This is an owl purchased through eBay in April. I've spent some time researching this coin, which is an imitation of the Athenian intermediate owls of the 4th century BC. As with many imitative owls this coin was a little tough to nail down, given the wide range of styles, plus the fact that this coin has the typical AOE ethnic on the reverse, as so many have to increase their acceptance by the public. The vast number of owls attributed to Sabakes have Aramaic inscriptions on the reverse. However, this is not always the case, based on a coin offered by CNG. Here's the CNG coin: To quote: "EGYPT, Achaemenid Province. temp. Artaxerxes III Okhos – Sabakes. Circa 343/2-333 BC. AR Tetradrachm (23mm, 16.97 g, 10h). Imitating Athens. Head of Athena right, with profile eye, wearing crested Corinthian helmet with pi-style palmette / Owl standing right, head facing; olive sprig and crescent behind; AΘE to right; all within incuse square. CNG 111, lot 411; otherwise, unpublished. Toned, bankers’ marks on obverse, test cuts on reverse. VF. Very rare. This remarkable Athenian type tetradrachm combines an obverse of the earliest pi-style type with the reverse of the classical period types, but with the A of the ethnic placed high in the upper right corner, a characteristic that defied convention at Athens since the early 5th century. On closer examination, the style of the obverse die is a perfect match to those used from the Type III tetradrachms of Artaxerxes III through the Type III tetradrachms of Sabakes struck in Egypt (cf. Van Alfen, Owls, pl. 7, 121–35, and Anderson & Van Alfen pl. 50, 39-41). The style of the owl is also consistent with that found on those pieces, and the flan is of similar thick composition. The sole difference is that this coin bears the ethnic of Athens, and the reverse type is in an incuse square. While it is tempting to suggest that this may be the earliest of the imitations struck under Artaxerxes, the relative chronology of the dies in the Persian series does not support such a placement. An attractive alternative is that this coin was part of a parallel series struck under the Achaemenid administration that retained the city ethnic, perhaps to satisfy the requirements of the intended recipient of this coinage." Here's my owl: 16.84 grams There are similarities and differences between the two coin, but the total impression is that this owl is one belonging to Sabakes. Among the differences are the somewhat lower placement of the alpha on the reverse of this coin compared to the CNG owl; some stylistic difference in the rendering of the owl's wing and breast; the thick dot in the middle of the theta (θ) on this coin; the larger tendrils on the helmet for this coin. The similarities include the rendering of the olive leaves and crescent on the reverse; the large line of dots on the obverse from the bottom of the earring around the neck guard of the helmet; the style of the Pi on the obverse; the general shape of the flans with their shallow reverse incuses. I have ruled out the possibility that this coin is an Athenian owl from 393 BC. There are too many stylistic differences, including the modeling of the portrait, for this coin to fall in that category, and it is most certainly not a later Athenian intermediate "folded flan" owl. There is not sign of folding on the edge. This owl also has an interesting countermark which I am trying to decipher. There's also a punch mark on the reverse. So, what do you think? Are there any Sabakes owls out there with AθE on the reverse? Please post your owl imitations, your comments and anything else - I appreciate your input, as always. Thanks
While I suspect both of these coins are from Egypt, I don't believe either should be attributed to Sabakes. In the CNG coin case, their time period could very well be right, but as they note themselves that period can be attributed to multiple rulers/satraps. One possibility that I read recently (sadly I couldn't find the attribution), is that the unmarked Athens tets were minted by warlords along the Nile. When I read that statement, I doubted it given the number of dies and the quality. However, these issues seem to have fewer dies and lower quality, so perhaps the paper was wrong to classify all Egyptian unmarked tets in that basket, but correct in that some of them were minted that way. Note that there are papers such as this one that provide some information on the countermarks. Comparing your coin vs the CNG coin, IMHO they're not from the same time period. The first has a characteristic test cut seen on practically all Sabakes tets from that period. Sabakes clearly labeled his own tets, but that seems to indicate their coin was in circulation in roughly the same time period. Your coin has a punch and much more elaborate bankers marks (those from Sabakes' time seem simpler). I have no idea when that would place your coin, except to say it's unlikely the same time as Sabakes. I suspect further research into the bankers marks may provide some insight. For reference, here's my Sabakes tets that I've posted before.
That indeed might be true. CNG seems to be making the case for Sabakes owls with the AθE reverse, but like many things in this field of imitations the documentation is in a state of flux. Thanks for the post, and that owl is really nice!
There are two owls from Vcoins (Cerberus) that could parallel your coin: There is also this one, which has a context and a provenance: this coin was found in a hoard in the Gaza strip. The hoard contained more than 350 tetradrachms, none of which was a Persian period imitation (Artaxerxes or Sabakes). For this reason the hoarding can be dated 353-343 BC, before the Persian retook Egypt. This very strange imitation, struck on a large cast (not folded!) flan, seems to belong to the same imitation class as the two Cerberus coins. It was the only one of this sort among more than 350 tets - no reason for suspecting a local production - but it was in excellent condition, almost uncirculated.
Thank you, GinoLR, for the information. I've seen those two owl offered by Cerberus Coins on VCoins before. Actually they've been listed for a considerable period, at least three years. Yes, they do share some characteristics with the OP coin. I've been dissuaded from attributing that coin to Sabakes. Really, there's no way to make a firm attribution to that satrap. Instead, I'm thinking in two directions: 1) the coin could be an Arabian imitation, or, 2) it might be a late Athenian owl, possibly third century BC. Since I posted the OP owl and created the thread last year, I obtained another example, through VCoins, from Zurqieh, of the UAE. Here are the two owls side by side. The one on the left is the coin I posted last year, the one on the right a more recent purchase, also from 2022. Two eastern owls, 4th century BC, 16.86 grams (l) 17.09 grams (r). I'm not sure if there is a die match for the obverse and reverse for these two coins. I'm not very good at making a determination, but they seem pretty close. The coin on the right was struck on a somewhat wider flan. Also, both coins appear to have folded flans: The Arabian link seems to be based on style, especially of the owl, which is similar to the second owl from Cerberus. On the other hand, the folded flan would suggest an Athenian origin, unless other mints adopted this practice. Could these two owls be from the later 3rd century, when Athenian coinage became very sporadic and varied stylistically? These are interesting questions to ponder any time of the day, for me. Any comments are always welcome!
These dies are more than close, it's definitely a double die-link. No doubt! Both coins circulated in the Near-East, for countermarks are extremely frequent in near-eastern hoards, but not in Greek or Sicilian hoards. We can state that countermarks were struck in Egypt (there are hieroglyphic countermarks), Arabia (there is an Arabian K countermark), Syria-Phoenicia (there are Phoenician letters countermarks), Cyprus (there is at least one Cypriot syllabary countermark). Of course most are simple designs that cannot be attributed to a particular zone. Being struck on folded flans, your two die-linked owls must be bona fide Athenian tetradrachms of the Pi II style, minted c. 353 BC in the great restrike. I would think the exceptionally elegant classical style of the obverse is a reminiscence of the early 4th c. owls classical style, like those from the Lentini hoard dated 390s-360s BC.
Thank you so much for the information, especially the countermarks. Sometimes I make a stab at trying to identify an Aramaic or Phoenician character, but far more often than not I'm way off base. I am totally mystified by hieroglyphic countermarks, which I assume is the countermark on the obverse cheek of the first coin, so I really appreciate your assistance. I am inclined to agree, based on the obvious folded flans, that these coins are Athenian, but were they fit in the coinage history of that mint is not clear to me. They might be Pi II owls or even more likely Pi III types, since the outer tendrils are separate from the central one and run parallel to it. However, the reverse owls, stylistically are quite different compared to the examples shown in the Forum Ancient Coins article. Speaking of folded flans, I was able to purchase this interesting quadridigité style owl last year. It's not a pretty coin, but the elongated palmette is very bold and the folded flan is quite apparent, especially on the reverse. Athens Quadridigité style owl, circa 286 - 262 BC, folded flan. From Roma E-Sale 103, lot 245. 17.06 grams
Nice collection of owls! Attic bona fide ones, and imitations... Have you also Lihyanite stylized imitations?
Yes, I have been able to acquire some examples, but they are costly, especially the ones that are silver or billon. These are utterly fascinating coins, with their modernistic depictions of Athena and the owl - almost what one would expect Picasso to create in one of his abstract works. Northwest Arabia, Lihyanite Kingdom, silver or billon owl, 2nd-1st centuries BC. From CNG eAuction 529, lot 348. 13.02 grams In the sequence of Lihyan coinage, this is my earliest example. There is some die wear and surface porosity present, but it is overall an appealing and decently centered coin. The first character of what is supposed to be "AOE" on the reverse is apparently not an A, but something else, not sure what though. Northwest Arabia, Lihyanite Kingdom., AE owl, 2nd-1st centuries BC. From CNG eAuction 528, lot 188. 12.70 grams This is bronze coin, although I suppose some might call it billon, although if it is, the silver content must be almost negligible. Although dark and crude, the reverse is notable for the ethnic and olive branch/moon positions transposed. Northwest Arabia, Lihyanite Kingdom, AE owl, 2nd-1st centuries BC. This coin came from Shick Coins, Israel. Northwest Arabia Lihyanite Kingdom, AE owl imitation 2nd-1st centuries BC. 7.4 grams A later coin and very crude. Purchased on eBay in 2021. This coin depicts the owl's body facing left.
