two unpublished hoards and other owls from egypt / peter g. van alfen
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
1/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
2/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
3/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
4/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
5/27
AJN Second
Series
14
(2002) pp.
59-71
®
2003The
American
umismatic
ociety
TWO UNPUBLISHED
HOARDS
AND OTHER
OWLS
FROM EGYPT
Plates
13-17
Peter
G. van Alfen*
Scattered
among
various
trays
of
Athenian
owls
in the
American
Numismatic
Society's
Greek cabinet
were
the remnants
f two
unpub-
lishedhoardsthat have now been reassembled nd are presentedhere
for he first
ime.
The
24 owls
comprising
he
two lots were
once
part
of
the E.
T. Newell
collection,
which
was
bequeathed
to
the ANS
in 1944.
The
tags
associated
with
the
coins
are
in
Newell's
finehand and
provide
clues
to their
origins.
Those
of the first
roup
have
written
pon
them
the
phrase
ex Nahman's
1923
hoard ;
those of
the second
group
have
on
one side
of the
tags
from
indmade
in
Egypt ,
while on the
other
side
either he
name
Endicott
along
with
price)
or
the
phrase
Egyp-
tian hoard
F.
M.
Endicott
1926
appears.
Thus,
one
group
s called
here
Nahman's hoard,the otherEndicott'shoard.As will be seen momen-
tarily,
there
is little
question
that
the
two
groups
came
out of
the
ground
eparately;
he
styles,
atinas,
and
markings
make
this certain.
The
compilers
of
the
Inventory
f
Greek Coin
Hoards
(
GCH
)
somehow
overlooked
the two
hoards;
none of
the
IGCH
listings
for
Egyptian
hoards
containing
Athenian
owls
provide
information
hat
can
be
linked to
any
of these
coins.
More
recently,
he editors
of
Coin
Hoards
noting
a brief
remark
n
SNG
Delepierre
list
one
hoard,
CH
VIII.
151
Egypt
before
1925 ,
that could
be
related
to Nahman's
*
The
American
umismatic
ociety,
6
Fulton
treet,
ew
York,
NY
10038,
USA
59
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
6/27
60 Peter G. van Alfen
hoard.
Like the
coins
of Nahman's
hoard,
SNG
Delepierre
nos.
1475,
1478, 1481,
and
1482,
are
mid-fourth-centuryi-style
ssues
found n
Egypt
before1925 that are
freeof
any
countermarks
r cuts.
Caution,
however,
s
in order
ince
there s little
beyond
coincidence
hat can tie
Nahman's hoard
to
CH
VIII.151.
There are other clues
that
mightprovide
furthernformation n the
hoards. Newell
spent
the
winter and
spring
of
1923/24
in
Cairo
reviewing
nd
purchasing
coins for his collection. From M. Maurice
Nahman,
an
antiquities
dealer located on Sharia Kasr en-Nil
Dattari
1905:
103
n.3),
Newell
purchased
at least
one
hoard,
the so-called
Keneh
Hoard
(
GCH
1708;
Newell 1927:
14).
In
a short
note Newell
sent to The Numismatist
rom
Cairo,
he
wrote
(1924: 302):
In
fact,
the
unearthing
f hoards seems to continue
merrily.
or even while
this little
summary
was
being penned
the writerwas shown a hoard
of some
250 Atheniantetradrachms f
the fourth
entury
B.C.
Could
this be Nahman's
hoard?
For the Endicott
hoard there are fewerclues.
F.
Munroe Endicott
spent time in Cairo in the early part of the twentieth entury s a
secretary
f
the
United States
Legation
to
Egypt
where
he
purchased
coins
from ocal dealers
(Mosser
1941:
2).
When he died in 1935 his
collection
of
over
a thousand Greek and Roman coins was
given
to
the ANS
by
his heirs.
A
selection
of these
coins,
including
wo Athe-
nian owls
(not
related to
the
hoard),
was
published
number
f
years
later
by
S. Mosser
1941).
Endicott
kept
careful
notes on his collection
in an account
book that was also donated
to the
ANS
at the same time
as the coins.
Unfortunately,
t
some
point
in the
nearly
70
years
that
have passed since the donation,this account book has been misplaced
and cannot
be found. Should the
book be
located, however,
we
can be
almost
certain that
within t lies information
n the
purchase
of the
hoard
and how
it
came
into Newell's
possession.
THE
CATALOGUE
The
following
atalogue
lists the coins
of
the
two
groups
with
their
accession
numbers,
weights,
nd die
axes;
the
illustrations
f the coun-
termarks oted can be
found n
Figure
l.1
Also,
since this
opportunity
1
This
figure
s
reprinted
rom
he
preceding
rticle
n this
ournal
van
Alfen
2002);
hus,
ot
ll ofthe ountermarks
oundn the
figure
re
found n the oins
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
7/27
Two Unpublished Hoards 61
Figure
1. Table
f ountermarks.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
8/27
62 Peter G. van Alfen
has
presented
tself,
n additional 34
(mostly)
unpublished
owls that
were either
produced
or
circulated
in
Egypt
are also listed
below;
these coins are
part
of
the
ANS collection
but
are
not
part
of either
Nahmans or Endicotťs hoards.
A
general
discussionfollows.
NAHMAN'S HOARD
What is moststrikingbout thisgroupof nine owls is the fact that
none of them bear
the
countermarks
r
cuts
so
commonly
found on
coins
coming
out of
Egypt.
But without n
idea
of the
composition
f
the
hoard,
we have no
way
of
ascertaining
ow
meaningful
his obser-
vation
is;
Nahman or Newell
might
have
intentionally icked
un-
marked coins out of
the
lot.
Stylistically
he coins are mixed. Two of
the
coins,
nos. 3 and
4,
are
unquestionably
mitative
nd can
be attrib-
uted to Flamenťs
Style
A;2
no. 9 have a
suspicious appearance
that
might
ndicate
an imitative
origin.
No. 8 is the
only pi-style
owl
in
the group; its presence bringsthe terminus ost quernfor the hoard
down to the middle of
the fourth
entury.3
At the other end of the
temporal
pectrum
ies
no.
1,
a later
fifth-century
ssue. The
remaining
owls,
nos.
2, 6,
and
7
are
of the
earliest
profile-eye
eries hat came out
of Athens.4
1. ANS
1944.100.24201;
17.15
g;
9:00
2. ANS
1944.100.24224;
17.11
g;
9:00
3. ANS
1944.100.24226;
17.13
g;
9:00
4. ANS
1944.100.24227;
16.87
g;
9:00
5. ANS 1944.100.24228;17.17 g; 9:00
presented
n this
tudy.
he
figure
s reused
n
the
hopes
f
makingross-checking
andreferenceasier.
2
Flament
2001)
dentified
further
ub-style,tyle
A,
of hose
gyptian
mita-
tiveowl
styles, tyles
, M, X,
initially
dentified
y
T.
V.
Buttrey
1982).
For
furtheromments
n this
roup,
ee vanAlfen
2002: 6-20).
3
The owl
corresponds
o a
Bingen
1973)
pz-style
. Kroll
1993:
)
argues
hat
the
pi-styleoinage egan
. 350 BC.
4 Kroll1993: ) suggesteddate of c. 390-380 or hispre-pz-stylerofile-eye
series.
More
ecently,
owever,
e has downdated
he eries o end
shortly
efore
the
beginning
f he
pz-style
oins
. 350
2001:
0
n.13).
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
9/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
10/27
64 Peter G. van Alfen
The attribution
f the
following
hree
coins to Endicotťs
hoard is
insecure.
F. M. Endicott
gave
no. 13
to the
ANS
in
1923. Its
patina,
style,
and countermarks
re consistent
with the twelve coins listed
above;
therefore
t is
probable
that the coin came
from the same
hoard.
No. 14
is
problematic.
While the countermarks
it
with
the
other coins
here,
its
frontal-eye
tyle
does
not. Hoards
with
both
types
of
coins,
frontal
eye
and
profile eye,
are of course common
enough. The tag with the coin says only found n Egypt with no
indication
that Endicott
gave
it.
The label
on the box
( Egyptian
Hd ),
however,
s the same
as that on
the boxes of the twelve
above.
Finally,
Endicott
gave
no. 15
to
Newell,
and
its countermark
nd
style
suggest
that it could
be
part
of the
hoard,
although
the
tag,
which
s
arranged
differently
han
the
others,
nly
denotes an
Egyptian
prove-
nance.
13. ANS
1923.165.1;
17.24
g;
8:00;
obv. ctmk
no.
9;
rev. ctmk
no. 19.
14. ANS
1944.100.24222;
16.59
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
49(?);
rev. ctmk
nos. 8 and 46.
15. ANS
1944.100.24321;
17.21
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
no.
9;
rev. ctmk
no. 3.
TELL EL-MASKHOUTA
(
GCH
1649)
Of
the
six to ten
thousand
owls found
n this famed
hoard,
the ANS
received
only
a small
number,
but these have
not been
published
s
a
group
before.
The coins
are consistent
with those
published
by
Robinson
(1947)
and
Naster
(1948),
in so far as
they
are late-fifth-
century, rontal-eyewls. In addition to bona fideAthenianowls, the
hoard
produced
a
great
numberof
imitative
nd
plated
varieties;
nos.
6 and
7 are
plated,
nos.
8 and 9 are
imitative.7
he dies of no. 6
were
of
high quality
and,
as far
as the
preservation
f the coin
shows,
ndis-
tinguishable
rom hose of
Athens.
Were
it not for the bronze
disease
breaking
through
the silver
plating
from
the
core,
this
coin
would
6
For
more ecent
omments
nd
bibliography
n
thishoard ee
Kroll
2001:
1
n.14).7
No.
9,
n
fact,
s a Philisto-Arabian
ssue rom
heBurton
erry
ollection;
his
coinwas
first
ublished
n
SNG
BYB
no. 701.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
11/27
Two Unpublished Hoards 65
certainlypass
as an authentic
Athenian
ssue
today,
and
no doubt in
antiquity
s
well. The
situationwith no.
7,
however,
s
quite
different
since the
large,
awkward
profile
eye
of
the obverse
unquestionably
betrays
non-Athenian
roduct.
1.
ANS
1949.128.1;
17.18
g;
4:00.
2. ANS
1949.128.2;
17.16
g;
9:00.
3. ANS
1949.128.3;
16.79
g;
9:00;
obv.
graffito
X ;
cut
in
edge
(x 2).
4. ANS 1949.128.4; 17.17 g; 9:00; obv. ctmk20.
5. ANS
1949.T28.5;
17.19
g;
10:00.
6. ANS
1949.103.5;
15.03
g;
1:00
(plated).
7.
ANS
1951.17.4;
16.53
g;
9:00
(plated);
obv.
ctmk
18(?).
8. ANS
1951.17.2;
3.88
g;
9:00.
9ē ANS
1960.176.14;
17.19
g;
12:00
(=
SNG
BYB
no.
701;
SNG
ANS
6 no.
1).
MISCELLANEOUS
OWLS
The
remaining roup
consists
of
coins
that are either
knownto have
an
Egyptian provenance
nos.
2, 4, 6,
9-10)
because
it is so
stated on
their
ags,
or
very
ikely
did because
the countermarks
nd/or
patterns
of
cuts
and
countermarking
re consistent
with other coins
known to
have come out
of
Egypt
(nos.
1,
3,
5, 7-8,
11-25).
Nos. 2
(which
has
an
imitative character
reminiscent f
one of
Buttrey
types8),
13,
and
18 are of
frontal-eye
ifth-centuryype,
the rest are
pi-style
owls.
No.
12,
like no.
2,
appears
to be an
imitation.
The
unusuallyhighweight
of
no. 16 is because the coin was partiallymelted,and fused to what
appears
to be another
coin.9
1. ANS
0000.999.10176;
17.33
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
1.
2. ANS
0000.999.53378;
16.12
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
?).
3. ANS
1941.131.552;
17.07
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
45;
rev.
ctmk 1.
4. ANS
1944.100.24242;
14.60
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
49
(?);
rev. ctmks
9
(?),
46 and
(?).
8
See
note
no. 1 above.
9
Kroll
2001)
notes
similar
henomenon
ith n
owlfromn
Egyptian
oard.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
12/27
66 Peter G. van Alfen
5. ANS
1944.100.24315;
17.05
g;
9:00;
obv.
ctmk
49;
rev. ctmk 50.
6. ANS
1944.100.24316;
17.17
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk 47.
7.
ANS
1944.100.24317;
17.19
g;
9:00;
rev.
ctmk
1
8. ANS
1944.100.24318;
17.17
g;
8:00;
obv. ctmk 29
(?).
9. ANS
1944.100.24319;
17.13
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
48;
rev. ctmk1
(x
2).
10. ANS
1944.100.24320;
17.17
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk 1
(x 3);
rev. ctmk
1
(x
3).
11. ANS 1944.100.24398;16.94g; 9:00; obv. ctmks14 (?) and 29; rev.
ctmk
14
(?).
12.
ANS
1944.100.24488;
17.01
g;
9:00;
obv.
ctmk
32.
13. ANS
1953.171.222;
16.98
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
?);
rev. 2
cuts;
ctmk
(?)•
14. ANS
1953.171.234;
17.17
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
9;
rev. ctmk no. 1.
15. ANS
1953.171.236;
17.24
g;
9:00;
obv.
ctmk
1;
rev. ctmks 15 and
33.
16.
ANS
1953.171.237;
18.25
g;
obv.
ctmk
8.
17. ANS 1955.163.1;16.55g; 9:00; obv. eut; ctmks4 and (?, x 2); rev.
cut;
ctmks
1
and
50.
18. ANS
1957.172.1122;
16.84
g;
6:00;
obv. ctmks
?)
and 3.
19. ANS
1957.172.1132;
16.91
g;
9:00;
obv.
eut;
ctmk 20.
20. ANS
1968.34.65;
17.18
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
28;
rev. ctmk
4
(=
SNG
BYB no.
695).
21. ANS
1974.26.290;
17.21
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
9;
rev. ctmk
3.
The last
four
pi- tyle
owls listed
below
(nos.
22-25)
were
part
of the
same
donation
to the ANS
in 1954.
Two of the coins
(nos.
24 and
25)
bear countermarks imilar to those found on other owls known or
presumed
to
have circulated
n
Egypt.
Because all four coins
display
an
identical
and
unusual)
patina,
are
similarlyunderweight,
nd are
part
of the same
donation,
t is
very ikely
that these coins
came from
one
hoard,
perhaps
found
in
Egypt.
Which
hoard that
might
be,
however,
s
unknown;
furthermore,
o
suggestion
an
be made since
no
other nformation
oncerning
hese
coins
is available.
22.
ANS
1954.162.5;
16.42
g;
9:00.
23. ANS
1954.162.6;
16.80
g;
9:00.
24. ANS
1954.162.7;
16.77
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmks
14,
47,
and
(?).
25. ANS
1954.162.8;
16.60
g;
9:00;
obv. ctmk
20.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
13/27
Two Unpublished Hoards 67
DISCUSSION
With the
exception
of
the coins
from the
well-published
Tell
el-
Maskhouta
hoard,
little is known
about the
various
groups
of
owls
listed
above save
that
they
were
found
(or
likely found)
in
Egypt.
Thus,
the
observations ne can
make about the
coins are
fairly
imited.
Of the 58 tetradrachmspresented n this study,41 (or 71%) have
weights
hat are well
above 17.00
g;
many
are
quite
close to c.
17.20
g,
the
Athenian tetradrachm
tandard.
In
light
of
other
owls that have
come from
Egypt,
such
as the
indigenous
Sabakes
series
(van
Alfen
2002:
27-31,
table
2),
the
consistency
n
weight
foundhere
among
these
various unrelated
groups
s
quite
remarkable;
he
high quality
of these
coins s
also reflectedn the
frequency
f the
9:00 die
axis.
Thus,
except
for he
eight ?)
imitations ound n this
collection f
58
coins,
we
can be
reasonably
ertain hat the restwere
products
f
Athens
hat had found
theirwaytoEgyptsome time nthe fourthentury.Where here smuch
more
nformationo
be
gleaned,
however,
s from he
countermarkshat
many
of these
coins bear.
Over
the
course of
time,
from
he sixth
century
BC
on,
the use and
functionof
countermarks
resumably
underwent
gradual
develop-
ment:
[i]t
is the
common view
that the
early
countermarkswere
private
marks of
ownership
r
guarantees
of
worth,
but
that
during
the
hellenistic
period
countermarking
ecame a
monopoly
of
civic
or
royal
authority Howgego
1985:
1;
cf. Le Rider
1975).
Marking
oins
with
countermarks,uts,
and
graffitiwas an enormouslywidespread
practice
n
the Levant and
Egypt
during
he
Persian
period sixth
to
fourth
enturies
BC;
Elayi
and Lemaire
1998),
arguably
more so than
in the
Aegean.
Even
so,
there
has been little
evidence to
suggest
that
any
Egyptian
or
Levantine
markswere
applied by
civic or
other state
authorities rather
than
private
merchants,
bankers,
or the like.
However,
two countermarks
Figure
1 nos.
9 and
38)
and two related
type-elements
ppearing
on
Egyptian-made
oins
could
point
to some
official
i.e.,
non-private)
use
of countermarks n
Egypt
(van
Alfen
2002).
A
closer ook at
the behavior
of
countermarking
n coins with
a
(presumed) Egyptian
provenancemay
provide
additional corrobora-
tion.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
14/27
68 Peter G. van Alfen
One
of the most
ubiquitous
countermarks
ound on the owls is the
so-called
quatrefoilFigure
1 no.
1)
that
appears
almost
exclusively
n
coins
with
an
Egyptian provenance
pre-dating
he
Ptolemies.10 o date
I have located
66 individual
occurrences
f this mark
appearing
on 42
different
oins;
in this
study
alone of 58
owls,
the
mark
appears
41
times
on 20 different oins.
By way
of
comparison,
he next most
frequently ppearing
countermark
mong
these 58 owls is the
nefer
symbol Figure 1 no. 9), whichappears seven timeson sevendifferent
coins.
There is little doubt that
the
quatrefoil
was in
fourth-century
Egypt
the most
prevalent
ountermark.
Aside
from he
considerable
number
of
occurrences,
he manner n
which
the
quatrefoil
ppears
on coins
is
notably
different romother
countermarks:
)
multiple
ndividual
quatrefoil
marks
appear
on the
same
coin,
sometimes s
many
as
five
per
side;11
2)
quatrefoil
marks
cancel 12
ther
quatrefoil
marks,
but not
other
types
of countermarks
(other non-quatrefoil
marks
rarely
cancel one another but instead are
placed side by side);13 3) other types of marks cancel quatrefoil
marks.14
There are
two
primary mplications
o be derived from hese obser-
vations:
1)
the
quatrefoil
marks
were
applied
to the coins before
ny
other
marks,
and
2)
their semiotic
value was
low,
so
they
were
frequently
anceled.15
Also,
the
presumed
ommon
practice
of
applying
10
While here s
continuity
rom number
f thecountermarksound ere o
those
hat
ppear
n the coins
f
Ptolemy
,
the
quatrefoilirtuallyisappears
fromight. nly ne coinofPtolemy in the ANS'sextensiveollectionf this
ruler's
ssues ears
his
ountermark
1974.26.5401).
11
E.g.
Endicotťs oard o.
6.
12
I have
dopted
his
erm,
or ackofa better
ne,
o
describe
he
practice
f
overstriking
ne
counterstamp
ith
nother.
13
Examples
f he
uatrefoil
anceling
nother
uatrefoil:
ndicotťs
oards os.
2,
3, 5, 6, 9,
11 andMiscellaneouso.
9.
Examples
f
ide-by-sidelacement
fnon-
quatrefoil
ountermarks:
ndicotťs
oard os.
, 6, 9, 11,12,
14;
Miscellaneousos.
4, 11,15,
24.
14
E.g.
Endicotťs oard os.
,
4, 11;
Miscellaneous
o. 10.
15
On
coins
with
multiple on-quatrefoil
ountermarks,
lthough
hey
might
e
closely acked, arely o the countermarksctuallyouch r cancel neanother.
Thedesire
o
preserve
he
egibility
f he
previous
arksndicates
hat
hey
ontin-
uedto serve ome
urpose,
erhaps
o establishome
ype
f
pedigree
or he oin.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
15/27
Two Unpublished Hoards 69
one countermark
er
coin
per
handling
would
imply
that those owls
with
more than one
quatrefoil
mark had
passed through
the
same
hands
or
process
more than once.
If
the function f these marks was
to
prove ownership
or
guarantee
the metal or
weight
of
the
coin,
there was
little need to
reapply
successively
the same mark
every
time the coin
reappeared
for
nspection;
a
single
mark would suffice
to
convey
the
message.
The behavioral characteristics f the
quatrefoil,
however, point to a process rather mechanical in its application,
suggestive
f
an almost
mindless dministrative
epetitiveness.
ecause
the
quatrefoil
ppears
on
the
coins
chronologically
eforeother
coun-
termarks,
he
implication
hen s that
the
mark was
applied
before he
coins reached a wider
(public)
circulation.
The
manner
of
application
and the
possibility
of
(temporarily)
estricted
irculationall
suggest
that the mark
may
have served
some administrative
urpose,perhaps
for nternal
ccountingby
an
organization
ike the state
treasury.
ince
the markshad no value or understood
meaning
outside
of
this
context,
subsequentusers feltno need to preserve hem.
Finally,
we turnto the dates of Nahman's and Endicotťs hoards.
As
noted
above,
the
presence
of the
pz-style
wl in Nahman's hoard
brings
the date of burial for
the hoard down to the middle of the fourth
century,
but because of
the
greater
number of
early fourth-century
types,
the date is
probably
not
much
after
c.
350.
By
contrast,
Endi-
cotťs
hoard is
composed
almost
entirely
of
pi-style
ssues,
thus
the
date
for the hoard is
likely
closer
to the end
of
the
century.
t is
worth
noting
hat other
hoards
found
n
Egypt,
like the Tell el-Athrib
(
GCH
1663)
and
Memphis
hoards
GCH
1660),
which ike Endicotťs
hoard are
composed
of a
high
proportion
f
pi-style
owls,
also feature
coins that are
heavily
countermarked.
he coincidence f
the return f
Persian
rule
to
Egypt
(in
343
BC)
and the
apparent greaterfrequency
of
countermarking
fter
350,
especially
with the
quatrefoil
mark,
is
suggestive
f further ersian administrative
versight
n the
monetary
economy
n
Egypt
afterc.
340.16
16
See van Alfen
2002)
or
urtheriscussionfPersian
monetary
dministration
in
Egypt.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
16/27
70 Peter G. van Alfen
REFERENCES
Bingen,
J. 1973. Le trésormonétaire
Thorikos 1969.
Thorikos
:7-59.
Buttrey,
T. V. 1982. Pharaonic
imitationsof Athenian
tetradrachms.
In: T. Hackens
and R.
Weiller,eds.,
Proceedings f
the9th nterna-
tional
Congress
f
Numismatics,
erne
September
979 vol
I,
pp.
137-140. Louvain-la-Neuve
and
Luxembourg:
Association nterna-
tionale des NumismatesProfessioneis.
Dattari,
G. 1905. Comments
on a hoard of Athenian tetradrachms
found
n
Egypt.
Journal
International
Archéologie umismatique
8:103-114.
Elayi,
J. and
A.
Lemaire. 1998.
Graffiti
t
contremarques
uest-sémiti-
ques
sur les monnaies
grecques
t
proche-orientales.
laux 13. Milan:
Edizioni
Ennerre.
Flament,
C.
2001. À
propos
des
styles
d'imitations théniennes éfinis
par
T. V.
Buttrey.
Revue
belge
de
numismatique
47:39-50.
Howgego,C. J. 1985. Greekmperial ountermarks:tudies n theprovin-
cial
coinage of
the
Roman
Empire.
London:
Royal
Numismatic
Society.
IGCH.
Thompson,
M.,
O.
Morkholm,
nd
C.
M.
Kraay,
eds. 1973.
An
inventoryf
Greek
oin hoards.
New York: American Numismatic
Society.
Kroll,
J. H. 1993. The
Greek
coins. Athenian
Agora
26.
Princeton:
AmericanSchool of Classical Studies
in
Athens.
Kroll,
J. H. 2001.
A
small
bullion findfrom
Egypt.
AmericanJournal
ofNumismatics 3:1-20.
Le
Rider,
G. 1975.
Contremarques
et
surfrappes
dans
l'antiquité
grecque.
n: J.-M.
Dentzer,
P. Gauthier nd
T.
Hackens,
Numisma-
tique
antique problèmes
t méthodes
pp.
27-55.
Nancy-Louvain:
Editions Peeters.
Mosser,
S.
M. 1941. The
Endicott
gift of
Greek
and Roman
coins
including
he
catacombs
hoard.
NumismaticNotes
and
Monographs
97. New York: American
Numismatic
ociety.
Naster,
P. 1948. Un
trésorde tétradrachmes
théniens rouvé à
Tell el
Maskhouta
Egypte).
Revue
belge
de
numismatique
4:5-14.
Newell,
E. T. 1924.
Egyptian
coin hoards.
The Numismatist.
April):
301-302.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
17/27
Two Unpublished Hoards 71
Newell,
E.
T.
1927. Two recent
gyptian
hoards.
Numismatic
Notes
and
Monographs
3.
New York:
AmericanNumismatic
ociety.
Robinson,
E.
S.
G. 1947. The Tell el-Mashkuta hoard of
Athenian
tetradrachms. umismatic
Chronicle
:115-121.
SNG
BYB .
1961.
Sylloge
nummorum
raecorum
the
Burton Y.
Berry
collection,
art
1
Macedonia
to
Attica
New
York: AmericanNumis-
matic
Society.
SNG DelepierreH. Nicolet,J. Delepierre,M. Delepierre,and G. Le
Rider. 1983.
Sylloge
nummorum
raecorum
France:
Bibliothèque
Nationale,
collection ean
et
Marie
Delepierre.
Paris:
Bibliothèque
Nationale.
Van
Alfen,
P.
G. 2002. The owls
from he 1989
Syria
hoard,
with
a
review of
pre-Macedonian
oinage
in
Egypt.
AmericanJournal
of
Numismatics
4:1-57.
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
18/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
19/27
Plate
13
Nahman's
Hoard
Two
Unpublished
oards
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
20/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
21/27
Plate
14
EndicotťsHoard
Two
Unpublished
oards
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
22/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
23/27
Plate 15
Tell el-Maskhouta
IGCH 1649)
Two
Unpublished
oards
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
24/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
25/27
Plate
16
Miscellaneous
wls
Two
Unpublished
oards
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 23 Jan 2016 12:41:21 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
26/27
-
8/20/2019 Two unpublished hoards and other owls from Egypt / Peter G. van Alfen
27/27
Plate
17
Two
Unpublished
oards