(d)Four Early Greek Coins, (a) is of electrum, a metal alloy of gold and silver readily obtainable in western Asia Minor where (in Lydia) coinage traditionally started. The dump of metal is struck into the
decorated die by a broken metal bar. leaving the rough incuse square sinkings on the back. The example shown carries a stag and the name Phanes, perhaps a ruler or moneyer. and may have been struck in
Ephesus in 600 B.C. In the Greek homeland the first coinage is struck in silver, on Aegma. probably by the mid sixth century. The device (b) is a turtle and the markings on the punch at the back show that the
pattern of the broken metal bar had been stylized into quarterings. Athens soon followed Aegina's lead and her early coins (e.g. c: second half of the sixth century) have heraldic devices-here a Gorgon head
and. in the punch mark on the back, a lion's head and paws. From now on a reverse type such as this is a regular feature of Greek coins. Among the western Greeks a flatter coin was developed in the late
Archaic Period, with the reverse bearing a hollowed and simplified version of the obverse type. The example from Cauloma (d), of about 510 BC, shows Apollo carrying a branch and a small running figure,
with a stag before him. The top two coins are shown at three times actual size, the bottom two at twice.
But Xerxes had left behind his general, Mardonius, with a large force of his best soldiers, far more than the 35,000 or so that the Greeks could muster. In face of this the unity of Salamis began to look a little
hollow. Quite simply, the Athenians wanted their homes back in security; the Peloponnesians felt happier behind the Isthmus wall. One wanted offensive war, the other did not. There was a winter of bitter
argument before Athenian threats were again effective (Themistocles does not now appear by name; instead Aristides edges forward) and the Spartan Pausanias, regent for Leonidas' son, came out to face
Mardonius at Plataea on Boeotia's southern border.
The battle, when it came, was more typical of battles in general than Salamis had been-it was a chaotic affair. Neither side, the Greek especially, knew what it was doing, but the Greek hoplites, primarily the
Spartans, pushed their way out of the mess to complete victory. On the same day, it was said, the fleet, -which had ventured hesitantly across the Aegean, landed on the Ionian coast at Mycale, routed the
Persians who opposed them, destroyed much of what was left of their ships, and so cleared the Aegean and began the liberation of the Asiatic Greeks.
There is no one explanation of the outcome. That the hoplite phalanx was a superior military machine; that the Persians made more mistakes than the Greeks (not many); that the Persians were far from home
while the Greeks were at home and fighting for their home; that those who fought willingly as free men, 'fearing the laws more than your [Xerxes'] subjects fear you', as the exile Demaratus had once boldly said
to the King-all these things counted, and so did luck, or 'God'.
The results can be more clearly seen. The distinction between Greek and barbarian (foreigner) became one between Greek and Barbarian (national enemy), 'appeasement' became 'treachery'. Sparta had won on
land, Athens at sea; were these two supremacies to continue, were they to merge or clash? Athens had won as a budding democracy, Sparta as a monarchic oligarchy; would the difference divide not only them,
but other Greeks? So the pattern was set.
TOC