MN2 3 1914 THE KINGS OF LYDIA

A ND A

REA RRANG EM ENT O F SO M E F RAGM ENTS

F RO M N I C OLAUS OF D A MASC US

A DISSERTATI O N

PRESENTE D TO THE FA CULT Y O F PRINCET ON UNI VERS ITY I N C A NDI DA CY FOR THE DE G REE O F DOCT OR OF PHILO SOPHY

B Y

LEIGH ALEX AN DER

‘ I S’ N I E Z

THE KINGS OF LYD IA

A ND A

REA RRAN G EM ENT O F SO M E F RAGM ENTS F RO M N I C OLAUS O F DA M ASC US

A DISSERTATI O N

PRESENTE D TO THE FA CULTY OF PRINCET ON U NI VERSITY I N C A NDI DA CY FO R THE DEG REE OF DOCT OR OF PHILOSOPHY

B Y

LEIGH ALEX AN DER Ac c epted b y the Department Of Classic s

1 1 1 June , 9 PREFACE

The present work was undertaken shortly after the exca H f S d . O . vation ar es , under the direction of Professor C

Butler, was begun . It was at first my intention to write con cerning the history of that city in the Greek or the Roman period ; and some time in the future that purpose may perhaps

ou t. O i be carried n exam nation , however, it seemed that there was in ou r traditional sources concerning the kings O f ” for o f Lydia enough material further discussion that subj ect . The present study has been carried on under the direction Of w n Professor William K . Prentice , and I ish to ack owledge my great indebtedn ess to him for his constant assistance

s . and advice , and for his un paring criticisms My debt to him is especially great in Chapter III . My most hearty thanks are also due to Professor Edward Capps , for his unfailing e his ncouragement , and for stimulating suggestions .

LEIGH ALEX ANDER

O O . berlin , hio

a 1 1 . J nuary , 9 4

CONTENTS PAGE I NTRODUCTION

L - o I . The sources . imits Of the present w rk

o o on sfib ect II . Previ us mon graphs this j

AP TH E ELA I ONE A E OF CH TER I . R T ON TO NOTH R SOM E ’ FRAGME NTS CONCERNI NG LYDIA FROM NICOLAUS UNI VERSAL HISTORY

Virtutib us t Vitiis I . The Excerpta de e

I nsidiis II . The Excerpta de “ ” t O III . Tenta ive riginal account in Nicolaus

P L CHA TER II . ME ES .

I I I r ? . . o I Meles I , II , , Were they the same person not

e K mb les II . M les II and a story

I for . Possible reasons considering Meles II and III diff erent persons 2 . Reasons for identi fying Meles II and III

2 8 K amb litas or K amb les 3. Position Of fr . ( ) in Nicolaus ’ narrative m ’ 4 . Ele ent of historical fact in Nicolaus account o f Meles

III . Me les I N I . ot necessarily founder O f Sardes 2 . Relation between Meles I , II , and III L ’ 3. Relation between the ion story and Nicolaus account o f Meles

: n IV . Conclusion There was only o e Meles

AP TH E H ERAK LE ID AND A ES CH TER III . MERM N D DYNASTI OF LYDIA

I . Summary O f the traditional accounts I . Nicolaus 2 H . erodotus Th 3. e chronographers

II . Discussion Of certain details in the traditional ac counts ‘ ’ I ad att Ad a te a S es t s . . y ( y , Alyattes ) , a roy l title

2 K amb l z S ad t s rd . es a te y , the 3 Mermnad CONTENTS

Adram tes z Adram H 3 . y ys ermon Aly of attes , father Croesus

Da lo sk s . 4 . The murderer O f y I

1 r o1 rci1 ' 0 t f K n d u s d s s O a a l a a . 5 . The p p e ( S y tte )

M o sos Askalos 6 . Moxos ( p ) and “ Aki mos 7 . Ardys and a

A k l Da k l a os o . 8 . s and s y s I H i f 9 . istor cal summary O disturbances in reign

o f Akiamos “ ” d a s son O f K a d s I O . S a y tte the regent y I I T lon . y “ ” New genealogical list Of kings I . The list ’

2 . . Meles position in the list INTRODUCTION

for r I . The traditional sources the histo y Of the Lydian ‘ chiefl b f of kings are familiar . They consist y the first book ’ H L diaca erodotus , the fragments O f Xanthus y , the frag f ments Of Nicolaus o Damascus concerning Lydian history , together with the lists of Lydian kings contained in the works

O f the Christian chronographers , Julius Africanus , Eusebius , H ieronymus , etc . The other traditional sources which mention

are Lydian kings , for the most part , incidental references O f m en no value in the present study , which is concerned al ost “ ” “ ” tirely with the H erakl eid and Mermnad dynasties Of Lydian kings and does not undertake a consideration of the earliest kings and mythical heroes O f Lydia .

o II . Besides pa ssages in works of larger sc pe , such as

t m on . t his ories , com entaries ancient authors , etc , here have been within the past century , among other monographs bear

e or e on o f ing mor less dir ctly the history the kings of Lydia , tw o dissertations which are O f special importance in the present work

' S G schic d K om e van L di n . e ht er e R chubert , e g y , Breslau , 1 884 .

R d t L a L die et l monde rec u m s d M erm . a e e o te es G , y g p d 1 na es 8 . , Paris , 93 After careful examination and comparison with the original ancient sources , it has seemed necessary in a number Of cases to ff di er very materially from the works j ust mentioned , both to as method of treatment and also as to conclusions obtained .

c o to i It is ne essary , therefore , to revert nce more the or ginal

to . sources and subj ect them a fresh study Before , however , a comprehensive treatment o f the sources is undertaken , the b e path may cleared by two preliminary investigations , which

a will be found in ch pters I and II .

CHAPTER I

TH E RELATION TO ONE ANOTHER OF SOME FRAGMENTS CONCERN ’ 1 I NG LYDIA FROM N I COLAU S U NIVERSAL H ISTORY

“ It is well kn own that many O f the Sextant fragments Of Nicolaus of Damascus come to us through two O f the collee tions Of excerpts prepared for the Emperor Constantinus Porphyrogenitus (9 1 2 -9 56 These are the Excerpta de I nsidii r u ib u t Vi iis s. Vi t t s e t , and the Excerpta de In both Of these collections there were excerpts from other works by

icolau s N , doubtless made by the same excerptor or group O f ' excerptors ; b ut our present investigation is concerned only with

Universal H istor the excerpts from his y, Of which Lydian history formed a part .

ir u i us iis V t b t it . I . The Excerpta de t e V 2 By running over the pages Of this work , we can soon see ’ clearly that the chief excerptor s general plan and method t f h o . e e . was to go through works various writers , g , Josephus ,

Di doru i f H o s O . , D onysius alicarnassus , Polybius , Appian , etc ,

of and among them Nicolaus Damascus , and gather together anecdotes and accounts illustrative of the main theme , virtues

c . al one and vi es It would be natur , would think , to begin at i o the beg nning of each source book , and g straight through , ‘ ’ ‘ ’ noting down the virtues and vices ; and this method is 3 Diodoru s a followed in the excerpts from Josephus and , p pa rently without any mistakes o r variations from the true

f Now o . Order in the original works these authors , in deter ‘ ’ mining whether this same straightforward system of arrange ment is followed also in the excerpts from Nicolaus , the

a accomp nying tables will be Of assistance . The first is a M l complete list according to ii ler ( FH G. III ) Of all the frag ’ e icolaus Universal H istor I - m nts from N y, books VII , includ

a OAI m C S uid as S Nmbha os Aa ao'x vés . V . . j f . . u n ’ E x H s i m a r h r o n cta cer ta i torica ussa I Const nt Po en. c o e p p. . p y g f ; ‘ B ii n r- ob t ol a 1 a Tr éfiem s . tt e W s v s a ed . II , p r , p ssim ; lso the - E H a o 1 a a . Of the s me w rk, pp . 3. See lso the edition of the xcerpt by Val esiu s a a 1 6 ( Henri de V lois) , P ris , 34 . ' n 62 if v and o f See the conspectus o pp . 3 . Of the olume edition the Ex a o a a S cerpt cited . C mp re lso the numbering of the ections i h h e n t e tex t e . t, throughout dition I O TH E KINGS OF LYDIA ing not only the fragments preserved in the two series of

Excerpta mentioned above, but also those that have come

a down to us through other writers . The second t ble shows , in

or a double parallel outline, the fragments contained in the two series O f Excerpta only

’ T b u ar is r ments r om N o ns nivers Table I . a l l t of f ag f ic la U al H o b oks I - VI I ist o . ry, The numbering of fragments and their arrangement in ‘ ’ M iill r F H if 6 if e G. . books follow , in III , 345 , 35 A double ‘ asterisk >l ) indicates that the fragments so marked are o t definitely assigned , by their own w rding , to heir respective

‘ ’ ’ i x u E e . books in N cola s work . The section numbers in the E Vir th xe . t. e . de from Nicolaus , and in de Ins from this

- of B iittner Wob st o . author, are those and De Bo r respectively

S ee the two parts of Table II .

I A i d M di . ss r a an e a . [ , II ] y E x e 2 S . Fr . 7 ( . de Ins . ) emiramis 8 E x e ir V t. S ( . de 7 ) ardanapalos . Ex e . . S 9 ( de Ins 3) ardanapalos .

I Ex Vir Parsondas N nar . c . 8 os O ( de t. ) and a é exexh xa 1 1 ui s s Nan ros. da . v a ( S . £ i ) 1 2 E x i t Z n n n ios e V r . a S tr a a . ( . de 9 ) ari a d y g

. 1 80 . (Etym M . p . , 43) Achaemenes Of Persia

E l Gr ar eece . y , etc Ex Z h s 1 . : et o . 4 ( e de Ins . 4 ) Boeotia Amphion and E x 1 : . 5 ( e . de Ins . 5 ) Boeotia Laios 6 E x r 1 0 I i . e V t. ( . de ) Bellerophon 1 E xe 6 : O 7 ( . de Ins . ) Peloponnesus Pelops and eno

maus .

Ex ir I I V t . : I 8 e. ( de ) Thessaly the Argonauts . E L o f 1 xe . . : 9 ( de Ins 7 ) Thessaly arisa , daughter - Piaso s. E x 2 H ir 1 . 2 0 V . a ( e . de t ) er kles k n r 2 1 E x 1 : S ama d os. c Virt. ( . de 3) Troy King z 1 H d s 2 . 1 m s . . . O O a ( S chol o . y I ) dysseus

L I v dia etc . . y ,

* * c o z s Torrheb os. F r 2 2 B . s S . . v . . ( teph y ppnB ) ’ Avnoo Ocv L S zs co h n . 2 . B . v st e e 3 ( teph y . . q) y ( city) 2 E x ir . c V . 1 4 ( . de t 4 ) Meles the tyrant ; Moxos z Nw a o N rab o B s. v e s C . . s ( S teph . y . ip fi ) ( ity) FRAGM ENTS FROM NICOLAUS CONCERNING LYDIA I I

’ S z o atv Askalos B s. v ( teph . y . . ) , general of Aki mos a .

Ex irt 1 alm neu 2 e V . S o s. 7 ( . de 5 ) Daughter Of Ex r 1 K mb li a K mb l s 2 8 c Vi t 6 a t s a e . ( . de . ) ( ) ’ Acr fa B zs xa w C . v . ( S teph . y . . ) Ascania ( ity in Troad)

D m cu a as s. * * F r 0 . . . . 2 . . 3 (Josephus Ant Iud I 7 ) Abraham Adad s 2 o . 31 (Josephus Ant . Iud . VII . 5 . )

Greece . * * 6 . F 2 Por h . . . r . 3 ( Const . p De them II ) Peloponnesus h nid O f E ir 1 Am t ao ae . xe V t. 33 ( . de 7 ) The y ( Pylos ) f E x 8 i c de . 34 ( Ins ) Agamemnon and Aeg sthus . S z K a y la K arni B . s. v a . ( teph . y . p ) ( city in Ionia ) 6 Ex i 1 8 H e . V r . 3 ( de t. ) The eracleidae z h rn x B s T o . S . . v . . a ( teph y . Mt in Laconia 8 Ex e . . one 3 ( de Ins 9 ) Temenos , and Deiphontes Of the H eracleidae . Exe 1 0 1 1 K res hontes Ai tos 39 ( . de Ins . , ) p and py Of

Sparta . z M ca éAa i S B v s n . s. . ( teph . y . , q ) Messe ian cities 1 E x 2 1 Ph id n e . . 1 e : . 4 ( de Ins , 3) o Korinthos

Gr ce A d ee : rca ia . V .

’ 2 S B zs v A xds~ Fr . 4 ( teph . y . . . p ) The name Arcadia . Ex Vi L e . rt 1 ka n f . 43 ( de . 9 ) King y o O Arcadia ’ S B zs v B w f a LBau Ha d a a ( teph . y . . . X , p p ) Arcadian

cities .

The E nxin and Ae ean e g . ’ M e z ta . S . B . s. v 45 ( teph y . mp flp ) City in Thrace 6 S H 2 4 ( ocrates ist . Eccles . VII . 5 ) Chrysopolis , city a ne r the Bosporus . B zs v Ef bvos :0 5 . 2 S . . . m ( teph y q , p , Islands in

the Aegean . 8 z s Tw e Sé w v B . v S . 4 ( teph y . . p f ) Places in

Lesbos .

L dia [ VI ] y .

E x 1 1 . e . . Fr 49 ( de Ins 4 , 5 ) Ardys

Gr eece .

0 E x e 1 6 Fr . 5 ( . de Ins . ) Athens . E xe 1 . Virt 2 0 5 ( de . ) Athens .

2 Exe . 1 5 ( de Ins . 7 ) Cyrene . 1 2 TH E KINGS OF LYD IA

E xc 1 8 53 ( . de Ins . ) Ionia . E x d 1 2 0 e o . . 54 ( . Ins 9 , ) Ionia Ex 1 s 2 e a : . 55 ( e . de Ins . ) Th s ly Jason and Medeia

E x irt 2 1 h . V . 56 ( e . de ) T essaly : Acastus and Peleus E xe Vir 2 2 S t. . 57 ( . de ) parta : Lycurgus

I Gr [ V L] eece .

8 Ex 2 2 : e . . . Fr . 5 ( de Ins ) Corinth Cypselus E ir 2 xc . V t. : 59 ( de 3) Corinth Periander . E 2 2 60 xe . . : . ( de Ins 3, 4 ) Corinth Periander 6 1 Ex 2 S d . . ( e . e Ins 5 ) icyon Myron

L di y a. E x rt 2 62 e Vi . . Fr . ( . de 4 ) Gyges and Magnes

6 Ex e irt 2 t s ' e . d V . S ad at e 3 ( 5 ) y , son Of Alyattes . 6 E x ir 2 6 V t. ad tt . e . S a es 4 ( de ) Alyattes , son of y 6 E x r 2 i . e V t. 5 ( . de 7 ) Croesus

Per ia an M ia s d ed . 6 E x 2 6 . 6 e . ( . de Ins ) Cyrus 6 E xe ir 2 8 V t. . 7 ( . de ) Cyrus

L dia y . Ex r 2 68 e Vi t. . ( . de 9 ) Croesus and Cyrus

R me o .

E x r 6 i 0 . V t. 9 ( e . de 3 ) Amulius and Numitor E x irt 1 e V . ( . de 3 ) Romulus .

The tw o arts o this table are iven b elow a cin Table II . p f g , f g

a h th a e I nd I e c o er on s a . , p g 4 5 FRAGM ENTS FROM NICOLAUS CON CERNING LYDIA I 3

th At first sight , in e second table , if we look only at the order of the excerpts and their subj ects , there appears to be little

r or o no classification , at best only a very haphazard arrange

a s ction or o f ment . The excerptor seems to give e group ’ n icolaus ol extracts from o e part of N work , f lowing them by a to few from another part , then returning again some country

o . already touched up n , and so on Is this chaos due to lack

f h e or of system on the part o t excerptor, due to Nicolaus himself ?

l r M iil e has divided these Excerpta , assigning particular ex ‘ ’ ’ n l Hi tor cerpts to particular books o f Nicolaus U iversa s y . An indication of this division into books is given in the left

r u i us f Exe Vi t t b . hand column in the outline o the . de We can trace some o f the excerpts in this collection to their proper

t . books with certainty , o hers with probability , as follows At , ' Ex Virt 2 2 f ates To?) 9 Ad ov NLK oAa ov h e . t e end O f de . we find y - ’ A x oi} r 1 r cAo r oi} o f E xe Vi t. e a v . a a q At the end o . de 3 we find C ' ov Ti N ' o La Aéy }: u aM ov ia r P c . These excerpts belong therefore without doubt to books VI and VII respectively . Next , 4 M iil e r E x i 1 l e . V rt b puts de . 9 into ook V , because this L k n f ao o . 2 excerpt is about y Arcadia , and frags 4 and 44 ( from

B z a Steph . y . ) bout Arcadia (compare Table I ) are expressly

o f the m assigned to book V in the wording frag ents themselves .

O a i M iill r E x I n the s me princ ple e rightly puts c . de Virt. 7 and 1 FH 8 . G . 6 T ( III , 374 , 375 ; frags 33, 3 ) into book IV . hese fragments are about the Peloponnesus and the H eracleidae ; ’ 2 0 M iiller s and fragments 3 , 37, and 4 ( numbering ; compare Table I ) are also about the Peloponnesus and are expressly M ii b . ller E x assigned to ook IV also with good reason puts e . Virt 1 - 1 6 2 2 o . de . 4 into bo k IV ( frags 4 , 7, They are on 2 2 26 Lydian history ; and frags . and (compare Table I ) , B z S . . on from teph y , also Lydian history , are expressly as

E x i - M ll r . V r . ii e . t e . signed to book IV Lastly , de 7 9 ( frags 8 1 0 1 2 e to , , ) concerning Assyria and M dia , doubtless belong

or o o f not book I b ok II Nicolaus , only becau se they come at the very begi nning of the series o f excerpts from his Universal

H is r Ex Vi 1 - 6 o e . rt t y ( de . are taken from his Anto bi o ra h s r . 1 p ) , but al o because f ag concerning Achaemenes g y 3 I ‘ FH III 8 G . a . 37 , 379 ; fr g . 43 .

1 6 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

o f Pe rsia ( compare Table I ) is expressly assigned to

book II . There are no indications (such as the foregoing) o f ‘ ’ E x - 2 e . Virt 1 0 1 0 2 1 the particular books to which de 3, , , 2 3-2 9 belong ; but we have j ust seen that the definitely located excerpts and those loca ted with extreme probability appear

r o in perfectly regular and no mal p sitions in the series . That

is , excerpts from books I and II come at the beginning of the

series , excerpts from book IV a little farther along, and after b them in regular succession excerpts from ooks V, VI , and

VII . One may therefore feel practically certain that the

or doubtful excerpts , though no clue indication of position is attached to them, come in j ust where the excerptor puts them , ‘ ’ oo M iill r E s and belong to the b ks to which e assigns them .

ci ll o f Exe Vir 2 - 2 pe a y is this true . de t. 3 9 . These must belong to the first part and the middle part of Book VII , because E d irt 2 2 o x V . e . n they c me between e , the definitely know end

f E x r 1 o Vi . 0 e . t e book VI , and de 3 , 3 , the definit ly located end o f book VII . ma We y conclude , then , that the excerptor did use the same ‘ ’ straightforward method of arrangement not only in his ex c r s Diodorus e pt from Josephus and , but also in those from Nicolaus and the apparent confusion in the subj ect matter is His o r due to Nicolaus himsel f . plan system seems to have been this : to take one historical period and give parallel his ff tories or accounts o f di erent countries , one a fter the other, all belonging to the same general period ; then to take a later period and do the same thing over again . This accounts for the frequent returns to the history of a country already touched upon .

I n idi s s i . II . The Excerpta de

Ex This series of excerpts is similar in nature to the e . ir utib us of de V t , and consists a series of extracts from o various authors , all bearing up n and illustrating the main one theme indicated in the title of the collection . And here also ’ of the source books used by the excerptor was Nicolaus

r a H i o For of Unive s l st ry . purposes comparison the outline

f Exc b of the o the . de Ins . has already een given , facing that i x rt. E e . de V

E xe Virt Now , in the . de . we have seen that there are some FRAG M ENTS FROM NI COLAUS CONCERNING LYDIA I f

of a definite indications location , ssigning particular excerpts to ’ icolau s E xe particular books in N work . In the . de Ins . there n o are no such indications . But o e needs only t compare the general trend of the subj ects or countries mentioned in the two outlines (the right- hand column in each outline ) in order to

" feel certain that in both collections o f Excerptathe excerptor ‘ ’ e used the same straightforward method , and therefor that the ’ order of the excerpts gives us the correct order of Nicolaus

Muller has attempted to assign the particular Excerpta de

I nsidiis o to their respective bo ks , and one may agree in general s with his assignment , though with some important exceptions .

“ Exe M il ller of In the . de Ins . rightly puts the history Assyria j 1 1 E x c - an e . fe d . and Media into books I Ins . 4 7 he rightly assigns to book III , in which early Greek history is treated , as

E x 1 - 2 1 Ex i . 6 V rt. e . we see in the outline of the c . de de Ins

- 2 2 2 6 in . he rightly puts in book VI , and book VII We may

E x 1 6 2 1 2 2 -2 f e . o o . n te that the position de Ins , , and 4,

ni . concer ng Athens , Thessaly , and Corinth , respectively , corre spond s exactly in the gene ral order of the excerpts to the posi f E x i 2 d 2 o e . V rt. 2 0 1 an tion de , , 3, which also concern

respectively Athens , Thessaly , and Corinth .

E x - 1 M l . 8 But iil er is perhaps wrong in assigning e . de Ins 3 E x b e . to ook IV, and almost certainly wrong in putting de

. 1 1 O Ins 4 and 5 into book VI . ne can easily see , however , E x - 1 o f e . 8 why he did so . . de Ins 3 concern the history No one H the Peloponnesus , and . 9 is about o f the eracleidae ; and this seems to correspond very well with the Greek E x Vir E x e e . history from book IV in the . de t. But i f de

8- 1 1 6- 2 1 Ins . 3 belong to book IV , and to book VI , then 1 4 and 1 5 (which come between these tw o groups) might well

r be assigned to book V o perhaps to the first part of book VI . ’ 5 M ii ler l s . This would be reason , if expressed Against this view the following considerations seem per

I' Even v z a v t he, howe er, recogni es th t it is not conclusi e , for he pu s

l o . a F H G 80 at a the w rds fi m in br ckets ( cf . . III , 3 ) the he d f a . Ex e s o . I . 1 a a fr g 49 de ns 4, thus howing th t he is uncert in a a a Ta I and whether it should be ssigned to th t book . Comp re ble , a a of a at o f and V contr st the l ck br ckets the beginning books IV , a where he feels no such uncert inty . I8 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

’ tinent : E x - e . 8 1 Muller s assignment of de Ins . 3 to book IV o f certainly seems within the range possibility , but it is equally possible to put them in book III ; for, as we see by the outline of E xe ir . V t. o o e the de , b ok III also c ntains Gr ek history, and one 1 2 H excerpt ( No . ) is about erakles . That is , we may

E xe 8 - 1 consider . de Ins . 3 simply a continuation of the same

- - 1 general passage to which 4 7 belong , and thus put 4 3 all in Ex . e 8 f . . o book III Further , Agamemnon ( de Ins ) would course be mentioned in connection with the story of the Troj an

f Ex ir o e . war, and in the outline the de V t. we can see that

o NO there is a corresponding fragment in b ok III ( . I 3) deal k m ndros S a a . ing with , King of Troy It seems , therefore ,

Ex 8 - to e . 1 . very reasonable indeed place . de Ins 3 in book III Ex ir 1 o V . It would of course be possible to put e . de t 3 int

M iiller book IV (though does not do so) , and then retain ’ M iille r E x d 8 - 1 s o e . e o locati n of Ins . 3 in bo k IV to corre

E x ir 1 s ond e V t. p with it . But whether the two groups , . de 3

E x - 1 f m a nd e . 8 o o de Ins . 3 are placed both the in b ok III

(which seems to me preferable) , or whether they are both

b OOk e placed in the first part of IV , it nev rtheless remains true Ex I 1 in either case that e . de Ins . 4 and 5 (concerning Lydia) will naturally and almost of ne cessity fall not into bo ok VI w h M iiller t to oo s o ere places hem , but in b k IV , becau e b ok IV

E x ir o f . V o r in the outline o the e de t. contains a secti n division on L a i e o defi ydi n h story which , as we hav seen ab ve , can be nit l t n occu e o o . y assigned bo k IV In this way , Lydia history pies an exactly corresponding position in both outlines . Fur

f Ex Virt o o e . ther , at the end the . de we have this rder “ ” “ — Pe rsiam Rom e Co Corinth Lydia and , corresponding to — — ” x . rinth Persia and Media Rome at the end of the E e . de Ins

O e Thus , all the ri ntal sections throughout the two outlines h o will corre spond exactly : t e fragments from bo k VII , Persia ' — o — and Media Lydia , Persia ; from b ok IV , Lydia Lydia ; — - oo amd . from b ks I , II , Assyria Media Assyria and Media ff n But this correspondence , stated a little di ere tly, and coupled

e e n out with the other coincid nces of arrangem t already pointed ,

f Exe . means simply that the entire outline o the . de Ins will

a a o f thus correspond , throughout , in its rr ngement , to that

x ir tib u E e V tu s. the . de

C a a The proposed h nge , or re ssignment of fragments to FRAGM ENTS FROM NI COLAUS CON CERNING LYDIA 1 9

Exe I nsidiis books in the . de , seems therefore considerably ’ M iill r s more satisfactory than e arrangement .

t III . Proceeding then from his basis , we can see at once

x i 1 - 1 6 M oxos : K amb le E e V rt. s that . de 4 ( Meles and ; ) and E I 1 xe . . de Ins 4 , 5 (Ardys to Gyges) belong to the same on L o o f general passage ydian history , in the same bo k ’ i ersal or f l Nicolaus Un v H ist y . The importance o this wi l

out . a be brought later Me nwhile, the question at once arises in what order should these fragments in book IV from the

E x r E x Vi . e t e . . . de and those from the de Ins be combined , so as to arrive at the original consecutive order of the narrative in Nicolaus concerning Lydian history ? A tentative arrangement or combination of the fragments is represented by the column or

s table given on the next page , and in the following pages reason will be given for inserting particular fragments where they are “ ” here placed . With such an original account in Nicolaus , in o f the upper part the column , belonging to the earlier section o f Lydian history ( Nicolaus book IV) the excerptor de Virt f . t w o e Vit . ould find nothing to suit the purposes his collection of except the bravery o f Moxos and

K m K amb li s the gluttony of a b les ( ta ) . But the rest of this first

insidiae tw o part , detailing the plots and rivalry ( ) between the H great families of the eracleidae and the Mermnadae , would naturally b e given at some length by the excerptor de Insi ii d s. And vice versa the entire lower part of the column , the n of later sectio Lydian history ( Nicolaus book VII ) , would E x r o Vi . et from its very nature be appr priate for the e . de t f E x . or e . . Vit , but not the de Ins

CHAPTER II M ELES

tb ' follow I . The present discussion will be easier , i f the ” of a a entire summary tr dition l accounts , given below at the

of a ou r beginning Ch pter III , be read here . In traditional of f accounts Lydia , we have three di ferent stories about a

o r e of person persons nam d Meles , two which are found in the f fragments o Nicolaus . 6 H I . . Meles o f the Lion , whom we may call Meles I ero d otus 8 m r ( I . 4 ) tells the fa iliar sto y about a King Meles whose concubine bore him a lion . This beast he was to carry round of S the walls the acropolis at ardes , according to the directions of Telm essos the oracle at , and thus render the fortress impregnable . 7

2 . w ho . Meles the Tyrant , was driven out by Moxos We may call him Meles II . 8 h . . w o 3 King Meles , went into voluntary exile to Babylon

H e may be called Meles III . Thus far historians have considered that at least Meles II

H ist o H ero e . . . was different from Meles III , g Rawlinson , f

d otus 2 I S H er od otos . vol . I , 34 , note tein , vol

1 H o C rn n H erod otus . . 0 w o . o I , 3 ; and Wells , vol I , 97 Among those who make this distinction are Schubert and

R d e a et. The latter does not mention Mel s II at all ; so we ‘ may conclude that he Classes the story about him among the “ 9 ' é le nda ir s to r cits purement ge e which he consigns Meles I . But he certa inly doe s not consider the Meles of the Exile ( III )

he to be the same as Meles the Tyrant ( II ) else , where dis 1 0 cusses the reign of the former , he would surely make some mention o f the latter and o f the account that Moxos drove

“ Th e rel ation of Meles I to II and III will be discusse d a little a 0 ff e m a u a . r l ter , pp 3 ; so Mel s I y here be omitted from o consider a tion , lthough it seemed best to mention him here in order to j ustify the terminology I , II , I II .

2 S e . a . . e . 26 Nicol us fr 4 text below , p ‘ la . . a a o a a Nico us fr 49 See below, summ ry of tr diti n l ccounts ,

PR 33 , 34

“

La die 8 8 88 et al . Ly , 7 , 3, , 2 2 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA h u S to im o t. chubert also plainly considers Meles II and III ff be di e re nt persons . For he mentions Meles the Tyrant ( II ) “ G se d K on L e k . v d on p . 4 ( . . . y . ) as the predecessor of King H ’ Moxos , among the kings whom he believes were of erodotus ” o f At ad o i I ae c t. . . dynasty the y ( p. p ) But he does not

on I 2 2 mention him at all pages 9 , O , , where he takes up Meles “ ” III as one o f the last few H eracleidae o f Nicolaus and H o erod tus .

e o f i ve a of But , as the cours th s in stig tion will Show , it is great importance to determine whether there was more than n N o e . o s person named Meles w , it is rea sonable to a sume m that , where the sa e name occurs more than once in a historical l account , the same person is indicated , un ess the names are qualified in some way or there is some valid reason for dis tin u ishin e g g the persons referr d to . Consequently , it is proper to investigate all reasons which can be adduced for distinguish

s e suffi ing between Meles II and III . If the e r asons are not b cient , it is reasonable to believe that oth the passages in

Nicolaus which mention Meles refer to the same person .

1 . II . Possible reasons for considering Meles II and III ff di erent persons . a a . S ome h ve considered that Moxos was the successor of Meles II , the Tyrant , since he drove the latter out ; whereas f n M o ot rsos. the successor Meles III is Moxos , but y Clearly 1 1 this is one of the rea sons which caused S chubert to sepa rate not Meles II and III . But the actual text does warrant us 1 2 M s in believing that Moxos ( opso ) was a king at all . The - 6 Av86g aimos words used in referring to him are Simply , 1 3 “ l ?) vS G 6 dw . n !maM dt ov To A O n a d , o ip , l Mox s may have bee only a general , and reasons for believing that he was so will ff 6 . be brought forward below , pp . 4 I f so , then he would u not be the successor of the Meles whom he drove o t.

2 of f l i a w os b . In Nicolaus fr . 4 Meles II is spoken as a p ,

t a m Aeés and is driven ou ; while in fr . 49 Meles is called fi , goes voluntarily into exile to Babylon , returns , and resumes S ff o his throne . ince these statements di er , it l oks as if

” G K n L d a . sch . v . d . e . . y 4, 5 1 ” r of a a . . . These a e doubtless two forms the s me n me See below , p 47 a F H I 1 2 G. . Nicol us fr . 4 ; II , 37

1 FH G I 8 . a 1 . X nthus fr . ; , 3

2 4 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

h H t e . the mention of last few eracleidae If this were true , then Nicolaus cannot have regarded Meles II as identical with

o . Meles III , wh m he in fr 49 places among the last few H eracleidae .

e . But , in the first place , ther is some reason to believe ( as

if K am l . 0 b es will be shown later , pp 4 . ) that is to be identified with one of the Mermnadae . In this case it is Obvious th at Meles II might come before K amb les and still be identical with Meles III .

S : w he K amb les w as e or not econdly het r a M rmnad , in any 1 8 b —a case the story a out him, man so gluttonous that he ate

ow n — his wife , is altogether anecdotal in character, and of a kind likely to be introduced into a narrative as an illustration o f o S so s me topic under discussion , ince this is , then the posi tion of K amb les in a chronological list of the kings ( even if K amb le s were a very early king) does not determine the ’ K mb l i aus place which the a es story Occupied in N col narrative . of Further, we have also another example a statement about a Lydian king introduced as an illustration out of its chrono in logical order, the account of another king given by Xanthus

1 1 1 . d and so doubtless by Nicolaus . Athenaeus ( XII . . 5 5 ) 1 9 a quoting from X nthus book II , tells us that the Lydians w ere so given to luxury that they even practised the castration

a Adram te s o f o of women , and th t y , king the Lydians , riginated 20 21 H e s chiu s S uida s the custom . y Milesius and , however , both

o th giving Xanthus b ok II as eir authority, say that Gyges

a of to was the origin tor this practice , his purpose being keep the women fresh and young . The original statement in Xan in 22 ff thus was doubtless connection with Gyges , to the e ect

Ad ram tes Adram tes e that Gyges like y , or that y like Gyg s practised the custom .

had a i and a a I ardanos found he e ten his w fe ; cert in Lydi ns suspected , a K amb le An H a s. d a bec use of his enmity to erodotus ( I . 7) s ys th t H e rakles by a sl ave girl of I ardanos became the progenitor of the H eraklei a d dyn sty . 1 8 a See summ ry , p . 35 , note 3 . 1 ” a 1 FH G . I X nthus fr 9 , . , 39 . h H e ri llu ub . 0 s c D Vi I u F a T . . t ib . e . . e s s r s . y Miles , ( ed J l ch ; ) p 4 , no

d w o v E s. XLIX , . 2‘ d vo i E os. S u d s . a . v , s F far a s G w as a a a or , so we know , yges much more f mous king th n Ad ram tes a i o a m ar y , Of whom we know lmost noth ng bey nd this fr g ent y M ELES 2 5

e not But , it will here b urged , it does apparently alter the situation even if it b e granted tha t the story about K amb les w a s ’ only an illustration and therefo re that its place in Nicolaus

’ narrative was not determined by K amb les position in the lin e f ’ o kings . Just where is the place of this story in Nicolaus

? 2 8 K amb les C 2 a nd . work It is lear that fr . 4 ( Meles II ) fr ( ) C are losely connected , as regards their position in Nico ’ e a o f of laus narrative ; and if th pl ce either them be fixed , it will to a large extent determine that o f the other . But there seems to be no suitable connection into which the K amb les of the episode would fit , in the course passage in Nicolaus b w a s . from w hich fr . 49 excerpted And i f the story elongs ’ b . c o e e fore fr 49 in Ni olaus riginal narrative , th n it is still

u tr e , since the mention of Meles II preceded that of Kam H ow bles , that Meles II cannot be identical with Meles III . 2 8 can . ever , no reason be given for placing fr preferably

e b fore fr . 49 , and it is a priori equally possible to place it f b o . o after fr . 49 instead efore it Theref re the reason j ust given against the identification of Meles I I and III is not

o c nclusive . Furthermore , the next few pages will Show that

2 a the o f fr . 4 may very reason bly be placed in course the : passage in Nicolaus of which fr . 49 is an abridgment i f so ,

2 8 o . then fr . must have c me later still 2 to . There seems be no other reason to distinguish Meles II from Meles III ; and since the rea sons already stated are by no

to 2 means conclusive , it is proper assume that the Meles of fr . 4 n a d e . the M les of fr 49 are the same . Not only is there this presumption that there was only one o person named Meles , in the absence of any valid pro f to the contrary , but any other view involves the historian in f a most serious di ficulty . It may be seen in the outlines given

E x e ir i ii 1 . 1 1 V t. t V t s 1 n . 6 c o above (pp 4, 5 ) that de e 4 and (

K amb l E x 1 1 1 es e 3 . cerning Meles II and Moxos , and ) and . de

1 1 a H a 4 and 5 ( de ling with the last few eracleid e , including

a Meles III , and Gyges ) were taken from the s me general m . I a ff Ad ram e a . 2 a t s s ention ( t will be shown l ter , pp 4 . , th t y w ’ os f G cc A s o . a a p ibly one yges su essors ) Perh ps then eus , finding the na e Adra m tes a a a t a w as an a and m y unf mili r , ssumed h t he e rlier king ’ therefo a ne to the a o f a ' re ssig d him first pr ctice this custom . X nthus m a in w as r a a v r e n g more p ob bly th t gi en by the othe two writers cited . 2 6 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

’ passage concerning Lydian history , contained in Nicolaus

boo k IV . Thus I N E x S . E xe VI RT. e . . DE DE

I 4 and 1 5 . Nic . fr . 49 ) The kings from “ Ardys ” I to

2 1 4 Nic . fr . 4 ) Meles Gyges inclusive , including

. II , Moxos Meles III 2 8 K amb les I 6 Nic . fr . ) ( K amb litas) It is to be noticed that the two fragments dealing with a

-r King Meles are quoted by different e xce ptors. In one it

a is said that Meles was deposed from his tyr nny , that in his

oi dvb m roc time Lydia was Visited by a great drought , and that p

Q I I e eca v Ka r e ev ov m ua vr ¢ y . In the other we are told that when ' ff of (ivd onroi Meles was king Lydia su ered a great famine , and p

’ éw i vr eia er oirrow o m s p , and that Meles went into exile at Baby

for lon three years but a fterwards resumed his kingdom . The full text of the passages in question is as foll ows :

E Vi r . 1 E . t . . 1 . 2 xc x Fr 4 ( de 4) Fr . 49 ( e de Ins 4) ' ’ C m M 6 0 6 Avbd r1 ' o Ka i E 1 ri M i Acw 32 a m AeUOI/ r o Av8€ w 5 9 s, j fi s ’ ‘ ’ M i A / ' K a e a crof c o xa l. r e v 3 é Ac a K a i o (i a lt v s v o >6 a u i e i. v py u , j n ¢ p c n ' ’ ' i a ido K QOCAOSV r ol Avaois anro e i r eia i r afrrovr o r r v vv e d e 7r a v . j s p s , p u s p - ’ Sex 'r' (in 08053 . ! in n a p ek cketio a r o 7 97V of qv Tal e 3 emf/w a i ve ToOa t/1. 614 01 S u s I A I I O 82 ' a K 03 6 65 i. Aa K vo ( o ov V I nee. 7 9 9 9 . n a r r eo da c r ov O v , p p A I A s I

E eido r o Ka i di m l e oiivr e To. a m ew a vr a a Kov n v s im o. v k v. , p u p B T ’ K r a c ov Ti Oexdr v oimiv a w a i a r v v (m n a c) . r w o oltd v K fiu fj p j n s p xpn u y , ’ ’ I Q I I Q A H w xa edvo E K 7 01 57 01 ) e Ka r K i. r Sea e o £ 7 d v a v. on ( v vr a m 7 a , p y 7 7 np I 3 I ' ’ ' ‘ ' e w r os a v os Ka r a ka a va Av a dm r Ov ( OI/ov Ec v cv ede vO I w s p y xu ufi p , p y ’ i a r cia v / Bia K i o d w ozt w v G T C JC SE Ka i. s a i. rr s B a vA a W i v i n . , v p s fl Mt/ s ‘ ' Ka r é¢cvyou H OM II S SEo r pa r eca s (Dpvyia v i ra pd r Ov Aa o miltov f m? ’ ’ V Ae er a c r ew oc o da c 057 09 6 dvr AdG K vAOV Ka t a irrOv ovo a dur w a y fi jp , u , ‘ 1 3 A I I 9 A c ’ ‘ ‘ Ka t. v a vr ov w h o; e w r ov c v v 7 r r eu a a r i Z ovo a i t v e n u y ] p j np y p x p y , ' ’ ’ ‘ ' / / : Sois t m r e (ii Opel? Ka i Oma i omh g . K eltctiw v ( is Edpdets dcpmveio ea i Ka l ’ ' K d Ta fir a 33 w pdfa s eiri Tij v p Sina ;i Séxeo da c 7 013 m r pqiov (pdvov I I I ’ ’ ’ - ow ( m a lt Ka t. i roAvv ovov 0. 1 ra d lJTOV 013m ) ; d i diom L M fl y , xp a p y p C I t s I e I t a a I WOALO K O'O ei Ae Ka i c 7 0 07 0'e r ow ; O 86 OUK fi em e S OL a vr a . p fl r p 7 , p s r n, r I o I I ’ ' ' ‘ ' Al . 8; a vdp w vrovs a s r nv w Anm ov p Aeyw v p i] i w p a xeva i r bv n a r epa ' ' ' v v d a iov Ola ddeov En dvr w o ev. K e o a d in ar e oi m n y y s v i e l. y p ovv u pomjxew a i r r a ilr a r oAv ' n a ovei M r A 83 ( eti w v p yp v. j ns p y ’ ” r ij v dpxij v erria r evo e 2a 8voir r y r ep ’ ' ' - K oiSvo evOs 6e r ?) Gr im es)! (in O s, y ’ TUAw I/os do n £ 1 i ow a ei rer d , s ¢ y p I A ‘ cva e Ka t. Ka TLOVTa i n B a vkw n , fl vos 9 I - I - ier o. r w . Zn Ka t r a a I p p ) , mB ’ '63 6. 7 63 oi. c 1 )teia v 1 rw 9 . M ELES 2 7

The rese mblance pointed out b etw een these two fragments i is certa nly striking . It is true that in the first case the u famine appears to have occurred after Meles was driven o t.

2 has But it is obvious that in fr . 4 the excerptor , with

e or o f carelessn ss haste , inserted out its proper place the sentence about the drought . It has no point in its present

a position , and disturbs the narrative . Moreover , it can h rdly belong immediately after the stateme nt that Moxos instituted ff the custom of O ering tithes to the gods . It is more probable that the custom was supposed to have been instituted either in t for o f or hanksgiving the ending the drought , to prevent its recurrence . It is also true that in the first case Meles is represented as

out m the driven fro his kingdom , while in second he is said to have gone into voluntary and temporary exile . But , as 2 3 n already noted once before , these two stateme ts may well have been given in combination by Xanthus ( Nicolaus) , and were doubtless derived from different versions of the t f same story . In all o her respects the accounts o M eles in the two fragments are so similar that they can hardly be thought 24 to have been told o f different persons of the same name in

e e r a o f icolaus the sam gen al pass ge N . It follows , therefore ,

one that so far as the fragments Show , Nicolaus knew but

Meles , and gave an account of his career in a single passage

”

a ov 2 . See b e, p . 3 2‘ Y et it is j ust this un sa tisfactory position that the histori an is

‘ to a a 2 and 28 forced ccept if it be still held th t fr . 4 ( Meles II ) fr . ’ K mb le s a a a a a v . a a ( ) c me before fr . 49 in Nicol us n rr ti e In th t c se the resembl ances noted between the two fragments about Meles could be expl ained only in adequ ately and uns atisfactorily by s aying th at ff a a a a and a a s di erent kings in dyn sty Often bore the s me n me ; th t , a v f a to the f mine , the recurrence of the e ent would be su ficient re son for u of a a a and the rec rrence the ppe l to the or cle , this for the a a a a v recurrence of the st tement in the tr dition l ccounts . In iew of a a s a a the f ct th t , between the two storie bout Meles , such simil ri a a a ties exist , notwithst nding th t the two fr gments come to us through ff to a a f of V di erent excerp rs e ch writing from dif erent point iew , the n atural and rea son able conclusion is th at gi ven in the discussion a v And a Virtutib u s bo e . it is e sy to see why the Excerptor de should and a o f dwell upon Moxos his exploits with but sc nt mention Meles , v v a x I nsidiis x and while , ice ers , the E cerptor de should omit Mo os ’ give at some length th at p art of Nicol aus account which S howed ’ Da k l Meles conne ctio n with the wrongs done to the house of s y os. 2 8 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA from which somewhat different details were selected by the two excerptors . ’ f 2 8 K amb l s a . o e 3 The position fr . ( ) in Nicol us narrative o m 2 n w e . e may asily be deter ined Fr . 4 , as we have j ust s en, must have belonged to precisely the same passage in Nicolaus h o e . fr m which t at part of fr . 49 d aling with Meles was drawn 25 ’ 2 8 K amb l s icolaus . e Fr , concerning , appeared later in N 2 2 8 26 work than fr . 4 . But since fr . was still from book IV of n Nicolaus , and si ce fr . 49 ends with Gyges while the first fragment from book VII which relates to Lydian history treats 27 of for Gyges again and his passion a male favorite , it is 2 8 evident that fr . also must have belonged to the same general 2 passage in Nicolaus as fr . 49 , but occurred later than fr . 4 and probably later than fr . 49 itself , but before the end of ’ K amb les the account of Gyges . Probably , then , the story of gluttony was used as an illustration of a similar vice practised o by Gyges . Doubtless the same is true (as already menti ned ) of the story concerning the castration o f women by the kings 29 Ad ram te y s and Gyges . m f 4 . There re ains to b e considered how much o historical ’ f fact may be Contained in Nicolaus account o Meles . It has already been suggested that there were tw o versions concern ’ ing Meles fall which were combined by Xanthus ( Nicolaus ) , namely

2"’ E E x B x irt 2 8 e . a e V . . . ec use , in the . de ( see outline , p fr r 6 2 Ex ir I an f Vi . 1 V t d o t . c o de ) follows fr 4 . de . 4) the rder the a a N a Excerpt f ithfully represents the order in icol us . ” AS c an of a 2 8 we see from the outlines the Excerpt for fr . ’ belongs to the e arlier section Of Lydi an history contained in Nicol aus Universa l Histor a v a of y, where s the consecuti e tre tment the Merm a a n B n d e beginning with Gyge s belo gs to ook VII . 27

a o f a a a . . See summ ry tr dition l ccounts , p 35 ” An 2 a 2 o 2 2 d as a a . . i f , lre dy suggested ( see p 4, lso p 5 , n te ) Adram tes and K amb l es a o a a y were both m ng the Mermn d e , then their S lightly anticip ated mention seems still more appropri ate in the p ass age

- f 0 . at O . here the end fr . 49 See below , pp . 4 43 M EL E s 29

2 : . . A : fr . 4 . B fr 49 ‘

a . Mele s w a s a tyrant and was . Meles was a king D sk o b H e a l s . driven out by Moxos . . killed y I (This is not directly stated in

n ar a any extant r tive , but it

' f 3 0 seems to b e implie d by the statement that he made expia tion for the death of Da sky

los I . )

H e to c . went voluntarily for Babylon , an exile three to years , in Obedience an oracle which prescrib ed this

f a form o expi tion .

The e be . s cond version , B , may considered first f r . n o a It is ot probable that Meles was a legitimate king ,

no l fo r him . ( i ) . there is p ace in the royal line Neither a

father nor a son is mentioned in connection with him . “ ” son of Ad attes ( ii ) . The Ardys I , the preceding king , is y II ; and no mention is made o f any relationship between this

Ad at s y te and Meles .

b . That Me les killed Daskylos I is contradicted by the

t a the n h Ad attes s atement m de in same arrative ( fr . 49 ) t at y , f ” son o e . King Ardys I , kill d him

c . That Meles went voluntarily into exile is essentially

NO volun improbable and legendary . despot ever went into

e on coun e tary xile merely ac t of an oracle , given becaus a sub

c e j t had been put to death by another person . Nor would a tyrant be called to account in any such way even i f he him

e self had killed the subj ct , and even if the victim was a

powerful noble . The reckoning , if it came at all , would come

in the form of a revolution . 1 unhistorical ' Version B , therefore , appears to be f with

“ Radet L L die , a y , 78. m ’ ’ S chub ert s comment on the sto ry o f Mele s voluntary ex ile s ee ms l H i la . s a v a b we l grounded l st c use, howe er, is rendered unten ble y a ve o d H a v a an b . e a G sek e . d the consider tions gi n b e under s ys ( . ' K on L 2 Al s i a o i . t e a d . d e v. y 3) unbed ng w hr f sth lten m chte ich nur a aus R hat mii W he, (las ssen s Meles einm l seinem eiche fliehen , und nach dreij fihriger Ab w es-enheit die Regierung au s der H and des p 30 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

o e a the excepti n that M les may, fter having been expelled

a m to from his tyranny by Moxos , h ve returned fro Babylon seize the power a second time, like Peisistratus , only to be

a e . o deposed perm n ntly a little later It is quite p ssible , more

a for over , to ccount the origin of this version . The reference to Meles as a king may be merely a loo se statement that he ” a t a s or ruled for ime a tyrant usurper . That he killed Daskylos I may have been a deliberate false hood circulated

to later shield the real author of the assassination . That Meles ab sence in Babylon was v oluntary may have been of a o suggested in support this f lsehood , in rder that this n abse ce might seem a confession of guilt , though in fact the b out man had een driven by his political opponents . 3 2 n Version A then rem ains . It is perfectly reasonable a d credible , and it is not contradicted by any other statement .

ma e a . It y therefore be accept d , tentatively at least , as f ct

f III . Meles o the Lion ( Meles I ) has already been men ‘ i . t oned ( p . and may now be considered more fully 1 not n b e . This Meles is ecessarily to regarded as the founder of S ardes although some historians have so represented him . 3 3 “ S a : Griinder H For example , chubert s ys Als der aupt

e 8 K Oni stadt S ardes hat H rodot I . 4 einen g Meles genannt . ‘ ' H u H is : dn dro os r e But erodot s does not say this . words are p ‘ é 1 r dx dn okt Ka i d a o r 01583 M r A s On ér e ov a m yelp crr c 7 0. n ) p s u x r fj j n p p B ' ’ Aeij a di w v rofit/ of: w e c vecxe 7 5V Aeovr a 7 6V oi f n a AAa Ki Zr exe c Z p p y p fi ) ) , ' I h I A - TeX/I no a ew v Si xa o dvr w v (i) ? w cp ceva xdevr os r ov Arm/r oe Tor eixoc Zo om a t

C d dce d dkw r oz n 0 u dr e ov a mk a fs E p s v . The expressio p p B does not “ ” “ S man mean the first king of ardes , but rather the who was ” formerly king And H erodotus doe s not even say that

zu iick m fi n Die M otivirun F natiir S adyattes wieder r e p g . g der lucht ist lidh a a a z m l e o f b elh ft , ber trot dem schi mert in derse b n wohl n ch r a Ra M ermna den fiir Dask los a du ch , d ss che der den Tod des y d bei die ” ar eigentliche Ver anlassung w . ”3 S w as a a and a ince Meles tyr nt usurper , he might perh ps ( for this i rmo mm a o f re ason among others ) be identified w th S p e s. See su ry H v a a a . . tra ditional ccounts , p 33 owe er, it is quite possible th t , in

“ ” " a o f A of long reign like th t rdys I , there were two usurpers , one

rm a a and whom ( S p e os) w as behe ded or otherwise done to de th , the x othe r driven out b y Mo os . ” L d a a on G c K an v . s d . . e h. . . y , 3 Schubert here b ses his st tement

1 . th at of Duncker . See p . 3 , note 35

TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

: H e w a s Meles , and the facts about him appear to be these a ” e nd of usurper , probably toward the the reign of Ardys I ,

o H e and was driven out by Moxos , supposedly to Babyl n .

a -er appears to have returned ag in to pow , only to be expelled pe rmanently . And a report was circulated that he was re

f Da k l s sponsible for the assassination o s y o I .

u r are With this as o starting point , we now in a position to take up a more comprehensive treatment of our ancient

U I’ S O CCS . CH APTER III

TH E H ERAK LEID AND MERM NAD DYNASTIES OF LYDIA

S o f e I . ummary the traditional accounts giv n by Nicolaus ,

H . erodotus , and the chronographers

M iiller F H 1 1 G. . Nicolaus ( , III , 37

: ADY ATTEs of Frag . 49 , king the Lydians , left his kingdom

KADYs . to his twin sons , and ARDYS DAM ONNO o f K ad s , wife y , together with her paramour

PERM S f K d s K ad ff S O o a s. , cousin y , tried to poison y The e ort

K d D monno ermos now a s . a S failed , but later y died and p drove

out an d . Ardys , seized the kingdom

m s K r t . S er o e ses o Ardys escaped to Kyme p sent a robber, , kill Ardys , and promised him his daughter in marriage , as a

K erses reward . By arrangement with Ardys , returned and

rmo His or beheaded Sp e s. death caused no sorrow disturb an t ce , for he was a wicked man ; and among o her misfortunes 1 H there was a severe drought while he was king . e reigned

’ ' cv r ois' a m for two years , but his name is not written down B

Ad or e .

Ardys was now recalled from Kyme , by messengers from e “ H the Lydians , among the messengers b ing some o f the era cleidae H o f a ll e reigned best the Lydian kings , ALK I M H I OS . e after , and he was beloved and j ust numbered

o f : the army the Lydians this consisted mostly of cavalry , of Old DAS K Y LOS son of which there were In his age , ,

a e GYGES of the Mermnad family , bec me his favorit and gradu f ally obtained complete contro l o the government . The prince

ADYATTES son of Dask los , Ardys , secretly killed y , fearing that on the death o f the king the powerful favorite might se ize the throne . King Ardys was filled with grief , cursed the

one murderers , and gave any who found them permission to H f 0 e . kill them . died after a reign o 7 years M EL Es of When was king the Lydians , there was a great 2 e o famine in the land , and the peopl bet ok themselves to divina

l ’ b a e m a a a a w as a a n xun y perh ps me n the l nd in squ lid , miser ble ” condition . ’ N 2 v ut o o o a . o ic l us fr 4, concerning Meles the usurper dri en by M x s , a R a av b v should be pl ced here . e sons for doing so h e een gi en in the 33 34 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

tion . The god instructed them to exact penalty for the death ’ of Dask los y from the king s house . S o Meles withdrew to o a for Babylon in v lunt ry exile three years , to expiate the mur a S DAS K Y LOS der . Me nwhile he invited to ardes young , son of

Dask los the murdered y , whose mother had fled with him to

. . on Phrygia The youth , however , declined to come Meles , S ADYATTE S his retirement, entrusted his kingdom to , son of K ADY S o TY LON , wh se remote ancestor was . This regent faith ’ fully restored the kingdom on Meles return from B abylon after three years .

M Y RS OS Dask los son o f Da k lo In the reign of , y , the s y s who S ad attes was murdered by y , in fear lest he should draw upon m H hi sel f the plots of the eracleidae , fled from Phrygia to the S S yrians of Pontus , beyond inope . There he married a native woman and by her had a son , GYGES .

S ADYATTES of o , the last king the Lydians , was overthr wn

o . S son of as foll ws There was at ardes a certain ARDYS , Dask los Gyges , and uncle of the y who went to Pontus . Now , ’ t Ardys had no children , so he asked the king s permission o

n Dask los bri g y back from Pontus and adopt him . It was DAS K Y L I OI reasonable , he said , to be reconciled with the , since ’ the king s ancest ors ( u p on dr op es ) had already recalled them ’

L . to ydia from exile . Ardys request was granted But

Da sk los y liked his new home , and refused to come , so he sent of instead his son Gyges , a youth eighteen . ’ Gyges , a fine young man , attracted the king s notice and

- r was made one of the royal spear bearers . The king , afte a

m an time , suspected the honor o f the young , and purposely assigned him dangerous tasks in order to get rid of him with out openly putting him to death . Gyges accomplished all these tasks by his strength . The king now loved him , and honored him above all others ; but this royal favor a ttracted the j ealousy

f I x s n an o o f L o the T lo i . many , especially , of y family Tou do Gyges , sent by the king to bring home (a Mysian

S ad attes p rincess whom King y was to marry) , fell in love s c o with her, lo t ontr l of himself , and tried unsuccessfully

the n a n to . win her favors Later , to escape royal ve ge ce , he together with some of his friends broke int o the royal bed

a v 6. a and . 2 preceding ch pter , the full text of the fr gment is gi en on p A A an 2 F or M OPS OS AS K ALOS and K I M OS o 2 d . , , , see below , n tes 9 3 TH E H ERA K LE I D AND M ERM NAD DYNASTIES 35

ho m w . cha ber and killed the king, had reigned three years Then f f Gyges took possession o the woman and o the kingdom .

S t . ome of his enemies he killed , others he won over by gi f s Lixos b ut Toward , however, he showed great animosity ; he ’ was finally reconciled to him after the latter s bold reply to 3 him at a banquet . ’ 62 of of Fr . . In Nicolaus account the Mermnadae , Gyges 62 course comes first . Fr . tells us of his passion for his hand

B e some favorite Magnes , who was a poet and a musician . cause o f insults offered to this person by the people of M ag

nesia t . , Gyges inv‘aded heir territory and captured their city 4 x me ADYATTE s f L s n 6 . e co s S o . t o Fr 3 N , king the ydians , of A H . e ALY TTES was brave in war , but in other matters lacked

- H n ow . self control . e violated his sister and then married her S he to M I LETos LA son had been married , descendant of ME S , in- S ad attes tw o law of Gyges . y also married other women , sisters of each other , and by them had two natural sons ,

Attales one ADRAM Y S by , and by the other . By his own sister he A . had a legitimate son , ALY TTES d ttes 6 . S a a Fr . 4 This Alyattes , son o f y , was violent and uncontrolled in youth , but j ust and temperate in later li fe . f 6 . n o . so Fr 5 CROESUS , Alyattes , in his youth was dissolute ’ of and lacked force , but was one the generals in his father s m n of army , and was placed in com a d the town Adramyttium . o To raise funds for his quota of tro ps , he tried to borrow

S d a tte a s . from y } a wealthy Lydian merchant , but was refused

‘ H ere should be pl aced the fr agments concerning K AM BLE S ( see a v a 1 2 a K amb l e f L di . sa s o bo e , p X nthus ( fr . ) ys th t , king the y ans w as a on a and v , such glutt th t one night he tore in pieces de oured ’ w n a a his o wife . E rly next morning he found his wife s h nd in his

a w as a a and so . mouth . The m tter noised bro d , he slew himself N a 28 v a a a a a icol us ( fr . ) gi es lmost the s me story , with few ddition l a a K A M BLI TAS and a a I ardanos w a s det ils , c lling the king , dding th t a a suspected by the Lydi ns of h ving b ewitched the king .

H a a a v . 2 28 a . 1 ere lso should be pl ced ( see bo e , pp 4, ) X nthus fr 9 , a a a i o f a v a b de ling with the c str t on women , luxurious ice pr ctised y d ADRA M Y TES L a G an . yges , kings of ydi ‘ S uida s gi ves in briefer form the same information i a n h l o N a 6 S u d s a d X eno i us F H G. I f und in icol us fr . 3 ; but both p ( V,

0 a Al a ttes S ad attes. 53 ) c ll this king y , not y ui K oid os a a a a th S a . v e d s s v. ( p gi es ex ctly the s me fr gment , but c lls Al a S d atte a ttes not a s. miserly merch nt y , y 36 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

68 a m 66 Fr . describes Croesus on the funeral pyre ( fr g ents and 67 are an excursus on Cyrus of Persia) .

’ 2 H a : . erodotus account of early Lydi n kings

- 1 : I . 7 3 Those who ruled over this country (Lydia) before

o f L du s m m Agron were descendants y , son of Atys , fro who

M aionian this whole people , formerly called , received the L di n name y a . The H eracleida e were descended from H ERAKLES and a

I a rdanos : AL K AI OS female slave o f , in regular order, thus , H BELOS , NINOS , AGRON the first of the eracleidae who became f H 2 2 king o S ardes . The eracleidae reigned for generations , 0 a period of 5 5 years , the son succeeding the father , down “ ” to the time of K ANDAU L ES (called by the Greeks M Y RS I LOS )

M Y RSOS K andaules a a t son o f . was the l st o f this dyn s y , and w a s son of Da sk los overthrown and killed by Gyges , y , of the family of the Mermnadae . H erodotus ’ account of the Mermnadae is as follows

Y E s M iletos S and G G ( I . Warred against and myrna S ff : captured Colophon . ent gold and silver o erings to Delphi the oracle had confirmed him in the royal power w hen appeal

Del hi n was made to it by the Lydians . The p a s called these ‘ ff I v dda s a f a . 8 . o erings y ter the dedic tor Reign , 3 years 1 on f S . . o ARDYS ( I 5 , and successor Gyges Warred

M l s Pri n K immerians against i eto and captured e e . invaded

Asia Minor and captured S a rdes excepting the acropolis .

Reign , 49 years .

ADYATTE - f S 1 6 on A . S . S o ( I , and successor rdys M il etos. 1 2 . Warred with Reign , years L A I 6 1 8 2 S n f . o o A Y TTES ( I , , 5 , 73, and successor d a s K ax r S a tte . a es y Warred with y and the Medes , for 5 years ; eclipse of sun ; made peace and formed matrimonia l

a K x r K imm rians u f alli nce with ya a es. Drove e o t o Asia ; took Smyrna ; was defeated at Cla zom enae ; w arred with M iletos ;

M il tos a e . a made friendly lliance with Reign , 57 ye rs .

2 6- 6 6 - 1 - 2 1 - . 8 8 1 6 1 S CROESUS ( I 5 , 9 , 3 9 , 53 5 ; III . 4 , on o f u . s n and successor Alyattes Warred against Ephe s . Io ian

C . a and Aeolian ities made tributary Planned to ttack islands , " formed alliance with them instead . Empire extended over almost all of western Asia TH E H E RA K L E ID AND M ERM NAD DYNASTIES 37

i

At s. of Croesus ; slew himself in remorse , over the tomb of y

S . M agnificent gifts sent to Delphic oracle . Alliance with parta Warred with Cyrus ; crossed H alys and ravaged territory C S round Pteria , until hecked by Cyrus . Besieged in ardes and

on . captured by Cyrus . Croesus the funeral pyre Taken K ’ amb s s . away to Persia by Cyrus . Accompanied y e to Egypt

’

o f . 3 . The chronographers lists the Lydian kings n 6 7 These lists are all of o e type . Those of Eusebius and 8 Julius Africanus are here taken as the norm . L a rre s S f c f fl fl s 9 ARDY a “n . S , son of Aly ttes

2 .

M E LE s 3 . K ANDA LES 4 . U

5 . GYGES

6 . ARDYS S ADY ATTE S 7 . 8 . ALYATTES

9 . CROESUS

u Ge k K L I 6 1 d . a v . . se . n . d Sch bert, . y , , 7 ' ’ S - a ol II - . . 6 v . choene Peterm nn s edition o f Eusebius Chron , , pp 7 9 4, 6 6-1 Dindor f B z 9 Syncellus 455 . 5 , ed . , in Corp . scr . hist . y . , - a l A I 2 o cit. vo . 20 Schoene Peterm nn , p. , I , ppendix V , p . , section 44 . b . ‘ H a of a Al a ttes ere the f ther the first king in this list is c lled y , N a a Ad a tte I ff s. o while icol us fr . 49 c lls him y n the di erent chr no ’ ra hers ma a va a v of g p lists y be found m ny ri tions in the spelling ( . a f u a v the n mes o the individ l kings gi en in the list above . CON S PECTUS

40 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

or Either we have here inexplicable contradictions , , in view of its frequent use in the two dynasties , we should conclude

a Ad attes S a d attes or either th t y (or y , Alyattes ) was a name common in the family of these kings and often borne in

t or addition to some o her proper name , else that this name 1 2 was merely a title and was borne by every king of Lydia . These explanations are supported by the fact that each o f the

n n a b c three ki gs mentio ed under , , and above has this same

or or additional name title , while the proper individual names 1 3 M r K andaul s F sos e . or respectively were y , , and Ardys ‘ ’ Ad attes y I we have , so far , only the title and not a proper o f M ermna name . The same may be true the third and fourth dae ; but , as will be shown in the next two sections , indi vidual names may be found for these tw o rulers as well as ‘ ’ their titles . 2 K m l z d t s rd b S a a te . . a es y , the 3 Mermnad king ‘ 2 8 o K amb itas ho In Nicolaus fr . we are t ld of a king l vv pushed luxury and gluttony to such an extreme that he ate

n X an his ow wife in his sleep . The same story is given in

fr 1 2 t K m les A lian Varia h a b . e . e thus , only king is called (

H 2 K amb es is . t. I 7) in giving instances of gluttony mentions l 4 the n E ustathius - s of i - Lydia . tells the ame story w fe eating, and clearly uses Xanthus as his source ; but he cal ls the

K mb s K amb litas K mb l a si . a es king y These four names , then , , ,

K amb es K amb sis for , and y , were evidently used the same person . K f 1 - 0 amb ses o H . . Now , y , son Cyrus o f Persia ( erod III 3

was said to be a passionate , dissolute , intemperate man . Many stories o f self - indulgence and cruelty are attached to

o no . him , s me of which he may t have deserved Among other

“ which he would probably have rea d A1 du shu or Ardi shu a form

v v a o a a a a . W in ol ing rest r tion for which the l cun seems too sm ll inckler, “ ’ H istor o B a b lonia and Ass ria 2 6 a : His G y f y y 7 , s ys ( yges ) A son a a a a A H . is unn med by ssurb nip l , but is c lled rdys by erodotus E K i in B a S a l c 1 8 1 6. e s hr ibl . 0 See lso . chr der, . ( 9 ) II , 7 n This expl an ation has already been suggested by Radet 1 " ’ ’ a a G h d K b n v L 1 a K andaule c . d . s Schubert s exp l n tion ( es . . . y 3 ) th t a w as the brother and success or o f S ady attes seems in dequate . 1 ‘ R m E u hius I erS 1 0 1 6 0 o . tat O v . . s ad d ss. Com . y X . 3 ( p 3 ) , seeing in his source wh at m ay h ave been to him the unfamili ar n ame K amb es or K amb les a a K amb ses , perh ps decided th t it should be y , which he knew f Of well since it w as the n ame O the notorious son Cyrus . TH E H ERAKL EI D AND MERM NAD DYNASTIES 4 1

1 2 u on things , he is said ( Herod . III . 3 , 3 ) to have insisted p

marr in his ow n sister and a ter her a nother sister y g , f ; and the

younger woman died as the result of his cruelty and abuse .

6 a S ad attes icolau . In N s fr 3 it is s id that y , the third Merm

t he d e nad king, was passionate and intempera e , and that

b auched a nd married one o his sisters (I i/id also married tw o f , i s o men s ster . ther w o , Th e similarity b etwee n these stories about wi fe - abuse m ay of course be due to the possibl e fact tha t both the two kings l actua ly practised such things , and hence a similar story arose

B u n r tw about each . t about o othe o kings in antiquity do we a t r h ve j ust this story told in terms so similar . It is herefo e reasonable to conclude tha t it is perhaps the same story told of ff or one two di erent persons , rather transferred from to

the other . Probably the story was told originally about the

. S Lydian , and was then applied to the Persian uch a trans ference would be most likely to occur if the tw o kings had

K mb K m s s or m a es a b e . the same a similar na e , or y Quite S ad attes possibly, therefore , y the third Mermnad king ( Nico 6 K m e K mb l s . n a b s a e laus fr 3) had also the i dividual name or , the same name as that o f the gluttonous Lydian king men tion d i lau 2 8 e co s . in N fr . 8 2 8 . 2 We have s een in Chapter II (p . ) that fr comes close ’ to and probably after fr . 49 , at the end of Nicolaus treatment L 6 S a d attes of ydian history in book IV . Fr . 3, concerning y ’ o the third Mermnad , does not come until Nicolaus b ok VII

( see outline , p . where he returns to Lydian history . But ’ not Universal H istor Nicolaus authority , Xanthus , wrote a y L 1 5 dia caz o f . but y , which would course be in continuous form

K amb les S ad attes In this work , therefore , the glutton and y were doubtless mentioned within , comparatively speaking, a

a of few p ges each other, and perhaps in the same passage . It thus seems quite possible that the two were the s a me person . There is perh aps an obj ection to the identification proposed

I r n a da os 2 8 : . above , in the mention of by Nicolaus ( fr . see p

2 1 m a 4 , note 7 ; see also sum ry , p . 35 , note I f Xanthus identified this I ardanos (who was suspected by some of the Lydians as having bewitched K amb les into eating his own

I ardanos H wife) with the mentioned by erodotus ( I . 7) as

‘ u idas v Ed POOS S , s. . . 42 TH E R I NGS OF LYDIA

m a ster o f the slave girl by whom H erakles became progenitor

H erakleid t of the dynasty , then Xanthus mus have regarded

K amb l s e as a very e arly king indeed . But there is no evi

for o f dence , beyond the name , the identification these two

a persons . It is quite possible th t tradition knew a later

I ard anos e . , who lived in the time of the third M rmnad king

Ad r m s: Ad ram z H rm on 3. a yte ys e ( father of

Croesus .

2 Adram tes It has been shown above (p . 4 ) that a king y is 1 mentioned in Xanthus fr . 9 as having followed a vicious

i. e . practice known among the Lydian kings , , the castration of 2 8 ha s a . women . It lso been shown (p ) that this story , like

K amb les the episode , probably entered as an illustration into o f the general discussion the luxuries and vices of Gyges , j ust

after Nicolaus fr . 49 .

i l a . co au s . 6 According to N fr 3 ( see summ ry , p one of the natura l sons of S adyattes the third Mermna d is called Adra m s an d o f y , this name is evidently only a variant form

Adra B z m te m K mb l nd K amb li S . s a es a tas. y . Co pare teph . y ' '

V A3 a u§r r etov w 7 n one K eK A r a l. moreover (S . . p p ) rites as follows ( ) ) n

’ - ’ ’ ! K 32 dd oii (b (in O A3 a . tir ov K r w r oi) w a l do 21 A)tvofr ov oco ov d k e p p , ; p , p p ,

’ e ohcr eia t Ka i dAAOI Ti l/ E 82 (in ?) T w vo 7 013 AvSii w v n s . s pu s I - ' / A A v a iJ (b i a a c im r d w a vSoi S a v K AO O I v i o r . B h e. Ov y p q p l p u p y From

a Adram s this pass ge it appears that there was a Lydian king y , H erm on h called by some , and that he was associated wit the

m o f the city Adra yttium , as was also a person royal line

Adr m a tes son . called y , of ( King) Alyattes But it has been

ad attes Shown above (p . 39 ) that Alyattes and S y are doubtless o f forms the same name . It seems reasonable , therefore , to

b elieve that Adramytes son (of Alyattes was the same person as

Ad ram s son o f S ad attes i he y y , the th rd Mermnad , and that

a H m n H e bec me king and w as known by the Greeks as er o . n would thus be the fourth Merm ad king , known usually as a f 6 o e . Aly ttes ( father Cro sus) . Further , in Nicolaus fr 5 we see that Alyattes places his son Croesus in command of

a the city Adramyttium . It may well be that Aly ttes , during 1 6 o r his wars , founded or rebuilt colonized this city which had

” S n I I a a o . a . . a The choli st Homer VI . 39 7 ( scholi Towul , ed M ss , ol z ol v Din r f 1 . 2 2 a . I d 888 a v . . o V of series [ , p 4 ) tells us th t a a A ram o H a Pel sgi n d y s f the time of er kles founded the city . TH E H ERA K LE I D AND MERM NAD DYNASTIES 43

i o and such a strategic pos ti n , named it after his own name “ ” t Ad ramys . No hing would then be more natural than that he should place his son in charge o f it . To the identification suggested above there are the following obj ections possible

a 6 Ad ram s nati1 ral . Nicolaus ( fr . 3) says that y was only a S a d attes son of y the third Mermnad , and expressly distin “ ” gu ishes him from Alyattes ( father of Croesus ) the legitimate ’ a t e son of this S dya t s. But Nicolaus distinction between Adra ’ mys and Alyattes may easily be due to Xa nthus having seen both names Adramys and Alyattes used separately of this

or Ad ram s person in earlier sources , y called Alyattes a fter t his accession o the throne . z B . b S . . In the passage quoted from teph y we find that “ ” A r d amytes is designated as the brother of Croesus . This would place him in the fifth instead of the fourth generation of “ ” m o of a re Mer nad kings . But the w rds brother Croesus a pparently only an afterthought inserted by a mistake , by ’ S B z e teph . y . hims lf , or by the compiler of Aristotle s Lydian ' n oAI r eLa or a w a s , by his genealogical source . This mist ke due doubtless to a belief that the name Alya ttes for the father of Adramytes could not possibly be the same as the name of S ad attes y (the third Mermnad ) , and hence must refer to m H i o a st. Alyattes , f ther of Croesus . Co pare Rawlinson , f

H erodotus 6 vol . I , 3 3, note 9 .

There seems to be , therefore , in our traditional sources , no valid or conclusive reason against the identification of Adra m tes Ad ram s H y ( y , ermon) with Alyattes , father of Croe so sus ; and , for the reasons given at the beginning of this m e . section , it se ms proper to regard them as the sa e person o t t It is p ssible , hen , tha in his discussion immediately following

a m w as a the pass ge fro which fr . 49 t ken , Nicolaus (Xanthus )

the started to describe vices of Gyges , and from this proceeded to give at once a more or less detailed account o f the chief

vices of the whole dynasty . D . k os 4 The murderer of as yl I . ” a . e o When the murder is first mention d by Nic laus , the “ ” a Ad attes o f murderer is s id to be y II , son Ardys I , the

- twin king . 1 ’

a . See summ ry , p . 33 44 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

b Dask los . But soon a fterward Nicolaus says that y I was 1 8 a a t killed by S dy t es. 1 8 i lau c . co s a Further , N says that Meles expi ted the murder

Radet a s e by voluntary exile . therefore believes , alr ady 1 9 he r noted , that must have been the guilty pe son , for surely he would not take the trouble to wash away the guilt of a nother ’ person s crime . ff n We thus have three di erent perso s , apparently, charged

o f Da sk los a ttes with the murder y I . But since S dya and 20 Ad attes ff of y are only di erent forms the same name , there is

a a nd b b AS for no real contradiction between a ove . the ’ a c Radet s contradiction between and , belief that Meles killed Daskylos I is only an inference from the stateme nt that Meles went into voluntary and temporary exile to expia te this crime .

hi a for T s st tement appears to be unhistorical , reasons given 21 . at re above And if Meles did not one for the crime , there

i so n o a ma ns no rea n to believe that he committed it , and re son B Ad a s tte . to identi fy him , as adet does , with y II

D sk l A n a os d attes so . y I , then , was killed by y II , of Ardys I

A motive for the crime is given by Nicolaus ( see summary,

a p . the crown prince fe red that this powerful favorite ld ’ would seize the throne upon the o king s death . But did this Adyattes II a ctually succeed his father ? Apparently we have t H 2 - 2 no record tha he did . owever , i f Meles was (pp . 9 3 ) a not o f usurper and the royal house , the first legitimate king ” ” ’ i M rsos M rsos ment oned after Ardys I is y , and the next is y 24 K n l d s M rs s a dau es a atte . o son ( S y ) Presumably , then , y was “ ” son o f it s the Ardys I , From this is rea onable to conclude t M rsos a Ad attes hat y was the s me person as y II , and that

M rsos w a s . y was his individual name , while the other his title

a M r Da k los sos s . It follows , then , th t y killed y I Now , the

a See summ ry, p . 34 . ”

a v 2 0. See bo e , p . 9 , note 3 2°

a v . See bo e , p . 39 21 S ee 2 p . 9 . 2’ L L ie 8 . a yd , 7 23

8. See the conspectus , p . 3 i" Nic ol au s does not say that S ady attes w as son of M y rsos ; but ul M rs s And rea Herodotus does say th at K anda es w as the son o f y o . a K andaul es w a av v a v . a s sons h e been gi en bo e ( pp 39 , indic ting th t a S a attes the s ame person s dy . TH E H ERA K LE ID AND M ERM NAD DYNASTIES 4 5

‘ 25 only thing w e are told abo ut M yrsos is th a t in his reign Dask los a nd y II became alarmed , fled from Phrygia (where his mother had taken refuge after the death Of Da skylos 1 )

S w a s M rsos into Pontus beyond inope . Assuming that it y who

Dask los o f Da sk los r killed y I , the flight y I I from Ph ygia is

a r flee fully explained . It would b e perfectly n tu al for him to still farther away when the murderer of his father came to the throne .

7r 07rd7 0 £ K n t 9 o f a daules S ad at es . 5 . The p p ( y ) not Ardys ( the king, but the aged and childless Mermnad) , in asking permission of S adyatte s ( Ka ndaules) to bring back and Da sk los a for adopt his nephew y II , s id it was right the

Dask lioi king to welcome a reconciliation with the y , since the ’ king s n p on dr opes had already recalled them to Lydia from

e 7r 07r0i’ro 6 9 exile . But who were th se p p We have an account

one of only person who gave such an invitation , namely 27 Radet h Meles . concludes , therefore , t at Meles was the grand

1 r om ir w f H r k i B u o a e a le d . t father , the p p , the l st Meles , an

a a a a e expelled usurper, c nnot be reg rded as the gr nd f th r o f

K andaul es , a king of the regular line ; although it may be that 28 o f D sk l s he did try to win the favor a y o II . ‘ The latest person w ho could properly be called a 7rp 07rti rw p “ ” of K andaules the was Ardys I , who (as we have seen in

r p eceding section) was apparently his grandfather . And it is “ ” a o r certainly natural th t Ardys I should have recalled , tried

a Da sk los a to rec ll , y II , Since it is stated th t he grieved over

”5

a . See summ ry , p . 34 2" F H G 8 2 . h . a a o v W III , 3 3, line 3 See summ ry b e , p . 34 . y is the ? a A a Dask l os plur l used here ccording to the ccount, only one person , y I had a a 1 a a . a a nd I , been c lled b ck ( ) The plur l c nnot refer to f ther Da sk los I an d Da sk los had a a e son , y II , for y I lre dy be n murdered

b f a B Aud ra /M on o . e fore the time this rec ll esides , the form is , not AM KUM LS 2 I to a and . ( ) t doubtless refers the f mily household of Da sk l os Dask los and y I , which would include his son y II the immedi ate “ ” a v F Da sk los m a av an a rel ti es . ( 3) urther , y y well h e been ncestra l a a a a a a a n me in the Mermn d f mily, going b ck for m ny gener tions e rlier ” Da k li i a ou r . a s o a or th n records The plur l y would thus be the n me , f f r a F h one o a o . the n mes , the whole line or f mily ( 4) rom t em , it w as prob ably extended so as to include the entire p arty or followers a Of this f mily . ” ie La d . Ly , 79 ” See below , p . 53 . 46 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

Da sk l s the death of y o I and cursed the murderers . Perhaps the plural 7rp 07rdr op€ 9 is used because the speaker was referring not to a s O so much a single king to the royal house . r it may t be tha , in addition to the invitation which we may think was ” to Dask lo s of extended by Ardys I young y II , some the ” ancestors of Ardys I had recalled from exile earlier members of o m Dask lioi this p werful fa ily , the y or Mermnadae , and that this was the reason why a Da skylos was at the court in the “ ” m time of Ardys I . Perhaps the Mer nadae had once , at a S much earlier period , been kings in ardes or in Lydia , but had b een driven out and subdued , and finally had become so amenable that their presence at the court was no longer felt to be dangerous but a source of advantage to the king .

6 M o o Ask . Moxos ( ps s) and alos.

a 2 so . Nicolaus ( fr . 4 ) gives us me information concerning

M ox os e n a certain (see the full t xt of the fragme t, given above ,

a a H e w a s p . It is significant th t he is not c lled a king .

a brave and famous Lydian , renowned for his military exploits .

H e The fragment states that he drove out the tyrant Meles .

K ra b as captured and destroyed the town O f , and threw the ’ oia deeov n a S . inhabitants i to the lake ne r by , 29 30

b . Xanthus , from whom it is generally believed that o Nicolaus drew much of his material c ncerning Lydia , tells us that M opsos the Lydian captured Atergatis and her son Askalon ac Ichthys , and threw them into the lake near on ‘ ii t m count o f their flp s ; and that the fishes ate the . It is

29 A a 1 1 F H G I 8 e v I . X anthus fr . ( . . 3 ) is pres r ed by then eus (VII 37 ; 6 (I a M naseas as p . 34 , ) , who gets his inform tion from , whom he quotes “ o : M nasea s o f A a a f llows , in the second book his History of si , spe ks ‘ thus : B ut I think that Aterg atis w a s a very h arsh queen fia a lkw a a - axezrr and a a v a x f) th t she ruled her people with gre t se erity , so th t she v a law eat and e en forb de them by to fish , ordered them to bring And a o f a w as . this food to her , bec use she fond of it on ccount this , a a G he r a custom still prev ils when they pr y to the oddess , to offer golden or silver fish ; and for the priests ev ery day to pl ace on the a G a a b and t ble before the oddess re l fish , c refully cooked , oth boiled ’ A d a of G eat v . n a ro sted , which the priests the oddess themsel es ‘ a h n a a a : B ut Ate r atis as a little f rt er o he s ys g in g , X nthus the

a a w as a b M o sos a and w as Lydi n s ys , c ptured y p the Lydi n , thrown by a n a Askal on an Ti n him, together with her son Ichthys , into the l ke e r .

v w An ate . flp . d the fishes them 8" - i 2 . h . L esc . t. Gr. Christ , g p 4 9

48 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

3 4 names of the goddess Atergatis ( to whom fishes were sacred) and of her son Ichthys . Moreover in the quotation from

M na seas w ho o b , gives us this versi n , ( see note it may “ be seen that Atergatis the queen appears to b e identi

- cal with the god dess ; perhaps the word Ba a iAw o a was used in “ ‘ ” this connection with something of the meaning of B a alat d A 1 2 G. . ( for which see Eduard Meyer, . . , , pp 377, But how could Atergatis be fed to her ow n fishes ? The most

a o f a b a natural expl nation the two versions , and , is th t the people of the conquered tow n were worshippers of this god a of o e dess , and th t some them were thrown int the lake becaus the conquering general worshipped some other deity and pu

’ nishe d db eovs a a hi them as ( ) bec use they were without s gods .

S 6 m b o f Ater atis imilarly , then , the 3p ( ) g was doubtless the

o f c on very existence her worship in that town , which the

u er r ma q o y have thought belonged by rights to his own deity .

Apparently, then , he identified the conquered goddess with eo n her p p le , and actually fed her and her subj ects in grim iro y

ow n t to her fishes , that is , threw her statue along wi h her unlucky worshippers into the lake . 2 But if these three accounts discussed above ( Nicolaus fr . 4 M s c . 1 o so oncerning Moxos , Xanthus fr 1 concerning p , and

2 n Askalos n Akiamos Xanthus fr . 3 concer ing and Ki g ) are of o it h in origin three versions the same st ry , follows t at

Askalo as M o s s w the same person as Moxos ( p os) . “ ” A . ki m 7 Ardys and a os. In the time o f King “ Ardys I there was a usurper named M N out . o w Meles , and this eles was driven by Moxos if

Askalos Askal os w ho Moxos , then was the leader in the ” f u Askalos time o Ardys I drove o t the tyrant . But was a

i Aki m s Ak amos. a o general under King Perhaps , then , is the “ ” same person as Ardys I . Further, there is reason to believe that the name Ardys ” did not properly belong to this king at all the o f , and was inserted by a mistake into line the

“ a D e D ea S ria Luci n ( y , describes the of a a G Derk eto Ater atis at cult goddess Often c lled by the reeks ( g ) ,

a a . w as a a a Hierapolis ( B amb yke ) ne r C rchemish The shrine ne r l ke , a S a in which were fishes s cred to the goddess . imil r cults existed else k Diod 2 a II . . l n a . A a . . t o e . a s where , g in Philisti ( 4 See Edu rd Meyer

- h A a 6 a W . h L x M t s. v . o Rosc r . . . e e . d in y , st rte , col 53 ; Cum nt in P uly iss , D 2 s. v ea S a . 2 . yri , col 37 TH E H ERAK L EI D AND M ER M NAD DYNASTIES 49

H eracleidae This view is supported by the following considerations a Ar e to o f . dys is a nam which seems to belong the family o Gyges . We find it twice am ng the Mermnadae , Ardys son of

r o f uites ossib l Gyges I , and A dys son Gyges II , and q p y it was “ ” an ancestral name in the family . But except for the Ardys

o f Ad attes son y I , the name does not appear at all In the family

f H . o the eracleidae Further , i f the name really did belong to

o f H erakleid e this member the family , it se ms very strange that 3 6 Gyges II should have gi ven to his son and successor the name f Da k l borne by the father o the man who murdered s y os I . “ ” b in . The presence of the name Ardys in this isolated

ta in Ad attes a s nce, the family of y I , may e sily be explained as follows ‘

(i ) . by the presence of an Ardys in the same generation in

. S ee the other great family , the Mermnadae ( the conspectus above , p .

a (ii ) . by the f ct that Ardys I had a long li fe . Nicolaus 8 7 says he reigned 70 years . And the Mermnad Ardys in this i n generat o also had a long life , for he lived to adopt Gyges II , hi s son . grandnephew , as his f . the o (iii ) by the fact that a later Ardys , in dynasty the

of S ad attes or Mermnadae , was known as the father a y ( ” Ad at tes . Alyattes ) . And Ardys I had a son y II 8 Askalo Da k l s . s and s y o I .

According to Nicolaus ( fr . 49 ; see summary , p . 33) Das “ ” k los a of of y I was favorite King Ardys I , son Ady

a Aki mos attes I , and had gre t influence in his time . King a

Askalo s also had a trusted subj ect , a general named , who

Askalon 8 for founded . Reasons were given above ( p . 4 ) b elieving that this Askalos was the same person as Moxo s

M o sos w ho o K rab os h ( p ) , c nquered and fed the in abitants

f At r atis o e . to the fishes g And if it is true , as suggested in

Akiamo s son Ad attes the preceding section , that was the of y I , “ ” the name Ardys being given to him in some accounts only by

o Dask los mistake , then it lo ks as i f y the powerful favorite Askalo might be the trusted general called s in some accounts , and so M o sos the same as Moxos ( p ) . This view receives

“ 6 . 1 6 . a . Herod . I See summ ry p . 3 ”7 a See summ ry, p . 33. 50 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA some support from the statement of Nicolaus that Ar ” o dys I had a g od army . It sounds improbable , perhaps, that one person should figure in these accounts , meagre as they are anyway, under four names . But j ust as Moxos and

M o sos o f so Da sk los p are really forms the same name , y and Askalos may be the s ame name in origin ; for apparently “ ” “ ” Askalos u o f Da sk los is a corr ption y , not so much through 3 8 o c any ph netic change or on fusion o f script , as through the

c A k l n s a o . so t influen e of the well known name I f , hen this

ha d one person but two names , that from which the forms M o sos Moxos and p were derived , the other the original form

a Dask lo Ask lo H e ma of the n mes y s and a s. y have had a or one tw o n double name from the beginning, of his ames may

for have been a title an epithet . It is told by both Xanthus and Nicolaus that this Lydian “ ” n C Askalon Now general fou ded a ity called . , it is a far cry

Askalon Askal on from Lydia to in Philistia . But no other is O known . n the other hand , there were several towns named 3 9 4 0 Dask lion o f y in western Asia Minor ; and one these , it

on G aean . seems , was in Lydia the shore of the yg lake More 4 1 f K loene not o o . over, far from this town was the cult Artemis

w a s This goddess of the lake , quite possibly , sometimes called 4 2 Ate rgatis ; and the fishes in the lake seem to have been “ 4 4 K rab os sacred to her . Does it not look as i f the lake near ‘ 3* h fl 0 I t a a ad . . is possible th t this lso some in uence See below , note 4 l” - Da k lei n i w a s. v s Ru e a W sso . o . g , in P uly , y ” l A h a I skele m a Of O and S ie eltha b . . . The vill ge ( see p lfers p g , in d k 6 an a zu B 1 8 8 a a . A a W . k d . d . iss erlin , 5 , pl te f cing p 5 5 ) suggesting ncient - a D ask lion a Aa omtxw v n me y , like the ncient city on the Propontis , in o f are E skil-k iii E skil- limci n the region which the modern j , ( doubt ’ less from AmcvM 0 or Nun! and I skele or I skel essi K l -A NO 2 Texier Asi M ineure l ar v W st . s. . e K S ecia k te . e . ( iepert, p ; , I Of v a a I skele I , [ course, it might be possible to deri e n me like oxdxa I a a sca la a a a a fr om the modern Greek , t li n , me ning st irw y , l nding

- i T x er c . a sea . . e . pl ce , port Cf , l ] ‘1 626 Strabo XIII . . “ o b B uresch Aus dien Tw o sepulchral inscripti ns were found y ( Ly , a One a 1 1 1 1 8 a of . 7, ) some dist nce to the northwest the l ke cont ins the ’ ’ ‘ l 68 r a a ci 'r ' 7 5 r d c s er d r ow dd va r b v ov T u Ava eir w Ti v e xpression e 7 6 p u p g 4 pq n u , h j

t e ohw é v g f t o a : Ke ohw é ror é eI TO? du b l epoi) M a r a; x x u m i . The ther is simil r x u E

x l 066? ] a. “ r H d Al t n d . I H I I 20 F orb i e a b . N . . . R . a R . V rro . II Pliny 9 ; g , ' E M iiller a G es u nd der G ciische Geo II 1 . . yg g , 77 note 75 ; in his rticle yg F H 2 M iill r G. II 2 an . e I I see 43 d ; C , , 37 , , Philologus V notes I

on fr 2 . n ote . 7 TH E H E RA K L E ID AND M ERM NAD DYNASTIES S I

or Askalon , in which the inhabitants o f the conquered town “ ” were fed by the general Askalos to the fishes sacred to the 4 6 o Ater atis G aean g ddess g , was this same yg lake , and that the

w a s Dask lion Askalon “ town really named y not , though before it was conquered it may h ave been called K rab os ? The true story seems to have been that K rab os was destroyed and that a old new town was founded , perhaps on the site and named ” D k lion . a s from the conqueror But i f the town name was y , “ ” a D sk l s H ow then the conqueror must h ve been a y o . then “ ” does the name of the town appea r in the tradition as Askalon “ ” and the conquerpr as Askalos ? Doubtless Askalon was a ’ famous name even to the historians of Xa nthus time and per D sk li n . a haps earlier a y o may h ve been little known . What

con more natural than that some one assumed that the town ,

re- re - a quered , founded , and named by the great Lydian gener l o f the o f olden time , was the famous town which all knew

Askalon vaguely , namely the great in Philistia , and changed the

a Dask lion w a s Askalon w as n me from y , which right , to , which a nd wrong, so proj ected the sto ry of the feeding of the prison

ot ers to the fishes and all the her details upon the wrong city . This m istake would be still more natural b ecause the story

o Ater atis involved the g ddess g , an important seat of whose “7 o w a s Ask lon on w rship at a in S yria . And if some e in his ’ C Da sk lion Askalon account hanged the town s name from y to , ’ o f course he had to change the conqueror s name from Dasky Askalos los to , else there would have been no point in at least ” f D k lo o r . a s s a part his sto y I f so , the general was named y ” and Moxos ( M Op sos) and Askalos was not his name at all “ ” 4 8

the . but only a mistake in tradition Moreover, i f the con

a v . 26 a 2 See bo e , p , Nicol us fr . 4. 45

a 1 1 a v . 6 2 . X nthus fr . ; see bo e , p 4 , note 9 “ S ee a v 8 . bo e , p . 4 D r B z - is A k l n iodo u s a W so a v s a o . w s. . II . 4 See en inger in P uly , ” We av ab v a a 2 a a h e seen o e ( comp re p ge 47 , note 3 ) th t the n mes Askal os and Tantalos are a a a as ssoci ted by X nthus , belonging to is v a a G a brothers . It suggesti e to note th t mong the reek gene logists the a Da k lo an Tan al o re a N m his and H n mes s y s d t s a a ssoci ted . y p ero 2 2 D k l A R . a o u a . . r a a s s dor s ( p Schol . poll . hod II 7 4, 75 ) mention ce t in y ,

f Tantal L k os Dask l os w as a av o os. , son y , the son of this y s id to , h e ’ entert a ined H er akles during the l atter s expedition to get the girdle of Hippolyte . 5 2 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

t Askalon quered town was falsely identified wi h the real , it is easy to understand why some on e added to the account th e additional item that the expedition on which the general was sent was into “ Syria” 4 9 The identification of Daskylo s I with the Askalos of the

o o f K rab os . is traditi nal accounts the capture of , etc , that ,

M o sos a with Moxos ( p ) , m kes more comprehensible the feud A B between dyattes II and this person . In speaking of asky 5 0 ” ' lo : A Svt 82 r do xovn s I , Nicolaus uses the following words p y jp

' - ‘ ’ A I ew e/ M e db Oij r o i 31 u oo c th eo r a r os 7 V do K UAOS v nOS v s . s 5 ) p p 3 y , y pp n

’ ’ ’

Av é ci i 3a}. e ei e f du a o a v (To ciu ciu Ti v S w v S . O o ; j pxj x c x n the face it , such a passage might indicate nothing more than the influence exerted upon the affairs of Lydia by a royal favorite who

t . possessed no more real power than , for example , An inous

Da sk l os e o f But if this y , a memb r the powerful family of the a of h Mermn dae , was not only a favorite the king , but in imself a strong man ; if he was the leader of at least one successful

o K rab os military expediti n , had reduced and founded a city w hich he called by his ow n name ; if he had driven out the

old usurper Meles and restored the king to the throne , it is

to t ro Ad attes easy understand hat the c wn prince , afterwards y

II , regarded him as a dangerous rival and desired to be rid of S n him by foul means if not by fair . uch a rivalry , appare tly n o f to some extent inherited by the descenda ts the principals , 5 1 is plainly alluded to in the statements made to his followers

of Dask los by Gyges II , grandson y I , when he was preparing 5 2 S ad attes K andaul es o f for his revolution against y ( ) , son

Ad attes M rsos t H a this y II ( y ) and las king O f the er cleidae .

. o f 9 In the light o f the preceding discussion , and that given a in Ch pter II , we may now summarize briefly what appears to have been the histori cal course of events regarding the politi “ ” Akiamo cal disturbances in the reign of King s ( Ardys I ) . ’ o f had e Toward the end this king s reign , when he becom

aged and infirm , three political parties began to struggle for

a a Th : . e the ascend ncy ( ) party of the ruling house , headed by

2 a 2 . See p . 47, note 3 ; X nthus fr . 3 F F H G I I 82 1 0 r . 49 ; . I , 3 , line . a F H . G 8 . I I G Nicol us fr 49 ; I , 3 5 , line 5 . yges , in soliciting his ’ a id Da k o friends , reminds them of the murder of s yl s I and of the “ ” a A I curses pronounced by the ged rdys upon his murderers . ”2 S ee a v and 2 bo e , p . 44 note 4. TH E H ERA K L E I D AND M ERM NAD DYNASTIES 53

A t e d a es . b . crown prince y tt II ( ) The par y o f the Mermnada , D k lo c Th led by Moxos as y s I . ( ) . e party of Meles . This third party at first triumphed and Meles usurped the royal power , D l but was afterward driven out by Moxos asky os I . This general then became a hero and the powerful favorite of the n ki g . The crown prince in j ealousy killed him ; and the strong

f 'M oxos Da sk los of its party o y I , dep rived its leader , lost

o of re hold . Meles at once t ok advantage his opportunity,

S the turned from Babylon and seized the throne again . ince family of the Daskylioi were now alienated from the ruling i t house, Meles m ght naturally make over ures to them and try

s to secure their support for himself . Their refu al i s easy to

e understand , and it doubtl ss constituted the negative reason , while active op position on the part o f the crown prince was ’

o . the positive cause , of Meles second and permanent expulsi n “ ” “ ” 1 d t s f K d s 0 . S a a te o a . y the regent , son y This person has a place in the narrative only if Meles went into volunta ry exile ; for if Meles went into exile without losing 5 3 one the kingship , some must have held the throne for him ’ of during his absence . But i f the story Meles voluntary 5 4 exile is rej ected as unhistorical , the whole story about a S d at s o . O a te regent sh uld be rej ected too f course , y the son o f K ad s y , though not a regent , may have been a real person , as well as S adyattes the merchant from whom Croesus tried to

a borrow, unless these n mes were employed by tradition mongers merely to gi ve defi niteness to stories previously name less . 1 1 T lon . y . In Nic olau s no information is given concerning Tylom b e yond the mere mention that he was a remote 5 6 ancestor of K d s Lixos a . y , and o f But some exceedingly interesting ma 5 7 terial a him Radet bout is to be found collected by , and better

F HG 8 . III , 3 3, line 5 . ‘" S ee a v 2 ff bo e pp . 9 . 55 6 a . A a . . a a Nicol us fr 5 ; see summ ry , p 35 pp rently, then , the n me

S a d a ttes w a s v i L a y not used exclusi ely by the k ngs of ydi . “ ‘ a F H G 8 M h s 5a ( a i w v Ti v d i v . . : Nicol us fr 49 ; III , 3 3, line 4 fi n p y j px j

' ‘ éw la r eva e E a dvcir r 1 3 K dOvos évos den 7 6 d véxa flev drro Tt I/os A y 4 , y . lso p .

8 i 1 2 Ka i Al os r oUt o ulou c é vov s. 3 4 , l ne E y “ La L die 8 8 and y , 3, 4 , notes . 54 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

H 5 8 a . N H still by e d Briefly it is as follows : Pliny ( . XXV . on a the authority of Xanthus , relates th t , after having been 5 9 T lon killed by the bite of a serpent , y was restored to life by

o f resu sci the virtue an herb called Balis . In the story of the eo tation o f T los as N nnus Dio ia 1 y told by o ( nys c a XXV . 45

Al as iii/Gog the healing plant is called , and is given him by his

Nonnus sister Morie . According to , the serpent , after having T los bitten y , was slain by a giant warrior named Damasen , a Nonn s Ge. u son of next tells how a female serpent , the wife l o of the s aughtered m nster, coming to the rescue of her mate , brought him in her mou th a spray o f the magic plant and half i restore d to life her dead companion . Meanwhile the g rl T los Morie , the sister Of the dead y , witnessing this marvel , ” T los did likewise , and thus restored y to li fe . There are also 6 1 three coins of Sardes to be noticed : ( 1 ) Time of Severus T o m on . w Alexander ale figures face to face , each holding O one arm a bent and knotted club . ne presents to the other a

f he b ranch o some plant . On t ground between them is a dead “ of serpent . In the field are the names the two heroes , Mas ” “ T los nes and y These names are equally near both figures , s but presumably it is Masme s who presents the herb to Tylo . 2 of u ( ) Time Gordian III . Male fig re wielding club against in its mou th large serpent coiled and erect before him , holding “ ” A a branch of some plant . Across the field Masanes . ( 3) f O 1 8 N o . . O . coin tacilia ( Mion IV, p 3 , Male figure in “ ” His m T los a car drawn by two winged serpents . na e , y , is written across the field . Beneath the car lies another figure , ” “ e T los son of accompanied by the name G . And y was the ”

H 2 . o . earth according t Dionys . alic I . 7

n T lon los w ho Evidently the y or Ty was a god or hero , at n o least in the Roma peri d , was regarded as a national figure in

L n o w s . o e a ydian history At time , presumably in his y uth , he N to . ow killed (though soon restored life) by a serpent , a o f Greek hero, the most famous them all , was all but destroyed

H a nd of in infancy by serpents , namely erakles ; the coin

S e T lon d everus Alexander , repres nting y with a knotte club , suggests that Tylon and H erakles were identified . But i f

5 8 xi ff B M u L i c . d a . a ins rit s. C t . . o C , y , pp 5° a Pliny uses this form of the n me . e" N u onn s uses this form . “ a l C He d , . .

56 TH E KINGS OF LYDIA

T lis B z S . T lon y mentioned by teph y . regards y as in all probability imported by the I ndogerm anic migrations into 6 4 . 1 2 00 B C . Asia Minor (ca and earlier) , that is , among “ ” 6 M n ns 5 aio ia . o e . others , by the This is quite p ssibl And , “ H T o s oliz it. . l s mb o . c t as ead says ( p , p cxiii) , the y my h , as y n of e ing the retur spring after wint r, by resurrection after t no of dea h , doubt formed part of the sacred mysteries the ” o f S cult Demeter and Kore celebrated at ardes . But this same 6 6 the symbolism belongs to primitive Anatolian deity Attes , worshipped in S ardes and throughout a large part of Asia

Minor, with ritual Observances commemorating his death and 6 7 I n rm n l . do e a ic T on resurrection Perhaps , then , the g y simply ’ took the older, native deity s place with the new dynasty, m probably assi ilating part of his attributes , and becoming to e some extent , though nev r entirely, identified with him . If of this is right, then there seems to be a germ truth in ’ “ H d H erakleid ero otus tradition about the dynasty , and the “ ” rulers descended from Aty s w ho pre ceded the H eracleidae . And there is even some excuse for the Greek logographers who seem to re fer both Mermnadae and H eracleidae to H H e erakles as an ancestor . That the eracleidae w re so traced B i o f o l . . . b is obvious But Ap llodorus ( II mentions , as a son H erakles and 396V Ka i 7 5 K poio ov Per

the mn r our haps Mer adae (who we e , as far back as records oe8 g and therefore probably much earlier still , the powerful l 6 9 rivals of the H eracleidae) were O f the o d Anatolian stock . so If , it would be natural for them , like the earlier Anatolian 7 ° And L . rulers of ydia , to trace their descent from Attes i f a Lydian god could be identified by some of the H T lon Greeks with erakles , while others called him y , and still

“ ’ A I 61 E G d . a . : . du rd Meyer , . , , p 3 “ l G rache 8 d S . K E in in ie Gesch d er r . See retschmer , . . p , 3 5 See

a a 6 a v . lso summ ry p . 3 bo e “ B 2 2 P r ll r c e a a b lon . a ne , G ee nd y 54 , 5 5 “ - i s A 2 2 a W s ow a s. v. . . C y , , l 49 umont, in P ul ttis co 68

6 and 1 . 2 . a . a . See summ ry , p 33 ; see lso p 4 , note 7 on p 3 “ I a A a a t is my Opinion th t they were not only of n toli n stock, but also perh aps akin to the H ittites ; and I hope at some time in the V future to publish my reasons for this iew . 7° I v a At s a . Herodotus ( . 34) gi es the n me y to son of Croesus See a 6 summ ry, p . 3 . TH E H ERA K L EID AND M ERM NAD DYNASTIES 57

s o f es of con fu other spoke Att , it is easy to see one source n f sion in the compilatio s o genealogists .

n the o f ur III . Reverti g once more to summaries O traditional accounts and the conspectus of them given at the beginning of and of s this chapter, applying the results the discus ion con “ ” tained in the foregoing pages , a new genealogical list of F or Lydian kings may now be constructed . ( the following

a a i . list, comp re the accomp ny ng diagram ) 1 TY LON o i . a , the myth log c l eponymous ancestor is naturally f e to be placed at the top o the diagram . S omewhere betw en him 7 1 o f AL K I M OS and the list kings may perhaps b e placed , said to o f di t have been an early king Ly a , the mos prosperous and best beloved of all . The only other royal name mentioned in of H icolau s the accounts erodotus , N ( Xanthus ) , and the b e chronographers , preceding the nine kings given in the list ’ is AGRON H o n H low, , said by er dotus to have bee the first era o f kleid king of Lydia . All these three names course belong to c the mythologi al literature . The first name in the new list of kings is ADYATTES I (see “ ” KADY AK I A Nicolaus fr . S and M OS ( Ardys I ) are his two sons ; and DAS K Y LOS I (AS KAL OS ) Moxos ( M OPS OS ) may be placed in the corresponding generation o f the M ermna PERM OS K ad s dae , as a son of Gyges I . S was a cousin of y “ ” so of of and Ardys I , he was probably the son a brother Ad a s M YRso f Akiamos y tte I . s is here taken to be the son o “ ” AD Y ATTES of ( Ardys I ) , and identical with II , the murderer D sk los N A a . KA D ULES S ADYATTES y I Lastly , ( ) is here con “ ” sidered to son o f M rsos S ad attes be the y ; while y , the IK supposititious regent , and L OS, are respectively son and

s of K a s grand on dy . ff i no u . The Mermnad line presents di ic lt es The aged ,

D sk l f E a os son o . childless ARDYS I , uncle of y II , is a GYG S I DAS K YL OS E AR Then in order come I and II , GYG S II , DYS II n ’a L K amb les S AD YATTE S Adram tes ALY ( A YATTES) , [ ] ( ) , [ y ] (

“ a FH 2 G. . I 8 a 1 0 Nicol us fr 49 , II , 3 ; X nthus fr . . ” ff a ov . 0 . See b e , pp 4 " a 2 ff v . . See bo e , pp 4

TH E H ERA KL EID AND M ERM NAD DYNASTIES 59

A of S ad attes TTES) , and CROESUS . The sister y , married by f M I LETOS W o . him , was previously ife This man was a ” “ of - in- descendant MELAS, son law of Gyges . This passage doubtless refers to Gyges I ; for if Gyges II had been meant ,

M il os et would have been called the son , not the descendant - an 6 0m e a ( 7 ) , of M l s . Melas is then to be placed in the ” same generation with MELES ; and though the names Mame

M k ' ff and fi m are somewhat di erent , it is possible that the two

e the . p rsons may be same I f so , it was very natural for the t b e usurping tyrant to try to streng hen his position , perhaps n or al fore his tyra ny in preparation for it , by a marriage . l n d ia ce with the powerful family of the Mermna ae . “ ” In this genealogy or list there are thus tw o ruling dynas s tie , with four kings in the first (not including usurpers) , h 7 6 and five in t e second .

a 6 . S ee a Nicol us fr . 3 summ ry , p . 35 . T" The a M éka r M éM v - os 6 FH G I 6 : . . . n me (gen . Nic fr 3, I I , 39 ) a a t G ma av a a v a ppe rs o be reek, but it y h e been n ti e n me so written G to v a G an e a a by the reeks in order gi e it reek me ing, p rh ps nother instance of the lib erties freely taken by the Greeks with n ative non

’ G a F H a ttiden a nd Danubi er in Gn echenla nd reek n mes ( cf . ick, The n a me M éxa s (M éxa v - os) is a pplied to va rious riv ers in Asi a : a v e a a an a a I 66 Pa u Minor ri er b tween P mphyli d Cilici ( Str b o X V . 7 ;

san . d . a v a a o a a I an a v VIII ri er in C pp d ci ( Str bo XI . ri er N H o m a a . . a o un in Pontus ( Pliny . VI The s me r ot y perh ps be f d M éx s M éx —os a a v a a a a in n ( m ) the n me of ri er in Ioni , ne r Smyrn ( Str bo I And h irob sk a Th o . C o o o . d e d s. XI 554 ; XIV . though s ( Schol o a G a ma r . H G eci I v l I 1 60 c A . a a o . d . C non , in r m tici p rt V, , p . [ iller , 1 8 v M A 1 : v M 1 M 1 94, distinguishes the ri er 7 from the ri er 5a ( 5

M r - os a w as a a r ) , ne r Colophon , which so ne r Smyrn , yet he implies a a a a a a and a th t other gr mm ri ns considered the stre ms identic l , dmits a a a a a a he th t they reg rded one n ame s v ri nt form of t other . 7‘ There a re no records a nywhere of more th an fi ve kings in this a m a f G a 6 2 dyn sty . We ay d te the end of the reign o yges II bout 5

B . d a u C . an o f a and of at a , the f ll S rdes Croesus , the h nds of Cyr s , in B - - C a . . 6 . L . a a s v G 54 ( ehm nn H upt in P uly Wiss . . yges col 1 6 1 F a a 1 06 a are out 9 , or such period of bout ye rs , two kings of are a for are the question ; three possible, but improb ble , the reigns too a a a long . It is re son ble, therefore , to suppose th t four is the correct f ’ number o Gyges successors . 60 TH E K I NGS OF LYDI A

2 f . One obj ection to this new list o kings remains to be con ’ 7 7 sid r d a e e . In the chronogr phers lists Meles is placed after 7 8 A M K ndaul d attes rsos a es. Alyattes ( y II ) y , and j ust before

r In the econstructed list Meles , if mentioned at all , ought to ” a o r o f Akiamos come j ust fter in the time (Ardys I ) , whose h throne he usurped . But i f it be true t at Meles was a usurper, that he was a contemp ora ry o f Alyattes (Adya ttes II ) Myr and tha t he se ized the kingdom twice before he was 7 9 finally expelled , a confusion in the accounts preserved by the

o chron graphers is easy to understand .

3 . This new list o f nine Lydian kings attempts only to give the names of the kings and their correct order of succession . f It is o fered tentatively , as something more satisfactory than other lists thus far proposed . It may well be that it gives l us historical truth , and that parts of it were u timately de o f o rived from some kind e arly written rec rds , even i f these were no more than inscriptions on royal tombs . We can also see that the secret of the confu sion in ou r

a u t i u o traditional cco nts , in he r present untr stw rthy form , is this : Xanthus or some preceding writer doubtless had b e fore him at least tw o different earlier sources o r groups of s s ources . One of these was sub tantially correct and cor “ w e ou r responded , as may believe , to new genealogy but was confused , and used the proper names and the common name or ad attes Ad attes m title ( S y , y , Alyattes ) indiscri inately for f . o certain kings The other source , or group sources , wrongly “ ” Akiamos used the name Ardys instead o f , and regarded M Ask los D sk lo ff a a s . oxos , , and y , as di erent persons It is also clear that the key to the solution here offered is containe d in the identification o f Meles II ( Nico

. 2 n laus fr 4 ) a d Meles III ( Nicolaus fr . which was made po ssible by a re- examination of the order and the assignment ‘ ’ into books o f the fragments from Nicolaus conta ined in

an 8 a d . . See summ ry , conspectus , pp 37, 3

S ee ab v . o e , pp . 39 , 44 7° 2 0 See pp . 9 , 3 . TH E H ERAK LEI D AND M ERM NAD DYNASTIES 6 1

o f Virtu tib u s the two series Excerpta , the De and the De I ns i For idi s. , i f this identification is correct , the two frag

b e ments concerning Meles may , and properly should be ,

d one combine . It is thus made possible to deal with only “ ” a f o f ccount o this person , a usurper in the time Ardys I and mentioned by Nicolaus in the course of the passage from which fr . 49 was taken . The way is then clear for considering the relations b etw een the persons mentioned at the end o f the preceding paragraph , and for discussing the other matters b which have een taken up in this chapter .