Re: Harii/Hirri into (H)eruli?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:

>
> --- "Troels Brandt <trbrandt@...>"
> >
> >
> > This is the reference:
> > Odesski Kollektionerni Bulletin Numismatiki (or
> > similar),
> > Vypusk No. 4, 'Redkie i unikal'nie moneti Savromata
> > II-III',
> > Odessa, 2000.
>
> *****GK: The Bulletin of the Odessa Museum of
> Numismatics (Vestnik Odesskogo Muzeia Numizmatiki) is
> available on line (though not as to all particulars).
> Cf. http://www.museum.com.ua/en/nauch_isled/vestn.htm
> N. 3 (Vypusk No. 3) for 2000 is entitled "Redkie i
> unikal'nie moneti Savromata II". There is nothing in
> other issues that resembles the title you offered
> above. Note that Sauromatos II ruled in 174-210. This
> vypusk n. 3 offers reproductions of 12 coins. Is the
> one mentioned by Faltin among them, or is it another
> coin altogether?******
> >
> > Please notice that the point is not if he was a
> > co-ruler, but that
> > the name was used by the Bosporans,
>
> *****GK: I'm starting to lose you here. Originally you
> claimed (following Faltin) that "Naulobates" is known
> from a coin of Sauromatos III, dated ca. 233 AD, and
> that he was his co-ruler. Where else would the name be
> attested as Bosporan?******
>
> and that the
> > name looks similar
> > to some Bosporan names - at least for an amateur.
>
> *****GK: Who's the amateur? Faltin?

I am!

> Well the official
> language of the Bosporan Kingdom was Greek, even when
> it was being intensively "Sarmatized". I'm open to the
> view that "Naulobates" may not have been a Germanic
> name (though I would like the opinion of linguists on
> this. Could it be a hellenized version of a Germanic
> name?) I note the presence of similarly structured
> names in Herodotus, with EURYBATES being Greek, while
> MITROBATES and MEGABATES are Persian.=== I would still
> like more precise information about this "Naulobates"
> on the coin before speculating further. Is it Faltin's
> reading or that of the Museum? Is it a "scratch on" or
> part of the original mint? And is it Sauromatos II or
> III?******
> >

We are talking about Sauromates III and the coin is not among those
shown at the online bulletin. I agree that the number appear to be
wrong comparing with numbers and headers on-line. Dirks later
comments should answer some of your other questions:

"....... but be aware that the transliteration (from Cyrillic
to Latin) is most likely not fully correct.

The text refering to this coin is very short, saying no more than
that it is very rare and possibly unique. Also, the text mentioned
that the succession of Bosporan kings is still poorly understood and
that coins are among the main source for the dates. The text stated
that it is unknown who Naulobates was, perhaps a short-lived son who
Sauromates sought to accociate in his rule."

Troels