Treasures from the Deep: Coins from Hellenistic and Roman Republican Shipwrecks1
p. 147-156
Texte intégral
1The present paper surveys the shipwrecks dated to the Hellenistic and Roman Republican era – namely from late 4th to late 1st c. BC – that have been reported to have yielded coins2. The hundreds of sites recorded over the years are only a sample of the many thousands of ships which must have put to sea in ancient times, but nonetheless it is a sample which contains a good deal of information about ancient trade. Long-distance trade was primarily conducted by merchant ships over the waters of the Aegean, Mediterranean and Black Sea. Evidence from ancient authors as well as shipwrecks indicates that overseas trade developed into a specialized and important sector of the economy. Many of the goods traded included luxury items, such as jewelry, fine pottery and pieces of art as well as specialty agricultural products like wine and honey. Necessities were also traded, however, for without long-distance trade many areas would not have been able to obtain corn, metals, timber, and slaves3.
2The aim is, by presenting certain examples, to examine the potential of the coins to date the shipwrecks as well as to reconstruct ancient maritime trade routes.
The nature of the evidence
3Shipwrecks are examined by the appropriately-called “shipwreck archaeology”, a branch of the maritime and underwater archaeology4.
4A unique characteristic of the shipwreck sites is that they happen to be catastrophic sites – that is, sites created within minutes by some disaster that preserves various materials and the cultural context. These destructive sites offer valuable information on the study of ancient marine technology, maritime trade routes, transportation of people and goods, etc. A group of items from an archaeological site such as a shipwreck is found in a state that reflects a specific moment in the past. Such closed groups occur also in burials or in votive deposits, with the difference that in those cases the objects selected were intended to be used for the last time. In the case of ships, as of material remains revealed in constructions ruined during a physical devastation, like a volcanic eruption or an earthquake, the artefacts found allow a glance into the regular every-day life aboard a vessel5.
5Regarding the hundreds of shipwrecks dated to the Hellenistic and Roman Republican era coins comprise one of the least abundant types of material preserved. On the evidence provided in Parker 1992, there are 403 shipwrecks dated from the 3rd to late 1st c. BC only 27 have yielded coins (table 1). Although there have been new finds over the past decades recorded in Strauss 2013, the figure and percentage of the sites where coins have been found has not changed significantly. The nature and quality of the evidence are highly variable, ranging from isolate unidentifiable specimens to large hoards (table 2).
Table 1. Shipwrecks of the 3rd- 1st c. BC (based on Parker 1992, 10-12 with modifications).
Centuries a.C. | Shipwrecks catalogued | Shipwrecks with coins | % |
iiird iind ist | 64 155 184 | 1 14 12 | 1,6% 9,0% 6,5% |
Table 2. Shipwrecks of the 3rd-1st c. BC where coins have been reported.
Shipwreck | Site | Wreck date (BC) | Coins reported | References |
Kyrenia | Cyprus: N coast; 27 m depth. | early 3rd c. | 7 AE, mainly issues of Demetrios I Poliorketes. | Parker 1992, n° 563; Strauss 2013, n° 118. |
Sanguinaires | France: Near Ajaccio, Corsica; 18 m depth. | late 3rd c. | 1 AE of Ptolemy III Euergetes or Ptolemy IV Philopator. | Strauss 2013, n° 190. |
Grazel A | France: At Gruissan; in a sanded-up channel. | 200-150 | 1 AE of Ampurias. | Parker 1992, n° 482; Strauss 2013, n° 7898. |
La Chrétienne C | France: Near Agay/Anthéor; W of La Chrétienne; 35 m depth. | 175-150 | 1 denarius (210-200 BC). | Parker 1992, n° 304; Strauss 2013, n° 7724. |
Le Formiche di Capraia | Italy: N tip Capraia Island, Tuscany; 18 m depth. | 175-125 | 1 Roman ass (200-150 BC). | Strauss 2013, n° 8919. |
Capo Graziano A | Italy: SE of the Secca di Capo Graziano; 33-43 m depth. | 160-140 | 4 Roman asses. | Parker 1992, n° 233; Strauss 2013, n° 7656. |
Isla Pedrosa | Spain: At Cala Pedrosa, near L’Estartit; 36-40 m depth. | 150-140 | 2 AE of Kaiantolos; 1 AE of Rome; 6 AE of Massalia; 1 AE of Neapolis; 6 unidentifiable AE. | Parker 1992, n° 520; Strauss 2013, n° 7934. |
Apollonia A | Libya: In the harbour of Apollonia; 9 m depth. | 150-120 | 2 AE (2nd c. BC). | Parker 1992, n° 47; Strauss 2013, n° 128. |
Punta Scaletta | Italy: At the N point of Giannutri island; 33 m depth | 140-130 | 1 AR and 3 AE of Neapolis, 1 victoriate, 1 AE of Ptolemy VI Philometor. | Parker 1992, n° 960; Strauss 2013, n° 8342. |
Pointe du Brouil | France: Off Pointe du Brouil, Cavalaire bay; 32 m depth. | 140-130 | 2 Roman asses. | Parker 1992, n° 844; Strauss 2013, n° 8233. |
La Chrétienne A | France: Near Agay/Anthéor; E of La Chrétienne beacon; 21-25 m depth. | 150-100 | 1 AE of Cossura (2nd c. BC). | Parker 1992, n° 302; Strauss 2013, n° 7722. |
Spargi | Italy: Maddelana Island, NE Sardinia; 17-18 m depth. | 120-100 | 2 unidentified AE. | Parker 1992, n° 1108; Strauss 2013, n° 169. |
Atlit North Bay I | Israel: Off N bay of Atlit; 5 m depth. | late 2nd c. | Dozens of small Ptolemaic AE. | Strauss 2013, n° 8942. |
Naham Norem | Israel: Off N bay of Atlit; 5 m depth. | Ptolemaic AR. | Strauss 2013, n° 8943. | |
Neve Yam | Israel: Off Neve Yam shore; 3,5 m depth. | late 2nd c. | Several Ptolemaic AE. | Strauss 2013, n° 8846. |
Bagaud B | France: On the N side of Bagaud island; 18 m depth. | 110-100 | 1 AE of Massalia. | Parker 1992, n° 77; Strauss 2013, n° 7508. |
Kizil Burun Column | Turkey: SW of Izmir; 50 m depth. | late 2nd- 1st c. | 1 worn and corroded AE. | Strauss 2013, n° 12 |
Grand Bassin B | France: At Gruissan; 2-4 m depth. | 110-90 | 4 AE of Cese-Tarraco. | Parker 1992, n° 469; Strauss 2013, n° 7885. |
Mahdia | Tunisia: NE of Ras Mahedia; 40 m depth. | 110-90 | 4 AE. | Parker 1992, n° 621; Strauss 2013, n° 132. |
Cap Taillat | France: In Bon Porté bay; 33 m depth. | 100 | 1 illegible AE. | Parker 1992, n° 200; Strauss 2013, n° 7623. |
Cavalière | France: At the mouth of the Cavalière bay, near Le Lavandou; 43 m depth. | 100 | 5 AE of Massalia, 5 AE of Numidia, 1 AE of Carteia. | Parker 1992, n° 282; Strauss 2013, n° 133. |
Megadim A | Israel: Off Nahal Megadim, near ‘Atlit; shallow. | early 1st c. | A hoard of 55 Ptolemaic AE; a hoard of 19 Ptolemaic tetradrachms; a hoard of 7 Lycian, Ptolemaic and Seleucid AE. | Parker 1992, n° 689; Strauss 2013, n° 60. |
Cap Sicié | France: Near Les Deux Frères in the anchorage of Le Bruse; 40 m depth. | 75-70 | A hoard of 20 denarii. | Parker 1992, n° 198; Strauss 2013, n° 7621. |
Cap Camarat B | France: At Cap Camarat, near Saint Tropez; 41 m depth. | 75-25 | Roman asses. | Parker 1992, n° 180; Strauss 2013, n° 187. |
La Madrague de Giens | France: Off the N side of the Giens promontory; 18-21 m depth | 70-50 | 20 AE, 15 denarii. | Parker 1992, n° 616; Strauss 2013, n° 8023. |
Antikythera | Greece: NE side of Antikythera; 50-60 m depth. | 60 | A hoard of 36 cistophoric tetradrachms; 2 AE of Katane, 1 AE of Panormos, 1 AE of Knidos, 2 AE of Ephesos, 34 unidentifiable AE. | Parker 1992, n° 44; Strauss 2013, n° 69. |
Haifa | Israel: Off the Haifa shore. | mid 1st c. | A hoard of Ptolemaic tetradrachms (approximately 40 kg). | Strauss 2013, n° 59. |
Le Grotticelle | Italy: Between Ventotene and S. Stefano, Pontine Islands; 42-45 m depth. | mid 1st c. | Some specimens. | Parker 1992, n° 486; Strauss 2013, n° 9. |
Dramont A | France: In Saint Rafael bay, SW of Île d’Or; 36 m depth. | mid 1st c. | 1 Roman ass, 1 denarius (82 BC). | Parker 1992, n° 371; Strauss 2013, n° 7789. |
Plane A | France: Between the islands of Plane and Riou; 20 m depth. | 50 | 1 AE of Cese-Tarraco. | Parker 1992, n° 819; Strauss 2013, n° 8209. |
Le Titan | France: Off the E tip of Île du Levant; 27-29 m depth. | 50-45 | 2 Roman semiunciae. | Parker 1992, n° 1149; Strauss 2013, n° 8525. |
Fos A | France: 1 km off Fos-sur-Mer; 8-10 m depth. | 50-25 | 1 Roman ass. | Parker 1992, n° 422; Strauss 2013, n° 7839. |
Le Grand Radeau | France: On the beach of Le Grand Radeau, S/SE of L’Étang d’Icard. | 45-35 | 1 denarius (Gn. Pompeius, 46/45 BC). | Parker 1992, n° 475; Strauss 2013, n° 7891. |
Capo Rasocolmo A | Italy: W of Capo Rasocolmo, Sicily; 8m depth. | 36 | 34 denarii, asses, semisses (42/40-mid 30s BC). | Parker 1992, n° 247; Strauss 2013, n° 7670. |
The condition of the coins
6Usually, coins uncovered from shipwrecks are not in the best of condition. Unless circumstances are exceptional, coins – especially those of base metal – would succumb to the ravages of marine environment. To the above, it should be added in certain cases the effect of the cleaning process at the laboratory. It is not uncommon in the cases of groups of coins, the latter to be found in masses with corrosion products and incrustations.
7When the “Sophikon, 1893” hoard (IGCH 179) was discovered by sponge divers in the sea area of Sophiko – ancient Solygeia – in Northeastern Peloponnese, its coins were stuck together forming a solid heavy bulk6. In addition to the corrosion caused by the marine environment, coins had undergone chemical cleaning as well in order to separate them and study them further7. This procedure altered their initial weight.
8Similarly, the coins from the “Antikythera” shipwreck, that were retrieved during the 1976 supplementary investigation carried out by the Greek Archaeological Service and J.‑Y. Cousteau’s oceonographic “Calypso”, were accumulated in masses with corrosion products and incrustations. After they were separated and cleaned at the National Archaeological Museum, it was determined that they included a hoard of 36 silver cistophoric tetradrachms and more than 40 bronze coins. Most of the silver coins are in an advanced state of corrosion, some to such a degree that they present extensive wear on their surfaces and/or loss of material around their circumference, or have been broken. Their corrosion, together with the effects of chemical cleaning, has resulted in the reduction of each coin’s initial weight. Moreover, the number of bronze coins cannot be determined with greater precision since there are still some small bronze lamps of coins that could not be broken apart. In addition, most are in an advanced state of corrosion or mineralized, making it impossible to identify only but a very few8.
9The “Pantelleria, 2013” hoard was found in Cala Tramontana at 13 m depth and about 50 m southwest of a shipwreck site. Its 3,471 bronze coins were dispersed fairly evenly over an area of 4 x 4 m and had a thick, green, grainy encrustation characteristic of bronze oxidation. Following their recovery and delivery to a conservation laboratory at the Soprintendenza dei Beni Culturali di Trapani, on-site analysis revealed that their average weight seemed to be slightly reduced, probably due to the loss of material by oxidation9.
The coin evidence for dating
10In general, coins are considered to function as a fairly reliable tool for dating archaeological assemblages, when all the details of numismatic testimony are taken into account. One of these concerns the date of issue of the latest coins, that forms a terminus post quem, with the period of their circulation marked by their date of issue and the date of their deposit in an archaeological assemblage. It should be always born in mind that the potential for this particular means of dating is limited in the cases where the numismatic material is corroded. The corrosion does not allow one to determine the degree of wear on the coins, which would be suggestive of their having circulated over a shorter or longer period. The chronology of a wreck becomes less difficult if there were coin hoards on board and/or the cargo of the ship contained well-dated artefacts, then the proposed dating of the wreck should be deduced by combining all the evidence.
11There are certain examples indicative of the above.
12The “Kyrenia” shipwreck produced a few corroded bronze coins. Among them there are issues of Demetrios I Poliorketes (306-283 BC), which indicates that the ship sank in the early 3rd c. BC10.
13The “Punta Scaletta” shipwreck produced 13 coins, which included 1 silver and 3 bronze specimens of Neapolis, 1 bronze victoriate and 1 bronze of Ptolemy VI Philometor (181-146 BC). The numismatic evidence supports the dating of the pottery found at the site in the 130s BC thus indicating a date 140-130 BC for the wreck11.
14The “Megadim A” shipwreck12 revealed three hoards: one of 55 Ptolemaic bronze coins, mainly issues of Cleopatra III and Ptolemy IX (116-107 BC)13; one of 19 Ptolemaic silver tetratrachms, containing issues of Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II (145-116 BC), Cleopatra III and Ptolemy IX, and Ptolemy X Alexander I (101-88 BC)14; and one of 7 bronze coins, with 1 Lycian, 4 Ptolemaic and 2 Seleucid issues15. The latest identifiable coin from the three hoards, a tetradrachm of Ptolemy X issued in 100/99 BC, places the shipwreck in the beginning of the 1st c. BC16.
15The “Cap Sicié” shipwreck produced a hoard of 20 Roman Republican denarii. The latest denarius is an issue of L. Rutilius Flaccus (77 BC), which supplies a terminus post quem for the ship’s final voyage17.
16In the case of the “Antikythera” shipwreck the “Antikythera, 1976” hoard (CH VIII [1994], 521) of 36 cistophoric tetradrachms offers the most secure dating indication for the shipwreck, as far as numismatics is concerned. Thirty-two specimens issued between 104 and 67 BC come from the mint at Pergamon. The other 4 are from the Ephesos mint, and are dated between 94/93 (or 89/88) and 82/81 (or 77/76) BC18. The fact that, on one hand the latest issues included are from the years 76-67 BC, and on the other that it contains no issues from the years 59-49 BC, suggests that the group was probably closed prior to 60 BC. However, the absence from the hoard of issues containing the names of Roman proconsuls may be entirely accidental. In this case, one should not rule out the possibility that the group was formed even later than 60 BC, made up from earlier cistophori that had remained in circulation at the same time as the proconsular issues19.
The coin evidence for ship voyages
17In addition to their use as chronology tools, the study of coins provides valuable information regarding ship voyages. The presence of issues from various regions in a shipwreck demonstrates the ship’s wide sailing range. This is nicely indicated by the bronze coins, which were intended to facilitate a large number of small-scale financial transactions and were normally circulated within the territory of their issuing authority and neighboring regions. The coins found on the ship probably suggest the place of origin of persons on board and/or were connected with transactions carried out at inns, taverns and on the docksides of various Mediterranean ports.
18The “Isla Pedrosa” shipwreck produced 16 bronze coins, of which 2 of Kaiantolos (late 2nd-early 1st c. BC) of the Longostaletes, 6 of Massalia, 1 uncial as of Rome, 1 of Neapolis and 6 unidentifiable specimens which might be of Syracuse and Tarentum. According to the numismatic evidence, the ship should have travelled in Western and Central Mediterranean calling at places in Southern France, Italy and Sicily20.
19The “Cavalière” shipwreck produced 12 bronze coins, of which 1 of Carteia, 5 of Massalia and 5 of Numidia. According to the numismatic evidence alone, the ship, before her loss in the late 2nd c. BC, had visited among other places North Africa and Southern France21.
20The “Grand Bassin B” wreck, dated in 110-90 BC, yielded 4 bronzes of Cese-Tarraco. The coins as well as few other items on board show that the ship had Spanish connections22.
21In the case of the “Antikythera” shipwreck the numismatic evidence is quite suggestive for the ship’s last trip. From the 6 identifiable out of 40 bronze coins, 3 are from Sicily and 3 from Asia Minor. The Sicilian coins include 2 of Katane and 1 of Panormos. The Asia Minor coins include 1 of Knidos and 2 of Ephesos.23 Furthermore, the composition of the “Antikythera, 1976” hoard – with silver issues exclusively circulated in Asia Minor – suggests that some port in the province of Asia must have been one of the ship’s final stops before it sank. It has been maintained that since the majority of the hoard’s tetradrachms were struck at the Pergamon mint, the most important port on the ship’s final voyage has to be sought in that region24. That is not necessarily true. Pergamon (together with Ephesos) was the main mint for cistophori; hence, it’s reasonable that the size of its numismatic production would be represented in relevant proportion in hoards with cistophoric coins. More indicative in this case is the presence of the 2 bronze issues from Ephesos, which are probably contemporary with the hoard’s latest tetradrachms. Their more limited circulation vis-à-vis the cistophori demonstrates that the ship had most likely docked at Ephesos before it went under25.
22The chronological and geographic range of the coins from a ship that was transporting goods and passengers to and from different destinations corresponds with the nature of numismatic finds from a large harbour and important commercial center. Such a case is the island of Delos, which after its incorporation into the Athenian realm and its proclamation as a free port in 168 BC became a place of permanent or temporary residence and activity for thousands of people from many parts of the ancient world. In addition to Athenian cleruchy issues, many bronze coins from most of the regions in the central and eastern Mediterranean as well as the Black Sea were found on the island26.
23Similar conclusions are drawn from the “Ascalon, 1988” hoard (CH IX [2002], 548) found during excavations. It consists of 47 coins, 1 diobol and 46 bronzes, dated from the end of the 5th to the end of the 2nd c. BC and minted at Teos, Samos, Kos, Knidos, Rhodes, Lycia, Side, Paphos, Antioch and Tyre. All of these places are located along a geographically seafaring route and where remnants of ancient harbours can be traced. Thus, it has been suggested that this hoard may have been gathered by a sailor during his travels27.
Could there be more coins?
24It goes without saying that this is a period when many areas of the Mediterranean were heavily monetized. In those centuries, coins played a most prominent role in transactions. It is expected, in sites such as wrecks, which have a distinctly commercial nature, coins would be in abundance. Yet, there seems to be a discrepancy between the probable and the reality of evidence. What might be the reason behind it?
25Most of the shipwrecks are not fully excavated. A grand majority of them have been spotted because of their largest artefacts carrying in their hulls. Many shipwrecks of antiquity are typified by their amphoras manufactured in various places and used for storing and transporting goods28. Coins due to their size as well as the marine environment are normally less easily spotted in a non-systematic and appropriately equipped excavation.
26When coins are in fact found in a shipwreck, there is no certainty that those were the only ones kept there before the sinking. Absence of coins and valuables suggest that the crew and/or the passengers had time to collect their most precious possessions – or at least some of them – and then abandon ship. Coins could easily be carried away by the escaping people. Consequently, it is very plausible that those coins left behind might well be those their owners had no time to collect or did not think of taking with them or sadly went down with them.
27Even so, it should be stressed that the general picture might be misleading. It cannot be excluded that in cases where the ships sank near the shore, and their remains rested in water sufficiently shallow for breath-holding divers, salvage operations would most probably been carried later in order to recover the most valuables. The “La Madrague de Giens” shipwreck dated in the second quarter of the 1st c. BC, comprises such a case. Many of the shipboard objects and part of the cargo were salvaged in antiquity by divers, as it is evidenced by their stones lay abandoned in the upper layers of the wreck. Apparently 35 coins were found, 20 bronzes and 15 silver, of which the latest is a denarius of L. Farsuleius Mensor (75 BC)29.
28Apparently, this was commonplace as suggested by the silver hoards found in a few shipwreck sites.
29One example constitutes the “Sophikon, 1893” hoard (IGCH 179). It consists of 945 silver drachms, didrachms and tetradachms and weights more than 6 kg. There are issues of Alexander III (336-323 BC), Philip III Arrhidaios (323-317 BC), Demetrios I Poliorketes (306-283 BC, Antigonos II Gonatas (276-239 BC), Lysimachos (306-281 BC), the Aetolian League, the Boeotian Confederation, Athens, Sparta, Rhodes, Attalos I (241-197 BC), Seleukos I Nikator (312-281 BC), Antiochos I Soter (281-261 BC), Antiochos II Theos (261–246 BC), Seleukos II Kallinikos (246-226/225 BC), Ptolemy I Soter (305-283/282), Ptolemy II Philadelphos (285-246 BC) and Ptolemy III Euergetes (246-222 BC)30. The hoard may be connected with a shipwreck occurred in the last decades of the 3rd c. BC in the busy sea-route along the coast of the Argo-Saronic Gulf.
30Another is the “Haifa, 1994” hoard, discovered off the Haifa shore and consisted of thousands of silver Ptolemaic tetradrachms. The coins must have been placed in vessels or sacks and over the centuries the bulk of them conglomerated into a lump of more than 23 kg while the rest 1 500-1 700 remained separated. A preliminary assessment of the material has shown that there are issues of Cleopatra III and Ptolemy IX (116-109 BC), Ptolemy X Alexander I (88-80 BC) and Ptolemy XII Neos Dionysos (80-58 BC) minted in Paphos and Alexandria and has suggested that the hoard should have closed in c. 63 BC31.
31A third example concerns the “Antikythera, 1976” hoard. Despite its modest size compared to other hoards, its significance lies in its being the only one discovered to date that consists exclusively of cistophori, whether Attalid or Roman issues, and to have been found outside Asia Minor. It has been argued that this may be related to possible commercial practices. It is likely that some merchants who were making trips back and forth to the Roman province of Asia took cistophori with them upon sailing from some Asia Minor port, in the expectation that they would use them on their next trip back. In this way, they would avoid the services of bankers active in the area who exchanged the coins of other issuing authorities for cistophori charging a commission for doing so32. Τhe renewed research at the site inaugurated in Autumn 2014 will demonstrate whether the hoard constitutes the whole or a part of a larger assemblage.
32A case of an intentional concealment of coins in the sea in the hope to be retrieved later might be the “Pantelleria, 2011” hoard, which consists of Carthaginian bronzes minted in Sardinia during the First Punic war (264-241 BC). The hoard was found in the middle of the Cala Tramontana bay about 100 m from the shore in shallow depth. Apart from a large, trapezoidal lithic anchor at a distance of 1m, no other artefacts have been found that can associate the coins with a shipwreck. On the above evidence, it has been argued that the coins were carried on a Carthaginian ship headed to Sicily in the course of the First Punic War. As a result of an imminent danger, such as an approaching enemy fleet, the people on-board decided to hide the treasure on the bottom of the sea in relatively low waters. The anchor probably served as a marker to easily locate the spot from the surface and the shallow depth would allow free divers to easily access the hoard33.
Conclusions
33The coins recovered from Hellenistic and Roman Republican shipwrecks constitute an important piece of evidence for the maritime record of that era. Although the number of wreck sites that yielded coins is rather modest, the existed evidence indicates that coinage was carried on board as personal cash of the crew and the passengers as well as for military and trading purposes. The scarcity of coin finds is due to a variety of reasons associated with the very nature of coinage. Coins, due to their small size and value, must have been among the objects first taken by the people abandoning a sinking vessel and must have also been of the high priority material to be recovered during salvage operations. Furthermore, when coins remain at wreck sites for many centuries are affected by the marine environment and are less easily spotted compared to artefacts of larger size in a non-systematic research. Those found – whether isolate specimens or hoards – can offer alongside pottery and other datable artefacts valuable information on the dating of wrecks as well as indications for the possible ship traveling routes.
Notes de bas de page
1 Special thanks are due to Professor Catherine Grandjean, Director of Centre Tourangeau d’Histoire et d’études des Sources, Université François-Rabelais and Dr Frédérique Duyrat, Director of the Département des Monnaies, médailles et antiques, Bibliothèque nationale de France, for inviting me to participate in the conference on Les monnaies de fouille du monde grec, as well as the École française d’Athènes for its hospitality. The topic on coins found in shipwrecks first caught the author’s attention in 2011, when – as a curator at the Athens Numismatic Museum – he was asked to study the coins from the “Antikythera” shipwreck. The coins were to be displayed in the most successful temporary exhibition “The Antikythera Shipwreck. The Ship, the Treasures, the Mechanism” at the Athens National Archaeological Museum from 5 April 2012 to 28 April 2013.
2 The data have been gathered from Parker 1992 and Strauss 2013.
3 For a comprehensive presentation, see Bouyia 2012.
4 On the archaeology of shipwrecks, see Muckelroy 1978, 157-214 and Gibbs 2006, 4-19.
5 Parker 1992, 3; Gibbins 2001, 205.
6 Svoronos 1899, 289-290.
7 Ibid., 295; id. 1907, 35.
8 Tselekas 2012, 216-217.
9 Abelli et al. 2014, 349.
10 A certain ambiguity is observed with regards to the coins discovered in the “Kyrenia” shipwreck. In Katzev 1970, 8-9 is reported that four coins were found, “One of these was minted during the reign of Antigonos Monopthalmos (316-301 BC) and the other struck in the reign of his son, Demetrios Poliorketes (306-294)”. Katzev 2005, 78 mentions that “only seven bronze coins minted 306 to 294 were found”.
11 Parker 1992, 359.
12 Ibid., 273.
13 Syon et al. 2013, 4-5, n° 1-55.
14 Ibid., 5-6, n° 56-74.
15 Ibid., 6-7, n° 78-84.
16 Ibid., 3. An earlier examination of the numismatic material concluded that the latest coins belong to the 130s BC so the wreckage might have happened soon after that; see Raban & Galili 1985, 353.
17 Parker 1992, 106.
18 Tselekas 2012, 216 and 220-225.
19 Ibid., 217-218.
20 Parker 1992, 217-218.
21 Ibid., 133-134.
22 Ibid., 198-199.
23 Tselekas 2012, 217 and 216.
24 Yalouris 1990, 136.
25 Tselekas 2012, 218.
26 Hackens 1970; Hadjidakis 1997, 306.
27 Gitler & Kahanov 2002, 259-268.
28 Parker 1992, 31-35; Gibbins 2001.
29 Parker 1992, 198-199.
30 Svoronos 1899, 291-296; id. 1907.
31 Galili & Sharvit 1999, 17; Ariel & Sokolov 2003, 16.
32 Tselekas 2012, 217-218.
33 Abelli et al. 2014, 349-350.
Auteur
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Architecture romaine d’Asie Mineure
Les monuments de Xanthos et leur ornementation
Laurence Cavalier
2005
D’Homère à Plutarque. Itinéraires historiques
Recueil d'articles de Claude Mossé
Claude Mossé Patrice Brun (éd.)
2007
Pagus, castellum et civitas
Études d’épigraphie et d’histoire sur le village et la cité en Afrique romaine
Samir Aounallah
2010
Orner la cité
Enjeux culturels et politiques du paysage urbain dans l’Asie gréco-romaine
Anne-Valérie Pont
2010