The Edonians by Peter Delev

7/30/2019 The Edonians by Peter Delev

1/31

1

THE EDONIANS

Peter DELEV

The Edonians, or in Greek texts,1 were aThracian people on the lower Strymon.2 Their name was probablythe best known among the many tribal names of the region, andGreek and Latin poets would sometimes use it as a loose synonymfor the Thracians in general.3

Greek tradition gave most Thracian tribes eponymous mythologi-cal ancestors, but we remain in the dark as to whether this reiterateslocal Thracian beliefs or was mainly a creation of the Greek colonistsin the archaic age, when mythological constructions seem to have

Their history was never written, andthe scattered pieces of information that have been passed down tous by various ancient authors do not permit its full reconstructionand refer mainly to a rather brief period of time in the fifth centuryB. C.

1 Schol. in Lycophron. 418 suggests a difference in the usage of the two names,implying that although they belonged to the same tribe, the Edones lived nearthe sea and the Edonoi in the interior: ,

' , .2 The Edonians are qualified as Thracians by Herodotus (7.11) and many otherancient authors. Cf. E. Oberhummer. Edones. RE 5.2, 1905, 1974; .. . , 1976, 62-65; F. Papazoglou. Les villes de Macdoine l'poque romaine. Paris, 1988 (= BCHsuppl. 16), 385-413.

3 W. Smith (Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, London, 1854, 807, s. v.Edones) quotes as examples of such usage Aesch. Pers. 493; Soph.Ant. 955; Eu-rip. Hec. 1153; Ov.Met. 11.69; Trist. 4.1.42; Propert. 1.3.5; Hor. Carm. 2.7.27; I do

not however find it equally evident in all these instances.


2/31

2

been a popular addiction in the Greek world. Edonos () issaid to have been a son of Ares and Callirhoe the daughter of Nes-tos, and a brother of Biston and Odomas;4 other versions make himthe son of Paionos and grandson of Ares,5 or a brother of Myg-donos.6

Several other mythological figures bear some conjectural rele-vance to the shadowy early history of the Edonians. The story of Ly-curgus, the son of Dryas and offender of Dionysos, briefly men-

tioned by Homer in the Iliad,

It is doubtful whether these mythological links may haveany value beyond the mere reflection of the geographical proximityof the Edonians with their neighbours the Bistonians, Odomanti,and Mygdonians, with the Paeonians of the Strymon, and with theriver Nestos. A loose idea of common ancestry and therefore theeventual appurtenance of the Edonians, Bistonians, Odomanti andMygdonians to a larger tribal group could eventually (but very in-securely) be extrapolated from these mythological stemmata; thishowever is not feasible in the case of the Paeonians who were not ofThracian stock. The belief that all these peoples were descendants ofAres should probably be interpreted as an acknowledgement oftheir warlike character.

7

was developed by Aeschylus into afull tetralogy, of which only fragments have survived; the first trag-edy significantly bears the name of .8 Sophocles calls Lycur-gus a king of the Edonians ( ).9

4 Herodian. de prosod. cathol. p. 37, 185; Steph. Byz. s. v. .

In the version ofApollodorus Lycurgus, the son of Dryas, was the king of the Edo-nians living near the river Strymon, and the first man to defy anddrive away Dionysos. The god took refuge in the depth of the seawith Thetis, daughter of Nereus, while his train of attendants, the

Bacchantes and Satyrs, were all taken hostage. Then suddenly allthe captives were miraculously set free, and Lycurgus was seized

5Ibid.6 Steph. Byz. s. v. .7 Hom. Il. 6.130-140. Homer makes no mention of the Edonians in this text.8 K. Deichgrber. Die Lykurgie des Aischylos, Gttingen, 1939.9

Soph.Ant. 955-964. Cf. Strabo 10.3.16 (C 471).


3/31

3

with insanity by the will of Dionysos. In his madness he killed hisown son Dryas, thinking he was trimming a wine and chopping onhim with an axe; only when he had cut off all his limbs did he re-gain his consciousness. As the land refused thenceforth to give crop,the god gave an oracle that only the death of Lycurgus would re-store its fertility. On hearing this the Edonians brought him to Mt.Pangaeum and left him there tied, to meet his end torn into pieces

by horses.10

Thamyris the son of Philamon, the mythical singer who dared toinvite the Muses to a musical competition and was blinded for hisaudacity,

11 was also sometimes associated with the Edonians 12 orwith Mt. Pangaeum, where the event would have taken place ac-cording to some authorities.13 A different version makes Thamyris aking in the Athos peninsula.14

Another mythological story eventually connected with theEdonians was that of king Rhesus, best known from the descriptionin the Iliad of his untimely death in the Trojan war, on the verynight after his late arrival.

15 Homer does not specify the tribalaffiliation of Rhesus and his Thracians, but calls his father by the

name Eioneus,16

an ancient name of the river Strymon.17

Laterauthors make Rhesus a son of Strymon and one of the Muses(differently identified, sometimes as Euterpe or Clio).18

10 Apollod. bibl. 3.5.1 (3.34-35).

The name of

11 The earliest mention of this popular story is in Hom. Il. 594-600.12 Suda s. v. : , , , ' .

13 Aeschyl. fr. 84; Euripid. Rhes. 915-925; most ancient authors however followHomer in placing the musical competition in Messenian Dorion, retaining theThracian (sometimes Odrysian) origin of Thamyris.

14 Strabo 7 fr. 35; Eustath. ad Hom. Il. 1.462: .15 Hom. Il. 10.434-441, 470-525.16 Ibid. 435.17 Schol. Hom. Il. 10.435; Phot. bibl. cod. 186 p. 131b; Eustath. ad Hom. Il. 3.107.18 Euripid. Rhes. 279, 349-352, 393-394; Schol. Euripid. Rhes. 346, 393; Apollod.

bibl. 1.3.4.


4/31

4

Rhesus reappears in connection with the Athenian foundation ofAmphipolis in 437 B. C. on Edonian land. Polyaenus describes in astratagem how the founder Hagnon had his remains transferredfrom Troy in a red mantle and buried on the site in order to fulfill anoracle;19 the tomb of Rhesus was situated on a hill inside the city,opposite a shrine dedicated to his mother,20 and presumablyreceived a heroic cult in later times. According to Strabo Rhesus wasking of those among the Odomanti, Edonians and Bisalti, who hadcome to the lower Strymon and the region called Daton fromMacedonia.21

None of these mythological stories could be taken as directevidence for the earlier history of the Edonians; it is no merecoincidence that their tribal name is never mentioned in the oldestvariants of the myths, namely those in the Homeric poems. In somecases the later association with the Edonians could be attributed totheir dominant position in the area in the age when classicalAthenian drama elaborated actively on the inherited mythological

tradition; in other cases (namely that of Rhesus) the avoidance ofsuch an association could eventually reflect a notion ofchronological discrepancy based on the assumption that theEdonians were a newer population which was not present there atthe time of the Trojan war (taken here as a general chronologicalnotion of the mythological past rather than as a definite date).

Although Rhesus is usually characterized moregenerally as a "king of (the) Thracians", he seems topographicallyconnected with the territory which later belonged to the Edonians.

The idea of manifold migratory movements affecting the LowerStrymon area can be deduced from a number of ancient texts. The

story of Rhesus in the tenth song of the Iliad (which seems to belongto a later stratum of evidence compared with the main body of

19 Polyaen. strat. 6.53.20 Schol. Euripid. Rhes. 346: .21 Strabo 7 fr. 36. Herodotus 9.75 implies indirectly that Daton was in Edonian

land.


5/31

5

Homeric information)22 could eventually be linked with themigration of a large group of Thracians from the lower Strymon toAsia Minor as mentioned by Herodotus; known previously asStrymonians, these were later called Bithynians.23 Herodotus affirmsas well that the Strymonians had been driven from their previousterritory by the Mysians and Teucrians () fromAsia who had invaded Europe before the Trojan war ( ) and had subdued all the Thracians, reaching as far asthe Ionian Sea in the west and the river Peneus in the south;24 someof them settled on the Strymon and were later known as Paeonians().25 As has been demonstrated elsewhere,26 these informa-tions of Herodotus can be split effectively into two chronologicalindependent sets: the eventual invasion of the Mysians and Teucri-ans from Asia into Europe, which (if veritable at all, which is doubt-ful) would probably be of really early date, and the migration of theBithynians (or Strymonians, and probably equal to the Thracians ofRhesus) from the Strymon to Asia,27 which would post-date the timeof Homer or at least the main part of Homeric evidence.28

The earliest mention of the name of the Edonians, if we take into

account the date of the described events and not that of their docu-mented fixation in writing,

29 would be in a fragment of Aristotlepreserved in Pliny the Elder and Stephanus Byzantinus.30

22. . . , 1972, 44.

The two

23 Hdt. 7.75.2.24 Hdt. 7.20.2.25 Hdt. 5.13.2.

26 P. Delev. Stratifying Herodotus: Local Tribes between the Lower Axios andthe Nestos. Thracia 16, 2005, 106-107.

27 It is mentioned briefly also by late authors like Hesychius (s. v. )and Stephanus Byzantinus (s. v. ) who might eventually draw on theauthority of Herodotus.

28 The Bithynians are ignored completely in the Homeric poems.29 The procedure is outlined in P. Delev, Op. cit.30 Aristot. Fragmenta varia, fr. 478 (= Steph. Byz. s. v. :

, ; Plin. n. h.


6/31

6

parallel texts impart that the Aeolian city of Antandros in Asia Mi-nor was once called Edonis, being inhabited by Edonian Thracians,and later Cimmeris, when it was occupied by the Cimmerians for ahundred years. The order is explicitly mentioned by Pliny (Edonis

prius vocata, dein Cimmeris), so the Edonian presence in Antandrosshould be dated before the Cimmerian invasion of Asia Minor,probably in the eighth century B. C. To this singular piece of infor-mation, implying the participation of a part of the Edonians in a mi-gratory movement to North-Western Anatolia, should be added themore ample evidence on the presence of Mygdonians in Asia, nota-

bly in an area adjacent to Bithynia and Mysia on the southern coastof the Propontis,31 in Greater Phrygia 32 and eventually also inNorthern Mesopotamia.33 The first of these various localizations isparticularly interesting because of its geographical proximity to An-tandros,34 hence the possibility to think that the Edonians and Myg-donians would have migrated to Asia together and in one and thesame age. As to the probable definition of the time of that migration,the association of the Mygdonians with Phrygia and the Phrygiansseems more relevant and significantly appears very early, being

mentioned by Homer.35

Pausanias would even presume that thenames Phrygians and Mygdonians were interchangeable.36

5.123: rursus in litore Antandros Edonis prius vocata, dein Cimmeris; cf. Hero-dian. de prosod. cathol. p. 96).

It seemsreasonable therefore to suggest that the migration of the Edonians

31 Strabo 12.3.22; 12.4.4; 12.8.10-11; Salust. hist. 3 fr. 70.32 Plin. n. h. 5.145; Solin. 40.9; Steph. Byz. s. v. .

33 Polyb. 5.51.1; Strabo 11.14.2; 16.1.1, 23; Plin. n. h. 6.42; Plut. Lucul. 32.4; Steph.Byz. s. v. . Strabo and Pliny suggest that Mygdonia in Mesopotamiagot its name only after the Macedonian conquest of Asia, because its landscaperesembled European Mygdonia.34 The distance from the bay of Adramyteion on the Aegean coast, on which layAntandros, to the mouth of the river Rhyndacus on the Propontis, mentioned

by Strabo as the western frontier of Mygdonia, measures about 150 km, andthe distance to the middle course of the same river less than 100 km.

35 Hom. Il. 3.185-186.36

Paus. 10.27.1; cf. Hor. carm. 2.12.22; 3.16.41; Ovid. met. 6.45; Hygin.fab. 191.1.


7/31

7

and Mygdonians from Europe to Asia would have taken place to-gether with that of the Phrygians, for which a date as late as 800B. C. is considered possible.37

N. G. L. Hammond has suggested another option, namely that theEdonians migrated to Asia Minor in the first half of the seventh cen-tury B. C. together with the Cimmerians and Treres.

38 But the as-sumption of a wide impact of the Cimmerian invasion in the Bal-kans reaching as far as Macedonia and Epirus 39 seems to contradictthe well-grounded idea of their penetration into Asia Minor fromthe east, through the Caucasus and Urartu.40

In the seventh and sixth century B. C. the European Edoniansmust have passed through some of the most interesting and brilliantphases of their history, yet the remaining traces are so meagre thateven the determination of their definite geographical position re-mains impossible. Hammond has brought forward a consistent the-ory of Edonian expansion in this age, suggesting they conqueredMygdonia and much adjacent territory in the Chalcidic peninsulaand in the interior as far west as the lower Axios 41 and possiblypushed some of the Paeonians to the upper and middle Axios. 42

37 N. G. L. Hammond. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, Historical Geography andPrehistory. Oxford, 1972, 410-411.

Thracian presence in the area in this age and into the fifth century B.C. is attested both archaeologically, in a number of rich grave finds

38 Ibid. 427-429.39 Ibid.; cf. N. G. L. Hammond. Epirus. Oxford, 1966, 428. The theory is based onarchaeological material, the ethnic identification of which according to me isnot conclusive.

40 In 714 B. C. the Cimmerians were the allies of the Assyrian king Sargon IIagainst Urartu, and in 705 B. C. his enemies; in 696-695 B. C. they invadedPhrygia, in 679 Cilicia, and were defeated by Asarhaddon probably in Cap-padocia; only about 654 or 652 B. C. did they reach Lydia, capturing Sardissome ten years later. It is in the time of this last events that the presumablyThracian Treres appear together with the Cimmerians as a menace for theGreek cities in Anatolia, notably in the verses of Archilochus and Callinus. Cf.also Hdt. 4.12, 7.20.

41 N. G. L. Hammond.A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, 427.42

Ibid. 428.


8/31

8

from various locations, notably at Sindos, Ayia Paraskevi,Chauchitsa, Ayios Vasilios and Zeitenlik,43 and by the evidence of anumber of ancient texts.44 In a modified version of his theory,Hammond later linked the Edonian expansion to the Axios, wherehe suggested Lete and Sindos were among the seats of their royalpower, to the Persian invasion of the area under Megabazus in thelate sixth century B. C.45 But the question remains open whether theEdonians and other related Thracians were moving (or expanding)from east to west in the seventh or sixth century, as Hammond hassuggested, or were the original settlers of these more western parts,and also whether they already inhabited in this age their later terri-tory on the lower Strymon and in the vicinity of Mt. Pangaeum, oronly moved there in the course of the same migration which madethem abandon the more western area. Even the time of that move-ment is not definitely attested; despite the often quoted passage inThucydides which links their (final ?) expulsion with the advance ofthe Macedonians across the Axios, easily placed in the later reign ofAlexander I,46

43 . . ., 1985; . . . . . , , 1987, 787-811;

N. G. L. Hammond. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, 348, 352, 428-429; idem. TheMacedonian State. Origins, Institutions, and History. Oxford, 1989, 43; E. Borza. Inthe Shadow of Olympus. The Emergence of Macedon. Princeton, 1990, 88-89.Among the notable features of these graves are the golden face masks or goldplaques laid as mouth-pieces.

it remains open to speculation in what ways the ear-lier movements of large masses of population in a west-to-east di-

rection across the lower Axios, presumably in the seventh and sixthcenturies B. C. (including the Bottiaei and the Pierian Thracians) had

44 Thuc. 2.99.4; Strabo 7 fr. 11, fr. 36; Etymolog. Magn. s. v. : , .

45 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 550-336 B.C.Oxford, 1979, 57-58; N. G. L. Hammond. The Macedonian State, 43.

46

Thuc. 2.99.4. Cf. N. G. L. Hammond.A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, 436.


9/31

9

affected the Edonian presence in the west.47 Another unsettled prob-lem is posed by the appearance, presumably somewhere in the samearea, of the Thracian Brygi who attacked Megabazus in 492 B.C.,48

The eventual participation of the Edonians in the often troubledrelations of the early Greek settlers with the local population alsoremains ambiguous due to the lack of any precise information. Theancient name of Thasos, Odonis,

and who should have represented a formidable force to darethe whole Persian army. All these are questions without ready an-swers; the eventual discovery of archaeological proofs for the ethnicand tribal (?!) attribution of the rich necropoleis at Sindos and AyiaParaskevi or of some of the still unlocalized major mints in the areacould perhaps one day bring in more clarity.

49 suggests the initial inhabitants ofthe island might have been of Edonian or related stock; their fate af-ter the establishment of the Parians in the seventh century B. C. isunknown. Archilochus, who was among the seventh century set-tlers of the island, mentions in a famous fragment fights with theSaioi (presumably equal to the Sapaioi), but that would rather have

been on the continent across where the Parians were also trying to

establish a presence.50

The Edonians, if we assume that they alreadyoccupied the more eastern reaches of their later territories, couldalso have been active participants in the events near the mouth ofthe Nestos somewhat further east, where the seventh century Cla-zomenian settlers under Timesios were expelled by unnamedThracians,51

It is also very unfortunate that we do not possess a more detailed

account of the activities of the Athenian tyrant Peisistratus in the

and later the Teians re-established Abdera in the mid-dle of the sixth century.

47 The finds from pre-Persian Olynthos suggest a date of about 650 B. C. for themigration of the Bottiaei from the Macedonian plain to the Chalcidic peninsu-la, cf. N. G. L. Hammond.A History of Macedonia. Vol. 1, 433-434.

48 Hdt. 6.45.1-2.49 Hesych. s. v. .50 Archil. fr. 6 Diehl. Cf. Strabo 12.3.20; Herodian. de prosod. cathol. p. 62; Hesych.s. v. ; Steph. Byz. s. v. .

51

Hdt. 1.168.


10/31

10

Pangaeum area, briefly remarked by Herodotus and Aristotle.52

The earliest mention of the name of the Edonians in Europe in acertain chronological context is connected with events which fol-lowed the return of king Darius from his Scythian expedition, pre-sumably around or shortly before 510 B. C. Upon his arrival in Sar-dis Darius offered Histiaeus of Miletus a choice of reward for hav-ing guarded the Danube bridge; being already tyrant of Miletus andtherefore not craving more power, Histiaeus asked for Myrcinus inthe lands of the Edonians so that he might build a city there. The re-quest was granted immediately and Histiaeus departed without de-lay for Thrace.

TheEdonians are never mentioned by name in connection with theseevents, and their eventual role can only be suggested on the inse-cure basis of the assumption that the later attempts at settling inEdonian territory by Histiaeus, Aristagoras and the Athenians werein some way ensuing from the successful operation of Peisistratus.

53 Herodotus explicitly places Myrcinus in the landsof the Edonians ( )54 and near the Strymon( );55 a plausible modern localization putsit to the north of Amphipolis, near the place where the Angites

flows into the Strymon.56

It would be pertinent to ask ourselves about the eventual sourcesof the information on which Histiaeus based his demand and thesubsequent expedition. Rumours about the Pangaeum silver whichhad made the fortune of Peisistratus several decades earlier would

have been circulating in the Greek world, and real Pangaean silvercoined by Abdera, Thasos or some of the earlier tribal mints in thearea could actually have appeared already by that time on markets

It could be inferred that at the time of thesettlement of Histiaeus the Edonians were in control of at least apart of the lower Strymon valley; it remains however uncertain howfar to the east, west or south their territory went at the time.

52 Aristot.Ath. pol. 15.2; Hdt. 1.64.53 Hdt. 5.11.1-2.54 Hdt. 5.11.2, 124.2. Cf. Thuc. 4.107.3; Diod. 12.68.4.55 Hdt. 5.23.1.56

. . Op. cit., 140-141; cf. F. Papazoglu. Op. cit., 390-391.


11/31

11

in the Persian Empire. Or perhaps Hecataeus, the Milesian eruditeand geographer who counselled Aristagoras later 57 and whose ex-tensive knowledge on Thrace is beyond any doubt,58

It is most annoying that Herodotus omits the Edonians from hisaccount of the expedition of Megabazus against the StrymonianPaeonians,

being alreadyin possession of precise information on the Pangaeum area gainedthrough personal travel or diligently collected from other sources,could have passed this on to Histiaeus.

59 which followed shortly after the departure of Histiaeusfor Myrcinus.60 A number of other tribes are mentioned in his text,

both Paeonian and Thracian, but not the Edonians, and the geogra-phy of the area makes it impossible for them to have escaped theevents unaffected. One suggested reconstruction of the stratagem ofMegabazus 61

57 Hdt. 5.36, 125.

sends the Paeonians defending the pass of Akontismato the east of Neapolis (Kavala), while the Persian army would havesurrounded them along the pass between the mountains Bozdag(Falakro) and Chaldag (Lekani), following the direction taken by themodern road from Xanti to Drama via Stavroupolis and Paranestionrather than going as far inland as to reach the river Arda, as sug-

58. . . . 66, 1975 [1972/1973], . 3 ,17-34; V. Velkov. Thracian Tribal Names by Hecateus. Terra Antiqua Balcanica6, 1991, 21-24.

59 Hdt. 5.12-17, 23-24.60 The order of events is definite in the text of Herodotus: on his very arrival inSardis Darius awarded Histiaeus with Myrcinus and he departed right away

(5.11.1-2); then the Paeonian brothers Pigres and Mantyes incited in Darius thewish to deport the Paeonians and he sent to Megabazus his orders (5.12-14.1);during his action on the Strymon (5.14.2-17.1) Megabazus found that Histiaeuswas already fortifying his settlement at Myrcinus (5.23.1).

61 Hdt. 5.15.1-3: the Paeonians gathered in arms and marched towards the sea( ) to defend their territory at a coastal pass ( ); lead by Thracian guides, the Persians ofMegabazus surrounded their position by an inland route ( ) and attacked their cities which were left without protection; the-

reafter the Paeonians scattered and gave themselves up.


12/31

12

gested by Katsarov.62 This disposition presumes that the Paeonianswould have marched across the main territory of the Edonians, 63who could have been their active or passive allies in the defensiveoperation; then the Persians having surrounded their positionwould in their turn also have passed through Edonian territoryalong the Angites River to reach the Strymon. It fits well with thegeography of the region and the topographic details mentioned byHerodotus, but disregards one important circumstance namely theevident assumption of Herodotus that Myrcinus was a possessionfor which Histiaeus had to ask the Persian king, and which Dariushad the power to give him as a gift.64 This could not possibly be aresult of the expedition of Megabazus against the Paeonians, whichwas not even conceived by Darius until after Histiaeus had left forThrace.65 And it doesnt seem very convincing to think that whatHistiaeus asked for (and received) was just permission to attempt asettlement in foreign country, not really a gift of something Dariuswas already in real possession of.66 We are led therefore to supposethat Persian authority must have been established already as far asthe Strymon, and that the Edonians had been subjected to Persian

power. This would have been among the previous achievements ofMegabazus, whose activities in Thrace prior to the Paeonian expedi-tion are briefly, but emphatically characterized by Herodotus.67

62. . . -. , 1921, 44, notes 15 and 16; P. Delev. Op. cit., 109, note 28.

We

63 Assuming this was already comprising in this age the territory stretchingfrom the lower Strymon along the Angites valley and the northern foothills of

Mt. Pangaeum to the plain of Philippi.64 Hdt. 5.11.2, 23.1, 124.2.65 Note 60 supra.66 Herodotus qualifies twice the transaction as the giving of a present or reward(, 5.23.1, 124.2).

67 Hdt. 5.2.2: After Perinthus had been brought under, Megabazus led his armythrough Thrace, subduing to the dominion of the king all the towns and all the

tribes of those parts ( ). For the king's orders to him were that he should

conquer Thrace.


13/31

13

remain ignorant whether he had effectively reached the lower Stry-mon with his army, or the Edonians had not waited for his arrivaland had sent themselves the tokens of their submission, but the re-sult must have been there, and already known to both Histiaeus andDarius in Sardis, so that the one could ask for, and the other bestowas his royal property Myrcinus, a territory (probably with an exist-ing settlement) on Edonian land.

The idea that the expedition of Megabazus against the Paeoniansmust have been a continuation of previous Persian advance in thearea which would already have brought the limits of Achaemenidpower very close to their tribal territory, practically contiguous withthat of the Edonians in the Strymon valley, and that the Edonianswould have been Persian subjects or allies in this conflict, makes usrethink the interpretation of the whole campaign. It seems possiblein view of these circumstances to suggest that the Paeonians wouldhave gathered to a defensive position at the south-eastern end oftheir own territory, in the Strymon valley upstream from the mouthof the Angites and the site of Myrcinus;68 then Megabazus wouldhave passed through the plain of Philippi and across the intercon-

nected mountainous ridges to the northwest of the Angites, theZmiynitsa (Menikion), Sharliya (Vrondu) and Ali Botush (Orvilos),to enter the Strymon valley either near Seres or eventually even nearDemirhisar (Siderokastron). The notice of Herodotus about theThracian guides of Megabazus 69

According to Herodotus, at the time of the deportation of thePaeonians Histiaeus had already started fortifying Myrcinus;

might then refer to his eventualEdonian (or possibly Odomantian ?) allies in the operation. Thissuggestion has the further benefit of explaining why Herodotusomits the Edonians from the list of tribes that escaped deportation;

as Persian subjects and allies they would not have been mentionedamong the hitherto unconquered enemy tribes in the area.

70

68 The area was close enough to the sea (the confluence of the Strumon and An-gites at less than 20 km.) to warrant its mention in the text of Herodotus.

it

69 Hdt. 5.14.2.70

Hdt. 5.23.1: .


14/31

14

remains unknown whether his activities were in any way affecteddirectly by the military actions in the vicinity. But Megabazus whohad discovered what he was doing, upon his return to Sardis withthe abducted Paeonians counselled Darius to prevent the accom-plishment of the project, pointing out the inherent dangers in lettingthe untrustworthy Greek build a fortified city in a region abundantin wood and silver and heavily populated.71 Darius listened to theadvice and called Histiaeus to him under the pretext of making hima royal counsellor, and subsequently took him along to Susa.72

Herodotus says nothing of the fate of the establishment at Myr-cinus; it might have been abandoned for good, or could have goneon without Histiaeus, left in the hands of his Ionian companions,

but the latter seems less probable in view of the hostile attitude ofMegabazus and its approval by the king. Persian presence in thelower Strymon area must have been permanent henceforth, al-though Herodotus does not dwell particularly on the subject.Bubares the son of Megabazus who married the daughter of theMacedonian king Amyntas and later oversaw the construction ofthe Athos canal for king Xerxes, seems to have remained in the area

for some time after the Paeonian campaign, possibly as its Persiangovernor;

73

The Myrcinus episode of Histiaeus had a continuation 15 yearslater when his successor and son-in-law Aristagoras attempted torevive his establishment in Thrace,

his seat of residence might have been at Eion on theStrymon mouth or further west in Acanthus.

74 escaping from Miletus with allwho chose to follow him some time after the Sardis campaign, at atime when the counter-attacks of the Persians had gained momen-

tum and a number of rebellious Ionian cities had already fallen intheir hands, probably in 497 or 496 B. C.75

71 Hdt. 5.23.1-3.

Though at first successful

72 Hdt. 5.24.1-4.73 On Bubares: Hdt. 5.21; 7.22.2; 8.136.1; Justin. 7.5.1; cf. N. G. L. Hammond, G.T. Griffith.A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 59-60.

74 Hdt. 5.124.2.75

Cf. Thuc. 4.102.2, who counts 32 years from the death of Aristagoras to the


15/31

15

in occupying the area, Aristagoras then ventured on an expeditionand was routed with his whole army by the Thracians () while besieging a city ( ).76 Thucy-dides who also mentions briefly the episode (placing however theestablishment of Aristagoras at the site of the future Amphipolis),says that Aristagoras was expelled by the Edonians ( ),77 while Diodorus is even more specificwhen he asserts that after the death of Aristagoras the colonists weredriven out by the Thracians who are called Edonians ( ).78

The two Myrcinus episodes with Histiaeus and Aristagoras attest,in the late sixth and early fifth century B. C., the Edonians present ina key area of the Lower Strymon region. Their position was bothstrategically and economically important, and their ability to with-stand attempts at settlement speaks of political strength.

The anonymous citymentioned by Herodotus is here of some interest; it must have be-longed to the Edonians and was evidently a fortified place, able towithstand a siege.

The Edonians are again omitted from the brief narrative of He-

rodotus about the expedition of Mardonius in 492 B. C.79

defeat of Sophanes and Leagros at Drabescus, another 29 years to thefoundation of Amphipolis by Hagnon. Hammond 1955, 386, 389 opts for 496B.C.

The Per-sian army would have marched both ways, in its advance and sub-sequent retreat, through their territory, presumably crossing theStrymon at the Ennea Hodoi ford near the site of the future Am-phipolis. Two details in the brief narrative of Herodotus deserveparticular mention. In 6.45 Herodotus describes the attack of theThracian Brygi ( ) on the land army of Mardonius.Hammond argues for a differentiation between the Thracian

Brygi and the Bryges who migrated long ago from Lower Mace-

76 Hdt. 5.126.2.77 Thuc. 4.102.2.78 Diod. 12.68.2.79

Hdt. 6.43-45.


16/31

16

donia to Phrygia.80 His remark that in 492 B. C. the Brygi wouldhave been out of the then Macedonian territory, despite the doublestatement to the opposite effect in Herodotus,81 seems perfectlysound, but I think he is wrong in placing them far to the north,where they would have been out of the way of the army of Mar-donius.82 At Thermopylae Herodotus lists them between the Bottiaeiand Chalcidians on one side and the Pierians on the other,83 so a po-sition in the eastern parts of the Chalcidic peninsula, presumablysomewhere in the vicinity of Lake Bolbe, seems a reasonable sugges-tion. This however fits badly with the assumption that in this agethe Edonians controlled a continuous territory between the Strymonand the Axios;84

The other point concerns the extent of territory effectively domi-nated by the Persians. Herodotus states that Mardonius subjugated

the rich contemporary centres of western Mygdoniaand Amphaxitis (Sindos, Lete, etc.), if Edonian at all, would in suchcase belong to separate and politically independent divisions of thetribal group.

80 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 60-61. Cf.however Strabo 12.3.20:

. The Brygoi of 492 B. C. could have been a remnant of the Phrygians leftin Ematia and later expelled by the Macedonians, possibly together with theBottiaei. They could not have been the Bottiaei themselves (although thiswould have furnished a good explanation for the extermination of the popula-tion of Olynthus by Artabazus in 480 B. C., Hdt. 8.127), for Herodotus lists theBottiaei and Brygi separately at Thermopylae (Hdt. 7.185).

81 Once in 6.44 where Herodotus implies that all the peoples to the east of theMacedonians had already been conquered by the Persians prior to the expedi-tion of Mardonius (the Brygi evidently were not), and then in 6.45 where their

night attack on Mardonius is explicitely placed in Macedonia ().

82 Hammond (N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2,61) suggests an identification with the anonymous Thracians beyond theCrestonians mentioned by Herodotus in 5.3 and 5.5, and an eventual localiza-tion in the area between Lake Doiran and the Strumitsa valley, on the slopes ofMt. Orbelus (Belasitsa).

83 Hdt. 7.185.84 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 550-336 B.C.

Oxford, 1979, 57-58; N. G. L. Hammond. The Macedonian State, 43.


17/31

17

the Macedonians during the campaign of 492 B. C., while all thetribes to the east of Macedonia had already been enslaved previ-ously.85 The latter must have been true since the campaigns ofMegabazus for the Strymonian Edonians and all the tribes to the

east of them with few exceptions,86 but the appearance of the war-like Brygi in 492 suggests that the territories to the west of the Stry-mon had not previously been thoroughly reduced. Even at thatstage, the extent of territory which Mardonius subdued before hisignominious retreat should not be overestimated and probably didnot exceed the territory of the Brygi; the independent behaviour ofthe anonymous king of the neighbouring Bisalti and Crestonians in480 B. C. could be brought forward as an argument.87 As regards theMacedonians, their position would have remained practically inde-

pendent; both Amyntas in 512/510 and Alexander in 492 could haveacknowledged a formal obedience, but no more a situation whichevidently left the latter enough freedom to trade in strategic ship-wood with the Athenians, the official Achaemenid enemy, on theeve of Xerxes invasion.88

Describing the march Xerxes along the Aegean coast of Thrace in480 B. C., Herodotus offers a list of the Thracian tribes through theterritory of which the great army passed: the Paeti, the Ciconians,the Bistonians, the Sapaeans, the Dersaeans, the Edonians, and theSatrae; he adds that they all joined the land army of Xerxes except

All this leaves enough free space for anindependent position also of the tribes to the east of the Axios,where the community using the necropolis at Sindos was still livingthrough a flourishing age in the early fifth century B. C.

85 Hdt. 6.44.1.86 Hdt. 7.111 mentions the Satrae who were never subject to anybody.

87 Hdt. 8.116.88 Cf. the conflicting views of Nicholas Hammond (N. G. L. Hammond, G. T.Griffith.A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 58-60) and Eugene Borza (In the Shadowof Olympus, 102, 104-105). For the timber trade R. Meiggs. Trees and Timber inthe Ancient Mediterranean World. Oxford, 1982, 123-126; E. Borza. Timber andPolitics in the Ancient World: Macedon and the Greeks. Proceedings of the

American Philosophical Society 131, 1987, 34-45; idem. The Natural Resources ofEarly Macedonia. In: W. L. Adams and E. N. Borza (eds.). Philip II, Alexanderthe Great and the Macedonian Heritage, Washington D. C., 1982, 2-8; idem. In the

Shadow of Olympus, 109.


18/31

18

the Satrae.89 The following chapter contains a brief digression on theSatrae: they had never been subjected to any man, dwelled on highmountains, were warlike and possessed a famous sanctuary of Dio-nysos, where the clan of the Bessi served as prophets.90 Returningthen to the march of Xerxes, Herodotus mentions his passingthrough the lands of the Pierians past the fortresses of Phagres andPergamus, keeping Mt. Pangaeum on his right.91 The Paeonians,Doberes and Paeoplae who dwelled to the north of Mt. Pangaeumremained aside from the main route of Xerxes, who reached theStrymon at Ennea Hodoi near Eion in the land of the Edonians,where bridges had been prepared in advance. There the Magi sacri-ficed white horses and 18 local boys and girls who were buriedalive; Herodotus mentions that the region stretching from the Pan-gaeum to the river Angites and to the Strymon was called Phyllis.92Heading then into the Chalcidic peninsula through Argilus, Stagirusand Acanthus, Xerxes had Bisaltia on his right; the tribes of the Pan-gaeum and Chalcidice were also forced to join the Persian army.93

It is usually presumed that the enumeration of the tribes in thetext of Herodotus follows more or less strictly their geographical

order, in an east to west sequence. The position of the Ciconians tothe west of the lower Hebros is pinpointed by the site of Maroneia,and that of the Bistonians by the Bistonian Lake at Porto Lagos, soit could be presumed that the Paeti lived to the east of the Ciconians,across the Hebros, and the Sapaeans to the west of the Bistonians,eventually on both sides of the mouth of the Strymon.

94

89 Hdt. 7.110: ' , , , , , , .

Of the re-maining tribes the position of the Pierians, along the coastal range ofMt. Symbolon and on the southern slopes of Mt. Pangaeum, be-

90 Hdt. 7.111.91 Hdt. 7.112. The Pieres are easily localized in and around the coastal ridgeSymbolon south of Mt. Pangaeum, and probably on the southern slopes of thelatter.

92 Hdt. 7.113-114.93 Hdt. 7.115.94

. . Op. cit., 68-69.


19/31

19

tween the Thasian establishment of Neapolis (Kavala) in the eastand the mouth of the Strymon in the west, seems perfectly clear inthe text of Herodotus and is confirmed elsewhere.95 The name of theSatrae disappears from ancient texts after Herodotus, but wasknown to Hecataeus.96 Although Herodotus places them explicitlyas one of the tribes working the silver mines on Mt. Pangaeum, hisdigression in 7.111 creates a definite impression that they were anumerous population spreading over high mountains in the deeperinterior. This, and the association with the Bessi whom Herodotusmentions rather enigmatically as prophets in the Bacchic sanctuaryof the Satrae, has prompted modern science to extend their territoryto the north of Mt. Pangaeum, sometimes to the nearer mountainridges of Bozdag (Falakro), Sharlia (Vrondou) and Ali Botush (Orbe-los), sometimes also to the whole of Mt. Pirin, and some authorshave even included the Rila and Vitosha further north.97 Later T.Sarafov suggested the idea that the territory of the Satrae shouldalso be extended to the east across the Nestos to include most or allof the Rhodope massif.98 Whatever the case, it seems certain that inthe list of the tribes along the route of Xerxes Herodotus mentions

the Satrae as inhabitants of Mt. Pangaeum and thus their place inthe enumeration just before the Pierians is appropriate; this becomesthe more evident with the very specific notice that while passing thelands of the Pierians the Persian army had on its right Mt. Pan-gaeum where the Pierians, Odomanti (mentioned only here in theenumeration) and Satrae had mines for gold and silver.99

95 Cf. Thuc. 2.99.3.

96Steph. Byz. s. vv. , .97 Cf. the detailed review of these different localizations in . . - . . 67/1, 1974, 123-137.

98 Ibid., 149-176.99 Hdt. 7.112: , , , . It is interesting to notice that Herodotusdoes not include the Edonians in this list of the tribes working the mines on

Mt. Pangaeum.


20/31

20

The tribes of the Dersaeans and Edonians must therefore beplaced in the remaining space between the Sapaeans to the east andthe Satrae and Pieres to the west. It cannot escape notice that thename of the Edonians appears once more in the text of Herodotus:Ennea Hodoi (The Nine Roads) where the Strymon was bridged inadvance, was according to Herodotus also in Edonian land.100 EnneaHodoi was near the site of the future Amphipolis, probably on theso-called Hill 133, where the presence of a considerable Early IronAge settlement has been established archaeologically;101 togetherwith the evidence about Myrcinus further upstream this piece oftestimony marks the southern end of the lower Strymon valleyfirmly as Edonian territory in this age, and Herodotus even suppliesa name for it, mentioning that the tract of land around Mt. Pan-gaeum surrounded by the Angites and the Strymon was calledPhyllis.102 It could be assumed that the territory of the Edonians sur-rounded the northern slopes of Mt. Pangaeum, comprising most ofthe valley of the Angites, opening to the east into the plain of Phi-lippi and probably reaching near the coastal area of the ThasianPeraea along the bay of Neapolis (Kavala).103 It is in this area, called

Datos or Daton and famous for its natural wealth, that according toHerodotus the Edonians annihilated the ten thousand Atheniancolonists in 465 B. C.104 There remains little space for the Dersaeans,whom Thucydides qualifies as plain dwellers;105

100 Hdt. 7.114.1: .

the region be-tween the plain of Philippi and that of the Nestos, roughly betweenmodern Kavala and Hrissoupoli and towards the interior, is not atall a plain, but contains small pieces of lowland between the modest

101 B. Isaac. The Greek Settlements in Thrace until the Macedonian Conquest. Leiden,1986, 6; Z. H. Archibald. The Odrysian Kingdom of Thrace. Orpheus Unmasked.Oxford, 1998, 75.

102 Hdt. 7.113.2. Cf. Steph. Byz. s. v. ; Herodian. de prosod. cathol. p. 89;Eistath. ad Hom. Il. p. 565; Schol. Aeschin. 2.31.

103 Cl. Ptolemaeus (3.12.7, 28) places in Edonis, besides Amphipolis, Philippi,Oesyme and Neapolis.

104 Hdt. 9.75. On Datos cf. A. Philippson in RE 4, 2229-2230 (s. v. Daton).105

Thuc. 2.101.3.


21/31

21

ridges of the Lekani, Halkero, Stegno and Marouska. This couldhave been the country of the Dersaeans, whose name disappearscompletely after the casual notice of Thucydides.

Edonian contingents should have been present among theThracian levies in the Persian army both at Thermopylae and atPlataea, but Herodotus does not mention them particularly.106Hammond offers a plausible interpretation of a passage of Aeschy-lus Persians describing the retreat of the army of Xerxes to dem-onstrate that at the time Edonis comprised land on both sides of thelower Strymon, between Lake Bolbe to Mt. Pangaeum;107 the texthowever is elusive and should not be taken as a conclusive piece ofevidence. Herodotus mentions briefly that in 479 B. C. the retreatingarmy of Artabazus sustained heavy losses through hunger, fatigueand the attacks of the Thracians;108 but the inland road followed

by Artabazus is not reliably identifiable and it remains questionablewhether the Edonians were taking any part in these skirmishes. ThePersian garrison at Eion on the Strymon mouth remained in positionunder its valiant commander Boges until 476 B. C.,109 and that wasvery close to the main territory of the Edonians. Plutarch mentions

the presence in Eion of Achaemenid notables, and of adequate mili-tary forces, for they were able to molest the neighbouring Greek cit-ies.110 The Persians at Eion received help, notably food, from theThracians living across the Strymon ( ), against whom Cimon had to take action during the siegeof the city.111

106 Hdt. 7.185.2, 9.32.

The identification of these Strymonian Thracians in thevicinity of Eion with the Edonians, although not explicit, seemsquite probable, and the events in 476 must have set a bad start to

107 Aeschyl. Pers. 494-495: ' , ' ,' ; N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith.A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2,61-62.

108 Hdt. 9.89.4.109 Hdt. 7.107; Thuc. 1.98.1; Diod. 11.60.6; Schol. Aeschin. 2.31.110 Plut. Cimon 7.2.111

Ibid.


22/31

22

their subsequent relations with the Athenians. A scholion toAeschines mentions the defeat of an Athenian force at that sametime from unnamed Thracians in action which was presumably di-rected against Ennea Hodoi.112

Another obscure event of these years could have affected the Edo-nians on the Strymon. The Letter of Philip published among theworks of Demosthenes contains the otherwise unattested informa-tion that the Macedonian king Alexander had occupied the site ofthe future Amphipolis (Ennea Hodoi), taking Persian captives, anddedicated a golden statue at Delphi from the booty.

113 Hammondseems to accept the event as real and argues for its dating before theAthenian siege of Eion in 476 B. C.114 But there are strong grounds todoubt the veracity of this piece of information. It cannot be recon-ciled with the mentioned Athenian action against Ennea Hodoi dur-ing the siege of Eion, which would have followed the campaign ofAlexander; the Athenians met there neither Persians, nor the Mace-donian king, but were routed by the unnamed local Thracians( ), who should in all probability be iden-tified with the Edonians.115 The whole conception of the eastern ter-

ritorial expansion of Alexander in the years immediately followingthe defeat of the Persians,116 based mainly on the later and unspe-cific evidence of Thucydides 117 and Strabo,118 must now be re-viewed in the light of the new dates suggested for some of the localtribal coinages by the important numismatic finds from Asyut 119

112 Schol. Aeschin. 2.31, mentioning the names of Lysistratos, Lycurgos and Cra-

tinos; such details add to the credibility of the story. Cf. J. D. Smart. Kimonscapture of Eion. JHS 87, 1967, 136-137.

113 Demosth. 12.21. The golden satue is also mentioned by Herodotus (8.121.2).114 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith.A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 102.115 Schol. Aeschin. 2.31.116 N. G. L. Hammond, G. T. Griffith. A History of Macedonia. Vol. 2, 84, 102; E.Borza. In the Shadow of Olympus, 119-123.

117 Thuc. 2.99.4, 6.118 Strabo 7 fr. 11.119

M. Price, N. Waggoner.Archaic Greek Coinage. The Asyut Hoard. London, 1975.


23/31

23

and Lycia.120 The coins of the Bisalti in particular, who are amongthe tribes definitely attested as having been conquered by the Ma-cedonians, are now to be dated entirely in the period after the defeatof the Persians, in the seventies and sixties of the fifth century; 121

Next we come to what might be considered the most noteworthyevent in the known history of the Edonians the rout, in 465 B. C.,of the ten thousand Athenian colonists who had settled at EnneaHodoi. The story is told, with little variations of detail, by severalancient authors,

theBisalti enjoyed then a span of particular prosperity and were evi-dently independent.

122 and deserves full credibility. The Athenian expe-dition was undertaken simultaneously with the suppression of theThasian uprising and was lead by the strategi Sophanes the son ofEutychides and Leagros the son of Glaucon; the ten thousand colo-nists gathered among the Athenian citizens and the allies 123 ad-vanced inland from Eion and settled on the site of Ennea Hodoi,near the future Amphipolis.124 The new settlers portioned the sur-rounding territory in allotments,125 then venturing further inland 126

120 The so-called Decadrachm hoard (alternatively known as the Elmali,Antalia, or Lycian hoard), cf. S. Fried. The Decadrachm hoard: an introduction. In: I. Carradice (ed). Coinage and Administration in the Athenian and PersianEmpires. Oxford, 1987 (BAR Int. Series 343), 1-10; J. H. Kagan. The DecadrachmHoard: Chronology and Consequences. ibid., 21-28; M. J. Price. The Coinagesof the Northern Aegean. ibid., 43-47.

were defeated and presumably perished to the man, together with

121 S. Fried. Op. cit., 1-2; J. H. Kagan. Op. cit., 24-25; M. J. Price. Op. cit., 44-45.122 Hdt. 9.75; Thuc. 1.100; 4.102; Diod. 11.70.5; 12.68.2; Paus. 1.29.4-5.

123 Thuc. 1.100.3: .124 The sites of Ennea Hodoi and Amphipolis might have been different, butwere evidently so close to warrant their equation by ancient authors, e. g.Thuc. 1.100. Ennea Hodoi and Amphipolis were easily identified even withMyrcinus, although this was further north, cf. Thuc. 4.102.2; Diod. 12.68.1. Cf.B. Isaac. Op. cit., 24-30.

125 Diod. 11.70.5. Thucydides (1.100.3) mentions explicitly that the occupied ter-ritory had belonged to the Edonians, .

126 Thuc. 1.100.3: ; Diod. 11.70.5:

.


24/31

24

their generals; with this the whole foundation at Ennea Hodoi col-lapsed. Herodotus says that the disaster took place at Daton in a

battle for the gold mines there,127 while Thucydides and Diodorusplace the battle at Drabescus;128 there is a further discrepancy in theindication of the victorious enemy, the Edonians alone according toHerodotus,129 and a coalition, the united Thracians according toThucydides.130 Pausanias adds the plausible detail that the Atheni-ans were surprised by the enemy, and the incredible one that theywere struck by lightning.131

A coalition including some of the neighbouring tribes and headedby the Edonians who were the main victim of the Athenian expan-sion seems probable in this war, especially in view of the consider-able number of the Athenians, and would give a reasonable expla-nation to the various definitions in the extant sources. The two dif-ferently attested locations of the battle are however more difficult toexplain. Drabescus, which Thucydides names as the place of the bat-tle, has formerly been identified with modern Drama;

132 togetherwith the traditional identification of Daton with Philippi 133 or Nea-polis 134 or rather the whole plain of Philippi,135

127 Hdt. 9.75: . Cf. Isocr.8.86: .

this gave a reason-

able solution to the problem, including the gold mines mentionedby Herodotus. However, Drabescus has alternatively been identi-fied with Zdravik (now renamed Draviskos) near Amphipolis,

128 Thuc. 1.100.3: ; Diod. 12.68.2: .129 Hdt. 9.75: . Cf. Diod. 11.70.5: ;

Pausan 1.29.4: .130 Thuc. 1.100.3: ; 4.102.2: . Cf. Diod. 12.68.2: .

131 Pausan 1.29.4: .132 W. Smith. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, London, 1854, 1.787 s. v.Drabescus.

133 Cf. App. civ. 4.105, 439; Harpocr. s. v. .134 W. Smith. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, London, 1854, 2.411 s. v.Neapolis No 5.

135

A. Philippson in RE 4, 2229-2230 (s. v. Daton).


25/31

25

above the left bank of the Angites at the entrance of the gorge whichthe river cuts between the Pangaeum and Menikion mountains; thismore recent identification seems also better founded and more con-sistent with the data in the extant sources.136 A way out of the ap-parent contradiction between the localizations of Daton and Dra-

bescus, alternatively given by Herodotus and Thucydides as the siteof the battle, has been proposed long ago by Stein, who suggestedthat Herodotus would have confounded the objective of the expedi-tion (Daton) with the scene of the battle (Drabescus) which is con-veniently placed at a difficult section of the road between Amphipo-lis and Philippi.137 Another possible solution however is suggested

by a fragment of Strabo mentioning Daton alongside Argilus, Myr-cinus and Drabescus as a place-name in the vicinity of the ,138 and thus evidently different from the betterattested synonymous region to the north-east and east of Mt. Pan-gaeum.139

Wherever the battle really took place, the main events of 465 B. C.seem out of question: the Athenians had attempted a major advancein the Strymon area, and this was dramatically thwarted by the

Edonians, costing the life of most or all of the ten thousand Greekcolonists. In a recent development of our knowledge on one impor-tant source of information the silver coins abundantly minted inthe region in the late sixth and earlier fifth century B. C., it nowseems possible to identify the king of the Edonians who won thisgreat battle. This would have been Getas, known from a series ofheavy silver coins bearing different versions of the inscription Ge-tas king of the Edonians.

140

136. . Op. cit., 141-143 ; F. Papazoglou. Op. cit., 391-392; cf. Strabo 7 fr.33; App. civ. 4.105.

This claim results from the analysis of

137 R. W. Macan. Herodotus: The Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Books with Introductionand Commentary. London, 1908, 754-755.

138 Strabo 7.33.139 App. bell. civ. 4.13.105; cf. Philippson. Daton. RE 4.2, 1901, 2229-2230; .. . , 1976, 146-149.

140

On the coins of Getas cf. J. N. Svoronos. L'hellnisme primitif de la Macdoine


26/31

26

datable coin hoards. There were no Getas coins in the Asyut hoard,closing around 475 B. C., and for that matter in all the coin hoardsthat can be dated with some certainty before Asyut.141 On the con-trary, there were three Getas coins in the later Decadrachm hoard,142the closing date of the non-Lycian part of which is placed nowaround 465-462 B. C.143 All three are reported in a very fresh condi-tion, and all three belong to the later type of the coins of Getas,with the inscription on the reverse, around the four sides of a shal-low, linear quadripartite incuse square.144

The coins of Getas are tristatersby the weight system used in theNorth Aegean tribal coinage, hav-ing a weight of about 29 grams andusually measuring between 31 and34 millimetres. The common ob-

verse type displays a naked herds-man capped with a petasos leadinga couple of bulls usually to theright. The reverse types are two ashallow quadripartite incuse squa-re and a cross-spoked wheel in arectangular incuse; both evolvefrom presumably earlier variants

It could be presumed thatthe coinage of Getas falls in the period immediately preceding theclosing date of the hoard, thusaround and before the mid-sixtiesof the fifth century B. C.

prouv par la numismatique et l'or du Pange. Paris-Athnes, 1919 (extrait deJIAN19), 49-52; . . ., 1992, 22-25; M. Tatscheva. . In: Stephanosnomismatikos. Edith Schnert-Geiss zum 65. Geburtstag, Berlin, 1998, 613-626; .

. 1, , 2000, 29, 120-121.141 M. Price, N. Waggoner. Op. cit., 14-15.142 S. Fried. Op. cit., 2, pl. I/5; M. J. Price. Op. cit., 44, pl. VIII/2.143 J. H. Kagan. Op. cit., 21-24.144

S. Fried. Loc. cit.


27/31

27

where the inscription is on the obverse to later variants with inscrip-tions placed on the reverse, along the sides of the incuse square.Similar obverse types appear on coins of the Orresci, Derroni, Ich-nae, and on uninscribed coins, and the cross-spoked wheel as a re-verse type on coins of the Ichnae and on numerous anepigraphiccoins, including fractions, some of which by their obverse types (e.g. a single bull) could well belong to the coinage of Getas.

In 437 B. C., the Athenians at last succeeded in their repeated at-tempt to establish a strong outpost up the Strymon from their baseat Eion. Following the failure in 465 B. C., this time the operationended in success, the merit belonging to the talented strategusHagnon. The foundation of Amphipolis is briefly noted in the writ-ten sources,145 while the later history of the city is known from acombination of ancient texts with epigraphical, numismatical andarchaeological data.146 The population of the new establishment wasto a large extent drawn from the neighbouring Greek cities, theAthenian element being small; this was in part the cause for thelater easy change of sides, when Amphipolis defected to Brasidas.According to the stratagem of Polyaenus, the Athenians met with

strong resistance from the barbarians, who could be no other thanthe Edonians, but Hagnon outwitted them and put in place the forti-fications of the city, which occupied a strategic and easily defend-able position.147

145 Cf. Thuc. 4.102.3-4; Diod. 12.68.2; Polyaen. strat. 6.53.146 On the history and archaeology of Amphipolis cf. O. Hirschfeld. Amphipolis. RE 1, 1894, 1949-1952; J. Papastavru. Amphipolis. RE Suppl. X, 1965, 17-19;

P. Perdrizet. tudes amphipolitaines. BCH 46, 1922, 36-57; J. Papastavru.Amphipolis. Geschichte und Prosopographie. Leipzig, 1936 [= Klio, Beiheft 37]; J.Roger. Le monument de lion l'Amphipole. BCH63, 1939, 4-42 ; O. Broneer.The Lion of Amphipolis. Cambridge, 1941; F. Papazoglou. Eion Amfipol Hrisopol. ZRVI36/2, 1953, 7-24; C. Danoff. Amphipolis. Der Kleine Pauly 1,314-315; J. Cormack. Greek Inscriptions from Amphipolis. University of Lon-don, Inst. of Class. Studies Bull. No 10, 1963; . . . , 1972 (= 13); . . Op. cit., 136-138; F. Papazoglu.Op. cit. 392-397.

147

Polyaen. strat. 6.53.


28/31

28

The expedition of the Odrysian king Sitalces in 429 B. C. did notaffect directly the territory of the Edonians, but gave occasion for aninteresting notice we find in the text of Thucydides. According tohim, the great army of Sitalces inspired with fear the Thracians liv-ing beyond the Strymon to the north, who inhabited the plains, suchas the Panaeans, the Odomanti, the Droi, and the Dersaeans, all ofwhom were independent.148 The evident fact is the omission of theEdonians from this enumeration, which mentions even the Der-saeans, who would be rather far away from the scene of action if thelocalization suggested supra is correct, and the otherwise unknownDroi. On second glance we notice the presence of the Panaeans(), who are described by Stephanus Byzantinus as a con-stituent tribe of the Edonians living near Amphipolis.149

In the winter of 424 B. C. Brasidas attacked by surprise and suc-cessfully took Amphipolis, inflicting a very painful loss to Athenianinterests.

But whyshould Thucydides mention the shadowy name of the Panaeans in-stead of the well-known one of the Edonians? Their appearance inthis text not only implies some sort of political decentralization andautonomy, but could probably also be related in some way with theestablishment of the Athenians in Amphipolis. However, Thucy-dides says nothing more on the subject, and never again mentions

the name of the Panaeans in his work. His detailed account of thedramatic events around Amphipolis in 424-422 B. C. however con-tains some further information on the Edonians.

150

148 Thuc. 2.101.3: , , ' .

Among the events following immediately on the captureof Amphipolis Thucydides mentions a dramatic episode in near-byEdonian Myrcinus. The town came over to the side of Brasidas after

its Edonian king Pittacus had been killed by the sons of Goaxis and

149Steph. Byz. s. v. , .150 The events in 424-422 are discribed in detail by Thucydides. The brief narra-

tive of Diodorus is based on Thucydides and adds nothing of real importance.


29/31

29

his own wife Brauro.151 The persons involved in this coup dtat areotherwise unknown, and we can only guess at their mutual rela-tions. The former king, Pittacus, was evidently of pro-Atheniansympathies, and his overthrow permitted the successors (the sons ofGoaxis ?) to change sides. Who they were, and why the queen Brau-ro sided with them against her husband, remains a mystery. It isimportant to note however that Myrcinus evidently had a separategovernment, probably as the centre of a tribal area (Phyllis ?).Would this not be identical with the territory of the Panaeans men-tioned above, who lived near Amphipolis? The idea is further sup-ported by the following piece of information we get from Thucy-dides: in 422 B. C., before the battle of Amphipolis, Brasidas re-cruited 1500 thracian mercenaries and the whole army of the Edo-nians comprising light infantry and cavalry, and separately anotherthousand peltasts from Edonian Myrcinus and the Chalcidians.152The neighbouring Odomanti however took side with the Atheniansand their king Polles supplied them with an unnamed number ofmercenaries.153

Thucydides mentions the Edonians once more in his history, in apassage which comes between the last two quoted instances. Dis-cribing the actions of Brasidas early in 423 B. C., he lists the smalltowns on the peninsula of Athos, Thyssos, Cleonae, Acrothous,Olophyxos and Dion; these were inhabited by a mixed population

composed of bilingual barbarians (

It is interesting to note how Myrcinus is again notedseparately from the other Edonians; it evidently constituted an in-

dependent political entity at this time. The result of the battle wouldhave left the Edonians and the Greek city of Amphipolis in good re-lations for the ensuing period of time.

151 Thuc. 4.107.3: , . Cf. Diod. 12.68.4.

152 Thuc. 5.6.4: - , , .

153

Thuc. 5.6.2.


30/31

30

), comprising a small Chalcidic element, predominantPelasgians (from the Tyrsenians who once inhabited Lemnos andAthens), and also some Bisalti, Crestonians and Edonians. Most ofthem submitted to Brasidas, but Greek Sane and Dion didnt andBrasidas ravaged their territory.154

The little Thucydides says about the Edonians in the later fifthcentury B. C. is the last we ever hear abot them as direct historicalevidence relating to a certain time and chain of events, althoughsome of these would have affected their territory. In the fourth cen-

tury Athens recovered from its defeat in the Pelopponesian war andundertook a comprehensive, if finally unsuccessful attempt to te-cover her previous might; the consistent efforts of the Athenians toregain Amphipolis however all failed. Potidaea and Eion remainedthe main bases of the active Athenian political activity in the area inthe second quarter of the century. In the Chalcidic peninsula Olyn-thus went through its brief period of might and power as head ofthe Chalcidian league. The island of Thasos started a long period of

economic prosperity and flourishing trade, reflected in the long se-ries of stamped amphorae in which the famous Thasian wine wasexported om industrial scale in the fourth and third centuries. Ab-dera on the other hand met with unexpected disaster when thenorthern tribe of the Triballi reached the city in a plundering raid in375; the citizen army was defeated in regular battle after theneighbouring Thracians who had seemingly come to the aid of

This singular picture of scatteredethnic elements living in mixed communities is in clear contradic-tion with the easily preconceived ideas of compact and definitetribal territories; the ethnic reality must have been much more ver-satile. The picture drawn by Thucydides of the mixed communitiesof the Athos peninsula is often also taken to demonstrate a finalstage in the processes of multiple migrations and ethnic displace-ment in the greater Chalcidic peninsula; the Edonians there couldaccordingly be taken as remnants of those displaced from Mygdo-nia, either soon before by the advance of the Macedonians in thefifth century, or earlier still by other groups on the move.

154

Thuc. 4.109.4; cf. Diod. 12.68.5.


31/31

the Abderites suddenly changed sides, and only the timely arrival ofan Athenian fleet saved the city from being taken and pillaged.155

Some coins minted in this period could eventually belong to Edo-nian rulers, although any more definite attribution remains impos-sible. An abundant silver coinage from about 400 B. C. in the nameof Saratocus was minted somewhere in the Pangaeum area; he is notmentioned in written sources and his tribal affiliation is unknown.

The Edonians would have been directly affected by these events;their territory could have been ravaged by the Triballian hordes, orthey could have taken part themselves in the plundering of the terri-tory of Abdera, possibly among the unnamed neighbouringThracians who took part in the stratagem.

156Another local dynast, Bergaeus, seems to have minted bronze andsilver coins later in the fourth century B. C.157 On the obverse of anabderite drachma from about 360 B. C. appears the name of Spokes,preseded by the abberviated royal title BA, evidently another oth-erwise unknown local ruler.158 And finally, towards the middle ofthe century the coins of Cetriporis 159

This brings us to the time of Philip II, who annexed the lands of theEdonians early in his reign, established Philippi and Amphipolis asmajor centres of Macedonian power, and put an evident end to theindependent history of the Thracian tribes in the Pangaeum area.

recall the historical data of thebrief rule of Berisades and his sons, of whom Cetriporis was pre-

sumably the eldest, in the years after the death of Cotys I; they areusually considered Odrysian rulers, although we have no evidenceon their origin.

155 Diod. 15.36.1-4.156. . Op. cit., 43-47; U. Peter. Die Muenzen der Thrakischen Dynasten(5-3 Jahrhundert v.Chr.). Berlin, 1997, 29.

157 U. Peter. Op. cit., 104-106. It has been suggested that some or all of thesecoins, usually bearing the inscription , might in fact belong to the city ofBerge (cf. Z. Bonias. Une inscription de lancienne Berg. BCH124, 2000, 227-246 and esp. 243). The existence of silver drachms with the full inscription however make this suggestion

158. . Op. cit., 71.159

Ibid. 68-70.

Documents

The Edonians by Peter Delev