The numismatic chronicle and journal of the Royal Numismatic Society

42 J. MAVROGORDATO.
No. 14. It is not absolutely
certain whether there
is an amphora or not before the Sphinx on coins of
this type, although there is no sign of it on any of the
three pieces
here described. The question must be
considered to be still subjudice, however, as indications
are to be observed on two specimens at Berlin that
suggest an amphora.
In any case I think that it is as well to place the
type at the beginning of this group on account of
the resemblance it bears to No. 13, although inferior
as a work of art. The same trick of representing the
Sphinx with its hind legs half bent, as if in the act of
rising, may be noticed in both. It is also, on the
whole, the most archaic looking of all the types
assembled under this period. It is difficult, too, to be
positive about the composition of the wreath. Ivy
or vine-leaves were certainly to have been expected,
but there may have been some reason for using an
olive-wreath which the design suggests more than
anything else.
No. 15. This seems to be a rare type, and the two
coins cited are the only specimens I have seen. They
are both from the same dies. The type is remarkable
for its unusually rough execution, although it shows
the earliest signs of that massiveness in the bodily
forms of the Sphinx which characterizes many of the
subsequent issues.
There is
amphora.
no doubt here about the absence of any
No. 16 is a very difficult coin to attribute. The
style and execution are good, and the weight being
Chian there seems no reason to discredit its right to
a place among the island's issues. But the vase-shaped