The Agrinion Hoard / by Margaret Thompson

NUMISMATIC
AND
NOTES
No.
THE
THE
159
AGRINION
By
HOARD
MARGARET
AMERICAN
MONOGRAPHS
THOMPSON
NUMISMATIC
NEW
SOCIETY
YORK
1968
This content downloaded from 83.85.134.3 on Sat, 30 Jan 2016 16:44:50 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
NUMISMATIC
NOTES
AND
MONOGRAPHS
Number 159
ALLRIGHTSRESERVEDBY
THE AMERICAN
NUMISMATIC
SOCIETY
Prof.A. ALFLDI
99
SPIEZ, Oberlandstr.
Libraryof CongressCatalogueCard Number68-21876

PRINTEDIN GERMANY
GLCKSTADT
ATJ.J.AUGUSTIN
The
Hoard
Agrinion
By MARGARET
THE
AMERICAN
THOMPSON
NUMISMATIC
NEW
SOCIETY
YORK
1968
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
CATALOGUE
OF THE AGRINIONHOARD
INTRODUCTION
INDEX
THE COINS
I
5
6
COMMENTARY
THE EARLY COINAGES
THE THESSALIANAND BOEOTIANLEAGUES
ATHENS
CYME
MEGALOPOLIS
THE ACHAEAN
LEAGUE
THE AETOLIANLEAGUE
78
80
80
82
83
85
IO4
THE BURIALDATE
IO7
TABLESOF THE ACHAEAN

LEAGUEISSUES
CONSPECTUSOF HOARDS
CHRONOLOGICAL
TABULATION
IIO
I16
APPENDIX
THE DENARII OF THE AGRINIONHOARDBY RUDI THOMSEN
AND MICHAELH. CRAWFORD
II8
PLATES
131
CATALOGUE
OF
THE
AGRINION
HOARD
INTRODUCTION
This important hoard was found in 1959 at or near Agrinion in
westernAetolia and offeredto the American Numismatic Society in
the followingyear. A photographic record was made shortlythereafterbut the coins themselveswere not acquired until the summerof
1962, by which time it had become apparent that the deposit had
significantchronological implications and merited full publication.1
As reportedin a preliminarynote in the 1962 NumismaticChronicle
,2
the AgrinionHoard now consists of 1,340 silver coins:
179 autonomous drachms and hemidrachmsof various mints in
the Peloponnese and Central Greece
39 tetradrachmsof Athens
i tetradrachmof Cyme
151 hemidrachmsof Megalopolis
834 hemidrachmsof the Achaean League
97 hemidrachmsof Aetolia
39 denarii of the Roman Republic
1Thisstudyhas beengreatlyfacilitated
of
by theassistanceand cooperation
a numberofcolleagues,to whomI am deeplygrateful.
A preliminary
photographicrecordofthehoardwas madeby GeorgeC. Milesand thelateWilliam
P. Wallace.The oneroustask ofcleaningthe coinswas undertaken
by Persy
forthe plates is the workof Peter
Coronis;the subsequentphotography
Berghaus.MargildisSchlterprovidedprintsofa largeAchaeanLeaguehoard
foundat Olympia,whichshe is publishing,
and has been mostgenerousin
and tentativeconclusions.
Whenshe firstsuggested
sharingherinformation
the possibilityof commonmintsand a secondcenturybeginningforthe
Achaeancoinage,I was somewhat
material
skepticalbutstudyoftheAgrinion
has convinced
methatsheis right.RudiThomsenand MichaelCrawford
have
devoteda greatdeal oftimeto analyzingthe Romanmaterialand preparing
the Appendix,and CharlesHershhas suppliedhelpfuldata on the Roman
seriesas a whole.The publicationin its finalformowesmuchto the careful
of JoanE. Fisher.
checking
2"AthensAgain,"NC 1962,320-322.
i
Introduction
To this record should be added one tetradrachmof Cyme,which was

disposed of at the time the hoard was uncovered,and seven fractions,
four hemidrachms of the Achaean League and three drachms of
Chalcis, which were sold beforethe ANS obtained the material.
In view of the controversial chronology of several coinages representedin the hoard, it will be well to emphasize at the start that
we are dealing with a deposit which has not been adulterated in
moderntimes. A green copper encrustationwas presenton numerous
specimensof all series listed above, even on the single tetradrachmof
Cyme, and many pieces were also heavily coated with a distinctive
dark accretion.3 Beyond any question the coins are from a single
burial.
Adulterationin antiquityis a possibilitywhichcannot be ruled out,
but there is no cogent reason forsupposing that it took place. In its
basic composition the Agrinion Hoard is comparable with other
deposits in which autonomous issues of the fourth and third centuries are combined with second century strikingsof Megalopolis,
Aetolia and the Achaean League.4 It differsfromthe otherhoards in
containing tetradrachms of Athens and Cyme and denarii of the
Roman Republic.5 This admixture of coinages is, however, entirely
plausible in the light of the Aetolian provenance of the hoard. The
Athenian and Cymean material is contemporarywith the bulk of the
Federal money and the chronological problems presented by the
denarii do not seem serious enough to necessitate the segregationof
the 39 Roman coins and the assumption that they were added at a
later date to the 1301 Greek coins of an earlier hoard.
In the catalogue which follows,the arrangementis roughlychronological: the early series and the miscellaneous coinages of second
3According
to HansjrgBloesch,whosaw thecoinsbeforetheywerecleaned,
In orderto preservethe
thisis sulphuricoxidewithlimestoneencrustation.
recordofthetwotypesofdeposit,a smallgroupofcoinshasbeenleftuncleaned
as notedin thecatalogue.
4The Caserta,WesternGreece,Arcadiaand OlympiaHoardscitedon page4
thepublication.
and throughout
6The AbruzziHoard (NC 1962, 312-313) apparentlycontainedAthenian
but
and denariiassociatedwithAchaeanLeague hemidrachms
tetradrachms
are so obscurethat it cannotbe conof its accumulation
the circumstances
Hoard.
sidereda reliableparallelfortheAgrinion
Introduction
centurydate preceding the large issues of Megalopolis, the Achaean

League and Aetolia, whichcomprisethe bulk ofthe hoard. The denarii
and theirspecial problemsare treated in an appendix. It has seemed
worthwhileto divide the Achaean money into early and late groupings in an effortto show when the various cities were active and the
extent and character of the coinage at differentperiods. This distributionof issues involves a degree of confusion,especially in the
case of cities representedby autonomous strikingsas well as by early
and late Federal emissions. The geographical and alphabetical
listing on page 5 summarizes the contents of the hoard for more
convenientreference.
The entriesof the catalogue are by obverse and reversedies within
each issue, with transferswithin and between issues noted. Die axes
have been given throughoutbut they establish little more than the
lack of adjustment at most mints. The tetradrachmsof Athens and
those of Cyme, as we know from other evidence, show a consistent
relationshipof dies ( f) and several issues of Chalcis in the present
ther
hoard have a uniformlyhorizontal adjustment (f <-). For
the
mints providing sufficientmaterial for evaluation,
positions are
erratic (f, 1,
->).6
Since the Agrinioncoins will some day be useful fordie studies of
individual mints,a record of practically all obverse and reverse dies
is to be found on the plates.7 In the case of several examples of the
same pair of dies, the illustrated coin is the one listed first,unless
otherwiseindicated.
Throughout the publication there is frequent reference to the
studies of Clerk and Weil and to fourhoards, comparable in date and
compositionto that of Agrinion.The bibliographyis as follows:
Clerk- M. G. Clerk, Catalogue of the Coins of the Achaean League,
London, 1895.
Weil- R. Weil, "Das Mnzwesendes Achischen Bundes/' ZfN 1882,
199-272.
6Minordeviationsfromthesepositionshave notbeenrecorded.
Evencoinages
withadjusteddiesshowvariations
fromdifferent
resulting
pointsofalignment.
See W. P. Wallace, The EuboianLeague and its Coinage
, NNM 134 (New
etlesParthes(Paris,
York,1956),89-90and G. Le Rider,SusesouslesS&leucides
1965),20-21.
7The fewomissions,
due to exigenciesofspace,are notedm thecatalogue.
i*
Introduction
Caserta Hoard - A . Lbbecke, "Ein Fund achischerBundesmnzen,"

ZfN 1908, 275-303.
Arcadia Hoard - M. Crosby and E. Grace, An Achaean League
Hoard, NNM 74, 1936.
Western Greece Hoard - M. Thompson, "A Hoard of Greek Federal
Silver/' Hesperia 1939, 116-154.
Olympia Hoard - This is an unpublished hoard now being studied by
Margildis Schlter who has made photographs of the coins
available. Another Olympia Hoard, published by Newell in
Numismatic Notes and Monographs 39, is also mentioned in
the commentaryon the Agrinion Hoard. To avoid confusion
this earlier findis referredto as the Olympia 1922 Hoard.
INDEX
THESSALY
Aenianes
Lamia
Oeta
Corinth
12
12
13
13
Early Achaean
Late Achaean
Corone
Early Achaean
PHOCIS
p. 70
p. II
Locri OPUNTii
p. ii
Dyme
Late Achaean
Elis
Early Achaean
Late Achaean
League
AETOLIA
BOEOTiA
Early League
Late League
EUBOEA
Chalis
Histiaea
AEGINA
ATHENS
MEGARA
Early Achaean
Late Achaean
p.
p.
p.
p.
p. 10
p. 13
Epidaurus
Late Achaean
p. 8
p. 10
p. 13
p. 14
p. 45
p. 56
Peloponnesus
Aegira
Late Achaean
p. 63
Aegium
Late Achaean
p. 60
Antigoneia
Early Achaean
Argos
Autonomous
Early Achaean
Late Achaean
Caphyae
Late Achaean
Cleitor
Late Achaean
p. 41
p. 7
p. 28
p. 68
Megalopolis
"Arcadian"
Early Achaean
Late Achaean
Messene
Autonomous
Early Achaean
Late Achaean
Patras
Early Achaean
Late Achaean
Pellene
Late Achaean
Pheneus
Late Achaean
p. 20
p. 64
p. 30
p. 62
p. 38
p. 53
p. 58
p. 17
p. 48
p. 52
r
p. 69
p. 31
p. 68
p. 22
p. 61
p. 58
p. 57
Sicyon
Autonomous
Early Achaean
Late Achaean
p. 6
p. 21
p. 65
Sparta
Early Achaean
p. 48
p. 55 CYME
P- 17
p. 59 rome
p. 75
THE COINS
SICYON
(50 coins)
Obv.: Z I Chimaera 1.
Rev. : Dove flying1.; usually some markingin field.
Hemidrachms
No marking
1. Z E on obverse. 2.49 ->
7. 2.57
8. 2.59 t
2. 2.33 /
3. 2.53 ; 2.53 '
9. Obverse
4. 2.54 t; 2.461
2.53 t
10.
Obverse
5. 2.56
6. 2.49
2.61 /
letters uncertain.
letters uncertain.
NO upper r.
11. 2.64 ->
15. 2.59 ->
16. Same reverse die as 15. 2.63 t
12. 2.43
13. 2.56
17. 2.62 '
14. Same reversedie as 13. 2.52 <Dot upper r.
18. Obverse letters uncertain. 23. 2.70
24. 2.69
2.46 '
2.61
25. 2.45
19.
26. 2.51
20. 2.52
21. Same reverse die as 20. 2.70 27. 2.61 /
22. 2.61 t
28. 2.54 '
29. 2.80 <-
Dot upper and lowerr.

Two dots upper, one dotlowerr.
3i- 2.57 '
30. 2.73 t
6
The Catalogue
Threedots upper r.
35. 2.61 t
36. 2.64 t
32. 2.63 t
33- 2.73 t
34- 2.49 t
I upper r.
37. 2.49 '
I lowerI.
38. 12 on obverse. 2.68
39. 2.76 t
40. Graffito(K) upper r. 2.64 f

Uncertain
41- 2.53 -*
42. 2.60
43- 2.51 -
44. 2.52 *45- 2.42
46. 2.42 47. Obverse

2.51 '
48. Obverse
2.46
letters uncertain.
letters uncertain.
ARGOS
(10 coins)
Obv.: Forepart of wolf1.
in shallow incuse square ; letters and symbols
Rev.: A
in field.
Hemidrachms
49 a. A P above, crescent below. 54. TTP above, dolphin and club
below. 2.37 t
2.44
b. A[P] above, crescent be- 55. above wolf.A E above, eagle
low. 2.36 t
on harpa below. 2.32 f
50. A P above, club below. 2.59 / 56. above wolf.
a. A E above, eagle on harpa
51. N I above, crescent below.
below. 2.30
2-39 /
b. A E above, eagle on harpa
52. N I above, grapes r., club
below. 2.49 t
below. 2.25 f
53. 2 above wolf. TT P above,
club below. 2.44 f
Agrinion Hoard
CHALCIS
(69 coins)
Obv.: Female head 1.
Rev.: XAA Eagle flying1., holding serpent; symbol in
field.
Drachms
Torchabove
58- 346 ->
57- 3-33 I
Bucranium below
59. Eagle r. 3.25 <Rose below
60. Same obverse die as 59. 3.41 <-63.
61 a. 3.27
64.
b. 3.52
65.
62. Same reverse die as 61 b. 66.
341 ^
3.42
3.19
3.38
3.28
t
t
f
Obv.: Female head r.

Rev. : XAA Eagle flyingr., holding serpent; symbol or
monogramin field.
Drachms
Crescentr.
67 a. 3.36 <b. 3.18
68. 3.42 t
Cantharusbelow
69. 3.29
72. 3.28
73. 3.37
70. Same reversedie as 69. 3.28
71. Same reverse die as 69-70. 74. 3.39 <3-27 <Grain-earbelow
75- 3-29
The Catalogue
Lyre below
76. 3-13 I
Wreathbelow
77- 3-25 +78- 3-37 -
79- 3-31 Tridentbelow
80. 3-35 *Caduceus below

81. 3.09
82. 3-35
83- 3-27 *84. 3.36
85. 3.28 86. 3.34

87. 3.33 '
88. 3.26 -i above
3-35
89- 3-30
90 a. 3.24 -sb. 3.40
91- 3-25
92- 3-35 93- 3-09 -
94- 3-17 *
95. 3.26 -696. 3.24 97- 3-45
98- 3-20
99- 3-23 Trophybelow
100. 3.21 <105. Same reverse die as 104b.

101. 3.26 <3.24 *102 a. 3.56
106. 3.33 <b. 3.31
107. 3.40 -6103. Same reverse die as 102b. 108. 3.39 3-38 *-; 3.27 <109. Same reverse die as 108.
a.
3.33
104
3.46 <t>-3-45
no. 3.32
iii. 3.23
io
Agrinion Hoard
Uncertain
112. 3.33
3.26 -e113. 3.25 -e"4- 3-34 i
115. 3.31
116. 3.16
117- 3-25 *HISTIAEA

(6 coins)
Obv.: Head of Maenad r.

Rev.: ISTI Bull walking r. ; behind,vine withtwo bunches
of grapes; symbol or monogram in field.
Drachms
118. Grapes r. 3.15 -
119. Grapes r. 3.31
120. Grapes r. 3.17
121. r. 3.23 t
122 a. Same reverse die as 121.

3.19 '
b.
r. 3.32 f
BOEOTIA
(11 coins)
Obv.: Boeotian shield.

Rev.: A Amphora in incuse square.8
Hemidrachm
123. 2.57
Obv.: Boeotian shield
Rev.: BO I Cantharus; above, club.
All in shallow incuse square.
Hemidrachms
124. 2.42
125. 2.53
126. 2.19
127. Legend illegible. 2.41

128. B 01 Grapes r. 2.49
129. BO I Grapes r. 2.47
8Babelon ( Trait11.3,275-276)regardsthe A as a mintdesignationand

Newell in the
suggeststhat the issue was struckby Larymna-Lorymna.
with
Olympia1922Hoard (NNM 39, 18-19)discussesan analogousstriking
in interpreting
the lettersas a
A I and followsHead and Imhoof-Blumer
initials.
magistrate's
The Catalogue
ii
Rev.: BO I Cantharus; above, fulmen.

Hemidrachms
130. 2.38
131. 2.44
132. 1.90
133- 2.47
PHOCIS
(1 coin)
Obv.: Bull's head facing.
Rev.: Legend illegible. Female head r.
withinincuse square.
Hemidrachm
134. 2.51 4
LOCRI OPUNTII
(17 coins)
Obv.: Head of Persephone r.
Rev.: OTTONTI3NFighting Ajax r.
Hemidrachms
Serpentin shield
135. Helmet between legs. 2.45 138. Spear below. 2.34 f
136. Helmet between legs. 2.57 4 139. Cantharus between legs.
137 a. Spear ( ?) below. 2.31 <2.39 f
b. Illegible. 2.36 4
140. Wreath ( ?) between legs.
2.27 t
Uncertainsymbolin shield
141. Head 1. Spear below. 2.40 t
142. Head l.AY and spear below.

2.56 4
Lion in shield
143. Helmet crest between legs. 144. Helmet crest between legs.
2.39
2.33
12
Agrinion Hoard
Sea-horsein shield
145. Spear below. 2.81 f

Rev.: AOKPQN Fighting Ajax r.; fulmen in shield;
between legs.
Hemidrachms
148. Trophy r. 2.44 f
146 2.36
147. 2.51 1
Obv.: Head of Athena r., wearing crested Corinthian

helmet.
Rev. : AOKPN Fighting Ajax r.; sea-horse in shield;
tridentr.
Hemidrachms
149. 2.45 I; 2.53 t
AENIANES
(2 coins)
Obv.: Laureate head of Zeus 1.
Rev. : AINIANN Warrior hurlingjavelin r.
Hemidrachms
150. 2.43 t
151. 2.35
LAMIA
(4 coins)
Obv.: Head of young Dionysus 1.,wearing ivy wreath.
Rev.: AAMIEN Amphora; above, ivy leaf; to r.,prochous.
Hemidrachms
152. 2.55 t
153. 2.42 t
154- 2.44 t
155- 2.43 t
The Catalogue
13
OETA
(1 coin)
Obv.: Head of lion 1.; in mouth, spear-head.
Rev.: [OITAflN] Herakles facing,holding club.
Hemidrachm
156. 2.35 t
THESSALIAN
LEAGUE
(1 coin)
Obv.: ["AYAbehind laureate head of Zeus r.
Rev. : ESEA [AN] Athena Itonia fightingr. ; to 1. and
r., TTOAY
Hemidrachm
157. 1.91 <BOEOTIAN
LEAGUE
(4 coins)
Obv.: Laureate head of Poseidon r. Border of dots.
Rev.: BOIQT2NNike standing 1. with wreath and trident;
monogram or symbol in field.
Drachms
160 a. Nike probablyholds spear.
158. No dots visible. To 1.,
To 1., trident.4.77 ->
4.85
-*
b. Nike holds spear. To 1.,
159. Toi., cornucopiae (?). 4.58
trident.4.82
AEGINA
(1 coin)
Obv.: Tortoise.
Rev.: Incuse square divided into five compartments; in
one section, two globules.
Drachm
161. 5.22 t
Agrinion Hoard
14
ATHENS
(39 coins)
Obv.: Head of Athena Parthenos r. Border of dots.
Rev. : A 0 E Owl r. on amphora; various monograms or
names, symbols, amphora letters and control combinations. All within wreath of olive.
Tetradrachms
190/89b.c.
162. fifP-/?
Rudder. 16.76 f T. 28 (new reverse)9
163. S-ltl
Nike; star above owl. 16.70 t T. Not (new obverse

and reverse)
189/8
T.
41 (new reverse)
188/7
Trophy. 16.32 f
Trophy. 16.61 f T. 44 (new reverse)
164. W-E
165. W-E
166. 1-M
167. E-lfl
168.11ft-Jb
169.
170. -ifi
Grain-ear. 16.69 t T. 55 (new reverse) 187/6

Cicada; H on amphora.1016.73 f T. 71a 185/4
Serpents; on amphora. 16.45 f T. 83d 184/3
Serpents; N on amphora. 16.64 t T. 84
(new reverse)
Herm; T on amphora. 16.66 f T. 88 (new
183/2
reverse)
171. TTOAY-TI Palm behind owl; ? on amphora; H 1.

field.Uncleaned. 16.36 f T. 106 d
181/0
172. TTOAY-TI Palm behind owl; ME on amphora; p? 1.
field.1216.76 t T. 110 a
9 References
are to M. Thompson,The New StyleSilverCoinageof Athens
,
NS 10 (NewYork,1961).
10Thisbetter-preserved
as
exampleofThompson71a resolvestheuncertainty
to theamphoraletter.
11Not illustrated.
12The markingin the leftfieldpresentsa problem.On thespecimensofthe
as a monthletterbut
Athenscorpus(No. no) it was readas M andinterpreted
this mustnow be correctedfromthe evidenceof theAgrinioncoin,which
showsa loop to the rightoftheM. Untilwehavea reverseon whichtheamitwillbe wellto
is clearerthanit is on anyrecordedspecimen,
phoralettering
ofmarkings.
reservejudgmenton themeaningofthecombination
The Catalogue
15
173. AMM-AlO Cornucopiae; TIP 1. field. 16.59 t T. 114

(new reverse)
180/79
174. AMM-AlO Cornucopiae; MH 1. field. 16.30 f T. 114X0
175 a. AMM-AlO Cornucopiae; TIP 1. field. 16.70 f T. 117
(new reverse)
b. AMM-AlO Cornucopiae; EY 1. field. 16.68 f T. 117
(new reverse)
176. AMM-AlO Cornucopiae; EY 1. field. 16.47 t T. 118
(new reverse)
177. XAPI-HPA
Cock; marking uncertain. 16.55 f T. 130

(new reverse)13
1:78/7
178. XAPI-HPA
Cock; TTP1. field. 16.25 t T. 13rd
179. XAPI-HPA
Cock; TIP 1. field. 16.41 f T. 132a
180. XAPI-HPA
Cock; SM below. 16.73 | T. 134 (new

reverse)
18
W AYTIA
A
Forepart of horse; Z on amphora ; 2<t>

below. 16.63 1 T. 167h
177/6
1 2' [iq aytia

A
Forepart of horse; ? on amphora; AP 1.

field. 16.79 t T. 169 (new reverse)
183 a. A-
Filleted thyrsos;
below. 16.76 t T.
Filleted thyrsos;
below. 16.59 t T.
b.k-%
? on amphora; ME
177 (new reverse)
? on amphora; EY
177 d
176/5
184. AHMH-IEP Helmet; A on amphora; MH/0Y15below.

16.70 t T. 202 d
X74/3
18Doublestriking
makesidentification
oftheobversedie difficult.
It seemsto
be T. 130.
14Thisnewreverseprovidesa newcontrolcombination
fortheissue,onewhich
is foundin thecontiguous
emissionofAdei-Helio.
15A coin fromthe MeletopoulosCollection(Athens202d) probablyhas the
ofthecontrolcombination.
samerecutting
Its reverseis notclear.
i6
Agrinion Hoard
185. AHMH-IEP Helmet; A on amphora; E16below.

16.68 t T. 206 (new reverse)
186. BMfcj
187.
188.
189. ifc-f
Eagle; A on amphora; EY below. 16.62 f

T. 228 c
!73/2
H
on
below.
Eagle;
amphora;
16.57 t
T. 236 (new reverse)
Aplustre; ? on amphora; ? below. 16.54t
T. 257 b
I72/1
K
on
TP
below.
Aplustre;
amphora;
16.22 t T. 258a
190. KTHZI-EYMANike; H on amphora; EN below. Uncleaned. 16.71 f T. 271 (new reverse)

171/0
KTHZINike; M on amphora; TTPbelow. 16.49 t
191 a.
EYMA
T. 277 (new reverse)
b. KTHZIEYMA
Nike; M on amphora; TTP1. field. 16.56 t

T. 277 (reverse of 278 h)
192. KTHZI-EYMA Nike ; ? on amphora; ME 1. field.16.76 f

T. Not (reverse of 277 k)
193. KTH2I-EYMANike ; ? on amphora; EN below. 16.60 f
T. 281
194. TAAY-EXE Helios bust; ? on amphora; HP 1. field.
16.73 t T. 300 (new reverse)
170/69
195. MIKIEO<DPA
Nike in quadriga; E/A(?) on amphora;

ME/APbelow. 16.69 t T. 318 c
169/8
on
nOAYXPAM-NIKOr-eEMIZTOKAH
I
Caduceus;
196.
amphora; Al below. 16.80 f T. Not
(reverse of 378i)
165/4
Fulmen; A on amphora;
197. ECXDPA-STAS-TTEISQN
ME below. Uncleaned. 16.79 t T. 407
162/1
(new reverse)
16The newreversedie adds stillanothercontrolcombination
to the thirteen
Svoronos'recordofthecombination
alreadylistedforthisissueand confirms
, p. 86).
(see Athens
The Catalogue
17
CYME
(1 coin)
Obv.: Head of Amazon Cyme r.
Rev. : KYMAIN Horse r. ; below, cup. All within wreath
of laurel.
Tetradrachm
198. MHTPO<t>ANHZin exergue. Uncleaned. 16.14 t
MEGALOPOLIS
(151 coins)
Obv.: Laureate head of Zeus 1.
Rev. : A- Pan seated 1. on rocks, holding lagobolon.
Hemidrachms
I on obverse; I on reverse
199. 2.76 f
A on reverse
200. 2.74 I
201. 2.54 <Obv.: Laureate head of Zeus 1.

Rev.: Pan seated 1. on rocks, holding lagobolon; eagle on
his knee.
Hemidrachms
2 j on reverse
202. 2.43 -
A
K i on reverse
203 a. 2.41 <b. 2.46
a
i8
Agrinion Hoard
R S on reverse
204. a. 3.13 f; 2.19 (broken) 4

b. 2.36 -
205. a. Same reverse die as 204b.

2.39 4; 2.43 f; 2.27 t
b. 2.41 c. 2.58
R ^ on reverse
211. 2.32 4
206 a. 2.33
2.30 *212. 2.22 ->
b. 2.49
c. 2.27 t
<2.28
a.
2.27 *207
2.37 4;
b. 2.26
b. 2.37 4
c. 2.36 <c. 2.33 ->
d. 2.29 -
d. 2.34 4
e. 2.26
e. 2.34 t
ff. 2.34 t
2.27 t
208 a. Same reverse die as 207i.
g. 2.44 ->
h. 2.20 t ; 2.24 ->
2.45 t
i- 2.32 4
b. 2.36
2.36 t
c. 2.29 4; 2.36
214. 2.26 <2.41 4
d. 2.33
215. 2.24 t
216 a. 2.23 <e. 2.31 4
b. 2.28 4
f. 2.33
c. 2.28 4
a.
2.23 t
209
d. 2.38 f (Plate XIX)
b. 2.26 f
c. 2.30 4
217 a. 2.35 -
b. 2.36 -
d. 2.38 4
218 a. 2.44 4
e. 2.46 f
b. 2.42
210 a. 2.25 -; 2.29 4
2.43 -
b. 2.28 4
A A on reverse
219. Same obverse die as 218.17 220 a. 2.35 4; 2.45 4
b. 2.33 t
2.26 f
The Catalogue
19
A on reverse
b. Same reverse die as 222 d.

221. Same obverse die as 214.17
2-35 2.27 t
c.
as
222. Same obverse die
2.37 4- (Plate XIX)
215.17
d. 2.39 *a. 2.27 t
b. 2.36 -*
224. Same reverse die as 223d.
c. 2.29
2.23 4-;2.20
->
d. 2.33 t; 2.18
225. Same reverse die as 223d
and 224. 2.29 4e. 2.26 t
226. Same reverse die as 223 d,
f. 2.29 t (Plate XIX)
as
216.17
obverse
Same
224, 225. 2.32 4-; 2.31 ->
223.
as
222
e.
die
Same
reverse
a.
(Plate XIX)
2.28 4A on reverse
h. 2.29 4227. 2.29 1
i. 2.30
228 a. 2.39 -*
b. 2.34 t
j. 2.25 --(PlateXIX); 2.26t
231 a. 2.37 -
229 a. 2.24 1
b. 2.39 t; 2.28 t
b. 2.26 t
c. 2.27 '
c. 2.45 t
d. 240 ->
e.
a. Same reverse die as 229 c.
2.29
f- 2-34 '
2.31 1
b. 2.28
g. 2.34 1; 2.26 -
c. 2.40 -*;2.32 t
232 a. Same reverse die as 231g.
->
d. 2.31 1; 2.38
2.27 t
b. 2.23 t
e. 2.32 +c. 2.28 ->
f. 2.29 ->
g- 2.37 t
17Die linkagebetweenNos. 218-219is illustratedon Plate XVII; the coins
dies are groupedat the bottomof
of the fourotherinstancesof transferred
Plate XIX forconvenient
comparison.
The locationofthebreakson thelaterspecimensis as follows:on No. 219
of the wreath,and thelonglockof
smallflawsby the nose,the termination
hairbehindtheneckline; on No. 222 aroundthenose; on No. 223 aroundthe
crownofthehead; on No. 230 beforetheface.
20
Agrinion Hoard
No markingon reverse
b. 2.43 ->
233. 2.38
2.40 t
c. 2.38 t
234 a. 2.39
2.40
b. 2.31 t; 2.38
->
d.
2.37
2.40 4
235 a. Same reversedie as 234b. 237. Possibly same reverse die as
2.42 1; 2.41 f; 2.43
235 and 236a. 2.35
2.20
2.40
2.40 1; 2.36 ->
2.47 4
b. 2.43 4
238 a. 2.35 4
c. 2.37 ->
b. 2.44 f; 2.42 f; 2.32 ->
d. 2.35 ->
239 a. 2.30-1; 2.41
b. 2.35 f; 2.42 -*
236 a. Same reverse die as 235 d.
2.40t; 2.294; 2.394:2.414
ACHAEAN LEAGUE
(EARLY)18
(576 coins)
Obv.: Laureate head of Zeus r.
Rev. : X with various markings in field; all in laurel
wreath tied below.
Hemidrachms
Corinth
6 coins (part)
9 to r.' |SP below
240 a. <jS]below. 2.39

b. 2.43 t
2.23 -> 241 a. Wreath tied above. 2.35 f

(Plate XLVII)
b. [Si below. 2.44 ->
242. Wreath tied above. 2.35 f
18The readeris reminded
thattheAchaeanLeague coinagehas beendivided
into earlyand late groupings(see p. 3 supra); the notation"(part)" after
therecordofcoinagefora givenmintmeansthatthereare issuesin another
sectionofthecatalogue.The tabulationon p. 5 gives exactlocations.
In the commentaries
on the variousmintsthe recordof knowncoinsand
obversedies forthe issuesof the AgrinionHoard is supplemented
by other
material.This is by no meansan exhaustivecompilation.It includesillustrationsin readily-available
and sale catalogues,photographs
of
publications
hemidrachms
partoftheOlympiaHoard,andtheMessenianandMegalopolitan
oftheParis,London,Cambridge,
Berlinand Leningrad
Cabinets.Photographs
and castsofthecoinsofthetwocitieswerecollectedby JamesDengatefora
studyofthemoneyofMegalopolis(ANSMN 13 [1967],57-110)and werethus
at handfordie comparisons.
21
The Catalogue
Sicyon
17 coins (part)
E Y to I. and r. ; ZI below
(all wreaths tied above)
243. 2.30 ->

2.39 t (Plate XLVII)
b. 2.38 t
245 a. Same reverse die as 243,
244a. 2.26
b. 2.38
c. 2.44 <d. EY above; II below. 2.44 ->
e. Z I to 1. and r.; EY below.
Uncleaned. 2.45 f
246 a. 2.45 t
b. Same reverse die as 245b.
2.42 f
a.
247
2.44 fi 2.42 t
b. 2.45 ->
248 a. 2.40 <b. 2.40 <249. Z I to 1. and r. ; EY below.
2.36 <250. 2.41
Corinthand Sicyon each produced a single issue during the early

period of the Achaean League coinage.19Neither seems to have been
a large emission. More than three times as many obverse dies have
survived fromthe Sicyonian strikingas fromthat of Corinth,but our
record is very likely incomplete forboth mints.20
AgrinionHoard
9-[8p
EY-ZI
Coins
638
17
Other
Obverse dies
Coins
24
New obverse dies

2
19As is thecase at othermints,insignificant

variationsoccurwithintheissues,
and thearrangement
ofthe
notablyin theformoftheCorinthian
monogram
Sicyonianletters.
20Evaluationsthroughout
of the degreeof completenessof our recordof
obversedies and henceof the size of individualcoinagesare based on the
statisticalsurveyofFrancisMarriott(discussedin Athens,
711).The operative
is thatan averageofsixormorecoinsperobversedieperissueindicates
premise
thatveryfewdiesareunknown
whilelowerratiosimplythattherewereoriginally morediesthanwe nowknow.
22
Patras
Agrinton Hoard
124 coins (part)
to r.' tridentto I. below
251. 2.34
252 a. 2.38 t
b. 2.19 ->
253. 2.43 t
254. 2.37
255 a. 2.40 <b. 2.38
(Plate XLVII)
256. Monogram above. Probably
same reverse die as 252 b.
2.22 t
257. * to 1. 2.42 ->

258. Same reverse die as 257.
2.33 t
258. 2.46 t
b. to r. 2.37 t
260 a. to r. 2.45 ->
b. 2.44 ->
E Y to 1. and r. ; tridentto r. below

261. Same obverse die as 259.
a. 2.41 -
b. Trident above. 2.35 ->
a. 2.37
b. 2.44
Same reverse die as 262 a.
a.
263
2.39 <b. Trident above. 2.42 ->
c. Trident above. 2.37 ->
d. 2.39 4
264 a. C to 1. 2.40
b. Same reversedie as 261b.
2.37 '
c. 2.37 f
265. 1.95 ->
2.13
267. C to 1. 2.40 t
268. C to 1. 2.42 <269. Same reverse die as 268.
2.37 <-
K to I. ; 3Mto r. ; tridentto r. below

270 a. 2.39 t
b. 2.41 1 (Plate XLVII)
271. Over Ambracia?21 2.40
21The undertype
is verysimilarin sizeand shapeto theobeliskon Victoriates
ofAmbracia(as BMCThess.,pl. XVIII, 1) ofthelate thirdand earlysecond
Official
weight
clippingmightaccountforthereducedflanandlighter
century.
coin.
oftheAgrinion
A
on the reverseare uncertaindue to the overstriking.
The monograms
coin fromthe ArcadiaHoard (NNM 74, No. 11) is fromthe
well-preserved
ofour270.
sameobversedie as No. 271 and has thereverselettering
The Catalogue
23
M above; A I to I. and r. ; tridentto r. below

c. 2.38 -
272 a. 2.40 -*
d. 2.27
b. 2.38 t
2.39 273 a. Same reversedie as 272a. 275. a. 2.33 ->
b. Same reverse die as 272b,
2.41 4-(Plate XLVII)
273b. 2.22 f
c. Same reverse die as 274 c.
2.35 ->
2.28 t; 2.29 t
c. 2.42
d. 2.28 276. 2.24 e. 2.42
->
2.44 -
274 a. 2.36
b. Same reverse die as 273 c.
2.32 t
Al to I. and r. ; tridentto r. below
278. 2.35 4
279 a. 2.48 4
b. 2.36 4
280. 2.66 t
281. 2.36 t
2.39
b. 2.25 <- (Plate XLVII)
283. 2.29 4
2.38-b. Same reversedie as 279b.
2.28
2.34 -
c. 2.33 *285 a. 2.34 t
b. Same reverse die as 279 b,
284 b. 2.36
c. 2.39 4
286 a. 2.47 ->
b. 2.31
c. Same reverse die as 285c.
2.31 4; 2.28 4; 2.42 -
d. 2.28 ->
e. 2.36 -+
a.
Same reverse die as 286a.
287
2.42 t
b. 2.33
2.27 t
c. 2.24 t
288 a. 2.37 t; 2.40
2.29 4
289. Same reverse die as 286a,
287 a. 2.34 t
Al
behind Zeus head.
290.
a. 2.37 ->
b. 2.29 ->
c. 2.41 4; 2.43 t
d. AE to 1. 2.34 t
e. AE to 1. 2.45 t; 2.37 t;
2.48 -*
f. E to 1. erased from die.
2.42 4; 2.25 4
Al
behind Zeus head.
291.
a. 2.44
Agrinion Hoard
24
b. Same reverse die as 290 c.

2.39
c. E to 1. erased from die.
2.31 ->
d. E to 1. erased from die.
2.33 -> (PLATE XLVII)
e. E to 1. erased from die.
2.32 t
Al
behind Zeus head.
292.
a. 2.21
b. Same reverse die as 290c,
291b. 2.39
c. Same reverse die as 291c.

2.35
d. Same reversedie as 291 d.
2.56 t
293. 2.39 f
294. 2.41
(PLATE XLVIII)
295. 2.29
(Plate XLVIII)
a.
1
2.41
296
b. 2.28 f
2.22
b. 2.45 t
AY above; A P to I. and r. ; dolphinto r. below

298. Circle of dots on obverse.
300. Circle of dots. Same obverse
a. 2.42
die as 347 (Elis).
b. 2.22 ->
a. Same reverse die as 298 a,
c. 2.35
299a. 2.29 ->
d. 2.41 <b. Same reversedie as 298b,
e. Uncleaned. 2.41
299b. 2.34 f
Circle
of dots. Same obverse
c. 2.33 4
299.
die as 345 (Elis).
d. 2.40
a. Same reverse die as 298 a.
e. Same reverse die as 299 e.
2.43
2.23
b. Same reverse die as 298 b.
f. Same reverse die as 299 c.
2.28 4 (Plate XLVIII);
2.40
(PLATE XLVIII)
c. 2.37
2.31 1
d. 2.22 -*
e. 2.22 4
Assignment of these six issues to Patras represents a radical
departure fromtradition. Earlier publications attribute Issue 1, and
sometimesIssue 3 as well, to Ceryneia on the basis of Weil's reading
of the monogramas KAPY.22The other tridentstrikingsare given to
Mantinea or Troezen, and the dolphin issue is listed as the output of
Dyme or an uncertain mint. There are, however, valid grounds for
associating the emissions and attributingthem to the city of Patras.
ZfN1882,245.
The Catalogue
25
Taking the trident coinage first,it is evident that it forms an

indivisible sequence. Die linkage between Issues 1 and 2 (Nos. 259262) proves that the strikingsbelong togetherand that it is the trident and not the letteringin the field which indicates the minting
authority. Even without this concrete evidence of transferreddies,
one would be justifiedin associating the fivetridentissues, which not
only share a symbolbut show a marked homogeneityin the rendering
of the compact, heavy heads in high relief.
Within the large Al issue there is both stylistic diversity and
deterioration,ending in the crude obverses of Nos. 295-297. This is
clearly the last trident striking,preceded by Issue 4 with M-AI.
WhetherIssue 3 belongs afterthe EY emission or at the beginningof
the sequence is somewhat uncertain. Its reverse dies are cut with
care. The trident is more elaborately delineated than on other
strikingsand in thisissue alone a prominentpellet marks the junction
of the diagonals of the League monogram. This evidence of painstaking workmanship suggests the initial stages of a coinage but
there are considerations which indicate a later date. In Issue 1 the
wreaths of the reverse are tied above and the trident prongs point
left; in Issues 2, 4, and 5 the wreaths are tied below and the prongs
point right. Issue 3 with ties below and prongs right would seem to
belong afterratherthan before Issue 1. A later placement of Issue 3
also derives some support fromthe style of the obverse heads. They
are very similar to those of the firstissue of Elis and the Elean
mint was almost certainly opened some years after the trident
coinage started, which again implies that Issue 3 was not the first
emission.
The trident mint contributed more coins to the Agrinion Hoard
than any other Achaean League mint except Antigoneia and only
Antigoneia and Megara surpass its record of obverse dies. Obviously
the coinage was heavy and this is an important consideration in
determiningits origin. In attributingthe trident issues, one must
look for a mint likely to have produced a very substantial coinage
and one for which the trident would have been the equivalent of a
mint signature.
Ceryneia is improbable on both counts. It was an inland site of
minor importance, known to have produced one issue of League
Agrinion Hoard
bronze but no autonomous coinage. Mantinea, to which some of the

tridentissues are often attributed,was at this period23called Antigoneia and we have a large League coinage marked AN. Apart from
the assignmentof the coins to Mantinea
the chronologicaldifficulty,
on the basis of the tridentsymbolis not convincing.Poseidon and the
tridentplay an insignificantrole in the repertoryof Mantinean coin
types; the bear and the acorn are the common devices of the autonomous silver. It is in the highest degree improbable that the trident
alone would have identifiedthe coinage as that of Mantinea. A much
strongercase can be made out forTroezen where the tridentwas the
distinctive civic badge, used almost exclusively on autonomous
silver and bronze. There are, however, objections to the Troezenean
attribution. It is doubtful, as Miss Grace points out, that Troezen
under the League was of sufficientsize and importance to have produced a very large coinage, considerably larger, it might be noted,
than that of Argos itself,the chiefcity of the Argolid. Furthermore,
as we shall see later in the discussion of the League coinage as a
whole, there seems to have been during this early period a rather
clear-cut distributionof mints on a geographical basis. Two mints
within the Argolid area is a definite deviation from the pattern.
Finally, if the trident mint is Troezen, one might expect some
stylisticsimilaritybetween its issues and those of nearby Argos. This
is not the case. The tridentissues bear no relationshipto the contemporary issues of Argos. No one of these factorsis in itselfconclusive
but taken togetherthey cast doubt on the Troezenean origin of the
tridentseries.
The argumentsadvanced against Troezen are the ones which speak
most persuasively for Patras as the mint of the trident coinage. In
concept and in execution the trident obverses show a pronounced
23The changeof nameoccurredca. 222b.c.; ourtridentissuesbelongto the
secondcentury(see pp. 89-90). Miss Grace {NNM 74, 13-19)was the first
thattheymustbe datedafter222,but she triedto reconcilethis
to recognize
witha Mantineanattribution
a "factionalupheaval"ca. 190by postulating
recordin theseriesofcoinswitha tridentand M
185whichlefta numismatic
or M forMantinea.Thisis purelyhypothetical,
as Miss Graceadmits,and the
sincetheM or M is almost
coinagecannotbe said to supportthehypothesis
certainlyan indicationoftheissue and notthe mintand the tridentsymbol
has no closeconnection
withMantinea.
The Catalogue
27
stylisticaffinitywith those of Sicyon, Elis and Megara.24 It would

seem to be somewherein the northernor northwesternsection of the
Peloponnesus that the tridentmintshould be located. It is there,too,
that one finds a surprisinggap in the list of active League mints.
During this early period there is coinage fromthe Corinth-SicyonMegara area, from Elis, from Arcadia, Messenia and the Argolid.
There is apparently nothingfromLaconia or Achaea. In the case of
Sparta this is understandable; in the case of Achaea it is puzzling.
At a later date several Achaean communitiesproduce League silver
and one of them, Patras, strikes extensively. That there should be
no earlier coinage fromAchaea is very peculiar, particularly since
there are no autonomous emissions to help account for the absence
of League issues. Assignmentof the tridentseries to Patras explains
the stylisticparallels with northernmints and rounds out the numismatic picture. Achaea, the homeland of the Federation, did assume
its share of financial responsibilitythrough the substantial coinage
of one of its major cities.
That the trident coins have never been attributed to Patras is
undoubtedly due to the fact that the symbol on the later issues of
that mint is the dolphin. Actually the two symbols are synonymous;
either would be a suitable device for a seaport where the cult of
Poseidon was strong.25Nor is the change in symbol unparalleled in
the League series. As will be seen later, Dyme uses an Athena head on
her firstFederal issue and then replaces it with a fish.
Whatever reservationsone may have about the source of the trident coins, Issue 6 with AY-AP and dolphin certainly belongs to
Patras. Earlier attributionsto Dyme were based on a misreadingof
the AY as AY by Weil and Lbbecke and on a misinterpretationof
the symbol as a fish.As Miss Grace points out in connectionwith the
Arcadia Hoard, the symbol is a dolphin and this being so, the mintis
Patras which placed a dolphin on later Federal issues inscribed with
the flA ethnic.
24Plate XLVII, Nos. 244a and 255b;
270b and 331a; 424 and 273a; 433,
291d, 282b and 442. Plate XLVIII, 449 and 294.
25The Imperialissues of Patras
use as reversetype a standing
frequently
Poseidonwithtridentand dolphin,a representation
of the statue by the
harbormentioned
in PausaniasVII. 21. 7 (Imhoof,"A Numismatic
Commentaryon Pausanias/'JHS 1886,84-85). Smallerbronzesshowa tridentalone.
28
Agrinion Hoard
Issue 6 is of special interestin that two of its three dies were used
forcoins of Elis. This phenomenonis discussed at some lengthin the
commentaryon the League coinage as a body, but it mightbe noted
here that it probably explains the strikingdifferencein style between
the trident obverses and those of the dolphin issue. If the dolphin
coins of Nos. 298-300 were not actually struck at Elis, their obverse
dies were surely cut there.
The record of survivingmaterial provided by the AgrinionHoard
and othersources is as follows:26
Other
AgrinionHoard
Coins Obverse dies
10
14
EY
16
9 (2 carried
over)
K-4
32
18
6
M-AI
AI
20
56
AY-AP 17
3
Coins
20
14
II
17
38
14
New obverse dies

i
3
5
i
2
i
20 coins (part)
"F above; wolfs head r. below
303. Head 1.
301. Head 1.
a. "Fr. 2.43
a. 2.50 f
b. 2.43 1; 2.47
b. 2.36 t
c. 2.31
304. Head 1. 2.44 <
27
302. Head 1.
305 a. O verstruck. 2.40 f
b. "F above; "F 1. 2.43 t;
a. Same reverse die as 301a.
2.45 (Plate XLVII)
2.37 t
b. Same reverse die as 301b. 306. Same reverse die as 305 b.
2.38
2.40 t; 2.40 f; 2.47 f
2.47 I; 2.42
26Some of Clerk'sentriesneed to be checked.The description
of No. 184 is
dubiousbutthecoinis notillustrated;No. 186is froma knowndie (our272)
on the obverse.The six varietiesof the K monogram
whichhas no lettering
but theplatesare too poorto permitaccurate
probablyincludemisreadings
I have seen,
corrections.
M as wellas M mayexistin Issue 4 ; on all specimens
thecross-stroke
is presentalthoughsometimes
carelesslyexecuted.
27The undertype
is uncertain.
Argos
The Catalogue
29
Harpa r. above; A below

307. Head 1. 2.41 1; uncleaned,
2.40 ' (Plate XLVIII)
R above; harpa r. below
2.44 t
In the Argive series the symbol rather than the letteringserves as
the major control. The coins which are earliest in style and most
worn in all hoards are those with the wolf's head device, usually
combined with R.28 Next come the harpa specimens with I, A or
R.29Finally, at a later period,the club appears with "Rand possibly
A (see p. 68, n. 75).
For the firsttime in the League issues there is deviation fromthe
standard representationof the obversetype. The Zeus head sometimes
faces leftinstead of rightin both the wolf'shead and harpa emissions.
On the basis of the existing evidence the early Federal coinage of
Argos seems to have been confinedto two distinct issues of rather
small size :
AgrinionHoard
Coins
Obverse dies
6
Wolf's head 17
Other
Coins
18
New obverse dies

2
Harpa
8
I
4
i
8
2
A
"R
i
i
2
28If Clerk'sNo. 137is accurately
thewolf'sheadsymbolis combined
described,
withA (or fa) as wellas with~R.
Otherentriesin Clerkcan be corrected.
The monograms
are "R
throughout
and fa. No. 138is fromthe samereversedie as our305b withR above and
repeatedin theleftfield;No. 140,ifcorrectly
reported,
probablyhas thesame
The H ofNo. 148a is almostcertainly
combination.
I. Die breaksare responsibleforwhatseemto be lettersin thefieldofNo. 150,and Clerk'srecordof
in thefieldofNo. 151is notsupported
ofthecoin
markings
bythedescription
in theHunterianCatalogue(p. 131,17).
29The stylisticsimilarity
and limitednumberof obversedies in the harpa
seriespointto a singleemissionratherthanthreeseparateissues.
Agrinion Hoard
30
Corone
6 coins
E E to I. and r. ; KO below
2.33 <309. Head 1. 2.38

->
Head
1.
310.
2.34
311. Head 1.
a. Same reverse die as 310.
2.36 <- (Plate XLVII)
b. 2.38
312. Head 1. 2.50 <-
This issue has been assigned to Messene, to Megalopolis and to

Corone (?). 30 The last attribution is almost certainly correct. An
association with Messene (or Megalopolis) is based on the rather
tenuous grounds of style and recurrenceof the lettersEE. The combination, however, is found at other League mints (see p. 117)
and a similarityof style between issues of Corone and Messene is
scarcelysurprisingin view of the geographicalproximityand political
ties of the two towns.
The strongestargument against the Messenian attributionis the
absence of M or PE, invariably present on issues of that mint. Unless
one assumes that the EE-KO striking belongs with the very few
examples of League money without clear indication of the issuing
authority,31one or the other combination must denote the mint.
30Clerk,No, 312 and pagev;ZfN 1908,291; NNM 74,26; Hesperia1939,151.
is eitherMesseneor Corone(?). Miss Gracegivesthe
The usual assignment
of a numberofMessenian
inlinewithherreattribution
to Megalopolis
striking
under
are outlinedin the commentary
issues.Objectionsto herarrangement
Messene(pp.33-37)81These are veryfewindeed.Amongthe uncertaincoins of the standard
can be
publications,No. 329 of Clerk and Nos. 146-148 of Crosby-Grace
assignedto Patras on the evidenceof the dolphinsymbol.Clerk's331a is
withAN belowand E Y to 1. and r.; his 331 and No. 145of
surelyAntigoneia
withtridentbelowand C Y to 1. and r., are simplyvariantsof
Crosby-Grace,
Issue 2 ofthesequenceassignedto Patrasin thepreceding
pages.Our469 and
on
Clerk's327-328haveA belowand Y to r. Theymaybe coinsofAntigoneia
theevidenceofa goodcoinin theANS Cabinetwhichshowsthatfijwas also
presenton thereversedie (p. 50).
ThereremainClerk's330,whichseemsto haveAY above and A A to 1.and
no
r., and his 222,withE Y to 1. and r., as examplesoflegiblecoinscarrying
by a
preciseindicationof origin.On all otherissues the mintis identified
the
in interpreting
have difficulty
symbolor letters.Althoughwe sometimes
found
mintmarks,thereis no reasonto supposethattheusersofthecurrency
themambiguous.
The Catalogue
31
Since EE cannot be the beginningof an ethnic, the possibilities are

Corinth,Corone or Cortys(Gortys). The firsthas two series of Federal
currency,marked with a koppa or a Pegasus, and these bear no
stylisticrelationshipto the KO emission. Cortyscannot be ruled out
but her insignificanceas a mint is underscored by the fact that the
only record of coinage is League bronze. Corone, which struck a
32
fairlysubstantial amount of autonomous silver and bronze as well
as League bronze, is surely the obvious source of this KO issue.
Coins
6
AgrinionHoard
Obverse dies
Other
Coins
New obverse dies
492
Messene
67 coins (part)
ME withEE, riA, X
313. Head 1.
315 a. E to 1.; hE below. 2.42 f
a. M E to 1.and r. ; |~T' below.
b. X above; E E to 1. and r. ;
M: below. 2.43 f; 2.41
2.34 ' (Plate XLVII)
b. hi above; E E to 1. and r. ;
2.44 <<below.
Same
reverse die as 315 b.
/TI
316.
2.44
Head
1.
above; E E to 1.
314.
2.35
and r. ; M: below. 2.45
M or ME withA or IIA
317 a. Ator.; M: below.332.32 <- 319. (1 A to 1. and r. ; M below.
b. A to 1.; M: below. 2.39 ->
2.09 f
318. Il A to 1. and r. ; M below.
2.40
32Threehemidrachms
in goodcondition
wereintheOlympiaHoard,indicating
withthelate Federalissuesofthatdeposit.The appearance
contemporaneity
oftheseautonomous
issuesin thehoardmightbe said to strengthen
thecase
fortheattribution
ofLeaguesilverto Coronesinceall otherautonomous
coins
of secondcenturydate foundin the OlympiaHoard and in similarAchaean
LeaguehoardscomefrommintswhichproducedFederalsilver.
33Themarking
belowtheLeaguemonogram
is not certainon 317a andb, but
a hemidrachm
in LeningradwithA to 1.has the M: monogram
below.
It is oftendifficult
to determine
whether
PE orM is theintendedformdueto
carelessexecution
ofthemintmark.VariationsofPE givenbyClerkandothers
are verylikelyeithermisreadings
or theresultofsloppyworkmanship.
32
Agrinion Hoard
AH to I. and r. ; M below
320 a. il A to 1. and r. 2.39 -;

2.44 t
b. M above. 2.46
Not illustrated.
c. 2.38 1; 2.41 f; 2.40

2.34
N ct>to I. and r. ; M below

321. O above; M below. 2.40 f
322. 2.42 <r323. Head 1.
a. 2.38
b. 2.34 ->
c. 2.35 t (Plate XLVIII)
d. 2.33 f; 2.39 f
e. 2.39 f; 2.42 t
f. 2.38
2.33
2.37
2.32
t;
t;
2.33 t;
g.
2.37
<2.43
HE above; O P toi. and r. ; M below

324. Head 1.; circle of dots.
a. M above; O P to 1. and r. ;
EE below. 2.37
2.43
b. 2.36 -*(Plate XLVIII)
c. 2.43 <rd. 2.42 <r325. Circle of dots on obverse.
a. Same reverse die as 324 .
2.36 -s-
b. 2.40 f
c. 2.39
2.34
2.45 t
d. OP above; O N to 1.and r. ;
M below. 2.35 ->
e. OP above; O N to 1. and r. ;
M below. 2.38
2.44
2.45 1; 2.32
X" above-,M below

c. 2.45 f (Plate XLVIII);
a. 2.36
2.46 4
b. 2.41
2.35
a. Same reverse die as 326 a,
Same reverse die as 325b.
328a. 2.364
b. 2.39 t
2.44 -e-; 2.33
c. 2.39 <328. Circle of dots on obverse.
d. 2.36 4; 2.35 f
a. Same reversedie as 326a.
->
e.
2.38 4; 2.37 t
2.43
2.41
b. 2.35 t
The Catalogue
33
The series of M-M: coins here attributed to Messene must be considered in relation to the coinages of Megalopolis and Pagae-Megara
since some or all of the issues have in the past been assigned to those
mints.34
Within the Achaean League series there are threeissues which are
indubitably strikings of Megalopolis: our Nos. 466-467, 472-474
marked with a pedum and M, a syrinx and M, and a syrinx alone.
The attributionof these issues to the Arcadian city has never been
disputed. A fourthissue, with M or M: over a fulmen(our 471) is given
to Megalopolis by Weil, Lbbecke and Crosby-Grace; to Messene by
Clerk. On Plates XXXVIII-XXXIX
(471-474) the fulmen issue
and the second syrinx striking of Megalopolis are shown in juxtaposition. The fourobverse dies are unmistakablyfromthe same hand
and the two issues are furtherconnected by the EB or BE control
combinationwhich appears on the reverse of the fulmencoins and on
the obverse of those with syrinx. Clerk's separation of the two issues
is not supported by the numismatic evidence.
The four emissions with symbols belong to Megalopolis, but what
of the M-M: strikingswithout symbols. Before discussing these as a
group, it will be well to dispose of the Pagae-Megara mint to which
one issue is given by Clerk35and Crosby-Grace, a strikingwith n A or
A n to left and right and M below. The attributionis based on an
interpretationof the letteringas referringexclusivelyto the striking
authority,but this is dangerous ground. Is it any more likely that
nA-M stands for Pagae-Megara than that FA-AN, for example,
denotes Elis-Antigoneiaand AITI-KO Aegium and Corinthor Corone ?
The assumption that in the case of Pagae-Megara alone there is a
joint emission with the name of the second mint replacing the usual
control combination is on the face of it a dubious premise and one
which is not substantiated by the coinage.
34Clerk,9, 13, 18 f.; Weil,ZfN 1882,262, 268; Lbbecke,ZfN 1908,294f.;
NNM 74,25-27.Theattribution
ofissuesintheWesternGreece
Crosby-Grace,
Hoard(Hesperia1939,148h.) corresponds
inthepresent
withthatproposed
study.
35Clerk'sattribution
is tentative;in his introduction
(pagev) he suggeststhe
ofa Messenianorigin.Two otherissueslistedunderPagae-Megara
possibility
by thesame writerhave no connectionwiththeflA-Mstriking.No. 133 is
anotherexampleof our 313a and fromthe same obversedie,while134 is a
variantofthesameissue,liketheOlympiaHoardspecimencitedbelow(note
38). In bothcases flA has beenreadas |~IA.
3
34
Agrinion Hoard
To argue that Megara already has an extensive coinage marked

with a cithara and bearing no stylisticsimilarityto the l~lA-M issue is
not conclusive forthe coins mighthave been struck at Pagae and M
instead of the cithara used to distinguish them from the normal
Megarian emissions. Far more significantis the connection between
the riA-Mstrikingand other M issues which cannot come fromPagaeMegara. On the coins here assigned to Messene there are various
combinations(il A, IIA, riA or All) associated with M or IÊ. Of these,
the firsttwo must be control combinations; there is no reason to
suppose that the thirdis anythingelse. Furthermore,coins with IIA
and IIA are linked by a transferredobverse die (Plate XXVI, A and
B), and Obverse 320 of the IIA strikingis so close in style to Obverse
322 of the NO-M issue as to be attributable to the same hand. The
threeemissionsare fromthe same mintand that mintcannot be Pagae.
It remains to determinethe originof the M-M:series withoutsymbols. Apart fromthe Pagae-Megara attributionsalready mentioned,
Lbbecke and Crosby-Grace give all issues to Megalopolis; Clerk
calls them Messenian except for the NO-M striking which he lists
under Megalopolis; Weil assigns the group as a whole to Megalopolis
withthe exceptionof an example of our firstissue whichhe lists under
Messene. Whetherrightor wrong,the arrangementof Lbbecke and
Crosby-Gracehas the merit of consistency,and it seems to me that
theirbasic premiseis correct.The issues belong together.Either they
are all part of the Megalopolitan sequence or they are all the output
of a second M mint, which must be Messene.36Allocating some to
Megalopolis and some to Messene, as Clerkand Weil do, introducesan
element of confusion into the otherwise orderly pattern of the
Achaean League coinage. Once symbols and letters or monograms
appear on the coins, the issuing authority is explicitly defined by
these markings.37To assume that M or hF alone was used by both
Megalopolis and Messene implies that no effortwas made to distinguish the issues of the two mints and this represents such a
strikingdeviation fromstandard procedure as to be implausible. If
36OnlytwootherLeague mintsbeginME: Megara,alreadyprovidedwitha
a small community
seriesof citharacoins,and Methydrium,
homogeneous
unlikelyto have beenthesourceofa silvercoinageofthissize and variety.
37For thefewinstancesofimprecision,
see p. 30, note31.
The Catalogue
35
Messene produced no League silver during this early period, as Miss

Grace suggests, the designation of some Megalopolitan issues by a
simple M or ht would create no problem of identification.The crux
of the matteris whetheror not the M issues, with and without symbol, can be related as a single series.
All known varieties of the M-ht coinage withoutsymbols are found
in the AgrinionHoard.38They seem to formsix distinct issues. The
initial strikinguses in various combinationsand positionsEE, I"1Aand
Xas controlmarks.Although the pattern is erratic(l~IAalone or with
obverse
HE, E orEE or EENQ alone, and EE with X) and threedifferent
styles are represented,die linkage and the recurrenceofEE point to a
singleissue. Withinthe second issue thereis some variation in reverse
markings: A or flA. Since IIA must be taken as two separate controls
and not the firsttwo lettersof a word,it is reasonable to assume that
A was firstused alone and later combined with f~l.
As noted above, the thirdissue is linkedwiththe second by a die not
representedin the AgrinionHoard, the transferillustratedon Plate
XXVI. A (fromParis 2.48 gm. ->), has IIA on the reversewhileB (No.
138 of the Arcadia Hoard, now in the ANS Cabinet) is inscribed IIA.
One reverse of the fourthissue has <Dalone ; all others are marked
NO, again two separate controls. An obverse die of this issue is
almost identical in style to one of the third emission (Nos. 320 and
322). The firstobverse of the fifthissue is fromthe same hand as No.
323 but a circle of dots now frames the head. A second die of very
similar style shows the head to the right instead of left and this
position is maintained throughthe emission forheads of gradually
reduced size. An obverse die is shared by Nos. 325 and 326, thus
linkingthe two issues.
38Minorvariantsofthefirstissueexist:t*Eabove and fi A to 1. and r. in the
OlympiaHoard; MEabove,H E to 1.and r.,NfbelowinBerlin;IÊabove,H E
to 1. and r., [^] belowinLeningrad;H E to 1. andr., Mi belowin theWestern
GreeceHoard.
Clerk'slistaddslittle,ifanything,
to therecord.His 298-299areexamplesof
our317; A (notA) is clearon theplate. No. 308 is a misreading
ofa reverse
withtheinscription
of our313b, and No. 296 is fromthesameobversedie as
our315andseemsto havemorelettering
thanClerkdescribes,
butthecoinis in
bad condition.
No. 305is something
ofa problem.It is fromthesameobverse
die as our321 and thetworeversesare probablyidentical,with321 thelater
stage.Thereis no traceof H E on theAgrinion
specimen.
3*
36
Agrinion Hoard
This M-MEcoinage withoutsymbols,despite its early irregularities,

reveals a basic unity. At least fiveof its issues are related and in all
probability are fairly close in time. Can the four Megalopolitan
strikingsbe inserted into the sequence ?
The coins with pedum, syrinxor fulmenare illustrated on Plates
XXXVIII-XXXIX.
It is immediately apparent that they fall into
two groups. Nos. 466-467 (Plate XXXVIII) are extremelyclose in
The earlier
style, as are Nos. 471-474 (Plates XXXVIII-XXXIX).
obverses are also fairlyclose in style to one die of the NO issue (Plate
XLVIII 321 and 467 a). It would be possible to insertthese two issues
of Megalopolisinto the M-M:series withoutsymbols betweenNos. 320
and 321, even though this means separating by at least two years
Obverses 320 and 322 with their marked stylistic relationship and
assuming that the mintinterpolatedtwo strikingswithsymbolsin the
middle of a coinage without symbols.
Nos. 471-474 with fulmen or syrinx are later than Nos. 466-467
on the evidence of style and of wear on the hoard coins. The obverse
dies with theirverylow reliefand sharplydelineated heads are unlike
anything in the M-M: coinage without symbols. Moreover, the last
threeissues of the latter series, with their stylistichomogeneityand
die linkage, cannot be separated. If this is all one coinage, the only
place forthe fulmenand syrinxissues would be after the emission
(Nos. 326-329), postulating a time interval to account fordifferences
in styleand wear. There is, however,a grave objection to this arrangement. The
issue and its die-linkedpredecessorhave obverse heads
surroundedby a circle of dots ; the fulmenand syrinx coins have no
dots. Throughoutthe early stages of the Achaean League coinage the
obverses are undotted. About 170 b.c. or slightly later (see p. 88)
the circle appears, and fromthat time on the strikingmints use this
decorative feature. The one exception is Megalopolis. No obverse in
either the Arcadian or Achaean coinage which can definitelybe
attributedto that mint has a dotted border. The crucial point is that
once the convention of dots was adopted at a given mint, it was
Two issues without dots followingtwo issues
observed consistently.39
39An occasionaldie may lack the circle,as in the case of one Argivepiece
errorsinceall other
morethana diecutter's
(No. 601),butthiscan be nothing
dies ofthesameissuehave dots.
The Catalogue
37
withdots at one and the same mintis perhaps not impossible but it is
in the highestdegreeunlikely.On the evidence of the dots alone there
is a strong case for assigning the fulmenand syrinxissues to a differentworkshop.
Other considerations support the attribution to Messene of this
Achaean League series with M-bt alone. She was a League mint at a
later period, for there is at least one issue, with MEZ, which can
belong nowhere else, and it is noteworthy that her late Federal
money and a contemporaryautonomous issue (Nos. 606-609) are in
the same stylistic tradition as the last of the issues under present
discussion. In view of her political and economic importance in the
second centuryit would be surprisingifMessene had no earlierLeague
money. Miss Grace's hypothesis that Messene was "too incoherent
to coin before 182" and after that date "too unimportant a state
to strike federal silver" is contradicted by an extensive series of
autonomous hemidrachmswith tripod type and MEZ legend which
prove more conclusively than any Federal coinage that Messene
was a powerful state during the last decades of the League's existence.40
The present division of the M-bE sequence between Megalopolis
and Messene is in accord not only with the numismatic evidence but
also with what we know of the coining history of the two mints. At
the time that Messene began her League issues, Megalopolis was
producingmoneyofthe old Arcadian type (see pp. 83-84) . M or M: was
sufficientidentificationof the Messenian source of the new Federal
money. When Megalopolis at a later date put out her firstissues of
League silver, she had no choice but to add a symbol to the M mint
mark to distinguishher coinage fromthat of Messene, and this basic
distinction between the two coinages continued to be observed for
subsequent issues.
Despite the diversityof reverse markings and the number of surviving coins, Messene's output of early Federal silver was not unduly
large. Nineteenobverse dies are listed below and the highratio of coins
to dies in every issue but the second indicates that the record is
substantiallycomplete.
40The issues occurin good conditionin the
Olympia,WesternGreeceand
CasertaHoardsand mustbe contemporary
withthelate Federalcoinage.
Agrinion Hoard
38
AgrinionHoard
Coins Obverse dies
Coins
8
21
IIA, EE
4
18
A, nA
3
4
An
14
71
16
N<D
35
3
EE-OP
2
15
37
carried
38
4
over)
17
(1
Elis
Other
New obverse dies
3
i (carried over)
~
73 coins (part)
330. 2.41 1
Eagle above; ^ lo I. and r. ; FA below

2.42 t (Plate XLVII)
b. 2.40
FA to I. and r. ; Q below
AI
00a a. CQ below. 2.27 f

332. 2.41
2.34 t
333. FA CI to 1. and r.; COM bebelow. 2.41 <b. ^
low. 2.44
2.39
'
335- Can below. 2.43 (Plate
XLVII)
FA to I. and r.; ct>|below
336. 2.41
A N to I. and r. ; FA below
d. Same reverse die as337d.
337 a. 2.41
b. 2.36 t
2.36
2.29
die as 338a.
a.
Same
reverse
c. FA above. 2.43 ->
339
2.28
d. FA above. 2.31
b. FA above. 2.41
2.27 t
338 a. 2.34
b. Same reverse die as 337b. 340 a. 2.21 ->
2.33 ->
c. Same reverse die as 337c
2.37 f
2.53 1; 2.37
The Catalogue
341 a. 2.34 -*
b. Same reversedie as 339b,
340b.
2.36 1;
2.38 f;
2.39 1; 2.41 *-
39
c. AN above; F A to 1. and r.
2.35 f
d. AN above; F A to 1. and r.
2.27 (Plate XLVII)
AY above; F A to I. and r.
e. 2.45
342. Circleofdots. A Y to 1.and r. ;
FA below. 2.29
f. 2.38 (Plate XLVIII)
343. Circle of dots.
g. 2.42
a. 2.42 346. Circle of dots.
b. 2.42^ ; 2.36 t Not illusa. Same reverse die as 345 g.
trated.
2.31 f
2.42
b. 2.39 t
a. Same reversedie as 343 b.
c. 2.50 f; 2.43
d. 2.39 ->
2.44
b. 2.43 -*
347. Circle of dots. Same obverse
c. A Y to 1. and r. ; FA below.
die as 300 (Patras).
a. Same reverse die as 346d.
2.43 345. Circle of dots. Same obverse
2.42 - (Plate XLVIII)
die as 299 (Patras).
b. Same reversedie as 345a.
a. 2.47 t
2.40 b. 2.41 <c. 2.34 t
c. 2.46
d. 2.43 ; 2.46 ->
d. 2.28 ->
AY above; F A to I. and r. ; 2X2below
a. 2.34 <b. 2.39
2.40 t
Same
obverse
die as 344.
349.
a. 2.43 '
b. 2.39 f; 2.43 -*
a. 2.41 f
b. 2.41
2.30 t

a. 2.38
b. 2.33 t
c. 2.27
352. Circle of dots. Same reverse
die as 351c. 2.53 f
353. Circle of dots. Same reverse
die as 351c, 352. 2.32
2.39-
Agrinion Hoard
40
The earlycoinage ofElis consistsoffiveissues ifthe IQ combination

added to some dies of the AY emission is considered a secondary
controlrather than indication of a separate issue. Two obverse dies
(Nos. 343-344 and 348-349) are used with both formsof the reverse.41
Style and special features determinethe sequence. The AY issue
with a circle of dots around the Zeus head clearly comes at the end,
preceded by the AN striking;the large flatheads of the two emissions
are similarin treatment.An eagle appears as the symbolon one striking
which must be early in view of the condition of the coins. The logical
explanation of this unusual issue is that it represents a brief experimentat the very beginningof the coinage. There is no certainty
as to the relative position of the CflCIAN and 01 issues.
This is apparently a coinage of modest size. The 152 coins listed
below were produced by 26 obverse dies, giving an overall ratio of
about 6 coins per die and an even higher ratio for each of the last
threeissues. Our record of the obverse dies used forthe early League
coinage of Elis may be nearly complete.
AgrinionHoard
Coins
NIZfl
324
CflCIAN
7
i
OI
22
AN
AY, AY-Ifl 40
Other
Obverse dies
Coins
4
i
16
6
15
38
5
10
New obverse dies

i
3
41Variantreadings,especiallyin theCflCIAN series,are foundin published

studies.No. 22 of the Arcadia Hoard was acquiredby E. T. Newell; it is
Clerk'sNos. 284-289
inscribed
CSifi/(notCAN) belowtheLeague monogram.
cannotbe accuratelycheckeddue to thepoorqualityoftheplatebut I doubt
in thepresentcatalogue.
notrecorded
thereareanyversionsoftheinscription
it
of Clerk's279, a veryworncoin,is also difficult;
A definitive
correction
probablyhas AY above themonogram.
The Catalogue
Antigoneia
41
185 coins
A N to I. and r. ; iSPbelow
354 a.
b.
c.
355 a.
356
357
358
359
360
361
2.32 t
2.25 <2.42 <Same reverse die as 354c.
2.44 <b. 2.31 ->
a. Same reverse die as 354c,
355 a- 2-5 ti 2.48 ->
2.35 ->
c. Same reverse die as 354b.
2.35 ->
d. 2.43
e- 2.33 t
f. 2.47 t
a. Same reverse die as 356I
2.39
b. 2.34 t
a. Same reverse die as 357 b.
2.41 4
b. 2.37 <a. Same reverse die as 358b.
2.38 ->
b. 2.41 ->
c. 2.33 <d. 2.47 f
e. 2.28 f
f- 2.35 4
a. Same reverse die as 359i.
2.41 -;2.30 f
b. 2.38
(Plate XLVII)
a. Same reverse die as 360b.
2-43 t
362
363
364.
365
366
b. Same reverse die as 359e.

2.43 f
c. H A to 1. and r. 2.48 ;
2.39 <d. 2.48 ->
e. 2.44 ->
a. 2.39
b. Same reversedie as 358b,
359 a- 2.38 <c. 2.45 t; 2.39 t
d. 2.43 f
a. Same reverse die as32d.
2.39 ->
b. 2.37
c. 2.36 4
d. 2.44 4
e. 2.35 ->
f. 2.32 4
Same reverse die as 363 i.
2.37
a. Same reverse die as 363 e.
2.44 4
b. 2.33
c. 2.38 4
d. 2.32 f
a. Same reverse die as 365b.
2.31 - >
b. 2.32
2.34 4
c. 2.32 f
2.28 -e-
367.
368. 2.39 f
369 a. 2.22 -
b. 2.39
42
Agrinion Hoard
AN to I. and r. ; CSI below
2.39
2.39 ->
Uncleaned. 2.04 f
a. N A to 1. and r. 2.48
b. 2.23 t
374. Same reverse die as 373b.
2.35 t
375. 2.34 t
2.38 t
b. 2.39
376a. 2.39
2.34 f; 2.40
378. Same reverse die as 376b,
2.34
377b. 2.32
die
as 376b,
Same
reverse
a.
379
-
377b> 378- 2.29
b. 2.26
c. 2.30
d. 2.40 ->
380. Same reverse die as 379c.
2.29 t
381 a. 2.35
b. 2.43 ->
c. Same reverse die as 379 d.
2.38
382 a. Same reverse die as 379 d,
381c. 2.32 <b- 2-37 I
383 a. Same reverse die as 379 b.
370.
371.
372.
373
2.42t
b. 2.43 1; 2.41 384. Same reverse die as 383 b.
2-35 t
385 a. Same reverse die as 382b.

2.28
b. 2.45
c. 2.33 -
386 a. Same reverse die as 385c.
2.43 f; 2.29 f
2.47 t
c. 2.31 ->
d. 2.44
e. 2.37
f. 2.43 <387 a. Same reverse die as 386i.
2.41 f
b. Same reverse die as 386e.
2.27 ->
c. 2.36 ->
d. 2.38
e. 2.36 ^
388. 2.37 ->
389. 2.36 t
390 a. 2.43
b. 2.19
c. 2.40
391 a. 2.35 t
b. Same reverse die as 390c.
2.28 ->
2.42
reverse
die as 390c,
Same
392.
<391b. 2.35
393 a. CAP! below. 2.39 ->
b. 9? below. 2.38
^
w
f
a
b. nA below. 2.34
The Catalogue
43
A N to I. and r. ; EY below
2.52 -
a.
2.38 -; 2.42
396
2.34!;
2.37
b. 2.40 <r397 a. Same reverse die as 396b.
2.44
b. 2.49
2.36 -
c. 2.41 t
d. 2.34 t
e. 2.37 f; 2.32
398 a. Same reverse die as 397e.
2.41 4
b. 2.35
c. 2.37 4
a.
Same reverse die as 398 c.
399
2.31 1
b. Same reverse die as 397e,
398 a. 2.39 4; 2.40 4
c. 2.36
d. 2.41 f
e. AY below. 2.41
f. 2.32 <400 a. Same reverse die as 399i.
2.39 t
b. 2.33 4
c- 2-35 t J2.41 1
401. 2.37
2.37 4; 2.46 ->
402. 2.45 t
403. 2.22 4; 2.34 t
404 a. 2.26 ->
b. 2.32 t
405 a. Same reversedie as 404b.

2.40 4
b. 2.32
c. 2.39 t
d. 2.32 f; 2.40 e. 2.30 f
406 a. Same reversedie as 405 e.
2.37 4 (Plate XLVII)
b. Same reversedie as 405 d.
2.31 1
c. 2.37 ->
d. 2.47 4; 2.36 f; 2.36 4
407. 2.39
408. 2.40 t
2.37 <410. 2.37 ->
411 a. 2.33 <b. 2.33 4
2.38 <413. 2.33
2.38 <-*
414. 2.27
2.36 f
2.43
2.41 <a. Same reverse die as 417.
2.29 4
b. 2.38 4
419 a. Same reversedie as 418b.
2.30 <b. 2.29 *415.
416.
417.
418
Agrinion Hoard
44
E Y to I. and r. ; AN below
420. 2.20 t; 2.36 t
421. 2.52 t
422 a. 2.55 t
b. 2.49
c. 2.43 t; 2.30 t
d. 2.48 f; 2.28 f ; 2.45
All known varieties of the Achaean League money of Antigoneia

are included in the AgrinionHoard.42Althoughthe catalogue follows
general practice in dividing the AN-EY and EY-AN coins, it is almost
certain that this is a single emission and that Antigoneia struck only
three distinctissues of League coinage.
The issues, furthermore,are contemporary. Even without the
conclusive proofof die linkage, this would be apparent fromthe condition of the Agrinioncoins, all showing signs of considerable wear,
and from stylistic parallels. Two distinctive types of Zeus head
dominate the coinage. The first,found on practically all obverses of
the |SPissue, on Nos. 393-394 of the C issue, and on Nos. 413-419
of the EY issue, shows a large head with ratherloose treatmentof the
hair and a peculiar renderingof the eye which gives the impression
of sleepiness. The second style, characteristicof most obverses of the
C and EY issues, is neater and more compact. Toward the end of the
coinage a third style appears, illustrated by Nos. 420-422.
Die links provide evidence forboth contemporaneityand sequence.
The obverse die of Agrinion 369, with |SP reverse, is found in the
Arcadia 1929 Hoard with a C reverse;43the obverse dies used for
Agrinion392, 393 and 394 in the C issue carryover into the EY emission, the last used with both AN-EY and EY-AN reverses.44
42The twelveentriesin Clerkincludea numberofmisreadings.
Nos. 195,196,
on his plateVIII) are all marked|Sp; whatis takento be
202,203 (illustrated
a different
belowa [1 on No. 203 is merelyan elaboratewreathtie
monogram
underthestandardmonogram
(thereverseis our356i).
Variationssuchas pspandI andtheadditionof11or(1 A to theC control
in termsof separateissues.The presenceof AY on one
have no significance
wouldseemtobe nothing
morethana diecutter's
error.
reverseoftheEY striking
43NNM 74,No. 70.
44In thecase oftheobversedie used forAgrinion
392 and 395,a diebreakin
frontofthebrowestablishesthesequence.The die ofAgrinion
393is foundin
the OlympiaHoard witha reversemarkedAN-EYand thatof Agrinion394
withboth AN-EY (RosenbergLXIX, 1930, 2350) and EY-AN (ANS-ETN,
Plate XXXV, C; 2.39gm.->).
The Catalogue
45
Although short-lived,the coinage of Antigoneia was abundant.

The followingtabulation establishes this clearly:
AgrinionHoard
P
C
EY
EY
Coins Obverse dies

16
55
56
25
64
25 (1 carried
over)
10
3
Other
Coins
29
41
35
10
New obverse dies

2
3
7
5
At least 85 obverse dies were used forthe threeissues of Antigoneian

coinage and the ratio of known coins and dies is so low forall issues
that one must assume many more obverses were originallyemployed.
Megara
58 coins (part)
Cithara above; ME T to I. and r.
423. 1.95 f
426. Same reverse die as 425 c.
Same
reverse
die
as
424.
423.
2.47 ->
1.99
2.07 t
427. 2.52
425 a. Same reverse die as 423, 428. 2.01
424.2.361
429.2.321:2.371
b. 2.34 -
c. 2.39
2.47
Cithara above; Af PO to I. and r.
431.2.351:2.51t
438 a. 2.31 -eb. 2.37 f
432. 2.38
433. 2.42
(Plate XLVII)
434. 2.25
2.43
435. Same reverse die as 434. 440. Same reverse die as 438b,
2.38
439. 2.31 <436.2.41 ->
Same
reverse
as
die
437.
436.
439, 440. 2.23 <2-43 '
Agrinion Hoard
46
Cithara above; 00 KA to I. and r.

b. 2.27 ->
442. 2.37 -> (Plate XLVII)
c.
2.44 <443. 2.34 t
446- 2-37 t
444 a. 2.32
b. 2.52
447. 2.33 -H*
445 a. Same reverse die as 444b. 448. 2.61
2-35 -
Cithara above; A 10 to I. and r.
449- 2-43 t
Cithara above; H PO to I. and r.
242
450. 2.46
2.48-- 457. Circle of dots.
451. Circleofdots. 2.00
of
dots.
Circle
452.
a. Same reverse die as 451. 459. Circle of dots.
2.36 t
b. 2.07 t
of
dots.
Circle
4
2.64
453.
a. 2.36 ->
reverse
dots.
Same
of
Circle
454.
b.
die as 453. 2.31 4
2.46 <c.
2.07 4
a. 2.30 +b. 2.32
2.31 ->
1.99 ->
2.51 -
2.52 ->
2.19 4
2.56 ->
Cithara above; n Y to I. and r. ; 00 below

463. Same obverse die as 462. 464. Circle of dots. 2.52 4 (Plate
2.10 4
XLVIII)
Cithara above; I~1E to I. and r. ; AA below
465. Circle of dots. 2.36 4
Seven issues of Megarian money are here assigned to the early
the
period of the Achaean League coinage.46The reasons fordividing
46A variantofone oftheseissues(Clerk's123withH PO to 1. and r. and NY
below)is dubious.The plateshowsno traceoflettersundertheLeaguemonogram.
The Catalogue
47
emissions at this point are discussed in the commentaryon the first

sectionof the coinage (pp. 87-88). Four of the strikingsare large. The
other three are known fromvery few specimens, that of AIO froma
single coin of the AgrinionHoard, and it is probable that they were
produced during relativelyshort periods of minting.
Issues marked HPO and l~IY0O are joined by a transferredobverse
die. The one coin of AIO is so close in style to No. 450 of HPO, and
No. 465 of nEAA so close to Nos. 463-464 of I1YOO as to establish the
sequence of the last fourissues. Of the firstthree emissions, OKA
would seem to belong at the end since two of its dies (Nos. 447-448)
foreshadow the coarse style characteristic of the HPO and later
strikings. Recutting apparently determinesthe relative position of
the METO and AQPO issues.46
The workmanship of this Megarian series is very poor. Dies are
inferiorin style, oftenclumsilyexecuted, and there is a considerable
degree of doublestriking.This probably reflectsthe hasty production
of a bulk coinage, forit is evident that Megara struck a great deal of
League money during this period. Fifty-fourobverse dies are on
record for 101 coins, a ratio of under two coins per die. It would be
hazardous even to estimate the number of dies originallyin use but
it must have been a very high total.
AgrinionHoard
Coins Obverse dies
8
12
ii
13
10
7
i
i
13
19
2
2 (1 carried
over)
flEAA
ii
METO
APO
OKA
AIO
HPO
riYeO
Other
Coins
7
9
8
13
3
New obverse dies

2
i
2
5
2
46Two reversedies of OKA (Nos.442-443)showa recutting

of letters.On
thefirst,the thetaseemsto be a reshapeddelta, whichwouldprovidea firm
connection
betweenIssues 2 and 3.
Agrinion Hoard
48
Megalopolis
13 coins (part)
Pedum above; K A to 1. and r. ; M below
466 a. 2.40 1; 2.39 ->

b. 2.44 t; 2.40 1; 2.44 ->
c. 2.45
B above; E A to I. and r. ; M and syrinx below
467 a. M above; syrinx and B
below. 2.44 <-(Plate
XLVIII)
b. 2.44
2.39 ->
c. 2.45 ->
d. 2.42
2.48 <e. A E to 1. and r. 2.39 <-
Coins fromthese two issues of Megalopolis show a near identityof

obverse heads and a marked similarityin state of preservation.The
strikings are undoubtedly contemporary. Minor variations of the
syrinxissue exist but they are fromthe same obverse die as our 47.47
It seems in fact almost certain that Megalopolis employed only two
obverse dies for this coinage; including the Agrinionmaterial, there
are 18 coins of the firstissue on record and 47 of the second, all from
the same two dies.
Sparta
5 coins
AA above, Dioscuri caps to I. and r. ; hi below

a. 2.40 t; 2.38
2.38 4;
2.40 t
b. 2.40
(Plate XLVIII)
Sparta struck very little early Federal silver. The fivecoins of the
AgrinionHoard and seven of eight otherrecordedspecimensare from
the same obverse die. A variant in Clerk (325) from the Athens
Cabinet shows a club below the PE monogrambut it, too, shares the
die of our 468.
Bl above,A E to 1.andr.,M and syrinxbelowin theWesternGreeceHoard;
syrinxabove,E A to 1.and r.,M overB belowin thesamedeposit;B above,A
E to 1.and r., syrinxbelowin theHermitage.
The Catalogue
49
The same die was used for an issue with Y above, A A to left and
rightand E below, not representedin the Agrinionlot but illustrated
on Plate XXXVIII (D) by a coin fromthe ANS Collection.48Clerk
attributes this AA-EY emission to Epidaurus, citing in his introduction (p. vi) the correspondenceof letteringbetween this issue and
one with A above, Y A to left and right and a cupping vase below.
From Clerk's illustrations(pl. VII, 17-18) the symbol is by no means
certain on the firstcoin but in any case the obverse heads are totally
dissimilar in style. The issues cannot be brought into temporal
relationshipand any significancewhich mightotherwisebe attached
to the repetitionof AAY is greatly diminished by the fact that the
coin with E must have been struckat a considerablyearlierdate than
the one with the "cupping vase." Since the E coin shares an obverse
die withour Spartan issue, it is veryprobable that the AA and not the
E indicates the mint.
Extensive die breaks below the chin on the ANS coin with AA-EY
establish the sequence. It would seem that Sparta marked her first
League issue with AA plus a symbol or a combinationof symbols. On
a contiguous strikingand on another of somewhat later date,49the
AA alone is used. At the end of the League period the symbol of the
caps of the Dioscuri again appears on the coinage.
Uncertain
2 coins
469. Head 1. Y to r. of monogram; 470. - above monogram; I to 1.;

A below. 2.10 <M below. 1.98
No. 469 is another example of Clerk's 327-8 from an uncertain
mint. In his introduction (p.vi) Clerk describes the coins as having
a monogram standing for AA or AP to left, I or a pillar above, Y to
right and A below. The lambda is taken to be the mint mark, indicating Leontion or Lepreon.
48Thisis No. 26 ofthe ArcadiaHoard. On pl. II ofNNM 74 theobversesof
Nos. 26-27have beentransposed.
49Clerk326 withA A to 1. and r. and 2. below. The obversehead is oflater
stylethanthatofour468butlesscrudethanthoseofthelastLeagueemissions
of Sparta.
4
50
Agrinion Hoard
Our Agrinionpiece is fromthe same obverse die as Clerk's 328 and

probably fromthe same reversedie as his 327. On all threespecimens
the area above and to the left of the League monogram is very obscure.50There is, however,a well-preservedcoin in the ANS Collection
(Plate XXXVIII, E)51 which gives us for the firsttime a clear impression of the entirereversefield.The markingto the leftis peculiar
in that it consists of a large A, formedin part by the upper left segment of the League monogram,to whichis attached the I of the upper
field.Either AI in ligature or AN in monogram would seem to have
been the diecutter's intention.62
Since there is no symbol on the coins, the clue to the striking
authority must be provided by a letter or combination of letters.
As noted above, Clerk selects the lambda in the lower field as the
crucial letter and identifiesthe mint as Leontion or Lepreon. It
cannot be said that this is impossible, although it mightbe argued
that Lusi is a strongercandidate than either of the other A mints,63
but there are two considerations which cast doubt on Clerk's attribution. In the firstplace, an identificationof a mint by a single letter
is very unusual in the Achaean League series.64Furthermore,it is
noteworthythat it is not the lambda which is emphasized on the
reverse but the Al or AN combination. The pronounced differences
in size of the two sets of letterspoints to AI (AN) as the mint and AY
as a control combination.
50On No. 469 theobscurity
ofthecoin.
is causedby a defacement
51The coinis fromthesamereversedie as No. 469 and possiblyfromthesame
obverseas Clerk's327.Weight2.02 gm.f
52Clerk'sinterpretation
to be
of the cuttingin the leftfieldas a monogram
wouldbe renderedmore
read AA or AP is notlikely;the firstcombination
as A and thesecondas A or A . It is barelypossiblethat the
intelligibly
markingis simplya rhowithan angularloop derivedin partfromtheline
but I do notthinkthiswas the intent.The excesoftheLeaguemonogram,
of theinitialstrokeofthelettercan be logicallyexplained
sive prolongation
to makethe two diagonalsof theA equal in length.What
onlyas an effort
resultsis a well-proportioned
A, comparablein scale to the I in the upper
field.
53Thereis Federalsilverand bronzeofLusi butno evidencethatLeontionor
Lepreonstruckeither.
54All othermintsused two or morelettersor a monogram.
The one partial
is MessenewhichplacedM aloneon someofherissuesbutthiswas a
exception
have theIÊmonogram.
Her firststrikings
laterdevelopment.
The Catalogue
51
The possibilities are three: Aegira, Aegium and Antigoneia.55Of

the two AI mints, Aegium seems the more likely. No early League
coinage is known foreithertown, which is particularlystrangein the
case of Aegium,one of the centersof the Federation. At a later period
both strikebut Aegira consistentlyidentifiesher money by the forepart of a goat alone while Aegium uses Al or AITI in addition to a
fulmensymbol. On some issues (Clerk,pl. II, 1-2) the AI is rendered
in ligature, and on the earliest of the issues which can be definitely
ascribed to Aegium (our Nos. 544-549) thereis a circularlegend. The
arrangementof the letteringon No. 469 is not strictlycircular but it
does have to be read around the reverse fieldinstead of across as is
normallythe case.
In style, however, the AY issue has its closest relationshipwith a
differentregion. The obverse die of the ANS coin resembles some in
the AN strikingof Elis (for example, Plate XXVIII, 341) ; the obverse of No. 469 is very similar to certain Messenian and Argive dies
(Plate XLVIII, 307, 323c, 324b). Its orientation,too, is significant.
In the early period of the coinage the only mints which show Zeus
heads facing left are Megalopolis with her Arcadian issues, Corone,
Argos and Messene. At both Argos and Messene, as at the AY mint,
there is within a single issue a change in direction: some heads left,
others right. At the northernmints the heads invariably face right.
These considerations would link the AY issue with the southern
section of the Peloponnesus and make Antigoneia the most likely
source of the coinage. That the strikingwas actually done at Antigoneia is less probable. The problem created by the close stylistic
relationshipbetween issues of differentcities and the possibility of
common workshopsare discussed at some length in the commentary
on the coinage as a whole (pp. 101 f.). Without going into details at
this point, one might suggest that the mint of Antigoneia was closed
after the brief period of concentrated coining which produced the
large l8p,C and EY issues and that at a later date a small emission
in the name of Antigoneia was struck elsewhere,perhaps at Messene.
65Alipheira,a smallArcadiantownforwhicha
singleissueofFederalbronze
is known,mightbe added to thelist,assumingthatN standsforAAI, but
it seems improbablethat Alipheirawould have identified
her moneythus
whichostensibly
readsAI or AN.
imprecisely
by a combination
4*
Agrinion Hoard
52
No. 470 looks barbaric and is possibly a copy of the pedum issue of
Megalopolis. The head is sketchilyrenderedand the reversemarking,
except forthe M below, is unintelligible.
ACHAEAN LEAGUE
(LATE)
(258 coins)
Obv.: Laureate head of Zeus r. Circle of dots.
with various markingsin field; all in laurel
Rev.: X
wreath tied below.
Hemidrachms
Megalopolis
43 coins (part)
EB above; K A toi. and r. ; M overfulmenbelow

471. No circle of dots.
a. 2.35 *-;2.35 -
b. 2.44
2.40 ->
c. 2.44 1; 2.42
d. 2.43 -;2.43 -
e. K to 1. 2.33 I; 2.37
2.40
2.44 t
f. K to 1.; :M over fulmen.

2.31 -*
2.32 ; 2.37
PE
over fulmen.
g. K to 1.;
2.47 t; 2.434.
h. K to 1.; PE over fulmen.
2.13 t
E above; K I /0/. and r.; syrinx below

j. 2.37
472. BE on obverse; no circle of
k. I K to 1. and r. 2.33 '
dots.
a. 2.41
(Plate XLVIII) ; 2.38 f ;
b. 2.37
2.39 t
1. I K to 1. and r. 2.41 f
c. 2.38 t
BE
on obverse; no circle of
d. 2.29 t
473.
dots.
e. 2.25
a. I K to 1. and r. 2.48 -;
f. 2.42 I; 2.40 t
*Uncleaned.
2.45 f; 2.43 2.40
g.
b.
h. 2.37
2.36
2.36 1; 2.41 t;
474. BE on obverse; no circle of
2.46 t; 2.40
dots. 2.19
i. 2.45
2.43 -*
The Catalogue
53
As noted above in the discussion of the Messenian series, these

strikings of Megalopolis are closely related in style and further
united by the repetitionof the HB control combination.56Like the
two earlier issues of the same mint (Nos. 466-467), they are small
emissions:
AgrinionHoard
Coins
18
Syrinx 25
Fulmen
Elis
Obverse dies
1
3
Other
Coins
48
42
New obverse dies

-
43 coins (part)
I above; FA to L and r. ; fulmenbelow
475. 2.41 t (Plate XLVIII)

476 a. 2.45 t
b. 2.41 ->

2.65
b. 2.38
2 above; FA to I. and r. ' T overfulmenbelow

478.67 2.44 <479 a. 2.44 <b. 2.46 - >
c. 2.45
480 a. 2.33
(Plate XLVIII)
b. 2.48
c. 2.39 t
! above; FA to I. and
481 a. 2.48
b. 2.43 ->
4^2. 2.44 ~~^
2.45 <-
; E I overfulmenbelow
484. Same obverse die as 482. C I 485. Same obverse die as 483.
over fulmen.2.36
2.44 f
56Clerkgives the obversereadingas BI (see his list of corrections)
and
Graceas BX but theformis BH on all legiblespecimens.
CrosbyOne coin of Clerk'scatalogue(No. 213) has the standardreverseof our
472-474coupledwitha head ofcrudestylefacingleft.If theobverse-reverse
combination
is correctand ifthisis an official
issue,it wouldseemto be an
isolatedprecursor
ofthelateArcadianissuesofMegalopolis(Plate XLIX, J).
57A diebreakacrossthereversefieldmakestheletter,if
any,abovethefulmen
uncertain.
54
Agrinion Hoard
above; F A to I. and r. ; A overfulmenbelow
Fulmen omitted. 2.44 |

Fulmen omitted. 2.38
Fulmen omitted. 2.42 t
a. 2.42 t (Plate XLIX)
b. 2.38 ->
2.43 t (Plate XLIX) ;
2.38
2.42
2.34 t
486.
487.
488.
489
b. 2.40 f
c. 2.43
2.42 <491. 2.50 f
492. 2.43 ->
493. 2.35 f
494. 2.42 ->
495 a. 2.39 <b.582.52 t
A above; F H to I. and r. ; X overfulmenbelow59

500. X above; F A to 1. and r. ;
496. 2.44 t
to
r.
H
hP overfulmenbelow. 2.42 <2.45 t
497as
reverse
die
Same
498.
497.
(Plate XLIX)
2.46
2.43 '
499. Same reversedie as 497, 498.
t;
2.48
2.41
A sharp contrast in condition and in style separates these coins
from the earlier League strikings of Elis (Plates XXVII-XXIX).
Five issues are listed but it is possible that 2 is a single emissionwith
three secondary controls: T, E I, and A. The fact that the three
obverse dies on record here for E 1 coins were used for T reversesas
well proves the contemporaneityof these two strikings.
There is a marked similarityin obverse style throughoutthe series
with the exception of Nos. 489-495 in the S-A issue, which are
clearly froma differenthand or hands. They may belong at the end
ofthe sequence but the presentarrangementseems morelikelyin that
it places the I issue with its single control before those with double
markings,unites the three 2 strikings and brings togetherthe two
issues in which very small heads appear.
58Even allowingforthe doubleimpression,
to accountforthe
it is difficult
stateofthisreverse.
confused
59Clerks 238withIA aboveis fromthesamereversedie as our497; the is a
in Clerk'srecordshouldbe noted: 230 and
die break.A fewothercorrections
240 have I aboveand are examplesofthefirstissueofthepresentseries;234
withtracesof theI afterthemonogram
and 235arefromthesameE I striking
ofthefirstcoin.
visibleon thereproduction
The Catalogue
55
In state of preservationthe fiveemissions are closely comparable.

Deteriorating dies and weak striking are responsible for the worn
appearance of Nos. 490-491; other coins of the same issue show no
evidence of excessive circulation.
Other
AgrinionHoard
I
-r
2-E I
Coins Obverse dies

5
3
ii
6
2
2 (both carriedover)
-A
H-X
18
10
76
Gaphyae
Coins
82
62
5
ii
81
New obverse dies
(1 otherdie carried over

fromT)
6
5 coins
O above; K A to I. and r. ; Athena head below
502. 2.44 t
504. Same reverse die as 503 b.
2.20
2.18 -> (not illustrated)
b. 2.41 1 (Plate XLVIII)
504. 2.49 <Caphyae's League coinage was apparently limited to three issues :
the one above, anotherwith the monogram 1*1,and a third with .60
Of these, the firsttwo have obverses of very similar style and would
seem to be roughlycontemporarystrikings; the last is a later issue,
representedby one example in the Western Greece Hoard and one in
Clerk. Although coins of Caphyae do not appear in the other large
Achaean hoards, the firstemission at least seems to have been of
fair size. The Agrinion Hoard has five hemidrachms fromfour obverse dies and two additional obverse dies are found on the nine
other recorded specimens.
60The ofClerk's174is a variantofourmonogram.
His 177and a coinin the
WesternGreeceHoard have t besidethe Athenahead and a secondmonooff
gramin theupperfield,obscureon thehoardspecimenand almostentirely
flanon Clerk'scoin.No. 178ofClerkis an issueofDyme(see our564-567).
Agrinion Hoard
56
Megara
41 coins (part)
Cithara above; <t>lAO to I. and r. ; H below
506.81 2.39 t
Cithara above; Al toi. and r. ; AO below
507. 2.21
508 a. 2.36
b. 2.24 t
Cithara above; H P to I. and r. ; A below
509. 2.36 t; 1.83 t

510 a. 2.31 1
b. 2.04 t
511 a. 2.31
b. 1.97 ->

2.84
513- 2.31 514. 1.99
515- 1-95 I
Cithara above; AI toi. and r. ; O below

518 a. 2.46
b. 2.41
a. 2.39 t
b. 2.58 t
c. 2.24
c. 2.51 -*
519. Same reverse die as 518 c.
2.41 t
517 a. Same reverse die as 516 c.
2.22 t
520. 2.47 <b. 2.44
c. 2.25 t
Cithara above; M A to I. and r. ; T below
521. 2.35
a.
Same
reverse
die
as
522
521.
2.24 <2.15 t
b. 2.28 t; 2.39 <61Althoughthecircleof dotsis notvisibleon the Agrinion
coin,it was part
ofthedie forit can be seenon othercoinsfromthesameobversestamp.On a
numberof Megarianhemidrachms
of this periodthe dottedborderis only
due to poorworkmanship
and weakstriking.
faintlydiscernible
The Catalogue
57
Cithara above' 10 to I. and r. ;

524. 2.19 t (Plate XLIX)
525 a. 2.22 t
b. 2.21 <526 a. 2.08 ->
b. 2.27
c. 2.22
below
527. 2.30
2.33 b. 2.54 t
529. 2.28 1 (Plate XLIX) ; 2.17
Except for the HPA and AKD issues which are linked by a transferreddie, the sequence of these six Megarian strikingsis tentative.
The coins show little differencein wear and the heads are generally
similarin style,but those ofthe MAT and ZKPA emissionsare coarser
than those of the other four series.
Two variants of the ZKPA issue are given in Clerk: No. 129 with
CO) KP to leftand rightand No. 132 with 10 t. Not even the cithara
is certain on the obscure reverseof the firstcoin and the second piece
is not illustrated. It is probable that its monogramhas been misread.
AgrinionHoard
<DIAOE
AIAO
HPA
AIO)
MAT
ZKPA
Coins Obverse dies

ii
32
10
ii
53
ii
Pheneus
7
5 (1 carried
over)
6
Other
Coins
4
5
7
9
4
41
New obverse dies

i
i
i
2
i
4 coins
E Y toi. and r. ; caduceus below
530. 2.33 (Plate XLIX)

531. 2.38
532. 2.00

2.39
Agrinion Hoard
58
The caduceus symbol identifiesthis EY issue as Federal silver of

Pheneus. Clerk's attributionof a second issue with EY alone (his 222)
to the same mint is questionable. EY is a very common control
combination in the Achaean League series and there is no stylistic
similarityof obverse heads to link the two strikings.
Althoughlimitedto one issue, Pheneus' coinage was probably more
extensive than the number of surviving specimens would suggest.
Four obverse dies were used for the four Agrinionpieces and one of
the two other recorded coins was struck froma fifthdie.
Pellene
4 coins
rE above; A to L and r. ; chelysbetweenO and I below

534. 2.20 <537. Same reverse die as 536.
2.42
535. 2.65 t (Plate XLIX)
536. A0 Ol to 1. and r.; chelys
below. Uncleaned. 2.43 f
Pellene, like Pheneus, seems to have struck only one issue of
League silver. The fourcoins of the AgrinionHoard and six recorded
elsewhere are fromsix obverse dies. No. 90 of Clerk and two specimens fromthe Western Greece Hoard are described as having a vase
below the Achaean monogram,but this is an error. Pellene consistentlyused the chelys as a symbol.
Epidaurus
5 coins
Cupping vase above;
538. 2.50 t
Si to I. and r. ; AA below
539. Same reverse die as
2.32 t
538.
Snake above; TI to I. and r. ; IA below

542. Snake between I and A
540. 2.43 -> (Plate XLIX)
<below. 2.45 ->
above;
541. [xj below wreath ties. 2.29
The Catalogue
59
Twenty-oneentriesare listed under Epidaurus by Clerk. Of these,

some are doubtful62and others merelyrecord differentarrangements
of the same control letters. Still other entries can be brought togetheron the basis of recurrentmajor controls.63There would seem
to be only eight distinctissues with the snake symbol and two with
the cuppingvase. Stylisticsimilaritiesand die linksprovide additional
evidence of contemporaneity. The issues represented by Clerk's
Nos. 154 and 162 share an obverse die and another obverse is used
forNos. 156, 157, 164 and probably 160. All of this suggests a diversifiedcoinage extendingover a relativelyshort period.
AgrinionHoard
Other
Coins Obverse dies

Cupping vase
Zf-AA
22
Snake
TI-IA
3
Cleitor
Coins
New obverse dies
i coin
F ( ?) above; AI to I. and r. ; Helios headfacing below
543. Head 1. 2.45

Three issues are known for Cleitor, two with Helios head symbol
and one with KAH. A minimumof eight obverse dies were used forthe
ten coins on record.
62Nos. 170-172 are discussedunder Sparta (p.
49); their attributionto
the 0A is probablya
Epidaurusis questionable.On No. 169,notillustrated,
of the usual AA. No. 166,also withoutillustration,
is verylikely
misreading
a poorly-preserved
withE aboveand dolphin
exampleofthePatrasstriking
below(our 560-563).The lettersbeneaththe League monogram
on No. 160
are difficult
to makeout; fromtheplate theyseemto read 12.
63Nos. 156-7,fromthesameobversedie,withOA andEY orZf; Nos.
158and
161,fromthesameobversedie,withZQ (OA) andZI orKA.
6o
Agrinion Hoard
Aegium
9 coins
Fulmen below; ethnicand KO

reads
outward, counter-clockwisefromr. field)
(legend
546. A /? on obverse. KO Y' A
544. ' on obverse.
a. Al TI KO 2.18
2.45 <b. Al r I KO (frombottom) 547. A? on obverse. AIT I KO
2.38 t (Plate XLIX)
(from top) 2.40 f; 2.18
in
KO
fi?
on
obverse.
A
545.
2.24 ->
<2.44
Fulmen below; ethnicand YA
(legend reads outward, counter-clockwisefromr. field)
548. EY TEI on obverse. AI TI TA 549. EY TEI on obverse. 11 11 TA64
2.43
2.44 t
(Plate XLIX)
During the late period of the League series, Aegium produced five
or six issues of silver.65The firsttwo, representedby the coins of the
AgrinionHoard, combine an abbreviated ethnic with KO or TA in a
circular arrangementwhich is difficultto read. Obverses are marked
fi?or A R and EY TEI. One of the EY TEI coins in Clerk (No. 40), with
TA above and Al T I to left and right,seems to mark the transition
fromthe peculiar circular legend to the conventional arrangement.
The next two or three issues have Al above and various combinations to left,right and below: O-TEI, AE-AI, and possibly A-A. A
in fullon the obverse and APICTOAAMOC on
finalissue has AITIGCON
the reverse.
The two Agrinionstrikingsare close in style and condition. They
are earlierthan the otherissues but the interval between is probably
not extensive.
64In thisblunderedlegendtheYA maybe a mistakeforfA.
65The onlyuncertain
entriesin Clerk'slist are his 36, an exampleof theKU
issuewithHE on the obversein additionto the usual A A), and 34 withAl
of the secondpiece
above and A A to leftand right.Thereis no illustration
ofthefirstshowsno traceoftheH E.
and thereproduction
6i
The Catalogue
Other
AgrinionHoard
Coins
KO
TA
Obverse dies
4
2
7
2
Patras
Coins
9
8
New obverse dies

2
2
20 coins (part)
Dolphin to r. above; A II to I. and r.
550 a. 2.40 t
b. 2.47
551- 2.42 t
552. 2.38 t
TEI above; AN toi. and r. ; dolphinto I. below

553 a. 2.43
b. 2.43 <- (Plate XLIX)
A above; SE to I. and r. ; dolphinto I. below
554 a. 2.35
(Plate XLIX)
b. 2.45 ->
555- 2.37 t
556 a. 2.42
b. 2.43

2.41
558. 2.43 f
2.41 t
0E above; EE to I. and r. ; dolphinto I. below

a. 2.33 ->
b. 2.40 1; 2.39 ->

2.42 t
562. 2.32
563. 2.36
The two EE strikingsof Patras are joined by a common obverse die

and the AN-TEI issue must be contemporaryto judge fromthe condition of the coins and the similarityof the Zeus heads. In the An
issue the obverses are executed in higher relief and in somewhat
heavier style and the reverseshave a single controlcombinationand
the symbol above instead of below. These differencesmay indicate
a break in the sequence afterthe firstissue but thereis no reason to
suppose that it was of long duration.
62
Agrinion Hoard
AgrinionHoard
Coins
Obverse dies
3
An
AN-TEI
EE-A
EE-0E
4
2i
8
6
Dyme
6 coins
6
4 (1 carried
over)
Other
Coins
4
32
2
10
New obverse dies

i
AY above; E N to I. and r. ' Athena head below

564. 2.34 1; 2.39 <566. Same reverse die as 565b.
2.46 | (Plate XLIX)
->
2.44
567. Same reverse die as 565 b,
b. 2.46 -
566. 2.41 <This issue is given to Caphyae by Clerk (No. 178), presumably
because its reversedies have the same symbolas those ofthe Arcadian
mint. There are, however, distinct differencesin the two coinages,
differencesin the renderingof the Athena head, in obverse style and
in lettering.The threeissues of Caphyae are clearly identifiedby the
firsttwo letters of the ethnic, KA, in the fieldto left and right. The
present issue has EN in the same position and AY above. Were it
not forthe symbol,the obvious attributionwould be to Dyme.
It is the evidence of the obverse dies that seems conclusive. On
Plate XLIII coins of the Athena head - AY issue are shown with
coins of Patras. The similarityin style of the Zeus heads is striking.
Even more decisive is the close stylistic relationship between the
obverses of our Nos. 564-567 and that of a coin in Clerk (No. 56,
pl. Ill, 6) which is clearly the firstfishissue of Dyme.66The Athena
head - AY striking,linked as it is in style withissues of Dyme and of
the neighboringmint of Patras, must be just what it says it is, the
coinage of Dyme. It is the AY and not the Athena head which is
significant.
66Theworkmanship
to thatof
ofbothobverseandreverseis definitely
superior
on Clerk'splate.
theotherissuesofDymereproduced
The Catalogue
63
Dyme apparentlybegan her League silver at about the same time

as Caphyae (p. 93). Both mintschose an Athena head as the symbol
fortheir coins. Since the firstlettersof their respective ethnics were
also placed on the dies, thereshould have been no confusionas to the
issuing authority,but forsome reason the duplicationofdevice proved
undesirable. Afterone emission Dyme replaced the Athena head with
the fish,a coin type of her earlier autonomous money.
Other
AgrinionHoard
Coins
Obverse dies
Coins
New obverse dies
6441
Aegira
28 coins
Forepart of goat to r. above; ^ y t ^ an^ r568 a. TA AY to 1. and r. 2.42 <- 569. 2.52
b. 1.88 ->
570. 2.43
Forepartof goat to r. above; AA Kl to I. and r.
c. 2.55 1; 2.49 f
a. 2.30
d. 2.34 <e- 2-2^ ^
b. ^ to 1. and r. 2.14 -;
f- 2-36 '
a
2.32 t
o
S- 2-38
AA
c. K , to 1. and r. 2.59 t;
5?3 a 2 43 ^
->
b. 2.18 2.55
574- 2.22 - (Plate XLIX)
d. ^ to 1. and r. 2.45 '
c
t.
j.
575 a- 2-20
' 2'^
2'34 t
a. Same reverse die as 571 d.
,
Same
reverse
die as 575 b.
576.
2.19
A A*
b. to 1. and r. 2.16 1;
2.29 t
Forepart of goat to r. above; E E [downward)to I.
577. 2.26 ->
Agrinion Hoard
64
Forepartof goat to r. above; A A to I. and r.

578. 2.42 -> (Plate XLIX)
Issues of TAAY and AAKI are united by two transferredobverse
dies with the sequence established by die breaks.67The two other
strikingsof the AgrinionHoard and some ten or eleven issues known
fromdifferentsources68complete the record of the League silver of
Aegira. Die linkage69and a homogeneityof style within this later
series bring a numberof issues into close relationshipand point to a
coinage of comparativelyshort duration.
AgrinionHoard
Coins
TAAY
AAKI
43
22
i
i
SE
AA
Corinth
Obverse dies
6 (2 carried
over)
i
i
Other
Coins
14
17
3
i
New obverse dies

3
2
11 coins (part)
Pegasus r. overW above
(wreaths tied above)
579. Head 1.
a. 2.44
b. 2.44
c. 2.38
(Plate
XLIX)
580. Head 1. 2.41

581. Headl. K upper r. on reverse.
2.34 ->
582. Head 1. 2.43
67A breakjustbehindtheforelock
can be seenclearlyon 571bbutnoton 569;
outfromthebridgeof thenoseis visibleon 572a butnotpresent
oneextending
on 570.
68FromtheplateClerk's24 seemsto havethesamereadingas our577andmay
NI.
be fromthe same reversedie. His 26 and 27 have the same inscription:
Cabinetsprovidea morecompleteversion
Coinsin theANS and Copenhagen
ofthename,NIKO (S), and add twoissuesto Clerk'slist: Ol AO (ANS) and
XAI (Copenhagen).
69The AA, HAP, HlNfl and AP strikings
are connected
by commondies.
The Catalogue
65
Pegasus r. overK above; hi to I. and r.

(wreathstied to 1.)
583. Same obverse die as 582. 585. Head 1. Same reverse die as
584a. 2.37 <2.36 '
Head
1.
584.
a. 2.45 t
b. 2.29 1; 2.46 t
There is a considerable interval between the koppa emission of
Corinth (Nos. 240-242) and these die-linked strikings.70Like other
mints,Corinthproduced an early and a late League coinage in silver,
limitedin this case to the threeissues of the AgrinionHoard.71
AgrinionHoard
Coins
6
W
KAZ 5
Sicyon
Obverse dies
4
3 (i carried
over)
Other
Coins
8
New obverse dies
25 coins (part)
ht above; N I to I. and r. ; dove r. below
586 a. 2.36
b. 2.45 <c. 2.45
(Plate XLIX)
587 a. 2.39 ->
b. 2.48
588 a. Same reverse die as 587a.

2.45 t; 2.44 ->
b. 2.44 f
2.45 t; 2.41 <590. 2.49 ->
70The die of 582 is breakingdownbadlyby the timeit is used fortheKAZ

coin.
71Clerk's112withPegasusand koppais fromthesame reversedie as our581.
The marking
seemsto be a poorly-cut
kapparatherthana koppa.
5
66
Agrinion Hoard
Al above; N I to I. and r. ; dove r. below
591. Same obverse die as 589. 593. Same reverse die as 591,
2.56 ->
592 a. 2.48 ->
Same
obverse
as
die
a.
Same reverse die as 592 b.
592.
590. 594
a. Same reverse die as 591.
2.42
b. 2.41
2.45 I
b. 2.40
c. 2.46 t
d. 2.43 ->
A above; N I to I. and r wr. below
(wreath tied above)
2.47 ->
ra above}A E to I. and r. ; dove r. below
596. 2.44
(Plate XLIX)
597. Same reverse die as
2.46 ->
598. 2.53
596.
ra above; M to r. ; dover. below

(wreath tied above)
599- 2-39 t
ra above; ' to I.; dove r. below
(wreath tied above)
600. 2.43 ->
The patternof coinage at Sicyon is very similar to that at Corinth,
one early and two late issues, but a basic differencein mint organization is revealed by the coins of this second period. Whereas the
The Catalogue
67
Corinthian strikingsuse a single control combination (PI or KAZ),

those of Sicyon employ both principal and secondary controls:
NI with f*E,Al, A or fR; PI with AE, M (or M), A* and variants,
Ar, El or K.72 Many of these secondary controls are linked by
transferredobverse dies. For the NI issue, whereour recordof obverse
dies would seem to be nearly complete,the linkage is comprehensive:
I
I
I
I
rc
I
ai
1
1
1
1
Within the PI issue there are fewerconnections73but the low ratio of

known coins and dies forthis strikingimplies that our recordis fragmentary.
It seems clear that the late Sicyonian coinage comprised two distinct issues with an elaborate system of minor controls. That these
controlswere more or less contemporaneousand not spaced over any
extensiveintervalis attested by the pattern of die linkage and by the
hoard evidence. The 25 coins of the Agrinion Hoard are not only
similar in style but closely comparable in condition.
AgrinionHoard
NI
ra
Coins
20
5
Obverse dies
7
5
Other
Coins
17
16
New obverse dies

7
72Againsomecorrections
in Clerk'slist can be noted.Fromthe plate his 91
readsA T and notAT to 1. and r. Both 98 and 99 have N I to 1. and r.; a die
breakis responsible
forwhatseemsto be a monogram
on thefirstcoin.No. 100
is almostcertainlyanotherexampleof our 595. No. 105 conceivablyhas the
but one cannotbe surein theabsenceofillustration.
For
ME-NIcombination
the same reasonit is impossibleto checkNo. 106 withZ above and dove
below.No. 107 withZ I to 1. and r. and dove flying
leftbelowis renderedin
a finallateissueoftheSicyonian
verycrudestyle.Ifnotbarbaric,it represents
mint.
781 have notedonlythree:AE and EI, M and K, AP and M.
5*
68
Agrinion Hoard
io coins (part)
Argos
Club above; "Fto r.

6oi.74 2.35 t
602 a. 2.41 t; 2.39 ->
b. 2.44 (Plate XLIX)
603 a. 2.47 f
2.43
2.34 t
604. 2.42
2.45 605. 2.47 t
The late coinage of Argos combines a club symbol with the "R
75
monogram of earlier emissions (Nos. 301-306 and 308). Twenty
coins, ten fromthe AgrinionHoard and the same numberfromother
sources, provide a total of six obverse dies, apparently the work of a
single engraver.
3 coins (part)
Messene
M to I. ; E above; Z to r.
606. 2.30 t
Tripod between and M above; IZ ^ to I. and r.
607. 2.44 t
608. 2.45 t
74The circleofdotsis notvisibleon thisobverse.

75ClerklistsunderArgosthreeentrieswithclub and different
No.
markings.
but is describedas havingA intherightfield.This is
143a is notillustrated
on a
of the standardmonogram
probablynothingmorethan a misreading
to explain.The
coin. Nos. 145 and 146 are moredifficult
poorly-preserved
first
has A to leftandclubbelow.It mayformpartofthepresentissue,despite
of
oftheformula
obversestyle,in whichcase thereis a repetition
itsdissimilar
an earlierArgiveissuein whichthe symbolis combinedwithmorethanone
controlmark(our307and308).No. 146withMI or aboveand a clubbelow
a tokencontribution
is a muchcruderpiece.It mayrepresent
by Argosto the
finaloutputofLeaguesilver.Bothcoinshave the wreathtied belowinstead
sinceNo. 308 ofthehoardalso
ofabove,but thisis probablynot significant
deviatesfromstandardArgivepractice.
The Catalogue
69
MESSENE
(2 coins)
Obv.: Laureate head of Zeus r. Border of dots.
Rev. : MEZ in laurel wreath.
Hemidrachms
609 a. 2.27 <b. 2.43 ->
Nos. 607-8 represent an issue which has been assigned to Sicyon
by Weil (ZfN 1882, 248 f.), to Messene (?) by Poole (BMCPelop ., 7)
and to Hermione by Clerkand Crosby-Grace.Of these,the Hermione
attribution seems the least plausible. The tripod symbol has no
connectionwith that mint and the t monogramis only one of four
combinationsoflettersplaced on the reversedies.76Sicyon did use the
tripod on her autonomous money but it would be very difficultto
bring our tripod issue into any reasonable relationship with the
homogeneoussequence of dove issues produced by Sicyon in the later
Achaean League period. Poole's Messenian assignment is almost
certainlycorrect.Nos. 607-8 are similarin style to the earlier League
strikingsof Messene (Nos. 325-329) and very close to later issues with
MEZ (Nos. 606 and 609 on Plate XLVI). Although the tripod
symbol does not appear on any other Federal coins of Messene, it is
prominentlyfeatured on her autonomous silver and bronze fromthe
fourthcenturydown to Imperial times.
The Agrinion Hoard provides two specimens of an autonomous
issue which is apparently unpublished (Nos. 609 a and b)> Except
for the absence of the League monogram, this striking is closely
comparable to No. 606 and a common obverse die establishes the
contemporaneityof the two issues.77
The output of late Messenian silver would seem to have consisted
of League and autonomous issues with MEZ, one League issue with
76Furthermore
it is notgivena positionofprominence
as is usuallythecase
withlettersor monograms
themints.Thereis indeeda possibility
indicating
that the two monograms
the tripodshouldbe read togetheras a
flanking
namebeginning
EPMA . . .
77A hemidrachm
in theParisCabinet(Plate XLVI, F; 2.36gm.f) is fromthe
same obversedie as Nos. 609a and b.
Agrinion Hoard
70
tripod symbol,and finallya series of autonomous hemidrachmswith

tripod type and MEZ legend, alone or combined with magistrates'
names (BMCPelop ., pl. XXII, 8-9). Many of these last are of poor
style and inferiorworkmanship.78
Other
AgrinionHoard
MEZ
Coins
i
Tripod
22
MEZ
Obverse dies
i
Coins
10
New obverse dies

i (used forautonomous silverwith
MEZ)
54
-
(autonomous)
AETOLIA
(97 coins)
Obv. : Head of Aetolia r., wearing kausia.
Rev.: AlTAQN above Calydonian boar r.; spear-head
in exergue.
Hemidrachms
A belowboar
610. 01 on obverse. 2.52 <K belowboar; A in exergue
611 a. 2.36
b. 2.36
612. 2.36 ->
2.38 <-
613 a. 2.46 <b. 2.47

c. 2.25 <*614. Same reverse die as 613 c.
2.46 -
78The names of only fourmagistratesare foundon the materialI have

a shortperiodofemission.
examined,suggesting
The Catalogue
71
AY belowboar; A in exergue'9
615. 2.42
PI belowboar; Al in exergue
616. 2.38
2.31 1; 2.49
t;
2.34 ->
617. 2.25
618. 2.41
2.42
621. 2.44 t
619.80Same reverse die as 618.

2.40 ->
620. 2.31
E belowboar; Al in exergue
t belowboar; R in exergue
622. 2.47 t; 2.37 t

<Dbelowboar; R in exergue
623. 2.44 t
624. 2.34 t
R I belowboar
625. 2.51 1
626. 2.25 ->
b. 2.40 <2.40 t
KO t. belowboar
628. 2.58 f; 2.57 t
B Z belowboar
629. 2.43 -
/ Z belowboar
630. 2.43 f
631. 2.47 t
79TheA is offflanon theAgrinion

coin.Its presenceon thedie is attestedbya
Parisspecimen.
80Upon rechecking,
thiscoinprovesto be fromthe same pair of dies as the
twopreceding
entriesand is, therefore,
a thirdexampleof No. 618. The correctiondoes notseemimportant
of
enoughto necessitatetherearrangement
thecatalogueand plates.
Agrinion Hoard
72
behindboar' R below
2.35
632. 2.50
634. 2.41 <-
A betweenhind legs of boar; below
A betweenhind legs of boar; ! /oz#

637. 2.57
638. 2.43
635. 2.41
636. 2.37 I
! K belowboar
639. ! on obverse. K below boar. 642. 2.49 ->
2.30
643. 1 on obverse.
a. 2.46 f
640. on obverse. -< below boar.
b. 2.45 t
2.28 t
641. K 2 below boar. 2.38 f
AY foZoze;
644. 2.41
X belowboar
645. 2.41 ->
2 /oz#
boar
646. 2.46 ->
A 2 foto
2.42 I
81A die breakabove the kausia establishesthe orderof Nos. 646-647.The
witht ona coinin theMunichCollection.
sameobversedie is combined
The Catalogue
73
A t. belowboar
648. a. 2.41
b. 2.44 t
El 2 belowboar
2.45t
Tl S belowboar
a. 2.44 t
650. 2.52 t
same
die
as
obverse
b.
651. Possibly
2.33 f
641.
652. 2.42
2.34 < ! belowboar
653. 2.42
654. 2.42
2.45 <-
655. 2.44 fe<2 belowboar
656. Same obverse die as 655. 657. Same obverse die as 652.
a. 2.50 ->
2.49 t
b. 2.49 <12 belowboar
658. Same obverse die as 654. 660. Same obverse die as 655,
2.43 ->
656. 2.44
659. Same obverse die as 657. 661. Same reverse die as 660.
Same reverse die as 658.
2.44
2.42
IH
belowboar
662. Same obverse die as 655,

656, 660. 2.44
82Die breaksin theregionoftheneckestablishtheorderofNos.
648-649.The
obversedie is also combinedwithTI
Agrinion Hoard
74
A
club S.belowboar
2.41
A83 tL belowboar
2.39 ->
AAMO SLbelowboar
665. Same obverse die as 661,
664.a42.44 t
A
belowboar
667. 2.35 -
666. 1.95 -s-
ON"A belowboar; Z85in exergue

668. 2.45 ZKAE belowboar
669. 2.50
A I E belowboar
670. 2.42
2.19 ->
671 a. 2.40 1
b. 2.50 -eKt belowboar
672. 2.45
2.39 t
83The formof the monogram

maybe A but whatseemsto be a horizontal
strokeis probablytheremainsofan earliermonogram.
84No. 665 is thelast stageofthedie.
85On theAgrinion
cointhe2is offflan.An Oxfordhemidrachm
providesthe
completereading.
The Catalogue
AP belowboar
676 a. 2.43
b. 2.39 t
673. 2.41
674. 2.59 4
675. 2.44 -
t EY belowboar
677. Same obverse die as 676. 678. 2.40 f
2.42 < EY belowboar
679- 2. 35 1 ; 2.39
2.35 i; 2.47 t;
2.42
2.46 (-;2.40
ROMAN REPUBLIC
(39 coins)
Obv.: Helmeted head of Roma r. ; X to 1.
Rev. : ROMA Dioscuri riding r.
Denarii
680. Anonymous. 3.56
681. CN.DO 3.01
Rev.: ROMA Victory in biga r.
682.
683.
684.
685.
686.
687.
688.
NAT 3.77 t
L.SAV 3.61 Similar. 3.44 4
P.S V A 3.30 t
Similar. 3.86 <NATA 3.69
Similar. 3.59
689. FLAVS 4.04 f
690. Similar. 3.63 ->
75
Agrinion Hoard
76
Rev.: ROMA Dioscuri ridingr.

691. Cornucopiae to 1. and X to r. of head. L.CV0 3.41 -*
692. C. AESTI to 1. and X to r. of head. Dog below Dioscuri. 4.12 J
693. Similar. 3.49 -
Rev.: ROMA Juno Caprotina in biga of goats r.
694. C.RENI 3.71 J
695. Similar. 3.62 f
696. Similar. 3.79 697. Similar. 3.90 f
698. Same reverse die as 697. 3.92 J
699. Similar. 3.85 Rev. : ROMA Diana in biga r.
700. A.SP'AI 3.76
Rev.: ROMA Dioscuri riding r.
701. P. PAETVS 4.09 ->
Rev.: ROMA Apollo in quadriga r.
702. Head 1.; X to 1. and TAMPIL to r. M. BAEBI.Q.F on reverse.3.91
Rev.: ROMA Dioscuri riding r.
703. TRIO to 1. and X to r. of head. CN.LVCR 3.71 Rev. : ROMA Jupiterin quadriga r.
704. GRAG to 1. and * to r. of head. L.AES 3.99 ->
705. Similar. 4.13 J
706. Similar. 3.94 t
707. Similar. 3.83 J
708. Similar. Uncleaned. 3.85 f
The Catalogue
77
Rev. : Dioscuri ridingin opposite directions.

709. Wreath to 1. and X ROMA below head. C.SERVEILI.M.F. Uncleaned. 3.66
710. Similar. 3.79
Rev. : ROMA Jupiterin quadriga r.
711. L. "REEWI 3.92 <Rev.: ROMA Column with togate figureto eitherside.
712. * to 1. of head. Tl.MINVCI.C.F.AVGVRINi 3.82 J
713. Similar. 3.96 f
Rev.: ROMA Victory in quadriga r.
714. * to 1. of head. P.
a. 3-83 ->
b. 3.92
/T
Rev.: ROMA Sol in quadriga r.

715. GEM to 1. and * to r. of head. M. A>V I 3.76 f
Rev. : ROMA Apollo in biga r.
716. Tripod to 1. and # to r. of head. M.OPEIMI 3.91 ->
Rev. : ROMA Horseman r. ; behind, helmet.
to 1. of head. Q.PILIPVS 3.80 f
717. -X-
COMMENTARY
THE EARLY
COINAGES
(Nos. 1-156, 161)

About twelve per cent of the Agrinioncoins antedate the burial of
the hoard by several centuries. The oldest piece, a hemidrachm of
Phocis (No. 134) belongs to the fifthcentury; all other coins of this
firstgroup are fourthcenturystrikings,withthe possible exceptionof
some Argive issues and the Aeginetan drachm (No. 161) which may
be slightlylater. The same high proportionof early coinage is found
in other hoards of the period, notably in those of Olympia, Arcadia
and Western Greece.86A fifthhoard, that of Caserta, has comparativelylittleearly material. All fivedeposits, moreover,show a striking
similarityin composition. In each case the bulk of the early coinage
derives fromthe mintsof Chalcis, Sicyon, Argos, Locris and Boeotia.
Coins of Histiaea, Phocis, Aenianes, Lamia, Oeta and Aegina are
included in more than one find. The Olympia Hoard has a single
hemidrachmof Thessalian Thebes. No othermint of Greece properis
represented.
Since the AgrinionHoard is the firstdeposit of the second century
b.c. to be discoveredin Aetolia,87its evidence formonetarycirculation
in that area is of considerableimportance,and it is interestingto note
how consistent the pattern is on both sides of the CorinthianGulf.
Down to the beginningof the second century,in Aetolia and in the
Peloponnesus alike, the need for fractional silver was apparently
satisfiedby the fourthcenturydrachms and hemidrachmsof a limited
number of mints in Central and Southern Greece. Afterthat date,
these early coins continued to circulate as a supplement to the new
Federal issues. Why other fourthcenturycoinages are missing from
86Arcadiahas aboutthesamepercentage
as Agrinion,
WesternGreecebetter
thansixteenpercent,Olympiaa verysubstantialproportion.
87To the best of my knowledgethe onlyotherAetolianfindsare thoseof
Naupactus(S.P. Noe,NNM 78,Nos. 731,732) whichare earlier.
78
Commentary-Early Coinages
79
the hoards and why there is little, if any, third century money are
problemsnot easily answered.88Where are the coins of Elis,89Athens,
Alexander? They appear in Peloponnesian hoards of earlier date.90
Is their absence fromthe second centurydeposits purely fortuitous
or does it indicate that theynever circulated in the regionin anything
like the abundance of the issues representedin the hoards ?
A few individual coins are noteworthy.Nos. 59 and 60 with their
common obverse die establish the contiguityof the Chalcidian issues
with bucranium and rose symbols. No. 145 is remarkable for its
state ofpreservation.Despite its age, this fourthcenturyhemidrachm
shows little evidence of wear and serves as a reminderof the hazards
of basing chronological conclusions on the condition of one or two
hoard coins. Another well preserved example of an early strikingis
the drachm of Aegina, No. 161. This Aeginetan issue with two pellets
or globules on the reverse is of special interestforit alone appears in
the Achaean League hoards. The Olympia Hoard has fourspecimens,
Arcadia and Agrinion one apiece. Since this is not the latest issue
of Aeginetan silver,91it is difficultto understand why it should be
the only one present in the hoards.
88Untildefinitive
studiesoftheautonomous
Argiveand Sicyonianserieshave
beenmade,it is impossibleto dividethe issueswithmagistrates'
namesbetweenthelatethirdand thesecondcenturies.
Mostofthestrikings
includedin
the Casertaand WesternGreeceHoards,and to a lesserextentin that of
Olympia,probablybelongto thesecondcentury.
It was formerly
thoughtthat the small changeof the thirdcenturywas
oftheAchaeanand AetolianLeagues.Very
largelycomposedofhemidrachms
fewoftheissues,however,
can be dated before200 b.c. (pp. 89-90,106). The
whichmakes
greatbulkoftheFederalmoneycomesfromthesecondcentury,
thescarcityofautonomous
issuesin thehoardsall themorepuzzling.
89A singlehemidrachm
ofElis ofthethirdcenturyis in theOlympiaHoard.
90Epidaurus,Olympia1922and Sophikon(Noe 392,754,997).
91On theevidenceoffabricand hoard contents,it comes beforethe series
withai, Air or Ain. Thisinscribedgroupis discussedby E. T. Newellin his
ofthe Andritsaena
and Olympia1922Hoards (NNM 21, 31-37
publications
and NNM 39, 16-17)wherehe suggeststhattheminting
ofAeginetansilver
statersdid not stop in 348 b.c. but was resumedat a laterdate withMacedoniansanction.It is possiblethattheissuewithglobuleshas also beendated
tooearly.
8o
Agrinion Hoard
THE THESSALIAN
AND BOEOTIAN
LEAGUES
(Nos. 157-160)
Both coinages are dated 196-146 b.c. in the standard catalogues.
There is not enough material in the Agrinion Hoard for anything
more than a fewgeneral observations on chronology.The Thessalian
coin with nOAY is very worn and may be assumed to have been
struck in the early years of the Federation. Of the four Boeotian
drachms, the firstis also poorly preserved and the second shows
considerable wear while the other two, froma common obverse die
and with a common symbol, are of later style and in excellent condition. They are, in fact, among the best preserved coins of the
AgrinionHoard. Althoughthe testimonyof so few specimens cannot
be regarded as conclusive, it suggests at least that a considerable
interval,perhaps as much as a half century,separates Nos. 158 and
160 and that the tridentpieces belong to the finalperiod of Boeotian
League coinage.
ATHENS
(Nos. 162-197)
The Athenian material includes an almost unbroken sequence of
issues, beginningin 190/89b.c. and ending in 169/8.Two coins from
the slightlylater strikingsof 165/4an(i 162/1are also present. As a
group these tetradrachmsshow a considerable degree of wear, attesting a fairlylong period of circulation. This evidence of extensive
use is the more reliable forbeing supported by a substantial number
of specimens. More than half of the issues are representedby at least
two coins and some by four or five. Eleven tetradrachms, about
one-thirdof the lot, belong to the fiveyears between 173/2and 169/8
and are thus near enough in time to be considered contemporary
strikings.As one can readily see fromthe illustrations(Nos. 186-195
on Plates XII-XIV), they are closely comparable in condition.
Long handling has smoothed over the contact areas of obverses and
reverses,obscuring or obliteratingthe amphora letters,the feathers
of the owls and the details of the helmets.
Nos. 196 and 197 are in a far better state of preservation,so much
betterin fact that they would seem to be separated fromthe earlier
Commentar y- A thens
81
issues by more than four and seven years. It is, however, well-nigh
impossible to break the succession of emissions forthis section of the
Athenian coinage. Die links and stylistic considerations determine
the order from Miki-Theophrathrough Theophra-Sotas, and GlauEche is related to Miki-Theophraon the evidence of the Salonika
Hoard. Furthermore,the material of the Salonika Hoard and the
late strikingsof the Kessab Hoard cover roughlythe same period as
the last four issues of Agrinion, 170/69-163/2,and the condition of
the coins of those deposits is compatible with their chronological
range.92One must assume that the preservation of Nos. 196-197 is
the result of an abnormal pattern of circulation, as in the case of
No. 145 of Locris and No. 161 of Aegina. A possible explanation may
be foundin consideringthe relationshipof this Athenian money with
historical events in Aetolia.
In a recent article Luis A. Losada93 discusses the reason for the
presence of a substantial number of New Style tetradrachms in
Aetolia, as indicated by the contents of the Agrinion Hoard. He
concludes that the influx of Attic money reflectsthe terms of the
treaty imposed by Rome in 189 b.c. compelling Aetolia to pay 200
talents immediatelyand 50 talents per annum forthe next six years,
this indemnityto be in coinage of Attic weight and quality.94Since
Aetolia produced no coins ofAttic standard duringthe second century
and is unlikelyto have had a reserve of third centurytetradrachms
sufficientto meet the Roman demands,95the only solution would have
been to obtain foreigncurrency.The obvious source was Athens.
On several occasions Athens had intercededwith Rome on behalf
of Aetolia and the termsofthe treatyof 189, hard as theywere,might
have been even more stringenthad it not been forthe pleading of an
02See Athens,
307-309and 475-477forthesequenceand hoards.
93"The Aetolian
of 189 and the AgrinionHoard," Phoenix1965,
Indemnity
129-133.
94Polybius21.32.8
95Duringthesecondhalfofthethird
centuryAetoliadid striketetradrachms
on the Atticstandard.Onlysevenobversedies are knownand thereis considerabledie-linking
of issues, indicatinga very small coinageof limited
duration.The wearon coinsin hoardsfromCorinthand elsewhere
placestheir
emissionwithinthe period230-215b.c. (Losada, 130; Noe, "The Corinth
Hoardof 193V ANSMN 10 [1962],30-31).It is improbable
thatthesetetradrachmswouldhave beenavailablein quantityin 189b.c.
6
82
Agrinion Hoard
Athenian envoy.96Clearly the relationship between the two Greek

states was a close and friendlyone; turning to Athens for help in
meetingthe payments to Rome would have been the natural course
forAetolia to take. The Athenian coins of the AgrinionHoard indicate that aid was provided.
Losada makes the interestingsuggestion that the wording of the
peace treaty, which practically calls for payment in Athenian
tetradrachms, was a deliberate move on Rome's part to reward
Athens for support in the war with Antiochus97and also to orient
Aetolia's economy toward Athens and away from Macedn. The
policy seems to have been successful for Athenian tetradrachms
continuedto flowin quantity into Aetolia until the end of the Third
Macedonian War.
AfterPydna Aetolia had no political or economic importance. Her
own fractionalsilver all but stopped and there would have been no
need and no resources for the importation of larger denominations
fromAthens or anywhere else. What large coins did come into the
regionwere probably broughtby returningmercenaries.One assumes
that they were valued highlyat a time when new tetradrachmswere
in short supply. The condition of the two latest Athenian pieces and
those of Cyme testifiesto long hoarding beforefinalburial.
CYME
(No. 198)
The exact date ofthis coin is uncertainbut it was verylikelystruck
in the late io's or early i5o's. In style,fabricand general composition
the Cymean series of spread-flantetradrachmsis closely related to
issues fromthe nearby mints of Aegae, Myrina and Magnesia. The
strikingsare undoubtedly contemporary.
Coins of this group are not present in the large Latakia Hoard of
I759 buried ca. 165 b.c. They are common in seven Syrian hoards,
96Polybius21.31.6-16.
97As Losada pointsout, Athensno doubt profitedhandsomelyfromher
withAetolia,whichcouldscarcelyhave failedto stimbusinesstransactions
Indeeditis possiblethatthesizeoftheearlyNew
ulatetheAthenian
economy.
713-714)is in partexplainedbytheAetolianindemnity
Stylecoinage(Athens,
payments.
C ommentary-M egaioftolis
83
some published and others recorded by Henri Seyrig, which were

interredca. 150-140 b.c. on the evidence of dated Seleucid material.98
Of these the Haiffa Hoard is the most significantfor it is partially
illustrated in the Dupriez Sale of December 12, 1906. The find included 12 coins of Myrina with nine differentmonograms, 3 of
Magnesia with three magistrates,and 14 of Cyme with four magistrates. All are classifiedin the catalogue as good or very good and the
plates bear out the estimates of condition for the illustrated pieces.
The latest coin is a tetradrachmof Demetrius II dated 146/5,which
led Regling (ZfN 1928, 95) to place the burial ca. 145-140 b.c.
Since tetradrachms of this type seem to have made their first
appearance in Syria after 165 but before 150 and since a number of
specimensturned up in the Haiffa Hoard of ca. 145-140 in uniformly
good state of preservation,a reasonable date for the coinage would
be ca. 165-155 b.c., allowing time forthe various emissions to travel
to Syria and to acquire a degree of wear in the course of their circulation. In this connectionit should be noted that the Agrinionexample
with the name of Metrophanesis closely comparable in condition to
the one Metrophanescoin illustrated by Dupriez ; it has experienced
some but not extensive handling.99
No. 198 and its elusive companion piece reached Aetolia after
Pydna. In the absence of any historicallink between Aetolia and Asia
Minorat that time,it is probable that they,like the two late Athenian
tetradrachms,came in with discharged mercenaries.
MEGALOPOLIS
(Nos. 199-239)
It has been evident forsome time that the Arcadian-typecoinage,
here assigned to Megalopolis, belongs to the second rather than the
third century and hence cannot be connected with the Arcadian
League. This was pointed out by Crosby and Grace in their public98The publisheddepositsarethoseofLatakia (Noe 603),Haiffa(Noe 475) and
Zahle (Athens,
523). Suggestedburialdatesare thoseof Seyrig.
99The sameis likelytrue
ofthetetradrachm
whichdisappearedjust afterthe
hoardwas discovered.
At least it is hardto believethata man selectingone
cointo keeporsellwouldpickanything
buta fine,perhapsthefinest,
specimen.
6
84
Agrinion Hoard
ation of a small hoard fromArcadia100and by the writerin a study of

a similar findfromWestern Greece.101In both hoards the condition
of the ' 'Arcadian" coins could not be reconciled with the early date
of the standard catalogues. More recently James A. Dengate has
made a die study of over 700 examples of the series and has come to
definiteconclusions about their sequence and chronology.102
The style and wear of the various Agrinion strikings support
Dengate's general arrangement: issues with no eagle on the knee of
Pan, issues with eagle and miscellaneous controls,fourlinked issues
with eagle and AA or A as the controlmarking,issues with eagle but
no controls,and finallyissues with eagle and miscellaneous controls
supplementedby the inscriptionMEH These last strikingsare not in
the AgrinionHoard. The presence of the ethnic on the one group of
emissions provides proofof the origin of the earlier issues with identical types.
Of the 151 "Arcadian" coins of Agrinion,103 come fromthe linked
issues with AA or A as a control. Twenty-twoobverse dies are representedand the patternof transfersis significant.Die breaks (p. 19,
note 17) establishthepositionof -A afterA^
and ofA-Aafter
A.
They also place A-A afterA>-^ which means that A-A and & -A are
strictly contemporary strikings. As Dengate suggests, the strong
probability is that all four issues with their extensive die linking
were put out at roughlythe same time. Some indication that
A>-^
and A-A continued to be struck longer than the other emissions is
to be found in the style of Obverses 217-220 of those issues. They
are very differentfrom the other obverses of the linked group but
quite similar in treatment to the obverses of the issue without
controls.
Certain dies of the "Arcadian" series are close in style to obverses
of the Achaean League coinage. These relationships with their
chronologicalimplications are discussed in the commentaryon the
Achaean section of the hoard.
100
NNM 74t5_I2
101
Hesperia1939,142-144.
102
"The TriobolsofMegalopolis/'ANSMN 13 (1967),57-110.
Commentar y- Achaean League
85
THE ACHAEAN LEAGUE

(Nos. 240-608)
One of the major contributions of the Agrinion Hoard is the
evidence it provides forthe chronologyand character of the Achaean
League coinage. No otherdeposit ofits kind,withthe exception of the
enormous Zougra Hoard, makes as much material available.103In
addition to the 834 hemidrachms of Agrinion, 985 specimens from
otherhoards and public collections have been included, forpurposes
of comparison,in the present analysis. This is a substantial body of
coinage but it falls far short of a corpus and die study of the League
issues. Until such a studyhas been made, any theoriesand conclusions
based on the partial record must be regarded as tentative. Their
chiefvalue lies in indicatingsignificantpoints of departureforfuture
research.
The evolution of the Achaean series is analogous to that of other
large Hellenisticcoinages. Obverse and reversetypes remain constant
but there is an increasinglyextensive use of adjunct markings. The
earliestissues are anepigraphicor inscribed with a single letterin the
reverse field.104Later reverses indicate the mintingauthority by a
symbol or an abbreviated ethnic and also include a single or double
control in the formof one or two letters or a monogram. Lettering
appears very occasionally on the obverses. The final stages of the
coinage are markedby a complicatedsystemofprimaryand secondary
controls,by morespecificdesignation of the mintsand by the common
occurrenceof letters or full names on the obverses.
We are not concerned here with the anepigraphic issues. They
seem to have been small emissions produced over a limited period,105
but in the absence of a die study, there is no firmfoundationfor an
103
The ZougraHoard (Noe 1186)is unpublished.Otherhoardsalreadycited
containsmallerquantitiesof Achaean money:Caserta 322, Olympia633,
WesternGreece429 and Arcadia152.
104
Examplesofthiscoinageare illustratedby Clerk(pl. I, 1-3).
105Not manycoins are knownbut the fewspecimenscheckedshow a fair
amountof die duplication.Two of Clerk'sthreecoinsare fromthe same obversedie,as is theone Londonhemidrachm
(BMCPelop.,pl. I, 1) and one of
fourANS coins.A singlespecimenin Copenhagen(SNG 227) is fromClerk's
seconddie. The threeotherANS piecesare fromthreedifferent
dies.
86
Agrinion Hoard
evaluation of theirsize and chronologicalspan. They do not appear in

the Agrinion Hoard, which comprises only issues bearing mint and
controlmarkings.It is this body of material which has been divided
into early and late groups.
Before attemptingto determinehow early and how late the coins
are, it will be well to consider the nature of the coinage as a whole.
One importantfeatureis immediatelyapparent : this is not a regular
sequence of annual issues but a coinage with clearly-definedpoints of
concentration.
The firstsection of the catalogue consists of 576 hemidrachms
which on the evidence of style and wear are earlier than the other
coins. Every known early issue of what may be called the civic
coinage, to distinguishit fromthe anepigraphic issues, is represented.106Eleven mints are active but their output varies considerably.
Corinth, Sicyon, Corone and Sparta strike single emissions; Elis,
Patras, Messene and Megara produce five to seven issues. Many are
contemporaneous on the evidence of die links and close stylistic
parallels. Antigoneia, for example, contributesmore coins (185) and
more obverse dies (68) to the Agrinion Hoard than any other mint,
but the coins all belong to three die-linkedissues. This is the entire
Achaean coinage of Antigoneia unless No. 469 of the catalogue
representsa small, later strikingof that mint. Furthermore,thereare
instances of stylisticsimilaritiesbetween the issues of different
mints,
whichimplychronologicalproximityand help to establish the overall
pattern of the coinage. These relationshipscan best be brought out
by taking the issues in what seems to be their chronological order,
with referencesto Plates XLVII-XLVIII where stylistic comparisons are illustrated.107
A very early, and perhaps the first, Achaean issue with clear
indication of minting authority is the |SP striking of Corinth. Its
obverses are of good style and rather similar to those of the anepigraphic series (Plate XLVII, G, in the Berlin Cabinet [2.56 gm. 4],
106
Theonlypossibleexceptionis theI and harpacoinageofArgosifthisis a
separateissueand not,as seemslikely,partofan issuewhichhas theharpaas
controland I, fa and "Fas subsidiarymarks(p. 29).
primary
107
Data on dielinkageand thesequenceofissuesat individualmintsaregiven
thecatalogue.
in thecommentaries
throughout
87
and 241a). The wreaths of some reverses are tied above, which again
relates the issue to the anepigraphic coinage. There are only three
obverse dies on record and even allowing for missing material, the
issue cannot have been a large one.
At about the time Corinthis putting out the P emission, Sicyon,
Patras and Argos are striking.The earliest hoard coins of those mints
show a great deal of wear and the wreaths of the reverses are consistently tied at the top. Obverses of Sicyon and Patras (Plate
XLVII, 244a, 255b) are related in style: small heads in high relief
with short locks and beards. Those of Argos face leftinstead of right
and are in a quite differentstylistic tradition: large heads with a
loose renderingoflong hair and beards. It seems likelythat the Argive
style derives fromthe early Arcadian issues of Megalopolis (Plate
XLVII, 204 a, 302 a).
The singleissue of Corone has obverses similarto those of Argos,as
does the firstissue of Messene (Plate XLVII, 311a, 313 a) and one
notes that the same control combination (EE) is found on coins of
both Messenian mints. Meanwhile in the north Corinth and Sicyon
have stopped striking,but Patras continues and Elis puts out an
initial issue very close in style to the third issue of Patras (Plate
XLVII, 270b, 331a).
The next section of the early coinage seems to consist of two issues
of Elis, three of Antigoneia and possibly one each of Patras and
Megara. The obverses of the CQ(CIAN) emission of Elis are extremely
close to some dies of the Antigoneia sequence (Plate XLVII, 335,
360 b), so close in fact that a common place of minting,or at least
a common diecutter,is probable. The one obverse of the O I issue of
Elis is also linked by style with other obverses of Antigoneia (Plate
XLVII, 336, 388, 406 a). Clearly therewas a strongbond between the
two mints. To this period, or to the beginning of the next, may be
assigned the METO coins of Megara and the M-AI coins of Patras,
which have a certain stylistic similarity(Plate XLVII, 424, 273 a).
In its finalstages the early coinage shows greaterdiversity.Messene
resumes minting with the FIA, Ail, NO, EE-OP and >? emissions, a
sequence linked by transferreddies and style. Strikingresemblances
exist between the obverses of the O-NO issue of Messene and those of
several other coinages : the two very small issues of Megalopolis with
88
Agrinion Hoard
pedum and syrinxsymbols,the coins of Argos with harpa and I or

and the AY issue of Antigoneia (?); while the EE-OP coins of
Messene and the harpa-T coins of Argos have obverse dies which
are almost identical despite the differentorientation of the heads
(Plate XLVIII, 321, 467a, H[ANS., 2.47 t], 307, 323c, 469, 308,
324 b).
Six issues of Megara probably belong to this period. Individual
heads of the AfPO and OOKA issues are similar to some found in the
large Al issue of Patras (Plate XLVII, 433, 291 d, 282b, 442). The
AN issue of Elis is linked stylisticallywith the Arcadian sequence of
Megalopolis with AA and A controls (Plate XLVII, 232 a, 341 d,
210b). Late dies of Megara, Patras and Megalopolis (Arcadian issues)
are comparable in the coarseness of their execution (Plate XLVIII,
217a, 237, 449, 294, 295, 464). Nos. 217a and 464 show a certain
resemblance to Nos. 308 and 324b of Argos and Messene. At the
end of the period one encounters the small neat heads of some of
the coins of Messene, the die-linkedissues of Elis and Patras and
the ME striking of Sparta, the firstemission of that mint (Plate
XLVIII, 328c, 468b, 345 f, 299b, 347a, 30of). These are the final
issues of the early sequence. Aftertheir strikingthere is a definite
break in the coinage ; issues ofmany ofthe same mintsare represented
in the second part of the catalogue but the coins are of quite different
style and in better condition than these earlier pieces.
A noteworthyfeatureof the last section of the Early Period is the
circle of dots framingthe obverse heads and although it cannot be
assumed that the change occurred at all mints at exactly the same
time, it is a criterionfor relative chronology. Dotted obverses are
found on three strikingsof Megara, on two of Messene and on single
emissionsof Patras, Elis, Argos and Sparta. The Arcadian coins have
no dots but in this case there can be no chronologicalsignificancefor
Megalopolis never employs the convention. Even her late Arcadian
issues with MEr have undotted obverses.
The tabulation on pp. 116-117 summarizesthedata ofthe preceding
paragraphs. Solid lines representdie links,brokenlines show stylistic
relationships within and between coinages. The number of known
obverse dies, in parenthesesaftereach issue, gives some indication of
the size of the individual issues and of the activity of the various
89
mintsat various periods.108

A vertical arrow below an issue or group
of issues means that emission may have extended over some time to
judge fromthe size and stylisticheterogeneityof the coinage.
The chronologyof this Early Period, as indicated in the tabulation,
depends on the history of Elis and Messene and to a limited extent
on hoard evidence. In 192-191 b.c. the Achaeans, who had supported
the winning side in the struggle of Rome against Antiochus and
Aetolia, were able to incorporate Sparta, Messene and Elis into their
League.109 Sparta was from the beginning a recalcitrant member
and a source of trouble until her formal reunion with the League
in 182. Messene was not enthusiastic about her new status but
there is no record of overt hostility until the revolt of 183 which
led to the invasion of Messene by the League. Elis apparently was
willingto join the Federation and created no difficulties.
It was only after 191 that these three states could have struck
Achaean League issues. It is highly unlikely that Sparta availed
herselfof the opportunityforsome time. Messene and Elis may have
been more amenable to providingfinancialsupportforthe League but
it is doubtful that they struck immediately after their admission.
The crucial point is that they did not do so before 191 b.c. at the
earliest. In the AgrinionHoard there are no League coins which look
morewornthan those of the firstissues of Elis and Messene, and there
are none which are earlierin style,with the possible exception of the
Corinthianpieces. One cannot, of course,equate conditionto the year
but it seems almost certainthat the firstcivic coins ofthe League and
the firstissues ofElis and Messene are close in time.The earlystrikings
of Patras, Sicyon, Argos and Corone on the one hand and those of
Elis and Messene on the other are too homogeneous in style and
condition to be separated by more than a decade at the outside.
If these observations are valid, the entirebody of Achaean League
coinage withmintmarkingswas produced duringthe second century;
108
Therecordofobversediesinthetabulationdoesnottakeintoaccountthose
carriedoverfromone issue to anotherbut thenumberinvolvedis smalland
does notsignificantly
affectthepicture.
109
The historical
in thepagesthatfollowis basedontheaccounts
background
ofLivy,Pausanias,Plutarchand Polybius.Sincetheeventsand datesarefor
the mostpart familiarones,citationsof chapterand verseare infrequent.
Whentheydo occurtheyreferto theLoeb editions.
go
Agrinion Hoard
there was no League money of the third century except the scanty
anepigraphicissues. A more precise date forthe inception of the civic
series can be suggested with referenceto the events of the igo's. The
Achaean League had in 198 joined the Roman alliance against Philip
V, despite the disapproval ofsome memberstates : delegates of Dyme,
Megalopolis and Argos walked out before the vote was taken and
Argos in particular was sympathetic to Macedn. The decision
proved a wise one, forthe Roman victoryat Cynoscephalae, followed
by Flamininus, proclamation of the freedom of the Greek cities,
marked the beginningof a period of consolidation and expansion for
the Achaean League. Corinthwas set freein 196 and handed over to
the Achaeans. In 195 Argos, which had been threatenedwith "liberation" by Sparta, was rescued by Rome and reunited to the League.
Sparta, Messene and Elis were added in 192-191 and at about the
same time Megara, which had earlier enteredthe Boeotian League of
necessityand with the consent of the Achaeans, expressed a desire to
rejoin the Achaean Federation. Corone may have been admitted even
before the annexation of Messene and she would have been a particularlywelcomememberbecause ofher strategically-locatedport.110
It is possible that the new League coinage started on a small scale
as early as 195, afterthe freeingof Corinthand Argos, but it seems
more likely that the bulk of it representsa war coinage, put out to
pay the Achaean troops who foughtagainst Antiochus and Aetolia in
192-189. Achaean money was provided by Corinth, Sicyon, Patras,
Argos and possibly Corone, while Megalopolis made a distinctive
contribution in the form of Arcadian hemidrachms. Single small
issues were struck by Messene and Elis a few years after their incorporationin the League.
There seems to have been some coinage in the 180's, possibly to be
connected with Spartan unrest and the invasion of Messene by the
League, but the next mass output is to be dated somewhat later and
most plausibly associated withthe Third Macedonian War. The issues
of 175-168 in the tabulation of the coinage forma tightly-knitgroup
of strikingsrelated by die linkage, style and condition in hoards.
Within individual issues there is evidence of the simultaneous
employmentof diecutters of varying ability, an indication of hasty
110Pausanias(4.34)saysthatCoronewas called"theharboroftheAchaeans."
91
productionover a limitedperiod. Everythingsuggests a concentrated

and extensive coinage. We know that the Achaeans sent 1,000 troops
to Chalcis in 172. What furthercontributionsof men and money they
made is uncertain,but in 169/8the League voted to send its entire
militarylevy to Thessaly and was disposed to respondfavorablyto an
appeal for5,000 soldiers to serve in Epirus. These measures were not
carried throughbut the fact that they were seriously contemplated
would have been sufficient
reason forstrikingthe large coinage necesto
them.
sary implement
Two hoards are ostensiblyrelevantforthe chronologyof the Early
Period: the Arcadia Hoard published by M. Crosby and E. Grace
(NNM 74) and the Oreus Hoard published by Svoronos (JIAN 1902,
318-328). The burial of the firstis put ca. 185-182 b.c., a date which
depends on the interpretationof the Federal coinage of Elis as a long
series of annual issues fillingthe period between 191 and the dissolution of the Federation in 146 b.c. Under the assumption that the
seven issues of Elis in the hoard, plus two early issues not included,
representsthe firststrikingsof that mint, the deposit would have
been interredin the late i8o's. If the date were firm,the Arcadia
Hoard would provide an important record of the Achaean coinage
before 182 b.c., but unfortunatelythe basic premise of its chronology is shaky. If Elis struck a regular sequence of annual issues, she
was the only League mint which did so, and when one analyzes the
Elean coinage as a body, it is evident that it is not a continuous
series of annual emissions but a coinage concentrated at certain
periods. As we shall see later, many of the strikings which are
classified as separate issues are in reality sections of the same issue
differentiated
by secondary controls.A very great deal of the coinage
belongs to the last years of the Federation and is surely money
mintedin preparationforand during the war with Rome. It is quite
impossible that all the Elis issues in the Arcadia Hoard, much less all
its other Achaean coins, were struck before 182 b.c. If the Arcadia
Hoard is an intact find,its burial is probably twentyto twenty-five
years later than the date proposed in the publication. A more serious
consideration involves its integrity.A European numismatist,who
was presentwhen the coins were offeredforsale, has expressed doubts
that the material escaped adulteration while it was being marketed,
92
Agrinion Hoard
and this possibility makes its evidence suspect. Under the circumstances one cannot safely base chronologicalconclusions on the contents of the Arcadia Hoard.
The Oreus Hoard is more reliable but it, too, has its elements of
uncertainty.Originallyit was a verylarge deposit of some 1300 silver
coins, of which about half disappeared beforethe material was seen
and published by Svoronos. Nine tetradrachmsand one didrachm of
Perseus in excellent condition are the latest coins on record and
since these date fromthe earlier years of Perseus' reign,Mamrothin
his study of the coinage of Perseus111places the Oreus burial ca. 173
b.c. In a more recent publication P. R. Franke112argues that later
issues of Perseus may have been among the lost coins and that
Svoronos' burial date of ca. 171 is more plausible fromthe historical
point of view since it connects the intermentwith the attack by
Perseus on the Roman fleetlying at anchor near Oreus.113An even
later burial, ca. 169 b.c., seems not beyond possibilityforit was then,
according to Livy,114that Marcius Figulus brought a part of the
Roman navy to Oreus to use the city as a base forforwardingsupplies
to the armies in Macedonia and Thessaly. If Svoronos is justifiedin
his interpretationof the Oreus Hoard as money brought into the
regionat the time of Perseus' victoryin late autumn 171 and turned
over to a pro-Macedonian citizen, the actual burial may well have
taken place a few years later when anyone with Macedonian sympathies must have viewed with alarm the returnof the Roman fleet.
In any case a burial date ca. 171-169 b.c. is probable for the Oreus
Hoard.
It contained three hemidrachms of the Achaean League: single
coins of Patras, Antigoneia and Megalopolis.115These and associated
issues must antedate 171-169. There is no evaluation of the condition of the three Achaean coins and the Megalopolis piece is the
111"Die Silbermnzen
des KnigsPerseus,"ZfN 1928,6, note2.
112"Zur Finanzpolitikdes makedonischenKnigs Perseus whrenddes
KriegesmitRom 171-168v. Chr.,"Jahr. /.Num. 1957,35 an(l 39113Plutarch,Aem.Paul. 9.
114Livy 44.13.ii.
115AlthoughSvoronos'descriptions
are faulty,theissuesare almostcertainly
the following:K-3NI and trident(Patras),AN-EY (Antigoneia)
and K-A-M
and pedum(Megalopolis).It is the last, and not the Antigoneiacoin,which
appearson Svoronos'plate (XI, 4).
Commentary-Achaean
League
93
only one illustrated. From Svoronos' plate it seems to be in good

state of preservation.The issue to which it belongs is placed, on the
evidence of stylistic parallels, toward the beginning of the third
section of the early coinage, some years beforethe issues with small
heads and dotted obverses which are clearly the last strikingsof the
175-168 period. The chronological arrangement of the tabulation
derives some support fromthe Oreus Hoard but since a single coin
is involved, its testimonycannot be considered weighty.
More mints are representedin the coinage of the Late Period but
they contributefewercoins to the Agrinion Hoard. Again one notes
stylisticparallels between the issues of differentmints,indicating a
measure of contemporaneity.The two small emissions of Megalopolis
are fromfour dies, undoubtedly cut by the same hand, and the nervous style of the large heads in very low reliefis strikinglysimilar to
that on dies used for the first issue of Elis (Plates XXXVIIIXXXIX and Plate XLVIII, 472 k, 475). The coins of Caphyae and
those of the next Elean issue are in the same tradition and show
almost identical representationsof the Zeus heads (Plate XLVIII,
480a, 503 b). Smaller heads of somewhat similar type bring together
issues of Patras, Dyme and Aegira (Plate XLIX, 553 b, 566, 544 a,
574)Megara at this period produces a series of six issues, of which the
firstfour are close in style and at one point linked by a transferred
obverse. The last two emissionshave coarser heads, similarto some in
the Elis series (Plate XLIX, 500, 529, 490a, 524). Issues of Pheneus,
Pellene, Epidaurus and Aegium are related to these late coins of Elis
and Megara by the careless and sketchyrenderingof the crude heads
(Plate XLIX, 489a, 530, 490 a, 524, 535, 540, 544b, 549).
Another group of late dies is of better workmanship. Individual
heads of Aegira and Sicyon are stylisticallyclose (Plate XLIX, 578,
586 c) while other dies of Sicyon are related to those of Argos and
Corinth by a delicacy of delineation, particularly noticeable in the
treatmentof the features and the beards (Plate XLIX, 596, 602 b,
579 a). The single coin of Cleitor and the few dies of Messene do not
fitinto any of the above stylisticsequences but they seem to belong
to this period of the coinage.
94
Agrinion Hoard
The last section of the tabulation (page 117) shows the stylistic
relationshipswithin and between mints and makes it apparent that
we are dealing with a coinage of moderate size and considerable
diversitybut of rather limited duration. These issues, however, are
not the last of the Achaean League series and before attemptingto
fixtheir chronology,it will be well to take a look at what follows.
In contrast to the record forthe Early Period, there are numerous
issues of the Late Period missing fromthe Agrinion Hoard. This is
not to say that they are invariably of later date, forchance and other
factors are always involved in the composition of a hoard. Three
mints are not represented at all: Tegea, Pallantium and Lusi. A
single hemidrachmis known for the last town while Tegea and Pallantium struck only three or fourissues apiece. In style most, if not
all, of this material seems to belong to the period of the finalissues
of Agrinion.The same is true of the issues of Epidaurus absent from
Agrinion,and other strikingswill almost certainly be found to be
roughly contemporarywhen a definitivestudy of the coinage has
been made.
One large body of material is indubitably later than the Agrinion
issues. This consists of extensive coinages fromSparta, Elis, Dyme,
Patras and Megalopolis, supplemented by a less abundant output
fromAegira and Aegium and perhaps by isolated issues fromthree
or four other mints. Leaving aside the MEr coins of Megalopolis,
whichhave been dealt with by Dengate (ANSMN 13 [1967], 57-110),
and some of the minor coinages, let us consider the pattern at the
four mints producing the largest amount of very late Achaean
money.
The strikingsof Dyme, Patras and Sparta are obviously contemporary on the evidence of condition in several hoards and of the
remarkable similarity of their degenerate heads.116Clerk's list includes some twelve entriesforDyme, eighteenforPatras and ten for
Sparta. If these are annual issues, the coinage of the three mints
would cover ten to eighteenyears, but analysis of the entriesgives a
quite differentpicture. What we have is a pattern of coining similar
to that established for Sicyon (p. 67) in which the issue is designated
by a single primaryand a varying number of secondary controls.At
116Clerk'spls. Ill and IV forDymeand Patras,XII and XIII forSparta.
95
Patras the emissions of the Agrinion Hoard are followed by four

distinctissues with diverse subsidiary controls:
EE with A>,01 or I
A with EY, AX or TA
P with F
O with Xp or AE
Dyme seems to have produced the same number of very late issues:
t with AA
faP or fa with O
A) with T or XP
X with "M4
At Sparta the data point to a single issue. All coins have fa above the
League monogram, combined with seven subsidiary controls: flY,
0E, ffl,A,0), EY, .
The latest coinage of Elis is considerably more complicated. Clerk
lists thirty-nineentries but again this does not mean thirty-nine
separate issues. Nos. 274-275 are identical except that the obverse
head faces left on one coin and right on the other. Nos. 255-256 are
described as having differentmonograms in the upper field but the
plate shows that the markingis in reality the same. Nos. 252 and 254
have the same combination of monograms. Nos. 273 and 275 are
fromthe same reverse die; the control in the upper field is in one
instance given as fa and in the other as O. Other misreadings due to
die breaks, careless diecutting or the poor condition of the coins
almost certainlyexist. One suspects that 248 and 261 have the same
monogram in the upper field and that 262, 264, 265 and 293 are
identically inscribed, but 248 and 293 are not illustrated and the
area above the League monogram is obscure on both 262 and 265.
A comprehensivestudy of the League silver of Elis will surely make
a substantial reduction in Clerk's list.117
For the moment the important fact is that the remainingentries,
like those of Sparta, Dyme and Patras, can be grouped on the basis
of primaryand secondary controls. There are perhaps ten or eleven
117Someofthecorrections
forrevision
notedhereand additionalsuggestions
are to be foundin Crosby-Grace,
NNM 74, 35 f.
g6
Agrinion Hoard
and
are combined
primarymarks,of which the most common (
with five or six subsidiary monograms, while others are coupled
with only one or two. This is still a substantial numberof issues but
far less than one would assume from a cursory glance at Clerk's
catalogue.
How much time should be equated with an issue is highly uncertain. The strikings have none of the earmarks of a regularly
spaced coinage. Individual issues include dies of fairly good and
extremelybad style. The work of a single diecutter can often be
traced througha series of issues, side by side with the output of other
engravers linking still other issues. The lettering of the obverses
introducesfurtherconfusion.On the coins of the large % issue one
finds five monograms or names behind the Zeus heads: A, l<,
KAAAinnOI, 0PAKYAECON, AnOAANIOC. The Caserta Hoard
contains 75 examples of these issues, of which 72 are classified as in
good condition; thereis little differencein wear among the specimens
of the same strikingsin the Western Greece Hoard. In all of this
there is the strong implication of a mass coinage put out over a
relativelyshortperiod. It seems verylikelythat these late degenerate
emissions of Patras, Elis, Sparta and Dyme, as well as the MEr
issues of Megalopolis, representfor the most part the money which
supported the war against Rome and that they may be assigned
to the last, turbulentyears of the League's existence ca. 151-146 b.c.
The sequence at Aegium is helpfulin relating the latest Agrinion
coins to the still later issues discussed in the precedingpages. Five or
six emissionsseem to comprisethe entireAchaean coinage of Aegium:
1. (A>and A A>on obverse) AITI with KO (Agrinion544-547)
2. (EY TEI on obverse) AITI with TA (Agrinion 548-549 and Clerk
40118with variant arrangementof the reverse lettering)
3. Al with O-TEI (Clerk 30)
4. Al with A-E and Al (Clerk 29)
5. Al with A-A (Clerk 34 but the coin is not illustrated and the
reading which would establish this as a separate issue cannot be
verified).
6. (AiriEOiN on obverse) APICTOAAMOC (Clerk 44-45)
118Clerk'sreadingshave in a fewcases beencorrected
fromhis plates.
97
The threeobverse stylesof these issues can be seen on Plate XLIX

(549, L and M fromthe ANS Collection, 2.41 gm. <- and 2.28 gm. f).
Issues 3 and 4 have heads very similar in renderingto some found
on the latest issues of Patras, Dyme and Sparta, of whichone example
is illustrated (Plate XLIX, K fromthe ANS Collection,2.39 gm. f).
They are later than the heads of the two Agrinion issues (1 and
2 above) but not much cruder and there is the possibility of a link
between the two groups in the repetitionof the TEI control.119The
Aristodamos strikingis unquestionably the last of the Aegium series,
as is evident fromthe full name of the mint on the obverse and the
excellent condition of the coins in the Caserta Hoard. As Lbbecke
points out, this issue, representedby 63 specimensin the hoard, must
be consideredone of the last emissions of the League. It is interesting
to note that its obverses resemble those of the last Agrinion issues
of Sicyon, Argos and Corinth in the tightnessof the modelling: the
wreaths and hair,
compact heads in low reliefwith carefully-defined
the beady treatment of the beards and the evenly-spaced border of
small dots. A somewhat similar renderingis found on a few of the
late Megalopolis coins with MEr (Plate XLIX, J from the ANS
Collection, 2.32 gm. ->). Although the issues of the Late Period
of Agrinion include none of the League's final strikings (with the
possible exception of the issues of Sicyon, Argos and Corinth),some
at least are fairlyclose in time to the terminal emissions. A general
dating of 160-150 b.c. is likely forthe group as a whole.
From the literarysources one gets the impression that the period
between Pydna and 150 b.c. was a comparatively peaceful one for
the League, marred only by border disputes between memberstates.
There is no specificreferenceto concerted military activity, which
might have required a war coinage. Yet two passages in Pausanias
seem to implythat the historicalrecordis faultyand that duringthis
period the Achaeans made at least two forays into Central Greece
to annex towns under Aetolian control and influence.In 164 b.c. a
Roman emissary,C. Sulpicius Gallus, heard the petition of the people
119
The EY TEI on theobversesmaybe a singlenameor a combination.
It is
someobversesare
perhapsindicativethatin theissueimmediately
preceding
inscribed
a doublecontrol.On somedies thereis a divisionof
A fi?,implying
theEY TEI legendwithEY behindthehead and TEI in front.
7
g8
Agrinion Hoard
of Pleuron for separation from the Achaean League (Paus. 7.11).

Some years later, in 147 b.c., L. Aurelius Orestes was sent to Greece
with instructionsto detach certain importantcommunitiesfromthe
Achaean League, among them Heracleia by Mt. Oeta (Paus. 7.14).
The incorporationof Pleuron must have taken place between 167 and
164; the addition of Heracleia can be set after155/4since a decree of
that year is dated by local magistrates.120
It probably occurredbefore
150, for afterthat date the League was too deeply involved in preparations for war, firstwith Sparta and later with Rome, to have
embarked on a program of territorialaggrandizement so far from
home terrain.
The circumstances under which Pleuron and Heracleia were annexed remain conjectural but it is in the highestdegree unlikelythat
eithertown joined the League of its own volition. Pleuron's plea for
separation in 164 and Heracleia's alacrity in heeding Rome's call for
secession in 147 strongly suggest forced membership, and one
wonders if this could have been accomplished without a show of
military power. In the case of Pleuron this need have been little
more than a token force,for in the years immediately after Pydna
Aetolia was too weak to put up any effectiveresistance.An expedition
to Heracleia some ten to fifteenyears later would have been a different
matter. One assumes that a substantial body of troops would have
been required to insure the success of the incursion into remote and
unfriendlyterritory,and it is not impossible that Aetolia offered
armed resistance to Achaean aggression. The late Achaean League
money of the AgrinionHoard may well have moved north with the
men who annexed Heracleia between 155 and 150 b.c.
The problems of the Achaean League series cannot be solved by
the evidence of one deposit, or even a group of deposits, but the
AgrinionHoard does point up considerationsand possibilitieswhich
will be worth testing against a larger body of material. Even this
preliminarysurvey establishes several important facts about the
League's fiscal policy. The uniformcurrencydescribed by Polybius
(2.37.10-11) was obviously not intended to replace the autonomous
money of member cities. Megalopolis put out exactly four Federal
120G. Daux, Delphesau IIe etau Iersicle,327,note3.
99
emissions of very small size during the period when she was producing a vast quantity of coins with the old Arcadian types. Sparta,
Argos, Corone, Messene, Sicyon and probably other mints as well
continued to strike autonomous silver while they were associated
with the League and in some cases the civic coinages were more
extensive than the Federal. Furthermore,the League does not seem
to have demanded of its members any systematic contributiontoward administrativeexpenses. One supposes that these existed but
there is no evidence of regular payments into a League exchequer.
On the contrary the coinage consists of concentrated emissions in
which a varying number of mints participate for varying lengths of
time and to varying extents. For the most part, minting activity
seems to be related to militaryactivity,and it is surelypertinentthat
the hemidrachm apparently represented the basic daily wage of a
Hellenistic soldier.121
With referenceto the tabulation on page 116, one notes an interesting pattern of distribution during the pre-Pydna period. Eleven
mints are productive but not simultaneously. In the northeastern
sector of the Peloponnesus, Corinthand Sicyon strikebrieflyand are
then supplanted by Megara as the chief mint of the area. Patras is
active throughoutmost of the period as is Elis afterher incorporation
in the League. In Arcadia thereis a shiftingback and forthbetween
the two large cities: firstMegalopolis with an Arcadian sequence,
then Antigoneia with very heavy Federal issues, followedby Megalopolis again with a scanty striking of Federal coins and a series of
large Arcadian issues. Sparta contributesnothinguntil the end of the
period and Argos only two rather small issues at the beginningand
the end. In the Messenian area an Achaean mint may have opened
firstat Corone and then been transferredto Messene aftershe became
a member state. The bulk of the money of the 195-188 period is
121References
to rates of pay have been assembledand discussedby G. T.
TheMercenaries
World(Cambridge,
Griffith,
oftheHellenistic
1935),294-307.
Two textsare ofparticular
relevance.The earlier,ca. 383 b.c.,is themention
in Xenophon(Hell. 5.2.21) of an Aeginetantriobolper day per man as the
amountto be paid by citiesofthePeloponnesian
Leaguecontributing
money
insteadof soldiers.In 218B.c.,accordingto Polybius(5.1.11 sqq.; 2.11),the
Achaeansagreedto pay seventeentalentsa monthin wagesto Philip'sarmy
of7200,or roughlythreeobolsa day foreach soldier.
7*
ioo
Agrinion Hoard
seeminglysupplied by northernmints,notably Patras. Ca. 188-180

it comes fromAntigoneia and the importance of the Arcadian mint
at this time is understandable in the light of Arcadian leadership in
the invasion of Messene and of Spartan truculencewhich threatened
Arcadia more directlythan other regions. Financial support for the
Third Macedonian War seems to have been chieflythe responsibility
of Megara, Patras and Megalopolis and the strategic location of the
firsttwo mintswith respect to battlegroundsin Thessaly and Aetolia
may be significant.For the Early Period at least, it looks as though
the production of League money was concentratedin a single mint
within each major geographical region, with the activity of various
mintsat various timesbearing some relationshipto the movementsof
the Achaean armies.
For an interval afterPydna theremay have been no League silver.
Differencesin styleand in the preservationofthe hoard coins assigned
here to the Early and Late Periods point to a break in the coinage.
When it is resumed,thereis greaterdiversification.Megara, Elis and
Patras are still comparatively active but the first seems to have
suspended operations in favor of Sicyon and Corinth before the
Agrinionseries ends. Patras is no longerthe only mintof the Achaean
district: Dyme, Aegium, Aegira and Pellene make contributionsin
various degrees. There is a little League money from Messene and
Argosand a second Argolidmint,Epidaurus, is now open. In Arcadia,
at least six mints- Caphyae, Cleitor, Pheneus, Tegea, Pallantium
and Lusi - supplement the small issues of Megalopolis. The final
period of League mintinginvolves the extensive output of Megalopolis with Arcadian types and MEr legend and the Federal issues of
Sparta, Dyme, Patras and Elis with smaller coinages at Aegium,
Aegira and perhaps a fewothermints.Again it seems significantthat
many of these cities are in the northernpart of the Peloponnesus and
hence close to areas of militaryactivity.
This is, of course, only part of the picture. There are contemporary
autonomous coinages fromsome of the same mints and until these
have been analyzed and their chronologiesdetermined,no one can
say to what extent they supplement or take the place of Achaean
emissions.Nor can we be certain that the Federal coinage itselfgives
a true record of mint activity. There may have been far fewermints
ioi
in operation than the symbols and ethnics on the coins imply. What
seem to be mint marks may in reality be nothingmore than acknowledgements of financial contributionsto the League treasury. It is
difficultto see in the erratic pattern of the coinage any evidence
of efficient
mintingprocedure. One would assume that the expense of
and
staffinga mint for the production of a single issue of
opening
silver,or of bronze forthat matter,would have been high, yet there
are a number of communitieswhich ostensibly stuck only once. Did
they strike locally or did they pay over to the Federal exchequer
a certain sum in miscellaneous currencywhich was then turned into
Federal money at a central mint or mints?
The available material does not prove that this happened but there
are suggestivebits of evidence. In the AgrinionHoard we have coins
of Elis and Patras struck fromthe same obverse dies (Nos. 345 and
347 of Elis; Nos. 299 and 300 of Patras). In both cases the Patras
strikingsrepresenta later stage of the die.122It may be that the two
dies were sent fromElis to Patras but it seems more likely that the
coins were all produced in the Elis mint. The issue of Elis to which
Nos. 345 and 347 belong is firstinscribed AY and later AY-Sfl,123
whilethe Patras coins are inscribedAY-AP.A plausible reconstruction
of the sequence of emission can be suggested on the basis of these
facts. At some time in the 175-168 period, Patras stopped her large
AI coinage. Elis at about the same time or perhaps slightlyearlierhad
started her AN issue. A few years later Patras made an additional
financial contributionto the war effort.The sum involved was not
large and rather than reopen the mint for a small issue, it was decided to have the money struck at Elis, then engaged in producing
the AY issue. The AY controlwas retained forboth lots of coinage but
that of Patras was marked with the subsidiary AP controland that of
Elis with Zfl.
The present survey provides no evidence of other dies shared by
different
mintsbut they may appear when more materialis collected.
122No. 299has diebreaksbelowthehairin thelowerleftfieldandbetweenthe
hairand thetop ofthewreath;theseare notpresenton No. 345. No. 300 has
breaksin thearea ofthechinnotfoundon No. 347.
123
The sequenceof controlsis establishedby Nos. 344 and 349 of Elis; the
AY-2X2coinshave die breaksnotapparenton theAY pieces.Thisis perhaps
trueof343and 348as wellbutthespecimens
arewornandit is hardto be sure.
102
Agrinion Hoard
Meanwhile there are numerous examples of stylisticrapprochements

so strikingas to imply a common engraver if not a common mint.
The small eagle issue at the very beginningof the Elean coinage may
have been struckat Patras fromdies used forthe latter's K-iN issue.
During the 188-180 period the issues of Elis and Antigoneia are very
close in style, some dies unmistakably from the same hand. And
again one notes a possibly significant differentiationof control
markings: C alone on most dies of an Antigoneia issue but a few
with CflriA,and it is these CQIIA dies which are almost identical in
style with those of Elis inscribed CC1AN. The stylisticparallels in
the 175-168 period have already been stressed. Were the very small
Achaean issues of Megalopolis,Antigoneia( ?), Argos and Messene the
products of a single mint,perhaps Messene which seems to have been
the most active ? This would not only account for the stylisticsimilarity of this group of issues but would also explain the stylistic
differenceswithin what purports to be the coinage of a single mint.
The situation at Megalopolis is especially confusing.Throughoutthe
Early Period the Arcadian city produced a series of large emissions
bearingArcadian types. Two verysmall issues withAchaean types,of
dissimilarworkmanshipand with heads facingin the opposite direction, are interpolatedin the Arcadian sequence. If the Achaean coins
were actually struck elsewhere,the anomalies would be understandable. Finally, one wonders if the single small emission of Sparta at
the end of the Early Period may not have been minted at Elis.
During the Late Period there are again examples of issues from
differentmints which show close stylistic relationships,and at this
time thereare more mintswhich seeminglyproduce only one or two
issues. Two or three central workshopsis a possibility to be tested
against a corpus of the coinage.124
The appearance of the same control combination on coins of Elis
and Patras and on those of Elis and Antigoneiahas been noted above.
Other cases of repetitionare apparent fromthe tabulations on pages
fromSicyonto Patras and then
116-117. Was the EY controltransferred
to Antigoneiain the early stages of the coinage ? Did Antigoneia also
124
That Messeneservedas a mintfortheLeague duringat leastpartofthe
Late Periodis suggestedby thefactthat the sameobversedie was used for
and Federalissues(Plate XLVI, F and 609).
autonomous
103
inheritthe |SP control of Corinth? If we knew what the monograms

and names signified,a comprehensiblepattern mightemerge,but the
present record gives the impressionthat duplication is, forthe most
part, fortuitous.
One interestingresult of the present inquiry is the light it throws
on the financial support given the League by its members. At its
height the Achaean Federation included some 60 communities. Of
these, only 22 struck or participated in the striking of the silver
coinage which supported the League's activities. Many of the mints,
moreover,produced veryfewissues, oftenof small size. In the case of
towns of minor importance this is not surprisingbut it is hard to
explain the comparativeinactivityof centerslike Corinth,Sicyon and
Argos. It may be that their autonomous coins compensated for the
scantiness of their League emissions as was certainly the case with
Megalopolis. If the interpretationof the money as basically a war
coinage is correct,it is also probable that the obligations of membership could be discharged in times of emergencyby contributionsof
eithermoney or men. It seems clear that the source of the monetary
contributionswas recordedon the coins themselveswhethertheywere
struckat local workshopsor in centralmints.During the last years of
the League's life,however,the system apparentlybroke down forthe
numberof cities involved in the finalissues of Federal coinage cannot
be reconciled with the extensive public collections recorded for the
period. We have, forexample, an inscriptionfromMegalopolis, dated
148/7B.c.,125giving a list of donors of from one to six staters as a
service to the city. In the next year, according to Polybius (38.15),
Diaeus' preparations for war included the order for all citizens
capable of bearing arms to musterat Corinthand the exaction of contributionsfromthe wealthiestinhabitants,women as well as men, to
fillthe depleted public exchequers. Polybius goes on to say that there
was no choice in the matter,men were forced to give whatever they
were assumed to possess and women had to contributetheir jewelry
and that oftheirchildrento a fundwhichcould onlybringdestruction
on them. The implicationis that these measures were widespread and
that "gifts" came fromall membercities vulnerable to "persuasion."
If the bulk of the terminalissues of Megalopolis, Patras and Dyme
125IG V2,439,and also discussedby Hiller,RE 15, 1932,138.
104
Agrinion Hoard
and the tremendousoutput of Elis126are, as seems likely, the fruit

oftheselevies,thenit musthave proved impossibleunderthe pressure
of mass mintingto record the specificsource of the contributions.
THE AETOLIAN
LEAGUE
(Nos. 610-679)
This large series of Federal emissions, like its counterpartin the
Peloponnesus, needs to be studied systematically,for only a corpus
and die study will provide firmevidence forsequence and chronology.
Meanwhile the data of the Agrinion Hoard, supplemented to some
extent by other material,help to definethe periods of strikingwith
some degree of precision.
The most worn coins of the hoard and the earliestin stylebelong to
a group of issues with three primarycontrols (A, AI and ), usually
placed in the exergue,and various secondary controls,usually placed
below the boar (Nos. 611-627). 127Several obverse styles are representedand thereis a definiterelationshipbetween primarycontrol
and obverse stylein the case of the A and AI emissions. Within theA>
issue there is greater variety. The boars of these early coins are
generally shown with heads down, a renderingnot found on later
strikings,but there are exceptions, especially in the series.
A second and extremelyhomogeneousgroup ofissues is represented
by Nos. 628-667 of the Agrinion Hoard. After the sequence gets
under way, all obverse dies can be divided into two basic styles: the
firstfoundon Nos. 631-642 and later on Nos. 650-651 and the second
appearing with No. 643 and continuing through 649 and then reappearing with the somewhat stifferand distinctly unattractive
heads of Nos. 652-665. Nos. 666-667 are cruder versions of this
second style.
126Thehugesizeofthelate Elean coinageis bestindicatedbytheinfrequency
withwhichduplicatedies are found.In the ANS Cabinetalone thereare
of the
thirteencoins of the issuefromtwelveobversedies and fourteen
A issue,each witha different
obversedie. A partialcheckof othersources
turnedup seven^ coinswithsix newobversedies and seven A coinswith
sevennewdies.
127
No.610is a singleexampleofa groupofstillearlierissueswithlettersonthe
obverses.
Commentar y-Aetolian League
105
On the reverses of Group II the boars, larger and more ferocious

than those of Group I, are invariably rendered at bay with heads
erect. A few dies show a hindleg extended, giving the animal a peculiar stance. Controlmarkshave been removedfromthe exergue and
are now usually combined below the boar. There are exactly two
primary controls: S and . Seventeen secondary controls coupled
withZ and fivewith AIZ are foundin the AgrinionHoard alone and
thisis by no means the completerecord.128
There is some overlapping:
both primarycontrols are combined with TI, A and . There is a
verygreat deal of die linkage. One obverse die is coupled with |-2,
A-AE and AAMOfcPN,li- and l~l-AE. Another links -,
AE. The instances of two combinations sharing an obverse die are
numerous, as can readily be seen fromthe catalogue. And again it
should be stressed that this is a fragmentaryrecord based on a
limited amount of material.
The conclusion is inescapable. Despite the diversityof secondary
controls,the coins of the Z and AIZ emissions with their stylistic
homogeneity,extensive die linkage and similar state of preservation
in the AgrinionHoard are roughlycontemporaneous.
A thirdand last group of issues (Nos. 668-679)129is separated by a
fairlyconsiderable interval of time fromthe strikingsof Group II.
The coins are well preservedas a lot and some are verysharp. Obverse
heads are quite differentfrom those of Group II and much more
appealing in their youthful delicacy. There is a uniformityin the
rendering, especially pronounced in Nos. 670-678. Nos. 670-679
have a single primaryand fivesecondary controls below the bellicose
boars: 1or EY combinedwith Al, K, AP, NE and ^ . A transferred
die joins the AP and NE emissions.
This is a smaller coinage than that of the preceding groups on the
evidence of known obverse dies : ten in the Agrinion Hoard as compared with seventeen for Group I and twenty-eightfor Group II.
128
CoinswithAE and TI,
and PP werein theWesternGreeceHoard; AE
combinedwithKAE appearsin the OlympiaHoard.
129Thereis no firmevidenceforthe
placementofNos. 668-669.Theirsystem
ofcontrolmarkings
doesnotfitintothepatternofeitherGroupII or III and
probablyindicatessmall isolatedissues. The obverseheads are somewhat
similarto thoseofGroupIII and thecoinsarebetterpreserved
thantheaverare availableforcomparison.
age of GroupII, but onlytwospecimens
io6
Agrinion Hoard
It is also a coinage struck over a very limited period on the evidence

of condition,the stylisticsimilarityof obverse dies and the appearance of the same basic control combination on five of the seven
emissions.
The Aetolian League coinage resembles its sister currencyto the
south in consistingnot of a succession of annual issues spread over a
long periodoftimebut of several groupsoflarge emissionsofrelatively
short duration. Not all knownissues are representedin the Agrinion
Hoard and the material available provides no basis forthe dating of
the earliest hemidrachms,but what we do have comprises the great
bulk of the coinage and it at least belongs to the second century.
The coins of Group I are closely comparable in condition to those of
the firstperiod of the earlyAchaean League seriesand are veryprobably to be connected with the war against Rome in the late igo's. In
the interval between the settlementof 189 and the beginning of the
Third Macedonian War, Aetolia seems to have struck little, if any,
silver. The coins of Group II with theirevidence fora short period of
concentrated coining would belong to the years before Pydna and
again the conditionof the hoard pieces substantiates the relationship
with the pre-Pydna series of the Achaean League.
Of special importance is the evidence from Agrinion for a silver
coinage after168 b.c., the generallyaccepted date forthe dissolution
of the Aetolian League. The well-preservedcoins of Group III must
be roughlycontemporarywith the last Achaean issues of the hoard
and hence datable to the ISO's. It seems likely that these hemidrachms reflecta feeble and futile attempt on Aetolia's part to prevent by armed interventionthe absorption of Heracleia into the
Achaean League.130
THE DENARII
(Nos. 680-717)
These coins are discussed in an Appendix by Rudi Thomsen and
Michael H. Crawford.
130
The annexationof Heracleiaca. 155-150b.c. is discussedon page 98 in
connection
withtheAchaeancoinage.
THE
BURIAL
DATE
This has not been easy to determine.If it were a question of the

Greek material alone, the Agrinion Hoard would seem to be earlier
than the deposits fromCaserta, Western Greece and Olympia which
have been cited throughoutthe presentstudy. It contains none of the
verylate Achaean League coinage of Elis, Sparta, Dyme, Patras and
Aegium and none of the final "Arcadian" strikingsof Megalopolis issues which appear in the other three hoards.131On the evidence of
style and condition the latest Agrinion coins are Achaean issues of
Aegium, Aegira, Sicyon, Argos and Corinth132and Aetolian issues
with EY as a control combination.133These strikings apparently
belong to the period ca. 155 150 b.c.134Althoughthe series show some
wear, their general condition is good to very good,135and a burial
date ca. 150-145 would not only take into account the preservation
ofthe coins but also explain the absence ofthe last Achaean emissions.
Either the issues had not yet been struckor theyhad not had time to
penetrate the remote hinterland of Aetolia before the hoard was
interred.
The denarii introduce a complication. The most recent of the
Roman coins are in excellentto FDC conditionand clearly later than
any of the Greekissues. Accordingto Sydenham the sequence begins
ca. 150 and extends down to 110-108 but, as Thomsen and Crawford
have shown in the Appendix which follows, Sydenham's chronology
must be revised. The latest denarii of Agrinion are probably to be
131
Not all coinagesare in all hoardsbuteachdeposithas a substantial
amount
oflate material.
132Someof thecoinsareillustrated
on Plate XLIX, 549,578,586c,596,602b,
579a.
133
Plate LIII, 670-679.
134
For a discussionofthechronology
see pp. 97-98,105-106.
135
The Corinthian
forexample,are verywell preserved.Obhemidrachms,
verses581 and 583lookrubbedbutthisis theresultofworndies; reversesof
thetwocoinsare quitefresh.
107
io8
Agrinion Hoard
dated ca. 135 b.c., at which time or very shortly thereafter,the

AgrinionHoard would have been buried.
Unless the denarii are earlier than Thomsen and Crawfordbelieve,
one must eitheraccept this later burial date or regard the Greek and
Roman coins as two separate lots of material brought together in
antiquity. This last is not a very convincinghypothesis: a hoard of
1301 Greek coins buried ca. 150-145, the cache subsequently disinterred and 39 denarii added to it prior to reburial some ten to
fifteenyears later. To be sure we know of no other Achaean League
hoard with denarii, and this might be considered an argument for
division, but the Agrinion Hoard is also unique in including tetradrachms, and the coins of Athens and Cyme are an integral part of
the find.136
It seems likely that the AgrinionHoard is a currencydeposit. Its
size, its pattern of wear, its heavy proportionof early coins and its
heterogeneous composition point to a collection withdrawn simultaneously from current circulation. The inclusion of Athenian
tetradrachmsof the pre-Pydna period is in accord with an eastern
orientation of the Aetolian economy in the years before the Third
Macedonian War; the inclusion of denarii of post-Pydna date is
explicable in terms of tighter Roman control after the defeat of
Perseus. Against the historical background, there is every reason to
regard the admixture of currenciesin the Agrinion Hoard as a true
reflectionof the kind of money circulatingin northwesternAetolia in
the middle decades of the second century.This is of some significance,
136Pp. 80-83. Since the Cyme tetradrachms
were unquestionably
struck
beforethemiddleofthecentury,
thereis no justification
ongroundsofchronoforsegregating
themfromthehoardas a whole.Thisis also
logyor condition
trueoftheAtheniancoins; theirwear is whollycompatiblewitha burialin
forbeingprovidedby twolots
the 140's or i3o's. The evidenceis the firmer
forit is surelyimpossible
to dividethetwoseriesoftetradrachms,
ofmaterial,
acceptingthe Cymepieces as part of the originalhoard and rejectingthe
Athenianas an independent
accumulation.
Thesecoinsoflargedenomination
belongtogether.
undoubtedly
As has alreadybeen pointedout (NC 1962,320ff.),the AgrinionHoard
of the New Stylecoinage.On the
supportsthe presentchronology
strongly
tetralaterdatingproposedby David Lewis (NC 1962,275ff.)thewell-worn
wouldhave beenstruckbetween140
drachms,hereassignedto 173/2-169/8,
withdenariiin FDC conditionand
and 136and hencewouldbe contemporary
of Corinthin verygoodcondition.
at least a decadelaterthanhemidrachms
The Burial Date
109
forifwe are dealing witha singledeposit and ifthe revised chronology

of the denarii is correct,the Agrinion Hoard indicates more clearly
than any text the impoverished condition of Aetolia from the late
i5o's on and the extent to which the region was isolated fromthe
rest of Greece.
TABLES
OF
THE
ACHAEAN
ISSUES
LEAGUE
OF HOARDS
CONSPECTUS
Arcadia
....
x Western
Caserta
,
Agrinion
Olympia
vjT0GCC
2
Corinth
9-fSp
Ia
Pegasus-R
Pegasus-KAZ
7
65
EY
17
Dove-NI
20
Dove-PI
---25
8
6
10
14
16
Sicyon
Patras
Trident-^
Trident-EY
Trident-K,
Trident-M,Al
Trident-A I
31
ib
1
1
-
94
13
3
8
19
9
4
4
25
3
18
56
a No. 542, an issue of Corinth,is erroneously

includedin the Antigoneia
section.
mints(NNM 74, No. 145).The reversehas E Y to 1.
Listedunderuncertain
whichare takenforletters,are diebreaks.
and r.; theothermarkings,
IIO
Tables of Achaean League Issues

Arcadia
hi
_
....
x Western ^
Caserta
Olympia
Agrmion
reece
Dolphin-AY, AP
3e
id
ya
Dolphin-An
Dolphin-TEI, AN
Dolphin-A,EE
Dolphin-0E, EE
Later issues
11
17
4
6
13
41
8
6
-
17
---12
-
18
Argos
Wolf's head
14
Harpa
31453
Club
10
4e
Corone
EE
Messene
IIA, EE, X
A, IIA
An
2e
if
NO
EE-OP
X
3e
-
Ie
2e
3
2
6
2
4e
14
24
67
14
5
5
c Listedunderuncertain
mint,
dListedunderDyme.
e ListedunderMegalopolis.
' ListedunderPagae-Megara.
16
15
17
112
Agrinion Hoard
Arcadia
....
, Western
Caserta
,
reece Olympia Agrinion
MEZ
22
AN
2-277
i
i
16
13
22
AY, AYZ
31
39
40
Fulmen-I
1
-
5
2
5
11
1
-
18
7
-
Tripod
Elis
Eagle-NIZ
CCIAN
Ol
Fulmen-, T
Fulmen-, I I
Fulmen-l, A
Fulmen-H , X
Later issues
12
-
22
5
1
75
21
8
16
14h
54
40
34
53
31
i
55
56
12
9
2
7
6
13
10
Antigoneia
W
CO
EY
PAY
21
15
6
74
i
Megara
Cithara-METO
Cithara-APO
Cithara-0OKA
12
23
2
gListedunderHermione.The obversesofNos. 26-27are transposed

on pl. II
ofNNM 74.
hNo. 542,underAntigoneia,
is a coinofCorinth.
113
Arcadia ~
....
, Western
Caserta
,
Qreece Olympia Agrinion
Cithara-AIO
Cithara-HPO
Cithara-YGO
Cithara-riEAA
Cithara-OIAOE
Cithara-AIAO
1
4
---12
4
3
15
iii
12
19
---31
2-2
13
Cithara-HPA
Cithara-AIO
4
3
Cithara-MAT
Cithara-ZflKPA
3-2
-
Megalopolis
Pedum-KA
i1
Syrinx-BEA
12
667
Fulmen-EB, KA
Syrinx-E, Kl
11
10
11
12
18
25
12
Caps-PE
AA-EY
ii
i
ii
5
i
5
-
Later issues
20
34
Caphyae
Athena hd.- n
Athena hd.-t
5
-
Sparta
i The s3niibol
ofthisunillustrated
reverseis describedas a fulmenbut thisis
almostcertainly
an error.
JListedunderEpidaurus.
8
Agrinion Hoard
114
Arcadia
_
....
, Western ^
Caserta
reece Olympia Agrmion
Pheneiis
Caduceus-EY
1
-
12
Pellene
Chelys-A0, 01
Efiidaiirus
Cupping vase-ZAA
Cupping vase-P, IA
Snake-Tl, 1A
Snake-Z, ZIorK
4
-
Cleitor
Helios-AI
Helios-KAH
ii
1
i
3
-
27
-
63
2
i
23
KAH
Aegium
Fulmen-KO
Fulmen-TA
Fulmen-O, TEI
APICTOAAMOC
11
-
Dyme
Head-EN
Fish-AN
Later issues
_
-14

Arcadia Caserta
115
Olympia Agrinion
A egira
GoatTAAY
Goat-AAKI
Goat-EE
Goat-AA
Later issues
21624
-
2
-
10
-
5
ii
-
15
3
10
6
21
13
8
21
22
1
-
Pallantmm
Trident-nAA
Trident-nAA, N
Trident-nAA,t
Tegea
TE
TE-CH
ii6
CD
s
1
'T
^ ST
io ^,^20
-=
< C ^ ai
c<zm*
. .t.-ji- j.- .
M
: :
i i
i !
i i
4f3
<-
uj
[ii
:
v
se, i
LU.....
m
i
SI
t
5
o
- !
S;
!
W, 1
IT ""
73
I
!>
ai
I
i
t
i
6
$
I
.5
I
i
5
o
:
z .SP
i
O
H li
:
<
i-l
cn
PQ =S
O iH
H 6
I
h-1 rt ^
<1 S? S
O
HHs
7
O
o
h-1
o
o w
ffi
o
o
h
<!
*1 vcii
ai
ft Oh
h
aj
WW
*
,L"J
!"
s?
o? < ^
H.C
*4* :
i j
j
i; i!
i i '
i i
ii
il
^ *
z 1
?
s
os
ss
i
-v
-- is
tr 2
^-7
3* lu
&
L-'
S
>r
5
2
a
^
i
i
i
:
;
I
i
i
H
r?
fa
Z
bJD
g
S
I
00 o
H
c 00
UH
^
Z
*
!
i:
i
"hT N
!
"a
TL
S S
,3 15 _. i
j
;
^ < S
"J
i
i
^
<
^
<
E
:
c
g,
.H
<"
.
6
~
g ?
ft
o
I
tou
8s
rt 08
Om
I
!
il
'cT
>r
*
i
<
iii
! i
i !
i i
: :
iii
i i
i i
i i
'-- --*
T+;?
. <
2
<*
i
i
i
:
i
i
i
00 ^ >
^
< "OÔ
O
ru ^ tr'O (Ti<<^
O o 2
<<ICC
L-- 1
i- *j.- *.1- *J
I
vi o
& n
cS
OH
0
S .>
S 1
2 e
SO
*
I
g e
JS
m
tuo Si
g j,
t
S ^
-go
^
?
li
go
Cfl
SS
o
>
<u
^<u S
2
'S -h
0 t
l
I
2
I
- I
tn O
'S
8 S
I
-S
!t
*
t.
4^
t
*
S.g
t:<
a g?
|S<
lir^
i|f
rii
H
>
u~>
Hh
O W73
o
A--.oo
SS-g-S-s
^
03
-S O 'd 3t O
- - I
^
= ^
s .2^8
gS- A,K
S
0
S>_
88 M*
S
g fi *
. o O 8 ,0
^,H
.SA.sB
0 O __,
ndM
gslg'
"3 S S>
'S . ro
t 1 +J
SH
^
.2
oo4S(o
H [S g S"1S
SO
r
S
(ET
c/
1
<
i
o
I55
_
ô,
i
2
3
3
5
iti
i
2j
2
'?
!
s i
Z i
LU !
!>
O
^
2
oj
pH
^ or*
C LULU
< ^7 [il
I
i
!
cr'
0)
C
a,
m
w
^
ft
o
c
SP
S
03
c3
bjo
<D
îsi
CO
2
<p
s
S
<L>
3
0)
PL,
co
2
^ S"
oo vU H N
^1 < ><
a Ca CS rr
^rw
I JI H
IL HJL cL
J
! i
ii
~ I
M
i i
-î.
ii
< co
^
ii
ca
M
iy m
I ;
i I
A
"x-S"*^
pi
Xo0
o O ^ ^ I- *-A < G
^ <r1
2 CL H
w
< X < z-"J
e l--"-""-'
i
5
s
i
Ax
o
^
!
i
A o
P
" 2
'&
<D . O
<1 c io
O M
m
^ ^
n
O <
Lsi--.J
117
APPENDIX
THE DENARII
OF THE AGRINION
HOARD
By Rudi Thomsen and Michael H. Crawford

The thirty-nineRepublican denarii in the Agrinionhoard are :
Syd. no.1
Moneyer
Anonymous with Dioscuri
Cn. Do
Nat
L. Sauf
P. Sula
Natta
Flaus
L. Cup
C. Antesti
C. Reni
A. Spuri
Cn. Lucr Trio
L. Antes Grag
P. Paetus
L. Trebani
M. Opeimi
Cat. no.2
680
681
349
682
382
683, 684
384
386
685, 686
687, 688
390
689, 690
391
404
691
411
692, 693
432
694-699
448
700
450
703
451, 465
704-708
455
701
456
711
716
475
717
477
Q- Pilipus
M.
Aburi
Gem
715
487
M. Baebi Q. f Tampi(l)
702
489
P. Mae Ant
714a, b
492
Ti. Minuci C. f Augurini
712, 713
494
C. Serveili M. f
525
709, 710
1E. A. Sydenham,The Coinageof theRomanRepublic(London,1952).In all
ers' namesaregivenintheforminwhichtheyoccuronthecoins.
lists,themoney
2The denariiare enteredin the catalogueaccordingto the arrangement
outlinedon pp. 127-130.The degreeofwearis not givensinceit cannot,in so
smalla group,be used as a basis forargument.
118
Appendi x-The Denarii
119
The date of burial of the denarii in the Agrinionhoard depends on

its relationshipto otherlate second centuryb.c. hoards, particularly
the hoards of Riccia,3 Maser4 and San Giovanni Incarico,5 with
which the Agrinion hoard displays a striking similarity of composition. The three hoards contain the followingissues struck after
the deposition of the Lacco Ameno hoard:6
Syd. no.
Moneyer
M. Aureli Cota
429
C. Reni
432
Cn. Gel(i)
434
C. Cur Trige
436
438
Anonymous
440, 441, 454 C. Val C. f Flac
L. Iuli
443
L. Atili Nom
444
C. Titini
445
M. Auf Rus
446, 458
A. Spuri
448
Cn. Lucr Trio
450
L. Antes Grag
451, 465
P. Paetus
455
L.
Trebani
456
C. Cur f Trig(e)
459
Sex. Po(m) Fostlus
461
C.
463
Aug
C. Numitori
466
P. Calp
468
Riccia
Maser
62
94
39
38
21
40
14
i
61
2
17
121
162
43
20
San Giovanni
19
18
12
6
15
12
5
23
73
17
6
63
91
24
11
21
8
23
9
2
1
1
-
5
2
4
4
8
1
1
4
i
2
3 ZfN 1884,202.
*NSc 1883,223. The hoardis preservedin the Museo Nazionaledi Napoli,
and thelistincorporates
a numberofcorrections
to earlierdescriptions.
5 RIN 1893,99.
6Annali dell'Istituto
Italiano di Numismatica(1960-61), 153; Rivista di
CulturaClassicae Medioevale(1963),54, n. 130. Togetherwiththehoardsof
Rome (RIN 1907,211),theCani Islands (Bulletinarchologique
des
du comit
travauxhistoriques
etscientifiques
[1916],cciv) and West Sicily (unpublished,
in the Museo Nazionaledi Palermo,of the same date as the Cani Islands
in thesequence
hoard),theLacco Amenohoardprovidesa cleardividing-line
ofthecoinage.
120
Agrinion Hoard
Syd. no.
Moneyer
L. Minuci(u)
L. Post Alb
L. Opeimi
M. Opeimi
Sex. Iuli Caisar
470
472
473
475
476
477
478
480
483
485
487
489
490
492
494
Q. Pilipus
Q. Max
M. Metellus Q. f
C. Serveil
C. Metellus
M. Aburi Gem
M. Baebi Q. fTampi(l)
C. Aburi Gem
P. Mae Ant
Ti. Minuci C. f
496
500
502
505
507
509
511
513
514
516
517
525
527
Augurini
Anonymous
M. Marc
C. Cassi
T. Q.
M Varg
Q Mete
M. Acilius M. f
M. Porc Laeca
Cn. Dom
T. Clouli
N. Fabi Pictor
C. Serveili M. f
Ti. Vet
Riccia
39
28
30
32
72
78
36
1
64
170
28
63
46
43
69
68
36
65
41
25
42
50
71
52
60
Muser
15
4
4
3
3
i
4
4
25
58
11
15
13
San Giovanni
i
i
2
2
3
3
3
1
4
14
2
5
-
21
10
4
17
7
7
4
5
i
29
3
2
3
3
2
1
3
2
1
6
i
The Riccia hoard, by far the largest of the three hoards, consisted
of 168 victoriates and 3,067 denarii; the Maser hoard was made up
of 1204 coins and the San Giovanni Incarico hoard contained about
800 coins, of which only 202 were preserved for identification.It is
fairlycertain that no common denarius issued in the years preceding
the deposition of the Riccia hoard is missing fromit. The Maser
Appendi x-The Denarii
121
hoard can also be regarded as having a veryfullrepresentationof the

issues struckbeforeits burial. The Maser hoard contains 4 denarii of
M. Porcius Laeca, 1 of Q. Maximus and 4 of C. Metellus, while the
Riccia hoard has none of these issues. Since the Riccia hoard usually
has a much largernumberof specimens of the various issues than the
Maser hoard, the Riccia hoard must have been deposited a short
time beforethe Maser hoard, at a time when at any rate the denarii
of M. Porcius Laeca, which are very common,had not yet come into
circulation. On the basis of the fourthof the San Giovanni Incarico
hoard preserved,it seems most probable that it was buried at about
the same time as the Maser hoard.
The absolute chronology of the three hoards is less certainly
established. However, an indication of the period of their burial is
affordedby the fact that none of them includes any specimen of the
serrate denarii struck by L. Porcius Licinus, L. Cosconius M. f, L.
Pomponius Cn. f, M. Aurelius Scaurus and C. Malleolus C. f (Syd.
520-524). These denarii, bearing the names of L. Licinius and Cn.
Domitius as well as those of the issuing magistrates,are shown by the
evidence of the hoards to have been struck several years before 100
b.c.7 and Mattinglysuggested that the issue was occasioned by the
foundationof Narbo Martius in 118 b.c.8 For, as is evident fromthe
carnyx formingpart of the reversetype, the issue alludes to the wars
against the Gauls whichended with the defeat of the Allobrogesand
theirally, King Bituitus of the Arverni,by Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus
(Cos. 122 b.c.), and Q. Fabius Maximus (Cos. 121 b.c.). In Witte's
opinion,9shared by Babelon,10Bahrfeldt11and Grueber,12the warrior
of the reversetype is intended to be Bituitus himself.This theorywas
contested by Kubitschek,13who preferredto identify the warrior
7The groupfirstoccurscompletein the Pozoblancohoard (Th.Mommsen,
Histoire
dela monnaie
romaine
[Paris,1865-75],II, 131).Betweenthedeposition
of thishoardand theissue of Piso and Caepio in 100b.c. (see below,n. 19)
thereweresomefortyregularmoneyers.
8JRS 1922,231.
9 Bulletinde la SocitdesAntiquaires
deFrance(1882),348.
10Description
etchronologique
desmonnaies
de la rpublique
romaine,
historique
I, 463.
11ZfN 1895,62.
12CoinsoftheRomanRepublicin theBritishMuseum,I, 184,n. i.
13NZ 1913,223.
122
Agrinion Hoard
with Mars, as Eckhel14and Mommsen15had already done. On either

supposition,however,the coins display an appropriate allusion to the
foundationof Narbo, which was a result of the defeat of Bituitus and
which was surnamed Martius. L. Licinius Crassus, whose name
appears on the coins underdiscussion,is associated with the founding
of the colony.16As a general rule, however,a colony was not founded
by one man and so it is a reasonable assumption that the other name
on the coins, Cn. Domitius, indicates Crassus' colleague in the founding of Narbo Martius. As a son of the conqueror of Bituitus, the
young Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus will have been a most suitable
memberof the commissionto found the colony in Gaul.
Sydenham,while largely accepting Mattingly'stheory,held (p. 64)
that the coins were not actually struck until 112-109 b.c. But, as
Mattinglystressed, their connection with the colony would on this
view almost be lost.17 Therefore, Sydenham's dating of the coins
depends on the contention that the colony was founded later than
118 b.c. H. B. Mattingly,arguing mainly fromthe order of events in
Cicero's account of the career of Crassus, placed the foundation of
Narbo Martius in no b.c.18 However, his supporting arguments,
of the denarius and on
based on a conjectured date forthe retariffing
are
not
and, of course,
convincing
prosopographical speculation,
Cicero's language is far frombeing compatible solely with a chronological arrangement of his subject. Once Sydenham's unjustified
ascriptionofthe issue of Piso and Caepio to 96-94 b.c. is abandoned,19
14Doctrinanumorum
V, 196.
vetevum,
15Geschichte
desrmischen
Mnzwesens,
573.
16Cicero,Brutus.160.
17Proceedings
oftheBritishAcademy(1953),244.
18Hommages
Collection
Albert
Latomus,LVIII, 1159.
Grenier,
19Sydenhamheld (NC 1940,164) thatthe smallamountof coinagebetween
theissueof Piso and Caepioand thatof D. SilanusL. f of 90 b.c. (in factof
91 b.c.,NC 1964,142)couldnotcovermorethana veryfewyears.Thereis no
reason,however,to supposethat coiningduringthe Roman Republicwas
and it does notseempossibleto makeit so at theexpense
alwayscontinuous
a coinstruckby a Caepioas quaestorsometimebeforetheSocial
ofdetaching
in 100b.c. The coinageoftheperiod
Warfroma Caepio'sknownquaestorship
in questionis in any case moreextensivethan Sydenhamthought.The evidenceof the Gioia dei Marsihoard(NSc 1899,146),preservedin theMuseo
Nazionaledi Chieti,makesit clearthattheissuesof quinariiof T. Cloulius,
P. Sabinusand C. EgnatuleiusC. f werestruckafterthe issue of Piso and
Caepioand notbefore.
Appendix-The
Denarii
123
his reasons for dating the issue for Narbo Martius to 112-109 b.c.
disappear and both colony and coins may reasonably be placed in
118 B.C.
With this point in the absolute chronologyestablished, it is possible to work back to the date of deposition of the Riccia, Maser
and San Giovanni Incarico hoards. The arrangement of those
moneyers who struck in the interveningperiod is facilitatedby the
hoard evidence which, for this period, is both full and consistent.
The arrangementwhich emergesis as follows:
S
^ ^
S
'
J
I
I^
<N
JvS
^
*3 s
I -2 S
s
8
'S
g
fc^
Moneyer
Syd.No.
g
^
Qa
Mn. Acili Balbus
i
x
2
498
1
2
1
2
532
3
Q. Fabi Labeo26
17
Cato
i
C.
i
2
5
13
417
M. Fan C. f
2
2
419
3
g
M. Carbo
1
423
13
5
2
421
3
3
Q. Minu Ruf
61
410, 414 C. Pluti
3
Carb
i
i
2
415
3
Tulli
M.
531
112x54
M. Fouri L. f Phili
1
1
16
529
3
13
Mar
C.
F.
L.
R.
1
2
541
Q.
8
i
534, 544 M. Sergi Silus
i
530
Anonymous
20Vjesnikza Arheoloiju
i HistorijuDalmatinsku
(1905),Suppl. 1-5, 1.
21NSc 1909,299.
22Unpublished,
in theMuseoNazionaledi Siracusa.
23Unpublished,
in theANS.
2*NSc 1914, 172. A groupof twenty-five
denarii,broughtto the Museo
Nazionaledi Napoli laterthanthe rest,are clearlyshownby theirwearand
patinationto be extraneousto the hoard.Amongthemis the denariusof
T. Deidius.The figures
in the table do notincludetheextraneouscoins.
25See above, p. 121,n. 7.
26The Lucolihoard(Annali1957, 79),otherwise
similarin composition
to the
Maserhoard,includesone wholedenariusand one fragment
of Q. Fabius
Labeo. The bulkof thewholepiecesin thehoard,however,are plated.Prestock,it is oflimiteduse forchronology.
sumablya forger's
124
Agrinion Hoard
Althoughthe detailed arrangementstill depends partly on stylistic

considerations and is not thereforeentirelycertain, one important
fact is evident: at least the moneyers from Mn. Acilius Balbus to
M. Tullius had already struck before the appearance of the issue
forNarbo Martius. Not only is this not present at all in the Zasiok
hoard, which closes with the issue of M. Tullius, but it is only partially representedin the hoards of Gerenzago, Terranova di Sicilia,
Roncarolo and Maddaloni. Clearly this issue was struck just a little
earlier than the period of their burial and does not thereforeoccur
complete beforethe Pozoblanco hoard.27
With the knowledge that there were at least nine issues, most of
them large, between the burial of the Maser and San Giovanni
Incarico hoards and the strikingof the issue forNarbo Martius, it is
possible to postulate an almost certain date for the former.In his
discussion of the Riccia hoard,28Mommsen held that it was buried
in connection with the commotion among the Italian allies which
culminated in the revolt and destruction of Fregellae in 125 b.c.
Whetheror not his explanation is correctforthe hoard which he was
considering,it is perfect for the hoard of San Giovanni Incarico,
unearthed seventeen years afterthe publication of his paper. For the
burial place of this hoard was in the very territoryof Fregellae.
Since it has emergedthat it closes some little time before 118 b.c., it
cannot reasonably be doubted that the occasion forits burial was the
siege of Fregellae by the Romans.
Mattingly,whileaccepting the terminusantequem of 118 b.c., maintained that the burial took place at the end of the I20,s.29This dating
resultsfromMattingly'sassociation of the somewhatworndenariusof
Ti. Veturiuscontainedin the hoard withthe insurgentFregellae rather
than with the mintat Rome, a hypothesiswhichcan hardlybe correct.
27The highincidenceofdie-cutters'
mistakessuggeststhattheNarboMartius
issuewas actuallystruckat Narbo. L. LIC. CN. QOM. occurson denariiof
L. CosconiusM. f (G. L. Fallani Coll., Vatican 2555), L. PomponiusCn. f
(BM 1193 [Rome],etc.) and M. AureliusScaurius(G. L. FallaniColl.,Vatican
2552),L. LIC. CIA.DOM. on denariiof L. PomponiusCn. f (Alba di Massa
hoard,RIN 1913,23, ANS), L. LIC. CN. QM. on denariiof L. Pomponius
Cn. f (G. L. Fallani Coll.) and L. LIC. CN. ODM. on denariiof M. Aurelius
Scaurus(Vatican2554).
**ZfN1875,43.
29ANSCent.Pubi. (NewYork,1958),452.
Appendix-The
Denarii
125
A more serious objection to 125 b.c. as the burial date of the San
Giovanni Incarico and Maser hoards is raised by Sydenham's interpretationof the denarii of Cn. Domitius. Sydenham (p. 63), following
Grueber and Babelon, describes the reverse type of these denarii as :
"Victory in biga r., holding whip; below, a man attacking a hound."
He notes: "The reverse type commemorates the victory of Cn.
Domitius, probably the fatherof the moneyer, over the Gallic tribes
under Bituitus, who is said to have employed packs of enormous
hounds to terrifythe Roman soldiers." In view of the ancient tradition of Bituitus' war hounds,30a denarius with a representationof
a man fightinga hound, struckby a Cn. Domitius in the later second
centuryb.c., must referto the victoryof Cn. Domitius over Bituitus
in 121 b.c. However, the animal with which the man is fightingis
not a hound, but a lion31and the issue thus bears no referenceto
Bituitus. The natural dating of the three hoards to the period of the
revolt of Fregellae may thereforebe regarded as a firmbasis from
which to argue to the date of burial of the denarii in the Agrinion
hoard.
The table on pp. 127-130 based on thehoard evidence,establishesthe
relative order forthe later denarii. The issues in the Maser hoard of
later date than the close of the Syracuse hoard are judged to fall into
two parallel series which are indicated in the table by the alternate
use of roman and italic type. The issues whichformthe firstseries are
alike in a numberof points of detail as well as in general similarityof
style and fabric of both silver and bronze. That the series derives
from the issue of C. Serveilius M. f may be seen from the form of
spike adopted for the helmet: an integral part of the design on the
denarii of C. Serveilius M. f - absurd and out of place on those of
C. Curiatius f Trigeminus and L. Trebanius. With the issue of P.
Calpurnius, the point of attachment of the wing on the helmet is
placed much furtherback and with that of Q. Pilipus a star is engraved on the flap,featureswhich last to the end of the series.
The second series is of a much more uniformquality than the first,
but has fewerlinks in details of design. The most noticeable is the
30Orosius.V.14.1.
31As wasrealizedbyMommsen,
Geschichte
desrmischen
Mnzwesens,
523,and
NZ 1913, 229.
Kubitschek,
126
Agrinion Hoard
border of dots on the reverses of the firstsix issues, a feature taken

over fromthe reverse of C. Serveilius M. f.
A numberof chronologicalindications, both absolute and relative,
make it impossible to place eitherseries afterthe other.The extended
formof the name on no. 22 was clearly used to distinguishthe issue
fromthat of C. Augurinus,presumably the moneyer's elder brother.
The type ofthe dodrans, a cantingtype ofthe gens Caecilia, must have
been invented by M. Metellus Q. f and taken over by C. Cassius. But
if the series beginningwith the issue of Ti. Minucius C. f Augurinus
cannot precede that beginning with the issue of C. Curiatius f Trigeminus, neither is the reverse arrangement possible. The erratic
representationof nos. 42 and 43 in the Riccia and Maser hoards is
explicable only if they fall near the close of the hoards. The moneyer
who struck no. 34, presumably the consul of 123 b.c., can hardly
have struck later than his youngest brother,the consul of 113 b.c.
and doubtless the moneyerwho produced no. 47.
If a parallel arrangementof moneyersin the period before125 b.c.
is accepted, it remains to consider exactly what formthe parallelism
took. It does not seem probable that part of every triumvirate
workedin each series, since there appear to be complete triumvirates
withinthe series (e.g., nos. 33-35 and 41-43). A system of two triumvirates every year, one to each series, conflictswith what we know of
the Roman constitution.The only remaining possibility is that the
moneyersstruck in each series in alternate years and that the workshop which was not actually producing coins spent the firstpart of
its freeyear preparingblanks, the second part, afterthe appointment
of the moneyers,cutting dies. It is notable that all the issues immediately preceding the appearance of the parallel series are very
large and the labour was presumably found to be too much for one
workshop. However, the way chosen to alleviate the situation was
inevitably rather wasteful and there is no evidence that the system
remained in forceafter 125 b.c.
Although the order presented here cannot, of course, be regarded
as exact in every detail, no significantlydifferentarrangementseems
compatible with the evidence at present available. And although it
is not yet possible to assign every moneyer to his proper year, the
numberof issues which fall between the latest in the Agrinionhoard
Appendix-The
Denarii
127
and the latest in the Maser hoard suggests that the formershould
be regarded as having been struck about 135 b.c. This year or one
very close to it may thus be accepted as the date of burial of the
denarii in the Agrinionhoard.32
%>
2
O
S
SS
"S
Oh
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Cn. Gel(i)37
C. Reni
Anonymous with crescent
C. Cur Trige
M. Aureli Cota38
A. Spuri39
6
2
,
1
;
On
8
s
1
^s
?s
i
3
i
eo
si
s
I
OQ
^
&
^
3
8
i
i
*
-S
o
01
v
sco
39
94
21
38
62
18
19
6
12
5
17
32MichaelCrawford
forthe
believesthata date ofabout130b.c. is preferable
ofthe denarius
hoard. In any case,theretariffing
latestissuein the Agrinion
cannothave occurredin the Gracchanperiod,as is nowgenerally
held,but
mustbe placedin the 140'sb.c.
33Unpublished,
in theMuseoNazionaledi Chieti.
34Unpublished,
in theMuseoNazionaledi Siracusa.
35NSc 1896,495; RIN 1912,321, n. 3. The hoardis preservedin the Museo
Nazionaledi Napoliand theearlynucleuscan easilybe distinguished
by the
patination.
36NSc 1932,395.
37A quadransofCn. Gelliusoccurred
intheVerolihoard(NSc 1931,542) as the
However,sincetheonly
onlypieceofan issuelaterthanthatofC. Antestius.
other moneyersto strikebronze betweenC. Antestiusand L. Antestius
GraguluswereC. ValeriusFlaccus, Sex. PompeiusFostlusand Ti. Veturius
und Berichtigungen,
passim),thisfactis not
Nachtrge
(see M. von Bahrfeldt,
of muchuse. Two pointsmay be made in favourof placingtheissueof Cn.
Gelliusimmediately
aftertheclose oftheLacco Amenohoard.Not onlycan
ofthebead and
thelaurel-wreath
ofhisdenariusbe regardedas a development
reel borderused by AnniusRufus, but it mayexplainthe reductionin the
of the
size of head on the groupof issues whichfallsbeforethe retariffing
denariusand whichis largelyrepresented
in the Petacciatoand Pachino
hoards.
88Note the necklaceof pendantson part of the issue,copiedby M. Baebius
Tampilus.
39Bahrfeldt(Nachtrge
undBerichtigungen
, I, 241) reportstwovariantsofthe
denariusofA. Spurilius.BothhaveVictoryin a bigaon thereverse(thedie is
thesameinbothcases),onehasXVI ontheobverse.Boththepiecesinquestion
are
(nowin theMedagliareCapitolinoand seenin 1967byMichaelCrawford)
clearlyforgeries,
probablyancient.
128
Agrinion Hoard
O
2
O
a^
Oh
7. C. Val C. f Flac
8. M. Auf Rus
9. L. Iuli
10. L. Atili Nom
11. C. Titini
12. P. Paetus40
13. Sex. Po(m) Fostlus41
14. Ti. Vet
15. M. Baebi Q. f Tampi(l)
16. Cn. Lucr Trio42
17. L. Antes Grag43
18. C. Serveili M. f
19. C. Cur f Trig(e)44
.1
^
4
o
8
Oh
^
s^
^
^
S
i
Cg
.g
.s*
&
^
22
i
i
2
4
65
2
8
12
281
13
7
4
4
1
1
5
2
M iso*
fe
-s
O
oo
-8
ft ^
40
2
15
14
i
61
43
91
60
12
170
121
162
52
63
17
21
3
58
23
73
29
40The evidenceof thePetacciatoand Pachinohoards,lackingnos. 13-16 of

thistable,makesit clearthatX re-emerged
as markofvalue aftertheuse of
ofX afterthe use of$on the issuesof L.
XVI. Comparethere-appearance
AntestiusGragulusand C. ServeiliusM. f.
41The heterogeneous
natureofthisand thenextthreeissuesmakesit difficult
to determine
theirrelativeorder.All,however,
appearto be earlierthanthose
of L. AntestiusGragulusand C. ServeiliusM. f. Those of Fostlusand Trio,
withconventional
headsof Roma,cannotbe placedimmediately
beforethat
in style
of C. Curiatiusf Trigeminus
considerably
(see below)and also differ
and fabricfromtheserieswith as markofvalue,beginning
withthedenarii
ofTi. MinuciusC. f Augurinus.
That partoftheissueofM. BaebiusTampilus
whichcloselyresembles
thedenariiofC. ServeiliusM. fseemsin everyrespect
simplerand earlier.The bronzeofTi. Veturiusis closerto thatofC. Valerius
Flaccusand Sex. PompeiusFostlusthanto any ofthelatergroups.
42Thepresenceon bothobverseandreverseofa borderconsisting
ofa lineand
dotsis curiousand unexplained.
43The issuesof L. AntestiusGragulusand C. ServeiliusM. f seemto go very
as thelatestintheSyracusehoard.Bothadopting
-)as markof
closelytogether
value,theirbronzeis identicalin styleand fabricand is alonein thisperiodin
beingofa verylightweight.
44Considerations
withobverseTRIGE
ofstyleindicateclearlythatspecimens
are nothybrids,
but genuinevariants.
Appendix-The
O
2
S*
O
<5
I^
20. L. Tre(bani)
21. C. Aug45
22. Ti. Mimici C. f Augurini
23. C. Aburi Gem
24. P. Mae Ant
25. C. Numitori
26. P. Calp
27. L. Minuci(u)
28. M. Marc47
29. M. Aburi Gem
30. L. Post Alb
31. L. Opeimi
32. M. Opeimi
33. M. Acilius M. f
34. Q. Mete
35. M. Varg
36. Sex. Iuli Caisar
37. Q. Pilipus
38. T. Clouli48
39. Cw. Dom
40. Anonymouswithelephans head
41. M. Metellus Q. f
Denarii
Oh
S2
rt
^?
^
cq
129
.O
s
-<s
"^<S>
N? S
<0
S
^
I
fc> -a
01
oq
^
'S^
05
i
2
246
2
6
8
13
11
15
1
8
15
21
25
4
4
3
7
7
17
2
3
i
5
3
4
i
2
2
1
2
20
24
46
28
63
1
23
39
69
64
28
30
32
25
41
65
7
78
50
42
4
36
45The formofspikeon thehelmeton thisissue differs

fromthaton thetwo
issues,but its associationwiththemis assuredby the close simipreceding
larityamongthebronzeofthethree.The borderofdotson thereverse,used
in theseriesto whichthisissuebelongs(nos.30 and 37 are
onlysporadically
the otherissues whereit occurs),presumablyderivesfromthe issue of C.
ServeiliusM. f.
46The brockagein theBanzi hoardis a pieceofTi. MinuciusC. f Augurinus.
47The thirdmember
ofthistriumvirate
wasprobablyM.Fabrinius,
whostruck
onlybronze.
48The typeofT. Clouliusis clearlya crudecopyofthatof C. ServeiliusM.f.
Agrinion Hoard
130
^
"S
ft,
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
C. Serveil49
Q. Max
N. Fabi Pictor
C. Cassi
T. Q.
C. Metellus
M. Porc Laeca 50
ft,
?
^1
co
S
eg
I
'
S*
b
^
O
te;
1
7
68
36
~
ôo
^
i
1
10
4
4
4
49Mommsenheld (Sitzungsberichte
Akademieder
der kniglich
preussischen
zu Berlin, 1883,1152) that the denariusof C. ServeiliusreWissenschaften
portedfromthe Riccia hoard was reallya piece of C. ServeiliusM. f and
that the issuewas notstruckuntilafterthedepositionof the Maserhoard.
to confusean issue of C. Servedifficult
However,it would be extremely
wouldinvolvesplitting
s theory
M.fandMommsen'
iliuswiththatofC. Serveilius
a morethanprobabletriumvirate.
60Notethatthehead on thedenariiofM. Rorcius.Laecahas onlytwolocksof
hair fallingdown the neck,a featuresharedby specimensof Mn. Acilius
Balbus.
thediscussion
We shouldliketo thankMargaretThompsonforentrusting
forvaluhoardto us and HaroldB. Mattingly
ofthedenariiin theAgrinion
able commentand criticism.
PLATES
SICYON
II
SICYON
Ill
ARGOS: 49-56. CHALCIS: 57-68.
IV
CHALCIS
CHALCIS
VI
CHALOS: 106-117. HISTIAEA:118-122. BOEOTIA: 123-128.
VII
BOEOTIA:129-133. PHOCIS:134. LOCRI:135-U9. AENIANES:150-151.
VIII
LAMIA:152-155. OETA: 156. THESSALIANLEAGUE:157.

BOEOTIAN LEAGUE:158-160. AEGINA:161. ATHENS:162-164.
IX
ATHENS
ATHENS
XI
ATHENS
XII
ATHENS
XIII
ATHENS
XIV
ATHENS:193-197. CYME: 198.
XV
MEGALOPOLIS
XVI
MEGALOPOLIS
XVII
MEGALOPOLIS
XVIII
MEGALOPOLIS
XIX
MEGALOPOLIS
XX
ACHAEAN LEAGUE(EARLY)
Corinth:240-242;Sicyon:243-250;Patras:251-254.
XXI
Patras
XXII
Patras
XXIII
Patras
XXIV
Patras
XXV
Patras:300; Argos:301-308;Corone:309-312;Messene:313-317.
XXVI
Messene
XXVII
ACHAEAN LEAGUE (EARLY)

Messene:326-329; Elis:330-338.
XXVIII
ACHAEANLEAGUE(EARLY)
Elis
XXIX
Elis:347-353;Antigoneia:
354-357.
XXX
Antigoneia
XXXI
Antigoneia
XXXII
Antigoneia
XXXIII
Antigoneia
XXXIV
Antigoneia
XXXV
Antigoneia
XXXVI
Megara
XXXVII

Megara
XXXVIII

469-470.
466-467;Sparta:468; Uncertain:
Megara:463-465;Megalopolis:
ACHAEAN LEAGUE(LATE)
471-472.
Megalopolis:
XXXIX
472-474; Elis:476-481.
Megalopolis:
XL
Elis:482-501; Caphyae:502-505.
XLI
Megara
XLII
Megara:521-528; Pheneus:531-533; Pellene: 534-537;
Epidaurus:538-542; Cleitor:543; Aegium:544.
XLIII
Aegium:545-548;Patras:550-563;Dyme:564-565.
XLIV
Dyme:567; Aegira:568-577;Corinth:579.
XLV
Corinth:580-585;Sicyon:586-594.
XLVI
Sicyon:594-600;Argos:601-605;Messene:606-608.
MESSENE:609.
XLVII
ACHAEAN LEAGUEAND MEGALOPOLIS

Stylistic
Comparisons
XLVIII
ACHAEANLEAGUEAND MEGALOPOLIS
Stylistic
Comparisons
XLIX
ACHAEAN LEAGUEAND MEGALOPOLIS

Comparisons
Stylistic
AETOLIA
LI
AETOLIA
Lil
AETOLIA
LIII
AETOLIA
LIV
DENARII
LV
DENARII
DENARII

The Agrinion Hoard / by Margaret Thompson

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Agrinion Hoard / by Margaret Thompson

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NUMISMATIC

Libraryof CongressCatalogueCard Number68-21876

TABLESOF THE ACHAEAN

To this record should be added one tetradrachmof Cyme,which was

centurydate preceding the large issues of Megalopolis, the Achaean

Caserta Hoard - A . Lbbecke, "Ein Fund achischerBundesmnzen,"

Dot upper and lowerr.

37. 2.49 '

40. Graffito(K) upper r. 2.64 f

46. 2.42 47. Obverse

Obv.: Female head r.

79- 3-31 Tridentbelow

80. 3-35 *Caduceus below

85. 3.28 86. 3.34

100. 3.21 <105. Same reverse die as 104b.

117- 3-25 *HISTIAEA

Obv.: Head of Maenad r.

122 a. Same reverse die as 121.

Obv.: Boeotian shield.

127. Legend illegible. 2.41

8Babelon ( Trait11.3,275-276)regardsthe A as a mintdesignationand

Rev.: BO I Cantharus; above, fulmen.

142. Head l.AY and spear below.

145. Spear below. 2.81 f

Obv.: Head of Athena r., wearing crested Corinthian

Rudder. 16.76 f T. 28 (new reverse)9

Nike; star above owl. 16.70 t T. Not (new obverse

Grain-ear. 16.69 t T. 55 (new reverse) 187/6

171. TTOAY-TI Palm behind owl; ? on amphora; H 1.

173. AMM-AlO Cornucopiae; TIP 1. field. 16.59 t T. 114

Cock; marking uncertain. 16.55 f T. 130

Cock; TTP1. field. 16.25 t T. 13rd

Cock; TIP 1. field. 16.41 f T. 132a

Cock; SM below. 16.73 | T. 134 (new

Forepart of horse; Z on amphora ; 2<t>

1 2' [iq aytia

Forepart of horse; ? on amphora; AP 1.

184. AHMH-IEP Helmet; A on amphora; MH/0Y15below.

185. AHMH-IEP Helmet; A on amphora; E16below.

Eagle; A on amphora; EY below. 16.62 f

190. KTHZI-EYMANike; H on amphora; EN below. Uncleaned. 16.71 f T. 271 (new reverse)

Nike; M on amphora; TTP1. field. 16.56 t

192. KTHZI-EYMA Nike ; ? on amphora; ME 1. field.16.76 f

Nike in quadriga; E/A(?) on amphora;

201. 2.54 <Obv.: Laureate head of Zeus 1.

204. a. 3.13 f; 2.19 (broken) 4

205. a. Same reverse die as 204b.

b. Same reverse die as 222 d.

240 a. <jS]below. 2.39

2.23 -> 241 a. Wreath tied above. 2.35 f

243. 2.30 ->

Corinthand Sicyon each produced a single issue during the early

New obverse dies

19As is thecase at othermints,insignificant

257. * to 1. 2.42 ->

E Y to 1. and r. ; tridentto r. below

K to I. ; 3Mto r. ; tridentto r. below

271. Over Ambracia?21 2.40

M above; A I to I. and r. ; tridentto r. below

b. Same reverse die as 290 c.

c. Same reverse die as 291c.

AY above; A P to I. and r. ; dolphinto r. below

Taking the trident coinage first,it is evident that it forms an