Jump to content

Lifetime coinage of Alexander the Great


kapphnwn

Recommended Posts

In answer to @Severus Alexander Over the years I have read of the debate, however I did not catalogue it that much, as up to about 12 years ago (thereabouts) I was firmly in the camp of the traditional chronology as put forward by Price. Thus once I became convinced by the overwhelming evidence of the chronology as proposed by Troxell and Le Rider (and others)  I had to change my views and look at the coinage far more closely.  Thus up to recently my primary focus was on the Staters and Tetradrachms. For a few years now I considered that the vast majority of the drachm coinage from Asia Minor were posthumous. In this I followed Le Rider. I really only started to look closely at the drachm coinage about two years ago. From that time I tried to collect as much literature as I could. What I have done thus far is the fruit of that study. 

  As to my theory. So far most of the theories are based on what I could see as the "top down" approach. That some authority decreed that this region produce primarily drachms. The question is; why would they do that? Who would be in charge of the entire region long enough for this to happen? My theory is more of a "bottom up" approach. That individual cities decided to produce a coinage that would be more acceptable within the region and could be acceptable outside. As I continue I will look more closely into this. Thank you for your response.     

Edited by kapphnwn
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a conference held in Calgary Alberta Canada on Saturday April 29 at the University of Calgary. There will be a number of speaker many of whom will be speaking on aspects of the coinage of Alexander III of which I am one. (Don't let that dissuade you) If any of you can do attend. This is the attached PDF  Symposium program.pdf  

Screenshot2023-04-17011415.png.a13d77687e0f07b2e4e41f090b4e6ce6.png

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALEXANDER III MAKEDONWN LIFETIME - Tetradrachm

[IMG]
[IMG]
BABALONIA, Babylon
Alexander III Lifetime
AR Tetradrachm / Stater (or Dishekel)
Minted ca. 323-328 B.C.
24 mm, 16.3g
Obv: Ba’al seated left holding scepter
Rev: Lion walking left, control mark Г above.
(Control mark Г was minted during Alexander III Lifetime)
Ref: Ref: BMC Arabia XXII no.1
Comment: "This type was discussed by Martin Price in his article "Circulation at Babylon in 323 BC," in the book "Mnemata: Papers in Memory of Nancy M. Waggoner." He asserts that a reengraved die clearly shows the "lion staters" with gamma followed the ones with delta. "They are probably shekels on the local standard." (page 67). He dates them to the lifetime of Alexander, because they were present in a hoard with deposition dated to 323/2. He doesn't give the earliest possible date explicitly, but mentions that Mazaeus was governor until 328 and issued coins, so I infer Price would put them at or after 328. So you can say "Struck 323 or before, under Alexander the Great." Quoted from @Valentinian
Ex: @Ancientnoob

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DAD… LIFETIME PHILIP II

[IMG]
Makedon
Philip II
AR Tetradrachm
Pella mint
LIFETIME
353-349 BCE
Zeus
Horse star spearhd
Le Rider 102

SON… LIFETIME ALEXANDER

[IMG]
Makedon
Alexander III
Lifetime Tet Myriandrus mint-
Alexandria near Issus

Edited by Alegandron
Spelling
  • Like 9
  • Heart Eyes 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Alegandron said:

ALEXANDER III MAKEDONWN LIFETIME - Tetradrachm

[IMG]
[IMG]
BABALONIA, Babylon
Alexander III Lifetime
AR Tetradrachm / Stater (or Dishekel)
Minted ca. 323-328 B.C.
24 mm, 16.3g
Obv: Ba’al seated left holding scepter
Rev: Lion walking left, control mark Г above.
(Control mark Г was minted during Alexander III Lifetime)
Ref: Ref: BMC Arabia XXII no.1
Comment: "This type was discussed by Martin Price in his article "Circulation at Babylon in 323 BC," in the book "Mnemata: Papers in Memory of Nancy M. Waggoner." He asserts that a reengraved die clearly shows the "lion staters" with gamma followed the ones with delta. "They are probably shekels on the local standard." (page 67). He dates them to the lifetime of Alexander, because they were present in a hoard with deposition dated to 323/2. He doesn't give the earliest possible date explicitly, but mentions that Mazaeus was governor until 328 and issued coins, so I infer Price would put them at or after 328. So you can say "Struck 323 or before, under Alexander the Great." Quoted from @Valentinian
Ex: @Ancientnoob

As a side-note, I've been looking into these types a lot over the past few months (I even catalogued your example here as I think you posted it on CoinTalk previously) and there are a lot of unknowns and issues with the current attributions and dates. There's yet to be a die study or even a comprehensive overview of all the types. Nicolet-Pierre comes close but misses a bunch, Price only focusses on those in the Iraq 1973 hoard, Iossif & Lorber only focus on their Commerce 2003 hoard, and Mitchiner misses a tonne as well and mostly just plates them.

I know Iossif & Lorber have cast doubt on Price's dating from "Mnemata", mainly due to concerns that the hoard he studied was not intact and may have been compromised by additions of other coins that weren't found with the hoard. I haven't yet decided fully on where I would date these myself, there's not a lot of evidence to firm up the dates besides the other coinage minted at Babylon and the dates for those coins are still being changed or debated all the time.

My best guess at the moment would be a date somewhere between 324-317 BC. Partly because the crossed legs of Baal on the obverse would point to a post-326 BC date if we are to assume the Zeus of the Alexander tetradrachms followed, or led, the Balakros staters from Tarsos in crossing of Baal's legs on those types. It is unlikely this characteristic originated in Babylon given the best evidence we have suggests that Babylon didn't start minting Alexandrine tetradrachms until about the first cross-legged types started appearing in the Levant. When crossed-legged Zeus did appear at Babylon, it wasn't until Babylon Group III near the beginning of Philip III's regency.

The other bit of evidence I would point to is the following type, Nicolet-Pierre 8, which has the same gamma-reverse but with different control symbols on the obverse. This type surely followed Nicolet-Pierre 7 (your type) and the interesting thing about N-P 8 is that nearly all of the obverse control symbols parallel those found on Babylon Group II to Group IV tetradrachms. Group II is currently dated to 325-323 BC but there are some who would downdate it further to starting in 323 BC or so. The following type, Nicolet-Pierre 9, also parallels some of the controls found on Group III tetradrachms struck under Philip III between 323-317 BC.

So based on that, and the types that need to fit in the sequence before this gamma-type, I would err on the side of it being a late-lifetime early-posthumous type.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I was planning to begin a discussion on the Alexander coinage of Miletos, however it became increasingly obvious that I needed to first take a detour and look at the Zeus/ Eagle coinage for reasons that will become evident later. The principal denomination of this series is this coin a tetradrachm in the name of Alexander and struck on the Thraco- Macedonian standard. AGAIN NONE OF THESE ARE MY COINS

Tetradrachm of Alexander III Thraco-Macedonian standard Uncertain Mint 332BC?? Obv Head of Zeus right laureate Rv Eagle standing slightly to the right head left wings folded Price 143 14.33 grms 26 mm Triton XXIV Lot 463 January 19 2021

4-1E0CO0.jpg.3bc9b65e5ed9ccf568104173a96e2dd6.jpg

Drachm of Alexander III Attic Standard Amphipolis Mint??  332 BC?? Obv Head of Herakles Rv Eagled standing right head reverted on long torch Price 151 4.28 grms  17 mm Triton IX Lot 754 January 9 2006

710754.jpg.2bc8f952420b322f11fd5fa077a3437f.jpg

 Diobol of Alexander III Attic Standard Amphipolis Mint?? 332 BC? Obv Head of beardless Herakles wearing lions skin headdress. Rv Two eagles facing  Price 155 1.37 grms 11mm CNG Auction 64 Lot 91 September 24 2003 

640091.jpg.ec84f877e4ba751a2fc66887e8595270.jpg

This issue poses more questions than it does answers. The first has to be is the tetradrachm issue even related to the minor denominations as they are struck on two different weight standards. This would have a great deal of bearing as to attaching a possible date to the coinage.  When looking at this group we have three alternatives.

1. The coins were struck in 336 BC at the beginning of the reign. Le Rider (2007) does discuss this problem at length however does not come to any clear consensus. Furthermore he only discusses the tetradrachm issue not the minors. However he does mention that stylistically this coinage does not resemble the contemporary  Philip II coinage. I do not personally like this idea.  It would certainly mean that the tetradrachm issue is not related to the minors as it is extremely  unlikely that he would be striking a tetradrachm in the Thraco- Macedonian standard and supporting it with Attic standard minors. This to me does NOT make any sense. 

2.The coins were struck circa 332 BC. This is the date that I DO  favor though I am still not happy with the stylistic problems with the tetradrachm, however the style of contemporary Philip coinage is much closer. Antipater has been striking Philip's since 336 and is now embarking on a program of striking Attic standard Alexanders.  The Zeus/Eagle tetradrachm could be a brief unsuccessful attempt to continue with the Thraco-Macedonian standard but proved unsuccessful and was quickly abandoned. The minor denominations which are Attic standard coinages probably started with the first issues of Alexander tetradrachms struck circa 332 BC but many  may have been struck circa 330 BC in order to pay off the debts to the army that Antipater raised to fight the Spartans. This war ended early in 330 BC with the victory over the Spartans at Megalopolis. One can see a similar pattern in the coinage struck by Alexander III upon his return from India. Though the vast majority were tetradrachms some smaller denominations were also struck in order to satisfy the debts owed to individual soldiers. With the Heracles/eagle coinage Antipater was following a similar pattern that he had established with the gold quarter stater. With that coin he honored Athena with the reverse honoring Herakles (club and bow). With the silver minors he was honoring Herakles on the obverse with the familial animal of Zeus (the eagle) on the reverse. Again it should be noted that this is the chronology that I currently favor. 

3. The coins were struck circa 323 BC or later. It is possible with the tetradrachms that they were struck even later. Le Rider does sort of hint at this but does not give details. Again there are major problems with this. As for the Herakles/eagle minors, it would seem to be very unlikely. By now the standard types the Herakles / seated Zeus types would have been seen. Again I do not see this as being very likely.

  However this analysis is at best very superficial. I have glossed over a number of issues 

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Some weeks ago on May 11 2023 Roma Numismatics had their E Sale 109. What was particularly noteworthy about this sale was the number of coins struck during the lifetime of Alexander III of Macedon. I did not at the time think it would be right to comment on these coins at the time I had always planned to make some observations on some of the coins featured in this auction.  However it must be noted that NONE OF THESE ARE MY COINS.

All the coins are from Roma Numismatics E Sale 109 which was held on May 11 2023 All the pictures come from that auction as well

Ar Tetradrachm of Alexander III Amphipolis Standard types 332-326 BC Janiform head Price 6 Troxell A3 17.09 gms 30mm Lot 260

11115.2.13_1.jpg.d3cc4e76ee50a7c473ca221fba7bdd68.jpg

 

This coin is among the earliest Alexander type coinages that were struck at Amphipolis. This coin shares the same symbol as one of the issues of tetradrachms stuck in the name and types of Philip II. The dating that I gave above is me being conservative.  What is remarkable is that because the flan is so broad, some of the metal was not struck by the  punch die giving us a good idea as to what this die might have looked like.  

Ar Tetradrachm of Alexander III Amphipolis Standard types 326-323 BC Macedonian Shield  Price 57 Troxell D2 16.61 grms 25mm Lot 261

15781_25.74_1.jpg.fc5083e56a8805027d1e5c4d9a0971d9.jpg

 

Group D is the last issue struck during Alexander's lifetime. Troxell knew of 216 coins divided into 12 issues. The number of coins known to her is roughly comparable to her groups A and B  though the number of issues are 5 and 7 respectively. This may suggest that this group was struck over some time. One thing that is a bit unusual and more than a little troubling is the weight and diameter of this coin. The coin is about .7 grams too light. There is no easy explanation for this though I cannot see anything that would cause me to think it is modern.

Ar Tetradrachm of Alexander III Tarsos Standard types Likely 333 BC Pellet.  Price 2990 17.27 grms 26mm Lot 268

11115.2.117_1.jpg.8461a51e4dd655c360c6b8b365f5813d.jpg

 

Price list this coin as being the first of the issues listed for Tarsos. It certain appears to have preceded the A and B issues associated with Balakros. What is interesting about this coin as well is that the engraver of the obverse die appears to have stayed around for a number of years as one can see his handiwork on the great "plow" series of coins which started  possibly as late as 324 BC. 

Ar Tetradrachm of Alexander III Tyre Standard types 331-330 BC M Price 3240b 17.15 grms 24 mm Lot 273 

11115.2.121_1.jpg.fc51a10d0f1865e6fbeb012f78d84061.jpg

 

This coin is one of the earlier issues from the mint of Tyre and is roughly contemporaneous with the one from my collection cited above. Unlike many of the coins from Tyre this one is undated.  Ar Drachm of Alexander III Tyre Standard types 327/6 BC ??  -i o /   Price 3249 var 3.99 grms 18 mm Lot 274

15781_25.77_1.jpg.322039505c4c60d0e439ba91f8844efb.jpg

 

This coin is an unusual example of a drachm struck from one of the Levantine mints. It does present us with a problem as / is the Phoenician designation for 10. This would give this coin the nominal date of 337/6 BC which is too early. I believe that the die cutters simply missed on diagonal line thus the date should have read // or twenty, 

 

Ar Tetradrachm of Alexander III Sidon Standard types 332 BC Price 3467 17.21 grms 24 mm Lot 278

11115.2.119_1.jpg.6dd8c4475f653416a52e58e7675a3382.jpg

What vaguely looks like a K superimposed over an X is part of the date. This coin is part of  one of the first dated issues from the mint of Sidon

 These were just a few of a number of coins that i found interesting in this auction. I did try to win one of the coins the Sidon but it went for more than I was willing to pay.

  • Like 6
  • Mind blown 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool fact about a lot of Alexander tets in this auction is that is that they were used my Lloyd Taylor in his studies! 
it was a great selection of tetradrachms in this auction. I managed to grabbed the Salamis one. Sadly struck out on some others. 
 


image.jpeg.4127155a5533a0f324d79d08af846d5a.jpeg

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Benefactor

This is a coin that I posted earlier, on another thread.  I'm reposting it here to see if I have the correct dates, and to tap into the expertise of the members who specialize in this coinage.  The Price catalog number, 103, puts this tetradrachm in the range of 323-320 BC, making it an early posthumous issue, from Amphipolis. Could this coin actually be somewhat earlier?  What does the literature say?  I raise this question because of the style of the portrait on the obverse, which is quite similar to earlier tetradrachms from Amphipolis.  Also, does the orientation of Zeus's feet still have any relevance in date attribution?

Alexander III, tetradrachm, 323-320 BC, Amphipolis.

Price 103; Mueller 153; Demanhur 895-908.

17.23 grams

D-CameraAlexanderIIItetradrachm323-320BCAmphipolisPrice103Mueller153Demanhur895-90817.23gramsSal5-7-23.jpg.210b9c063ac8fa5648f9b371d2f009f8.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In response to @Pantoffel I am very pleased that you like the thread. I had done some work on this subject during the old CT days but when I started this I wanted to keep everything together so people might have a chance to find it. When I started this I did not think it would get this big. I still have to look at a few more mints. Yor coin is indeed from Salamis. It is Price 3139 and I date it to 328?-323 BC, The placement of Zeus' legs on the reverse is very similar to one of the coins struck at Arados. I too struck out on one coin. I was after the Sidon pictured above. Unrequited love. 

As for @robinjojo I would say your attribution is correct. The Troxell number for your coin is Group F 2. So I would say that your coin would most probably been struck sometime in the date range you have indicated. Lovely coin too.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Benefactor

Thanks! 

Great thread.  I hope to learn more moving along.  

As a footnote for this thread, I was lucky to be able to acquire this tetradrachm of Kamarina a few years ago, with one of the earlier depictions of Hercules wearing the lion headdress.  

Sicily, circa 425–405 BC
AR tetradrachm
Kamarina
Obverse: Quadriga three quarters to right, horses galloping; Athena as charioteer in crested Athenian helmet and chiton; in drawn-back right, a goad; in left hand, three reins; crowned by Nike with wreath; double ground line. In exergue, a tunny fish facing right.
Border of dots.
Reverse: Head of Herakles to left, lightly bearded, in lion's scalp; side whiskers.
Below, laurel leaf and berry. Inscription in Greek around.  
Rare,  Similar to Brett, Greek Coins (MFA), no. 0259.  Abt. VF,  Worn dies?  17.5 grams

D-CameraKamarinaTetradrachm425-405BCVF5-12-20.jpg.9964f32836e35b6c8635ee6723c975c4.jpg

 

Edited by robinjojo
  • Like 4
  • Heart Eyes 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, kapphnwn said:

In response to @Pantoffel I am very pleased that you like the thread. I had done some work on this subject during the old CT days but when I started this I wanted to keep everything together so people might have a chance to find it. When I started this I did not think it would get this big. I still have to look at a few more mints. Yor coin is indeed from Salamis. It is Price 3139 and I date it to 328?-323 BC, The placement of Zeus' legs on the reverse is very similar to one of the coins struck at Arados. I too struck out on one coin. I was after the Sidon pictured above. Unrequited love. 

As for @robinjojo I would say your attribution is correct. The Troxell number for your coin is Group F 2. So I would say that your coin would most probably been struck sometime in the date range you have indicated. Lovely coin too.

Its been very pleasing to read! The Alexander coinage is an very interesting period. Even after collecting them for couple of years, i still learn new things!

plus they are just a beauty to look at with all the different styles and mints. Which is wat also makes them so interesting  

 

 @robinjojo What a wonderful coin! Thats portrait is really lovely. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2023 at 11:14 PM, kapphnwn said:

 

 

 

Alexander III (IV)Ar Tetradrachm Lampsokos Mint Circa 322 BC Price 1355 Symbol Demeter standing with two torches DO Monogram 17.22 grms 26 mm CNG Coin Shop Inventory No 525518 No Date. 

525518.jpg.3962ef464c9bc84341e0a759e5e50667.jpg

Alexander III(IV) Ar Drachm Lampsakos Mint Circa 322 BC Price 1356 Symbol Demeter standing with two torches DO Monogram 4.29 grms 18 mm CNG Auction 108 Lot 63 May 16 2018

10800063.jpg.6643975f1dff13e7d53d7c8f29650c39.jpg

 Commentary: Though the symbols are different the very distinctive monogram appears to link the two series together. The tetradrachm 1355 does exhibit a later image of Zeus with the foreleg reverted back  which can be seen on the drachm 1356 and even on the drachm 1347. To me this would indicate that the mint at Lampsakos did not commence production until after the death of Alexander III. Production was initially slow and there is no evidence of a sudden striking of Gold staters as can be seen on the coinage struck at Sardes. Thus I am more inclined to position this mint as starting later in 323 BC with limited production which changed somewhat later. 

I know that the Demeter, Persephone story is a classic but any reason why Lampsakos picked it?  How common was Eleusinian imagery beyond mainland Greece , indeed Athens ?  The monogram....might it be infact D I O for Dionysos?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot say however just a very quick search on the CNG site, I can find Demeter featured heavily at Metapontion Petella Enna as well as Mytilene Persephone appears at Syracuse as well. As for Eleusinian imagery I really cannot say. Most cultic activity in other than major centers is all but unknown as it is unrecorded in the sources. As for Lampsakos, I am following Thompson. She ascribed these coins to the mint of Lampsakos because the next major grouping used as a symbol two Pegasos foreparts back to back .  A Pegasos foreparts is a longstanding device seen on the coins of Lampsakos. Looking at the coins in her book I can see a stylist similarity between both groups.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@kapphnwn, an excellent and educational thread (with interesting contributions from @Kaleun96  too), I will add my example of Price 1356, for which the additional context above is interesting.  Throughout this thread some amazing coins as well.

Quote

Commentary: Though the symbols are different the very distinctive monogram appears to link the two series together. The tetradrachm 1355 does exhibit a later image of Zeus with the foreleg reverted back which can be seen on the drachm 1356 and even on the drachm 1347. To me this would indicate that the mint at Lampsakos did not commence production until after the death of Alexander III. Production was initially slow and there is no evidence of a sudden striking of Gold staters as can be seen on the coinage struck at Sardes. Thus I am more inclined to position this mint as starting later in 323 BC with limited production which changed somewhat later.

image.png.544a9941cff15eda88d899dbd81f007d.png

Edited by Sulla80
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Benefactor

Very interesting discussions.  Regarding the high number of drachms versus tetradrachms for this coinage, I think considerations might have been made, at least at the local mint level, to produce more drachms than tetradrachms.  This consideration might have been driven by local supplies of silver. 

An analogous situation existed in Spain from the 16th century to the 19th century.  Despite the wealth of silver flowing in from the colonies, Spain was always strapped for silver since a good portion of the silver simply flowed through to the banks financing loans to the Spanish crown.  As a result the Spanish mints produced far higher numbers of minor coins compared to the crown size 8 reales.  The smaller coins were needed for commerce, the large denomination used mostly for major transactions, or reservoirs of wealth.

Which raises the question of sources of silver for the tetradrachms and drachms of Alexander III and his successors.  Given the massive volume of coinage stretched out over centuries, I would assume that much of came from the melting of silver coins.  Aside from the silver being mined in Macedon, providing a major source for Amphipolis and Pella, was silver being mined in Asia Minor and elsewhere in significant quantities to support the mints?  If they existed, as I am sure they did, would the flow of silver dictated to a degree on what denominations would be produced?

The Athenians in the 5th century BC did not have concerns about adequate supplies of silver, thanks to the mines of Laurium, the transfer of the Delian League's treasury to Athens in 454 BC, and the taxes or tribute paid to Athens by allies permitted the production and flood of tetradrachms to the east and elsewhere.  Minor denominations in comparison are quite rare.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool thread, I will give it a more comprehensive read when I am less busy. But in the meantime, here is my Alexander tet apparently from Tarsos, apparently lifetime. @Kaleun96 and I talked about it on Discord 😇

nM9A6kHLrLT4bm8D2BsPMR7d5imEao.jpg

Got it from Tom Vossen, he listed it as Price 2991 though we are not sure. I am just really happy with it, it is a thick one! 😁

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/28/2023 at 6:18 AM, kapphnwn said:

Some weeks ago on May 11 2023 Roma Numismatics had their E Sale 109. What was particularly noteworthy about this sale was the number of coins struck during the lifetime of Alexander III of Macedon. I did not at the time think it would be right to comment on these coins at the time I had always planned to make some observations on some of the coins featured in this auction.  However it must be noted that NONE OF THESE ARE MY COINS.

All the coins are from Roma Numismatics E Sale 109 which was held on May 11 2023 All the pictures come from that auction as well

Ar Tetradrachm of Alexander III Tarsos Standard types Likely 333 BC Pellet.  Price 2990 17.27 grms 26mm Lot 268

11115.2.117_1.jpg.8461a51e4dd655c360c6b8b365f5813d.jpg

 

Price list this coin as being the first of the issues listed for Tarsos. It certain appears to have preceded the A and B issues associated with Balakros. What is interesting about this coin as well is that the engraver of the obverse die appears to have stayed around for a number of years as one can see his handiwork on the great "plow" series of coins which started  possibly as late as 324 BC. 

I ended up winning this Tarsos one but bid on most, or all, of the ones you listed here. As in your case, I found the prices of many to be far too high so decided to settle for this one, albeit at a somewhat high price too.

Quite happy with it even though I already have this type with the same obverse die (should be Newell obv. die II, not III). It's rare to find these in such good condition so glad I was able to pick it up. I was also aiming for the Sidon tet for the same reason, as again I already have the type, but ended up as the underbidder.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again in response to @NewStyleKing I have thought about this issue  for some time now and I can now say that when trying to examine the symbology on ancient coins, it would be wise to look at the coins of the Roman Republic. Because we have the name of the moneyer, some history of the individual as well as his family, along with the types he employs we can see clearly the differing relationships between the individual and his badge. I cannot go into detail because the subject is so vast but I will post a couple of examples.

Ar Denarius of Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Northern Italian Mint 80 BC Obv Head of Pietas right diademed Rv Elephant advancing left Crawford 374/1 RBW 1396 This coin illustrated 3.90 grms 18 mm Photo by W. Hansen

374-a.jpg.0eb4e1a402ce7b511f852b9943530546.jpg

 His ancestor won the Battle of Panormus in 250 BC capturing a large number of Carthaginian elephants. The Caecilia Metelli ever afterwards adopted the image of an elephant as their totemic symbol. Metellus Pius played an important role in the civil war between Sulla and Marius.

Ar Denarius of C. Vibius Pansa 48 BC. Obv Mask of bearded Pan right Rv Jupiter Auxurus seated left Crawford 449/1a 4.04 grms 18mm Photo By W. Hansen This is No longer My Coin

449-a.jpg.182b71803a91953def84fe0156cc0642.jpg

Here we see a type which is a cunning allusion to the name Pansa. The Roman moneyers appear to enjoy puns and thus there are a large number of these types of coins within the Republican series.  We just have to look at coins struck by Q. Pomponius Musa, L Philippus and many others to see this phenomenon in action. Furthermore there are those coins that are commenting on what for them would be current issues. 

  Though we have no real knowledge of the moneyers in the Greek world we must assume that to one degree or another the same phenomenon may be occuring in other mints as well. Thus the image of Artemis from the mint of Lampsakos could easily be a totem, a pun or possibly even be due to current events. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...