ehh? ... I may have included a couple of non-archaics? => but like I said => I'm not a judger "Please" post your cool archaic animals!! I like you dudes
Ok, I'll play too...one archaic and one not so archaic... BTW; I lost a cool one on CNG today---An RR with alternate modes of transportation...and I LOVE lion driven chariots!!!
Both are nice coins H8, but the Sinope is my favorite. Great detail. Also like the reverse on the Tyre.
Coins with three different types of animals: Selinos tetradrachm: Obverse - bull Reverse - snake (around altar) and heron Tarentum nomos: Obverse - dolphin, prawn Reverse - bird (held by the wings)
AncientNut: That is my favorite Tarentum! I love the prawn. The Selinos is very nice as well. Way to max out the animal count.
Man Steve, you do have some nice animals! Only one archaic and more provincial animals. Please be easy...
I'm afraid I don't have any "archaic" coins to show...except this one: And this one..... And this one..... and this one..... So yeah, nothing to see here
No animals on this one, but an obol like yours and also Ex Cederlind, won in the auction today. CILICIA, Tarsos. Balakros. Satrap of Cilicia, 333-323 BC. AR Obol
I always found it interesting that Sear separated 'Archaic' Greek coins from later issues of the same city when he laid out his Greek Coins books. Exactly how do you separate Archaic coins from later ones and what do you consider important in deciding whether to call a coin by that name or not? Not all will agree on this one. I told you previously that I like this coin but I'm not sure I would call it archaic. I doubt that you will come up with a clear cut date range or set of characteristics that will stand the test of all the standard catalogs but, since this forum is read by many beginning collectors, tell us how we should know what it is you wanted us to post and what we should not.
Hey Mentor, as you probably already know, I'm certainly not an expert at the nitty-gritty coin details ... but I usually call the older incuse-type "archaic" (4th-5th-6th century BC) ... but I admit that incuse-type coins from the 4th century BC are probably getting a bit "modern" to be called archaic, eh? For example, this incuse-punch example "Bull on Grain" is from 340-320 BC (it may be a bit of a stretch calling it an archaic?) ... but because it has such a cool incuse-punch reverse, it gets lumped-in Bithynia, Kalchedon AR Siglos Bull On the flip-side, I didn't include a few coins from the 5th century BC which probably should be called archaic, but because they're not incuse-type examples, I don't think of 'em that way ... example => Syracuse Heiron I Tet (480 BC) This baby is certainly old enough to be considered archaic, but because it isn't an incuse-punch type, I never include it when I'm showing my archaic stuff! (maybe I should?) again, I am certainly "not" an expert in these coin-details ... I merely kinda go with it!! => anything that is "old" and has a noticeable incuse-punch seems to fit into my definition of an "archaic coin" (they are the coins that I love!!) Here is a classic example of what I think is an archaic coin ...
H8_modern & Z-Bro => wow, congrats on the fabulous wins from today's auction (I love all of those beauties!!)