The numismatic chronicle and journal of the Royal ... - IndianCoins.org

242 J. MAVROGORDATO.The die-positions do not include any placed f< ,which will have been observed occasionally in thethree previous bronze types and in the one that I taketo be the contemporary of these drachms.No. 75. These few bronze issues being characterizedby the large O, by the absence of a symbol, and mostof them by letters without " apices ", I am suggestingthat they may be the contemporaries of the drachmsjust described. They are not all quite consistent inthese points, but it is difficult to decide where else toplace those that show divergences.Some of the issues with the name APIZTOHAHZhave a prow on the obverse in an unusual position,exactly like the one on the drachms of type No. 69with MENEKPATHZ. They also provide the onlyinstance known to me among Chian coins of a sigmashowing the square form C, intermediate betweenZ and C.The groupis connected with type No. 72 on the onehand and No. 78 on the other by the different designsshown on the coins signed by the magistratesmust rankZliZTPATOZ and HrHM[N]. 'Hywwas a new name in the Chian annals, thoughitmaywell be only a variant of the form 'Hye/xcoi' recordedin the last period. Since there is no mention in the"Wellenheim Cat. of a wreath on the reverse of the coinwith the name AIAHMO - -, which seems to be unique,it must necessarily fall into one of the four bronzegroups belonging to this period. The reading of thename seems very uncertain.No. 76 a is an unusually uniform type for the periodand looks as if it had been separated from its predecessorsby a few years. Even the weights agree in