APPENDIX SEVEN L YCIAN TROOPS and THEIR EQUIPMENT It May Well Be That Lycian Mercenaries Were Regularly Employed by the Persians

APPENDIX SEVEN

L YCIAN TROOPS AND THEIR EQUIPMENT

It may well be that Lycian mercenaries were regularly employed by the Persians. It has already been mentioned that the mercenaries that served under Tissaphemes against Amorges were quite possibly Lycians (pp. 137- 38). A carved stele seen by Texier1 near Konya (ancient Ikonion) on the border between Pisidia and Lycaonia (cf. Xen. An. 1.2.19), probably dating to the mid-fifth century,2 depicted a warrior armed in Greek dress, but car• rying a buckler Texier identified as Lycian. 3 This stele carried an inscrip• tion which, though largely destroyed by the time Texier recorded it, may well have been in Lycian.4 The stele perhaps records the death of a Lycian soldier in the vicinity, presumably in a campaign against one of the recalcitrant Anatolian peoples in the area.' It may well be that the Lycians earned much of the silver they coined into money through mercenary serv• ice for the Persians, 6 even in the mid-fifth century when they were techni• cally allies of Athens. This may be a tradition of foreign service that goes back to the Bronze Age; there were Lukka in the Hittite army at the Battle of Kadesh in the thirteenth century. 7 It is certainly one that continues after the Achae• menids; Lycian mercenaries are a common occurrence in the Hellenistic period. Eumenes secured their services in 318 (Diod. 18.61.4-5), they are known to have served under Antigonos Monopthalmos and Demetrios in

1 Texier 1849: 148-49, pl. Cll; Perrot, Chipiez 1890: II, 224, fig. 359; Reinad:i 1912: pl. 105.1; Bossert 1942: 86 no. 1121. The stele was lost after Texier saw it. For a full discus.sioo., see now Sekunda 1996: 12-14. Texier and Perrot and Chipiez thoui?Pt the moo.umwt a grave stele; Sekunda 1996: 12 is inclined to suspect that it was originally part of a polygoo.al wall, be• cause of the relief's asymmetric shape. I think a fimerary stele still to be most likely. 2 Texier thoui?Pt the moo.umwt ard:iaic, \Wilst Bossert thoui?Pt it Hellwiltic. The qiid:ioric insaiptioo., however, suggests a fifth or fowth-cwtury date, and Sekunda 1996: 14 advances that the style points to a date c. 450-400, \Wilst noting that the accuracy of Texier's drawing an the probability that it was executed by a nm-Greek hamper dating according to normal artistic crite• ria. 3 Texier's guess is now supported by the appearance of a moo.ster of some sort oo. the shield blazcn; a very similar emblem has now bew fO\Dld oo. a series of late fiflh-cwtury Lycian coins (Waggoo.ner 1983: no. 708). 4 Ot-possibly Lydian; see Sekunda 1996: 12. 5 For trouble with Lykaoo.ians and Pisidians in Ad:iaemwid times: Lewis 1977: 56. I am grateful to Dr N. V. Sekunda for discus.sing this matter with me. 6 So Prof. Bryce (pers. comm). Cf. Zahle 1989: 172. 7 See Kuhrt 1995: 388. LYCIAN TROOPS AND THEIR EQUIPMENI' 229

317,314 and 312 (Diod. 19.29.3, 69.1, 82.4), and they are also found de• serting Lysimachos just before the battle of Ipsos in 301 (Diod. 20.113.3; Polyaen. 4.12.1).1 Still others are found giving assistance to Aspendos, on the side of Ptolemy I (SEG 17 639). On the other hand, it is notable that there are no Lycian forces in any of the Persian armies assembled to repel Alexander.9 Homer describes the Lycians as <'xmttcr'ta.t, 'shield-fighters' (//. 16.490). Herodotus' list of the forces of Xerxes describes Lycian marines (who may or may not represent the typical appearance of Lycian foot-soldiers in the fifth century) in the following terms (7.92): 8rop111eoq>6pot u fovuc; 1eal. 1eV,tµtooq>6pot, etxov oE ,:o~a 1epavfava 1eal. o'icri:ouc; lCllAllµivouc; 0.1t1:Epouc; 1C(ll 0.1COV1:l(l, £1tl OE aiyoc; OEpµa'ta 1tEpt i:ouc; roµouc; aimpEoµEva, 1tEpt OE -tjjm lCE(pllAU..ouc; 1t'tEpoicrt 1tEpl• EµEVOU<;' £'Y')CEtpiota OE lC(lt opE1tllV(l etxov. They were thorekophoroi ['cuirassiers'] wearing greaves and carried bows made of comel-wood, unfeathered arrows made of cane and javelins. They wore skins of goats hllllg about the shoulders, and felt caps encircled with feathers on their heads. They also carried hand-daggers and drepana [scimitars or 'war-sickles']1°). Herodotus uses the term thorekophoroi on two occasions apart from this; at 7. 89 it refers to marines on Egyptian ships, and at 8.13 it refers to a unit of Persians, probably heavy-armed infantry. The term is also used by Xeno• phon (Cyr. 5.3.36), again to refer to infantry.11 The thorax itself seems to have been, at least in Persian service, a scale-mail breastplate (Hdt. 9.22.2). There are several problems with this account. The first is that this de• scription does not really tally with any artistic representation of soldiers that can be found in Lycia. 12 Most of these13 depict figures in standard Greek or Persian dress. The second is that the possibility must seriously be entertained that such troops were not actually involved in the expedition of Xerxes, since they are only to be found mentioned in this initial army list. 14 There are, however, some parallels to Herodotus' description, which may suggest that he was not wholly ignorant. The drepanon, 15 which may

8 See Saitta 1955: 78n. 49; LW1d 1992: 77. 9 There are Carians at Gaugamela (Arr. Anab. 3.2.3ff.); see Marsdm 1964: 33-34. 10 Sekunda 1996: 11 suggests the slight pos.sibility that a naval cmtext might mean that these were not the typical war-sickles but dorudrepana, a Ieng-hafted 'spear-sickle'. 11 On Persi:m cavalry 'cuirassiers', see Sek.Wlda, Chew 1992: 25. 12 Head 1992: 58. 13 For a representative selectien of the cmsiderable number :md varitty of rq,resentaticns of warriors en Lyci:m menummts, see Head 1992: 56-58, from \\inch the informatien following is largely taken. 14 For a criticism of the army list, see Barkworth 1993, especially 156-67. 15 On this weapen see now Sekunda 1996.