Weighing 16.63 g., this coin of Alexander the Great shows Zeus seated on reverse with his feet being uncrossed, parallel and nearly close. As far as I remember on this site, that could be a sign that the Tet was struck during Alexander rule. Am I right? Please post your comments and kindly appraise this silver coin since I'm being offered a series of them and need to be guided on value. Thank you very much.
I am not comfortable saying with certainty that it is either genuine or a forgery, but in general agree with Sallent's statement. The coin is rather underweight for a tetradrachm. If authentic, it generally matches a very late lifetime or early posthumous issue struck in Tarsus, 323-317 BCE. On the Wildwinds page for Alexander III of Macedon, look at Price 3038. Wildwinds can be cumbersome to search. It is very helpful in cases like this to use your browser's "find on page" search function. For the OP coin, once on the Alexander III Wildwinds page I used the search term "Nike" in my browser's webpage search. Nike isn't a common control mark but there are many dozens of entries for the AV staters, so you have to tab through all of those but it is still more efficient than scrolling through all of the entries on that page. That is how I found your coin's attribution after only a couple of minutes of searching. Uncrossed legs on Zeus can also be seen on some posthumous issues so it isn't a guarantee of a given coin being issued in his lifetime.
It doesn't look at all strange to me for the weight of a coin to decrease by less than 2 percent, after more than 23 centuries, especially when the corrosion is quite apparent. Anyway, the general wear is acceptable, I believe,
The only answer I can give is an echo of @Sallent's post. Which brings up a question most of us have....Besides the accepted 'striking' date, what else would guarantee a 'lifetime issue? Presently, I'm bidding on an interesting example that straddles the accepted dates. ?????
16.63 weight appears correct. Surfaces look a bit wonky but I will refrain from commenting on the authenticity.
I honestly can't decide how I feel about this coin. I've been thinking about it over the last day and I still don't like it, but I can't be sure. The whole thing is vexing me. I would accept this level of corrosion on a post-Commodus Roman tet as they were mostly billon after that date. But it looks a little odd on a Greek Tet that's supposed to be high grade silver. But the weight is what I would expect on a corroded coin, so you can't discount it could still be authentic. But a Tet from this period under 17 grams would probably be a pass for me regardless. I also see some silvery deposits on the surface that look odd, and lend credibility to it being a cast. But could it be horn silver? If it is maybe that could lend some credibility the other way and in favor of it being authentic. Is it yours? Can we see a picture of the edges?
Thanks to all of you for your kind interest and deep concern. @Sallent . In many ways, the more we're curious and the more we prove that we are more learnt. Please watch these 2 different shots of the edge.
The coin is fine. No issues with the authenticity, just corroded. It is indeed Tarsus mint, dated to 323-317, so possibly lifetime issue, Price #340-342. On a bad day it would sell for $100, on a good day $250, the average price in that condition I would say about $150. If you are looking at buying a group of these you might want a copy of Martin Price, The Coinage in the Name of Alexander the Great And Philip Arrhidaeus. I havent seen copies lately, but one is on ABE and Amazon for $850 (I bought mine many years ago for $250, which was a small fortune then).
I agree with everything Ken wrote except I'd call $250 for that coin a nightmare. While I suspect the coin is OK but abused, you will have to face the fact that many in your peer group will look at the coin and say 'No, thanks' so you might be stuck with it for life. I might suggest buying one that was $250 on what I would call a good day (dealers would call that a nightmare because price ranges depend on whether you are the one paying or the one being paid). I did not buy Price when it was new because I only have a dozen coins it covers and really little interest in specializing in this type. If I had been smart, I would have bought four copies and sold three so I could keep one free and buy a nice coin for my trouble. Is the book worth $850? I say no. I'm wrong so very, very often but my interest in having a hundred or a thousand Alexander tets is miniscule at best. It is a book for a dealer like Ken not for a guy who has interests in other coins. I have noted a real prejudice on this list toward lifetime Alexander coins. OK, I have one but I don't like it any better than the later ones and really don't see the need to pay a premium for a situation that requires a Price attribution to establish.
I agree, its why I called it 'on a good day', but one sees a huge disparity in price on these (as one does with Athenian tetradrachms) and in many instances the mint city is a deciding factor (as is lifetime issues). Value is a completely different topic I suppose. But, it is easy to google retail prices. I just did so and found a very few slugs for $100, but decent ones like the OP example average at $200. Yes, its for dealers but also for those specializing in the series. Funny you should mention buying multiple copies. Many years back I did just that, keeping one copy and marking the others up modestly until I either paid for my copy or it was cheap. I dont do that anymore as shipping books is a nightmare. I hadnt noticed, but I have not been here as long. In my experience the lifetime issues are more sought after and command a premium price.
After seeing the edges, and taking into account that the weight is probably a result of corrosion, I now feel confident that the coin is real.
OK. A correction. It is Price #3039. Price notes the weight range for that mint to be from 16.5 to 17.3. He does discuss the earlier coinage having a weight disparity of "within 2%" noting "it is probably safe to ignore all but the most severe wear or corrosion in this discussion...", but it is not clear if he is making a blanket statement of all coinages or just the earlier Attic weight examples. Anyway, this example is certainly within the published range.
