A posthumous Alexander III tetradrachm from Ake. Need help with year.

[robinjojo]

Here's a coin that came in yesterday, one that I have been waiting with anticipation for a few weeks.

This is a tetradrachm of Alexander III, minted in Ake.  That much I am certain of.  There is a year on the reverse, but I am having some difficulty determining the Phoenician numerals, which I assume run from right to left.  I saw a similar coin, with what appears to be the same year on Harvard's collection website.  They date the coin from 309/8 BC, but they do not provide the Era of Ake year.  Here's a link to that coin:

https://harvardartmuseums.org/collections/object/191617

Using the logic of linking Harvard's information related to that coin to the Era of Ake, which I read started in 347/6 BC, I think my coin's year is year 40.  This is an educated guess.  

I also understand that the year dating of these coins changed in year 39, with the introduction of a new year 8 (308/7 BC), apparently due to the the arrival of Antigonos in the region, in 315-314 BC.

Here's an example of a tetradrachm with the new year system:

https://www.ma-shops.com/henzen/item.php?id=75921

Here's my coin:

Alexander III, posthumous tetradrachm, Ake Mint, Era of Ake year 40 (309/8 BC).

Price 3295

16.90 grams (Attic standard)

Can anyone help with the date? 

Also, please post you Ake Mint coins or anything else that strikes your fancy.

Thanks!

 

Edited January 11 by robinjojo

[Kaleun96]

Nice coin! I love the dating on these types, so important to the Alexander series as a whole along with the dated types from Sidon.

I believe the Harvard coin is year 38 as it mentions "Reverse Inscription: AK 38" but you can also add up the numerals. The horizontal lines are 10 and the vertical lines equal to 1, so we get 3 horizontal (=30) plus 8 vertical (6 on the same line, 2 are down by the knee I think) to total 38. At the beginning of the top line, to the right of the 3 horizontal lines, are the ayin-kaph letters. Price and, I believe, Newell originally thought they stood for Ake but the consensus now is that these coins belong to Tyre and instead denote Tyre's King Azemilkos. That shift in attribution does affect the dates somewhat. Price has year 38 as 309/8 BC while the attribution to Tyre would have it as 312/11 BC.

Quote

 

Using the logic of linking Harvard's information related to that coin to the Era of Ake, which I read started in 347/6 BC, I think my coin's year is year 40.  This is an educated guess.  

I also understand that the year dating of these coins changed in year 39, with the introduction of a new year 8 (308/7 BC), apparently due to the the arrival of Antigonos in the region, in 315-314 BC.

 

As you mention, the dating reference changed after Year 39 and started from Year 8, so with your coin we can rule it out being Year 40 as we see it has the horizontal lines in the date, which we know represent decades (i.e. above Year 10 at a minimum).

Here's what I think I can make out on yours. So at least Year 36 but I think there's probably 6 vertical lines on the top row, one is just off-flan on the left side, so Year 37 is a possibility too. We can confirm that based on a reverse die match to this example of Price 3297 (Year 37): https://numismatics.org/collection/1947.98.309

So in Taylor's new dating scheme for the attribution to Tyre, that would make it 313/12 BC 🙂

[robinjojo]

8 hours ago, Kaleun96 said:

Nice coin! I love the dating on these types, so important to the Alexander series as a whole along with the dated types from Sidon.

I believe the Harvard coin is year 38 as it mentions "Reverse Inscription: AK 38" but you can also add up the numerals. The horizontal lines are 10 and the vertical lines equal to 1, so we get 3 horizontal (=30) plus 8 vertical (6 on the same line, 2 are down by the knee I think) to total 38. At the beginning of the top line, to the right of the 3 horizontal lines, are the ayin-kaph letters. Price and, I believe, Newell originally thought they stood for Ake but the consensus now is that these coins belong to Tyre and instead denote Tyre's King Azemilkos. That shift in attribution does affect the dates somewhat. Price has year 38 as 309/8 BC while the attribution to Tyre would have it as 312/11 BC.

As you mention, the dating reference changed after Year 39 and started from Year 8, so with your coin we can rule it out being Year 40 as we see it has the horizontal lines in the date, which we know represent decades (i.e. above Year 10 at a minimum).

Here's what I think I can make out on yours. So at least Year 36 but I think there's probably 6 vertical lines on the top row, one is just off-flan on the left side, so Year 37 is a possibility too. We can confirm that based on a reverse die match to this example of Price 3297 (Year 37): https://numismatics.org/collection/1947.98.309

So in Taylor's new dating scheme for the attribution to Tyre, that would make it 313/12 BC 🙂

Thank you so much!  After breakfast I will take a closer look at the coin. 

Like you I really enjoy these dated tetradrachms, very unlike most Alexander III tets.  

[PeteB]

Alexander III, the Great; 336-323 B.C. AR tetradrachm (28mm; 16.90 gm; 7h). Ake mint. Obv: Hd. of Herakles r. wearing lion’s skin headdress. Rev: ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ. Zeus seated left on backless throne holding eagle in right hand & scepter in his left. To left, under right forearm, date:  III III - = -I O above II; CY year 38? [309/8 BC).  This coin is Price 3295a, as pictured (Volume 2, Plate XCIV), but the text in Volume 1 does not match the picture. The above date inscription for Ake is not to be found in Price's text. Price 3292 has the matching first line but lacks the "II" in a second line. Price 3293 matches the first line inscription on this coin, but has only "I" in the second line, rather than "II."