Messana tetradrachm

[planetetour]

Dear experts,

Your opinion about this coin ?

https://www.hjbltd.com/#!/inventory/item-detail/ancient-coins/110380

 

 

[skubydu]

7 ore fa, planetetour dice:

Dear experts,

Your opinion about this coin ?

https://www.hjbltd.com/#!/inventory/item-detail/ancient-coins/110380

 

 

 

Sicily, Messana; ca. 420-413 BC, Tetradrachm, 28.74g. SNG ANS-372, Rizzo-8, BMC-42, HGC-790. Obv: Nymph Messana appears draped and facing left as she guides a mule-drawn two‑horse chariot in the same direction. She holds the reins in her left hand and a goad in her right, with the legend ΜΕΣΣΑΝ above and two dolphins facing each other beneath the ground line. Rx: ΜΕΣΣΑΝΙΟΝ accompanies a hare shown leaping left; below it, an ear of grain with two leaves extends to the left.Biga driver flatly-struck. Virtually MS

[skubydu]

Per uno studio della moneta é importante partire dagli esemplari conosciuti e dai riferimenti indicati nel testo.

 

Ans 372

g. 16,95 

Trovo strano non abbiano citato il testo della Caltabiano, testo base per la catalogazione di Messana

caltabiano 511

 

[skubydu]

Sng Lockett 823

[skubydu]

Sicuramente nel testo di berk c è un errore nel peso. Non può pesare 28,74 g.

Modificato 9 Dicembre da skubydu

[roby14]

42 minuti fa, skubydu dice:

Sicuramente nel testo di berk c è un errore nel peso. Non può pesare 28,74 g.

 

Esatto...la stessa moneta nel passaggio in asta da Astarte un anno e mezzo fa riportava  (Silver, 28.74 mm, 17.18 g)

per quello che vale il mio parere, è una bellissima moneta che non lascia spazio ad alcun dubbio. Se devo fare un appunto è solo alla tirata a lucido a cui è stata sottoposta...

[Lelouch]

Ciao a tutti,

I have noticed that many auction houses label Messana (the female figure on the coins) as a nymph. If possible, could you let me know if Caltabiano also labels Messana as a nymph?

[numa numa]

Hello Lelouch

I checked the Caltabiano text: she speaks for these issues of a feminine ‘auriga’ . At least at a superficial check I could not see any mention of a nymph ( also a bit incongruous if I may, for a nymph to be represented with  auriga functions ). 

Modificato Mercoledì alle 15:38 da numa numa

[Lelouch]

Grazie mille, Numa.

I was wondering, but Caltabiano has confirmed it, there is actually no nymph named Messana. The auction houses are all wrong and made her completely Messana up. No ancient texts refer to a nymph Messana either. Thucydides writes as well the Anaxilas renamed Messana after Messine, not after a nymph like Kamarina or Himera.

[numa numa]

For sake of precision I checked how these tetradrachms had been described in the past in older collections and found out - for example - that in the De Luynes collection the reverse was described as:

Bige des mules conduit par la deesse eponyme Messana

In the Locker Lampson (1923) the auriga  was described as a “female figure (Messana?)” with the question mark providing at least the benefit of the doubt.

from these quick references it must  at least recognized that the Messana nymph identification of the auriga has not been altogether invented by subsequent dealers

 

 

[Lelouch]

Ciao Numa,

Admittedly I was being a bit facetious, most auction houses just repeat references maybe a bit misquoted sometimes. 

I also tried to work out where it was from but could not figure it out.

BMC Sicily also mentions Messana, but still no nymph.

The reference as you well mentioned does not say nymph just "female figure (Messana?)".

Where does the nymph attachment to Messana come from? I could not find a proper reference with the word nymph attached to Messana. The older references are correct by being vague and not calling her a nymph, even though they do identify her as Messana. The modern references like Caltabiano and Buceti are also correct saying  auriga (but not Hoover HGC 2 though (but Hoover copies CNG references which incorrectly label Messana as nymph Messana)).

At some point someone attached Nymph, instead of just a female figure named Messana. I do believe the female auriga is named Messana, just that she isn't a nymph.

Modificato giovedì alle 23:28 da Lelouch

[numa numa]

You are right Lelouch the old catalogues and repertoire references quoted above refer to either Messana’ as such or eventually ( De Luynes) “ deesse Messana” … however no ‘nymph’ mention as such which is possible a misquote that has been subsequently repeated by later authors reiterating a conceptual typo as is often the case in numismatic scholars and authors who simply copy/paste old references without taking the pain to fact-check them

good catch anyway 👍

[Brennos2]

@Lelouch, this is a very interesting observation.

Messana, the female figure driving the mule-biga, is described by most of the numismatic scholars as a civic personification of the city (e.g. Imhoof-Blumer, Nymphen und Chariten auf griechischen Münzen), or, by others, as a city-goddess (e.g. "Stadtgöttin" in Roscher’s Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie).

To my knowledge, there is no clear literary or cultic evidence that Messana was regarded as a nymph in the strict sense. However, her association within the nymphic iconographic sphere — notably Pan, a water source, and the nymph Pelorias — may explain why some authors identify her as such.

In fact, Messana is explicitly called a nymph by modern numismatists, not only by Hoover, but also by Westermark (the coinage of Akragas, p. 137), who writes: “At Messana the legend MESSANA designates the nymph driving her biga.”

This usage seems to reflect an iconographic and functional interpretation, rather than a securely attested mythological or cultic tradition.

 

[numa numa]

To Brenno’s excellent remark ( and wonderful tetra with Pan and hare on the reverse) I would only add that the city name was derived by the Peloponnesians settlers, Messenians, who repopulated the city, Zankle (sickle) after it had been seized by Rhegion tyrant Anaxilas in late 5th century.

Apparently the identification of the auriga with a nymph and altogether the nymph Messana purported iconography looks to be confined solely to the numismatic context 

 

 

 

 

Modificato 1 ora fa da numa numa

[Lelouch]

In my opinion though we should look to Caltabiano who is the expert on Messana and says female auriga. Even if Westermark and Hoover say nymph, I believe they have been misled by the modern auction houses.

Please show me a single old reference pre-Caltabiano that says nymph. And why should we trust any reference after Caltabiano who wrote the book on Messana and is the expert on this coinage. I have looked through over a dozen works myself.

The signifance of these nymphs Kamarina, Himera and others are the role of the eponymous nymph where the city is named after that nymph. However as @numa numa says we know the true etymological reason as Anaxilas renamed Messana based on the the Messenians. There is no role here for the eponymous nymph. Thus this seems to be wholly fictitious modern nymph attribution. It is very convenient though because it almost just works which is why auction houses latch unto it.

Hoover as well I know makes frequent misattributions as he directly copies the CNG references even if he does cite for example Caltabiano. Why does he say nymph if he cites Caltabiano himself? Hoover is not an expert on this area, he is a generalist having written books on all of Greek coinage. He heavily relies on CNG and does not check the sources he himself cites.

Hoover says eponymous nymph, but like I said above which is quoted from Thucydides there is no eponymous nature here. We know 100% without a doubt from true literary evidence of why Messana is called Messana, Anaxilas renamed it based on the Messenians. So Hoover here is just wrong.

Buceti who is still more general, but only focused on Sicily wrote the Italian equivalent of HGC 2 and says female auriga.

It is interesting Westermark says nymph but again every auction house does which is a major issue. But even if she says it, her work is new and nobody is citing a work on Akragas for a coinage for Messana. All the auction house citations are to Caltabiano's work.
Both Hoover and Westermark's opinion don't matter for on this topic, we should look to Caltabiano as the auction houses do.

I think we should see Messana as the personification of the city as Imhoof-Blumer said, but that is if anything.

There is absolutely no reason to see her as nymph regardless of the Pan coin. That is 1 coin among many and there are other coins that display Pan without a nymph. I don't see how this one link implies that Messana is a nymph, just because Pan is often a companion of ones. NAC in this listing for example don't suggest that Messana is the nymph on the obverse https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=12672810 (and their major citation is once again Caltabiano)

The nymph Pelorias is real and attested in ancient texts. And, the nymph Pelorias is from a different period altogether as well and is not connected to the female auriga with Messana legend, unless I unaware of a coin with them both. If so please show it to me. But otherwise no connection can be drawn between them.

Modificato 2 ore fa da Lelouch

[Lelouch]

As obvious I don't speak Italian, but perhaps one of the members here could write to Caltabiano and ask her opinion on this. But based on her work she does not find a nymph.

Modificato 2 ore fa da Lelouch

[Archestrato]

Sìnce on the online catalogue of cultural heritage of the Italian Ministry of Culture the auriga is described as nymph Messana and the bibliographic reference given is to Georges Vallet 1958 (I guess in “Rhégion et Zancle: histoire, commerce et civilisation des cités chalcidiennes du détroit de Messine”), I would suggest checking his work for the possible origin of the definition of nymph referring to the auriga on the coinage of Messana.

Modificato 2 ore fa da Archestrato

[Lelouch]

Grazie Archestrato. Will try to find it, but doesn't seem to be free online so might take a while.

But really, should we not all look towards Caltabiano as the expert on this coinage? Perhaps she would even supercede the Italian Ministry on Cultural Heritage too.
Her book on Messana is recent being written in only 1993. And as shown above the other numismatists after her either have weak (Hoover) or no arguments (Westermark).
The great Rizzo before her are also says "Biga guidata da auriga muliebre". So would there really be new evidence he was unaware of that that this Georges Vallet would be, but then Caltabiano in 1993 would no longer be?
Her whole work as is well is focused on iconography and the spread of symbols. Nymphs are significant so would she not have been able to "find" the nymph Messana if there really was one.

[numa numa]

Fully agree Lelouch, Caltabiano is undoubtedly the foremost reference for the coinage of Messana 

[Archestrato]

Does professor Caltabiano mention Georges Vallet in the bibliography of her work on the coinage of Messana?