Quick viewing(Text Mode)

The Bosporan Kingdom – Greeks of the Crimea

The Bosporan Kingdom – Greeks of the Crimea

053: The – of the

The is an oft-neglected area when it comes to the broader framework of the ancient world, and at the same time it can provide us with “unusual” case studies that prove to be extremely interesting. The Bosporan Kingdom, centered along the modern Strait of , was a curious mixture of cultures and peoples. During the , it was largely settled by Greek colonists, ruled by a dynasty of known as the Spartocids, and was closely tied to the nomadic steppe tribes like the and . In some ways the Bosporians can be considered among the first examples of a Hellenistic society, largely isolated from the affairs of the Successor Kingdoms until their independence came to an end in the 1st century BC. In this episode we will talk about the history of the Bosporians and Spartocids, their relations with the wider Greek and Hellenistic world, and end our miniseries on Minor and the Black Sea.

The Black Sea was something of a Wild West, a frontier land inhabited with dangers both real and imagined. Sailing the “Euxine ” could be quite treacherous, and while it translates to “the Friendly Sea”, this was more of an ironic name bequeathed upon the Black Sea after it had been tamed by Greek settlers.1 Exploration was originally limited to heroes of legend such as the strongman Heracles or the unfaithful Jason and his Argonauts, who had to deal with monsters and wild women like the Amazons or the witch Medea.2 Besides the realm of myth, there were actual barbarian tribes living along or near the coastline that performed human sacrifice and turned skulls into drinking cups.3 Yet by the 6th century, a large number of expeditions organized by Ionian Greeks planted colonies (apoikiai) around the Black Sea, and its northernmost part would be where the seeds of the Bosporan Kingdom would be laid. To clear up any possible confusion, in antiquity there were two Bosporuses: there is what we generally classify as the , the strait which links the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara in western Turkey. Then there is the “Cimmerian” Bosporus, named after the nomadic steppe peoples of the early Iron Age, which is equivalent to the modern .4 The strait connects the Black Sea to the Sea of , known in antiquity as Lake Maeotis, and separates the eastern Crimean Peninsula in from the in Russia5. It also gets problematic when Bosporus is often interchanged for “Bosphorus”, so I am going to stick with “Bosporus” from this point on and refer to the kingdom as the “Bosporan Kingdom”.

Colonization of the Cimmerian Bosporus began in the first half of the 6th century BC on the initiative of the prominent Ionian city of , which already had past success in settling the Pontic region.6 The reasons for doing so tend to vary depending on the author, some arguing that it was for more arable land, some due to political turbulence in the mother cities, and some arguing that they wanted to take

1 , Geography, 7.3.6 2 See Ivantchik, A. “The Greeks and the Black Sea: The Earliest Ideas about the Region and the Beginning of Colonization” in “The Northern Black Sea in Antiquity: Networks, Connectivity, and Cultural Interactions” Pgs. 7-25 3 Strabo, Geography, 7.3.6 4 , Histories, 4.12; Strabo, Geography, 2.4.8, 11.2.5 5 The Crimea has recently been contested between Ukraine and the Russian Federation, with both claiming ownership (though most countries recognize the claims of Ukraine). 6 Athenaeus, The Deipnosophists, 12.26; advantage of the trading opportunities of the Northern Black Sea. It is generally assumed that there were three waves of colonization: in the first half of the 6th century due to the expansion of the Lydian kingdom, in the second half following the conquests of the Persian Empire, and in the first quarter of the 5th century due to the failure of the Ionian Revolt and the subsequent destruction of Miletus.7 The reverence of the Bosporians towards their Milesian origins could still be seen on their coinage centuries later, which bore the image of a lion’s head in a similar style to that of their mother city.8 Among the most important settlements founded during this period were , Hermonassa, and [PAHNT-TI-KA-PIE-UM] (the modern city of Kerch).9 Instead of bearing the appearance of a classical or Hellenistic Greek city, these early colonies were rather modest and built with local materials instead of stone. Several of these dwellings were also partially subterranean, a local adaptation to the region’s sometimes brutal winters.10

But the Greeks were not the only major cultural presence within the northern Black Sea area. There were the native inhabitants just bordering the , peoples like the to the North and the Sindian kingdom to the East.11 Some of the tribes proved to be particularly annoying like the Taurians, who were avid pirates and would routinely sacrifice prisoners and shipwreck survivors to their gods.12 Still, a much more significant presence could be seen with two groups. The first are the tribes of the steppes, the nomadic or semi-nomadic horse-rearing peoples that lived along the grasslands directly bordering the Bosporus, a region known as the Pontic-Caspian steppe. We discussed them in considerable detail in episode 051, so do check that out if you haven’t already. The nomads had long dwelled in this region: the first major tribe being the who were eventually driven off or settled thanks to the Scythians, who had begun to arrive in greater numbers during the 6th century.13 Strabo claims that the Greeks had been responsible for driving out the Scythians settled on the Bosporus, though some modern scholars question the existence of a stable native population in this territory.14 It was also posited by a later Byzantine writer that the city of Panticapaeum was a gift to the Greeks from a Scythian king.15 While some tribes raided and were met with hostility, others preferred to maintain a strong commercial relationship. The Scythians and other nomads could provide large amounts of prisoners to feed the ever-constant demand for slaves by Bosporan traders, who could

7 Zinko, V. and Zinko, E. “Greek colonization of the European Bosporus” in “The Danubian Lands Between the Black, Aegean and Adriatic Seas: (7th Century BC-10th Century AD)” Pgs. 109-117; 8 Hind, J. “The Bosporan Kingdom” in “The Cambridge Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC, 2nd edition” Pg. 486; Compare this 4th Century Bosporan coin (https://www.beastcoins.com/BosporusKingdom/C1762.jpg) to those of Miletus (http://rg.ancients.info/lion/miletos.html) 9 Hind, J. “The Bosporan Kingdom” in “The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC, 2nd edition” Pg. 484 10 Zinko, V. and Zinko, E. “Greek colonization of the European Bosporus” in “The Danubian Lands Between the Black, Aegean and Adriatic Seas: (7th Century BC-10th Century AD)” Pgs. 110-112; Herodotus, Histories, 4.28; Strabo, Geography, 7.3.18 11 Strabo, Geography, 11.2.1; Tsetkshladze, G.R. “Black Sea Ethnicities” in “A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean” Pg. 315 12 Herodotus, Histories, 4.103; Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.25 13 Melyukova, A.I. “The Scythians and Sarmatians” in “The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia” Pgs. 97-100; “Cimmerians and Scythians, Herodotus reconsidered” in Ancient World Magazine. (https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/cimmerians- scythians-herodotus-reconsidered/) 14 Strabo, Geography, 11.2.5; Zinko, V. and Zinko, E. “Greek colonization of the European Bosporus” in “The Danubian Lands Between the Black, Aegean and Adriatic Seas: (7th Century BC-10th Century AD)” Pg. 115 15 Stephanus of , Ethnica, P501.13 command a considerable price from the slave markets of the Mediterranean.16 The Bosporians would later establish the port of Tanaïs at the mouth of the River to help facilitate the exchange of goods between them and the tribes.17 Cleoboule, the mother of the 4th century Athenian orator , was said to be of Bosporan Greek and Scythian descent, suggesting that there might have been some degree of social mixing between the nomads and the settled societies18

The Bosporus was abundant in its natural resources: fish and salt were among its top exports, along with other agricultural products like honey and livestock which could often be exchanged in order to import vast amounts of wine.19 However, the most important commodity of the Northern Pontic region was its grain, produced in considerable amounts by both the Bosporan Greeks and the peoples ruled over by the Scythians in nearby just off the Dnieper River.20 The grain probably began by the early 5th century BC and the Bosporian’s most famous customers would be , which created strong ties that would likely dominate the foreign policy of the North throughout the 5th and 4th centuries.21 Despite the economic and social links between the two communities, it is possible that the threat of nomadic attack inspired a massive political change among the various colonies of the Bosporus. In the late 6th century, some of the cities of the Kerch Strait had organized themselves into a singular political body with Panticapaeum at its head, forming the prototype for the Bosporan state.22 Unfortunately, the history of this region is very poorly documented, as the sources only mention the Bosporus either at glance or when it is directly relevant with the wider Mediterranean/Greek world. Much of the narrative is speculative or poorly detailed, so I apologize in advance if it feels like I am jumping around quite a bit.

The pseudo-unification of the Bosporan cities came at a time of great upheaval for the Black Sea region. In 494, Miletus was destroyed in retaliation for its participation in the Ionian Revolt against the Persian Empire, which had also undertaken military campaigns into against the Scythians nearly 20 years before.23 As far as Herodotus tells us, there doesn’t seem to be any indication that Persia attempted to subjugate the Bosporan Greeks directly. Still, the threat of an imperial power was no small matter, and it is quite possible that the exerted some sort of political pressure over the region, or perhaps even employed mercenaries against them.24 It is also possible that there was a renewed attack on the Bosporan cities by the Scythians as a consequence of being driven off by the Persian campaigns.

16 , Histories, 4.38; Strabo, Geography, 11.2.3; Avram, A. “Some Thoughts about the Black Sea and the Slave Trade” in “The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic Exchanges (Black Sea Studies 6)” Pg. 241 17 Strabo, Geography, 11.2.3 18 , Against Ctesiphon, 172 19 Polybius, Histories, 4.38; Vnukov, S. “The Formation of the Pontic Market” in “The Northern Black Sea in Antiquity: Networks, Connectivity, and Cultural Interactions” Pgs. 125-126 20 Polybius, Histories, 4.38; Herodotus, Histories, 4.17 21 Noonan, T.S. “The Grain Trade of the Northern Black Sea in Antiquity”. The American Journal of Philology, 1973, 94(3) pp. 231-242; ; The extent of the grain trade has been questioned, with some arguing that the Black Sea wasn’t a main source even by the time of the middle of the 5th century BC, see Moreno, A. “Feeding the Democracy: The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC (Oxford Classical Monographs)” Pg. 162 22 Hind, J. “The Bosporan Kingdom” in “The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC, 2nd edition” Pg. 486 23 Herodotus, Histories, 4.83-142, 6.18-20. 24 For the potential role played by the Persian Empire in the devastation of the Bosporan cities during the early 5th century, see Nieling, J. “Persian Imperial Policy Behind the Rise and Fall of the Cimmerian Bosporus in the Last Quarter of the Sixth to the Beginning of the Fifth Century BC” in “Achaemenid Impact in the Black Sea : Communication of Powers” Pgs. 123-136 Archaeological evidence dating to the early 5th century does suggest hostility between the two groups, with the construction of new fortress walls in multiple cities that suffered significant damage by fire, and there are remains of old ones peppered with Scythian arrows.25 There may have even been a degree of social upheaval following the influx of immigrants and refugees from Miletus.26 Whatever the case may be, in about 480 BC Panticapaeum fell under the sway of a tyranny headed by the Archaenactidae, a clan of Milesian origin.27 Diodorus calls them “Bosporan Kings”, but this is probably due to his 1st century perspective, and it is almost certain that they were only . At the same time, we know almost nothing about the Archaenactids beyond the fact that they ruled about 42 years.

In the year 438, the Archaenactids were overthrown by a man known as Spardocus or .28 The exact nature of this power grab remains largely a mystery, but there are several interesting pieces of evidence that can maybe give us a hint of what happened. The name Spartacus and any of its variations are not Greek in origin. In fact, it is distinctly Thracian.29 For those who remember, the famous gladiator general of the Third Servile War is also named Spartacus, and was said to be from Thrace.30 At about the same time as Spartacus’ coup, the in Thrace had unified under the rule of Teres, becoming one of the most powerful and wealthy political entities of the mid-late 5th century and especially during the time of Teres’ successor Sitalkes.31 This we discussed in episode 049 along with the history of the Odrysians, but it is interesting to note that the brother of Sitalkes was named Sparadokos. Based on the evidence, it certainly is attractive to think that a member of the Odrysian royal house had taken advantage of the political turmoil of the Bosporus to install one of their own.32 This is all speculative mind you, but it is probably no coincidence that in 437 BC the Athenian statesman undertook a Pontic expedition.33 is the only one to have written about it, and there is no direct mention of the Bosporan cities.34 Still, given Athens’ interest in the Pontic grain trade and the close ties it had with the Odrysian royal house, it is very possible that the two are connected.35

Along the steppe peoples, it appears that the Thracians were the other great non-Greek cultural presence intimately involved with the Bosporians, and 438 marks the beginning of the unified Bosporan

25 Zinko, V. and Zinko, E. “Greek colonization of the European Bosporus” in “The Danubian Lands Between the Black, Aegean and Adriatic Seas: (7th Century BC-10th Century AD)” Pg. 115; Moreno, A. “Feeding the Democracy: The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC (Oxford Classical Monographs)” Pgs. 155-159 26 Petropoulos, E.K. “The Kingdoms of the Bosporus and Pontus” Pgs. 23-24 (https://www.academia.edu/20284387/History_of_the_Kingdoms_of_Bosporus_and_Pontus) 27 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 12.31.1 28 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 12.31.1 29 Braund, D. “Thracians and Scythians: Tensions, Interactions and Osmosis” in “A Companion to Ancient Thrace” Pg. 357; 30 Plutarch, Life of Crassus, 8 31 , 2.29.2; Zahrtn, M. “Early History of Thrace to the Murder of Kotys I (360 BCE)” in “A Companion to Ancient Thrace” Pg 40 32 Hind, J. “The Bosporan Kingdom” in “The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC, 2nd edition” Pg. 491; M. Rostovtzeff argues that the Spartocids were a Thracian family that was native to the Bosporus and had long belonged to Panticapeum in “Iranians & Greeks in South ” Pg. 67 33 Plutarch, Life of Pericles, 20 34 In Plutarch’s text, it mentions “they sailed whithersoever they pleased and brought the whole sea under their own control”, but it is incredibly vague in the overall purpose of Pericles’ mission. 35 For criticisms against connecting the Periclean expedition to the Spartocid rise to power, see Burstein, S.M. “The Greek Cities of the Black Sea” in “A Companion to the Classical Greek World” Pgs. 137-152 state. Spartacus would be the first in a series of rulers from the house that bears his name, the Spartocid dynasty, for his descendants would move from tyrants to kings of the Bosporus.36 ------

After being in charge and residing at his capital city of Panticapeum for at least five years, Spartacus died and was succeeded by his son Satyrus in 433/432.37 Satyrus is the first of the Bosporan rulers that we have any considerable information about, no doubt because of his lengthy reign of about 45 years which was marked by territorial expansion and economic growth. The increasing Athenian dependence on Bosporan grain as the rolled on meant that money was flowing into Spartocid coffers, which presumably was able to fund the military. In the earlier centuries, traditional would form the bulk of the army.38 Over time, they gradually incorporated units that were comprised of non-Greeks.39 There is strong evidence that Thracian warriors were employed as either cavalrymen or as light infantry, never mind the likelihood that the Spartocids had some form of political or military connections to their ancestral homeland.40 Of additional use were the mounted archers that could be recruited from the tribes of the steppes, either for their own sake or as a way to counteract other horse- archers.41 Perhaps the strengthened military and financial backing allowed Satyrus to expand his control by forcibly seizing Nymphaeum in the southern Crimea during the late 4th century. Nymphaeum was a Greek city that had not been part of the original Bosporan hegemony, and it was a clear sign that the new rulers were taking a more militaristic attitude than had their Greek predecessors. Spartocid control was expanding on the European and Asiatic side of the Bosporus, encountering resistance from both Greek and non-Greeks alike. Less successfully, Satyrus would also wage war on the Kingdom of the Sindi, a Maeotian people on the Taman peninsula. He apparently attempted to install a puppet monarch a vi a marriage alliance, but this backfired and resulted in open conflict with the Sindians.42 It is likely that an expansionist policy was being enacted to keep up with the increased demands for grain by Athens, which in turn would require the Bosporians to acquire more arable land to farm on.43

Satyrus died in 389/388, probably during an attempted siege of nearby Theodosia, whereupon his sons Leucon and Gorgippus would share the throne.44 Leucon would continue his father’s plans by besieging Theodosia again, which was a Greek settlement which held immense value as a port for both trading and military matters.45 This attracted the attention of Theodosia’s southern ally , who

36 Aelian, Various Histories, 6.13 37 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 12.36.1; There is a debate in the literature, as Diodorus refers to a Seleucus in the text as succeeding Spartacus. This has been explained as either Seleucus being a usurper of Spartacus (see Petropoulos, E.K.) or an error by a copying scribe (see Hind, J.). Either way, Satyrus would quickly become ruler. 38 Bouzek, J. “The Black Sea” in “A Companion to Greek Art” Pg. 352 39 Polyaenus, Stratagems, 6.9.4; Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.22.4 40 Braund, D. “Thracians and Scythians: Tensions, Interactions and Osmosis” in “A Companion to Ancient Thrace” Pg. 357; Gunby, J. “Oval Shield Representations on the Black Sea Littoral” Oxford Journal of Archaeology 19(4) 359-365 41 Polyaenus, Stratagems, 6.9.4; Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.22.3-4; Cunliffe, B. “The Scythians: Nomad Warriors of the Steppe” Pg. 260 42 Polyaenus, Stratagems, 8.55 43 Moreno, A. “Feeding the Democracy: The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC (Oxford Classical Monographs)” Pg 44 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 14.93.1; Leuco is also called Leuco by some authors 45 Strabo, Geography, 7.4.4 attempted to land on the Bosporus and meet Leucons’ army to lift the siege.46 The Heracleiots were soon driven back thanks to Leucon’s generalship and employment of Scythian , and the city was absorbed into the kingdom to be turned into a massive grain emporium.47 This war has a couple of references, mainly in the work of Polyaenus and his Stratagems, but dating results in a range from a start date of 389 to a possible end in 354.48 It seems that Leucon had also followed through with his father’s aims to expand into the Asiatic side of the Bosporus by conquering the Sindi as well.49

The middle of the 4th century provides us with the clearest picture regarding the relationship between the Bosporan Kingdom and Athens.50 The dependency by the latter upon the former was no doubt exacerbated by the reduction of Athenian naval power following the conclusion of the Peloponnesian War and the dissolution of the , then again by the defeat at Chaeronea by Philip II of Macedon. Our main source on this relationship is the orator Demosthenes, and as I mentioned earlier his family had ancestral ties to the Black Sea: his mother Cleouboule was from the Bosporus, his grandfather Gylon was the one in charge of Nymphaeum and responsible for turning the city over to Satyrus I, and Demosthenes may have even taken a wife from the Spartocid royal house.51 Much of his rhetoric is unabashedly pro-Spartocid in tone, describing the generous contributions of grain by Leucon and urging a lifting of taxes from Bosporan imports.52 This also coincides with the gifting of Athenian citizenship on members of the Spartocid dynasty, an already established practice that was done with the Odrysian royalty to help assist with Athens’ foreign policy.53

Since I keep describing the Spartocids as “rulers”, let me pose a question: when can we properly describe them as kings? Both Spartacus I and Satyrus I were considered tyrants, strongmen with enough military, economic, or political backing to become the dominant leader in the particular city or government. During the time of Leucon, this seems to have changed. We see that he received the title Archon, a Greek term referring to an elected magistrate like what was practiced in Athens, though it is somewhat marred by the fact that Archons were usually annual positions while Leucon’s was for life.54 This could certainly help legitimize him in the eyes of his Greek subjects or with trading partners and allies, and the full title reflects this as “Archon of the Bosporus and Theodosia”. Now the curious thing is that while he was presented as a magistrate to the Greeks, Leucon was also described as a king, but only for the various tribes within the region: Maetoian peoples like Sindi, the Dandarii, and Toreti.55 This is a remarkable aspect of the Bosporan Kingdom, because long before Alexander and his Successors we can

46 Polyaenus, Strategems, 5.23, 6.9.3-4; Pseudo-, Oeconomica, 2.2.8 47 Polyaenus, Stratagems, 6.9.4 48 For an excellent overview, see Burstein, S.M. “The War between Heraclea Pontica and Leucon I of Bosporus” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte , 4th Qtr., 1974, Bd. 23, H. 4 (4th Qtr., 1974), pp. 401-416 49 Burstein, S.M. “The Greek Cities of the Black Sea” in “A Companion to the Classical Greek World” Pg. 145 50 An excellent overview can be found in Moreno, A. “Feeding the Democracy: The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC (Oxford Classical Monographs)” Pg. 177 51 Aeschines, Against Ctesiphon, 171-172; 52 Demosthenes, Against Leptines, 20.30-33; Braund, D. “Black Sea Grain for Athens?” in “The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic Exchanges (Black Sea Studies 6)” Pgs. 57-64 53 Demosthenes, Against Leptines, 20.30; Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War, 2.29.1, 2.29.7 54 CIRB 1111 55 CIRB 1037, 1038 see that the Spartocids were deliberately presenting themselves in different ways to compensate for the multiple cultures and peoples that resided within their domain. In many ways this also reflects the importance of Leucon as a ruler, someone who was clearly able to expand his borders and bring in vast quantities of money from the grain trade; though we refer to the dynasty as Spartocid, in antiquity they would instead be known as the Leuconidae.56 Much of the wealth would go towards the development of Panticapeum as an urbanized city with stone fortifications and buildings, more in line with the Hellenistic settlements of the Successor Kingdoms. As a testament to its status as a royal capital, Panticapeum possesses inscriptions that generally tend to relate to the importance of the Spartocid kings as the foundation of law and order.57 Governors could be appointed, or they would be staffed by younger family members similar in function to the paradynastes of the Odrysian kingdom.58 There is also a pattern of co-regency, either between father and son or with brother and brother, and usually the senior ruler would be given control of Panticapeum while the lesser received Theodosia. Overall, this seems to be a reasonably stable form of government: if we judge a dynasty by the regnal lengths of each of its kings, the Spartocids come out quite favorably. Still, no family is without its squabbles. So let us turn to the last third of this episode, where we will see how the Bosporians coped with the coming of the Hellenistic World. ------The emergence of a king similar in practice to those of the Successor Kingdoms would only occur after Leucon’s death in 349/348, after 40 years of rule. Once again there was a succession by two sons, Spartacus II and Paerisades I (Pie-air-ri-say-deez), but Spartacus would die less than five years later.59 Paerisades has little information about him, but during his long reign of three decades he managed to avoid the conquests of Philip II and . In the meanwhile, he had proven himself a capable general like his father, expanding the Bosporan Kingdom by taking much of the eastern coast of the Sea of Azov up to the Don River. The Wars of the Diadochi also diverted the attention from possible competitors like King Lysimachus I in Thrace, all the way down to around the year 310 when Paerisades died.

But instead of a peaceful accession of a new ruler, as had been the pattern for the Spartocids since the dynasty took power over a century before, the Bosporan Kingdom found itself embroiled in a civil war. Paerisades had three sons: Prytanis, Eumelus, and Satyrus, and it appears that there was something of a disagreement as to who was in charge. Being the eldest son, Satyrus II was made king upon the death of his father.60 The youngest, Eumelus, attempted to overthrow his older brother by amassing an army through an alliance with Aripharnes, king of the nomadic tribe.61 Now, a Spartocid ruler employing tribesmen of the steppe was nothing new by this point, as Satyrus would bring mounted

56 Aelian, Various Histories, 6.13; For an analysis of Leucon and the impact of his rule on the Bosporan Kingdom see Wormell, D.E. “STUDIES IN GREEK TYRANNY—II. Leucon of Bosporus” Hermathena No. 68 (November, 1946), pp. 49-71 57 Chaniotis, A. “Cities in the ‘Long Hellenistic Age’” in “The Northern Black Sea in Antiquity: Networks, Connectivity, and Cultural Interactions” Pg. 148 58 Hind, J. “The Bosporan Kingdom” in “The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC, 2nd edition” Pg. 496 59 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History 16.52.9 60 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.22.1-2 61 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.22.4 warriors to battle as well.62 But as we discussed in a previous episode, the late 4th century was the start of a transformative experience for the Pontic-Caspian Steppe. There was the gradual influx and eastern migration of new nomadic tribes known collectively as the Sarmatians, of which the Siraces belonged to. The Sarmatians would come into conflict with the Scythians until they became the dominant power on the steppe, and Eumelus was directly taking advantage of the hostility between the two groups to try and disrupt his brother’s powerbase.63

In their first engagement, Satyrus managed to send Eumelus and Aripharnes fleeing back to the Siraces’ territory to hide out in the Sarmatian’s fortified capital near the Sea of Azov.64 Though he was able to plunder the countryside, Satyrus had immense difficulties in trying to deal with the city’s defenses and the swamps that hindered his progress.65 In an effort to save one of his commanders, Satyrus was mortally wounded during the siege, and died only 9 months into his reign.66 Eumelus was probably both shocked and relieved upon hearing the news, but he now had to contend with Prytanis, who had been left behind in Panticapeum and proclaimed king.67 It appears that Prytanis was not as militarily capable as his brothers and was defeated in battle, forcing him to submit and voluntarily vacate the throne to Eumelus in exchange for his life. He did try to rally the citizens of Panticapeum to reinstate him as king, but this was a big mistake: Eumelus showed no mercy and had Prytanis killed, and the supporters and families of his brothers were also massacred.68

Understandably, the Bosporians were more than a little upset at King Eumelus for instigating a civil war and murdering his citizenry. But through tax exemptions and legitimately good leadership, such as eliminating piracy in the Black Sea, Eumelus was able to earn their goodwill and rule… for about 5 ½ years.69 Then he is said to have died because of a freak accident involving an out-of-control wagon that was heading over a ravine, and when he tried to leap from it his sword got caught in the spokes of the wheel and promptly carried him to an early death.70 Unfortunately, the death of Eumelus and the accession of his son Spartacus III in 304/303 conclude the account of Diodorus on the affairs of the Bosporan Kingdom. This leaves us with a very empty hole in the narrative from this point until the final years of the Spartocid dynasty, and even with coins and inscriptions it is still extremely difficult to present a general sequence of the order of the kings.

Instead of an overall narrative, we can conclude our discussion by looking at the changes that occurred during the Hellenistic period, which we can detect in the archaeological evidence. In spite of the proclamations of the generals of Alexander as kings in 306, it appears that the Spartocids were relatively slow to follow. The title of Archon remained in use until the late 3rd century, when we start to properly

62 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.22.4 63 Cunliffe, B. “The Scythians: Nomad Warriors of the Steppe” Pg. 260 64 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.22.5-6, 20.23.1 65 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.23.1-5 66 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.23.6-8 67 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.24.1 68 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.24.2-3 69 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.25.1-3 70 Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 20.25.4 see the use of titles like in a similar model to other Hellenistic monarchs.71 The coinage had changed considerably as well. Under Leucon I in the mid-4th century, Panticapeum issued a number of coins that bore the image of the god on the front, which is probably not a coincidence given the shared name.72 The reverse had a gold-guarding griffin standing over a stalk of wheat, demonstrating a clear understanding of where the kingdom’s prosperity lay, along with a mythological creature that was associated with the East or even the Scythians.73 By the late 3rd century we begin to see specimens that are more in line with the typical Hellenistic format, which are almost certainly modeled after the famous tetradrachms minted by Lysimachus I bearing the image of a horned Alexander the Great.74 At the same time, many of the Spartocid coins had bows and arrows on the reverse, a symbol of authority among nomadic societies.75 Given the importance of the nomads within the region, the adoption of Scythian or Sarmatian elements into the kingship model is not unlikely.76

Given the multicultural and multiethnic nature of the Bosporan Kingdom, there are a number of signs that ideas were being exchanged among the various peoples living there. The city of Panticapeum played host to a number of cults which could worship syncretized deities of Greek and native pantheons. One of them is Parthenos, a protector goddess of the Greek cities of the Crimea that appears to be associated with Artemis or the Roman Diana. Whether she can be associated with a goddess of the Taurian peoples who demanded the sacrifice of washed up sailors is under debate.77 Ourania was revered as a fertility goddess and her cult was originated in the Bosporus, but there was also the imported worship of foreign cults like the Egyptian Isis and the Ephesian Artemis.78 One of the more unique creatures to emerge out of the Black Sea is the Mixoparthenos, a mermaid-like creature that has the top half of a maiden and a double fish tail. If you tend to order out coffee, then you likely have seen her: she is the logo of the Starbucks corporation.

One of the most striking consequences of the exchange between the various cultures of the Northern Black Sea can be seen with its art. The region produced some marvelous figures, such as oik jars shaped like Aphrodite emerging from a clamshell, or a female Sphinx.79 Close contact with the Scythians resulted in the creation of designs called “Greco-Scythian”, a blending of Greek realism with the nomadic “animal-style” which showcased intimate scenes like hunting or warfare on beautifully

71 Moreno, A. “Feeding the Democracy: The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC (Oxford Classical Monographs)” Pg. 183 72 (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Coins_of_Panticapaeum#/media/File:Pan_compilation.jpg) 73 Hind, J. “The Bosporan Kingdom” in “The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC, 2nd edition” Pg. 494 74 Stolyarik, E. “ Coinage of the Bosporan King Spartocus: The Problem of Attribution” American Journal of Numismatics , 2004-05, Vol. 16/17, pp. 75-85 75 Frolova, N.A. “Catalogue of Coins of the Kings of the Spartocid Dynasty in the 2nd Century BC (Hygianeon, Spartocus and the Paerisades)” in Ancient Civilizations from to 19 (2013) Pg. 234 76 Moreno, A. “Feeding the Democracy: The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC (Oxford Classical Monographs)” Pg. 182 77 Braund, D. “Greek Religion and Cults in the Black Sea Region: Goddesses in the Bosporan Kingdom From the Archaic Period to the Byzantine Era” Pgs. 15-60; Burstein, S.M. “The Greek Cities of the Black Sea” in “A Companion to the Classical Greek World” Pg. 149 78 See Braund, D. “Greek Religion and Cults in the Black Sea Region: Goddesses in the Bosporan Kingdom From the Archaic Period to the Byzantine Era” 79 There are excellent examples in the , see the Aphrodite (https://tinyurl.com/y6xeokx8) and the Sphinx (https://tinyurl.com/y3vmlx7k) oil jars. worked gold and silver pieces.80 Since these have been mostly found in the graves of Scythians located near or within the borders of the Bosporan Kingdom, it is assumed that Greek metalworkers within the cities were commissioned by the Scythian nobles. The level of detail and accuracy of these pieces also suggest that the artists themselves were extremely familiar with nomadic culture, or they were able to easily acquire props of some kind.81 The burial practices of the Bosporians are very interesting: there are traditional Scythian that surround the Kerch Strait, but there are also Scythian or Thracian- styled tombs found within the cemeteries of Panticapaeum. The largest of these is the “Royal ”, an enormous tomb located within the city limits that has the outward appearance of a Scythian tomb yet contains several elements of Greek craftsmanship and design.82 Still, there are some burials of Greek citizens that explicitly use native customs like wooden or marble sarcophagi which contain Scythian arrows and weaponry.83

Though the civil war of 310 was rather dramatic, the internal politics of the Bosporan Kingdom was largely peaceful, minus one or two instances of dynastic bickering.84 But the 3rd and 2nd centuries saw the gradual decline of Spartocid prestige and wealth. While they no longer held the monopoly over the grain trade thanks to new competitors like the in Egypt, it is unlikely that such a decline was due to a lack of potential customers.85 The encroachment of the Sarmatians into the territory of the Scythians destabilized the Pontic-Caspian steppe, disrupting the established commercial relationship while also driving those Scythians into conflict with Greek cities as they looked for new places to settle.86 Things got particularly messy during the reign of Paerisades V in the late 2nd century, when he was being forced to make large payments to the local tribes as bribes to not attack.87 The instability made it a perfect target for the up-and-coming ruler from a kingdom of the southern Pontic region: Mithridates VI Eupator. Rather than outright conquest, Mithridates responded to a cry for help from his allied city of Taurike to deal with the Scythian threat. He sent his general , who successfully managed to best the tribes in roughly 111-109 and force them to ally with the , and Chersonesus fell under Mithridates’ control.88 In 106 BC, Diophantus was sent to Panticapeum, whereby he negotiated with Paerisades to step down from the throne.89 It is suggested that the success of commander against the nomads had persuaded the Spartocid king to hand over the reins of the kingdom for protection, but one must wonder if the weight of inevitability from the ambitious

80 Bouzek, J. “The Black Sea” in “A Companion to Greek Art” Pgs. 360-363; Cunliffe, B. “The Scythians: Nomad Warriors of the Steppe” Pgs. 241-242 81 Cunliffe, B. “The Scythians: Nomad Warriors of the Steppe” Pg. 331 82Cunliffe, B. “The Scythians: Nomad Warriors of the Steppe” Pgs. 13-14; (https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/tsarsky- kurgan) 83 Bouzek, J. “The Black Sea” in “A Companion to Greek Art” Pg. 360; 83 Hind, J. “The Bosporan Kingdom” in “The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC, 2nd edition” Pg. 508 84 The Roman poet Ovid does suggest in Ibis, 309 that a Leucon was murdered by his brother, and subsequently avenged by his wife. 85 Rostovtzeff, M. “Iranians & Greeks in South Russia” Pg. 70 86 Cunliffe, B. “The Scythians: Nomad Warriors of the Steppe” Pgs. 318-319; Rostovtzeff, M. “Iranians & Greeks in South Russia” Pg.70 87 Strabo, Geography, 7.4.4 88 This event is actually recorded in an inscription dedicated to Diophantus, see here for a translation: (http://www.chersonesos.org/?p=museum_coll_ep1&l=eng); Roller, D.W. “Empire of the Black Sea: The Rise and Fall of the Mithridatic Kingdom of Pontus”, Pg. 128; Mayor 89 Strabo, Geography, 7.4.4 Mithridates was used as leverage. Either way, Paerisades would abdicate the throne, the last of the Spartocid dynasty to rule the Bosporus. Under Mithridates reign, the Bosporan Kingdom became something of a quasi- while he sent family members there to insert themselves into the seat of government.90 Though Mithridates was driven out by internal revolts and his subsequent defeat by the , the Bosporus continued to be ruled by his descendants for almost 400 years after his death. It would remain a client state to Rome, enjoying a degree of peace down to the late 4th century AD.

The Bosporan Kingdom was a remarkable place, and despite the general lack of information from the sources, it appears to be a rather dynamic and well-organized state. Although there was a strong possibility for conflict between the settled Greeks and the nomadic tribes, such confrontations were generally limited until the final years of the kingdom’s independence, and for the most part there was somewhat amicable coexistence. The Spartocids, despite their “barbarian” heritage, were in some ways the prototype for the Hellenistic monarchs. A general pattern of stability can be seen for over 330 years of their rule, and their effective management brought tremendous wealth and prosperity to the North Pontic region. What had once been the Wild West was tamed and brought in the larger fold of the Greek world, yet it continued to carry forward several of the traditions of the nomadic tribes of the Steppes and other peoples native to the region.

90 For the status of the Bosporan Kingdom under Mithridatid control, see Molev, E.A. “Bosporos under the Rule of Mithridates VI Eupator” in “Mithridates VI and the Pontic Kingdom” Pgs. 321-328 Bibliography Primary: Various Histories - Aelian Strategems – Polyaenus Against Ctesiphon – Aeschines The Histories – Polybius The Deipnosophists – Athenaeus Oeconomica – Pseudo-Aristotle Against the Leptines – Demosthenes Ethnica – Stephanus of Byzantium Library of History – Diodorus Siculus Geography – Strabo The Histories – Herodotus The Peloponnesian War – Thucydides Ibis – Ovid Corpus Inscriptionum Regni Bosporani (CIRB) Life of Crassus – Plutarch Dedication to Diophantus Life of Pericles – Plutarch Secondary: “The Danubian Lands Between the Black, Aegean and Adriatic Seas: (7th Century BC-10th Century AD)” – Avram, A. et al. “Greek Religion and Cults in the Black Sea Region: Goddesses in the Bosporan Kingdom From the Archaic Period to the Byzantine Era” – Braund, D. “The Scythians: Nomadic Warriors of the Steppe” – Cunliffe, B. “The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and Interregional Economic Exchanges (Black Sea Studies 6)” – Gabrielsen, V. and Lund, J. “Mithridates VI and the Pontic Kingdom”- Højte, J.M. “A Companion to the Classical Greek World” – Kinzl, K.H. “The Northern Black Sea in Antiquity: Networks, Connectivity, and Cultural Interactions” – Kozlovskaya, V. “The Cambridge Ancient History Volume 6: The Fourth Century BC, 2nd edition” – Lewis, D. et al “The Poison King: The Life and Legend of Mithradates, Rome’s Deadliest Enemy” – Mayor, A. “A Companion to Ethnicity in the Ancient Mediterranean” – McInerney, J. “Feeding the Democracy: The Athenian Grain Supply in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC (Oxford Classical Monographs)” – Moreno, A. “A Companion to Greek Art” – Plantzos, D. and Smith, T.J. “Achaemenid Impact in the Black Sea : Communication of Powers” – Rehm, E. and Nieling, J. “Empire of the Black Sea: The Rise and Fall of the Mithridatic Kingdom of Pontus” – Roller, D.W. “Iranians & Greeks in South Russia” - Rostovtzeff, M. “The Cambridge History of Inner Asia” – Sinor, D. “A Companion to Ancient Thrace” – Valeva, J., Nankov, E. and Grainger, D.

Burstein, S.M. “The War between Heraclea Pontica and Leucon I of Bosporus” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte , 4th Qtr., 1974, Bd. 23, H. 4 (4th Qtr., 1974), pp. 401-416 Frolova, N.A. “Catalogue of Coins of the Kings of the Spartocid Dynasty in the 2nd Century BC (Hygianeon, Spartocus and the Paerisades)” in Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 19 (2013) Pg. 234 Noonan, T.S. “The Grain Trade of the Northern Black Sea in Antiquity”.The American Journal of Philology,1973, 94(3) pp.231-242 Petropoulos, E.K. “The Kingdoms of the Bosporus and Pontus” (https://www.academia.edu/20284387/History_of_the_Kingdoms_of_Bosporus_and_Pontus) Stolyarik, E. “Silver Coinage of the Bosporan King Spartocus: The Problem of Attribution” American Journal of Numismatics , 2004-05, Vol. 16/17, pp. 75-85 Wormell, D.E. “STUDIES IN GREEK TYRANNY—II. Leucon of Bosporus” Hermathena No. 68 (November, 1946), pp. 49-71

Top View