In his publication of the Demanhur Hoard, Newell assigns three tetradrachms to Sardes: coins with bucranium, Mithras head-trisceles, and monogram.3 His tickets consistently carry the same mint attributions for staters, tetradrachms and drachms of our Series VIII-XXIII. The gold staters of the first six series in the present catalogue were not labelled by Newell but he had placed them in proximity to the Sardes material in his trays and it is evident that he sensed a relationship. Since the six issues are intimately die-linked, they are obviously the output of a single mint. That they are to be associated with the tetradrachms of Demanhur is indicated by one common symbol, the bucranium, and by the close stylistic affinity of some stater and drachm dies with those of the Mithras head emission. Subsequent issues with their extensive die-linkage, combined with the repetition of monograms and symbols, are unquestionably a unified sequence.
Newell, again in Demanhur, 4 gives three reasons for his attribution of the tetradrachms to Sardes: the style which points to a mint north and west of the Taurus, the adjustment of dies which characterizes Persian but not Macedonian coinage and hence indicates an eastern mint, and the strong probability that the Persian capital with its active royal mint would have continued to function under Alexander.
Of the three arguments, the last seems the most cogent. The stylistic criterion merely places the coinage in Asia Minor but not necessarily at Sardes and the alignment of dies is no more pronounced in the case of Sardes than in that of other Asia Minor mints. Like the early tetradrachms, the gold and the small silver coins are predominantly adjusted in the 12 o'clock position5 but there are a fair number of exceptions. The present catalogue records 44 examples of a 6 o'clock relationship, and 40 in which the alignment is at 3 or 9 o'clock. In a few instances divergent relationships appear with coins from the same pair of dies.6
Newell's belief that Sardes would have continued to operate under Alexander is surely valid. It was there that darics and sigloi were produced during the period of Persian control and when the city surrendered peacefully in 334 B.C., Alexander came
into possession not only of a minting establishment with ample facilities and skilled workmen but also, one assumes, of a goodly supply of Persian bullion. When the time came, a few years later, to add Asia Minor mints to those further south and east which were already striking royal money, it would be surprising indeed if Sardes were not among them.
Of the seven mints responsible for the production of most of the drachm coinage of the empire, the sequences of Miletus, Lampsacus and Magnesia can be identified with certainty or a high degree of probability. The attribution of other discrete series to Abydus, Colophon and Teos is supported by various considerations of style, mint organization and transferred dies, linking them with the output of Lampsacus and Magnesia One major sequence remains and it is this which is here assigned to Sardes.
Demanhur 1748–50 nos. 38, 46 and 53 in the catalogue that follows.
Minor deviation in the direction of 11 or 1 o'clock has been disregarded. As W. P. Wallace points out (The Euboian League and Its Coinage [New York City, 1956], pp. 89–90) when an obverse head is involved, one does not know what the fixed point may have been: center of the neck, nape or throat.
As for example nos. 3b and 33.
Series I. Control: RAM'S HEAD
Rev. to l., ram's head
1. Rev. below wing l., ram's head. *L. Naville Coll.; London; ANS (SNGBrry 164), 8.55↑
Series II. Control: STAG'S HEAD
Rev. to l., stag's head
3. Obv. of 1.
4. Obv. of 2. Rev. of 3b. *ANS, 8.48↑
Series III. Control: SERPENT
Rev. to l., serpent
6. Obv. of 5. *ANS, 8.54↑
a. Rev. of 6. *Copenhagen (SNG 649), 8.57↑
b. Commerce (No. Greece '66), 8.57
8. *Ives Coll.; London; Florence; Coin Galleries May 24, 1972, 2, 8.63
9a. Rev. of 8. ANS. 8.50↓; Hermitage (Anadol), 8.46↓; Commerce (No. Greece '66), 8.57; Sotheby June 2, 1924, 287
10. *Stack's ANA Conv. Aug. 10, 1971, 1486, 8.59; Stack's Oct. 1960, 85
11. a. Rev. of 10. ANS cast (Topolovo)
b. *Commerce (No. Greece '66), 8.57
c. Burgas (Jasna Poljana)
12. a. Rev. of 11c. The Hague; ANS (SNGBerry 166), 8.60↑; Commerce 1922
b. *Paris; Burgas (Jasna Poljana)
13. Rev. of 12b. *London
14. *Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
15. *Berlin, 8.62↓
Series IV. Control: GRIFFIN'S HEAD
Rev. to l., griffin's head
16. Obv. of 7. *ANS, 8.55↑; Commerce 1937, 8.57
17. *Hermitage (= Schlessinger Feb. 4, 1935, 656), 8.63↑
18. Obv. of 14.a. Rev. of 16. Brussels (de Hirsch 1050), 8.56↑
b. *ANS, 8.56↑
19. Obv. of 15.a. Copenhagen cast (Young Coll.)
21. a. Rev. of 18b. Commerce (Paeonia), 8.58↑
b. Rev. of 19b. *Saroglos Coll.
22. *Naville 6, Jan. 28, 1924, 708 (= Sotheby May 4, 1908, 304), 8.56; Hermitage, 8.55↑; Lanz Dec. 8, 1972, 72, 8.57
Rev. as above
23. *Glendining Feb. 12, 1958, 1343 (= Naville 17, Oct. 3, 1934, 371 = Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 875 = Egger Nov. 28, 1904, 588), 4.29; London; Münz. u Med. FPL 200, May 1960, 4, 4.13
Rev. as above
24. *Paris, 2.16↑; Glasgow (Hunt. 1, p. 299, 36), 2.14
Rev. as above
25. *Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.37↑; Saroglos Coll.
Series V. Control: TRIPOD
Rev. to l., tripod
26. Obv. of 14. *ANS, 8.55↑
27. Obv. of 20.a. Rev. of 26. *ANS, 8.57↓
b. Coin Galleries FPL 6, 1962, F5
29. Obv. of 9. Rev. of 27b. *ANS, 8.49↑
30. Obv. of 15. *Copenhagen (SNG 645), 8.62↑; Commerce (Paeonia), 8.55
Rev. as above
31. Obv. of 24. *Münz. u. Med. Dec. 2, 1975, 73 (= Münz. u.Med. FPL 247, Sept. 1964, 11 = Asia Minor '64), 2.14; Glendining Oct. 4, 1957, 53, 2.14
32. Rev. of 31. *Paris, 2.16↑
Series VI. Control: BUCRANIUM
Rev. to l., bucranium
34. Obv. of 13. *London; L. Naville Coll.; Commerce 1929, 8.52↓
35. Obv. of 12.a. Rev. of 34. Burgas (Jasna Poljana)
b. *Saroglos Coll.; Commerce (No. Greece '66), 8.54
36. Rev. of 35b. *ANS, 8.57↑
37. a. *Hermitage, 8.56↑; Grabow July 9, 1930, 286, 8.57; Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
b. Bourgey June 17, 1974, 6, 8.60
Rev. as above
38. *ANS (Demanhur; Reattrib., pl. 17, 1), 17.20↑
Rev. as above
39. *ANS (Armenak), 4.11↑; Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.32↑
Series VII. Control: CANTHARUS
Rev. to l., cantharus
40. *Egger May 2, 1912, 744
41. *ANS (SNGBerry 257), 4.27↑
42. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.24↑; London
b. ANS, 3.98↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
43. *ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑; Hermitage
Series VIII. Control: MITHRAS HEAD
Rev. to l., Mithras head
44. *ANS, 8.59↓
Rev. to l., Mithreas head; below throne, trisceles
46. *ANS (Demanhur; Sotheby Apr. 30, 1958, 55), 17.23↑; London, 17.14↑
Rev. to l., Mithras head
47. Obv. of 43. *ANS, 4.00↑
Rev. below club, trisceles
50. *ANS, 5.42 ←
Series I-VI form a compact group of issues, linked by a complicated pattern of transferred dies. Output is almost exclusively gold staters, supplemented by some fractional gold, as well as a few tetradrachms and drachms. It is the staters that provide the basic evidence for the sequence or contemporaneity of issues, which may be outlined as follow:8
|Ram's head||Stag's head||Serpent||Griffin's head||Tripod||Bucranium|
|14. ——||—— 18. ——||——26.|
|15. ——||——19. ——||——30. ——||——33.|
Clearly some at least of the symbols must have been employed concurrently. The striking with ram's head has been placed first since one of its reverse dies has the symbol below Nike's wing; thereafter the symbol is centered in the left field. Two obverse dies link Series I and II; there is one link between Series II and III. Thus far there seems to be an orderly progression of emissions with output on a modest scale.
From that point on, the picture changes. The serpent issue uses ten obverse dies, of which one is a carry-over. Six of the remaining nine are shared with other issues. Of the nine obverse dies of the griffin's head striking, three for staters and one for quarters are shared; all seven dies employed with tripod reverses are used for other issues with the exception of one quarter-stater obverse; the bucranium issue shows a transfer of three of its five obverses. Noteworthy is the linkage of serpent, griffin's head, tripod and bucranium (nos. 15, 19, 30, 33). If we had, however, a full record of the original coinage, this might not be an isolated example of multiple transfer.
In all probability, the issues with griffin's head, tripod and bucranium�and possibly with serpent as well� were in simultaneous production, obverse dies being shifted at random among the various anvils. If this is true, it indicates a brief period of concentrated coinage. How brief is a difficult question. Only eighteen obverse dies for staters plus three for fractional gold are catalogued. It is unlikely that minting extended over more than three years; the time span may have been even shorter.
In view of the foregoing, it is obvious that the sequence of issues as outlined in the catalogue is to some extent arbitrary. Ram's head, stag's head and serpent are surely the earliest strikings, with some degree of concurrent production a possibility. At the other end, the bucranium issue in its introduction of the tetradrachm denomination and in the style of its one drachm obverse seems to foreshadow the cantharus and Mithras head emissions. There is no evidence for the relative position of the griffin's head and tripod issues; they may have appeared in reverse order or simultaneously.
At least two hands are apparent in the obverse dies. Style 1, characterized for the most part by corkscrew locks of hair and by an upswept helmet-crestt terminal (), is dominant in the early stage of the coinage and recurs sporadically thereafer.9 With Style 2 the hair is generally loose and the triple strands of the crest fold in toward Athena's neck ()10. Dies such as 12, 13 and 22 may be variants of Style 2 or the work of still a third engraver.
One anomaly among the early stater dies is found in the Mithras head issue. No. 45 is in the standard Sardian tradition; no. 44 is not only alien in style but strikingly similar to some dies at Miletus. Compaer, for example, Plate 2, 44 and Plate 21, 8. Either this is an instance of truly expert imitation or, as seems more likely, the Milesian die-cutter was trained at Sardes and then went south to work for the Carian mint.
A single pair of drachm dies is known for the griffin's head issue and another singleton for the bucranium. After that, drachms are produced regularly and provide the link (nos. 43 and 47) between the cantharus and Mithras head issue.11 The former is represented only by drachms but it may originally have had large silver and even gold. During this early period tetradrachms are exceedingly rare; one specimen of no. 38 and two of no. 46 are the extent of the present record.
The symbols for the most part are banal representations which are of no help in identifying the minting city. The one exception is the Mithras head of Series VIII, an appropriate emblem for a former Persian capital. Otherwise the controls belong to the common repertoire of symbols employed on the Alexander coinage as a whoe. In themselves they are by no means exclusively Sardian and therein lies the possibility of misattribution. A ram's head, both below the wing of Nike and in the left field, occurs at Salamis in combination with obverses of quite different style from those of Sardes.12 Another ram's head in the left field is part of the Magnesian sequece,13 its provenance attested by the tiny ram's head below the neck of Athena which marks the early output of that Ionian mint. A small stag's head below Nike's wing is found on coins of Teos, with the obverse crest terminals taking the form of a fulmen as they do on other specimens with a griffin below the wing. On these issues as on the coins with griffin, one of which was erroneously attributed to Sardes in SNGBerg (no. 167), Nike is advancing in contrast to the static pose of the early Sardian issues. The cantharus, too, is an ambivalent symbol, appearing at Tarsus as well as Amphipolis.14 Only the Mithras head is found at Sardes alone.
52. Rev. to l., rose (?) erased from die. *ANS, 8.46↑
53. *ANS (Demanhur; Reattrib., pl. 16, 12), 17.14↑
b. Rev. to l., rose; below, . London; Berry Coll., 4.16; Schlessinger Feb. 14, 1935, 715, 4.20
c. *ANS (Sinan), 4.23↑
55. Benson Coll., 4.19↑; Athens (Corinth), 4.10
56. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.19↑
57. a. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
b. Rev. of 56b. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
c. Cambridge (SNGLeake 2233), 4.05↑
d. Turin, 4.09↑
58. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.24→
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑; ANS, 4.13↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 3.78↑
d. Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.26↑
59. a. *ANO (Sinan), 4.29↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.16↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.09↑
60. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.24↑
c. ANS, 4.19↑
61. a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.13↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
62. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.08↑
63. a. ANo, 3.67↑
b. ANS, 3.99↑
65. a. *ANS (Larissa), 4.10↑; ANS, 4.10↑
b. AMS, 4.21↑
66. a. *ANS (Larissa), 4.16↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.09↑
c. ANS (Armenak), 4.16↑
d. ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑
67. a. *ANS (Larissa), 4.16↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.12↑; Hermitage
b. ANS (Armenak), 4.09↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
d. Cambridge (SNGLeake 2232), 4.10↑
68. a. *ANS, 4.21↑; Glasgow (Hunt. 1, p. 319, 212), 4.19
c. Rauch June 4, 1971, 34, 3.80
69. ANS (Sinan), 4.24↑
70. Rev. of 69. *ANS (Sinan), 4.24↑
71. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.24↑
72. *The Hague; Oxford (SNG 2830), 3.83↑
73. *ANS, 6.09↑
74. *ANS, 6.38↓
74. a. *ANS, 6.72←
With Series IX the mint begins a large-scale production of drachms and adopts a more elaborate control system. In addition to the monogram, which appears on all strikings, the reverses of the small silver have a secondary control: a rose below Zeus's stool or a club in the outer right fied.15 Obverse dies were apparently not shared between the two symbols.
While the Heracles heads of the silver and bronze of this issue are similar in style to those immediately preceding, the one stater of Series IX is peculiar in several respects. Its obverse die bears no resemblance to any other in either the Sardian sequence or elsewhere in the Alexander coinage. One is tempted to regard it with suspicion but it certainly seems to be genune,16 and the deletion of the symbol from the original die is more likely to have happened at the mint than in a forger's workshop. The position of the inscription, reading upward in circular fashion from lower left, is also unparalleled at Sardes although it does occur briefly at Miletus and a few other mins.17
Erasure of the symbol from the reverse die of this stater seems pointless. Presumably it had something to do with the basic control system, which required secondary controls only in the case of the small silver. Initial uncertainty as to exactly how the reverses were to be marked is also suggested by the variant form of the monogram on nos. 52 and 54a, the presence of a dot above the strut of the stool on 53 and 54a, and the transposition of symbol and monogram on 54a-b.
76. Obv. of 72. Rev. no monogram. *Cambridge (SNGLeake 2231), 3.98↑
77. Rev. as 76. *Commerce 1971
b. Rev. obscure. ANS, 3.67↑
79. a. *ANS, 4.21↑; Oxford (SNG 2826), 4.17↑
b. Rev. no monogram. ANS, 4.28↑
80. Obv. of 68.a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.19↑; Yale (Bab)
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.08↑
Rev. below, rose
82. Rev. as 81. *Berlin, 4.12
b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
c. ANS (Asia Minor '64), 4.28↑
d. Egger May 2, 1912, 742, 4.20
84. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.17↑
c. Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.31↑
85. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 3.98↑
86. ANS, 3.80↑
87. ANS (Larissa), 4.19↑
88. *ANS (Sinan), 4.20↑
89a. ANS (Armenak), 4.23↑
b. Berry Coll., 4.24
90a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
d. Commerce 1925 (Sinan), 4.25
91a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
92. *ANS (Larissa), 4.20↑
93. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
94. ANS (SNGBerry 258), 4.25↑; Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.30↑
Rev. below, rose
95. *Stockholm, 1.88↑
96. a. Rev. to 1. below wing, Mithras head; no monogram. *London.
b. *Saroglos Coll.
97. Rev. of 96b. *Berlin, 8.62↑; Hess Dec. 14, 1931, 280, 8.51
Rev. to l., Mithras head
98. *Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.30↑
100. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
101. *ANS (Sinan), 4.35↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
104. *ANS (Sinan), 4.15↑
105. Obv. of 104.a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
106. Petsalis Coll.
108. Rev. of 107. ANS, 4.15↑
109. Rev. of 107. *ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
110. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.18↑; Commerce (Asia Minor '61), 4.24↑
b. U.S. Mint
111. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
b. ANS, 4.13↑
112. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
113. a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.24↑
b. ANS, 4.24↑; ANS, 4.21
114. a. Rev. below, . ANS (Larissa), 4.27↑
b. Rev. as 114a. London
115. Rev. as 114a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
116. a. Rev. as 114a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.16↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
117. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
b. ANS (SNGBery 259), 4.29↑
118. a. * ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
119. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.23↑
120. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
If there was some evidence of confusion in minting procedure during Series IX, it is even more apparent in the earlier stages of Series X. Assuming that the sequence presented in the catalogue is basically correct, the mint begins by following the pattern of the preceding issue: monogram in the left field with a rose below the stool or a club in the right field. Very soon, however, the monogram is erased from both rose and club dies. The rose is now the sole control on 23 subsequent reverses and the club stands alone on two. When the monogram reappears on the coinage, it is placed below the stool and at least one reverse carries no secondary control (no. 78a) while others have the club in the right field (80a-b) This is the last use of the club as a control on the Sardes coinage; the rose recurs in later issues but it is no longer a dominant symbol.
Meanwhile a third symbol, the Mithras head, is introduced: at first alone on both gold and small silver and then in combination with the monogram. 18 Only seven reverse dies are recorded for drachms before this secondary control, like the club, disappears from the coinage. For the remainder of Series X, a bee or a torch is employed for control purposes.
Two obverse dies of Series IX continue to be used in Series X (72 and 76; 68 and 80). Another obverse (104–5) is shared within Series X by two controls, presumably transferred from Mithras head to bee when the former symbol was abandoned.
On the gold of Series VIII, the Mithras head, like earlier symbols, is centered in the left field; in Series X it appears first below Nike's wing (96a) and then is moved to center left to make way for the monogram below the wing (96b). It would seem that the Mithras head was added to the controls of Series X at the time when the mint had temporarily abandoned the monogram and was using a symbol alone. Shortly thereafter, the monogram was reinstated but shifted to the area below the stool for both club and Mithras head drachms, as well as later strikings with bee or torch symbol.
In general the earlier obverses of Series X are stylistically similar to those of Series IX; later stages of emission, marked by bee and torch, produce heads of grosser, less pleasing appearance. On the reverses the figure of Zeus is frequently rendered in an awkward pose with legs far apart, while a few dies show him with crossed legs.19 Occasionally a true throne with back replaces the customary stool.
121. *ANS, 8.52↑; Kelly June 1, 1953, 958
123. ANS (Cavalla), 4.08↑
124. Yale (Bab)
125. *Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.30↑
127. Rev. as 126. ANS (Armenak), 4.14↑
128. Rev. as 126. *Petsalis Coll.; Oxford (SNG 2829), 4.17↑
129. Rev. as 126. *Mass. Hist. Soc.
130. *ANS (Sinan), 4.32↑
b. Rev. as 131a. Hermitage
132. a. Rev. to l., in exergue, rose. *Vienna, 4.02
b. Rev. monogram may be recut. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.13↑; ANS, 3.97↑
c. ANS, 4.18↑; Berry Coll., 4.16; Berlin
133. a. Rev. of 132c. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
c. Vinchon Apr. 6, 1959, 30, 4.10
This peculiar rendering of a spread-lap Zeus is found on coins of Lampsacus and Abydus but not elsewhere among the Asia Minor mints.
134. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
135. *ANS (Sinan), 4.18↓
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.15↑
Rev. . *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑; Athens
138. *ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
139. *ANS (SNGBerry 260), 4.25↑
140. Athens (Corinth), 4.24
142. *ANS (Sinan), 4.22↓
143. a. Rev. of 142. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↓
b. Oxford (SNG 2827), 4.12↑
144. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.04↑
b. ANS, 4.07↑
145. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. ANS, 4.28↑
c. Auctiones A.G. Sept. 30, 1976, 109, 4.29
With Series XI the control monogram returns to the left field. Secondary controls of rose, bee and torch carry over from the preceding issue, and these are now often placed directly below the monogram. The recutting on the reverse of no. 122 more likely indicates initial uncertainty as to what the basic annual control would be rather than the reuse of an old die.20
There is no transfer of dies from Series X but the stylistic characteristics of its bee and torch dies are repeated on the obverses and reverses of Series XI.
146. Obv. of 121a. Rev. AΛEΞANΔPOY. *ANS (= Glendining May 27, 1936, 49), 8.53↑
b. Cambridge (SNGLeake 2253), 8.56↑
147. Rev. of 146c. *Paris
148. *Commerce (Paeonia), 8.56↑
149. Obv. of 131a. *London
b. Commerce (Asia Minor '61)
150. Obv. of 145. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; below, monogram. *ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
151. Rev. cut over (?); below, torch. *Vienna
152. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY. London
c. Rev. as 152b. Paris
153. a. Rev. of 152c. ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
154. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.30↑
b. ANS, 4.25↑
155. Stockholm, 4.12↑
156. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.32↑
b. ANS, 4.27↑
157. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; below, monogram. *ANS, 4.29↑
158. a. Rev. as 157 but monogram blundered. ANS, 4.22↑
b. Rev. as 157. *London
159. a. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. ANS (Armenak), 4.15↑
160. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; below, monogram. *ANS (Armenak), 4.17↑
161. Rev. of 160. ANS (Armenak), 4.18↑
162. Rev. as 160. *ANS (Larissa), 4.17↑
163. a. *ANS, 4.26↑; ANS, 4.21↑
b. Navile 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 953, 4.22
164. *ANS, 4.22↑
166. Rev. AΛEΞANΔPOY; to l., monogram and rose. *ANS, 4.03↑
167. Rev. as 166. *Berlin, 4.10↑
For the first time at Sardes, coinage is struck with the names of both Philip III and Alexander IV in roughly equal proportions. There seems to have been no attempt at segregation, either by symbol or by obverse die. Torch and rose serve as secondary controls for drachms with both inscriptions and the same obverse die is shared by Alexander and Philip reverses. Only with respect to the placement of monogram and symbol is there any evidence of differentiation: on drachms with Alexander reverses the two controls are generally combined in the left field, on Philip reverses the symbol is usually in the left field and the monogram below the stool.
One stater and two drachm dies are carried over from Series XI. In the case of no. 150, there is a distinct die break at the outer corner of the eye, which is not visible on no. 145. What is almost certainly a cutting of over on no. 151 provides further support for the sequence of issues.
170. * Agora Excavations; Istanbul, 8.53↑
171. *Munich; Kress 154, Mar. 21, 1972, 134, 8.50
172. a. *Berlin; Hermitage, 8.52↑; Commerce 1923, 8.48
b. ANS, 8.53↑
c. Obv. die recut. *London; Santamaria Oct. 12, 1949, 29, 8.58
173. Rev. to l., ; r., acrostolion. *London; Gotha
174. *Godefroid Coll. 1934
175. *Berry Coll., 4.15
176. *ANS (Armenak), 4.25↑
177. ANS, 4.13↑
178. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., monogram; below, bee. *The Hague
179. a. Rev. of 178. ANS, 4.22↑
b. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., bee; below, . *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; ANS (Cavalla), 4.10↑; ANS (Larissa), 4.19↑
180. Rev. as 179b but with . *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑; London
181. .23 Rev. to l., ; to r., torch. *ANS, 3.90↑
182. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
b. ANb (Sinan), 4.25↑
c. ANS, 4.21↑
183. a. Rev. . *Myers Dec. 5,1974, 72 (Asia Minor '61), 4.31
b. Rev. as 183a. Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor 64), 4.34↑
184. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.18↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.18↑
185. ANS, 3.69↑
186. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.34↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
c. Parris, 4.30↑
d. Schlessinger Feb. 4, 1935, 713, 4.10
187. Rev. of 186d. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
188. a. *ANS (SNGBerry 261), 4.25↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
189. Rev. symbol above monogram. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
190. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.16↑
191. Obv. of 190. *ANS, 4.22↑
192. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.27↑
c. ANS (Armenak), 4.14↑
193. Rev. of 192c. ANS, 4.22↑
194. a. Rev. of 192b. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.15↑
b. ANS, 4.08↑
c. Copenhagen (SNG 904), 3.96↑
195. Rev. symbol omitted. *ANS (Sinan), 4.17↑
196. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
d. ANS (Olympia), 4.16↑
e. ANS (Larissa), 4.21↑
197. *ANS (Armenak), 4.23↑
198. ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
199. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; ANS (Armenak), 4.19↑; London
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.14↑
200. Rev. symbol in exergue. *Cambridge (SNGLeake 2278), 4.21↑
201. a. Rev. of 200. Oxford (SNG 3197), 4.01↑
b. *ANS, 4.09↑
202. *ANS, 4.21↑
204. *Zara Coll., 4.09↑
205. *ANS, 4.25↑
207. Rev. as 206. *ANS (Armenak), 4.19↑
208. Obv. of 202. *ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑; Helbing Mar. 20, 1928, 197, 4.25
209. *ANS, 4.21↑
211. Obv. of 209.a. *ANS (Larissa), 4.15↑
b. The Hague
212. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
213. *ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑; ANS, 4.12↑
b. ANS (Armenak), 4.21↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
d. ANS (Mesopot. '20), 4.07↑
Obv. Shield with caduceus in center
Rev. BA and helmet; to l., caduceus; to r., rose
215. Rev. symbols transposed. *ANS, 3.61↑
Series XIII has the same basic control as Series IX but even a cursory glance at the plates reveals the marked stylistic difference between the two emissions. After several years of rather modest operation, production is increased: at least 36 obverse dies are used for drachms and five for staters, of which two (nos. 170–71) are very close in style to the earlier no. 146 and a third (no. 169) may be a transfer from Series XII. A surprising addition to the output of gold is the distater denomination, known for Miletus
Two new symboss are employed along with the familiar rose, bee and torch: the acrostolion for gold and the horse's leg for small silver. As in Series XII, there is a fairly even division of coinage between Philip III and Alexander IV but almost all gold carries the inscription AΛEΞANΔPOY. On the evidence of the present record, which may be misleading since it is obviously incompete, the acrostolion and rose seem to have been reserved for coins with the name of Alexander, while the horse's leg is used only with Philip reverses.
The bee is shared but, following the general pattern of Series XII, the symbol and monogram are combined in the left field for Alexander and separated for Philip. Similarly there are variations in the location and representaionn of the torch, the major symbol of the issue, which appear to be related to the inscription. Alexander's coins either have an upright torch and the monogram together in the left field or the monogram alone to left and a horizontal torch below the stool. On Philip's money the symbol and monogram are also separated but the torch is invariably upright.
Reverses of the two rulers do not share a common obverse die; when linkage occurs it involves reverses of somewhat different format but with the same name. For example, nos. 202, 208, 214, as well as 261 of Series XIV, are from a single obverse die. Although the reverse markings are diverse, all coins are inscribed ϕIΛIΠΠOY.
Eight reverses of the Philip sequence have TI in addition to as the basic control and a bronze piece (no. 217) is marked in the same fashion. Unmistakably these coins link Series XIII and XIV but whether they belong at the end of one issue or the beginning of the next is quite uncertain.
Series XIV. Control: TI
Rev. to l., TI and torch
219. a. *London
b. Rev. TI in circle. Hermitage
220. a. Rev. of 219a. *ANS, 8.56↑
b. Rev. as 219b. Berlin
b. Rev. as 219b. ANS, 8.53↑; Glasgow, 8.42
c. Rev. BA∑IΛEΩ∑ AΛEΞANΔPOY; to l., torch; to r., TI. Paris
d. Rev. as 221c. Saroglos Coll.; London
f. Rev. as 221c. *ANS (= Ratto May 16, 1935, 5), 8.56↑
Rev. to l., TI and bird
223. Rev. of 222. *Saroglos Coll.
Rev. to l., TI in circle25 and ivy leaf
224. a. *ANS, 8.53↑
b. ANS, 8.42↑
d. Rev. to l., TI in circle; to r., ivy leaf. Saroglos Coll.; Oxford (SNG 2823), 8.55↑; G. Hirsch Dec. 11, 1967, 2090, 8.47
Rev. to l., TI and bee
225. Obv. of 224a. London (Larnaca)
c. *ANS, 8.38↑
d. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY. Athens (Thoricos), 8.58
Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., TI and star
226. *ANS, 8.56↑
227. Rev. to l., TI; to r., star. *London
Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., TI and rose
228. *Commerce 1951
229. *Turin, 8.52
230. Rev. of 229. *Commerce (Paeonia), 8.55↑
Rev. to l., rose; below, TI
231. *Phillips Coll. (Abu Hommos)
Rev. to l., TI; below, ivy leaf
232. Obv. of 231a. ANS, 17.10↑
b. *Phillips Coll. (Abu Hommos)
c. Commerce 1971, 16.96
233. *ANS, 17.01↑
234. a. Rev. of 233. *ANS, 16.88↑; London
b. Oxford (Kuft; SNG 2834), 17.17↑
c. Commerce 1968
235. a. *Oxford (Kuft; SNG 2833), 17.08↑
b. Hollschek Coll., 17.01
Rev. to l., torch; below, TI
236. a. *ANS, 16.96↑
b. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 16.88↑
237. a. *ANS (Kuft), 17.19↑; Vienna
b. ANS, 17.03↑
238. a. *Berlin
b. Oxford (Kuft; SNG 2837), 17.05↑
c. Yale Univ, 17.05↑
239. a. ANS, 16.28↑
b. Oxford (Kuft,; SNG 2838), 17.07↑
c. ANS, 16.91↑
d. ANS, 16.77↑
e. Peus FPL 29, July 1972, 8
240. Rev. filleted torch. *ANS, 17.13↓
241. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY;. *London
242. Rev. as 241. *London
Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., TI
Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., TI; below, horse's leg
244. Obv. of 203. *ANS, 4.10↑
Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., TI above star
246. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
c. Rev. to l., star above TI. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., rose; below, TI
247. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; ANS, 4.20↑
248. a. ANS, 3.68↑; Copenhagen (SNG 1095), 4.15↑
b. Rev. to l., TI; below, rose. *ANS, 4.31↑
249. Rev. as 248b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
Rev. to l., TI above bird
250. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., bird; below, TI. *ANS (SNGBerry 264), 4.27↑
251. Rev. as 250. *ANS, 4.19↑
252. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.19↑; ANS, 4.02↑
253. a. Rev. as 252. Oxford (SNG 3199), 4.17↑
b. Rev. as 252. *ANS, 3.89↑
254. a. Rev. of 253b. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.17↑
b. *ANS (Armenak), 4.13↑
255. a. Rev. of 254b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
b. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY inscribed upward. *ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
256. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
257. a. Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY. Copenhagen (SNG 1098), 4.19↑
b. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.25↑
258. a. Rev. of 257b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑; ANS (Larissa), 4.17↑
c. *ANS, 4.29↑
d. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
259. a. Rev. of 258d. * Istanbul (Izmit), 4.27↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑; ANS, 4.07↑
Rev. ϕIΛIΠΠOY; to l., torch; below, TI
261. Obv. of 202. Rev. to l., TI; below, torch. *ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
262. Obv. of 213. Rev. as 261. *ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑; ANS, 3.91↑; London
263. Rev. of 262. *ANS (Larissa), 4.15↑
264. Obv. of 255
a. Rev. to l., TI above torch. *ANS (Sinan), 4.23↑
b. Rev. as 264a. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
265. Obv. of 253. Rev. of 264b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
266. Obv. of 254. Rev. as 264a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.16↑
267. Rev. as 264a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.12↑
268. Rev. as 264a. *London
269. Obv. of 210. *London
270. Obv. of 207. *ANS, 4.29↑
271. *ANS (Mosul '17), 4.07↑; The Hague
272. a. Rev. to l., TI; below, torch. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.11↑
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.16↑
273. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. ANS, 4.24↑
274. Rev. of 273b. *Schlessinger Feb. 4, 1935, 752, 4.10
275. Rev. of 273b. *Cambridge (SNGLeake 2277), 4.15↑
275. A. ANS (Cavalla), 4.16↑
276. a. ANS, 3.92↑; Superior Stamp and Coin June 17, 1974, 163
b. ANS (Armenak), 4.17↑; Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 952, 4.09
c. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑; Copenhagen (SNG 1092), 4.18↑
277. a. Rev. of 276c. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. Rev. of 276b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
Rev. to l., TI; below, bee
278. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.17↑; ANS (Cavalla), 4.19↑; Commerce (Asia Minor '61)
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
d. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
e. ANS (Sinan), 4.20↑
f. ANS, 4.02↑
g. Commerce (Sinan), 4.29
h. ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
279. a. Rev. of 278i. *ANS (Sinan), 4.32↑
b. Rev. of 278h. ANS (Armenak), 4.20↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.34↑
d. Rev. to l., TI above bee. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑; London
e. Rev. as 279d. ANS, 4.29↑
280. a. Rev. of 278f. *ANS (Sinan), 4.24↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.32↑; ANS, 4.12↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
c. Rev.: to l., TI above bee. ANS (Armenak), 4.14↑; Münz. u. Med. FPL 317, Oct. 1970, 9, 4.31; Cahn 75, May 30, 1932, 289 (= J. Schulman, June 8, 1931, 94), 4.30
d. Rev. to l., bee above TI. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
e. Rev. as 280d. ANS (SNGBerry 263), 4.22↑
281. *ANS (SNGBerry 262), 4.27↑
282. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.22↑; ANS, 4.25↑
283. a. ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
b. Rev. to l., bee above TI. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
284. a. Rev. to l., bee; below, TI. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
b. Rev. to l., bee above TI. *ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
c. Rev. as 284b. Vienna
285. a. Rev. of 284c. ANS, 4.01↑
b. Rev. of 284b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.20↑
c. Rev. as 285b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
286. a. Rev. to l., bee above TI. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.32↑
b. Rev. as 286a. ANS (Armenak), 4.24↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
287. a. Rev. to l., bee above TI. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
b. Rev. as 287a. ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑; Cahn 84, Nov. 29, 1933, 25527 (= Naville 15, July 2, 1930, 501), 4.24
c. Rev. as 287a. ANS, 4.28↑; Rome (Terme)
288. a. Rev. of 287c. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
b. Rev. of 287b. ANS, 4.09↑
c. Rev. of 287a. ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑; Auctiones AG Sept. 30, 1976, 110, 4.26
d. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
289. a. ANS, 4.21↑
b. Rev. ΦIΛIΠΠOY. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
290. a. Rev. ΦIΛIΠΠOY; to l., bee; below, TI. *ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑; Hermitage
b. Rev. as 290a. ANS (Sinan), 3.86↑
c. Rev. as 290a. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
291. Rev. as 290a. *ANS (Larissa), 4.19↑
292. a. Rev. ΦIΛIΠΠOY; to l., TI above bee. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
b. Rev. to l., bee above TI. ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑; Berry Coll.
c. Rev. as 292b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
d. Rev. as 292b. ANS, 4.01↓
e. Rev. to l., TI above bee. ANS, 3.98↑
293. a. Rev. ΦIΛIΠΠOY; to l., TI above bee. ANS (Cavalla), 4.18↑; U.S.Mint
b. Rev. to l., TI above bee. ANS, 4.30↑
c. Rev. to l., bee above TI. *ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
d. Rev. as 293c. ANS (Armenak), 4.21↑
e. Rev. as 293c. ANS, 4.31↑; ANS, 4.14↑
f. Rev. to l., TI; below, bee. ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
g. Rev. as 293f. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
294. a. Rev. of 293g. ANS (Cavalla), 4.22↑
b. Rev. as 294a. Hesperia Art Bulletin 4, 4
d. Rev. as 294c. ANS (Armenak), 4.21↓; ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
e. Rev. as 294c. ANS, 4.17↑
Obv. Shield with caduceus in center
Rev. BA and helmet; below, caduceus, TI and rose
295. *ANS, 3.75 ←
296. *ANS, 4.27↖
After several emissions with little gold and no tetradrachms, the mint drastically increases production with Series XIV. Twelve obverse dies for staters are on record and eleven for tetradrachms, heretofore a very rare denomination at Sardes. Drachms are plentiful and there is some bronze of the shield/helmet variety. New subsidiary controls appear: bird, ivy-leaf and star supplement the rose, bee, torch and horse's leg of earlier strikings. Coinage continuss to be issued for both Philip and Alexander and there is some evidence of systematic differentiation on the basis of symbols. Philp's gold is generally marked with rose or star; most of his small silver is associated with rose, star, horse's leg or torch. Alexander's name is found on practically all tetradrachms and on the majority of the drachms which carry the bird or bee symbo1. An obverse die is occasionally shared by Philip and Alexander reverses.28
No. 221 is unusual in two respects. A griffin replaces the customary serpent on Athena's helmet and four of the six recorded reverses are inscribed BAΣIΛEΩΣ AΛEΞANΔPOY, the first appearance of the royal title at Sardes. Certain stylistic developments are also noteworthy. For the most part Nike is still rendered in a rigid standing position, but on a few reverses she is definitely advancing left. On all tetradrachms and the majority of the drachms Zeus is now shown in relaxed pose with legs crossed; the grotesque spread-lap representation of earlier issues has disappeared.
Series XIV is linked to Series XIII by five transferred drachm dies (nos. 244, 261-62, 269-70). Within the TI emission itself, reverses with different symbols sometimes share an obverse die: ivy-leaf and bee for staters; rose and ivy-leaf for tetradrachms; bird and torch for drachms.
298. Rev. of 297. *London; Hermitage (Anadol); Commerce (Paeonia), 8.51↑
300. a. Rev. down to l., BAΣIΛEΩΣ (retrograde). *Cambridge (SNGLeake 2095), 8.47←
b. Rev. down to l., probably BAΣIΛEΩΣ. Vienna, 8.41
301. a. *ANS, 8.54↑
b. London; Berry Coll., 8.53↑; G. Hirsch Sept. 20, 1956, 28
302. Rev. of 301b. *Berlin
303. a. *ANS, 8.56↑
c. Rev. down to l., BAΣIΛEΩΣ. Hermitage, 8.49↑
d. Rev. down to r., BAΣIΛEΩΣ; down to l., AEΞAN [sic]. Glendining May 14, 1957, 701, 8.43
Philip II Stater
305. a. *ANS, 17.10↑; ANS, 16.72↑; London; Myers-Adams Dec. 6, 1973, 97, 17.00
c. *ANS, 17.14↑; Hamburger Apr. 3, 1933, 520, 17.12
306. *Riechmann 30, Dec. 11, 1924, 471, 17.15
307. Obv. of 242. *Private Coll., Cairo (Abu Hommos)
308. a. *London
b. Rev. to l., filleted torch. *Lyons; Commerce before 1941
309. Rev. AΛEΞANΔPOY; below, A⊖. *Alexandria
310. Rev. AΛEΞANΔPOY. *London
311. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.13↑
312. a. Rev. of 311. *ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
b. ANS (Armenak), 4.13↑
313. a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.23↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; ANS, 4.24↑
c. Athens; Dewing Coll.
314. a. Rev. ΦIΛIΠΠOY. *ANS (Armenak), 4.19↑; London
b. Rev. as 314a. ANS (Armenak), 4.19↑
c. Rev. as 314a. Oxford (SNG 3200), 4.09↑
315. Rev. as 314a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.14↑; ANS, 4.10↑
316. Rev. as 314a. ANS, 4.22↑
317. Obv. of 294a. Rev. to l., cut over bee above TI; below, bee. *ANS (Armenak), 4.31↑; ANS (Larissa), 4.13↑; ANS (Armenak), 4.23↑; ANS, 4.19↑; Hermitage
b. Rev. symbol and monogram transposed. ANS (Armenak), 4.16↑
c. Rev. as 317b. ANS, 4.08↑
318. Obv. of 293. Rev. as 317b. *ANS, 4.24↑
319. a. Rev. as 317b. *ANS (Annenak), 4.19↑
b. Rev. as 317b. ANS (Armenak), 4.17↑; Phar Coll.
320. a. Rev. as 317b. *London
b. Rev. to l., large bee horizontally r. *London
321. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.18↑
b. Rev. as 317b. Oxford (SNG 2839), 4.22↑
322. Obv. of 277. Rev. ΦIΛIΠΠOY. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
323. Rev. of 322. *Ratto Feb. 8, 1928, 310, 4.28; Copenhagen (SNG 1091), 4.06↑
324. a. Rev. ΦIΛIΠΠOY. *ANS, 4.20↑
b. Rev. as 324a. ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
c. Rev. as 324a. ANS, 4.03↑
d. Rev. as 324a. Ratto Apr. 4, 1927, 709, 4.27
Obv. die recut.
e. Rev. as 324a. ANS, 4.14↑
f. Rev. as 324a. ANS, 4.26↑
g. Rev. as 324a. Turin
325. Rev. as 324a. ANS, 4.07↑
326. Rev. as 324a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
327. Rev. as 324a. *London
328. Obv. of 321. *ANS (Armenak), 4.19↑
330. .30 *ANS (Cavalla), 3.76 (plated ?)→
331. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.19↑
332. *ANS (Larissa), 4.15↑
333. a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.20↑
b. ANS, 3.99↑
c. Athens (Corinth)
334. a. Rev. to l., torch above . *ANS (SNGBerry 265), 4.29↑; Commerce (Asia Minor '61)
b. ANS, 4.28↑; Cambridge (SNGLeake 2194), 4.17↑
c. ANS, 4.17↑
335. *ANS, 3.88↑
336. a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.18↓
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.20←
c. Cambridge (Grose 3484), 4.15→
d. Cambridge (Grose 3500), 4.18↑
337. Commerce (Asia Minor '61)
338. *ANS, 4.25↑
339. a. *ANS, 4.28↑
b. The Hague
c. G. Hirsch Apr. 4, 1960, 139
340. *ANS, 3.97↓
341. *Berry Coll., 4.18
342. Oxford (Davidson)
343. a. Rev. from l. below, BAΣIΛEΩΣ. *ANS, 4.17←; Paris
b. ANS, 4.04→
344. a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.13↓
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.03↓
c. ANS, 4.27↓
d. ANS, 4.14↓
345. a. Rev. of 344d. *Commerce (Asia Minor '61); ANS, 4.15→
b. ANS, 4.25←
c. *ANS (Armenak), 4.14←; ANS (Cavalla), 4.11←
346. a. Rev. of 344d. ANS (Mesopot. '20), 4.05↑
b. *ANS (Mosul '17), 3.99↓
c. ANS (Mosul '17), 4.13↓
347. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.14←
b. ANS (Larissa), 4.19→
c. ANS, 4.22←; Glendining June 21, 1972, 148, 4.22
d. ANS (Mesopot. '20), 4.16→
e. ANS, 4.1←
f. ANS, 4.17←
348. *ANS, 4.18↓
349. Cambridge (SNGLeake 2195), 4.08↑
350. a. *ANS (Larissa), 4.26↑
b. ANS, 4.15↑
351. a. *ANS, 4.28↑
b. ANS (Larissa), 4.11↑
352. a. *Commerce (Asia Minor '61)
b. Commerce (Asia Minor '61)
353. a. *Hermitage
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.18↑; Kricheldorf Oct. 15, 1955, 256, 4.22
354. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.23↑
b. ANS, 4.21↑
c. ANS, 4.26↑
d. ANS (Armenak), 4.11↓
355. a. Rev. of 354d. ANS (Armenak), 4.17↓
b. *Commerce (Asia Minor '61)
c. Commerce (Asia Minor '61)
d. ANS, 4.05↑
e. Rev. to r., amphora. ANS, 4.04↑
356. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.20↑
b. Rev. to r., amphora. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.09↑
357. a. *ANS (SNGBerry 266), 4.27↑; Commerce 1970
b. 31 ANS, 4.21↑
c. Rev. to r., amphora. *ANS, 4.13↑
d. Rev. as 357c. ANS, 4.20↑; ANS, 4.25↑
Series XV, the last issue at Sardes in the names of both Alexander and Philip, is somewhat smaller than the preceding TI emission but similar to it in basic format. Only three control symbols are employed: rose, torch and bee. The first is apparently reserved for Philips coinage and the others more or less equally shared by the two rulers. On four drachm reverses (355e, 356b and 357c-d) a second symbol, an amphora, appears in the right field while other reverses from the same obverse dies have only the standard markings.
Nike now normally advances left and on some stater dies the full inscription BAΣIΛEΩΣ AΛEΞANΔPOY is again used. Zeus is generally, but not invariably, depicted with crossed legs; occasionally, as in earlier issues, the engraver has taken pains to indicate that the god is sitting on a throne rather than a stool.
One noteworthy aspect of Series XV is the appearanee of a stater with the types of Philip II. This is an isolated occurrence, as at Miletus, but whereas the Milesian staters seem to belong to the beginning of the reign of Philip III, those of Sardes date from a few years before his death.
The transfer of five obverse dies (one for staters, one for tetradrachms and three for drachms) links Series XIV and XV.
358. Obv. of 303. Rev. Nike advances r.; to l., inscription; to r., star and . *London
359. Obv. of 302. *London (Larnaca)
361. *Yakounchikoff Coll., 8.27
363. *ANS (Mesopot. '20), 16.80↓
364. *ANS, 16.83↓
365. a. ANS, 16.89↑
c. Hollschek Coll., 17.06
366. *Athens; ANS, 17.05↑
367. *ANS, 16.94↑
Series XVII. Control: Γ, A and STAR
Rev. to l., Γ; below throne, A above star
368. Obv. of 367a. Rev. star? London
b. ANS (= A. Cahn Mar. 10, 1913, 112), 16.91←
c. *ANS, 17.08↑
369. a. Rev. no star. Univ. of Chicago
c. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 16.78↓
d. Rev. no star; to r., amphora. ANS, 17.11↓; Commerce 1919, 16.88
e. Rev. to r., amphora. *ANS (= Egger May 2, 1912, 600), 17.02↑
f. Rev. as 369e. Stockholm, 17.10↑
g. Rev. to l. beside Γ, amphora. *Dattari Coll.
h. Rev. as 369g. Hermitage
370. Rev. below, leaf replaces star; to r., amphora. *London
Series XVIII. Control: F, A and AMPHORA
Rev. to l., F; below, A; to r., amphora
372. Obv. of 369, recuta. Amer. Univ. Beirut; Paris
b. Rev. to l., star above F; no amphora. *London; Private Coll. (Aksaray), 17.07
375. Obv. of 365. Rev. to l., star above ; no amphora. *The Hague
b. Rev. probably as 376a with star off flan. ANS, 17.07→
377. a. Rev. to l., ; below, only tip of A or visible; no amphora. London
b. Rev. to l., star above ; below, . *The Hague
c. Rev. as 377b. London
d. Rev. as 377b. Seyrig Coll.
378. Rev. to l., leaf above F or ; below, . * Vienna
379. a. Rev. of 378. * Athens
b. Rev. to l., star above ; below, only tip of A or visible. Vienna
c. Rev. to l., leaf above ; below, only tip of A or visible. Athens (Pontoleibade-Kilkis), 16.70
e. Rev. to l., ; below, A above bee; no amphora. Berlin
f. Rev. as 379e. *ANS, 17.07↑
b. Paris, 16.95↑
c. *ANS 16.88↑
d. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 16.88↑
e. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 15.96→
381. a. *Malloy Mar. 28, 1973, 142
b. ANS (Mesopot. '20), 16.40→
c. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 15.59→
d. Rev. monogram above star. ANS (Ankara), 17.06←
e. Rev. as 381d. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 16.49↑
382. a. Rev. of 381e. Cambridge (Grose 3433), 16.98→; Commerce 1956 (Phacous)
b. Myers-Adams Mar. 15, 1973, 80 (= G. Hirsch June 22, 1966, 144)
c. Rev. monogram above star. ANS, 16.00↑
d. Rev. as 382c. *Vienna
e. Rev. as 382c. Petsalis Coll.
383. a. Rev. of 382e. Athens
b. *ANS, 17.03→
c. The Hague
d. Commerce (Mersin)
384. a. Rev. of 383d. *ANS, 17.13→; Paris (de Luynes 1630), 17.05
b. Oxford (SNG 2840), 16.94↑
385. a. Rev. to l., star; below, . *Copenhagen (SNG 859), 16.98↑
b. Rev. as 385a. ANS, 16.68↓; Hermitage
386. a. Rev. monogram above star. *Vienna; Pozzi Coll.; Commerce before 1941
c. Rev. as 386a. ANS, 16.43↑; Spink Num. Circ. June 1972, 6154, 16.88
d. Rev. as 386a. ANS, 17.05↑
e. Rev. as 386a. ANS (Armenak), 16.98→
387. a. Rev. to l., star; to r., . *London (Larnaca); Private Coll., 8.54↑
b. Rev. to l., ; to r., . *Berlin
388. Rev. to l., above . *London
389. Obv. griffin on helmet. Rev. to l., above and Π below wing. *ANS, 8.54↓; Berlin; Hess-Leu Mar. 27, 1956, 273
390. a. *Munich
391. a. *London
b. ANS, 17.16↑; ANS, 16.80↑
d. Glasgow (Hunt. 1, p. 301, 52), 16.73
e. ANS, 17.00↓
f. Rev. monogram omitted. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 15.74↑
392. *ANS, 16.92↑
393. Obv. of 392. *Private Coll. (Aksaray), 16.32
394. Obv. of 391, recuta. Rev. to l., monogram omitted. Cambridge (SNGLeake 2144), 16.67→
c. Commerce 1971, 16.81
e. Rev. to l., ; below, above amphora. *Athens (Pontoleibade-Kilkis)
396. a. *ANS, 17.04↑
397. a. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 16.47↑
b. Rev. to r. between stool and scepter, I. *London
c. Rev. as 397b. Athens; ANS, 16.94←
398. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.13→
b. ANS (Armenak), 4.21→
c. ANS, 4.16→
399. *ANS (Armenak), 4.11↑
400. a. ANS (Cavalla), 4.08→
b. *ANS (Armenak), 4.16↑
401. Rev. of 400b. *Dresden, 4.09
403. a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.18←
b. Gans Apr. 19, 1960, 251 (= Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 941), 4.23
c. Rev. below, Δ above . Athens (Megara)
d. Rev. as 403c. London
404. *ANS, 4.28↓
405. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.24↑
b. ANS (Armenak), 4.15↓; Athens (Megara)
c. ANS (Larissa), 4.18↓; ANS (Armenak), 4.12↑
d. ANS (Armenak), 4.25↓
e. ANS, 4.18↑
f. ANS (Armenak), 4.14↑
g. ANS (Armenak), 4.06↑; Oxford (SNG 2841), 4.21↓
Obv. Shield with caduceus in center
406. *ANS, 3.12↑
410. a. Rev. AΛEΞANΔPOY; to l., above forepart of lion. *London
d. Rev. as 410b. Cambridge (SNGLeake 1837), 16.59↑
The final fourth-century issues of Alexandrine money at Sardes present problems in chronology and arrangement similar in some degree to those which marked the beginning of the coinage. That Series XVI-XX belong together is evident from the plates and from the pattern of die transfers outlined in the catalogue; that they are related to the first emissions of Lysimachus (Series XXI-XXIII) rather than the last strikings of the Philip III period (Series XIV-XV) seems to me equally clear. One must, I believe, postulate a temporary cessation of coinage, paralleling the situation at Miletus, but of shorter duration.
While it is true that there is a cany-over of two stater obverses (nos. 358-59) from the issue to that with and star, there is nothing inherently improbable in the assumption that the mint in closing down c. 318 kept its well-preserved obverse dies for possible future use and that two of these, and perhaps others of which we have no record, were put back into service when coinage was resumed. Certainly the abnormal reverse coupled with one of the dies, which shows Nike advancing right instead of left and without stylis, is more likely to have been produced in the initial stages of a mint reorganization than in the context of an estabiished and ongoing coinage.
Otherwise there is no ostensible connection between the present issues and those of the earlier period. This is now basically a tetradrachm coinage with some gold but very few drachms. The Heracles heads of the large silver are engraved in higher relief, the profiles are heavier even to the point of coarseness, and the locks of the lion's mane are rendered with greater freedom and boldness. In general the obverses of the drachms display a similar pattern. One notes, however, that even in the final stages of coinage, there are occasional echoes of earlier stylistic conventions. Drachm reverses alternate between a Zeus with spread legs and one with legs crossed. Nike is normally shown in motion but three stater dies, two from the time of Lysimachus, revert to the static pose. On one obverse die Athena's helmet is adorned with a griffin in place of a serpent.
When the mint reopens after a hiatus of some years, it adopts a control system which is essentially new but has some links with the past. The first issue adds a star to the which had been employed in Series XV, but no subsidiary symbols are used. The star continues to be a part of the basic control for the next four emissions although there are a number or instances in which it is omitted or replaced by other markings, which are familiar from earlier strikings. Series XVII and XVIII are die-linked to Series XVI in a pattern which makes it difficult to tell in what order they appear, if indeed they are not concurrent issues.
|367 ——||—— 368 ——||—— 374|
|369 ——||—— 372|
|365 ——||——||—— 375|
|366 ——||——||—— 371|
An amphora, which was part of the control on four drachm dies of Series XV, appears on some reverses of both the Г-A and F-A strikings, and a leaf is occasionally associated with the same two emissions. A bee replaces the amphora on two reverses of Series XVIII.
Series XIX is less complicated, controlled consistently by star and , a monogram which was encountered earlier at Sardes. For a time, too, Series XX uses only star and monogram but the symbol is soon replaced by a variety of secondary monograms, usually within a circle, a convention that carries over into the coinage of Lysimachus (Series XX-XXIII).33
M. Naville confirmed in correspondence that his coin showed no trace of the shell which is clear on the ANS piece.
The numbess are those of the catalogue entries.
As Plate 1, 1–8.
As Plate 1, 9 and 19–21.
Note also the close stylistic similarity of the bucranium obverse (no. 39).
E. T. Newell, in his notebooks, assigns the coins to Salamis.
This is usually represented with the head up, occasionally with the head down. That the divergent renderings have no significance is evident from the fact that reverses of nos. 66 and 68 show both positions.
Newell, who purchased the coin, had no doubt of its authenticity and several other numismatists who have looked at it concur in his judgment.
Plate 21, 19–21 and Plate 24, 124–27. See also Newell, Sidon and Ake, pl. 1, 4–9 and pl. 5, 16.
Stylistic considerations dictate the separation of the two emissions with a Mithras head as sole control. The obverses of nos. 47–48 of Series VIII are clearly related to the drachm obverses of the two preceding issues, and in one instance die-linked, while nos. 98–101 have obverses similar in style to those of nos. 102–104 with Mithras head left and monogram below the stool.
On two earlier reverses (nos. 47–48) the legs are also crossed as they are on nos. 119a and 120, but other reverses from the same obverse dies have the usual representation of parallel legs (nos. 43 and 119b).
The slouched, spread-lap Zeus of no. 122 has no parallel on the drachms of the earlier issue. The same monogram, however, is used for a later series and may have been originally intended as the control for the present emission.
The photograph in the Parke Bernet catalogue is so poor that it is impossible to be sure of the die identity.
Possibly the same obverse die as no. 182; the condition of the single specimen makes certainty impossible.
No. 174 reproduces a cast from Newell's trays, labelled "Gotefroid Collection 1934". The present whereabouts of the coin are unknown. A second specimen from the same pair of dies has recently appeared (Leu 28, May 5, 1981, 85).
The circle is sometimes dotted.
This is a peculiar striking. The hoard coin, with a die-break below the lion's jaw, has no trace of any marking below the throne. On the ANS piece, which should be the earlier since its obverse shows no die-break, there seems to be an erasure below the throne. Curious flaws on its reverse surface suggest the use of an old flan with inadequtee erasure. The style of the obverse is closest to no. 249.
Misnumbered on the plate as 256.
For example, nos. 225, 255, 289, 292-93.
This crude and apparently plated coin may be an imitation.
The area where the amphora would be if it were part of the original die is off flan on this coin.
On the reverse die of 374 there is an X above the strut of the stool and the same marking appears between the two struts of nos. 377-79. This would seem to be merely a decorative device.
|No. coins||Obv. dies||Rev. dies||No. coins||Obv. dies||Rev. dies||No. coins||Obv. dies||Rev. dies||No. coins||Obv. dies||Rev. dies|
The excavations at Sardes have turned up a fair number of bronzes from the time of Alexander and the Successors with Heracles head/bow and club and shield/helmet types, but for the most part symbols and monograms are illegble. It is interesting to note, however, that several bronzes with the name and types of Lysimachus have the unusual marking of our Series XXI. See T. V. Buttrey, et al, Greek, Roman and Islamic Coins from Sardis (Cambidge, Mass., 1981), pp. 16–18.
The count includes 1 distater and 8 fractions.
Including 1 triobol.
The carry-over of obverse dies from one issue to another reduces the totals by 21 for staters (of which 15 involve Series I-VI). 6 for tetradrachms and 13 for drachms.
In all probability Sardes was the first of the Asia Minor drachm mints to coin for Alexander. This is not surprising. The capture of Sardes surely held special significance for Alexander since this was not merely another "liberated" city but a center of Persian power. Furthermore and of even greater importance, the acquisition of the royal Persian mint must have provided a substantial amount of coinage and bullion for Alexander's treasury. When the time came to begin minting operations in Asia Minor beyond the Taurus, Sardes would have been a logical first choice.34
For a few years the mint's output consisted of gold alone and indeed, prior to 325 B.C., the bulk of the stater coinage of Asia Minor came from Sards.35 Once silver coinage commenced on a large scale, the amount of gold declined substantially although there is a marked upturn for a few issues after 321 B.C.36
Apart from some scanty emissions associated with Series IV-VIII there is practically no silver until Series IX. Drachms are then produced in abundance through Series XV. Series XIV-XV also include a substantial number of tetradrachms and from that point on the coinage is basically large silver. Five issues of bronze can be identified.
Various hoards provide a framework for the chronology. Saida ( IGCH 1508) and Asia Minor 1964 ( IGCH 1437) would seem to have been buried at about the same time, c. 321/0 B.C. In both deposits the Sardes material stops with Series XIII.37 There is no later coinage in Demanhur ( IGCH 1664), dated c. 318, and this is rather puzzling since Series XIV includes a sizable issue of tetradrachms and is die-linked with Series XIII.38 In the slightly later Sinan Pascha Hoard of 317/6 B.C. ( IGCH 1395), Series XIV and XV are well represented and they are in the Paeonia Hoard of c. 315 ( IGCH 410).
Between 315 and 305, the one hoard of relevant material which has a secure burial date is the large Abu Hommos find of c. 311/0 according to Newell ( IGCH 1667). There is no Sardian coinage later than Series XV with the name of Philip III. In hoards interred c. 300, however, the late Sardes issues appear.39 A few tetradrachms of Series
The crucial hoard is that of Aleppo ( IGCH 1516) which had at least 27 examples of Series XVI-XIX, all in fine to mint condition according to Newell's record with those of Series XIX the most numerous and the best-preseved. If, as seems likely, the deposit was laid away c. 300 or slightly later, the Sardian tetradrachms must belong to the last decade of the fourth century.
Taking the evidence as a whole, the chronological pattern that emerges can be outlined as follows:40
A central location and established communication facilities would have been additional reasons for opening a mint there.
Some gold issues from Magnesia seem to have been struck before 325 but they are comparatively small emissions. From other mints there is nothing.
The record of known dies for the coins of Sardes is outlined on p. 40.
The record goes no further than Series II in Asia Minor 1950 (IGCH 1442), which can only be a few years earlier in date, but this is a small hoard with a heavy concentration of south Anatolian and Phoenician issues.
In Newell's publication there is nothing from either Series XIV or XV, but a recent article by Orestes Zervos ("Additions to the Demanhur Hoard of Alexander Tetradrachms," NC 1980, pp. 185–88) includes one coin of Series XV: rose and in the name of Philip III. If this piece is indeed from the hoard, then the absence of TI tetradrachms is all the stranger. For a possible explanation, see p. 86.
It is the tetradrachm hoards that are most significant since the only drachms of the late period are those of Series XX and they are not numerous.
Bracketing to the left indicaess die-linkage.
Identification of Miletus as one of Alexander's major drachm mints rests upon firm grounds. As Newell has demonstated,41 the city struck coinage for Demetrius Poliorcetes during the initial decade of the third century. After Ipsus, which gave Lysimachus theoretical control of western Asia Minor, Demetrius managed to retain his hold on Caria42 and it was at Miletus that he issued gold and silver of the Alexander type, first with the name of Alexander and then with his own. The last emission, inscribed ΔHMHTPIOY, is die-linked to a striking with the monogram of the Milesian autonomous coinage, thus establishing Miletus as the mint of the Demetrius sequence.
The bipennis, a Carian symbol par excellence, is prominently featured on the staters, tetradrachms and drachms which belong to the time of Demetrius. The same symbol appears on the gold and on some bronzes of earlier date and although the associated large and small silver normally lacks the double-axe marking, identity of basic controls and extensive die-linkage prove that a single mint is involved.
Only the first Milesian emission stands apart in that it makes no use of the bipennis symbol and is not connected by die transfer to any other issue. As will be apparent from the plates, however, the engraver who produced some of the obverses and reverses for its gold was clearly the same man who cut dies for the next issues on which the bipennis is displayed.
Obv. below neck, fulmen
Rev. to l., monogram; to r., inscription
2. *ANS, 8.56↑; London
3. a. Rev. of 2. ANS cast (Topolovo); Franceschi FPL 1968, 8 (= Franceschi FPL 1967, 6)
b. *ANS, 8.59↑; London, 8.62; Schlessinger Feb. 4, 1935, 664 (= Egger 41, Nov. 18, 1912, 381), 8.59; Stacks Sept. 6, 1973, 254 (= Stacks Apr. 30, 1964, 9), 8.56
4. Rev. of 3b. *London (Svoronos, Ptolemies, pl. 1, 2), 8.50; Glasgow, 8.55
5. *Stockholm (Saida), 8.60↑
6. a. Münz. u. Med. FPL 318, Nov. 1970, 8, 8.53
b. *Saroglos Coll. (= Santamaria Apr. 6, 1908, 235), 8.60; Commerce (No. Greece '66), 8.52; Hollschek Coll., 8.55; Coin Galleries Nov. 22, 1963, 299; Sotheby Mar. 9, 1936, 187; Harlan Berk FPL 2, Fall 1974, 50, 8.57
c. London; Helbing Apr. 9, 1913, 292
7. a. Rev. of 6c. *Kricheldorf July 1, 1966, 65 (Asia Minor '64)
b. Ball 6, Feb. 9, 1932, 155, 8.50
8. a. Rev. of 7b. *Naville 6, Jan. 28, 1924, 715, 8.59; Florence; Hermitage (from barrow of Great Blisnitza on Taman Peninsula), 8.57↗; Ciani Dec. 12, 1921, 18; Oxford (SNG 2774), 8.61↑
b. Vienna, 8.52↑
c. Paris (Delepierre 972); Gans Apr. 19, 1960, 234
9. a. *Commerce (Asia Minor '50); Hermitage
b. Portland (Oregon) Art Museum; Coin Galleries FPL 6, 1962, F4; Vinchon Oct. 29, 1973, 16
10. Obv. fulmen? *Commerce (No. Greece '66), 8.52
11. *ANS, 8.58↗; Coin Galleries Apr. 20, 1961, 4
12. a. Rev. to lower r., monogram. *ANS (SNGBerry 161), 8.59↗; ANS (Saida?), 8.53↑; Bourgey June 24, 1975, 10, 8.49
b. Rev. as 12a. Ratto Apr. 4, 1927, 575 (= Ratto FPL Dec. 1922, 1950), 8.60
13. Obv. no fulmen. *Istanbul, 8.62↑
14. Obv. as 13. *ANS, 8.49↑; Münz. u. Med. FPL 327, Sept. 1971, 23, 8.55
15. Obv. fulmen? Rev. to lower l., monogram. *Berlin, 8.58↑
Obv. as above
Rev. as 15
16. *ANS (ANSMN 12, p. 13), 4.26↓
Obv. as above
Rev. as 15
Obv. as above
Rev. as 15
18. a. Berlin (Abusir), 8.60↑
b. *ANS (Saida?), 8.58↑
c. London (Larnaca)
19. a. Rev. of 18c. Commerce (Asia Minor '50)
b. Cahn 84, Nov. 29, 1933, 245, 8.22
c. Rev. to lower r., monogram; to l., circular inscription. *Athens
Obv. as above
Rev. as 19c
Obv. no fulmen
Rev. as 19c
21. a. *ANS, 8.63↑; Berlin
Philip II Staters
Rev. to l., monogram; below throne, fulmen
24. a. Rev. positions of symbol and monogram reversed. *ANS, 17.11↑
b. Rev. as 24a. ANS (Demanhur; Reattrib., pl. 29, 10), 17.21↑
26. *ANS, 17.20↑
27. a. *London; ANS (Abu Hommos), 17.11↑
b. ANS, 17.21↑; Commerce (Demanhur; ANSNNM 19, pl. 4, 3)
Rev. to r., monogram
28. a. *Seyrig Coll. 1971, 4.17↑
29. a. *ANS, 4.25↑ (= Kress Oct. 23, 1963, 376)
b. ANS (SNGBerry 250), 4.10↑
30. a. *London
b. Oxford (SNG 2517), 4.22↑
Rev. to l., fulmen; below throne, monogram
32. Obv. of 31?a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.23↑; ANS, 3.82↑
b. ANS, 4.21↑
33. ANS (Sinan), 4.23↑
34. *ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑; ANS (Cavalla), 4.19↑
35. a. Cambridge (SNGLeake 2227), 3.99↑
b. Rauch June 4. 1971, 32, 4.30
36. Berlin, 4.24↑; Commerce 1970
37. Ratto Apr. 4, 1927, 677, 4.28
38. ANS (Sinan), 3.58↑
39. a. ANS, 4.26↑
b. *ANS (Mosul '17), 4.11↑
40. *ANS, 4.18↑
41. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↖
42. *ANS, 4.24↑
43. a. ANS, 4.24↑
b. Oxford (SNG 2780), 4.19↖
44. Rev. of 43b. Berlin, 4.11↑
45. ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
46. *ANS, 4.01↑
47. a. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.21↑
48. *ANS (Armenak), 4.10↑
49. ANS, 4.13↑
50. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
51. Commerce (Asia Minor '61), 4.22↑
52. Berlin, 4.23↑
53. *Turin, 4.17↑
Rev. to l., monogram; below throne, star
54. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.16↑
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.13↑; Helbing Oct. 24, 1927, 2844, 4.30; Commerce (Thessaly)
Rev. to l., monogram
55. *ANS, 4.25↗
56. a. ANS, 3.96↑
b. Oxford (SNG 2775), 4.15↑
57. a. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.17↓
b. Cambridge (SNGLecike 2230), 4.26↑
58. Egger 40, May 2, 1912, 744
59. Helbing Jan. 31, 1930, 202, 4.50
60. Ratto Apr. 4, 1927, 693, 4.24
61. ANS (Sinan), 4.11↑
62. Cambridge (SNGLeake 2228), 4.00↓
63. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
64. ANS, 4.18↑
65. Yale Univ. (Bab)
66. *ANS, 4.32↑; Aberdeen (SAGDavis 149), 4.19↑
67. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
68. a. ANS, 4.29↑
b. *von Post Coll., 4.26↑; Commerce 1970
69. ANS, 3.95↑
70. Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.30↑
71. ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
72. *ANS (Armenak), 4.25↑; ANS, 4.16↑
73. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑; ANS, 4.12↑
74. *Stockholm, 4.14↑
75. Bettermann Coll.
76. a. *Cambridge (SNGLecike 2229), 4.30↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
77. ANS, 4.24↑
78. a. ANS (Cavalla), 4.23↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; Athens (Corinth), 4.08
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.24↑
d. ANS, 4.16↑
e. ANS, 4.14↑
79. ANS (Sinan), 3.85↑; G. Hirsch May 28, 1962, 98
80. *ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑; ANS (Cavalla), 4.25↑
81. ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
82a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
b. ANS (SNGBerry 251), 4.14↑
83. ANS, 4.20↑
84. a. *Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
b. Oxford (SNG 2777), 4.07↗
c. ANS, 3.90↗
d. ANS, 3.86↗
85. *ANS, 4.16↗
86. a. ANS (Sinan), 4.24↑
b. *Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
87. Oxford (SNG 2778), 4.14↗
88. ANS (Sinan), 4.27↗
89. *ANS (Sinan), 4.24↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
90. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑; ANS, 4.14↑
91. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↗; Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.27↗
92. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.32↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↗; ANS, 4.19↗
93. Seltman Coll.
94. a. ANS, 4.11↗
b. Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
95. ANS (Cavalla), 4.15↑; Turin, 4.21↑
96. Yale Univ. (Bab)
97. *ANS (Sinan), 4.20↑
98. ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
99. a. ANS, 4.08↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑
100. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
101. *ANS, 4.28↗
102. ANS (Siphnos), 3.93↓
103. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.24↗; Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.22↗
d. ANS (Sinan), 4.23↗
104. ANS, 4.17↑
105. a. ANS, 4.05↗
b. ANS, 4.05↑
106. a. *ANS, 4.21↑; ANS (Cavalla), 4.24↑
b. Zygman Coll.
107. a. ANS (Larissa), 4.10↑
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.18↓
c. Berry Coll., 4.15
108. Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.31↑
109. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.23↑; Benson Coll., 4.16↑; Malloy FPL 19, Oct.-Nov. 1970, 403
110. a. Münz. u. Med. FPL 247, Sept. 1964, 12 (Asia Minor '64), 4.26
b. *Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
111. a. *ANS Armenak), 4.23↗
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.13↑
c. Commerce 1970
112. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑; ANS, 4.13↑
113. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.34↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑
c. ANS, 4.26↑
d. ANS, 4.08↑
114. *ANS (Sinan), 4.22↑
115. Commerce (Asia Minor '61), 4.15↓
116. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.23↑; ANS (Armenak), 4.02↑; Hersh Coll. (Asia Minor '64), 4.29↑
b. Glasgow, 4.22; Kress Apr. 2, 1973, 190
118. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
b. ANS (Larissa), 4.17↑
119. Kress Oct. 28, 1960, 310, 4.20
120. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.13↑
121. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
122. ANS (SNGBerry 252), 4.32↑
123. *ANS (Sinan), 4.31↑
This first issue of Alexanders at Miletus is by far the most extensive of the series with as many obverse dies as are recorded for the remainder of the coinage at that mint. Both gold and silver have distinctive aspects. The Alexander gold was produced in four denominations: a sizable output of staters supplemented by small issues of half and quarter staters as well as distaters, the last an excessively rare denomination outside of Macedonia. Almost all obverses are marked with a small fulmen below the neck of Athena, thus providing the same combination of symbol and monogram that is found on the tetradrachms and some of the associated drachms.
Diversity in obverse style and reverse format is noteworthy. The heads of the earlier staters are rather large; the hair falls loosely with two long locks curling forward and back over the neck while the inner terminal of the crest crosses the outer at the nape and swings upward. On later dies the two loose curls are omitted and the hair hangs limply or is twisted into corkscrew curls. Crest terminals are often rendered in zigzag fashion and the heads are smaller.
On the reverses Nike stands stiffly, holding a long stylis. Her hair is rolled back from her face and normally arranged in a chignon on the top of her head with a confining ribbon clearly visible on some dies. Monogram and inscription shift position within the issue. The former appears in the center of the left field on the earlier dies and then drops to lower left or lower right, below the wing. The name of Alexander, which generally reads straight down in the right field, is later moved to the left field to read upward in a curved line, an arrangement which carries over into the next issues.43
Doubles and fractions are to be associated with late rather than early stater dies: nos. 16 and 17 are strikingly similar to no. 15 while no. 20 is an enlarged version of no. 19. The emission of posthumous Philip staters, employing at least two pairs of dies, is almost certainly to be considered part of this issue despite the variation in monogram. That the coins were struck in Asia Minor is evident from the fact that the obverse of no. 23 was later used with a Magnesia reverse showing a bee and spearhead below the horses. This phenomenon of die linkage between mints, involving Philip staters, will be discussed in connection with the coinage of the Ionian mints.
Some tetradrachms and a very great many drachms constitute the remainder of the issue, All reverses of the large silver and a substantial number of those cut for fractions are marked with both monogram and fulmen symbo1. The latter is replaced briefly by a star on the reverses of no. 54; other drachms have the monogram alone in the left field. In sheer size this initial emission of drachms at Miletus is overwhelming and may well prove to be the largest single issue of drachms at any of Alexander's Asia Minor mints. Nearly 100 obverse dies are on record and one can be quite certain that originally many more were employed since a high proportion of entries are known from only one example. As a coinage of this magnitude, even if spread over several years, would have required a number of die cutters, it is not surprising that one finds considerable variation in both obverse and reverse representations.
What is surprising, however, is the appearance at Miletus of two kinds of drachms: the standard type and also the eagle on fulmen variety otherwise attested for the mint of Amphipolis alone. The eagles seem to have been produced in small quantity but four obverse dies are known, one of which was probably used with a standard reverse.44
Rev. to l., inscription; to r., bipennis; to lower r., monogram
124. a. Rev. . *London
b. Rev. of 124a with monogram recut: changed to . *ANS, 8.57↑; Berlin; Grunthal Dec. 5, 1949, 368
Series III. Control: EAR OF BARLEY
Rev. to l., inscription; to r., barley; to lower r., bipennis
125. Rev. positions of symbols reversed. *ANS (= Sotheby May 4, 1908, 303), 8.56↑
127. a. *Berlin; ANS, 8.56↑; Münz. Basel Mar. 15, 1938, 206, 8.57; Bucharest Inst. Arch. (Gîldǎu), 8.45; Commerce 1920 (Saida?)
b. Hess-Leu Apr. 7, 1960, 145, 8.57↑; ANS, 8.09↑; Coin Galleries Apr. 19, 1962, 1 (Asia Minor '50)
c. Paris (Delepierre Coll. 973)
129. Rev. to r., inscription; to lower r., bipennis; to lower l., barley. *London; Hermitage (Anadol), 8.54↑; Berlin; Copenhagen (SNG 632), 8.50↑ Egger 39, Jan. 15, 1912, 263; Commerce (No. Greece '66), 8.49; Münz. u. Med. FPL 187, Feb. 1959, 2; Ratto FPL Dec. 1922, 1946; Kastner Nov. 26, 1974, 26, 8.55; Münz. u. Med. 41, June 18, 1970, 74, 8.58
Rev. to r., inscription; to lower r., barley; to l., bipennis
130. *London; Naville 5, June 18, 1923, 1406, 2.11; Helbing 70, Dec. 9, 1932, 581 (= Riechmann 30, Dec. 11, 1924, 447), 2.12; Münz. u. Med. FPL 353, Feb. 1974, 21, 2.11
131. *Commerce 1928, 2.09↗
132. *ANS (= Hirsch 12, Nov. 17, 1904, 114), 2.06↑; Copenhagen (SNG 656), 2.08↑
Rev. to l., barley
133. *Commerce 1955
134. a. ANS (Demanhur), 17.16↑
b. *ANS, 17.16↑; ANS, 17.15↑; Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 15.80↗; Commerce before 1941
135. Rev. of 134b. *ANS, 17.14↑
136. a. *ANS, 17.14↑; ANS, 17.11↑; Grabow 14, July 27, 1939, 257; Coin Galleries Nov. 20, 1975, 1450, 17.17
b. ANS, 17.18↑; Commerce before 1941
c. ANS, 17.10↑
137. a. *Toronto (Demanhur), 17.12; ANS, 17.16↑; ANS, 17.15↑; Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 898, 17.11; Schlessinger Feb. 4, 1935, 703, 17.20
b. ANS ("Tripolitsa"), 17.14↑; Brussels (de Hirsch 1063), 17.07↑
c. ANS, 17.16↑; Commerce (Manissa), 17.06
d. Obv. die recut during its use with this reverse. *ANS, 17.11↗; ANS, 17.26↑
e. ANS, 17.16↗; ANS (Demanhur; Reattrib., pl. 18, 9), 17.20↗; Egger 40, May 2, 1912, 628
f. ANS, 17.05↑
138. *Oxford (Demanhur; SNG 2783), 17.09↑
Rev. as above
139. a. *Commerce (Asia Minor '64)
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.13↑; ANS, 4.07↑
140. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↗
b. von Post Coll., 4.09↑
141. Rev. of 140b. Athens, 3.95↑
142. *ANS, 4.24↑; ANS, 4.18↑
143. Rev. of 142. *Cambridge (SNG Leake 2191), 4.14↗
144. *ANS, 4.23↑
145. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.16↑; Copenhagen (SNG 877), 4.14↑
146. *ANS, 4.06↑
147. *ANS, 4.19↑; G. Hirsch Oct. 3, 1961, 1512
Rev. as above
148. a. *Commerce, date uncertain
b. Münz. u. Med. FPL 296, Jan. 1969, 7
Rev. below club, ear of barley
149. *ANS, 5.90→
150. a. ANS, 5.49→
b. ANS, 5.59→
151. *ANS, 6.81→
152. *ANS, 6.03→
153. ANS, 5.74→
154. ANS, 6.08→
155. *ANS, 5.42→
156. *ANS (found at Physcus), 5.52→
Series II, comprising a few staters from a single pair of dies, seems to have been a short-lived experiment, quickly replaced by Series III. That the gold with comes between that of Series I and III is clear from a comparison of obverse and reverse dies. The Athena head of no. 124 is remarkably close, especially in the treatment of hair and crest terminals, to nos. 18–20 and also to nos. 125–27. On the reverse the basic formula of circular legend in the left field and monogram to lower right carries over from nos. 19–21 but a bipennis has now been added center right. The reverse of nos. 125–26 shows an identical arrangement with an ear of barley taking the place of the monogram. Later reverses of the gold are less consistent: the inscription moves from left to right field on nos. 129–32; the ear of barley on the staters shifts from lower right to center right and finally to lower left; the bipennis appears center left on nos. 130–32 but is placed to lower right on nos. 127–29, the position it will retain through Series VIII.
The output of tetradrachms is roughly equivalent to that of Series I but there is substantially less fractional silver, with the result that one finds a general stylistic homogeneity that is lacking in Series I. Bronze units of Alexander type with the ear of barley symbol form a part of this issue. That the Milesian attribution is correct is apparent from the marked similarity of Heracles heads on silver and bronze.46 The provenance of no. 156, from the coastal town of Physcus in Caria, is confirmatory evidence.
It is noteworthy that the bipennis, which is a characteristic feature of the gold throughout the remainder of the coinage, is not placed on the silver and bronze until considerably later. Bronze coins of Series VII and VIII carry the symbol but it is not added to the silver until Series IX.47
Series IV. Control: FULMEN
Rev. to l., fulmen; to lower r., bipennis
157. *ANS, 8.51↖
Rev. below throne, monogram
158. a. Vienna (= Egger 40, May 2, 1912, 638), 17.14↗
b. *Helbing Mar. 20, 1928, 186 (= Naville 10, June 15, 1925, 443 = Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 902), 17.10
d. Commerce 1975
e. Bourgey Mar. 27, 1912, 158
159. a. Rev. of 158f. *Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 903, 17.06
b. ANS, 16.58↑
c. Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 904, 17.19; H. H. King Coll.
d. ANS, 17.13↗
e. *Glendining Oct. 3. 1973, 11
Rev. to l., first monogram; below throne, second monogram
160. Obv. of 159. *ANS (Demanhur; Reattrib., pl. 18, 10), 17.15↑; Haughton Coll. (Demanhur; Sotheby Apr. 30, 1958, 53), 17.15↑
161. a. *ANS, 17.17↑
b. ANS, 17.22↑; Alexandria
162. a. ANS (Abu Hommos), 17.12↑
b. Obv. die slightly recut at this stage. ANS, 17.13↑; Morgenthau Nov. 26, 1934, 193; Beirut Natl. Mus.
c. H. M. F. Schulman Nov. 25, 1967, 825 (= Münz. u. Med. June 17, 1954, 1107 = Ratto Apr. 4, 1927, 663), 17.10
d. *Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 926, 17.22
163. a. Rev. of 162d. ANS, 17.18↑
b. ANS, 17.18↑
c. *Athens; ANS, 17.14↑
164. a. Rev. of 163c. ANS, 17.09↑
b. *ANS, 17.08↑
165. a. *ANS (Abu Hommos), 16.40↑; London
b. ANS (= Egger 40, May 2, 1912, 581), 16.99↑
166. *ANS, 5.60→
167. *ANS, 5.89→
168. *ANS, 5.11→
With Series IV we have another isolated issue of gold, this time known from a single stater. Although its exact position in the sequence connot be determined, it seems to belong with either Series V or VI. The presence of the bipennis separates it from Series I, the only other issue to use a fulmen symbol, while the position of the inscription and symbols would apparently rule out an association with Series II or the early dies of Series III. In style the charming Athena head with its delicate features and formal curls is very similar to no. 128 of Series III and almost equally close to no. 169 of Series VII. The scale of the bipennis is perhaps significant. When it first appears on the reverses of nos. 124-27, the axe is a prominent adjunct to the type; subsequently it is greatly reduced in size and inconspicuously tucked away under Nike's left wing. Compare the representations on nos. 128-29, 157 and all staters of Series VII.
Series V involves a small issue of tetradrachms from two obverse dies. The ten recorded reverses are of particular interest in their representation of the type. In this issue alone Zeus sits on a high-backed throne instead of the usual stool and his pose is remarkable for its rigidity. On earlier tetradrachm dies the god is generally portrayed with legs uncrossed but slightly spread, giving an impression of relaxation; in Series V the legs are held close together in uncompromising stiffness.48 Toward the end of the issue, on reverses 159d and e, one notes a rearrangement of Zeus's drapery. The thick fold of cloth swathing the lower torso has been loosened to allow a fold to fall below the seat of the stool, a rendering which appears on all later tetradrachm dies.
Series VI is linked to Series V by a shared obverse die. A break above the two lowest locks of the lion's mane, starting as a mere hairline on some coins of no. 159 and becoming more pronounced on both examples of no. 160, establishes the sequence of issues. Five additional obverse dies are recorded for Series VI but, as in the case of Series V, no fractional silver is associated with the tetradrachms.
An emission of bronze is attributed to Series VI, in accordance with Newell's arrangement of his trays, although the connection cannot be considered absolutely certain. The Heracles heads are not dissimilar to those of the tetradrachms, allowing for the difference in scale, but there is not the close stylistic affinity so apparent in the drachms and bronze of Series III. The reverses of nos. 166-68 are, however, identical with those of the earlier striking: bow in case with opening to left above and club to right below the name of Alexander. Furthermore, the die orientation of the two lots of bronze is consistently fixed at three o'clock. Given the degree of variation within the type as a whole,49 this parallelism is a persuasive argument for linking the two issues as the output of a single mint.
The monogram below the club, although it contains elements of both tetradrachm monograms, is not identical with either. Drachms of Series X do have exactly the same marking but they belong to the time of Demetrius Poliorcetes, who had his own bronze types and is unlikely to have reverted to those of Alexander.
Rev. to l., monogram; to lower r., bipennis
169. a. Rev.: monogram omitted. *ANS, 8.56↑
c. Rev. as 169b. Helbing Nov. 8, 1928, 3835, 8.50
d. Helbing Oct. 24, 1927, 2828, 8.60
170. a. Hermitage; Berlin (Larnaca)
b. Kricheldorf July 1, 1966, 64; G. Hirsch Apr. 2, 1959, 779
c. *Paris; Coin Galleries FPL 1, 1963, A2; Gibbons FPL 8, Autumn 1975, 16 (= Glendining Dec. 11, 1974, 20)
171. a. Rev. of 170c. Hermitage
b. *ANS (= Naville 15, July 2, 1930, 480 = Hirsch 34, May 5, 1914, 292), 8.62↑
c. Frank. Münz. 12, Apr. 1966, 5
173. *ANS (SNGBerry 162), 8.59↑; Gotha; Glasgow (Hunt, 1, p. 298, 32), 8.53; Hermitage; Paris (de Luynes 1611), 8.60; Commerce 1921; Hess-Leu Apr. 7, 1960, 144
174. a. *ANS (= Naville 1, Apr. 4, 1921, 868), 8.56↑
b. ANS cast (Topolovo)
175. a. *Saroglos Coll.; Hermitage; Saroglos Coll.
b. Commerce (Paeonia), 8.51↑
176. a. Rev.: bipennis omitted. Zelensky Barrow, Taman Peninsula (Arch. Anz. 1913, p. 180), 8.49↑
b. *Hess 208, Dec. 14, 1931, 268 (Anadol); ANS cast (Topolovo)
c. Hermitage (Anadol); Commerce 1921; Myers Dec. 5, 1974, 66, 8.41; Helbing Oct. 24, 1927, 2829, 8.50
177. *Münz. Basel 10, Mar. 16, 1938, 205 (= Münz. Basel 4, Oct. 1, 1935, 629), 8.50
Rev. as above
178. *Paris, 4.28↑
Rev. as above
Rev. to l., monogram
181. Obv. of 165a. ANS (Abu Hommos), 17.12↑; ANS (Abu Hommos), 16.40↑; Locker Lampson Coll. 163, 17.04; Copenhagen (SNG 747), 17.18↑
b. ANS, 17.05↑; Empedocles Coll.
d. Oxford (Demanhur; SNG 2784), 17.28↑; Oxford (Kuft; SNG 2785), 17.10↑; Münz. u. Med. 19, June 5, 1959, 397; ANS (Abu Hommos), 16.67↑; ANS, 16.87↑
e. ANS (Abu Hommos), 17.12↑
f. Münz. u. Med. FPL 327, Sept. 1971, 21; ANS (Abu Hommos), 13.31 (pl)↑
g. *ANS, 16.97↑
182. a. *ANS (Demanhur; Reattrib., pl. 18, 11), 17.16↗
c. Oxford (Kuft; SNG 2789), 17.14↗
183. a. R ev. of 182c. ANS, 16.98↑; Hermitage
c. Oxford (Kuft?; SNG 2787), 17.23↑
d. Dewing Coll. (= Naville 6, Jan. 28, 1924, 752), 17.15
e. Oxford (Demanhur; SNG 2786), 17.17
f. ANS, 16.41 (broken)↑
g. ANS, 17.11↗
184. *ANS, 17.16↑; Peus June 20, 1960, 781 (= Naville 6, Jan. 28, 1924, 729), 17.17
Rev. as above
185. a. ANS (Sinan), 4.25↑
b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↑; ANS, 3.97↑
c. ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
186. *ANS (Sinan), 4.28↑
187. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.20↑
188. *ANS (Sinan), 4.27↑
189. *ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
190. *ANS, 4.07↑
191. a. ANS (Sinan), 4.29↑
b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.32↗; ANS (Sinan), 4.32↗
192. Rev. of 191b. *ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑; ANS (Sinan), 4.26↑
193. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.19↑; ANS, 3.79↑
b. Yale Univ. (Bab)
194. a. *ANS (Sinan), 4.30↗; ANS (Armenak), 4.20↗
b. ANS, 4.07↑
195. a. ANS (Sinan), 4.13↑
b. ANS (Sinan), 4.16↑
196. *ANS, 4.05↑
197. *ANS, 4.26↑
Bronze Units (Philip)
Rev. above horseman, bipennis; below, monogram
198. *ANS, 5.71 ←
199. *ANS, 4.87 ←
200. *ANS, 5.32 ←
201. *ANS, 5.44 ←
202. *ANS, 5.14 ←
203. ANS, 4.90 ←
After a period of limited production, the mint of Miletus becomes more active with Series VII. Output, although considerably lower than that of Series I, is closely comparable with that of Series III, both in quantity and in the range of metals and denominations.
Once again we have a substantial amount of gold, involving fractions as well as staters. Obverses dies, similar in style, are in the tradition of nos. 128–29 and 157, but the reverses display a new and distinctive element. In earlier issues the stylis which Nike holds is rendered as a plain cross bar bisected by a shaft with a bulbous terminal.50 On the reverses of the present emission tiny Nikes adorn the ends of the cross bars.51 Newell, noting the same decorative motif on early Sidonian staters, suggested an allusion to naval victories in connection with the siege of Tyre.52
Linkage between issues is once more provided by a tetradrachm die: no. 165 of Series VI carries over to no. 181 of Series VII. Two die breaks, extending down from the lowest lock of the lion's mane, are more prominent when the obverse is used with reverses. Tetradrachms and drachms show a strong stylistic affinity and would seem to be the work of the engraver who produced the tetradrachms of Series VI.
Bronze was also issued but now the types are those of Philip II: Apollo head and horseman galloping to the right with BAΣIΛEΩΣ ΦIΛIΠΠOY above and below the rider. The presence of both bipennis and monogram is unusual; heretofore the symbol has been reserved for gold emissions.
Rev. to l., monogram; to lower r., bipennis
204. Obv. of 177. *ANS (SNG Berry 163), 8.48↑; London
205. *Berlin (Topolovo?)
206. Rev. of 205. *ANS, 8.60↑
Rev. to l., monogram
207. *Hersh Coll., 17.22
Rev. as above
208. *ANS, 4.24↑
209. ANS (Armenak), 4.22↑; ANS (Armenak), 4.19↑
210. *ANS (Armenak), 4.14↑; Athens
b. Rev. as 211a. ANS (Armenak), 4.21↑
b. Rev. as 212a. Athens
213. a. Rev. as 212a. *ANS, 4.21↑; ANS (Larissa), 4.05↑
b. Rev. as 212a. ANS (Armenak), 4.08↑
215. Rev. to l., above bipennis. * Athens
216. Obv. of 215. Rev. no markings. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.07←; Athens
Bronze Quarter (Philip)
Rev. above horseman, monogram
217. *ANS, 1.19←
Bronze Units (Alexander)
218. *ANS, 3.83←
219. *ANS, 3.99 ←
220. Rev. ctmk: fulmen. *ANS, 4.13←
221. Rev. bipennis? *ANS, 4.34←
223. Rev. obscure; ctmk: fulmen. *ANS, 3.30←
224. *ANS Mǎrǎşeşti), 8.11↑
One obverse die of Series VII continues to be used for the first staters of Series VIII, thus linking the issues. A pronounced die break across the lower crest terminals, present on no. 204 but not visible on no. 177, fixes the sequence. The few dies known for the gold of the present striking are similar in style to those of the preceding series, and again small Nikes decorate the cross bar of the stylis.
Only one tetradrachm is on record, clearly from the hand of the engraver who produced nos. 181–84 in the sequence. The more abundant small silver shows evidence of confusion or disturbance at the mint. Although early obverses are of respectable style, there is a marked deterioration in the workmanship of nos. 214–15. The first reverses conform to the normal pattern of monogram or symbol in the left field; subsequently supplementary monograms appear below the throne (nos. 211–14). On no. 215 the second monogram has been dropped and a bipennis added to the left field; while another reverse coupled with a later state of the same obverse die has no markings.
Bronze is struck in two denominations with diverse legends. A single quarter unit carries the monogram and the name of Philip; units with the same types but stamped with basic monogram, bipennis and secondary monogram bear the name of Alexander. A fulmen, which had been used as an adjunct device or symbol on earlier Milesian issues, now appears as a countermark on some of the larger bronzes.
Presumably to be connected in some way with Series VIII is a strange stater from the Mǎrǎşeşti Hoard (no. 224). The Athena head is fairly well executed but the Nike of the reverse is little better than a caricature: coarse features, exaggerated "pony-tail" hairdo and misunderstood stylis (). The iconspicuous bipennis of preceding issues has been shifted from lower right field to a position of prominence below Nike's outstretched arm in association with the monogram found on some small silver and bronze. There is no trace of the basic control monogram and the weight is very low. Since Series VIII is abnormal in other respects, no. 224 may be an official striking but on the whole it seems more likely that it represents an imitation from the Danubian area, perhaps a poor copy of an unrecorded issue.
With Series VIII the coinage of Alexander types at Miletus comes to a temporary halt. Apparently the mint was inactive during the remainder of the century, with production resumed only after Ipsus.
Series IX. Control: HELMET CREST
Rev. to l., crest; to lower l., bipennis
225. *ANS (Mǎrǎşeşti), 8.44↑; Paris; Hermitage (Anadol)
226. Rev. of 225. *Berlin
227. Rev. Nike carries palm. *ANS (Anadol = Hess 208, Dec. 14, 1931, 289), 8.42↑; The Hague; Hermitage
Rev. to l., crest; below throne, bipennis
229. a. Rev. symbols transposed. *ANS 4.22↑
b. Rev. as 229a. ANS (Armenak), 4.17↑
230. Rev. as 229a. ANS (SNGBery 253), 4.12↑
231. a. *ANS (Larissa), 4.22↑
b. ANS (Cavalla), 4.14↑; Commerce 1971, 4.13
232. a. *ANS, 4.27↑; ANS (Armenak), 4.19↑
b. ANS, 4.18↑
c. ANS, 4.22↑; ANS, 4.24↑
d. ANS, 4.26↑
233. a. *ANS, 4.26↑
b. Athens (Corinth), 4.18
c. Rome, Terme
234. ANS (Cavalla), 4.12↑
235. ANS, 4.19↑
236. *ANS (Cavalla), 4.22↑
237. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.24↑; ANS (Armenak), 4.21↑
b. Paris; Yale Univ. (Bab)
238. *ANS, 4.27↑
In the publication of the Bab Hoard,53 Series IX was isolated from the rest of the Milesian coinage and dated c. 310 B.C. At the time there seemed no clear evidence for a connection with either the earlier or later issues of that mint. Since then two new coins (nos. 238 and 242) have appeared, providing die links between the helmet crest striking and the early third century money of Demetrius Poliorcetes. The obverse die of no. 228 is used for staters of Series XII while the obverse of no. 238 is shared by drachms of Series X.
Even without this proof of contemporaneity, there is good reason to associate Series IX with Series X-XIII. On the reverses of the gold, the bipenns, which had invariably been placed in the lower right field on all but the earliest issues, is moved to the left, below Nike's wing in Series IX and to center field thereafer. More significantly, Nike at times carries a palm branch instead of the customary stylis. One reverse die of Series IX has the stylis and two the palm; in Series XII there is one stylis and one palm; all four reverses of Series XIII as well as that of the subsequent staters (Plate 31, A) show the palm. Prior to Series IX the bipennis symbol had been reserved for the gold.54 In Series IX-XIII it appears on large and small silver as well.
Rev. to l., monogram; below throne, bipennis
239. Obv. of 238. *ANS, 4.28↑; ANS (Armenak), 4.05↑; Berlin; Petsalis Coll., 4.16
240. Rev. of 239. *ANS (Armenak), 4.24↑; Saroglos Coll.
Rev. to l., monogram; below throne, bipennis
241. a. *Berlin
b. London; Saroglos Coll. (= Egger 40 May 2, 1912, 630)
c. ANS, 16.58↑; Paris
Rev. to l., monogram above bipennis
243. Rev. of 242. *Berlin
244. Rev. Nike carries palm. *Berlin; Brussels (= Hess-Leu 24, Apr. 16, 1964, 141), 8.45
Rev. to l., monogram; below throne, bipennis
245. *Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 16.43↖
246. a. ANS, 16.86↑; Copenhagen (SNG 748), 15.64↑
b. London; Grabow July 9, 1930, 294, 16.75; ANS (Armenak), 16.82↑
c. *Münz. u. Med. June 18, 1970, 83
b. Rev. of 246c. ANS, 16.53↑; Berlin; Natl. Mus. Lebanon
c. *ANS, 16.96↑
f. Commerce (Mersin)
b. Yale Univ., 17.13↑
c. *ANS (Zemun), 16.90↑
249. a. *ANS, 16.99↑; Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 15.66↗
b. Athens; Hollschek Coll., 17.07
c. ANS, 16.91↑; Commerce (Karaman), 16.11
d. Mass. Hist. Soc.; Amer. Univ. Beirut; Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 16.33↗
e. Commerce (Asia Minor '70), 16.61↘
250. a. Cambridge (SNGLeake 2301), 17.00↑
b. Mass. Hist. Soc.
251. *Athens (Epidaurus)
252. a. *Morgenthau May 9, 1935, 134, 16.91↑
c. Commerce (Mersin)
Rev. as above
253. Obv. of 240. *ANS (Armenak), 4.22↑; ANS, 4.26↑
254. Rev. of 253. *ANS, 4.12↑
255. Yale Univ. (Bab)
Rev. to l., monogram above bipennis
256. Obv. of 244. Rev. Nike carries palm. *London; Sotheby Feb. 27, 1908, 48
257. Rev. of 256. *ANS ( Demetrius, pl. 4, 17), 8.52↑
258. a. Rev. as 256. *ANS, 8.35↑
b. Rev. as 256. Hermitage (Anadol)
c. Rev. as 256. Athens ( Demetrius, pl. 4, 18)
Rev. to l., monogram; below throne, bipennis
259. *Berlin ( Demetrius , pl. 4, 19), 17.01↑
Rev. as above
260. a. *ANS (Larissa), 4.20↑
261. a. ANS (SNGBerry 254), 4.32↑; ANS, 4.21↑; Lockett Coll. (SNG 1482), 4.28↑
b. Helbing Dec. 9, 1932, 588
262. a. ANS (Armenak), 4.18↑; ANS, 4.05↑
b. *ANS (Larissa), 4.18↑
c. ANS, 4.15↑
d. Copenhagen (SNG 896), 4.12↑
263. a. *ANS (Armenak), 4.25↑
b. Navile 6, Jan. 28, 1924, 767, 4.17
264. a. ANS, 4.10↑
b. *Washington, U.S. Mint
265. a. *ANS (Mosul '17), 4.18↑
b. ANS, 4.18↑
266. ANS, 4.11↑; Merzbacher Nov. 15, 1910, 403 (= Ratto Apr. 26, 1909, 1926)
267. *ANS, 4.01↑
268. ANS ( Demetrius , pl. 4, 20), 4.20↑
269. *Dewing Coll.
270. ANS, 4.04↑
271. ANS (SNGBerry 255), 4.26↑
272. *Knobloch Coll.
The association of Series X-XIII is confirmed not only by style but by a gratifying sequence of die links. As noted above, the issue with helmet crest symbol (Series IX) shares an obverse drachm die with Series X, and the latter in turn passes along one of its drachm obverses to Series XII (nos. 240 and 253). Stater dies are also transferred. There is apparently no gold coinage for Series X and XI; when staters are again struck in Series XII an old obverse from Series IX is used (nos. 228 and 242). Another stater die is shifted from Series XII to Series XIII (nos. 244 and 256) and, finally, as Newell points out,55 Series XIII shares a stater obverse with an issue of autonomous coinage bearing the monogram (nos. 258 and A on Plate 31).
Two of the four series seem to have been small emissions: Series X represented by a few drachms and Series XI by a few tetradrachms struck from the same obverse die. The next two issues on the other hand have the full complement of staters, tetradrachms and drachms although the silver output of Series XII is chiefly tetradrachms and that of Series XIII almost exclusively drachms.56 In view of the disparity in size, it would be hazardous to regard all four series as annual emissions. A year's output is probable in the case of Series XII-XIII, less likely for Series X-XI. All strikings, however, must belong to the general period c. 300–294 B.C. when Demetrius Poliorcetes controlled Miletus. Within this time frame the order of issuance is certain with the sole exception of Series XI, an unlinked coinage containing only tetradrachms. The style of its obverse die seems closer to nos. 245–46 of Series XII than to any other obverses of the sequence, but this is not definitive evidence for placement.
Demetrius, pp. 59-63.
In this he was undoubtedly aided by his alliance with Seleucus and by Lysimachus's preoccupation with affairs elsewhere as well as by his father's enlightened policy toward the Greek cities when most of Asia Minor was under Antigonid control.
The Hermitage piece (no. 31) is in such poor condition that certainly is impossible, but I feel fairly confident that the obverse of no. 32 is the same die with some recutting probable. In any event the same hand is involved.
Only four entries in the catalogue can definitely be identified as coming from Demanhur but it is likely that a number of other tetradrachms, acquired by the ANS from the Endicott and Storrs Collections, were originally from that find.
Compare nos. 134 and 149, nos. 147 and 151–52.
The sole recorded exception is no. 215 of Series VIII.
The only exception is no. 159e, obviously the work of a different engraver whose cross-legged Zeus, like those of Series VI, has lost his throne but regained his ease.
The club, facing either left or right, is sometimes above and sometimes below the name. Similarly the bow in case shifts position and orientation; frequently it is replaced by a bow and quiver. Die axes vary considerably. At Lampsacus, for example, where the club is above the name, the dies are fixed at nine o'clock; at Sardes, where the placement of the weapons corresponds with Milesian practice, the dies are loose: ↓ ← ↖ ↑
See no. 128 for a particularly clear exampe.
When the top of the standard is on flan, the minute figures are always visible; sometimes very sketchily drawn but usually quite recognizable as on nos. 171b, 175 and 178.
Newell, Sidon. and Ake , pp. 7, 25.
See n. 1 above.
Except for one drachm of Series VIII, no. 215, and the bronze issues of Series VII and VIII.
Demetrius , p. 61.
|Staters a||Tetradrachms||Drachms||Bronze b|
|No. coins||Obv. dies||Rev. dies||No. coins||Obv. dies||Rev. dies||No. coins||Obv. dies||Rev. dies||No. coins||Obv. dies||Rev. dies|
The count includes 2 distaters and 15 fractions.
Bronzes of shield/helmet type with bipennis and K controls (Plate 31, B and C) are probably Carian issues under Demetrius. Miletus may be the mint but this is far from certain.
Including 2 hemidrachms.
Including 1 bronze quarter unit.
The carry-over of obverse dies from one issue to another reduces the totals by 3 for staters, 2 for tetradrachms and 2 for drachms.
Unlike the other drachm mints of Asia Minor, Miletus struck no gold or silver in the name of Philip, III and thus we are deprived of a valuable chronological peg. There are, however, three issues with the types of Philip II × one gold and two bronze × which can be assigned to the years of the joint kingship of Philip III and the young Alexander IV; these would seem to be Miletus's sole gesture in recognition of the dual reign.
For the rest we are dependent on the hoards, of which five provide the basic evidence. Even so there is a measure of uncertainty in that the output of Miletus is unbalaned. As the synopsis on p. 65 shows, there are issues without staters and drachms; their absence from one hoard or another can have no significance.
Two gold hoards, Saida ( IGCH 1508 and Asia Minor '50 ( IGCH 1442), and one fractional silver deposit, Asia Minor '64 ( IGCH 1437), are roughly contemporary in their burial date of c. 320 B.C. or slightly earlier. These hoards contained staters and drachms with , , and barley ear controls. The condition of the coins is excellent; they cannot have circulated long before interment. A single issue of Philip II staters has the monogram, which is surely a more elaborate version of the found on staters, tetradrachms and drachms of Miletus's initial emission. If, as Le Rider argues,57 the posthumous staters of Philip II began, after a six year interval, to be produced again in Macedonia and if the situation in Asia Minor is analogous, as it seems to be,58 then this striking at Miletus would belong to the final months of 324/3 B.C. The emission is a very large one, the most extensive by far of any Milesian issue, and probably covered more than a single year. It may well have begun c. 325 when other Asia Minor mints initiated or increased production, for whatever reason, and lasted until the dual reign was established. During Alexander's lifetime, then, there would have been a more or less uniform coinage with and two subsidiary controls. After his death a more elaborate system was introduced with controls changing annually and the distinctive bipennis added to the gold strikings.
Demanhur ( IGCH 1664), with a firm burial date c. 318 B.C., includies the and barley ear issues as well as the die-linked strikings of Series V-VII.59 This last has associated bronzes with the types of Philip II and the BAΣIΛEΩΣ ΦIΛIΠΠOY inscription, which one may interpret as a reference to Philip III. One gold stater of Series VII comes from the Paeonia Hoard of c. 315 ( IGCH 410).
In Sinan Pascha ( IGCH 1395), interred c. 317/6, all early drachm issues are represented, at least through and probably through as well. One well-peserved piece of that issue, no. 211a. was with the hoard coins and its ticket carried the same "Athens Find" label as other Sinan specimens which had been purchased in Athens, but the "Find" had been crossed over and hence there is some question as to provenance. In any case a die transfer links Series VIII to Series VII and a single bronze with the Philip II types and legend provides additional evidence for dating the issue to the time of Philip III.
After this there is no coinage at Miletus until the very end of the century. In hoards buried between 315 and 300,60 only the strikings of 325–318 are present.
Following the disastrous defeat at Ipsus, Demetrius Poliorcetes fled to Ephesus and then to Greece.61 Shortly thereafter, he was back in southern Asia Minor, landing in Cilicia and taking possession from Pleistarchus, who had been given the province after Ipsus. At Kyinda, c. 299/8, the remains of its great treasure, some 1200 talents, fell into Demetrius's hands, and this bullion likely provided the sinews of a new coinage at Miletus and elsewhere. In Demetrius , Newell assigns issues to Salamis, Tarsus, Ephesus and Miletus c. 300–295. Evidently Demetrius was securely in control of the area during those years. In 294 Cyprus was captured by Ptolemy and Demetrius's major mint in that part of the world was lost. How much longer he managed to maintain a foothold in the region is uncertain. The important naval station at Caunus was still in his hands in 286 and the year preceding had witnessed his marriage to Ptolemaïs in Miletus itself. As Haussoullier points out,62 this would have been impossblee if Demetrius's arch-enemy Lysimachus had been in control of the city. Between 294 and 287, however, Demetrius's major mints were those of Amphipolis and Pella in Macedonia where his rule was secure, and it seems probable that the loss of Cyprus, underlining the precariouness of his position in southern Anatolia, resulted in the closing of other royal mints still operating there.
Series IX through XIII would then have been issued during the five or six years when Demetrius held Mietus.63 The elaborate pattern of die-linkage establishes the sequence but as noted above (pp. 64–65), it is perhaps unwise to try to divide the output by years. All that one can safely say is that the five series were struck c. 300–294 B.C.
In the chronological outline that follows, die-linkage is indicated by brackets to the left.
Philippe, pp. 429–38.
As noted below (p. 84 and n. 77), the emission of Philip II staters in Asia Minor may have started a year or two later than 324 B.C., the date suggested for several mints in the publication of the Bab Hoard ( IGCH 1534). For further discussion of these staters and a possible explanation of their reappearance c. 323/2, see M. Thompson: "Posthumous Philip II Staters of Asia Minor," Festschrift in honour of Paul Naster (forthcoming).
Newell records 68 tetradrachms, unequivocally attributed to Miletus, as coming from this hoard. All specimens except those with are described as in very fine to brilliant condition.
The sequence of events is that of Plutarch ( Demetrius 30–32 and 46). Diodorus (21.4b) says Demetrius went to Cilicia and then to Cyprus.
B. Haussoullier, �tudes sur l'histoire de Milet el du Didymeion (Paris, 1902), p. 30.
As one would expect, there are a great many deposits recorded as having coins of Philip II, Alexander III and Philip III. In the Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards nearly 400 entries follow the name of Alexander alone and even when one eliminates bronze hoards and those without material from our Asia Minor mints, one is left with a formidable residue of finds.
Hoards of gold and of silver have been segregated and are presented here in roughly chronological order of burial. Whenever possible their contents are associated with individual coins in the catalogues for Miletus and Sardes. Specific identifications for the other mints await their final publication. With few exceptions, the deposits are included in IGCH and references cited there are normally not repeated. Any pertinent publication appearing after IGCH was in print is recorded. Of these, the most important is the comprehensive study of Georges Le Rider, Le monnayage d'argent et d'or de Philippe II.
|Asia Minor ante 1951||94|
|Asia Minor 1950||70|
|Asia Minor 1961||90|
|Asia Minor 1964||73|
|Asia Minor 1964 (Gold)||81|
|Asia Minor 1965 (Silver)||93|
|Asia Minor c. 1967||96|
|Asia Minor 1970||94|
|Mesopotamia ante 1920||87|
|No. Greece ante 1966||76|
|Topolovo (see Malko Topolovo)|
This small hoard of 24 Alexander staters was offered to the ANS in 1950. Nine coins were acquired by purchase or gift and a photographic record was made.
No one of the five obverse dies is included by Newell in his Cypriote study ("Some Cypriote Alexanders," NC 1915, pp. 306–16 but nos. 14–15 share obverses with coins in his collection labelled "Salamis." No. 16 is from the same pair of dies as Svoronos, Ptolemies , suppl. pl. A, 2, while no. 18 has the same die combination as Svoronos, Ptolemies pl. 2, 3. In the NC article Newell differ�entiates between his one example of a stater with eagle symbol (p. 307, 3) and "much more common ones from another mint" with reference to Svoronos pl. 2, 1–3. That he later changed his mind is evident from his notebook on Cyprus, which postdates the published artice. There on the first page of his Salamis section, under the heading "Apparently Salamis in Cyprus," he lists the two Svoronos pieces and also his specimens which share obverse dies with our nos. 14–15. These all precede the Salaminian issues recorded in the NC.
The burial date in IGCH, c. 310 B.C. is almost certainly based on the Babylonian stater (no. 24) from an issue which Nancy Waggoner assigns to c. 316 and later. That the coin may be an intrusion is suggested by the consistently earlier chronology of the other issues. The Cypriote pieces belong to the first years of Newell's 332–320 period; the Sidonian staters are assigned by him to "late 333 -c. 330 B.C."; the Tarsus coin is dated 327–324 B.C. Although no detailed analysis of the Amphipolis sequence has been made, nos. 1–2 were certainly produced during Alexander's lifetime as was the Alexandrian stater (no. 23) according to Orestes Zervos who is making a mint study of that coinage. Both issues of Sardes and one of Miletus may be attributed to the years before 323, while the second Milesian issue was probably struck shortly thereafter. Its two coins (nos. 5–6) are among the best-preserved specimens in the lot, superior in condition to the Babylonian stater. If this last piece be discounted as intrusive, a burial date for the hoard c. 322/1 B.C. is highly likely. Although the coins appeared on the Istanbul market, their findspot may well have been southern Anatolia, to judge from the representation of mints, and their interment connected with the troubled situation in that part of the world after Alexander's death.
Three of the coins are in the ANS collection: nos. 15 (8.60↑), 17 (8.59↑) and 18 (8.60↑).
|(T. 5; 12a?, 18b?)|
|, bipennis (Sotheby June 1862, 259 "bipennis and monogram of Priene Π Pl)|
|Ear of barley, bipennis (T. 127a?)|
|Bucranium (T. 33?)|
|, Mithras head|
|, antler (identified as an acrostolion in the catalogue)|
Since there is considerable uncertainty as to the exact composition of this hoard or hoards, the burial date is problematical. Newell (Sidon and Ake, pp. 57–60), commenting on the absence of issues of Philip III and the fresh condition of the latest Alexander staters of Sidon and Ake, struck in 324/3 B.C., places its interment at about that time.
If one takes into account only the Alexander material, the record is consistent with a burial soon after Alexander's death but perhaps closer to 320 than to 324. One stater of Babylon is later by a number of years and may be intrusive. An issue of Salamis with rudder symbol is dated by Newell c. 320–317 although he notes that it may have begun a few years earlier.65 The Milesian staters with and ear of barley seem to be the first posthumuss emissions of that mint. It should be noted, however, that the last issue of Sardes, if it belongs to our Series XIII and was indeed in the hoard, was produced in the names of both Alexander IV and Philip III.
All ten Alexanders from this small pot hoard are illustrated in Bucur Mitrea's publication:
|Fulmen (M. 6)|
|Cantharus (M. 10)|
|Trident (M. 3, 5)|
|Trident (M. 4; cf. Newell, Tarsos, 13)|
|Spear-head (M. 7; cf. Newell, NC 1915, 5)|
|Rudder (M. 9; cf. Newell 11)|
|Ear of barley, bipennis (T. 127a; M. 1)|
|Foreparts of horses, (M. 2)|
|above (M. 8)|
The suggested burial date, c. 320 B.C., may be too early. Newell assigns Salamis coins with rudder symbol to the years 320–317 although he remarks (NC 1915, p. 314) that some may belong to the preceding period, 332–320, and Le Rider suggests (Philippe, p. 264) that the first rudder issues may have been struck just after the death of Alexander. The Colophonian stater, howeve, seems to postdate the death of Philip III.
See the commentary under Gildău (p. 73).
Le Rider, Philippe, pp. 270–72
This important hoard, comprising staters of all seven Asia Minor mints except Colophon, is fully described and illustrated by Le Rider. The pertinent Alexander issues for Miletus and Sardes are as follows:
|(T. 7a; Le R. 34)|
|Serpent (T. 14; Le R. 36)|
|Tripod (T. 31; Le R. 35)|
|Bucranium (T. 37a; Le R. 37)|
For the most part the composition is chronologically consisten. The Macedonian Philips include the last issues of Pella IIIB and Amphipolis IIIA, both groups dated by Le Rider c. 323/2 -c. 315 B.C. The latest posthumous Philips and Alexanders from Asia Minor are issues struck during the reign of Philip III and hence no later than 317 B.C. Of the two Sidonian staters, the later bears the name of Philip III and is dated 318/7. Mørkholm's burial date of c. 315 in IGCH is fully confirmed by the hoard as a whole, but it is said also to have contained six Alexanders of Babylon, one of which is tentatively dated by Nancy Waggoner to c. 311–309 B.C.
Le Rider, Philippe pp. 298–304
Staters of Lampsacus, Abydus, Magnesia, Miletus and Sardes were present in this large hoard of mixed gold and silver. Le Rider adds a few pieces, on information from Pierre Strauss, to the listings in the sales catalogue.66
|Alexander:||(PB. 144 but the illustration is too poor for die identification)|
|, bipennis (T. 175b; S. 271)|
|Alexander:||Griffin's head (T. 21a; PB. 149)|
|Tripod (T. 30; PB. 147)|
|Philip III:||, torch (T. 148: PB. 156)|
|Tl, rose (T. 230; S. 356)|
|, torch (T. 298: S. 359)|
A burial date shortly after 316/5 B.C. is based on the Macedonian tetradrachms of Philip II and confirmed by the Asia Minor material which extends through the reign of Philip III.
Sotheby, Apr. 16, 1969 and Parke Bernet, Dec. 9, 1969.
Jasna Poljana ( IGCH 777)
M. Lazarov, "A Hoard of Gold Staters of the Macedonian Kings Philip II and Alexander III," Noumismatika 3.1 (1971), pp. 20–22 (in Bulgarian)
Le Rider, Philippe, pp. 266–67.
In the original publication by Lazarov, 22 staters from the hoard are illustrated but by only one side of each coin. While assembling material for his study of Philip II, Georges Le Rider was able to obtain a full record of the 10 Philip staters for incorporation in his book. Through the kindness of Ivan Karayotov of the Burgas Museum and Jordanka Youroukova of the Sophia Museum, photographs of 12 Alexander staters were made available to me.
Eight of the Philips are from the mints of Pella and Amphipois, the latest being Le Rider's 465b which is dated c. 323/2 -c. 315 B.C. The remaining two Philips come from Asia Minor: one from Abydus and the other from Teos. Both are from the time of Philip III.
The Alexanders illustrated here are from the following mints:
Chronologically the two lots of staters are in complete accord. The Alexanders are lifetime or early posthumous issues, the latest dating from the reign of Philip III. Nothing in the hoard as we know it points to burial after c. 315 B.C.
Since there is no detailed record of the contents of this pot hoard of staters and tetradrachms of Philip II and Alexander III, the find is useless for chronological purposes. It contained at least one early stater of Miletus (T. 18a).
Le Rider, Philippe, pp. 277–78
|(T. 18c, 21b; P. 48–9)|
|Ear of barley, bipennis (T. 126; P. 50)|
|, bipennis (T. 170a; P. 51)|
|Stag's head (T. 3b; P. 58)|
|Griffin's head (T. 20; P. 121)|
|Tl, torch (T. 221a; P. 56)|
|Tl, torch (T. 221e, 221e; P. 54–55)|
|Tl, leaf (T. 224c; P. 57)|
|Tl, bee (T. 225a; P. 52)|
|, star (T. 359); P. 59)|
|, star (T. 387a; P. 133)|
Price and Le Rider agree on a burial c. 300 B.C. Most of the Asia Minor coinage was struck well before that date but there are some issues that belong to the last decade of the fourth century.
J. Bingen, "Le trésor monétaire Thorikos 1969,"
Thorikos 6 (1969), pp. 7–59
Three Alexander-type staters and one of Philip II were included in this large hoard of Athenian silver, which Bingen believes was buried in the first decade of the third century. Its two Asia Minor staters date from the time of Philip III.
Philip III: Tl (not KI) above bee (T. 225d; B. 2)
Colophon (not Magnesia)
Philip II: Tripod (B. 4)
Le Rider, Philippe, pp. 269–70 (no. 11) and 273–76 (no. 13)
|(T. 6b, 10)|
|Ear of barley, bipennis (T. 129)|
|Serpent (T. 7b, 9a, 11b)|
|Bucranium (T. 33, 35b)|
In the IGCH entry it was suggested that this hoard has survived in two sections: 100 staters seen and photographed by Pierre Strauss in 1969 and about 75 staters seen by an ANS correspondent in Greece in the late 1960s. Although admitting the possibility that the two lots belong together, Le Rider felt it unlikely since he had traced four of Strauss's staters to sales catalogues of 1959, thus establishing an interval of roughly 10 years between the appearance of the two bodies of material.
Actually Le Rider's discovery makes it even more probable that they are indeed one and the same hoard. The correspondent who provided the ANS with information had seen his 75 staters in the late 1960s but his letter of July 1969 states that according to his source "the hoard has been in the hands of its present owner for some ten years, individual pieces having been sold off from time to time." Since the hoard recorded by Strauss is said to have contained originally about 350 staters, it seems highly likely that the 75 coins seen in Greece by the ANS correspondent represent a second major portion of the find and should be associated with the 100 staters seen by Strauss.
|Alexander:||1–2. ⊖ on obverse; caduceus, and ⊖ on reverse (same pair of dies and same obverse die as Newell, Tarsos, 52–0)|
|Philip II:||5. , trident (Philippe 588b)|
|6. Boeotian shield (Philippe 606d)|
|Philip II:||7. Bee, spear-head|
|Philip II:||8. Lyre|
The first seven coins present no problems of chronology given a burial date toward the end of the fourth century for the Strauss lot. Newell dates the Tarsus Alexanders c. 324–319, while Nancy Waggoner assigns those of Babylon to the period 316–310 B.C. The Philips of Pella belong to the final years of Le Rider's Group IIIB, c. 315 or slightly earlier, and the Philip of Magnesia was issued during the joint reign of Philip III and Alexander IV.
It is the eighth coin which is of special interes. In style, it is clearly later than the other Philips and indeed finds its closest parallel in issues of the Maeander Valley Hoard published by Martin Price (NC 1969, pp. 9–10). One might even suggest that it shares a mint with one of the Maeander staters: Price 11 with AN below the horses (Plate 37, A). A stater in a recent Leu sale (May 5, 1977, 121 and Plate 37, B) is, as Silvia Hurter points out, from the same pair of dies as the Price specimen but the Leu coin has a small lyre in the lower right field.67 Although the lyre in one case is a chelys and in the other a cithara, both types of lyre appear on the autonomous coinage of Mytilene and it is to that mint that one might tentatively assign the two Philip issues.
If we are dealing with a single hoard from northern Greece in which this lyre stater was included, then the burial date of the deposit should be lowered to about the time of the Maeander Valley interment. Price would place this in the early part of the third century since he finds the fourth-century Philips of Maeander Valley comparable in condition to similar issues of the Larnaca Hoard, buried c. 300 B.C. Any closer chronological definition must await a systematic analysis of the entire group of third-century Philips, which is beyond the scope of the present study. It is evident, however, that the phenomenon was not confined to the mints already identified: Magnesia, Mylasa, Mytilene and Rhodes.68 In all probability Abydus, Ephesus and Teos or Phocaea also produced late posthumous Philips of roughly contemporary date:
D — Ephesus with EΦ above bee (Kress 127, Oct. 23, 1963, 357, 8.50)69
E — Teos or Phocaea with head and neck of griffin (Hermitage, Anadol Hoard, 8.52)
Apparently these were brief and small emissions if one can judge by the fact that many of the staters are unique specimens. They must have been struck when the mints in question enjoyed a measure of autonomy but did not feel sufficiently secure to produce coinage in precious metals with their own autonomous types. It is possible that the striking took place soon after the death of Lysimachus in 281 B.C. and that of Seleucus I in the following year. Although Corupedium gave the Seleucids hegemony over Asia Minor, the period that followed was one of confusion and uncertainty. As Newell's survey shows, there is practically nothing in the way of Seleucid coinage from western Asia Minor until the latter part of the reign of Antiochus I.70 During the preceding decade, 280–270, a number of Asia Minor mints, such as Parium, Chios and Lampsacus, were producing posthumoss Alexander tetradrachms and drachms as civic issues.71 One might suggest that at the same time other mints in the area were taking advantage of their quasi-independent status to put out a new series of the posthumous Philip staters which had played such an important role in the economy of the region during the fourth century.72
The symbol, which is not visible on the BM coin, was probably added to the original die.
See Price, p. 10, n. 1 for the addition of Rhodes. An example of the coinage is illustrated in the sale of the Ashburnham Collection (Sotheby May 6, 1895, 76).
The date of the catalogue raises the possibility that this stater is also from the No. Greece Hoard.
WSM, pp. 281–358, covering Caria, Ionia, Aeolis, Mysia and Thrace.
H. Seyrig, "Parion au 3e siécle avant notre ére," ANSCent., p. 614. See also R. Bauslaugh, "The Posthumous Alexander Coinage of Chios," ANSMN 24 (1979), pp. 1–12.
The limited number of gold Philips from Miletus and Sardes gives no true indication of the extent of the coinage. There were substantial emissions at Lampsacus and Abydus, sizable ones at Magnesia, Colophon and Teos.
Le Rider, Philippe, pp. 279–80
|(T. 3a, 21b)|
|, bipennis (T. 174b, 176b)|
|, bipennis (T. 205?)|
|Serpent (T. 11a)|
The casts on file at the ANS are in very poor condition. Four Milesian Alexanders can be identified by dies; a fifth coin (T. 205) in Berlin is possibly from the hoard. An example of the early serpent emission of Sardes is present as are Philip II staters of Lampsacus and Colophon. Since this is a third-century hoard, interred c. 285–275 B.C., it is of no chronological importance for the present study.
Le Rider, Philippe , 282–83
|Ear of barley, bipennis (T. 129; P. 238)|
|, bipennis (T. 176b; P. 239. T. 176c; P. 244)|
|Helmet crest, bipennis (T. 225; P. 436. T. 227)|
|, bipennis (T. 258b; P. 437)|
|Serpent (T. 9a; P. 226)|
|Tl, torch (T. 221e; P. 4)|
|, torch with the name of Philip III (T. 298; P. 1)|
The find also contained staters of Lampsacus, Abydus, Colophon and Magnesia. Some of the Hermitage entries in the present catalogues can be linked with Anadol on the basis of Pridik's illustrations but the record is obviously incomplete. The burial date of the hoard, c. 228–220 B.C. according to Seyrig, is too late for it to have any chronological significance in terms of the earlier material.
Gh. Poenaru Bordea, "Le trésor de Mărăşeşti," Dacia 18 (1974), pp. 103–25
Le Rider, Philippe, p. 284
Twenty-one Alexander staters of Lampsacus, Abydus and Miletus are published by Poenaru Bordea.
|, bipennis (PB. 31–32 of which only 31 is illustrated and die identifications are uncertain)|
|Helmet crest, bipennis (T. 225; PB. 34)|
|Imitation? (T. 224; PB. 33)|
Numerous posthumous Lysimachi from Byzantium and Euxine mints place the burial in the early first century B.C.
Four other hoards have Miletus-Sardes material which cannot be associated with specific catalogue entries.
Krivodol ( IGCH 408) has two staters of Miletus (both with ear of barley and bipennis) and one of Sardes (bee above TI). A communication from T. Gerasimov lists three more coins: a Philip II stater of Teos (Σ and spear-head), a Macedonian Alexander (trident above ), and a Babylonian Alexander (∧Y). The seventh component of the small pot hoard is not described. Since the material from Asia Minor, Babylon and possibly Macedonia as well dates from the time of Philip III, the association of issues is chronologically consistent.
Ougri ( IGCH 121) includes a Milesian stater of uncertain type in a mixed gold and silver deposit. A Philip II stater of Pella, two tetradrachms of Athens and four tetradrachms of Alexander were also acquired by the Athens Cabinet. The hoard record is almost certainly incomplete.
Aisaros River ( IGCH 1955) with a number of Alexander staters which can be identified from von Duhn's list and among them Asia Minor issues: and bipennis from Miletus and foreparts of horses and from Lampsacus. The hoard is said to have been acquired by the Berlin Cabinet but Hans-Dietrich Schultz tells me that the Alexander and Philip material is not there and that he doubts it ever was. In any case, this is a late deposit, interred c. 290 according to Kraay.
Sardes — TI and leaf, and torch.
Burial c. 280 B.C. is likely in that numerous staters of Lysimachus and one of Seleucus I were mixed with the Alexander material. The hoard is too late to be of significance for the dating of the Asia Minor coins, but it is interesting to note the inclusion of two Milesian staters from the time of Demetrius Poliorcetes.
A number of additional hoards contain staters from Asia Minor mints but nothing from Sardes and Miletus. They will be discussed in connection with the publication of the Lampsacus and Abydus coinages.
About 50 deposits contain identifiable examples of the coinage of Miletus and Sardes from the last quarter of the fourth century and the first decade of the third. These hoards vary considerably in importance. Some are small accumulations which may or may not be complete records; in the latter case, if we had the entire hoard, the burial date might differ from the one suggested in the IGCH. Others, although probably intact finds, have only Alexandrine material and their burial dates often depend upon the tentative judgment of the editors of the IGCH with regard to the chronology of the mints represented. When we possess hoards with an admixture of Seleucid, Ptolemaic or Lysimachene coins, we are on safer ground for dating the burials, but such hoards are usually so late that they throw scant light on the chronology of the fourth-century strikings. Nevertheless all available evidence has been included in the section that follows.
For the early period of the coinage this is the most important drachm hoard on record.73 It contained 88 coins from eight mints.
The crucial coin is, of course, the dated drachm of Ake. Year 22 is the equivalent of 324 B.C.75 and the excellent condition of the piece attests limited circulation. Even allowing an interval for it to reach Asia Minor and be incorporated into the body of hoard material, the burial of the deposit must be close to the time of Alexander's death. That it took place a few years later is established by several issues of the Asia Minor mints.
Since all coins bear the Alexander legend, one might assume that they antedate the joint reign of Philip III and the young Alexander but this is not the case. Coins inscribed with the name of Philip are known for the last Magnesian issue, that with bee and spear-head (nos. 74–75); they are also known for the final issue at Sardes (nos. 52–53). In fact the emission immediately preceding, with but not represented in the hoard, was struck in the names of both Philip and Alexander. Furthermore posthumous staters of Philip II type are associated with the last issue at Lampsacus (nos. 8–11) and the last two at Abydus (nos. 40–43). If, as Le Rider postulates in his superb study of the coinage of Philip II,76 there was a period between 328 and 323 when gold Philips ceased to be struck at Pella and Amphipolis and if, as seems likely, the situation was similar in Asia Minor, then the latest hoard coins of Lampsacus and Abydus belong to the early years of the joint reign77 All in all the evidence for a burial date c. 321 B.C., as given in the IGCH, is very strong.
Practically without exception the coins of the hoard are in very good to mint state of preservaion.78 Indeed the amount of die duplication, particularly in the case of Abydus and Magnesia, suggests that many of the drachms had come from the mint only a short time before burial. The last three issues of Abydus are represented by 24 coins, produced from 12 obverse and 16 reverse dies. The entire sequence at Magnesia (22
coins) is from 9 obverse and 10 reverse dies: 10 coins of the bee-ram's head-spear striking from 4 obverses and 4 reverses while all 5 coins with bucranium alone are from a single pair of dies. Lampsacus has some duplication, Miletus one example and Sardes none. Linkage between issues within the same mint adds nothing to the existing record.
The representation of mints is decidedly unbalanced. There is nothing from Teos, which is not surprising since it was a minor mint and may have begun its Alexander coinage only shortly before the hoard was buried. The presence of only one Colophonian drachm is, however, puzzling for the barleycorn issue of that mint was a very large one and certainly in production well before 321 B.C. Neighboring Magnesia on the other hand supplied the second largest number of hoard coins. At this period the output of Lampsacus and Abydus was roughly comparable, yet Lampsacus's contribution to the hoard was only a third that of Abydus. One wonders if the distribution of small change to various parts of Asia Minor followed a certain pattern, with the region in which our hoard was buried drawing largely from a single Hellespontine and a single Ionian workshop. To define that region more closely would be impossible, although, considering the hoard's burial date, one might suggest that it lay in the path of the military operations of Craterus and Eumenes. 79
The cooperaionn of the European dealer, who acquired the hoard, and of Charles Hersch, who supplied the photographic record, has made this publication possible. All pieces are illustrated with the exception of four die duplicates: nos. 27, 29, 61 and 70. About one-third of the hoard is now in the Hersh Collection and a few additional specimens were purchased by the ANS before the remaining material was dispersed.
The obverse is very close to nos. 63–64 but not, I think, identical.
E. T. Newell, Sidon and Ake, p. 43 for tetradrachms; no drachms are recorded for this date.
Philippe, pp. 435–37.
Coin Hoards 2, p. 20, 51–52
Two drachms of Miletus () and one of Magnesia (thyrsus) were in the hoard; one Milesian piece is illustrated in the publication (T. 54b). Price places the burial c. 323–320 B.C. The later date is more likely in view of the absence of the thyrsus issue from the Asia Minor 1964 Hoard (see above) which contained so much Magnesian material.
|2 (T. 24b, 27b)|
|4 Ear of barley (T. 134a, 137a, 137e, 138)|
|1 (T. 158c)|
|2 (T. 160, 160)|
|5 (T. 181d, 182a, 183b, 183b, 183e)|
|1 Bucranium (T. 38)|
|1 Mithras head - trisceles (T. 46)|
The burial date of 318 B.C. is especially significant for the coinage of Miletus; its last issue must have been struck prior to that year and is accordingly dated c. 319. There is very little tetradrachm coinage from Sardes during this early period but its TI issue is a fairly large one, probably also produced c. 319 although not present in Demanhur. The absence may be accounted for by the greater distance between Sardes and Egypt. Numerous drachms with TI were included in the Sinan Pascha Hoard, buried c. 317/6 at a place much closer to Sardes than Demanhur.
Diodorus 18.29–31. The battle which cost Craterus his life took place in the Hellespont area and is dated 321/0 by the Parian Marble.
The New York City portion of this drachm hoard was acquired by E. T. Newell over a period of years. According to his records, a number of small lots were obtained from a London dealer in 1919 and later. Newell himself purchased over 400 pieces from several Athenian dealers in 1920–21, and Sydney P. Noe found additional specimens in Athens a few years afterwards. Other lots came between 1924 and 1927 from a dealer in the United States.
Although Newell had no illusions about having secured the entire hoard, he was confident that these various lots derived from the same find despite the diverse geographical and chronological circumstances of acquisition. As supporting evidence, he cited the consistently fine condition of the coins and a similarity of patination: "very thin patches of purple oxide with a light brownish discoloration of the remaining portions of the surfaces."80
No precise information on the findspot was available from the dealers who provided Newell's specimens. The Athenian sections were said to have been brought from Asiatic Turkey. Other lots were described as "from near Chesm�" and "from near Afyon-Karahissar." The Istanbul Cabinet, which obtained 30 drachms from the hoard, recorded them as coming from Sinan Pascha, which is near Afyon-Karahissar. Whatever the exact location, it seems highly likely that the discovery was made in the general vicinity of Phrygian Prymessus.81
Since the hoard supplies much of the tangible and chronological evidence for the output of Alexander's drachm mints between 330 and 316 B.C., it merits detailed analysis. Representation of mints in New York City is as follow:82
The 22 miscellaneous drachms are reproduced on Plate 38.84
The presence of a few intrusions in a very large hoard, assembled in various lots at various times, is scarcely surprising. It does, of course, open the possibility of other intrusive material. One can only judge the case of any additional "suspect" entries on the basis of the evidence as a whole.
22. Rev. ΦIΛIΓΓOY; to l., star; below, ΦIΛ. 4.27↑
For the most part there is nothing unusual about the presence of these stray pieces. A few drachms of Amphipolis, Side, Aradus and Babylon are also found in the later Cavalla and Armenak Hoards, in which the bulk of the drachm material derives from the same mints as those of Sinan Pascha.
The four coins of Side with pomegranate symbol are from the time of Philip III; those with A (nos. 4–7) are, I believe, roughly contemporary issues from the same workshop. Newell dates Aradus tetradrachms with Σ and I in the left field between 327 and 319 BC.,86 while the Babylonian drachms are to be associated with tetradrachms of c. 326 (nos. 16–18) and 323–320 (no. 19). The M-ΛY of the last entry is found on coins struck in the names of both Alexander and Philip III.87
The material from Amphipolis is of greater interest. That mint produced very little in the way of drachm coinage of the standard Alexander type, but examples of the arrow issue are known. Just where they belong in the overall sequence is somewhat uncertain since there are no tetradrachms with the same symbo1. In style nos. 1–2 seem closest to the Demanhur tetradrachms of Newell's Group F, dated c. 326 B.C.,88 and the arrow would be a logical abbreviation for the bow and quiver which appear on some of the larger coins.
No. 3 is exceedingly rare. Its obverse style is that of Amphipolis and its reverse marking, in the left field,89 links it with a large series of tetradrachms from that mint, some with the types of Philip II and some with those of Alexander. These tetradrachms, absent from Demanhur, are the immediate successors of coins with Γ alone, which comprise the final strikings of the Demanhur deposit.90 The new drachm then would date the burial of Sinan Pascha slightly later than that of Demanhur.
Concerning the three uncertain pieces there is little to be said. On the evidence of style, no. 20 should be a lifetime or very early posthumous striking but it cannot be associated with a known mint and the marking below the stool is illegible. No. 21 may be intrusive. Although it was with the other hoard coins, its ticket says that it was obtained from an American dealer in 1931 and the late date makes its connection with the hoard somewhat suspect. The last coin, no. 22, belongs to the time of Philip III but its mint has not been identified.
In some miscellaneous notes on Sinan Pascha, Newell writes "what the great Demanhur Hoard accomplished for the correct understanding of the probable sequence of the early tetradrachms of Alexander and Philip III, the present hoard does for the corresponding drachms." And a little later he comments "the issues run down to c. 317/6, the date of burial." No reasons are given but the picture is clear, particularly with respect to Sardes.91 In the Egyptian deposit of 318 B.C., there is not a single example of the sizable issue of TI tetradrachms or of the smaller issue with . The relevant drachms, however, are present in Sinan Pascha: 65 with TI and 7 with . The evidence from Sardes, combined with that from Amphipolis, places the burial of Sinan Pascha about the time of the assassination of Philip III.
Subsequent cleaning has removed this evidence but there is no reason to question Newell's observations made at the time the coins reached him.
A degree of confirmation is provided by the relative representation of mints. Sardes, the site closest to Sinan Pascha, has the largest number of coins, followed by the Ionian mints of Colophon and Magnesia, with Miletus also well represented. On the other hand the Hellespontine centers of Lampsacus and Abydus, with extensvee drachm coinages at this early period, are present in comparatively short supply.
Catalogue numbers for Sardes and Miletus are not given because of the large amount of coinage involved, but a breakdown by issues is provided on the Hoard Chart (p. 98). Similar charts will be included in publications of the other major mints.
The total in IGCH is 682: New York City 652 and Istanbul 30. In large measure the discrepancy is accounted for by the exclusion of seven coins from the helmet crest issue of Miletus. As noted in the commentary on Series IX (p. 61) this emission is die-linked to one which forms part of the coinage of Demetrius Poliorcetes at Miletus in the years after Ipsus. It must date c. 300 B.C. and its coins cannot belong to the Sinan Pascha Hoard. One of the pieces, moreover, shows distinct signs of wear.
No attempt has been made to illustrate the hoard in its entirety. Due to their excellent condition, the Sinan coins from the major mints are well represented on the regular plates.
For the attribution of nos. 4–7, see M.Thompson, "The Cavalla Hoard," ANSMN 26 (1981), pp. 44–48.
Demanhur, pp. 51–52.
Demanhur, pp. 60, 63.
Demanhur, p. 29; examples of the issues are illustrated on plate 8 of Reattribution. Compare nos. 1–4 for the obverse style.
Although the dot within the Γ does not reproduce clearly, it is very definitely present on the coin.
Newell ( Demanhur, p. 32) places an issue with -Λ at the very end but I would agree with Le Rider (Philippe, p. 397. n. 5) that it more likely comes before rather than after the Γ issues.
The latest tetradrachm is the issue of Philip III, struck some years before Newell's burial date of 311/0 B.C.
D. Nash, "The Kuft Hoard of Alexander III Tetradrachms" NC 1974, pp. 14–30.
The following 17 tetradrachms are recorded by Nash as part of the Kuft Hoard; only 11 can be associated with catalogue entries:
Coins of Sidon (312/1) and Ake (311/0) provide the evidence for interment c. 310–305, the date of both Newell and Jenkins. Nash prefers the later date, c. 305. Since the Asia Minor material above was minted before the death of Philip III, there is no chronological significance in its inclusion in the hoard.92
Two coins of Sardes are among the 19 tetradrachms of this small pot hoard:
Star above F-A (T. 372b; P. 5)
- (T. 393; P. 6)93
The latest dated piece is an issue of Seleucus I (ESM 4) of 305/4 according to Newe1. In the original publication Pfeiler suggests a burial between 304 and 300 B.C., perhaps to be associated with military operations of Seleucus against Antigonus. This accords well with the probable chronology of the late third-century tetradrachms of Sardes.
In the IGCH the burial date of 281 B.C. represents a later revision by Pfeiler in his publication of the Manissa Hoard ( IGCH 1293). There he cites Nancy Waggoner's re-arrangement of the emissions of Seleucus at Seleucia,94 which would date the Aksaray coin c. 292–280 B.C. With the exception of this one tetradrachm, however, the hoard closes c. 300 or a few years earlier and from the illustrations the Seleucid striking seems to be in no fresher condition than those of Sardes which must predate the issues of Lysimachus at that mint. Is the single Syrian coin perhaps intrusive?
The bulk of the hoard (173 coins) passed through the hands of a European dealer who sent photographs to Charles Hersh; the cooperation of the latter makes it possible to present a detailed record here. An additional 27 drachms, undoubtedly from the same deposit, were secured by an American dealer and casts were taken at the ANS. All coins are Alexander-type drachms with the exception of three hemidrachms of Cius, discussed by Georges Le Rider 95 and dated c. 330–320 B.C. or possibly even earlier.
Twelve coins of Sardes and three of Miletus can be identified by catalogue numbers in the listing below. The hoard as a whole was composed as follows:
|Sardes||12 (T. 110a, 149b, 183a, 243, 278b, 334a, 337, 345a, 352a-b, 355b-c)|
|Miletus||3 (T. 51, 82c, 115)|
|Side||1 (A below stool)96|
A burial date c. 300 B.C. is established by the presence of one drachm of Lysimachus from Abydus with forepart of lion and Alexander legend and by the large number of drachms from Lampsacus of an issue die-linked to the first coinage of Lysimachus at that mint. Given the presence of the Cius hemidrachms and the heavy proportion of drachms from the two Hellespont centers, it seems reasonably certain that burial took place somewhere in northwestern Asia Minor.
Actually the composition of the hoard is not certain. See O. Zervos, "The Delta Hoard of Ptolemaic Alexanders, 1896." ANSMN 21 (1976), pp. 51–52 and "Newell's Manuscript of the Kuft Hoard," ANSMN 25 (1980), pp. 17–29.
Listed by Pfeiler as Miletus ?
"The Early Alexander Coinage at Seleucia on the Tigris," ANSMN 15 (1969), pp. 21–30, esp. 27.
Deux tr-sors de monnaies grecques de la Propontide (Paris, 1963), p. 31.
In addition to one early tetradrachm of Lampsacus (Artemis-) the pertinent Asia Minor material includes:
The latest dated tetradrachms in Jar 1, which held the Attic weight coins, are from Ake (307/6) and Sidon (306/5). Jenkins thought the hoarder put aside the heavier coins from outside Egypt until c. 305 B.C. In discussing the Kuft Hoard (see above, p. 89), Nash argued that the date should be lowered to c. 300 or even later and this is to some extent confirmed by the Sardes material. All 10 coins of Miletus and the TI pieces of Sardes belong to the time of Philip III but the last issue at Sardes was probably struck after 305 or so close to that date that the coins could scarcely have reached Egypt by 305.
For the attribution see the publication of the Cavalla Hoard (above, n. 85).
Newell's hoard notebook records a considerable portion of this very large deposit of tetradrachms and drachms. Although only one catalogue entry can be identified as coming from Aleppo,97 the hoard is significant for the chronology and sequence of the late tetradrachms of Sardes.
|Drachms: 2||Tetradrachms: 1 Ear of barley|
|Drachms: 2||Tetradrachms: 1 Bucranium|
|2 TI||7 TI|
|4 г -A|
Of the coins that Newell records, the latest dated specimens are from Sidon (308/7) and Ake (305); presumably they are the basis for his burial date of c. 305 B.C. There are, however, three drachms which indicate that this date is somewhat early: two from an issue die-linked to the first coinage of Lysimachus at Lampsacus and another, from Abydus, which was struck shortly before Lysimachus began using that mint. Furthermore, some at least of the late material from Sardes was in all probability issued after 305. The Aleppo Hoard seems to be a deposit of c. 300 or even slightly later. Its "fine to mint" Sardes tetradrachms would belong to the preceding decade and of the four issues represented, that with -star would be the latest.
There is a tetradrachm of Abydus, one of Miletus and two of Sardes.
|Sardes :||Γ-A above star|
In the IGCH the burial date of c. 315 B.C. is given on Seyrig's authority but this must be a mistake.98 The only coin from our mints is a tetradrachm of Sardes with star above to left, below the stool, and an amphora to the right. This is described as "assez bien." There is also a tetradrachm of Ake which Seyrig carefully identifies as Newell 44 (obv. die 38) and thus a striking of c. 309/8 B.C. It is also "assez bien" as is another tetradrachm with forepart of a lion to left and an uncertain monogram below the stool. Although this is unidentifiable by mint, it is surely an issue of Lysimachus. The hoard cannot have been buried prior to 300 B.C. and it may well be somewhat later.
The latest dated coin is one of Ake from 313 B.C. but the Sardes issues go beyond that date, the last probably struck only shortly before Lysimachus gained control of the city. Burial c. 300 is more likely than c. 310.
From Newell's partial record, the hoard contained:
|Miletus :||1 -bipennis|
|Sardes :||1 TI-leaf|
The Milesian coin, the latest, belongs to the time of Demetrius Poliorcetes, c. 300-295 B.C.
Newell's hoard book lists drachm varieties for five of our Asia Minor mints; nothing is recorded for Miletus or Teos.
|Sardes :||1 -rose|
|-horse's leg (Philip III)|
|-rose (Philip III)|
|- (1 = T. 403c)|
|- (T. 405b)|
Seyrig supplied the ANS with a list of the hoard pieces but without indication of any burial date.
A tetradrachm of Miletus with -bipennis (T. 249c; P. 5) is the latest coin in the hoard. Its association with the coinage of Demetrius Poliorcetes after Ipsus would lower Pfeiler's burial date to c. 295-290.
As in the case of the hoard immediately preceding, the latest piece is a Milesian tetradrachm with -bipennis Burial may have been connected with Ptolemy's seizure of Cyprus in 294 B.C. In any event the IGCH date of c. 310 is too early.
M. Kampmann, "Un tr-sor d'Alexandres," RN 1972, pp. 151-68 Coin Hoards 1, p. 19, 55
With the exception of the TI striking, from the time of Philip III, the Sardes material belongs to the last decade of the fourth century. The Milesian coins, again with the exception of the first entry, are even later: the six with monogram and bipennis from the years between 300 and 294 when Demetrius Poliorcetes used the mint and the last coin a civic issue to be dated after 294. It may in fact be one of the latest of the hoard coins.
In his publication, Kampmann points out that the absence of tetradrachms of Lysimachus is strange in a deposit from Asia Minor buried close to the time of his death. The hoard, however, is predominantly composed of eastern materia1. That it had no tetradrachms of Lampsacus, Abydus, Colophon, Magnesia and Teos is not surprising for those drachm mints struck little or no silver in large denomination after Alexander's death. What is surprising is the comparative scarcity of Macedonian material: only 24 tetradrachms from Amphipolis and 6 from Pella. Of the overall total of some 300 coins, 165 are of Babylon and most of the others come from mints in southern Anatolia, Cyprus, Syria, Phoenicia and further east. The impression is that of a Levantine hoard. If the discovery was made in Asia Minor, it must have been somewhere in the extreme south where Lysimachus seems never to have exercised firm contro1.100 There is also a strong possibility that Asia Minor was merely a way station for a hoard unearthed in the Levant.
The following hoards, some of which have been fully published elsewhere, require no special comment. In general they contain only a small amount of Miletus-Sardes material, often identifiable by issue alone, and their burial dates are too late to be relevant for the chronology of the Asia Minor coinage.
" Tripolitsa " ( IGCH 84). Newell's burial date is c. 315 B.C. The one tetradrachm of Miletus (T. 137b) was struck before 320.
Kannaviou ( IGCH 1468). Martin Price has kindly provided specific information on the contenss of this mixed hoard of tetradrachms and drachms, which Otto M-rkholm dates c. 310 B.C. Miletus : . Sardes : -rose with name of Philip III, -torch, TI-bee, TI-? with name of Philip, -bee. All Sardes issues belong to the time of Philip III; the Milesian coin is earlier.
Sardes: 2 with -torch (one in the name of Philip).
Aghios Ioannis ( IGCH 1470). One tetradrachm of Sardes (TI-torch) was struck during the reign of Philip III; another with star left may belong to the -star issue of the same mint. If so, it is roughly contemporary with the dated coin of Sidon (307/6) which places burial c. 305 or a little later.
Aphrodisias ( IGCH 1283). Published by K. Erim and D. MacDonald, "A Hoard of Alexander Drachms from Aphrodisias," NC 1974, pp. 174–76. The two relevant coins are not illustrated: Miletus with ; Sardes with -rose. Both are considerably earlier than the suggested burial date of 305 or later.
Kiouleler ( IGCH 144). Newell's partial record of the tetradrachms includes:
Sardes: 1 -star-leaf, 1 F-A-amphora, 1 -star, 1 -star.
The latest coins are the two with bipennis from Miletus, of the time of Demetrius Poliorcetes and therefore antedating by a decade or more the suggested burial date of 285–275 B.C.
Burial dates for the following hoards range from 280–200 B.C.
Epidaurus ( IGCH 158). A tetradrachm of Miletus with -bipennis (T. 251).
Sardes: 1 -torch, 1 -torch in the name of Philip, 1 -torch
Manissa ( IGCH 1293). One tetradrachm of Miletus with ear of barley (T. 137c; P. 7).
Cavalla ( IGCH 450). For the publication of this ANS hoard, see M. Thompson, "A Hoard from Cavalla," ANSMN 26 (1981), pp. 33–49. A breakdown by issues for its 20 drachms of Miletus and 35 of Sardes is given on the Hoard Chart (p. 98).
Armenak ( IGCH 1423). Another ANS hoard which is now being prepared for publication. Its 28 drachms of Miletus and 56 of Sardes are recorded by issues on the Hoard Chart (p. 98). In addition it contained four relevant tetradrachms: one of Miletus with -bipennis (T. 246b), one of Sardes with -star (T. 386e) and two others with (T. 407, 408).
Larissa ( IGCH 168). For the publication of this third ANS hoard, see T. Martin, "A Third-Century B.C. Hoard from Thessaly at the ANS," ANSMN 28 (forthcoming). Eight drachms of Miletus and 22 of Sardes are entered in the present catalogues and recorded by issues on the Hoard Chart (p. 98).
Bab ( IGCH 1534). The hoard has been published with illustration but many of the coins are in such poor condition that precise die identifications are hazardous. Five of Miletus (T. 65, 96, 193b, 237b, 255) and three of Sardes (T. 80a, 105b, 124) are catalogue entries.
Susa ( IGCH 1799). Ten drachms from this small hoard are illustrated by Le Rider but the only one from our mints (Sardes with -rose) is too worn for die comparison There is also a Milesian drachm with -bipennis from c. 295 B.C. and a Magnesian issue with maeander in the exergue, which was probably struck shortly after the death of Lysimachus.
Corinth ( IGCH 187). Again a published hoard from the end of the third century. Thompson and Noe numbers for catalogue entries are as follows:
Miletus : T. 78b, 233b, 247d = N. 183–84, 155
Sardes: T. 55, 140, 333c = N. 192–94
Published hoards from Gordion ( IGCH 1401, 1403–6) and Euboea ( IGCH 175, 205) have material from our mints. All are late third-century deposits with the fourth-century coins in poor condition. Die comparisons have not been attempted.
I am grateful to M. Kampmann for photographs of coins not illustrated in RN, which have made die comparisons possible.
At least it is noteworthy that he used no mints in that area; Magnesia was the southernmost source of his Asia Minor coinage.
|Asia Minor '64||Sinan||Cavalla||Armenak 1*||Larissa|
|IV: Griffin's hd.||1|