B. C. did not affect directly the territory of the Edonians, but gave occasion for an interesting notice we find in the text of Thucydides. According to him, the great army of Sitalces inspired with fear the Thracians living beyond the Strymon to the north, who inhabited the plains, such as the Panaeans, the Odomanti, the Droi, and the Dersaeans, all of whom were independent. 148 The evident fact is the omission of the Edonians from this enumeration, which mentions even the Dersaeans, who would be rather far away from the scene of action if the localization suggested supra is correct, and the otherwise unknown Droi. On second glance we notice the presence of the Panaeans (), who are described by Stephanus Byzantinus as a constituent tribe of the Edonians living near Amphipolis. 149 But why should Thucydides mention the shadowy name of the Panaeans instead of the well-known one of the Edonians? Their appearance in this text not only implies some sort of political decentralization and autonomy, but could probably also be related in some way with the establishment of the Athenians in Amphipolis. However, Thucydides says nothing more on the subject, and never again mentions the name of the Panaeans in his work. His detailed account of the dramatic events around Amphipolis in 424-422 B. C. however contains some further information on the Edonians. In the winter of 424 B. C. Brasidas attacked by surprise and successfully took Amphipolis, inflicting a very painful loss to Athenian interests. 150 Among the events following immediately on the capture of Amphipolis Thucydides mentions a dramatic episode in near-by Edonian Myrcinus. The town came over to the side of Brasidas after its Edonian king Pittacus had been killed by the sons of Goaxis and

Thuc. 2.101.3: , , ' . 149 Steph. Byz. s. v. , . 150 The events in 424-422 are discribed in detail by Thucydides. The brief narrative of Diodorus is based on Thucydides and adds nothing of real importance.
148

28

his own wife Brauro. 151 The persons involved in this coup dtat are otherwise unknown, and we can only guess at their mutual relations. The former king, Pittacus, was evidently of pro-Athenian sympathies, and his overthrow permitted the successors (the sons of Goaxis ?) to change sides. Who they were, and why the queen Brauro sided with them against her husband, remains a mystery. It is important to note however that Myrcinus evidently had a separate government, probably as the centre of a tribal area (Phyllis ?). Would this not be identical with the territory of the Panaeans mentioned above, who lived near Amphipolis? The idea is further supported by the following piece of information we get from Thucydides: in 422 B. C., before the battle of Amphipolis, Brasidas recruited 1500 thracian mercenaries and the whole army of the Edonians comprising light infantry and cavalry, and separately another thousand peltasts from Edonian Myrcinus and the Chalcidians. 152 The neighbouring Odomanti however took side with the Athenians and their king Polles supplied them with an unnamed number of mercenaries. 153 It is interesting to note how Myrcinus is again noted separately from the other Edonians; it evidently constituted an independent political entity at this time. The result of the battle would have left the Edonians and the Greek city of Amphipolis in good relations for the ensuing period of time. Thucydides mentions the Edonians once more in his history, in a passage which comes between the last two quoted instances. Discribing the actions of Brasidas early in 423 B. C., he lists the small towns on the peninsula of Athos, Thyssos, Cleonae, Acrothous, Olophyxos and Dion; these were inhabited by a mixed population composed of bilingual barbarians (
Thuc. 4.107.3: , . Cf. Diod. 12.68.4. 152 Thuc. 5.6.4: , , . 153 Thuc. 5.6.2.
151

29

), comprising a small Chalcidic element, predominant Pelasgians (from the Tyrsenians who once inhabited Lemnos and Athens), and also some Bisalti, Crestonians and Edonians. Most of them submitted to Brasidas, but Greek Sane and Dion didnt and Brasidas ravaged their territory. 154 This singular picture of scattered ethnic elements living in mixed communities is in clear contradiction with the easily preconceived ideas of compact and definite tribal territories; the ethnic reality must have been much more versatile. The picture drawn by Thucydides of the mixed communities of the Athos peninsula is often also taken to demonstrate a final stage in the processes of multiple migrations and ethnic displacement in the greater Chalcidic peninsula; the Edonians there could accordingly be taken as remnants of those displaced from Mygdonia, either soon before by the advance of the Macedonians in the fifth century, or earlier still by other groups on the move. The little Thucydides says about the Edonians in the later fifth century B. C. is the last we ever hear abot them as direct historical evidence relating to a certain time and chain of events, although some of these would have affected their territory. In the fourth century Athens recovered from its defeat in the Pelopponesian war and undertook a comprehensive, if finally unsuccessful attempt to tecover her previous might; the consistent efforts of the Athenians to regain Amphipolis however all failed. Potidaea and Eion remained the main bases of the active Athenian political activity in the area in the second quarter of the century. In the Chalcidic peninsula Olynthus went through its brief period of might and power as head of the Chalcidian league. The island of Thasos started a long period of economic prosperity and flourishing trade, reflected in the long series of stamped amphorae in which the famous Thasian wine was exported om industrial scale in the fourth and third centuries. Abdera on the other hand met with unexpected disaster when the northern tribe of the Triballi reached the city in a plundering raid in 375; the citizen army was defeated in regular battle after the neighbouring Thracians who had seemingly come to the aid of
154

Thuc. 4.109.4; cf. Diod. 12.68.5.

30

the Abderites suddenly changed sides, and only the timely arrival of an Athenian fleet saved the city from being taken and pillaged.155 The Edonians would have been directly affected by these events; their territory could have been ravaged by the Triballian hordes, or they could have taken part themselves in the plundering of the territory of Abdera, possibly among the unnamed neighbouring Thracians who took part in the stratagem. Some coins minted in this period could eventually belong to Edonian rulers, although any more definite attribution remains impossible. An abundant silver coinage from about 400 B. C. in the name of Saratocus was minted somewhere in the Pangaeum area; he is not mentioned in written sources and his tribal affiliation is unknown. 156 Another local dynast, Bergaeus, seems to have minted bronze and silver coins later in the fourth century B. C. 157 On the obverse of an abderite drachma from about 360 B. C. appears the name of Spokes, preseded by the abberviated royal title BA, evidently another otherwise unknown local ruler. 158 And finally, towards the middle of the century the coins of Cetriporis 159 recall the historical data of the brief rule of Berisades and his sons, of whom Cetriporis was presumably the eldest, in the years after the death of Cotys I; they are usually considered Odrysian rulers, although we have no evidence on their origin. This brings us to the time of Philip II, who annexed the lands of the Edonians early in his reign, established Philippi and Amphipolis as major centres of Macedonian power, and put an evident end to the independent history of the Thracian tribes in the Pangaeum area.
Diod. 15.36.1-4. . . Op. cit., 43-47; U. Peter. Die Muenzen der Thrakischen Dynasten (5-3 Jahrhundert v.Chr.). Berlin, 1997, 29. 157 U. Peter. Op. cit., 104-106. It has been suggested that some or all of these coins, usually bearing the inscription , might in fact belong to the city of Berge (cf. Z. Bonias. Une inscription de lancienne Berg. BCH 124, 2000, 227246 and esp. 243). The existence of silver drachms with the full inscription however make this suggestion 158 . . Op. cit., 71. 159 Ibid. 68-70.
155 156

31