ROMAN/Provincial Egypt; Antoninus Pius CE 138-161 with an interesting provenance(?)

AE Drachm; 31mm, 20.85 g, 12h. Dated RY 18/CE 154-155, Alexandria mint.

Dattari (Savio) 2845 legend
K & G 35.660 (same)
Emmett  1663 v

O: partial legend, laureate bust of Antoninus left. 

R:  L I-H across field. Serapis std left with left arm extended holding scepter in his right at feet to left is Cerberus std l.

Ex: Edward T. Newell (1886-1941) Collection with "his envelope" (per dealer) presently undocumented provenance and not supported by documentary evidence at the present time. Reliability of this aspect of the provenance is in question without further supporting evidence.

Photos of "his envelope" as received:

Front of envelope with mixed ink and pencil markings, the pencil markings appear to be more recent perhaps.
dimensions 58 x 55 mm 
Note the marking "AP 22" in lower right. This also appears on the inside edge of the interior (Sergl) holder.

Reverse of the envelope with the flap open, note the manila holder inside. Note the detailed description of the reverse of the coin in question. (the yellow color is due to a lighting issue rather than the actual color of the envelope which is as it naturally appears in the photos above and below)

Reverse of the envelope with the flap closed, note again what appears to be more recent pencil markings. Greek inscription as noted is not extraordinary as indicated by dealer. Also note the description of the obverse. 

Interior items from envelope. Obviously different handwriting on the interior holder, but "cabinet card" bearing Dattari #2845 appears to have been written by same hand that inscribed the outer envelope.
dimensions 53 x 53 mm. 

Reverse of same, noting that the reverse has a 1937 copyright and is marked "H. SERGL, New York City" raises a potentially interesting prospect to the provenance. It may be that this coin was acquired from the NYC coin dealer Hans J. Sergl (1886-1951) from his shop at 147 Fulton St in Manhattan sometime after 1937. This would perhaps rule out acquisition by Newell of this particular coin during one of his Egyptian journeys earlier in the century. On the other hand, it could just be that the holder was purchased from Sergl to house the coin after the fact, but these theories require further research before any firm conclusions can be made. 
Hans J. Sergl 1886-1951

Also, on the basis of the limited handwriting samples I have seen from Newell, I am not convinced that the handwriting on the outer envelope is his, and again this requires further research as well.  

Another provenance provided by the dealer was "Ex: Alex G. Malloy Collection". A Malloy "light blue envelope" was provided (I have seen a number of these envelopes over the years from past dealings with Malloy) and it appears that the coin was not so much a part of a formal collection as it was more likely unsold stock as there is a #334 separately affixed to the envelope along with the description. This number should make it relatively easy to determine in which Malloy auction this coin was listed. Again, further research is needed. 

Updates to follow....  

22 June 2015 Update:
A visit to the ANS revealed that I was correct in my assumption that this coin was not Ex: Malloy Collection, but it was in fact Ex: Malloy MBS XXVI (30 November 1988) lot # 334 noted "Ex: E.T. Newell Collection" selling along with other examples from that same collection. When I have a chance to upload the scans I will post them here. As for the envelope being Newell's as described by the dealer, I reviewed examples of correspondence and notebooks from the Newell archive which included samples of Newell's handwriting as well as that of his wife during my visit with the assistance of Librarian Dave Hill (who I thank for his help and time), and we both concurred that the handwriting on the envelope provided with the coin is neither Newell's nor his wife's. 

Malloy's MBS price matched that found on his envelope "$100" and the condition was listed as "abt VF" which the coin clearly is not. So the working provenance as it now stands is possibly: (info thought to now be correct is in italics)

from the looks of the envelope perhaps an early anonymous 20th century collector owned the piece prior to Sergl having it as stock, based upon the handwriting on the envelope.
Ex: Hans J. Sergl (NY) sometime around or after 1937
Ex: E.T. Newell before 1941 in question without supporting documentation.
likely collection duplicate deacquisitioned prior to 1988.
Ex: Alex G. Malloy MBS XXVI (Nov 1988) lot 334
since it was sold, it likely had nothing to do with Malloy or his collection again and belonged to an anonymous collector or so between 1988-2015
In 2015 it was sold by another auction during which time I purchased the piece.

It should be noted that I looked through Malloy MBS catologues dating between 1988-2004 until I found the correct reference. I used to receive these catalogues and occasionally made purchases from the Malloy auctions or fixed price lists, so the exercise brought back some memories.

Cover of Malloy Catalogue for MBS XXVI

excerpt from catalogue showing info re Lot 334 (this coin)

catalogue photo 

Update 5 July 2015:

Taking a closer look at the script on the envelope, I would hazard a guess that the handwriting may be Sergl's due to the script bearing a slight resemblance to German influence in the script stylings of the time? 

Update 3 September 2016:

Based upon discussions with a well known dealer in NYC, the Newell provenance could likely have been "made up" in his words by someone prior to the November 1988 MBS.  This unconfirmed aspect of the provenance is unsupported at the present time by reliable documentary evidence and therefore cannot be connected to Newell without further research.

The only certain information that appears to exist for this provenance is the dealer from whom I purchased this coin, the MBS evidence from 1988 and the likelihood that the coin originated in the late 30's or early 40's from Hans Sergl a NYC coin dealer. No definitive evidence other than an assertion that it is Ex: Newell in the 1988 MBS supports that information and this is not sufficient in and of itself to support such a provenance. More information is needed as stated.