Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus

Altay Coşkun

doi:10.37095/gephyra.1889978

Research Article

Year 2026, Volume: 31 , 1 - 9 , 02.04.2026

Altay Coşkun

https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.1889978

https://izlik.org/JA88YP95FW

Abstract

References

Anokhin, V. A. 1986. Monetnoe delo Bospora.
Anokhin, V. A. 2011. Antichnye monety Severnogo Prichernomor’ya.
Arsenyeva, T. – Böttger, B. – Vinogradov, J. 1995. “Griechen am Don. Die Grabungen in Tanais 1994.” Eurasia Antiqua 1: 213-263.
Arsenyeva, T. M. – Böttger, B. – Vinogradov, Yu. G. 1996. “New Studies in Tanais.” VDI 3, 54-72.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 1996. Mithrídates Eupátor, rey del Ponto.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 2017. “Pharnakes and His Title ‘King of Kings’.” AEW 16: 297-303.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 2021. “The Return of the King. Pharnakes II and the Persian Heritage.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Ethnic Constructs, Royal Dynasties and Historical Geography around the Black Sea Littoral, 183-198.
Choref, M. 2024. “On the Question of Dating the Dedicatory Inscription of Aspurgus Found in 2013 in Gorgippia.” MAIASP 16: 811-835.
Cojocaru, V. 2025. Cetăţile greceşti pontice şi binefăcătorii lor: Die Pontischen Griechischen Städte und ihre Wohltäter.
Coşkun, A. 2016. “Heinz Heinen und die Bosporanischen Könige – Eine Projektbeschreibung.” In: V. Cojocaru – A. Rubel (edd.), Mobility in Research on the Black Sea. (Iaşi, July 5–10, 2015), 51-71.
Coşkun, A. 2019a. “The Date of the Revolt of Asandros and the Relations between the Bosporan Kingdom and Rome under Caesar.” In: M. Nollé – P. M. Rothenhöfer – G. Schmied-Kowarzik – H. Schwarz – H.C. von Mosch (edd.), Panegyrikoi Logoi. Festschrift für Johannes Nollé zum 65. Geburtstag, 125-146.
Coşkun, A. 2019b. “Chersonesos Taurike, Asandros and Rome – A New Interpretation of the Embassy of C. Julius Satyrus to Rome, 46 BC (IOSPE I2 691).” In: A. Bencivenni – A. Cristofori – F. Muccioli – C. Salvaterra (edd.), PHILOBIBLOS – Scritti in onore di Giovanni Geraci, 281-306.
Coşkun, A. 2019c. “The Course of Pharnakes II’s Pontic and Bosporan Campaigns in 48/47 BC.” Phoenix 73.1-2: 86-113.
Coşkun, A. 2022. “The Bosporan Kings in-between the Mithridatic Tradition and Friendship with Rome: the Usurpation of Asandros Revisited.” In: D. Braund – A. Chaniotis – E. Petropoulos (edd.), The Black Sea Region in the Context of the Roman Empire. International Symposium Dedicated in Memory of Victor I. Sarianidi (Athens 5–8 May 2016), 125-147.
Coşkun, A. 2024. “Scribonius Mithradates, King of the Bosporus.” APR 14: 551-556.
Coşkun, A. 2025a. “(Tiberius Iulius) Aspurgos Philorhomaios, King of the Bosporos.” APR 15: 525-531.
Coşkun, A. 2025b. “Dynamis, Addendum II: Chronology of Succession, APR 15, 2025, 293-302.
Coşkun, A. 2025c. “Agency, Representation, and Dynastic Succession: The Role of the Seleukid Basilissa.” In: G. Puigvertt – M. Oller Guzmán (edd.), Lideratge femení en el món grecoromà (Barcelona 24-25 Nov. 2022), 83-108.
Coşkun, A. 2025c. “Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros.” APR 15: 429-431.
Coşkun, A. forthcoming. “Basilissa Dynamis Philorhomaios: A Revised Sketch of Her Political Biography.”
Coşkun, A. – Heinen, H. 2004. “Amici populi Romani. Das Trierer Projekt ‘Roms auswärtige Freunde’ stellt sich vor.” AncSoc 34: 45-75.
Coşkun, A. – Stern, G. 2021. “Dynamis in Rome? Revisiting the South Frieze of the Ara Pacis Augustae.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Ethnic Constructs, Royal Dynasties and Historical Geography around the Black Sea Littoral, 199-230.
Coşkun, A. – van Wijlick, R. 2025. “Polemon I Eusebes, King of Pontos and of the Bosporos.” APR 15: 525-531.
Dąbrowa, E. 1985. “Un aspect peu connu de la politique de Rome à l’égard du Bosphore sous le règne d’Auguste.” Thracia 7: 79-83.
Frolova, N. A. – Irland, S. 2002. The Coinage of the Bosporan Kingdom from the First Century BC to the First Century AD.
Gajdukevič, V. F. 1971. Das Bosporanische Reich. 2nd ed.
Golubtsova, E. S. 1951. Severnoe Prichernomor’e i Rim na rubezhe nashej éry.
Goroncharovskii, V. A. 2007. “Aspurgians and the Military and Political History of the Bosporos in the Last Years BC and the First Years AD.” In: S. L. Solovyov (ed.), Greeks and Natives in the Cimmerian Bosporus 7th‑1st centuries BC. Proceedings of the International Conference Taman, Russia, October 2000, 61-65.
Halamus, M. 2017. “Barbarization of the State? The Sarmatian Influence in the Bosporan Kingdom.” VDI 77: 160-167.
Halamus, M. 2025. “Golden Staters of Queen Dynamis and Her Rule over the Bosporan Kingdom.” Bulgarian Numismatic Journal 3/2: 1-14.
Heinen, H. 1994. “Mithradates von Pergamon und Caesars bosporanische Pläne.” In: R. Günther – S. Rebenich (edd.), E fontibus haurire. Beiträge zur römischen Geschichte und zu ihren Hilfswissenschaften (FS Heinrich Chantraine), 63-79.
Heinen, H. 2001. “Die Mithradatische Tradition der bosporanischen Könige – ein mißverstandener Befund.” In: K. Geus – K. Zimmermann (edd.), Punica–Libyca–Ptolemaica. Festschrift für Werner Huß zum 65. Geburtstag, 355-370.
Heinen, H. 2008a. “La tradition mithridatique des rois du Bosphore, de Rostovtzeff à l’historiographie soviétique.” In: J. Andreau – W. Berelowitch (edd.), Michel Ivanovitch Rostovtzeff, 137-152.
Heinen, H. 2008b. “H. Heinen, Romfreunde und Kaiserpriester am Kimmerischen Bosporos. Zu neuen Inschriften aus Phanagoreia.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Freundschaft und Gefolgschaft in den auswärtigen Beziehungen der Römer (2. Jh. v.Chr. – 1. Jh. n.Chr.), 189-208.
Heinen, H. 2011. “Kaisareia und Agrippeia: das Tor zur Maiotis als augusteisches Monument.” In: N. Povalahev – V. Kuznetsov (edd.), Phanagoreia und seine historische Umwelt. Von den Anfängen der griechischen Kolonisation (8. Jh. v.Chr.) bis zum Chasarenreich (10. Jh. n.Chr.), 225-240; 345-364 (bibliography).
Ivantchik, A. I. – Tokhtas’ev, S. R. 2011. “Queen Dynamis and Tanais.” In: E. Papuci-Władyka – M. Vickers – J. Bodzek – D. Braund (edd.), Recent Research on the Northern and Eastern Black Sea in Ancient Times. Proceedings of the International Conference, 21st–26th April 2008, 163-173.
Justi, F. 1895. Iranisches Namenbuch.
MacDonald, D. 2005. An Introduction to the History and Coinage of the Kingdom of the Bosporus. Including the Coinage of Panticapaeum (with “Apollonia” and “Myrmecium”), Phanagoria, Gorgippia, Sindicus Limen or the Sindoi, Nymphaeum, Theodosia, and the Kings of the Cimmerian Bosporus.
Makarov, I. 2007. “Les données épigraphiques sur l’histoire de Chersonèse Taurique entre le Ier s. a.C. et le Ier s. p.C.” In: M. Mayer – G. Baratta – A. Guzmán Almagro (edd.), XII Congressus Internationalis Epigraphiae Graecae et Latinae: Provinciae Imperii Romani inscriptionibus descriptae: Barcelona, 3-8 Septembris 2002, 877-883.
Minns, E. H. 1913. Scythians and Greeks.
Muccioli, F. 2013. Gli epiteti ufficiali dei re ellenistici.
Nawotka, K. 1989. “The Attitude Towards Rome in the Political Propaganda of the Bosporan Monarchs.” Latomus 48: 326-338.
Parfenov, V. N. 1996. “Dynamis, Agrippa und der Friedensaltar. Zur militärischen und politischen Geschichte des Bosporanischen Reiches nach Asandros.” Historia 45: 95-103.
Payen, G. 2019. “Ti. Iulios Kotys I, King of the Bosporus.” APR 9, 2019, 311-315.
Payen, G. 2020. Dans l’ombre des empires. Les suites géopolitiques du traité d’Apamée en Anatolie.
Pokrass, J. 1997. “O neopisannykh monetakh Bospora (I v. do n. ė. – I v. n. ė.).” Numizmatika i Faleristika 2: 6-7.
Povalahev, N. 2011. “Eine Bauinschrift aus Phanagoreia von 220/1 n.Chr. und ihr historischer Hintergrund:Text und Kommentar.” ZPE 177: 141-156.
Rose, B. 1990. “Princes and ‘barbarians’ on the Ara Pacis.” AJA 94: 453-467.
Rostovtzeff, M. 1919. “Queen Dynamis of Bosporus.” JHS 39: 87-109. (Russian original: 1916)
Rostovtzeff, M. 1922. Iranians and Greeks in Southern Russia.
RPC I. 1992. A.M. Burnett – M. Amandry – P.P. Ripollès, Roman Provincial Coinage, Vol. I (Part I–II).
Saprykin, S. Y. 2002. Bosporskoe tsarstvo na rubezhe dvukh épokh.
Saprykin, S. Y. 2005. “Thrace and the Bosporus under the Early Roman Emperors.” In: D. Braund (ed.), Scythians and Greeks: Cultural Interaction in Scythia, Athens and the Early Roman Empire (Sixth Century BC – First Century AD), 167-175.
Yaylenko, V. P. 1995. “Zhenshchiny, Afrodita i zhritsa Spartokidov v novykh bosporskikh nadpisyakh.” In: L. P. Marinovich – S. Ju. Saprykin (edd.), Zenščina ν antičnom mire, 204-272.
Yaylenko, V. P. 2010. Tysyacheletniy bosporskiy reich. Istoriya i épigrafika Bospora VI v. do n. é. – V v. n. é.
Zavoykina, N. V. – Novichikhin, A. M. – Konstantinov, V. A. 2018. “Novaya posvyatitel’naya nadpis’ Aspurga iz Gorgippii.” VDI 78/3, 680-692.
Zavoykina, N. V. 2023. “Aspurg – tsar Bospora (9/8 g. do n. e. – 38 g. n. e.).” In: Masalennikov A. A. et al. (edd.), Drevnosti Bospora. Mezhdunarodnyy ezhegodnik po istorii, arkheologii, epigrafike, numizmatike i filologii Bospora Kimmeriyskogo. 28, 149-167.
Zograf, A. N. 1977. Ancient Coinage, vol. 2: The Ancient Coins from the Northern Black Sea Littoral (trans. from the Russian by H. Bartlett Wells).

Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus

Year 2026, Volume: 31 , 1 - 9 , 02.04.2026

Altay Coşkun

https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.1889978

https://izlik.org/JA88YP95FW

Abstract

Two inscriptions naming a certain Mathianes can shed new light on the history of the Bosporus under Queen Dynamis (47/21 BC–AD 7/8). His tombstone depicts him mounted on a horse with a spear, probably hunting. The epitaph (SEG XLV 1018) names basilissa Dynamis as the one who commissioned the tomb. Since she is men-tioned without her epithet Philorhomaios, we can date Mathianes’ death during her first sole reign, 17/6–14 BC, perhaps even in a combat with Polemon. An honorific decree from Tanais is dedicated to his son, whose name is lost (SEG XLV 1023). While previ-ous scholars dated the inscription to the mid- or late-1st century AD, the genealogical link with Mathianes as well as the fragmentary epithet of the anonymous king allows us to date the decree to the short rule of [Polemon Eu]sebes Philokaisar kai Philorhomaios (14–12/8 BC). This benefactor seems to have played a central role in assuaging the king after the Tanaitai had resisted him and thus suffered substantial damage (Str. 11.2.3 [493C]).

Keywords

Mathianes son of Zaidaros , King Mithradates VI Eupator , King Pharnakes II , King Asandros Philorhomaios , King Scribonius Mithradates , King Aspurgos Philokaisar kai Philorhomaios , Queen Dynamis Philorhomaios , King Polemon I Eusebes Philokaisar kai Philorhomaios , Tanais , Roman Empire , Augustus , Marcus Agrippa , Sarmatians , Bosporan Kingdom

Thanks

I gratefully acknowledge that readings in Russian or Ukranian, especially when not accompanied by summaries in a Western European language, have been made accessible through German or English summaries provided by Victor Cojocaru, Michał Halamus, Heinz Heinen, Germain Payen, and Joanna Porucznik. I am likewise thankful for the financial support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (Insight Grant ‘Ethnic Identities and Diplomatic Affiliations of the Bosporan King-dom’, 2017–2024). I’d further like to express my gratitude to my friend Dr. Ben Scolnic for critical feedback on an earlier draft.

References

Anokhin, V. A. 1986. Monetnoe delo Bospora.
Anokhin, V. A. 2011. Antichnye monety Severnogo Prichernomor’ya.
Arsenyeva, T. – Böttger, B. – Vinogradov, J. 1995. “Griechen am Don. Die Grabungen in Tanais 1994.” Eurasia Antiqua 1: 213-263.
Arsenyeva, T. M. – Böttger, B. – Vinogradov, Yu. G. 1996. “New Studies in Tanais.” VDI 3, 54-72.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 1996. Mithrídates Eupátor, rey del Ponto.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 2017. “Pharnakes and His Title ‘King of Kings’.” AEW 16: 297-303.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 2021. “The Return of the King. Pharnakes II and the Persian Heritage.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Ethnic Constructs, Royal Dynasties and Historical Geography around the Black Sea Littoral, 183-198.
Choref, M. 2024. “On the Question of Dating the Dedicatory Inscription of Aspurgus Found in 2013 in Gorgippia.” MAIASP 16: 811-835.
Cojocaru, V. 2025. Cetăţile greceşti pontice şi binefăcătorii lor: Die Pontischen Griechischen Städte und ihre Wohltäter.
Coşkun, A. 2016. “Heinz Heinen und die Bosporanischen Könige – Eine Projektbeschreibung.” In: V. Cojocaru – A. Rubel (edd.), Mobility in Research on the Black Sea. (Iaşi, July 5–10, 2015), 51-71.
Coşkun, A. 2019a. “The Date of the Revolt of Asandros and the Relations between the Bosporan Kingdom and Rome under Caesar.” In: M. Nollé – P. M. Rothenhöfer – G. Schmied-Kowarzik – H. Schwarz – H.C. von Mosch (edd.), Panegyrikoi Logoi. Festschrift für Johannes Nollé zum 65. Geburtstag, 125-146.
Coşkun, A. 2019b. “Chersonesos Taurike, Asandros and Rome – A New Interpretation of the Embassy of C. Julius Satyrus to Rome, 46 BC (IOSPE I2 691).” In: A. Bencivenni – A. Cristofori – F. Muccioli – C. Salvaterra (edd.), PHILOBIBLOS – Scritti in onore di Giovanni Geraci, 281-306.
Coşkun, A. 2019c. “The Course of Pharnakes II’s Pontic and Bosporan Campaigns in 48/47 BC.” Phoenix 73.1-2: 86-113.
Coşkun, A. 2022. “The Bosporan Kings in-between the Mithridatic Tradition and Friendship with Rome: the Usurpation of Asandros Revisited.” In: D. Braund – A. Chaniotis – E. Petropoulos (edd.), The Black Sea Region in the Context of the Roman Empire. International Symposium Dedicated in Memory of Victor I. Sarianidi (Athens 5–8 May 2016), 125-147.
Coşkun, A. 2024. “Scribonius Mithradates, King of the Bosporus.” APR 14: 551-556.
Coşkun, A. 2025a. “(Tiberius Iulius) Aspurgos Philorhomaios, King of the Bosporos.” APR 15: 525-531.
Coşkun, A. 2025b. “Dynamis, Addendum II: Chronology of Succession, APR 15, 2025, 293-302.
Coşkun, A. 2025c. “Agency, Representation, and Dynastic Succession: The Role of the Seleukid Basilissa.” In: G. Puigvertt – M. Oller Guzmán (edd.), Lideratge femení en el món grecoromà (Barcelona 24-25 Nov. 2022), 83-108.
Coşkun, A. 2025c. “Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros.” APR 15: 429-431.
Coşkun, A. forthcoming. “Basilissa Dynamis Philorhomaios: A Revised Sketch of Her Political Biography.”
Coşkun, A. – Heinen, H. 2004. “Amici populi Romani. Das Trierer Projekt ‘Roms auswärtige Freunde’ stellt sich vor.” AncSoc 34: 45-75.
Coşkun, A. – Stern, G. 2021. “Dynamis in Rome? Revisiting the South Frieze of the Ara Pacis Augustae.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Ethnic Constructs, Royal Dynasties and Historical Geography around the Black Sea Littoral, 199-230.
Coşkun, A. – van Wijlick, R. 2025. “Polemon I Eusebes, King of Pontos and of the Bosporos.” APR 15: 525-531.
Dąbrowa, E. 1985. “Un aspect peu connu de la politique de Rome à l’égard du Bosphore sous le règne d’Auguste.” Thracia 7: 79-83.
Frolova, N. A. – Irland, S. 2002. The Coinage of the Bosporan Kingdom from the First Century BC to the First Century AD.
Gajdukevič, V. F. 1971. Das Bosporanische Reich. 2nd ed.
Golubtsova, E. S. 1951. Severnoe Prichernomor’e i Rim na rubezhe nashej éry.
Goroncharovskii, V. A. 2007. “Aspurgians and the Military and Political History of the Bosporos in the Last Years BC and the First Years AD.” In: S. L. Solovyov (ed.), Greeks and Natives in the Cimmerian Bosporus 7th‑1st centuries BC. Proceedings of the International Conference Taman, Russia, October 2000, 61-65.
Halamus, M. 2017. “Barbarization of the State? The Sarmatian Influence in the Bosporan Kingdom.” VDI 77: 160-167.
Halamus, M. 2025. “Golden Staters of Queen Dynamis and Her Rule over the Bosporan Kingdom.” Bulgarian Numismatic Journal 3/2: 1-14.
Heinen, H. 1994. “Mithradates von Pergamon und Caesars bosporanische Pläne.” In: R. Günther – S. Rebenich (edd.), E fontibus haurire. Beiträge zur römischen Geschichte und zu ihren Hilfswissenschaften (FS Heinrich Chantraine), 63-79.
Heinen, H. 2001. “Die Mithradatische Tradition der bosporanischen Könige – ein mißverstandener Befund.” In: K. Geus – K. Zimmermann (edd.), Punica–Libyca–Ptolemaica. Festschrift für Werner Huß zum 65. Geburtstag, 355-370.
Heinen, H. 2008a. “La tradition mithridatique des rois du Bosphore, de Rostovtzeff à l’historiographie soviétique.” In: J. Andreau – W. Berelowitch (edd.), Michel Ivanovitch Rostovtzeff, 137-152.
Heinen, H. 2008b. “H. Heinen, Romfreunde und Kaiserpriester am Kimmerischen Bosporos. Zu neuen Inschriften aus Phanagoreia.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Freundschaft und Gefolgschaft in den auswärtigen Beziehungen der Römer (2. Jh. v.Chr. – 1. Jh. n.Chr.), 189-208.
Heinen, H. 2011. “Kaisareia und Agrippeia: das Tor zur Maiotis als augusteisches Monument.” In: N. Povalahev – V. Kuznetsov (edd.), Phanagoreia und seine historische Umwelt. Von den Anfängen der griechischen Kolonisation (8. Jh. v.Chr.) bis zum Chasarenreich (10. Jh. n.Chr.), 225-240; 345-364 (bibliography).
Ivantchik, A. I. – Tokhtas’ev, S. R. 2011. “Queen Dynamis and Tanais.” In: E. Papuci-Władyka – M. Vickers – J. Bodzek – D. Braund (edd.), Recent Research on the Northern and Eastern Black Sea in Ancient Times. Proceedings of the International Conference, 21st–26th April 2008, 163-173.
Justi, F. 1895. Iranisches Namenbuch.
MacDonald, D. 2005. An Introduction to the History and Coinage of the Kingdom of the Bosporus. Including the Coinage of Panticapaeum (with “Apollonia” and “Myrmecium”), Phanagoria, Gorgippia, Sindicus Limen or the Sindoi, Nymphaeum, Theodosia, and the Kings of the Cimmerian Bosporus.
Makarov, I. 2007. “Les données épigraphiques sur l’histoire de Chersonèse Taurique entre le Ier s. a.C. et le Ier s. p.C.” In: M. Mayer – G. Baratta – A. Guzmán Almagro (edd.), XII Congressus Internationalis Epigraphiae Graecae et Latinae: Provinciae Imperii Romani inscriptionibus descriptae: Barcelona, 3-8 Septembris 2002, 877-883.
Minns, E. H. 1913. Scythians and Greeks.
Muccioli, F. 2013. Gli epiteti ufficiali dei re ellenistici.
Nawotka, K. 1989. “The Attitude Towards Rome in the Political Propaganda of the Bosporan Monarchs.” Latomus 48: 326-338.
Parfenov, V. N. 1996. “Dynamis, Agrippa und der Friedensaltar. Zur militärischen und politischen Geschichte des Bosporanischen Reiches nach Asandros.” Historia 45: 95-103.
Payen, G. 2019. “Ti. Iulios Kotys I, King of the Bosporus.” APR 9, 2019, 311-315.
Payen, G. 2020. Dans l’ombre des empires. Les suites géopolitiques du traité d’Apamée en Anatolie.
Pokrass, J. 1997. “O neopisannykh monetakh Bospora (I v. do n. ė. – I v. n. ė.).” Numizmatika i Faleristika 2: 6-7.
Povalahev, N. 2011. “Eine Bauinschrift aus Phanagoreia von 220/1 n.Chr. und ihr historischer Hintergrund:Text und Kommentar.” ZPE 177: 141-156.
Rose, B. 1990. “Princes and ‘barbarians’ on the Ara Pacis.” AJA 94: 453-467.
Rostovtzeff, M. 1919. “Queen Dynamis of Bosporus.” JHS 39: 87-109. (Russian original: 1916)
Rostovtzeff, M. 1922. Iranians and Greeks in Southern Russia.
RPC I. 1992. A.M. Burnett – M. Amandry – P.P. Ripollès, Roman Provincial Coinage, Vol. I (Part I–II).
Saprykin, S. Y. 2002. Bosporskoe tsarstvo na rubezhe dvukh épokh.
Saprykin, S. Y. 2005. “Thrace and the Bosporus under the Early Roman Emperors.” In: D. Braund (ed.), Scythians and Greeks: Cultural Interaction in Scythia, Athens and the Early Roman Empire (Sixth Century BC – First Century AD), 167-175.
Yaylenko, V. P. 1995. “Zhenshchiny, Afrodita i zhritsa Spartokidov v novykh bosporskikh nadpisyakh.” In: L. P. Marinovich – S. Ju. Saprykin (edd.), Zenščina ν antičnom mire, 204-272.
Yaylenko, V. P. 2010. Tysyacheletniy bosporskiy reich. Istoriya i épigrafika Bospora VI v. do n. é. – V v. n. é.
Zavoykina, N. V. – Novichikhin, A. M. – Konstantinov, V. A. 2018. “Novaya posvyatitel’naya nadpis’ Aspurga iz Gorgippii.” VDI 78/3, 680-692.
Zavoykina, N. V. 2023. “Aspurg – tsar Bospora (9/8 g. do n. e. – 38 g. n. e.).” In: Masalennikov A. A. et al. (edd.), Drevnosti Bospora. Mezhdunarodnyy ezhegodnik po istorii, arkheologii, epigrafike, numizmatike i filologii Bospora Kimmeriyskogo. 28, 149-167.
Zograf, A. N. 1977. Ancient Coinage, vol. 2: The Ancient Coins from the Northern Black Sea Littoral (trans. from the Russian by H. Bartlett Wells).

Year 2026, Volume: 31 , 1 - 9 , 02.04.2026

Altay Coşkun

https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.1889978

https://izlik.org/JA88YP95FW

Abstract

References

Anokhin, V. A. 1986. Monetnoe delo Bospora.
Anokhin, V. A. 2011. Antichnye monety Severnogo Prichernomor’ya.
Arsenyeva, T. – Böttger, B. – Vinogradov, J. 1995. “Griechen am Don. Die Grabungen in Tanais 1994.” Eurasia Antiqua 1: 213-263.
Arsenyeva, T. M. – Böttger, B. – Vinogradov, Yu. G. 1996. “New Studies in Tanais.” VDI 3, 54-72.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 1996. Mithrídates Eupátor, rey del Ponto.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 2017. “Pharnakes and His Title ‘King of Kings’.” AEW 16: 297-303.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 2021. “The Return of the King. Pharnakes II and the Persian Heritage.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Ethnic Constructs, Royal Dynasties and Historical Geography around the Black Sea Littoral, 183-198.
Choref, M. 2024. “On the Question of Dating the Dedicatory Inscription of Aspurgus Found in 2013 in Gorgippia.” MAIASP 16: 811-835.
Cojocaru, V. 2025. Cetăţile greceşti pontice şi binefăcătorii lor: Die Pontischen Griechischen Städte und ihre Wohltäter.
Coşkun, A. 2016. “Heinz Heinen und die Bosporanischen Könige – Eine Projektbeschreibung.” In: V. Cojocaru – A. Rubel (edd.), Mobility in Research on the Black Sea. (Iaşi, July 5–10, 2015), 51-71.
Coşkun, A. 2019a. “The Date of the Revolt of Asandros and the Relations between the Bosporan Kingdom and Rome under Caesar.” In: M. Nollé – P. M. Rothenhöfer – G. Schmied-Kowarzik – H. Schwarz – H.C. von Mosch (edd.), Panegyrikoi Logoi. Festschrift für Johannes Nollé zum 65. Geburtstag, 125-146.
Coşkun, A. 2019b. “Chersonesos Taurike, Asandros and Rome – A New Interpretation of the Embassy of C. Julius Satyrus to Rome, 46 BC (IOSPE I2 691).” In: A. Bencivenni – A. Cristofori – F. Muccioli – C. Salvaterra (edd.), PHILOBIBLOS – Scritti in onore di Giovanni Geraci, 281-306.
Coşkun, A. 2019c. “The Course of Pharnakes II’s Pontic and Bosporan Campaigns in 48/47 BC.” Phoenix 73.1-2: 86-113.
Coşkun, A. 2022. “The Bosporan Kings in-between the Mithridatic Tradition and Friendship with Rome: the Usurpation of Asandros Revisited.” In: D. Braund – A. Chaniotis – E. Petropoulos (edd.), The Black Sea Region in the Context of the Roman Empire. International Symposium Dedicated in Memory of Victor I. Sarianidi (Athens 5–8 May 2016), 125-147.
Coşkun, A. 2024. “Scribonius Mithradates, King of the Bosporus.” APR 14: 551-556.
Coşkun, A. 2025a. “(Tiberius Iulius) Aspurgos Philorhomaios, King of the Bosporos.” APR 15: 525-531.
Coşkun, A. 2025b. “Dynamis, Addendum II: Chronology of Succession, APR 15, 2025, 293-302.
Coşkun, A. 2025c. “Agency, Representation, and Dynastic Succession: The Role of the Seleukid Basilissa.” In: G. Puigvertt – M. Oller Guzmán (edd.), Lideratge femení en el món grecoromà (Barcelona 24-25 Nov. 2022), 83-108.
Coşkun, A. 2025c. “Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros.” APR 15: 429-431.
Coşkun, A. forthcoming. “Basilissa Dynamis Philorhomaios: A Revised Sketch of Her Political Biography.”
Coşkun, A. – Heinen, H. 2004. “Amici populi Romani. Das Trierer Projekt ‘Roms auswärtige Freunde’ stellt sich vor.” AncSoc 34: 45-75.
Coşkun, A. – Stern, G. 2021. “Dynamis in Rome? Revisiting the South Frieze of the Ara Pacis Augustae.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Ethnic Constructs, Royal Dynasties and Historical Geography around the Black Sea Littoral, 199-230.
Coşkun, A. – van Wijlick, R. 2025. “Polemon I Eusebes, King of Pontos and of the Bosporos.” APR 15: 525-531.
Dąbrowa, E. 1985. “Un aspect peu connu de la politique de Rome à l’égard du Bosphore sous le règne d’Auguste.” Thracia 7: 79-83.
Frolova, N. A. – Irland, S. 2002. The Coinage of the Bosporan Kingdom from the First Century BC to the First Century AD.
Gajdukevič, V. F. 1971. Das Bosporanische Reich. 2nd ed.
Golubtsova, E. S. 1951. Severnoe Prichernomor’e i Rim na rubezhe nashej éry.
Goroncharovskii, V. A. 2007. “Aspurgians and the Military and Political History of the Bosporos in the Last Years BC and the First Years AD.” In: S. L. Solovyov (ed.), Greeks and Natives in the Cimmerian Bosporus 7th‑1st centuries BC. Proceedings of the International Conference Taman, Russia, October 2000, 61-65.
Halamus, M. 2017. “Barbarization of the State? The Sarmatian Influence in the Bosporan Kingdom.” VDI 77: 160-167.
Halamus, M. 2025. “Golden Staters of Queen Dynamis and Her Rule over the Bosporan Kingdom.” Bulgarian Numismatic Journal 3/2: 1-14.
Heinen, H. 1994. “Mithradates von Pergamon und Caesars bosporanische Pläne.” In: R. Günther – S. Rebenich (edd.), E fontibus haurire. Beiträge zur römischen Geschichte und zu ihren Hilfswissenschaften (FS Heinrich Chantraine), 63-79.
Heinen, H. 2001. “Die Mithradatische Tradition der bosporanischen Könige – ein mißverstandener Befund.” In: K. Geus – K. Zimmermann (edd.), Punica–Libyca–Ptolemaica. Festschrift für Werner Huß zum 65. Geburtstag, 355-370.
Heinen, H. 2008a. “La tradition mithridatique des rois du Bosphore, de Rostovtzeff à l’historiographie soviétique.” In: J. Andreau – W. Berelowitch (edd.), Michel Ivanovitch Rostovtzeff, 137-152.
Heinen, H. 2008b. “H. Heinen, Romfreunde und Kaiserpriester am Kimmerischen Bosporos. Zu neuen Inschriften aus Phanagoreia.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Freundschaft und Gefolgschaft in den auswärtigen Beziehungen der Römer (2. Jh. v.Chr. – 1. Jh. n.Chr.), 189-208.
Heinen, H. 2011. “Kaisareia und Agrippeia: das Tor zur Maiotis als augusteisches Monument.” In: N. Povalahev – V. Kuznetsov (edd.), Phanagoreia und seine historische Umwelt. Von den Anfängen der griechischen Kolonisation (8. Jh. v.Chr.) bis zum Chasarenreich (10. Jh. n.Chr.), 225-240; 345-364 (bibliography).
Ivantchik, A. I. – Tokhtas’ev, S. R. 2011. “Queen Dynamis and Tanais.” In: E. Papuci-Władyka – M. Vickers – J. Bodzek – D. Braund (edd.), Recent Research on the Northern and Eastern Black Sea in Ancient Times. Proceedings of the International Conference, 21st–26th April 2008, 163-173.
Justi, F. 1895. Iranisches Namenbuch.
MacDonald, D. 2005. An Introduction to the History and Coinage of the Kingdom of the Bosporus. Including the Coinage of Panticapaeum (with “Apollonia” and “Myrmecium”), Phanagoria, Gorgippia, Sindicus Limen or the Sindoi, Nymphaeum, Theodosia, and the Kings of the Cimmerian Bosporus.
Makarov, I. 2007. “Les données épigraphiques sur l’histoire de Chersonèse Taurique entre le Ier s. a.C. et le Ier s. p.C.” In: M. Mayer – G. Baratta – A. Guzmán Almagro (edd.), XII Congressus Internationalis Epigraphiae Graecae et Latinae: Provinciae Imperii Romani inscriptionibus descriptae: Barcelona, 3-8 Septembris 2002, 877-883.
Minns, E. H. 1913. Scythians and Greeks.
Muccioli, F. 2013. Gli epiteti ufficiali dei re ellenistici.
Nawotka, K. 1989. “The Attitude Towards Rome in the Political Propaganda of the Bosporan Monarchs.” Latomus 48: 326-338.
Parfenov, V. N. 1996. “Dynamis, Agrippa und der Friedensaltar. Zur militärischen und politischen Geschichte des Bosporanischen Reiches nach Asandros.” Historia 45: 95-103.
Payen, G. 2019. “Ti. Iulios Kotys I, King of the Bosporus.” APR 9, 2019, 311-315.
Payen, G. 2020. Dans l’ombre des empires. Les suites géopolitiques du traité d’Apamée en Anatolie.
Pokrass, J. 1997. “O neopisannykh monetakh Bospora (I v. do n. ė. – I v. n. ė.).” Numizmatika i Faleristika 2: 6-7.
Povalahev, N. 2011. “Eine Bauinschrift aus Phanagoreia von 220/1 n.Chr. und ihr historischer Hintergrund:Text und Kommentar.” ZPE 177: 141-156.
Rose, B. 1990. “Princes and ‘barbarians’ on the Ara Pacis.” AJA 94: 453-467.
Rostovtzeff, M. 1919. “Queen Dynamis of Bosporus.” JHS 39: 87-109. (Russian original: 1916)
Rostovtzeff, M. 1922. Iranians and Greeks in Southern Russia.
RPC I. 1992. A.M. Burnett – M. Amandry – P.P. Ripollès, Roman Provincial Coinage, Vol. I (Part I–II).
Saprykin, S. Y. 2002. Bosporskoe tsarstvo na rubezhe dvukh épokh.
Saprykin, S. Y. 2005. “Thrace and the Bosporus under the Early Roman Emperors.” In: D. Braund (ed.), Scythians and Greeks: Cultural Interaction in Scythia, Athens and the Early Roman Empire (Sixth Century BC – First Century AD), 167-175.
Yaylenko, V. P. 1995. “Zhenshchiny, Afrodita i zhritsa Spartokidov v novykh bosporskikh nadpisyakh.” In: L. P. Marinovich – S. Ju. Saprykin (edd.), Zenščina ν antičnom mire, 204-272.
Yaylenko, V. P. 2010. Tysyacheletniy bosporskiy reich. Istoriya i épigrafika Bospora VI v. do n. é. – V v. n. é.
Zavoykina, N. V. – Novichikhin, A. M. – Konstantinov, V. A. 2018. “Novaya posvyatitel’naya nadpis’ Aspurga iz Gorgippii.” VDI 78/3, 680-692.
Zavoykina, N. V. 2023. “Aspurg – tsar Bospora (9/8 g. do n. e. – 38 g. n. e.).” In: Masalennikov A. A. et al. (edd.), Drevnosti Bospora. Mezhdunarodnyy ezhegodnik po istorii, arkheologii, epigrafike, numizmatike i filologii Bospora Kimmeriyskogo. 28, 149-167.
Zograf, A. N. 1977. Ancient Coinage, vol. 2: The Ancient Coins from the Northern Black Sea Littoral (trans. from the Russian by H. Bartlett Wells).

Year 2026, Volume: 31 , 1 - 9 , 02.04.2026

Altay Coşkun

https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.1889978

https://izlik.org/JA88YP95FW

Abstract

References

Anokhin, V. A. 1986. Monetnoe delo Bospora.
Anokhin, V. A. 2011. Antichnye monety Severnogo Prichernomor’ya.
Arsenyeva, T. – Böttger, B. – Vinogradov, J. 1995. “Griechen am Don. Die Grabungen in Tanais 1994.” Eurasia Antiqua 1: 213-263.
Arsenyeva, T. M. – Böttger, B. – Vinogradov, Yu. G. 1996. “New Studies in Tanais.” VDI 3, 54-72.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 1996. Mithrídates Eupátor, rey del Ponto.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 2017. “Pharnakes and His Title ‘King of Kings’.” AEW 16: 297-303.
Ballesteros Pastor, L. 2021. “The Return of the King. Pharnakes II and the Persian Heritage.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Ethnic Constructs, Royal Dynasties and Historical Geography around the Black Sea Littoral, 183-198.
Choref, M. 2024. “On the Question of Dating the Dedicatory Inscription of Aspurgus Found in 2013 in Gorgippia.” MAIASP 16: 811-835.
Cojocaru, V. 2025. Cetăţile greceşti pontice şi binefăcătorii lor: Die Pontischen Griechischen Städte und ihre Wohltäter.
Coşkun, A. 2016. “Heinz Heinen und die Bosporanischen Könige – Eine Projektbeschreibung.” In: V. Cojocaru – A. Rubel (edd.), Mobility in Research on the Black Sea. (Iaşi, July 5–10, 2015), 51-71.
Coşkun, A. 2019a. “The Date of the Revolt of Asandros and the Relations between the Bosporan Kingdom and Rome under Caesar.” In: M. Nollé – P. M. Rothenhöfer – G. Schmied-Kowarzik – H. Schwarz – H.C. von Mosch (edd.), Panegyrikoi Logoi. Festschrift für Johannes Nollé zum 65. Geburtstag, 125-146.
Coşkun, A. 2019b. “Chersonesos Taurike, Asandros and Rome – A New Interpretation of the Embassy of C. Julius Satyrus to Rome, 46 BC (IOSPE I2 691).” In: A. Bencivenni – A. Cristofori – F. Muccioli – C. Salvaterra (edd.), PHILOBIBLOS – Scritti in onore di Giovanni Geraci, 281-306.
Coşkun, A. 2019c. “The Course of Pharnakes II’s Pontic and Bosporan Campaigns in 48/47 BC.” Phoenix 73.1-2: 86-113.
Coşkun, A. 2022. “The Bosporan Kings in-between the Mithridatic Tradition and Friendship with Rome: the Usurpation of Asandros Revisited.” In: D. Braund – A. Chaniotis – E. Petropoulos (edd.), The Black Sea Region in the Context of the Roman Empire. International Symposium Dedicated in Memory of Victor I. Sarianidi (Athens 5–8 May 2016), 125-147.
Coşkun, A. 2024. “Scribonius Mithradates, King of the Bosporus.” APR 14: 551-556.
Coşkun, A. 2025a. “(Tiberius Iulius) Aspurgos Philorhomaios, King of the Bosporos.” APR 15: 525-531.
Coşkun, A. 2025b. “Dynamis, Addendum II: Chronology of Succession, APR 15, 2025, 293-302.
Coşkun, A. 2025c. “Agency, Representation, and Dynastic Succession: The Role of the Seleukid Basilissa.” In: G. Puigvertt – M. Oller Guzmán (edd.), Lideratge femení en el món grecoromà (Barcelona 24-25 Nov. 2022), 83-108.
Coşkun, A. 2025c. “Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros.” APR 15: 429-431.
Coşkun, A. forthcoming. “Basilissa Dynamis Philorhomaios: A Revised Sketch of Her Political Biography.”
Coşkun, A. – Heinen, H. 2004. “Amici populi Romani. Das Trierer Projekt ‘Roms auswärtige Freunde’ stellt sich vor.” AncSoc 34: 45-75.
Coşkun, A. – Stern, G. 2021. “Dynamis in Rome? Revisiting the South Frieze of the Ara Pacis Augustae.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Ethnic Constructs, Royal Dynasties and Historical Geography around the Black Sea Littoral, 199-230.
Coşkun, A. – van Wijlick, R. 2025. “Polemon I Eusebes, King of Pontos and of the Bosporos.” APR 15: 525-531.
Dąbrowa, E. 1985. “Un aspect peu connu de la politique de Rome à l’égard du Bosphore sous le règne d’Auguste.” Thracia 7: 79-83.
Frolova, N. A. – Irland, S. 2002. The Coinage of the Bosporan Kingdom from the First Century BC to the First Century AD.
Gajdukevič, V. F. 1971. Das Bosporanische Reich. 2nd ed.
Golubtsova, E. S. 1951. Severnoe Prichernomor’e i Rim na rubezhe nashej éry.
Goroncharovskii, V. A. 2007. “Aspurgians and the Military and Political History of the Bosporos in the Last Years BC and the First Years AD.” In: S. L. Solovyov (ed.), Greeks and Natives in the Cimmerian Bosporus 7th‑1st centuries BC. Proceedings of the International Conference Taman, Russia, October 2000, 61-65.
Halamus, M. 2017. “Barbarization of the State? The Sarmatian Influence in the Bosporan Kingdom.” VDI 77: 160-167.
Halamus, M. 2025. “Golden Staters of Queen Dynamis and Her Rule over the Bosporan Kingdom.” Bulgarian Numismatic Journal 3/2: 1-14.
Heinen, H. 1994. “Mithradates von Pergamon und Caesars bosporanische Pläne.” In: R. Günther – S. Rebenich (edd.), E fontibus haurire. Beiträge zur römischen Geschichte und zu ihren Hilfswissenschaften (FS Heinrich Chantraine), 63-79.
Heinen, H. 2001. “Die Mithradatische Tradition der bosporanischen Könige – ein mißverstandener Befund.” In: K. Geus – K. Zimmermann (edd.), Punica–Libyca–Ptolemaica. Festschrift für Werner Huß zum 65. Geburtstag, 355-370.
Heinen, H. 2008a. “La tradition mithridatique des rois du Bosphore, de Rostovtzeff à l’historiographie soviétique.” In: J. Andreau – W. Berelowitch (edd.), Michel Ivanovitch Rostovtzeff, 137-152.
Heinen, H. 2008b. “H. Heinen, Romfreunde und Kaiserpriester am Kimmerischen Bosporos. Zu neuen Inschriften aus Phanagoreia.” In: A. Coşkun (ed.), Freundschaft und Gefolgschaft in den auswärtigen Beziehungen der Römer (2. Jh. v.Chr. – 1. Jh. n.Chr.), 189-208.
Heinen, H. 2011. “Kaisareia und Agrippeia: das Tor zur Maiotis als augusteisches Monument.” In: N. Povalahev – V. Kuznetsov (edd.), Phanagoreia und seine historische Umwelt. Von den Anfängen der griechischen Kolonisation (8. Jh. v.Chr.) bis zum Chasarenreich (10. Jh. n.Chr.), 225-240; 345-364 (bibliography).
Ivantchik, A. I. – Tokhtas’ev, S. R. 2011. “Queen Dynamis and Tanais.” In: E. Papuci-Władyka – M. Vickers – J. Bodzek – D. Braund (edd.), Recent Research on the Northern and Eastern Black Sea in Ancient Times. Proceedings of the International Conference, 21st–26th April 2008, 163-173.
Justi, F. 1895. Iranisches Namenbuch.
MacDonald, D. 2005. An Introduction to the History and Coinage of the Kingdom of the Bosporus. Including the Coinage of Panticapaeum (with “Apollonia” and “Myrmecium”), Phanagoria, Gorgippia, Sindicus Limen or the Sindoi, Nymphaeum, Theodosia, and the Kings of the Cimmerian Bosporus.
Makarov, I. 2007. “Les données épigraphiques sur l’histoire de Chersonèse Taurique entre le Ier s. a.C. et le Ier s. p.C.” In: M. Mayer – G. Baratta – A. Guzmán Almagro (edd.), XII Congressus Internationalis Epigraphiae Graecae et Latinae: Provinciae Imperii Romani inscriptionibus descriptae: Barcelona, 3-8 Septembris 2002, 877-883.
Minns, E. H. 1913. Scythians and Greeks.
Muccioli, F. 2013. Gli epiteti ufficiali dei re ellenistici.
Nawotka, K. 1989. “The Attitude Towards Rome in the Political Propaganda of the Bosporan Monarchs.” Latomus 48: 326-338.
Parfenov, V. N. 1996. “Dynamis, Agrippa und der Friedensaltar. Zur militärischen und politischen Geschichte des Bosporanischen Reiches nach Asandros.” Historia 45: 95-103.
Payen, G. 2019. “Ti. Iulios Kotys I, King of the Bosporus.” APR 9, 2019, 311-315.
Payen, G. 2020. Dans l’ombre des empires. Les suites géopolitiques du traité d’Apamée en Anatolie.
Pokrass, J. 1997. “O neopisannykh monetakh Bospora (I v. do n. ė. – I v. n. ė.).” Numizmatika i Faleristika 2: 6-7.
Povalahev, N. 2011. “Eine Bauinschrift aus Phanagoreia von 220/1 n.Chr. und ihr historischer Hintergrund:Text und Kommentar.” ZPE 177: 141-156.
Rose, B. 1990. “Princes and ‘barbarians’ on the Ara Pacis.” AJA 94: 453-467.
Rostovtzeff, M. 1919. “Queen Dynamis of Bosporus.” JHS 39: 87-109. (Russian original: 1916)
Rostovtzeff, M. 1922. Iranians and Greeks in Southern Russia.
RPC I. 1992. A.M. Burnett – M. Amandry – P.P. Ripollès, Roman Provincial Coinage, Vol. I (Part I–II).
Saprykin, S. Y. 2002. Bosporskoe tsarstvo na rubezhe dvukh épokh.
Saprykin, S. Y. 2005. “Thrace and the Bosporus under the Early Roman Emperors.” In: D. Braund (ed.), Scythians and Greeks: Cultural Interaction in Scythia, Athens and the Early Roman Empire (Sixth Century BC – First Century AD), 167-175.
Yaylenko, V. P. 1995. “Zhenshchiny, Afrodita i zhritsa Spartokidov v novykh bosporskikh nadpisyakh.” In: L. P. Marinovich – S. Ju. Saprykin (edd.), Zenščina ν antičnom mire, 204-272.
Yaylenko, V. P. 2010. Tysyacheletniy bosporskiy reich. Istoriya i épigrafika Bospora VI v. do n. é. – V v. n. é.
Zavoykina, N. V. – Novichikhin, A. M. – Konstantinov, V. A. 2018. “Novaya posvyatitel’naya nadpis’ Aspurga iz Gorgippii.” VDI 78/3, 680-692.
Zavoykina, N. V. 2023. “Aspurg – tsar Bospora (9/8 g. do n. e. – 38 g. n. e.).” In: Masalennikov A. A. et al. (edd.), Drevnosti Bospora. Mezhdunarodnyy ezhegodnik po istorii, arkheologii, epigrafike, numizmatike i filologii Bospora Kimmeriyskogo. 28, 149-167.
Zograf, A. N. 1977. Ancient Coinage, vol. 2: The Ancient Coins from the Northern Black Sea Littoral (trans. from the Russian by H. Bartlett Wells).

There are 58 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language	English
Subjects	Classical Greek and Roman History
Journal Section	Research Article
Authors	Altay Coşkun
Submission Date	February 15, 2026
Acceptance Date	March 7, 2026
Publication Date	April 2, 2026
DOI	https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.1889978
IZ	https://izlik.org/JA88YP95FW
Published in Issue	Year 2026 Volume: 31

Cite

APA	Coşkun, A. (2026). Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus. Gephyra, 31, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.1889978
AMA	1.Coşkun A. Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus. GEPHYRA. 2026;31:1-9. doi:10.37095/gephyra.1889978
Chicago	Coşkun, Altay. 2026. “Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus”. Gephyra 31 (April): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.1889978.
EndNote	Coşkun A (April 1, 2026) Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus. Gephyra 31 1–9.
IEEE	[1]A. Coşkun, “Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus”, GEPHYRA, vol. 31, pp. 1–9, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.37095/gephyra.1889978.
ISNAD	Coşkun, Altay. “Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus”. Gephyra 31 (April 1, 2026): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.37095/gephyra.1889978.
JAMA	1.Coşkun A. Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus. GEPHYRA. 2026;31:1–9.
MLA	Coşkun, Altay. “Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus”. Gephyra, vol. 31, Apr. 2026, pp. 1-9, doi:10.37095/gephyra.1889978.
Vancouver	1.Altay Coşkun. Mathianes, Son of Zaidaros, His Anonymous Son, and New Spotlights on Queen Dynamis of the Bosporus. GEPHYRA. 2026 Apr. 1;31:1-9. doi:10.37095/gephyra.1889978

Aim & Scope

Gephyra – A Journal for the Ancient History and Cultures of the Greek and Roman World aims to provide an open-access scholarly platform for original research on the ancient Greek and Roman world up to the sixth century AD. The journal seeks to publish studies that advance our understanding of antiquity by offering new interpretations of historical, geographical, social, cultural, economic, administrative, and institutional phenomena, grounded in the critical use of primary source material.

The scope of Gephyra encompasses all fields of research related to the ancient Greek and Roman world, with particular emphasis on studies that employ, analyse, or reassess epigraphic, philological, numismatic, and papyrological evidence. Contributions may address, but are not limited to, issues of political organisation, social structures, cultural practices, economic systems, religious life, administration, and regional or supra-regional interactions. Manuscripts are expected to engage substantively with one or more of these categories of primary material; submissions that do not meet this requirement will not be considered for evaluation.

Author Guidelines

General issues

Article submissions to the Gephyra Journal are made from the DergiPark Gephyra homepage. You can also click here for article submission (you should login first).
Manuscripts should be written in one of the following languages English, French, German and Italian.
For indexing purposes, submitted titles, abstracts, keywords and names of contributors (authors, editors, translators etc.) should not contain non-Latin characters, but should use transliterations of the corresponding words according to the relevant American Library Association - Library of Congress (ALA-LC) Romanisation Table (see, for example, the Greek Romanisation Table). The parts with non-Latin characters of the bibliography entries should be transliterated according to the same rules and written in italics in square brackets ([]) next to their originals. See examples:
- Ast, R. 2021. “χμγ = Ῥαφαγήλ [chmg = Rhaphagēl] in an Apotropaic Amulet.” ZPE 217: 178.
- Diamantis, N. 1998. "Επιγραφές από το παλαιοχριστιανικό νεκροταφείο της Κισάμου [Epigraphes apo to palaiokhristianiko nekrotapheio tēs Kisamou]." AD 53: 313-330.
- Polemis, D. I. 1995. Οἱ ἀφεντότοποι τῆς Ἄνδρου. Συμβολὴ εἰς τὴν ἔρευναν τῶν καταλοίπων τῶν φεουδαλικῶν θεσμῶν εἰς τὰς νήσους κατὰ τὸν δέκατον ἕκτον αἰῶνα [Hoi aphentotopoi tēs Androu. Symbolē eis tēn ereunan tōn kataloipōn tōn pheoudalikōn thesmōn eis tas nēsous kata ton dekaton hekton aiōna]. Andros: NN.
It should contain an English abstract of min. 150 - max. 300 words. A Turkish abstract will also be required before publication with the translations of the new inscriptions, if any are published, this can be prepared by Turkish editors if the author cannot write one, it can be longer and more detailed if desired.
5-7 keywords should be provided.
The full text files to be uploaded to the system must be in both Microsoft Word docx and pdf format.
The body of the text should be set at 11 pt and footnotes at 9.5 pt.
For Greek texts, a polytonic Unicode font should be used.
There should be no manual hyphenation in the text, except for special occasions as may be required in some languages such as Greek.
Artwork submitted in digital format must be a minimum of 300 dpi. Artwork must also be uploaded or sent in JPEG or TIFF format. For other or special cases, the author(s) should contact the editors.
Filenames of figures should include the correct figure number (e.g. Fig. 1 ...).
Captions and sources of photographs and other figures must be given.
Do not use abbreviations such as f. or ff. for “following page(s)”; include full page numbers separated by a hyphen (-) without spaces before or after.
The following should not be used in the manuscript: ad loc., ibid, idem, loc. cit., op. cit., passim, Use full citations.
Where cross-references are necessary, use “above” and “below” instead of “supra” and “infra”.
With the exception of words generally accepted and used in Western languages, Greek words in body text and footnotes should be written in Greek and not in italics; Latin words should be written in italics.
When other scholars are mentioned in the body text, they should be quoted first by their full first name. In the following only the surname should be used.
Units of measurement should be in the metric system and should be abbreviated in the text without a period as follows: g, kg, km, m, cm, mm.
A "n." is used when referring to a single footnote, while "nn." is used when referring to more than one footnote. Footnote numbers given in the text should always be placed outside the punctuation mark unless they refer to a specific word, term or phrase within a sentence.
Arabic numerals are always used to indicate the volume and issue numbers of periodicals in the bibliography, separated by a slash (/) with no space before or after.
When referring to a publication, the spelling rules of the language of the publication (such as capitalization, accent, small letters and phonemes) should be respected.
Authors' names should always be given in Latin characters.
Whether in the bibliography or in the text, the accepted spelling of a city in the language of the submission is used.
When giving the places of publication of a work (if it is published in more than one place), the places should be separated by a slash (/), with no space before or after.
If there are sources with the same author and year in the manuscript, each item should be distinguished by adding a, b, c, etc. to the year of both in the body of the text and in the footnote (e.g. [author] 2008a, 15-19; 2008b, 25-26).
Use "et al." for more than two authors/editors in footnote and intext citations after the first author/editor., but for more than four authors/editors in the bibliography after the third author/editor.

Citations

Authors are obliged to apply the following rules only after their submissions are accepted for publication.

Basic reference guides:

Modern / secondary sources: see below
Ancient Literary Texts:
- Der Neue Pauly
  - for exclusive sources Oxford Classical Dictionary (go to "B. Authors and Books")
Journal abbreviations:
- L’Année Philologique
  - for exclusive sources American Journal of Archaeology
Epigraphic Corpora:
- List of Abbreviations of Editions and Works of Reference for Alphabetic Greek Epigraphy (GrEpiAbbr)
  - for exclusive sources Clauss / Slaby
Papyri:
- Papyri.info
When referring to ancient sources, there should be no comma after the abbreviation of the author, but the abbreviation of the work should be in italics. Ancient literary sources should not be listed in the bibliography (see above for the abbreviations to be used) unless there is a question about the edition(s) or a philological discussion of the edition(s).
- Exp.: Arr. an. 1.24.5 (for Arrianos, anabasis 1.24.5); CTh 2.1.3 (for Codex Theodosianus 2.1.3)
When referring to epigraphic corpora and papyri, abbreviations should be written in italics. Volume numbers should be given in Roman numerals; fascicules (if available and necessary) should be given in Arabic numerals after an unspaced slash "/"; the inscription number should be given in Arabic numerals, with no punctuation between vol/fasc. and inscription number, only a space. No corpus should be given in the bibliography unless it is not included in the bibliographic lists above (see above for the abbreviations to be used).
- Exp.: TAM II²/2; MAMA IV 154; P.Cair.Zen. III 59309.

Examples of References and Citations

Journal article

Corcoran, S. 2000. “A Fragment of a Tetrarchic Constitution from Crete.” ZPE 133: 251-255.
- Corcoran 2000, 253-254.
Baker, P. – Thériault, G. 2023. “Liste de contributeurs à des célébrations villageoises dans les eschatiai montagneuses de Xanthos à la basse époque hellénistique.” Chiron 53: 169-236.
- Baker – Thériault 2023, 172-174.
Nigdelis, P. – Anagnostoudis, P. 2017. “New Honorific Inscriptions from Amphipolis.” GRBS 57/2: 295-324.
- Nigdelis – Anagnostoudis 2017, 320.

Chapter or article in an edited book/symposium proceedings

Hanel, N. 2007. “Military Camps, Canabae, and Vici. the Archaeological Evidence.” In: P. Erdkamp (ed.), A Companion to the Roman Army, 395-416.
- Hanel 2007, 400-401.
Kileci, Ş. – Tüner-Önen, N. 2024. “Restoration Works in Kibyra during the Claudian Period: New Inscriptions, tà sebastà érga of the Lycian Governor Quintus Veranius and New Inscriptions Concerning His Family.” In: F. Onur – C. Schuler (edd.), New Research on Greek Epigraphy in Lycia. Proceedings of the Symposium at Antalya, Turkey, 28-30 March 2022, 123-141.
- Kileci – Tüner-Önen 2024, 136-139.
Milner, N. P. 2007. “A Hellenistic Treaty from Boubon.” In: C. Schuler (ed.), Griechische Epigraphik in Lykien: Eine Zwischenbilanz. Akten des int. Kolloquiums München, 24.-26. Februar 2005. DAAW 354/ETAM 25, 157-164.
- Milner 2007, 160.

Book with One Author

Şahin, S. 2014. Stadiasmus Patarensis. Itinera Romana Provinciae Lyciae. Lykia Eyaleti Roma Yolları.
- Şahin 2014, 127.

Book with Two or More Authors

Abbott, F. F. – Johnson, A. C. 1926. Municipal Administration in the Roman Empire.
- Abbott – Johnson 1926, 52.
Kienast, D. – Eck, W. – Heil, M. 2017. Römische Kaisertabelle. Grundzüge einer römischen Kaiserchronologie. 6th ed.
- Kienast et al. 2017, 82.

Book in a series

Blömer, M., – Facella, M. 2022. Dülük Baba Tepesi II. Inscriptions and Sculptures from the Sanctuary of Jupiter Dolichenus. AMS 101/Dolichener und Kommagenische Forschungen XII.
- Blömer – Facella 2022, 56.

Book in more than one edition

Habicht, C. 1970. Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte. 2nd ed.
- Habicht 1970, 27.

Facsimile book (the original publication date should be taken as the basis, but facsimile information should be given as follows)

Ramsay, W. M. 1890. The Historical Geography of Asia Minor. London: John Murray (used reprint: Cambridge University Press 2010).
- Ramsay 1890, 55.

Book in more than one volume (citing the work as a whole)

Hellenkemper, H. – Hild, F. 2004. Lykien und Pamphylien. TIB 8, 3 Vols.
- Hellenkemper – Hild 2004, 2:155.

Book in more than one volume (citing a particular volume)

Bonnard, A. 1959. La Civilisation grecque. Vol. 2, D’Antigone à Socrate.
- Bonnard 1959, 267.

Book review

Sitz, A. 2019. Review: K. Bolle, C. Machado – C. Witschel (edd.), The Epigraphic Cultures of Late Antiquity (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2017), JRS 109: 425-427.
- Sitz 2019, 426.

Encyclopaedia entry

Ruge, W. 1932. “Takina.” In: RE IV/A,2: 2056-2057.
- Ruge 1932.

These and dissertation

Avcu, F. 2020. Eskiçağ’da Yerleşim Statüleri ve Teritoryumları: Stadiasmus Patarensis ve Lykia Örneği. Ph.D. diss., Akdeniz University.
- Avcu 2020, 50-56.
Tüzün, B. 2021. Phrygia’nın Latince ve Latince-Yunanca Çift Dilli Yazıt Kataloğu. Master’s thesis, Akdeniz University.
- Tüzün 2021, 130-141.

Postal Address:

Research Centre for Mediterranean Languages and Cultures
GEPHYRA Editorial Office
Akdeniz University, Faculty of Letters
Dept. of Ancient Languages and Cultures
Campus 07058 ANTALYA - TÜRKİYE

E-mail: gephyra.adkam@gmail.com

Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Gephyra is an Open Access journal and offers its content directly to open access. The journal aims to contribute to the support and development of science with the Open Access policy. All stakeholders of the journal (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, reviewers and editors) are expected to be aware of the journal's "Open Access and Copyright Policy". After being published online, the journal is also published in print by Phoibos Verlag. Gephyra does not charge any fees for article submission, evaluation, publication or other editorial activities. The journal also does not accept sponsorship and advertising offers.

The publication processes applied in Gephyra journal constitute the basis for the impartial and reputable development and distribution of knowledge, scientific research and approaches. Each process applied in this direction directly reflects on the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions supporting the authors. Peer-reviewed publications are works that embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important that all stakeholders comply with the standards for ethical principles. Within the scope of Gephyra's journal publication ethics, all stakeholders are expected to carry the following ethical responsibilities. The editors of Gephyra Journal have prepared the ethical principles based on the "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published as open access by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

A. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Author(s) submitting manuscripts for publication in the journal Gephyra are expected to comply with the following ethical responsibilities as well as the "Author Guidelines" of the journal:

The work submitted by the author(s) is expected to be original. In case the author(s) benefit from or use other works, they are required to cite and/or quote fully and accurately. Each manuscript submitted to Gephyra is checked within the framework of the "Plagiarism Policy".
Persons who do not contribute scientifically and intellectually to the content of the work should not be indicated as authors.
All manuscripts submitted for publication must disclose any conflicts of interest and relationships, if any.
The author(s) may be asked for raw data on their manuscripts within the framework of the evaluation processes, in such a case, the author(s) should be ready to present the expected data and information to the editorial and scientific boards.
The author(s) should undertake that they have the rights to use the data in the manuscript, the necessary permissions related to the research/analyses, or have a document showing that the consent of the experimental subjects has been obtained.
In the event that the author(s) becomes aware of an inaccuracy or error in the published, early view or under review manuscript, the author(s) has/have the obligation to notify the journal editor or publisher and to co-operate with the editor in correcting or withdrawing the manuscript.
Authors may not submit manuscripts, which they have submitted to Gephyra, to another journal, nor may they submit manuscripts, which are in the submission process in another journal, to Gephyra. Each application can be started after the completion of the previous application. Manuscripts published in another journal cannot be submitted to Gephyra Journal.
It cannot be proposed to change the author responsibilities (such as adding an author, changing the author order, removing an author) of a submission, whose evaluation process has started.
Authors should observe the copyrights of items such as tables, images, maps, etc. that they use in their manuscripts and do not belong to them, and should correctly show the necessary attribution or permission.

B. Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

1. General duties and responsibilities

Editors are responsible for all kinds of articles published in Gephyra. In the context of this responsibility, the editors have the following roles and obligations:

To endeavour to meet the information needs of readers and authors within the framework of the methods and requirements of the fields addressed by the journal
To ensure the scientific development of the journal by following current developments within the framework of established principles in the field
To carry out processes to continuously improve the quality of the papers published in the journal and to provide them with the necessary support
To support the freedom of scientific thought in manuscripts and to ensure that reasons that may be personal or contrary to scientific methodology do not affect the publication of manuscripts
Not compromising on intellectual property rights and ethical principles while managing all processes
To take the necessary responsibility by showing openness and transparency when situations requiring correction and explanation occur.

2. Relations with journal users

in the process of publishing the articles, editors should make decisions by taking into account the expectations of the readers, researchers and practitioners that the journal addresses.
They should take care that the published works contribute to these expectations and scientific development and have original qualities.
Editors are obliged to provide explanatory and informative responses by taking into account the feedback about the journal or published articles.

3. Relations with authors

While evaluating the manuscripts to be published, the editors should decide according to the aims and objectives of the journal by taking into account the scientific quality, methodological approach, original value, current validity, and clarity of the manuscript.
Submissions should be taken into the preliminary evaluation process, unless they have significant problems, provided that they are in accordance with the aim and scope of the journal.
Editors should consider the recommendations of the reviewers, who give a favourable decision, unless the submission has a significant ethical or scientific problem.
Editors should prevent any irregularities that may occur within the framework of the process and rules within the scope of the journal's "Peer Review Policy".
They should provide explanatory and informative feedback for any technical or scientific problems that authors may experience.

4. Relations with reviewers

Reviewers should be selected from among experts in the field of the work.
All information and instructions necessary to evaluate the application should be provided to the reviewers.
Editors should ensure objective peer review by paying attention to possible conflicts of interest between authors and reviewers.
Identity and information pertaining to reviewers and author(s) should be kept confidential from one another.
Reviewers should be encouraged to provide scientific and objective evaluations.
Discourteous, non-scientific, inadequate or cursory evaluations should be prevented.
Necessary steps should be taken to ensure that the reviewer pool consists of a wide range of competent scholars.

5. Relations with the advisory board

Editors should supervise that all members of the editorial board, from submission to publication, proceed in accordance with the journal's publication policies and guidelines. Editors should inform the members about the publication policies and any updates. Editors should also:

Ensure that the members of the advisory board evaluate the submissions objectively and fairly.
Ensure that the members to be included in the advisory board are able to contribute and have appropriate qualifications.
Send submissions to the advisory board members for evaluation according to their field of expertise.

6. Relations with the journal owner and publisher

The relationship between the editors and the journal owner and publisher proceeds within the framework of editorial independence. Except for legal or technical issues that directly concern the journal owner and publisher, all decisions of the editors are independent from the publisher and journal owner, and the journal owner and publisher do not interfere with these decisions.

7. Editorial and blind review processes

Editors are obliged to implement the "Peer Review Policy" within the framework of journal policies. In this context, they ensure that each submission is evaluated in a fair and impartial manner in a timely manner.

8. Quality assurance

The editors ensure that each paper to be published in the journal is published in accordance with the journal policies and international criteria.

9. Protection of personal data

Editors are obliged to ensure the protection of personal data regarding the subjects or images included in the evaluated applications. Unless the explicit consent of the individuals used in the studies is documented, they will not accept the study. In addition, it is the responsibility of the editors to protect the personal data of authors, reviewers and readers.

10. Ethics committee, human and animal rights

Editors are responsible for ensuring the protection of human and animal rights included in the evaluated submissions. They are responsible for rejecting the submission in the absence of ethics committee approval for the subjects used in the work and permissions for experimental research.

11. Materials used in the work

In the case of the first publication of artefacts recovered during excavations or field surveys or preserved in museums, editors should obtain information about the authors' permission to work on the artefact(s) and whether there is any violation of rights and provide positive or negative notification to the authors accordingly.

12. Precautions against possible abuse and misconduct

Editors are obliged to take precautions against possible misconduct and abuse of office. It is among the responsibilities of the editor to conduct a rigorous and objective investigation in identifying and evaluating complaints about this situation, as well as sharing the findings on the subject.

13. Ensuring the integrity of academic publications

Editors should ensure that errors, inconsistencies or misleading judgements in manuscripts are corrected promptly.

14. Protection of intellectual property rights

Editors are responsible for protecting the intellectual property rights of all published papers and defending the rights of the journal and the author(s) in case of possible violations. In addition, editors are obliged to take the necessary measures to ensure that the contents of all published papers do not violate the intellectual property rights of other publications.

15. Constructivism and openness to discussion

Editors

Should take into account the persuasive criticisms of the papers published in the journal and show a constructive attitude towards these criticisms.
Should give the right of reply to the author(s) of the criticised works.
Should not ignore or exclude works producing negative results.

16. Complaints

Editors are obliged to carefully examine complaints from authors, reviewers or readers and to respond in an enlightening and explanatory manner.

17. Political and commercial considerations

The journal owner, publisher or any other political or commercial motives do not influence the independent judgement of the editors.

18. Conflicts of interest

The editors guarantee the independent and impartial completion of the publication process, taking into account conflicts of interest between the author(s), reviewers and other editors.

C. Authorship of Editors

As epigraphy is a highly specialised and relatively small field, there may be circumstances in which members of the editorial board of Gephyra submit manuscripts to the journal. Such submissions are neither encouraged nor prohibited in principle. In the event of such a submission, all ethical safeguards and the provisions set out below must be fully respected.

Editorial recusal and independent handling: An editor submitting a manuscript to the journal must be entirely excluded from the editorial handling of that submission. The editor-author shall have no role whatsoever in the selection of reviewers, the peer-review process, editorial correspondence, evaluation, or the final publication decision.
Assignment to another editor: The submitted manuscript must be assigned to another editor, who shall oversee the entire review and decision-making process independently and in accordance with the journal’s standard editorial procedures.
Peer review and ethical standards: Manuscripts authored or co-authored by editors are subject to the same double-blind peer-review process and ethical standards as all other submissions. No preferential treatment is permitted at any stage of the evaluation.
Conflict of interest management: The journal shall ensure that any potential conflicts of interest arising from editor authorship are properly managed, in line with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. Transparency and impartiality must be maintained throughout the review process.
Restriction on consecutive authorship: An editor of the journal may not appear as an author or co-author in two consecutive issues. Accordingly, a manuscript authored or co-authored by an editor—having successfully passed the double-blind peer-review process and been deemed suitable for publication in accordance with ethical guidelines—may only be published if the editor was not an author in the immediately preceding issue of the journal.
Limitation on the total number of editor-authored articles per issue: In any single issue of the journal, the total number of articles in which any member of the editorial board appears as an author or co-author shall not exceed two. This limitation applies regardless of authorship position and is intended to safeguard editorial independence and to prevent any perception of editorial bias.
Restriction on multiple authorships by the same editor within the same issue: Within a single issue of the journal, an individual editor may not appear as an author or co-author in more than one contribution.

D. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

It is very important for the reviewers to make all evaluations within the framework of the "Peer Review Policy" in terms of objective and independent evaluation of publication quality. The evaluation process of Gephyra is carried out with the principle of double-blind reviewing. Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two reviewers. The journal management provides the communication between the reviewers and the authors, and the evaluations and comments of the reviewers are communicated to the authors through the journal management system. In this context, reviewers evaluating applications for Gephyra are expected to comply with the following ethical responsibilities:

They should only accept submissions related to their field of expertise for evaluation.
They should maintain the principle of impartiality and confidentiality while evaluating.
If they think that they are faced with a conflict of interest during the evaluation process, they should refuse to review the submission and inform the journal editor.
Due to the principle of confidentiality, they cannot use the applications they have reviewed in any way and must destroy them after the evaluation process. They can only use the final versions of the applications they have reviewed only after publication.
They should make the evaluation objectively only in relation to the content of the paper. They should not allow nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political thoughts and commercial concerns to influence the evaluation.
They should make the evaluation in a constructive and courteous manner. They should not make derogatory personal comments containing hostility, slander and insult, in such cases, the editors may cancel the peer-review process.
They should carry out the submission they accept for evaluation in a timely manner and with the above ethical responsibilities.

E. Ethical Responsibilities of the Publisher

Gephyra Journal Editors, Advisory and Editorial Boards act with the awareness of the following ethical responsibilities:

Editors are responsible for all processes of the submissions submitted to Gephyra. In this context, editors are the decision-makers, regardless of economic or political gains.
Publisher is committed to independent editorial judgement.
Publisher protects the ownership and copyright of each paper published in Gephyra and undertakes the obligation to keep a record of each published copy.
Publisher has the responsibility to take measures against all kinds of scientific misconduct, fraud and plagiarism related to editors.

F. Corrections, Retractions, and Withdrawals

Corrections (Errata): If minor errors are identified in a published article that do not affect the overall results, interpretations, or conclusions, the editorial team maypublish a correction notice. The notice will be linked to the original article and will remain permanently accessible.
Retractions: If serious issues are discovered after publication—such as plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, unethical research practices, or major errors that invalidate the findings—the editors, in consultation with the publisher, reserve the right to retract the article. A retraction notice will clearly state the reasons for the retraction and will remain permanently accessible in place of the original article.
Withdrawals: In rare cases, an article that has been accepted but not yet formally published may be withdrawn at the request of the authors or by the editors. A withdrawal notice will be issued explaining the reason for removal.
Responsibilities: Authors are obliged to promptly notify the editors if they discover significant errors in their work. The editors and the publisher bear the responsibility to take appropriate corrective actions to ensure transparency, fairness, and the reliability of the academic record.

G. Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Gephyra adopts the following policy on the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in line with the general principles and best-practice guidelines established by Elsevier. The purpose of this policy is to ensure transparency, accountability, and the integrity of the scholarly record throughout the submission, peer-review, and editorial decision-making processes.

1. Purpose and Scope

This policy defines Gephyra’s expectations for the responsible use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the preparation, review, and editorial evaluation of manuscripts submitted to the journal.

2. Definitions

Generative AI / AI-Assisted Technologies: Software tools capable of generating or modifying content (such as text, figures, or data), including large language models and similar systems.
AI Tools: Any system used to assist in drafting, revising, summarising, or enhancing material that contributes to a manuscript.

3. Policy for Authors

Authors may use generative AI tools for limited and specific purposes, such as improving language, grammar, or readability. However, the following principles must be strictly observed:

Human Oversight and Responsibility: Generative AI tools must not replace human scholarly expertise, interpretation, or critical judgement. Authors remain fully responsible and accountable for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the entire content of their work.
Disclosure of AI Use: Any use of generative AI tools must be transparently disclosed in the manuscript. The disclosure should specify the tool used, the purpose of its use, and the extent of human oversight.
Authorship: Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors, as authorship implies responsibility and accountability that can only be assumed by human researchers.
Accuracy and Verification: Authors must carefully review and verify all AI-generated outputs to ensure they do not contain factual errors, fabricated data, or incorrect or incomplete references.
Original Scholarly Contribution: The final manuscript must reflect the authors’ own original analysis, interpretation, and conclusions. AI tools must not be used to generate core scientific or scholarly content.
Data Protection and Confidentiality: Authors are responsible for ensuring that the use of AI tools does not compromise confidentiality, data protection, or intellectual property rights.
Images and Figures: The use of generative AI tools to create or manipulate images, figures, or graphical material is not permitted, unless such use is an explicit and documented part of the research methodology and is clearly described in the manuscript.

4. Policy for Reviewers

Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not upload any part of a manuscript, review report, or related materials into generative AI tools.
Use of AI in Peer Review: Reviewers must not use generative AI tools to assist in the scientific or scholarly evaluation of a manuscript.
Reviewer Accountability: Reviewers remain fully responsible for the content, accuracy, and fairness of their evaluations.

5. Policy for Editors

Confidentiality: Editors must treat all submitted manuscripts and editorial communications as strictly confidential and must not upload them into generative AI tools.
Editorial Judgement: Generative AI tools must not be used to support or replace editorial decision-making. Editorial decisions must rely solely on human scholarly judgement.
Editorial Responsibility: Editors remain fully accountable for all editorial decisions and communications.

6. Compliance and Enforcement

Failure to comply with this policy may result in editorial actions in accordance with the journal’s ethical principles, including rejection, correction, retraction, or other appropriate measures.

7. AI Use within the Editorial Workflow

Gephyra may employ internally managed and licence-protected AI-assisted tools for technical editorial checks (such as plagiarism screening or completeness checks), provided these tools are used under strict human oversight and in compliance with data protection and ethical standards.

If You Encounter an Unethical Situation

If you encounter a violation of the above-mentioned ethical responsibilities, unethical behaviour or content in Gephyra, please report it via e-mail to gephyra.adkam@gmail.com.

Price Policy

Article submission/process management is free of charge.

Indexes

Citation Indexes

	WorldCat
	SOBIAD
	ResearchBib
	MIAR
	Eurasian Scientific Journal Index
	Scopus
	Zeitschriftendatenbank (ZDB)
	Google Scholar
	Index Copernicus
	Rootindexing
	ASOS Index
	İSAM
	EZB Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek
	COSMOS IF
	Journal Factor
	DOAJ