On the possible names of issuers on imitations of Thracian tetradrachms from the middle and second half of the 1st century BC

Published: 30.11.2025 Volume: 3/ Number: 2 Pages: 30-38 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercialNoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. ON THE POSSIBLE NAMES OF ISSUERS ON IMITATIONS OF THRACIAN TETRADRACHMS FROM THE MIDDLE AND SECOND HALF OF THE 1ST CENTURY BC ОТНОСНО ВЪЗМОЖНИТЕ ИМЕНА НА ЕМИТЕНТИТЕ НА ИМИТАЦИИ НА ТРАКИЙСКИ ТЕТРАДРАХМИ ОТ СРЕДАТА И ВТОРАТА ПОЛОВИНА НА I В. ПР.ХР. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17756548 ILYA PROKOPOV ИЛЯ ПРОКОПОВ https://bulgnj.com ISSN: 2815-4827 On the Possible Names of Issuers on Imitations of Thracian Tetradrachms from the Middle and Second Half of the 1st Century BC Ilya PROKOPOV Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski” [email protected] ORCID: 0009-0009-7305-795X Относно възможните имена на емитентите на имитации на тракийски тетрадрахми от средата и втората половина на I в. пр.Хр. Иля ПРОКОПОВ Софийски университет „Св. Климент Охридски“ [email protected] ORCID: 0009-0009-7305-795X Abstract: The reason for this paper is the interesting results reflected in my last book on the topic of some coinages in Thrace from the period of 2nd – 1st century BC. Several scholars have explored the topic and achieved notable results. My work starts based on what they achieved. During my work on the imitations of the Dionysus-Heracles/Soter type, I registered several inscriptions on coins that I believe could belong to names of people. The idea of the present article is to provoke a discussion about the possible issuers of this unusually rich coinage of Thracian tetradrachms of the Dionysus-Heracles/Soter type. At the time when they were minted in Thrace, bronze coins with the names of Thracian kings were also minted. It is necessary to emphasize the fact that the names of the Thracian kings, with the sole exception of KOTYOC XAPAKTHP, are not rendered on the silver tetradrachms. With few exceptions, we see the ethnonym ΘPAKΩN being connected to the name of Heracles. To explain this phenomenon, it is important to understand the nature of the imitations of the Thracian tetradrachm. All late Hellenistic tetradrachm issues are organized in the same way. The iconography contains a text showing who the issuer is (city, ruler, etc.), when the coin was minted (through mint marks or a specific date), and who the responsible person is (through monogram(s). The imitations of the Thasos and Maroneia types, however, have none of these features. They have no resemblance to other late Hellenistic coinages. There are no anchor points to be explored. They are unique as a phenomenon and random in their internal organization. However, the analysis shows a well-functioning, full-fledged monetary machine. This suggests an external center of organization and influence. Here, I will address only one problem for discussion: that of the numerous inscriptions, which perhaps denote the name(s) of the issuer(s). Keywords: Imitations, Names on coins, Inscriptions, Thracian tetradrachms, Thracian kings, Barbarized coins, Monetary policy, Die study, Coin hoards, Coin dies. PROKOPOV On the Possible Names of Issuers on Imitations of Thracian Tetradrachms from the Middle and Second Half of the 1st Century BC 31 BulgNJ 3.2 (2025) In the last several decades, I have been working on a book about the abundant coinage of barbarized tetradrachms in Thrace in the mid-1st century BC (Prokopov, forthcoming). In it, I raise one fundamental question: does this rich coinage indicate an economic rise in Thrace, or is it evidence of a hidden Roman monetary policy? Behind this basic question lies a number of other minor questions and facts. All of them integrate the overall very complex picture of monetary policy in Thrace for the period from 72-71 BC to the end of the 1st century BC. One of these problems is the appearance of names on the issues of silver coins of Thrace. In my work, I built on the results of previous researchers. The beginning was laid by scholars such as Robert Forrer (1908) and Leon Ruzicka (1922). They studied and analyzed imitative types, including Thracian tetradrachms. Interest in imitations has not declined after them. Robert Göbl (1973) also presented his original classification. Derek Allen (1987) and Karel Castelin (1985) continued the work, offering their own classification and dating systems. A significant contribution to the collection of information about these coins has been made by Ivo Lukanc and Michaela Kostial. Lukanc managed to collect the largest number of imitations of the Dionysus-Heracles/Soter type and published it in a corpus (Lukanc 1996). Kostial processed and published Lanz’s rich collection (Kostial 1997). In his extensive study of Celtic coins, Günther Dembski also devoted space to the imitations of the Thracian tetradrachms (Dembski 1998). A major role in the interest in imitations of Thracian tetradrachms was played by the publication of Miklós Dessewffy’s rich collection. Along with the imitations considered as Celtic, the collection also displays specimens of the Dionysus-Heracles/Soter type (Dessewffy 1910). In Bulgaria, the topic of the imitations of Thracian tetradrachms is addressed in the works of Todor Gerassimov (Герасимов 1956, 83-84), Yordanka Yourukova (Юрукова 1994), Adolf Rogalski (Рогалски 1974, 5-12), Ivan Karayotov (Karayotov 1990, 25-28). There are many more scholars, and it would be impossible to include them all here. I continued to study the available finds in order to develop a die study. It includes the known obverse and reverse dies. Some observations from my new book about imitations can already be summarized here: the number of obverse dies for the imitations is over 1200. The number of reverse dies is about 1600. In comparison, the regular coinage showed more than 400 obverse and more than 1400 reverse dies. The number of monograms and symbols by the imitations is 183, while in the regular Thasian issues, the attested monograms are only 36. Regarding the names on the barbarized Thracian tetradrachms, the following can be clearly stated: the only Thracian tetradrachm from the 1st century BC with a definite inscription of a personal name is that of KOTYOC XAPAKTHP (Fig. 1). It has been studied by several scholars (Svoronos 1912, 61-64; Герасимов 1956,83-84; Юрукова 1992; Karayotov 1990, 25). According to its stylistic characteristics, it should have been minted soon after the last regular Thasian issues from the beginning of the 1st century BC. The portrait is very close to nos. 1853-1856 (V HH3) and nos. 1856-1859 (V HH4) (Prokopov 2006, 209). It is undoubtedly borrowed from them, although the execution is much weaker. The images are highly stylized. This means that the tetradrachm with the name of Kotys is later than the regular Thasian issues. It can be assumed that it was minted in the period between the third decade and the middle of the 1st century BC. This definitely did not happen in any of the famous mints. The coin is the work of one of the small Fig. 1. Tetradrachm with the name of Kotys (RHM-Shumen, Haralanov Coll., Inv. No. 124). Photo credits: Provided by the Regional History Museum Shumen. PROKOPOV On the Possible Names of Issuers on Imitations of Thracian Tetradrachms from the Middle and Second Half of the 1st Century BC 32 BulgNJ 3.2 (2025) workshops that minted coins for the local chieftains in the southeastern part of Thrace. Below, I present an excerpt from the catalogue of my new book (Prokopov, forthcoming). The numbers used correspond to the book catalogue. The series number is listed at the beginning, followed by the obverse number and the reverse number. Below them, all known specimens struck with this pair of dies are listed. In cases when more than one coin is known, they are numbered consecutively under the distinguished pair of dies. Coins with an inscription KOTYOC XAPAKTHP on the reverse 1606. O. 1226 – R. 1585 1. 29/31 mm; 16.76 g – RHM-Shumen 124, Haralanov Coll. 2. 16.81 g – Freeman & Sear, Manhattan Sale III, Lot number: 125 3. 36/35 mm; 16.30 g – RHM-Burgas A 270 (CH: Slivarovo), Karayotov 1990, 25; Lukanc 1996, no. 1926. 4. Sofia Priv. coll. (CH: Strandza?), unpublished 5. 31/31 mm; 16.32 g – Dresden 1609, Lukanc 1996, no. 1924 6. 16.20 g – Bucarest MHAMB no. 3388, Coll. Severeanu, Lukanc 1996, no. 1925 1607. O. 1226 – R. 1586 16.31 g – Classical Numismatic Group, Numismatica Ars Clasica, Freeman & Sear, Triton II, Lot number 362 1608. O. 1226 – R. 1587 1. 16.31 g – Classical Numismatic Group, Triton VII, Lot number 182 2. 16.33 g – Gorny & Mosch Giessener Münzhandlung, Auction 107, Lot number 103 1609. O. 1227 – R. 1588 16.35 g – Auktionshaus H. D. Rauch GmbH, Auction 71, Lot number 113. So far, I have identified only two obverse and four reverse dies. The distribution of the coins with the name of Kotys is along the Black Sea coast, mainly in the region of Burgas. The first known hoard with such a coin is from Slivarovo, Malko Tarnovo municipality (ICHB I, 64-65). One coin hoard is registered to the north – in the region of Varna (ICHB I, 87). The coins have been published (Gerasimov 1956, 79; Topalov 1991, 59, Yurukova 1992, 177; Topalov 1996, 102), although they are still not included in my catalogue. Only one coin was found northwest of the Black Sea coast and north of the Danube river: in Prahova region in 1936. It comes from Coada Malului near Ploesti (IGCH 674). The information about the find has been published (Moisil 1944, 3 -32; Chirila, Pop 1968, 161-165; Lukanc 1996, no. 1925). All finds in which coins with the inscription KOTYOC XAPAKTHP are attested, are composed predominantly of imitations of the DionysusHeracles/Soter type. We can assume that this is the natural environment of this rare coin type. If we compare with the bronze coins, we will find that the only match among the names of known Thracian kings is the name of Kotys. It is striking that for the period after 72-71 BC, during which a significant amount of silver tetradrachms were made, we see only on bronze coins the names of Sadalas I, Kotys I /II [VI] [VII], Sadalas II, Sadalas III, Rhescuporis I /II, and Rhascus (Paunov 2024, 201-204). In fact, it is known that the bronze coins of the Thracian kings from this period and until the time of Rhoemetalces I were few in number and were more of a propaganda nature. The main internal currency during this period were the imitations of the silver tetradrachms of the Dionysus-Heracles/Soter type. Parallel to them, the Roman Republican denarii were also distributed. The question arises, were there names of Thracian rulers inscribed on the silver tetradrachms? Are there any names at all that would suggest who is responsible for this abundant coinage? At least until the time of completion of the catalog, with over 1200 obverse and over 1600 reverse coin dies, this cannot be confirmed. The only coin that undoubtedly bears a personal name, apart from the already mentioned name PROKOPOV On the Possible Names of Issuers on Imitations of Thracian Tetradrachms from the Middle and Second Half of the 1st Century BC 33 BulgNJ 3.2 (2025) of Kotys, bears the inscription ΔΗΜΗΤ (Forrer 1908, 232-233). But unlike Kotys, no Thracian ruler with a similar name is known – at least not yet. Derek Allen also examined this coin and, based on the analogies in the iconography, determined it to be similar to the coins of Norican and Biatec (Allen 1987, 74, no. 240). But a similar coin also appeared from the region of present-day southern Bulgaria (RHM-Sofia, inv. no. 5277). In Allen‘s case, the inscription is ΔΗΜΗΤ under the horseman galloping to the left with a spear in his raised right hand. In the version from Southern Bulgaria, the inscription is ΔΗΜΗΤ-ΡΙΟΣ (Ρ retrograde). In the second coin, however, the iconography of the reverse is different. The horseman holds a flowing cloak with his left hand. On both coins, two Х signs are depicted at the beginning and after the end of the inscription, assuming that it was depicted in a circle (Fig. 2). The abbreviations ΔΗΜΗ and ΔHMIΩ also appear on two other coins, but with the classical iconography of the imitations of the Dionysus-Heracles/Soter type ( cat. numbers 1604 and 1605 – Gemini, LLC. Auction I. Lot number: 112; https://www.wildwinds. com/coins/celtic/danube/t.html). Obviously, the presence of a person (ruler?, chieftain?) named Demetrios cannot be ignored. The use of the name on coins featuring the classical iconography of the Dionysus-Heracles type imitations of Thasos and Maroneia suggests a connection with Thrace. Furthermore, the discovery of a specimen with iconography resembling the Thracian Horseman points to the region that was the very core of the imitative coinage, namely the southeastern part of the Balkans. Coins with an inscription ΔΗΜΗΤ / ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟС on the reverse 350. O. 273 – R. 349 …./…. / ΔHΛH (Possible wrong inscription instead of ΔΗΜΗ) 16.06 g – Gorny&Mosch, Giessener Münzhandlung - Auction 216, Lot number: 2053 1602. O. 1223 – R. 1581 ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟС (Ρ retrograde) Rev. in left and right fields above X–X 16,20 g; 12 h – RHM-Sofia inv. no. 5277 1603. O. 1224 – R. 1582 ΔΗΜΗΤ Rev. in left field above X 16.11 g; 10 h – BMC Celtic coins I. Spink, 1909 -1-5-8. Allen 1987, no. 240 1604. O. 1225 – R. 1583 ΗΡΑΚΛΗC / CΩΤΗΡΟ ΔHMH 15.26 g – Gemini, LLC. Auction I. Lot number: 112 1605. O. 1225 – R. 1584 .ΘΝIΣ ΣΩΤΗΡ ΔHMIΩ. 15.50 g; 11 h – https://www.wildwinds.com/coins/celtic/danube/t.html Since we have two undisputed names – of Kotys the Thracian, and of Demetrios, whose origin is unknown – it is appropriate to consider that there should be several other possible names found on the reverse of the Thracian tetradrachms in question. Before that, however, it is important to clarifty the topic of the issuer. According to the opinion of Peter Delev, one of the prominent researchers of Thracian history, it is questionable whether a unified Odrysian kingdom had existed during that period, since there is no unambiguous evidence of a large Odrysian kingdom or a unified centre of power. It is possible that, to some extent, the Fig. 2. Tetradrachm with the name of Demetrios (RHM-Sofia, Inv. no. 5277). Photo credits: Provided by the Regional History Museum Sofia. PROKOPOV On the Possible Names of Issuers on Imitations of Thracian Tetradrachms from the Middle and Second Half of the 1st Century BC 34 BulgNJ 3.2 (2025) Sapean and Astean dynasties played the role of a centre in the region, although they did not have the power of a united kingdom (Delev 2018, 191-196). As there was clearly no single centre of power in Thrace at that time, it is reasonable to assume that power was distributed to smaller regions. Could the rulers of these separate, smaller regions have had their names inscribed on the Thracian tetradrachms? Forrer also identified several names inscribed on the reverse of this unusual coin type. Some of them, which I do not discuss here, are included in the study of probable names of Celtic chieftains (Forrer 1908, 229-231). In addition to them, he distinguished several other names, among which I note ΤΥΝΥΘΣ, ΣΟΛΙΩΣ, ΣΙΥKΥΗΘN (Forrer 1908, 232). In the course of my work, I discovered several more coins with similar inscriptions. I present them here according to the numbering in my catalog. All the inscriptions are placed on the reverse. 277. O. 212 – R. 277 .ΣЕΛΚΟΣ .EΛΤVO. TIΩΝ (Fig. 3) 34/34 mm; 14.40 g; 12 h – Bucarest: 3467 (Coll.Severeanu), Lukanc 1996, no. 1161. 329. O. 258 – R. 329 ZOKNOΣV / ΣΩNKOS / ATΣN 31mm; 14.88 g; 11h – iNumis Mail Bid Sale 51, Lot 66. 442. O. 325 – R. 435 .PEVΣEHΘ /HPEΣH / ΘHEΛΣ (Fig. 4-5) 1. 32 mm; 16.53 g – Sofia, NAIM-BAS no. 9984. 2. 16.56 g – Jean Elsen & ses Fils S.A., Auction 127, Lot number: 241. 3. 32/32 mm; 15.71 g; 12 h – Budapest: 27.1957.1,Lukanc 1996, no. 1174. 508. O. 373 – R. 501 .NKOTAΣ / .ΩITΞOΣ / MIΛΞΩ; (Fig. 6-7) 1. 28/28 mm; 15,57 g; 12 h – Varna: I 1749, Lukanc 1996, no. 1557. 2. 27 mm; 16.68 g; 12 h – Roma Numismatics Ltd, E-Live Auction 3, Lot number:16. 3. 16.64 g – Naville Numismatics Ltd. – Auction 39, Lot 1. 607. O. 465 – R. 600 ΔΑΞΑΥC, radiant hair. (Fig. 8) 30/30 mm;15,86 g – ANS: 1948.19.2356, Lukanc 1996, no. 1478. 682. O. 530 – R. 673 EXIV.XI.ПH 15.15. g – Numismatic Naumann (formerly Gitbud & Naumann) – Auction 117, Lot number: 32. Fig. 3. Detail of the reverse of a coin with an inscription -ΣЕΛΚΟΣ- (after Lukanc 1996, no. 1161). Fig. 8. Detail of the reverse of a coin with an inscription -ΔΑΞΑΥC- (after Lukanc 1996, no. 1478). Fig. 4-5. Details of the reverse of a coin with inscriptions -PEVΣEHΘand -ΘHEΛΣ- (NAIMBAS, Inv. no. 9984). Photo credits: Provided by the National Archaeological Institute with Museum Sofia. Fig. 6-7. Details of the reverse of a coin with inscriptions -NKOTAΣand -MIΛΞΩ- (RHM-Varna, Inv. no. I 1749). Photos by I. Prokopov. PROKOPOV On the Possible Names of Issuers on Imitations of Thracian Tetradrachms from the Middle and Second Half of the 1st Century BC 35 BulgNJ 3.2 (2025) 752. O. 576* – R. 740 In the field below: ΜΩΤΑΜIΗΡ (Fig. 9) 33/33 mm; 15,80 g – Bucarest: 3444 MHAMB (Coll.Severeanu), Lukanc 1996, no. 1333A. 809. O. 617 – R. 797 ΣΚΥΕΥΣ / ΘΕΗΡΣ / ΘΑΡΣИ in left field Θ – Θ (Fig. 10) 32/32 mm; 16.00 g – Bucarest: 1130 MHAMB (Coll.Severeanu), Lukanc 1996, no. 1317. 852. O. 640 – R. 840 ΣΙΝΟΣΥ ΣΩΗΟΣ ΑΗΙΤΛΝ 35 mm;16.17 g; 1h – Leu Numismatik AG – Web Auction 31, Lot 150. Without speculating or interpreting, I can conclude that several of these inscriptions should not be regarded as random scribbles. According to the order in the catalog, they are as follows: .ΣЕΛΚΟΣ . ΛΤVO. TIΩΝ ZOKNOΣV ΣΩNKOS ATΣN ΣΩKPΣM .PEVΣEH HPEΣH ΘHEΛΣ .NKOTAΣ .ΩITΞOΣ MIΛΞΩ ΔΑΞΑΥC EXIV.XI.ПH ΜΩΤΑΜIΗΡ ΣΚΥΕΥΣ / ΘΕΗΡΣ / ΘΑΡΣИ ΣΙΝΟΣΥ ΣΩΗΟΣΣ ΑΗΙΤΛΝ At first glance, although with serious caution, should we regard these inscriptions as names such like Selkos, Zonkos, Nikotas, Daxais, Motamier, Skieis, Zonos, and Sokrem? To this list, we may also add the names ΤΥΝΥΘΣ, ΣΟΛΙΩΣ, and ΣΙΥΚΥΗΘΝ noted by Forrer (Forrer 1908, 232). A more definite answer can be obtained after a thorough study in teamwork. Such a more indepth co-authored publication on the names based on the die-study of the Thracian tetradrachm imitations is already planned. While the above lines are attempting to raise a debate for probable personal or generic names, there is no serious dispute about the ethnonym attested on the coin legends. There are different opinions about the Thracian character of the imitative tetradrachms of the Dionysus-Heracles/ Soter type, but the inscriptions on some specimens are indisputable. They are not very numerous, although rendered in different variants. Coins with inscription ΘPAKΩN and variants on the reverse In addition to the known “regular” coins struck with three pairs of dies nos. 1598-1601 (Prokopov 2006, 143, nos. 977-979, V BBd1 – R 780; V BBd1 – R 780/A; V BBd1var. – R 780/1), several other combinations of barbaric imitations are known. Fig. 9. Detail of the reverse of a coin with an inscription -ΜΩΤΑΜIΗΡ- (after Lukanc 1996, no. 1333А). Fig. 10. Details of the reverse of a coin with an inscription -ΣΚΥΕΥΣ- (after Lukanc 1996, no. 1317). Fig. 11. Detail of the reverse of a coin with an inscription ΘPHΣIΩN (NAIM-BAS, Inv. no. 7404). Photo credits: Provided by the National Archaeological Institute with Museum Sofia. PROKOPOV On the Possible Names of Issuers on Imitations of Thracian Tetradrachms from the Middle and Second Half of the 1st Century BC 36 BulgNJ 3.2 (2025) 354. O. 277 – R. 353 ΔΣΤOΥΚ ΣΩKPΣM ΘPHΣIΩN (Fig. 11) 1. 35 mm; 16.04 g – Sofia, NAIM-BAS (CH: Karnobat) inv. no. 7404. 2. 31 mm; 16.89 g – Sofia, NAIM-BAS, inv. no. 10668. 3. 15.98 g – Münzen & Medaillen Deutschland GmbH. Auction 30. Lot number: 1233. 4. 35/35 mm; 16.05 g – Paris: BN 9674, Lukanc 1996, no. 1201. 5. 35/36 mm; 16.15 g; 12 h – Budapest: N.I. 4970, Lukanc 1996, no. 1190. 6. 16.86 g – Gorny&Mosch, Giessener Münzhandlung – Auction 261, Lot number: 24. 355. O. 277 – R. 354 ΔΣΤOΥP ΣΩEPΣΥ ΘPИΣIΩ(N) 16.35 g – UBS Gold & Numismatics, Auction 59, 27.01.2004. no. 5068. 650. O. 501 – R. 641 In the field below ΘΡΑΩΛΣΘ 1. 15.98 g – Numismatik Lanz München. Auction 157. Lot number: 14. 2. 33 mm; 15.88 g; 12 h – Agora Auctions, Numismatic Auction 96, Lot number:2. 3. 32 mm; 16.58 g – Davissons, Ltd. E-Auction 27, Lot 26. 810. O. 617 – R. 798 ΣΣ(Ρ)ΕΘZΣ / ΣΚΣΟΞΣ/ ΘΑΡΕΣIΩ 35/34 mm; 15.60 g – Bucarest: 3403, Lukanc 1996, no. 1342. 1596. O. 1218 – R. 1575 IPAKVEOVΣ/ .ΩTHIPOΣ / ΘPAKΩNION or ΘPAKΩMON (Fig. 12) 32/33 mm; 16.62 g; 12 h – RHM-Shumen 27.1.4Б. Haralanov Coll., Lukanc 1996, no. 1565 1597. O. 1218 – R. 1576 PAKVEOVΣ / ΩTHIPOΣ / ΘPAKΩNO; Monogram: M 1. Sofia 4344 Prokopov 2006, no. 974. 2. 15.12 g – Numismatik Lanz, Auction 102, no. 31. 3. Sofia. Priv. Coll. St.Topalov. 1598. O. 1219 – R. 1577 ΗΡΑΚΛΕΟΥΣ ΣΩΤΗΡΟΣ ΘPAKΩN 1. Nova Zagora (CH: Padarevo) Юрукова 1992, 280. 2. 16.32 g; 12 h – BMC Celtic coins I. Bank, 1930. Allen 1987, no. 239* 1599. O. 1219 – R. 1578 ΗΡΑΚΛΕΟΥΣ ΣΩΤΗΡΟΣ ΘPAKΩN 15.93 g – Classical Numismatic Group. Auction 64. Lot number: 162. 1600. O. 1221 – R. 1579 ΗΡΑΚΛΕΟΥΣ ΣΩΤΗΡΟΣ ΘPAKΩN 1. Numismatic Lanz München, Auction 123. Lot number: 133. 2. 14.97 g – Classical Numismatic Group. Auction 55, Lot number: 11. 1601. O. 1222 – R. 1580 ΗΡΑΚΛΕΟΥΣ ΣΩΤΗΡΟΣ ΘPAKΩN 16.21 g – UBS Gold & Numismatics. Auction 57. Lot number: 5065 = UBS Gold & Numismatics. Auction 59. Lot number: 36. Besides the known inscription ΘPAKΩN, here we see several other variants: ΘPHΣIΩN, ΘPИΣIΩ(N), ΘΡΑΩΛΣΘ, ΘΑΡΕΣIΩ, ΘPAKΩNIO or ΘPAKΩMO, and ΘPAKΩNO (Prokopov forthcoming, nos. 1615-1618). Conclusions In general, the distribution areas according to the different degrees of barbarization can be described as follows: the early imitations go far to the north with the regular series; following the closure of the mints in Thrace in 72-71 BC, the supply to the served territories decreased. GraduFig. 12. Detail of the reverse of a coin with an inscription ΘPAKΩNION (RHM-Shumen, Haralanov Coll., Inv. no. 27.1.4Б). Photo credits: Provided by the Regional History Museum Shumen. PROKOPOV On the Possible Names of Issuers on Imitations of Thracian Tetradrachms from the Middle and Second Half of the 1st Century BC 37 BulgNJ 3.2 (2025) ally, the territory of distribution shrank. It declined in the northwest and prevailed in the north. By the middle of the 1st century BC, it had shifted south of the Danube, and shortly afterwards, south of the Balkan Mountains. Ultimately, with a few exceptions, it remained in the area comprising present-day south-east Bulgaria, eastern Greece, and northern Turkey. The coins presented here are from this area of distribution. For those with the inscription KOTYOC XAPAKTHP we have well-localized specimens from the collective find from the village of Slivarovo, Malko Tarnovo municipality, Burgas region. Also from the Burgas region are two other finds. In fact, all the coins for which we have more confident data for their place of discovery were found in the Strandzha Mountains region. The find from Varna region has no exact location. At this stage, we have no information about finds in the southern part of the Strandzha Mountains, from the present-day Republic of Türkiye. Regarding the coins with the inscription ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟC, we have information about only one coin from present-day southern Bulgaria. For the coins with the inscription ΘPAKΩN and variants, we have a coin from the find near Karnobat (IGCH 967; ICHB I, 49), from the find from the village of Padarevo (Юрукова 1992, 280), one coin from the Haralanov Collection, and one from the Topalov Collection in Sofia. All of them originate from Bulgaria. The only definitely attested name is of Kotys, and it is reflected in a small group of less than 10 coins. All of them were found near the Black Sea coast, in the territory between Nessebar and Malko Tarnovo. Probably, this Kotys had power and influence only in a limited area near the coast and in the Strandzha Mountains. This coincides with Delev‘s opinion about the distribution of power between separate lines of the Astaean and Sapaean dynasties (Delev 2018, 191-196). It is possible that the rest of the names on the silver Thracian tetradrachms were of other rulers from the Eastern Rhodopes, the Maritsa River Valley, and the corner closed between the Black Sea, the Balkan Mountains, and the Maritsa River valley. This publication is an announcement to the collegium in the hope of a fruitful discussion. Bibliography Allen, D., 1987. Catalogue of the Celtic coins in the British Museum. Vol I. Silver coins of the East Celts and Balkan Peoples. Cambridge. Delev, P., 2018. Did a „Late” Odrysian Kingdom ever exist?, In: Studia Archaeologica Universitatis Serdicensis Supplementum VI, Sofia 2018, 191-196. Chirila, E., I. Pop., 1968. Tezaurul monetar de la Sînpetru (Or. Braşov). Apulum 7, 145-170. Dembski, G., 1998. Münzen der Kelten. Katalog der Antiken Münzen Reihe A: Griechen II: Massalia und Keltenstämme. Wien. Dessewffy, M., 1910. Barbar Penzei. Budapest. Castelin, K., 1985. Keltische Münzen. Katalog der Sammlung im Schweizerischen Landesmuseum Zürich, 2 vols., Bern. Forrer, R., 1908. Keltische Numismatik der Rhein-und Donaulande. Strassburg. Göbl, R., 1973. Ostkeltischer Typenatlas. Braunschweig, “Klinkhardt & Biermann” Publ. ICHB I = Теодосиев, Н., 2017. Опис на колективни монетни находки от България. Том 1, София. Kostial, M., 1997. Kelten im Osten. Goldund Silber Münzen der Kelten in Mittelund Osteuropa: Sammlung Lanz. (Staatliche Münzsammlung München). München. Lukanc, I., 1996. Les imitations des monnaies d‘Alexandre le Grand et de Thasos. Wetteren, Cultura. Moisil, C., 1944. Les tetradrachmes de Thasos et de Macedoine I-re et leur circulation en Dacie. Balcania 7, 3-32. Paunov, E., 2024. Coinage of the Late Thracian Kings (ca. 150 BC – AD 45/6): Issues, Types,