Centro Ricerche e Documentazione sull’Antichità Classica
47
Monografie 47
1. Piana Agostinetti P., Documenti per la protostoria della
Val d’Ossola S. Bernardo di Ornavasso e le altre necropoli
preromane.
2. Ianovitz O., Il culto solare nella «X Regio Augustea».
3. Letta C., I Marsi e il Fucino nell’antichità.
4. Cebeillac M., Les «quaestores principis et candidati» aux Ier
et IIeme siècle de l’empire.
5. Poggio T., Ceramica e vernice nera di Spina: le oinochoi
trilobate.
6. Gambetti C., I coperchi di urne con figurazioni femminili nel
Museo Archeologico di Volterra.
7. Letta
 C.-D’Amato S., Epigrafia della regione dei Marsi.
8. Zecchini G., Aezio: l’ultima difesa dell’Occidente Romano.
9. Gillis D., Eros and Death in the Aeneid.
10. Gallotta B., Germanico.
11. Traina G., Paludi e Bonifiche nel mondo antico. Saggio di
archeologia geografica.
12. R  occhi G.D., Frontiera e confini nella Grecia Antica.
13. L  evi M.A., I Nomadi alla frontiera.
14. Z  ecchini G., Ricerche di storiografia latina tardoantica.
15. Agostinetti A.S., Flavio Arriano. Gli eventi dopo Alessandro.
16. L  evi M.A., Adriano Augusto.
17. L  evi M.A., Ercole e Roma.
18. L  anducci Gattinoni F., Duride di Samo.
19. AA.VV., L’Ecumenismo politico nella coscienza dell’Occi-
dente. Alle radici della casa comune europea.
20. AA.VV., L’ultimo Cesare. Scritti riforme progetti poteri
congiure.
21. AA.VV., Identità e valori. Fattori di aggregazione e fattori
di crisi nell’esperienza politica antica.
22. AA.VV., Integrazione mescolanza rifiuto. Incontri di popoli,
lingue e culture in Europa dall’Antichità all’Umanesimo.
23. AA.VV., Modelli eroici dall’antichità alla cultura europea.
24. AA.VV., La cultura storica nei primi due secoli dell’Impero
Romano.
25. Prandi L., Memorie storiche dei Greci in Claudio Eliano.
26. Chausson F., Stemmata aurea: Constantin, Justine, Théodose.
27. Colonnese C., Le scelte di Plutarco. Le vite non scritte di
greci illustri.
Paganoni cope Moncerdac 47.indd 1
MONOGRAFIE
The kingdom of Bithynia arose during the age
of Alexander and his successors, and, thanks to
its ambitious and charismatic kings, became the
C.E.R.D.A.C.
dominant power in the Propontic area within a few
decades. This book explores its emergence through
an in-depth analysis of the surviving sources in
order to reassess its role in the Hellenistic political
28. G alimberti A., Adriano e l’ideologia del principato.
landscape.
29. Bearzot C., Vivere da democratici. Studi su Lisia e la
democrazia ateniese.
30. Carsana C.-Schettino M.T. (a cura di), Utopia e Utopie
nel pensiero storico antico.
31. Rohr Vio F., Publio Ventidio Basso. Fautor Caesaris, tra
storia e memoria.
32. Lo Cascio E., Crescita e declino. Studi di storia dell’eco-
ELOISA PAGANONI was awarded her doctorate
nomia romana.
33. Migliario E.-Troiani L.-Zecchini G. (a cura di), So-
from the University of Padua in 2017 and is
cietà indigene e cultura greco-romana. Atti del Convegno currently a post-doctoral fellow at Ca’ Foscari
Internazionale Trento, 7-8 giugno 2007. University of Venice. Her research interests focus
34. Zecchini G., Ricerche di storiografia latina tardoantica II. on the history of Hellenistic Asia Minor, Greek
Dall’Historia Augusta a Paolo Diacono.
A HISTORY OF THE KINGDOM OF BITHYNIA FROM ITS ORIGIN TO PRUSIAS I
epigraphy, and local historiography. She has
35. R aimondi M., Imerio e il suo tempo. published several articles on these topics.
36. C ristofoli R.-Galimberti A.-Rohr Vio F. (a cura di),
Lo spazio del non-allineamento a Roma fra tarda Repubbli-
ca e primo principato.
37. Z ecchini G. (a cura di), L’Augusteum di Narona.
38. H ölkeskamp K.-J., Modelli per una Repubblica.
39. B earzot C. Landucci F. (a cura di), Alexader’s Legacy.
40. Bianchi E., Vulci. Storia della città e dei suoi rapporti con
Greci e Romani.
41. C ristofoli R.-Galimberti A.-Rohr Vio F. (a cura di),
Costruire la Memoria. Uso e abuso della storia fra tarda
repubblica e primo principato.
42. Pellizzari A., Maestro di retorica, maestro di vita: le lettere
FORGING THE CROWN
teodosiane di Libanio di Antiochia.
43. C asella M., Galerio. Il tetrarca infine tollerante.
44. Schettino M.T. - Zecchini G. (a cura di), L’età di Silla.
Atti del Convegno “Istituto italiano per la storia antica” -
Roma, 23-24 marzo 2017.
45. Schettino M.T., Prospettive interculturali e confronto poli-
A HISTORY OF THE KINGDOM OF BITHYNIA
tico da Augusto ai Severi.
46. Prandi L. (a cura di), EstOvest. Confini e conflitti tra
FROM ITS ORIGIN TO PRUSIAS I
Vicino Oriente e mondo Greco-Romano.
FORGING THE CROWN
47. Paganoni E., Forging the Crown. A history of the Kingdom
of Bithynia from its origin to Prusias I.
«L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER
Eloisa Paganoni
Eloisa Paganoni
E. PAGANONI - FORGING THE CROWN
ISBN 978-88-913-1895-4
On the Front cover:
Statuette of satyr from Nicomedia, 2nd century B.C.
«L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER Archaeological Museum of Istanbul, inventory 5985.
15/01/20 11:04
CENTRO RICERCHE E DOCUMENTAZIONE
SULL’ANTICHITÀ CLASSICA
MONOGRAFIE

47
 ELOISA PAGANONI

Forging the Crown

A History of the Kingdom of Bithynia

from its Origin to Prusias I

«L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER
Roma - Bristol
 ELOISA PAGANONI
Forging the Crown
A History of the Kingdom of Bithynia
from its Origin to Prusias I

© Copyright 2019 «L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER

Via Marianna Dionigi, 57 70 Enterprise Drive, Suite 2
00193, Roma - Italia Bristol CT, 06010 - USA
www.lerma.it

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored, or transmitted

in any form or by any means without written permission of the publisher.

Il volume è stato sottoposto a procedura di Peer-Review

Sistemi di garanzia della qualità

UNI EN ISO 9001:2015

Sistemi di gestione ambientale

ISO 14001:2015

Eloisa Paganoni
Forging the Crown
A History of the Kingdom of Bithynia from its Origin to Prusias I:
«L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER, 2019 - 280 p. 24 cm. -

ISBN (BROSSURA) 978-88-913-1895-4

ISBN (PDF) 978-88-913-1898-5

CDD 930

1. Ancient History

This Volume has been made possible with the Contribution of the
Dipartimento di Culture e Civiltà dell’Università degli Studi di Verona
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface................................................................................................ VII

Introduction ........................................................................................ IX

CHAPTER ONE. BITHYNIA BEFORE THE KINGDOM OF BITHYNIA................. 1

1. The Origin of the Bithynians ................................................... 1
2. Bithynia and the Bithynians in the Archaic and Classical Ages. 10

CHAPTER TWO. THE BIRTH OF A NEW KINGDOM. BITHYNIA IN THE AGE

OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT AND THE DIADOCHS (334-280 BC) .......... 23
1. The Turning-Point. Bas and Zipoites in the Late 4th Centu-
ry BC ........................................................................................ 23
2. Troubled Years 301-280 BC. Zipoites’ Politics between Ex-
pansion and Defence ................................................................ 29
3. Zipoites: from Ruler to King.................................................... 37
4. Independence ........................................................................... 43

CHAPTER THREE. BUILDING THE HEGEMONY. THE KINGDOM OF BITHYNIA

UNDER NICOMEDES I AND ZIAELAS (279-229 BC) ............................. 45
1. 279-277 BC Nicomedes I’s Wars ............................................. 45
2. Fragments of Nicomedes I’s Politics ....................................... 58
3. International Recognition......................................................... 68
4. The Traditional Portrayal of Nicomedes I, Hellenisation and
Peer Polity Interaction.............................................................. 70
5. From Nicomedes I to Ziaelas ................................................... 76
6. Ziaelas in His Father’s Footsteps ............................................. 81
7. An Appraisal of the Reigns of Nicomedes I and Ziaelas ......... 95

CHAPTER FOUR. BITHYNIA AND THE RISE OF ROME IN THE EAST

(229-182 BC) ................................................................................ 97
1. The Early Years of Prusias I ..................................................... 97
2. Great Expansion in a Changing World. Prusias I’s Politics in
the Turn of the 2nd Century BC ................................................ 110
 3. Prusias I’s Last Years. Deescalation to West and Escalation to
East ........................................................................................... 129
4. Prusias I’s Politics between Economy and Propaganda, Hel-
lenising and National Claims ................................................... 140
5. A Final Assessment of Prusias I ............................................... 148

Conclusion ......................................................................................... 151

Appendix. Epigraphic Evidence ........................................................ 157

Abbreviations ..................................................................................... 191

Bibliography ...................................................................................... 195

Kings of Bithynia ............................................................................... 239

Tables ................................................................................................. 241

Index .................................................................................................. 251

 PREFACE

This work originates from my PhD dissertation Bithynia. Politics of

a Hellenistic Kingdom, which I submitted to the University of Padua in
March 2017. I owe a debt of gratitude to many people, first of all, to my
supervisors, Luisa Prandi and Thomas Corsten, for their generous advice,
constant encouragement and endless patience.
Words cannot express my gratitude to Franca Landucci, who initiated me
into Hellenistic history and drew my attention to the kingdom of Bithynia.
She has carefully followed my work during these years, providing me with
insights and thought-provoking suggestions. My research has benefitted
from feedback from many scholars who commented on individual parts
of this work. I am particularly indebted to Domitilla Campanile, Andrew
Meadows, Federicomaria Muccioli, Christof Schuler, Giuseppe Squillace,
and Peter Thonemann. Michael Wörrle disclosed to me the meaning of a
mysterious abbreviation. Marco Bonechi suggested many good readings to
me, one of which was fundamental to this work. Raffaela G. Rizzo helped
me with designing the maps. Thomas R.P. Coward kindly proofread the
English for me. My warmest thanks to all of them. Any mistakes that remain
are my own.
I thank several institutions for their support in making this work pos-
sible. The University of Padua awarded me a three-year PhD fellowship,
which also funded my stays in Vienna (2014-2016) and Oxford (spring
2016). The Jacobi Fellowship from the Deutsches Archäologisches Insti-
tut allowed me to spend some fruitful weeks at the Kommission für Alte
Geschichte und Epigraphik in Munich in summer 2016. I prepared and
revised the manuscript for publication while I was a research fellow at Ca’
Foscari University of Venice. In the final stages of revision I benefitted
from a fellowship of the Istituto Italiano per la Storia Antica.
My parents, Angelo and Margherita, have always supported and en-
couraged me. This book is dedicated to them.
 INTRODUCTION

The dominant view reduces the Hellenistic world to the realms of the
Antigonids, Seleucids, Ptolemies and Attalids. A cursory look at the main
reference works, encyclopaedias, handbooks and companions confirms
this perception. Among the countless contributions, three works can serve
as an example.
In the second edition of the Cambridge Ancient History, the seventh
(divided into two parts), eighth and ninth volumes deal with the Hellenistic
centuries1. The first part of the seventh volume has the illustrative subtitle
The Hellenistic World and its chapters on the historical account focus on
the establishment of the kingdoms of the Diadochs. The second part and
the eighth volume are entitled The Rise of Rome to 220 BC and Rome and
the Mediterranean to 133 BC respectively. Their titles reveal that the his-
tory of the Greek world in the 2nd-1st centuries BC is conceived as the his-
tory of the rise of Rome in the East. It follows that the historical narrative
pivots on Rome, its enemies (Philip V, Perseus, and Antiochus III) and its
friends (the Attalids). This approach is confirmed by the ninth volume on
The Last Age of the Roman Republic 146-43 BC. The narrative of the his-
tory of the Hellenistic East is limited to a chapter of roughly thirty-pages
(from a volume of more than nine hundred pages), which deals with the
wars against Mithridates VI, the last enemy of Rome in the East.
The 2003 A Companion to the Hellenistic World introduces the reader
to many aspects of the Hellenistic period2. The second section entitled Pro-
tagonists is composed of four chapters on The Ptolemies and Egypt, The
Seleukids and Asia, Macedon and the Mainland, 280-221, and The Attalids
of Pergamon.
In 2017 the second edition of Le monde hellénistique appeared3. It in-
cludes chapters on the rise of the Hellenistic kingdoms down to 276 BC,
Egypt in the 3rd-1st century BC, the Seleucid empire in the 3rd century BC,

1
CAH2 VII.1 and 2; VIII; IX.
2
ERSKINE 2003.
3
GRANDJEAN et. al. 2008, 2nd ed. 2017.
X ELOISA PAGANONI

Macedonia until the end of the Antigonids, followed by two chapters on the
Eastern Mediterranean and Greece in the later Hellenistic era. Like the two
aforementioned works, the 2017 handbook ‘selects’ the protagonists of the
Hellenistic age according to the ‘traditional’ approach. Furthermore, as far
as we can see from the table of contents, the kingdoms ‘disappear’ from the
account when they enter the sphere of Roman influence. The chapters about
the second half of the Hellenistic age, indeed, are devoted to Greece, the East,
and the Ptolemies, the last dynasty to capitulate to Rome. The reader has the
overall impression that the Hellenistic era was, broadly speaking, the ‘age of
the kingdoms’, and that this era came to an end when Rome entered the East.
This idea is not new in scholarship. Johann Gustav Droysen, the father
of Hellenism, planned to describe the history of the Eastern Mediterra-
nean from Alexander’s to Cleopatra’s death. But in fact he concluded his
Geschichte des Hellenismus with the account of the Greek and Asiatic
situation in the 220s, that is, before the arrival of Rome4. In the histori-
cal account at the beginning of The Social and Economic History of the
Hellenistic World, Michail Rostovtzeff called this ‘age of the kingdoms’
the ‘Hellenistic balance’, in contrast with the following decades between
the 220s and the 130s BC, when, he thought, the ‘decay of the Hellenistic
monarchies’ took place5.
The picture of the Hellenistic world is deeply affected by Rome. Its
entrance in the East is considered a turning-point. Afterwards, the history
of the Hellenistic world is presented as a step of Roman imperialism. The
years between the age of Alexander and the coming of Rome are reduced
to a mere preamble to Rome’s conquest of the East. The account of them
focuses on the Macedonian monarchies and the Attalids, in other words,
those kingdoms that were the most involved in the rise of Rome in the East.
Modern scholars are not solely responsible for this situation. Due to the
loss of nearly all of Greek local and general Hellenistic historiography, they
mostly depend on the Histories of Polybius, the Historical Library of Dio-
dorus of Sicily, the Ab urbe condita of Livy, the Roman History of Appian
and Justin’s summary of the Philippic Histories of Trogus. In what survives
of the first four works, the narrative on the Hellenistic centuries coincides
with the account of Roman imperialism. As a consequence, it focuses on the
Hellenistic kingdoms (Macedonia, Syria, Egypt and Pergamum) that were
in contact with Rome, and information is limited on Rome’s relations with

4
DROYSEN 1952-1953. Cf. MARI 2019, p. 18.
5
ROSTOVTZEFF 1941, pp. 24-73.
 INTRODUCTION XI

them. Nearly nothing is said about the Eastern situation; the inter-state re-
lations between the kingdoms and with other Hellenistic entities are com-
pletely overlooked unless they concern Rome. The universal history of Tro-
gus has been defined as ‘una storia «non romana» e, se non proprio contro
Roma, almeno senza Roma’6. The unique perspective of this work, however,
cannot remove the fact that only a summary of Justin survives. It often offers
a viewpoint different to events told in other sources and testifies to episodes
otherwise unknown. On the other hand, Justin’s information turns out to be
unreliable in some cases. When trustworthy, it is sometimes difficult to con-
textualise within the historical frame the Roman focused sources depict. In
fact, the history of the Hellenistic realities between the age of the Diadochs
and the oncoming of Rome in the East is barely known to us.

This contributes to the bi-dimensional, simplified, and incomplete view

of the Hellenistic world still in vouge. It allows little room for the other
protagonists of that world, which are generally called with the diminishing
designation of ‘minor kingdoms’ in contrast to the monarchies ruled by
Macedonian dynasties, Macedonia, Syria and Egypt7. Nonetheless, from
the 1980s onwards, scholarship has taken a fresh interest in these king-
doms, testified by a growing number of monographs on Pontus, Cappado-
cia, Galatia, Commagene, Armenia, Parthia, and Bactria8. With regard to
the kingdom of Bithynia, recent contributions include the monographs by
Henri-Louis Fernoux and Christoph Michels9. These works provide fresh
insights on the society of Hellenistic Bithynia and the cultural politics of
its kings respectively.
The historical account, which informs the background of their stud-
ies, dates back to some decades ago, though. It was elaborated in a long
season of studies that began in the late 19th century. In 1861 Karl A. E.
Nolte presented the dissertation De rebus gestis regum Bithynorum usque
ad Prusiae I mortem10. A few years later Theodor Reinach devoted two
essays on the history and coinage of the kingdom of Bithynia11. In 1925 Jo-
hann Sölch published the paper Bithynische Städte im Altertum12. In 1953

6
SANTI AMANTINI 1981, p. 26.
7
Cf. GABELKO 2017, pp. 319-321.
8
SCHOTTKY 1989; STROBEL 1996; LERNER 1999; ARSLAN 2004; PRIMO 2004; FACELLA 2006; COLOROU
2009; PANICHI 2018.
9
FERNOUX 2004; MICHELS 2009.
10
NOLTE 1861.
11
REINACH 1888; REINACH 1902.
12
SÖLCH 1925.
XII ELOISA PAGANONI

Giovanni Vitucci wrote the first monograph on the Bithynian kingdom

with the title Il regno di Bitinia13. It was the only volume on Hellenistic
Bithynia for decades. Notwithstanding, it never became a reference work.
This purpose was fulfilled by the entries about Bithynia and the Bithynian
kings, which appeared in the Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertum-
swissenschaft between the 1890s and 1970s14. In 2005, fifty-two years af-
ter Vitucci’s work, Oleg Gabelko presented the monumental monograph
NСтОрия ВиϕинСKОго царСтва, an updated history of the kingdom of
Bithynia15. Regrettably, it has remained unknown to non-Russian speaking
scholarship. Nearly no European or American scholar mentions it, and it
is difficult to find a copy in Western libraries. In fact, the current inter-
pretation of the politics of the kingdom of Bithynia is based on contribu-
tions published in the 1970s. They show the faults of the traditional storia
evenemenziale, among which the little effort to contextualise events. This
traditional approach conceived the history of a political entity just as a se-
quence of events. Its politics were not interpreted in light of the wider his-
torical context, and they did not contribute to the definition of this context.

Despite recent progress, an easily accessible and updated study on the

history of Hellenistic Bithynia is still lacking. This book aims to contribute
to filling this gap through a reassessment of the emergence of the Bithyni-
an kingdom in the Hellenistic world. It is a political history of Bithynia in
the ‘age of the kingdoms’. It points out the conditions that allowed the rise
of the kingdom and investigates the agency of the kings, who ruled before
Bithynia entered Rome’s sphere of interest, Zipoites, Nicomedes I, Ziaelas
and Prusias I. This work explores their domestic and foreign policies, as
far as can be ascertained from the sources, in order to determine the role
of the kingdom of Bithynia in the Hellenistic world. Outlining the rise
and consolidation of this kingdom involves reassessing the history of the
whole of northern Asia Minor in the first decades of the Hellenistic era. It
reconsiders the history of this region taking Bithynia as the focus of the
historical analysis. The investigation of Bithynian politics reveals the con-
tact networks of powers involved in this region. In this way, it contributes
to the understanding of the interests that shaped the history of this area.
Although the evidence from the 3rd-early 2nd century BC is scanty, the

13
VITUCCI 1953.
14
MEYER 1897; GEYER 1936; GEYER 1936a; GEYER 1936b; GEYER 1936c; HABICHT 1957; HABICHT 1957a;
HABICHT 1972; HABICHT 1972c.
15
GABELKO 2005.
 INTRODUCTION XIII

state of sources about the kingdom of Bithynia is appreciably different from

others. To outline the role of Bithynia in the ‘age of the kingdoms’, we can
rely not only on sources mentioned above but also on Memnon’s On Hera-
clea. What survives of this work is a long summary of Books IX-XVI, that
constitutes Codex 224 of Photius’ Bibliotheca. It is a detailed account of the
history of the Propontic area from the 4th to the 1st centuries BC. It provides
a decisive contribution to the understanding of the history of the kingdom
of Bithynia, especially in its earliest decades. Here and there, it is affected
by the consequences of works which are preserved as a summary. Photius’
narrative is in some cases unclear or imprecise. Some episodes for which it
is the only testimony are difficult to contextualize. However, scholars agree
that the historical information that Photius preserves is reliable16.
The wealth of information and the local perspective of the summary of
Memnon’s work, which also provides a glimpse into domestic events, is a
source of regret for the loss of local literary production on Bithynia. It should
have been remarkable, judging from the number of the authors who are known
to have devoted a work to this region or one of its cities. Two fragments sur-
vive from the On Nicaea by a certain Menecrates, who is often identified with
the 2nd-century-BC Menecrates of Tralles17. Demosthenes of Bithynia, who is
supposed to have lived in the Hellenistic age, wrote the Bithyniaka, an epic
poem in at least ten books18. In the second half of the 2nd century BC, Nicander
of Chalcedon composed the Misadventures of Prusias, a satiric work on Pru-
sias II19. The works of Asclepiades of Myrlea, active in the 2nd-1st century BC
included a Bithyniaka in at least ten books20. Alexander Polyhistor wrote an
On Bithynia21. The obscure Artemidorus of Ascalon was the author of an On
Bithynia of which nothing is extant but the title22. Arrian of Nicomedia wrote
his Bithyniaka in ten books recounting the history of his country from the ori-
gin to the end of the kingdom23. A few fragments of these works are extant and
most of them concern geographical and mythological information. However,

16
YARROW 2006, pp. 109-110; PAGANONI 2015, pp. 61-62. On Photius, see HÄGG 1973; HÄGG 1975;
SCHAMP 1987; WILSON 1992; BEVEGNI 1996. On Memnon and his work, see JANKE 1963; DESIDERI 1967; DE-
SIDERI 1970-1971; DUECK 2006; YARROW 2006, passim; ARSLAN 2011; HEINEMANN 2010; Billows, Nymphis
BNJ 432, Biographical Essay; DAVAZE 2013; TOBER 2013, pp. 387-414; GALLOTTA 2014; PAGANONI 2015.
17
Trachsel, Menekrates, BNJ 701.
18
Trachsel, Demosthenes, BNJ 699.
19
Trachsel, Nikandros, BNJ 700.
20
Trachsel, Asklepiades, BNJ 697.
21
Blakely, Alexandros Polyhistor, BNJ 273 FF 12-13, 125 with Commentary and Biographical Essay.
22
Trachsel, Artemidoros BNJ 698.
23
Jacoby, FGrHist 156, FF 14-29, 57-109 with Commentary; STADTER 1980, pp. 152-161; DANA –
DANA 2014, pp. 27-32.
XIV ELOISA PAGANONI

they attest to the existence of a thriving local tradition, that was probably in
part produced at the Bithynian court24.
The research on some aspects about Hellenistic Bithynia, such as interna-
tional relations and cultural and economic politics, benefits from numismatic
and epigraphic evidence as well as from literary sources25. The coinage of
the Bithynian kingdom has raised the attention of scholars since the time of
Theodor Reinach. The achievements of decades of studies have been recently
concentrated in the handbook on the coinage of northern Anatolia by Oliver
D. Hoover, which is now the standard reference work26. The documents from
Bithynia are collected in the catalogues of inscriptions from Cius/Prusias ad
Mare, Prusa ad Olympum, Bithynium, Myrlea/Apamea, Pylai, Cierus/Pru-
sias ad Hypium and Nicaea of the series Inschriften griechischer Städte aus
Kleinasien27. The absence of a volume about Nicomedia is remarkable. For
this city the only reference remains the first part of the fourth volume of the
Tituli Asiae Minoris28. Other inscriptions relevant to this research are pub-
lished in other corpora. It is therefore difficult to acquire an overall overview
of this evidence, its value and the matters it raises. For this reason, I collect
it in an appendix. It intends to be a useful tool for the reader looking for texts
and translations as well as an update of the scholarship about each document.
It reassesses the main matters and provides a proper space for issues that
would be relegated to a footnote in the historical account.

NOTE

Translations from Greek and Latin are my own.

Personal and place names have been Latinized (e.g. Byzantium, Nicaea instead
of Byzantion, Nikaia) except for unfamiliar names or names usually quoted in the
Greek form (e.g. Tios). Words, such as institutions, epithets, and special designa-
tions, are transliterated (e.g. boulē).

24
PAGANONI 2016 with further literature on the authors of these works.
25
Archaeologic sources too could offer a valuable contribution to the historical investigation, but no
extensive excavations, bringing to the light the Hellenistic layers, have been so far conducted in the Pro-
pontis.
26
HOOVER 2012, pp. 206-226.
27
IK Kios; IK Prusa ad Olympum; IK Klaudiu Polis; IK Apameia und Pylai; IK Prusias ad Hypium; IK
Nikaia. MAREK – ADAK 2016 collect the inscriptions from Bithynia that have been found after the publication
of these corpora. Unforunately, they do not provide new evidence for the history of the kingdom of Bithynia.
28
TAM IV, 1. See also DÖRNER 1941; DÖRNER 1952; ROBERT 1980.
 CHAPTER ONE

BITHYNIA BEFORE THE KINGDOM OF BITHYNIA

1. THE ORIGIN OF THE BITHYNIANS

Ancient sources often call the Bithynians Θρήικες οἱ ἐν τῇ Ἀσίῃ1,

Βιθυνοὶ Θρᾷκες2, Θρᾷκες Βιθυνοί3, Θρᾷκες οἱ περὶ Βιθυνίαν4 or Θρᾷκες οἱ
Βιθυνοί5 and their region – broadly corresponding to the Propontic penin-
sula – Βιθυνὶς Θρᾴκη6, Θρᾴκη ἡ ἐν τῇ Ἀσίᾳ7, Asiae Bithynia8 or Thracium
Bosphorum9. These names refer to the Thracian ethnicity of the Bithynians,
which is confirmed by onomastics and archaeological evidence10. Literary
sources explain that they were among the Thracian tribes that passed from
Europe to Asia in remote time. The information is fragmentary, occasion-
ally unclear and sometimes not trustworthy, as usual for distant events, but
it produces a sufficiently detailed account of the peopling of the Propontic
peninsula. Herodotus first relates the migration of the Thracians:

the Thracians... who crossed over to Asia were called Bithynians. Formerly,
they were called Strymonians – as they themselves say – since they lived by
the Strymon11.

1
Hdt. VII, 75.
2
Thuc. IV, 75, 2.
3
Xen. An. VI, 4, 2; Ps. Scylax 92.
4
Diod. XIV, 38, 3.
5
Arr. An. I, 29, 5. In his account of the arrival of the Bithynians in the Propontis, Appian (Mithr. 1)
uses the words τὴν Θρᾳκῶν τῶν Βιθυνῶν to describe a region near to Byzantium (therefore in Europe). For
the whole passage, see below in this chapter.
6
Xen. Hell. III, 2, 1.
7
Xen. An. VI, 4, 1; cf. 2, 17, where the Asiatic coast of the Propontis is referred to as τῆς Θρᾴκης.
8
Sall. Hist. III, 50.
9
Mela I, 14.
10
About onomastics and toponymy, see DURIDANOV 1980; CORSTEN 2007; MICHELS 2009, pp. 12-13 n.
5. ÖZLEM-AYTAÇLAR 2010; AVRAM 2013; OnomThrac, pp. LXXIX-LXXXII. About archaeological sources,
see below p. 6 n. 42.
11
Hdt. VII, 75: Θρήικες... δὲ διαβάντες μὲν ἐς τὴν Ἀσίην ἐκλήθησαν Βιθυνοί, τὸ δὲ πρότερον
ἐκαλέοντο, ὡς αὐτοὶ λέγουσι, Στρυμόνιοι, οἰκέοντες ἐπὶ Στρυμόνι.
2 ELOISA PAGANONI

Herodotus focuses on the name change of the Thracians who moved to

Asia, identified here with the Bithynians only. In doing so he locates the
region they inhabited in Europe. It was the area along the Strymon, today’s
Stryma, which has its source in the Vitosha Mountains and flows into the
Aegean Sea near Amphipolis12.
Elsewhere, Herodotus13 lists the Thracians among the peoples subject
to Croesus, and what seems a gloss14 clarifies that they were Thynians and
Bithynians. In this case, the Bithynians are associated with another Thra-
cian tribe, similar by name, which supposedly passed into Asia with them.
In this regard Strabo is explicit. In Book VII, he records both the Bithyni-
ans and the Thynians among the Thracian tribes migrating to Asia15, and
in Book XII, he says:

It is commonly accepted that the Bithynians, who formerly were Mysians,

changed their name after the Thracians, the Bithynians and Thynians, who
settled in the region16.

As with these passages, sources often couple the Thynians with the
Bithynians17. The assonance of their name created some confusion already
in ancient times18, but actually they were two distinct tribes that inhabited
different areas in Europe. The Bithynians, as we have seen, lived in the
Strymon valley, while the Thynians occupied the south-eastern Thrace,
bordering the Black Sea19. Most of them were still living there in the Clas-
sical and Hellenistic periods. This suggests that just a few of them passed
to Asia. The same conclusion cannot be drawn confidently for the Bithyni-

12
For the identification of the European land of the Bithynians with the Strymon’s valley, see also
Jacoby, FGrHist 156, F 77a (deriving from Herodotus); Eus. II, 66-67 Schoene. Cf. Pliny (NH V, 142-143),
who says that Asiam Bithyniamque... ea appellata est Cronia, dein Thessalis, dein Malianda et Strymonis
(‘Asia Bithynia... was called Cronia, then Thessalis, then Malianda and Strymonis’).
13
Hdt. I, 28.
14
MACAN 1908, p. 99 n. 75.
15
Strabo VII, 3, 2.
16
Strabo XII, 3, 3: οἱ μὲν οὖν Βιθυνοὶ διότι πρότερον Μυσοὶ ὄντες μετωνομάσθησαν οὕτως ἀπὸ τῶν
Θρᾳκῶν τῶν ἐποικησάντων, Βιθυνῶν τε καὶ Θυνῶν, ὁμολογεῖται παρὰ τῶν πλείστων.
17
Jacoby, FGrHist 156, F 77a; Eust. De capta Thess. p. 30 l. 26; Porphyr. Quaest. homericarum ad
Il. XIII, 3, 5.
18
Pliny (NH V, 145) says that the Bithynians were the Thynians who changed name after crossing over
to Asia and also HANNESTAD 1996, p. 68 thinks so.
19
On the Thynians, see MEYER 1897, col. 513; LENK 1936; FOL [– MARAZOV] 1977, pp. 141-142; LENDLE
1995, pp. 431-433; MIHAILOV 1991, pp. 604-605; STRONK 1995, pp. 185-186; MÜLLER 1997, p. 959; VON
BREDOW 2002; WEBBER 2011, pp. 203-204. About the Thynias region near Salmydessus, see OBERHUMMER
1936; MÜLLER 1997, pp. 922-924; VON BREDOW 2002b.
 BITHYNIA BEFORE THE KINGDOM OF BITHYNIA 3

ans, as their presence in Europe in the historical time is too scarcely at-
tested20.
The Bithynians and Thynians came from different areas of Thrace and
continued to live separately when they settled in Asia. Fragment 77a of
Arrian, probably from Book I of the Bithyniaka for content21, records the
migration of the Thracians into Asia and describes the land the Thynians
and Bithynians inhabited:

It is also said that at that time the Bithynians occupied the region from the Bos-
porus to the Rhebas. The Thynians inhabited the mountainous region border-
ing on the Pontus as far as the river Cales, as the Thynians and the Bithynians
were neighbouring peoples22.

It is clear from the reference to ‘that time’ that Arrian is dealing with the
situation in a distant past, probably close to the arrival of the Thynians and
the Bithynians in Anatolia. According to him, the territory of the Thynians
extended as far as the river Cales, the current Alaplı Çayı, which flows
into the sea a few kilometres south-west of the promontory of Heraclea
Pontica23. The Bithynians inhabited the area between the Bosporus and
the river Rhebas, that was – Arrian said above – a tributary of the river
Sangarius. It corresponds to the modern Gökçe Suyu, that flows south of
Askania Lake24. The rivers Cales and Rhebas constituted the southern bor-
ders of the Thynians and the Bithynians who inhabited the eastern and the
western Propontic peninsula respectively, as confirmed by other sources.
Toponymy suggests the presence of the Thynians on the shores bordering

20
According to the edition of MEINEKE 1877, Strabo XII, 3, 3 says: καὶ σημεῖα τίθενται τοῦ μὲν τῶν
Βιθυνῶν ἔθνους τὸ μέχρι νῦν ἐν τῇ Θρᾴκῃ λέγεσθαί τινας Βιθυνούς (‘[As for the migration of the Bithyni-
ans] they present as evidence of the Bithynians that in Thrace some people are still called Bithynians’). In
his edition, LASSERRE 1981 ad loc. prefers the alternative reading handed down by the manuscript tradition:
καὶ σημεῖα τίθενται τοῦ μὲν τῶν Βιθυνῶν ἔθνους τὸ μέχρι νῦν ἐν τῇ Θρᾴκῃ λέγεσθαί τινας Μαιδοβιθυνούς
(‘they present as evidence of the Bithynians that in Thrace some people are still called Maidobithynians’). It
is risky to turn this passage into the only evidence of the presence of the Bithynians in Europe in historical
times, most of all in the light of the alternative reading that refers to the Maidobithyoi. They are generally
identified with the Maidoi, who are attested by other sources. About them, see LENK 1928; DANOV 1972, p.
185 n. 1; VON BREDOW 1999; BORA 2017.
21
Cf. PAGANONI forth.
22
Jacoby, FGrHist 156, F 77a: Λέγεται δὲ καὶ ὅτι τὴν ἀπὸ Βοσπόρου γῆν ἕως ἐπὶ Ρήβαντα Βιθυνοί
ποτε κατέσχον. Τὴν δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐπέκεινα ἐπὶ Πόντον ὀρεινὴν οἱ Θυνοὶ ἔσχον ἄχρι ποταμοῦ Κάλητος, ὡς εἶναι
ὁμόρους τούς τε Θυνοὺς καὶ τοὺς Βιθυνούς.
23
ŞAHIN 1986, p. 146; STROBEL 1996, pp. 193-194; TALBERT 2000, Map 52, E-G 2.
24
DÖRNER 1964, col. 909; ŞAHIN 1986, pp. 144-147; STROBEL 1996, p. 192 n. 149; ROELENS-FLOUNEAU
2018, p. 297. About the homonymous river Rhebas flowing through the northern Propontic peninsula, cor-
responding to the modern Riva Deresi, see ŞAHIN 1986, pp. 144-147; STROBEL 1996, p. 192 n. 149.
4 ELOISA PAGANONI

the Black Sea: about thirty-five kilometres north-west of the Sangarius’

mouth, there was the island of Thynias25. As for the Bithynians, Arrian’s
information fits with what is known about their spread in the Hellenistic
and Imperial times when they are attested in the today’s Yalova peninsula
between the Astacenean Gulf and the area of Cius and Myrlea26.
Only Arrian and a few other authors27 set a clear distinction, at least
for what concerns geography, between the Bithynians and Thynians.
Most sources just speak of ‘Bithynians’ and ‘Bithynia’ in regard to the
inhabitants of the Propontic peninsula and the region they occupied. Ar-
rian himself does so in his Anabasis, where he describes the Propontic
area at the time of Alexander28. Moreover, literary evidence testifies to
the presence of the Bithynians in the area originally occupied by the
Thynians. According to Xenophon29, the Bithynians were settled on the
eastern Propontic shores and according to Mela30, the island of Thynias
was inhabited by the Bithynians. Pliny says that Bithyniae Thynias had
got to be called Bithynia31. Again, there is nearly no historical infor-
mation about the Thynians of Asia. These elements invite us to con-
clude that the Thynians assimilated themselves to the Bithynians32. This
process was presumably facilitated by the ethnic similarity of these two
tribes. Although it was already in an advanced stage in Xenophon’s time,
it was not yet complete at the beginning of the 3rd century BC when the
latest information about the Thynians dates back33.
The accounts of the Thracian migrations connect the Bithynians to the
Mysians and the Bebrycians. These were two other Thracian tribes that
seem to have occupied the Propontic peninsula before the Bithynians and
Thynians34. Some sources35 claims that the Bithynians (and Thynians) set-

25
About this island, see ZIEGLER 1936; DÖRNER – HOEPFNER 1989; VON BREDOW 2002a; BITTNER 1998,
pp. 125-126; RADT 2008, p. 354.
26
Polyb. IV, 50, 2-4; 52, 6-9; Strabo XII, 3, 7.
27
Plin. NH V, 150: tenent oram omnem Thyni, interiora Bithyni (‘the Thynians occupy the coast, the
Bithynians the hinterland’); Steph. Byz. s.v. Ψίλιον: ποταμὸς μεταξὺ Θυνίας καὶ Βιθυνίας (‘a river between
Thynia and Bithynia’).
28
Arr. An. I, 29, 5.
29
Xen. An. VI, 4, 1-2.
30
Mela II, 98.
31
Plin. NH V, 151.
32
BURSTEIN 1976, p. 9.
33
Memnon BNJ 434, F 1, 9, 5. On the Thynians see also Nep. Datames 2.
34
On their ethnicity, Strabo VII, 3, 2. On the Bebrycians, see RUGE 1897; PRÊTEUX 2005, esp. pp.
246-250; FERRARI 2011, pp. 164-165; CHIAI 2017, p. 109. On the Mysians, see SCHWERTHEIM 2000; DEBORD
2001; WEST 2013.
35
App. Mithr. 1; Eus. II, 66-67 Schoene; cfr. Sall. Hist. III, 50.
 BITHYNIA BEFORE THE KINGDOM OF BITHYNIA 5

tled in the lands of the Bebrycians, while others36 say it was in those of the
Mysians. Strabo37, then, says that the Mysians established themselves in
the lands of the Bebrycians. These pieces of information set in one area –
the Propontic peninsula and the nearby region – four Thracians tribes, the
Bithynians, Thynians, Mysians and Bebrycians. They suggest that these
tribes migrated in different waves and that the Bosporus was the ‘gate of
Asia’ for them38. The Bebrycians arrived first, the Mysians followed, then
it was the turn of the Bithynians and Thynians. These two latter pushed the
Mysians westwards to the region they inhabited in the historical age. As
for the Bebrycians, they left no significant trace in the ethnic landscape of
northern Asia Minor. As we read in Pliny, Eratosthenes already listed them
among the perished peoples39; they were probably assimilated to the other
inhabitants of the region like the Thynians.
In the passage on the establishing of the Bithynians in Asia at the begin-
ning of the Mithridatikē Appian covers historical information with the veil
of myths:

The Greeks think that the Thracians who marched to Ilion with Rhesus – Rhesus
was killed by Diomedes by night in the manner Homer says in the poems – fled
to the outlet of the Pontus at the site where the crossing to Thrace is shortest.
Some say that since they found no ships they remained there and took posses-
sion of the country called Bebrycia. Others say that after crossing over to the
country beyond Byzantium, which is said to be of the Thracian Bithynians, they
settled by the river Bithya and were forced by hunger to return to Bebrycia. They
called the region Bithynia, instead of Bebrycia, from the river by which they had
previously settled. Or perhaps the name was changed by them insensibly with
the lapse of time since Bithynia is not very much different from Bebrycia. Some
think so. Others say that the first one who ruled them was Bithys, the son of Zeus
and Thracia. (Bithys and Thracia) gave name to the two countries40.

36
Strabo XII, 3, 3; 4, 8. According to Herodotus (VII, 75), the Mysians and the Teucrians expelled the
Bithyinians from their lands in Europe. Arrian (Jacoby, FGrHist 156, F 97) and Pliny (NH V, 143) hint
at the presence of the Halizones in the area occupied by the Bithynians (cf. DANA 2016, p. 222 n. 294).
These almost unknown people, that is already attested by Homer (Il. II, 856; V, 39) and lived in northern
Asia Minor, might be part of the indigenous substratum on which the Thracian tribes overlapped. On the
Halizones, see DAN 2012-2013.
37
Strabo XII, 3, 3; XIII, 1, 8.
38
Cf. SIEGERT 1983, pp. 75-76; ÖZLEM-AYTAÇLAR 2010, pp. 507-508 and n. 8.
39
Plin. NH V, 127.
40
App. Mithr. 1: Θρᾷκας Ἕλληνες ἡγοῦνται τοὺς ἐς Ἴλιον μετὰ Ῥήσου στρατεύσαντας, Ῥήσου [γὰρ]
νυκτὸς ὑπὸ Διομήδους ἀναιρεθέντος ὃν τρόπον Ὅμηρος ἐν τοῖς ἔπεσι φράζει, φεύγοντας ἐπὶ τοῦ Πόντου
τὸ στόμα, ᾗ στενώτατός ἐστιν ἐς Θρᾴκην ὁ διάπλους, οἳ μὲν οὐκ ἐπιτυχόντας πλοίων τῇδε καταμεῖναι καὶ
τῆς γῆς κρατῆσαι Βεβρυκίας λεγομένης, οἳ δὲ περάσαντας ὑπὲρ τὸ Βυζάντιον ἐς τὴν Θρᾳκῶν τῶν Βιθυνῶν