Coins From Seleucia On The Tigris / by Robert Harbold McDowell

COINS FROM SELEUCIA
ON THE TIGRIS
BY
ROBERT HARBOLD McDOWELL
ANN ARBOR
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN PRESS
1935

COPYRIGHT, 1935,
BY THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Set up and printed,
August, 1935
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BY THE PLIMPTON PRESS * NORWOOD - MASS.

C. S.B.
TO WHOSE EVER-WILLING
AND CAPABLE ASSISTANCE
THIS VOLUME OWES MUCH

PREFACE
THE COins included in this volume were found on the site of
Seleucia on the Tigris in connection with the excavations conducted there during the seasons 1927/28 to 1931/32 by Professor
Leroy Waterman under the auspices of the University of Michigan, the Toledo Museum of Art, and, for the last two seasons,
the Cleveland Museum of Art.1
The total of the coins found amounts to more than thirty
thousand. The majority came from the surface debris over the
whole extent of the mounds and represent all the principal levels
of occupation of the site. During each period in antiquity represented, coins of earlier occupations were brought to what was
then the surface through the excavation of subsurface structures
such as wells and foundation walls. The objects thus carried
along to the latest level of occupation were finally exposed on
the present surface as a result of the erosive action of wind and
water. It is readily to be seen, therefore, that surface coins, especially when recovered in large numbers, contribute largely in
their own way to the study of an ancient site.
Slightly more than one half of the coins included in the volume came from definite provenances rooms, streets, and
burials of the areas excavated. In the catalogs the provenances
of the coins have been indicated only in the case of certain of
the more important caches. The relation of the coins to the
architectural features of the site must be reserved for a separate
study. A further limitation in the scope of the volume has been
the exclusion of the relatively few Roman and Characenian
pieces and the fairly numerous examples of the Sassanian,
Mongol, and Arab coinages.
The greater part of the coins from Seleucia are in a poor
state of preservation. This appears to have been due to the
nature and quantity of the salts with which the earth and debris
1 Details regarding the site and the excavations may be found in Dr. N. C.
Debevoise's Parthian Pottery from Seleucia on the Tigris, pp. 6-II, and the author's
Stamped and Inscribed Objects from Seleucia on the Tigris, p. vii. Both these volumes
are in this series.
vii

Viiil
PREFACE
of the site have been impregnated. In order to provide the some
two thousand six hundred specimens which are described in the
catalogs, nearly ten thousand coins were treated and cleaned.
Silver coins were placed in a weak solution of hot formic acid.
The greater part of the bronze coins were passed through an
electrolytic process; the others were treated in a solution of
caustic soda and Rochelle salts. In this connection the writer
wishes to express his appreciation to Dr. Henry W. Nichols,
Associate Curator in the Field Museum of Natural History, for
his counsel and suggestions in connection with the installation
of the electrolytic baths. As a check on the technique used
locally, Mr. Newell and Mr. Noe of the American Numismatic
Society kindly undertook the treatment of a representative lot
of the bronze coins from Seleucia and obtained results approximately similar. The generally poor condition of the coins has
limited the number of plates which accompany the catalogs.
The preparation of plates from casts of the coins did not prove
satisfactory. Mr. George Swain, to whom the photographs are
due, obtained the best results possible under the circumstances
by coating each coin with a light film of uniform color.
The writer wishes to express his appreciation to the members
of the Institute of Archaeological Research of the University
of Michigan, under whose direction this volume has been prepared, and to the Executive Board of the Graduate School, under
whose auspices it has been published. In particular Dr. A. E. R.
Boak, chairman of the Department of History, and Dr. Leroy
Waterman, head of the Department of Oriental Languages and
Literature and director of the excavations at Seleucia, have given
the writer the benefit of generous counsel and aid. In addition,
real benefit has been derived from frequent discussions with Dr.
Wilhelmina van Ingen of the University of Michigan, who is
now engaged upon the publication of the figurines from Seleucia.
The editors of the Graduate School Publications have been unstinted in their co6peration towards the preparation of the
volume.
It is a matter of great regret to the writer that he was unable
to place before Mr. E. T. Newell proofs of the manuscript until
shortly before its publication. In spite of this handicap the
volume owes much to his always generous counsel and wide
experience. Owing, however, to the conditions, it has been neces-

PREFACE ix
sary to incorporate certain of Mr. Newell's suggestions as special
notes without making, in some instances, the corresponding alteration in the text which the suggestion warranted. Mr. Newell
also very kindly placed at the disposition of the writer the
manuscript of a study of the Parthian coinage which is to appear
in Mr. Arthur Upton Pope's forthcoming A Survey of Persian
Art and Archaeology.
To Professor A. T. Olmstead of the Oriental Institute, the
University of Chicago, the writer is indebted for stimulating
suggestions and for illuminating discussions of the background
of Parthian history. Throughout the period of the preparation
of the manuscript numerous discussions with Dr. N. C. Debevoise of the Oriental Institute have been of invaluable assistance.
Dr. Debevoise generously permitted the writer frequent access
to the notes and manuscript of his forthcoming A Political
History of Parthia, to be published by the University of Chicago.
The completion of this volume would have been impossible
without the loyal cooperation of capable assistants in the preparation of the coins. The greater part of the weighing and measuring of the coins was carried out by Mr. Charles P. Spicer, Jr.,
A.M., who aided also in their cleaning. Dr. Louise Shier of the
University of Michigan shared in the weighing and measuring
and aided in the filing of the coins. The principal burden of the
cleaning and filing of the coins during more than two years fell
on Miss Catharine S. Bunnell, A.M., who gave to this work a
particularly fine enthusiasm and adeptness. With equal capacity
Miss Bunnell carried out the preliminary identification of a
large proportion of the Parthian coins. To my wife, Olga R.
McDowell, I am indebted for extensive assistance in the proofreading and for the reorganization of the coin files upon the completion of the volume.
R. H. McD.

CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vii
BIBLIOGRAPHY... . . Xiii
PART I: COINS OF THE SELEUCID EMPIRE
I CATALOG OF COINS..... . . .......3
II NOTES ON THE COINS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
III CONCLUSION ........ ... . .........44
PART II: COINS OF THE PARTHIAN PERIOD
IV CATALOG OF COINS..... . . ....... 61
I. The Royal Coinage . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
2. The Autonomous Coinage . . . . . . . . . . 94
V NOTES ON THE COINS.. ..... ....... 112
I. The Royal Coinage. ...... . . . ... 112
2. The Autonomous Coinage . . . . . . . . . . 131
VI THE PARTHIAN MINT AT SELEUCIA . . . . . . . 147
i. The Calendar Employed . . . . . . . . . . . 147
2. Classes of Coins Struck. . . . . . . . . . . . 153
3. The Limits of the Mint Area . . . . . . . . . 177
4. Chronological Table of the Coins of the Mint 181
VII THE COINS IN RELATION TO EVENTS IN THE WESTERN PROVINCES. . ........ . . . . 201
I. The Reign of Mithradates I through That of
Orodes II.. ... . . ......... 201
2. Seleucia and the Parthian Dynasty . . . . . . 216
3. The Roman Campaigns and the Decline of Parthia 229
List of Parthian Kings . . . . . . . . . . . 237
INDEXES
I. Index of Types. .. . ......... 241
II. Index of Symbols and Particular Objects in
Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
III. Index of Variant Forms of Greek Characters . 244
IV. General Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
xi

PLATES
(The plates are to be found at the end of the book)
I Monograms
II Seleucid coins
III Seleucid coins
IV Seleucid coins and Parthian royal coins
V Parthian royal coins and autonomous coins of Seleucia
VI Autonomous coins of Seleucia
xii

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BABELON, E., Les Rois de Syrie, d'Armenie et de Commagane. Paris, 1890.
See under Morgan, J. de.
BELLINGER, A. R., "The Coins," The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Preliminary Report of Third Season of Work, November 1929-March
1930 (ed. P. V. C. Bauer, M. I. Rostovtzeff, and A. R. Bellinger).
New Haven, 1932, pp. 139-160.
"The Coins," The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Preliminary Report
of Fourth Season of Work, October 1930-March 1931 (ed. P. V. C.
Bauer, M. I. Rostovtzeff, and A. R. Bellinger). New Haven, 1933,
pp. 259-282.
BOUcHE-LECLERCQ, A., Histoire de S61eucides. Paris, 1914.
DAYET, MARCEL, "Un Tetradrachme arsacide inedit," Aretheuse, I(1925),
63-65.
DEBEVOISE, N. C., A Political History of Parthia (to be published shortly
by the University of Chicago Press).
DIEUDONNf, A., "La Mission de Suse," Revue numismatique, 4e serie,
32 (1929), 27-34FUYE, A. DE LA, "Les Monnaies de l'Elymaide," Revue numismatique,
40 serie, 22 (1919), 45-83.
GARDNER, P., The Parthian Coinage. London, 1877.
-- Catalogue of Greek Coins, The Seleucid Kings of Syria.London, 1878.
-- Catalogue of Coins in the British Museum: Thessaly to Aetolia.
London, 1883.
GROSE, S., Catalogue of the McClean Collection of Greek Coins. Cambridge,
1929.
GUTSCHMID, A. VON, Geschichte Irans und seiner Nachbarlinder. Tubingen,
1888.
HILL, G. F., Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Arabia, Mesopotamia and
Persia. London, 1922.
"A Hoard of Coins from Nineveh," The Numismatic Chronicle, Fifth
series, 11 (1931), 160-170.
IMHOOF-BLUMER, F., Monnaies grecques. Paris and Leipzig, 1883.
JOHNSON, JOTHAM, Dura Studies (Thesis, University of Pennsylvania).
Philadelphia, 1932.
JORDAN, J., Uruk-Warka, nach den Ausgrabungen durch die deutsche OrientGesellschaft. Leipzig, 1928.
LEGRAIN, L., "Coins from Nippur," The Museum Journal, University of
Pennsylvania, 15 (1924), 70-76.
xii

xiv
BIBLIOGRAPHY
LINDSAY, J., A View of the History and Coinage of the Parthians. Cork, 1852.
LONGDEN, R. P., "Notes on the Parthian Campaign of Trajan," The Journal
of Roman Studies, 21 (1931), 1-35.
LONGPNRIER, A. DE, Memoires sur la chronologie et l'iconographie des rois
parthes arsacides. Paris, 1853.
MCDOWELL, R. H., "The Excavations at Seleucia on the Tigris," Papers
of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters, 18 (1932),
101-I19.
Stamped and Inscribed Objects from Seleucia on the Tigris. Ann Arbor,
1935MARKOFF, A., Catalogue des monnaies arsacides. St. Petersburg, 1889.
MINNS, E. H., "Parchments of the Parthian Period from Avroman in Kurdistan," The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 35 (1915), 22-65.
MORGAN, J. DE, Numismatique de la Perse Antique. Paris, 1927. (This is
Volume III, Part I, in Trait6 des monnaies grecques et romaines,
ed. E. Babelon.)
NEWELL, E. T., The Seleucid Mint at Antioch. New York, 1918.
"A Parthian Hoard," The Numismatic Chronicle, Fifth series, 4
(1924), 141-180.
Mithradates of Parthia and Hyspaosines of Characene: A Numismatic
Palimpsest, Numismatic Notes and Monographs, No. 26. New
York, 1925.
The Fifth Dura Hoard, ibid., No. 58. New York, 1933.
"The Coins" (in Mr. A. U. Pope's forthcoming Survey of Persian Art
and Archaeology).
PETROWICZ, A. RITTER VON, Arsaciden-Munzen. Vienna, 1904.
PROKESCH-OSTEN, M. LE COMPTE, Les Monnaies des rois parthes. Paris,
1874-1875.
RAWLINSON, G., The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy. London, 1873.
ROGERS, E., "New Seleucid Coin Types," The Numismatic Chronicle,
Fifth series, I (1921), 26-36.
ROSTOVTZEFF, M. I., "Syria and the East," The Cambridge Ancient History,
VII, 155-196.
AND WELLES, C. B., "A Parchment Contract of Loan from DuraEuropos on the Euphrates," Yale Classical Studies, 2 (1930), 1-78.
STRECK, M., "Seleukeia," Pauly-Wissowa Real Encyclopidie der classischen
Altertumswissenschaft, Zweite Reihe, Vol. II.
TARN, W., "Parthia," The Cambridge Ancient History, IX, 574-613VAN INGEN, WILHELMINA, Figurines from Seleucia on the Tigris (a forthcoming volume in this series).
WROTH, W., Catalogue of the Coins of Parthia. London, 1903-

PART I
COINS OF THE SELEUCID PERIOD

CHAPTER I
CATALOG OF COINS
THE serial numbers of the catalog refer to the successive type
groups; the figures in parentheses, to the number of examples of
the group which have been studied. Under the heading "Monogram" the serial numbers are those of Plate I, on which have
been reproduced all monograms and groups of initials of both
the Seleucid and the Parthian periods. To facilitate reference to
them all occurrences of each monogram and of each group of
initials have been listed on the plate. Published coins have been
cited by the names of authors; the full titles are given in the
Bibliography on page xiii. In order to maintain the clarity of
the catalog for purposes of rapid comparison, all notes dealing
with individual groups or coins have been brought together in
the next chapter. Each note bears the serial number of the
type group to which it is related and in the catalog is cited by
the page number only. In the plates the catalog numbers of
the coins are retained. The weight and the greatest diameter
of each specimen of a group have been recorded in the order of
the weight of the coins. In only a few instances has an effort
been made to distinguish the various denominations of the bronze
coins.
On pages 44-47 a table will be found which lists the type
groups of the Seleucid period and gives the total number of
groups and of coins for each reign.
ALEXANDER THE GREATi
(Prior to 321 B.c.)
1 A (2)
Obv.: Zeus, half-draped, seated 1. Rev.: A lion advancing 1., the tail
on a throne without a back. The r. raised.
hand rests on a scepter in front,
the 1. hand, on the throne.
Legend: None occurs.
1 The two coins of Alexander, although strictly speaking not of the Seleucid
period, in a practical sense, form a part of this series.
3

4.
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
Monograms: Obv., beneath throne, on the larger coin, No. i, on the smaller,
obscured; rev., beneath lion, on the larger, No. 2, on the smaller, No. 3.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots on obverse
and reverse.
Cf. Hill, 181-191, Nos. 3-60; XX, 16, to XXII, 17. See Pl. II and discussion, p. 28.
gr. : 14.81 1.33
mm. : 23.60 12.4
SELEUCUS I
As SATRAP (prior to 311 B.C.)
2 E (I)
Obv.: A head r. male, wearing an Rev.: To the r., the head of a horse;
elephant-scalp headdress. to the l., an anchor, inverted.
Legend: Through the center of the field, down AAEZANAPOT.
Monogram: In the field 1., No. 4.
The adjustment of the dies is T -. No border can be distinguished. The
edge is straight.
Cf. Babelon, v, Fig. 5. See Pl. II and discussion, p. 28.
gr. : 2.37
mm. : 12.5
As KING (311-280 B.C.)
3 IR (I)
Obv.: Head of Hercules r., without Rev.: Zeus seated 1. on a throne with
beard, wearing a lion-skin head- a high back. The outstretched r.
dress. arm holds an eagle; the 1. rests on a
long scepter, behind.
Legend: Obscure traces in the field r. and in the exergue.
Symbol: In the field 1., an inverted anchor.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. No border can be distinguished.
Babelon, 2, No. 6; I, 4. See discussion, p. 29.
gr. : 17.41
mm. : 27.00
4 A. (I)
Obv.: As on No. 3. Rev.: As on No. 3 except that the
throne has no back.
Legend: Obscure traces in the, field r. The exergue is off flan.

CATALOG OF COINS
5
Monogram: None can be distinguished.
The adjustment of the dies is ? -+. No border can be distinguished. The
coin is silver-plated over a bronze core.
Babelon, 2, Nos. 4, 8; I, 2, 5. See discussion, p. 29.
gr. : 12.63
mm. : 24.60
5 R (1)
Obv.: Head of Zeus r., laureate. Rev.: Athena standing r. in a chariot
drawn by four elephants and brandishing a thunderbolt in the r.
hand.
Legend: 1., obscure, ex. [ZEA]ETKOT.
Monogram: None can be distinguished, perhaps owing to the condition of
the coin.
Symbol: In the field r., an anchor.
The adjustment of the dies is T ->. No border can be distinguished.
Babelon, 11, Nos. 72-73; III, 2. See discussion, p. 29.
gr. : 3.00
mm. : 15-5
6 E (2)
Obv.: Heads of the Dioscuri i 1. Rev.: Nike standing 1., crowning a
trophy. The 1. hand holds a palm
over the shoulder.
Legend: r. BAMIAEQ;, 1. IEAETKOT.
Monogram: In the field center, No. 5.
Symbol: At the feet of Nike, a boar's head.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of continuous fillet.
The edges are straight.
Cf. Babelon, 8, No. 47. See discussion, p. 29.
gr. : 3.64 1.17
mm. : 17.4 17.9
7 E (I)
Obv.: Head of Apollo 4 1., laureate. Rev.: The head of a bull 4 r.
Legend: Entirely obscured.
the coin.

6
COINS FROM SELE UCIA
The adjustment of the dies is 7 ->. There is a border of continuous fillet.
The edge is straight.
Babelon, 9, No. 52; II, 6.
gr. : 5.46
mm. : 18.3
8 E (I)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate. Rev.: The head of a bull facing front.
Legend: r. [B]AZIAEQ[2], 1. [Z]EAET[KOT].
the coin.
The adjustment of the dies is { -+. No border can be distinguished. The
edge is straight.
P1. II. See discussion, p. 29.
gr. :5.83
mm. : 19.2
9 E (16)
Obv.: The head of a horse r., with Rev.: An anchor, upright.
horns.
Legend: r. BAIAE&1G, 1. ZEAETKOT.
Monogram: In the field r., No. 6. This can be distinguished on five coins
of various sizes. On the rest this portion of the field has been obscured or
is off flan.
The adjustments of the dies are Z , /, I \ I /. There is a border
of dots. The edges are straight.
Babelon, 10, Nos. 59, 62; II, 13, 16. See discussion, p. 29.
gr. : 7.73 4.00 3.86 3.85 3.40 3.13 3.01 2.77 2.72 2.57 2.56
mm. : 26.0 16.4 16.7 16.5 16.5 17.0 16.1 15.6 15.8 16.8 15.0
2.45 2.45 2.41 2.12 2.08
16.3 15.5 15.0 15.5 16.1
10 E (6)
Obv.: Bust of Seleucus facing slightly Rev.: A horseman r., in the act of
off front. The head is surmounted hurling a javelin at a prostrate foe.
by horns.
Legend: Above BAZIAEI, below ZEAETKOT.

CAT ALOG OF COINS
7
Monograms: In the field 1., No. 7, r., on some coins, No. 8, on the others, an
obscure monogram.
The adjustments of the dies are iT , /, i --. There is a border of
continuous fillet. The edges are straight.
Babelon, 10, No. 63; II, 17. See discussion, p. 30.
gr. : 7.45 4.04 3.99 3.73 3.28 3.18
mm. : 22.6 17.9 18.o 17.8 17.2 17.7
11 YE (13)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate. Rev.: A humped bull r., with head
lowered.
Legend: Above BAIAE01, below 2EAETKOT.
Monograms and symbols: In denomination (a) on one coin occur No. 9
and No. 10; on two, an anchor; on four, a star and a sphere; on one, all
details have been obscured. In denomination (b) on one coin appears K;
on the second, a star and a sphere; on the third, all details have been
obscured. The two coins of denomination (c) are in a very obscure condition, and no monogram or symbol can be distinguished.
The adjustments of the dies vary extensively without relation to the denomination. There is a border of dots. The edges are straight.
Babelon, 13, No. 86; III, 8. See discussion, p. 30.
The coins appear to belong to three denominations.
gr. : (a) 5.60 5.48 5.46 5.46 4.97 4.61 3.84 2.82 (b) 3.08 2.49
mm. : 19.3 19.0 18.9 19.0 18.6 19.0 19.0 18.6 15.3 14.7
1.84 (c) 0.97 o.68
15.1 10.9 11-3
12 A (5)
Obv.: Head of Apollo 4 1., laureate. Rev.: Nike standing 1., holding a
wreath through the royal name.
Legend: r. BAZIAEDI, 1. IEAETKOT.
Monograms: In the field 1., on one coin, No. II; on a second, No. 7. On the
rest this portion of the field has been obscured or is off flan.
The adjustments of the dies vary extensively. There is a border of dots.
Pl. II. See discussion, p. 30gr. : 3-58 3-13 2.86 2.40 1.41
mm. : 16.6 14.0 15-0 14.2 13-6

8
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
13 2E (i)
Obv.: An obscure head i 1., partly
off flan. The representation is
probably of Apollo, possibly of
Medusa.
Rev.: A draped figure, female (?),
standing 4 r. The head is largely
off flan. The 1. arm is raised in
front, the hand off flan. The r. arm
extends backward as though in the
act of hurling an object; the hand
is off flan. The type probably represents Athena.
Legend: r. off flan, I. [ZE]AETKOT.
the coin.
Symbol: In the field l., an inverted anchor.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. No border can be distinguished. The
edge is straight.
Pl. II (rev. only). See discussion, p. 30.
gr. : 3.52
mm. : 14.8
14 YE (2)
Obv.: Head of Apollo ? 1., laureate.
Rev.: A tripod.
Legend: r. BAIIAE I, 1. IEAETKOT.
the coins.
The adjustments of the dies are i , ->. No border can be distinguished.
See discussion, p. 30.
gr. : 1.55 1.34
mm. : 11.4 11.6
ANTIOCHUS I
15 1 (1)
Obv.: Head of Antiochus
demed.
(28o-261 B.C.)
r., dia- Rev.: Apollo, nude, seated 1. on an
omphalos. The r. hand, advanced,
holds an arrow diagonally down;
the 1. rests on a grounded bow.
the coin.

CATALOG OF COINS
9
The adjustment of the dies is t -+. No border can be distinguished. The
edge is straight.
Babelon, 20, No. 146; IV, 17. See discussion, p. 30.
gr. : 1.50
mm. : 15.0
16 E (17)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate. Rev.: Athena standing r., in her upraised r. hand a thunderbolt; in
her l., a shield held advanced diagonally. The ends of a folded
chlamys hang from the two elbows.
(a) Legend: r. BAIAED2, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monograms: In the field 1., No. 12, r., No. 13.
gr. : 6.62 6.53 5.62 5.54
mm. : 17.0 19.0 17.4 17.9
(b) Legend: r. BA, 1. AN.
Monograms: On two coins 1., No. 12, r., No. 13; on two 1., No. 12, r.,
No. 14; on one, No. 15.
gr. : 3.25 2.80 2.65 2.63 2.05
mm. : 15.2 14.7 14.9 15.3 14.5
(c) Legend: As under (a).
Monograms: On one coin 1., No. 16, r., No. 17; on two only No. 16 can be
distinguished; on two none can be distinguished, owing to wear.
gr. : 3.35 2.95 2-33 2.00 1.86
mm. : 15-4 15-6 14.1 15-5 14-9
(d) Legend: As under (a).
Monogram: None can be distinguished, perhaps owing to wear.
gr. : 1.67 1.41 1.22
mm. : 13.3 12.5 12.8
The adjustments of the dies vary widely without regard to denomination or
monograms. There is a border of dots. The edges are straight. The coins
appear to comprise three denominations.
Cf. Babelon, 21, Nos. 151-152; V, I. See discussion, p. 3117 AE (I)
Obv.: Head of Apollo 1., laureate. Rev.: As on No. 16.
Legend: r., obscure, 1. A[NTIOXOT].

10
Monograms: In the field 1. and r., obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. No border can be distinguished.
The edge is straight.
gr. : 2.34
mm. : 14.0
18 1E (3)
Obv.: As on No. 16. Rev.: Athena standing r. as on No.
16, except that the shield is held
advanced in a horizontal position.
Legend: r. BAIAE0I, l., obscure.
Monograms: In the field 1., No. 16, r., No. 17. They can be distinguished
on two coins; on the third these portions of the field have been obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots. The edges
are straight.
Cf. Babelon, 13, Nos. 8o-85. See Pl. II (rev. only) and discussion, p. 31.
gr. : 2.41 1.10 0.90
mm. : 15.0 11.4 13.5
19 YE (2)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate. Rev.: Athena standing 1. The r.
hand grasps an upright spear; a
grounded shield rests against the
knees.
Legend: r. BAIAE01, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: In the field r., No. 7.
The adjustment of the dies is T /. No border can be distinguished. The
edges are straight.
Babelon, 21, No. 156; V, 3. See discussion, p. 31.
gr. : 7.90 1.75
mm. : 19.2 12.3
20 YE (13)
Obv.: Bust of Apollo 4 r., laureate. Rev.: Nike standing r., erecting a
trophy.
Legend: r. BAZIAEG, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monograms: On two coins in the field 1., No. 17; on one of these in the field
r., No. 18; on the other this portion of the field is off flan. On two coins in
the field 1., No. 19; on both the r. side of the field has been obscured. On

CATALOG OF COINS
11
four coins in the field r., No. 13; on two of these in the field I., No. 2o;
on the other two this portion of the field is off flan. On the remaining five
coins no monograms can be distinguished, presumably owing to their
condition.
The adjustments of the dies vary widely without relation to monograms or
size. There is a border of dots. The edges are straight.
Babelon, 23-24, Nos. 177-180; V, 1o-ii. See discussion, p. 31.
gr. :3.85 3.83 3.46 3.34 3.25 3.04 2.52 1.85 1.74 1.52 1.30
mm. : 17.o 17.0 16.7 16.o 16.8 16-5 16.5 13-0 14-4 16.o 14.0
1.15 0.91
12.5 11.2
21 A (14)
Obv.: Head of Apollo s r., laureate. Rev.: A tripod.
Legend: r. BAZIAE01, I. ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: In the field l., on four coins, No. 21. On the rest this portion of
the field has been obscured or is off flan.
edges have been flattened.
gr. : 4.17 3.26 3.17 3.00 2.95 2.51 2.46 2.44 2.39 2.21 1.91
mm. : 17.5 14.8 15.0 14.9 16.2 14.1 14.6 16.2 13.6 15.5 14.3
1.87 1.85 1.73
14.0 13.6 14.3
22 E (4)
Obv.: Head of Athena 4 1. Rev.: Apollo seated r. on an omphalos, clad in a chiton. A cithara
rests on the knees, held by the 1.
hand. The r. arm is dropped at the
side.
Legend: r. BAZIAEGI, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monograms: On one coin in the field r., No. 7; in, the field 1., an obscure
monogram, comprising in part X. On the rest both sides of the field have
been obscured.
The adjustments of the dies are i I , I -+. No border can be distinguished.
The heaviest coin has a beveled edge; the edges of the rest are straight.
Cf. Babelon, 24, Nos. 186-187; V, 15. See discussion, p. 31.
gr. : 4.30 3-41 1.02 o-58
mm. : 16.4 16.7 13-0 11.-1

12
23 E (9)
Obv.: Head of Athena 4 r. Rev.: As on No. 22.
Legend: As on No. 22.
the coin.
The adjustments of the dies are i , I I . No border can be distinguished.
The edges are beveled with the exception of that of the lightest coin, which
is straight.
gr. : 4.25 3.66 3.62 3.57 3.37 3.16 3.14 2.30 1.89
mm. : 16.9 16.0 17.7 16.5 15-2 16.0 16.8 16.7 14.9
24 Y (5)
Obv.: Head of Athena r. Rev.: Apollo, nude, standing 1. The
r. hand, advanced, holds an arrow
diagonally down; the 1. rests on a
grounded bow.
Legend: r. BAZIAEDZ, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monograms: On one coin in the field r., No. 22, 1., an obscure monogram.
On the rest both sides of the field have been obscured.
The adjustments of the dies are normal on the three small coins; on the two
large, I-+, 1 . . There is a border of dots. The edges are straight.
gr. : 4.21 3.91 i.58 1.37 1.00
mm. : 19.5 20.8 13.5 12.9 12.3
25 YE (7)
Obv.: Head of Apollo 4 1., laureate. Rev.: As on No. 24.
the coins.
The adjustments of the dies vary widely. There is a border of dots. Both
beveled and straight edges occur.
Pl. II. See discussion, p. 32.
gr. : 2.65 2.51 2.46 2.25 2.19 1.86 1.49
mm. :14-5 14-1 14.0 14-3 13-9 14-3 12.5

CATALOG OF COINS
13
26 E (2)
Obv.: Head of Apollo 4 r.
Rev.: A quiver, apparently alone.
Legend: r., obscure, 1. ANTIO[XOT].
the coins.
The adjustments of the dies are i I , 7 /. No border can be distinguished.
The edges are beveled.
gr. : 3.02 2.54
mm. : 15.0 14.6
27 IE (4)
Obv.: A head 4 r., male, with mus- Rev.: A figure standing r. male,
tache and beard. The form of the nude, probably Apollo. The r.
headdress cannot be determined. hand is held over a tripod in front
It appears to be intended to repre- and clasps a short shaft, possibly
sent Zeus. an arrow. Behind the shoulder is
an obscure object which suggests
a quiver. The form of the headdress cannot be determined.
Legend: r. BAZIAEGI, I. ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: On one coin in the field l., No. 23. On the rest the sides of the.
field have been obscured or are off flan.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots. The edges:
are slightly beveled.
gr. : 4.84 3.10 3.01 2.90
mm. : 16.8 16.3 16.o 16-5
ANTIOCHUS II
(261-246 B.c.)
28 IE (8)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate.
Rev.: Apollo nude, seated 1. on an
omphalos. The r. hand, advanced,
Legend: r. BAZIAEG2, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: On two coins in the field r., No. 24. On three coins appear traces
of what is probably the same monogram. On the rest this portion of the
field is entirely off flan.

14.
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
The adjustments of the dies are 1 I, ' 1 , I 'k. There is a border of
dots. The edges are straight.
Babelon, 32, Nos. 239-242; VI, 17. See discussion, p. 33gr. :3.10 2.93 2.90 2.65 2.65 2.61 2.09 2.01
mm. : 15.3 15.1 15.0 15.0 14.8 13.6 14.0 15.0
SELEUCUS II
(246-226 B.c.)
29 A (i)
Obv.: Head of Seleucus r., diademed.
The presence or absence of a beard
cannot be determined.
Rev.: Apollo nude, standing 1., leaning the 1. elbow on a tripod. The
diagonally down.
Legend: r. BAZIA[EGE2]f, 1., obscure.
the coin.
The adjustment of the dies is I /. No border can be distinguished.
Babelon, 33-35, Nos. 248-260, VII, 4, 6. See discussion, p. 33gr. : 13.01
mm. : 27.90
30 YE (i)
Obv.: Head of Seleucus r., diaderned;
slight whiskers, no mustache.
Rev.: Nike standing 1., the top of the
r. wing showing over the r. shoulder. The r. hand, advanced, holds
a wreath through the royal name.
A palm rests along the 1. arm.
Legend: r. [BA]IIAEG2I, 1. 2EAETKOT.
Monograms: In the field 1., No. 25, r., an incomplete monogram, probably
No. 26.
The adjustment of the dies is I ->. No border can be distinguished. The
edge is beveled.
P1. II. See discussion, p. 33gr. :5-24
mm. : 19.6.
31 LE (18)
Obv.: Head of Seleucus r., diademed,
apparently clean-shaven.
Rev.: Apollo nude, standing 1. The
grounded bow.

CA TALOG OF COINS
I5
Legend: r. BA2IAEGI, 1. 2EAETKOT.
Monograms: On two coins, one large and the other small, in the field 1.,
No. 26, r., No. 27. The one or the other can be distinguished on three
additional coins. Traces of monograms can be discerned on the majority
of the group, and it is probable that the entire group bore these two monograms.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. A border of dots can be distinguished
on two of the smaller coins. The edges are straight.
Cf. Gardner, 16, Nos. 12-13; VI, 3. See P1. II and discussion, p. 34.
gr. : io.6 9.46 9.41 8.94 8.89
mm. : 22.6 21.2 22.0 21.2 22.0
8.84 8.49 8.34 8.13 7.22 7.18
22.0 20.7 22.2 21.9 21.0 21.5
4.90 4.45 4.79 4.42 4.26 4.14 3.56
20.7 17.5 17.4 17.3 17.3 19.8 16.7
ANTIOCHUS III
(223-187 B.c.)
32 IE (4)
Obv.: Head of Antiochus r., diademed. The features are very
youthful.
Rev.: Nike standing 1. The r. hand,
advanced, holds a wreath in front
of the body.
Monogram: On two coins in the field r., No. 28. On the rest this portion of
the field has been obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal.
are straight.
gr. : 3.67 2.78* 2.09 1-35
mm. : 17.1 16.7 13.4 15.3
* Broken
33 E (2)
Obv.: Head of Antiochus r., diademed. The features are youthful
but more developed than those in
the portrait of No. 32.
Legend: r. BAIIAEG2I, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: In the field 1., No. 28.
appear somewhat flattened.
There is a border of dots. The edges
Rev.:
r.
the
the
Apollo, fully draped, standing
The 1. arm holds a cithara to
breast. The r. arm is dropped,
hand holding a plectrum (?).
There is a border of dots. The edges

COINS FROM SELE UCLA
gr. : 5.43 5.25
mm. : 21.9 21.0
34 X (2)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate, Rev.: Nike standing 1., the r. hand
the hair done in a knot. holding a wreath over the royal
name. The 1. hand is dropped at
the side. Above the 1. shoulder
protrudes a palm, presumably held
in the 1. hand.
Legend: r. BAIIAE0Z, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monograms: In the field r., No. 28, 1., obscure.
Rogers, 28, No. 3. See P1. II and discussion, p. 35.
gr. : 8.21 7.84
mm. : 21.7 20.7
35 iE (10)
Obv.: Bust of Artemis r.,the hair done Rev.: Apollo nude, standing r., holdin a knot and bound with a diadem ing in both hands a lyre or a
or a double fillet. Behind the shoul- cithara.
der protrude the bow and quiver.
Legend: r. BASIAE22 , 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: On five coins in the field 1., No. 28. On the rest this portion of
the field has been obscured or is off flan.
The adjustment of the dies is normal on nine coins; on the tenth, There is a border of dots. The edges are more or less beveled.
See discussion, p. 35gr. :3.12 2-53 2.27 2.06 1.99 1.76 1.69 1.67 1.64 1.41
mm. : 13.9 13.7 14.0 12.9 14.4 13.1 13.6 12.8 13.4 12.6
36 , (2)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate. Rev.: Apollo nude, standing 1. The
grounded bow.
Legend: r. BA2IAEDI, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monograms: On one coin in the field r., No. 28; on the other in the field
1., No. 7. On each the opposite side of the field is off flan.

CATALOG OF COINS
17
Babelon, 54-55, Nos. 405-414; X, 6-7. See discussion, p. 35.
gr. :2.38 2.37
mm. : 14.3 18.9
37 A (I)
Obv.: Head ofApollo r.,laureate. The Rev.: A female figure standing 1.,
arrangement of the hair is obscure. clad in a tunic with girdle and,
perhaps, high boots. The r. hand,
advanced, holds what apparently
is a long torch. The 1. hand is
dropped at the side. This appears
to be a representation of Artemis.
Legend: r. [BA]IIA[EDI], 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: In the field 1., somewhat obscure, No. 7.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots. The edge
is slightly beveled.
gr. : 2.44
mm. : 14.6
38 1E (9)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate, the Rev.: An elephant advancing r., with
hair arranged in curls on the neck. tusks and lowered trunk.
Legend: Above BAZIAEGI, below ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: On five coins in the field 1., No. 29. On the rest this portion of
the field is off flan or has been obscured.
edges are somewhat beveled.
Rogers, 29, No. 5. See Pl. III and discussion, p. 36.
gr. : 4.94 4.07 4.04 3.86 3.65 3.63 3.26 3.18 3.08
mm. : 17.2 17.3 15.9 16.1 16.o 16.6 15-5 15.0 16.4
39 YE (5)
Obv.: A male bust facing front, the
head turned 4 r. and covered by a
kausia-like headdress. It appears
to be a portrait, presumably of Antiochus. The features are not distinct.
Rev.: An elephant standing r. The
tusks are short. The trunk is
lowered with the tip slightly upturned.

18
Legend: Above BA2IAEDI, below ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: On one coin in the field 1., No. 29. In the sane relative position
on a second coin there is an obscure monogram which appears to be similar.
On the rest this portion of the field has been obscured.
The adjustments of the dies are T I , I ->, T '. No border can be distinguished. The edges are slightly beveled.
P1. III. See discussion, p. 36.
gr. : 2.88 2.88 2.55 2.18 2.14
mm. : 14.7 14.2 13.7 14.3 14.5
40 AE (2)
Obv.: A male head 4 r., covered by a
kausia-like headdress. Details of
the features have been obscured;
very possibly the representation is
of Antiochus.
Rev.: A figure standing r., apparently male, draped in a long cloak.
On the head is what seems to be a
flat, turban-like headdress; this
may be an elaborate arrangement
of the hair. The face is cleanshaven. The r. arm is outlined
under the cloak and appears to be
held to the breast. The 1. arm
does not show. There is no suggestion of an object in front of the
figure.
Legend: r. BA2[IAEDI], 1. ANTIO[XOT].
Monogram: In the field 1. on one coin, No. 29, on the other, an obscure
monogram, perhaps the same.
Pl. III. See discussion, p. 37gr. : 3.89 2.59
mm. : 17.4 16.9
41 1E ()
Obv.: A head r., obscure and partly
off flan. There are traces that suggest a diadem.
Rev.: The head of an elephant 1.,
with tusks and elevated trunk. Behind, a tripod.
Legend: Above BAIAEGI; below AN[TIOXOT].
the coin.
is straight. The coin is of thick fabric.

CATALOG OF COINS
19
Cf. Babelon, 56, Nos. 424-428; X, 12. See discussion, p. 38.
gr. : 3.14
mm. : 12.6
42 YE (I)
Obv.: Head of Antiochus r., dia- Rev.: A mare standing 1., suckling
demed. a foal.
Legend: Above BA2IAEGI, below ANTI[OXOT].
Monogram: In the field 1., obscure.
The adjustment of the dies is '\. No border can be distinguished. The
edge is straight.
Babelon, 58, Nos. 446-448; XI, 3. See discussion, p. 38.
gr. : 8.20
mm. : 24.3
SELEUCUS IV
(187-175 B.C.)
43 IE (I)
Obv.: Head of Apollo r., laureate, the Rev.: Apollo nude, standing 1., the
hair done in a knot. 1. arm resting on a tripod behind.
The r. hand, advanced, holds an
arrow diagonally down.
Legend: r. BAZIAEDI, 1. [ZE]AETK[OT].
Monograms: In the field 1., No. 30; on the obverse behind, No. 31.
is serrated.
Babelon, 63-64, Nos. 479-491; XI, 16. See discussion, p. 38.
gr. : 6.6o
mm. : 21.5
ANTIOCHUS IV
(175-164 B.c.)
44 E (43)
Obv.: Head of Antiochus r., radiate. Rev.: Tyche seated 1. on a throne
with a high back. The r. hand,
advanced, holds a Nike, 1., with a
wreath. The 1. hand is dropped at
the side. In front of the feet stands
a bird, 1., with a long beak.

zo0
Legend: r. BAIAEGI, 1. ANTIOXOT.
Monogram: None occurs.
Symbols of denomination: On the obverse, behind, on three of the coins
grouped under (a) ; on nine of the coins under (b) . On the rest this
portion of the obverse is off flan or has been obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. A fillet border occurs on the obverse
and a border of dots on the reverse. The edges are beveled.
Babelon, 71-72, Nos. 548-555; XIII, 1-3. See discussion, p. 38.
gr. : (a) 8.77 8-34 8.18 7.67 7.18 6.99 5.94 (b) 4.40 4.10
mm. : 20.0 20.3 21.6 20.3 20.4 19.0 19.3 16.4 15.6
4.09 3.88 3.80 3.51 3.47 3.41 3-32 3.30 3.26 3.19 2.91 2.80
17.0 15.7 15.5 15.9 17.0 15.4 16.3 15.2 16.8 14.9 15.4 15.3
2.72 2.65 2.58 2.56 2.55 2.52 2.52 2.49 2.35 2.34 2.21 2.11
15.7 14.0 14.6 16.5 15.0 14.4 15.7 14.9 15.6 15.0 13.8 13.8
2.08 1.93 I.91 1.79 1.76 1.50 1.38 1.38 1.27 1.20
15.3 14.8 14.3 13.0 15.6 13.4 14.5 11.1 12.0 12.9
45 A (1)
Obv.: Head of Antiochus r., radiate. Rev.: Zeus standing 1. half-draped,
on his head a wreath. The r. hand,
advanced, holds a thunderbolt;
the 1. grasps a long scepter. At
the feet stands a bird, 1., the form
of which cannot be determined.
Legend: r. two lines, obscure, 1. OEOT[EIIIb]ANOT[I].
Monogram: In the field 1., reading down, the initials No. 32.
edge is straight.
Babelon, 72, Nos. 559-563; XIII, 5. See discussion, p. 39.
gr. :5.12
mm. : 19.7
46 YE (12)
Obv.: Head of Apollo 4 r., laureate, Rev.: Tyche standing 1., on the
the hair arranged in curls on the head a kalathos, in the 1. arm a
neck. cornucopiae. The r. arm appears
to extend through the letters of the
royal name. It is not clear whether
an object is held in this hand.

CATALOG OF COINS
21
Monogram: On four coins in the field 1., No. 33. On the rest this portion of
the field is off flan or has been obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots on both
obverse and reverse. The edges are slightly beveled.
Pl. III. See discussion, p. 39.
gr. : 3.15 2.85 2.52 2.52 2.52 2.51 2.46 2.27 2.18 2.06 2.01 1.87
mm. : 15-0 14.0 15.5 14-1 15.8 15.4 15.5 15.3 15.8 15.1 14.4 14.3
DEMETRIUS I
(162-150 B.C.)
47 YE (5)
Obv.: Head of Helios 4 1. Rev.: Artemis standing r., clad in a
tunic. The arrangement of the
hair cannot be distinguished. The
1. hand, advanced, holds a bow;
the r. is raised behind the shoulder,
having just released an arrow.
Legend: r. BA2IAEGI, 1. AHMHTPIOT.
edges are beveled.
Imhoof-Blumer, 435, No. 109. Imhoof-Blumer assigns this type to the second
Demetrius. See Pl. III and discussion, p. 39.
gr. : 4.17 3.79 3.75 3.74 3.09
mm. : 16.6 16.5 16.o 16.7 16.9
48 YE (I)
Obv.: Head of Artemis r., diademed. Rev.: A quiver and bow, upright.
Behind the shoulders, a bow and
quiver.
Legend: r. BA2IA[EDI], 1. [AH]MHTPI[OT].
edge is serrated.
Babelon, 92-93, Nos. 726-729; XVI, 5. See discussion, p. 40.
gr. : 7.15
mm. : 20.5
49 iE (14)
Obv.: The busts of Demetrius and Rev.: Nike standing 1., the r. hand
the queen r., jugate. extending a wreath over the royal
name.

zz2
Legend: r. BAZIAEQI2, 1. AHMHTPIOT.
edges are beveled.
Babelon, 101, No. 791; XVII, 7. See discussion, p. 40.
gr. :5.78 5.17 5.02 4.96 4.86 4.72 4.44 4.24 4.01 3.76 3.70
mm. : 17.8 18.3 17.1 17.9 18.2 18.2 17.8 17.3 16.7 16.9 17.2
3.19 2.34 1.74
16.2 16.6 15.6
50 )E (3)
Obv.: Head of Demetrius r., dia- Rev.: Apollo nude, seated 1. on an
demed. omphalos. The r. hand, advanced,
Legend: r. BAZIAEDI, 1. AHMHTPIOT, ex. 2QTHPOI.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of continuous fillet.
The edges are serrated.
Cf. Babelon, 94, No. 737; XVI, II. See discussion, p. 40.
gr. :5.20 4.61 3.90
mm. : 18.o 16.6 16.7
51 T (6)
Obv.: Head of Demetrius r., dia- Rev.: A cornucopiae, upright.
demed.
Legend: r. BAZIAEGI, 1. AHMHTPIOT.
edges are beveled.
gr. :3.33 3.22 2.99 2.79 2.65 2.10
mm. : 16.7 18.o 16.6 16.4 17.7 16.1
52 A (5)
Obv.: Head of Helios I 1. Rev.: As on No. 51.
Legend: r. BAZIAEI, l. AHMHTPIOT.
edges are beveled.
gr. : 3-44 3.25 3-12 2.96 2.74
mm. : 16.5 17-7 16.7 16-5 17-3

CATALOG OF COINS
23
53 2E (7)
Obv.: Head of Demetrius r., radiate.
The characteristic forelock is shown.
Rev.: Tyche seated 1. on a throne
without a back. The head appears
to be bare, the hair done in a knot.
In the 1. arm is a cornucopiae. The
r. arm is extended over the lap
toward the royal name. No object
can be distinguished in the hand.
Legend: r. BA2IAESZ, 1. AHMHTPIOT.
gr. : 3.76 3.62 3.46 3-38 3-34 3.25 2.37*
mm. : 17.o16-5 16-5 17.o 16.6 16.6 17.4
* Broken
54 AE (3)
Obv.: Head of Demetrius r., diademed. The forelock is shown.
Rev.: Tyche standing 1., the head
bare and the hair done in a knot.
In the 1. arm is a cornucopiae. The
r. hand is dropped in front, and it
cannot be determined whether it
grasps an object.
Legend: r. BAZIAEGZ, 1. AHMHT[PIOT].
gr. : 1.88 1.83 1.30
mm. : 14.8 14.2 13.9
55 .E (17)
Obv.: Bust of Apollo i 1., apparently
laureate.
Rev.: Tyche standing 1. On the
head is a kalathos, in the 1. arm a
cornucopiae. The 1. elbow rests on
a short column. The r. arm is
dropped in front with the hand extended toward the royal name. It
cannot be determined whether an
object is held in this hand.
Legend: r. BA.IAEDI, 1. AHMHTPIOT.

24
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
are beveled.
gr. : 6.19* 4.81 4.49 4.45 4.36 4.10 3.93 3.91
mm. : 17.6 17.4 16.8 17.0 16.8 18.3 17.0 18.o
3.07 3.04 2.97 2.92 2.54t 2.19
16.9 17.6 17.2 16.6 16.9 16.7
* Very thick t Broken
ALEXANDER BALA
3.81 3.47 3.35
16.9 17.5 17.9
(152-144 B.C.2)
56 E (i)
Obv.: Heads of Cleopatra Thea and
Alexander r., jugate, with that of
the queen in the foreground.
Rev.: Nike standing 1., the r. hand
extending a wreath over the royal
name. Further details have been
obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots. The edge is
slightly beveled.
gr. : 2.31
mm. : 14.7
57 A (6)
Obv.: Head of Alexander r., wearing
a helmet.
Rev.: Nike standing 1., apparently
as above. In the field 1. an upright
branch can be distinguished. It
cannot be determined whether a
palm is held in the 1. hand.
Legend: r., obscure, l., on one coin AAE[SANA POT].
are flattened.
Babelon, 108-IIo, Nos. 853-865; XVIII, I. See discussion, p. 42.
gr. : 2.40 2.38 2.36* 2.36 2.00 1.42
mm. : 16.o 15.3 15.5 16.3 16.7 15.9
* Broken
2 The exact duration of this reign in Seleucia is not known.

CATALOG OF COINS
25
58 YE (2)
Obv.: Heads of Cleopatra and Alexander r., jugate, with that of the
queen in the foreground.
Legend: Entirely obscure.
edges are slightly beveled.
Rev.: Apollo nude, standing 1. The
hair is done in a knot. The r.
hand, advanced, holds an arrow
grounded bow.
No border can be distinguished. The
gr. : 4.33 2.65
mm. : 16.9 16.3
59 YE (1)
Obv.: Head of Alexander r., repre- Rev.: As on No. 58.
sented as Hercules with a lion-skin
headdress.
Legend: r. BAIAEG2, I. AAEZ[ANAPOT].
is slightly beveled.
Babelon, 104-105, Nos. 810-824; XVII, 14. See discussion, p. 42, under
Nos. 58-59.
gr. : 5.81
mm. : 18.7
60 YE (2)
Obv.: Head of Alexander r., diademed.
Rev.: Zeus half-draped, seated 1. on
a throne without a back. The r.
hand, advanced, holds a Nike who
extends a wreath r.; the 1. hand
rests on a long scepter.
Legend: r. BA2IAE02., 1. AAEZANA[POT].
are beveled.
gr. : 2.97 2.73
mm. : 16.2 16.9

COINS FROM SELEUCIA
DEMETRIUS II
FIRST REIGN (146-140/39 B.C.A)
61 YE (8)
Obv.: Head of Demetrius, r., wearing
an elephant-scalp headdress.
Rev.: Athena in high-crested helmet
seated 1. The r. hand, in front,
grasps a spear which slants back
over the r. shoulder. The 1. hand
rests on a grounded shield at the
side.
Legend: r. BAMIAE0L, 1. AHMHTPIOT.
are beveled.
Pl. IV. See discussion, p. 42.
gr. :3.80 3.49 3.45 3.30 3.30 2.41 1.77* 0.81*
mm. : 16.9 16.5 16.5 16.3 15.6 17.8 14.6 13.8
* Incomplete
62 /E (3)
Obv.: Head of Demetrius r., wearing
an elephant-scalp headdress.
Rev.: Athena in high-crested helmet
standing 1. The r. hand, in front,
grasps an upright spear; the 1.
rests on a grounded shield at the
side.
Legend: r., 1st [B]AIIA[EQ22], 2nd AHMH[TPIOT],
1., obscure [@IAAAEA@OT NIKATOPO2I].
The adjustments of the dies are T T , /'. No border can be distinguished.
The edges are slightly beveled.
Gardner, 61, No. 27; XVIII, 9. See discussion, p. 42.
gr. : 4.04 3.30 2.22
mm. : 16.o 16.8 16.4
63 YE (4)
Obv.: Head of Demetrius r., dia- Rev.: Nike standing 1. The r. arm is
demed. advanced through the legend, the
hand off flan. The 1. hand is
dropped at the side.
Legend: r., 1st BAZIAEGI, 2nd AHMHTPIOT,
l., 1st @IAAAEA4OT, 2nd NIKATOPOS.
It is very possible that Demetrius effectively controlled Seleucia only between
141/40 and 140/39 B.c.

CATALOG OF COINS
27
edges are slightly beveled.
Cf. Babelon, 121, No. 942; XIX, 9. See discussion, p. 42.
gr. : 3.88 3.03 2.60 2.06 *
mm. : 15.9 15.7 15.6 16.7
* Broken
SECOND REIGN (?) (130-125 B.C.)
64 E (1)
Obv.: Female head r., the hair done
in a knot and surmounted by a kalathos.
Rev.: A cornucopiae, upright, from
which fall streamers.
Legend: r. BAIA[EGE], 1. ZHMHT[PIOT].
edge is beveled.
Cf. Babelon, 161, Nos. 1249, 1250; XXII, 21. See Pl. IV and discussion,
p. 43.
gr. : 3.07
mm. : 13.9
SECOND REIGN
65 IE (i)
Obv.: Entirely obscure.
Rev.: Zeus seated 1. on a throne with
a high back. The r. hand, advanced, holds a Nike r.; the 1. rests
on a long scepter. All other details
have been obscured.
Legend: r., 1st [B]AZI[AEQ2], 2nd [A]HMHTPIO[T],
1., obscure and off flan.
The adjustment of the dies cannot be determined. No border can be distinguished. The edge is straight.
See discussion, p. 43gr. : io.8
mm. : 23.6

CHAPTER II
NOTES ON THE COINS
THIS chapter is devoted to discussions regarding the individual type groups, the inclusion of which in the catalog would
have detracted from its ready use for reference. The serial
numbers correspond to those in the catalog.
ALEXANDER THE GREAT
1. The two examples of this type group representing two
different denominations are the only coins found at Seleucia
which bear the types of Alexander but lack the symbols characteristic of Seleucus. They cannot well be dated later than the
opening years of the first governorship of Seleucus; very possibly
they antedate 32I B.C. They differ both in details of execution
and in the form of the monograms from those published in Hill.
On one of the latter appears a monogram similar to Seleucia
monogram No. I, except that it lacks the encircling omega
(cxlviii, No. 13).
SELEUCUS I AS SATRAP
2. The coin in Babelon has a similar obverse type. On the
reverse, however, it shows the anchor not inverted and apparently unaccompanied by the horse's head. In this connection should be noted the clay model of a coin found at Seleucia
which bears the types and the name of Alexander and a symbol
of Seleucus.1 The assignment of coins which bear the name of
Alexander to the second governorship of Seleucus, that is, after
311 B.C., would require the assumption that at this period
Seleucus lacked the personal power to inspire confidence in
his coinage. The facts oppose such an assumption. Seleucus
returned to Babylonia in the spring of 311 practically unaccompanied. Through his personal popularity with the army and
the populace within a few months he had defeated two armies
of Antigonus and had inaugurated a successful campaign into
Iran. This was clearly a personal venture and in no sense a
1 R. H. McDowell, Stamped and Inscribed Objects from Seleucia on the Tigris,
p. 243, No. ia(i).
28

NOTES ON THE COINS
29
defense of the rights of Alexander's heirs. It is reported that
the natives of Babylonia hailed him as king immediately upon
his arrival in 311-2 On these grounds the coin and the clay
model have been assigned to the period of the first governorship,
from 321/20 to 315/14 B.C. The imitation of coins of Alexander
by his successors to a fairly late period is an admitted fact, but
this was practiced in areas where the instability of the de facto
government or the backward character of the population required it. Neither of these conditions prevailed in Babylonia.
The initials on this coin are those which appear in monogram on type No. 20 (monogram No. 19) of the reign of Antiochus I. It is possible, but not likely, that a single mint official
is indicated.
SELEUCUS I AS KING
3. The legend on the coin from Seleucia undoubtedly comprised the title as well as the royal name. The coin in Babelon
bears monograms which do not occur on coins from Seleucia
of the same general period.
4. The coins cited are similar in type, showing the throne
without a back, but they are both drachmae. One bears the
name of Seleucus alone, the other the name with the royal title.
The form of the legend on the coin from Seleucia cannot be
determined nor, consequently, its exact chronological position.
The monograms on the coins in Babelon do not occur on coins
from Seleucia of the same general period.
5. The royal title occurs in the field left, but obscured. The
first of the coins cited bears a monogram which appears on a
coin of Antiochus I from Seleucia, type No. 16, monogram No. 14.
6. Babelon describes a silver coin of Seleucus which bears
not only similar types but the same symbol and monogram which
occur on the coins from Seleucia (8, No. 46). The character of
these adjuncts on the bronze coin cited is not clear.
8. The coin is assigned to the first Seleucus because the
motif of the reverse types is most characteristic of this reign,
and because of the obvious relationship of this type group to
that preceding, No. 7.
9. The coin in Babelon appears to lack a monogram. With
2 M. I. Rostovtzeff, "Syria and the East," The Cambridge Ancient History,
VII, 166-167.

30
the exception of the specimen weighing 7.73 gr., the coins of this
grou.p are of a single denomination. They represent the largest
group of the coins of Seleucus I found at Seleucia.
io. The coin cited shows a monogram in the left field only,
similar to that occupying the corresponding position on the coins
from Seleucia. The coins of the group appear to comprise two
denominations.
i i. The kappa which occurs in the field of one of these coins
may be one element of an obscured monogram, perhaps No. 6.
The coin in Babelon shows the symbol, a star and a sphere. It
appears that in the case of this type group, at least, the symbols
and monograms possessed a coordinate value, that is, both represented mint officials. If this is so, it must be admitted that the
anchor, although a symbol representative of the dynasty, might
distinguish an individual official. This type comprises the second
largest group of coins of this reign found at Seleucia.
12. This combination of types appears to be new. The obverse type is more characteristic of the coinages of the first two
Seleucid kings than of those of their successors. The reverse type
is in a general way similar to that on a coin of Seleucus I published by Babelon (i4, No. 97). On this coin the wreath is held
over rather than through the royal name, and Nike holds a palm
in the left hand. The attribution of the group to Seleucus I is
further supported by the form of the second monogram, which is
reproduced on another group of this reign, type No. io. [Mr.
E. T. Newell informs me that the collection of Dr. Edgar Rogers
contains examples of this type. See Preface, p. viii.]
13. The assignment of this coin to Seleucus I is based on the
style of the obverse type and on the character of the symbol.
After the reign of Antiochus I only a few coins show the obverse
head in frontal position, and the anchor is not employed as a
symbol by the later kings who bore the name Seleucus.
14. The coins are in a very obscure condition. The general
similarity of this combination of types to that found on an issue
of Antiochus I, and the frontality of the obverse head, justify
the assignment of this group to Seleucus I.
ANTIOCHUS I
15- The coin cited bears monograms which do not occur on
coins from Seleucia of the same general period.

NOTES ON THE COINS
31
16. The coins in Babelon show two of the monograms which
occur on the group from Seleucia, Nos. 12 and 13. The intentional abbreviation of the legend in subgroup (b) is analogous to
the use of the first four letters of the words of the legend on other
issues of Antiochus I (Babelon, 20, Nos. 147-149; 22, No. 165-;
25, No. 190).
17. The close relationship of this variety to.the preceding
group requires no discussion. It appears to have been characteristic of the Seleucia mint to emit successive issues distinguished only by a change in the style of the obverse type,
such as from the profile to the frontal position.
18. The obverse type of this group is that of No. 16. The
reverse differs from that of Nos. 16 and 17 only in the position
of the shield, held horizontally rather than diagonally. The types
of this group, however, differ from those of an issue of Seleucus I
only in the presence of the folded chlamys (Babelon, 13, Nos. 8o85). The illegibility of the royal name, therefore, makes the
attribution of the group somewhat doubtful. The presence of
the chlamys appears to be more significant than the variation
in the position of the shield.
19. The coin cited bears monograms which do not appear on
coins from Seleucia of the same general period.
20. The coins in Babelon show only one monogram; this is
not found on coins from Seleucia of this period. Monogram
No. 18 is composed of the characters which comprise monogram
No. 14 on type No. 16. The characters of monogram No. 19
appear as initials on type No. 2. There appears to be no relationship between the variations in size within the group and the
change of monograms.
21. No monogram appears on-the coin cited.
22. On the reverse: of the coins in Babelon the right hand of
Apollo rests on the lap. One of the coins cited bears in the field
right monogram No. 7, as on the coins. from Seleucia. In the
field left occurs a monogram which does not appear on coins
from Seleucia of this general period. One of the elements in this
monogram is the letter X. It is possible, therefore, that the
obscure monogram on the coins from Seleucia is similar.
23. This group is distinguished from the preceding one only
by the variation in the execution of the obverse, the change in
the position of the head from left jtorght. This may be the

32
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
result of an error on the part of the engraver. It is equally
possible, however, that the two groups furnish another illustration of the apparent practice at the Seleucia mint of retaining a
common reverse type on two successive issues, while varying the
execution of the obverse.
24. The coin cited shows only one monogram, obscure.
25. The attribution of this group to the first Antiochus is
supported by the close relationship of the reverse type to that
of the preceding group and by the style of the obverse which is
characteristic of the first two Seleucid reigns. The two groups
illustrate again the tendency noted under No. 23. The substitution of the head facing partly front for that in profile emphasizes the strength of this technique in engraving at the Seleucia
mint. This condition is discussed further on pages 47-48. It
should be noted that one of the coins of group No. 25, weighing
2.46 gr., is of very crude execution (see Pl. II).
26. The assignment of these coins to Antiochus I is based on
two factors. The representation of the head of Apollo facing
partly front is characteristic only of this and the preceding reign.
A quiver, accompanied by a bow, forms the reverse type of
another issue of Antiochus (Babelon, 25, Nos. 189-190). The
representation of a quiver without the associated bow is unusual.
Since the coins from Seleucia are in a very obscure condition, it
is not impossible that a bow was intended to be shown as a
second element in the design of the reverse.
27. The types of this group are new and of an unusual interest. The obverse shows a definite relationship to the heads of
Zeus executed in profile on early Seleucid coins. It is distinctly
unlike the portrayals of Zeus on coins of Antiochus IV and his
successors. Some of the representations of Zeus on early Seleucid
issues appear to possess the features of Seleucus I, that is, they
portray an assimilation of Seleucus to Zeus.' The frontal position
of the obverse head on the coins under consideration makes difficult a comparison with portraits of Seleucus in profile. They
appear, however, to possess certain elements in common, and it
is possible that the obverse type represents the deified Nikator.
The reverse type has been obscured on all the specimens. - In
the absence of evidence to the contrary the nudity of the figure
and the presence of the tripod require an attribution to Apollo.
3 McDowell, op. cit., pp. 209-212.

NOTES ON THE COINS
33
If the object held in the hand is an arrow, the identification is of
course strengthened; the type becomes a modification of the
common motif of Apollo leaning on the tripod and holding an
arrow. The object behind the shoulder is very obscure. If a
quiver, it introduces an unusual element in the motif.
The single appearance of the monogram in an obscured condition is unfortunate. It may represent one of the two alternatives grouped as monogram No. i i of the reign of Seleucus I, or
monogram No. 21 of the reign of Antiochus I. On the other
hand, it may be similar to monogram No. 29, which occurs
repeatedly on coins of Antiochus III. Should this be the case it
would not justify an assignment of the group to the third
Antiochus. A representation of Zeus as an obverse type in
this reign is unknown, and representations of Apollo appear but
rarely on the reverse types. Though frontality of the obverse
type occurs on coins of Antiochus III, it is rare (type groups
Nos. 38 and 39). Of prime significance is the character of the
execution of the obverse, which links these coins to the early
issues in the name of Antiochus I. The group may well be
assigned to the opening years of this reign.
ANTIOCHUS II
28. The coins cited in this group bear a monogram which
appears at Seleucia on an issue of Seleucus II, type No. 30,
monogram No. 25. Repeated examination of the group under
consideration, as well as of the corresponding reproduction in
Babelon, suggests strongly that the obverse type portrays not
Apollo but Antiochus Theos as Apollo. In view of the consolidation of the observance of the royal cult during this reign such
a concept would not be unnatural.
SELEUCUS II
29. This is the latest Seleucid silver coin that has been found
at Seleucia. Among the monograms appearing on the coins cited
are three which occur on contemporary coins from Seleucia,
monograms Nos. 7 and 13 on type groups Nos. 19, 22, 16, and
20 of the reign of Antiochus I, and monogram No. 25 on type
group No. 30 of the current reign.
30. The attribution of this coin to Seleucus II is determined
by the portrait of the obverse. Babelon has published a bronze

34
coin of this reign with a reverse generally similar but on the
obverse an Athena head (37, No. 273). The first monogram
on the coin from Seleucia, No. 25, occurs on a silver coin of
Seleucus II and on a bronze coin of the reign of Antiochus II
(Gardner, 16, No. 5; Babelon, 32, No. 239).
31. The coins published by Gardner appear to be entirely
similar in types except that the king is described as wearing
slight whiskers. There is no suggestion of a beard on the obverse
type of the coins from Seleucia. The second monogram on the
coins, No. 27, occurs on the specimens cited, where it is associated with a monogram which does not appear on coins from
Seleucia of the same general period.
ANTIOCHUS III
32. The attribution to Antiochus III is required by the portrait of the obverse. Babelon has published coins of this king
with types superficially similar (57, Nos. 438-439). The portrait
on these coins, however, is that of a mature man, and the reverse
has as adjunct the head of a horse. There appears to be no
relationship between these coins and the group from Seleucia.
The monogram which occurs on the group is common to the four
succeeding issues of Antiochus at Seleucia.
The chronological position of this issue within the reign is
determined by the relation of the portrait to that on the next
group, No. 33. In both issues the king is represented as youthful,
but the features portrayed on the second are definitely more
mature. The comparison is rendered legitimate by the facts
that the two groups were the product of one mint and cannot be
widely separated in time. Though engravers might increase the
age of their royal subjects when the latter were very young, as a
point of state policy, the contrary may not well be assumed. It
should be noted further that the young Antiochus was resident
in Seleucia at the time of his elevation to the throne.4 It will
be shown below that type groups Nos. 33 and 34 preceded the
revolt of Molon. Group No. 32 must have been issued, therefore,
within a few months after the accession of Antiochus.
33. The details of the portrait require the attribution to
Antiochus III. The monogram is that which occurs on the:
4 M. Streek, "Seleukeia," Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopdidie des classischen Altertumswissenschzaft, Zweite Reihe, Vol II.

NOTES ON THE COINS
35
coins of the preceding group and on those of the three groups
which follow. The reverse type appears to be entirely similar
to that of a coin of Molon (Babelon, 6o, No. 457). Though a
usurper might well continue the coin types of his predecessor,
it is highly improbable that a type instituted by a rebel would
appear shortly afterward on the legitimate coinage. The conditions require, therefore, that the issue under consideration be
assigned to the period prior to the revolt of Molon.
34. The coin cited shows in the field left Q. The reverse
type is closely similar to that of an issue of Molon (Babelon, 6o,
No. 458). It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that the coins
under consideration were issued for Antiochus shortly before the
capture of Seleucia by Molon. The latter retained the types for
an issue in a smaller denomination. It is possible that the reverse
type on the issue of Antiochus commemorated an initial repulse
of the rebel army before the city. The suggestion is supported
by the fact that type groups Nos. 33 and 34, although issued at
about the same time, are of a single denomination.
The monogram which occurs on the group is common also to
groups Nos. 32, 33, 35, and 36. To judge by an examination of
the plate in Babelon, the monogram on the corresponding issue
of Molon is similar. Babelon, however, gives it as an eta inclosing an inverted alpha. This form appears on another coin of
Molon (Babelon, 6o, No. 457).
35. The obverse type of this group is closely related to that
on an issue of Seleucus IV (Babelon, 65, No. 501). The reverse
appears to be new to the Seleucid coinage. It is a modification
of that found on No. 33 which, as has been shown, was imitated
by Molon. The modification may have been due to this circumstance. The continuation on the coins of this group of the
monogram which characterizes the earliest issues of Antiochus
requires the assignment of the group to the first half of the reign.
It is the heaviest issue of Antiochus found at Seleucia.
36. This issue appears to be the latest in the series distinguished by monogram No. 28. It is accompanied here by a
monogram which occurs alone on the succeeding issue of Antiochus, No. 37. The coins cited in the catalog are entirely
similar in type but bear monograms which do not occur at
Seleucia in this general period.

36
37. The attribution of this coin to Antiochus III depends
partly on the form of the monogram which is that of group
No. 36. However, this monogram occurs also on coins of Antiochus I, type groups Nos. 19 and 22. The decisive factor lies in the
motif of the reverse. Representations of Artemis as obverse type
appear as early as the "reign of Seleucus II, but on the reverse
only with the reigns of Antiochus III and his successors. Coins
with types generally similar to those of this group were issued for
Antiochus by the Aetolian League.5 The group from Seleucia,
however, must be placed at an earlier point in the reign. The monogram which characterizes the group occurs on the preceding group
associated with the monogram which is common to the earliest
issues of the reign. The three succeeding issues, which bear a new
monogram, appear on the basis of the character of their reverse
types to belong to the period of the campaign of Antiochus to the
Upper Satrapies and India, prior to his conflicts with Rome.
38. The attribution of this issue and of No. 39 presents some
difficulties. Though the use of the elephant as a reverse type is
more characteristic of the third than of the first Antiochus, it
occurs on the earlier coins with sufficient frequency to warrant
consideration. Further, the monogram found on this group may
occur also on coins of Antiochus I, type group No. 27. The
attribution to Antiochus III is based principally on the fact that
the monogram characterizes type groups Nos. 39 and 40, which
possess elements foreign to the period of Antiochus I but germane
to that with which we are now concerned.
The reverse type of the group differs from the elephant motif
found on bronze coins of Antiochus published by Babelon, but
is rather similar to that on the silver (52, Nos. 394, 395). After
No. 35 this appears to be the heaviest issue of Antiochus III at
Seleucia.
39. The monogram on this issue relates it to group No. 38
above and to No. 40 below. The reverse type differs from that
of No. 38 in that the elephant is pictured as standing rather than
advancing and has short tusks and the trunk curled upward near
the extremity. In these respects the group is more closely related than is No. 38 to the bronze coins with generally similar
reverse types published by Babelon. The obverse, however,
SP. Gardner, Catalogue of Coins in the British Museum: Thessaly to Aetolia,
P1. XXVII, No. 5.

NOTES ON THE COINS
37
presents features which are new to the Seleucid coinage. The
frontality of the obverse head should normally associate the
coins with the reigns of Seleucus I and Antiochus I. But at
Seleucia this technique in coin engraving persisted throughout
the Seleucid period.6 It is the character of the headdress on the
obverse that appears to require the assignment of the group to
Antiochus III. On Bactrian coins the king is frequently portrayed wearing a kausia or a helmet shaped like a kausia.7
From Seleucia we have impressions of seals of Timarchus which
show a similar form of headdress, probably the result of Bactrian
influence.' On no other official monuments of the Seleucid Empire or its successor states is this style of headdress pictured,
although it appears on scattered coins from other parts of the
Hellenistic world. The kausia was of course a common Macedonian feature, yet it appears to have gained an especial significance in Bactria. It is difficult to associate Antiochus I with
these conditions, but in view of his lengthy stay in the Upper
Satrapies, as well as the chronological factor, they do apply to
the third Antiochus. As none of the other Antiochi of the
Seleucid line were in any particular sense associated with the
Upper Satrapies or India, both the obverse and the reverse of
the group would be foreign to their coin types.
The reverse type of this as of the preceding group may reasonably be assigned to the period of the Indian campaign of
Antiochus or shortly thereafter., The representation of Antiochus wearing the kausia must be linked to some incident of the
campaign, but its exact significance cannot be determined.
Antiochus may have adopted a practice already followed by the
Bactrian princes; it is equally possible that the use of the kausia
by the Great King set a style that was imitated and retained by
the Bactrian dynasty.
40. The monogram of this group is that of the two preceding
groups. The relationship of the obverse to that of No. 39 is
evident. In the absence of specimens in good condition it must
6 See below, pp. 47-48.
S. Grose, Catalogue of the McClean Collection of Greek Coins, III, 408-411, Nos.
9689, 9692, 9703, 9705.
8 McDowell, op. cit., pp. 46, 67, 214-220. The new coin types of Antiochus III
had not come to light when the study of the impressions was made. They do not alter,
however, the conclusions reached in the passages cited, since the features portrayed
on the impressions are definitely not those of Antiochus. 9Babelon, lxxviii.

38
be presumed that both portraits represent the features of Antiochus III. I am unable to explain the exact significance of the
reverse type. So far as the condition of the coins permits of
observation it may be suggested that the motif represents a
religious act in an Oriental cult. It is definitely foreign to the
body of known Seleucid coin types. As in the case of the obverse, the reverse type can best be explained on the assumption
that it was inspired by some incident of the campaign of Antiochus in the Upper Satrapies. Figurines found at Selucia show
an arrangement of the hair which produces a turban-like effect.'0
41. The reverse type of this single coin appears to be entirely
similar to that of the coins cited. Although it is possible that the
obverse shows a female head veiled, as on the coins in Babelon,
so far as the condition of the piece permits of judgment the
details suggest a portrait of Antiochus. The thick fabric is unusual, as is the form of the omega in the royal title (see p. 244,
No. 16). The coin may have been struck in a mint farther to the
east. In the absence of a monogram it is difficult to assign the
issue to a particular period in the reign. The character of the reverse suggests that it belongs to the campaign coinage or to that
which immediately succeeded the campaign.
42. The monograms on the coins of this type published by
Babelon and Imhoof-Blumer do not occur on coins from Selucia
of this general period. The character. of the reverse suggests
that the issue originated in a mint farther to the north or the
east.
SELEUCUS IV
43. This is the sole coin of this reign found at Seleucia. The
monograms on the coins cited in Babelon do not occur on coins
from Seleucia of this general period. It should be noted, however, that the obverse of one of the coins is stated to bear a
monogram, an alpha inclosing a beta. Actually this may be
monogram No. 31, the epsilon having become obscured on the
specimen examined by Babelon.
ANTIOCHUS IV
44. It should be noted that Babelon describes the Tyche of
the reverse type as holding a long scepter in the left hand. The
10 See Figurines from Seleucia on the Tigris, a forthcoming volume in this series
by Dr. Wilhelmina van Ingen.

NOTES ON THE COINS
39
scepter does not form a part of the design on the coins from
Seleucia, and I fail to distinguish it on the plates in Babelon.
45. The coins cited show initials and a monogram which do
not occur on coins from Seleucia of this general period.
46. The attribution of this issue presents some difficulties.
Representation of an obverse head in a frontal position is most
characteristic of the first two Seleucid reigns, but this style does
occur in the reigns of Antiochus III and Demetrius 1.11 The concept of Tyche, the city-goddess, first appears as a Seleucid coin
type in the reign of Antiochus IV. In view of these facts an attribution of the group to the first or the second Antiochus would
be entirely uncalled for, and an assignment to Antiochus III as
opposed to Antiochus IV would require further direct evidence
in support of the contention. Actually the extant direct evidence
supports the latest date. The coins from Seleucia issued prior
to the reign of Antiochus IV show a border only on the obverse.
On the coins of type group No. 44 of this reign the obverse bears
a border of continuous fillet, the reverse a border of dots. On
the coins of the issue under consideration a border of dots can be
observed on both obverse and reverse, a characteristic of coins
of later periods.
DEMETRIUS I
47. The attribution of this group to the first rather than to
the second Demetrius is warranted by the character of both
obverse and reverse types. Two other issues bearing the name
Demetrius, Nos. 52 and 55, have the obverse head executed in the
frontal position. In the case of the former the reverse type is
that of group No. 51 which bears on the obverse the portrait of
Demetrius I. The motif of the obverse of the group under consideration cannot well be divorced from the frequent recurrence
of Apollo and Artemis concepts on the coins of this king, nor
from his adoption of the title of Soter. Although popular tradition attributed this title to the gratitude of certain elements in
Babylonia toward Demetrius for his defeat of Timarchus,12 it is
more probable that from the moment of his accession Demetrius
sought to assimilate himself to Apollo the ancestor of the Seleucid
line. The political basis for this course may well have been the
fact that Antiochus IV, who had assumed the throne which
11 See pp. 47-48.
12 Appian, Syriaca, xi.47; Justin, xxxiv.35.

40
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
rightfully belonged to Demetrius upon the death of Seleucus IV,
had sought to assimilate himself to Zeus.
The reverse type of the group under consideration appears
to be entirely similar to that of a coin of Timarchus (Gardner,
5o, No. i). Since it cannot be assumed that the legitimate
dynasty would imitate a type adopted by a rebel, the group must
be assigned to the beginning of the reign of Demetrius, prior to
the revolt.
48. In view of the facts that the queen of Demetrius is represented with him on one issue, No. 49, and that Demetrius himself was assimilated to Apollo, it is very possible that the motif
of Artemis on coins of this reign refers to an assimilation in the
royal cult of the queen to this goddess, the sister of Apollo. The
relationship between the types of this group and the reverse
type of the preceding group, and the fact that they are of different denominations, suggest that the two issues may be contemporary.
49. On the coin cited Nike is shown holding a palm in the
left hand. This feature cannot be distinguished on the coins
from Seleucia, but this may be due to their obscure condition.
The jugate heads of Demetrius and his queen appear on a silver
coin on which the types of Demetrius have been struck over
those of Timarchus (Gardner, 50, No. 20). It is reasonable,
therefore, to assign the bronze issue under consideration to the
period immediately after the close of the revolt.
50. The coin in Babelon has similar types and legend, but is
of a larger denomination and lacks the serrated edge. The title
Soter occurs on the coin cited above, on which the types of
Demetrius have been struck over those of Timarchus (Gardner,
50, No. 20). Groups Nos. 50 and 49 should be, therefore, approximately contemporary.
Si. The attribution of these coins to the first Demetrius is
based on the portrait of the obverse. It is very similar to that
on a silver coin of Demetrius which has as reverse type a cornucopiae of slightly different form (Babelon, 96, No. 753). The
motif of the reverse may be connected with the characteristic
Tyche motifs of this reign.
52. The group is assigned to Demetrius I because the reverse
type is that of the preceding group and because both the style and
the fabric of the two issues are similar. The two groups, Nos.

NOTES ON THE COINS
41
51 and 52, exemplify a procedure characteristic of the Seleucia
mint during the early Seleucid period, the retention in a new
issue of the reverse type of a preceding issue, together with a
change in the position of the obverse head from the profile to
the frontal.13 The obverse type of the group is closely similar
to that of No. 47. In neither instance does the condition of the
coins permit of a determination whether Helios is represented
with the features of Demetrius. In any case the recurrence of
the motif was intended to emphasize the relationship of the king
to Apollo.
53. The portrait of the obverse is definitely that of Demetrius I. The association of the radiate headdress with the portrait has not hitherto been noted on coins of this reign. Its
occurrence strengthens the suggestion that the facing head of
Helios on two other issues of Demetrius, Nos. 47 and 52, is in
fact a portrait of Demetrius as Apollo.
54. The assignment of the group to Demetrius I is, of course,
required by the character of the portrait on the obverse. It constitutes the only issue of small bronze at Seleucia during this reign.
55. The attribution of this group to the first Demetrius is
based on the motifs of the two types. The cults of Apollo and of
the City-Goddess are closely related to the coinage of this reign
and they influence only slightly that of Demetrius II. The reverse type presents a variation of the Tyche motif which is new
to the Seleucid coinage. The group constitutes the largest issue
of the reign of Demetrius I.
ALEXANDER BALA
56. Babelon has published a coin of Alexander with a similar
obverse and on the reverse a likeness of Nike in a different pose
(119, No. 928 bis). Although the details have been obscured,
the reverse of the coin under consideration appears to be similar
to that of the succeeding group, No. 57, which bears on the obverse a portrait of Alexander alone. Likewise type groups Nos.
58 and 59 have a common reverse; on the obverse in the one case
is the portrait of the king and queen, in the other, that of the
king alone. I suggest that those issues of Alexander which bear
the portrait of Cleopatra Thea alongside that of the king should
be assigned to the opening years of the reign, while this interloper
13 See pp. 48-49.

42
in the Seleucid line was yet dependent upon the prestige and the
power of Egypt. The hostility displayed by Ptolemy Philometor
toward Alexander before the close of his short reign cannot have
arisen overnight. It may well have been instigated by an early
readiness on the part of his son-in-law to forget the basis of his
rise to the throne.
57. Although the coins are in an obscure condition they appear to be entirely similar to the examples cited. As has been
stated the reverse type seems in turn to be similar to that of the
preceding group, No. 56.
58. The obverse type of this group is that of No. 56, and as in
the case of that issue the group is assigned to the early years of the
reign. The reverse type is that of the succeeding group, No. 59.
59. The coin from Seleucia appears to be entirely similar to
those cited. The relationship of type groups Nos. 58 and 59
through their common reverse type is discussed under No. 56
above.
6o. The types of this bronze issue are found on a gold coin
of Alexander published by Babelon (ioi-ioz, No. 793; XVII, 9).
DEMETRIUS II (FIRST REIGN)
61. The obverse and reverse types of this group relate it
closely to the group just below, No. 62, which must be assigned
to the second Demetrius on the basis of the legend. The character of the types, especially that of the obverse, reminiscent as it
is of Alexander the Great and his conquest of India, suggests that
the two issues were minted either just prior to or during the early,
successful phases of the campaign of Demetrius to Babylonia
and beyond. In the absence of direct evidence to the contrary,
the issue under consideration, with its simple legend, must be
assumed to predate group No. 62, which bears in addition the
titles Nikator and Philadelphos.
62. The attribution to Demetrius II, first made by Gardner,
is required by the form of the legend which is characteristic of
the coinage of this reign and does not occur on that of Demetrius I.
63. On the reverse of this group the Nike presumably holds a
wreath through the royal name. On the coin cited the wreath is
held over the name, and the legend lacks the title Philadelphos.

NOTES ON THE COINS
43
The question may be raised as to the conditions under which
Demetrius assumed the title Nikator. If it was inspired by a
specific victory does it refer to the defeat of Tryphon or to the
initial successes of Demetrius over the Parthians? It is difficult
to assume that once this, and the title of Philadelphos, had been
adopted they were omitted from subsequent coin issues. The
obverse type common to groups Nos. 61 and 62, with its suggestion of the exploits of Alexander the Great, supports an assumption that these coins were issued in connection with the
campaign in the east. Since one of these issues includes in its
legend the title Nikator whereas the other lacks it, if the line of
reasoning pursued is justified, one must assume that the title was
adopted as a result of events in the east rather than in Syria.
On the basis of this argument group No. 63, which bears in addition to the title the reverse motif of Nike, cannot have been
issued prior to groups Nos. 61 and 62, and probably immediately followed the second of these.
DEMETRIUS II (SECOND REIGN?)
64. The coins in Babelon differ slightly from our specimen
in the details of the reverse type, and one of them bears the date
126/25 B.C. (by the Macedonian calendar). The coin from
Seleucia does not appear to have been intended to show a date.
In the absence of further examples I have assumed that it was
carried by chance into Parthian territory from Syria. It is not
impossible, however, that the coin represents a local issue of the
first reign of Demetrius II, the types of which were later copied
by one of the western mints.
DEMETRIUS II (SECOND REIGN)
65. The character of the reverse of this single specimen requires its assignment to the second reign of Demetrius. Its size
differs greatly from that of Seleucid issues struck at Seleucia; in
this respect it is related to types issued in Syria and to an autonomous issue of Seleucia struck during the reign of Mithradates I
(p. 94, No. 126). Nos. 64 and 65 comprise the sole examples
of Seleucid coins apparently struck after the capture of Seleucia
by the Parthians which have as yet been recovered from the
excavations.

CHAPTER III
CONCLUSION
THE COinS of the Seleucid period which have been described
in the preceding chapters total three hundred and forty-seven
and represent a number of new types, combinations of types, and
varieties. They have been discussed individually in Chapter II;
certain general characteristics, however, warrant further observations. The table which follows is intended to show the character
of the types and the proportions in which the coins of each type
group and each reign occur. The numbers in parentheses at the
left indicate the total of the type groups of each reign, the silver
and the bronze being figured separately. The figures in column
at the right give the total number of coins of each group, those in
parentheses the total for each reign, the two metals again being
classified independently.
ALEXANDER THE GREAT (prior to 321 B.c.)
}R (1) Zeus seated 1.
Lion advancing 1.
2 (2)
SELEUCUS I AS SATRAP (prior to 311 B.C.)
YE (i) Head of Alexander r.
Horse's head and anchor.
I (I)
SELEUCUS I AS KING (311-280 B.c.)
A
7n
A (3)
YE
IE
YE
YE
A
YE
YE
Head of Hercules r.
Head of Hercules r.
Head of Zeus r.
Heads of the Dioscuri i41.
Head of Apollo 1.
Head of Apollo r.
Head of a horse r.
Bust of Seleucus front
Head of Apollo r.
Head of Apollo 4 1.
Obscure head 1 1.
Head of Apollo 4 1.
Zeus seated 1.
Zeus seated 1.
Athena in chariot r.
Nike crowning trophy 1.
Head of a bull i r.
Head of a bull front.
Anchor
Horseman in combat r.
Humped bull r.
Nike and wreath 1.
Athena(?) i r.
Tripod
44
I
I
I
(3)
2
I
I
16
6
13
5
1
2 (/

CONCLUSION
ANTIOCHUS I (280-261 B.C.)
45
IE
IE
AE
IE
IE
.E
.E
AE
YE
E (13)
Head of Antiochus r.
Head of Apollo r.
Head of Apollo 4 1.
Head of Apollo r.
Head of Apollo r.
Bust of Apollo 4 r.
Head of Apollo 4 r.
Head of Athena 4 1.
Head of Athena 4 r.
Head of Athena r.
Head of Apollo 4 1.
Head of Apollo 4 r.
Head of Zeus ? r.
Apollo on omphalos 1.
Athena Alkis r.
Athena Alkis r.
Athena Alkis r.
Athena Promachos 1.
Nike and trophy r.
Tripod
Apollo Citharoedos r.
Apollo Citharoedos r.
Apollo 1.
Apollo 1.
Quiver
Apollo (?) r.
I
17
I
3
2
13
14
4
9
5
7
2
4 (82)
8 (8)
I (I)
ANTIOCHUS II (261-246 B.C.)
9E (i) Head of Apollo r.
SELEUCUS II (246-226 B.C.)
E
.Z (2)
Head of Seleucus r.
Head of Seleucus r.
Head of Seleucus r.
Apollo 1., tripod
Nike and wreath 1.
Apollo 1.
I
18
('9)
SELEUCUS III (226-223 B.C.)
No coins of this reign have been found.
ANTIOCHUS III (223-187 B.c.)
AE
IE
AE
7C
7C
7C
IE(II)
Head of Apollo r.
Bust of Artemis r.
Head of Apollo r.
Head of Apollo r.
Head of Apollo r.
Bust of Antiochus (?) 4 r.
Head of Antiochus (?) 4 r.
Head of Antiochus (?) r.
Nike and wreath 1.
Apollo Citharoedos i r.
Nike, wreath and palm 1.
Apollo Citharoedos nude r.
Apollo 1.
Artemis 1.
Elephant advancing r.
Elephant r.
Unidentified figure r.
Head of an elephant 1.
Mare and foal 1.
4
2
2
I0
2
I
9
5
2
I
I (39)
I (I)
SELEUCUS IV (187-175 B.c.)
AE (1) Head of Apollo r.
Apollo 1., tripod

46
ANTIOCHUS IV (175-164 B.C.)
YE(
Head of Apollo i r.
Tyche Nikephoros seated 1.
Zeus 1.
Tyche 1.
43
I
12 (56)
ANTIOCHUS V (164-162 B.C.)
DEMETRIUS I (162-15o B.C.)
IE(
YE
.E
YE
Head of Helios 4 1.
Head of Artemis r.
Busts of Demetrius and
queen r.
Head of Demetrius r.
Head of Helios ? 1.
Bust of Apollo z 1.
Artemis r.
Quiver and bow
Nike and wreath 1.
Cornucopiae
Cornucopiae
Tyche seated 1.
Tyche 1.
Tyche 1., column
5
I
14
3
6
5
7
3
17 (61)
TIMARCHUS (161-160 B.C.)
ALEXANDER BALA (152-144 B.C.)
/E Heads of Cleopatra and Nike and wreath 1.
Alexander r.
A Head of Alexander r. Nike and branch 1.
E Heads of Cleopatra and Apollo 1.
Alexander r.
2E Head of Alexander as Her- Apollo 1.
cules r.
1E (5) Head of Alexander r. Zeus seated 1.
DEMETRIUS II (first reign 146-140/39 B.C.')
IE Head of Demetrius as Alex- Athena seated 1.
ander the Great r.
I
6
2
I
2 (12)
8
1 It is entirely possible that Demetrius effectively controlled Seleucia only from
141/40 to 140/39 B.C.

CONCLUSION
47
Head of Demetrius as Alex- Athena 1. 3
ander the Great r.
1E (3) Head of Demetrius r. Nike 1. 4 (15)
DEMETRIUS II (second reign ? 130-125 B.c.)
IE (1) Female head r. Cornucopiae 1 (i)
DEMETRIUS II (second reign)
AE (i) Obscured Zeus Nikephoros seated 1. 1 (1)
The greater number of these coins must be presumed to have
been struck at the mint in Seleucia. Evidence is lacking concerning the few examples of the silver coinage. In respect to the
bronze, however, it must be borne in mind that coins of this metal
would have been transported from one mint area to another only
by chance and in very small quantities. Only by an odd chance
do examples of such comparatively rare migrant coins find their
way into the hands of the excavator of an ancient site. I assume
without hesitation, therefore, that type groups represented by
more than one specimen were struck at Seleucia. I would tentatively assume that single bronze coins are examples of local
issues unless specific characteristics are hostile to the assumption.
Of the seventeen coins that fall within this classification only
four appear to possess characteristics which require their assignment to mints other than Seleucia. Two coins of Demetrius II,
Nos. 64 and 65, one of which is certainly, the other probably, of
the second reign, presumably were brought to Seleucia after the
occupation of the city by the Parthians. On the basis of their
fabric and design groups Nos. 41 and 42 of the reign of Antiochus
III must be attributed to mints of Iran, No. 42 perhaps to that
at Ecbatana, No. 41 to some center farther to the east. [Mr.
E. T. Newell informs me that types similar to those of the single
coins Nos. 43, 45, 48, and 59 and of the group No. 57 occur on
coins which almost certainly should be assigned to the Antioch
mint. See Preface, p. viii.]
Special attention should be paid to the frequent recurrence
on the coins from Seleucia of frontality as a technique in the
engraving of the obverse types. Of the fifty-seven types or varieties of bronze struck during the period from the opening of
the reign of Seleucus I as king through the first reign of Demetrius II - the presumable limits within which the Seleucid mint

48
at Seleucia functioned twenty, or just over thirty-five per
cent, are characterized by this technique. For the reign of
Seleucus I the proportion of its occurrence amounts to sixty-six
and two-thirds per cent; for that of Antiochus I, just over sixtyone per cent; for the reigns of Antiochus IV and Demetrius I,
thirty-three and one-third per cent; and for that of Antiochus
III, a little more than eighteen per cent. So far as I have knowledge the technique is employed on only three Seleucid bronze
types which have not, as yet, been found at Seleucia.2 In view
of the frequency of its occurrence at Seleucia it is very possible
that this style, as applied to coin engraving in the Seleucid
Empire, was limited to the Babylonian mint. Its very occasional use in the west outside the empire was certainly imitative.
The technique was employed at intervals in the Parthian and
Sassanian coinage; some of these later coins were struck at
Seleucia, but for the determination of the mints, whether Parthian or Sassanian, responsible for the others, one must await
further studies. Whatever the primary source from which the
technique in engraving was derived, it must be sought east of
the Euphrates, and there is nothing to suggest that Seleucia
(with Ctesiphon)' was not the center in which it developed and
survived. The appearance of this style in other forms of art has
been noted at Seleucia and at Dura-Europos.4
It is interesting to remark that of the twenty occurrences of
frontality on the coins from Seleucia, fourteen represent Apollo
or Helios, one the Dioscuri, one Athena, one either Zeus or the
Nikator as Zeus, one Seleucus I wearing the horns of divinity,
and two Antiochus III as a mortal. The examples on Seleucid
coins not found at Seleucia portray Apollo and Athena.
It will be observed that a number of successive issues bear
the same reverse type, but on the obverse show either a common
type executed in different positions or two distinct types. The
first group is constituted by Nos. 16 and 17 and Nos. 22 and 23
2 One of Seleucus I (Babelon, II, 7), one of Antiochus I (ibid., V, 14), and one of
Demetrius I (Rogers, 31, No. 8).
3 It is to be presumed that after the occupation by the Sassanians the mint was
located in Ctesiphon.
4 This statement applies in particular to terra-cotta figures. A volume on the
figurines from Seleucia will be published by Dr. Wilhelmina van Ingen (see p. 38, note
10). Dr. van Ingen has called to my attention various examples of frontality as it
has been observed in connection with the material from Dura.

CONCLUSION
49
of the reign of Antiochus I; the second group by Nos. 24 and 25
of the same reign; Nos. 51 and 52 of the reign of Demetrius I;
and Nos. 56 and 57 and Nos. 58 and 59 of the reign of Alexander
Bala. Further examples of the retention of a single reverse for
two different obverse types have been noted by Dr. Edgar
Rogers,5 the English numismatist. On these coins the royal portrait of the obverse is discarded in favor of the representation of a
deity, or vice versa. On the coins from Seleucia this is true of
but one pair, Nos. 51 and 52, which shows on the one the head of
Demetrius I, on the other that of Helios. In the two pairs of the
reign of Alexander Bala the shift is explained by the political
situation which marked the period.' In no instance can the
changes have been intended to indicate distinctions in denominations, nor is there evidence to suggest that the individuals of a
pair were struck at different mints. It is interesting to note
that aside from the two pairs of the reign of Alexander Bala, the
changes in the obverse type are accompanied by a shift in the
position of the head from a profile to a frontal pose.
Throughout the series of Seleucid coins no uniformity is to
be remarked in the form of the edges of the flans. Frequently considerable variation exists within a single type group. This carelessness as to finish will be found also in the series of autonomous
coins of Seleucia. It is particularly interesting that the serrated
edge occurs on but three type groups, No. 43 of Seleucus IV
and Nos. 48 and 50 of Demetrius I. Nothing in the nature of a
mint mark can be discerned on the coins from Seleucia, but owing
to the general lack of examples of the silver coinage little significance may be attached to the fact.7 Monograms (or initials
having a similar value) were apparently intended to be shown on
all issues until the reign of Antiochus IV. Of the three type
groups of this reign represented in our series, one, No. 44, lacks
any indication of a monogram or its equivalent. Beginning with
the next reign, that of Demetrius I, no monogram or inital appears on any of the coins, notwithstanding that on contemporary
coins such as those published by Babelon, presumably of Syrian
mints, they are of frequent occurrence.
5 "New Seleucid Coin Types," The Numismatic Chronicle, Fifth series, i (1921),
p. 30. 6 See p. 41, under note 56.
7Mr. E. T. Newell has noted that the mint of Antioch in the Seleucid period employed no mint marks, whereas the coins of secondary mints, such as Tyre, generally
showed them. (The Seleucid Mint of Antioch, pp. 3-4-)

50
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
In view of the fact that the greater part of the excavations
at Seleucia has been conducted in Parthian rather than Seleucid
levels of occupation,8 no comparison can be made between the
totals of the coins of the two periods. The three hundred and
forty-seven examples of the earlier coinage which have been
cataloged do constitute, however, a body of material sufficiently
comprehensive to permit of observations on the proportions
which obtain between the issues of the successive Seleucid reigns.
Of the six silver coins five belong either to the period of
Alexander the Great or to the early portion of the reign of
Seleucus I. In this connection there should be noted clay
models of Seleucid tetradrachms which have been found at Seleucia. There is no indication that these objects were used as
currency; indeed, the purpose they served is obscure. In view
of these facts only limited conclusions can be drawn from the evidence which they may afford. A certain value, however, attaches
to the fact that the originals for these models were tetradrachms
which undoubtedly were actually in circulation in Seleucia. Of
the nineteen examples sixteen are models of tetradrachms of Seleucus I, Antiochus I, and Seleucus, the elder son of Antiochus I,
and comprise eleven issues. The remaining three represent the
reigns of Antiochus III, Antiochus IV, and Timarchus. These
proportions, to the extent of their value, thus support the coins in
suggesting that the extensive minting of silver by Alexander the
Great was continued by his immediate successors in the east, and
that, thereafter, the issue of this metal was relatively light.
No coins have been recovered for the reigns of Seleucus III or
Antiochus V, or of the rebels Molon and Timarchus. It is very
possible that the mint was inactive during the few years covered
by the first two of these reigns. Molon presumably employed
only the mint at Ecbatana. - That no coins of Timarchus have
been found is more difficult to comprehend and may possess a
certain significance. In addition to the model of a tetradrachm
referred to above, impressions of official seals of Timarchus have
been recovered at Seleucia.1O They appear to have belonged to
the period just prior to the outbreak of open rebellion. These
facts are discussed below on pages 55-56.
8 See Preface, p. vii.
9MCDowell, Stamped and Inscribed Objects from Seleucia on the Tigris, pp. 241-250.
10 Ibid., p. 46, Nos. IA~o(1) and IA~o(z).

CONCLUSION
51
The ten Seleucid reigns represented in the catalog display a
marked difference in the rate of issue of bronze currency at
Seleucia. This is illustrated by the table below. Owing to the
probability that they were never in circulation at Seleucia, the
last two coins assigned to Demetrius II in the catalog have not
been included in the table.
King Length of reign Coins Average rate of issue
per year
SeleucusI................ .. .. . 31 47 1.51
AntiochusI ................ 19 82 4.26
Antiochus II............... . 15 8 0.53
Seleucus II................. .. . 20 19 0.95
Antiochus III............... 36 39 1.08
Seleucus IV................. 12 1 o.08
Antiochus IV..........'...... . 11 56 5.09
Demetrius I................ 12 61 5.08
Alexander Bala............. . 6 12 2.00
Demetrius II ................ 4 15 3.75
Without overstressing the value of these proportions certain
general conclusions may reasonably be drawn from them. The
fifty-year period covered by the first two reigns shows an average
rate of issue of 2.58 coins per year. The apparent great increase
in the rate during the second reign should be somewhat reduced
if, as is possible, certain issues of Antiochus were struck during
the lifetime of his father. From the accession of Antiochus II to
the death of Seleucus IV there was an elapsed period of eightysix years, just over one half of the total period of Seleucid rule in
Babylonia. For this interval we get an average rate of issue of
0.78 coins per year. There followed twenty-five years covered
by the reigns of Antiochus IV, Antiochus V, and Demetrius I,
during which minting reached and maintained a peak with an
average rate of 4.68 coins per year. We do not know, of course,
the exact year in which the administration of Alexander Bala
succeeded that of Demetrius I in Seleucia. Either ten or eleven
years may be allowed, therefore, as the period during which
Alexander and Demetrius II controlled the mint. Depending
upon the figure employed, the rate for this period is either 2.7 or
2.45 coins per year.
It is perhaps needless to remark that in an ancient society,
unused to banking and to commercial paper as we understand

52
the terms, the effective volume of currency very definitely reflected the prosperity of the community. Furthermore, the
bronze currency possessed greater significance as a medium of
exchange; it represented greater purchasing power than does our
copper coinage today and it maintained a much higher ratio to
the total volume of currency. With these conditions in mind it is
reasonable to state that in an ancient society the rate of issue of
the bronze coinage was normally responsive to two demands:
the necessity for the replacement of the currency in circulation,
owing either to a change of government or to wear and loss, and
the need for an increase in the volume of the coinage to meet an
increase in the population or in commercial activity and, possibly, capital wealth. It should be noted, also, that in order to
affect appreciably the rate of issue of bronze the local medium
of exchange as opposed to tetradrachms - extensively employed in interregional trade - any increase in commercial
activity or in prosperity must have been one which applied
primarily to the mass of the population rather than to a small
group in the community, such as the merchants in the transit
trade.
To some extent the changes in the rate of issue at Seleucia,
as suggested by the proportions in which our coins occur, were
due to the institution of the new Seleucid currency by Seleucus I,
the adequacy of which may possibly have obviated the necessity
for the striking of new issues during subsequent reigns until the
original coinage was dissipated in use. This explanation, however, is only partially satisfactory. An indicated increase in the
rate of issue amounting to six times that which had prevailed
over almost ninety years notwithstanding the limited character of our basic figures - must have been due in part to other
factors. The evidence suggests strongly that during the reigns of
Antiochus IV and Demetrius I, from about 175 to 150 B.C.,
Seleucia enjoyed a significant increase either in population or in
the general level of prosperity, or in both. It is natural and
probably reasonable to connect this with the well-known efforts
of Antiochus IV to preserve the unity of the empire through his
encouragement and subsidy of the Hellenized urban elements.
That the sharp rise in the rate of issue was maintained for a
quarter of a century and that the subsequent decrease during
the remainder of the Seleucid period appears to have been

CONCLUSION
53
moderate, in spite of the political disturbances which marked
those years, suggest again the general character as well as the
solidity of the changes which had taken place. It is interesting,
and very likely significant in the light of the ease with which the
Parthians were allowed to occupy Babylonia, that Seleucia appears to have entered upon an era of economic growth and prosperity while at the same time in Syria the dynasty was frittering
away the strength and destroying the tradition of loyalty which
might have enabled them to hold together their empire in the
east.
Although full benefit of the numismatic material from Seleucia cannot be enjoyed until further excavation will have revealed more of the Seleucid levels of occupation, the coins of the
Seleucid period serve to throw some light upon other contemporary political events. Nothing definite can be added to the
little which is already known regarding the date for the foundation of Seleucia. The presence of coins of Alexander the Great
and of Seleucus as satrap, together with the wide variety in the
types of Seleucus as king, is inconclusive as evidence, but, of
course, favors the conclusion that the city was founded considerably earlier than 300 B.C., the date frequently suggested.
On grounds which cannot be discussed within the limits of this
work I have assumed that Seleucia was in existence as capital
and mint city very shortly after the return of Seleucus to
Babylonia in 311 B.C.11 The rise in the rate of issue of bronze
under Antiochus I supports the conclusion that the initial large
increase in population brought to the new capital took place
during this reign.12
It is very possible that a definite relationship existed between the number of distinct types and varieties struck for each
king in proportion to the years of the reign and the degree of
personal interest displayed by the king toward the community in
which the coins were intended to circulate. While practical
motives governed the volume of the currency, the king's pleasure
must frequently have dictated not only the nature of the designs
but the frequency with which the designs were altered. This
11 Reference can be made to a former study by the author which covers in part
the evidence favoring an earlier date for the foundation of Seleucia: "The Excavations at Seleucia on the Tigris," Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and
Letters, 18 (1932), 107-109. 12 Cf. McDowell, as cited in note 11.

54
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
tendency, apparently, is illustrated by the coins from Seleucia.
Those of the Seleucidae who are known to have spent some time
in the east and who were personally interested in that portion
of the empire Seleucus I, Antiochus I, Antiochus III, Demetrius I, and Demetrius II are represented by coinages rich in
the variety of design displayed by obverse and reverse types.
During the Parthian period a somewhat similar relationship may
be noted. In both the Seleucid and the Parthian periods this
tendency can be remarked within given reigns, the issues of
which, through their types, can be related to particular episodes
in which the king played a personal part.
The numerous issues struck at Seleucia for Antiochus III
illustrate the tendency. Type group No. 32 must have been
struck immediately after his accession, Nos. 33 and 34 prior to
the revolt of Molon, and Nos. 35-37 shortly thereafter. Nos.
38-40 belong to the period of the great campaign to the east, as
does No. 41, a specimen of some Iranian mint.13 This campaign
brought to a close the first half of the reign of Antiochus. His
accession found the young king beyond the Euphrates, probably
with his headquarters at Seleucia; here he placed himself during
his reorganization of the administration after the revolt of Molon, and from this stronghold as a base was conducted the
campaign in Iran. During the second half of his reign Antiochus
was exclusively involved in the west until shortly before his
death, and to this period at best one issue of the Seleucia mint
might be assigned, No. 42. As the relation of this group to the
local mint is in fact doubtful, it is very possible that no bronze
was struck for Antiochus at Seleucia during the final eighteen
years of his reign.
The coins of Demetrius I struck at Seleucia have some bearing
upon the circumstances attendant upon the revolt of Timarchus.
At least one and probably two issues had been struck before the
revolt became overt in this area.4 The adherents of Demetrius
appear to have succeeded in securing Seleucia from the party of
Antiochus V very shortly after the coup d'etat of Demetrius had
been inaugurated in Syria, if not simultaneously with that event.
This circumstance and the rapid rise thereafter of the independent movement of Timarchus suggest that certain groups in
13 See pp. 34-3 8.
14 See pp. 39-40, under Nos. 47 and 48.

CONCLUSION
55
Seleucia and Babylonia which were dominant at the moment
were moved by no strong loyalty toward the memory of Antiochus IV. One may legitimately inquire whether this condition
was not brought about in part by the policies to which this ruler
had been devoted. The extremely powerful Jewish communities
in Babylonia must have been incensed by his conduct in respect
to Jerusalem, and his efforts to re-create Babylon as an active
Hellenized center must undoubtedly have offended not only conservative Babylonians but also the elements in Seleucia which
had profited largely from the supremacy of the latter city and
which for the most part controlled its government.
The recovery of issues of Demetrius I struck immediately
prior to and after the revolt and the absence of coins of Timarchus, together with the fact that impressions of official seals have
been found at Seleucia which belong to the inception rather
than the culmination of the revolt," suggest that the overt rebellion in the city covered a very short period, during which his
currency failed to pass into general circulation. The evidence
requires the conclusion that Seleucia and, probably, Babylonia
were not focal points of the movement which Timarchus represented. It has been suggested elsewhere by the writer that this
movement had for its purpose the restriction of Parthian expansion through the replacement of the disintegrating Seleucid
Empire by a more compact and vigorous state on the western
borders of Iran which would co6perate more closely toward this
end with the Bactrian state in the east.16 The source from which
Timarchus drew his principal strength appears to have been
Media, and it is reasonable to assume that his coinage was issued
from Ecbatana rather than from Seleucia or Babylon. The
maintenance of order in the great cities and along the trade routes
was essential to the survival of the Greek commercial aristocracy
of Seleucia and Iran. The absorption of the Seleucid kings in
western politics and the consequent weakening of their control
over the East placed a severe strain on the traditional loyalty
of the Greeks in those regions. It is probable that the promise
of their support rather than a nationalistic awakening among the
Iranians and Babylonians constituted the preponderant force
15 See p. 50.
16 McDowell, Stamped and Inscribed Objects from Seleucia on the Tigris,
pp. 218-220.

56
behind Timarchus. The rapid collapse of the separatist movement denoted only that the natives remained indifferent and that
the Greeks of Seleucia saw in the audacity and vigor of the young
Demetrius the basis of an effective revival of the empire. Disappointment with the subsequent failure of Demetrius and the
degeneration of the intradynastic strife into a series of brawls,
together with the continued prosperity of Seleucia, as suggested
in an earlier paragraph, may be presumed to have swung the
Greek aristocratic party toward that alliance with the Parthian
military power which characterized the later history of the city."7
The coins of Demetrius II struck at Seleucia contribute nothing to a more exact determination of the date at which Seleucid
rule in that city finally ceased to be effective. They possess, however, a definite historical interest. The representation of the
young king wearing an elephant-scalp headdress was certainly
intended to call to mind the conquest of the east by Alexander
the Great. An impression of the seal of a royal steward at
Seleucia reproduces the same motif.18 The implication of this
style is that in his campaign beyond the Euphrates Demetrius
sought more than recruits and treasure with which to retain the
surviving Seleucid territories in the east and to carry on the war
in Syria; he appears to have had visions of restoring the Seleucid
Empire to the limits it had attained in the early reigns. The initial victories of the young king over the armies of Mithradates I,
fresh from their conquest of Bactria, Media, and the powerful
tribal groups of Iran, and the fact that the Parthian was obliged
to resort to a trick in order to defeat him,19 demonstrate real
military ability on the part of Demetrius. The short reign of his
brother Antiochus revealed an even superior capacity for organization.20 The successful course of subsequent Parthian history proves the absence of any effective nationalistic spirit in the
East prior to the rise of the Sassanian renaissance. The majority
groups within all classes of the population in Babylonia and Iran
rejected the Seleucid line in favor of the equally alien Arsacids
only because of the continued vigor and military power of the
latter. It is fascinating, therefore, to ponder over the changes in
17 See below, pp. 216-221.
18 McDowell, op. cit., p. 68, No. IIAis(i).
19 Justin, XXXVI.I.4; XXXViI.5; XXXViii.9.2.
20 E. R. Bevan, The House of Seleucus, II, 242.

CONCLUSION
57
the history of the Near East which might well have resulted if
Demetrius and his brother had succeeded in reestablishing the
Seleucid Empire east of the Euphrates.
We possess no direct evidence as to the course of events in
Seleucia after 146 B.C., when Demetrius II first launched his attack on Alexander Bala, and prior to the first occupation of
Babylonia by Mithradates I in 14I B.C.21 Seleucia probably fell
with the rest of Babylonia, but the evidence is not positive.
Demetrius recovered Babylonia late in 141 or early in 140 B.C.
and was finally defeated and taken prisoner late in 140 or early in
139 B.C.22 It is this period of the campaign, comprising at the
most a year and a half, to which must be assigned the three issues
of the first reign of Demetrius which have been recovered at
Seleucia.23 Although the absence of coinage struck in the name
of Demetrius does not prove that his administration was not
recognized at Seleucia during the preceding five years, it does
suggest strongly that these years constituted an interregnum,
during which Seleucia lay outside the area effectively controlled
by any aspirant to paramount power. The interval was of prime
importance to the people of Seleucia. Both to the east and to the
west fundamental political changes were taking place which
would obviously affect the future course of the city. Sister cities
in Syria were being torn by the factional strife which had been
encouraged by the dynastic struggle. The hostility of Rome
toward the Seleucid kingdom was becoming more marked, but
there was as yet no clear indication that Rome herself intended
to guarantee order and the security of commerce in western Asia.
The Greek cities on the Iranian plateau were becoming accustomed to Parthian rule. The new power was clearly not so
barbarous as might have been expected; rather, the Arsacids
had rapidly proved themselves tolerant in their relations with
the newly subjected peoples. Of particular importance to Seleucia, the great trade route to Central Asia, India, and China for
the larger part of its course lay securely under Parthian control.
The opportunity to examine the situation dispassionately, unbiased by the actual presence of one or the other of the rival
forces, served the city well. The initial onset of the Parthians
21 W. Tarn, "Parthia," The Cambridge Ancient History, IX, 580.
22 Ibid.
23 See p. 42 under No. 63.

58 COINS FROM SELE UCIA'
and the counterstroke of Demetrius were accepted with equal
passivity, but by 140/39 B.C. Seleucia was striking silver and
bronze for Mithradates I in consummation of an alliance the
value of which to each party subsequent Parthian history amply
proves.24
24 The evidence afforded by the early coinage of the Parthian period as to the
relationship between Seleucia and the Parthian dynasty is discussed on pages 201-216.

PART II
COINS OF THE PARTHIAN PERIOD

CHAPTER IV
CATALOG OF COINS
THE Coins of the Parthian period fall into two divisions, the
royal coinage and the autonomous coinage of Seleucia. The
general arrangement of the catalog is that employed for the coins
of the Seleucid period (see p. 3). In the legends no attempt has
been made to reproduce those peculiarities in the formation of the
Greek letters which characterize certain periods. All changes in
form, however, have been described in the "Notes on the Coins,"
to which references are made in the catalog. The peculiarities
have been reproduced on page 244. The dates have been calculated by the Babylonian calendar, and it has been assumed that
by the year 46/47 A.D. an extra month had been intercalated in
the Greek cycle. The general problem of the calendar has been
treated on pages 147-153. As in the case of the Seleucid coins,
all discussion of the individual type groups and coins has been
reserved for the next chapter. A discussion of the historical evidence afforded by the coins of the Parthian period will be found
in subsequent chapters. On pages 183-Zoo will be found a table
of all coins of the Parthian period which are considered to have
been struck at the mint of Seleucia.
The serial numbers are continuous from Part I.
1. THE ROYAL COINAGE
PERIOD OF MITHRADATES I
(171-138/37 B.C.)
66 /. (1)
Obv.: Bust of the king r., diademed; Rev.: The beardless Hercules standlong beard. The hair is represented ing ? 1. The club is held in the 1.
in a very naturalistic manner. arm. The r. hand, in front, grasps
an obscure object.
Legend: r., 1st, obscure 1., 1st [A]PLAK[OT]
2nd [M]EIAA[OT] 2nd [<MAEAAH]NOZ
61

62
the coin.
Date: None can be distinguished.
Wroth, 12-15, Nos. 48-50, 55-56, 58-60; III, 7. See discussion, p. ii2.
gr. 13.4
mm. : 27.0
ARTABANUS I
(128/27-124/23 B.C.)
67 R (I)
Obv.: Bust of the.king r., diademed;
medium, pointed beard; increased
formalism in the treatment of the
hair on the head. Border of continuous fillet.
without a back. The head is bare,
the hair done in a knot. In the 1.
arm is a cornucopiae; the r. hand,
advanced, holds a Nike who extends a wreath toward Tyche.
Legend: r. [B]AZIAE21, 1. APIAKOT.
Monograms: In the ex., No. 34, No. 33.
Date: None appears to occur.
Wroth, 20, note I. See Pl. IV and discussion, p. 112.
gr. : 11.05
mm. :3-1.00
MITHRADATES II
(123/22-91/90 B.c.)
68 A (2)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed;
long beard; formal treatment of
the hair. Border of dots.
Rev.: Arsaces seated r. on an omphalos. The r. hand, advanced, grasps
a bow; from behind the 1. side protrudes a sword. In the field r. is an
upright palm.
Legend: 1., up BA2ZIAEQ22
r. APIAKOT
above [M]EFAAOT
ex. EIIIchANOTZ
Monogram: In the ex., 2nd No. 35.
Date: None occurs.
Wroth, 24, Nos. 1-3; VI, 1-2. See discussion, p. 112.
gr. : 14.94 12.99
mm. : 28.70 27.30

CATALOG OF COINS
63
ORODES II
(57-38/37 B.C.)
69 R (1)
hair in three waves; close beard.
Border of dots.
Legend: Above, 1st BAXIAEQ2
2nd BAZIAEON
2., 1st [E]IIIANOTI[
2nd [@DI]AEAAHNO[Z;]
Rev.: The king seated r. on a throne
with a high back, receiving the
hand of Tyche kneeling 1. Tyche
wears a turreted headdress and
holds a scepter in the 1. arm.
r., ist APAKOT
2nd ETEPPETOT
ex., 1st (inverted) AIKAIOT
Monogram: In the field center, No. 36.
Date: Of the year, does not appear to occur; of the month, in the ex., 2nd
[-]A.
Wroth, 72, No. 31; XIV, II. See discussion, p. 112.
gr. : 12.70
mm. : 29.50
70 R (1)
hair in three waves; close beard.
Border of dots.
Legend: Above, 1st BA:IAE 1
2nd BAXIAEON
l., 1st EIIIdANOTO
2nd [@D]IAEAAHNOZ;
Rev.: The king seated 1. on a throne
with a high back. The head is uncovered and bears the diadem. The
r. hand, advanced, holds a Nike
who extends a wreath toward the
king. The 1. hand rests on a long
scepter. The pose is that of Zeus.
Nikephoros.
r., 1st APIAKOT
2nd ETEPPETOT
Wroth, 73, No. 34; XV, I. See discussion, p. 113.
gr. : 12.06
mm. : 29.40

64
PHRAATES IV
(38/37-2/I B.C.)
71 A (I)
Obv.: Bust of the king I., diademed; Rev.: The king seated r. on a throne
hair in four formal rows; short with a high back, receiving a palm
beard; no star on the tunic. from Tyche standing 1. Tyche
Border of dots. wears a kalathos and carries a
cornucopiae in the 1. arm. The
presence or absence of a pellet
cannot be determined.
Legend: Largely obscured; 1., 1st [EIII]@ANOT[2], ex., 1st (inverted)
AIKAIOT.
Date: In the field center TIM, 26/25 B.c.; in the ex., 2nd THEP[BEPETAIOT],
the 6th month.
Wroth, 103, No. 20; XIX, 5. See discussion, p. 113.
gr. : 8.72
mm. : 27.6
72 RR (I)
hair in four formal rows; short
beard; no evidence of a star on the
tunic. Border of dots.
Legend: Above, 1st [B]AZIAE&1
2nd BAZIAEQN
2., 1st [E]HIAANOT
2nd [(DIAE]AAHN [O1]
without a back, receiving a diadem
from Tyche standing 1. Tyche
wears a kalathos and carries a
cornucopiae in the 1. arm.
r., 1st APIAKOT
2nd ETEPIETOT
Date: In the ex., 2nd T111, 26/25 B.c.; AIIEA[AAIOT], the 8th month.
Wroth, 103, No. 21; XIX, 6. See discussion, p. 113gr. : 9.96
mm. :30.7
73 I (3)
beard. The presence or absence of
a star on the tunic cannot be determined. Border of dots.
with a high back, receiving a palm
wears a kalathos and carries a
cornucopiae in the 1. arm. In the
field center, a pellet.

CATALOG OF COINS
65g
Legend: Above, 1st BAZIAEQ[Z]
2nd BAZIAEGN
2., 1st E AIAANOT [
2nd [4I]AEAAHNO[Z;]
r., 1st APIAKOT
2nd ETEPPETOT
Date: Beneath the throne, on two coins Z1I1, 25/24 B.c.; on the third,
obscure. In the ex., 2nd IIAAN (HANHMOT), the 3rd month, MIOT, the
7th month; on the third coin, month obscure.
Wroth, 104, No. 26; XIX, 7. See discussion, p. 113.
gr. : 14.49 9.36 9.05
mm. : 28.00 30.1 30.4
74 AZ (2)
hair in four formal rows; medium,
pointed beard. No border can be
distinguished.
Legend: Above, 1st [B]AIAE[2]
2nd BA2IAEG[N]
2., 1st [E]EIJANOTZ
2nd [@PIA]EAAHN[OI;]
without a back. The r. hand, advanced, grasps a bow; the 1. rests
on a long scepter behind.
r., 1st APIAKOT
2nd ETEPPETOT
Monograms: In the field 1., No. 37; on one of the coins, between the legs of
the throne, No. 38.
Date: Of the year, none; of the month in the ex., 2nd APTEMI[XIOT], the
1st month.
Wroth, io8, Nos. 52-54; XX, 2. See discussion, p. 113gr. : 9.79 7.25
mm. : 28.3 27.3
75 /R (I)
Obv.: As on No. 74. Border of dots.
Legend: Above, 1st BAZIAEGI
2nd BAZIAES2N
1., 1st EIIJ4ANO[T2]
2nd off flan
without a back, receiving a palm
wears a kalathos and carries a long
scepter in the 1. arm.
r., 1st APIAKO[T]
2nd ETEPFE[TOT]
ex., 1st (inverted) AIKAIO[T]
Monogram: In the field, none; between the legs of the king A; between the
legs of the throne, No. 39.

66
Date: Of the year, none; in the ex., 2nd, the month off flan.
Wroth, 109, Nos. 55-56, XX, 3. See discussion, p. 114.
gr. : 12.14
mm. : 28.10
PHRAATACES (PHRAATES V)
(2/I B.C.-4/5 A.D.)
76 R (5)
hair in three rows; short beard;
apparently no star on the tunic; in
front of the head a Nike r., with a
wreath. The field behind the head
is off flan. No border can be distinguished.
Legend: Above, 1st BAZIAE[Q22]
2nd BALIAED[N]
1., 1st EIII4ANOT[2]
2nd @IAEAAHN [Or]
Monogram: None occurs. Beneath
on another, one pellet.
Rev.: Arsaces seated r. on a throne
with a back. The r. hand, advanced, grasps a bow.
r., 1st APZA[KOT]
2nd ETEPI'E[TOT]
ex., 1st (inverted) [A]IKAI[OT]
the throne on one coin, two pellets;
Date: In the field r., down AIT, I B.C.-I A.D. In the ex., 2nd, the month
off flan.
Wroth, 137, Nos. 5-8; XXIII, ii. See discussion, p. 114.
gr. : ii.6o 11.39 9.83 8.70 6.oi
mm. :26.50 27.70 27.70 28.60 25.40
77 2R (I)
hair in five rows, which are indicated by dots rather than lines;
short, pointed beard. In front of
the head is a Nike with a crown flying r.; behind the head are traces,
perhaps of a second Nike. Border
of dots.
Rev.: As on No. 76, except that there
appears to be no back to the
throne.
Legend: As on No. 76, except that the first line of legend in the exergue is
not inverted.
Date: In the field r., horizontally A IT, 3/4 A.D.; in the ex., 2nd, the month
obscure.

CATALOG OF COINS
67
De Morgan, 286, No. 191; XVI, 40. See Pl. IV and discussion, p. 114.
gr. : 10.35
mm. 26.90
78 1R (I)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of the queen r., wearing
hair in two natural rows; medium, tiara and diadem. In front, obcurly beard. In front a Nike with a scure, a Nike flying 1.
crown flying r. No border can be
distinguished.
Legend: Illegible traces can be distinguished on the obverse and the reverse.
Date: Obverse behind the shoulders AIT, 3/4 A.D. No month date can be
distinguished.
Petrowicz, 102, No. 16; XV, 9.
gr. : 12.0
mm. : 26.7
79 A (i)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1. The fillets
of the diadem fall from the top of
the head. Short beard; necklace
and V-necked tunic. In front and
behind Nikes fly to crown the king.
Rev.: Tyche seated 1.; turreted
headdress. The r. hand, advanced, grasps a palm; the 1. falls
at the side.
Legend: None can be distinguished.
Monogram: In the field r., No. 40.
Cf. Wroth, 139, Nos. 19-20. See discussion, p. 114.
gr. : 1-36
mm. : 14.5
ARTABANUS II
(11/12-40/4I A.D.)
80 R (2)
hair in four formal rows; medium,
squared beard. No border can be
distinguished.
with a low back, receiving a palm
from Tyche standing facing front.
Tyche wears a kalathos and carries
a cornucopiae in the 1. arm.

68
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
Legend: Above, 1st BA2I[AEGI]
2nd BAIAE[QN]
2.,n 1st EIIIAANO[TZ]
2nd [@P]IAEAAH[NOI]
r., 1st [AP2]AKO[T]
2nd [E]TEPTETO[T]
Date: In the field r., down BKT, 11/12 A.D. No month date can be distinguished.
Wroth, 146, No. I; XXV, i. See discussion, p. 115gr. : 12.48 12.26
mm. : 25.60 29.30
81 AR (i)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.:
hair in two less formal rows; medium, squared beard. Border of
dots.
Legend: So far as visible, as on No. 8o.
Date: Of the year, does not appear; in the
obscure.
As on No. 8o.
field r., down, the month date,
Wroth, 146, Nos. 4-7. Cf. Petrowicz, 105-106, Nos. 2-4. See discussion,
p. 115.
gr. : 10.77
mm. : 28.00
82 zR (io)
hair in three less formal rows;
medium, squared beard. Border of
dots.
Legend: Above BAMAE2N
ex. (inverted) [E]TEPPETO[T]
with a low back, receiving a palm
from Tyche standing r. Between
the two a male figure kneeling r.
offers a diadem to the king. The
distinctive headdress of Tyche
appears to be lacking.
r. BAXIAE2[h?]
I. (up) APIAKOT
Monogram: None occurs
Date: In the field center AAT, 23/24 A.D. On some specimens this date
appears also on the obverse at the 1., up. In the exergue, 2nd, the month
date is off flan on all of the coins.
Wroth, 147-148, Nos. 11-19; XXV, 3. See discussion, p. 115.

CATALOG OF COINS
69
gr. : 12.81 12.49 11.16 11.05 10.30 9.98 9.47 9.43 7.78 7.19
mm. : 25.40 27.90 26.10 28.80 26.10 26.9 25.8 24.6 25.0 26.3
83 R (2)
Obv.: Bust of the king facing front,
diademed; hair falling in less formal
rows; short, squared beard. No
border can be distinguished.
Legend: Above [B]AMAEO[l]
ex. (inverted) AIK[AIOT]
Rev.: The king mounted on a horse
standing 1., receiving a palm from
Tyche standing r. The headdress
of Tyche and the object held in the
1. arm are off flan.
r. AP2AK[OT]
1. obscure.
Monogram: Beneath the horse apparently a simple A. Possibly other details
have been obscured.
Date: In the field center T, r., down All, 27/28 A.D. No month date appears
to occur.
Wroth, 148-149, Nos. 20-32; XXV, 5-6. See discussion, p. 116.
gr. : 9.21 5.80
mm. : 26.3 25.6
84 YE (io)
hair falling in two or in three less
formal rows; medium beard; Vnecked tunic. The diadem has a
long fillet falling from the top of the
head.
Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped;
turreted headdress.
Date: In the obverse field ., up (2) EAT, 24/25 A.D.; (4) TAT, 25/26 A.D.;
(i) ZAT, 26/27 A.D.; (3) obscure dates.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are flattened.
Pl. IV (obv. only). See discussion, p. 116.
gr. : 1.76 1.36 1.29 1.29 1.22 1.16 0.98 0.94 0.90 o.81
mm. : 14.2 14.9 14.1 12.2 12.3 13.9 14.6 12.8 12.5 15.1
85 YE (i)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., badly obscured in front; hair in three rows.
A fillet of the diadem hangs from
the top of the head; V-necked tunic.
Rev.: The king seated 1. on a throne.
The r. hand, advanced, holds a
Nike r.; the 1. rests on a long
scepter behind. All details of the
head have been obscured. The
figure is draped, probably wearing
loose trousers and tunic.

70
Date: In the obverse field 1., down EAT, 25/26 A.D.
There is a border of dots on the obverse. The edge is flattened.
gr. : 0.93
mm. : 12.6
86 YE (9)
Obv.: Bust of the king facing front,
diademed; the hair in waves at the
sides; medium beard, V-necked
tunic.
Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped;
turreted headdress.
Date: In the reverse field r., up (i) probably MT, 29/30 A.D.;
AMT, 30/31 A.D.; (7) dates off flan.
No border can be distinguished. The flans were definitely too
dies. The edges are curved rather than flattened.
gr. : 1.57 1.40 1.28 1.13 1.07 0.90 0.87 0.87 0.65
mm. : 1o.8 io.8 9.90 10.1 10.2 9.50 10.7 10.4 9.40
VARDANES I
(40/41-45 A.D.)
87 R (6)
(I) probably
small for the
beard. On one coin a star appears
on the tunic. Border of dots.
Legend: Above, 1st BAZIAE[Z]
2nd BAZIAEG[N]
1., 1st EIIIANOTI
2nd [@]IAEAAHN[O2]
with a back, receiving a palm from
Tyche standing 1. The head of
Tyche appears to be bare; a cornucopiae is held in the 1. arm.
r., 1st AP2AK[OT]
2nd ETEPFETO[T]
Date: In the field center (1) J'NT, 42/43 A.D.; (2) ANT, 43/44 A.D.;
(z) ENT, 44/45 A.D.; (i) an obscure date. In the ex., 2nd, a month date
can be distinguished on only one coin, of 44/45 A.D., OAOT, the 4th. On
the rest this portion of the field is off flan or has been obscured.
Wroth, 153-156, Nos. 1-23; XXVI, I. See Pl. IV (rev. only) and discussion, p. 117.

CATALOG OF COINS
71
gr. :12.12 11.98 10.21 9.63 9.16 7.91
mm. :27.60 25.40 26.40 27.9 25.2 27.8
88 YE (4)
Obv.: Bust of the king r., diademed;
hair falling in waving natural lines;
medium beard; V-necked tunic.
Rev.: A female head r., veiled. On
each coin the top of the head is off
flan. It is possible that a kalathos
is worn.
Legend: In the reverse field 1., down ]9T. This is visible on one coin; on the
others this portion of the field is off flan.
Date: In the obverse field r., down ANT, 43/44 A.D.
The adjustment of the dies is normal on three coins; on the fourth P ,.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are approximately straight. The metal is of unusual color and texture. The engraving of both types is of unusual excellence.
gr. : 0.94 0.73 0.48* 0.30*
mm. : 11.6 8.20 9.80 10.5
* Broken
89 YE (94)
hair in three formal rows; short
beard.
Rev.: A figure completely draped
seated r. on a circular seat with a
back shaped to represent the neck
and head of a swan. The head of
the figure is probably bare, although on all coins the top is largely
off flan. The r. hand lies along the
lap, the hand grasping a short upright scepter or staff. The 1. arm,
under the folds of the robe, is
raised toward the face.
Legend: In the reverse field r., down BOTAH.
Symbol: On two coins (small) on the reverse, behind, A. On a number, of
varying size, it is clear that no symbol occurs. On the majority of the coins
this portion of the field is off flan.
Date: In the obverse field 1., down (io) ANT, 43/44 A.D.; (5) ENT,
44/45 A.D.; (13) SNT, 45/46 A.D.; (66) dates obscure or off flan.
The adjustment of the dies is normal on ninety coins; four have T I . There
is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are straight.

72
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
Wroth, 157-158, Nos. 37-39; XXVI, 6-8. See Pl. IV(rev. only) and discussion, p. 117.
gr. : 3.68
mm. : 14.4
3.00
14.9
3.64
13.9
2.99
15.7
3.49
13.3
2.94
15.0
3.47
15.8
2.93
14.3
3.47
15.3
2.90
15.6
3.41
16.4
2.87
13.5
3.37
14.5
2.84
15.0
3.23
13.3
2.67
16.4
3.16
15.0
2.66
14.0
3.02
15.1
2.65
13.7
3.00
15.0
2.57
15.9
2-31 2.20 1.96 1.74 1.71 1.62 I.61 1-58 1.57 1.51 1.47
16.1 14.0 12.5 13.1 12.9 12.6 12.9 12.2 13.0 12.9 11.9
1.43 1.42 1.41 1.38 1-33 1.31 1.31 1.29 1.27 1.25 1.23
14.0 11.1 12.8 12.6 12.3 12.4 12.1 1.8 12.4 11.9 12.5
1.23
11.4
1.15
12.7
1.01
12.5
0.94
12.3
1.22
13.0
1.14
11.7
1.00
15.0
0.94
12.2
1.20
12.6
I-I I
12.2
1.00
12.7
0.94
12.0
1.20 1.20 1.18 1.16 1.16
12.4 11.7 14.1 14.0 12.2
1.10 1.09 1.09 1.08 1.08
12.8 12.8 11.8 12.8 11.9
1.16
12.2
1.05
10.7
0.97
12.3
0.87
12.7
1.15
12.9
1.03
12.1
0.96
13.7
o.81
12.5
1.15
12.8
1-02
12.0
0.94
12.9
0.80
12.2
1.00
12.5
0.93
12.8
0.99
10.2
0.93
11.3
0.98
13.0
0.90
12.7
0.98
12.6
o.88
12.5
0.98
io.8
o.88
I 1.9
0.79 0.79 0.78 0.74 0.69 0.69
12.0 11.7 13.2 13.0 12.7 9.80
GOTARZES II
(44-51/52 A.D.)
90 R (i)
hair in four formal rows; long
beard; V-necked tunic on which
appear K and a star. No border
can be distinguished.
Legend: Above, 1st, off flan
2nd BA2IAEON
2., 1st [E]IIIAANOT[]
2nd [@DIA]EAAHN[OI;]
with a back, receiving a diadem
fromTyche standing 1. The headdress of Tyche has been obscured;
in the 1. armis a cornucopiae.
r., 1st APIA[KOT]
2nd ETEPIPE[TOT]
Date: In the field center HNT, 47/48 A.D.; in the ex., 2nd ZANA[IKOT],
the 1st month (see pp. 151-153 for intercalary change at this period).
Wroth, 163, Nos. 12-20; XXVI, 12. See Pl. IV(rev. only) and discussion,
p. ii8.
gr. : 8.o6
mm. : 29.9

CATALOG OF COINS
73
91 E (I)
Obv.: Bust of the king I., diademed;
hair in vertical lines; long beard;
other details obscure.
Rev.: A figure, three-quarters length,
standing r. and holding a palm.
The figure is draped. All other details have been obscured.
Symbol: In the reverse field r. A.
Date: None occurs.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The.edge is straight.
Wroth, 170, Nos. 78-88; XXVII, 13-14. See discussion, p. 119.
gr. : 1.34
mm. : I1.6
92 IE (45)
hair in three formal rows; long
beard. The diadem has a loop at
the back; the fillets show only below the hair.
Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turreted headdress. A single fillet
hangs from beneath the knot of the
hair.
Monogram: In the reverse field ., No. 41. This can be distinguished on
twenty-one coins of both years. On the rest this portion of the field has
been obscured or is off flan.
Date: In the obverse field 1., down (i9) ZNT, 46/47 A.D.; (8) HNT,
47/48 A.D.; (18) obscure dates. On the coins for the year 46/47 month
dates occur in the reverse field r., (5) VA, Xandikos, the 1st month; (1) AP,
Artemisios, the 2nd month; (1) AA, Daisios, the 3rd month; (2) HA,
Panemos, the 4th month; (1) OAS, Loos, the 5th month; (3) POP, Gorpiaios, the 6th month; (2) THE, Hyperberetaios, the 7th month;
(4) month obscure. On some coins of the first year, the zeta of the date is
found reversed. The months are arranged according to Johnson's intercalation.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are straight.
Pl. IV. See discussions, pp. 119 and 152-153.
gr. : 46/47 A.D.: Xandikos 3.12 3.10 3.03 2.54 2.08
mm. : 14.5 15.3 15.5 13.8 13.0
Artemisios 2.20 Daisios 2.77 Panemos 2.98 2.78
13.3 14.5 12.8 13.3
Loos 3.35 Gorpiaios 2.45* 2.44 2.41 Hyperberetaios2.48
14.4 14.5 14.4 14.4 14.0
Month 3.28 2.84 2.41 2.18 47/48 A.D.: 2.87 2.19
obscure 14.5 14.5 12.0 13.5 14.6 14.4
* Broken
2.13
13.7
1.79
14.0

74
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
gr. : 1.76
mm. 13.4
2.18
13.5
'.53
14.0
1.70 1.53 1.18 0.87 Year obscure: 2.85 2.61 2.56
12.7 15.0 13.7 12.7 14.0 14.5 13.7
2.17 2.15 2.03 1.90 1.89 1.69 1.68 1.64 1.62
13.3 16.1 13.8 13.0 14.2 13.6 15.0 14.0 13.4
1.47 1.25
14.2 12.4
2.48
14.7
1.59
14.1
VOLAGASES I
51-80 A.D.
93 R (I)
Obv.: Bust of the king facing front
with the head turned 1., diademed;
beard. No border can be distinguished.
Legend: Above, 1st [B]AZIAEi2[I]
2nd BA2;IAEGN
1., 1st EII@IA[NOTI]
2nd [@I]AEAA[HNOZ]
without a back, receiving a diadem
from Tyche standing r. Tyche
wears a turreted headdress.
r., 1st AP2A[KOT]
2nd ETEPTE[TOT]
ex., 1st (inverted) AIKA[IOT]
Date: In the field center EST, 54/55 A.D.; in the ex., 2nd, the month date,
off flan.
Wroth, 178-180, Nos. 1-14; XXVIII, 12.
gr. : 13.21
mm. : 25.50
94 AZ (I)
helmet with hooked appendages;
hair in two rows; short beard.
Border of dots.
Legend: Above, 1st [B]AZIA[EDI]
2nd B[AZ]IAE[GN]
I., 1 st EHI AN[OTI]
2nd [4IA]EAA[HNOZ]
Symbol: In the obverse field r. A.
with a back, receiving a large diadem from Tyche standing r. The
king wears a helmet and rests the 1.
hand on a sword. Tyche holds a
scepter in the 1. hand. The back of
the throne has a crosspiece.
r., 1st [A]P2IA[KOT]
2nd OAAPA[2IOT]
ex., 1st AIKAIOT

CATALOG OF COINS
75g
Date: In the field center 2T, 79/80 A.D.; in the ex., 2nd, the month date, off
flan.
Wroth, 209-210, Nos. 1-7; XXXII, 6-7. Wroth assigns this coin to a "first"
reign of Volagases II. See discussion, pp. 119-121.
gr. : 9.60
mm. : 26.6
95 zI (6)
Obv.: Bust of the king; 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turhair in three formal rows; short reted headdress.
beard; necklace, V-necked tunic.
Monogram: In the reverse field r., No. 42.
Date: In the obverse field 1., down UT, 69/70 A.D.
There is a border of dots on the obverse and reverse. The edges are slightly
beveled.
gr. : 1.14 1.12 1.08 0.99 0.94 o.88
mm. : 11.7 10.9 io.8 12.3 12.1 11.4
96 E (66)
Obv.: Bust of the king I., diademed; Rev.: Nike standing 1., holding in
similar in style to No. 95. the outstretched r. hand a wreath
from which fall two short fillets.
The 1. arm is dropped at the side.
Monogram: In the reverse field 1., No. 43. This can be distinguished on
thirty-three coins of all the years represented in the group. On the rest
this portion of the field is off flan or has been obscured.
Date: In the obverse field 1., down (6) UT, 69/70 A.D.; (3) AUT, 70/71 A.D.;
(I) TUT, 72/73 A.D.; (3) AUT, 73/74 A.D.; (I) 11T, 75/76 A.D.; (I) HUT,
77/78 A.D.; (I) OUT, 78/79 A.D.; (4) either AUT or AUT; (I4) [ ]UT;
(32) obscure dates. The first numeral of eT is partly off flan. It does
not appear possible to complete it except as theta. However, since this is
the latest date in the series, the reading is classed as tentative.
The adjustments of the dies vary widely. There is a border of dots on obverse
and reverse. The edges are somewhat flattened.
gr. : 1.66 1.40 1.29 1.29 1.27 1.21 1.21 1.18 1.17 1.15 1-13
mm. : 12.2 11-3 11.0 10.9 io.8 11.8 11.6 io.8 13.0 11.2 11.5
1.13 1.12 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.10 1.09 1.o8 1.o8 1.07 1.o6
11.4 10.7 11.4 10.9 10.5 13-2 11.1 12.0 11.5 10.8 11.2

76
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
gr. : i.o6 1.05 1.03 I.0 i.oo I.oo 0.98 0.96 0.96 0.95
mm. : 11.0 11.1 10.4 11.0 12.4 10.0 11.2 10.9 10.5 10.9
0.94 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.89 0.89 o.88 0.85 0.84
12.0 9.90 11.1 11-3 10.2 11.1 11.0 11.4 9.90 11.9
0.95
10.3
0.84
10.5
0.76
11.2
0.34
10.0
0.83 0.83 0.83
11.8 11-5 I0.8
0.83 0.82 0.82 0.79 0.78 0.78 0.78
10.4 11.1 10.0 11.2 11.6 11.5 io.6
0.73 0.73 0.71 o.66 0.65
11.4 9.90 11.0 io.6 8.90
97 A; (i)
high helmet with squared flaps;
rather short beard. The presence
or absence of hooked appendages on
the helmet cannot be determined.
0.58 0.55 0.52 0.52 0.48
9.70 10.5 11.5 9.50 9.20
Rev.: An eagle with wings outstretched standing facing front
with head turned 1.
Date: In the obverse field 1., down HIIT, 77/78 A.D.
No border can be distinguished. The edge is slightly beveled.
gr. : 1.07
mm. : 11.5
PACORUS II
(78-115/16 A.D.)
98 AZ (1)
hair in four formal rows; cleanshaven. Border of continuous fillet.
2nd [B]AIAE2N
1., 1st EIIICDAN[OTI]
2nd, off flan
with a high back, receiving a diadem from Tyche standing r. Tyche
holds a scepter in the 1. hand. The
back of the throne has a crosspiece.
r., 1st [API]AK[OT]
2nd IIAKOP[OT]
ex., 1st AIKAIOT
Symbol: In the obverse field r. I'.
Date: In the field center 2T, 79/80 A.D.; in the ex., 2nd ATAN[AIOT], the
1oth month.
Wroth, 193-194, Nos. 1-13; XXX, 1-2. See discussion, p. 122.
gr. : 11.8
mm. : 28.2

CATALOG OF COINS
77
99 YE (I)
Obv.: Head of the king 1., diademed;
hair in three formal rows; cleanshaven; necklace. The shoulders
and tunic are not shown.
Rev.: A bust r., male. The head is
bare but the top is off flan. No
traces of diadem or wreath can be
discerned around the head, but behind the head are traces of what
appear to be fillets. There is a
short curly beard. Only the top of
the shoulders is shown and there is
no drapery. The features and the
execution are Greek rather than
Oriental.
Date: In the obverse field 1., up A2T, 80/81 A.D.
There is a border of dots on the obverse only. The edge is beveled.
Pl. V. See discussion, p. 122.
gr. : 1.31
mm. : 11.5
100 AE (44)
hair in three formal rows; slight
beard. The fillets of the diadem
hang from a loop at the top of the
head.
Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turreted headdress.
Symbol: In the reverse field r. A. This can be distinguished on thirty coins
of both years. On one coin of the year 83/84 there appears to have been
no symbol intended. On the rest this portion of the field is off flan.
Date: In the obverse field 1., down (13) A2T, 83/84A.D.; (6) E2T, 84/85 A.D.;
(3) [ ]2T; (22) the date off flan or entirely obscured.
Wroth, 198-199, Nos. 37-44; XXX, 11-12. Cf. Petrowicz, 147, Nos. 15, i8.
gr. : 3.99 3.94 3.70 3.69
mm. : 14.8 14.8 15.3 14.7
3.16 3.16 3.15 3.15
16.6 15.1 14.3 14.2
2.97 2.96 2.87 2.84
15.4 14.9 15.6 17.5
2.42 2.41 2.35 2.23
15.2 14.8 13.7 16.o
3.58
16.1
3.13
15.0
3.46 3.44 3.38 3.37 3.24 3.18
15.0 16.9 14.8 14.2 15.7 14.4
3.11 3.09 3.08 3.07 3.00 2.99
14.8 14.0 14.5 14.4 13.8 18.5
2.84 2.81 2.81 2.70 2.67 2.59 2.46
13.7 14.9 14.2 14.3 13.5 14.9 15.0
2.13 2.06 2.00 1.87 1.56 1.41 1.39
13.6 13.8 14.6 16.7 14.7 12.9 14.7

78
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
101 I (9)
helmet or other headdress with perpendicular stripes and short,
straight flaps; hair in two less
formal rows; short beard; probably necklace and V-necked tunic.
Rev.: Head of Tyche r.; turreted
headdress.
Symbol: In the reverse field r., a palm branch. This can be distinguished on
seven coins; on two this portion of the field is off flan.
Date: In the reverse field 1., down SKT, 115/16 A.D. This can be distinguished on six coins; on three this portion of the field is off flan.
Cf. Wroth, 202, No. 52 and note i. See P1. V and discussion, p. 123.
gr. : 1.16 1.05 1.01 0.99 0.98 0.96 o.86 0.71 0.69
mm. : 11.9 io.6 12.7 I0.8 12.0 10.4 11.7 10.7 I0.8
OSROES
(109/Io-128/29 A.D.)
102 IE (39)
Obv.: Bust of the king l., diademed;
hair in bunches; long beard.
Symbol: In the reverse field 1. A. This can be discerned on twenty-one coins;
on the rest this portion of the field is off flan.
Date: In the reverse field r., up (2) AKT, 113/14 A.D.; (I) EKT, 114/15 A.D.;
(ii) HKT, 117/18 A.D.; (9) OKT, 118/19 A.D.; (3) AT, 119/20 A.D.;
(13) the date incomplete or off flan.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are approximately
straight.
Wroth, 205-206, Nos. 8-17; XXXI, 10-14. See discussion, p. 123.
gr. : 7.77 6.81 4.48 4.34 4.32 4.29 4.28 4.18 4.13
mm. : 22.9 19.2 16.4 16.9 17.8 16.8 17.4 16.9 16.8
4.06 4.00 3.99 3.98 3.95 3.84 3.74 3.74 3.62
17.6 16.4 17.3 16.2 16.4 17.3 17.3 11-7 17.3
3.48 3-36 3.35 3-35 3.29 3.27 3.27 3.24 3.11
15.0 17.1 17.1 16.8 17.0 16.o 15.8 17.4 17.8
4.10 4.09
15.9 16.9
3.60 3.48
17.0 16.4
3.06 3.06
17.5 17.3
3.06 2.90 2.90
16.4 16.6 16.2
2.78 2.48 1.90
17.6 16.8 16.7

CATALOG OF COINS
79
103 YE (15)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turhair in bunches; headdress with reted headdress.
spiked appendages and flaps; long
beard; necklace and V-necked
tunic.
Symbol: In the reverse field 1. A. This can be distinguished on nine coins;
on the rest this portion of the field is off flan or has been obscured.
Date: In the reverse field r., up (6) OKT, 118/19 A.D.; (I) AT, 119/20 A.D.;
(8) the date incomplete, obscured, or off flan.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are approximately straight.
Cf. Wroth, 207, No. 21. See discussion, p. 123.
gr. : 1.72 1.58 1.45 1.40
mm. : 12.4 12.9 12.4 12.0
1.38 1.23 1.20 1.20 1.14 1.11 1.09
12.5 I1.5 13.2 12.1 11.7 12.3 12.7
1.03 0.95
11.4 12.1
0.89 0.62
11.6 11.2
104 A (23)
Obv.: Bust of the king facing front, Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turdiademed; hair in bunches at the reted headdress.
sides and the top; short beard.
Symbol: In the reverse field 1. A. This can be discerned on eight coins; on
the rest this portion of the field is off flan or has been obscured.
Date: In the reverse field r., up (4) OKT, 118/19 A.D.; (I) AT, 119/20 A.D.;
(18) the date off flan or obscured.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are somewhat
beveled.
Wroth, 207, Nos. 18-19; XXXI, 15. See Pl. V and discussion, p. 123.
gr. : 1.35 1.29 1.22 1.20 1.20 1.14 1.13 1.07 1.07 0.99 0.95 0.91
mm. : 11.2 10.8 11.2 11-5 10-7 10.2 11.7 11.1 10.9 11.2 11.4 10.8
0.87 o.86 0.82 0.82 0.77 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.74 0.55 0.45*
9.80 11.8 11.8 10.3 o.6 11.4 9.40 10.7 9.90 9.90 10.0
* Broken
105 YE (16)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turhair in bunches; headdress with reted headdress.
spiked appendages but no flaps;
long beard; necklace and V-necked
tunic.

80o
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
Symbol: In the reverse field r., a caduceus. This can be distinguished on
three coins; on two others there are traces that may represent this symbol.
On the rest none appears, and it is not possible to determine whether one
was intended to be shown on all the coins.
Date: In the reverse field r., up (5) BAT, 121/22 A.D.; (4) [ ]AT; (7) the
date entirely obscured or off flan.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are approximately straight.
Wroth, 207, No. 2o; XXXII, I.
gr. : 1.65 1.40 1-33 1-32 1.24 1.21 1.21 1.19 1.17 1.16 1.13
mm. : 11.7 11.4 13.2 12.7 1I.8 ii.8 11.7 11.2 11.2 11.4 11.0
1.01 1.00 0.92 0.91 0.77
1I.8 11.5 11.0 13.3 10.5
106 YE (28)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turhair in bunches; long beard. reted headdress.
Symbol: None appears to occur.
Date: In the reverse field r. (3) AAT, 123/24 A.D.; (I) TAT, 125/26 A.D.;
(7) ZAT, 126/27 A.D.; (2) HAT, 127/28 A.D.; (15) the date incomplete or
off flan.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are roughly
beveled.
gr. : 1.92 1.81 1.49 1.44 1.42 1.42 1.40 1.40 1.38 1.35 1.27
mm. : 13.6 12.3 12.0 12.2 13.2 12.4 12.8 12.0 12.3 12.5 12.8
1.25 1.24 1.24 1.23 1.20 1.20 1.15 1-15 1.13 1.12 1.09
11.4 12.8 11.8 12.5 12.4 12.0 12.4 10.7 11.2 12.2 12.3
1.09 1.03 0.97 0.95 0.95 o.80
11.4 11.7 11.8 11.4 11.0 11.6
107 IE (8)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turhair in a bunch behind; helmet reted headdress. Tyche holds a
with flaps; medium beard. palm.
Symbol: None occurs.
Date: In the reverse field 1., down (6) OAT, 128/29 A.D.; (2) the date off flan.
Wroth, 207, No. 22; XXXII, 3.
gr. : 3.72 3.61 3.33 3-17 3.12 2.99 2.88 2.83
mm. : 16.8 15.6 15-7 15-9 15.2 16.2 17.0 15-0

CATALOG OF COINS
81
108 IE (2)
hair in a bunch behind; helmet
with flaps; medium beard.
Rev.: Tyche standing r. holding in
the r. hand a long palm tied with
fillets and in the 1., a scepter; turreted headdress.
Date: In the reverse field ., down OAT, 128/29 A.D.
Wroth, 208, Nos. 23-24; XXXII, 4.
gr. : 6.19 5.81
mm. : 18.8 19.3
VOLAGASES II.
(105/06 ?-147/48 A.D.)
109 A (3)
helmet with hooked appendages
but no flaps; short beard. No
border can be distinguished.
2nd BAIAEQN
1., 1st EIIIPANOT2
2nd [<bI]AEAAHN[OI]
holds a scepter in the 1. hand.
r., 1st [A] PIAKO[T]
2nd OAAFA2OT
ex., 1st AIKAIOT
Date: In the field center (1) FAT, 122/23 A.D.; (2) [ ]AT; in the ex., 2nd,
on the coin dated 122/23, IIEPITEIOT, the iith month.
Wroth, 210-212, Nos. 8-26; XXXII, 8-9. See discussion, p. 123.
gr. : 12.23 10.12 8.51
mm. : 27.50 24.30 25.7
109a JR (i)
Obv.: As on No. 109.
Rev.: As on No. 109.
Legend: As on No. 109, but blundered in part.
Date: In the field center OMT, 138/39 A.D.; in the ex., 2nd AIOT, the 8th
month.
Wroth, 212, Nos. 27-28. See discussion, p. 124.
gr. : 6.63
mm. : 28.6

82
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
110 zR (i)
helmet with curved flaps and hooked
appendages; long beard squared at
the bottom. Border of dots.
Legend: Above, off flan
1., 1st [E]TEPFE[TOT]
2nd, off flan
r., off flan
ex., 1st, obscure
Symbol: In the obverse field r. B.
Date: In the field center FAT, 122/23 A.D.; in the ex., 2nd IIANHMOT, the
4th month.
gr. : 5.26
mm. : 26.5
111 Y (29)
hair in three formal rows; long
beard; necklace and V-necked tunic.
Symbol: None can be distinguished.
Date: In the reverse field r., up (i) SIT, 105/06 A.D.; (7) HIT, 107/08 A.D.;
(2) OIT, 108/09 A.D.; (19) the date partly or entirely obscured or off flan.
Wroth, 204, Nos. 1-2; XXXI, 6-7. See discussion, p. 125.
gr. : 1-51 1.24 1.14 1.09 1.07
mm. : 11-3 Io.8 11.9 10.5 9.60
0.91 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.87
11.0 11.9 10.2 9.80 10.3
0.76 0.76 0.74 0.72 0.64
10.5 9.90 10.2 10.4 io.6
* Broken
112 zI (7)
helmet with flaps and hooked appendages; medium beard.
i.o6 1.05 1.04 0.98 0.93 0-91
11.4 I0.8 9.80 11.0 9.80 11.2
0.85 0.82 0.82 0.80 0.80 0.80
11-5 10.7 10.2 11.0 10.2 9.70
0.60* o.6o
10.5 10.2
Rev.: Tyche seated 1. on a short
column, the r. elbow resting on the
knee and the hand raised to the
face; turreted headdress.
Symbol: In the obverse field r., A on three coins, two of which bear the date
112/13, and B on one coin dated 113/14. On the rest this portion of the
field is off flan.

CATALOG OF COINS
83
Date: In the reverse field r., down (2) I7KT, 112/13 A.D.; (2) AKT,
113/14 A.D.; (3) the date incomplete or off flan.
Wroth, 215, Nos. 46-47; XXXIII, 1-2. Cf. Petrowicz, 141, No. 4oa. See
discussion, p. 126.
gr. : 6.81 6.65 6.35 6.33 6.25 6.04 4.61
mm. : 18.6 18.4 17.4 19.0 18.2 17.7 18.9
113 E (45)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turhelmet with hooked appendages reted headdress.
and short flaps; medium beard.
Date: In the reverse field r., up (23) AT, 119/20 A.D.; (8) AAT, 120/21 A.D.;
(4) AAT or AAT; (io) the date partly or entirely obscured or off flan.
Wroth, 216, Nos. 49-5 5; XXXIII, 3-4. Cf. Petrowicz, 141-142, Nos. 41-46.
gr. : 8.o6 5.28 4.67 4.61 4.47 4-38 4.33 4.26 4.23 4.21 4.18 4.13
mm. : 20.9 17.8 16.7 16.4 16.4 17.6 16.4 16.2 15.9 17.3 16.9 17.0
4.04 4.00 3.97 3.96 3.95 3.89 3.88 3.88 3.87 3.84 3.82 3.74
16.2 16.9 17.0 17.8 17.1 16.6 17.1 15.7 15.1 16.7 17.1 13.6
3.72 3.62 3.61 3.61 3.60 3.40 3.37 3.32 3.18 3.18 3.10 3.08
17.2 15-9 16.5 16.2 16.6 16.o 16.o 16.1 16.7 15-4 16.o 16.9
3.06 2.93 2.91 2.85 2.82 2.74 2.65 2.60 2.18
16.8 10.5 16.o 16.3 15.8 16.7 16.2 17.2 15.6
114 IE (15)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Tyche seated 1. on a short
helmet with curved flaps and no column; turreted headdress. The
spiked appendages; rather long r. hand holds a short palm in front;
beard; necklace and tunic do not the 1. rests on the lap.
appear on the flan.
Symbol: In the reverse field 1., A on six coins, two of which are dated 129/30,
and B on one coin with the same date. On the rest this portion of the
field is off flan.
Date: In the reverse field 1., down (7) MT, 129/30 A.D.; (i) PMT, 132/33 A.D.;
(7) the date off flan.
Wroth, 216, No. 56; XXXIII, 5. See P1. V and discussion, p. 127

84
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
gr. : I.6o 1-51 1.28 1.26 1.18 1.17 1.15
mm. : 11.1 11.7 10.3 9.80 10.0 11.6 10.7
1.04 1.oo0 .99 0.96
11.1 10.3 io.8 10.6
1.12 1.07 1.07 I.06
10.1 10.5 9.90 12.3
115 YE (3)
Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turreted headdress; necklace (?). In
front is an object partly off flan,
probably a wreath.
Date: In the obverse field 1., down AMT, 133/34 A.D.
Cf. Wroth, 234, No. 80; Petrowicz, 142, Nos. 47-49. See discussion, p. 127.
gr. : 4.13 4.10 3.89
mm. : 12.3 15.7 15.8
VOLAGASES III
(148-192 A.D.)
116 Ak (I1)
helmet with long curved flaps; long
beard squared at the bottom.
Border of dots.
Legend: Above, 1st [B]A2IAE[Oi]
2nd BA2IAEI2[N]
1., 1st EHIJANOT[l]
2nd @IAEAAHN[OI]
r., 1st [A]P2IAK[OT]
2nd OAAFAZOT
ex., 2nd [AIKAIOT]
Symbol: In the obverse field r. (io) B; (1), obscured.
Date: In the field center, the year, and in the ex., 1st, the month;
(3)
(I)
(2)
(I)
(2)
(I)
(I)
AST, 153/54 A.D., of these (2) AIIEAA[IOT], 9th month;
ZST, 156/57 A.D., month obscure;
e2T, 158/59 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
AOT, 16o/6I A.D., [A]IIEAAIOT, 9th month;
BOT, 161/62 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
OHT, 178/79 A.D., [AIIE]AAIOT, 9th month;
year obscure, AIOT, 8th month.
Wroth, 224-228, Nos. 1-34; XXXIV, 1-3. See discussion, p. 128.
gr. : 13.60 12.96 12.92 11.07 10.54 10.29 10.25 9.04 8.o6 7.70 7.65
mm. : 28.20 27.50 28.70 27.70 28.30 26.70 29.70 27.4 25.4 26.4 27.0

CATALOG OF COINS
85;
116a R (213; a cache, see p. 128)
Legend: As on No. 116 (but see discussion, p. 128, under No. 1i6a).
Symbol: In the obverse field r., A on coins dating from 148/49 to 150/51
and B on those dating from 151/52 to 165/66.
Date: In the field center, the year, and in the ex., either 1st or 2nd, the month;
(17) ONT, 148/49 A.D., of these (4) APTEMIZIOT, 2nd month, (3) AAI1IOT, 3rd month, (9) HANHMOT, 4th month, (I) AIOT, 8th month;
(20) ST, 149/50 A.D., of these (19) AIOT, 8th month, (i) month off flan;
(25) ANT, 150/51 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(3) BET, 151/52 A.D., AHEAAIOT, 9th month;
(2) FS"T, 152/53 A.D., AHEAAIOT, 9th month;
(59) AST, 153/54A.D., of these (i) AAI2IOT, 3rd month, (51) AHEAAIOT,
9th month, (7) month obscure;
(22) EZT, 154/55 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(5) TZT, 155/56 A.D., of these (4) AIOT, 8th month, (i) month obscure;
(I) ZIT, 156/57 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(2) HET, 157/58 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(3) OeT, 158/59 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(2) AOT, i60/61 A.D., AHEAAIOT, 9th month;
(I) BOT, 161/62 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(2) AOT, 163/64 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(i) EOT, 164/65 A.D., AIIEAAIOT, 9th month;
(42) TOT, 165/66 A.D., AIIEAAIOT, 9th month;
(6) year obscure, of these (I) AIOT, 8th month, (4) AIIEAAIOT, 9th
month, (i) month off flan.
Wroth, 224-227, Nos. 1-25; XXXIV, 1-3. See also Petrowicz, 158, No. i,
for a coin dated in 148/49. See discussion, p. 128.
gr. : 148/49: 2nd mo. 13.62
mm. : 29.40
12.70 4th mo. 13.65
29.70 26.90
12.95 12.87 8th mo.
31.90 29.30
13.26
27.90
13.63
29.50
13.26
30.80
13.18 12.96 3rd mo. 13.46
29.70 28.50 29.60
13.59 13.50 13.20 13.12
28.90 29.60 28.10 29.90
149/50: 8thmo. 13.81 13.62
28.30 27.00
12.75
28.80
12.99
26.90
13.6o
27.80
13.58 13.50 13.42 13-38 13.37 13.31 13.30 13.29 13.16
29.10 28.20 27.80 27.40 28.30 28.80 29.20 27.80 27.30
13-15 1315 1i.o6 12.86 1I.05 9.23 8.26 Month obscure
29.40 27.80 28.90 28.30 29.50 28.7
28.5
6.77 150/51: 8th mo.
29.3
13.72
29.40
13.55 13.54 13.54 13.48 13.43
28.60 28.80 28.40 27.90 27.80
13.32 13.20 13.13 13.13 13.11
31.00 30.50 29.30 28.20 29.20
13.42 13.41 13.41 13.36
29.20 28.50 27.80 29.50

86
gr. : 13.03 13.03 13.01 12.84 12.82 12.74 12.46 12.09 11.87
mm. :28.10 27.60 28.90 30.50 29.90 29.20 28.80 30.90 28.90
9.46 151/52: 9th mo. 13.80 13.64 6.47 152/53: 9th mo. 13.43
28.0 26.80 30.10 29.0 30.10
12-55 153/54: 3rd mo. 13-45 9th mo. 13.89 13.80
28.20
13.79
26.80
13.62
26.40
13.46
28.50.
13.21
27.90
12.78
28.40
9-92
26.8
13.52
29.60
13.6o
28.10
13.12
28.60
10.72
28.00
13.76
29.00
13.62
26.o0
13.45
25.90
13.18
27.00
12.74
28.30
9.18
27.7
13.51
26.90
13.55
28.40
13.12
28.50
10.43
26.90
26.90
13.75 13.74 13.71 13.68 13.68
28.30 28.60 26.90 27.10 26.80
13.61 13.58 13.54 13.53 13.51
27.00 26.40 27.20 27-30 28.90
13.44 13.41 13.40 13.38 13.34
26.90 30.80 27.10 27.40 28.90
13.13 13.11 13.09 13.04 13.04
28.80 28.20 30.20 28.70 25.60
12.72 12.71 12.56 12.54 12.24
28.20 28.90 29.90 25.90 27.20
7.97 6.79 Month obscure 13.89
27.5 29.2 27.00
13.34 12.94 154/55: 8th mo.
29.30 28.80
13.52 13.49 13.46 13.43 13.35
27.40 25.90 27.50 28.00 29.70
12.97 12.96 12.82 12.53 12.39
29.10 28.00 31.30 29.70 28.00
155/56: 8th mo. 13.45 13.44
28.30 26.80
27.40 28.30
13.67 13.63
27.30 27.80
13.51 13.50
28.30 27.80
13.29 13.24
28.70 30.00
13.01 12.92
27.90 28.30
12.02 10.33
28.70 26.80
13.70 13.62
28.20 26.40
13.72 13.68
26.90 26.90
13.35 13.31
28.30 27.10
11.25 11.18
27.60 27.80
13.33 13.04
28.20 26.40
Month obscure 13.44 156/57: 8th mo. 13.42 157/58: 8th mo. 13.55
27.40 29.70 26.90
11.77 158/59: 8th mo. 13-53 13.46 12.87 16o/6i: 9th mo. 13.81
26.90 26.40 28.30 29.20 26.00
10.55 161/62: 8th mo. 12.95 163/64: 8th mo. 13.66 13.57
28.40 29.80 27.50 27.40
164/65: 9th mo. 13-35 165/66: 9th mo. 14.21 14.16 14..10
28.30 27.80 26.00 27.50
14.09 14.03 14.01 14.00 14.00 13.99 13.97 13.94 13.93
26.90 28.90 28.90 28.30 26.50 28.20 27.80 27.30 29.40
13.93 13.91 13.89 13.88 13.87 13.87 13.84 13.82 13.80
27.90 28.20 28.90 27.60 29.30 26.10 28.20 29.10 27.20
13.78 13.75 13.69 13.67 13.67 13.61 13.48 13.33 13.26
28.30 26.90 28.00 28.00 26.40 27.30 29.00 28.80 28.40

CAT ALOG OF COINS
87
gr. : 12.74 12.57 12.44 11.90 11.42 11.33 10.93 10.74 9.95
mm. :30.20 28.50 26.10 27.80 30.20 28.80 27.10 27.00 28.2
7.25 6.42 6.40 Year obscure: 13.92 13.50 13.46 11.27
28.9 28.2 30.7 29.30 27.80 26.8o 28.20
11.00 9.07
29.00 27.10
116b /k (5; a cache, see p. 128)
Obv.: As on No. I16. Rev.: As on No. i16.
Legend: As on No. I16.
Symbol: In the obverse field r., A on the coin dated 150/51, B on the coins
dated from 153/54 to 156/57Date: In the field center, the year, and in the ex., 1st, the month;
(i) AET, 150/51 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(1) AVT, 153/54 A.D., AIIEAAIOT, 9th month;
(2) EET, 154/55 A.D., month obscure or off flan;
(I) ZZT, 156/57 A.D., AIOT, 8th month.
gr. : 11.45 10.73 10.14 9.51 7.77
mm. : 27.50 26.40 27.40 26.4 27.0
116c R (13; a cache, see p. 129)
Obv.: As on No. I16. Rev.: As on No. i16.
Date: In the field center, the year, and in the ex., 1st, the month;
(2) A"T, 153/54 A.D., AIIEAAIOT, 9th month;
(3) ENT, 154/55 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(i) HET, 157/58 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(i) AOT, 163/64 A.D., AIOT, 8th month;
(6) ~OT, 165/66 A.D., AIIEAAIOT, 9th month.
gr. : 13.47 11.16 10.92 10.91 10.75 10.74 10.64 10.63 10-53 10.20
mm. :30-80 26.50 25.90 26.10 26.40 29.10 26.40 28.70 26.90 28.10
10.04 9.92 9.73
27.90 29.4 28.9
117 .1 (23)
Obv.: Bust of the king facing front; Rev.: Tyche seated 1. on a short colhelmet with flaps; long beard. umn, the r. hand raised to the face;
turreted headdress; in front a palm.

88
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
Date: In the obverse field r., up (5) ONT, 148/49 A.D.; (2) AZT, 150/51 A.D.;
(I) AZT, 153/54 A.D.; (2) SZT, 155/56 A.D.; (13) date obscured or off flan.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are somewhat
flattened.
Wroth, 232, Nos. 68-72; XXXIV, 8-9. See discussion, p. 129.
gr. : 4.08 3.87 3.73 3.67 3.59 3.57 3.29 3.13 3.11 2.97 2.89 2.87
mm. : 16.9 16.7 17.5 16.7 16.o 16.5 14.6 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 17.0
2.78 2.73 2.70 2.63 2.54 2.45 2.40 2.34 2.15 2.07 1.07*
16.4 19.3 17.0 18.2 15.1 14.8 15.2 14.4 14.6 15.2 14.2
* Broken
118 YE (65; a cache, see p. 129)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; turhelmet with long curved flaps; long reted headdress.
beard.
Date: In the obverse field I., down (12) EOT, 164/65 A.D.; (34) TOT,
165/66 A.D.; (19) date off flan.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are rounded.
The coins are practically in mint condition.
Wroth, 233, Nos. 73-76;
gr. : 164/65: 4.35
mm. : 16.1
3.23 3.19 3.08
15.7 14.8 14.3
3.74 3.73 3.68
14.7 14.8 15.0
3.47 3.46 3.46
15.1 15.9 15.6
3.22 3.I1 3.09
15.3 15.2 14.3
4.07 3.86 3.79
15.2 15.6 14.0
3.31 3.27 3.11
14.8 14.6 14.4
XXXIV, 10.
4.05 3.88
15.9 15.5
165/66:
3.68
14.5
3.44
14.0
3.04
14.8
3.72
15.5
2.67
14.6
3.66
14.6
3.42
14.2
2.94
13.5
3.66
16.7
2.66
14.3
See discussion, p.
3.76 3.74 3.72
15.4 17.3 17.0
4.27 3.90 3.85
15.0 13.8 15.9
3.64 3.57 3.56
14.0 14.2 17.5
3.41 3.37 3.36
15.8 14.9 14.4
2.48 No date:
15.0
3.63 3.63 3.62
15.0 14.7 13.9
129.
3.58
15.2
3.81
13.5
3.55
14.3
3.31
14.9
4.20
14.6
3.57
13.8
3.56
14.0
3.77
15.7
3.54
14.9
3.28
16.o
4.14
16.2
3.52
13.8
3.38
15.5
3.76
15.0
3.53
16.o
3.25
14.0
4.08
17.5
3.47
14.2
118a A (iio; a cache, see p. 129)
Obv.: As on No. i18.
Rev.: As on No. I18.

CATALOG OF COINS
89
Date: In the obverse field 1., down (25) EOT, 164/65 A.D.; (44) TOT,
165/66 A.D.; (41) date off flan or obscure.
Wroth, 233, Nos. 73-76; XXXIV, io. See discussion, p. 129.
gr. : 164/65:
mm. :
3.74
15.0
3.o8
13.7
3.53
14.6
3.27
14.9
3.14
14.5
2.84
14.4
3.93
15.6
3.40
14.9
3.19
14.7
2.78
14.3
3.73
15.0
3.05
15.5
3.45
15.3
3.27
14.1
3.13
14.8
2.79
14.5
3.90
15.0
3.37
14.5
3.17
14.5
2.66
14.6
4.58
15.0
3.71
15.5
3.03
15.2
3.45
14.2
3.27
13.9
3.12
14.6
2.76
14.5
3.89
17.5
3.36
14.5
3.13
17.1
2.63
15.8
4.42
14.7
3.65
14.6
2.97
14.3
3.44
14.9
3.26
14.9
3.12
13.9
2.55
16.o
3.61
15.6
3.35
14.2
3.13
14.5
2.38
13.7
4.33
15.6
3.64
15.8
2.89
15.0
3.39
14.6
3.25
14.4
3.12
13.8
2.54
14.8
3.6o
15.5
3.34
15.2
3.11
14.3
2.01
14.3
4.18
15.9
3.53
14.9
165/66:
3.38
14.0
3.23
14.5
3.11
14.6
2.47
13.3
3.56
16.9
3.34
13.6
3.05
14.6
4.13
15.5
3.45
16.9
4.27
15.1
3.37
14.6
3.21
14.8
3.09
14.7
Noy
3.55
15.1
3.27
14.2
3.00
14.2
4.10
14.9
3.33
15.7
4.13
16.4
3.33
15.3
3.21
13.6
3.02
16.o
d ate:
3.43
15.0
3.27
14.1
2.97
14.9
4.02
17.4
3.29
15.0
3.73
15.6
3.32
14.4
3.19
14.3
3.02
14.5
5.00
18.3
3.43
14.2
3.27
13.6
2.92
14.1
4.01
16.7
3.21
14.9
3.58
14.2
3.29
14.9
3.19
14.1
2.96
14.0
4.09
15.2
3.41
14.6
3.26
14.1
2.87
13.4
3.90
15.5
3.14
15.7
3.55
14.1
3.28
13.8
3.14
14.6
2.95
14.8
3.93
16.3
3.41
14.2
3.24
13.9
2.79
16.7
118b AE (5o)
Obv.: As on No. i8.
Rev.: As on No. I18.
Symbol: In the reverse field r. A; off flan on a number of coins.
Date: In the obverse field I., down (4) TOT, 165/66A.D.; (2) fiT, 169/70 A.D.;
(I) AIIT, 170/71 A.D.; (I) EIIT, 174/75 A.D.; (2) dIIT, 175/76 A.D.;
(5) [ ]HT; (35) the date off flan or obscured.
Wroth, 233, Nos. 73-76; XXXIV, 1o. Cf. Petrowicz, 166, Nos. 55-57See discussion, p. 129.
gr. : 4.34 3.76 3-52 3-39 3.33 3.23 3.18 3.18 3.05 3.04 3.03
mm. : 16.6 17.0 14.3 14.2 14.7 15.8 14.6 13.4 16.8 15.4 15.0

90
gr. : 3.02
mm. : 13.8
2.68
12.6
3.00 2.98 2.97 2.91 2.86 2.84 2.79
13.0 14.0 13.9 13.9 13.6 13.7 13.9
2.67 2.64 2.57 2.55 2.55 2.52 2.47
16.4 14.3 14.3 13.9 12.4 12.2 13.5
2.78 2.76 2.69
13.7 14.8 15.0
2.42 2.28 2.25
15.0 13.2 12.9
2.23 2.19 2.17 2.02 1.94 1.34 1.33 1.15 1.o6 i.o6 0.98
13.6 15.8 13.2 14.2 12.0 10.3 11.3 11.7 10.3 9.70 12.1
o.86 0.85 0.84 0.72* 0.64
10.8 9.30 10.8 11.2 10.7
* Broken
119 IE (4)
Obv.: The king mounted on a horse
advancing 1. The 1. hand of the
king rests on his sword; the r. hand
is advanced over the head of the
horse, grasping or receiving an object off flan. The king wears a helmet with curved flaps, a tunic, and
loose trousers.
0.59
10.5
Rev.: Tyche standing r., holding a
palm; turreted headdress.
Date: In the reverse field 1., down (3) AU T, 173/74 A.D.; (I) date off flan.
No border can be distinguished. The edges are slightly rounded.
gr. : 2.92 2.57 2.50 2.40
mm. : 13.8 12.3 13.5 12.4
120 YE (36)
helmet with long curved flaps; long
beard.
Rev.: Tyche seated 1. on a short
column, the r. hand raised to the
face; turreted headdress; in front
a palm.
Date: In the obverse field l., down
175/76 A.D.; (6) ZIT, 176/77 A.D.;
(12) date entirely obscured or off flan,
(I) EIIT, 174/75 A.D.; (2) TIT,
(5) HiT, 177/78 A.D.; (i) [ ]iT;
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are slightly
rounded.
Wroth, 233, Nos. 77-79; XXXIV, 11. Cf. Petrowicz, 166, Nos. 58-59a.

CATALOG OF COINS
91
gr. : 4.04 3.65 3.53 3.27 3.15 3.12 3.10 3.09 3.07 3.04 2.88 2.74
mm.: 14.8 14.0 14.4 14.2 15.2 13.9 12.4 15.6 14.6 14.3 13.9 14.6
2.73 2.71 2.65 2.63 2.61 2.59 2.48 2.48 2.44 2.44 2.35 2.33
14.4 14.6. 13.6 14.3 12.8 14.5 14.6 13.7 14.6 13.8 14.7 14.8
2.29 2.27 2.25 2.23 1.99 1.94 1.92 1.91 1.83 1.78 1.00o 0.82
15.0 16.5 15.5 43.9 13.5 13.7 13.8 12.6. 14;0 14.0 12.8 13r-3
121 IE (7)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: Bust of Tyche r., draped, with
helmet with long cprved flaps; long arm holding a wreath; turreted
beard. headdress.
Date: In the obverse field 1., down (3) A2T,i8o/8I A.D.; (I) []2T; (3) date obscure or off flan.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are slightly
rounded.
Wroth, 234, No. 80; XXXIV, 12. See discussion, p. 130.
gr. : 3.85 3.65 3.50 3.46 3.42 3.26 2.89
mm. : 15.8 16.2 16.8 15.7 15.9 15.5 15.6
VOLAGASES IV
(191-208/09 A.D.)
122 2R (116; a cache, see p. 130.)
Obv.: Bust of the king 1., diademed; Rev.: The king seated 1. on a throne
hair in bunches; long, pointed with a high back, receiving a diabeard. Border of dots. dem from Tyche standing r.
Legend: This is largely off flan on all coins. The surviving traces, with their
frequent blunders, are discussed on pages 234-235.
Date: In the field center, the year, and in the ex., 1st, the month
(40) A+, 193/94 A.D.; of these (I) [A]PT[EMIZIOT], 2nd month, (i) HANH[MOT], 4th month, (1) [I'O]PI[IAIOT], 6th month, (i) [AHI]EAA[IOT], 9th month, (1) IIEPIT[IOT], iith month, (z) [A]T2T[POT],
12th month;
(18) E@, 194/95 A.D.; of these (i) A[NAIKOT], 1st month, (I) IIANHM[OT], 4th month;
(14) '4, 195/96 A.D.; of these (1) ANAIK[OT], 1st month, (i) [A]PTEM[IIIOT], 2nd month;
(22) Z, 196/97 A.D.; of these (1) ATAN[AIOT], 1oth month;
(15) H@I, 197/98 A.D.;

92
(6) 084, 198/99 A.D.;
(I) [ ](.
The greater number of the month dates are off flan.
Wroth, 238, Nos. 4-10; XXXV, 8. See discussion, p. 130.
gr. : 193/94:
mm. :
12.01
25.6o
11.42
25.30
11.18
25.80
10.63
26.80
12.08
26.40
11.09
24.90
11.94
25.50
10.96
26.20
12.03
26.40
11.32
26.30
12.45
26.70
11.85
26.80
12.38
25.80
12.71
24.70
11.93
25.90
11.41
25.20
11.16
26.40
10.37
28.80
12.00
25.80
10.92
28.40
11.52
24.20
10.87
27.50
12.00
26.00
11.26
27.20
12.36
24.80
11.59
25.70
12.25
24.70
12.33
26.20
11.86
25.6o
11.40
24.60
11.00
27.10
10.18
27.90
11.71
26.50
10.84
25.6o
11.42
26.60
10.73
26.00
11.94
25.60
11.17
25.50
12.27
25.40
I1.58
25.50
11.99
24-50
12.27 12.24 12.21 12.11
25.90 25.50 25.50 24.60
11.86 11.84 11.53 11.52
25.20 25.60 24.70 26.50
11.31 11.31 11.29 11.28
28.00 26.30 26.70 26.90
10.99 10.84 10.78 10.77
26.50 24.80 26.40 26.30
9.77 9.52 194/95: 12.21
25.4 27.8 26.90
11.70 11.62 11-54 11-54
24.10 26.oo 25.20 24.60
10.83 10.82 10.77 195/96:
12.10
25.50
11.47
26.40
11.27
25.50
10.72
24.90
12.21
25.50
11.44
26.70
12.50
25.50
11.27
26.70
12.15
25.00
11.38
26.00
10.00'
29.40
12.01
24.80
26.10
11.40
26.80
196/97:
11.90
26.00
11.14
28.40
12.20
24.40
11.51
24.90
11.82
28.20
24.70
11.38
25.80
12.70
25.50
11.83
26.20
Io.66
26.30
12.08
26.20
11.35
25.50
10.84
27.40
25.00
11.32
26.70
12.23
25.6o
Ii.8o
25.40
10.64
26.90
12.05
25.10
12.01
25.90
11.43
26.30
11.21
24.60
10.71
26.00
12.10
26.40
11.37
26.50
12.06
27.20
11.17
27.00
12.09
26.90
11.37
26.00
197/98:
12.00
26.10
12.53
24.30
11.31
27.00
12.17
25.40
11.59
25.90
10.47
25.20
12.02
26.00
11-35 198/99: 12.79
25.40 24.60
122a AZ (6)
Legend: Largely off flan. See discussion, p. 130, under No. 122.
Date: In the field center (1) A, 193/94 A.D.; (I) 54, 195/96 A.D.; (i) H4,
197/98 A.D.; (I) BI, 201/02 A.D.; (i) Pl , 202/03 A.D.; (I) date obscure.
On all the coins the month date is off flan.

CATALOG OF COINS
93
Wroth, 238-239, Nos. 4-16; XXXV, 8.
gr. : 11.51 11.14 10.30 9.58 8.53 7.00
mm. :25.00 24.60 25.20 24.9 24.8 23.4
123 YE (4)
Obv.: Bust of the king facing front, Rev.: Bust of Tyche r.; turreted
diademed; hair in bunches; long, headdress.
pointed beard; presumably tunic.
Date: None can be distinguished. This may be due to the small size of the
flans in comparison with the dies.
No border can be distinguished. The edges are flattened.
gr. : 2.85 2.24 1.90 1.45
mm. : 15.6 15.2 15.7 14.1
VOLAGASES V
(208/09-222/23 A.D.)
124 AR (27; a cache, see p. 131)
helmet with flaps; long beard.
Border of dots.
Legend: Almost entirely off flan.
Date: In the field center (4) K4, 209/10 A.D.; (8) AKI,
(I) BKI, 211/I2 A.D.; (I) 1'K, 212/13 A.D.; (8) [ ]KJ;
tirely obscured. On all coins the month date is off flan.
Wroth, 241-243, Nos. 1-18; XXXV, 14-15. See discussion, p.
gr. : 11.4 11.2 8.72 8.io 8.oo 8.oo 8.oo 8.oo 7.30
mm. : 24.9 24.4 27.0 26.0 26.1 25.8 25.5 24.7 26.2
7.20 7.00 7.00 6.90 6.90 6.50 6.30 5.90 5.79
26.0 26.1 25.6 26.0 25.6 26.3 25.0 26.5 24.0
5.14 5.10 4.70 3.60 2.72
27.1 27.2 25.9 25.2 25.0
210/II A.D.;
(5) date en13'7.20
26.3
5.70
25.2
7.20
26.3
5.30
24.5
124a AZ (12)
Obv.: As on No. 124. Rev.: As on No. 124.
Legend: Almost entirely off flan. On a number of coins traces of the first
line on the left may be discerned, AEII[.

94
COTNS FROM SELE UCIA
Date: In the field center (2) K4, 209/I0 A.D.; (2) AK4, 210/II A.D.;
(2) BK@b, 211/i2 A.D.; (1) AK@P,- 213/14 A.D.; (2) EK@b, 214/15 A-D-;
(2) [ ]K@; (i) date entirely obscured. On all coins the month date is
off flan.
Wroth, 241-243, Nos. 1-18; XXXV, 14-15.
gr. : 12.86
mm. : 26.20
12.77 12.44 9.80 9.32
25.50 26.40 25.7 23.7
8.99 8.8o 8.67 8.58 8.05
24.5 24.6 25.2 25.0 24.8
5.42 5.17
25.8 24.8
125 1 (5)
helmet with flaps; long beard.
Rev.: Tyche standing r., holding a
palm; turreted headdress.
Date: In the reverse field l., down (i) EK[I@], 214/15 A.D.; (2) SKI,
215/16 A.D.; (2) the date off flan.
A border can be distinguished only on the obverse of one coin; this is probably
due to the small size of the flans in comparison with the dies. The edges
are slightly flattened.
gr. : 1-93 1.81 1.66 1.35 1-32
mm. : 12.4 12.2 11.1 io.8 12.2
2. THE AUTONOMOUS COINAGE
The bronze coins with civic types found at Seleucia are all
of the Parthian period. Their relation to the Parthian coinage
as a whole has been discussed on pages 153-158. On the coins
of some groups dates cannot be distinguished, and their chronological sequence has been discussed in the "Notes on the Coins,"
to which references are made in the catalog.
ZEUS AETOPHOROS
126 Y (28)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r. draped; turreted headdress; hair done in a
knot from which fall curls.
Rev.: Zeus seated 1. on a throne without a back, half-draped; details of
the hairdressing obscured. The r.
hand, advanced, holds a bird r.; the
1. rests on a long scepter behind.

CATALOG OF COINS
95
Legend: r. IEAETKES2N, 1. ThNIIPO2ITOI, ex. TIPPEI. On no coin is the
legend complete.
Date: On one coin in the second line of the exergue appear traces of characters
that must represent a date. On all other coins of the group this portion of
the field is either off flan or badly obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots on the
obverse. The edges are flattened.
gr. :5.98 5.28 4.68 4.62 4.54 4.46 3.99 3.88 3.81 3.71 3.48
mm. : 22.2 22.2 21.1 22.4 22.5 19.8 21.7 20.3 19.1 17.9 20.7
3.45 3.39 3.37 3.33 3.26 3.04 2.88 2.74 2.58 2.54 2.05
17.8 18.9 18.7 20.5 17.1 18.2 18.7 19.9 16.8 18.8 15.4
1.97 1.76 1-56 1.46 1.08 o.85
16.3 17.7 15.9 15.7 15.1 13.9
TRIPOD
127 AE (76)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r., turreted Rev.: Tripod-lebes.
headdress; hair done in a knot from
which fall curls.
Legend: r. ZEAETKEN, l., 1st TONIIPO1TOI, 2nd TIPPEI. On no coin
is the legend complete.
Monogram: In the reverse field 1. on two coins, traces of monograms. On
the rest this portion of the field has been obscured or is off flan.
Date: In the exergue on a number of coins appear traces of characters which
may represent dates. On no coin is the exergue sufficiently clear to demonstrate that a date was not intended to be shown.
edges are beveled. In form the coins approximate Seleucid issues.
Hill, 140, Nos. 1-2; XXIII, 3-4. See Pl. V (rev. only) and discussion,
p. 133gr. : 4.63 4.03 3.99 3.73 3.72 3.68 3.66 3.63 3.62 3.61 3.59
mm. : 16.2 16.o 16.7 15.9 17.8 16.6 17.3 16.1 17.5 16.8 15.9
3.55 3.49 3.45 3.38 3.38 3.33 3.29 3.28 3.26 3.25 3.24
17.1 15.9 17.1 16.4 16.2 16.4 15.9 16.5 16.5 16.8 16.o
3.21 3.18 3.08 3.07 3.02 2.96 2.92 2.92 2.75 2.63 2.63
16.8 17.3 17.2 15.2 16.9 15-5 16.8 16.7 15.8 17.3 15.9
2.58 2.57 2-57 2.52 2.45 2.44 2.32 2.27 2.26 2.26 2.23
16.4 15-9 15- 15.6 15-9 15.0 14-3 15-4 15-7 14.8 15-3

96
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
gr. : 2.21
mm. :15-1
1.86
15.2
2.20
15.-3
1.85
13.0
2.19 2.10
15.0 15.5
1.83 1.81
15.5 15.5
2.09 2.05 1.99 1.93 1.93 1.90 1.86
16.0 14.9 16.3 15.5 14.9 15.2 15.4
1.81 1.75 1.73 1.72 1.71 1.70 1.63
15.0 15.0 14.6 15.2 14.5 14.6 15.9
1.50 1.44* 1-35 1.28 1.22 1.09*
16.o 15.4 15.3 14.5 15.1 15.1
1.62 1.6o 1-55 1.54
15.4 15.8 15.5 14.5
* Broken
TYCHE NIKEPHOROS (SEATED)
128 (205)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r.; turreted
which fall curls.
without a back, on her head a kalathos. The r. hand, advanced,
holds a Nike r., who extends a
wreath with fillets. In the 1. arm
is a cornucopiae.
Legend: r. IEAETKEO2N, 1. TO2NIIPOITQI, ex. TIPPEI. On no coin is the
legend complete.
Monograms: In the reverse field 1. on five coins, No. 44. On two of these
the same monogram appears in the obverse field 1. Two of the five are dated
in 102/01 and 99/98. In the same position on another coin appears No. 45.
In the obverse field 1. on still another coin N can be discerned. A number
of other coins show traces of monograms on one or the other field at the 1.
On the rest this portion of the field is off flan or has been obscured. It is
probable that all the coins were intended to show a monogram on the
reverse, but this was not invariably repeated on the obverse.
Date: In the ex., 2nd, (2) 01, 103/02 B.c.; (1) I1, 102/01 B.c.; (1) FIS,
99/98 B.C.; (5) 'Il, 96/95 B.c.; (1) ZIP, 95/94 B.c.; (3) AKA, 88/87 B.c.;
(1) ZKI, 85/84 B.c.; (2) HKI, 84/83 B.C. A number of coins show traces
of the date; on the rest this portion of the field is off flan or has been
obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal with one exception, T -. There is a
border of dots on the obverse. Some of the coins have beveled edges and
in form resemble Seleucid issues; others have the edges flattened.
Hill, 141, No. 4; XXIII, 6. See Pl. V (rev. only) and discussion, p. 133gr. : 5.22 5.19 5.17
mm. : 17.5 20.0 18.8
5.09 5.07 4.96 4.96 4.95
19.7 18.6 18.7 18.2 I8.I
4.92 4.91 4.83
18.2 17.8 18.6
4.80 4.79 4.68 4.64
18.3 19.4 19.6 18.2
4.38 4.36 4.35 4.32
19.7 19.8 17.8 19.0
4.64 4.57 4.51 4.51 4.50 4.49 4.39
18.0 18.o 18.2 18.0 19.0 18.7 17.8
4.32 4.31 4.30 4.29 4.25 4.25 4.22
18.9 17.8 18.1 18.4 18.6 17.5 17.4

CA 1 TA 4 LO G O F CO I N S 9
97
g r . :4 .2 1
m m .: 1 8 .3
3 .8 9
1 8 .7
3 .6 9
2 0 .0
3 .4 5
1 7 .2
3 .2 5
1 6 .8
3 .0 1
1 9 .2
2 .9 0
1 8 .5
2 .6 5
1 7 .8
2 .4 4
1 6 .6
2 .2 8
1 6 .6
2 .1 7
1 6 .5
2 .0 2
1 6 .6
1 .8 6
1 5 .2
1 .6 9
1 5 .9
1 .3 4
1 6 .4
1 .0 2
1 3 .8
* Br o k en
4 .1 9
1 6 .8
3 .8 7
1 8 .9
3 .6 8
1 8 .9
3 .4 3
1 7 .3
3 .2 2
1 7 .9
3 .0 0
1 7 .3
2 .9 0
1 7 .6
2 .6 3
1 6 .4
2 .4 3
1 7 .7
2 .2 5
1 6 .1
2 .1 6
1 5 .9
2 .0 2
16.I
1 .8 3
1 6 .1 i
1 .6 8
1 .3 4
1 4 .8
0 .9 9
'5 .'
4 .1 6
1 7 .5
3 .8 5
1 7 .9
3 .6 6
1 9 .4
3 .3 9
I 1 7 .'
3 .2 1
1 8 .9
2 .9 9
1 8 .8
2 .8 9
1 6 .9
2 .6 2
1 6 .5
2 .4 2
1 7 .2
2 .2 3
1 8 .o
2 .1 5
1 7 .0
2 .0 0
1 7 .7
1 .8 3
1 4 .9
1 .6 3
1 6 .2
1 .3 1
1 5 .2
0 .9 2
1 5 .0
4 .1 5
1 8 .3
3 .8 2
1 8 .4
3 .6 3
1 7 .9
3 .3 8
1 8 .9
3 .1 8
2 .9 8
1 7 .8
2 .8 2
1 9 .3
2 .6 1
1 5 .9
2 .4 1
1 6 .3
2 .2 2
1 6 .3
2 .1 2
i8 .I
1 .9 8
1 5 .2
1 .8 2
1 6 .o
1 .6 1
1 4 .4
1 .3 0
1 4 .7
0 .9 0
1 3 .9
4 .1 0 4 .0 5
1 8 .2 1 9 .2
3 .7 8 3 .7 7
1 8 .9 1 7 .5
3 .6 0 3 .5 6
1 7 .3 1 6 .9
3 .3 5 3 .3 4
1 9 .5 1 8 .9
3 .1 7 3 .1 5
i8 .5 1 7 .8
2 .9 7 2 .9 7
1 9 .3 1 7 .4
2 .8 1 2 .8 0
1 6 .7 1 6 .5
2 .5 5 2 .5 4
1 6 .7 1 7 .6
2 .4 0 2 .4 0
1 7 .9 i6 .8
2 .2 2 2 .2 0
1 5 .7 i6 .8
2 .1 1 2 .1 1
1 7 .8 1 4 .7
1 .9 7 * 1 .9 7 *
1 8 .2 1 7 .3
1 .8 1 1 .8 1
1 6 .9 i6 .5
i.6 o 1 .4 9
1 7 .0 i6 .6
I .2 5 1 .2 1
1 4 .0 1 5 .4
o .8 8 o .8 1
1 5 .4 1 4 .5
4 .0 4
1 7 .9
3 .7 7
1 7 .3
3 .5 5
1 7 .9
3 .3 3
3 .1 4
1 8 .4
2 .9 5
1 7 .3
2 .7 7
1 5 .3
2 .4 9
1 8 .3
2 .3 9
1 7 .2
2 .2 0
1 5 .8
2 .1 0
1 7 .5
1 .9 5
1 7 .5
1 6 .4
1 .4 7
1 6 .1
1 .2 1
1 5 .3
0 .7 4
1 6 .2
4 .0 3
1 8 .0
3 .7 5
1 8 .9
3 .5 4
1 7 .8
3 .3 1
1 7 .4
3 .1 2
1 7 .6
2 .9 4
1 8 .3
2 .7 4
1 6 .9
2 .4 8
1 6 .9
2 .3 6
1 5 .9
2 .1 9
1 8 .2
2 .1 0
1 4 .6
1 .9 5
1 6 .9
1 .8 1
1 6 .2
1 .4 6
1 6 .1
1 .1 9
1 4 .4
3 .9 8
1 8 .3
3 .7 4
1 8 .o
3 .5 1
1 8 .3
3 .3 0
1 8 .5
3 .0 9
1 7 .5
2 .9 3
1 7 .7
2 .7 2
1 7 .8
2 .4 7
1 7 .5
2 .3 5
1 7 .9
2 .1 9
1 5 .9
2 .0 9
1 7 .0
1 .9 5
1 5 .2
1 .7 3
1 6 .6
1 .3 7
1 7 .0
1 .1 7
1 5 .0
3 .9 8 3 .9 1
1 7 .8 1 8 .8
3 .7 2 3 .7 0
1 7 .4 1 7 .7
3 .5 0 3 .4 7
1 7 .6 1 9 .8
3 .2 9 3 .2 7
1 8 .5 1 9 .1
3 .0 7 3 .0 5
1 8 .4 1 6 .9
2 .9 3 2 .9 2
1 7 .6 1 7 .8
2 .6 8 2 .6 6
1 7 .9 1 8 .o
2 .4 7 2 .4 5
1 7 .2 1 7 .8
2 .3 1 2 .2 8
1 6 .1 1 7 .4
2 .1 8 2 .1 8
1 5 .9 1 5 .8
2 .0 5 2 .0 5
1 6 .1 1 6 .o
1 .9 3 1 .8 7
'5 .5 1 5 .9
1 .7 3 1 .7 0
1 6 .3 1 5 .7
1 .3 6 * 1 .3 6
1 5 .7 1 5 .4
1 .1 4 i.o 6
1 7 .3 1 4 .4
CO RN U CO P I A E
1 2 9 zE ( i6 )
O b v .: Bu st o f Ty ch e r .; tu r r eted Rev .: A co r n u co p iae, u p r ig h t.
h ead d r ess; h air d o n e in a k n o t f r o m
w h ich f all cu r ls; th e p r esen ce o r ab sen ce o f d r ap er y can n o t b e d eter m in ed .

98
Legend: r., ist IEAETKEG2N, 2nd TONIIPOI, 1. TQITIFPEI. On no coin
is the legend complete.
Date: In the reverse field 1., down (3) Ml, 72/71 B.c.; (2) probably MI but
possibly [ ]Ml; (11) the date largely or entirely off flan or obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots on the obverse.
The edges are flattened.
Hill, 140, No. 3; XXIII, 5. See Pl. V (rev. only) and discussion, p. 134.
gr. : 2.67 2.01
mm. : 14.9 14.3
1.99 1.92 1.77 1.63 1.61
16.2 14.2 13.9 12.6 13.9
1.52 1.44 1.42 1.71
12.2 13.7 13.9 13.2
i.o6 1.o6 1.03 1.01 0.41*
12.1 12.0 11.9 13.0 11-4
* Broken
TYCHE AND RIVER GOD
130 z (72)
Obv.: Head of Tyche r.; turreted
which fall curls.
Rev.: Tyche, wearing a turreted
headdress, seated r. on a short column and holding a palm in the r.
hand. At her feet, the river god
swimming r.
Legend: Circular, starting at the upper r. ZEAETKIAZTHIIIPOITOTIFPI.
On no coin is the legend complete. On some of the coins the final sigma of
the city name is omitted.
Monogram: In the obverse field 1., No. 46. This can be distinguished on
thirteen coins. On the rest this portion of the field is obscured or off flan.
Date: In the field r. (15) O1, 42/41 B.c.; (ii) AOL, 41/40 B.C. On the rest
this portion of the field has been obscured.
obverse. The edges are flattened.
Hill, 141, No. 6; XXIII, 8. See Pl. V and discussion, p. 134.
gr. : 3.07 3.02 2.95 2.95 2.95 2.83 2.78 2.77 2.73 2.60
mm. 17.9 18.8 18.2 17.1 16.9 16.9 16.5 18.o 17.9 18.2
2.56 2.45 2.43 2.42 2.42 2.35 2.29 2.26 2.24 2.23
14.9 16.9 17.9 17.7 15.3 17.1 17.3 16.5 17.6 17.7
2.10 2.09 2.08 2.08 2.06 2.06 2.05 2.05 2.04 2.02
18.6 14.8 16.8 15.1 16-5 14-9 17-7 16-5 17-9 17-3
1.98 1.96 1.95 1.93 1.92 1.89 1.88 1.86 1.86 1.81
19.3 16.o 14.5 16.2 15.0 16.4 15.4 16.6 15.8 15-5
2.60
18.2
2.21
16.9
2.00
17.8
1.8o
15.8

CATALOG OF COINS
99
gr. : 1.76 1.74 1.73 1.72
mm.: 15.5 14.3 15.8 14.5
1.55 1.54 1.53 1.52
17.0 15.0 17.7 17.1
1.70 1.67 1.67 1.65 1.62 1.61
15.9 16.8 15.8 16.1 14.5 16.6
1.52 1.45 1.45 1.39 1.34 1.34
16.2 16.5 15.4 15.3 15.5 14.9
1.58
15.1
1.25
15.5
1.24 1.16 1.12 1.01 0.85 0.63
15.8 15.7 17.0 14.5 15.2 15.2
130a YE (7)
Rev.: As on No. 130, save that the
column is definitely longer.
Legend: None can be distinguished at the top or the r.; this, however, may
be due to the poor condition of the coins. No legend occurs along the
bottom. On two coins traces of legend can be discerned at the 1.; on one,
reading up ]TO AA.
Date: In the field r., traces only.
The adjustment of the dies is normal except on one coin which has There is a border of dots on the reverse; though none can be distinguished
on the obverse this may be due to the condition of the coins. The edges
are flattened.
gr. : 2.16 2.01 1.55 1.34 1.13 1.10 1.04
mm. : 16.o 15.8 14.5 15.8 14.9 14.9 13.7
TYCHE NIKEPHOROS (STANDING)
131 YE (46)
Obv.: Head of Tyche r.; turreted Rev.: Tyche standing 1. The form of
headdress; hair done in a knot, no the headdress cannot be distincurls. guished. The r. hand, advanced,
holds a Nike r.; in the 1. arm rests
a cornucopiae.
Legend: r. ZEAETKEQ[N], 1. [TO]N IIPO2 T[I], ex. TII'PEI.
Monogram: In the obverse field 1. apparently No. 46. This can be distinguished on one coin only. Both faces of all the coins of this group are in an
obscure condition, and the apparent absence of monograms lacks significance.
Date: In the field 1. (7) A0, 38/37 B.c.; (8) [ ]O1; in the ex., 2nd (3) III,
32/31 B.c.; (2) traces only. On the rest of the coins no date can be distinguished.
The adjustments of the dies are i I, I /, I ->. There is a border of
dots on the obverse. The edges are flattened.

100
Imhoof-Blumer, 452, No. 67. See Pl. V and discussion, p. 135gr. :3.53 3.35 3.25 3.23 2.90 2.65 2.60 2.57 2.50 2.49 2.49 2.44
mm. : 15.9 18.3 13.9 19.1 18.5 17.2 18.4 17.2 16.3 16.7 16.4 16.3
2.39 2.37 2.33 2.30
18.9 17.1 17.2 17.1
1.92 1.85 1.85 1.81
14.9 18.9 16.7 16.7
2.29 2.27 2.20 2.20 2.08 2.00 1.99 1.99
17.0 17.1 20.5 15.0 16.6 15-5 16.6 16.5
1.58 1.75 1.74 1.70 1.68 1.66 1.56 1.46
16-5 17-7 14-9 16.8 15-7 17-9 15-9 15.8
1.41 1.34 1.27 1.26 1.26 1.23 1.23 1.20 1.13*-0.79*
15.8 15.9 14.1 13.1 15.0 17.1 13.9 14.9 15.0 15.6
* Broken
TWO CITY-GODDESSES
132 YE (129)
headdress; hair done in a knot,
from which curls fall along the
neck.
Rev.: Two figures standing facing
each other with their r. hands held
over a tripod between them. Each
figure is fully draped and has the
head covered by a kalathos; in the
1. arm of each rests a cornucopiae.
The sex is not definitely indicated
but presumably is female. It is not
certain whether the r. hands are
clasped or whether each holds an
object.
Legend: (rarely completely visible on a single coin) r. IEAETKES N, 1.
T2NIIPO2TS2I, ex. TII'PEI.
Date: None can be distinguished. The second line of the exergue in all instances is off flan; it is possible that dates were intended to be shown here.
The adjustment of the dies is approximately normal. There is a border of
dots on the obverse. Some of the coins have beveled edges and in form
resemble typical Seleucid issues. On others the edges are entirely flattened
in the manner most characteristic of civic issues. On the rest the edges
show variations of these extremes.
Imhoof-Blumer, 451, No. 6o; Hill, cxv, No. i. See Pl. VI and discussion,
p. 136.
gr. : 3.95 3.95 3.93
mm. : 17.8 17.2 16.4
3.89 3.87 3.72 3.68 3.63 3.59
17.3 17.5 11-7 16.6 16.o 17.2
3.45 3.38
18.o 17.1
2.69 2.52
16.1 15.4
3.33 3.29 3.06 3.02 2.98 2.85 2.82 2.82 2.72
17.5 16.2 16.1 17.5 17.5 16.5 16.1 15.8 18.6
2.51 2.48 2.48 2.41 2.39 2-35 2.33 2.29 2.25 2.23 2.20
16.9 16.6 15.7 16.1 15.7 15.5 15.3 14.8 15.3 15.9 16.3

CATALOG OF COINS
101
gr. :2.15 2.15 2.15 2.11 2.10 2.10 2.07 2.06 1.96 1.93 1.93
mm. : 18.5 15.6 14.4 14.5 16.4 15.4 13.7 16.o 18.2 16.6 15.1
1.92 1.92 1.91 1.88 1.86 1.86 1.85 1.85 1.84 1.84 1.83
15.5 15.2 16.5 15.3 14.9 14.7 16.2 15.5 15.8 15.1 14.3
1.81 1.8o 1.79 1.78 1.78 1.75 1.75 1.72 1.69 1.69 1.67
14.6 17.7 15.0 15.3 15.0 15.8 15.1 16.4 14.7 16.3 15.7
1.66 1.65 1.65 1.63 1.63 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.61 1.60 i.6o
15.4 16.3 15.9 15.3 14.3 16.5 14.6 14.2 15.5 15.1 14.6
1.59 1.55 1.55 1.54 1.54 1.53 1.53 1.53 1.50 1.50 1.49
15-5 15.6 14.4 15.6 15.6 15.8 15.0 14.9 14.6 14.5 15.1
1.47 1.47 1.45 1.44 1.44 1.43 1.42 1.41 1.41 1.39 1.39
15.5 13.2 15.1 14.9 14.3 16.2 14.7 15.3 14.1 15.2 14.6
1.38 1.38 1.37 1.36 1.36 1.35 1.34 1.32 1.32 1.29 1.29
15.1 14.3 14.8 15.3 14.9 14.2 14.7 16.1 13.9 15.7 14.6
1.25 1.25 1.24 1.23 1.19 1.17 1.16 1.15 1.14 1.13 1.11
16.4 15.6 14.9 15.8 14.8 15.6 12.7 15.5 13.9 14.9 14.9
1.11 1.10 1.07 1.o6 1.05 0.93 0.79 0.77
14.5 15.0 13.9 14.6 14.0 12.6 12.6 13.9
MALE DEITY WITH KALATHOS AND LYRE
133 A (14)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r.; turreted Rev.: A nude male figure seated 1.
headdress; the hair done in a knot on the edge of a cippus-like seat.
from which fall curls. The presence The head is covered by a kalathos
or absence of drapery cannot be de- and the hair is done in a knot. Betermined. hind the figure a large cithara rests
on the back of the seat. The r.
hand, advanced, holds a palm, reversed on two coins, upright on the
rest.
Legend: Circular, starting at the upper 1. XE AE TKEG[NIIPO]2I TQI[TII'PEI].
On all the coins the legend is badly obscured.
Monograms: In the reverse field 1. and the obverse field 1., No. 47. This can
be distinguished in both fields on seven coins, on the reverse alone on four
others. Without doubt it was intended to be shown on both faces of all
the coins.
In the reverse field r. and on the obverse between two of the turrets of
the headdress, either II or II. This can be distinguished on both faces on
eight coins and on the one face or the other on the rest.
Date: None can be distinguished. It is possible that this is due to the condition of the coins.

102
and reverse. The edges are flattened.
Hill, 141, No. 5; XXIII, 7. See Pl. VI and discussion, p. 137gr. : 4.23 4.16 3.98 3.65 3.64 3.60 3.60 3-57 3.37 3-33 3-33
mm. : 18.6 18.5 18.9 18.2 19.1
20.1 19.1 19.5 19.0 18.6 18.2
3.07 3.04 2.51
18.7 18.1 17.7
DRAPED FIGURE ON A THRONE
134 .E (22)
headdress; hair done in a knot
from which fall two formal curls.
Rev.: A draped figure seated 1. on a
throne with a low back. The head
appears to be bare and beardless;
other details have been obscured.
There is nothing definite to indicate the sex, but the character of
the drapery suggests that the figure
is male. The 1. hand rests on the
lap. The r. rests on a short staff
or scepter immediately in front of
the knees.
Legend: Quadrangular, above ETOTI, r. KTIEA[E], ex. (inverted) TKIAZT, l., up HHlPOI. There is no indication in the legend of a reference
to the name of the river, the Tigris. It is possible that the river name
with the article occupied an outer line at the top, off flan on all the coins.
Monograms: In the reverse field ., No. 47, and r., No. 48.
Date: As a part of the legend, on the r., down (1) KT, 9/10 A.D.; (2) [-]T.
On the rest this portion of the field is obscured or off flan.
obverse. The edges are straight.
Pl. VI. See discussion, p. 137.
gr. : 6.21 6.07 5.82 5.74 5.63 5.63
mm. : 19.0 21.0 19.0 19.6 19.6 18.4
4.54 4.45 4.38 4.31 4.20 3.82
20.5 17.9 19.4 20.8 20.4 18.8
5.34 5.16 4.99 4.95 4.59
18.9 20.2 19.0 18.8 21.5
3.64 3.35 3.32 3.15 2.67
18.5 19.4 18.9 18.9 17.0
ANCHOR
135 YE (6)
Obv.: Head of Tyche r.; turreted Rev.: An anchor, inverted.
which fall two formal curls.

CA T ALOG OF COINS
103
Legend: Semicircular starting at the 1., up ZE[AETK]IA2. Although the
legend is at least partly obscure on all of the coins, it clearly comprised
only the one word.
Monogram: Between the flukes of the anchor, at the r., obscure traces that
suggest monograms.
Date: Between the flukes of the anchor, at the 1., traces of what may be dates.
and reverse. The edges are somewhat rounded.
Pl. VI (rev. only). See discussion, p. 138.
gr. : 1.98 1-95 1.80 1.76 1.66 1-57
mm. : 15.5 14.1 15.7 14.3 14.8 15.7
FEMALE BUST WITH KALATHOS AND VEIL
136 I (28)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; tur- Rev.: A female bust r., wearing kalareted headdress; hair done in a thos and veil.
knot from which falls a curl.
Monograms: In the field 1., No. 49 on three coins dated in 15/16, months
Hyperberetaios, Apellaios, and Audynaios; No. 50 on four coins dated in
15/16, months Peritios, Dystros, and Xandikos, and on ten coins dated
in 16/17. On the rest the monogram is off flan or has been obscured.
Date: In semicircular form starting at the 1.
(7) SKT, 15/16 A.D.: (I) TIIEPBEPETAIOT, the 6th month, (1) All[E]A[A]IOT, the 8th month, (1) A[TAT]NAIOT, the 9th month,
(1) HEIPITIOT, the 1oth month, (2) ATIT[POT], the iith month,
(1) EA[NAIKOT], the 12th month;
(14) ZKT, 16/17 A.D.: (i) APTEM[IIIOT], the 1st month, (2) ilANH[MOT], the 3rd month, (5) HEIPITIOT, the 1oth month, (6)
month obscure:
(7) the year date obscured or off flan.
The adjustment of the dies varies according to the monogram: with the first
the adjustment is I I ; with the second it is normal. There is a border
of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are either straight or beveled,
without reference to the chronological sequence of the coins.
Hill, 145, No. 41; XXIII, 16. See Pl. VI (rev. only) and discussion, p. 138.
gr. :5-56 5-16 4.00 4.00 3.96 3.86 3.82 3.68 3.68 3.33 3.32
mm. : 21.5 20.5 18.6 17.8 19.9 17.4 18.3 17.7 17.3 18.2 16.9
3.31 3.27 3.15 3.13 3.04 2.99 2.93 2.86 2.56* 2.50 2.21
17.4 17-9 17.6 18.9 17-5 18.o 18.6 17.9 18.6 17.4 15.8
* Broken

104
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
gr. : 2.17 1.83 1.76 1.67 1.35 1.o6
mm. : 18.2 16.5 16.7 14.8 15.0 12.7
MONOGRAM AS TYPE
137 AE (27)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; tur- Rev.: A monogram as type.
reted headdress; hair done in a
knot.
Monogram: In the center of the field, No. 49 on seven coins, six dated in
15/16 and one in 16/17; No. 51 on twenty coins, ten dated in 16/17 and
ten on which the date has been obscured.
Legend: From the upper r., down BOTAH7.
Date: At the 1. below, up (6) T KT, 15/16 A.D.; (II) ZKT, 16/17 A.D.;
(io) date obscure.
The adjustment of the dies is normal on most of the coins; a few, without
relation to date or monogram, show I / and T I . There is a border of
dots on obverse and reverse. The edges show a wide variation with some
straight and others beveled or flattened.
Hill, cxvi-cxvii, No. 6. See Pl. VI (rev. only) and discussion, p. 139.
gr. :3.94 3.56 3.40 2.80 2.63 2.11 2.02 1.97 1.93 1.84 1.65
mm. : 18.6 18.4 18.9 16.6 16.8 15.3 15.3 16.2 15.8 14.5 15.0
1.55 1.45 1.44 1.44 1.42 1.35 1.33 1.28 1.20 1.19 1.17
16.0 15.8 15.1 14.6 15.8 15.9 14.8 15.7 13.0 14.5 15.0
1.04 0.95 0.95 0.93 0.79
15.2 15.7 14.9 13.9 16.1
THE KING AS ZEUS NIKEPHOROS
138 E. (26)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; tur- Rev.: The king seated 1. on a throne
reted headdress; hair done in a without a back. The head is bare,
knot from which fall fillets. the body clad in loose trousers and
tunic with V-shaped neck. The r.
hand, advanced, holds a Nike r.
who extends a wreath toward the
king. The 1. hand rests on a long
scepter behind.
Monogram: None appears to occur.

CATALOG OF COINS
105
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are beveled. The fabric is that of Parthian
bronze of the reign of Artabanus II.
Hill, 143, No. 16; XXIII, ii. See P1. VI and discussion, p. 139gr. : 1.83 I.75 1.69 1.68 1.68 1.62 I.61I 1.59 1-57 1.54 1-53
mm. : 12.5 12.7 12.8 12.6 12.2 12.5 14.2 12.8 12.6 12.7 13.1
1.50 1.43 1.41 1.36 1.34 1.33 1.31
12.9 12.6 12.3 12.6 12.3 13.2 12.4
1.28
12.9
1.11 1.09 1.08
12.2 13.0 12.0
1.02 0.95 0.87 0.82
13.1 12.7 12.0 11.6
THE KING RECEIVING A DIADEM FROM TYCHE
139 AE (6)
Obv.: A draped female figure seated Rev.: The king seated 1. receiving a
1. The form of the headdress can- diadem from Tyche standing r.
not be determined. The r. hand, The king appears to be wearing
advanced, holds a wreath with the characteristic trousers and
streamers. Presumably the figure tunic. All other details have been
represents Tyche. obscured.
Date: In the reverse field r., down (i) OK[T], 18/19 A.D. On the rest this
portion of the field is off flan.
and reverse. The edges are roughly flattened. The fabric is that of Parthian
bronze coins.
Hill, cxvi, No. 4; XXIII, 12-13. See Pl. VI (rev. only) and discussion,
p. 140.
gr. : 1.61 1-38 1.34 1.25 0.92 0-34*
mm. : 11.7 10.3 14.4 12.1 12.8 10.7
* Broken
THE KING SEATED ON A THRONE
140 YE (3)
Obv.: Tyche seated 1. on a cippus-like
seat; turreted headdress. The r.
hand rests on a short staff or scepter immediately in front of the
knees. The 1. arm is dropped at the
side.
Rev.: The king seated 1. on a throne,
the details of which cannot be determined. The form of the headdress cannot be distinguished. The
costume is that usually worn. The
1. arm is dropped at the side. The r.
arm is outstretched in front, the
hand off flan.

106
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
Date: In the obverse field l., up (2) AAT, 23/24 A.D. On the third coin this
portion of the field has been obscured.
and reverse. The edges are roughly flattened.
gr. : 1.05 o.88 0.78
mm. : 13.5 13.0 12.2
HUMPED BULL
141 I (153)
Rev.: A humped bull standing r., the
head on a level with the body but
turned front, the tail raised.
Legend: Above IEAET, r. KIA, ex. (inverted) THIIHPO, 1. T ITPEI. The
legend at the left reads up on some coins and down on others. On no coin
can the entire legend be distinguished. On the majority it is largely or
entirely off flan or obscured.
Monogram/Initials: In the reverse field r. (5), No. 52; (18) groups of two
letters written vertically, very obscure, possibly HT or NT. On the rest
this portion of the field is entirely obscure or is off flan. The initials are
more readily obscured than is the monogram, and it is probable that the
great majority of the coins bore one or more groups of letters.
Date: Probably none was intended to be shown.
The adjustment of the dies on most of the coins is normal; a few show i /
and T I . There is a border of dots on the obverse. The edges are flattened.
The metal is of poor quality and the coins are all badly worn and chipped.
The execution of the types is below the average for the civic issues.
gr. : 2.78 2.67
mm. : 16.8 16.7
2.54 2.34 2.33 2.30 2.27 2.26 2.19 2.18 2.16
16.9 16.8 18.6 17.4 16.9 16.7 16-5 18.7 16.4
2.14
18.5
1.96
15.9
2.11 2.09
i6.o 15.8
1.93 1.92
17.5 17.3
2.07 2.06 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.01 2.00* 1.99
16.5 i8.i 17.0 16.2 15.7 15.0 15.3 17.7
1.90 1.86 1.85
15.9 15.8 16.3
1.77 1.76 1.75 1.75 1.74 1.73
17.1 16.o 17.0 16.4 14.6 16.4
1.84 1.84 1.83 1.81* 1.78
18.o 15.1 15.6 17.0 17.6
1.73 1.70 1.67 1.65 1.64
15.1 16.4 18.2 16.7 15.6
1.57 1.57 1.55 1.55* 1.55
15.5 15.0 17.0 15.9 15.2
1.63* 1.62 1.62 i.6o 1.6o
15.9 18.4 14.3 15.3 14.9
1-58
15-7

CATALOG OF COINS
107
gr. : 1.54 1.54* 1-53 '-53
mm.: 16.9 16.7 16.5 15.8
1.47 1-45 I-44* I-44
15.2 16.5 19.2 16.6
1.39 1.39 1.38 1.37
15.4 15.2 16.1 18.2
1.30 1.28 1.27* 1.27
13.2 14.4 16.4 16.1
1.17* 1.17* 1.17 1.14
16.9 15.9 15.3 16.3
1.o8 1.04 1.01 0.99
14.9 15.0 15.5 14.1
0.86* 0.85* 0.79 0.78
13.3 14.7 14.9 13.1
o.68 0.61* 0.60* o.6o
10.4 11.3 14.3 11.1
0.41 0.41 0.40 0.39
11.7 10.7 10.4 9.40
* Broken
1.52* 1.51* 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.47 1.47
15.9 14.7 17.4 15.4 14.9 16.9 16.8
1.44 1.43 1.42 1.42 1.41 1.41* 1.40
15.2 16.1 16.2 15.7 15.6 15.0 14.7
1.37 1.37 1.35 1.35 1.33 1.33 1.32
16.3 15.2 16.2 15.7 15.5 15.3 16.o
1.26 1.24 1.24* 1.23
15.6 19.4 16.0 14.4
1.13 1.13 1.13* 1.13
15.5 15.4 15.1 14.9
0.94* 0.94 0.92 0.89
14.4 14.2 15.0 13.9
1.21 1.21 1.19
14.9 14.3 14.8
1.12 1.11 1.11
15.2 16.1 14.3
0.88* 0.87 0.87*
15.4 16.4 13.9
0.78 0.77
12.6 15.6
0.59 0.57
12.1 11.6
0.76 0.73* 0.72 0.72 o.68
14.8 12.7 12.2 9.90 13.7
0.56 0.54 0.49* 0.43 0.42*
11.8 10.8 12.3 11.7 10.5
0.38 0.38* 0.35 0.35 0.32 0.28
11.2 10.2 11.6 9.90 9.40 8.50
NIKE WITH PALM
142 Y (53)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r., draped; tur- Rev.: Nike advancing 1., holding a
reted headdress; hair done in a palm upright in the r. hand.
knot from which hangs a fillet.
Monogram: None occurs. On one coin, date obscure, in the obverse field 1.
the symbol A can be observed. This may recur on some other coins which
are obscure; it is clear that a symbol was not intended to be shown on
the great majority in this group.
Date: In the reverse field 1., down (18) ANT, 40/41 A.D.; (11) BNT, 41/42 A.D.;
(3) TNT, 42/43 A.D.; (21) date partly or entirely obscured or off flan.
The adjustment of the dies is normal with one exception, which has I 1.
The quality of the metal and of the execution is noticeably superior to that
of the two groups immediately preceding.
Hill, 145-146, Nos. 43-48; XXIII, 18-21. See Pl. VI and discussion, p. 142.
gr. : 3.70 3.62 3.59 3.57 3.50 3.49 3.45 3.42 3.39 3.33 3.31
mm. : 16.2 15.8 14.9 15.2 14.7 16.o 14.8 15.3 15.5 14.9 16.1
3.31 3.31 3.30 3.24 3.23 3.23 3.15 3.11 2.99 2.98 2.96
14.4 14.1 14.8 14.6 15.3 15.2 16.4 15.5 15.0 13.3 14.1

108
gr. :2.91* 2.88 2.88
mm. : 16.2 14.7 14.5
2.86 2.84 2.75 2.72
14.3 15.8 15.2 15.9
2.65 2.64 2.61 2.53 2.50 2.48
15.1 15.1 16.8 15.8 14.4 13.6
2.15 2.09 1.95 1.90* 1.89 1.69
13.4 16.2 13.6 15.0 14.9 14.2
* Broken
2.72 2.71 2.70 2.65
15-o 14-9 16.5 16-3
2.39 2.36 2.33 2.24
16.3 15.4 15.9 14.1
1.52 1.49
15.5 15.5
THE DEIFIED KING
143 YE (26; in a cache, see p. 143)
Obv.: Tyche seated 1. on a short column. The headdress cannot be distinguished. A cornucopiae is held
in the 1. arm. The r. arm appears
to be advanced, but the hand is off
flan.
Rev.: A male figure seated 1. The
form of the seat cannot be determined. The figure is clad, apparently in a long robe. The head is
bare; details of the hairdressing
cannot be distinguished. The figure wears a beard, rather long and
executed in a style common to
Parthian coins. The 1. arm is
raised behind, as though grasping a
long scepter; the hand is off flan.
The r. arm is advanced; the hand
grasps either a small wreath or a
flat vessel.
Date: In the reverse field l., down (5) ANT, 43/44 A.D. On the rest this
portion of the field has been obscured or is off flan.
and reverse. The edges are roughly flattened. The fabric is that of Parthian bronze issues.
gr. : 1.19 1.09 1.o8 1.05 0.95 0.87 0.84 0.84 0.83
mm. : 12.7 11.8 12.9 13.4 12.9 11-5 13.0 12.7 12.4
0.76 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.73 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.69
12.4 13.2 12.6 12.0 12.8 12.1 11.9 10.7 11.5
o.61 0.59 0.59 0.52
12.2 13.3 I1.9 12.5
0.83 0.79
11.5 12.8
o.65 o.65
13.2 11.5

CA TA LOG OF COINS
109
EAGLE
144 IE (9)
headdress; all other details obscured.
Rev.: An eagle standing 4 r., wings
outstretched; probably a wreath
held in the beak.
Legend: None can be distinguished; probably none was intended to be shown.
The adjustments of the dies are 1 1 , I /, I -+. There is a border of
dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are flattened. The fabric is more
related to that of Parthian bronze than of civic issues.
gr. : 1.47 1.20 1.14 i.o8 1.01 0.87 0.67* 0.65 0.57*
mm. : 15.0 14.6 15.5 14.6 14.6 14.6 14.8 13.3 14.0
* Broken
ARTEMIS
145 I (37)
headdress. A curl lies along the
neck.
Rev.: A female figure standing facing
front with head turned 1. The head
appears to be bare. The figure is
clad in a short tunic; a folded
chlamys hangs from the elbows.
The 1. arm is raised, the hand grasping a spear held upright. The r.
hand rests on the head of a deerlike animal which stands 4 1. The
representation is of Artemis.
Monograms: In the reverse field r. (16), No. 53; (6), No. 47. On the rest
this portion of the field has been obscured or is off flan. On a few coins the
monogram is repeated in the obverse field 1. One coin, however, which has
the first monogram on the reverse, on the obverse shows No. 54.
Date: In the field 1., top (2) OT, 59/60 A.D.; (1) BOT, 61/62 A.D.; (4) [ ]OT.
On the rest this portion of the field is off flan or has been obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal with a few exceptions which show 7 /.
There is a border of dots on obverse and reverse. The edges are abruptly
beveled. The metal is of reddish tinge.
P1. VI. See discussion, p. 144.

11O
gr. : 4.17 3.43 3.37 3.36 3.24 2.73 2.63 2.53 2.53 2.48 2.39
mm. : 18.2 17.4 17.2 16.4 17.3 17.8 14.9 17.1 16.5 16.6 17.2
2.36 2.20* 2.19 2.17 2.17 2.03 2.00 1.97 1.95 1.94 1.84
15.2 18.8 14.8 17.1 16.7 16.9 17.8 17.5 15.9 15.2 14.3
1.75 1.66* 1.51 1.40 1-30 1.27 1.21 1.11 1.04 0.97 0.97
15.9 12.0 14.3 15.7 16.9 15.0 16.2 13.9 12.7 13.9 13.7
0.94 0.93 o.81 0.77
14.6 12.5 13.6 14.6
* Broken
HUMPED BULL
146 YE (47)
Obv.: Bust of Tyche r.; turreted Rev.: A humped bull standing r., the
headdress. Either a curl or a fillet head held on a level with the body,
hangs along the back of the neck. the tail raised.
Initials: In the reverse field r., written horizontally (15) AT; on the rest this
portion of the field has been obscured or is off flan.
Symbol: On the obverse field 1., on one coin, a cornucopiae. It may have
been intended to show this symbol on other coins which have this portion
of the field off flan or obscured. On a number, however, it is clear that
the symbol does not occur.
Date: In the reverse field at the top (27) IIT, 69/70 A.D. On the rest this
portion of the field is off flan or has been obscured.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of continuous fillet
on obverse and reverse. The edges are beveled.
gr. : 2.62 2.16 2.14 2.04 1.81 1.77 1.67 i.6o 1.59 1.57 1.52
mm. : 14.6 13.0 13.2 14.1 13.7 11.7 14.0 13.2 13.5 13.0 13.1
1.51 1.48 1.47 1.44 1.44 1.42* 1.41 1.36 1-36 1-31 1.29
13.9 12.7 13.8 15.7 13.4 13.5 11.7 13.2 12.9 14.1 12.8
1.27 1.27 1.25 1.18 1.18 1.15 1.14 1.14 1.10* 1.10 1.10
14.6 13.7 12.5 14.4 12.8 13.6 13.2 12.9 13.9 12.6 12.6
1.09 1.01 0.98 0.96 0.94 0.89 o.88 0.87* 0.85* 0.83* 0.74
14.9 12.6 13.5 13.7 12.8 12.9 13.4 13.8 13.7 12.8 11.7
0.74 0.72 0.31
11.9 10.7 11.8
* Broken

CATALOG OF COINS
111
TYCHE SEATED ON A COLUMN
147 YE (12)
Rev.: Tyche seated 1. on a short column; turreted headdress. The r.
hand is raised to the face; the 1.
arm is dropped at the side.
Legend: Above [ZEAETKIAZ], r. TH2IIP[O2], 1. TI' PE. The legend is entirely off flan on the majority of the coins.
Monogram: In the reverse field 1., No. 42. This can be distinguished on seven
coins. On the rest this portion of the field has been obscured or is off flan.
Date: In the reverse field I., up (5) IIT, 69/70 A.D. On the rest this portion
of the field is off flan.
The adjustment of the dies is normal. There is a border of dots on the obverse. The edges are rounded.
See discussion, p. 145gr. : 1.36 1.33 1.27 1.25 1.21 1.12 0.95 0.78 0.78 0.78* 0.67 0.37*
mm. : 12.9 15.0 13.0 12.4 12.8 13.9 12.8 13.5 13.3 12.8 13.2 11.4
* Broken
NIKE WITH WREATH
148 E (3)
headdress; hair done in a knot.
Rev.: Nike standing 1. The r. hand,
advanced, holds a wreath from
which fall two short streamers.
The 1. arm is dropped at the side.
Monogram: None can be distinguished. This may be due to the fact that
the flans are too small for the dies.
edges are somewhat flattened.
P1. VI. See discussion, p. 146.
gr. : 1.22 1.20 1.04
mm. : 11.4 11.4 10.7

CHAPTER V
NOTES ON THE COINS
IN THIS chapter have been brought together under the serial
headings employed in the catalog all discussions having to do
with the individual type groups. The purpose has been to make
the catalog more readily available for rapid reference to the
various types. As in the catalog the Royal Coinage is treated
first, then the Autonomous Coinage.
1. THE ROYAL COINAGE
PERIOD OF MITHRADATES I
66. The coins with similar types published by Wroth comprise three varieties, two of which bear dates, 139/38 and 13 8/37
B.C. Owing to the obscured condition of its details the specimen
from Seleucia cannot be assigned to a particular variety. The
examples which lack a date were probably struck shortly before
those on which the date appears (see below, p. 147).
ARTABANUS I
67. The coin from Seleucia is apparently similar to that in
the Berlin Museum; Wroth, however, gives the second monogram on that specimen as alpha enclosed by pi. Both coins lack
a date. Another, published by Wroth (20, No.I), is dated in the
year 124/23 B.C. The undated examples probably represent an
issue which preceded that on which the date occurs (see below,
p. 147).
MITHRADATES II
68. The coins in Wroth show a monogram behind the figure
of Arsaces, a feature which cannot be distinguished on the examples from Seleucia. The characters in the exergue, TT, appear
on one of the coins cited and also on a tetradrachm of Phraates II
(Wroth, 23, No. 1, attributed to Himerus).
ORODES II
69. The coin cited in the catalog is similar in respect to types
and monogram, but bears the month date Peritios. The months
II2

NOTES ON THE COINS
113
on this and all succeeding coins have been calculated on the basis
of the Babylonian calendar. The problem of the calendar employed by the Seleucia mint has been discussed on pages 147-153.
The issue represented by No. 69 was struck probably shortly
prior to type group No. 70. In the legend the letter phi has the
form reproduced on page 244, No. 15.
70. On this issue we find for the first time on the coins from
Seleucia the use of the rectangular sigma. The forms of the upsilon and the phi have also been changed. See page 244, Nos. 13,
14, and 15. Although the two types of Orodes found at Seleucia
fail to show year dates, a variety of type No. 70 published by
Wroth (73, No. 37) bears the date 39/38 B.c. The issue of which
No. 70 is an example may be presumed to have been struck just
prior to the dated variety. Since the legend on group No. 69
employs the older form of the sigma, this issue was probably
struck before No. 70.
PHRAATES IV
71. On the coin cited a pellet is shown in the reverse field.
Possibly this has been obscured on the coin from Seleucia. The
form of the upsilon and the phi of the legend are reproduced on
page 244, Nos. 14 and 15.
72. The coin cited is similar in respect to the types, but
bears a different year date, 25/24 B.C. Wroth does show a
specimen with the year and month dates of group No. 72, but the
types are those of No. 71 (103, No. 18). The issue of variant
types of tetradrachms within the same month, a feature of the
coinage of Phraates IV, is discussed on pages 174-175. It should
be noted that the epsilon in the legend of type No. 72 lacks the
middle horizontal bar. Its form and those of the sigma, upsilon,
and phi are reproduced on page 244, Nos. 5, 13, 14, and 15.
73. The coin in Wroth bears the month date Apellaios. Note
the peculiar spelling of Panemos on one of the coins from Seleucia. The forms of the alpha, sigma, upsilon, and phi of the legend
are reproduced on page 244, Nos. 1, 13, 14, and 15.
74. The coins cited bear the first monogram which occurs on
the specimens from Seleucia. Under the throne, however, Wroth
has noted a simple A in place of our lambda and rho in monogram. In the legend of this group and that of No. 75 the older
form of the sigma temporarily reappears. The forms of the up-

114
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
silon and the phi of the legend and of the alpha of the date are
reproduced on page 244, Nos. 14, 15, and i. The issues represented by groups Nos. 74 and 75 alone among those struck
under Phraates IV appear to be undated. In style they are
closely similar to the dated issues and probably succeeded them.
75. In addition to the adjunct characters which appear on
the examples from Seleucia, the coins in Wroth show the same
monogram which occurs on group No. 74. This has undoubtedly
been obscured on our single specimen of group No. 75. The
forms of the upsilon and phi of the legend are reproduced on
page 244, Nos. 14 and i5.
PHRAATACES (PHRAATES V)
76. The coins cited are dated in the month Artemisios of the
year in which the specimens from Seleucia were struck. They
appear to lack the pellets in the reverse field. Two of the coins
of group No. 76, weighing 9.83 and 6.oi grams, have what seems
to be a bronze core under a plating of silver. In the legends of
this group the sigmas again have the rectangular form. In addition the epsilons lack the middle horizontal bar and the crossbar of the alpha is represented by a dot. These forms and those
of the upsilon and the phi are reproduced on page 244, Nos. 13,
5, 2, 14, and 15. So far as I have been able to read the legends,
the debased forms are common to the succeeding issues of
Phraataces which have been found at Seleucia. They became
aggravated on the coinage of Artabanus II, who followed
Phraataces, but disappeared thereafter. The significance of this
temporary debasement of the legends is discussed on pages 216217.
77. The coin cited is similar except in the date which is
equivalent to I B.C./I A.D.
79. The reverse type of the coin in Wroth is partly off flan.
It is probable that the types are similar to those of the coin
from Seleucia, but the presence or absence of a monogram cannot be determined. The style of the engraving and the form of
the monogram of our specimen are characteristic of the Parthian
bronze coinage struck in the mints of Iran. Presumably the
coin had been brought to Seleucia by some chance. See page 157
for further discussion.

NOTES ON THE COINS
115
ARTABANUS II
8o. On this group, as on the other issues of silver of this
reign, the Greek letters of the legends retain the debased forms
which have been noted for the reign of Phraataces. The crossbar of the alphas disappears entirely, and this character cannot
be distinguished from lambda. Similarly the epsilons and the
sigmas have the same form. These characters along with the
letters omicron, upsilon, and phi are reproduced on page 244,
Nos. 3, 5, 13, II, 14, and 15.
81. Petrowicz (io6, No. 4) shows a tetradrachm, wrongly
assigned by him to Vonones I, which has types similar to those
of the coin from Seleucia and of the examples cited from Wroth,
but which bears on the second line of the exergue the legend
[E]TOT2 ]F[KT]. The date is equivalent to 12/13 A.D. Petrowicz has noted traces of this legend in a corresponding position
on another tetradrachm of Artabanus (io8, No. 3). On an
autonomous issue of Seleucia struck three years earlier ETOTI
is again found associated with the date. On the coin from Seleucia with which we are now concerned the second line of the
exergue has been obscured. It is very possible that the coins in
the British Museum have suffered in a similar manner, and I have
tentatively assigned all the examples of this group to the year
12/13 A.D. It should be noted that these coins, alone among the
tetradrachms of Artabanus II, have been considered to have
lacked the year date. The examples cited from Wroth and from
Petrowicz are dated in Loos and Gorpiaios, the fourth and fifth
months.
82. One of the coins in this group, of 7.78 grams, has a bronze
core under a silver plating. On all of the specimens the first line
of the legend has as the final character a nu, reversed, in place
of a sigma. The final letter of the second line cannot be distinguished, but it is probably a sigma instead of the normal nu.
The engraver appears to have inverted the order of the two lines.
On one coin of the group the word in the exergue reads AIKAIOT
in place of ETEPITETOT. The types have been struck over an
earlier issue of Artabanus. In the legend the alpha, epsilon,
omicron, sigma, upsilon, and phi have the forms reproduced on
page 244, Nos. 3, 5, II, 13, 14, and 15The title Phil-hellenos, which had only rarely been omitted

116
from the legends of the tetradrachms since the reign of Mithradates I, does not occur on groups Nos. 82 and 83. The significance of the omission is not certain.
83. The coins cited bear various monograms, one of which
includes A. Possibly the alpha which can be discerned on the
coins from Seleucia constitutes one element of a similar monogram, the other characters of which have been obscured. The
alpha, epsilon, omicron, sigma, upsilon, and phi in the legend
have the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos. 3, 5, II, 13, 14,
and 15.
84. This group represents the earliest issue of Parthian royal
bronze currency struck for use in the Seleucia mint area. The
transition from the autonomous coinage of Seleucia to the royal
coinage is discussed on page 156.
85. The reverse type of this bronze piece is essentially that
of an earlier tetradrachm (Wroth, 102, Nos. 13-17). The choice
was probably inspired, however, by the appearance of this motif
on autonomous coins struck about 17/18 A.D. (see p. 104, No.
138).
86. The form of the character mu of the date, which closely
resembles the letter pi, is of not infrequent occurrence on Parthian
coins (see p. 244, No. 8; cf. Wroth, lxxviii). Although the dates
on all the examples are somewhat obscure, the attribution of
the group to Artabanus II receives support from other factors.
The manner of representation of the hair on the head and the
beard is definitely that of the full-faced portrait of Artabanus on
his tetradrachms. Vardanes II, Osroes, and Volagases IV are
pictured. in the frontal position on certain of their issues (Wroth,
XXIX, 16; XXXI, 15; XXXV, 7), but the treatment of the
hair differs significantly. The nine coins which constitute the
group under consideration were found in Level III of the Great
House, two together in one room and seven together in another.
Occupation of this level came to an end about 43 A.D., three or
four years after the death of Artabanus. Vardanes II was in
successful revolt for only a short period around 55 A.D.; Osroes
and Volagases IV came to the throne in turn during the next
century. The provenance of the coins, therefore, requires their
assignment to Artabanus II and supports the reading of the
dates. The latest date on coins of Artabanus hitherto published
15 27/28 A.D. (Wroth, 148, No. 20).

NOTES ON THE COINS
117
VARDANES I
87. One coin of this group (10.21 gr.) appears to have a
bronze core under silver plating; another (7.91 gr.) is apparently
of a base metal. The coin of the year 42/43 has been overstruck,
but it is not possible to identify the earlier types. On this and all
succeeding issues of tetradrachms through the reign of Volagases III the Greek letters of the legend are again correctly formed,
although, in some instances, in a different style. See page 244,
Nos. 4, 11, 13, 14, 15, and 17.
88. This issue is of unusual interest. The obverse type
with the bust of the king turned right follows a practice which
on Parthian coinage had been abandoned since the period of
Artabanus I, about a century and a half earlier. The reverse
type appears to be related to that of an autonomous issue of an
earlier date which was struck by the Boule, the organization
of the aristocratic party at Seleucia (see p. 103, No. 136). This
title occurs on the succeeding issue of Vardanes, on coins of this
same year, 43/44 A.D. The quality of the engraving of the group
is markedly superior to that of any other Parthian bronze and is
equaled only by certain of the early issues of silver. The group
constitutes the first known issue of the royal bronze currency
at Seleucia after the close of the period of anarchy and revolt
which marked the latter part of the reign of Artabanus II. The
issue appears to have been light, and was followed in the course
of the same year by another of more nearly normal fabric and
design.
The fragmentary legend on the reverse of the group is
puzzling. The two surviving characters constituted the final
letters of the word of which they formed a part. The most
reasonable explanation appears to be that the coins were dated
by the month as well as by the year. This would be the more
natural if, as is likely, they commemorated a particular event.
89. Wroth fails to show any examples of this group for the
year 45/46 A.D. Although the British Museum specimens do
not show the symbol letter on the reverse at the left, Petrowicz
has noted this feature on one of the coins in his collection
(115, No. 13).
The figure of the reverse type appears to symbolize the Boule,
the council of the aristocratic party at Seleucia. The significance

118
of this motif on the first normal issue of the royal bronze currency
in Seleucia after the revolt is discussed on pages 224 to 226 below.
On a few specimens of the group under consideration, on which
unfortunately the dates have been obscured, the technique of
the engraving appears to be related to that of an autonomous
issue of the reign of Artabanus (see p. 105, No. 139). Aside from
these the group represents a quality of engraving superior to
that found on either the royal or the civic bronze of that reign.
The execution is decidedly superior to that of the coins struck
in the revolt period, No. 141, but there is a close similarity in
respect to both style and fabric between the coins of this group
and those of the autonomous issue, type No. 142, which marked
the victory of the aristocratic party over the rebels and the
return of the city to its allegiance to the Parthian dynasty.
It is probable that the few coins representing an inferior technique were the earliest struck, from a die that was soon discarded
along with the engraver responsible for it. The reverse reproduced on Plate IV illustrates the technique.
It should be noted that there is no relation between the
variation in the size of the coins and the changes in date; if
two denominations are represented, as is likely, both were issued
in each of the three years.
GOTARZES II
90. The coin has been overstruck on the types of Vardanes.
On the obverse the outline of the bust of Vardanes can be distinguished and on the reverse the palm branch represented in
the hand of Tyche on the tetradrachms of that reign. The legend
and the dates recorded in the catalog belong to the second striking. The month Xandikos does not appear on the coins for
this year published by Wroth. The date of the types of Vardanes
on our coin cannot be distinguished. In the legend the alpha,
omicron, sigma, upsilon, phi, and omega have the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos. 1, II, 13, 14, 15, and 17.
Beginning with the year 46/47 A.D. in the reign of Gotarzes
the dates on all coins discussed in this volume have been calculated on the basis of the Babylonian calendar as before, but a
change of one month has been assumed in the correspondence
of the Greek months with the Babylonian. Xandikos rather
than Artemisios has been correlated with Nisannu, the initial

NO TES ON THE COINS
119
month of the year. The reasons for this modification have been
discussed on pages 151-153.
91. The coins cited appear to be similar, although the
presence of a symbol has not been noted. The style of the
engraving is that characteristic of the later Parthian mints in
Iran, and it must be presumed that the single example found at
Seleucia had not been intended to circulate in the local mint
area. The distinctions between the bronze struck at Seleucia
and in the other Parthian mints are discussed on page 158.
92. The group constitutes the sole established instance in
the Parthian royal coinage of the occurrence of month dates on
bronze issues. What may be a fragmentary month date on an
issue of Vardanes I has already been noted (p. 117, No. 88).
The month as well as the year has been indicated also on an
autonomous issue from Seleucia (p. 103, No. 136) and on a
commemorative issue of an unidentified city (pp. 155-156). The
group under consideration is important because of the light which
it throws on the form of the calendar employed by the mint at
Seleucia. The evidence is presented on pages 152-153. In the
date the numeral xi has the form reproduced on page 244, No. io.
Petrowicz has published (115, No. 14) what appears to be an
example of type group No. 92. The coin is not illustrated, but
the obverse is said to be similar to that of an issue of Vardanes,
and the specimen has been assigned to that reign. Aside from
the coin published by Petrowicz no issue of Vardanes is known
which has as the reverse type a head or bust of Tyche. Petrowicz gives the monogram as alpha and rho linked, and a query
is placed after the reading of the date I7NT. I suggest that the
date should be read XNT, with the zeta reversed as on some of
the examples of this group from Seleucia, and that on the monogram the vertical stroke of the tau has been obscured. The
month date presumably is off flan or has been obscured. De
Morgan also has published a coin of the type under consideration (298, No. 223), which he erroneously assigns to Vardanes.
The portrait is clearly that of Gotarzes and the coin is dated
in 46/47 A.D., after the death of Vardanes.
VOLAGASES I
94. Wroth has published examples of this group which are
dated variously in 78/79 and 79/80 A.D. He assigns the group

120
to. Volagases II on the grounds of the close similarity of the types
to those of this reign. He is compelled to assume that the second
Volagases came to the throne about 78 A.D., reigned until about
80, and then disappeared until 122, from which date he reigned
until 147. The decision of Wroth appears to have been based on
the fact that although literary evidence cited by him suggests
the continued tenure of the throne by Volagases I as late as
75 A.D., dated coins known to him "carry the reign only as far
as A.D. 67/68" (op. cit., 1). In making this statement he has
entirely ignored a series of tetradrachms published by Lindsay
which reproduce exactly the types of Volagases and which are
said to be dated in 69/70, 73/74, 74/75, 75/76, and 77/78 (185,
Nos. 76-80). A hitherto unpublished series of bronze coins
found at Seleucia (p. 75, No. 96) bears dates which cover the
period from 69/70 through 77/78 and very probably through
78/79. This group can be assigned only to Volagases I and,
with the series noted by Lindsay, it serves to bridge entirely
the gap between the earlier coinage of Volagases I and the group
of tetradrachms dated in 78/79 and 79/80, which Wroth would
assign to Volagases II.
The group of tetradrachms which are in question have a
reverse generally similar to that of the coinage of Volagases II
and of the earliest coinage of Volagases I (Wroth, XXXII,
8-10; XXVIII, 12-14). It differs from the second coinage of
Volagases I (ibid., XXIX, 5) in the substitution on the latter
of a palm for a diadem in the hand of Tyche. On the obverse
of the first two coinages of Volagases I the king is represented
with the head bare; on that of the group in question and of the
coinage of Volagases II, the head is covered by a helmet. Actually the relationship of the group to the earlier coinage of
Volagases I as well as to the coinage of Volagases II is superficial and of secondary importance. A close examination demonstrates that the reverse type of the group is a literal reproduction
of the type chosen by Pacorus II for his first coinage (Wroth,
XXX, 1-2). At this period Pacorus was in revolt against
Volagases (see pp. 229-230); he seized the mint and struck
tetradrachms about April, 78 A.D. About June Volagases reoccupied the mint and struck the first of the group of tetradrachms with which we are concerned. He came into possession
of the mint again about June, 79 A.D., and about January,

NOTES ON THE COINS
121
8o A.D., at which times the rest of the group were issued.
During the greater part of this period Pacorus maintained
control and Volagases contented himself with the reverse type
employed by his rival. The distinguishing feature of the design
is the crosspiece forming the back of the throne which had been
absent from the earlier coinages of Volagases I and which was
not reproduced on the coinage of Volagases II. It was employed
again by Pacorus on his third coinage. On the obverse of the
group in question there appears to have been no attempt to
reproduce the features of Volagases. The portrait, indeed, is
more nearly that of the bearded Pacorus (Wroth, XXXI, I)
than of either Volagases I or Volagases II. The coins were
obviously struck under the stress of conflict, and it is only the
presence of the royal name on the legend which identifies the
group. In assigning the group to Volagases I the latter is not
provided with a greater variety of portraiture than his three
coinages afforded Pacorus II. There is nothing strange in the
adoption of the types of Volagases I by Volagases II some forty
years later. Pacorus had been a rebel under whose reign
the paramount power had been seriously weakened; when
Volagases II finally reestablished the unity of the empire it
must have served to increase public confidence that he should
have chosen the types of the last legitimate monarch. In the
legend of this group alpha, beta, omicron, sigma, upsilon, phi,
and omega have the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos. I, 4,
II, 13, 14, 15, and 17.
95. On one of the coins in this type group the date has been
obscured, but the form of the monogram and the fabric of the
coin require its inclusion. On another example both the date and
the monogram are illegible, and identification has been based on
style and fabric alone. The first coin weighs 0.94 gram; the
second, 1.o8 grams. The assignment of the group to Volagases I
is required by the date, which is entirely too early for Pacorus II.
The portrait on the obverse might be attributed to either of these
two kings, and the group affords an illustration of the unreliability of portraiture at this late period as a principal means for the
identification of coins.
96. It is unfortunate that the reading of the latest date on
the coins of this group must be classed as tentative. The pi and
the tau are distinct, but only the upper portion of the theta can

122
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
be discerned. Although I am convinced that the fragmentary
character is neither alpha, nor beta, nor delta the other possibilities the fact that the date constitutes the latest in the
series and is unsupported by other evidence requires its limitation to a tentative reading. Wroth has published a coin with
types apparently similar to those of the group under consideration (158, No. 40, note i). He describes the date as having the
appearance of AIIT, but he tentatively reads it as ANT. The
first reading is undoubtedly correct. It should be noted again in
respect to this group of coins that variations in the weight have
no relationship to the year of issue.
97. A general similarity will be noted between the types of
this coin and those of a group published by Wroth, which he assigns to the reign of Volagases 11(214, Nos. 40-45). In details
of execution, however, they differ, and because of the absence of
a date from the coins in Wroth they must be attributed to a mint
other than that at Seleucia. Our specimen must be assigned to
the reign of Volagases I not only because of the character of the
date but by reason of the closer relationship of the obverse to the
types of this reign than to those of Pacorus II. It is very possible
that the group of coins cited likewise belong to the earlier reign.
PACORUS II
98. The coin has been overstruck, the types of Pacorus appearing over others, which probably are those of the first coinage
of Volagases I. The name of the latter cannot be distinguished.
In the legend the alpha, beta, omicron, sigma, upsilon, phi, and
omega have the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos. 1, 4, II,
13, 14, 15, and 17.
99. The obverse type shows a characteristic portrait of Pacorus. The reverse, however, is unusual in respect to both motif
and execution. Both of these factors reveal a fresh and direct
western influence generally lacking in the Parthian coinage after
the reign of Phraates II. Owing to the condition of the coin one
cannot be certain of the significance of the reverse motif. It
is scarcely possible that a portrait of the king was intended.
Probably the representation is of deity - Dionysos rather than
Zeus or Hercules.
100. In addition to the dates which occur on the examples
found at Seleucia, Petrowicz has published coins of this type

NOTES ON THE COINS
123
group dated in 8o/8i and 85/86 A.D. (147, Nos. 15, 18); LongpErier, one of 87/88 (p. 131); and Lindsay, one of 93/94 (2o8,
No. ioo). The variation in the weight of these coins has no
relation to the date of issue.
101. The coin cited appears to be entirely similar to those
from Seleucia; the palm on the reverse presumably is off flan.
As Wroth has noted, Longperier in the first publication of this
coin read the date as TKT, but Gardner, whom Wroth follows,
preferred TT. By comparison of the reproduction of this coin
in Wroth with the specimens from Seleucia I am entirely satisfied
that the correct reading is SK[T]. In spite of the late date the
attribution of the group to Pacorus II is required by the character of the obverse.
OSROES
102. The coins of this group represent two denominations,
the one comprising only two examples (7.77 and 6.81 gr.). The
types of group No. io6 are similar, but the denomination is
smaller. On the coins of 114/15 A.D. the epsilon of the date has
the form reproduced on page 244, No. 6. In addition to the dates
found on the coins of these groups from Seleucia Wroth gives
110/II A.D. (205, No. 8) and Petrowicz 109/10, 112/13, 121/22,
and 122/23 (150-152, Nos. 3, 5, 15, i6).
103. The coin cited is similar to the group from Seleucia in
respect to the types and the symbol. It is reasonable, therefore,
to change Wroth's restoration of the date from OAT to OKT.
104. The coins in Wroth bear only the one date, 118/19 A.D.,
and the symbol has been read as A rather than as A.
io6. See discussion under No. 102, above. On group No. io6
no symbol can be distinguished, and apparently none was intended to be shown. On the coins of this group dated in 123/24,
125/26, and 127/28 A.D. the dates read up; for the year 126/27
on two examples the date reads up, on five, down.
VOLAGASES II
109. Tetradrachms of Volagases II are known for the greater
number of the years between 122 and 147 A.D. The two examples from Seleucia on which dates cannot be read may belong
anywhere within this period. In this volume the so-called early
coinage of Volagases II has been attributed to Volagases I

124
(see p. 119, under No. 94). In the legend alpha, beta, omicron,
sigma, upsilon, phi, and omega have the forms reproduced on
page 244, Nos. 1, 4, 11, 13, 14, 15, and 17.
io9a. This specimen is of a base, spongy metal. In view of
this fact and of the blundered legend it is possible that we have
here an example of ancient counterfeiting. In addition to the
forms noted under No. 109 the theta of the legend has the form
reproduced on page 244, No. 7.
i io. The example from Seleucia is dated five months prior to
the earliest tetradrachm of Volagases II hitherto published (see
the table on p. 194). The details of the obverse closely approximate those characteristic of the coinage of Volagases III; this is
particularly true of the long squared beard and the helmet with
rather long curved flaps. Because of the conventionalization of
the portraiture on late Parthian coins, it is not possible to determine whether the features are those of the second or the third
Volagases. The reverse type is that common to both reigns.
Although the greater part of the legend has been obscured,
the epithet ETEPTETOT which has survived demonstrates that
this portion of the design has been drawn from the coinage of
Volagases I. This particular title had been dropped from the legend on the latest issues of that reign and on those of Pacorus II
in order to provide space for the royal name. This had been a
requisite during a period when rival kings claimed the paramount
power. Although Volagases II during the latter portion of his
reign and Volagases III throughout his reign were untroubled by
rivals, on all examples of their tetradrachms except that with
which we are now concerned the royal name continued to form a
part of the legend. The month date appears on the tetradrachms
of Volagases II on the second line of the exergue except in the
case of the latest issues, on which, as on all the issues of Volagases III, this date has been placed as the first line of the exergue.
In this respect the specimen with which we are concerned is related to the coinage of the second Volagases.
The coin is abnormally light and may well be of a base metal.
The question arises whether it may be counterfeit. On this
supposition the coin could be assigned to the reign of Volagases
III, with the early date an error on the part of the illegal engraver. It is unreasonable, however, to suggest that a counterfeiter would err so patently in respect not only to the year of

NOTES ON THE COINS
125
issue, but to the character of the legend. I have assumed, therefore, that if the coin is counterfeit it was copied from a legal issue
of Volagases II which bore corresponding types, legend, and date.
There have been found at Seleucia bronze coins of the later years
of the reign of Volagases II (type groups Nos. 114 and 115) which
have obverse types very similar to those of Volagases III. I
suggest that curved rather than straight flaps for helmets, and
beards worn long, became the style sometime after 120 A.D.
On one of his late issues Osroes is pictured with the new style of
helmet (Wroth, XXXII, 4). I suggest further that our coin
reproduces the design chosen for the first issue of tetradrachms by
Volagases II. On this he is portrayed in the actual style of the
day. The fact that his administration reinaugurated the minting
of tetradrachms after a lapse of twenty-five years (see discussion
on pp. 233-234) affords evidence that conditions within the
empire were rapidly being restored to normal. The choice of the
traditional form of the legend, omitting the royal name, expressed
confidence in this trend. The abrupt abandonment of this design
on the tetradrachms can reasonably be explained by the supposition that the public displayed a lack of confidence in the new
types and that it became necessary to reEmploy those of Volagases I, the last legitimate king from whom Volagases II derived
his right to rule (see discussion under No. 94, p. 119, and on
pp. 228-229). The use of the current style of headdress on later
bronze issues indicates simply that by this date Volagases II had
entirely established his political strength in the area within
which these coins were intended to circulate. With the accession
of Volagases III, the legitimate successor of Volagases II, the
administration was in a position to complete the shift from an
archaistic to a natural representation of the royal portrait on the
coinage.
i i1. Wroth tentatively assigned this type group to the reign
of Osroes. He quotes Gardner's suggestion that it may belong
to another, unidentified, rival king of the period (204, note I;
Gardner, 54). Since the extensive coinage of Osroes is entirely
homogeneous and shows an obverse which differs in every significant characteristic from that of the group with which we are
concerned, I feel that the suggestion of Wroth is not admissible.
On the other hand, I see no necessity for introducing an unknown
king, nor any objections to the attribution of the group to Vola-

126
gases II. From the year 112/13 A.D. the issues of this king
recur with adequate regularity. No difficulty is presented by the
fact that on the obverse of the coins under consideration the king
is shown bareheaded, with the hair in formal rows, whereas on
the succeeding coinage of Volagases he is represented helmeted.
A similar change in the obverse took place in the coinages of
Volagases I and Pacorus II. This variation involved no break
with traditional style such as is caused by the introduction of the
peculiar hairdressing represented on the coinage of Osroes a break which points to a change in cultural domination. In
view of these conditions, therefore, I have tentatively assigned
the group to Volagases II and have accepted the earliest date,
105/06 A.D., as the first year of this reign.
112. This type group and the two following, Nos. 113 and
114, have been attributed by Wroth to Volagases II, but with a
query. He notes two objections to the attribution: first, that the
form of the helmet and of the beard differs from that characteristic of the known issues of this king and, second, that the dates on
this bronze fail to coincide with those on the tetradrachms (215,
note 1). An explanation of the early form of helmet pictured on
the tetradrachms of Volagases II has been presented above under No. I11o. The helmet on the bronze under consideration
shows a form intermediate between that on the tetradrachms and
that on the later bronze of Volagases (type groups Nos. 114 and
115). Wroth describes the beard of the portrait on the coins as
long and pointed. Actually it is of medium length and squared
at the bottom. That is, the beard, like the helmet, is represented
with greater naturalness on the bronze than was feasible for the
tetradrachms. The bronze unquestioningly assigned to Volagases II by Wroth (XXXII, 13-14) is not a product of the Seleucia mint and quite naturally, therefore, differs in style from the
local issues. If the coins with which we are concerned are not
assigned to Volagases II, his long reign at Seleucia after I22 A.D.
is entirely unrepresented by bronze issues, whereas his tetradrachms are numerous during this period. Of the five type
groups of bronze attributed to Volagases II in this volume, the
last four, Nos. 112-115, cannot reasonably be separated. The
reverse motif of No. 114 repeats that of No. 112; of No. 115,
that of No. 113. The changes in the style of the obverses reflect
simply the progressive stabilization of the political situation (see

NOTES ON THE COINS
1 27
above under No. 11o), and in this respect the bronze constitutes
one link in the continuity of the legitimate coin types between
the reigns of Volagases I and Volagases III. There is nothing
in the details of either the obverses or the reverses of the four
type groups to warrant their separation and attribution to two
different kings, one of whom, in the entire absence of historical
evidence, would have to be created for this particular purpose.
The example of group No. 112 cited from Petrowicz is dated in
the year 115/16.A.D.
113. The attribution of this group to Volagases II has been
discussed under No. iiz above. Examples of the group which
have been published by the authors cited in the catalog bear
the following additional dates: 122/23, 123/24, 124/25, and
126/27 A.D. The variation in the weight of the coins appears to
have no relation to the year of issue.
114. This group and No. 115 below are dated in the reign of
Volagases II, but the obverse types of both approximate that
characteristic of the coinage of Volagases III. This is particularly true in respect to the curved flaps of the helmet and the
form of the beard. As has been suggested under the discussion of
group No. 11o above, the coins with which we are now concerned
probably portray Volagases II as he actually appeared, in the
current style of his day, whereas on the tetradrachms his likeness had been approximated to that of Volagases I. Volagases
III, in turn, as the legitimate successor of Volagases II, continued
the latest type adopted by the latter. The coin cited in the
catalog under No. 114 appears to be entirely similar, although
the palm in the hand of Tyche cannot be distinguished. The
form of the beard and that of the helmet can be distinctly discerned on the reproduction of this coin in Wroth (XXXIII, 5).
The specimen is dated in 128/29 A.D.
115. The obverse type of this group appears to be entirely
similar to that of No. 114. The coins cited in the catalog are
without doubt examples of group No. 115. Although Petrowicz
has failed to state that the flaps of the helmet are curved, he
compares his coins with a type of Volagases III published by
Wroth which possesses these features. The dates on the examples in Petrowicz, 133/34 and 138/39 A.D., require their attribution to Volagases II.

128
VOLAGASES III
116. One coin in this group, weighing 8.o6 grams and dated
in 178/79 A.D., has a bronze core under silver plating. The variation in weight within the group has no relation to the sequence of
dates. In the legend alpha, beta, omicron, sigma, upsilon, phi,
and omega have the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos.- 1, 4,
II, 13, 14, 15, and 17.
i16a. The coins of this group were found together below the
floor of room 92, Level I of the Great House. The latest coin in
the group establishes approximately the date at which the cache
was constituted the ninth month of the year 165/66 A.D. The
relationship of the cache to current events at Seleucia is discussed
on page 234.
In the case of this as of other large caches described in this
volume the weights and the measurements have been listed according to the dates on the coins. This reveals the degree of
variation among coins presumably of a single issue. It should be
noted that on the series of tetradrachms of Volagases III the
symbols A and B are mutually exclusive in time. It is very possible that these characters represent mint offices or titles which
might be rendered as "First Controller" and "Second Controller," and that the officials concerned alternately rather than
concurrently assumed responsibility for issues or series of issues.
The coins of this group reveal a certain carelessness in both
the engraving and the striking. There are several instances of
double and even triple striking with the same dies. On four coins
dated in 149/50 the month date occupies the second line of the
exergue rather than the first, the normal position. On some
specimens initial or final letters have been dropped from an upper
to a lower line of the legend.
i16b. The coins of this group were found together below the
floor of room 190, Level I of the Great House. In the same
room two caches of bronze coins were uncovered, groups Nos.
118 and 118a, each of which has for its latest date the year
165/66 A.D. It is not possible to determine definitely whether
the burial of the five tetradrachms was connected with that of the
bronze. The latest date on the silver, 156/57 A.D., suggests no
political event which might have caused the secretion of valuables at that time. Our knowledge of the domestic history of

NOTES ON THE COINS
129
Parthia is so limited, however, that little significance can be
accorded a negative condition. In view of the number of
caches which appear to be connected with events in the year
165 /66 A.D., it is not unreasonable to assume that the five coins
under discussion were buried along with one of the two lots
of bronze.
116c. These coins were found together below the floor of
room 226, Level I of the Great House. As in the case of the
cache constituted by group No. 116a, the latest coin of the group
is dated in the ninth month of 165/66 A.D.
117. Among the coins cited are two, published by Petrowicz,
which bear dates not found on the examples from Seleucia,
149/50 and 154/55 A.D.
118. The coins of this group were found together below the
floor of room 190, Level I of the Great House. The latest coins of
the group are of the year 165/66 A.D. Although buried in the
same room with group No. 118a, and at the same general time,
this cache is distinct from the other. There is a possibility,
however, that the silver coins listed under No. 116b above formed
a part of this lot.
118a. The coins of this group constitute a cache found below
the floor of room 190, Level I of the Great House. The latest
date in the group is 165/66 A.D. Forming a part of the cache
were a large number of bronze coins with similar types, carelessly
struck, but of a fractional denomination. These specimens
averaged a little over one gram in weight and about eight millimeters in diameter. Owing to the slight value which attaches to
them such coins have not been listed in the catalog.
S118b. One of the coins in Petrowicz bears the date 172/73 A.D.,
not found on the examples of this group from Seleucia.
119. The representation of the king in full figure and
mounted as the obverse type of these coins is most unusual.
I suggest that the two types constitute details from a common
motif the king on horseback receiving a palm from the standing Tyche. This appears as the reverse type on tetradrachms of
Artabanus II (see p. 69, No. 83).
120. The obverse type of these coins is that of group No. 118,
the reverse type that of group No. 117. One of the examples
cited from Petrowicz bears the date 173/74 A.D., which does not
occur on the coins of the group found at Seleucia. The vari-

130
ation in the weight of the coins has no relation to the sequence
of dates.
121. On the coin cited the date has been obscured, but, so
far as one may judge from the reproduction, it appears to be
similar to that which can be distinguished on the coins from
Seleucia. The types of the group are closely related to those of
group No. 115 of the reign of Volagases II (see p. 127).
VOLAGASES IV
122. These coins constitute a cache found below the floor of
room 192, part of a late occupation of Level I of the Great House.
The latest coins in the group are dated in the year 198/99 A.D.,
with the month dates obscured or off flan. The relationship of
the cache to events in Seleucia at this time is discussed on
page 235.
As is true of nearly all extant tetradrachms of this reign, on
the examples from Seleucia the legends are in large measure off
flan. The outer lines at the top and the right are entirely missing
on all our specimens. This was due to the general use of flans too
small for the dies and points to a change in mint practice and
policy under the new administration. Such words of the legend
as survive are in many instances hopelessly blundered. The
inner line at the right besides the normal form OAOFAIOT
shows the following: AL[AI, OAI, AOAT'A, TOE, AOAF, OAIH,
AAMA, etc. In the corresponding position at the left for
EIII@ANOTI appear AIANO, IIIANO, ETI@, I1ID, MHNO1,
MHNOT, AIKAI, AIKHO, IKOH, ETEPPE, AOAOT', etc. Without doubt the engravers responsible for the tetradrachms of
Volagases IV copied the legends from earlier coins and were
themselves largely or entirely ignorant of Greek. The significance of this fact is discussed on page 235. It is interesting to
note that the character phi as a numeral of the date retains its
early form, whereas in the legend proper it appears as a simple
cross. Similarly the character nu has been reversed in the legend,
but not in the date. These and other letters with special forms
are reproduced on page 244, Nos. 15, 9, I, 4, II, 13, 14, and 17.
123. The representation of the royal bust on the obverse of
these coins in the frontal position relates them to the early issues
of tetradrachms of this reign, and they were probably struck
within the same period (Wroth, 237, Nos. 1-3).

NOTES ON THE COINS
131
VOLAGASES V
124. These coins formed part of a larger lot of tetradrachms
found adhered together in debris of Level I, block A (just north
of the Great House). The majority of the specimens could not
be disengaged and cleaned. The silver is of an unusually low
quality. The coins undoubtedly constituted a cache or hoard.
Since those cleaned formed only a small proportion of the total,
no estimate can be made of the date limits represented by the lot.
125. The two examples of this group dated in 215/16 A.D.
are the latest Parthian coins which have as yet been recovered at
Seleucia. Both were found on the surface of the mounds.
2. THE AUTONOMOUS COINAGE
ZEUS AETOPHOROS
126. Although the dates on these coins are not legible their
chronological associations can be determined by other means.
The right to issue an autonomous coinage was accorded Seleucia
by the Arsacid dynasty (see pp. 218-219); no groups in this
coinage, therefore, were struck prior to 141 B.C., when Mithradates I occupied Babylonia for the first time. The privilege of
coinage was withdrawn about 24 A.D.; subsequently autonomous
types, easily identified, were issued only during periods of revolt
when the central authority became ineffective (see pp. 141-142,
143-145, and 216-229). Of the twenty-three autonomous type
groups which have been identified as belonging to Seleucia, there
are nine on which dates cannot be distinguished. On the basis of
monograms, motifs, style, or fabric six of the nine can be assigned
to the period beginning with the close of the first century B.C.
On the basis of the character of the legend, the form of the edge
of the flans, and the denominations the remaining three groups Nos. 126, 127, and 132 - can well be attributed only to the early
Parthian period at Seleucia. For the interval between 141 and
the end of the first century B.C. we possess autonomous coins
dated in 103/02, 102/01, 99/98, 96/95, 95/94, 88/87, 85/84,
84/83, 72/71, 42/41, 41/40, 38/37, and 32/3 I B.C. (see the table,
pp. 183-185). It will be remarked at once that between 141 and
103 B.C., 71 and 42 B.C., and 31 B.C. to the close of the century
there were long periods for which we have no dated coins. It is

132
reasonable to assume that the issue of the newly won autonomous
coinage would have been especially heavy during the early
decades of the Parthian occupation. Two occasions stand out
at which in particular it is likely that issues would have been
struck the presence in Seleucia of Mithradates I either upon
its initial occupation or after the defeat of Demetrius II, and of
Phraates II after the defeat of Antiochus VII.
It is to the first of these two occasions that I suggest the attribution of the group with which we are now concerned. The
reverse type of the group reproduces that of a series of drachms
of Mithradates I (Wroth, 13, No. 51; 14, No. 57; i5, No. 61).
What is apparently the latest issue of these drachms is dated in
138/37 B.c. The assignment of this silver to the mint of Seleucia
may be questioned in favor of its attribution to the mint of
Ecbatana, for aside from this series, and one assigned by Wroth
to Himerus (Prokesch-Osten, 21, No. 4; cf. Wroth, 23, No. 2
and note 2), I believe that no drachms were struck at Seleucia
(see the more general discussion on pp. 153-172). I assign the
drachms of Mithradates to Seleucia because they share common
monograms with a series of tetradrachms (Wroth, 12, No. 48;
14, No. 55; 15, No. s8), and there is no evidence to suggest that
any Parthian tetradrachms were struck except in the Seleucia
mint (see pp. 153-172). Zeus Atophoros occurs as a coin type
under Parthian rule only on the series of drachms and on the
bronze which is under discussion. The portrayal on a later
tetradrachm of the living king Phraates III in the pose of Zeus
Atophoros represents a different concept (Wroth, 48, No. 25).
In the absence of any hostile evidence it appears necessary to assign the two series not alone to a common mint, Seleucia, but to
approximately the same date. Added evidence regarding group
No. 126 is afforded by the size of the coins. Their average weight
and diameter are greater than those of any other group of autonomous coins. The autonomous coinage in turn includes
heavier denominations on the whole than occur in the Parthian
royal bronze coinage with a significant exception. A series of
bronze of Mithradates I, probably of the mint at Ecbatana,
shows weights and diameters closely equivalent to those of group
No. 126 (Wroth, 8, Nos. 14 and 15; 9, Nos. 21 and 22). The position in respect to these factors which each of these groups occupies within its class suggests that they are contemporary. On

NOTES ON THE COINS
133
these several grounds, therefore, I have assigned the group under
discussion to the reign of Mithradates I, and, within that reign,
to the years around 140-137 B.C. The extant examples of the
group are not numerous, and it is probable that they were issued
within a relatively short period. It should be noted that most
of the coins are badly worn. They represent a single denomination, the variation in the weight and the diameter being due in
large measure to the wear.
TRIPOD
127. That this group is among the earliest within the autonomous coinage is demonstrated by the form of the letters and
the use of the ethnikon in the legend and by the fabric of the
coins, which approaches that of Seleucid issues. An attribution
of the group to the reign of Phraates II can be based on the relation between the reverse type, the tripod, and that of an issue of
tetradrachms of this king which shows Apollo seated on the
omphalos (Wroth, p. 16). The evidence obviously is suggestive
rather than conclusive, but the attribution satisfactorily meets
the need for an issue at this period as well as for an interval during the first few Parthian reigns into which the group may be
fitted. The number of the examples of the group which have
been recovered suggest that its issue may have been continued
over a number of years.
TYCHE NIKEPHOROS (SEATED)
128. Dates can be read on sixteen examples of this unusually
large group. On many others traces of dates can be distinguished, and there can be no doubt that they were intended to
be read on all the coins of the group. The surviving dates cover
the period from 103/02 to 84/83 B.c., but in view of the number
of specimens which have been found, there is no reason to doubt
that the group was struck over a more extensive period. The
reverse type reproduces in a general way that of a series of
tetradrachms struck during the reigns of Phraates II and Artabanus I (Wroth, 23, No. I; 20, Nos. 1-2). Mithradates II,
who succeeded Artabanus in 123 or 122 B.c., appears to have
spent some time in Babylonia shortly after his accession (see
pp. 202-203). I suggest, therefore, that the issue of group No.
128 was inaugurated at, or shortly after, that date. Monogram

134
No. 44 of this group appears to be that which occurs on tetradrachms of Gotarzes I (assigned by Wroth to an Artabanus II;
38, Nos. 3-4). On the examples of No. 128 which have
hitherto been published no dates have been remarked. It
should be noted, also, that the group appears to represent a
single denomination; the wide variations in weight and diameter
are in large measure due to unequal wear. In the reference cited
in the catalog Mr. Hill refers to a possible thymiaterion behind
the seated Tyche. No such object forms a part of the design on
the specimens from Seleucia. Confusion may have been caused
by the fact that the rear leg of the throne on some coins gives
the impression that it is distinct from the body of the seat.
CORNUCOPIAE
129. On the coin cited no date has been distinguished, but
the presence of an obscure monogram on the obverse has been
noted. On all the examples from Seleucia the left edge of the
obverse, where a monogram would normally appear, has been
obscured or is off flan. The dates which are legible on the coins
of this group fall in the reign of Sinatruces (c. 77-70 B.c.). Since
but a few specimens have survived, it is very possible that the
issue of this type was confined to the single year 72/7I B.C.
TYCHE AND RIVER GOD
130. On twenty-six coins of a total of seventy-two dates can
be distinguished. Since the dates which have survived represent
only two successive years, it is probable that the entire group
was struck during this period, 42/41-41/40 B.C., in the reign of
Orodes II.
Type group No. 130 initiates a number of changes in the
autonomous coinage. One remarks a definite decrease in the
quality of execution of both obverse and reverse. The legend is
circular rather than rectangular. The date for the first time
appears in the field rather than in the exergue. In the legend
alpha, omicron, and sigma have the forms reproduced on page 244,
Nos. i, I I, and 13. The final letters of the river name and
its accompanying particle have been dropped. On some coins
a similar degradation marks the name .of the city. Of greater
significance still is the fact that the city is referred to by the place
name rather than by the ethnikon. The changes in the form

NOTES ON THE COINS
135
of the letters and in the position of the date can be noticed on
the tetradrachms of this same period. These features and the
new shape of the legend indicate simply a development in style.
A blundered legend has been noted by Wroth on an issue of
tetradrachms of Orodes II dated in 39/38 B.C. (73, No. 37). The
significance of the temporary debasement in the quality of the
design and of the change in the form of the city name which
mark this group of coins is discussed on pages 221-222.
It should be noted that, whereas on the legend proper the
sigma is rectangular, on the date it retains the older form. In
the date of two numerals the omicron is rectangular, but in
that of three numerals it is represented by a large dot. In his
description of the coin of this group in the British Museum Mr.
Hill makes no mention of any peculiarities in the rendering of
the legend. In spite of the great variation in weight among the
coins of the group, they appear to represent a single denomination.
13oa. These seven coins stand out among those comprising
group No. 130 by reason of the particular crudity of their design.
There are no grounds for an assumption that they are counterfeit.
I can offer no explanation of the fragmentary legend beyond a
suggestion that the engravers responsible were ill acquainted
with Greek. The alpha has the form referred to under No. 130.
It is probable that the coins belong to the same period as does
the larger group.
TYCHE NIKEPHOROS (STANDING)
131. The dates which can be read on the coins of this group
fall in the reign of Phraates IV. Since specimens of the preceding
group, No. 130, were struck as late as 41/40 B.C., it is probable
that the new types were inaugurated in 38/37. It will be noted
that the coins struck during this year show the date in the field
at the left, whereas on the coins of 32/3I B.C. the date is in the
exergue. Presumably the group comprised simply two issues
struck in these two years.
The design for this group disregards the changes adopted
for the engraving of group No. 130, and the quality of its execution is equivalent to that of the earlier autonomous issues. In
the date but not in the legend omicron and sigma have the rectangular form. It should be noted that in the reference cited

136
Imhoof-Blumer reads the place name JEXEVKia rather than as
the ethnikon, which appears on all the specimens from Seleucia. If the reading published is correct, one may assume that it
represents the earliest issue of this type group and that on the
succeeding issues the place name was discarded in favor of the
ethnikon.
TWO CITY-GODDESSES
132. The large number of examples of this group which have
been preserved suggest that its issue extended over a period of
years. In the discussion of group No. 126 three principal intervals were noted for which we possess no coins that bear legible
dates. Type groups Nos. 126 and 127 were assigned to the earliest interval. On the basis of style, the form of the legend, the
quality of execution, and corresponding criteria the group with
which we are now concerned might be assigned to either the
period 71-42 B.C. or the period from 31 B.C. to the end of the
century. Certain other factors, however, favor the later interval.
Prior to 71 B.C. the issue of autonomous types appears to have
been heavy, and group No. 130, struck at the close of the earlier
interval, represents again a heavy issue. On the other hand,
after the final striking of this group in 41/40 no unusually heavy
issues, aside from that under discussion, occur until about 36 A.D.,
with the inauguration of group No. 143. Further, it should be
noted that the issue of tetradrachms at Seleucia was heavy
during the years from 31 B.C. to the end of the century, whereas
for the period 71-42 B.C. it was relatively light. In the absence
of hostile evidence these factors appear to require the assignment of group No. 132 to the interval between 32/3I B.C. and the
succeeding issue of the autonomous coinage, No. 133, which was
struck in the opening years of the first century A.D.
The reverse type of the group under consideration is unusual. So far as I have knowledge it is found elsewhere only on
an issue of Rhesaena in northern Mesopotamia of the Roman
period (Hill, 130, Nos. 28-31; cf. also 131, No. 32). The reverse
of a coin of Demetrius II shows a Tyche grasping the hand of
a bearded deity (Babelon, XIX, 8). In his description of the
type from Seleucia Imhoof-Blumer refers to a turreted headdress.
This is an error since both the goddesses are represented with the
kalathos. The possible significance of the motif has been discussed on pages 177-179.

NOTES ON THE COINS
137
MALE DEITY WITH KALATHOS AND LYRE
133. Although no dates can be distinguished on the coins of
this group, they show a monogram which appears also on group
No. 134, dated in 9/Jo A.D. The two groups, that is, must have
been struck within the same general period. Since after 9/10 the
autonomous issues succeed one another with a fair degree of
frequency, group No. 133 must be presumed to have been struck
prior to No. 134, which falls in the reign of Vonones I. Since
the examples of the group are few, they were probably struck
within a few years. Without an attempt to fix a precise date it
appears reasonable to assign group No. 133 to the reign of
Phraataces, from about 2/1 B.C. to about 4/5 A.D. As do the
preceding two, this group retains the ethnikon and the quality of
execution of the earlier autonomous type groups.
In the references cited Imhoof-Blumer has largely misjudged
the character of the reverse motif, and Hill has described an
omphalos-shaped object behind the figure of the type which
in reality is simply the base of the cithara. The nudity of the
figure, the arrangement of the hair in a knot, and the presence
of the cithara strongly support the identification of the type as a
representation of Apollo. The presence of the kalathos and the
palm fails to harmonize with this attribution, but may indicate
that we have here some local concept of this deity.
DRAPED FIGURE ON A THRONE
134. The date, although legible on only one coin, is certain.
It identifies the group as of the reign of Vonones I. The term
hrovs, which accompanies the date, is found nowhere else in the
autonomous coinage, but occurs on tetradrachms of Artabanus
II of about the same date (see p. 115, under No. 81). In the
legend alpha and sigma have the forms reproduced on page 244,
Nos. i and 13.
On this group we find again the place name substituted for the
ethnikon, as on No. 130 above. The possible significance of the
change at this time is discussed on pages 222-223. The significance of the reverse motif is difficult to determine. The figure
presumably is symbolic of the city as represented by the particular party in power at this date. The quality of execution is
generally inferior to that displayed by the preceding groups, with

138
the exception of No. 130. In connection with this one remarks
the carelessness in the placement of the legend. A corresponding
lack of care characterized the striking of the coins. Although a
wide variation in weight will be noted, they are all of a single
denomination.
ANCHOR
135. Two factors in particular serve to distinguish this small
group of autonomous coins from those which have preceded.
The fabric of the coins is more closely related to that of the
Parthian royal bronze which began to be struck at Seleucia in
24/25 A.D. than it is to the fabric of the earlier autonomous issues,
and the legend bears simply the name of the city, with no
reference to its position on the Tigris River. In the legend alpha
and sigma have the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos. I and 13.
Of the autonomous groups which can be given a date later than
that assigned to the coins under consideration, the city name in
any form occurs on two only, Nos. 141 and 147, which were issued by a revolted faction within the city (see pp. 141, 145, and
224-229). It is on the basis of these general factors that the
group has been assigned a position in the series between groups
Nos. 134 and 136. It is assumed, that is, that the coins were
struck in some one of the years between 9/1O and 15/16 A.D.
These years cover the close of the reign of Vonones I and the inauguration of that of Artabanus II. Since group No. 134 falls in
the reign of the former and since it is unlikely that his short and
troubled rule at Seleucia would have produced two distinct issues
of bronze, group No. 135 has been tentatively assigned to the
period between 11/12, the year in which Artabanus first secured
control of the Seleucia mint, and 15/16 A.D.
FEMALE BUST WITH KALATHOS AND VEIL
136. With this group of autonomous coins of the reign of
Artabanus II all reference to the city is dropped from the
legend. The possible significance of the change is discussed on
pages 223-224. The legend with the name of the city and of the
river appears again only on two groups of the "revolt coinage"
of Seleucia, Nos. 141 and 147. In the names of the month
alpha and nu have the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos. 1
and 9. Group No. 136 is unique within the autonomous series

NOTES ON THE COINS
139
because of the presence of month as well as year dates. The
conjunction on the same coins of the two forms of the date and of
monograms affords important evidence concerning the calendar
employed by the mint at Seleucia (see pp. 149-150). Although
one of the coins in the group (1.o6 gr.) is markedly smaller than
the others, it is probable that they represent a single denomination. There is no relation between the variation in weight
and the chronological sequence. The coin published by Hill is
dated in Gorpiaios, 15/16 A.D.
MONOGRAM AS TYPE
137. The two monograms which appear on the various coins
of this group as reverse types occurred on the coins of the preceding group with their normal value, that is, as representing
mint controllers. It should be noted, however, that the center
upright stroke of monogram 51 on the coins under discussion
has been elaborated to form a palm branch. The significance of
the use of the initials of mint controllers as coin types has been
treated on page 224, note 46. The single word of the legend occurs nowhere else in the autonomous coinage, but in the nominative case is found on group No. 89 of the royal bronze struck at
Seleucia (see p. 117). Its significance is discussed on pages 224226. The sigma of the legend and the stigma of the date have
the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos. 13 and 18. The reference in the catalog is to a coin dated in 15/16 A.D. The coins
of the group represent a single denomination.
THE KING AS ZEUS NIKEPHOROS
138. In the absence of a date which can be read the chronological position of this group can be determined by other factors.
With this group we are approaching the close of the period in
which the right of Seleucia to strike its own bronze:was recognized by the Parthian administration. On its reverse for the
first time in the autonomous coinage appears a representation of
the reigning Arsacid. It is perhaps significant that he is portrayed as deity (see pp. 219-221). The same reverse type is
found on the second issue of the new royal bronze, No. 85,
dated in 25/26 A.D. The fabric, also, of the coins under consideration is that of the new royal issues. It is evident that the group
must be placed among the latest of the autonomous series. Two

140
groups, however, Nos. 139 and 140, must be assigned to the very
end of the period. On their obverses the usual head or bust of
Tyche has been replaced by seated figures of the city-goddess
suggestive of reverse rather than obverse types. They exemplify the change from the autonomous to the royal coinage.
Since group No. 139 bears the date 18/19, and since we already
have issues struck in 16/17, group No. 138 has been assigned
to the year 17/18 A.D. In the reference in the catalog Hill has
assigned a coin of this type to the second century A.D. (cf. Hill,
cxvi). This is entirely unnecessary since in respect to both style
and fabric the coins are closely related to the earliest royal bronze
struck at Seleucia in the first half of the first century A.D.,
examples of which were unknown to Mr. Hill. It should be
noted that the reverse type of the group is in all essentials that
of tetradrachms of Phraates IV struck at Seleucia in 27/26 B.C.
(Wroth, 1o, Nos. 13-17).
THE KING RECEIVING A DIADEM FROM TYCHE
139. The reverse motif of this group is that of tetradrachms
of Phraataces dated in 2/1 B.C. (Wroth, 136, Nos. 1-4). The
motif recurs on the silver with the accession of Gotarzes II in
44/45 A.D. The obverse of this, as of the succeeding group, has
the appearance of a reverse type. Indeed Hill, in the passage
cited in the catalog, has referred to the type which shows the
seated Tyche as the reverse, and that which represents the king
with Tyche as the obverse. Actually groups Nos. 139 and 140
were struck during the period which was marked by the transition
from the autonomous to the royal bronze coinage at Seleucia.
This transition was symbolic of a fundamental change in the relationship of the city to the dynasty, a change which, however,
did not constitute an act of hostility on the part of the dynasty
(see pp. 223-224) and for which, therefore, there could have been
little precedent. That the nature of the sovereignty expressed
by the coin types is obscure can reasonably be explained by the
fact that the status of the city was itself in doubt at this time.
On the coin published by Hill the date is apparently off flan.
It should be noted that the quality of execution of this group is
mediocre and is characterized by a peculiar style in the representation of the drapery. This can be observed on the reproductions
both in this volume and in the catalog of the British Museum.

NOTES ON THE COINS
141
THE KING SEATED ON A THRONE
140. The peculiar character of the obverse of this group has
been discussed under No. 139. There is a definite relationship
between the motif of the obverse on the group under discussion
and that of the reverse on group No. 134 (see p. 102). This is
expressed principally by the character of the figure and by the
form and the position of the staff or scepter held by the figure.
The reverse type of group No. 140 probably represents a detail
from the common reverse motif of the tetradrachms the king
seated and receiving a diadem or palm from Tyche. This group
is the latest in the regular series of autonomous types. Issues
with civic types which were struck at later dates represent either
revolt coinages or coins struck by the loyalist party in the city at
periods when the royal power had become ineffective. These
circumstances are discussed on pages 224-226 and 228-229.
HUMPED BULL
141. In the absence of dates on these coins their chronological position must be established by other criteria. Their fabric
is of poor quality and differs from those characteristic of the
regular autonomous series and of the royal bronze. The execution of the design is likewise distinctly inferior to that of the
preceding groups. The reverse type portrays a motif which
though similar in form is entirely unrelated to that of early coins
of Seleucus I (see p. 7, No. iI), but is characteristic of the
Oriental glyptic art of the period with which we are now concerned. It represents, therefore, the influence of Oriental culture
in Seleucia at this time. These factors which are all foreign to
the regular autonomous coinage suggest strongly that group
No. 141 was unconnected with that series. Four of the coins in
the group formed part of a cache which contained a majority
of specimens dated in 43/44 A.D. (group No. 143). In addition,
a large number, in some instances comprising caches, were found
in various rooms of Level III of the Great House, occupation of
which came to an end about 43 A.D. A faction in the city held
Seleucia inrevolt during the years from about 36 to 40 A.D.
(see pp. 224-226). All the factors are satisfied by the assignment of group No. 141 to this period, and this classification has
been adopted for the purposes of this volume. It is assumed, that

142
is, that these coins were struck by the mint of Seleucia while that
institution was held by a group within the city which was in
revolt against the legitimate Arsacid succession. Since other
types make their appearance in 40/41 the specific date limits of
the group can best be fixed at 36-40 A.D. The fact that the examples number 153 presupposes that they were struck during
each year of the period. Beyond this, however, the large total
supports the assignment of the group to a rebel government. The
evidence points to the existence of an ample coinage already in
circulation upon the inauguration of group No. 141. The purpose of the heavy striking, therefore, must be presumed to have
been largely political - the replacement of the old types with
one more expressive of the cultural sympathies of the new government. One should note the recurrence of the legend on this
revolt coinage after it had disappeared from the normal autonomous issues. In the legend alpha, epsilon, sigma, and upsilon have the forms reproduced on page 244, Nos. 1, 5, 13, and
14. Although it is difficult to fix a division point, it is probable
that the coins of this group comprised two denominations.
NIKE WITH PALM
142. The quality of both the fabric and the execution represented by these coins is markedly superior to those features not
only of the preceding group but of groups Nos. 139 and 140.
In these respects they show a close relationship to the royal
bronze of Vardanes I struck in 43/44, 44/45, and 45/46 A.D.
(see p. 71, No. 89). On the latter we find associated the royal
bust and a personification of the Boule, the council of the
aristocratic party at Seleucia. These various factors appear to
require the assumption that the group of autonomous coins with
which we are now concerned was not issued under the same authority as the three preceding groups, and that the Nike motif was
intended to commemorate the victory of the loyalist, aristocratic
party which prepared the way for the resumption of the Arsacid
rule in the city. The situation is discussed in further detail on.
pages 224-226. The exact date of the death of Artabanus II is
not known, and the issue of group No. 142 may have been inaugurated either in the closing years of his reign or with the
opening of the reign of Vardanes I. The alpha of the date has
the form reproduced on page 244, No. 1. There is no relation

NOTES ON THE COINS
143
between the variation in the weights of the coins of this group
and their chronological sequence.
THE DEIFIED KING
143. The obverse type with its seated figure in place of a
head or bust is in a general way similar to those of Nos. 139
and 140 above. Just as the types of these two groups expressed
the transition from the autonomous to the royal coinage prior
to the revolt, group No. 143 represents the change from the
autonomous issue which succeeded the revolt, No. 142, to the
initial issue of the royal bronze after the central authority had
been reestablished. That is, there appears to have been again a
certain hesitation on the part of those responsible for the choice
of the coin types which would portray to the public the immediate relationship between Seleucia and the Arsacid dynasty.
The reverse type is somewhat unusual. The general pose of the
figure is that characteristic of Zeus. The garment appears to be
a robe rather than tunic and trousers. The head, however, is
typically Parthian. I suggest that we have here an assimilation
of the reigning king to Zeus such as is represented by the reverse of No. 138 (see p. 104), and that this again illustrates the
effort which was being made throughout this general period to
arrive at a satisfactory basis for the relationship of Seleucia to
the dynasty (see pp. 219-221). Group No. 143 must have been
struck early in 43/44, since for the same year we have two groups
of royal bronze, Nos. 88 and 89. Of the coins in this group
twenty-three, along with four examples of No. 141, were found
together in Street 36, below Level II of the Great House.
EAGLE
144. Although a date cannot be distinguished there is no
indication that the coins of this group were not intended to
show dates. Their chronological relationship to the series of
coins with civic types must be determined by general factors.
The motif of the reverse is characteristically Oriental of the first
and second centuries A.D., and is foreign to the stock of motifs
from which were drawn the reverse types of the regular autonomous issues. In this respect the group is related to the revolt
coinage struck just prior to 40 A.D. (see p. IO6, No. 141), on
which the humped bull is shown. In fabric and in style, how-

144
ever, the group is later and suggests a relationship with the
issues of royal bronze struck during the latter part of the first
century. Type groups Nos. 145 and 146, which will be discussed
just below, are characterized by Oriental motifs and by a style
and fabric generally similar to that of group No. 144. The three
groups, which revived the civic types given up in the reign of
Artabanus II, must be classed as revolt coinage struck during
the period of unrest which marked so much of the reign of
Volagases I (see the more detailed discussion of this situation
on pp. 228-229). Since the latest of the revolt issues is followed
immediately by a loyalist issue, No. 148, group No. 144 must be
placed at the outset of the revolt. Probably as a result of the
disturbed conditions in Seleucia, no tetradrachms were struck between 58/59 and 61/62 A.D. The earliest examples of group
No. 145, of the revolt coinage, were struck in 59/60. To this
same year, therefore, I assign group No. 144. Since it is represented by only nine extant examples, it was probably limited to
a single striking and was then superseded by group No. 145.
ARTEMIS
145. The presence of legible dates for the years 59/60 and
61/62 suggests that coins of this group were struck also in 6o/61.
Prior to 59/60 no bronze had been struck at Seleucia since
47/48 A.D. in the reign of Gotarzes II (see table on p. 190), and it
must be presumed that a real need for new currency had arisen.
In view of this condition the fact that only thirty-seven coins of
group No. 145 have been preserved suggests that its issue was
limited to a short period. The character of this group as a part
of the revolt coinage struck during the reign of Volagases I has
been discussed elsewhere (see pp. 228-229). On the basis of this
character it is reasonable to assume that group No. 145 was
struck only during the three years, 59/60-61/62, for which no
tetradrachms are known. The reverse type is significant in view
of the conditions under which the group appears to have been
struck. Artemis represented originally, of course, an Anatolian
religious concept adopted by the Greeks. Throughout Babylonia and Iran, however, this goddess had become assimilated to
local forms of deity and in the first and second centuries A.D.
represented a concept fundamentally much more Oriental than
Greek, although clothed in Greek form. In fabric, style, and

NOTES ON THE COINS
145
quality of execution, group No. 145 is closely related to the succeeding group, No. 146. In spite of the wide variation in weight
and size the group represents a single denomination.
HUMPED BULL
146. The fact that, out of a total of forty-seven in this group,
the twenty-seven coins which show a legible date are all of the
year 69/70 A.D. requires an assumption that the entire group
was struck in this year. The reverse type is that of the revolt
coinage issued between 36 and 40 A.D. (see p. Io6, No. 141), but
the style is entirely distinct in spite of a common crudity of execution. One cannot logically escape the conclusion that, although separated in time by a full generation, the two groups
were struck by individuals who possessed a common cultural
background. As has already been stated, group No. 146 is
closely related to group No. 145 through a common quality of
execution, style, and fabric. The significance of the relationship
between the three groups is discussed on pages 228-229.
TYCHE SEATED ON A COLUMN
147. Although struck in the course of the same year this
group differs from No. 146 in the presence of the legend and in
the style, fabric, and quality of execution. The legend emphasizes the practical state of autonomy in which the city found
itself at this period, but suggests no change in this respect subsequent to the issue of the two preceding groups; the three
groups, through their use of the civic type for the obverse rather
than the portrait of Volagases I, reveal in equal measure the
failure of the royal administration to enforce its authority in
Seleucia upon the occasion of their minting. The other distinctions are more significant and suggest that two different elements within the city were responsible for the issue of the two
groups, Nos. 146 and 147. The suggestion is measurably strengthened by the fact that, in contrast to the preceding two groups,
No. 147 has a reverse motif drawn from the stock which supplied the autonomous coinage prior to its abrogation under
Artabanus II. It should be noted further that the monogram
found on the group under discussion occurs also on the first issue
of the royal bronze of Volagases I, struck later in the same year
(see p. 75, No. 95). These two groups are similarly related in

146
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
respect to form and to the character of the bronze. The significance of these attributes of group No. 147 is discussed on
page 228.
NIKE WITH WREATH
148. Although no date can be distinguished on the coins of
this group, through certain factors it can be established that the
issue was struck in 69/70 A.D. A detailed similarity exists between its reverse type and that of group No. 96 of the royal
bronze which bears this date (see p. 75). In addition, the two
groups are related through fabric and style. In these respects
group No. 148 is also related to No. 147 above, likewise dated in
69/70. There can be no reasonable doubt, therefore, that the
group under discussion was struck immediately after the other
issue of civic types and shortly before the group of royal bronze.
The concentration of issues in this one year is discussed on page
228. The relation of group No. 148 to the revolt coinage of this
period is treated on the same page. It represents the latest issue
of coins with autonomous types which has been found at Seleucia.

CHAPTER VI
THE PARTHIAN MINT AT SELEUCIA
I. THE CALENDAR EMPLOYED
NO DATED coins of the Seleucid period have been recovered
at Seleucia, and it is to be presumed that the practice of placing
dates on coins at least those of bronze - was adopted by this
mint from Syria or Phoenicia only after the occupation of
Babylonia by the Parthians. Seleucia was the only mint of the
Parthian Empire which followed this practice.1 Dates first appear in the reign of Mithradates I, after 141 B.C., but irregularly;
they occur on the majority of coins struck during the last half
of the first century B.C. During this same period the tetradrachms begin to show month dates as well as year dates. Within
the next half-century the use of dates became the invariable
practice of the Seleucia mint.2 Although the original idea was
developed by the Phoenician mints, Seleucia appears to have
been responsible for the technique of noting both the month and
the year of issue. In the early period certain Parthian tetradrachms bear dates, and others, having similar types, lack the
date. The value of the date on coins appears to have been primarily that of a serial number; it distinguished successive issues
and strikings. In the beginning the first issue of a given type
was struck without regard for the date, whereas, apparently, the
second issue was given a date to distinguish it from the first. As
issues became more numerous and frequent, it was a natural development to record the year on all issues and to employ the
names of the months to distinguish the emissions within a single
year.
The Seleucid Era differed from other eras in that the date
from which were calculated the regnal years of the first king,
Seleucus, was not replaced by the accession year of each succeeding king, but continued to serve as the fixed point for the era
throughout the Seleucid period. The innovation, indeed, was
so practical that as a popular institution the era far outlived the
1 See pp. 157-158 and 167-168. 2 See pp. 189-200.
147

148
empire. As Bouch6-Leclercq has pointed out, the Seleucid Era
was instituted in Babylonia, and from there its use spread to
Syria and the west.3 The fixed point was the first New Year
after the return of Seleucus to Babylonia as an independent ruler
in fact if not in name. This took place in the early spring of
311 B.C. The Babylonian new year was inaugurated with the
month Nisannu, corresponding generally with our April. The
era, therefore, was originally based on Nisannu i (c. April 1),
311 B.C. After the Seleucid administration became centered in
Syria, the fixed point appears to have been calculated from that
Macedonian New Year which fell closest to the actual date of
the accession of Seleucus, Dios i (c. October 1), 312 B.C. We
have, therefore, a variation of about six months between the
Babylonian and Macedonian calendars as applied to the Seleucid
Era, and in transposing dates from that to the present era it
becomes important to know which calendar was employed.
In the publication of Parthian coins it has generally been
assumed that the dates on the coins are to be calculated on the
basis of the Macedonian calendar. There is no question but
that the Seleucid Era was employed by the Parthian mint of
Seleucia. That they used the Macedonian calendar, however,
is pure assumption. The exclusive use of the Babylonian calendar for the dating of tablets demonstrates the hold this system
retained over the mass of the population of Babylonia. There is
no evidence to suggest that the Seleucid administration east
of the Euphrates imposed the western calendar for either popular
or official use. The system of reckoning dates employed by the
Babylonians of the Seleucid period was scientifically superior
to that of the west. The Babylonian New Year represented an
event much more important in the tradition and consciousness
of the east than was true of the corresponding day among the
Greeks. From every aspect the burden of proof appears to rest
on those who assume that in the Seleucid period the Macedonian
calendar was employed in Babylonia, either for official purposes
or by the general public. I find no grounds for belief that the
Arsacid dynasty would have preferred Babylonian usage in any
respect to the Greek; there is nothing to indicate that the
Parthian ruling class sensed a necessity for loyalty to eastern as
opposed to western culture. Except where there is definite
3 Histoire de Sileucides, I I, 516--517-

THE PAR THIAN MINT AT SELE UCIA
149
evidence to the contrary, one must assume that the Parthians
adopted the local administrative practices of each area which
they conquered. In short, I suggest that the mint at Seleucia
during the Parthian period employed the Babylonian calendar
because the evidence available points to this system of reckoning
as the standard at the moment of occupation of Babylonia by
the Parthians.
Certain of the coins from Seleucia present concrete evidence
that the Babylonian calendar was employed by the Seleucia
mint in the dating of coins for the years 15/16 and 16/17 A.D.
They comprise group No. 136 in the autonomous coinage.4 The
British Museum possesses an example with a month date not
found on the specimens from Seleucia.J The value of the coins
lies in the fact that they bear monograms representing mint
controllers and month dates as well as the year dates. It
should be noted that the position of the dies on all these coins
varies in accordance with the particular monogram which they
bear. It must be assumed that the monograms divide the group
into two classes which are mutually exclusive in point of time.
The coins of the group can be arranged successively according
to the Babylonian and the Macedonian calendars, as follows:
i. By the Babylonian calendar
r I Gorpiaios 5th month (Hill)
) I Hyperberetaios 6th
I . Apellaios 8th
326A.S. I I Audynaios 9th "
15/16 A.D.
I I Peritios 1oth
I I Dystros IIth
T I Xandikos 12th
3 r t Artemisios ist
327 A.S. i I Panemos 3rd
16/17KA.D. I I Peritios ioth
4 See p. 103, and note on p. 138.
I Hill, p. 145, No. 41.

150
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
2. By the Macedonian calendar
i f Apellaios 2nd month
A 14. Audynaios 3rd "
T T Peritios 4th "
326 A.S. T iDystros 5th "
15/16A.D. T 'Xandikos 6th "
Gorpiaios 11th " (Hill)
SI T Hyperberetaios 12th "
S'1 Peritios 4th "
327 A.S. I I Artemisios 7th "
16/17 A.D. }I Panemos 9th C
The interchange of monograms required by the Macedonian
calendar would mean that two individuals relieved each other
in the office of mint controller every second or third month an untenable conclusion. There can be little question that in
the dating of this group of coins the mint employed the Babylonian calendar. It cannot be assumed that the Seleucia mint
would employ one calendar in connection with the autonomous
coinage and another for the royal coinage. The dates as substitutes for serial numbers were of primary value to the mint
officials, and any calendar would have served their purpose;
presumably they employed that with which they were most
familiar. Nor can it be assumed that the use of the Babylonian
calendar at the date with which we are concerned was the result
of a change in national sentiment during the century and a half
of Parthian rule. The group of coins which have served as evidence was struck under the order of the Boule, the council of
Seleucia traditionally representative of the aristocratic and
Hellenic elements in the city., The city still enjoyed autonomy
with a large measure of self-government.7 I suggest, therefore,
that in the absence of any indication pointing to Parthian interference with local practices or to the use of the Macedonian
calendar in the east at any time, the coins must be accepted as
reasonable evidence that the Babylonian calendar was employed
by the mint at Seleucia throughout the Parthian period. One
may well conclude, indeed, that the practice of the mint was
followed by the city administration and the general public.
6 See pp. 223-224.
' See p. 224.

151
Dr. Jotham Johnson of the University of Pennsylvania has
recently published an important study of the calendar employed
at Dura-Europos.8 This system of reckoning time he terms
the "Seleucid Calendar" and describes it as differing from the
Babylonian only in the selection of the fall rather than the
spring equinox as the fixed point which determined the inauguration of the new year. The material collected by Johnson demonstrates the strength of the Babylonian practice in the area west
of the Euphrates to a late period. It is important to note further
that the sponsor of this importation from Babylonia must have
been the administration of the Seleucid Empire.
Of particular interest is the evidence pointing to the insertion of an extra intercalary month in the cycle of Greek months,
with the result that, whereas formerly Artemisios had corresponded with Nisannu the initial month of the Babylonian
year , now this position was occupied by Xandikos. This
change, according to Johnson, took place "at some moment
between 229 B.c. and the floruit of Josephus." 9 The question
naturally arises whether this shift can be remarked in the dating
of the coins from Seleucia.: According to it Xandikos became
the initial month by the Babylonian calendar, Hyperberetaios
by the Macedonian calendar. If this change is assumed for the
group of coins which has just been examined, we get the following unsatisfactory results:
i. By the Babylonian calendar
S 4Xandikos 1st month
4 4 Gorpiaios 6th
326 A.S. x 4 Hyperberetaios 7th
16 A.D.i 4 Apellaios 9th
15 4' 4.Audynaios 1oth
S/ 4' Peritios IIth
T 4 Dystros 12th
3 S Artemisios 2nd
327 A.S. T ' 4Panemos 4th "
16/17 A.D. ' Peritios ith
8 Dura Studies, I, 1-15.
I Ibid., p. 15-

152
2. By the Macedonian calendar
1T7
326 A.S.
15/16 A.D. W'
i
1 Hyperberetaios
t Apellaios
4 Audynaios
i Peritios
1 Dystros
T Xandikos
T
t1'
'1'
1st month
3rd "
4th
5th
6th
7th
12th
5th
8th
ioth
1 I Gorpiaios
327 A.S.
16/17 A.D.
rI
T
1'
I Peritios
I Artemisios
i Panemos
The confused interchange in the monograms and in the fixation of the dies which results from this adjustment of the calendars requires an assumption that at Seleucia in 15i/6 and
16/17 A.D. a shift had not taken place in the correlation of the
Greek and the Babylonian months.
A different picture is presented by a group of bronze coins
struck at Seleucia by Gotarzes II.1o They are dated in the year
357 A.s., 46 47 A.D., and bear in addition the names of months.
Since the Babylonian calendar was in force thirty years previously, the dates on these coins must likewise be reckoned by it.
The two columns which follow represent the sequence of the
months named in the group, in the first correlated conventionally,
in the second shifted as suggested by Johnson.
i. Conventional
Artemisios 1st
Daisios 2nd
Panemos 3rd
Loos 4th
Gorpiaios 5th
Hyperberetaios 6th
Xandikos 12th
2. Johnson's Intercalation
Xandikos 1st
Artemisios 2nd
Daisios 3rd
Panemos 4th
Loos 5th
Gorpiaios 6th
Hyperberetaios 7th
It should be noted that the same type of coin continued to be
struck in the succeeding year, 47/48 A.D., but on these the
month dates were omitted. The group constitutes the sole
occurrence of month dates on Parthian royal bronze. Although
the exact significance may not be determined, it is unlikely that
10 See p. 73, No. 92, and note on p. 119.

153
coins of this unique character would have been issued at two
disconnected intervals within a single year. It is possible that
coins were struck in each of the twelve months of this year and
that the absence of examples for five months is due to chance.
However improbable it is that an unbroken sequence covering
six of the twelve months should have been preserved and for
five consecutive months no examples recovered, this factor of
uncertainty cannot be disregarded. The coins do not constitute
proof that between 16/17 and 46/47 A.D. the correspondence of
the Greek months with the Babylonian had been shifted at
Seleucia as indicated. Their evidence does support, however,
an assumption of such a change.
Quite apart from the coins, in the absence of concrete evidence to the contrary concerning Seleucia, the very fact that the
intercalation had been accepted at Dura appears to me to require
the assumption. One must bear in mind the background. The
shift in the correspondence of Greek and Semitic months cannot
have been the product of political forces alone the edict of an
administration. We are concerned neither with the political
nor with the economic interrelationship of Seleucia and Dura.
Rather, the change constituted simply an example of a particular
adjustment between two great cultures which, intermingled in
each local area, jointly united all the peoples from the Mediterranean to the Iranian plateau. Granting that the shift took
place at Dura, as the evidence adduced by Johnson appears to
require, the fact of the change must be postulated for the entire
region dominated by Graeco-Semitic culture. Because of these
general factors, supported as they are by the coins from Seleucia,
I have transposed the month dates on coins referred to in the
present volume, beginning with 46/47 A.D., to accord with the
correspondence of Xandikos with Nisannu as the initial month
of the year. Actually the change may have taken place at any
time between 16/17 and 46/47 A.D. Throughout the volume
the dates on coins of the entire Parthian period, whether found
at Seleucia or cited from other publications, have been calculated
on the basis of the Babylonian calendar.
2. CLASSES OF COINS STRUCK
The allocation of ancient coins to particular mints and mint
areas constitutes an essential element in the preparation of more

154
general historical studies. The extant coins of the Parthian
period already published form a body of material which, owing
to its great size and the wide extent of the area from which it
was obtained, must approximate a fair representation of the
complete Parthian coinage, in respect to both chronological and
geographical distribution. Attempts to assign this material to
individual mints have in large measure failed because of the
almost total absence of known factors upon which to base a
study of the mints. The coins from Seleucia, coming as they
do from a single well-stratified site which represents one of the
principal cities of the empire, themselves establish certain facts
and, in addition, aid in classifying the body of general material
in respect to the characteristics which distinguish the issues of
the various mints. In studying the published coins of Parthia
I have employed the standard works cited in the Bibliography,
but for the distribution of the coins to particular reigns I have
generally followed the arrangement supported by Mr. Warwick
Wroth, with a few modifications suggested by Mr. E. T. Newell
and others."
The coins of the Parthian period from Seleucia which have
been included in this volume total 2,330. Of these 453 are tetradrachms, none are drachms, 826 are of the royal bronze, and
1,051 are bronze with civic obverse types. As a basis for the
determination of the mint associations of the various classes of
currency here represented, the following premises may be made:
(1) The series of autonomous coins which bear the name of the
city constitute proof that a mint existed at Seleucia during the
Parthian period; (2) So far as the bronze coins are concerned,
types of which at least three examples have been recovered in
the excavations must be assumed to have been issued for circulation in the Seleucia area; (3) Since Seleucia possessed a mint,
bronze coins which were intended to circulate in this area must
be assumed to have been struck locally.
Eleven of the type groups of the autonomous coinage which
have been listed in the catalog are not identified by the use of
the city name as a part of the legend. That they were minted
at Seleucia is evidenced not only by their satisfaction of the
conditions laid down above but by the relationship of their
types, legends, monograms, and style to other coins of the local
11 See the Bibliography, pp. xiii-xiv.

THE PAR THIAN MINT AT SELEUCIA
155
mint. Of the known groups of coins with civic obverse types
which appear to have been struck within the Parthian Empire,
three are not represented in the series from Seleucia. Published
references to these groups assume, at least tentatively, that they
were minted at Seleucia.2 The first has as reverse type Tyche
Nikephoros seated left with a river god at her feet. This is a
variation of group No. 130 found at Seleucia. No date appears,
and the legend bears the single word roXs. The second group
lacks a type figure and shows on the reverse only the legend
AK4\IAIOT[ A, the first day of the month Dios (the seventh month
by the Babylonian calendar), 88/87 B.c. The third group, represented so far as I know only by a single specimen, has as reverse
type either the figure of a dolphin or the head of an elephant.
An obscure date is probably equivalent to 23/24 A.D. The style
and the quality of execution of this coin correspond to those of
other contemporary types from Seleucia, and it may well represent a light issue of the local mint.
The other two groups appear to be closely related in style
and are probably of a single mint. This style, however, is
definitely not characteristic of the coins from Seleucia for any
period. Further, they appear to have represented heavy issues
which, if struck locally, would almost certainly have contributed
to the series found in the excavations. The peculiar elements
present in the two groups - on the one the reference to a particular form of civic organization, on the other the replacement
of the reverse type by a particular date render doubtful their
acceptance as representative of autonomous coinage struck in
the exercise of a normal fiscal policy. I suggest that the two
groups with which we are now concerned, although used as currency, constituted nonreplaceable commemorative medals rather
than media of exchange. The date on the one marked not only
the first day of the Macedonian year but the equivalent of the
first of the month Tashritu, which was a Babylonian festival of
some importance. On the other the presence of the term polis
suggests that the issue celebrated the acquirement by some community of more formal civic rights. Viewed primarily as medals
12 Hill, p. 142, Nos. 7-15; pp. 143-145, Nos. 19-40; p. 145, No. 42. I disregard,
of course, the large number of civic coins of the Roman period struck by cities which
had formerly been part of the Parthian Empire. Mr. E. T. Newell informs me that
the first two of these groups appear to have been struck in Iran. See Preface, p. viii.

156
rather than as currency, they might be assigned to any one of a
number of Babylonian cities which did not possess the right of
autonomous coinage, but which may well have been granted the
privilege of an especial commemorative issue. Whatever the
value of these groups they do not constitute evidence that any
Parthian city other than Seleucia maintained its own currency.
In the complete absence of such evidence the further premise is
established that the relation of the mint at Seleucia to the
Parthian administration differed from that of the other mints in
the empire.', The mint cannot logically be dissociated from the
city as an active political force within the empire. One cannot
state that the royal government maintained a mint in Seleucia;
rather, Seleucia struck and issued coinage, whether royal or
civic, for the Parthian government.
There is no evidence to indicate that the abrogation of the
right to possess its own coinage was caused by or resulted in
an estrangement between the dynasty and the traditional ruling
class in Seleucia which, except for a short interval, had controlled
the mint since Seleucid days. By all the evidence, indeed, the
abrogation took place almost simultaneously with the consummation of an alliance between this group in the city and the
dynasty."' There is no basis, therefore, for an assumption that
the shift from a bronze currency with civic obverse type to one
with the royal portrait as type constituted a break in mint
policy or tradition. The shift took place about 24 A.D., in the
reign of Artabanus II. Just prior to this date a marked change
had occurred in the style of engraving employed for the obverse
of the royal bronze currency which had circulated in those parts
of the empire not served by the Seleucia mint. It involved a
simplification of the design and the indication of the hair by
straight lines which are almost vertical.15 The royal bronze
which began to be issued at Seleucia in place of the autonomous
coinage presented, on the other hand, a style of obverse which
was copied closely from the contemporary tetradrachms. The
hair lay in formal rows and on both the head and the beard
13 A more extended discussion of the status of Seleucia under the Parthians will
be found on pages 216-229.
14 See the more detailed discussion on pages 223-224, where is pointed out the
significance of the interrelation of the latest autonomous and the earliest royal types.
15 See pp. 161-162.

THE PAR THIAN MINT AT SELE UCLA
157
emphasized horizontal lines. Of the 826 bronze coins with royal
obverse types included in our catalog, two single coins fail to
follow the style of the tetradrachms, and they alone show the
simplified design characteristic of the other Parthian mints.16
These two specimens obviously are not of the Seleucia mint and
were not intended to circulate in that area. The homogeneous
character of the royal bronze struck at Seleucia is not limited to
factors of style. With the exception of the two "foreign" coins
noted, all bore dates. Only five of the type groups show a reverse
motif other than some representation of the city-goddess.17
The 824 coins which are related by the factors cited above
constitute thirty-one type groups. Three of these, Nos. 85, 97,
and 99, are represented by single coins; another, No. io8, has
two examples. There cannot be the slightest doubt that the
twenty-seven larger groups circulated in Seleucia and were
minted in Seleucia. This being so, the close relationship of
the other four groups to the large majority requires an assumption that they, too, were products of the local mint.
It should next be noted that no type groups are known to
exist which conform to the factors characteristic of the Seleucia
royal bronze, but which are not included among the coins from
the site. The bronze coinage of Parthia is abundantly represented in all the principal catalogs. This includes, naturally, a
few individual examples of the thirty-one types from the Seleucia
mint, duplicates of which have not as yet come to light from
among the quantity of coins from the excavations. A few others
have as reverse type some representation of Tyche, but executed
in a style foreign to that of the series from Seleucia and accompanied by an obverse portraying either a king who reigned prior
to 24 A.D. when at Seleucia only civic types were struck or
one of the later kings but in a style and quality of execution
which set it apart from the portraits engraved at Seleucia. One
issue of Phraates IV should be noted.18 The reverse shows a
bust of Tyche and a date equivalent to 32/31 B.C. At this
16 Osroes struck bronze at Seleucia but no silver. He introduced momentarily a
style foreign to the tradition of all the Parthian mints and himself appears to have been
an interloper on the Arsacid throne. His reign is discussed further on pages 231-23417 No. 85 (p. 69) reproduces a reverse from the tetradrachms; No. 89 (p. 71)
shows a personification of the city council; No. 96 (p. 75), Nike with wreath, copied
from an autonomous issue; No. 97 (p. 76), an eagle; No. 99 (p. 77), a deity head.
18 Wroth, p. 128, Nos. 23 1-235-

158
period Seleucia still possessed the right to issue her own coinage,
and for this very year we have a group with civic types, No. 131.
Further, the style of the coins is entirely different from that
characteristic of the Seleucia mint, and there can be no doubt
that they were struck elsewhere in the empire. Among the
great number of groups of the royal bronze from mints other
than Seleucia which have been published, this one alone bears
a date. The evidence presented by the general body of Parthian
coins clearly requires the additional premise that the factors
characteristic of the royal bronze from Seleucia do not occur
together on the issues of any other Parthian mint.
We are now in a position to formulate certain statements
with regard to the bronze currency of the Parthian Empire.
It falls into two distinct classes: that of Seleucia and that of
the other mints. Seleucia was the only Parthian city which
possessed an autonomous coinage. All coins of the empire which
bear a civic obverse type must be presumptively assigned to the
Seleucia mint unless definite evidence to the contrary can be
established. To mints other than that at Seleucia must be
attributed all bronze coins which have as the obverse type
the portrait of one of the kings who reigned prior to 24 A.D.
All bronze coins later than this date must be assigned to Seleucia
if their obverse portraits are styled after contemporary tetradrachms and if they were intended to show dates; to the other
Parthian mints must belong all coins of this later period which
display on either the obverse or the reverse a style and quality
of execution that are foreign to the Seleucia issues and which were
apparently not intended to show dates.19
It has been stated above that 453 Parthian tetradrachms have
been found at Seleucia, but no drachms. These facts permit of
only one conclusion, that the larger silver was in common use
locally, the smaller, rarely or never. It follows, of course, that
drachms were not minted at Seleucia except, perhaps, some rare
and very light issues of which examples have not yet been uncovered. It is generally assumed, and rightly, that the Seleucia
mint regularly struck tetradrachms. I believe, however, that it
19 The bronze of the other Parthian mints followed closely the style characteristic
of the drachms which is described on pages 159-165. Distinctions between the bronze
coinage of Seleucia and of the other Parthian mints based on fabric cannot be discussed in the present volume.

159
is possible to proceed a step farther and to demonstrate that,
with the exception, perhaps, of the earliest issues, Parthian tetradrachms were struck only at Seleucia. The conclusion is based
on the essential dissimilarity of the two classes of silver, on the
homogeneity of the tetradrachms and their relation to the bronze
struck only at Seleucia, and on the relation of the drachms to
the bronze of the other Parthian mints. An examination of
the general body of published Parthian coins suggests certain
fundamental points of distinction between tetradrachms and
drachms. In particular I refer to (i) the position of the head
on the obverses, (2) the arrangement of the hair of the head
and beard on the obverses, (3) the motifs of the reverses, (4) the
quality of execution of the types, (5) the quality and the content
of the legends, (6) the presence or the absence of dates, (7) the
character and the use of monograms, and (8) the relative abundance of the tetradrachms and drachms. The significance of
most of these factors has been pointed out by earlier writers.
Little effort has been made, however, to follow the evidence
through to a logical conclusion.
The position of the head on the obverses
On the Seleucid and Bactrian coinages to which the Parthians
succeeded the head is regularly turned right, although the frontal
position was frequently chosen for bronze of the Seleucia mint.20
The earliest Parthian coinage - drachms and bronze of Mithradates I (171-138/37 B.c.) with the beardless head on the
obverse - broke away from this tradition and pictured the obverse head turned left.21 Tetradrachms began to be struck only
toward the close of the reign. On them, and on three series of
drachms and bronze, probably contemporary,22 the head faces
right after the Seleucid tradition. This change was coincident
with the expansion of Parthian territory to include Ecbatana
and Seleucia. Immediately upon the death of Mithradates I
the obverse of the drachms reverted to the style adopted for
the earliest Parthian coins.23 On the tetradrachms, on the other
20 See pp. 47-48.
21 One issue in this series (Wroth, p. 5, (vi)), probably the latest, has the obverse
head turned right.
22 Wroth, Pis. II, 1-5; II, 6-13; III, 8-9, I, 13.
23 As the sole exception should be noted an issue of drachms attributed by Wrath
to Himerus (p. 23, No. 2), which may well have been struck at Seleucia.

16o
hand, the head turned right continued to appear until the accession of Mithradates II (123/22-91/90 B.C.), under whom took
place the first consolidation and organization of the empire.
Thereafter the Parthian practice became general for all classes
of the royal coinage, except for the occasional appearance of
frontality on both tetradrachms and drachms.24 The distinction
between the two denominations of silver in respect to the positions of the obverse heads is supported by a corresponding
distinction in the reverse type of the silver of Phraataces
(2/I B.c.-4/5 A.D.). On these issues the bust of the queen is
shown on the reverse, on the tetradrachms turned right, on the
drachms, left.25
The arrangement of the hair of the head and beard on the obverses
On the Parthian coinage minted in the earlier part of the
reign of Mithradates I the head on the obverse is shown covered,
and the face clean-shaven. Thereafter, throughout the Parthian
coinage, the kings were represented as bearded and, generally,
with the head bare. On the latest series of the issues of Mithradates I the hair of the head and beard was executed in a style
distinctly naturalistic. Two techniques, however, can be distinguished. On the series which shows the obverse head turned
left the hair is represented by rather fine, almost straight lines,
which emphasize the vertical strokes. The other series of late
coins of Mithradates, with the head turned right, emphasizes
curly tufts of hair a technique characteristic of contemporary
Hellenistic engraving and sculpture. It recurs on a tetradrachm
of Phraates II (138/37-128/27 B.c.).26 This naturalistic tendency did not long survive; by the reign of Mithradates II
(123/22-91/90 B.c.) one observes what appears to be a deliberate
effort toward formalism, especially noticeable in the treatment
of the beard.2" In the reigns of Gotarzes I, "Arsaces," and
Orodes I 28 (c. 91-c. 77 B.C.) further experimentation developed
the technique of representing the hair by formal rows. A culmination was reached with the portrait of Orodes, which differs
24 Frontality, so far as I know, never occurs on both classes of silver at the same
time except in the reign of Volagases IV. What mint other than Seleucia employed
this style cannot be determined at the present time. 25 Wroth, Pl. XXIV, 1-3.
26 Ibid., Pls. III, 2-6; III, 7-13; IV, 1. 27 Ibid., Pl. VI, 5-I.
28 ibid., Pis. VIII, 12; VIII, 11; VIII, 10, and IX, 1. Wroth assigned these
coins to an Artabanus II. See discussion on pages 206-210.

markedly in style from that of Gotarzes. The unit in each row
was the individual tuft of curly hair noted in respect to one of
the series of Mithradates I, but the curl had now become entirely
formalized. The rows emphasized horizontal rather than vertical
lines, and came to be applied to the beard as well as to the hair
of the head. The similarity of this technique to that employed
on Assyrian and Achemenid sculpture is obvious. It appears,
nevertheless, to have been an independent outgrowth of attempts
to follow a naturalistic style of the Hellenistic west. The formalism was a recognition of the practical limitations in the way of a
successful application of this style to coin engraving by the personnel available in Parthia.
The formalistic treatment of the hair reached a climax on
the coins of Orodes 11(57-38/37 B.C.) and Phraates IV (38/372/i B.c.). Both denominations of silver were equally responsive
to this development. On the tetradrachms, however, the individualism of portraiture was maintained to a large extent and,
within a given reign, was uniform, whereas at least as early as
the reign of Phraates IV the appearance of the drachms suggests
that engravers of sufficient skill and feeling were not generally
available. In the succeeding reigns, of Phraataces (2/I B.C.4/5 A.D.), Vonones I (9/10-12/13 A.D.), and Artabanus II
(11/12-c. 40 A.D.), a distinct reaction took place and a wide
break developed between the style of the tetradrachms and that
of the drachms. On the former the horizontal lines of the rows
continued to be emphasized, although on certain issues the formalism has been relaxed. The individuality of the portrait has
perhaps been increased; certainly there was no lessening in the
complexity of the design.29 For the drachms the case is entirely
distinct. The coins of this denomination of Vonones I have
undergone a marked simplification in design.0 Of immediate
concern is the fact that on both the head and the beard the
formal rows, with their emphasis on the horizontal, have been
replaced by fine lines, nearly straight and with the emphasis
definitely on vertical strokes. In contrast with contemporary
tetradrachms, the formalism of expression has been retained to
the detriment of the individuality. For the preceding reign, of
Phraataces, a bronze coin exists that is characterized by the new
29 Wroth, Pis. XXIII, 10; XXIV, 1, 6; XXV, 2-6.
30 See below, pp. 164-165-

162
technique," which, in all probability, was initiated in that
reign. Actually the technique was not new but was a redevelopment, either conscious or unconscious, of that which had appeared briefly on a late series of Mithradates I,12 as well as on
scattered succeeding issues. By the accession of Vardanes I
(c. 40/41-45 A.D.) there had taken place a stabilization in techniques of obverse style which survived to the end of the Parthian
period. The tetradrachms retained the complicated design of
formal horizontal rows, the drachms, the no less formal but
greatly simplified design which emphasized the nearly straight
and vertical lines of the hair."1
The motifs of the reverses
The reverse type of the earliest Parthian silver, drachms,
portrayed a male figure in Parthian dress seated right on an
omphalos, presumably the deified founder of the Arsacid dynasty.
The omphalos in time was replaced by a throne. Though its
prototype is obviously Seleucid, the motif is a definitely Parthian
contribution to the stock of reverse types. With only four shortlived exceptions throughout the entire Parthian period, the
drachms were marked by the uninspired repetition of this
type.34 In contrast to the uniform monotony of the drachms,
the tetradrachms from the moment of their inauguration toward
the close of the reign of Mithradates I developed a wide variety
in motif, and finally became stereotyped only after the passage
of more than two centuries. With a single exception to be noted
below, the typically Parthian motif of the drachms was copied
for the tetradrachms only during the period from the accession
of Mithradates II, 123/22 B.C., to a point early in the reign of
Orodes II, shortly after 57 B.c. During this interval the issue of
tetradrachms was light and of relatively little importance. Prior
3' Wroth, Pl. XXIII, 13.
32 See above, p. 16c.
3 As an exception should be noted certain drachms of Volagases I which follow
the lines of the tetradrachms. See Wroth, Pl. XXVIII, 15-16. I suggest that the
obverse dies for this issue had been prepared at the mint for the tetradrachms, Seleucia,
and forwarded to the mint where the drachms were struck, probably Ecbatana. See
p. 165, note 41.
3 The exceptions follow: issues of Mithradates I with reverse of Zeus Aitophoros
(Wroth, Pl. III, 8-9, 11, 13); of Himerus with reverse of Nike (ibid., Pl. V, io); of
Phraataces with the portrait of the queen on the reverse (ibid., P1. XXIV, 2-3), and
of Vonones I with Nike as reverse type (ibid., P1. XXIV, 7).

163
to this period the tetradrachms of Mithradates I, of Artabanus I,
and of Phraates II had borrowed their reverse types directly from
the Hellenistic coinages Hercules, Apollo, and Tyche Nikephoros. Phraates III (c. 70-57 B.C.) for one of his issues discarded
the seated bowman type and struck tetradrachms which portrayed him as Zeus Atophoros crowned by the city-goddess.35
With the second coinage of Orodes II the issue of tetradrachms
became, and thereafter remained, much more frequent and heavy
than had heretofore been the case. This development was accompanied by the introduction of a new reverse in which the
king, portrayed as a mortal, is shown with Tyche, the citygoddess. Occasionally, thereafter, the new type was replaced by
one representing the king as Zeus. In special issues Phraataces
employed again the bowman type and the portrait of his mother,
Musa, and Vonones I celebrated his victory over Artabanus.3"
Of particular significance, however, is the fact that when the
new type of the king with Tyche was repeated in a number of
issues the individuality of each type was maintained by the
introduction of distinctions in the details of the motif. This is
in direct contrast with the early and complete acceptance of an
unvarying design for the reverse of the drachms. The tetradrachms became stereotyped only in the reign of Pacorus II
(78-115,/16 A.D.) with the type of the king in the act of accepting a diadem from the standing Tyche. It should be noted
finally that, with the exception of the rare use of the reverse
copied from the drachms, all the varied motifs employed on the
tetradrachms are either largely or entirely Hellenistic Greek
rather than Oriental in concept, and that the portrayal of the
city-goddess as a part of the motif on the great majority of
the tetradrachms beginning with the reign of Mithradates I
points to a special relationship between this class of silver and
the city of Seleucia."7
The quality of execution of the types
Throughout the duration of the empire the quality of execution of the obverse and the reverse of Parthian tetradrachms
remained approximately uniform in respect to one another. A
35 Wroth, P1. XI, 1.
'* Ibid., Pis. XV, 1-2; XVIII, 17; XXIII, 11; XXIV, 1, 6.
" See the discussion of the significance of this motif on pages 219-221.

164
decrease in quality can be remarked between the earlier and the
later periods, but it was constant in progression and operated
equally upon both types. Within a given reign no significant
distinction in the quality of the various issues can be remarked.A8
With regard to the drachms the situation is entirely different.
In the period of Mithradates I the obverse and the reverse displayed an approximately equivalent degree of artistry, but with
the standardization of the reverse motif under Mithradates II
a distinction developed in this regard which widened with each
successive reign. The stereotyped design of the reverse dies came
to be executed by men of little manual skill and little or no
feeling for the symbolism which they were supposed to portray.
Each copied the work of his predecessor, and the results departed
farther and farther from the original concept. There is no relation whatsoever between the decrease in quality of the tetradrachms and that of the reverse of the drachms in respect to
either the rate of decrease or the ultimate result. The obverse
portraits on the drachms from the reign of Mithradates II to
that of Phraates IV (38/37-2/I B.C.) not only were similar in
style to the design of the tetradrachms but, in most instances,
maintained a general equivalence in the quality of execution.
One must except, naturally, certain coins which were imitations
of Parthian issues and which were struck beyond the Parthian
borders.
With the reign of Phraates IV there becomes noticeable a
change in the quality of the engraving of the royal portraits on
the drachms. Though following the style of the tetradrachms,
as a whole they suggest the efforts of copyists and on some the
portraits become caricatures.3" The tendency continued in the
next reign, that of Phraataces, whose portrait on the drachms
entirely lacks the individuality of that on the larger silver and
represents a much lower quality of execution. In the reign of
Vonones I which followed, the complicated design for the portrait
which continued to characterize the tetradrachms was abandoned
for the drachms. In its stead we find an extreme simplification
38 A certain variation may occur even within a single issue, caused by a lack of
uniformity in the dies. Some appear to have been the product of assistants rather
than of master engravers. This tendency is particularly noticeable in the caches of
tetradrachms and in the large groups of the autonomous bronze. There can be no
question here of a plurality of mints.
39 Wroth, Pis. XX, 6; XXII, 9-12; also others.

THE PAR THIAN MINT AT SELE UCLA 165
of design which required a minimum of strokes and which preferred straight lines to curves.40 The hair was represented by
vertical lines, and where curves were required, as for the loop
of the diadem, they were large. This change in style can only
have been an acknowledgment of reality. The mints for the
drachms could no longer attempt even to copy the work of
the engravers responsible for the tetradrachms. Therewith the
quality of execution of the obverse types of the drachms fell
to the level of that of the reverse, and this equivalence on a far
lower standard than that of the tetradrachms was maintained
throughout the rest of the Parthian period."1
The quality and the content of the legends
The quality of the Greek in the legends is nearly as significant
as the quality of execution of the types in demonstrating the
existence of essential distinctions between the tetradrachms and
the drachms. We are not concerned with variations in the forms
of letters consequent upon changes in standards of orthography
which were general throughout the East, but with peculiarities
in the formation of letters and in the spelling of words which
indicate an ignorance of good contemporary Greek. Except
during one definitely limited period the legends on the tetra40 See above, p. 161.
41 An explanation must be offered for the maintenance of a high standard of
engraving for the royal portraits on the drachms until the reign of Phraates IV while,
during the same period, the reverses for the most part were cut by mechanics and for
the general equivalence of this standard to that of the tetradrachms. It cannot
reasonably be assumed that both obverse and reverse dies for the drachms were
prepared by the same hands or in the same mints. Orodes II, the predecessor of
Phraates IV, had moved his principal capital from Iran to Ctesiphon. Both these
kings, and most of their successors as well, were occupied in large measure by affairs
in the west, whereas the eastern part of the empire demanded little attention. Presumably, in consequence, less of the royal time was spent in the east and less interest
was taken in its administration. I suggest that it had previously been customary to
prepare the dies for the obverse of all the royal coinage in Seleucia where the tetradrachms were struck and that so long as the kings were resident in Iran the obverse
dies for issues intended to be struck in Iran were sent to the court for inspection and
thence distributed to the various mints. Naturally some degree of variation would
characterize each die within a given reign, but all would maintain a certain uniformity.
I suggest further that, once the court was thoroughly established in the west with the
reign of Phraates IV, the mints of the east were left to prepare the obverse dies of the
drachms locally, that the local engravers copied the design for the portrait of Phraates
from the tetradrachms but with indifferent success, and that with the accession of
Vonones a simpler design was inaugurated for the drachms which was more in keeping
with the capacity of provincial engravers.

166
drachms are entirely satisfactory from their inauguration under
Mithradates I to the close of the reign of Volagases III, from
about 141 B.C. to 192 A.D. Beginning with the latest issue of
Orodes II, of 39/38 B.C. down to the latest issue of Artabanus II,
of 27/28 A.D., a few blunders in spelling occur together with a
more frequent use of debased forms for certain of the letters.
This period is followed by the first revolt at Seleucia. With
the first issues of Vardanes I, the successor of Artabanus, the
quality of the legends again became entirely satisfactory according to contemporary standards.42
On the drachms debased forms of letters and blundered
legends made their appearance as early as the reign of Mithradates II. Blunders and barbarities increased with each succeeding reign. It is evident that before the end of the first
century B.C. the engravers of the drachms were for the most
part ignorant of the Greek language. With the appearance of
a legend in Pehlevi alongside the barbarous Greek in the second
half of the first century A.D. one understands that the western
characters had become only a part of a meaningless design. It
is important to note that from the reign of Mithradates I
through that of Volagases III debased and peculiar forms of
letters which occur on one of the two denominations of silver
are not found on contemporary examples of the other denomination. As has been stated above, these observations do not apply
to such normal developments as the rectangular sigma and corresponding forms.
The variations in the content of the legends as between the
two denominations of silver possess a significance, especially
if regarded collectively. During the reigns of Mithradates I,
Phraates II, and Artabanus I the legends of the tetradrachms
consistently differed from those of the drachms. The title
Philhellenos appears on most of the tetradrachms, but never
on the drachms; the latter favor the term Theopatoros, which
never occurs on the former. As usual, the drachms display a
wider variation among themselves than do the tetradrachms.
During the next reign, of Mithradates II, the legends are uni42 On the issues for 43/44 and 44/45 A.D. the letter phi of Epiphanous has been
omitted, a temporary slip which cannot be attributed to ignorance of Greek. The
cause of the debasement in the legend during the particular period noted is discussed
on pages 22 1-226. The change in the quality of the legend which followed the overthrow of Volagases III by Volagases IV is discussed on page 235.

167
form save for the appearance on the greater number of the
drachms of the title King of Kings, absent from the tetradrachms. After the death of Mithradates II distinctions in the
legends again became prevalent, with certain titles more generally characteristic of the one denomination than of the other.
It is only with the later coinage of Orodes II, after his installation of the court at Ctesiphon, that a common legend for both
drachms and tetradrachms was definitely determined and thereafter retained. These conditions require the conclusion that in
the earlier period the form of the royal title on the coins was
determined by local considerations in each principal division of
the empire, and that distinctions which persisted over a considerable interval imply that the classes of coins so distinguished
were struck in different areas. Uniformity was sought by such
rulers as Mithradates II, the first Arsacid to attempt a serious organization of the central administration, and Orodes II, who continued the reorganization inaugurated by his father, Phraates III.
This later enforced uniformity serves to emphasize the separation
of the mints for tetradrachms and drachms in the early period.
The development of the term "King of Kings" during the
reign of Mithradates II should be noted. His tetradrachms
appear to have been struck during the early part of the reign,
when Mithradates was engaged in the organization of the western
part of the empire. The numerous drachms which bore the new
title were first struck when the power of Mithradates reached its
zenith, that is, after his reestablishment of the Parthian frontiers
in the east and the north. If it had been the Parthian practice
to issue tetradrachms in the eastern provinces, where Mithradates undoubtedly maintained his headquarters at this time,
certainly types of this, the more important denomination of
silver, would have been struck in commemoration of the assumption of the paramount title.
The presence or the absence of dates
In the Parthian coinage dates first make their appearance
in the latter part of the reign of Mithradates I on a series of
tetradrachms and drachms struck at a common mint, probably
Seleucia.4 Another dated drachm assigned by Wroth to Himerus
* Wroth, pp. 14-15, Nos- 55-61. See also the discussion of the attribution of these
coins on page 132.

168
is also of the Seleucia mint."4 Aside from these two special issues
of the Seleucia mint, no dated drachms are known for the entire
Parthian period. In direct contrast with this the use of dates on
the tetradrachms, irregular in the earlier reigns, became the regular practice with the reign of Phraates IV and, thereafter, they
invariably form a part of the design."1
The character and the use of monograms
Of the various factors which demonstrate the fundamental
dissimilarity of the two denominations of Parthian silver none,
perhaps, affords such emphatic evidence as the usage in respect
to monograms. On the tetradrachms monograms are numerous
during the earlier reigns, prior to that of Orodes II. With this
reign the issue of this class of silver became frequent, and with
that of his successor the practice of placing dates on the tetradrachms became common. Coincident with these developments
the use of monograms decreased sharply. Although both dates
and monograms appear on a few issues, as a rule the latter are
confined to those tetradrachms which lack the date. With the
reign of Vardanes I monograms disappear entirely and thereafter are never found on the tetradrachms.46 There can be no
question but that the monograms on this class of silver represented the names of mint officials.
On the early drachms monograms appear at least as frequently as on the contemporary tetradrachms and with each
succeeding reign during the early period their use became more
common. The monograms which occur on the drachms up to
the close of the reign of Phraates III (c. 70-57 B.c.) had a character similar to that of the monograms on the other silver, that is,
they represented the names of individual mint officials. Although the use of monograms was so general on both classes
of silver during this entire period, with one exception no monogram found on an example of the one class is known to occur
on coins of the other class. The exception is constituted by the
4 Wroth, p. 23, No. 2 and note 2. See also discussion on page 202.
4 On one issue of Artabanus II (Wroth, p. 146, Nos. 2-7) no date can be distinguished, but it was apparently intended to be shown. See discussion on page 115,
under No. 81. The purpose served by dates is discussed on page 147.
46 With this same reign is inaugurated the practice of placing on the obverses of
the tetradrachms a single letter or numeral, which did not stand for the name of an
official but perhaps referred to an office in the mint.

169
series of tetradrachms and drachms of Mithradates I referred to
above as the product of the Seleucia mint.47 In contrast to the
usage on the tetradrachms, after the reign of Phraates III the
drachms almost without exception continued to show monograms to the end of the Parthian period. Their value, however,
was now fundamentally changed. They cannot have represented individual officials, for on the drachms of each succeeding
reign were reproduced the same monograms which had characterized those of the reign of Phraates III. With the passage of
time some of the monograms disappeared, but they were not
replaced by other new letter combinations. The steadily diminishing examples of the original group continued to serve all the
drachms issued until for the latest reigns only one survived. We
cannot escape the conclusion that the monograms on the drachms
of the reigns which followed that of Phraates III had the value
of mint marks. That is, each mint for the drachms was represented by a particular monogram. Since this practice was limited
strictly to the one class of the silver coinage, the force of the
evidence afforded by the monograms is readily seen.48
The relative abundance of tetradrachms and drachms
A comparison of the rates of issue of the two classes of silver
at various periods serves not only'the purposes of the present
discussion but others of a more general historical nature.49 A
practical value is given such a comparison by the fact that it
is based, in the case of Parthian coins, on the very large number
of examples which have been published. In calculating the rates
I have made use of those catalogs which for the most part are
based on separate collections, and I believe that to a reasonable
degree the figures are representative of the total issue of each
4 See discussion on pages 167-168.
48 In explanation of the change in the character of the monograms I suggest a
fact which has often been proved true in the more backward parts of the present-day
Orient - that the public objects seriously to any change in the appearance of the
currency. It is very possible that a certain group of officials had been left in charge
of the mints of the drachms over a long period, that the public became accustomed
to the appearance of their initials in monogram, and that the administration decided
to retain this set of monograms as the marks of the respective mints. It must be
borne in mind that in Iran at that period few users of the currency would have been
able to read the legend; to the great majority it was the monograms which indicated
the authenticity of the coins.
4They are discussed on pages 219-221.

170
class of the silver in particular periods. The use of these data
for our present purposes is based on the assumption that major
changes in the rate of issue of currency at a time when the
services of banks as we know them were unknown must have
been caused by a corresponding expansion or contraction in the
activity of commerce. A corollary assumption has been that,
if the two classes of silver circulated in common areas, their
rates of issue would respond in a similar manner both to the
stimulus of economic change and to the repressive influence of
internal strife.
From the inauguration of the issue of tetradrachms about
141 B.C., shortly after the occupation of Babylonia by Mithradates I, to a point in the reign of Orodes 11(57-38/37 B.c.) this
class of silver was struck only at irregular intervals and in extremely small quantities. Probably toward the close of the reign
of Orodes what is called his second coinage introduced new and
varied types, approximately contemporary, and at the same
time the rate of issue advanced sharply. This trend culminated during the reigns of his successors, Phraates IV and
Phraataces, from 38/37 B.C. to 4/5 A.D., in a rate approximately
five times the average of that of the period prior to the second
coinage of Orodes II. There followed a long period of intermittent civil strife which was brought to a close only about 130 A.D.
As a result, during intervals the production of tetradrachms decreased and for as long as twenty-five consecutive years ceased
entirely." When, however, a particular royal administration
was able to maintain its strength over a number of years, the
rate of issue rose abruptly to figures apparently comparable to
those of the peak. From about 130 A.D. to the period of final
internal decline, which set in with the close of the reign of
Volagases IV, about 208 A.D., the rate appears to have remained
uniformly high, probably not appreciably under that of the
earlier peak. It should be noted that in respect to the proportions in which they occur the tetradrachms found at Seleucia
support the figures obtained from an analysis of the general body
of material.
The coinage of Parthian drachms appears to have been inaugurated with the accession of Mithradates I about 171 B.C.
From the beginning the issues were numerous and moderately
50 The political events of this period are discussed on pages 229-23 4.

171
heavy. A slow steady increase marked the rate during the succeeding reigns until that of Phraates III. During this reign and
that of his successors, Mithradates III and Orodes II, from about
70 to 38/37 B.C., the production of drachms was abruptly increased about three times. During the next reign, however, that
of Phraates IV (38/37-2/I B.C.), the rate dropped back to approximately the average level for the period prior to 70 B.C.
Thereafter, to the close of the empire and without apparent
reference to the conditions which affected the production of
tetradrachms, the rate of issue of drachms remained uniform at
a lower figure than that which had characterized the early period.
It is evident from this analysis that a graph of the rate of
issue of the drachms has nothing in common with one based on
the production of the tetradrachms. Both show periods of rapid
expansion, but these were not contemporary and appear to have
been produced by two different stimuli."' Natural causes tended
to sustain the rate of production of the tetradrachms at a high
level, although at times political forces operated to lower this
level temporarily. On the other hand, the forces which had
raised the level of production of the drachms for a period apparently ceased to function and the rate fell back to a new low,
which does not appear to have been affected by the political
factors which had influenced the rate of the tetradrachms. These
distinctions in themselves would make unreasonable an assumption that the two denominations of silver circulated to a significant extent in common mint areas.
Of the eight principal factors of distinction between the tetradrachms and the drachms which have just been discussed, certain
ones apply most significantly to the early period, others to the
middle and the later periods. Taken together, the evidence
afforded by these factors reveals, I believe, distinctions so fundamental and at the same time so comprehensive as to require the
conclusion that the two classes of Parthian silver were not struck
in common mints except for certain strictly limited exceptions.
As exceptions should be noted the series to which reference
has already been made - tetradrachms with reverse of Hercules
and drachms with reverse of Zeus Atophoros struck by Mithradates I near the close of his reign.52 Because of their common
51 The reasons for these major increases in circulation are discussed on pages
219-221. * Wroth, pp. 12-15, Nos. 48-61.

172
monograms the two series must be assigned to the same mint.
These tetradrachms are among the earliest struck under Parthian
rule, and it is possible that this one series of the heavy silver
was a product of the Ecbatana mint, though I can find no evidence to support such an assignment. It was issued just after the
reoccupation of Seleucia which followed the defeat of Demetrius
II a particularly appropriate moment for an issue of coinage
by the new administration in what had been the Seleucid capital
in the East. The reverse motif of Hercules was a favorite one in
Bactria, but no less so in Characene to the south of Seleucia; 1
it is of no assistance, that is, for a determination of the mint.
The reverse type of the drachms, on the other hand, is closely
similar to that of a group of autonomous coins of the Seleucia
mint.4 This fact, taken with the general evidence requiring the
attribution of the tetradrachms to the local mint, has led me to
assign this series of drachms to Seleucia. As the only additional
exception I have tentatively attributed to the mint at Seleucia
the group of drachms which Wroth assigned to Himerus and
which have as reverse a Nike with palm.,, Like the drachms of
Mithradates I which have just been discussed, these coins differ
in style from all other contemporary drachms. In addition, on
the obverse the head is turned right, as on the contemporary
tetradrachms, whereas all other drachms struck after the death
of Mithradates I show the head turned left.
It will be well to consider here whether any evidence suggests
that Parthian tetradrachms were struck in more than one mint.
Several factors strongly support the contrary assumption. It
has already been noted that mint marks were developed for the
drachms with the close of the reign of Phraates III, about 57 B.C.
If there had been more than one mint for the tetradrachms, it
is reasonable to expect that they would have been distinguished
in a corresponding manner. The absence of mint marks, that
is, constitutes important evidence indicating a single source for
this class of the silver. Mr. E. T. Newell has pointed out that
in the Seleucid Empire certain provincial mints placed identifying marks on their issues, whereas the principal mint at Antioch
5 S. W. Grose, Catalogue of the McClean Collection of Greek Coins, III, 407,
Nos. 9685, 9687; 410, No. 9705; G. F. Hill, Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Arabia,
Mesopotamia and Persia, pp. 289-302.
" See p. 94 No. 126. * P. 23, No. 2.

173
did not. He noted further that the same practice prevails in the
United States.56 Under the Seleucidae, although the mint at
Seleucia was active, at least in respect to the bronze coinage, it
employed no identifying mark.7 This may well have been due
to the fact that the city was the second capital. Whatever its
status in the early Parthian period, the Seleucia mint enjoyed the
primacy by the close of the reign of Orodes II, when the principal
capital was established in the west and the issue of tetradrachms
assumed a major importance. The evidence indicating the fabrication of the obverse dies for the drachms at the mint of the
tetradrachms during the early period and the special privileges
enjoyed by Seleucia in respect to the autonomous coinage both
suggest that from the beginning of the Parthian period a ranking
position was accorded the local mint. Since in the development
of their coinage the Arsacids drew upon Seleucid practice for
many features, it is most likely that under the new administration
the Seleucia mint continued its earlier practice and employed no
distinguishing mark because its absence signified that this was
the principal mint. This suggestion serves to explain the absence
of mint marks from the tetradrachms and again points to their
issue exclusively at Seleucia.
It has already been noted that monograms appear on the
tetradrachms less frequently than on the drachms. Yet in one
instance the former show a number of monograms within the
same year. They occur on a type group of Artabanus II for the
year 27/28 A.D.58 and, taken by themselves, would suggest that
the group represented the issues of several mints. One of the
monograms is similar to that which served as one of the principal
mint marks on the drachms, but this is probably due to an accidental similarity in initials. Although it was unusual to employ
several different controllers for the issue of a single type group,
this explanation of the plurality of monograms is preferable to an
assumption that during one year of the entire Parthian period
tetradrachms were struck in a number of centers which at no
other time had possessed mints for this class of silver and only
one of which was among the recognized mints for the drachms.
56 The Seleucid Mint at Antioch, pp. 3-4.
Very few Seleucid tetradrachms have as yet been recovered in the excavations.
58 Wroth, pp. 148-149, Nos. 20-32. In a letter to the author Mr. E. T. Newell
has offered the suggestion that the monograms on the coins of this group stand for
various months, that is, they take the place of month dates. See Preface, p. viii.

174
During the reign of Phraates IV tetradrachms with variant
reverse types appeared within the same year, in some instances
within the same month .9 This situation by itself would also
suggest that at least during this period tetradrachms were struck
in a number of mints. However, in no other respects do these
coins show distinctions which would favor such a conclusion.
If another reasonable explanation exists for the variation in
types, the absence of anything in the nature of mint marks on the
coins overweighs the suggestion in favor of a plurality of mints.
The period of these coins is that marked by the rapid and very
extensive increase in the minting of tetradrachms, which has been
noted elsewhere.O Prior to the inauguration of this expansion
in the last years of Orodes II the few tetradrachms which were
struck had borne the reverse of the drachms.61 The expansion
and the appearance of a variety of new reverse types were coincident with the concentration of the interest of the Arsacids in
the western part of the empire which aimed at an economic, and
perhaps a military, penetration toward the Mediterranean.62
Both these objectives required a large increase in the coinage of
tetradrachms, the unit of silver preferred in Syria and its borderlands. At this same period there probably took place a renewal
of what I have called the alliance between the Arsacids and the
Greek commercial aristocracy of Seleucia.63 The reverse motif
which became the new standard for the tetradrachms - the
city-goddess with her scepter offering a palm or a diadem to the
reigning king was intended, I believe, to portray this alliance.
Beyond Seleucia this reverse, along with its variations and that
other contemporary type which represented the king as Zeus
Nikephoros, was more acceptable to the tastes and the traditions
of the peoples outside the western border of Parthia than would
have been the motif of the drachms. Considering these various
factors one cannot well escape the conclusion that the apparent
confusion in the selection of reverse types during the reign of
Phraates IV was due (1) to the search for a type which would
express the relationship between the dynasty and the powerful
Greek element and which would be well received by the popula59 See table on pages 184-186. Cf. p. 164, note 38, a reference to possible variations in the quality of engraving within a single mint.
60 See pp. 169-171.
61 See p. 162. 62 See pp. 219-220. 63 See pp. 220-221.

175
tion in the west who were just coming under Parthian influence
and (2) to the necessity for a rapid expansion in the circulation of
tetradrachms which could not wait for a final decision on the
question of types.
Aside from the appearance at one period of variant reverse
types within the same year and month, and, at another period,
of a plurality of monograms within the same year, no characteristics of Parthian tetradrachms suggest that they were the product
of more than one mint. The net evidence strongly supports the
fact of their essential homogeneity. Even more conclusive is the
evidence that the tetradrachms were not struck in the mints
which issued the drachms. This consideration by itself appears
to require the assumption that Seleucia was the sole mint for
this class of silver. Additional and very practical evidence is
afforded by a comparison of the characteristics of tetradrachms
with those of the bronze struck at Seleucia. The issue of tetradrachms and of the autonomous coinage was inaugurated at the
same time, shortly after the capture of Seleucia by Mithradates
I, and the first three type groups of the one class are related to the
corresponding three groups of the other class through common
factors in their reverse motifs." At a later period, when the civic
types were giving way to the royal, the autonomous coinage
borrowed two reverse types from the tetradrachms.65 Again,
during the early period tetradrachms and autonomous bronze of
the period of Gotarzes I bore a common monogram.66 The
temporary debasement of the quality of the legend on the tetradrachms, which has been discussed above, was paralleled on the
autonomous coinage during the same period and, apparently,
owing to the same causes.67 The word E-rovs used with the date
appears in the entire coinage of the Parthian period only twice on tetradrachms and autonomous coins of the approximately
contemporary reigns of Vonones I and Artabanus 11.68 With
respect to common elements in style, so far as it is possible to
compare the civic types in bronze with the royal types in silver,
64 See pp. 131-132, 133, 133-134.
65 See p. 139, No. 138; p. 140, No. 13966 See p. 133, No. 128. The absence of further examples of common monograms
lacks significance in view of the fact that the poor condition of the greater part of the
bronze has rendered obscure many of the details of the design.
67 See discussion on pages 221-222.
68 See p. 115, No. 81; p. 137, No. 134

176
contemporary tetradrachms and autonomous coins display no
dissimilarity.
The close relationship between the royal bronze struck at
Seleucia and the contemporary tetradrachms has already been
touched upon. Its evidence is decisive for the period beginning
with 24 A.D. The invariable use of dates and the common treatment of the royal portrait characteristic of the two classes require
their attribution to a single mint, Seleucia, and set them off as
entirely distinct from the contemporary drachms and the rest
of the Parthian bronze which followed the style of the drachms.
The distinctions between the silver and the bronze of the Seleucia
mint area and the silver and the bronze of the other Parthian
mints which are so clear cut after 24 A.D. are no less real in the
period prior to that date. The autonomous bronze of Seleucia
is set off against the royal bronze of the other Parthian mints.
The tetradrachms, related to the autonomous bronze by every
factor of comparison which can be drawn, are in all significant
respects entirely dissimilar to the drachms. Finally, the royal
bronze of the period prior to 24 A.D., and in Iran later, followed
the drachms through each development in style, technique,
quality of execution in design and legend, and in the monograms
used and the value which they possessed. All the factors involved, if carried to a natural conclusion, support the hypothesis
advanced at the beginning of this discussion, that the Parthian
tetradrachms were struck exclusively at the mint of Seleucia and
that, with certain enumerated exceptions, the drachms were
struck exclusively in the other mints of the empire.
This geographical separation of the two classes of silver harmonized entirely with the monetary traditions and the habits of
the ancient East. The siglos, the larger silver unit of the Achemenid period, weighed on an average only 5-38 grams. Under
the Seleucid kings the use of tetradrachms became general
throughout the East, but by the close of the reign of Antiochus III, about 187 B.C., the drachm had surpassed in popularity the heavier silver." This shift in the comparative rates
of issue, which increasingly marked all subsequent Seleucid coinage in Iran, affords a definite indication that the economy of the
country made the small unit more suitable. The earlier Bactrian
69 This information I owe to the kindness of Mr. E. T. Newell, who, however, does
not necessarily share my conclusions.

177
successors of the Seleucid line in the eastern portion of Iran continued to strike tetradrachms, but by the reign of Heliocles
(c. 150-125 B.C.) the local units of currency had apparently
regained favor.70 This was only shortly after the organization
of the currency system of Parthia. In southern Iran Persis
inaugurated an independent currency which included tetradrachms until only about 150 B.C.71 In the coinage of Elymais,
lying between Persis and Babylonia, silver tetradrachms disappeared by the first century A.D.; in that of Characene, adjoining Elymais and Babylonia on the south, perhaps a little
earlier.72 To the west of Babylonia, in Syria and its adjoining
territories, the use of tetradrachms continued late into the
Roman period. Here was the center which throughout appears
to have inspired a demand for the heavy silver. In Iran this
demand was artificial, a creation of political ties. In Babylonia there-was undoubtedly a local demand for tetradrachms,
but beyond this they were a necessity if Seleucia was to compete
successfully with Antioch and the other cities of the west for the
trade of the great areas along the Euphrates and in northern
Mesopotamia which lacked mints of their own. Before Parthian
tetradrachms began to be struck in abundance Babylonia continued to use the stock of Seleucid tetradrachms which had been
in local circulation and, in addition, those which undoubtedly
were forced out of circulation in Iran with the development of
the Parthian drachms. It will be shown in another section that
Parthian tetradrachms began to be minted extensively only
when relations with Syria took on an especial importance."1
These various factors demonstrate that the limitation of the
minting of drachms to the eastern provinces, and of tetradrachms
to the western part of the empire, was in no sense arbitrary, but
was rather the expression of a natural economic demand.
3. THE LIMITS OF THE MINT AREA
A word is necessary at this point with regard to the relationship between Seleucia and Ctesiphon. I find no evidence to indicate that Ctesiphon ever possessed a political entity distinct
from that of Seleucia. In the Seleucid period it was a suburb,
70 Grose, op. cit., III, 409, No. 9702, and others.
71 H-ill, op. cit., p. elxx.
72 Ibid., pp. 247--250, cxcviii. " See discussion on pages 220-221.

178
important probably as a warehouse center where were unloaded
the caravans from Iran and beyond, preparatory to the transfer
of the merchandise across the river by boat. A similar district
must have occupied the western suburbs of Seleucia to serve the
caravans from Syria and Phoenicia. With the Parthian occupation it is doubtful if any immediate change took place in the
status of Ctesiphon. Strabo has referred to the quartering of
the troops there out of consideration for the sensibilities of the
Seleucians."4 That the court spent the winters there, as Strabo
states, is probably not true of the period prior to the reign of
Orodes II. It was undoubtedly a garrison center from the time
of the Parthian occupation; that it was preferred in this respect
over Seleucia was due to military rather than social considerations. Both exercises and actual operations, especially for an
army which included a large proportion of mounted troops, must
have been difficult to carry out in the area between the Tigris
and the Euphrates, cut up as it was by a network of canals.
This was true to a much less degree on the east bank of the Tigris.
The topographical factors again must have played an important
r6le when under Orodes II and thereafter the Arsacids found
it necessary to concentrate their attention on the western portion of the empire. Not only was Ctesiphon better suited than
Seleucia as a principal military headquarters but more space was
there available for the peculiar needs of the royal court spacious gardens and open country suitable for hunting from horseback.
There is no evidence to suggest that with the establishment of
the court in Ctesiphon the east bank of the Tigris developed a
political entity and in this respect became separated from Seleucia. One must think, I believe, in terms of a metropolis which
occupied the two banks; in the course of time the newer sections
inevitably gained in prestige at the expense of the older, but this
involved no political separation. One group of the autonomous
coins does in fact support an assumption that in the reign of
Phraates IV, some time after 32/31 B.c., a union took place between Seleucia and Ctesiphon more formal than that which had
previously characterized their relations." The reverse type of
the coins represents two city-goddesses probably clasping hands
over an altar. This symbolism would scarcely have been ema xvi.1.16. Th See p. 100, No. 132.

THE PAR THIAN MINT AT SELEUCLA
179
ployed to express the union of two parties within Seleucia. This
is the more unlikely since, at this period, party strife in the city
was becoming more intense. I suggest that previously Ctesiphon
had not shared in the privileges enjoyed by the polis of Seleucia,
that indeed it had not possessed the status of a polis, and that in
consequence of its increased political consciousness as the seat
of the court the quarters on the east bank became amalgamated
with those across the river as a single metropolitan unit, SeleuciaCtesiphon. For our present purposes it should be noted that
there is no indication of a transfer of the mint from Seleucia to
Ctesiphon at any period. The apparent retention of certain
branches of the administration in the older center in spite of the
location of the principal royal palace and the military headquarters in the newer section harmonizes with this concept of
one united metropolis.
It is important to examine the extent of the area served by
the mint of Parthian Seleucia, that is, the area within which the
tetradrachms and the autonomous and royal bronze were intended to circulate. It is obvious that coins are frequently carried beyond the boundaries of the territory which they were
primarily intended to serve, but an essential difference in this
respect exists between the silver and the bronze. The latter
was employed almost exclusively in local trade, whereas the
former played a certain part in interregional commerce, in maintaining a balance in the exchange of goods for goods, and must
have been sought after, whatever the denomination, by those
who hoarded precious metal. There were in addition important
communities which lay along the border between two mint areas
and enjoyed commercial relations with both centers. In such
areas the medium of circulation was mixed, the proportions
largely determined in each locality by the varying degree of
proximity to the mint cities.
In Iran in the areas served by other Parthian mints occasional
finds of tetradrachms have been made.76 They serve only to
illustrate the point made in the preceding paragraph, that under
certain conditions silver was drawn beyond the areas in which
76 Of particular importance is the so-called Teheran hoard discussed in part by
E. T. Newell, "A Parthian Hoard," The Numismatic Chronicle, Fifth series, 4 (1924),
141-180. Mr. Newell has knowledge of still another hoard from Persia which contained numerous tetradrachms.

18go
it was intended to circulate. In northern Mesopotamia some
tetradrachms from Seleucia have come to light through native
dealers, but the excavated material of which I have knowledge
consists of drachms from Iran and tetradrachms struck at the
mint of Roman Antioch. At Dura-Europos along the middle
Euphrates Parthian tetradrachms and drachms have both been
found, along with a number of autonomous coins and a few specimens of the royal bronze from Seleucia. The great bulk of the
currency in that locality, however, was furnished throughout the
Parthian period by the Antioch mint.77 In eastern Mesopotamia
the influence of Seleucia may have been stronger. A large number of autonomous bronze coins of the Seleucia mint have been
found at Susa in Elymais.78 So far as I have knowledge Parthian
coins brought to light through excavations in Babylonia have
all been of the mint at Seleucia. The sites include Babylon,
Nippur, and Orchoi (Uruk) in the south and one near Tel Asmar
to the northeast of Seleucia, probably along the highway which
ran from Ctesiphon to Ecbatana.79
" Cf. R. H. Pfeiffer, "Excavations at Nuzi," Bulletin of the American Schools
of Oriental Research, No. 34, April, 1929, p. 4; G. F. Hill, "A Hoard of Coins from
Nineveh," The Numismatic Chronicle, Fifth series, 11 (1931), 160-170; E. T. Newell,
The Fifth Dura Hoard, Numismatic Notes and Monographs, 58 (1933), 9; A. R.
Bellinger, "The Coins," The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Preliminary Report of
Third Season of Work, November, 1929-March, 1930, pp. 139-160; idem, "The
Coins," The Excavations at Dura-Europos, Preliminary Report of Fourth Season of
Work, October, 193o-March, 1931, pp. 259-282.
78 A. Dieudonn6, "La Mission de Suse," Revue numismatique, 4e serie, 32
(1929), 32.
79 Twenty-three autonomous coins were found at Babylon, apparently together.
I have seen no description of their types, but they bore the ethnikon form of the name
Seleucia and appear to have been associated with coins of Characene which had been
overstruck with the types of Mithradates II. This suggests that they belonged to the
close of the second century B.c. or the opening of the first. See A. de la Fuye, "Les
Monnaies de l'Elymaide," Revue numismatique, 4e serie, 22 (1919), 74; cf. E. T.
Newell, Mithradates of Parthia and Hyspaosines of Characene: A Numismatic Palimpsest,
Numismatic Notes and Monographs, 26 (1925).
From Nippur have come five examples of the royal bronze struck at Seleucia
during the early second century A.D., together with a specimen of our autonomous
group No. 128 (see p. 96), which dates from about 122 to 83 B.C. This last coin
(Nippur No. CBS 14555) has been described as an issue of the Seleucid king Alexander
Bala, but an examination of the published photograph leaves no doubt as to its real
character. See Leon Legrain, "Coins from Nippur," The Museum Journal, University of Pennsylvania, 15 (1924), 70-76.
At Orchoi there were found three autonomous coins in a very obscure condition
and 196 tetradrachms of Gotarzes II (44-52 A.D.). The latter have been described

181
Although the evidence is as yet incomplete the outline of the
Seleucia mint area can be distinguished with reasonable clearness. It embraced all of Babylonia and, probably, southern
Mesopotamia. In the territories bordering on this area the coinage of Seleucia competed with that of other mints, in the north
with that of Antioch and of one or more mints of Iran, and to the
east with a mint of Iran, probably that of Ecbatana. Elymais
presents an interesting problem which cannot be solved on the
basis of extant knowledge. The fairly frequent occurrence in
Susa of the autonomous coinage of Seleucia suggests rather close
trade and social relations. This receives support from the fact
that tetradrachms continued to be favored in Elymais after this
class of coin had been discarded in central and northern Iran.
The evidence of regional currency preferences throws light on
another problem of cultural relationships. The fact that drachms
circulated freely in northern Mesopotamia, but are not found in
Babylonia, suggests that Iranian influence was stronger in the
north than in the south. From the point of view of currency
relationships we have one belt (the users of tetradrachms) extending from Syria down the Euphrates to Babylonia and thence
across into southern Iran, and another (the users of drachms)
stretching west from the solid block of central and northern
Iran through into northern Mesopotamia as far west as the
Euphrates. The relative influence of trade and of community
of culture in establishing these relationships constitutes an important study which must wait on the discovery of more adequate
evidence.
4. CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE COINS OF THE MINT
This table includes all the issues known to me of tetradrachms, of the autonomous coinage, and of the royal bronze
as of bronze, but the photographs reveal plainly the normal designs of the tetradrachms of this period. See J. Jordan, Uruk-Warka, nach den Ausgrabungen durch
die deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft, pp. 70 and 39.
Dr. N. C. Debevoise of the Oriental Institute, The University of Chicago, has
kindly permitted me to examine a number of coins found on' the surface near Tel
Asmar. They comprise examples of our Nos. 127, 128, 129, 130, and 132 of the
autonomous coinage (see pp. 95, 96, 97, 98, ico), dating from as early as 137/36 to
the interval from 32/3I to 2/1 n.c.; examples of the royal bronze from Seleucia for
the reigns of Pacorus II1(78-115/16 A.D.), Volagases II1(105/06-148 A.D.), and Volagases III (148-192 A.D.); and a tetradrachm of Volagases IV (191-207/08 A.D.).

182
which replaced the autonomous coinage. Included also are two
groups of drachms which were probably struck at Seleucia. The
first column gives the date of each issue. The figures which appear
in parenthesis are the estimated dates of coins on which the year
of the issue does not appear. The second column is provided for
those coins which are dated by the month as well as by the year.
The third column gives the metal of the coins. The four occurrences of drachms are indicated by the letter d. In the fourth
column the following abbreviations have been used in naming the
successive kings: Mith. (Mithradates), Phra. (Phraates), Artab.
(Artabanus), Sinat. (Sinatruces), Tirid. (Tiridates), Phra. V
(Phraataces), Von. (Vonones), Vard. (Vardanes), Volag. (Volagases), Pac. (Pacorus). The autonomous issues are referred to as
"autonom.," the revolt coinage of the city as "revolt." In the
fifth column, with its references to the publication of each coin,
I have cited the present volume in the case of all coins examples
of which have been found in the excavations. In the case of
tetradrachms the month dates of which have been obscured on
the specimens from Seleucia but which are given in other publications, the reference to this volume follows the other in
parenthesis. If several other authors have described the same
coin, a reference to Wroth has been preferred. The following
abbreviations have been used for the names of authors:
DeM. De Morgan M. Markoff
G. Gardner N.a Newell, "A Parthian Hoard"
Gr. Grose N.b Newell, "A Numismatic Palimpsest"
H. Hill N.c Newell (letter to author)
L. Lindsay P. Petrowicz
Long. Longperier P.-O. Prokesch-Osten
The full titles of the works cited will be found in the Bibliography on page xiii. In his letter Mr. Newell has described coins
of his collection. The first numerals in the fifth column refer to
pages, the second to serial numbers. Certain authors have not
numbered their coins; in these instances the page references
stand alone. The last column gives an abbreviated description
of the reverse types. In the case of some of the later bronze coins
this has been accompanied by a description of the obverse types.

183
Year B.C. Mo.
(141)80
(c.140/39)81.
(") 82
139/38
138/37 ..
(c. 140-137)83 . .
(c. 137/36) 84
(c. 129/28) 84
(c. 137/36123/22) 85
(c. 125/24) 86
124/23
(c. 124/23) 87
123/22 . .
(c. 122/21- ..
121/20) 88
121/20 ..
(c. 121/20104/03) 89
103/02
1 0 2 / 0 1 .."
99/98 ..
96/95 ..
95/94 ..
(c. 91/90) 90
88/87
(c. 86) 90
85/84 ..
Ml. King
A Mith. I
A
Ad
Ad
Jd
A
Ad
YE
A
A
"
Autonom.
Phra. II
"c
Reference
W. 10.29
McD. 61.66
W. 13.51
W. 14.55
W. 14.57
W. 15.58
W. 15.61
McD. 94.126
W. 16
W. 23.1
1E Autonom. McD. 95.127
A Artab. I
JR
Ad
Ad
JR
"c
Himerus
t
Mith. II
McD. 62.67
W. 20.1
N.a 153.71
P.-O. 21.4
McD. 62.68
Type
Tyche .Nikephoros
(seated)
Hercules
Zeus Aetophoros
Hercules
Zeus Aetophoros
Hercules
Zeus Aetophoros
Apollo on omphalos
Tyche Nikephoros
(seated)
Tripod
Tyche Nikephoros
(seated)
Dionysos Nikephoros
Nike
Arsaces on omphalos
Cornucopiae
Tyche Nikephoros
(seated)
Arsaces on throne
Tyche Nikephoros
(seated)
Arsaces on throne
Tyche Nikephoros
(seated)
Arsaces on throne
" N.b
Autonom. McD. 96.128
YE
IE
.E
7E
A
ZE
'P
JR
c'
Gotarzes I
Autonom.
W. 38.3
McD. 96.128
"Arsaces" W. 38.2
84/83
(c.8o) 90
c'
Orodes I
W. 38.1,5
80 See p. 201. 81 See p. 112, No. 66.
82 The drachm bears the monogram which appears on the tetradrachm and is
probably contemporary. 83 See p. 131, No. 126.
84 See pp. 201-202. The second type was assigned by Wroth to Himerus.
85 See p. 133, No. 127.
86 See p. 112, No. 67, and discussion of the value of dates, p. 147.
87 See p. 202. 88 See p. 203. 89 See p. 133, No. 128.
90 See pp. 206-210. The types were assigned by Wroth to an Artabanus II.

184
Year B.C.
(c. 77)91
72/71
(c.70) 92
(c.66) 92
(c.57) 93
(c.56) 93
(c-54) 93
(c.52) 94
(")
42/41
41/40
(c. 40/3 9) 94
Mo. Ml.
.. JR
..E
. RA
King
Sinat.
Autonom.
Phra. III
Reference
G- 35
McD. 97.129
W. 45.1
W. 48.25
JR Orodes II W. 68.1
S R Mith. III W. 58
10 J Orodes II W. 72.31
(McD. 69)
ii? JR " W. 72.32
12
JR
A
JR
" W. 73.33
Orodes II McD. 63.70
" W. 73.37
39/38
38/37
37/36
36/35
(One year
34/33
33/32
32/31
3 JR Phra. IV P. 77.1
Type
Arsaces on throne
Cornucopiae
Arsaces on throne
The king as Zeus
with Tyche
Arsaces on throne
King r., Tyche kneeling
King r., Tyche and
palm
Tyche and river god
The king as Zeus
Nikephoros
Tyche Nikephoros
(standing)
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
The king as Zeus
Nikephoros
King r., Tyche and
palm
The king as Zeus
Nikephoros
92 See pp. 211-212.
4 JR
5 JR
6 JR
5 JR
for which no
' JR
W. 99.1
P. 77.3
P. 77.4
Long. 47
issues are known)
Phra. IV P. 78.5
3
4
5
6
I
5
6
I
2
2
JR
JR
A
A
r
A?
A?
JR
W. 99.2
P. 78.7
W. 100.4
P. 78.9
W. 100-5
P. 79.11
W. ioo.6
P. 79.12
W. 1oo.8
P.-O. 36.10
W. 101.9
3 JR
91 See p. 211.
93 See pp. 212-216. Th
Wroth to an Unknown King.
he coin here given to Mithradates III was assigned by
11 See p. 216.

185
Year B.c. Mo. Ml. King
Reference
32/31
4 R Phra. IV N.c
5 AR "c W. ioi.1o
6 A " P. 79.15
I AR P.-O. 36.8
YE Autonom. McD. 99.131
. E McD. 100.132
4 AR Phra. IV W. 101.11
(32/31-2/1)95
31/30
" 6 YR
(One year for which no
29/28 1 A
6
6
A
11
28/27
2 YR
10 YR
? YR
" P. 8o. 16
issues are known)
Phra. IV W. 101.12
" P. 80.17
P.-O. 36.13
P.-O. 37.4
" P. 80.18
M. 20.310
" W. 102.13
W. 102.14
P.-O. 37-9
W. 103.19
Type
The king as Zeus
Nikephoros
King r., Tyche and
palm
Tyche Nikephoros
(standing)
Two city-goddesses
and altar
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Tyche kneeling
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Athena and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
The king as Zeus
Nikephoros
27/26
"/
26/25
2
12
I
2
5
6
8
8
YR
YR
YR
YR
A
YR
King r.,
palm
Tirid. II
Phra. IV
W. 135.2
P. 82.26
McD. 64.71
W. 103.18
McD. 64.72
Tyche and
25/24
12 YR
2 YR
3 YR
Tirid. II W. 135.1
Phra. IV P.-O. 37.3
" McD. 64.73
y See p. 136, No. 132.
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm

186
Year B.C.
25/24
Mo. Ml. King
7 JR Phra. IV
Reference
McD. 64.73
7 AZ
8A
8 JR
9 JR
9 AR
" W. 103.21
P. 83.29
" W. 104.24
" W. 104.29
"C W. 104.27
P.-O. 37.2
Long. 58
" W. 104.31
'" W. 105.33
II
12
JR
JR
Emb. AR
24/23
1J
2 " W. 105.34
3A
P. 84.35
Type
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
King, r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Athena and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Athena and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
King r., Tyche and
palm (variant)
The king as Zeus
with bow
4
5
6
12
A
JR
JR
JR
W.
W.
W.
W.
105.35
106.37
106.39
105.32
23/22
"
'C
c'
c'
c'
c'
c'
(22/212/I) 96
(") 96
4 JR
5A
6A
6 JR
7 JR
8 JR
9 JR
10 JR
"J RZ
12 A
1 AJ
' JR
" W. 107.49
" W. 107.50
" W. 107.51
" Long. 59
"c P. 85.38
W. 106.41
" W. 106.42
" W. 106.43
W. 107.45
W. 107.47
" W. 109.55
(McD. 75)
McD. 65.74
96 See p. 222.

187
Year B.C. Mo. Ml.
King
Reference
i? AR Phra. V W. 136.4
"c
"c
"c
I B.C./I A.D.
'c
"c
"c
"c
"c
"c
"c
(One year fo
2/3 A.D.
c
3/4
c
4
5
6
I
JR
A
A
AR
3 JR
4A
5A
6A
7A
8 JR
9 JR
11 A
r which no
5 JR
12 JR
4 JR
P. 100.1
P. 100.2
W. 136.1
" W. 137.5
(McD. 76)
"c P.-O. 39.18
P. 101.5
P. ioi.6
"c P. 101.7
P. 100.4
"c P.-O. 39.15
P.-O. 39.16
N.c
issues are known)
Phra. V G. 46
"c P.-O. 40.3
"c McD. 66.77
P.-O. 40.4
(McD. 78)
P.-O. 40.5
Type
King r., Tyche and
diadem
'C
Arsaces on throne
6'
"
Bust of the queen
Arsaces on throne
Bust of the queen
Male deity, with lyre
The king as Zeus
with bow
Nike
Draped figure on
throne
Nike
Nike
King r., Tyche and
palm
Nike
Anchor,
4/5 6
(2/I B.C.4/5 A.D.) 97
(One year for which no issues are known)
6/7 Emb. R Orodes III G. 46.V.i.
(Two years for which no issues are known)
9/10 .. JR Von. I W. 143-1
i3" . E Autonom. McD. 102.134
11/12 5 AR Von. I W. 143.2
" 6 J " W. 143.3
" AR Artab. II McD. 67.80
12/13
(") 98
JR
4 JR
P.-O. 48.3
"c P. 105.2
(McD. 81)
(") 98 5 R " P. I
(") 98 8 A Von. I P. 1
(11/12- .. LE Autonom. McI
15/16) 99
06.4
05.1
D. 102.135
97 See p. 137, No. 133.
98 See p. 1I5, No. 8i.
"9 See p. 138, No. 135.

i88 COINS FROM SELE UCIA
Year A.D. Mo. Ml. King Reference
15/16
C
LL
'C
"C
'C
16/17
"8
(17/18) 100
5 E Autonom. H. 145.41
Type
Female bust with
kalathos
"C
6
8
9
10
I
12
I
3
I0
E
E
YE
" McD. 103.136
"c "
"C "C
Mc
McD. 104.137
McD. 103-136
McD. 104.137
McD. 104.138
18/19 .. " McD. 105.139
20/21 .. 21R Artab. II W. 147.8
23/24
C
C'
"C
24/25
'C
25/26
26/27
27/28
1 A Artab. II W. 147.11
(McD. 82)
6 A " W. 147.12
12 2 " Long. 93
S. Autonom. McD. 105.140
. A Artab. II P. 11o.6
(note)
.. AE " McD. 69.84
. E . E" McD. 69.85
.. 1E " McD. 69.84
. ." McD. 69.83
A monogram as type
Female bust with
kalathos
A monogram as type
The king as Zeus
Nikephoros
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
King, Tyche and subject
King seated 1. on
throne
King, Tyche and subject
Bust of Tyche
The king as Zeus
Nikephoros
Bust of Tyche
King mounted,
Tyche and palm
29/30 ? - . , Artab. II McD. 70.86 Bust of Tyche
30/31 ? .. E ""'c
(Approximately five years for which no issues are known)
(c. 36-40) 101 . Y. E Revolt McD. 106.141 Humped bull
40/41 .. E Autonom. McD. 107.142 Nike with palm
41/42 . . E ""c
"I See p. 139, No. 138.
101 See p. 141, No. 141.

THE PAR THIA N MINT A T SELF UCIA18
189
Year A.D.
42/43
43/41
G'
Mo. Ml.
3 AR
4
5
6
7
8
9
I0
II
12
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
II
ZR
ZR
ZR
ZR
ZR
ZR
ZR
ZR
ZR
ZR
King Reference
Vard. I W. 153.1
(McD. 87)
'C W. 154.5
P.-O. 53.2
" P.-O. 53.3
" P.-O. 53.4
64 P.-o. 53.5
c P.-O. 53.7
P.-O. 53.9
Autonom. N.c(McD. 142)
" McD. 108.143
Vard. I P.-O. 53.10
(McD. 87)
cc P.-O. 53.12
66 W. 154.9
Vc W. 154.12
" .155.13
cc W. 154.6
64 W. 154.7
W. 154.8
c McD. 71.88
" McD. 71.89
W. 155.19
Type
Nike with palm
King r., Tyche and
palm
CG
44/45
'c
YZR
Nike with palm
The deified king
King r., Tyche and
palm
Veiled head (with
kalathos?)
Boule
King r., Tyche and
palm
4'
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
6'
Boule
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
palm
2 ZR c
3 ZR
3 Z Gotarzes II
4 ZR Vard.J
P. 114.7
P.-O. 53.21
De M. 299.2 24
McD. 70.87
N.c
XV. 155.17
XV. 155.18
N. c
McD. 71.89
De M. 299.224
C'
CC
GL
:G
6
7
8
I0?
ZR
ZR
c'
'c
Gotarzes II
45/46
i ZR Vard. I P.-O. 53.23
3 Z P.-O. 53.24
4 ZRP.-O. 53.25

190o
Year A.D.
45/46
46/47 102
Mo. Ml.
10 AZ
I
2
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
YE
JR
A;
AR
A
AR
King Reference
Vard. I McD. 71.89
Gotarzes II W. 161.2
McD. 73.92
W. 161-3
McD. 73.92
W. 162.5
McD. 73.92
W. 162.6
McD. 73.92
W. 162.7
McD. 73.92
W. 162.Io
"c W. 162.11
McD. 72.90
P.-O. 54.9
"c P.-O. 54-11
W. 163.15
"c W. 163.16
"c W. 163.12
"W. 163.13
P.-O. 54.7
" McD. 73.92
"c P.-O. 54.14
"W. 163.21
W. 164.23
W. 164.24
"c P.-O. 54.17
P.-O. 54.18
W. 164.25
P.-O. 54.22
P.-O. 54.23
Type
Boule
King r., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King r., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King r., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King r., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King r., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King r., Tyche and
diadem (with name
of king)
As above (with name)
King r., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King r., Tyche and
diadem
47/48
48/49
49/50
5o/51
. JR
1JR
2
3
4
7
8
II
12
I0
II
2
3
4
6
7
I
2
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
A
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
c
102 Beginning with the opening of this year I have assumed the insertion of an
extra intercalary month, which brings Xandikos rather than Artemisios into correspondence with Nisannu as the first month of the Babylonian year. See pp. 151-153.

THE PAR THIAN MINT A T SELE UCIA
'9'
Year A.D.
50/51
51/52
5 2/53
'c
53/54
54/5 5
c'
55/56
56/57
c'
57/5 8
58/59
'c
(59/60)"10
(6o/6i) 104
61/62
Mo. Ml. King Reference
9 ZR Gotarzes II P.-O. 54.21
2 ZRA P.-O. 55.7
3 Z" W. 164.31
6 ZR Vol ag. I Long. I Io
7 ZR " W. 178.I
9 Z GotarzesllIP. 118.11
2 ZR Volag. I P.-O. 58.2
Type
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
King r., Tyche and
diadem
King ., Tyche and
diadem
cc
C'
3
5
9
10
12
II
7
12
5
7
9
10 ?
3
9
2
4
II
Z
ZR
ZR
Z
ZR
ZR
ZR
ZR
'c
C'
'c
c'
'c
Reol
Rvolgt
W. 179.4
W. 179.5
W 179.3
P.-O. 57.1
P.-O. 58.1
P.-O. 58.5
P.-O. 5 8.7
(McD. 93)
P.-O. 58.6
N.c
W. 180.15
P. 130.1
P.-O. 62.1
N.c
W. 181.21
W. 181.2o
L. 185.68
L. 185.69
W. 181.27
McD. 109.144
McD. 109.145
P.-O. 63.10
Eagle
Artemis
Artemis
Artemis
King 1.,
palm
Tyche and
62/63
63/64
64/65
65/66
66/67
64
c'
ZRD
IZJR
6 ZR
6Z
IZR
7Z
iiZR
12 ZR
103 See p. 143, No. 144.
P. 133.1
W. 185.58"
L. 185.7 G
W. 185.62"
P.-O. 63.14"
L. 185.73"
W. 186.63"
W. 186.65 c
104 See p. 144, No. 145.

192
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
Year A.D. Mo. Ml. King
Reference
67/68
68/69
69/70
"c
"G
(") 105
"c
70/71
(One year
72/73
73/74?106
"c
74/75 ?'06
75/76
(One year
77/78 ?106
78/79
"c
"c
"
"C
79/80
C
8o/81
'c
i zR Volag. I P.-O. 63.15
IJR
..E
..E
..E
for which no
.J. A
'c
Revolt
Autonom.
"'
Volag. I
"4
P.-O. 63.17
L. 185.76
McD. 75.95
McD. 110.146
McD. 111.147
McD. 111.148
McD. 75.96
"6
issues are known)
Volag. I McD. 75.96
" L. 185.77
McD. 75.96
"4 L. 185.78
Type
King 1., Tyche and
palm
Bust of Tyche
Humped bull
Tyche seated 1. on
column
Nike with wreath
Nike with wreath
King 1., Tyche and
palm
Nike with wreath
King 1., Tyche and
palm
Nike with wreath
King 1., Tyche and
palm
Nike with wreath
Eagle
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Nike with wreath
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
.. " McD. 75.96
for which no issues are known)
. . Volag. I L. 185.80
I
3
3
4
6
12
2
3
E
A
JR
A
7G
AZ
C'
c'
Pac. II
Volag. I
"C
Pac. II
6'
Volag. I
Pac. II
Volag. I
Pac. II
"C
McD. 75.96
McD. 76.97
W. 193.2
P. 136.3
McD. 75.96
W. 194.3
N.c
W. 194.4
W. 193.1
P.-O. 66.3
P.-O. 64.4
(McD. 94)
McD. 76.98
P. 136.4
G. 56
W. 194.11
McD. 77.99
c'
10
10
Emb.
R
JR
JR
JR
!1\
C6
CC
Male bust r.
105 See p. 146, No. 148.
106 Some doubt attaches to the correctness of Lindsay's reading of these coins.
His No. 79, said to bear the date 75/76, has not been included in the table.

193
Reference
8o/81
"9
81/82
82/83
83/84
"4
84/85
85/86
6 3R
Pac. II P. 147.15
Artab. III N.c
I
3
8
9
7
A~.
"c
"c
"c
"c
Pac. II
W. 203.3
P. 143.2
W. 203.1
W. 203.2
W. 195.14
II
(One year for which no i
87/88 ..
(Five years for which no
93/94 3 AR
"/
"C
"C
94/95
4
6
I0
A
ZE
A
"c W. 197.33
"c McD. 77.100
"c W. 198.36
"c P. 147.18
ssues are known)
Pac. II Long. 131
issues are known)
Pac. II W. 200.45
"c P.-O. 68.1
"c P.-O. 68.2
L. 208.100
" P. 148.24
P.-O. 68.6
P.-O. 68.7
o issues are known)
Volag. II? McD. 82.111
ssues are known)
Volag. II ? McD. 82.111
Osroes P. 150.3
Type
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
4'
4'
King mounted,
Tyche and subject
Bust of Tyche
King mounted,
Tyche and subject
Bust of Tyche
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
'c
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
Bust of Tyche
Bust of Tyche (obv.:
head bare)
Tyche seated 1.
head bare)
Tyche seated 1.
head bare)
c'
Tyche seated 1.
Bust of Tyche
95/96 4
96/97 12 1R
(Eight years for which n
105/06 .. AE
(One year for which no i
107/08 .. E
108/09 .. E
109/10 .. E
I10/11
(One year
112/13
113/14
c'
. ." W. 205.8
for which'no issues are known)
S. Volag. II McD. 82.112
S. Osroes P. 151.5
2E
ZE
Volag. II McD. 82.112
Osroes McD. 78.102
cc cc
Volag. II P. 141.4oa
Pac. II McD. 78.101
14/15
115/16
"c
7E
E

194
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
King Reference
Year A.D. Mo. Ml.
(For the year 116/17 no Parthian issues are known, bu
Trajan circulated.) 107
117/18 .. XE Osroes McD. 78.102
118/19
"c
.E
..E
". " 0
McD. 79.103
McD. 79.104
"McD. 78.102
119/20
.E
120/2 I
121/22
122/23
E " McD. 79.103
XE " McD. 79.104
S E Volag. II McD. 83.113
XE "
.. XE Osroes P. 152.15
. . E " McD. 79.105
4 AZ Volag. II McD. 82.110
9 R " L. 186.87
ii 2k " McD. 81.109
. E Osroes P. 152.16
. XE Volag. II W. 216.54
4 A " P. 137.12
8 A " W. 211.15
. E " W. 216.55
XE Osroes McD. 8o.io6
4 A Volag. II P.-O- 75.1
8? 2k " W. 211.19
. E " P.-O. 75.9
S. " W. 212.23
8 2 " N.e
. E Osroes McD. 8o.io6
Type
it at Seleucia coins of
head bare)
spiked headdress)
head facing)
head bare)
spiked headdress)
head facing)
Bust of Tyche
head bare)
spiked headdress)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
head bare)
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
head bare)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
head bare)
"4
1 23 /24
124/25
"'
125/26
107 See pp. 232-233.

195
Reference
126/27
4 R Volag. II P.-O. 75.5
"
c
Osroes
P.-O. 75.10
McD. 8o.io6
127/28 .. A "
128/29 .. ZE Volag. II W. 216.56
" . E Osroes McD. 80.107
" .. E " McD. 8i.io8
129/30 .. IE Volag. II McD. 83.114
132/33 9 A Volag. II L. 186.97
" . . E " McD. 83.114
133/34 .. E " McD. 84.115
Type
The king 1., Tyche
and diadem
Bust of Tyche
head bare)
Tyche seated1. (obv.:
helmet flap curved)
head helmeted)
Tyche standing r.
Tyche seated 1. (obv.:
helmet flap curved)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
helmet flap curved)
helmet flap curved)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
helmet flap curved)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
'C
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
(Two years
136/37
137/38
138/39
"C
"'
139/40
140/41
141/42
142/43
143/44
(Two years
146/47
147/48
148/49
"C
'C
"C
"'
for which no issues are known)
S. Volag. II P. 139.24
. R " P. 139.25
1 R " N.c
8 R " McD. 81.Io9a
. E " P. 142.49
9 ZR
9 ZR
9 AR
9 ZR
for which no
8A
8A
2Z
3Z
4A
8 AZ
8A
P.-O. 75.7
"c W. 212.29
P. 139.27
L. i86.ioo
P. 139.28
issues are known)
Volag. II W. 213.30
cc
Volag. III
"c
W. 213.31
McD. 85.116a
" McD. 87.117
McD. 85.116a
head facing)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
149/50

196
196 COINS FROM SELE UClA
Year A.D. Mo. Ml. A
149/50 .. E Vol150/51
4 JR
8
9
JR
AR
151/52
152/53
'53/54
154/5 5
8 .R
9
9
3
4
8
9
AR
JR
JR
IzE
ding Reference
ag. III P. 165.51
" W. 224.3
" MeD. 85.Ii6a
P.-O. 75.11
McD. 87.117
W. 224.4
McD. 85.116a
P.-O. 75.16
" Gr. 403.9668
" McD. 85.116a
McD. 87.117
" McD. 85.116a
P. 166.54.
" McD. 85.116a
McD. 87.117
P.-O. 76.2
McD. 85.116a
P.-O. 76.4
W. 226.19
N.c
P.-O. 77.19
MeD. 85.116a
8 JR
Type
head facing)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
head facing)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
head facing)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
head facing)
King ., Tyche and
diadem
head f1.)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
155/56
8 JR
156/57
157/58
158/59
159/6o
i6o/6i
161/62
162/63
163/64
164/65
165/66
31JR
8
8
8
9
9
I0
JR
JR
9 JR
8 JR
8 JR
9 JR
8 JR
9 JR
9 JR
W. 226.22
P.-O. 76.8
McD. 85.116a
McD. 88.118a
McD. 85.116a
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem

197
Year A.D.
165/66
166/67
167/68
168/69
"9
169/70
"c
"c
"c
170/71
"c
171/72
172/73
"7
"c
"c
"c
173/74
Mo. Ml.
8 !R
King
Volag. III
Reference
McD. 88.ii8a
P. 160.20
8
5
12
4
8
12
6
A
2k
A
A
A
.E
2k
42
3
5
6
I0
8
2k
A
A
1E
A.
" P.-O. 76.13
W. 227.26
" N.c
" N.c
" P.-O. 76.15
" W. 227.27
" McD. 89.118b
"c W. 227.28
McD. 89.118b
P. 161.24
P.-O. 76.17
P.-O. 76.18
W. 227.29
" N.c
P. 166.57
P. 161.26
McD. 90.119
" P. 166.58
N.c
McD. 89.118b
McD. 90.120
W. 227.31
Type
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Tyche standing r.
head 1.)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Bust of Tyche
head 1.)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
C'
'c
174/75
175/76
4
C'
"
"'
8
176/77
8 2R
"c P.-O. 76.20 "
" McD. 89.118b Bust of Tyche
" McD. 90.120 Tyche seated 1. (obv.:
head 1.)
" P.-O. 76.21 King 1., Tyche and
diadem
head 1.)
"4 cc
177/78
C'
"C
I
3
2k
2k
IN .c
C' P.-O. 76.22
C" W. 228.34
"c L. 187.114
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
"C
6
II

198
198 COINS FROM SELE UCLA4
Year A.D. Mo. Ml. K
177/78 12 JR Vo]
'C
'ing Reference Type
lag. III W. 227.33 King 1., Tyche and
diadem
head 1.)
" P.-O. 76.23 King 1., Tyche and
diadem
178/79
'c
179/80
c'
'c
180/81
c'
181/82
'c
182/83
cc
183/84
184/85
cc
185/86
cc
186/87
187/88
188/89
cc
cc
189/90
190/91
'c
191/92
3 AR
4
9
I0
2
4
5
II
4
9
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR1
JR
JR
JR
AE
cc
cc
'c
cc
C'
N.c
McD. 84.116
N.c
P.-O. 76.25
W. 228.36
P.-O. 76.26
W. 228.3 5
W. 228.38
P.-O. 76.27
McD. 91.121
4 JR
CC W. 228.40
6
12
2
6?
9
I
4
I
2
4
6
8
3
7
2
8
6
3
5
12?
I
4
6
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
cc
c
cc
c'
c'
c'
cc
'c
cc
c'
c
'c
c'
c
c'
c
cc
VoagcI
P.-O. 76.28
W. 228.39
P.-O. 76.32
W. 228.41
P.-O. 76.30
P.-O. 76.33
P.-O. 76.34
N. c
W. 229.44
W. 229.45
N. c
W. 228.43
P.-O. 76.38
N.c
W. 229.48
P.-O. 76.39
P.-O. 76.40
N.ec
P.-O. 77.1
W. 229.51
P. 163.42
P.-O. 77.5
W. 229.5 2
W. 23 7.1
Bust of Tyche (with
arms)
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
c'
cc
c'
cc
cc
cc
'c
c'
cc
c'
cc
c'
'c
C6
" (obv.:
head facing)
CC
12 JR Volag. III W. 229.53

THE PA4R THIAN MINT A T SELF UCIA
'99
Year A.D. Mo.
192/93 7
(c. 192/93) 108.
Ml. K
JR VoLc
ing Reference
ag. IV W. 237.3
" McD. 93.123
" McD. 91.122
'93/94
C'
'94/95
195 /96
196/97
197/98
198/99
199/200
200/01
20I/02
202/03
203/04
204/05
205/06
206/07
207/08
208/09
209/10
21 o/ II
211/12
212/13
213/14
214/15
2AJR
Type
King 1., Tyche and
diadem (obv.:
head facing)
head facing)
King ., Tyche and
diadem
4'
4
5
6
9
II
12
I
4
I
2
I0
io?
JR
11R
JR
JR
AR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
JR
c'
C'
'c
'c
c'
'c
c'
c'
'c
C'
c
'c
c'
'c
'c
Voagc
P.-O. 77.22
McD. 91.122
c'
'cc
'c
W. 238.11
W. 238.12
McD. 92.122a
W. 239.13
W. 239.14
W. 239.16
P. 169.14
P. 170-15
W. 241.1
JR
"JR
"J R
"J R
"JR
"JRA
" McD. 93.124
" P.-O. 81.3
(McD. 124)
P.-O. 81.4
(McD. 124)
61 P.-O. 81.5
(McD. 124)
" P.-O. 8i.6
(McD. 124a)
P.-O. 81.7
(McD. 124a)
" McD. 95.125
108 See p. 13o, No. 123.
c'
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
c'
'c
c'
Tyche standing r.

200 COINS FROM SELE UCLA
Year A.D. Mo. Ml. King Reference
215/16
216/17
217/18
218/19
219/20
220/21
221/22
222/23
S. Volag. V P. 173.7
Type
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
Tyche standing r.
King 1., Tyche and
diadem
.A
R
JR
1R
r
r
.R
" McD. 95.125
"< P. 173.8
" P. 173.9
P. 173.10
W. 242.16
W. 243.17
P. 173.13
W. 243.18
issues are known)
c
(Five years for which no
228/29
S R Artavasdes? Long. 157
G. 59

CHAPTER VII
THE COINS IN RELATION TO EVENTS IN THE
WESTERN PROVINCES
I. THE REIGN OF MITHRADATES I THROUGH THAT OF
ORODES II
SELEUCIA probably was occupied by Mithradates I along
with the rest of Babylonia in 14I B.C. By the spring of 139
Demetrius II had been captured and the western provinces reoccupied.1 Immediately thereafter Mithradates began the issue
of the tetradrachms which were struck during the years 140/39,
139/38, and 138/37. To the interval in 141 during which
Seleucia was in Parthian hands I have tentatively assigned the
issue of undated tetradrachms with reverse of Tyche Nikephoros.
The attribution is based on the distinction in the style of the
portrait as compared with that of the later issues of Mithradates
and on the complete absence of evidence linking the issue with
some mint other than that at Seleucia. The reverse type,
borrowed from the contemporary Seleucid coinage, recurs on
issues of Phraates II and Artabanus I which appear to be of
the Seleucia mint. The exact date for the death of Mithradates
and the accession of Phraates II is not known. Rawlinson suggested the year 136, and Wroth, confused by his use of the
Macedonian calendar in computing the dates on the coins,
the year 138.2 It is probably accurate to count 138/37 as the
last calendrical year for the reign of Mithradates and 137/36
as the first of the next reign. There is little doubt that, beginning
with Phraates II, the accession of each king was normally marked
by the issue of tetradrachms. Two groups of this denomination are attributed to Phraates, one with reverse of Apollo, the
other with reverse of Tyche Nikephoros.3 The obverse of
1 W. W. Tarn, "Parthia," The Cambridge Ancient History, IX, 581-582.
2 H. C. Rawlinson, The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy, p. 83; W. Wroth, Catalogue
of the Coins of Parthia, p. xxi.
The second group was assigned by Wroth to Himerus, but later writers have not
concurred. See M. Dayet, "Un Tetradrachme arsacide inbdit," Aretheuse, I (1925),
201

zoz2
the former represents the king as somewhat youthful, whereas
the obverse of the latter shows him as a mature man. Antiochus VII of Syria was defeated by Phraates in the spring of
129 B.C., and shortly thereafter the Arsacid left for the eastern
provinces, where he was killed in battle with the Scythians.4
It is reasonable to assign the first issue to the year of the accession of Phraates, 137/36, and the second to the interval after
the defeat of Antiochus before the departure of Phraates to the
east, that is, 129/28 B.C. At this time the king was in the
western provinces and was in communication with the administration of Seleucia. The late date is required by the differences
in the two obverse portraits. The circumstances suggest that
the issue of the second group, after an interval of about seven
years, was not necessarily a matter of routine mint policy, but
may have been the result of the momentary interest in the
western provinces experienced by the royal administration at
this particular time.'
So far as the literary sources afford evidence, Artabanus I
throughout his reign was occupied by the threat of the invasion
of Parthia by the Steppe peoples from the northeast. He met
his death during a campaign in those regions, probably in 124/23.
It is possible that he visited the western provinces in connection
with his preparations for this campaign, say in 125/24, when his
initial issue of tetradrachms was inaugurated, but there is no
evidence for this. Both the issues of tetradrachms of Artabanus,
therefore, were probably struck under the orders of Himerus,
who was the viceroy in the West.
The relations of Himerus with Seleucia have been discussed
elsewhere.6 Appointed as governor-general of the western provinces under Phraates II, he appears to have made himself
independent during the latter part of the reign of Artabanus.
The tetradrachms of Himerus are undated, but one of his two
issues of drachms at Seleucia bears the date 123/22. This
implies that the other issue was struck in 124/23, to which date
we may also assign the tetradrachms.7 Since the latest coins
63-65; also E. T. Newell's chapter on coins in Mr. A. U. Pope's forthcoming Survey
of Persian Art and Archaeology.
4 Tarn, op. cit., p. 581. 5 See pp. 217-218. 6 See p. 219.
7See the discussion of the value of dates on page 147. Dayet (loc. cit.) assigns
these tetradrachms to Phraates II. I do not feel, however, that his evidence over-

EVENTS IN THE WESTERN PROVINCES
zo3
of Artabanus are of the same date, it is to be presumed that the
open revolt took place toward the close of the year.
The separatist and nationalist movement in Babylonia of
which Himerus was the formal head was crushed by Mithradates II, who succeeded to the throne upon the death of
Artabanus. The date for the accession can best be placed at
123/22 B.C. Bronze coins have been found in Babylonia which
had been issued by Hyspaosines, king of Characene, and had
been overstruck with the types of Mithradates II in the year
121/20 (by the Babylonian calendar).8 By this date, then,
Parthian sovereignty had been reestablished in Babylonia. Since
the campaign against Characene must have followed the overthrow of Himerus, the latter event can be placed in 122/21.
This agrees with the date for the issue of the latest coins of
Himerus, which must have taken place toward the close of 123/22.
The drachms of Mithradates II comprise five successive
series. Details of the reverse design, the style, and the form of
the legend demonstrate that his tetradrachms constituted one
series approximately contemporary with the first, or earliest,
series of the drachms.9 None of his tetradrachms bear dates,
which implies again that they formed a single group, all struck
at approximately the same time.10 Under the circumstances it
may be assumed that their issue was inaugurated upon the occupation of Seleucia by Mithradates in 122/21, but was continued for only a short time thereafter. Mithradates appears to
have left Babylonia for the east very soon after his reorganization of the administration, probably by 120 B.C.11 Subsequent
to his departure no tetradrachms were struck during the rest
of his reign, a period of thirty years.
In the previous twenty years, since tetradrachms were first
struck under Mithradates I, ten issues had appeared. After
weighs the argument adduced by Mr. Newell upon the initial publication of the type,
"A Parthian Hoard," The Numismatic Chronicle, Fifth series, 4(1924), 141-180.
8 E. T. Newell, Mithradates of Parthia and Hyspaosines of Characene: A Numismatic Palimpsest, Numismatic Notes and Monographs, No. 26 (1925).
9 E. T. Newell, "A Parthian Hoard," The Numismatic Chronicle, Fifth series,
4 (1924), 165-166.
10 It should be noted, however, that the issue was very large. This is indicated by
the variety of the dies represented by examples of the issue which formed part of the
Teheran hoard. See Newell, op. cit., p. 165.
"' Tarn, op. cit., p. 584.

zo4
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
the close of the thirty-year period, for the subsequent period
of about fifty years, eleven issues were struck at intervals, the
greatest of which approximated ten years. Thereafter the striking of tetradrachms each year was the normal practice, interrupted only by periods of civil commotion. During the
generation which passed without the issue of silver at Seleucia
the issues of drachms in Iran were numerous and large, and
the autonomous bronze of Seleucia appeared at fairly frequent
intervals and in large quantities. It follows that in the East a
policy was pursued not only of continued displacement of the
Seleucid currency by Parthian types but of support of national
prestige and of trade through an increase in the coinage of silver,
which served also to commemorate the assumption by Mithradates of the new title "King of Kings." In Seleucia the extensive coinage of autonomous bronze reveals an active civic
consciousness. To what, then, may be ascribed the failure to
issue silver in Babylonia?
It is to be understood, of course, that silver continued to
circulate in the western provinces. The extant issues of Parthian
tetradrachms, although insufficient to displace, served to supplement the older Seleucid coinage. It is very likely that Seleucid
tetradrachms, forced out of general circulation in Iran, found
their way into the channels of western trade. In addition,
drachms from Iran passed into Mesopotamia, which probably
was also served at this period, as later, by the mint at Antioch.,,
It is clear, therefore, that no drastic stoppage in interregional
and international trade took place. Very possibly the controlling elements in Seleucia, the Greek bankers and traders, so
profited by the displacement of Seleucid tetradrachms in the
East that they were opposed to the issue of additional silver by
the Seleucia mint. Although obviously only a hypothesis, this
solution alone appears to satisfy the conditions. Political turmoil in Syria at this time would not have permitted Antioch to
supplant Seleucia as the banking center of the western part of
the Parthian Empire. An assumption that Mithradates intentionally throttled the commercial life of Seleucia by forbidding
the coinage of silver there would be opposed by the strong
indications of an alliance between the dynasty and the Greeks
throughout the Parthian period.' Nor, again, can it be assumed
12 See pp. 179-18o.
13 See pp. 216-221.

2o5
that during the reign of Mithradates conditions were so disturbed
in Babylonia as to prevent the entry of bullion for the mint or
the passage of trade which would serve to place the resulting
currency in circulation. Although our literary sources are silent,
cuneiform tablets reveal that in Babylonia, as in Iran, Mithradates was recognized first as king, later as "King of Kings,"
and the heavy issue of bronze coins reflects a healthy economic
situation in and around Seleucia.
Although the long interruption in the minting of silver at
Seleucia does not point either to a political or to an economic
breakdown locally, it does demonstrate, I believe, that at this
time the Parthian royal administration valued but little its
prestige in the west and the political and economic importance
of the western provinces, especially Babylonia. Only on this
hypothesis can one well explain its failure to displace the Seleucid
currency and to commemorate with issues of tetradrachms the
assumption of the paramount title by Mithradates II. Actually
the attitude of mind was one to be expected at this time. The
Parthian dynasty and nobles were much more indifferent toward
Babylonia than is, perhaps, generally recognized. In this respect
Greek and Roman writers frequently perpetuated the wrong
impression, owing to the fact that this province and Seleucia,
with Ctesiphon, were better known to them than was Iran with
its principal city, Ecbatana. The chief pleasure of the Parthian
nobles lay in hunting from horseback, and cavalry formed their
reliance in war; it is not to be expected, therefore, that Babylonia, cut up as it was by a network of canals large and small,,
would have appealed to them. There is as yet no evidence to,
indicate that the culture of Babylonia during the Parthian period was significantly influenced by the introduction of North
Iranian elements.
It is apparent that Mithradates I had realized the importance
to the development of his empire of the Greek commercial and
banking class which had its center at Seleucia, and in time his
views appear to have become part of the normal dynastic policy.
Notwithstanding this, to an extent at all times but especially
during the early period, it is to be presumed that the military
aristocracy which formed the nucleus of Parthian expansion
and the basis of Parthian power better understood and more
willingly supported that economic system which relied upon the

zo6
acquisition of agricultural and pastoral lands suitable to their
tastes and the erection thereon of feudal fiefs. To these nobles
and kindred of the royal family fundamental governmental
policy was undoubtedly largely limited to, first, the protection
of the lands already won from the inroads of later arrivals from
the Steppes and, secondly, the expansion of the Parthian boundaries into the naturally rather than artificially fertile lands of
northern Mesopotamia and Armenia. The campaigns of Mithradates II into Central Asia resulted in the stabilization of the
frontiers on the east. Our fragmentary sources afford glimpses
of subsequent Parthian aggression in Armenia and northwestern
Mesopotamia. Under these conditions throughout the greater
part of the reign of Mithradates II Babylonia and the Greeks
of Seleucia appear to have been left to their own devices.4
One of the latest acts of Mithradates was the sending of an
embassy to the Roman, Sulla. This, I believe, was due neither
to Parthian fear of Tigranes nor to Parthian ability to read the
future of Roman policy in the Orient,15 but to Parthian plans for
further expansion in Armenian territory which might be facilitated by an ally in western Asia. It is possible, however, that
the embassy also involved the question of the trade routes between Seleucia and the Mediterranean which later was to become
an important factor in Parthian policy. In any event the death
of Mithradates soon after prevented any more concrete display of
interest in the development of the western portion of his empire.
In the table tetradrachms have been attributed to a Gotarzes
for the year 91/90 B.C., an "Arsaces" for the year 86, and an
Orodes for the year 8o. These coins were all assigned by Wroth
to an Artabanus II. The insertion of this ruler in the Parthian
king list between Mithradates II and Sinatruces, with a reign
which is supposed to have extended from about 88 to 77 B.C., is
based on a reconstruction of the text in Justin by the German
historian, Gutschmid.16 Otherwise a king of this name in the
general period with which we are concerned is not known.
Since the publication of the work by Gutschmid cuneiform
tablets from Babylon have come to light which name as kings
14 It is to be noted that the campaigns of Mithradates in Central Asia served to
open, perhaps without intention, the road to commercial relations with China from
which Seleucia greatly profited. See pp. 217-221.
15 Rawlinson, op. cit., p. 134; Tarn, op. cit., p. 586. 16 Geschzichite Irans, p. 81.

207
a Gotarzes, from 90 through 87; another called simply "Arsaces,"
from 86 through 81; and an Orodes, in 8o B.C.17 The fact that
they are not mentioned by name in our literary sources has
delayed their inclusion in the Parthian king list. Actually,
strictly contemporary documents, which these tablets are, must
be given their face value. The omission of the names of these
kings from our incomplete literary sources is of no significance,
especially in view of the short duration of their reigns and the
dominant position held by Armenia during this interval. Although the tablets naturally are not concerned with the geographical limits of their power, they do establish the existence
of three successive kings in a part of the Parthian Empire.
Certain modern writers have assumed the existence at various
periods of "joint kings" within Parthia. A careful study of
the literary sources fails to support this hypothesis, and the
evidence of the coins is opposed to it. In rare instances "local
kings" were recognized on the borders of Parthia, but there is
nothing to suggest that Parthian Babylonia ever possessed such
dynasts. The formulas in the tablets of the three reigns of the
interval 91-80 B.C. differ in no significant respects from those
in the tablets of the reign of Mithradates II. In the absence of
conclusive evidence suggesting the existence during this period
of rulers in other parts of the empire,'8 it is only reasonable to
assume that Gotarzes, "Arsaces," and Orodes were acknowledged kings of all Parthia.
17 The tablets have been brought together by Minns ("Parchments of the Parthian Period from Avroman in Kurdistan," The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 35 [1915],
34-36).
18 The sole possibility is that Mithradates II continued to live until 88 B.C. So
far as I know, the only evidence which favors this possibility is afforded by Professor
Minns' dating of the well-known Avroman parchments and by a passage in Josephus.
Minns (op. cit., pp. 22-65) argued that the documents are dated by the Seleucid Era
and in consequence assigned the earliest to the year 88. Since the parchment refers to the reigning king by the title "King of Kings" it would follow that Mithradates
was still alive in that year. However, there are strong and, to my mind, convincing
reasons for dating the Avroman documents by the Arsacid Era and thereby assigning
the earliest to the reign of Phraates IV. These reasons have been clearly set forth
by Professor M. I. Rostovtzeff (M. I. Rostovtzeff and C. Bradford Welles, "A Parchment Contract of Loan from Dura-Europos on the Euphrates," Yale Classical Studies,
II, 41-42). It should be noted in addition that the use of the Seleucid Era on the coins
has no bearing on the dating of the parchments, for the latter were composed in Iran
whereas the practice of placing dates on coins was limited to the Seleucia mint.
In connection with an account of affairs in Syria Josephus wrote that after
Demetrius III had been captured by a confederated force which included Parthians,

zo8
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
It has long been recognized that statements in certain of the
classical authors suggest the existence of several short reigns
during the period with which we are concerned.19 Justin, on
the authority of Trogus Pompeius, stated that many kings ruled
between Mithradates II and the Orodes (II) who came to the
throne about 57 B.c.20 The reigns of two kings, Sinatruces and
Phraates III, completely occupied the period from about 77 to
57 B.C. The passage in Justin, therefore, not only supports but
requires the insertion in the "king list" between 91 and 77 B.C.
of the three kings Gotarzes I, "Arsaces," and Orodes I. Plutarch remarked that Parthia lacked the strength to withstand the
attacks of Tigranes of Armenia because of internal as well as
external welfare.21 In the passage cited above, Justin refers also
to the "varied succession" of the many kings. This Rawlinson
takes as an indication of strife in the succession.
In this connection it is interesting to note the possibility
that Gotarzes, "Arsaces," and Orodes may have been sons of
Mithradates II. It is difficult to doubt that by the close of his
reign Mithradates had at least three grown sons. The strife of
brothers over the succession all too frequently marred Parthian
history and constituted a threat at all times. The portrait on
the tetradrachm assigned to Gotarzes shows a strong family
resemblance to that on the coins of Mithradates, and the legends
on the coins of the three reigns include the title "Theopator."
he was sent to "Mithridates who was then king of Parthia," at whose court he remained
until his death (Ant. Jud., xiii.14.3). The battle took place about 88 B.c., and it has
been assumed that the Parthian king was Mithradates II. The assumption, however,
presupposes that, though the latter was unable to enforce the normal form of royal
administration in Babylonia -near the center of Parthian power - he maintained
his own governor (Josephus has E7rapxov in the extreme northwestern portion of
Mesopotamia, who had the strength to interfere in Syrian affairs. Whatever the
weakness of Josephus as an authority, he is generally accurate in his direct references
to affairs in Babylonia. I would accept, therefore, his statement that Demetrius III
ended his life as a prisoner of a Mithradates, king of Parthia. The passage in question,
however, does not require the assumption that this Mithradates was on the throne
at the date of the battle. It will be suggested below that the "Arsaces" who reached
the throne in the year 86 was a son of Mithradates II, who may well have borne the
personal name of his father. I suggest here that he may be the king referred to by
Josephus. While only a hypothesis, the suggestion, unlike the assumption of the
survival of Mithradates II until 88 B.c., is not opposed by contemporary documents
and does not entail improbable corollaries.
19 Rawlinson, op. cit., pp. 137-138; Tarn, op. cit., p. 587.
20 Prologue, p. xlii. 21 Lucullus, xxxvi.6.

209
Previously the term had appeared only on issues of Phraates I
and Artabanus I, sons of Phriapatius, and of Phraates II, son
of Mithradates I, and it is difficult to imagine its use during
the period under consideration by anyone other than a son of
the second Mithradates. The references in the literary sources,
therefore, and the shortness of the reigns can well be explained
by the assumption that the sons of Mithradates disputed the
succession until, at last, the third was displaced by Sinatruces,
who represented some collateral branch of the Arsacid family.
A Parthian rock carving at Behistun in Persia portrays Mithradates II attended by a small group of principal figures, one of
whom is named in the accompanying legend as "Gotarzes,
Satrap of Satraps." It is difficult to believe that anyone other
than the heir apparent would have been permitted to employ
this title, which appears to have been inspired by the royal title
"King of Kings," itself at this period a relatively new concept.
It has already been suggested by recent writers that the Gotarzes of the inscription and the Gotarzes of the tablets are one;22
I would suggest further that he was the eldest son of Mithradates II. The "Arsaces" who brought to a close the short reign
of Gotarzes I in 86 B.C. is not distinguished in the tablets by his
personal name. We know that the Arsacids followed the practice of bestowing the father's name on one of the sons other than
the eldest. As a hypothesis, therefore, intended to harmonize
the passage in Josephus discussed above with the evidence
of the tablets, I suggest that this prince was a younger son of
Mithradates II, named after his father but, like him, known to
the temple scribes by the dynastic name.
The insertion by Gutschmid of an Artabanus in the Parthian
king list between 88 and 77 B.C. won support on the part of
Wroth because of the existence of groups of tetradrachms,
drachms, and bronze which form a fairly homogeneous whole
and clearly belong to this period, but which cannot well be assigned either to Mithradates II or to Sinatruces. The similarity of the tetradrachms applies to their use of a common reverse
and legend and a superficially common style in the representation
of the hair on the obverse portraits. This style - the indication
of the hair by formal rows - was followed on practically all
22 E. Herzfeld, Am Tor von Asien, p. 35. See also N. C. Debevoise, A Political
History of Parthia (to be published shortly by The University of Chicago Press).

210
subsequent tetradrachms, but hitherto had only been hinted at.
The tetradrachms fall into three clear-cut classes in respect to
the degree of development of the style; that assigned to Gotarzes shows the least development, whereas on those attributed
to Orodes the formalism is pronounced. On the obverses differences are to be noted also in the style of portrayal of the diadem
and the tunic. These distinctions in the tetradrachms transcend
the variations which normally result within a single reign from
a change in the dies or in the engraver. Mr. E. T. Newell has
kindly informed me that an examination of the coins themselves,
rather than of the plates, reveals greater similarity than dissimilarity in the features of the portraits. This factor taken
alone would require the assumption that the coins were struck
within a single reign. However, the various factors of dissimilarity in portraiture and in style, together with the fact that the
coins must have been struck at Seleucia within the relatively
short period between the death of Mithradates II and the
accession of Sinatruces, and the unquestioned existence during
this period of three kings in Babylonia appear to me to require
the assumption that the similarities in the portraiture are due
to the kinship of the subjects, and that the tetradrachms were
struck by the three kings, Gotarzes, "Arsaces," and Orodes.
The series of tablets which name Gotarzes as king start with
the last month of the year 91/90, about March, 90 B.C. They
had been preceded by a long series which referred to an Arsaces,
King of Kings, and came to a close about October, 91 B.C. The
reference can have applied only to Mithradates II, whose death,
therefore, and the accession of Gotarzes must be presumed to
have taken place during the winter of 91/90 B.C. Since the issue
of tetradrachms upon the accession of each new king appears
to have been customary, the tetradrachms of Gotarzes have
been assigned to this same date. These tablets cease in 87/86
and are followed in the year 86/85 by a series in which the ruler
is called simply "Arsaces, King." To 86 B.C., therefore, I assign the accession of this Arsaces, who perhaps was called
Mithradates, and the issue of his tetradrachms. The latest
tablet of this series is of 81/8o and is followed in the year 80/79
by one which names Orodes as king. His accession and the issue
of his tetradrachms can best be assigned to the year So B.C.
Note should be taken of the drachms which are associated

211
with the tetradrachms of Gotarzes, "Arsaces," and Orodes.
So far as it is possible to attempt an identification of the portraits, it is likely that the majority are of the reign of Gotarzes.
One group, the so-called campaign coins, does not appear to
me to have more than a superficial relationship to the others.23
Additions to the normal legends on these coins require their
assignment to a campaign in the provinces of the northeastern
frontier of Parthia. As a result efforts have been made to
attribute them either to Mithradates II, who alone of the
Arsacids of this period can be connected with an aggressive
policy in that area, or to a co-king, for whom no basis can
be established by fact or through analogy.24 On numismatic
grounds, however, the coins cannot reasonably be assigned to
the reign of Mithradates II. The portrait of their obverses
approaches that of the coins of Sinatruces. Aside from this and
from the addition to the legends the coins are closely similar to
those of Gotarzes. It is known that Sinatruces was not in the
regular line of succession and gained the throne with the aid of
the Steppes people.25 I suggest, therefore, that instead of representing a campaign on the part of the royal government against
this element an assumption which presents great difficulties the coins were struck in the areas named on them to support the
campaign of Sinatruces to gain the throne. It would be natural
for these coins, issued in the haste of the campaign, to follow
the style of the drachms then in circulation. This solution, I
believe, satisfies the conditions which have made difficult the
identification of the coins and is warranted by the relationship
of their obverse portrait to that on the subsequent coinage of
Sinatruces. It should be noted that the rate of issue of drachms
during the years between the death of Mithradates II and the
final succession of Sinatruces appears to be distinctly lower than
that maintained both prior to and after this period. Although
possibly without significance, this fact suggests that in Iran
conditions were disturbed.
The exact date cannot be established, but Sinatruces is
supposed to have gained the throne by about 77 B.c., and to this
year his issue of tetradrachms has been tentatively assigned.
He was succeeded about 70 B.c. by Phraates III, to whom two
23 Wroth, op. cit., p. 40, Nos. 23--25 and note 1. 24 Tarn, op. cit., p. 585.
25 Ibid.

z2z2
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
issues of tetradrachms are generally attributed. On the obverse
of one the head is bare and in style is related to the tetradrachms
of Orodes I. On the obverse of the other the king is shown
helmeted and on the reverse he is pictured as Zeus Atophoros
crowned by the city-goddess. This is supported by the legend,
which bears the new title Theos. It is probable that the one
group represents a routine issue in connection with the accession
of Phraates, and it has been assigned the date 70 B.C. The second
group appears to have been struck upon some especial occasion."
Although conclusive evidence as to the date of its issue is lacking,
a tentative determination is suggested by various factors. The
drachms of Phraates III are numerous and, like the tetradrachms, fall into two classes according to whether the obverse
head is bare or is helmeted.27 The first class is small, the second
large; the collection in the British Museum gives a proportion
of about one to four. If, as appears likely, the first class was
inaugurated with the accession of Phraates, it covered the first
fourth or third of the reign. On this basis the second class
might be presumed to have been inaugurated in 67 or 66 B.c.
Now, according to the literary sources, about the year 66
Phraates opened a campaign against Armenia in alliance with
the Romans.23 The circumstances may well have required the
issue of additional coinage, and the occasion was suitable for
the representation of the king wearing a helmet. The correspondence warrants, I believe, the tentative choice of the date
66 B.c. as the initial year of issue of the second class of his coinage, including the tetradrachms on which the king is shown
associated with the city-goddess.
Phraates III was succeeded by his sons Mithradates (III) and
Orodes (II). Some confusion attends the accounts in the literary
sources, and a decided difference of opinion exists among modern
writers as to the order in which they came to the throne. Although the evidence of the coins is not final, it supports the
conclusion that Mithradates directly followed Phraates, after a
short interval was succeeded by Orodes, later regained the
throne, and, after a somewhat longer period, was again defeated
by Orodes, who thereafter retained the diadem. To Mithradates
26 The possible significance of the reverse type is discussed on page 219.
27 J include those doubtfully assigned to Phraates by Wroth (op. cit., pp. 5 1-55)28 Dio Cassius, xxxvi-45-3; Rawlinson, op. cit., p. 143-

213
can be attributed one issue of tetradrachms and two classes of
drachms. The coinage of Orodes consists of numerous classes,
but we are immediately concerned with two issues of tetradrachms and four classes of drachms.29 The first class of
drachms of Mithradates, comprising a limited number of issues,
is distinguished by the frontal position of the obverse head, includes in the legend the term Theopator, and represents all the
principal mints of Iran, but has associated with it no issue of tetradrachms from Seleucia. In the second class the obverse shows
the head in profile; for Theopator we have Philopator; the class is
again representative of all the eastern mints and, because of the
similarity in style and in the legend, the issue of tetradrachms
must be assumed to have been contemporary with it. Of the first
four classes of drachms of Orodes the earliest is distinguished
by the title "Great King" and the term Theos Eupator, the
second by the title "Great King of Kings" and the same term,
the third by the title "King of Kings" and the term Philopator, and the fourth (as well as those which succeed it) by the
title "King of Kings" unaccompanied by a reference to the
father. Each of the four classes is representative of the principal mints of Iran. The first issue of tetradrachms of Orodes
bears the peculiar combination of "Great" with the title "King
of Kings" and hence is contemporary with the second class of
drachms. The second issue of tetradrachms duplicates the legend of the fourth class of drachms and, therefore, is not of an
earlier date.
This issue of tetradrachms shows on the reverse the citygoddess kneeling before Orodes and, presumably, was struck to
commemorate the surrender of the city in connection with the
final defeat of Mithradates.3" The expression Theos Eupator
appears nowhere in the Parthian coinage except on the first and
second classes of drachms of Orodes. If Orodes himself had
assumed the title Theos, it is unlikely that it would have been
omitted from the numerous issues which succeeded. It is more
reasonable to associate it with Eupator as a reference to Phraates
29 It is now rather generally agreed that the coins assigned by Wroth to an unknown king (op. cit., pp. 56-60) actually constitute the coinage of Mithradates, whereas
those attributed to the latter by Wroth (op. cit., pp. 61-67) represent the two earliest
classes of drachms of Orodes. See in particular Mr. Newell's forthcoming survey of the
Parthian coinage. (See p. 201, note 3.)
30 Tarn, op. cit., p. 604.

214
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
III. It must be borne in mind that the brothers had murdered
their father, and that each would seek, on his early coinage at
least, to proclaim his own innocence. The introduction of the
new term suggests that it was intended as a counterblast to the
use of Theopator on the first issues of Mithradates which, on this
assumption, it followed. The assumption is supported by the
fact that on his second coinage Mithradates discarded the term
Theopator in favor of still another, Philopator. With the issue
of the third class of the drachms of Orodes he, in turn, dropped
the title Theos Eupator in favor of Philopator. The second
and third classes of drachms of Orodes are extensive, and both,
along with the first class, can scarcely have occupied the period
prior to the second coinage of Mithradates. It must be presumed, therefore, that the use of Philopator on the third class
of Orodes was borrowed from the second coinage of Mithradates
and, hence, succeeded it. On the basis of these various factors
the evidence of the coins may be said to suggest strongly that
the first coinage of Mithradates immediately succeeded the death
of Phraates III and was followed shortly by the first class of
drachms of Orodes, then by the second class of drachms with the
first issue of the tetradrachms of Orodes. Similarly, the second
coinage of Mithradates was followed in turn by the third class
of drachms of Orodes, his second issue of tetradrachms, and the
fourth class of his drachms. The presence of mint marks on the
drachms confirms the fact that at no interval did the brothers
divide the empire between them.
The literary sources provide only four significant references
to the struggle between Mithradates and Orodes. Dio Cassius
and Appian mention it casually in discussing criticism in Rome
of the conduct of Gabinius, Roman proconsul in Syria. That is,
their accounts represent statements very much abridged.31 The
former says that, after Phraates had been murdered by his sons,
Orodes succeeded to his kingdom and drove out Mithradates,
who was ruling Media. The latter, fleeing to Gabinius, persuaded him to aid his restoration to the throne. Media was the
largest and richest province of Iran, contained the principal
Parthian capital, Ecbatana, and was better known to westerners
than were the other provinces of Iran. The earlier kingdom of
Media, which included a large portion of Iran, was well known
31 Dio Cassius, xxxix-56.2; Appian, Roman History, xi.8.51-

EVENTS IN THE WESTERN PROVINCES 215
to western writers. I suggest, therefore, that the term was employed by Dio in reference to Iran. There are no grounds in
reason for the assumption sometimes made that the original plan
of the brothers had provided for a division of the empire, Mithradates taking the province of Media, Orodes as paramount king,
the rest. For Media was the geographical as well as the political
center and, at this period, Babylonia, with Seleucia and Ctesiphon, was of secondary importance. It is clear also that Mithradates was ruling "Media" when Orodes succeeded to the
kingdom. The passage in Appian, which applies to the same
episode, reads as follows: "Mithradates, king of the Parthians,
having been driven out of the kingdom by Orodes his brother,
persuaded him [Gabinius] to turn his forces against the Parthians." Plutarch in describing the character of the chief of the
Surens clan, who defeated Crassus, recounts a later episode in
the civil war.32 He says that Orodes was once expelled from the
kingdom and that the chief brought him back to Parthia and
captured Seleucia for him. Justin describes the same event in
more detail, 3 but omits the inconclusive capture of Seleucia:
"Mithradates, king of the Parthians, after his war with the Armenians was banished by the Parthian senate for cruelty. His
brother, Orodes, who took possession of the vacant throne, besieged Babylon, whither Mithradates had fled." He continues
with the statement that Mithradates surrendered and was executed.
The events of the civil war and the relation of the coins to
the events may be stated as follows. About 57 B.C. Mithradates
III succeeded Phraates III in Iran but, after a very short interval
and before he had been able to occupy Babylonia, was driven
out by Orodes II. During this interval in Iran he struck drachms
which bore the term Theopator. Within the same year Orodes
established himself in Iran and issued the first class of his
drachms, with Theos Eupator. He then extended his administration to Babylonia, proclaimed himself King of Kings, and
struck the first issue of his tetradrachms and the second class of
his drachms, still with Theos Eupator. Sometime in 56 B.c.
Mithradates returned from Syria, drove out Orodes, and occupied Babylonia and Iran. At this interval he struck his second
coinage, of tetradrachms and of drachms, which bore the term
82 Crassus, 21.7. " xlii.4.

216
Philopator. He appears not to have assumed the paramount title,
perhaps because of an obligation to Roman influence. His campaign against Armenia must have been of short duration. A
group of Parthian nobles, led by the chief of the Surens clan,
revolted and brought back Orodes to the principal capital, Ecbatana. Mithradates fled to Seleucia and probably at this
moment Orodes struck his third class of drachms, which borrowed the term Philopator. Seleucia was captured and Mithradates fled south to Babylon, which was besieged. Upon the
surrender of Mithradates and his death, perhaps early in 54 B.C.,
Orodes caused to be struck at Seleucia his second issue of tetradrachms, which picture the kneeling city-goddess. This was
soon followed in Iran by the issue of his fourth class of drachms
which, since the question of the succession had been settled,
omit all reference to Phraates III.
Four further issues of tetradrachms of Orodes II are known.
One is dated in the last year of his reign, 39/38 B.C. Another,
which has the same types, probably immediately preceded it "4
and may be assigned, therefore, to about the year 40/39. Since
in this year the Parthians inaugurated a campaign into Syria,
where tetradrachms would be required, it is very possible that
the coins were struck in connection with the campaign. The
remaining two issues of tetradrachms have a common type, but
lack a year date. They were probably struck in a single year,
in the eleventh and twelfth months. On the grounds that a
campaign into Syria would increase the demand for tetradrachms, I have tentatively assigned them to the year 52, when
for the first time the Parthian armies entered the Mediterranean
coastlands. This gives us a period of about twelve years during
which no tetradrachms were struck, although in Iran the issue
of drachms appears to have been uninterrupted. Certain factors
suggest that during this period there was internal dissension in
Seleucia as well as in other parts of the Empire.3
2. SELEUCIA AND THE PARTHIAN DYNASTY
The history of party strife within Seleucia parallels to an
extent the course of the disturbances which mark Parthian
political history from the close of the first century B.C. to the rise
*4 See the discussion of the value of dates, p. 147.
* See pp. 221-222.

217
of the Sassanids. The operation of the mint at Seleucia naturally
was affected by disorders and revolt within the city, and such
conditions are reflected in the rate of issue. It is possible, I
believe, to draw further evidence as to political conditions from
the character and the quality of the designs and the legends on
the coins, both royal and autonomous. Certain types and certain
elements in the legends find a reasonable explanation only in the
assumption that they were intended to commemorate new developments in the relationship between the paramount power,
the dynasty, and the local political unit which issued the coins,
the city. During certain intervals a deterioration in the quality
of the Greek of the legends took place, but disappeared as
rapidly as it had developed. The variations can well be explained only by the assumption that during these periods the
personnel of the mint was less well acquainted with, and more
indifferent to, the usages of good contemporary Greek than were
those who preceded and succeeded them.
It is not possible to discuss in this volume the origin and
history of party strife in Seleucia. It may be summarized, however, as follows. Seleucia was founded to serve as the principal
center in the East for Hellenic culture and trade. It became the
greatest city of its time because it controlled the transit trade
between the Mediterranean area and Iran and Farther Asia.
The dominant group in the city, its aristocracy, was composed
largely of traders and bankers of Hellenic extraction. The
majority of the population, however, undoubtedly consisted of
Babylonians drawn originally from Opis and Babylon. Jews
comprised a third important element. The popular party, in
opposition to the Hellenic and Hellenized aristocratic party,
appears to have been principally representative of the native
Babylonians, with whom the Jews were at times associated.
The statement is generally made by present-day writers that
Seleucia was hostile to the Parthians. This is inexact. Throughout the greater portion of Parthian history what may be called
the legitimate succession within the dynasty was supported by
the aristocratic party, whereas rival claimants for the throne
were frequently aided by the popular party.
The affiliation was natural. At an earlier period the commercial elements in the Greek cities of Asia Minor had preferred
the security and the avenues of trade offered by the Persians to

218
the obligations of kinship and culture represented by the Athenians. At a later date the conservative elements in Antioch called
in Tigranes of Armenia to suppress the disorders into which the
intradynastic strife of the Seleucids had degenerated. The lifeblood of Seleucia's wealth and power flowed along the single
great artery of trade which passed through the center of Iran.
A hostile power in control of that highway could throttle the
transit trade, whereas a friendly power in Iran, possessed of
military capacity, could protect and extend the eastern branches
of the artery as far as India and China. Toward the west the
situation was entirely different; a number of alternate routes
led to the sea, and when one was blocked by disorder or a hostile
frontier, another was usually available. The Arsacids, in turn,
by this alliance gained a large, regular, and easily controlled
source of revenue and the services of highly trained Greeks for
the administration of their dominions. Beyond these factors
it must be borne in mind that the military aristocracy which we
call the Parthians was as alien as the Greeks to the great mass
of their subjects, not only the Semitic elements of the west but
the more settled Iranians of the east. The Parthian Empire was
not a reaction against Hellenism. Throughout its course it
protected and made use of Hellenism against Oriental nationalism, and it was the persistence in this policy by the later Arsacids which permitted the rise to power of the Sassanids.
When Mithradates I defeated Demetrius II of Syria, instead
of placing some penalty upon Seleucia, the eastern capital of the
Seleucids, he granted the city an autonomy which was not only
much greater than that enjoyed previously but which remained
as an outstanding example of civic liberty in the ancient world."
At the same time he caused to be placed on the royal silver
struck at Seleucia the term Philhellenos, hitherto never used as
a royal title and indicative, therefore, of an especial relationship
between the dynasty and the Hellenic elements of the empire
which had their center in Seleucia. The absence of delay in
conferring these benefits, together with the fact that Seleucia,
36 For the relationship between Seleucia and the Seleucids see R. H. McDowell,
Stamped and Inscribed Objects from Seleucia on the Tigris, pp. 171-172. Of Seleucia
under the Parthians Lucius Ampelius says (1): "Rerum publicarum tria genera sunt,
regium, optimatum, populare. Aut enim sub regum sunt potestate, ut Seleucia Parthorumn."

219
although a notable stronghold, appears to have offered no resistance to the Parthians, suggests that Mithradates and the
Greeks may have come to an agreement prior to the occupation.
The title Philhellenos appears only sporadically on the coins
of the early successors to Mithradates, and it is very possible
that the true value of the Greek commercial class was not
again recognized until the reign of Phraates III, when the period
of expansion and of the stabilization of the eastern frontiers had
come to an end.37 In any case the Greeks appear to have remained loyal. When Antiochus VII invaded Parthia the native
princes deserted to him, whereas it was in the cities, more influenced by Hellenism than the countryside, that the plot was
executed which led to the destruction of the Syrian army.38
Himerus, a rebel against the Arsacid dynasty, was notorious
for his persecution of the Hellenic elements in Babylonia."9 His
strength, therefore, must have been based on the non-Greek
elements.
Phraates III caused to be struck, about the year 66 B.c., an
issue of tetradrachms on which he is portrayed as Zeus AEtophoros in the act of being crowned with a wreath by the citygoddess of Seleucia. After a short interruption this association
of the reigning Arsacid and the city-goddess, the latter grasping a scepter, became the standard motif for Parthian tetradrachms. Its inauguration commemorates, I believe, a renewal
of the alliance between the dynasty and the Hellenic elements
within the empire. This resulted from a shift in the direction
and character of Parthian expansion. It is very possible that
Mithradates I and Phraates II had planned to continue the
Parthian sweep westward until it reached the limits of the Seleucid Empire, but the subsequent series of invasions from the
Steppes had afforded their successors little occasion to renew
their policy. As Tarn has stated,40 with the reign of Phraates
III the west became the principal front. The immediate task,
performed by this ruler and by Mithradates III, was the restoration in the west of Parthian administration and prestige, which
had fallen to a particularly low ebb. This was followed under
Orodes II by a series of efforts to push the Parthian frontiers to
the Mediterranean. The urge behind the program was primarily
n See the next paragraph. " Ibid., xlii.1-3; Diodorus Siculus, xxxiv.18.
38 Justin, XXXViii.IO0. 40 Op. cit-, p. 587.

zzo0
economic. The old land hunger of the Parthian nobles presumably had its influence. But beyond this there was, I believe, a
new realization of the importance of the transit trade and its
control. About 115 B.C. the joint efforts of Mithradates II and
of the Han emperor in China had resulted in the opening of trade
communications through Central Asia. During the period from
about 70 to about 40 B.C. the mints of Iran appear to have
abruptly and very markedly increased their issue of silver."
This can be reasonably explained only by the assumption that
by the period in question trade between Iran and Central Asia,
China, and India had become of major importance. Full advantage of the trade, from the point of view of its value for
revenue purposes, could be enjoyed only if Parthia controlled an
outlet to the Mediterranean.
Such appears to have been the basis of the renewed alliance
between the Greek commercial aristocracy and the Arsacids.
The latter had come to appreciate the value of this source of
revenue; the former benefited to the extent that their goods
were protected, and taxed, by the minimum number of fiscal
agencies. Beyond this, however, I suggest that the new reverse
motif of the tetradrachms reveals another factor in the alliance.
The Arsacids possessed no claims to power beyond their military
organization. No national groups of importance recognized
them. In Persis, Elymais, and Armenia local dynasties did in
increasing measure receive such support. The Seleucid predecessors of the Arsacids had based their right to rule not alone
on force but on two theories, that the Hellenic groups transplanted into Asia represented the Macedonian people and by
their acclamation conferred the succession from Alexander the
Great, and that the apotheosis of the kings permitted the "free"
cities within their borders to accept the royal administration.
Recognition of the Arsacids as the successors of the Seleucid
dynasty would at all times and in all parts of the Empire possess
a certain value. It was particularly important if Parthia was
to make effective her administration of Mesopotamia and was
to advance her boundaries into territory from which the last of
the Seleucid dynasty had only lately been driven by the Romans.
Seleucia traditionally was the center of Hellenism beyond the
Euphrates, and in the west it enjoyed a great renown. Under
41 See pp. 170-171.

221
these conditions it cannot have been chance that led to the
selection of the new type for that unit of the Parthian currency
which in particular would circulate in areas where Hellenic
influence was still strong. The representation of the city-goddess
of Seleucia in the act of crowning the deified Phraates commemorates, I believe, a formal assumption of that claim to kinship
with Alexander the Great and Seleucus Nikator which became
the boast of later Parthian kings. It may well have been due
in part at least to this act of policy that the Parthian armies a
few years later were so readily received from Palestine to Asia
Minor. Even though their military capacity did not permit the
Parthians to retain their political hold on the west, the remarkable increase in the rate of issue of tetradrachms which persisted
after 40 B.c.42 suggests that a satisfactory outlet had been arranged for the transit trade.
The r6le of Seleucia during the civil war between Mithradates
III and Orodes II is obscure. It will be seen in a later instance
that the pro-Roman candidate to the Parthian throne was supported by the native-popular party, and this may well have been
true at this time. Mithradates had sought Roman aid, and his
rapid success thereafter suggests that, in some form, it had been
extended. Since he retired to Babylon in defeat and since that
city underwent a siege in his behalf, it is not unlikely that his
principal support was afforded by the native Babylonians. The
fact that on the first issue of tetradrachms after the defeat of his
brother, Orodes is shown accepting the hand of the kneeling citygoddess suggests that only slight blame attached to Seleucia for
her part in the revolt, limited, perhaps, to a division of allegiance.
During the period between 50 and 40 B.C. Parthia failed to
interfere in Syrian affairs and struck no tetradrachms. Whether
this was due to internal weakness is not known. The literary
sources are silent, but the autonomous coins indicate that at
least during the years 42/41 to 39/38 B.C. the native party had
gained control of Seleucia. The bronze struck during these years
for the first time bears the place name rather than the ethnikon
- always employed by cities with Hellenic traditions and
shows a quality of execution noticeably inferior to that of the
preceding and succeeding issues."3 Control of the city by the
native party would not necessarily imply a state of revolt. On
42 See p. 170. * See p. 98, No. 130-

zzz2
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
the latest issue of tetradrachms of Orodes II, in 39/38, the Greek
of the legend has errors in spelling, but on the tetradrachms of
Phraates IV which begin in the year 37/36 the legends are correctly formed. An issue of autonomous bronze struck in 38/37
has the ethnikon, and the quality of execution is again equivalent
to that of early issues. The conditions suggest that the murder
of Orodes and the succession of Phraates were accompanied by
a transfer of the control of Seleucia from the native-popular
party to the Greek-aristocratic party. At what period the
popular party had assumed power cannot be determined.
Of some significance in the reign of Phraates IV was the
attempt by one faction among the Parthian nobles to replace
him by an avowedly pro-Roman candidate, Tiridates. Two
issues of tetradrachms can be assigned to this prince, one of
about May, 26 B.C., the other of about March, 25 B.C. Issues
of Phraates are known for approximately April, August, September, and November, 26, and for May, 25 B.C. Tiridates
struck no drachms. On the evidence of the coins it appears that
the revolt consisted of two successive spring offensives, probably
launched from the Roman border of Mesopotamia, which reached
Babylonia but failed to win Iran. The latest dated tetradrachms
of Phraates IV were struck in the year 23/22, the earliest of his
successor, Phraataces, in 2/I B.C. Two groups of this denomination, on which no dates can be distinguished, were assigned by
Wroth to the period 27-26 B.C. I find no adequate grounds,
however, for not attributing them to the period for which we
have no examples with dates. If they were not intended to show
dates it is to be assumed that each represented a single issue,
separated by an interval from those which preceded and succeeded. The slackened rate of issue of tetradrachms during the
final twenty years of the reign of Phraates is to be noted, although no particular significance appears to attach to it. Two
issues of autonomous bronze, one of 32/31, the other assigned to
the period from 32/31 to the end of the reign of Phraates, bear
the ethnikon and reveal the quality of execution which associate
them with earlier issues of the aristocratic party. This is true
also of the issue of bronze assigned to the reign of Phraataces,
2/I B.C. to 4/5 A.D.
The short reign of Orodes III, marked by an issue of tetradrachms in 6/7 A.D., was preceded and succeeded by years in

z23
which no silver was struck. The absence of drachms indicates
that his power either failed to extend into Iran or was effective
there for a very short interval. His successor, Vonones I, inaugurated his issue of tetradrachms in 9/I0 A.D. For this same
year we have an issue of autonomous bronze which is poorly
executed and which bears the place name rather than the ethnikon; it appears, that is, to have been struck by the native
party. This indication of a shift in party rule at Seleucia coincident with the accession of Vonones suggests that his partisans
included the native Babylonians. He had been brought from
Rome by one party among the Parthian nobles, whereas another
faction put forward Artabanus, who had been king of Media
(Atropatene). The appearance of the personal name of Vonones
on his first issues of tetradrachms and drachms points to the
presence of Artabanus in the field, already an open claimant to
the throne. Both classes of silver show Nike as reverse type.
In addition, the drachms bear a legend which refers to a victory
over Artabanus. These factors point to a battle in the year 9/Jo,
somewhere in Iran, in which Artabanus was defeated."4 Vonones
continued to rule at least until about September, I I A.D. Sometime during I1/12 Artabanus II issued his first tetradrachms,
presumably between September, ii, and April, 12 A.D. He remained in control of Seleucia until at least August, 12 A.D., but
in November of this year we find Vonones again issuing tetradrachms in Seleucia. The drachms of Vonones, and his rule over
Media, belong to the opening of his reign.
Artabanus II struck no more tetradrachms until the year
20/21, but for the years 15/16 and 16/17 we have two issues of
autonomous bronze, related by their use of common monograms,
which were struck under the authority of the aristocratic party.
It is to be assumed that during the two preceding years, when
the mint was inactive, the native party had been overthrown and
that Vonones, who had received their support, had been obliged
to flee."5 On this group of autonomous coins all reference to the
" The mint mark which distinguishes the greater part of the drachms is probably
that of Ecbatana. It is likely that in Iran the rule of Vonones was effective only in
Media.
4 One of the issues of bronze, that for 15/16, bears month dates and presents an
uninterrupted series from the fifth through the twelfth month. It is very possible that
the victory of the aristocratic party, therefore, should be dated only from about August,
15 A.D.

224
city was discarded. On the second issue the monograms which
had appeared on the first in normal position occur as the reverse
types, accompanied by the word /3ovX s, in reference to the
aristocratic council of Seleucia. Three other issues of autonomous bronze, on none of which the city name occurs, followed
in the years 17/18, 18/19, and 23/24. The first was probably
struck by the aristocratic party, but the last two, to judge from
the coarseness of their design, by the popular party. During the
next year the royal bronze of the Seleucia mint was inaugurated;
thereafter civic types reappeared only during periods of revolt.
I believe that the revocation of the right to employ an autonomous currency marks also the end of the city's autonomous
rights. I suggest, further, that this was decided upon at a time
when the aristocratic party was in control, in 15/16, when the
name of the city was dropped from the design of the coins, and
that it received the approbation of this group.46 Tacitus states
that at some time during this particular period Artabanus had
betrayed the people of Seleucia into the power of the aristocrats."7
The correspondence of this act with the apparent withdrawal of
autonomy can be reasonably explained only by the supposition
that by this time the native party had become more powerful
than the Greek party and that to maintain their position the
aristocrats, with their ally Artabanus, superseded the forms of
self-government by the armed force of the royal administration.
During the years 20/21, 23/24, and 24/25 tetradrachms were
struck which show on the reverse Artabanus seated, the citygoddess standing, and a male in native costume kneeling. I take
this as commemorative of the formal submission of the native
elements in the city who, as we have seen, had again come into
power during 18/19 and who had probably offered resistance to
the proposed change in the constitution. This was consummated
in 24/25, which saw the initial issue of the royal bronze.
With the aid of Roman intrigue certain elements in Parthia
turned against Artabanus and welcomed in his place the Roman
46 The use of the personal monograms of mint controllers as the type suggests that
the initial issue, which lacked the familiar city name, was not well received and that
the controllers were men of such standing in the community that their initials served
as a guarantee of the authenticity of the succeeding issue, which was probably first
struck at the very close of the year 15/16. The remaining three issues borrowed their
motifs from the tetradrachms with which the public was familiar.
*' Annales, vi.42.

zz5
candidate, Tiridates. The native party in Seleucia was evidently
associated with the revolt, for an account has been preserved of
its extravagant reception of Tiridates and his transfer to it of
the power which Artabanus had conferred upon the aristocratic
party.48 This took place about 36 A.D. For several years previously no coinage had been struck in Seleucia. The inactivity is
probably to be associated with the condition of anarchy in
Babylonia which Josephus has described.49 About June, 42 A.D.,
the issue of tetradrachms was resumed in the name of Vardanes I,
a son of Artabanus, who had meanwhile succeeded to the throne.
During this interval there had taken place the so-called revolt of
Seleucia which, according to Tacitus, occupied seven years.50
It is important to bear in mind that, contrary to the impression
left by nearly all modern commentators, this "revolt" was only
a detail in the civil war which was raging throughout Parthia.
The native party in control of Seleucia under the authority of
Tiridates simply continued his administration. After the flight
of Tiridates Artabanus was probably so occupied with the
continued dissension among the nobles that he was unable to
concentrate an important force to retake the city. Upon his
death, probably about 40 A.D., the civil war was continued in the
rivalry between his sons Vardanes (I) and Gotarzes (II). At
one time the former attacked Seleucia, but was driven off by a
counter thrust on the part of Gotarzes.1 Effectively there was an
interregnum after about 36 A.D. During this period the native
party struck an extensive series of bronze, which again bore the
city name, was of a very inferior execution, and had on the reverse the characteristic Oriental motif of the humped bull. It
was displaced in the year 40/41 by a new series without the city
name, well engraved and showing on the reverse Nike with a
palm. These coins continued to be struck from 41/42 to 43/44.
In 43/44 there was struck a new issue of bronze with civic types,
without the city name and well executed, and two issues of royal
bronze. The more important of the latter bore on the obverse
the portrait of Vardanes; on the reverse, a personification of the
48 Ibid. This passage taken out of its context has been employed as evidence that
Seleucia as a unit was anti-Parthian and pro-Roman.
49 Antiquities of the Jews, XViii.9.
"0 Annales, xi.9. Cf. Gutschmnid, op. cit., pp. 121-12551 Tacitus, Annales, xi.8.

zz6
COINS FROM SELEUCLA
Boule, the aristocratic council of Seleucia, accompanied by
the legend BovX. The "Victory" coins of the years 40/4143 /44 are closely related to this royal bronze in respect to both
style and quality.
These successive series of bronze permit of but one conclusion. In 40/41 the aristocratic party overthrew the popular
party and took over the administration of the city. Only in the
spring of 42 did Vardanes arrive again in the vicinity; he was
voluntarily received into the city and about June began the issue
of a continuous series of tetradrachms.2 The first issues of royal
bronze commemorate the alliance between Vardanes and the
aristocratic party. The one small issue of civic bronze which
immediately preceded the royal bronze and was struck alongside the tetradrachms suggests that there was some question of
retaining that class of coinage.
On the evidence of the coins it is apparent that in the civil
war between the two brothers Vardanes inherited the policy and
the partisans of his father, Artabanus. Prokesch-Osten had
read on a tetradrachm of Gotarzes the date equivalent to 41/42,
but Petrowicz has demonstrated that the correct reading gives
the year 48/49.4 The literary sources state that upon the death
of Artabanus Vardanes laid hands on the "adjoining provinces,"
which in this period must refer to the western part of the Empire,
whereas they associate Gotarzes with the East. This division
is supported by the large number of drachms and bronze coins
of the latter struck in Iran, where Vardanes can have retained
possession of little more than Media and that for a short
period only. It may be assumed also that the native party in
Seleucia and Babylonia looked to Gotarzes to break the domina52 It should be noted that Tacitus, our only literary source on the "revolt," states
simply that, when Vardanes had previously attacked Seleucia, it had been in anger at
the revolt against Artabanus (that is, at the native party for their loyalty to Tiridates)
and that later the city gave itself up to him (Annales, xi.8-9). The victory of the
aristocratic party in 40/41 appears to represent the conclusion of the incident related
by Josephus to the effect that the natives in Seleucia had overthrown the Greeks with
the aid of a group of Jewish refugees and that later the Greeks and the natives became
reconciled and joined in a massacre of the Jews, upon whom the blame was conveniently
cast (Antiquities of the Jews, xviii.9.9). Cf. Gutschmid, op. cit., p. 121.
5 This supports the testimony of Josephus that Artabanus had chosen Vardanes
as his successor, as against the generally accepted interpretation of Tacitus to the effect
that Gotarzes immediately succeeded (Antiquities of the Jews, xx-3-4; Annales, xi.8).
" Op. cit., p. 118, note.

227
tion of the Greek aristocratic party supported by Vardanes. In
the course of the continued civil war Gotarzes twice occupied
Seleucia, about June, 44, and about January, 45 A.D., before
he was able to make himself master. The latest tetradrachms
of Vardanes were struck about July, 45. We have an issue of
Gotarzes of about January, 46, followed in July of that year by
the inauguration of an uninterrupted series which continued to
the close of his reign. The unique series of royal bronze dated
in each of the first seven months of 46 A.D. suggests strongly
that the administration of Gotarzes was established in Seleucia
just prior to the opening of that year.
The issues of tetradrachms in 46/47 and 47/48, probably in
consecutive months, bear the personal name of Gotarzes and
indicate that at this period some rival laid claim to the throne.
Such a rival existed in the person of a pro-Roman candidate,
Meherdates, but the date 49 A.D. generally assigned to his campaign presents difficulties." According to Tacitus,56 Gotarzes
died of an illness and was succeeded by a Vonones, king of Media
(Atropatene), who in turn died after a short reign and was succeeded by his son, Volagases. Josephus,57 on the other hand,
states that Gotarzes was killed as a result of a conspiracy and
was followed by his brother, Volagases. The coins demonstrate
the essential accuracy of the Jewish historian. No coins exist
which can be assigned to Vonones, who, aside from the mention
in Tacitus, is unknown. Volagases I came into control of Seleucia and struck tetradrachms about September and October,
51 A.D.; Gotarzes regained possession of the mint in December
of this year, and the uninterrupted series of tetradrachms of
Volagases date only from about May, 52. It is clear that there
was an open revolt led by Volagases, in the course of which
Gotarzes appears to have been assassinated during the late
winter or early spring of 52 A.D. Josephus as a Jew enjoyed
closer relationships with Babylonia than did contemporary
western writers, and his narrative of Parthian history, especially
as it concerns Babylonia and Mesopotamia, deserves more credence than is generally accorded to it. In this instance it is
reasonable to assume that he is correct in making Volagases the
brother of Gotarzes.
55 See Gutschmid, op. cit., p. 127. 56 Annsales, xii.14.
57 Antiquities of the Jews, xX-3-.4-

zz8
Vardanes I, who received the support of the aristocratic
party in Seleucia, had been overthrown by Gotarzes II, probably
supported by the popular-native party. Volagases, who took
the throne from Gotarzes, appears to have represented again
the political forces which had supported Vardanes and, before
him, Artabanus II. During the early years of his reign occurred
the short-lived revolt of his son, Vardanes II, to whom may
rightfully belong some of the tetradrachms here assigned to
Volagases I.18 Again, for the years 59/60 and 6o/6i no tetradrachms exist. During this interval and a part of the succeeding
year there were struck two groups of bronze with civic types,
Oriental in motif and of poor execution. Thereafter silver continued to be issued into the year 69/70. For this single year we
have, besides the issue of tetradrachms, two issues of royal
bronze and three issues of bronze with civic types. One of these,
No. 146 in the table, is related by the character of the motif and
by style and execution to the civic types struck in the interval
59/60-61/62, and repeats the reverse type of the revolt coinage
struck during the interval 36-40 A.D. The other two issues with
civic types for 69/70 are dissociated from the first by their execution, style, and fabric; on the basis of these characteristics
they are related to the succeeding issue of royal bronze. The
latter repeats the reverse type of one of the two issues and the
monogram which appears on the other. These successive issues
of bronze can be explained only on the assumption that a revolt
of the native party became overt in Seleucia in the year 59/60,
was temporarily broken up in 61/62, presumably by royal forces,
broke out again in 69/70, and was almost immediately crushed
by a counter movement of the loyalist party in the city. It
appears, further, that the royal administration was temporarily
unable to resume control, with the result that the loyalist party
issued its own coinage in commemoration of the disaster of the
revolt (the city-goddess seated on a broken column in an attitude
of mourning) and of the subsequent victory (Nike with wreath).
Before the close of the year, however, the central government
again became effective and continued the issue of the "Victory"
coinage, but with the royal portrait on the obverse.
58 Wroth, op. cit., pp. 1-lii. See also the forthcoming survey of Parthian coins by
Mr. E. T. Newell, cited on p. 201, note 3. A bronze coin from Seleucia, found too late
to include in the catalog of the present volume, appears to reproduce on the obverse
the facing portrait of Vardanes II.

zz9
The temporary weakness of the central administration in
Babylonia during the year 69/70 may well have been due to
more general disturbances in Parthia. About 58 A.D. there had
broken out in the eastern provinces a revolt which appears to
have continued, perhaps intermittently, until approximately
75 A.D., when Hyrcania, at least, obtained its independence.9 The
two outbreaks by the native party in Seleucia, therefore, can
reasonably be assumed to have formed part of a general nationalistic reaction against the Parthian overlordship encouraged, to
some extent, by the Romans. The relationships of the coins
demonstrate that Volagases supported the Greek-aristocratic
party and was opposed by the native-popular party. His reign,
that is, represents the domination of the group in Babylonia,
and probably in Parthia as a whole, which had formerly been
headed by Artabanus II and Vardanes I. It is very possible,
therefore, that the disturbances which marked the reign of
Volagases constituted a continuation of the struggle for power
by those elements in Parthia which had previously supported
Gotarzes II. Volagases is credited by Pliny with the construction of a new metropolis, Volageisias, intended to destroy the
position in commerce hitherto held by Seleucia.60 The continued
disloyalty of the native groups in Seleucia, with the consequent
disruption of the transit trade, may well have resulted at this
time in a decision on the part of both the central administration
and the leading merchants and bankers of Seleucia to erect a
new center through which commerce could flow under the more
facile control of the royal government.
3. THE ROMAN CAMPAIGNS AND THE DECLINE OF PARTHIA
The disturbed conditions which marked the reign of Volagases I were accentuated in those of his immediate successors.
Parthia became again an effective unity, for a time at least, only
with the final defeat of Osroes by Volagases II about 130 A.D.
A revolt against Volagases I broke out under the leadership of
Pacorus II in the spring of 78. To judge from his portrait, the
prince was closely related to Volagases, a son or a nephew. Although evidence is lacking, it is not unreasonable to attribute
59 Rawlinson, op. cit., pp. 270-271 and 271, note 1; p. 286 and note 2.
*0 Nat. Hist., vi.123, where it is called Vologesocerta.

230
COINS FROM SELEUCIA
the revolt to the same groups in Parthia which had been responsible for earlier disturbances. In the course of the movement
Seleucia and the mint changed hands repeatedly until the tetradrachms of Volagases came to an end early in the year 8o, to
which date, in the entire absence of evidence in the literary
sources, the death of this ruler may be assigned.,, The new
administration was almost at once attacked by another prince,
Artabanus III, who issued tetradrachms at Seleucia in the fall of
8o and the greater part of 81. Since he appears to have struck
no drachms, his rule must have been effective only within the
confines of Babylonia and Mesopotamia. Between 82/83 and
96/97 A.D., when the tetradrachms of Pacorus ceased to be
issued, there was a consecutive period of seven years, 86/87 to
92/93 inclusive, for which no issues of silver are known and during which unrest may well have prevailed. For a period of
twenty-five years after the spring of 97 A.D. no tetradrachms
were struck and the mint at Seleucia was entirely inactive until
105/o6. The abundant bronze coinages during the period between io5/o6 and 129/30 vividly illustrate the bitter struggle
between Volagases II and Osroes for control of Seleucia, interrupted only by short occupations on the part of Pacorus and
the Roman army in 115-116. The status of Seleucia during the
interval between 97 and 105/o6 is not known; presumably the
city was under the nominal rule of Pacorus, and the conditions
of practical anarchy prevented the operation of the mint. During this and later intervals the effective rule of Pacorus seems to
have been limited to northern Mesopotamia.62 Osroes, another
claimant for the paramount power, appears to have hailed from
Elymais, adjacent to Babylonia on the southeast.3 These conditions require the assumption that the third contestant, Volagases II, made his headquarters somewhere in northern Iran,
near its western borders. The close relationships between the
61 It should be borne in mind that in this volume a group of tetradrachms has
been assigned to Volagases I which were attributed by Wroth to a "First Reign" of
Volagases II. See p. i9, No. 94.
62 This is suggested by the fact that he controlled Armenia through his son Exidares, that he sold the principality of Edessa at some time about I 10 A.D., and that he
was engaged in border disputes with the Romans.
63 It was pointed out by Percy Gardner (Parthian Coinage, p. 19) that the name
Osroes is "Persian" (that is, South Iranian), as is the peculiar style of hairdressing
which marks his coin portraits. As Osroes retired before the advance of Traj an, instead
of making for Media he moved first to Babylon, then to Susa in Elymais. The daughter

231
coin portraits of Volagases I, Pacorus II, and Volagases II suggest that the last two may have been brothers, and sons of Volagases I. The fact that Pacorus revolted against Volagases I
suggests further that Volagases II may have been the rightful
heir, who was forced to wait before asserting his claims until the
power of Pacorus had abated.
The general assumption by historians that Osroes was recognized as paramount king of Parthia lacks a basis in fact. To
the east of the Zagros during this period only western Iran
appears to have remained under Parthian control; the center
of the kingdom lay to the west. Yet Osroes struck no tetradrachms, the principal medium of exchange in the west. His
issues of drachms and bronze outside Seleucia are very limited.
His letter to Trajan, which may have led Roman writers to
think of him as effectively King of Kings, represents necessarily
nothing more than a bid for Roman support. The answer of
Trajan that the friendship of kings depends on deeds, not
words suggests that the emperor was well aware of the real
status of Osroes. This situation explains also the cavalier treatment accorded by Trajan to Parthamasiris, Osroes' candidate
for the Armenian throne.4 The reign of Osroes represents essentially an antidynastic reaction on the part of Elymais and
Babylonia.
Volagases II appears to have been responsible for the issue
of bronze in Seleucia from 105o/6 through 1o8/09. Presumably
he had advanced from Media and driven out the administration
of Pacorus if Pacorus still exercised any control on the borders
of Babylonia. The occupation of Seleucia by Osroes in 109/10
was, I suggest, part of a campaign which carried him north from
Elymais to Armenia, where he deposed Exidares, the son of
Pacorus, and installed Parthamasiris. To this period must be
assigned the few drachms of Osroes, struck probably in Ecbatana.
Presumably Volagases was pushed back to the outlying parts of
Media, while Pacorus retired on western Mesopotamia. The
and the throne of Osroes were captured in Susa by the Romans, who followed his flight.
Contrary to the impression left by modern commentators, I find in the sources no evidence which connects Osroes by name with Ctesiphon or which requires the assumption
that he was the brother of Pacorus. Dio (18.19.4) states simply that Osroes was the
uncle of the sons of Pacorus; in other words, the relationship may well have been one
of marriage.
64 For a general discussion of these events see Rawlinson, op. cit., pp. 3 01-305-

z2z2
sale of Edessa by the latter about 110 A.D. may well have been
for the purpose of raising troops. During the years 112/13
through 114/15 Osroes was chiefly engaged in contesting with
Volagases the possession of Seleucia and, presumably, Ctesiphon.
This explains the failure of either to aid materially in resistance
to the Roman aggression in northern Mesopotamia.6" During
II 5/16, the year in which Trajan occupied Babylonia," Volagases and Pacorus both struck bronze in Seleucia.
Of the considerable number of Roman coins found at Seleucia
nearly all can be connected with one of the campaigns to Babylonia. The thirteen bronze coins of Trajan which have been
recovered fall within this class; most of them are dated "XX
TRIB POT," which is also the latest date. This is equivalent
to the period from October/December, 115, to October/December, 116. Since it is not likely that they were struck in Seleucia,
it is reasonable to assume that the Roman occupation of the
city covered the latter part of this period only, and may in part
have been subsequent to it. The accounts of the campaign in
our sources fail to mention any occupation of Seleucia prior to
the later uprising against the Romans. They do describe, however, what superficially appears to be an extraordinary maneuver
on the part of Trajan an advance down the Euphrates to
Babylon, leaving the Roman left flank and rear exposed to an
attack from Seleucia or Ctesiphon.67 Both these factors become intelligible if it can be assumed that Seleucia had been
occupied by a friendly force prior to the Roman advance, and
that Babylon rather than Ctesiphon was the headquarters of the
particular Parthian prince against whom the Roman drive on
Babylonia was directed. I suggest, therefore, that Pacorus
headed the pro-Roman elements in Mesopotamia and Babylonia,
and that as an ally of Trajan he advanced down the Euphrates
ahead of the Roman army 68 to take Seleucia from the hands of
Volagases II who, presumably, retired on Ctesiphon, whence he
could maintain contact with Media. Since Volagases had al65 The evidence of the coins is supported by the direct statement in Dio Cassius,
lXViii.26.
66 R. P. Longden, "Notes on the Parthian Campaign of Traj an," The Journal of
Roman Studies, 21 (1931), Part I, 8.
67 Dio Cassius, lxviii.26.
68 In view of the faCt that our sourCe material for this period is only fragmentary,
the absence of specific reference to Pacorus in this connection has no significance.

233
ready issued coins in Seleucia after April of 115, the occupation
by Pacorus must have taken place in the summer or fall. Osroes,
who had been forced out of Seleucia by Volagases, probably in
the winter of 114/15, can have retired in only one direction,
south on Babylon, whence ran the main highway to Susa in
Elymais.
During the Roman campaign in Mesopotamia it was Osroes
rather than Volagases who had been the nominal source from
which resistance proceeded. This follows from the fact that he
had been conducting an aggressive campaign in those regions
just prior to the Roman advance. It was natural, therefore, for
Trajan to seek battle with him rather than with Volagases, and
the presence of Pacorus in Seleucia, guarding the crossing from
Ctesiphon, made it safe for the Roman army to break up the
forces of Osroes around Babylon before seeking to occupy Ctesiphon. Upon the flight of Osroes to Susa, where certain of the
Romans who followed him captured his throne and his daughter,"9 Trajan appears to have passed by Seleucia without entering the city, and occupied Ctesiphon, from which Volagases II
fled without resistance."0 Following the evidence of the coins
I suggest that Seleucia remained in the hands of Pacorus and the
pro-Roman party until the uprising against the Romans in the
winter of 115/16, after which it presumably was garrisoned by
Trajan until the time of his retreat.71
After the retreat of the Romans Osroes occupied Seleucia
and struck coins in 117/18 while Volagases appears again only
after two more years. This may indicate that the "puppet
king," Parthamaspates, set up by Trajan had been able to maintain himself during this interval. There is nothing in the literary
sources to invalidate such a conclusion. It is very possible also
that during the period from 117 to 119 Volagases had been preoccupied with the reestablishment of Parthian control over
E9 Spartianus, Hadrian, 12; Capitolinus, Antoninus Pius, 9.
7" It was only surmise on the part of Rawlinson which led him to describe the
flight of Osroes from Ctesiphon (op. cit., p. 312). Longp6rier has noted that the literary
sources give no information concerning the Parthian prince from whom Traj an took
the capital (Mimoires, p. 138).
71 Although the excavations have not yet revealed definite evidence, we know
that the Great House suffered a severe conflagration between 115 and about 12o A.D.,
and the remains of a very heavy fire in trial trench 4, in the temple area, can be assigned
to this general period.

234
Mesopotamia, evacuated by the Romans under the orders of
Hadrian. Such a reopening of the trade routes between Seleucia
and the highlands to the north would explain the ability of
Volagases to reinaugurate the issue of tetradrachms in 122/23.
Although Osroes continued to dispute his control of Seleucia,
probably from a base in southern Babylonia, the issues of
bronze reveal the constantly increasing strength of Volagases.
The latest issue of Osroes at Seleucia is of 128/29, but he may
have continued to control Elymais for some years after this date.
Although Volagases II reestablished Parthian unity in the
western provinces, with their consequent commercial prosperity
reflected in the almost unbroken sequence of tetradrachms
struck during the rest of his reign and that of his successor, a
series of drachms struck in Iran by another prince, who must
have been a contemporary, proves that the old empire no longer
existed.72 The comparatively few Parthian drachms of the late
period which have been recovered suggest that only small areas
in Iran were under effective Parthian rule and that even in those
regions there was a low level of prosperity.
The latest issue of Volagases II is of 147/48; the earliest of
Volagases III was struck about May, 148. This was the first
instance of a succession to the Parthian throne unaccompanied
by civil war, revolt, or parricide since about 70 B.C., when
Phraates III, so far as we have knowledge, inherited peacefully
the rights of his father, Sinatruces. The apparently prosperous
reign of Volagases III was interrupted by the invasion of Babylonia and the capture of Seleucia on the part of the Roman,
Avidius Cassius. A number of caches of coins of this period
have been described in the catalog." The latest date on such
coins is always the ninth month of the year 165/66, or about
December, 165. Tetradrachms were again struck about November, 166, and continue thereafter with no apparent decrease in
the rate of issue of either silver or bronze. The evidence of the
coins, amply supported by the results of the excavations themselves, demonstrates that the damage inflicted by the Romans
was not so extensive as the literary sources suggest.
The reign of Volagases III appears to have been brought to
a close by a revolt of which the literary sources have left no
record. He struck tetradrachms in about April and July, 190;
72 Wroth, op. cit., pp. 217-233- " See pp. 85-88.

235
for about September, 191, there appears an issue by his successor,
Volagases IV. Volagases III was in control of the mint again
about March, 192, but in October of the same year the series of
Volagases IV was resumed. The quality of the engraving and
of the Greek of the legends on the tetradrachms of Volagases III
was maintained without noticeable variation throughout his
reign. From the outset those of the new king, on the other hand,
are markedly inferior in regard to both these characteristics.
It must be concluded, therefore, that the revolt introduced a
new group of engravers to the Seleucia mint. The hairdressing
pictured on the coin portraits of Volagases IV is closely similar
to that characteristic of Osroes, that is, South Iranian in style.
I suggest, therefore, that the reign of Volagases IV represents a
period during which Elymais once more sought the paramount
power. During this period Babylonia was again attacked by the
Romans, under Septimius Severus. To this occasion must be
assigned a cache of tetradrachms, the latest of which is dated
in 198/99. No month dates can be distinguished.74 There was
no break at this time in the annual issue of the silver, which
continued without interruption upon the accession of the next
king, Volagases V, until the year 222/23. Another son of Volagases IV, Artabanus IV, ruled during a part of this period in what
was left of Parthian Iran, where he struck a series of drachms,
probably at Ecbatana.5 The issue of the royal bronze at Seleucia appears to have reached a close in the year 215/16, and the
regular issue of tetradrachms apparently ceased in 222/23, probably the year of the death of Volagases V. A tetradrachm exists,
however, which, on the authority of both Gardner and Longp6rier, bears a date equivalent to 228/29 A.D.76 It was struck by
an Artavasdes, perhaps a son of Artabanus IV, who must be assumed to have been ruling in some part of Iran, where he issued
drachms. The tetradrachm probably marks a temporary occupation of Seleucia by this prince.
The evidence of the coins " demonstrates that the site of
Seleucia continued to be inhabited from the outset of the Sassanian occupation of Babylonia, but apparently on a much7 See p. 91, No. 122. 7 Wroth, op. cit., pp. 247-250.
76 Gardner, op. cit., p. 59; Longprier, op. cit., p. 157.
" Fairly numerous Sassanian coins have been found among the surface debris
at various parts of the mounds, and a few in burials.

236
reduced scale. The important Sassanian town of Weh-Ardashir
covered the southeast portion of the complex of mounds; a large
villa appears to have existed during this period at the northcentral extremity (trial trench 4); but what had been the principal residential section until the close of the Parthian period
reveals only scattered burials of Sassanian times.
Seleucia probably ceased to be the center for the transit
trade after the foundation of Volageisias during the troubled
reign of Volagases I.78 It is likely that this change was accompanied and followed by a major shift in the population, the gradual transfer to the new site of that important element in the older
metropolis which was directly dependent upon interregional
commerce. The evident local prosperity which had marked the
relatively peaceful reign of Volagases III was perhaps made possible by the residue of accumulated capital which had not been
directly connected with this form of trade. Besides local trade
agriculture may be presumed to have occupied a large share of
the population of Seleucia as of other cities in the Orient, both
ancient and modern. The seizure of power by Volagases IV
must have drawn yet closer the bonds which had long linked
Seleucia with Susa in Elymais.79 This in turn may well have
facilitated the Sassanian occupation. The dominant element
in the city, however, remained the native Babylonian which,
boring from within during the course of generations, finally succeeded in entirely destroying the Hellenic blood and tradition to
which the commercial greatness of Seleucia had been due. WehArdashir appears to have been a local Babylonian emporium,
in its economic relationships probably very similar to the earlier
Babylonian Opis which, as an individual entity, had so abruptly
disappeared when the genius of Seleucus I and Antiochus I
created Hellenic Seleucia.
78 See p. 229.
79 See pp. 181 and 231.

237
LIST OF PARTHIAN KINGS
The table which follows comprises those rulers who appear
to have struck coins at the mint of Seleucia within the Parthian
period. The two columns of figures give the earliest and the
latest dates to which such coins of each of the successive rulers
have been assigned in this volume.
KING
Mithradates I
Phraates II
Artabanus I
Himerus
Mithradates II
Gotarzes I
"Arsaces"
Orodes I
Sinatruces
Phraates III
Mithradates III
Orodes II
Phraates IV
Tiridates II
Phraataces
Orodes III
Vonones I
Artabanus II
Vardanes I
Gotarzes II
Volagases I
Pacorus II
Artabanus III
Volagases II
Osroes
Volagases III
Volagases IV
Volagases V
Artavasdes
B.C.
141-138/37
137/36-129/28
125/24-124/23
124/23-123/22
122/21-121/20
91/90
86
80
77
70-66
56
57/56-39/38
37/36-2/I (?)
26/25
2/I B.c.-4/5 A.D.
A.D.
6/7
9/10-12
11-30/31 (?)
42-45
44-51
51-8o
78-Ii/16
80/8i
105/06-148
109/10-128/29
148-192
191-208/09
208/09-222/23
228/29

INDEXES

I. INDEX OF TYPES
Alexander Bala, portrait of, 24, 25;
with Cleopatra, 24, 25; as Hercules, 25
Alexander the Great, head of, 4
Anchor, 4, 6, 102
Antiochus I, portrait of, 8
Antiochus III, portrait of, 15, 17,
18(?), 19
Antiochus IV, portrait of, 19, 20
Apollo: head of, 5, 6, 7, (?)8, 8, 9,
10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 23;
Citharoedos, 11, 12, 15, 16 (nude);
seated on omphalos, 8, 13, 22;
standing holding bow and arrow,
12, 14, 16, 25; and tripod, (?)13,
14, 19; see Deity
Arsaces, deified: seated on omphalos,
62; on throne, 66
Artabanus I, portrait of, 62
Artabanus II: portrait of, 67, 68, 69,
70; as Zeus Nikephoros, 69, 104;
enthroned, 1o5; receiving diadem
from Tyche, 105; receiving palm
from Tyche, 67, 68; receiving palm
from Tyche and diadem from
kneeling subject, 68; mounted,
receiving palm from Tyche, 69
Artemis: head of, 16, 21, (?)27;
with torch, 17; with bow, 21;
with deer and spear, 109
Athena: head of, 11, 12; in chariot,
5; Alkis, 9, 10; Promachos, 10,
26; figure of (?), 8
Bael, see Zeus
Boule, personification of, 71
Bull: head of, 5, 6; humped, 7, io6,
110
Bust, female, veiled, 71, 103
City-goddesses, two, and tripod,
100
Cornucopiae, 22, 27, 97
Deity: Apollo (?), with cithara and
palm, 101; Dionysos (?), bust
of, 77
Demetrius I, portrait of, 22, 23; with
queen, 21
Demetrius II, portrait of, 26; as
Alexander the Great, 26
Dionysos, see Deity
Dioscuri, heads of, 5
Eagle, 76, 109
Elephant: head of, 18; advancing, 17;
standing, 17
Figure, draped, seated, 102
Gotarzes II: portrait of, 72, 73; receiving diadem from Tyche, 72
Helios, head of, 21, 22
Hercules: head of, 4; with club, 61
Horse, head of, 4, 6
Horseman, 6
Lion, 3
Mare, and foal, 19
Medusa (?), head of, 8
Mithradates I, portrait of, 61
Mithradates II, portrait of, 6z
Monogram, 104
Musa, portrait of, 67
Nike: with palm, 107; with wreath,
7, 14, 15, 16, 21, 24, 26, 75, III
241

242
INDEX OF TYPES
Orodes II: portrait of, 63; as Zeus
Nikephoros, 63; with kneeling
Tyche, 63
Osroes, portrait of, 78, 79, 8o, 81
Pacorus II: portrait of, 76, 77, 78;
receiving diadem from Tyche, 76
Phraataces, portrait of, 66, 67
Phraates IV: portrait of, 64, 65;
holding bow and scepter, 65; receiving diadem from Tyche, 64;
receiving palm from Tyche, 64, 65
Priest (?), 18
Quiver, 13; with bow, 21
Seleucus I, portrait of, 6
Seleucus II, portrait of, 14
Tripod, 8, 11, 95
Tyche: head or bust of, 69, 70, 73, 75,
77, 78, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 88, 91,
93, 94-111 (as obverse type);
standing, 20, 23; and column, 23;
holding palm, 90, 94; holding
palm and scepter, 81; represented
in three-quarters length, holding
palm, 73; enthroned, 23; seated,
holding palm, 67; seated on short
column, 82, 83, 87, 90, 108, III;
seated on short column, river god
at feet, 98, 99; Nikephoros, seated,
19, 62, 96; standing, 99; see Citygoddesses
Vardanes I: portrait of, 70, 71; receiving palm from Tyche, 70;
deified (?), io8
Volagases I: portrait of, 74, 75, 76;
Volagases II: portrait of, 81, 82, 83,
84; receiving diadem from Tyche,
8i, 82
Volagases III: portrait of, 84, 85, 87,
88, 90, 91; receiving diadem from
Tyche, 84, 85, 87; mounted, 90
Volagases IV: portrait of, 91, 92, 93;
receiving diadem from Tyche, 91,
92
Volagases V: portrait of, 93, 94;
Zeus: head of, 5, 13; Bael, 3; with
thunderbolt, 2o; Atophoros, 4,
94; Nikephoros, 25, 27

II. INDEX OF SYMBOLS AND PARTICULAR
OBJECTS IN TYPES
Anchor, 4-5, 7, 8
Arrow, 8, 12, 13 (?), 13-14, 16, 19, 22,
25
Bird, 4, 19-20, 94
Boar, head of, 5
Branch, 24
Caduceus, 8o
Chariot, 5
Cippus, 101
Cithara, 11, 15-16, 101
Club, 61
Column, 23, 82-83, 87, 98-99, io8,
1-1 I
Cornucopiae, 20, 23, 62, 64, 67, 70, 72,
96, 99, 100, io8, 110
Deer (?), 109
Diadem, 68, 72, 74, 76, 81-82, 84, 85,
87, 91-93, 105
Horse, 69, 90
Javelin, 6
Lyre, see Cithara
Nike, 66-67
Omphalos, 8, 11, 22, 62
Palm, 5, 14, 16, 62, 64-65, 67-70, 73,
78, 8o, 81, 83, 87, 90, 98, 101, 107
Pellet, 64, 66
Plectrum (?), 15
Quiver, 16, 21
Scepter, 3-4, 20, 25, 27, 63, 65, 69, 71,
74, 76, 81-82, 84-85, 87, 93-94,
102
Shield, 9-10, 26
Spear, 10, 26, 109
Sphere, 7
Star, 7, 70, 72
Sword, 62, 74, 90
Throne, 3-4, 19, 23, 25, 27, 62-72, 74,
76, 81-82, 84-85, 87, 91-94, 96,
102, 105
Thunderbolt, 5, 9, 20
Torch, 17
Tripod, 13-14, 18, 19
Trophy, 5, 10
Wreath, 7, 14-16, 19, 21, 24, 62-63,
75, 84 (?), 91, 96, 11I
243

III. INDEX OF VARIANT FORMS OF GREEK
CHARACTERS
i (A) A First occurrence, p. 64, No. 73
2 (A) A Pages 66-67, Nos. 76-78
3 (A) A Pages 67-69, Nos. 80-83
4 (B) K First occurrence, p. 74, No. 93
5 (E) E Pages 64, 66-67, 67-69, io6, Nos. 72, 76-78, 80-83, 141
6 (E) E Page 78, No. 102 (as numeral)
7 (0) Page 81, No. io9a (as numeral)
8 (M) [~ Page 70, No. 86 (as numeral)
9 (N) N Pages 68, 91, 103, 109, Nos. 82, 122, 136, 144
10 (Z) 7 Page 73, No. 92 (as numeral)
11 (0) First occurrence, p. 67, No. 8o
12 (0) . Page 98, No. 130 (as numeral)
13 (1) E First occurrence, p. 63, No. 70
14 (T) \/ First occurrence, p. 63, No. 70
15 (4) -- First occurrence, p. 63, No. 69
16 (0) (9 Page 18, No. 41
17 (D) [jJ First occurrence, p. 70, No. 87
18 (5) E Page 104, No. 137 (the numeral stigma)
244

IV. GENERAL INDEX
Alexander Bala: coins of, 24-25, 4142, 46; and Ptolemy Philometor,
41-42
Alexander the Great: coins of, 3, 28,
44; imitation of coins of, 29
Antioch: Roman mint at, i8o; and
Tigranes of Armenia, 218
Antiochus I, coins of, 8-13, 30-33, 45
Antiochus II: coins of, 13, 33, 45; as
Apollo, 33
Antiochus III: coins of, 15-19, 3438, 45; campaign of in the East,
36, 37
Antiochus IV: coins of, 19-21, 3839, 46; assimilation of to Zeus,
39-40
Antiochus V, coins of, 46, 50
"Arsaces," possibly a Mithradates,
son of Mithradates II, 208-209
Artabanus I, coins of, 62, 112, 202
Artabanus II, coins of, 67-70, 115116, 223-224; reign of, 223-225
Artabanus III, coins and reign of in
Seleucia, 230
Artabanus IV, reign of in Iran, 235
Artavasdes, coinage of at Seleucia,
235
Avroman, dating of parchments from,
207 (note 18)
Babylon, coins of Seleucia found at,
180
Babylonia, Parthian: anarchy in as
described by Josephus, 225; coinage of, 18o; culture of, 205; see
Seleucia
Bactria, 37
Behistun, rock carving at, 209
Calendar, Babylonian, 61, 112-113,
118, 147-153; intercalation of an
extra month in the cycle of, 151153
Catalogs, arrangement of, 3, 61
City-goddess, see Tyche
Coins: provenances of, vii; methods
of cleaning, viii; Arab, Characenian, Mongol, Roman, and Sassanian, vii
Seleucid: denominations of, 3;
models of, 28, 50; movement of,
47; variation in form of, 49;
minting of Seleucid silver at Seleucia, 50
Parthian: volume of known, 154;
included in this volume, 154; and
commemorative medals, 155-156;
characteristics of, 158-I71; position of heads on obverses of, 15916o; arrangement of hair on obverses of, 160-162; formalism in
engraving of, 16o-161; motifs of
the reverses on, 162-163; quality
of execution of types of, 163-165;
quality and content of legends of,
165-167; presence or absence of
dates on, 167-168; character and
use of monograms on, 168-169;
relative abundance of tetradrachms
and drachms, 169-171; caches of,
128, 234, 235; latest struck at
Seleucia, 131; see Drachms, Parthian; Tetradrachms, Parthian;
Rate of issue; Seleucia
Ctesiphon, relationship of to Seleucia
and to Parthian dynasty, 177-179
Dating of coins: value of, 147; by
the month, I19; in Parthian period
limited to Seleucia mint, 147; see
Coins
Demetrius I: coins of, 21-24, 39-41,
245

246
GENERAL INDEX
46; assimilation of to Apollo Soter,
39, 41
Demetrius II: coins of, 26-27, 42-43,
46-47; campaign of to the East,
42-43, 56, 57
Demetrius III, capture of by Parthians, 207 (note 18)
Drachms, Parthian: mint areas of,
158, 176-177, 181; dates on, 167168; decrease in coinage of in late
period, 234; see Coins
Dura-Europos, coins found at, 180
Ecbatana, mint of, 50, 132
Era, Seleucid, 147-148; see Calendar;
Avrom an
Exidares, and Osroes, 231
Figurines, from Seleucia, 38
Frontality, on Seleucid coins, 30, 31,
32, 33, 37, 39, 47-49
Gotarzes I, coins and reign of, 206210
Gotarzes II: coins of, 72-74, i18i19; struggle of with Vardanes I,
225-227; relationship of to native
party at Seleucia, 226-227, 228;
and Meherdates, 227; manner of
death of, 227
Hellenism, and Parthian Empire,
218, 220-221
Himerus: coins of, 202-203; basis
of strength of, 219
Josephus, accuracy of, 227
Kausia, 37
Legends, Greek, debasement of, 114115, 130, 134-135, 217, 234; see
Coins, Parthian; Index of Variant
Forms of Greek Characters, 244
Media, the value of the term as used
by ancient writers, 214-215
Meherdates, rival of Gotarzes II, 227
Mesopotamia, Parthian, coinage of,
180
Mint: officials of, 30, 128; importance of study of, 153-154; Parthian at Seleucia, relation of to
Parthian administration, 156;
limits of area of, 177-181; in Iran,
limitation in number in late period,
234
Mint marks: on Seleucid coins, 49;
on Parthian coins, 168-169, 172173
Mithradates I: coins of, 61-62, 112,
201; length of reign of in Seleucia,
201; and the Greek elements, 205
Mithradates II: coins of, 62, 112,
203-204; reign of, 203-206; date
for death of, 207 (note 18); possible
sons of, 208
Mithradates III: coins of, 212-214;
contest of with Orodes II, 212-216;
and native Babylonians, 221
Molon: coins of, 50; revolt of, 34, 35
Monograms: on Seleucid coins, 49;
on Parthian coins, 168-169
Nationalism, in the East: under the
Seleucidae, 55-56; under the
Parthians, 218
Nippur, coins of Seleucia found at,
i8o
Orchoi, coins of Seleucia found at, i8o
Orodes I, reign of, 206-210
Orodes II: coins of, 63, 112-113, 212214, 216; struggle of with Mithradates III, 212-216; and expansion
of Parthia to west, 219-220
Orodes III, coins and reign of, 222223
Osroes: coins of, 78-81, 123; center
of power of, 230; relationship of to
Parthian dynasty, 231; struggle of
with Volagases II, 230, 232; relationship of to Traj an, 231; campaign of in Mesopotamia, 23 1-232;

GENERAL INDEX
247
and Babylonia, 233-234; rule of
in Elymais, 234
Pacorus II: coins of, 76-78, 122-123;
revolt of, 229-230; relationship of
to Volagases I, 229; center of
power of, 230; sale of Edessa by,
232; probable alliance of with
Trajan, 232-233
Parthamasires, treatment of by Trajan, 231
Parthians: bronze coinage of, 158;
and occupation of Seleucia, 53,
201; dynastic policy of, 148-149,
205-206, 217-221; and Hellenism,
218; basis of power of, 220-221;
decline in power of, 229-236; see
Coins
Phraataces (Phraates V), coins of,
66-67, 114
Phraates II: coins of, 201-202;
length of reign of in Seleucia, 202
Phraates III: coins of, 211-212;
campaign of against Armenia, 212;
and Seleucia, 219
Phraates IV, coins of, 64-66, 113-114
Rate of issue: of Seleucid bronze,
51-53; of Parthian coins, 169-171
Romans: and Mithradates II, 206;
and native-popular party in
Seleucia, 221; and Phraates IV,
222; and Vonones I, 223; and
Artabanus II, 224-225; and Gotarzes II, 227; and Volagases I,
229; and Osroes, 231; and occupation of Seleucia under Trajan,
232-233; and capture of Seleucia
by Avidius Cassius, 234; and
capture of. Seleucia by Septimius
Severus, 235
Seleucia: excavations at, vii, 50;
foundation of, 53; increase in population of under Antiochus I, 53;
and Antiochus III, 54; and Antiochus IV, 52, 55; occupation of by
Parthians, 53, 201; autonomous
coinage of, 94-111, 131-145, 154156; table of Parthian coins struck
at, 181-200; limits of mint area of,
177-181; relationship of to Ctesiphon, 177; relationship of to Parthian administration and dynasty,
156, 216-229; character of population of in Parthian period, 217; aristocracy of, 217; party strife in,
216-217, 224-226; alliance of aristocratic party of with Parthians,
56, 57, 174, 220; Oriental culture
in, 141; autonomy of under Parthians, 218-219, 224; native-popular
party of, its power under Orodes
II, 221-222; under Vonones I,
223; revolt of in reign of Artabanus
II, 224-226; revolt of in reign of
Volagases I, 228-229; final victory
of over Hellenic elements, 236;
and Volageisias, 229; latest Parthian coinage at, 235; prosperity of
under Volagases III, 236; decline
of in late period, 235-236; Sassanian occupation of, 235-236; see
Trade, transit
Seleucus I: coins of, 4-8, 28-30, 44;
as governor of Babylonia, 28-29;
assimilation of to Zeus, 32
Seleucus II, coins of, 14-15, 33-34,
45
Seleucus III, coins of, 45, 50
Seleucus IV, coins of, 19, 38, 45
Sinatruces: coins of, 211-212; length
of reign of, 211; and the so-called
campaign coinage of Mithradates
II, 210-211
Sulla, Parthian embassy to, 206
Susa: coins of Seleucia found at, 180;
relationship of to Seleucia, 181,
236; and Osroes, 233
Tetradrachms, Parthian: mint area
of, 159, 172-177, 181; dates on,
167-168; and transit trade, 221;
see Coins

248
GENERAL INDEX
Timarchus: coins of, 46, 50; revolt
of, 39, 40, 54-56
Tiridates (II), pro-Roman rival of
Phraates IV, 222
Tiridates (III), pro-Roman rival of
Artabanus II, 224-225
Trade, transit, and Seleucia, 55, 57,
217-218, 229, 236
Trajan: coins of found at Seleucia,
232; relationship of with Osroes,
231; see Romans
Uruk, see Orchoi
Vardanes I: coins of, 70-72, 117-118;
struggle of with Gotarzes II, 225226; and Seleucia, 225-226, 228
Vardanes II, revolt and coinage of,
228
Volagases I: coins of, 74-76, 119-122;
revolt of against Gotarzes II, 227;
basis of power of, 228, 229; and
revolt of Vardanes II, 228; and
revolt of native party in Seleucia,
228-229; and revolt of Pacorus
II, 229-230; date for death of, 230
Volagases II: coins of, 81-84, 123127; relationship of to Volagases I,
230-231; center of power of, 230;
struggle of with Osroes, 230;
struggle of with Pacorus II, 231
Volagases III: coins of, 84-91, 128130; peaceful succession of, 234;
and campaign of Avidius Cassius,
234; and revolt of Volagases IV,
234-235
Volagases IV: coins of, 91-93, 130;
degradation of legends on coinage
of, 234; relationship of to Elymais,
235; and campaign of Septimius
Severus, 235
Volagases V: coins of, 93-94, 131;
reign of, 235
Volageisias, purpose of founding of,
229, 236
Vonones I, coins and reign of, 223
Vonones, king of Media Atropatene,
227
Weh-Ardashir: position of in relation to Seleucia, 236; importance
of, 236

PLATES

PLATE I
nq I FV A P zl
1234
8 or9 1 1
8 9 10 11
HA
12 13
14 15 16
18 19 20 21
22
23 24 25 26 2 2 28 29 30 31
32
33 34 35 36 37
38 39 40
41 42 43 44
A5
46 47
48
49 50 51 52 53 54
AY
55
Monograms
The pages on which the various monograms are mentioned and the type groups to which
they belong are listed below
I. p. 3, No. i
2. p. 3, No. i
3. p. 3, No. i
4. p. 4, No. 2
5. p. 5, No. 6
6. p. 6, No. 9
7. p. 7, No. 1o
p. 7, No. 12
p. Io, No. 19
p. ii, No. 22
p. 16, No. 36
p. 17, No. 37
8. p. 7, No. io
9. p. 7, No. ii
10. p. 7, No. Ii
II. p. 7, No. 12
12. p. 9, No. 16
13. p. 9, No. 16
p. ii, No. 20
14. p. 9, No. i6
15. p. 9, No. 16
i6. p. 9, No. 16
p. 10, No. 18
17. p. 9, No. 16
p. 1o, No. 18
p. 1o, No. 20
18. p. 10, No. 20
19. p. 10, No. 20
20. p. ii, No. 20
21. p. II, No. 21
22. p. 12, No. 24
23. p. 13, No. 27
24. p. 13, No. 28
25. p. 14, No. 30
26. p. 14, No. 30
p. 15, No. 31
27. p. 15, No. 31
28. p. i5, No. 32
p. 15, No. 33
p. 16, No. 34
p. 16, No. 35
p. 16, No. 36
29. p. 17, No. 38
p. 18, No. 39
p. 18, No. 40
30. p. 19, No. 43
31. p. 19, No. 43
32. p. 20, No. 45
33. p. 21, No. 46
p. 62, No. 67
34. p. 62, No. 67
35. p. 62, No. 68
36. p. 63, No. 69
37. p. 65, No. 74
38. p. 65, No. 74
39. p. 65, No. 75
40. p. 67, No. 79
41- p. 73, No. 92
42. p. 75, No. 95
p. III, No. 147
43. p. 75, No. 96
44. p. 96, No. 128
45. p. 96, No. 128
46. p. 98, No. 130
p. 99, No. 131
47. p. 101, No. 133
p. 102, No. 134
p. 109, No. 145
48. p. 102, No. 134
49. p. 103, No. 136
p. 104, No. 137
50. p. 103, No. 136
51. p. 104, No. 137
52. p. io6, No. 141
53. p. 109, No. 145
54. p. 109, No. 145
55. p. 110, No. 146

31 s
j
v
Y". L v ,A
1JIx Aft
ev; i n
{

At,
n
00
m}
a "A" a
10
44,

PLATE IV
PLATE IV
PLATE IV
Selevcd consi fis o (pp. 16 a7); Parhiavrylcis nohrrw (pp. 6-6
Seecd on fis ra pp. 26--7); Ptia ryal con inohrrw (pp. 62-76)
Selevid con An firs (pp. 26-rz7); Pathiav roa Aon noturw (pp. 6a-76)

PLATE V
PLATE V PLATE V
Parthian myal coins iv first three row, (pP. 7794); a ramous cons of
Sel-in in last - rows (pp. 94-99) m
Parhin oyl cin i frstthoeros pp. 77-94);auomusci f

fr
P z / fJ
t a.< L
"a:
r. i %.i
" ,;
9
;. ' ; ,
r
,, /!:
r
bas' r , 7a J
j<.;
h
$d
/
l
1aE.',
9
.
f
.% L,.y. i;
0
r. /
P/ f
/
rg r
j . '
r .:'
0
4
e' a
pY
0g
,. I. ... l : 4'aF r
r
s
4' y
..
,F,
l%
r
r
'.
r
ry.
qY:. ,j,
tr % /
,i
f
,if
t Vii,
ai
i
.
i
i g, r
?e
a'r
.,"e
;.;. f, ,,
r

Coins From Seleucia On The Tigris / by Robert Harbold McDowell

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coins From Seleucia On The Tigris / by Robert Harbold McDowell

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coins From Seleucia On The Tigris / by Robert Harbold McDowell

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COINS FROM SELEUCIA

You might also like