Punic Hoard

[bpmurphy]

http://news.discovery.com/history/pu...ed-110812.html

Barry Murphy

[vozmozhno]

"They decided to hide the treasure on the bottom of the sea, in relatively low waters, in the hope to recover it later. Indeed, near the coins we found a large stone anchor," Abelli said.

Why couldn't it simply be that the coins and anchor both came from a sunken/grounded ship?

[bpmurphy]

I assume because there's no ship in the water also. There could be plenty of other reasons though besides buried to be retrieved later. I would think it would be quite difficult to bury something under water and then try to find it again later unless the spot was well marked, in which case it wouldn't be a very good hiding place.

Barry

[Jacktat]

An archaeologist with some numismatic background would also probably reach different conclusions.

First, the AEs were minted in Sardinia during the 1st Punic War. They were probably being transported to Sicily (or Carthage), which would account for the single type (different symbols) with head of Tanit/horse head.

Second, I agree the coins were very unlikely to be deposited intentionally. More likely, they were dumped under duress during an engagement with a Roman ship or even during a storm. A storm could even account for no ship at the site if the anchor broke free.

Still, a very interesting find related to the 1st Punic War!

John

[djmacdo]

Sixty-eight feet down would hardly be easily recovered. A professional diver might get that deep, but his time there to recover anything would be measured in seconds. About 30 feet is the limit for most people surface diving without modern breathing gear. It certainly sounds like an accidental loss to me. A ship could easily have broken up there and then been washed away.

Mac

[livingwater]

The Atocha treasure that Mel Fisher found was driven by a storm that left its gold, jewelry, coins and gems spread over a distance of over forty miles long as the ship broke up and sank.