the archaic owls of athens : classification and chronology / [c.m. kraay]

8/12/2019 The archaic owls of Athens : classification and chronology / [C.M. Kraay]

1/29

THE

NUMISMATIC CHRONICLE

AND

JOURNAL

OF THE

ROYAL NUMISMATIC SOCIETY

Edited

by

JOHN

WALKER

M.A. .UTT.

.S.A.

Keeper

f

CoinsBritish useum

E. S. G.

ROBINSON

C.B.E.

M.A.

LITT.

.B.A.

.S.A.

and

C. H. V.

SUTHERLAND

M.A. LITT. .M.A.

Deputy eeper

f

Coins

shmolecmuseum

SIXTH SERIES

Volume

XVI

LONDON

THE ROYAL

NUMISMATIC SOCIETY

1966

This content downloaded from 83.85.130.64 on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 13:48:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


2/29


3/29

THE

ARCHAIC

OWLS OF ATHENS:

CLASSIFICATION AND CHRONOLOGY1

[SEE

PLATE

XIII]

The

date

and

circumstances

f the

ntroductionf theowl

coinage

of

Athens,

estined o

become

one of the

most

prolific,

nfluentialnd

lasting oinagesof theancientworld,have been longdebated;yet

even

oday, espite reatly

ncreased

nowledge

f archaicGreek

rt,

disagreement

eems as wide as

ever,

and

the dates

proposed

still

fluctuate

rom nd to

end of

the sixth

entury.

In

1858Beul2

elt

nable

to hazard

nyprecise

ate for he

arliest

owls,

lthough

e believed hat

omemust ntedate hePersian

Wars

and was

obviously

ttracted

y

the dea ofa

synchronism

etween he

expulsion

f

Hippias

in 510

and the nitiation f the owl

coinage.

Imhoof-Blumer

n

18823 nd Six in

18954

ssentially

ollowed

eul,

but

thought

ippias

himself as

responsible

or he

coinage.

Head,

however, n 18875went to the other extreme nd attributed he

earliest wls to

Solon

at

the

beginning

f the ixth

entury;

hisview

he

ater

modified

n

favour

f

566,

giving

he nitiativeo Pisistratus.6

Another

hampion

f

Pisistratus,

hough

t a

slightly

ater

period

of

his

career,

was E.

Babelon,

who

favoured 50.7

That this ntermediate

view has

become

the orthodox

osition

oday

s

largely

ue

to the

work fC.

T.

Seltman,8

ho

surpassed

is

predecessors

n

elaboration

of

argument

nd

in his

detailed

reatment

f the

coinage.

A similar

date was

impliedby

Ashmole's

stylisticomparison

f the head

of

Athena

on a

single

oin with imilarheads

in

vases

and

sculpture.9

1

n

writing

his

aper

have een

specially

ndebtedo wo

cholars,

r.E.

S.

G.

Robinson,

ith

homhave

epeatedly

iscussedthenian

roblems,

nd

Mr. . J.

.

Raven

f

Aberdeen,

ho as

enerouslyut

t

my

isposal

is wn

ery

etailed

otes.

Another

bvious

ebt

s oDr.C. T. Seltman

although

have ound

yself

ompelled

to

disagree

ithome f

his

onclusions,

he

resentaper

ests

ery

argely

n

the

material

e

has ssembled

nd lassified.

LesMonnaies

Athnes,

p.

3

ff.

8

Annuairee a Soc.

ranc,

e

Num.

882,

p.

9f.

4

N.C.

1895,

p.

175 .

5

H.N.'

p.

311;

f. .M.C.Attica

1888),

.

xx.

6

H.N

2

1911),

p.

68 .

7

Traiti. 1

1907),

ol. 35.

8

Athens

its

History

nd

Coinage

efore

he ersiannvasion

1924),

p.

40

f. n

support

f 61.More

ecently

eltmanas

referred

ead's evisedate f

66

N.C.

1946,

.

101 ndGreek

oins2,

. 49).

Trans.nt.Num. ongr.936pp.17 t.n viewf he acthattylisticriteriahaveed ifferentcholarsowidelyifferingateshavemade ouse f hemn his

article,

uthave riedo

rely

n

what

eemedo me he

more

bjective

riteriaf

internal

evelopment

ndhoard

nalysis.

This content downloaded from 50.63.197.136 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 13:55:35 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


4/29

44 C. M. KRAAY

A

recent

upporter

f Head's

original

olonian

date s H. A.

Cahn,

while

Gabrici

agrees

with he

Hippian

date

of Imhoof-Blumer

nd

Six.1 t s the im ofthis

aper

o

revive with ome

new

rguments

the old

view

that the

owl

coinage began

in the ast

quarter

of

the

sixth

entury.

The nature

f

the

roblem

The

owl

coinage

of

Athens,

o far s it comes within

he

scope

of

this

paper, comprises

wo main

phases;

in

the

earlier

of these

the

helmet fAthena s unwreathed PI.XIII. 1],whereas n thesecond

it is wreathed

witholive and

a

small

waning

moon is added

above

the

back of the owl on the

reverse

Pl.

XIII.

2];

these

wo

additions

weremade

early

n

the fifth

entury.2

he

unwreathed

wls

are not

only extremely

umerous,

ut also

vary

considerably

n

style

nd

fabric;

this

accountsfor

the

wide

range

of dates

proposed

for

the

start f the owl

coinage,

fordifferent

cholarshave selected ifferent

groups

of coins as

representing

he

earliest ssues. Those who have

selected

primitive-looking

r

clumsily

xecuted

pecimens e.g.

PI.

Xm.

3]

have

been

drawn o

early

dates,

while hosewho have been

guidedby early etter-formsombined, s they re,with dvanced

style

nd

technique

e.g.

Pl. XIII.

4]

have favoured laterdate. The

date, therefore,

f the

earliest wls cannot

profitably

e

discussed

until he

preliminaryuestion,

which wls are

the

earliest,

as been

finally

nswered.

Accordingly,

he

following

ectionswillbe

devoted

to

assembling

vidence

which

bears

upon

the classification f the

early

wls.

Classification:

he

vidence

f

technique

In

some series he

development

f

technique rovides

he surest

guideto the equenceof ssues;at Selinus, or xample, hedevelop-

ment

of

the reverse

rom

plain

ncuse

square

to an

incuse

square

containing

leaf,

nd

later leaf

nd

legend,

s clear nd

logical.

But

for

the

archaic

owls of Athens

techniqueprovides

no

such clear

guidance;

though

tylemay

vary,

ll

owls

have two

fully

eveloped

types,

nd

most are

struck

n a

uniform

echniquewhereby

ies

carved

n

deep

intaglio

re

impressed

pon

dumpy

lans

which

end

to be

slightly

oo

small to

accommodate

hem.

Yet there s

some

evidence f technical

evelopment

hich s

nottaken

nto

ccount

by

champions

f

the earlier

ates.

1Cahn, useumelveticum946,.133;Gabrici,ecnicacronologiaellemonete

Greche

p.

54.

2

Their

ate s

discussed

elow,

p.

55

ff.



5/29

THE ARCHAIC OWLS OF ATHENS 45

The owls

were not the earliest

oinage

of

Athens,

but were

pre-

ceded

by

those

anepigraphic

oins with

changing

ypes

known as

'wappenmnzen'.1

Within his eries here s

clear

evidence f tech-

nical

development.

he earliest

idrachms ave

upon

their everses

a

simple

ncuse

square

divided

diagonally

Pl.

XIII.

5].

Upon

the

latest

didrachms, owever,

he

first

tep

towardthe

adoption

of

a

reverse

ype

s

taken

by

the nsertion f

a

small

panther's

ead

into

one

triangle

f

the ncuse

quare

[Pl.

XIII.

6].

Finally,

n the

wap-

penmnzen' etradrachmshepanther's ead oroccasionally bull's

head)

has

grown

o

as to fill

he

whole

ncuse

quare

and

has become

a true everse

ype

Pl.

XIII.

7].

The

technique

f

he

wappenmnzen'

is

essentially

he ame

throughout,

lthough

t s seen n

itsmostdis-

tinctive orm

pon

the

tetradrachms.hese

are

thin nd

spread,

nd

the

flans

ppear

to have been disks flattened efore

triking;2

he

incuse

square

s small and

neat,

fitting

omfortably

ithin he total

area of

the

reverse.

he

wappenmnzen'

an

be

regarded

s

a

single

series

n

the course of which true

reverse

ype

was

developed.3

f

this

e

accepted,

hen

t

would

be reasonable o

expect

hat

he

arliest

owlsshould show some technical ffinityith he wappenmnzen'.

Classification:

he vidence

f

design

nd

epigraphy

The

technique

f the

greatmajority

f

owls s

noticeably

ifferent

from

hat of the

wappenmnzen'.

The

flans are thicker nd more

globular;

the incuse

square

of the reverse s

distinctlyarger4

nd

rarely

its

ompletely

nto the

flan;

the surround f the

square

s

no

longer

flat,

but

usually

swells

up

on each

side in a

gentle

urve.5

1

here

ccept

ithout

iscussion

he iewhathiseriess

Attic,

hich

eemsobe

confirmed

y

he

istribution

f indsswell s

by

he bvious

ppropriateness

f ome

typesuch sowl nd mphora.eltmanas ostulatedcertainlternationetween

the

atest

ssuesf

wappenmnzen'

nd

he arliest

wls;

here

s,

however,

odis-

agreement

bout he

riority

f he arliest

wappenmnzen'

ver he

irstwls.

8

This

ppears

o

followromhe act hat

henhe

dge

f he everse

unch

as

broken

ff,

he

lat

ieldf he urround

xtendsnto

he

rea

f he ncuse

quare

without

ny

hange

f evel

cf.

eltman,

l.

xiv,

261);

he lat

urface

s

thus he

original

urfacef

he

lank,

ntouched

y

he

ie,

nd snot

roduced

n

he ct f

striking.

owe his

oint

o

Mr.Raven.

8

I donotmeano

mply

hathere

ere o

gaps

f ime etweenndividual

ssues,

but

nly

hat

hey

eed ot ave

lternatedithoins

f

differentabric.eltman

s

reconstruction

nvolves

n alternation

fowls nd

wappenmnzen'

to

orrespond

withhe

uccessive

scendancy

f

he

yrants

r heir

pponents)

nd

separation

f

wappenmnzen

didrachmsith

anther

ead romhe etradrachms

y hirty-six

years.

4

Most f hencusequaresf hewappenmnzen'etradrachmsllustratedySeltmannpl.xivmeasurerom3 o15mm.;mostwlsmeasure6mm. rmore.

6

The easons

presumably

hat

he

lans ere o

onger

lattenedefore

triking

but eft

n more r

ess

lobularhape.



6/29

46 C. M. KRAAY

There

are,

however,

few owls which

reproduce xactly

he tech-

nique

of the

wappenmnzen'

Pl.

XIIL

8].

These

are

assembled

n

Seltman's

Group

H,1

but fromhis

plates

xiii and xiv t can be seen

that

the small

incuse

squares

were

soon abandoned

in favour

of

larger

nes.2

incethis

group

ontains he

only

owls

which

how

any

affinity

f

technique

with he

wappenmnzen',

here

s

a

prima

facie

case for

regarding

t as the

earliest

roup

of

owls,

ssued

soon

after

the

'wappenmnzen'

tetradrachms.

oes this

group

exhibit

ny

otherfeatureswhichcan be legitimatelynterpreteds signsof an

earlyposition

n the

owl series?

The

normal

everse

ype

f an

Athenian wl has thebird urned

o

the

right,

with

sprig

of

olive above

its

back in the

top

left-hand

corner

nd the

ethnic

AGE

written

ownwards n the

right.

rom

this

schemethere

s

normally

o

variation,

ven the

shape

of

the

sprig

of

olive

being

standardized

s a

long

central tem

with

berry

flanked

y

two

outward-spreading

eaves

Pl.

XIII.

1,

13].

Yet

in

the

small

Group

H,

which

omprises nly ighteen

everse

ies,

there s

an

astonishing

mountof

variation.On

six dies the

owl is

turned o

the eft nd onthree f these heolive s displacedbya large rescent

[PI.

Xm.

8,

10]

and

on three

more the ethnic nd the olive have

exchanged

orners.

n

fact,

ut of the

eighteen

everse ies

only

nine

have the

lements fthe

ype rranged

n

themannerwhich lsewhere

was

strictly

tandardized.

assing

to the next

group

of owls

(Selt-

man's

Group

L

on

plate

xv),

almost ll variation n the reverse

ype

has

disappeared;

apart

from

single

reversal f the

positions

of

ethnic nd

olive,

ll

that

urvivess

a

certain laboration f the

prig

of

olive

Pl.

XIII.

11],

which s

nevertheless

ending

owards ts final

form

f one

berry

nd two

flanking

eaves.

Variation n thereverseypesthus onfined o twogroups fowls

only,

nd on

Seltman's

reconstruction

irst rose

after

period

of

forty

ears uring

which he

reverses ftheowlshad shownno

varia-

tion

whatsoever

n

composition.

While t would be rash to

deny

he

possibility

f such

variation

ppearing emporarily

n

special

ssues

in

the

midst f an

otherwise

nvarying

eries,

n

alternative

xplana-

tion

should be

considered.

ince some of

the coins

n

Group

H,

in

1

Seltman

ecognizes

he

ffinity

ithhe

wappenmnzen

but

nterprets

he wls

as

special

anathenaic

ssuesf

he

eign

f

Hippias,

ome

ortyears

fter

hentro-

ductionf

he wl

oinage.

n

pl.

xiii,

195-P244s

urely

isplaced

ince

ts everse

isquite ifferentromhe thersnthe ame late. 246sactuallyombinedith

A197 n

pl.

xiv,

nd

notwith

196

s shown.

On

pl.

xiv,

198 s

combined

ith

oth

large

nd

small

ncuse

quare.



7/29


which

variation

mainly

occurs,

show technical

ffinities

ith the

'wappenmnzen',

t

is

surely

ossible

that

Group

H

represents

he

next ssue

after he

wappenmnzen',

nd therefore

he

firstssue

of

owls.

Variationwould thenbe due

merely

o

experiment

ith

type

which

had

not

yet

been

crystalized

nto ts

final

orm.

Conservatism

is such n

outstanding

haracteristic

fthe

owl

coinage

hatvariation

is

much

more o be

expected

t its

beginning

han

n

the

middle

f

an

otherwise

nvarying

eries.

The claim of Group H to include the earliestowls is greatly

strengthened

y

a consideration f the letter

orms n the

ethnic.

Though

these cannot

yield

a close absolute

date,

the

presence

f

earlier

etter orms hould

be some

guide

to relative

hronology.

n

the

development

f theAttic

cript

tends o

be

displaced

by

O

and

the

with

he

drooping

ars becomes

rectangular,

ut

at

any

given

moment here s much

verlap

fdifferentorms.

mong

he

ighteen

reverse

ies

of

Group

H

four

have

,

and

epsilon

s

nearly lways

moreor

less

drooping

Pl.

XIII.

4,

8]

in

the

nineteen everse

ies of

Group

L

occurs ixtimes

nd

epsilon

s

againnearly lways

droop-

ing [PI. Xin. 11, 12]. In all othergroups,ncludingll thoseplaced

by

Seltman

arlier han

Group

H,

O

is nvariable nd

epsilon

uncom-

promisingly

ectangular

Pl.

XIII.

1, 3,

13].

This distributionf etter

forms s

important

onfirmation

hat the

earliestowls are to

be

sought

n

Group

H;

Group

L then

follows,

n

which,

despite

the

survival

f some

early

features,

he details of the reverse

ype

are

largely

tandardized.

Threereasons

have

now been examined or

upposing

hat

he rue

course

of the

development

f Athenian

oinage

was

from

wappen-

mnzen'

didrachms,

hroughwappenmnzen'

etradrachms,

o owl

tetradrachmsGroup H): the reasonswere 1) the technical ffinity

existing

etween he

wappenmnzen'

etradrachms

nd some of the

owls of

Group

H,

(2)

theoccurrence

n

Group

H

(and

nowhere

lse)

of a

high proportion

f what seem

to be

early

and

experimental

versions

f the reverse

ype,

nd

(3)

the use in

Groups

H and

L

of

early

etter

ormswhich

are

absent from

ll

other

groups

of owls.

But this

s

only

the

half

of what

needs to be

proved,

for

Seltman

placed

Groups

C, E, F, Gi,

and Gii

either arlier hanor

as

early

s

Groups

H and

L;

the econdhalfof the

rgument

must

demonstrate

that his

onsiderable

ody

of

coinage

s

actually

ater

han

GroupsH and L.



8/29

48 C M. KRAAY

Classification

the vidence

f

hoards

Hoards

are difficult

o evaluatebecause

usually

he

circumstances

of

neither ormation

or

burial an be determined ith

nycertainty.

A

single

hoard

may

be

whollyuntypical

nd its contents

may

thus

provide

misleading

vidence.

f, however,

number f

hoards show

common

features

r

combine

to

produce

a coherent

icture,

heir

evidence

obviously

deservesmuch

more attention. his

is

not the

place

to

embark

upon

a

detailed

analysis

of archaic Greek silver

hoards.For thepresent urpose t willbe sufficientoobtain rough

idea of

the time

when,

nd the

sequence

n

which,

wls

first

ppear

in

them.

Archaic

hoards

are found

fairly requently,

ut

of

comparatively

fewhave

adequate

detailsbeen secured

before

ispersal.

our well-

recorded

rchaic

hoards

do not ncludeAthenian

wls.

1.

The

Persepolis

hoard1 s

important

ecause it is

exactly

ated

by

ccompanying

uneiformocuments

o

515.

t

contained, owever,

only

four ilver

oins,

so that

no

great

ignificance

an

be

attached

to

the

absence

of

any particular

ssue.

2. TheRas Shamrahoard2 ontained hirty-sevenoins,nearly ll

from

he North

Greek

area. It

might

e

argued

thatthis

represents

a

single

onsignment,

rought

irect

erhapsby

a Thasian

trader,3

in

which,

herefore,

o

Athenian oins

are

to

be

expected.

ts date s

obviously

arly, erhaps

.

525/520.

3.

The Demanhur

hoard

165

coins)

s a varied ccumulation.4t

had

a substantial

North Greek

nucleus,

ut also numbers

f

coins

from

central

Greece,

the

islands,

and

Asia

Minor. Of

particular

interest,

s

being

close

neighbours

f

Athens,

re

the sixteen

oins

of

Aegina

and six

of

Corinth;

he

atter re all

of

the

early

variety

without everse ype.The date s perhaps . 510/500.

4.

The

Myt-Rahineh

oard5 ontained

wenty-three

oins

and

was

again

very

mixed,

ncluding

oth

Aegina

and Corinth.To some

extent t

repeats

he

contents

f the

Demanhur

hoard,

although

he

latter

certainly

ontains

ater coins. It should

probably

be

dated

c. 520.

These

four

hoards

thus fall within he last

quarter

of the sixth

century.

t

might

e

argued

that the absence of owls could

not be

1

Trans.nt. um.

ongr.

936

pp.

13 .

a

Mlangesyriensfferts

M. Ren

ussaud,

p.

61

f.

8Herod.l.44for templef he hasian erculestTyre.4

Z.f.N. 927, p.

8ff.

6

R.N.

861,

p.

14

f.



9/29


significant,

ecause

'wappenmnzen',

which are

certainly

f an

earlier

ate,

are

equally

bsent;

but thiswould

not

be

a valid

objec-

tion,

because

wappenmnzen'

didrachms o

not seem

normally

o

have

travelled

arfrom

Athens,1

ince

they

re

nearly lways

found

in Central

Greece.

Wappenmnzen'

etradrachms

ere

perhaps

oo

rare for their bsence to

be

significant,

lthough,

s will be seen

shortly, hey

did

travel

far afield.

Owls

certainly

ravelled,

nd

a

minimum onclusion

from he evidence

of these

hoards would be

thatbythe astquarter f the sixth enturywlswerenotyet ithercommonor

popular

n theNear East.

Soon

after

00,

however,

he

picture hanges.

Three

hoards are

here

significant.

he

great

Taranto hoard2 s

important

ecause its

date of burial

an be fixed

airly losely

from he

chronology

f

the

S.

Italian ncuse

oinswhich t

principally

ontains.

A fixed

oint

n

the

chronology

f

these

ssues

s

provided y

the

ncuse

oins

of

Sybaris,

which ome to

an end with hedestructionf the own n

510;

at this

time the

thin,

pread

flans had

only ust begun

to contract.The

Taranto

hoard,

however,

ontained fewcoins

of

Metapontum

n

which hecontractionadprogressed gooddeal further;3dateof

burial

n the

first ecade

of the

fifth

entury

hereforeeemsreason-

able.

The hoard contained

five

Athenian

owls,

all

from eltman's

Group

H and

all with he

neat,

small ncuse

square

reminiscent

f

the

'wappenmnzen'

tetradrachms.4

t is

interesting

o note that

there

was also

in

thehoard

a

'wappenmnzen'

etradrachm5

nd

an

alliance

coin

of Chalcis

and

Thebes struck

n the same

technique.

The Benha

hoard s

thought

o

have been buried

bout 485.6

ts

contents

ncluded

our

more

or less ntact

wls,

s well as

fragments

cut

from ive thers.

hree

ntact

pecimens

elong

o the

atter

art

of Seltman'sGroup H; the obversedies are in general imilar o

Seltman's

A193,

A194

(pl.

xiii); among

the reverses

ccurs

P249

[Pl.

XIII.

4].

Of

the

fragments

ne

may

lso

be

attributed

o

Group

H.

The

fourth

ntact

coin

belongs

to

Group

L,

with

an obverse

die

1

4

Wappenmnzen

didrachms

ave een

ecorded

romchubin

nPoland

Noe2,

no.

33

nd

eltman,

p.

33,

48)

nd

romhe akha

Egypt)

oard

Noe2,

o.

88).

The ormer

s a notorious

umismatic

ystery

f

whichhe

rovenance

s

far

rom

being

bove

uspicion.

heSakha

hoard*

omprised

oins f

such

aried ates

(including

t

east ne

modern

orgery)

hatt

an

hardlyepresent

single

nadul-

terated

ind;

here

sno

priori

eason,

owever,

hy

ts

wo

wappenmnzen

should

not

ave een ound

n

Egypt.

2

R.N.

912,

p.

1 f.

8

Noe2,

o.

1052.

4Seltman,ataloguenos. 856)andc), 86a), nd 87a)andb.5

Ibid.,

o.318

a).

6

N.C.

1930,

p.

3

ff.;

.C.

1931,

p.

6

ff.

B

6150

E



10/29

50 C. M. KRAAY

similar o A214

(pl.

xv);

a

fragment

esembles

A223

in the

same

group.

Thus theowls

n

the

Benha hoard

are

slightly

ater han hose

from

Taranto;

as at

Taranto,

there

s also a

'

wappenmnzen

tetradrachmn the hoard.

The

third

hoard,

which s from

agazig,1

musthave ben

buried

substantially

ater,

or t

already

ontains

ighteen

wlswith

wreathed

helmet nd

waning

moon;

but there re

also

present

ixteen f the

archaic

unwreathed

ype.

Most of

these re

attributedo

Groups

F

and Gi (discussedfurtherelow),and thusbelongto thosegroupsthe

temporal

elation f

whichto

Groups

H and L

is now

under

discussion.

Two

conclusions re seen

to

emerge

rom

study

f the

hoards:

(1)

that

owls do not occur n

hoardsuntil fter

00,

and

2)

thatthe

order

n which he

groups ppear

in

the

hoards s

first

and L

in

close

proximity,

nd thenF

and

G after

n

interval.

hese

conclu-

sions

agree

with hose

lready

eached

bove

concerning

he

priority

of

H and L.

But stillmore

nformationan be

extracted

rom he

owls

of the

Zagazig hoard. Of thesixteen arlier wls one is whollybarbarous

withboth

types

eversed.

f

the

remaining

ifteen,

ix are

classified

according

o

Seltman

s follows:3

Zagazig

No.

Seltman

at

No.

190

140

(Gp.

F,

546-535)

191

133

b)

(Gp.

F,

546-535)

192

Jail

rom ame

rev.

die4 133

a)

(Gp.

F,

546-535)

193

J

-

(Gp.

F,

546-535)

194

170

(Gp.

Gi,

546-527)

196

164

c)

(Gp.

Gi,

546-527)5

199 54 (Gp.C, 561-556)

The

remaining ight

oins were

badly

corroded,

ut,

so

far

s their

condition

llowed,

were

udged

similar

o the

bove. The

seven

oins

which an

be

accurately

dentified

elong

o a

clearly

efined

roup.

Three re

linked

by

a

common

reverse

ie,

and

these hare

with

no.

190

therare

feature f a

row of

studs

upon

the

helmet f

Athena

see

p.

52

below).

The

remaining

hree re

of

the

same

general

ype,

1

Z.f.N.

927,

p.

104 f.

2

See

further

n

pp.

2

f.

3

Seltmanefers

o his oard

s

*

Aegean

ind*

cf. .f.N. 927, .

120

.).

4

According

o

Seltmanos. 91

nd 92

ave he

ame

bverseie.

8This oins llustratednlynHirschat.vii, l. v,no.270.The everseie

appears

obe

Seltman

s

P126;

rom

he

hotograph,

owever,

he

bverse

oes

ot

seem o

be

the ame

s Seltmans Al13

see

articularly

he

ar).



11/29


struck

pon

thick lans

which

re

usually

oo smallfor

he

dies;

the

clumsy

nd coarse-featured

eads of Athena

are surmounted

y

crest-holdersecoratedwith

prominentigzag pattern.

he some-

what ruder

tyle

f no.

199

s

reflectedn theearlier ate to

which

t

is

attributed

y

Seltman.

n

general,

owever,

here s no doubt

that

the

dentifiable

pecimens

rom

Zagazig

are all

approximately

on-

temporary,

nd there

s no reason o

suppose

hat he orroded

oins

were

of

a

differentate or

series.

Accordingo Seltman's hronologyoneof hese oinswereminted

later han

527 and

all

may

be as

early

s

546.

Also in the

hoard,

s

mentioned

bove,

were

eighteen

wls with wreathed

helmet nd

waning

moon. The date of

these

hanges

s discussed

urtherelow

(pp.

57

f.),

but ince hese

xamples

re

notof he arliest

roup

o have

these

dditions,1

hey

annothave been

minted

arlier

han

480,

and

may

be

substantially

ater

till. f all

these ates re

correct,

hen here

is an

irreducible

ap

of

fifty ears

between

hetwo

groups

f

owls

n

this

hoard,

nd the

possibility

fa

much

onger

nterval.

he

presence

in a

single

oard

oftwo

groups

o far

part

n

time ould

be

explained

on thehypothesishat hey epresentwohomogeneous aymentsf

owlsmade at differentimes. he

ultimate

wner,

moreover,

eednot

have received heearlier

roup

until

ong

after

t was minted. ut on

the current

ating,

whatever

ircumstances

re

postulated,

t

does

remain

omewhat

urprising

hat the earlier

group

survived

ndis-

persed

or t least half

century,2

nd that

n a

very

mixed

hoard,

n

whichAthenian

oins accountforwell

over third f

the

otal,

here

should

be no

examples

f

Athenian oins ssued between bout 527

and

480.

Some

furtherimilar vidence s

provided y

the

record,

ncomplete

as it s,of a hoard of Athenian ndChiancoins discovered n Chios

in

1919.3

Of

theearlier hian

coins,

whichhave no

amphora

n

front

of

the

phinx,

herewas

only

one in

the

hoard,

s

against

more han

six

of the ater

ype

with

mphora.

The

amphora

was added

early

n

the fifth

entury,

o that he hoard will have been

buried ome time

after

bout 490.4

From thishoard three wls

are

recorded:

1

On he arliest

thena'sreathas

our

eaves;

his

as heneducedo hree

as

in he

agazig

oard).

2

The acthat

hreeut

f evenoins

re

romhe ame everseie

mplies

hat

t

least

art

f he

roup

ad

nevereen

ispersed

nto

irculation.

8

Seltman,

.

148

whereat.no.

78

recorded

s fromhis

ind)

hould

e dded

incol. .4OnlyoinswithoutmphoratDemanhur;mphoraypeslreadyppeart

Benha,

aranto,

nd

Zagazig;

f.

Baldwin,

.J.N.

914,

p.

0

f.for

he

ate

f

he

change.



12/29

52 C. M. KRAAY

Seltman

at. no. 183

Gp.

Gi,

546-527

190

Gp.

Gi,

546-527

278

Gp.

Gii,

527-510

Between he

Athenian

nd Chian

coins

n

thishoard there s

a dis-

crepancy

n

date

similar

o,

though

maller

han,

thatbetween he

two

groups

of

Athenian

oins

in

the

Zagazig

hoard.

Moreover,

n

both

cases,

the

discrepancy

s due

to the

dating

f the ame

group

of

coins,

namely

eltman

s

Group

G.

Athenian

owls do

not occur n hoards buried before

500;

when

theydo occurafter 00,the ssues datedbySeltmanfrom 61-527

are

not the

first o

appear.

Moreover,

when hese ssues

ppear,

they

do so

in

contexts

n

which oins

of such

early

date seem solated

nd

in need

of

special

explanation.

hese

considerations

re

sufficient

o

constitute

case for

reassigning

hese ssues to the end of the

early

owl

series,

nd

for

proposing

for

them

a date after

500.

Further

evidence

will

support

hese entative

onclusions.

Classification

the

vidence

f

thehelmets

Severalof

the

early

wls

n

the

Zagazig

hoard show

a row of

argepelletsornamentinghe bowl of Athena's helmet PL XHL 13]2 a

rare

feature

onfined o Seltman's

Group

F

(546-536).

These

pellets

presumably

epresent

ctual

rivets

n

contemporary

elmets,

ut,

since

hey

ccur na

single

roup nly,

he

ashion

was

probably

hort-

lived. The

date ofvases on

which

imilar

elmets

re

painted

hould

provide

ome

guidance

or hedate

of

he

oins.On

vases,

s on

coins,

the

fashion s

temporary

nd is

found

nly

n

the

workof

red-figure

painters

uch

as

Brygos,

ouris,

Kleophrades

nd

Alkimachos,

who

were

ctive

n

the

first

uarter

f

he

fifth

entury

ith

ome extension

into thesecondquarter; t does not extend ack into the sixth en-

tury.3

he

coins which

show this feature

re

likely,

herefore,

o

date

from he

first

uarter

f

the fifth

entury

ather han

the

third

quarter

of the

sixth.The

importance

f this conclusion s

that f

Group

F

is

to

be

dated

fter

00,

then

Group

G which

ccompanies

it n

the

Zagazig

hoard,

nd which s

essentially

imilar,

must ikewise

be

moved

down.

Thereafterhere s no reason for

eaving

Groups

C and

E

in

isolation

fifty ears

earlier.But about

Group

E

there

is moreto be

said.

1

Thematterf

his

ectionowe o

he indness

fDr.E.

S. G. Robinson.

2

Zagazig,os. 90-2.TypicalxamplesreC.V. .Oxfordp. 113, l. xi. (Brygos);.V.A. rit.

Mus.

p.

3,

pl.

xlvi.

and

p.

6,

pl.

iv,

(Alkimachos);urtwangler-Reichhold,

Griechische

asenmalr

,

pl.

34 nd 04

Kleophrades),

l.

53

Douris).



13/29


Classification

the vidence

f

the barbarous

issues

Some Athenian

owls,

most

of which are

collected

n

Seltman's

Group

E,

are

so

crudely

ngraved

hat

Seltman

originally

elieved

they

were truck t

a

Thracian

mint

peratedby

Pisistratusn exile

[PI.

Xm.

3,

9].1

He has

since abandoned

this

view

n

favour

f an

Athenian

rigin, espite

heir

ncompetence;

peaking

f

one

par-

ticular oin he has

said that it could

have been

made

at

any

time

between 60

and 490'.

2

But while t s true

oth

that

bad

coinage

an

be produced longsidegood at anytime, nd thatGroupE is the

workof

ncompetent,

ut

for ll

that

Athenian,

raftsmen,

roup

E

cannotfor

wo reasons

represent

he scattered

ncompetent

roduc-

tionsof the

Athenian

mint rom

period

of

fifty ears

or

more.

For

in

this

group

nstances f

coins

sharing

commondie are

unusually

common,

which

mplies

concentrated

roduction

f coins of

this

type

t a

particular

ime.

Moreover he

hoardof

these

oinsfound n

the

Acropolis

f

Athens n 18863

eads to

the ame

conclusion;

t was

presumably

ormed

rom

oinage

being

minted t a

particular

ime

rather han as a

result of the

deliberate

electionof the

ugliest

specimenso be found ncirculation.

The

crucial

uestion

s,

when

was

Group

E

minted? he

Acropolis

hoard is

here

ittle

help;

it

certainly

eached

ts

final

position

only

after

he

Persian

Wars because

t

ay among

the

debris

f the ack

of

the

Acropolis,

ut t could be

interpreted

s an

old

offering

iously

reburied. et the

coins are

obviously

erivative;

hey

re

unskilled

copies

of

more

successful

roductions

nd

should be

close to

their

prototypes

n

date. The

prototypes

re

clearly

Groups

F

[Pl.

XHI.

13]

and

G,

which

have the

same

umpy

abric,

nd in

which

here

s the

same

delight

n

exaggerating

he

igzagpattern

f the

rest

upporta simpledesignwellwithin hecompetence f themostunskilled

worker.

We

have

already

een reason

to

think

hat

Groups

F

and

G

are

to

be

dated

after

00,

but

the

case

willbe

stronger

f

a

late

date

for

Group

E

can be

demonstrated

ndependently

f

ts

relationship

to

Groups

F

and G.

After

ome nitial

ariation n

Groups

H

and

L,

the

sprig

f

olive

settles own

nto the

form

which s found

on the

great

majority

f

owls;

it

projects

t

about 45

from he

top

left-hand orner

f

the

incuse

quare

and

consists f a

long

central tem

with

berry

t

the

1Seltman,p. 6ff.

2

N.C.

1946, p.

105

.

3

Svoronos,

es

Monnaies

Athnes

pl.

3.



14/29

54 C. M. KRAAY

end flanked

y

two narrow utward

ointing

eaves

Pl.

XIII.

1,

13].

In

Group

E, however,

he

arrangement

s

often

ery

different

PI.

XIII.

3,

9].

The

sprig

often

hangs

almost

straight

own

from

he

upper dge

of the

ncuse

quare;

the

entral

tem

s now

short

o that

the

berry

s enclosed

between wo

broad,

pendent

eaves

which

re

outlined

y

a

peripheral

ine.1Elsewhere

his

scheme

s

found

only

on the

earliest wls

to have

a wreathed

elmet

pon

the

obverse

namely

hose which

have four eaves

n the

wreath

nstead

of three

[PI. Xm. 2].2The positionof the sprig

s

similar,

s

is the

short

central temwithdrawnetween wo

broad,

pendent

eavesofwhich

the

dges

re

again emphasized

y

a

surrounding

ine.

This

may

eem

a

small

point

ofresemblance

etween

wo ssues

which

iffer

o much

in

skill

of

execution,

ut ts

significance

ust

be assessed

n the

ight

of the

great

uniformity

f

design

which

xists

n the

other

ssues

of

owls.

The olive

prigs

f

Group

E and ofthe

arly

wreathed

ssues

re

undoubtedly

imilar

o

each other

nd

quite

different

rom he

prigs

either

f the other

arly

owls or

of the

ater

wreathed

ssues.

t is

surely

ar

more

ikely

hat

wo

very

imilar

ariations

rom

n other-

wiseuniformatternhouldoccurat aboutthe sametime hanthat

they

houldbe

separated

rom ach

other

by

about

sixty ears.

The

date

of

Group

E

cannot

be far rom hat

f the

arly

wreathed

ssues,

which

will

be discussed

n

more

detail

below,

but which

s

in

any

case

after 00.

Classification:

onclusions

The discussion

p

to now

has

fallen

nto

wo

complementary

arts.

The

first

ttempted

o show

that

he

earliest

wls

are to

be

sought

n

Group

H,

and the

second

that

Groups

C,

E, F,

and G

are

a)

to be

placed ate n the eries farchaic wlsand (b to be datedafter 00.

All

the

evidence

has favoured

what

may

be called

the

logical

de-

velopment

f

Athenian

oinage.

The

'wappenmnzen'

didrachms

lead

into

he

etradrachms;

he

echnique

f these

s carried

ver

nto

the

earliest

wls,

which

oon

develop

a

more

dumpy

abric f their

own.

The earliest

roups

how

some

uncertainty

ver

the details

of

1

This

cheme

s

seen

most

learly

n

Seltman,

l.

vi,

94

nd

P95,

nd ess om-

pletely

n

number

f ther

ies

n

pl.

v

and

i;

the

prig

s

often,

n

part

t

east,

ff

the

lan.

2

Seltman,

348-53

pl.

xvm-xix).

number

f

features

ink his

roup

o the

earlier

nwreathed

lass ather

han

o he

ater

reathed

wls:

oticehe

air

n he

foreheadarkednverticalinesnsteadfhorizontalaves,he rominentigzagn

the

rest-holder,

he

ompact

nd

pright

wl

nd he hick

lans hichre oo mall

for

he

everse

ies.



15/29


the reverse

ype,

ut

a

standard

design

s soon evolved

which hen

remains

unaltered

throughout

considerable

body

of

coinage.

Finally

n issue of

unusually

ebased

style

hows

points

of

contact

with he

earliest

ssues

to have a

wreathed elmet. hese

results an

be

summarized

n

a table

nd contrasted ith eltmans

classification.

Seltman

New

lassification

Wappenm.

dr.

Wappenm.

dr.

Pl.

XIII.

5,

6].

C

Wappenm.

dr.

PL

XHI.

7].

Wappenm. dr. H Wappenm. echniquevariationn re-

verses:

arly

etter orms

Pl.

Xffl.

,

8,

10].

E F

L

Variation

n

reverses:

arly

etter

orms

[PL

xm.

11, 12].

Gi

M

[PL

xm.

1].

Gii H

Gii

Uniform

everse

ype;1

ate

etter orms.

Wappenm.

dr. Gi

L

CfJ

Pl.

Xffl.

3].

M

E

'Barbarous'

group:

reverse

ypes

re

re-

lated

o

N

[Pl.

Xffl.

, 9].

N

first

reathedssues

N

[Pl.

Xffl.

].

The

following

ectionswill

attempt

o determine

he

approximate

dates of the end and of the

beginning

f the

early

wl issues.

The date

of

the nd

of

the

arly

wl ssues

The end of

the

early

owl series

s marked

by

the additionof an

olive

wreath o the helmet f Athena

on the obverse nd of a small

waning

moon above

theback of the

owl on thereverse

Pl.

Xffl.

2].

Between hesetwo

additions

here s some differencen scale.

The

wreath

s a

major

change

n the form

n which he

city

goddess

s

portrayed; encefortht is invariably resent n all denominations

of the

coinage.

The

crescent, owever,

s a

comparatively

inor nd

unobtrusive

ddition,

et close

in to the owl's back as

though

o

attract

s little ttention

s

possible

it s confined

o the

etradrachm

alone.2

Wreath

nd crescent

oth

ppear

for hefirst ime n

the

group

of

tetradrachms

o which

he

barbarous'

tetradrachms ithoutwreath

1

To

determine

he

equence

f he

Groups

to

F

would e

beyond

he

cope

f

this

aper.

he

rder

ere

uggested

s based

mainly

pon

he

ecreasing

ize

f he

head f

Athena,

nd he

ncreasing

rominence

f he

igzag

n he

rest-support.

2

If herescentas ny eference

o

particular

attler vent

n

he ersian ars

(see elow),ndf he ecadrachmsrenterpretedsvictoryedallions,t s urpris-

ing

hatt

snot

ncluded

n

he

ype

f

he ecadrachms.

ne r

more

rescents

ccur

as the

everse

ypes

f ome f

he maller

enominations

ater

n

he ifth

entury.



16/29

56 C. M. KRAAY

(Group E)

are related

Pl.

XIII.

2].1

As has

been

said

already,

his

small

group

of sevenobversedies has

four

eaves

n

the

wreath nd

is

linked

by

style

nd fabric

ather

o earlier nwreathedssues

than

to later

ssueswith

wreath.

After his

mall

group

number f

minor

alterations

ppear together

n

the

design.

On the obverse

hewreath

is

reduced o three

eaves;

the

igzag

of the

rest-supportisappears;

the

hair on the forehead

s drawn

n horizontal

waves

instead

of

straight

ertical

ines;2

and the scroll on the bowl of the

helmet

becomes arger ndmore laborate.On thereverse hependent prig

of

olive

becomes

fi*

;

the

owl becomes ess

compact

nd

upright,

nd

ceases to be

'one-legged';3

he

ethnic

ends o become

truly

ertical

and no

longer

o

cling

o thecontours f

the

owl's

body,

nd

finally

the flans

become

broader so as to

accommodate

completely

he

incuse

square.4

At an

early tage

n this

group

must be

placed

the

didrachms nd decadrachms f

Group

O. After hese

preliminary

remarks he

question

of

the

date

of

the

addition of wreath nd

crescent

an now be examined.

The

answerhas

usually

been

sought

n

the

nterpretation

f the

wreath nd crescenthemselves.hewreath an be reasonablynter-

preted

s a

sign

of

victory,

ut

by

itself his affords o means of

choosing

between

Marathon,

Salamis

or, indeed,

victory

ver

the

Persians n

general.

he moon

at first

eems

more

xplicit,

or

t

has

long

been

recognized

hat

t

nvariably

as its horns

o

the

right

nd

thus

appears

to be a

waning

moon in

its ast

phase.

A recent

tudy

has shown

hat his

phase

of the

moon s

applicable

o

the battle

of

Salamis rather han

Marathon,5

nd

therefore

if

this

argument

s

correct the

wreath nd crescent

musthave been added in

or after

480.

But,

plausible

s

this

rgument

s,

t

may

till e invalid

hrough

reading oo much nto hisunar ymbol. partfromts nsignificance

1

Seltman,

272-8..N.G.

ii

Lockett),

o. 1835 lso

belongs

othis

roup,

ut

lacks he

rescent;

his

may

e vidence

hathewreathas

ntroduced

lightly

efore

the

rescent,

r t

may

e

imply

n

engraver's

rror:f.

eltman,

l.

xxiii. for

oin

with

rescent,

ut

withoutreath.

2

Seltman,

279

pl.

ix)

stransitional

n

hat he

air

s

stillmarkedith

ertical

lines.

8

Seltmanelieveshe

one-legged*

wls f

Group

tobe

he arliestf

ll;

on

my

view his

eatureommono

the

arly

reathed

roup

ould e

onemore

ign

f

late ate.

*

Seltman

s

Group

seems

ittle

eterogeneous.

t onsistsf

1)

A272-8

4-leaved

wreaths),2)

A279, 80,

81,

86

3-leaved

reaths:

hesere

perhaps

losestothe

didrachmsnddecadrachmsf

Group

),

and

3)

stylistically

ateroins hichall

outside

he

cope

f

his

aper.8Sorge,ahrbuchr um.nd eldgeschichtei,pp.1 ff.t s mpossibleo ollow

Sorge

n

ttributing

he wls

f

Group

,

which

ave

crescentnsteadf

sprig

f

olive,

o he

monthsetween

he wo ersian

ccupations

fAthens

n

480.



17/29


and

its

restriction

o the tetradrachmt must

be

remembered

hat

moon

has to be

shown s

a

crescent

f

t s to be

recognizable.

More-

over,

he uniform irection f the

crescent

may

here

be due to

the

uniform irection

f

the reverse

ype

s a

whole. On certain ifth-

century

oins of

Corinth,

or

example,

he direction

f the crescent

used

s a

symbol

hanges

ccording

o the

direction f

he

ccompany-

ing

head of

Athena.1

Although

he

association of the

moon with

Salamis

may

be

correct,

t s

at

best uncertain nd

affords o secure

foundation or hronology.2

A sounder

pproach

s

perhaps

hrough

he

historical vents on-

nected

with he

discovery

f

the

new and richer res n

Attica

n

484,

whereby

thensfoundherself ith hundred

alents

urplus

n the

treasury.3

hether r

not

ny

distributionsf

these unds ook

place,

and whether

r

not

a

similar

urplus

ccrued

year by year,

he

fact

remains hat

between 84 and 480 the

Athenians uilta

very

arge

fleet.

hortly

efore

his Athens

possessed

only

50

ships

and

had

resorted o

hiring

0 morefrom orinth o attain

arity

with

Aegina.4

At

Salamis,

however,

he

was able to

muster

80,

so that

omething

approaching150 triremes ereprobablybuiltduring heseyears.

Such a

programme

would have

required

onsiderable

upplies

of

timber nd other

materials rom

broad;

the silverwas

available

to

pay

for

them,

nd its

conversion nto coin should be

detectable

n

a

sharply

ncreased

umber f

dies.

Where an

a

suitable

oncentrationf

dies

be

found?

f

thewreath

and

moon

were

dded

n

490,

then t

must

bviously

e

found

n the

early

wreathed

ssues.

But,

f the

additionsweremade after alamis

and

Plataea,

the

concentration

ill be

among

the

ate unwreathed

issues.

Using

Seltman's

figures

or the

early

wreathed

ssues the

following esults obtained:

Group

N

(4 dr.)

21

obverse ies.6

Group

O

(10 dr.)

8

Group

O

(2

dr.)

13_

Total

42_

1

Ravel,

esPoulains

e

Corinthe

T232,

33

nd

235,

37.

a

Presumably

here

s

ome eason

or

he

ddition,

hich

ay,

onetheless,

emain

obscure

o

us. s it

possible

hatt

was dded

nly

s

a

background

uitableor

nocturnal

ird

3

Ath. ol.

2,

.

*

Herod,

i,

9.

6

Herod,

ili,

4.

The

otal

s

ctually

8,

ut he

even

ies

with

4-leat reathave een

educted,

since,

upposing

he

hanges

o

have een

made

n

90,

hey

ould

ertainly

ave een

issued eforehe iscoveryf heminesn484.Moreovert s somewhatncertain

whether

ll he oins

ncluded

n

Group

really

elong

o

he ame

ecade;

f.

bove,

p.

56,

n.

4.



18/29

58 C. M. KRAAY

The

numbers or he

unwreathed

roups

re:

Group

C

15

obverse ies.

Group

Gi 42

obverse ies.

Group

E

26

Group

Gii 40

Group

F 15

Group

M 43

We have

already

eenthat here

re

strong

easons

for

believing

hat

Groups

E

and

F

belong

to the

very

nd of the series f unwreathed

owls,

and these wo

groups

lone about

equal

in

volume

Groups

N

and O.

But,

since

E

is

derivative,

ts

prototypes

n either

Gi

or

Gii

must lso be included. t is thus learthat he ateunwreathedssues

were

very

much

arger

hanthe

early

wreathed,1

nd

were

he

result

of

the new

discoveries

f

silver

which

financed

he

ship-building

programme.

heir

low

artistic

uality

must be attributed o the

urgency

ithwhich

he oinswere

equired;2

hewreath nd crescent

must

hen

have been added c.

479,

which husmarks he end of the

early

wl series.3

The

date

of

the

beginningf

the

arly

wl

series

The earliest wls have been shown above to be thosewhich n

Group

H areallied

by

their

echnique

o the

wappenmnzen'

etra-

drachms.

n

the

date of

Group

H

nearly

ll

scholars,

rrespective

f

their iews

on the

date of the

ntroductionf the owl

tetradrachm,

have

been

n close

agreement.

eltmandated

the

coins to the

Pana-

thenaic

estivals

rom

26 to

514;4

Six and

Imhoof-Blumer

egarded

them s the

ssues

of

Hippias;5

Hill

put

one

example

fter

1

16

nd

Babelon

gave

most

of them o

Hippias

and

a

few to the

restored

1

The

etradrachm

eriesf

yracuse

hows

comparable

oncentration

t

about

this

ime.

oehringer

llots

49 bverse

ies

o

he even

ears

85-479.ven

llowing

for

somewhat

onger

uration,

here

s

clearlyvery eavy

oncentration.

2Perhapshebarbarous'ssuesfGroup wereroducedutsidethensuringthePersian

ccupations

f he

ity.

8

The

ccasionf he ecadrachm

ssue emains

lusive.eltmanGreek

oins*,

p.

104

.)

eems

ight

n

nsisting

hat,

hough

ypes

ay

e

commemorative,

ize s due

only

o

n

exceptionalupply

fbullion

r

he eed oconvertt

rapidly

nto oin.

Here he

wlwith

pread-wings

s

plausibly

onnected

ithhe

roverb

'av

irrarai

as

a

sign

f

victory

cf. hompson,

lossary

f

Greek

irds*,

.

78,

nd

Jongkees,

Mnemosyne

944,

p.

108

f.).

ossibleccasionseem o be

1)

479,

fter

lataea

(parallel

o

the

yracusan

emareteion),2) 478/7,

he irst

ayment

f ributend

the ictories

t

Cyprus

nd

yzantium

for ooty

ee lut. im.

,

3-6 nd

olyaen.

.

34,

)

and

3)

the

urymedon

ampaign

f .467.

A

possible

bjection

o

1)

s

hathe

decadrachmas

nly

hree

eaves

n

he reathnsteadf

our,

nd s

herefore

ot he

first

reathedssue.

n

the ase f

2)

the wlwith

pread ings ight

enot

nly

sign

f

victory,

ut lso

ymbol

f he

pread

f he elian

eague

nder

thenian

hegemony.

4Pp.72ff.6

See

p.

43,

nn.

and

.

Principal

oins

f

he reeks

1932),

.

9,

no.

5.



19/29


democracy.1

here s

thus

agreement

hat

Group

H

is to

be

dated

within he ast

quarter

f the sixth

entury.

Within

his

period

n

historically

uitable ccasionfor

change

n

types

s dramatic s thatfrom

wappenmnzen'

o

owls s

obviously

provided

y

the

xpulsion

f the

yrants

n

510

and the

stablishment

of

the

democracy;

Athena and the

owl withthe new and

explicit

ethnicwould be

entirelyppropriate

s

expressions

f a

newly

ound

national

unity.

et

such

a

change

n

government

s

only possible,

and not a

necessary, ccasion for a changeoftypes, nd there redifficultiesn a date so late. t looks

hardly ossible

o cram he

great

and varied

ssues f

early

wls

nto he

pace

of

hirty ears.

Moreover

a

primitiveooking

stater

f

Cyrene

s overstruck

pon

an

owl of

Group

H

;2

t would

be

very

urprising

f such

a

coin were o

belong

to the

last

decade of

the

century,

nd

a

somewhat

arlier

date

is

therefore

referable.3

n the other

hand,

thecontents

f the

hoards

favour date low

in the ixth

entury;

or

hough

his vidence

may

be

misleading,

he hoards

are consistent

n

containing

o owls until

after

00, and,

when owls

do

appear,

they

do

so

in the

sequence

n

which hey eemtohave been ssued.Thissuggestshat heevidence

of

the

urviving

oards

s not

wholly nrepresentative.

oreover

he

undoubtedly

reat

volume

of the

early

owls

as a class need

not

be

takento

imply

prolonged

eriod

of issue. Seltman's lassification

involves

remarkably

teady roduction

f tetradrachms

t therate

of

about 25 to

30 obverse

dies

every

en

years

for

period

of

about

eighty ears;

but

we

have seen

reason to

suppose

that

xceptionally

heavy

ssues took

place

between

90 and

480,

whereas ome

issues

(particularly

roups

H and

L)

are

obviouslyvery

much smaller.

Taking

nto account

these

conflicting

actors,

he

earliest wls

can

hardlybe placed muchearlierthan the first art of the reignof

Hippias,

say

between

27

and

520.

1

Trait

i.

1,

pl.

xxxiv.

7-18;

xxv. and

elevant

omment

n

ext.

2

B.M.C.

yrenaica,

o.

pl.

.

10);

he

arly

oins

f

Cyrenaica

ave

sually

een

dated

hrough

heAttic

wls

n

which

hey

re

ometimes

verstruck.

he

rofile

f

Athena

s

arger

han

n

most

arly

wls

nd eems

o onform

ost

losely

o ome

of he

ater

ies

f

Group

(e.g.

eltman,

193,

94, 96, 97).

3

The

remarkable

halcis/Thebes

llianceoin

hasbeen

ttributedo the

oint

action

f

Chalcis

nd

hebes

gainst

thens

n

506

s recorded

n

Herod,

,

4

f.

cf.

Seltman,

p.

2

f.);

f

his

ere

ertain,

t

would

rovide

valuableixed

oint

or he

use

f he

abric

hich

t hares

ith

halcis

nd he

wappenmnzen

tetradrachms;

but

ur

wn

nowledge

f

ixth-century

istory

s oo

light

or s o

nsisthat 06was

the

nly

ossible

ccasion

or uch

n ssue.

arly

wls,

wappenmnzen

tetradrachms

and he halcis/Thebesllianceoinllbelongo bout heame atetheccurrence

of

ll three

n the

aranto

oard

s no

chance),

ut hat

ate

must e determined

through

he

wls.



20/29

60 C. M. KRAAY

In

fact several

features f the coins themselves

oint

to a

date

within he econd

halfof the

century

ather

hanone at or

before ts

middle.

Perhaps

the

most

mportant

f these s

the

existence

f

a

developed

everse

ype

n

all owls.

This was

a

secondary evelopment

in Greek

coinage

which

took

long

to

become

widely

stablished;

indeed,

some

states,

ike

Aegina,

never came to

use an

indepen-

dent

type

for the

reverse.

And

many

tateswhich

began

to

coin

in

the atter

art

of the sixth

entury,

uch

as

Syracuse,

Mende,

Acan-

thus nd Potidaea,still mployed n unadorned everse unch,theuse ofwhich asted n some ases well nto hefifth

entury.1

xamples

of

two-type

oins

going

back nto

he

ixth

entury

re to

be found n

Cyprus,

f which ne is

present

n the

Persepolis

oard of

515,2

nd

at Cnidus.

n

the

west,

he coins of Sicilian

Naxos,

which

ll have

two

types

rom he

beginning,

ave been

put

as

early

s 550

3

f this

date is correct

hey

re

entirely

xceptional,

nd,

in

any

case,

their

technique

s

notrelated o that f

Athens,

where

hereverse ie

grows

out

of an

originally

nadorned

punch.

Nearer

home the

group

of

coins attributed

y

Seltman

to the

Thracian Chersonese

nd

by

others o Chalcis affords n interestingarallel o Athens.4 he first

group

s

technicallyomparable

o the

wappenmnzen'

idrachms

with

unadorned,

iagonally

ivided

reverse

unches.

Then

comes

a

single

etradrachm ith head ofHera

on the

obverse nd a

quadriga

viewed

frontally

n

the ncuse

square

of the

reverse.5t is struck n

a broad flan

with

neat,

mall

ncuse

quare

and

high

bverse

elief,

just

ike ome

ofthe

owls of

Group

H

;

in

fact he

head of

Hera,

worn

though

t

s,

strongly

ecalls ome of

theAthena

heads of

Group

H,

such

as

A

194,

196,

withwhich t is

presumably ontemporary.

he

conclusion o

be

drawn

rom

his iscussions

that

wo-type

thenian

coinswould be wholly ut ofplace in themiddleof thecenturyr

earlier.

he

objection

s

not so much

hat man ike

Pisistratus

as

not

capable

of

stimulating

revolution n

technique,

ut

that

the

early

dates

dependupon

the

primitive

xecution

f

coins which

re

nonetheless

echnically ighly

eveloped;6

laced

n

the

middle f

the

1

The ase f

Corinth,

close

eighbour

f

Athens,

ould e

mportant,

f

twere

not

o

controversial.

myself

elievehe

econd

ype

as

not

ntroducedhere

ntil

the

ery

nd f

he

entury,

ut he ate

suallyiven

s around

40/530.

1

See

p.

48

above.

Cahn,

ieMnzen

er

izilischentadt

axos

dd.

9ff.

4

Seltman,

hap,

vii nd

l.

xxiv;

aebler,

.D.A.L

925,

p.

1

f.

Seltman,

l.

xxiv,

328-P414.

t s

nteresting

onote ow

former

bverse

ype

becomeshe ew

everse

ype,xactly

s

happens

ith he

wappenmnzen

tetra-

drachm208-P260npl.xiv.

In ll

eltmans

early

roups

hencuse

quare

as

ecomeo

muchf

traditional

survival

hatmorehan

wo

dges

re

arely

n

he lan.



21/29

temporaryarallels,

n ine

oiner

nana an invention a secona

type

in the ast

quarter

of the

century

till allows Athens

a

position

of

priority

n central

Greece,

ven

though

he dea

may ultimately

ave

been

borrowed rom artherast.1

A

similar ase can be

made

out for he

ncongruity

f

major

ssues

of etradrachms

n themiddle f the ixth

entury

r

earlier.

wing

o

the

high

value of silver

n

early

imes2 enominations

eighing

more

than12gr.wererarely mployed;3his tage s reflectedn the Ras

Shamra

hoard

n which ll coins

are n the

8-12

gm.

range

xcept

ne

of Abdera

whichreaches

15

gm.

The

output

of silver n the sixth

century,

owever,

aused

its value

to

drop

and

denominations

o

grow

arger.

he effectf this an

be seen

n

theDemanhur

hoard

n

which,

hough

he

great

majority

f

coins

weigh

ess than

12

gm.,

there

s

also

a number

etween

2 and 15

gm.,

s well

as two Euboic

tetradrachms

nos.

21 and

161)

aiming

at

a

standard

of about

17-4

gm.

A

further

tage

s reached

n thehoards

fter

00

Taranto,

Benha

and

Zagazig)

whichcontain

numerous

uboic

tetradrachms

from uchplaces as Acanthus,Terone,Mende,Potidaea, Athens,

Euboea

and

Cyrene.4

t

about the

same

time

there

ppeared,

spe-

cially

n the

mining

reas of north

Greece,

till

arger

enominations

-

octodrachms

nd even double

octodrachms;5

ost

of

these,

how-

ever,

were oon abandoned.

Against

his

background

opious

ssues

of

owl tetradrachms

efore he

middle

f the

century

re

wholly

ut

of

place.

There s

no

need to

deny

that

some

tetradrachms

n

the

Euboic standard

may

have

been minted

s

early

s

550,

but at

this

date

they

would have

been as

rare

compared

o

didrachms

s octo-

drachms

were to tetradrachms

n 500.

In the

last

quarter

of

the

century rowingssuesof tetradrachms ouldbe fullyn harmony

with

hat

endency

owards

arger

tandard

oins

which

was charac-

teristic

f

the

period.

Finally

the

ethnic,

which

s

perhaps

the

most

important

ingle

difference

etween

wappenmnzen

and

owls,

must

be considered.

1

The

Demanhur

oard

ontains

wo

oins

ttributed

o

Cyprus,

hich

ecall

he

technique

f

he

wappenmnzen

tetradrachms

nos.

30

nd

33);

nother

pecimen

of

no.

133

from

he

ame

ies)

as

n

he

ersepolis

eposit

nd

o

mustntedate

15

(see .

48

above);

t s

not

uite

ertain

hether

t

can

qualify

s

having

reverse

type,

ut

ome

f he

markings

n

he

ncuse

quare

eem

eliberate.

2

SeePlut.

olon

3,

,

where

ne

rachma

s said

o

be

ne

rice

i

a

sneep.

8

Aegina2-5 m.; hasos, ete,

c.

10-5

m.;

Corinth

nd

wappenmunzendidrachmsbout-7 m.; roesus-4 m.

4

Likewise

n

he

westhe

arliest

etradrachm

s the

yracusan,

eginning

.

z.

6

Mlanges

icard

i,

p.

968.



22/29

62 C. M. KRAAY

Issues which

egan

before he

middle

f

the ixth

entury

end ither

to be

wholly

nepigraphic

likeAegina

and the

wappenmnzen)

or

else to have the

shortest

ossible

nscription,

ike

the

?

at

Corinth.

The

issues of

many

citiesremained

ninscribed

ntilwell into the

fifth

entury,

nd

the

ppearance

f an

ethnic s often

inked

with

he

development

f a

reverse

ype.

During

the second

half

of the sixth

century,

owever,

numberof

cities

began

to

employ

a formof

ethnic

which s

something

ore han

single

etter,

ut

ess thanthe

whole

name. This had the

advantage

of

being explicit

n a

periodwhenmore and more citieswere

adopting

he

practice

f

coining.

A

single

etter

might

e the

nitialof a

number

f

cities,

but

there

could be no

doubt about

META, SYPA,

?Po

and

AA;

it s to this

class

that

AGE

belongs.

Once

again

the

possibility

f

a

master-stroke

of

advertisement uch in

advance of

its time cannot be

wholly

excluded,

but

the

half-length

thnic,

ogether

ith he

tetradrachm

denomination nd the

addition

of a

reverse

ype,

re

developments

characteristicf the

econdhalf

of the

ixth

entury;

aken

ogether,

they

uggest

he

ast rather

hanthe

third

uarter

nd to

this

xtent

they upport hedatealreadyproposed bove.

The

historical

etting

The

the archaic owls of athens : classification and chronology / [c.m. kraay]

Documents