Professional Documents
Culture Documents
39015042859556
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike / http://www.hathitrust.org/access_use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0
AMERICAN JOURNAL
OF NUMISMATICS
3-4
NEW YORK
1992
IN MACEDONIAN HOARDS
F. de Callatay
seven hoards composed only of Athenian coins and six which contain
observes that "the numerous Athenian issues they contain fit into the
1 It is a pleasure to thank the late Miss M. Thompson and Mr. G. Le Rider and Mr.
work, The New Style Silver Coinage of Athens, ANSNS 10 (New York, 1961). The
chronology, particularly the end of the sequence, of this standard reference has been
criticized by several people who proposed a down dating of ca. 32 years. For this, see
11
12
F. de Callatay
first from the Scordisces and then from Thracian tribes. This troubled
beginning of the 80s, fits well according to Touratsoglou with the impor-
mining activity.5
Macedonia. Did the arrival of this money coincide with the invasions ?6
production.
of the two main magistrates and the third to the varieties listed by
5 Touratsoglou (p. 18) slightly adapts an idea expressed by Otto Merkholm who
observed that the increased production of silver coin in Athens about 145/4 was
partly a result of political changes imposed by Rome which resulted in the inter-
ruption of some important silver coinages, see O. Merkholm (above, n. 4), p. 42.
6 Touratsoglou (p. 18) wrote: "The examination of the hoards in combination with
the information from historical sources seems to favour the chronological classifi-
cation of the Athenian issues as suggested by Merkholm and to justify the view that
upheaval and threat from abroad: the clashes of the Roman legions in 135 B.C., 119
B.C.; 114 B.C. and 106 B.C. with the Scordisci Gauls are reflected in the hoards of
Chalkidiki/1976, while the situation caused by the raids of the Thracians and the
7 In addition to the Merkholm down dating, the sequence of some emissions needs
to be changed. Until this is done it seems preferable not to give the illusion of perfect
accuracy, but to let the Thompson dates stand even through they are over three
Thompson.8 Next, for each emission, the number of obverse dies in the
(1983), and IGCH 524 (Zarova, 1898). The sixth hoard is the northern-
most and was unearthed some 70 km. south of Sofia, IGCH 976 (Belica,
1956).
Table 1
Magistrate
Varieties
Ott.
Spec.
Early Period
Dies
66
524
976
171/0 KTHZI-EYMA
266-286
21
102
170/69 TAAY-EXE
287-306
20
77
10
169/8 MIKI-GECXDOPA
315-324
10
68
15
Middle Period
168/7 HPA-APIZTOO)
324-340
12
84
13
167/6 MENEA-EnirENO
347-355
101
27
166/5 TIMAPXOY-NIKATO
360-368
66
13
165/4 nOAYXAPM-NIKOr
368-380
49
164/3 AQP09E-AIO<6
14
F. de Callatay
Diet
66
133
52i
151/0 AIONYZI-AIONYZI
552-577
25
175
+9
150/49 AMMQNIOZ-KAAAIAZ
577-593
15
136
149/8 GEMirro-eEonoMnoz
596-609
14
110
+4
148/7 XQKPATHZ-AIONYZOAQ
611-625
15
121
147/6 MHTPOAQPOZ-MIATIA-
629-644
16
115
+4
AHZ
146/5 AIOTIMOZ-MArAZ
648-664
17
98
+3
15
The first hoard (IGCH 478, Thessalonica) is different from all the
of the coins10 and the number of die links strongly argue for a burial
date at the end of 130s, very soon after the arrival of these tetra-
drachms in Macedonia.
each of the five hoards, these four emissions constitute more than half of
the specimens.
Table 2
Number
Total
Percentage
CH 4, 66
18
26
69.2
CH 7, 133
60.0
15
Adam Zagliveriou
20
38
52.6
IGCH 524
234
421
55.6
IGCH 976
15
19
78.9
This situation contrasts highly with the real significance of these four
10 Thompson, p. 475: "The coins recorded above are all well preserved, those of the
first three strikings somewhat more worn than those of the last, many of which are
FDC."
11 Indeed, if we down-date Thompson by 32 years the terminus post quern for each
133, 105/4; Adam Zagliveriou, 96/5; Zarova, IGCH 524, 95/4; and Belica, IGCH 976,
85/4.
12 Some hoards from northern Greece are not detailed here because they are either
attest the same phenomenon. Strojno 1961, IGCH 924, had four Athenian specimens
16
F. de Callatay
(18, 12, 16, and 18), these four emissions are certainly well repre-
emissions. Many of these are of a similar volume (even larger from time
four emissions above take a trifling place in hoards from Crete, Delos,
Table 3
Delos
Griechisches Munzwerk. Die Munzpragung von Maroneia (Berlin, 1987), pp. 105-6;
Benkovski 1933/4, IGCH 917, had one Athenian specimen with MIKIQN-EYPYKAEI, see
Further, one of the four emissions attested for the Simitlii hoard is, once again,
pp. 197-201, pl. 18. This article was still in press when Dr. I. Propopov sent me one
of his latest publications, "A Hoard of Athens and Thasos Tetradrachms Discovered
near the Town Raslog," News of the Historical Museum of Kjustendil (1989), pp. 249-
EYPYKAEI and 1 has KAPAIX-EPrOKAE. Thus, in this case, all the specimens belong to
goes without saying that this situation results in large part from Macedonian hoards.
17
Total
12
248
52
52
11
631
0.0
13.5
0.0
0.0
1.9
Euboea
Total
41
70
121
0.0
0.0
0.0
Attica
Total
12
33
45
8.3
0.0
2.2
Thessaly
13
903
1.4
one case and usually less than 2 percent. Thus, it seems evident that we
the 3 other ones nonetheless represent 45.8 percent of the total, 22 coins
In CH 7, 130, one specimen is added to the total and one variety (Th. 804a) is
18
F. de Callatay
teristics. First, they are not the most recent emissions in Macedonian
hoards. Second, they are nearly sequential. Indeed three out of four
emissions are sequential, from 158/7 to 156/5). The fourth one, 153/2
this hypothesis.18 Neither do the study of style nor the study of hoards
contradict it. The important point is to see that the main import of
commentary on the Zarova hoard, "It is true that one would expect a
must be remembered that we are concerned here not with the Athens
Athenian coins to the north during those years and their continued use
smaller quantity."17
dated from about 158/7 to 153/2 according to the high chronology, that
likely low chronology. This period from about 126/5 to 121/0 attracts
linked with this event) and the flood of Athenian tetradrachms which
ities. 1. After the closing of the Macedonian mints, enough coinage was
available for the needs of the next 20 years. 2. The great reorganization
of monetary production by the Romans did not take place in 146 but
rather than the other, I would like to submit the two following
the Maronean coinage was not initiated before the last quarter of the
may well be that the large monetary changes affecting Macedonia in the
say two decades after the most commonly believed dates. This last
abrupt manner continued for some thirty years to provide the bulk of
of a local market. Thompson was once again very circumspect when she
wrote that the composition of the Zarova hoard seems "to point up
18 Such a massive importation seems more likely to have been carried out by an
20
F. de Callatay
sometimes forgotten, namely that coinage did not flow in and out of any
always an even flow expanding ever outward. The hoard evidence here
constraints.
20 Thompson, p. 540.