DOI Artikel:
Maspero, Henri; Edgar, Campbell Cowan; Breccia, Annibale Evaristo; Lefebvre, Gustave; Spiegelberg, Wilhelm; Legrain, Georges: Le musée égyptien
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9426#0071
to the classification of Svoronos, belong to the reign of Ptolemy Soter and the
earlier period of Ptolemy Philadelphia. The silver ones, which are much more
numerous and varied, have as yet been only partly cleaned, but the great majority
of them seem to fall within the satrapy and reign of Soter. Most, if not all, of
the other articles must have been made in the period covered by the coins; or
in other words they mav be dated within a generation of 3oo B. C.
The fact that Toukh was a border fortress suggests the thought that part of
the treasure may have come from abroad, — in the way of plunder, for instance,
from a Syrian campaign. And it is curious that many of the gold coins (I cannot
speak for the silver ones) are of types which both Poole and Svoronos assign to
Cypriote and Phoenician mints. But it is safe to say that far the greater part of
the treasure must have been made in Egypt. The gold amulets and statuettes
(not published here), as well as many of the silver articles, are purely Egyptian
work. The plates and bowls too with the lotus patterns (see pis. XXVI-XWIII)
were certainlv made in this country. Further, several of the things which are
mainly Greek in style bear some indication of local origin. Thus one of the
altar-covers is decorated with heads of Bes (like some contemporary vases in
blue-glazed faience), while the other (see pl. XXIV) has a calvx of Nvmphaea
lotus round the top. There is more room for questioning the provenance of the
gold ornaments on plates XXII, XXIII, which do not seem to have anything pecu-
liarly Graeco-Egyptian about them. Several of them indeed (like some other
pieces of jewellery from Egyptian sites) have a remarkable resemblance to work
of the same period found in the south of Russia. There is another connection
between the arts, or rather the antiquities of the two countries, which makes an
interesting parallel. The decorated wooden coffins from the Russian coast belong
to a class of which fragments and whole specimens are found in the cemeteries
of Alexandria Naukratis and Memphis, both groups being- evidently derived
from the same source, which is thought by Watzinger to be Ionia The affinity
between the gold-work from the two regions is equally clear, and in this case too it
may be noted that much of the jewellerv from the Russian tombs is believed by
good judges to be of Ionian workmanship. Butas regards the actual place of manu-
facture, apart from the origin of the stvle, the ornaments from Toukh are quite
as likely to have been made in Egypt as anywhere else. The Sphinxes on the
small bracelets are of just the same type as those which form the legs of the
11 ' See Bulletin de la Société archéologique d'Alexandrie, n° 8, fig. 35.
'2' Holzsarcophage aus der Zeit Alexanders.
earlier period of Ptolemy Philadelphia. The silver ones, which are much more
numerous and varied, have as yet been only partly cleaned, but the great majority
of them seem to fall within the satrapy and reign of Soter. Most, if not all, of
the other articles must have been made in the period covered by the coins; or
in other words they mav be dated within a generation of 3oo B. C.
The fact that Toukh was a border fortress suggests the thought that part of
the treasure may have come from abroad, — in the way of plunder, for instance,
from a Syrian campaign. And it is curious that many of the gold coins (I cannot
speak for the silver ones) are of types which both Poole and Svoronos assign to
Cypriote and Phoenician mints. But it is safe to say that far the greater part of
the treasure must have been made in Egypt. The gold amulets and statuettes
(not published here), as well as many of the silver articles, are purely Egyptian
work. The plates and bowls too with the lotus patterns (see pis. XXVI-XWIII)
were certainlv made in this country. Further, several of the things which are
mainly Greek in style bear some indication of local origin. Thus one of the
altar-covers is decorated with heads of Bes (like some contemporary vases in
blue-glazed faience), while the other (see pl. XXIV) has a calvx of Nvmphaea
lotus round the top. There is more room for questioning the provenance of the
gold ornaments on plates XXII, XXIII, which do not seem to have anything pecu-
liarly Graeco-Egyptian about them. Several of them indeed (like some other
pieces of jewellery from Egyptian sites) have a remarkable resemblance to work
of the same period found in the south of Russia. There is another connection
between the arts, or rather the antiquities of the two countries, which makes an
interesting parallel. The decorated wooden coffins from the Russian coast belong
to a class of which fragments and whole specimens are found in the cemeteries
of Alexandria Naukratis and Memphis, both groups being- evidently derived
from the same source, which is thought by Watzinger to be Ionia The affinity
between the gold-work from the two regions is equally clear, and in this case too it
may be noted that much of the jewellerv from the Russian tombs is believed by
good judges to be of Ionian workmanship. Butas regards the actual place of manu-
facture, apart from the origin of the stvle, the ornaments from Toukh are quite
as likely to have been made in Egypt as anywhere else. The Sphinxes on the
small bracelets are of just the same type as those which form the legs of the
11 ' See Bulletin de la Société archéologique d'Alexandrie, n° 8, fig. 35.
'2' Holzsarcophage aus der Zeit Alexanders.