¹ Serb: Skadarsko Jezero; Alb.: Liçeni Shkoders.

² Alb.: Bunë.

³ For recent discussion see Beaumont, R. L., ‘Greek Influence in the Adriatic,’ JHS lvi, 1936, 184Google Scholar.

⁴ Diodorus xv, 13, 4. Several authorities have preferred to believe that this episode refers rather to Issa, the foundation of which is (otherwise) unrecorded (e.g. Müller, Geographi Graed Minores (GGM) —Paris, 1855—i, 30; Beloch, , Griechische Geschichte² iii, i, 118–19Google Scholar). Apart from a statement by Ps.-Scymnus, 413–14 (GGM i, 213), that Issa (Vis) was a Syracusan foundation, and apart from its convenient proximity to the Parian settlement on Pharus (Hvar), which Dionysius supported (Diodorus l.c.), reasons for believing that Diodorus meant Issa instead of Lissus are unconvincing. Beaumont o.c., 203, summarizes Dionysius' reasons for planting a colony at Lissus. Beaumont o.c., 184, assigns the original foundation of Lissus to ‘before the fifth century’: C. Praschniker and A. Schober, Archäologische Forschungen in Albanien und Montenegro (Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, Schriften der Balkankommission, Antiquarische Abteilung, Heft viii, 1919), 14, are less definite but admit the probability of a settlement at Lissus earlier than that of Dionysius.

⁵ Polybius ii, 12, 3.

⁶ Polybius viii, 13–14. For identification of Lissus and Acrolissus see Appendix, pp. 54 f.

⁷ Zippel's, suggestion, Die römische Herrschaft in Illyrien (Leipzig, 1877), 70Google Scholar, that Philip advanced northward even of the Naro (Neretva) is surely an exasperation of the possibilities, as Holleaux. Rome, la Grèce et les Monarchies hellénistiques (Paris, 1921), 199Google Scholar, note 4, points out. The risks involved in an advance of nearly 150 miles through hostile and sometimes difficult and inhospitable country are obvious, while the advantages to be gained could only have been transitory.

⁸ pp. 269 ff.

⁹ Selcë lies in the gorge of the upper Cemi (Cijevna) about 11 miles east of Medun, which is in Montenegro. Medun is identified with the ‘Meteon Labeatis terrae’ of Livy xliv, 23, 2, by Praschniker and Schober o.c., 3–7, figs. 6–10; Evans, , ‘Antiquarian Researches in Illyricum,’ Archaeologia xlviii (1884), 84Google Scholar; Casson, , Macedonia, Thrace, and Illyria (Oxford, 1926), 316Google Scholar, fig. 101. Beaumont o.c., 184, regards the site as probably fifth-century.

¹⁰ It is significant that, in contrast to the presence of three separate varieties of Genthius' coinage which must precede 168, the hoard contained no specimens of the autonomous post-168 issues of Scodra.

¹¹ A. Mamroth, ‘Die Bronzemünzen des Königs Philippos V von Makedonien,’ Zeitschrift für Numismatik 1935, 219–252, types 16a, b, Taf. vii, 1–3, attributed, o.c., 238–9, to 186–183/2 B.C.; also H. Gaebler, Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands (Berlin, 1906) iii, i, 26–30, Taf. i, 1–3, 5, 8–9. It should also be noted that the similarity between the Macedonian and Scodran types extends not only to the particular central device on the shield but also to the position of the helmet as the reverse type of both series: this now appears laterally instead of to front as in previous Macedonian issues (pl. viii, 2 Mamroth and o.c., type 17, Taf. vii, 4).

¹² Livy xxxviii, 7, 2–3.

¹³ See below, pp. 52 ff.

¹⁴ Holleaux, o.c., 278, note 2; Walbank, , Philip V of Macedon (Cambridge, 1940), 103Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Holleaux, o.c., 135, note 1, locates Dimale not far from Dyrrhachium, but not, as Philippson, P-W v, col. 646, on the coast. Parthinia is ill-defined: if Livy (xxxiii, 34, 11) is correct in his equation of ‘Pleurato Lychnidus et Parthini dati’ with the ἔδωκαν δὲ καὶ Πλευράτῳ Λυχνίδα καὶ Πάρθον, οὔσας μὲν Ἰλλυρίδας, ὑπὸ Φίλιππον δὲ ταττομένας of Polybius (xviii, 47, 12), it figures in a second restoration after Cynoscephalae; Zippel's attempt, o.c., 77–8, to dissociate the places named in these two passages and to locate ΛύΧνις and Πάρθος somewhere in North Illyria is not convincing, and Holleaux, o.c., 278, note 2, accepts the identification of ΛύΧνις and Lychnidus. Walbank, o.c., 103, note 4, and 182, note 5, regards as improbable a recovery by Philip of Parthinia during the period between Phoenice and Cynoscephalae. It is possible that Parthinia extended a considerable distance inland, and only that part of it which lay nearest to the coast is concerned in the settlement at Phoenice.

¹⁶ O.c., 278, note 2.

¹⁷ Livy xxvii, 30, 13.

¹⁸ Livy xxiv, 13, 5; Holleaux, o.c., 198–9.

¹⁹ For discussion of Lissus as a harbour and the mouth of the Drilo (Drin) in classical times, see Appendix, p. 54 f.

²⁰ Holleaux, l.c.; but cf. Walbank, o.c., 81–82, whose argument that Philip's policy should have been to secure Carthaginian naval assistance, in accordance with his arrangement with Hannibal in 215, against the Romans in Illyria … ‘for Philip to press ahead in Illyria and to call for Carthaginian naval help in this task was not only a fair interpretation of the treaty, but was also sound common sense’ is surely correct, in so far as Philip's operations against the coastal towns would be ineffective, unless the Roman fleet had first been driven away; and without the elimination of the protectorate the crossing to Italy could hardly be attempted. But whether the removal of the protectorate was an end in itself, or an essential prerequisite to a more ambitious project, is another matter. Once he had driven the Romans from Illyria and had gained possession of Apollonia and Dyrrhachium, Philip's long-cherished dream of invading Italy, first conceived in 217, was unlikely to abate, lukewarm though Hannibal might be.

²¹ Walbank, o.c., 93 f.

²² Livy xxvii, 32–3.

²³ Livy xxviii, 5, 7.

²⁴ The report of Ardiaean activity (supra, note 23) was brought to Philip at Demetrias in May, 208, and is thus appreciably earlier than the Roman naval victory over Bomilkar. It is doubtful whether Ardiaean movement would have been of such moment if Philip still held Lissus and the adjacent region.

²⁵ Supra. p. 49.

²⁶ Pl. viii, 6. Now in the Collection of the Franciscan Convent at Scutari. It is unfortunate that this coin is poorly preserved. On the reverse the legend ΣΚΟ ΔΡΙ/ΝΩΝ is legible below the helmet. Traces of a further inscription are visible above and, in two lines, on either side of the helmet: above it is possible to read Λ—? ΒΑΣΙ]Λ]ΕΩΣ; to r. of the helmet (upper line) ΝΘ—? ΓΕ-ΝΘ/Ι-ΟΥ. The obverse, on the analogy of other issues with the helmet reverse, is probably a Macedonian shield, the type being poorly centred.

²⁷ For Pleuratus' relations with Rome, see Polybius xxi, 11, 7; xxi, 21, 3.

²⁸ Livy xl, 18, 4; xl, 42, 1 ff. Cf. Ormerod, Piracy in the Ancient World (Liverpool, 1924), 180.

²⁹ Livy xli, 1, 3.

³⁰ Livy xlii, 26, 2–7.

³¹ Livy xlii, 48, 4 ff.; xliii, 9, 4 ff.

³² Livy xliv, 31, 2: ‘ad Scodram inde ventum est, quod belli caput erat, non eo solum quod Genthius eam sibi ceperat velut regni totius arcem, …’

³³ First published by Evans, Num. Chron. 1880, 271, 4, pl. xiii, 6, in his account of the Selcë hoard.

³⁴ Only two specimens are known of the autonomous coins of Lissus with these types: (1) Zagreb (here pl. viii, 10), first published by Dr. Josef Brunšmid, ‘Die Inschriften und Münzen der Griechischen Städte Dalmatiens’ in Abhandlungen des archäologischen Seminars der Universität Wien xiii, 1898, 74. 3. Pl. vi, 93; (2) Copenhagen (here pl. viii, 9).

³⁵ The Selcë hoard contained a unique bronze coin of Lissus, now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, with types of head of Artemis and thunderbolt (pl. viii, 11); this coin was originally published by Evans in his description of the hoard, o.c., 271, 2, pl. xiii, 3, where the head of Artemis, examined before the coin had been thoroughly cleaned, is mistaken for a goat to right. It is, of course, possible that the autonomous coins of Lissus with types similar to those of Genthius were issued during the period following 168, and are thus contemporary with the autonomous coins of Scodra struck after the Roman settlement of Illyria recorded by Livy (xlv, 26). Against this is the improbability that types so nearly identical to those of Genthius would have been circulated immediately after his downfall.

³⁶ O.c. in n. 4, 14–27, Abb. 21–39.

³⁷ von Hahn, J. G., Albanesische Studien (Jena, 1854), £92Google Scholar; and others as recorded by Fluss in P-W xiii, cols. 731–3.

³⁸ Diodorus xv, 13, 5.

³⁹ Caesar, , BC iii, 29Google Scholar, 3; cf. iii, 40, 5.

⁴⁰ Strabo vii, 5, 7, 316c.

⁴¹ O.c. in n. 3, 184.

⁴² Caesar, , BC iii, 26–9Google Scholar; Pliny, , NH iii, 144Google Scholar. Caesar says of Nymphaeum ‘ultra Lissum milia passuum iii’. The existence of a second and, in certain circumstances, more sheltered harbour at Nymphaeum (‘qui portus ab Africo tegebatur, ab Austro non erat tutus’—ibid.) would have enhanced the value of Lissus as a naval station, as both Dionysius and Philip doubtless realized.

⁴³ o.c., 93.

⁴⁴ Baldacci, A., Itinerari Albanesi (1892–1902) (Rome, 1917), 292Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Von Hahn o.c., 94, writing of the Drin shortly before the diversion of a part of its water through the Drin i Madh, states that craft of 40–50 tons could reach Lesh.

⁴⁶ Livy xliv, 31, 3 f.

⁴⁷ Geogr. lat. min., ed. Riese, 148, quoted by Praschniker and Schober, o.c., 10.

⁴⁸ Barletius, quoted by von Hahn, o.c., 95.