The earliest coinage of Alexandria Troas more

The Earliest Coinage of Alexandria Troas1 a.r. meadows [plate 3 ] At some point after 311/310 bc, the Macedonian general Antigonus Monophthalmus created a new city in the Troad and named it Antigoneia, after himself. This foundation involved a synoecism of a number of existing towns in the area. However, it did not survive long under the name of Antigoneia. and by the early third century had been renamed Alexandria. This subsequent renaming appears also to have involved an alteration in the constituent elements of the synoecism. Our principal source for these events is the Greek geographical writer Strabo. Strabo's source for the history of this region was the local writer Demetrius of Scepsis, but the geographer's account is not straightforward and is best set out in its various parts: (1) The people of Cebren and Scepsis were always hostile to one another and at war until Antigonus settled both peoples together in Antigoneia, as it was then called, or Alexandria, as it is now known: the people of Cebren. Demetrius adds, remained with the rest in Alexandria, but the Scepsians. by permission of Lysimachus. went back to their homeland (13.1.33, C597).2 (2) Both Larisa and Colone used to be adjacent to the Achaiion. formerly being in the Peraea of Tenedos; and then one comes to the present Chrysa. which was founded on a rocky cliff above the sea, and to Hamaxitus. which lies below Lectum and adjacent to it. At the present time Alexandria is adjacent to the Achaiion; and those towns, like several other of the strongholds, have been incorporated into Alexandria, among them Cebren and Neandria. And the Alexandrians hold that land. The location in which Alexandria now lies 1 The following abbreviations are used: Bellinger = A.R. Bellinger. Troy Supplementary Monograph 2. The Coins (Princeton, 1961): Robert, Troade = L. Robert. Mommies Antiques en Troade (Geneva/Paris, 1966): SC = A. Houghton and C. Lorber. Seleucid Coins. A Comprehensive Catalogue I (Lancaster. PA/London. 2002): Thompson. "Lysimachus' = M. Thompson. 'The mints of Lysimachus' in CM. Kraay and G.K. Jenkins (eds). Essays in Greek Coinage Presented to Stanley Robinson (Oxford, 1968). pp. 163-182. For assistance in providing images of coins in their collections I am grateful to P van Alfen (New York). D. Bateson (Glasgow) and Henry Kim (Oxford). Once again I am indebted to Richard Ashton and Philip Kinns for their advice and criticisms. '■ ejrBpav 8 de\ Ka'i noXeuov eivai tots tc Ke8p"n,voTs kou Tots SkthJjujls, ews AvTfyovos airrois onivioiaaev els tt)v totc u.ev Avrryoviav vvv 8e AXe^civfipeiuc" tous u.ev ouv KeBpT|i>ieas (ri!u.p.eu>aa rpCs uXXols ev ttj A\ei;avopei.a. toix; oe SkthJ/Lovs eimveXfteu' €is tt)v oi.Kei.av dmTp€il»aVTOS Auoiu-tixov. 4S A.R. MEADOWS used to be called Sigia. In the aforementioned Chrysa is also the temple of Sminthian Apollo (13.1.47-8, C604).3 (3) Then Antigonus incorporated Scepsis into Alexandria; then Lysimachus released them and they returned once more to their homeland (13.1.52, C607).4 (4) At that time [Lysimachus] had already concerned himself with Alexandria, since it had already been founded by Antigonus and named Antigoneia, and had changed its name, since it seemed reverent that the successors of Alexander should found cities named after him first, and then after themselves' (13.1.26, C 593).5 From a combination of these passages6 it has generally been deduced that the city of Antigoneia was formed by a synoecism of the smaller towns of Cebren, Scepsis, Neandria and, probably. Larisa, Colone and Hamaxitus.7 Since we know that Scepsis retained its own civic identity still in 311/310,8 the foundation will have taken place between this date and the death of its eponym Antigonus in 301 BC. After the battle of Ipsus in the latter year the city fell within the kingdom of Lysimachus, and it is clear that he concerned himself to a certain extent with the organisation of the city. It has further been assumed that the change of name to Alexandria belongs to the period of his rule,1* and Strabo explicitly informs us that Lysimachus permitted the secession of the people of Scepsis from the city.10 From numismatic evidence it also emerges that Cebren and Larisa were probably detached from the synoecism at some point in the third century bc Coins of the ' THu 8e Tuj Ax«ii({) otjvcx'tis' "n te Adpiaa KOtl KoXtofai, tt\$ <Tei'€8icov TTep>aias otkrai TTpOTCpdl^, KCU T| vvv XpUCTOt, 44>' VhJ»OIN tivos TT€Tpai5()US UTT€p TT|S H«Xc<TTT)S i&pUU-CVTl, KCIL T| Ap-a^iTu1; t| tijj Acktoj tnTOK6Lp.evT| OTJvexTls- vvv ft t| A\e^civ8p€ia <tdv€XT|<; €CTTi Tw Ax<*i-La)- Ta oe TToXurixotTtt eKefva 0-uvioKiau.evo nryxavei, kuHuttcp Km. dXXa TfXeuo twv <l>povpuoi', els rr\v 'AX€^dv8p€iai'. wv kcu KeppT|vr| ko'i Nem'opiu ecru Ka'i rr\v \6jpav exowiv fexeTvoi- 6 8e tottos ev oj vvv Kerrca -q "AXe^ctvSpeia Xiyia EKocXctTO. Ev 8e tt) Xpxxrrj Taurrj ko'i to toS S{Xlv9e(i>s AitoXXojvos" eariv iepov. 4 cut' els tt|v AXe^dvSpeiov owe-rroXure tois Xkt|i|iIo\><; Ai'Ti/vovos, ett' uTreXwre AixrL|Aax<k. ko'i eTravf)X0ov em tt]v oiKCiav. 6t€ Kai AXe^avSpelos TjnT) eT7€u.eXT|BTi, o-wu)Kio~p,€vt)<; p.ev t)8t| imt' '\v7iyovov Kal Tfpocrr|70p€u(X€VT|'s Avti^OvUxs, p.€Ta3aXo\HrT|<; 8e Touvop.a- e8o^e yap eur€pe<; eivai iova AXe^avSpov 8ia8e^ap.evous £K6|>V0U irpoTepov KTt^etV errojinip-oiis iroXets, €t0' eairrwi'- 6 Cf. also Pliny NH 5.33: Twudis primus locus Hamaxitus, dein Cebrenia ipsaque TraasAntigonia dicta, nunc Alexandria, colonic/ Romano. 7 For the modern bibliography see G.M. Cohen. The Hellenistic Settlements in Europe, the Islands and Asia Minor (Berkeley, 1995). pp. 145-8. 8 OCIS 5 (Welles. RC 1): Cohen, ibid. p. 146 '' The possibly corrupt state of the manuscript of passage 4 leaves room for doubt on this mailer, however. It is possible that Strabo meant lhat Antigonus had a change of heart. The formulation of passage 3, if pressed, suggests thai Alexandria existed as such in the lifetime of Antigonus. ™ On the political background to this and for the coinage of Scepsis after its secession see J.H. Kagan, 'Hellenistic coinage at Scepsis after its refoundation in the third century B.C.", ANSMN 29 (1984). pp. 11-24. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 49 former, refounded as an Antioch, are attested (see e.g. BMC Troas, p. 46, nos. 37_40), while it it is all but certain on the basis of bronze coins found at Larisa and with similar types to the coinage of Larisa, but with legend riTOAEMAIEilN, that Larisa was refounded as a Ptolemais between c. 246 and 230-220." It is in any case clear from their appearance in the list of Delphic theorodokoi that both Larisa and Hamaxitus had reverted to independent existence by the early second century BC.12 The coinage that has been attributed to Alexandria Troas was the subject of a study by A.R. Bellinger in his 1961 publication of the Cincinnati excavation coins from Troy.13 The issues of this mint in the Hellenistic period may be divided into two types: the 'autonomous' issues of the civic mint of Alexandria, which have not received any serious scholarly attention since Bellinger, and the 'royal' issues produced in the city by the succession of Hellenistic rulers who controlled it down to its incorporation into the Roman province of Asia in 129 bc; the latter have been the subject of a number of studies since Bellinger's work. The recent appearance in commerce of an entirely new 'autonomous' issue of the city now prompts a reconsideration of the activity of this mint in the fourth and third centuries bc. As the earliest coinage of Alexandria Bellinger listed a bronze issue in the name of Alexander the Great: Obv. Head of Herakles in lion skin r. Rev. Biga r.; beneath, trident; AAEEANAPOY (Bellinger Al; Price. Alexander, 1587). (PI. 3, 1) The principal reason for its attribution to the mint of Alexandria was the discovery of three specimens in the Cincinnati excavations at Troy. Price retained the attribution, noting the likelihood of a mint in the Troad.14 However, while the issue may have been produced in this region, there are no particularly strong reasons to attribute it to a new mint at Antigoneia/Alexandria. The trident control has no obvious association with the city, and the attribution must be regarded as circumstantial. On Bellinger's reconstruction, the next activity at the mint comes in the period of Lysimachus' control of the city (301-281 BC). For this ruler four types of coinage have been attributed to the mint of Alexandria Troas: silver coinage with types of Alexander the Great but in the name of Lysimachus, and gold, silver and bronze coinage with Lysimachus' own royal types. Of these Bellinger, in fact. " For ihe bibliography see Cohen, op. cit., pp. 148-51 and 157-9. " BCH 45 (1921). p. 8. II. 18-19. For assertion of this and a summary of previous debates and bibliography see L. Robert. "Documents d'Asie Mineure xx. Ptolemais de Troade'. BCH 106 (1982). pp. 319-333. esp. 330. The city of Cebren. which Robert had previously restored to the text of the inscription, was in fact probably not present on the list (ibid., n. 70). 13 Bellinger: this publication was the subject of a book-length, largely hostile review in Robert. Troade. " Price, Alexander, p. 234. 50 A.R. MEADOWS only included in his study the silver and bronze with Lysimachus' types (Bellinger A 2-20). and the attribution of these to Alexandria was not his own. As he describes it. "I can do no more than record such specimens as are attributed to Alexandria by Newell in the trays of the American Numismatic Society'. Under this heading he listed 14 issues of tetradrachms and 5 bronzes. Oddly, he did not include any reference to the gold staters whose controls match the silver. Nor did he include the silver coinage of Alexander type but in the name of Lysimachus. which Newell had attributed to Alexandria.15 The omission of the gold (though not of the Alexander-type coinage) was corrected by Thompson in her publication of Newell's arrangement of the gold and silver of Lysimachus in 1968.16 Thompson commented. 'Unlike the majority of Lysimachus* mints. Alexandria Troas seems to have maintained a steady output from 297-281. Production of tetradrachms was fairly limited (only about twenty dies are on record) but the number of stater issues is substantially larger than the total of any other mint during this period'. Neither Bellinger nor Thompson offered any explicit reasoning for their attribution of issues to Alexandria, and before we accept this picture of the mint's activity during this period it is valid to question the reason for attributing these issues of Lysimachus to the mint of Alexandria Troas. The explanation for this attribution is in fact to be found in the unpublished manuscript of Newell's study of the coinage of Lysimachus which is preserved in the ANS. and underlies the arrangement of the coins in the trays there.17 A full list of the issues attributed by Newell to this mint, together with some consequent additions through similarity of controls or shared dies is presented in Appendix 1 to this paper (the numbers employed to designate issues there are used throughout the following discussion). It should be noted at the outset that not one of the gold, silver or bronze issues given to Alexandria by Newell, Thompson or Bellinger exhibits the standard mint mark of the city, the grazing horse. Yet this was clearly a design associated with the city from early in its history,18 and appeared not only on the civic issues but also on the royal or royal-type issues produced at the city under the Seleucids, first in the reign of Antiochus I, with the types of Alexander the Great (JR tetradrachms: Bellinger A25-27; Price, Alexander, 1588-1590). under Antiochus II with Seleucid royal types (/R tetradrachms and drachms: SC 490-2), and again under Antiochus Hierax on an Alexander-type gold stater (Bellinger A126: Price, Alexander 1591; SC 873) and Seleucid silver types (/R tetradrachms: SC 874-886). 15 For the published population of this sec E.T. Newell. Royal Greek Portrait Coins (New York. 1937), p. 19. See further below. 16 Thompson. "Lysimachus", pp. 176-7. 17 I am extremely grateful to Peter van Allen for making available to me the relevant chapter of Newell's work, as well as for providing me with photographs of the ANS* holdings of the relevant issues. " For the use of the symbol on coinage, amphora stamps and weights of the city see Robert. TroaJe. pp. 50-52. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 51 Newell's case for attribution of the Lysimachi rests on two main criteria: style and control marks. The style of what he regarded as the earliest issues of Alexandria is very close to the style of the issues which he attributed to Lampsacus. and in fact his reconstruction of the history of the two mints implied the re-use of a recut obverse die of Lampsacus at Alexandria. This in turn led him to suspect that the two mints were geographically proximate. By setting the limit of this proximity at "some fifty miles', he was able to reduce the choice of cities to Sestus. Abydus. Lysimachia, Parium and Alexandria. By a process of elimination he arrived at Alexandria as the location for the non-Lampsacene mint.19 There are at least two major problems with this approach. First, it need hardly be pointed out that the limit of fifty miles for stylistic influence is entirely arbitrary, and this raises the more serious issue of how stylistic similarity might be transmitted. Was it absorbed from one die-cutter to another? Or did one die- cutter travel from one 'mint' to another? Or were dies engraved at centres from which they were distributed to the local mints ? Since dies, batches of dies or die- cutlers could move from one end of the kingdom to another if necessary, it is clear that arguments from geographical proximity carry little weight. Furthermore, there is the very basic question of why it should be necessary to assume that the 'Alexandria' and 'Lampsacus' issues are the products of two different mints. There is at least one observable obverse die-link between the groups and it is certainly conceivable that they may have been the products of different, but connected ateliers. Furthermore the control mark of a star on the throne shared by Newell's Lampsacus and Alexandria groups may suggest an administrative overlap between the two series.20 Newell's argument from control marks is also far from conclusive. While conceding that the control marks on the Lysimachi in question were undoubtedly the marks of individuals involved in their production, he presses them into service as geographical markers, regarding certain of them as reminiscent of the erstwhile civic badges for the constituent cities of Alexandria. Thus the ram's head of issues 5 and 27-28 recalls Cebrcn; the star of 1-5 and 26-27 recalls both Cebren and Colone. Moreover, the firtmen of issues 18-19 recurs on later autonomous issues of Alexandria, and the horse's head (issues 1-3 and 26) recalls the main type of the city, the grazing horse. Yet to alight upon only certain of the symbols that appear on the series attributed to Alexandria is simply special pleading. Among the other symbols not cited by Newell are two that might suggest other cities: the Megarian beta (FT) of issues 16-18 and 41-43, apparently paralleled by the combination 11V on the bronze issues 47-51. would " He had already identilicd the issues of Sestus and Abydus: he assumed those of Lysimachia to be for the most part identified by the lion's head control mark, and he regarded Parium as too insignificant for such a "large and consecutive a coinage". Newell also canvassed the possibility of Cy/icus but regarded this as too far from Lampsacus. and in any case followed von Fritze in regarding the city as autonomous under Lysimachus. " Lampsacus: Thompson. "Lysimachus". p. 171 no. 43. Alexandria: issues 1-5 and 26-7. 1 52 A.R. MEADOWS be in any other context a clear indicator of the mint of Byzantium.21 The bee in combination with the monogram A, representing the letters A and P (issues 15, 19-21 and 44), was taken, quite understandably, by Miiller and Head to indicate the mint of Ephesus, renamed Arsinoe under Lysimachus.22 And of the symbols cited by Newell the star is so common as to be worthless for attributive purposes, but in any case is found elsewhere, as noted above, on stylistically similar coins attributed to the mint of Lampsacus. The fiilmen is also a common symbol and seems to have no geographic/civic significance either on the Lysimachi of 'Alexandria' or on the civic bronzes. These instances are more likely, as Newell himself saw, to be personal badges. However, since the Lysimachi and civic- bronzes are unlikely to be contemporary (see below), the occurrence offulmina on the two coinages must be the badges of different people, and nothing requires these two individuals both to have been Alexandrians. Even the ram's head cannot be taken as particularly suggestive of the city of Cebren. It also appears as a control mark on the lifetime or immediately posthumous drachm issues of the mint of Magnesia, for example.23 And if the horse's head did stand by metonymy for the grazing horse of Alexandria, why should the eagle's head of issues 29-31 (which were subsequently attributed to the 'Alexandria' mint by Thompson, though not by Newell) not be similarly indicative of a mint such as Abydus? In truth, such special pleading from selected control marks cannot serve as the logical basis for the attribution of royal coinage to any mint, and certainly not for the attribution of this series of Lysimachi to the mint of Alexandria Troas. In fact, as emerges from the die-study presented in the Appendix, it cannot be regarded as proven that the issues assigned to Alexandria by Newell and Thompson are the product of a single mint. To find the earliest coinage that can be attributed with complete certainty to this city we must turn instead to the autonomous coinage and the appearance of a completely new coin in commerce in 2003. 21 The Megarian beta was so taken, for example, by Henri Seyrig in order to attribute the series of posthumous Lysimachi to Byzantium: his "emissions a la spirale' are die-linked to an ir-sue with the control IT. See H. Seyrig. 'Monnaies hellenistiques de Byzance et de Calcedoine'. Essays &Robinson, pp. 183-200 at 185 and 193 with n.3. On certain reverse dies of the lifetime issues the letter takes the form FT. apparently half-way between the beta and a representation of the letters ftY that appear on the bronze. While this might appear to suggest the resolution I1Y for all of the apparently Megarian betas on these issues, we can in fact see a similar development in the third century control marks on civic coinage indisputably attributable to the city of Byzantium. In the latter is there is an oscillation from Tl to IT to FIY. In the last case the apparently pi-shaped letter is obviously doing duty for beta. This same pi form appears on the well-known countermarks of the city. For illustrations see M. Thompson. 'A Countermarked Hoard from Biiyukcekmece', ANSMN 6 (1954), pp. 11-34. 22 L. Muller. Die Miinzen des Thrakischen Konigs Lysimachus (Copenhagen. 1858). pp. 80-1. nos. 429-433 and B.V. Head, On the Chronological Sequence of the Coins of Ephesus (London. 1880), class VIFy. See Price. Alexander. 1917ff. Interestingly, the ram's head on the issues attributed to Magnesia occurs in close proximity to the controls bee, cornucopia and A, also present on the Lysimachi given to Alexandria (ibid. 1936^8). THF. EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 53 JR. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing r.; above and below, AAEHAN I APEON. 1. 10.62 g 02h Rev. Between legs. SI above corn grain. Triion 6 (2(K)3) 323. Morton and Eden 11-I2.xii.2003, 21. (PI. 3, 2) The weight of this piece is remarkable and we are led inevitably to link it with the two other known silver coins of Alexandria Troas.24 with similar types and controls and apparently struck to the same standard: 2. 2.41 g 270° Rev. Between legs, SI above corn grain. Oxford (Milne. 1925). Bellinger A124. (PI. 3, 3) 3. 2.35 g Rev. Between legs, com grain. Paris. Bellinger A123. Bellinger described issues 2 and 3 as hemidrachms without further specification. At 2.35 g and 2.41 g they are clearly too heavy to be hemidrachms on the Attic standard, and seem better viewed as quarters of the new larger denomination (1). At 10.62 g the latter issue is at first sight puzzling, but should probably be interpreted as a double siglos on the Persian standard. On this reconstruction the fractions will be half sigloi.25 There is also a group of bronze issues which seems to belong typologically and stylistically with the silver: /E. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing r.; above and below. AAEHAN I APEfiN. A (20-21 mm; 7-10 g): controls & corn grain and palm. Bellinger A28. (PI. 3, 4) JE. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing r.: above. AAEHAN. B (15-17 mm; 3-4 g.): controls K com grain and palm. Bellinger A29. (PI. 3, 5) /E. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing r.: above, AAE. C (13 mm; 1.83 g): controls K. corn grain and palm. Bellinger A30. (PI. 3, 6) Two aspects in particular link these bronze and silver issues to each other. First, they all have the corn grain control symbol.2'' This symbol does appear later on the bronze of Alexandria, but in combination with the control mark thunderbolt in exergue, and then as just one of a number of variants.27 Second, on all three of these issues (A-C) the horse on the reverse is grazing to the right. This stands in contrast to the majority of the pre-imperial bronze issues of the city with this type, where the horse grazes to the left. This characteristic is in fact shared with a further bronze denomination: « On the uncertain attribution of Bellinger's A125. a silver Attic-weight obol with types head of Athena r. in Corinthian helmet/Owl r. on amphora. AAEHAN, see Robert, Troade, pp. 53-4. 25 So already Kagan, op. cit. (n. 10). p. 18. * The exception appears to be a variant of JE denomination A with a palm but no corn grain. Bellinger A28 f. (Gotha, not illustrated). „ . . » Bellinger A107 (18-20mm. c.6 g). A112 (14-16 mm. c.3 g) and A42 (9-12 mm, cA g). Bellinger dates the first two of these c.241-228 BC, and the last c.281-261. 54 A.R. MEADOWS /E. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing r.; above, A or AAE. D (7-10 mm; 0.54-1.55 g): K and various other controls. Bellinger A31 -46.-K (PI. 3, 7) Denomination D is linked to denominations AC by the use of the control K.29 However, as Bellinger noted (p. 84), the considerable range of controls exhibited by denomination D probably suggest that it continued to be produced after A-C had finished. We might also note a third similarity between the largest bronze denomination (A) and the silver (1-3): the ethnic on the reverse appears in full, above and below the main type. On the later bronze, even on the largest denominations (e.g. Bellinger A53-70. A104-108), the ethnic is abbreviated AAEHA or AAEEAN and appears above the main type only. The link between the silver issues (1-3) and the bronze (A-C) seems fairly secure on grounds of typology, but when are we to date them? Bellinger dated the two silver coins known to him (2-3) to the period 228-190 bc, by analogy with what he took to be a contemporary silver hemidrachm issue of the mint of Ilium (Bellinger T31, PI. 3, 8). However, the date of the Ilium hemidrachms is not clear-cut. Wroth in BMC had dated them c. 300-250 bc, and von Fritze "urn 250'.30 Bellinger regarded it as implausible that the silver could belong to a period of Seleucid control of the city, thinking it unlikely that a Seleucid king 'would have flattered [Ilium] so far as to permit this issue of silver'. Yet such assumptions about the relationship of ruler and city in the realm of coinage find little support in the ancient evidence, and cannot be relied upon for dating purposes.31 In fact, the silver of Ilium can provide us with no independent means of dating that of Alexandria. Nonetheless the relationship between the silver of Ilium and that of Alexandria may be significant. The weights of the hemidrachms of Ilium, all displaying some wear, cluster around 2.2-2.3 g. This seems too heavy to be the Attic standard but may be the Persian standard in use at Alexandria.32 Turning to the bronze issues that accompany the silver of Alexandria, we see that Bellinger had in fact dated these much earlier, suggesting a range of 281-261 bc. His inclination towards an early date came from comparison of the type of the Alexandrian bronze with that of Neandria, one of the constituent cities of the new synoecism. On the Neandrian coinage, as on the bronze and silver issues of 2S Bellinger (ad loc.) separated A44-A46 into a further, smaller denomination, although the weights of the four specimens known to him coincided with the higher denomination. 29 In this case the use of this monogram seems to identify a coherent group. However, caution is required. A monogram of this type continues to be used sporadically at the mint from the beginning of the third century down to the second. See the comments of Houghton and Lorber. SC. p. 308 (and below, n. 44). "' H. von Fritze. 'VII. Abschnitt. Die Miinzen von llion' in W. Dorpfeld (ed.l. Tltria mid llion (Athens. 1902), p. 479. no. 6. " See on this point. A. Meadows 'Money, Freedom and Empire in the Hellenistic World' in A. Meadows and K. Shipton (eds). Money and its Uses in the Ancient Greek World (Oxford. 2001). pp. 54-63. : In addition to the specimens listed by Bellinger (T31). the British Museum acquired a further specimen in 1979. displaying some wear and weighing 2.18 g. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 55 Alexandria discussed above, the horse was depicted grazing to the right, and a corn-grain control was used (PI. 3, 9). The similarity is striking, and Bellinger was surely correct to see a close chronological relationship between issues of Neandria and the first bronzes of Alexandria. But the relationship he posited was surely not close enough. Neandria must have ceased to exist and its coinage gone out of production by 301 bc at the latest. It seems unlikely that the identical types and controls of that coinage would have resurfaced in the new city of Alexandria as long as twenty years later. The bronze coinage of Alexandria with right-facing horse and corn-grain control must surely be more closely contiguous with the similar Neandrian issues. Such contiguity is supported not only by stylistic similarities and shared controls, but also by the existence of a specimen of Neandrian bronze with corn-grain control countermarked with the letters AAE5AN.33 From this it seems clear that some Neandrian bronze was still in circulation when Alexandria had achieved a civic administrative identity under that name. It thus seems more likely that the earliest output of the new city of Alexandria was much closer to the point of synoecism and to the period of Lysimachus' control of the city (301-281 bc). The coinage of Neandria may have finished as late as 302/1 bc, and the coinage of Alexandria started as early as 301. The implication of this reconstruction is either that the city was founded late in the rule of Antigonus, and named Antigoneia for only a brief period before it was renamed by Lysimachus, or that the city was in fact renamed during the period of Antigonid control. There is nothing in the literary sources to rule out either proposition.34 A date just before or during the reign of Lysimachus may have interesting implications for some other issues on the Persian standard. This standard had experienced a curious resuscitation in the latter part of the fourth century, notably in 340s-330s at Byzantium and Chalcedon, and shortly thereafter at Cius.35 Contemporary with these, it has been suggested in the past, are the Persian weight hemidrachms of Perinthus and Chersonesus in Thrace and Parium in Mysia. Moreover, as Kinns has recently demonstrated, Ephesus produced a short series of Persian weight issues around the time of or shortly after the arrival of 33 See D. Sestini. Descrizione delle Medaglie Antiche Creche del Museo Hedervariano (Florence. 1828). p. 139 no. 2. cited by Wroth at BMC Troas etc., p. xiv. " R.A. Billows. Antigonus the One-Eyed and the Creation of the Hellenistic State (Berkeley/Los Angeles/ London. 1997), p. 305 n. 29. assumes that the foundation must predate 306, since Antigonus was not thereafter in the area of the Troad. We need not assume however that Antigonus oversaw the synoecism in person. 15 For the date of the Persian weight issues at Byzantium and Chalcedon see G. Le Rider. Deux IVesors de Mommies Grecques del laPropontide (h e. siecle avant J.-C.) (Paris. 1963). and the recent defence of this chronology by F. de Callatay. RBN 149 (2003), pp. 268-9. Richard Ashton informs me, on the basis of a study he has made of the coinage of Cius, that most of this city's Persian-weight coinage was present in the second of Le Rider's hoards (IGCH 1365). which apparently dates to the last decade of the fourth century. 56 A.R. MEADOWS Alexander.36 It is clear, then, that a number of cities began to produce Persian weight issues around the time of the conquest of Asia Minor by Alexander, but on the whole it is likely that this phenomenon had come to an end by the last decade of the fourth century. The silver coinage of Alexandria which, as we have seen, must date to the last couple of years of the fourth century at the earliest, seems to be part of a different, slightly later phenomenon. Moreover, there are a number of issues on the same standard whose date has hitherto remained unclear but which are surely related. At both Mytilene on Lesbos and at Abydus in the Troad Persian-weight double sigloi were issued. The similarities between the coinages of the three cities are striking. On each a similar head of Apollo appears facing to the right. At all three mints double sigloi were accompanied by half sigloi. See Plate 3, 10-13. There can be little doubt that the issues of these three mints are contemporary, and since there is no hoard evidence for the dating of the issues of Abydus or Mytilene we must rely on the dates we have established for Alexandria.37 It would be rash to assume that this coincidence of weight standard of autonomous coinages was the result of any royal policy, particularly when it is securely attested at so few cities. The similarity of behaviour at a city (Alexandria) that was the subject of Lysimachian refoundation, and at two other cities at which royal mints of Lysimachus have been posited (Mytilene and Abydus) is noteworthy.3" Furthermore, in the light of the new evidence from Alexandria it is perhaps worth reconsidering the date of the silver coinage of Scepsis. As Kagan (op. cit. (n. 10)) has shown, a small group of half- and quarter- sigloi on the Persian standard was struck at this city in the Hellenistic period (PI. 3, 15). He suggested a date for these issues in the late third or early second century, citing principally the appearance of a highly unusual bead-and-reel border on the obverse. The coinage of Scepsis aside, the first datable instance of this feature occurs on Seleucid issues of Antioch from the reign of Antiochus III. If it is correct to assume that the mint of Scepsis was following the lead of Antioch, Kagan's date for the Scepsian issues follows. It is by no means certain, however, that there need be any causal relationship between the appearance of this feature on the two coinages. The die-cutters at Scepsis were presumably just as able to adapt a traditional architectural design to their medium as were their colleagues at Antioch. If this silver coinage of Scepsis and the hemidrachms of Ilium also on the Persian standard do belong to around the same period as the Persian-weight silver of Alexandria, we may have evidence for a concerted * Perinthus, Chersonesus and Parium: see Le Rider, op. cit. (last note), p. 53. For Ephesus see P. Kinns in CH 9 (2002), p. 200. 37 E.S.G. Robinson argued that the Persian weight issues of Abydus must be close in date to the Chian weight issues of that mint {NO 1 (1921). p. 13. followed by Le Rider op. cit. (n. 35), p. 51). His argument was based on stylistic similarity he perceived between the two issues. The similarity does not however appear particularly strong: compare PI. 3, 13-14. 31i For the Lysimachi of Mytilene and Abydus see Thompson. "Lysimachus'. pp. 175-6, nos 132-8 and pp. 171-2. nos 63-77. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 57 attempt on the part of cities within Lysimachus* kingdom to create a circulating medium beyond their civic confines. If we assume that the silver and bronze issues discussed above (1-3 and A-C) were contiguous with the pre-synoecism coinage of Neandria, and thus constituted the earliest coinage of Alexandria, the date of a small series of bronze of autonomous types assigned by Bellinger to the period 301-281 bc is called into question: /E. Obv. Head of Apollo r. Rev. Apollo Smintheus standing r. in himation, holding patera in r. hand and bow in 1., and with a quiver on his shoulder: at his feet, mouse r.; to 1., AAEH. Denom. I: (18-19 mm; 3.55-3.81 g): Bellinger A21 (PI. 3, 16). Denom. 2: (13-14 mm; 1.37-1.75 g): Bellinger A22 (PI. 3,17). Denom. 3: (11 mm; 1.05-1.14 g): Bellinger A23. Denom. 4: (6-8 mm; 0.67 g): Bellinger A24. In placing these issues at this early stage in the mint's activity Bellinger was essentially following the order proposed by Wroth in BMC. The only reason for placing them early is the apparent borrowing of the type used for these issues from the autonomous coinage of Hamaxitus, one of the constituent cities of Alexandria. As we have seen in the case of the grazing horse type of Neandria, such borrowing did occur, and could be a sign that the Apollo Smintheus issues are also early. Three facts, however, tell against such an early date for the latter issues. First, the fabric of the Apollo Smintheus coinage is appreciably thinner than that of the early grazing horse issues (above, A-C). Second, the inscription on the Apollo Smintheus coinage consists of an abbreviated form of the ethnic, written in rather large, almost clumsy lettering. It seems more probable that the grazing horse issues with full ethnic precede these coins, and unlikely that the two groups are contemporary. Third, the closest parallel for the Apollo Smintheus bronze issues, both in terms of type and execution comes in the well-known second/first-century silver coinage of the city (Bellinger A133-170).39 Obverse and reverse designs of the bronze and silver coincide (with the exception of the appearance of the mouse at the feet of Apollo on the reverse of the bronzes), and the lettering of the reverse legends is similarly clumsy and large in relation to the image of Apollo. The fabric of the bronzes is certainly not inconsistent with a second century date, and looks more natural there than in the early third century. OVERVIEW OF THE COINAGE It may be helpful here to present the revised order of the early issues of the mint of Alexandria, and set it against the evidence for the activity of the mint for the remainder of the third century. "* For an addition to Bellinger's corpus, see Appendix 2 (for first-century issues see now F. de Callatay, L'Histoire des Guerres Mithridatiques vue par les Mommies (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1997). pp. 151-9, pi. 39). 58 A.R. MEADOWS Period shortly after foundation JR. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing r.; above and below, AAEHAN I APEHN. 1. Double sigloi (Bellinger, A-) 2-3. Half sigloi (Bellinger A123-4) JE. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing r.; above and below, AAEHAN I APEHN or above. AAEHAN, AAE, or A. A-D Four denominations: c. 7-10 g; 3-4 g; 1.8 g; 0.5-1.5 g. (Bellinger, A28-31) Shortly thereafter JE. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing r.; above, AAE, or A. D One denomination: c. 0.5-1.5 g. (Bellinger, A32-46) The history of the mint for the remainder of the third century can be partially reconstructed only. Precious metal coinage was probably struck only once again by the civic authorities, probably after the death of Lysimachus.40 This time the types were those of Alexander the Great: c. 280-275 JR. Tetradrachms. Obv. Head of Herakles in lion skin. Rev. Zeus seated holding eagle and sceptre; AAEHANAPOY. Three recorded issues (Price, Alexander 1588-1590 = Bellinger. A25-27). Between this period and the end of the third century silver and gold with royal types was produced at Alexandria by the Seleucids under Antiochus II and Antiochus Hierax.41 Antiochus II (261-246) JR. Tetradrachms. Obv. Portrait head. Rev. Apollo on omphalos; BA2IAEHS ANTIOXOY. Three recorded issues (SC 490-2; Bellinger, A 47-52) 40 For the date. Price. Alexander, p. 234, on stylistic grounds. None of ihe controls on this phase of Alexander coinage appear on known civic bronze of Alexandria. H. Seyrig ('Monnaies Hellenistiques XIV. Stateres d'Or Pseudoalexandrins", RN 1969, pp. 36-39 at 37-8) argued that gold coinage with Alexander types produced at the city (Price 1591; SC 873; see below) was a civic issue. Although the issue shares controls with Seleucid-type silver of the mint, and the suggestion has been rejected by Price. Houghton and Lorber (ad locc). Philip Kinns reminds me of the case of Cyme in Aeolis where a civic didrachm (see e.g. BMC 58) shares controls with a Seleucid issue of Antiochus II (SC 503). The gold of Alexandria could, therefore, be a civic issue. * On the basis of the recurrence of the monogram K (known from the civic bronze) on Seleucid issues. Houghton and Lorber. SC, p. 308. canvass the possibility that the mint of Alexandria was in some sense jointly administered by the royal and civic authorities. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 59 Antiochus Hierax (c.242-227) N. Stater. Obv. Head of Athena helmeted. Rev. Nike standing holding wreath and stylis; AAKHANAPOY. One recorded issue (Price 1591; SC 873) JR. Tetradrachms. Obv. Portrait head. Rev. Apollo on omphalos; BASIAEOS ANTIOXOY. 42 recorded issues (SC 874-883; Bellinger. A73-103) Amidst these issues of royal silver must be assigned, in all probability, the two relatively large groups of autonomous bronze with similar types, distinguished from one another by the direction of head on the obverse: JE. Three denominations. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate r. Rev. Horse grazing 1. ; in ex., fulmen; above, AAEHAN. or AAEHA. 20 recorded issues (Bellinger, A53-72) JE. Three denominations. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate I. Rev. Horse grazing L; in ex., fulmen; above, AAEHAN, AAEHA or AAE. 19 recorded issues (Bellinger, A104-122) Bellinger associated these bronzes with the two periods of issue of Seleucid silver under Antiochus II and Hierax. However, although one issue (A55) seems to share a control with a tetradrachm of Antiochus II (SC 492), there is no clear basis for assigning the remainder of the issues to such precisely defined periods. Set against this background, the assignment of the gold and silver issues of Lysimachus to the mint of Alexandria in the first two decades of the third century would represent a major period of activity for the mint, not to be paralleled until the extraordinary period of Antiochus Hierax's use of the city. Yet, as has been argued above, there is no clear case for attributing the Lysimachian issues to Alexandria; and perhaps no good reason to posit such an anomalous period of production at the city. In such a context, the newly discovered silver issue and its accompanying fractions take on a particular significance. They become the only silver coinage datable to the immediate period of the city's refoundation. They are in any case the only silver coinage issued by the city with its own types before the second century bc. ft) A.R. MEADOWS APPENDIX t. THE SILVER, GOLD AND BRONZE ISSUES IN THE NAME OF LYSIMACHUS ATTRIBUTED TO ALEXANDRIA TROAS The following catalogue is based on the holdings of the British Museum and the American Numismatic Society, the photo file of the British Museum and Newell's MS study of Alexandria, and thus makes no pretensions to finality. Where I have not been able to trace an illustration of a specimen listed by Newell, but have relied upon his identification of dies, the entry for that coin is annotated *(N)\ /. Silver issues A. Alexander types Obv. Head of Herakles r. in lion-scalp head dress. Rev. Zeus seated I. on throne, holding eagle in r. and sceptre in 1.; BA2IAE112 AYSIMAXOY. Drachm. 1 (Price -). <LF> Horse's head; <TH> Star. ol/rl 4.18 Sofia. N.A. Mouchmov, Les Monnaies des Rois Thraces', C6opHMKb Bopncb JlHKoemb 1927, p. 225, no. 102, pi. Ill, 102. B. Lysimachus types Obv. Head of Alexander r. diademed and with Amnion's horn. Rev. Athena seated L on throne, holding Nike in r. and spear in L; behind, shield: BA21AEH2 AY2IMAXOY. Tetradrachms (2-20) and drachm (21). 2 (T148). <ILF> Horse's head and neck; <TH> Star. Ol/Rl a. 17.11 180° ANS 1944-100-45496. Armenak (IGCH 1423) 872. 3 (T149). <ILF> Horse's head; <TH> Star. a. 16.92 Ars Classica 15 (1930) 609; 17 (1934) 424. (IGCH 1423), p. 102. Armenak b. 16.60 CNG 46(1998) 232 c. 17.17 30° ANS 1944-100-45495. Thompson, pi. 20, 149. (IGCH 1423) 871. Armenak d. 16.81 CNG 60 (2002) 455 e. 16.93 240° Paris, SNG Delepierre 847. f. 16.66 0° BM 1964-2-15-10 (ex Robinson) g< Athens. Karditsa (IGCH 162). (N) 4 (T150). <OLF> A; <TH> Star 02/R3 a. 17.17 30° ANS 1944-100-81183. Braunschweiger Miinzverkehr 2 (1928)400 b. 17.05 Boston 825 c. 16.97 Giessener MH 44 (1989) 181 d. 16.20 Leiden 2236 (Six coll.) (N) 03/R4 a. 16.46 180° St Petersburg (N). THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 61 5 (T151). <ILF> Ram's head; <TH> Star. 02/R5 a. 17.01 270° ANS 1944-100-81184. Thompson pi. 20, 151. Urfa (IGCH 1772). Ars Classica 15 (1930) 597. Armenak (IGCH 1423), p. 102. Berlin (N). b. 17.03 c. 16.53 04/R6 04/R7 a. 17.07 120° ANS 1944-100-81185 ex Sotheby l.v.1929 (G.A. Bull), 35. b. 16.95 Kiinker 67 (2001) 231 a. 17.13 300° BM 1910-11-4-93. b. 16.88 Lanz 48 (1989) 160; Aufhauser 15 (2000)31. c. Athens 04/R8 a. 16.75 150° St Petersburg (N). 05/R9 a. 17.13 30° Sternberg 25/6.xi. 1976, 19 6 (T-). <ILF> Cornucopia; <TH> A. O6/R10 a. 16.88 330° ANS 1944-100-81186. Mosul (IGCH 1768). Stockholm, SNG D 845. Hirsch 212 (2000) 72 Kurpfalzische MH 49 (1995) 138 Burgan 2.vii.l988, 238 06/R11 b. 16.27 0° a. 16.47 b. 16.86 06/R12 a. 17.07 0° 7 (T-). <ILF> A; <TH> E. 06/R13 a. 16.97 0° ANS 1962-117-1 8 (T152). <ILF> Cornucopia; <TH> BI. 07/R14 a. 17.12 330° ANS 1944-100-81181. Hess (Lucerne) 28.iv. 1936, 621. b. 16.58 CNG 49 (1999) 315. 9 (T153) <ILF> Cornucopia; <TH> GZ. 07/R15 a. 17.06 60° Naville 5 (1923, Bertier de la Garde) 1700. SBV 33 (1993) 207. 10 (T155). <ILF> GE; <TH> M. 08/R16 a. 16.53 330° BM, Bank coll. 221. b. 17.09 Vienna (N) c. 16.90 330° Paris (N) 11 (T154). <ILF> QE; <EX> 08/R17 a. 16.89 180° Silifke. Meydaneikkale (CH 8. 308) 2657. b. 17.04 Naville 5 (1923, Bertier de la Garde) 1704. 08/R18 a. Berk 71 (1992) 102. 08/R? a. 17.00 300° Paris (N) 12 (T156). <ILF> ft; <TH> GZ. 08/R19 a. 16.88 90° ANS 1944-100-45497. Thompson, pi. 20, 156. Armenak (IGCH 1423) 873. 13 (T156). <ILF> PE; <EX> GZ. O8/R20 a.16.90 2100 ANS 1944-100-45498. Armenak (IGCH 1423) 874. b. 17.02 Naville 15 (1930) 598. Armenak (IGCH 1423), p. 102. c. Berlin (N) 08/R21 a. 16.91 180° Glasgow. Hunter, p. 431, 51. 62 A.R. MEADOWS 14 (T157). <ILF> rl or fT; <EX> PE. 08/R22 a. 17.00 210° BM 1898-6-2-99 b. 15.27 180° ANS 1944-100-54035. Larissa (IGCH 168). WO/ l\i-S> a. 1 7 04 0° AN9 1044-100-81101 /U'J 1 yfT 1 \J\J 111 171. 08/R24 a. Desvouges/Platt (Paris) 19-21.v.1921, 66. b. 16.98 NFAMB 27.vi.86, 159; MB 14.xii. 1989, 415. c. 17.10 180° Paris (N) 08/R25 a. 16.54 NFA6 (1979) 109. 09/R26 a. 16.60 Peus 374 (2003) 79 b. 16.92 0° ANS 1944-100-81192 c. 14.71 210° ANS 0000-999-70018 (pierced). 01U/R27 a. 16.9 Montreal MFA 922.N.28 15 (T160). <ILF> A and bee; <EX> PE. 09/R28 a. 16.91 Paris, de Luynes 1818 b. 16.90 30° BM 1949-4-11-294 c. 17.09 0° Cambridge, McClean 4485 d. 16.85 Baranowski 25.ii. 1931, 494 e. 16.90 30° ANS 1944-100-81203 ex Eggcr FPL 1927, 58a. 09/R29 a. 16.95 Hirsch 226 (2003) b. 16.18 210° ANS 1944-100-81204 O9/R30 a. 17.06 30° ANS 1944-100-45500. Armenak (IGCH 1423) 876. b. 16.90 Peus 299 (1980) 136 c. 17.00 Vienna (N) 16 (T158). <1LF> 17; <EX> Horse's head 011/R31 a. 17.07 0° ANS 1944-100-81193 b. 16.93 Seyrig, Tresors, 5. 15. Dniye (IGCH 1538) 15. 011/R32 a. 17.05 0° ANS 1944-100-45499. Thompson, pi. 20, 158. Armenak (IGCH 1423) 875. 17 (T-). <ILF> 17; <EX> A on shield. 011/R33 a. 17.04 Sternberg 8 (1978) 44 Oll/R? a. 17.03 Berlin (cat. 55) (N) 18 (T-). <ILF> rT; <EX> Thunderbolt. 011/R34 a. 17.15 Giessener MH 32 (1985) 50 19 (T159). <ILF> A and bee: <EX> Thunderbolt. 011/R35 a. 17.11 0° ANS 1966-75-114. SNG Berry' 437. 011/R36 a. 16.98 CNG 45 (1988) 290 b. 16.96 30° ANS 1944-100-81210. Urfa (IGCH 1772) c. 17.05 30° ANS 1944-100-81209. 011/R37 a. 17.04 CNG online 734153. b. 17.08 0° Burgan 23.xii.1991. 11. 011/R38 a. 17.03 Hirsch 173 (1992) 165. b. 16.99 330° Lanz 30(1984) 139. 011/R39 a. 16.40 0° ANS 1944-100-81211. b. 16.65 0° Glasgow, Hunter 68, pi. 28, 19. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 63 012/R38 012/R39 a. 16.80 0° a. 17.05 ANS 1944-100-81208. Peus 376 (2003) 309. 20 (T-). <ILF> A and bee: <EX> M . O12/R40 a. 16.89 30° BM RPK p. 86, B16; PCG IV.A. 16. b. 17.02 SBV 30 (1992) 32 012/R41 a. 16.89 Giessener MH 15 (1979) 39; 24 (1983) 6. 012/R42 a. 16.86 Hirsch 182 (1994) 93. b. 16.55 Hirsch 182 (1994) 94. 21 (T-). <ILF> A and bee; <EX> 61 . All42/R43 a. 3.80 0° BM G0597 22 (T161). <ILF> £: <TH> GE. 013/R44 a. 16.95 0° ANS 1966-75-113. SNG Berry 438. 013/R45 a. 17.19 0° Leu 79 (2000) 479 23 (T161). <ILF> £; <EX> A. 014/R46 a. 17.04 0° ANS 1944-100-81182. Thompson, pi. 20, 161. b. Naples 6488 (N) 24 (T162). <OLF> Wreath; <EX> §. 015/R47 a. 17.12 0° ANS 1944-100-81212 ex Sotheby 15.vi.10, 131. 25 (T163). <OLF> Wreath; <EX> 2> 015/R48 a. 16.56 Giessener MH 92 (1998) 94 b. 17.13 0° ANS 1966-75-115. SNG Berry 439. 015/R49 a. 17.07 0° ANS 1944-100-81213. Thompson, pi. 20, 163. Mosul (IGCH 1768). b. 16.85 0° Commerce (N). O15/R50 a. 16.99 NAC T (1999) 1262. b. 16.60 30° BM 1898-6-2-101. c. Berlin (N). //. Gold issues Lysimachus types Obv. Head of Alexander r. diademed and with Ammon's horn. Rev. Adiena seated 1. on throne, holding Nike in r. and spear in 1.; behind, shield; BASIAEftX AYSFMAXOY. Staters. 26 (T139). <ILF> Horse's head; <TH> Star Al/Pl a. 8.52 30° ANS 1967-152-699. Thompson, pi. 20, 139. Mara$e$ti (IGCH 958). 42 This apparently unique drachm is struck from an obverse die (All) otherwise used for gold staters. 64 A.R. MEADOWS 27 (T-). <1LF> Ram's head; <TH> Star. A1/P2 a. 8.49 0° St Petersburg (N). A2/P3 a. 8.47 MMAG 75 (1989) 218. 28 (T-). <ILF> Ram's head; <TH> M. A3/P4 a. 8.5 Schlessinger 13 (1935) 535. MMAG 64 (1984) 70. Sternberg 29 (1995) 58. NFA 30 (1992) 38. 29 (T140). <ILF> Eagle's head; <EX> GE. A4/P5 a. 8.50 330° ANS 1944-100-81206. 30 (T-). <ILF> Eagle's head; <EX> PE*3 A4/P6 a. 8.46 0° Lanz 72 (1995) 154 A4/P7 a. 8.5 Schlessinger 13 (1935) 523 31 (T141). <ILF> PE; <EX> Eagle's head A4/P8 a. 8.47 Hess 16.iv.57. 161. Vinchon 25/7.v.98, 39. b. 8.5 Schlessinger 13 (1935) 530. c. 8.53 330° ANS 1963-217-1, ex Dorotheum 8/9.vi.l956 (A. Zeno), 3075. Thompson, pi. 20, 141. d. 8.58 Giessener MH 90 (1998) 156; 96 (1999) 80. A4/P9 a. 8.55 330° ANS 1944-100-81207. b. 8.45 NFA 11 (1982) 68 (ex.N. Davis coll.). c. 8.47 0° BM 1924-6-17-9 (ex Grand Duke Alexander Michailovitch). 32 (T143). <ILF> Cornucopia; <EX> GE. A5/P10 a. 8.52 330° ANS 1944-100-81187. Thompson, pi. 20,143. b. 8.46 Naville 5 (1923. Bertier de la Garde) 1691. Cahn 26.xi.1930, 1179 c. 8.45 R. Ratto (Lugano) 24.vi.1929, 271 (this coin possibly identical with b.) d. 8.50 330° BM 1924-6-17-11 (ex Grand Duke Alexander Michailovitch) e. Bourgey23.v. 1910,54. f. 8.45 60° St Petersburg (N) 33 (T143). <OLF> GE; <ILF> Cornucopia. A5/PU a. 8.55 Sternberg 18 (1986) 61 b. Bourgey 29/31.v.191L 75. Sotheby 21/2.ii. 1929 (Prichard), 52. 34 (T-). <ILF> GE: <TH> Cornucopia. A5/P12 a. 8.52 MMAG 47 (1972) 440. 35 (T142). <dLF> M; <TH> GE. A5/P13 a. 8.50 330° ANS 1944-100-81188. 43 Another coin struck from obverse die A4 appears as Schlessinger 13(1935). lot 524. The reverse has an eagle's head in inner left field, but the exergue is off flan. It could, therefore, be from issue 29 or 30. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 65 A6/P14 a. 8.51 0° ANS 1955-190-48 36 (T-). <1LF> GE: <TH> M. A6/P15 a. 8.49 0° St Petersburg (N) b. 8.52 0° Marasesti (IGCH 958) (N). 37 (T-). <ILF> W; <TH> linear device44 <EX> M. A6/P16 a. 8.57 Locker Lampson 126. b. 8.55 0° Brussels, de Hirsch 925. 38 (T-). <ILF> BI; <EX> )E. A6/PI7 a. 8.45 0° St Petersburg (N) 39 (T-). <ILF> r*E; <TH> GE. A7/P18 a. 8.58 0° Lanz 48 (1989) 159 40 (T143). <OLF> Cornucopia; <EX> GE or 3D. A7/P19 a. 8.53 0° SNG Newnham Davis 117. b. Formerly BM, RPK p. 85, A.l. c. 8.51 0° Hess 208 (1931, Hermitage duplicates) 206 d. 8.57 Munich (N) A7/P20 a. 8.51 BM G0582 A8/P20 a. 8.56 0° Lanz 86 (1998) 85 A8/P21 a. Drouot (Bourgey) 25.v.1950, 63 b. 8.50 0° SNG Cop. 1085 c. 8.52 0° Oxford (Bodleian) (N). 41 (TI44) <OLF> A8/P22 a. 8.54 b. 8.51 c. 8.51 d. 8.56 A8/P23 A9/P22 A9/P23 A9/P24 e. 8.49 a. 8.53 b. 8.50 c. 8.52 a. 8.52 b. 8.43 a. 8.54 a. 8.48 b. 8.52 c. 8.49 d. 8.53 e. 8.42 Cornucopia; <ELF> IT or I"T. Peus 298 (1979) 57 ANS 1944-100-81189 ex Mehl, February, 1930 (J.A. Anderson coll.) 1502. Lanz 64 (1993) 124. Credit de la Bourse 24.ix.1995, 3. NFA 26 (1991) 47. Sotheby (Zurich) 26.x. 1993,41. CNG 34 (1995)74. St Petersburg (N) Florange & Ciani 17/21 .ii.1925 (Allotte de la Fuye), 318. Munich (N) Berlin (N). MMAG 77 (1992) 46 Hess 208 (1931, Hermitage duplicates) 207 ANS 1944-100-81190. Thompson, pi. 20, 144. Leu 86 (2003) 320. Egger41 (1912) 288. Berlin (N). St Petersburg (N). Hess 208 (1931, Hermitage duplicates) 208 0° 0° 0° 0° 0° 0° 0° (): 44 See Thompson. 'Lysimachus', pp. 176 n. 1 and 177 n. 2. This issue, which is clearly die-linked to other issues of "Alexandria', was not noted by Thompson. The curious linear device appears otherwise on issues assigned by Thompson to Mytilene and Ephesus. 66 A.K. MbAUUWi A10/P25 a. 8.46 30° BM 1927-5-6-2 (ex Grand Duke Alexander Michailovitch). b. 8.48 30° St Petersburg (N). 42 (T145) <ILF> IT; <EX> K A10/P26 a. Thompson p. 176, 145.4"1 43 (T146) <ILF> IT or fl; <EX> El . A10/P27 a. 8.51 30° ANS 1919-108-4. Thompson, pi. 20, 146. b. 8.50 330° Lanz 34 (1985) 118. c. 8.54 Hirsch 13 (1905, Rhousopoulos) 696. Hess 15.x. 1903, 193. d. 8.46 0° BM 1924-7-8-8 (ex Grand Duke Alexander Michailovitch). e. 8.47 0° St Petersburg (NT) A10/P28 a. 8.52 Egger 41 (1912) 289. Egger 45 (1913) 457. b. 8.48 0° Hess/Leu 9.v. 1973, 118. c. 8.52 0° St Petersburg (N). d. 8.49 0° Paris (N) 44(T147) <ILF>/ ? and bee; <EX>E1 . A10/P29 a. 8.51 330° MMAG 25 (1962) 430. Hess/Leu 25.iv.1972, 138. Lanz 56 (1991) 83. A11/P30 a. 8.48 0° BM B1841, 517. b. 8.54 Triton 6 (2003) 235. A12/P30 a. 8.47 0° ANS 1944-100-81205. Thompson, pi. 20, 147. b. 8.45 0° Hess/Leu (Lucerne) 12.iv.1962, 152. Leu 86 (2003) 476. A12/P31 a. 8.56 Triton 7 (2004) 173 45 (T-). <ILF> £; <TH> GE. A13/P32 a. 8.62 Munich (N) b. 8.61 Gotha (N) 46 (T-). <OLF> Wreath; <EX> 1. A14/P33 a. 8.51 0° St Petersburg (N) III. Bronze issues A. Obv. Head of Athena r. in crested Attic helmet; monogram or letters on neck guard. Rev. Lion leaping r.; above, AY. 47. (15 mm; 4.10 g.): Obv. Neck guard, Yfl. Rev. Below, spearhead. Bellinger -. Copenhagen (Thorvaldsen coll.). Midler, Lysimachus, p. 49 n. 9. pi. I. 3. B. Obv. Head of Athena r. in crested Attic helmet; monogram or letters on neck guard. Rev. Lion leaping r.; above and below, BASIAEI1S AYXIMAXOY. 48. (17-18 mm; 3.85-5.44 g): Obv. Neck guard. Y1T or ELY. Rev. Above. AI; below. ME and spearhead; to 1., r%.. Bellinger A17-19. SNG Cop. 1157; Oxford: BM (2); Newell (5); Berlin (3); Cambridge (McClean 4498). 15 This variety, listed (without illustration) by Thompson as sharing an obverse die with her T146-7, was not recorded by Newell. No specimen is known to me. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 67 49. (17-18 mm; 4.65-5.59 g): Obv. Neck guard, YII or UY. Rev. Above, AI; below, ME and spearhead; to 1., torch. Bellinger -. Berlin (2); Newell; BM; Copenhagen (Thorvaldsen coll. 752). 50. (17-18 mm; 4.04^1.98 g): Obv. Neck guard, YII or 1TY. Rev. Above, AI; below, ME and spearhead; to 1., A. Bellinger A20. BM (3); Newell; Berlin (2) 51. (18 mm; 4.64 g): Obv. Neck guard, YII. Rev. Above, 03 (?); below, rN( and spearhead. Bellinger -. SNG Cop. 1156. SUMMARY OF PRECIOUS METAL ISSUES Denomination No. of specimens Obv. dies Rev. dies A7 Staters 78 14 34 JR Tetradrachrns 100 15 49 Drachms (Lys.) 1 (1) 1 Drachms (Alex.) 1 1 1 COMMENTARY The sequence falls into four main sections. The first (JR. 1-5 and N 26-27) is unified by the presence of the control mark of a star, as well as by stylistic considerations. The second (A7 29-31), unified by the appearance of an eagle's head, was assigned by Newell to Byzantium. Their attribution to Alexandria is due to Thompson (p. 176, n. 2). The parallel appearance of the controls GJi and f^E, suggest a possible connection with other issues in this sequence. However, both are common monograms on the lifetime Lysimachi and the absence of die-links between these issues and others in the sequence gives ground for caution.46 The main group of issues (/R 8-21 and N 32-44) is clearly homogenous, exhibiting a distinctive combination of controls and tight die-linkage. At the end comes a group of silver issues (JR 22-25) which are stylistically related to each other, but which cannot clearly be shown to be connected to the other issues of the sequence. Considerations of style and the disposition of control marks led Newell to assign them to the same mint as the other issues, but again there is room for doubt. In general Newell look the style of the 'earlier' issues of this sequence to be reminiscent of his mint of Lampsacus, and the 'later' to be closer to Pergamum. 46 Note, for example. T133 and Tl 38 {M 'Magnesia': ME), Tl 83-5 (AR 'Cius': ME), T194 and T196 (JR 'Amphipolis': ME and (£), T221 (/R 'Pergamum': GE) and the N staters (T-) characterised by the appearance of ME in LF and a corn ear in EX (Schlessinger 13 (1935) 531 and Glendining 18—20.iv. 1955 (G. de Laval), 12 (die-duplicates)), perhaps attribulable to 'Cius'. 68 A.R. MEADOWS There is nothing inherent in the structure of the issues that would suggest attribution to a particular mint. If, as argued above (pp. 51-2). the arguments from geography and control marks cannot by themselves sustain the attribution to Alexandria Troas, then these groups of coins, whether they form a single sequence or not, must remain unattributed. THE EARLIEST COINAGE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS 69 ■E "S a u S3 + "2 + "I + <u — + + >- >- t=t= V + 3 2^ | + + + 11 + + + + >->->- 1=1=1= i 0 + + + a E S * s + + + ttt < + + I l_ «J B * + | < 2 < + 'B, E + u < \0 r-» + + n a) 'tL'a. c o ■j o + + + 0fcJ — rt- u-j + + 11 £ S ."=• + + 3 <K <n + < + w 70 A.R. MEADOWS APPENDIX 2. A NEW SECOND CENTURY TETRADRACHM ISSUE OF ALEXANDRIA TROAS I take the opportunity here to publish a recent acquisition at the British Museum which adds a new issue to the second century silver coinage recorded by Bellinger. Obv. Head of Apollo laureate 1. Rev. Apollo Smintheus laureate standing r., holding bow in 1. hand and patera in r.; over 1. shoulder, quiver; to 1. and r., AIIOAAflNOX I SMI0EO2; in ex., AAEHAN; in inner 1. field, PMA; in inner r. field Eg and El. 15.65 g 0° BM 1998-10-7-1 ex Spink 128 (1998) 170. Plate 3, 18. The date of this issue, year 144, probably equates to c. 158/7 bc, assuming that the era in use began in 301/0 bc. The issue thus belongs between Bellinger A135 (c.160 bc) and A136 (c.148 bc). KEY TO PLATES L Uncertain mint. BM. Price, Alexander, no. 1587. 2. Alexandria Troas. Private collection. 3. Alexandria Troas. Oxford (Milne, 1925). 4. Alexandria Troas. BMC Alexandria 4. 5. Alexandria Troas. BMC Alexandria 5. 6. Alexandria Troas. BM 1916-11-3-9. 7. Alexandria Troas. BMC Alexandria 14. 8. Ilium. BMC Ilium 1. 9. Neandria. BMC Neandria 8. 10. Mytilene. BMC Mytilene 30. 11. Mytilene. BMC Mytilene 32. 12. Abydus. BMC Abydus 11. 13. Abydus. CM 1979-1-1-252 (SNG von Aulock 7533). 14. Abydus. BM 1920-5-16-28. 15. Scepsis. Private collection. « 16. Alexandria Troas. BM 1841-7-30-428. 17. Alexandria Troas. BMC Alexandria Troas 1. 18. Alexandria Troas. BM 1998-10-7-1. Postscript Since this article went to press, the current owner of the new double siglos of Alexandria, Mr J.H. Kagan, has generously indicated his intention to donate the coin to the British Museum. PLATE 3 MEADOWS. ALEXANDRIA TROAS