Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Curtisimo, post: 2941883, member: 83845"]Coins 5 through 1 5. A Persian Alternative to Athenian Silver[ATTACH=full]716530[/ATTACH]Persian EmpireXerxes II to Artaxerxes II,AR Siglos, Mint in Asia Minor, struck ca. 420-375 BCWt.: 5.4 gDia.: 16 mmObv.: Persian king / hero wearing kidaris and quiver, kneeling-running right holding spear and bowRev.: Incuse punchRef.: Carradice Type IIIb C Why it’s my number 5:Persian coinage is absolutely fascinating to me.  The Persians used coins almost exclusively in the context of their interactions with the Greeks (and Lydians before them) and more than likely used bullion and/or barter in the rest of their empire.  Toward the end of the Peloponnesian War, (431-404 BC) as the tide began to turn against Athens in its struggle with Sparta, Persia decided to throw the weight of its immense wealth behind Sparta in an attempt to recover the cities in Asia Minor it had lost to the Athenian alliance (the Delian League).  We know from literary and scant hoard evidence that the Persian coins used to fund Sparta were most likely gold Darics (and Athenian tetradrachms!).  So what’s with all the Siglos in Asia Minor?  Near the end of the war the Spartan general Lysander effectively abandoned the Greek cities in Asia to their fate against the Persians.  The Spartans also cut off the Athenian supply of sliver forcing a shortage and a move toward debasement.  The Siglos from this period constituted a Persian strategy to consolidate their economic hold on the newly reconquered cities of Asia Minor by offering an alternative to the Athenian silver that was now less abundant and reliable.  The Greeks of Asia Minor remained adamant about trading with coined money and the prolific siglos of this period almost certainly constituted the Persian answer to that demand.  This coin was valued at 7.5 Attic obols or 1.25 drachms according to Xenophon.  Considering the Persian ambivalence to coins in general it is no surprise that a lot of these are not well centered or struck.  This example is well centered, has good details and, just as importantly, the surfaces are quite nice.  This coin’s positive qualities and connection with one of my favorite time periods in history makes it more than worthy of a top 5 ranking. 4.  The First Truly Jewish Coin[ATTACH=full]716531[/ATTACH]Hasmonean Dynasty of JudeaJohn Hyrcanus I, 134-104 BCAE Prutah, Jerusalem mint, struck ca. 129-122 BCWt.: 1.82 gDia.: 15 mmObv.: Paleo-Hebrew inscription in wreath; Greek letter alpha aboveRev.:  Double cornucopia with a pomegranate between hornsRef.: Hendin 1132 Write up:<a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-first-jewish-coin-and-its-modern-descendent.292881/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-first-jewish-coin-and-its-modern-descendent.292881/">The First Jewish Coin and its Modern </a><a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-first-jewish-coin-and-its-modern-descendent.292881/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-first-jewish-coin-and-its-modern-descendent.292881/">Descendant</a> Why it’s my number 4:This is a fantastic little coin.  As I explain in the write up above this coin was the first ever coin to be struck by a Jewish leader in his own name.  The absence of any depictions of humans or animals on the coin is notable in that it relates to the Jewish prohibition against graven images and is a direct departure from the tradition forced on the Jews by their Seleucid rulers.  This coin can most likely be seen in the context of the period following Antiochos VII’s death in 129 BC (see coin number 9) when the Judean Kingdom was able to reassert its independence and begin coining its own money.  The Greek letter “A” on the obverse is likely to be a reference to an alliance with a pretender to the Seleucid throne by the name of Alexander II Zabinas who died in 122 BC.  If this is true then it’s yet another fascinating historical tie for this coin.  These coins were not struck with great care so finding an example with the legend fully readable and the cornucopia fully visible is a win in my book.  All in all I think this example has good eye appeal for the type and in terms of interest for money this coin is also hard to beat coming in at less than $60. 3. A Diadochi Portrait from the Hand of a Master Artist[ATTACH=full]716532[/ATTACH]Ptolemaic Kings of EgyptPtolemy I Soter, (305-282 BC)AR Tetradrachm, Alexandria mint, struck ca. 300-285 BCDia.: 26 mmWt.: 14.13 gObv.: Diademed head of Ptolemy I right, wearing aegis around neck. Δ behind earRev.: ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΠΟΛΕΜΑΙΟΥ eagle with closed wings standing on thunderbolt. P above monogram ΠΑΡRef.: Noesje 41-42. SNG Copenhagen 70-71. Svoronos 255Ex W.F. Stoecklin, Ex Karl Steiner (1940s), signed by Delta. Why it’s my number 3:Ptolemy was always a step bolder than the other Diadochi.  He first proved this when he decided to steal Alexander’s body and have it brought to Egypt and so it is no surprise his coins reflect a similar level of bravado.  Ptolemy was the first Diadochi to alter Alexander’s ubiquitous Herakles/Zues silver pieces by placing a deified Alexander on the obverse in a clear boast of their close friendship (unlike Lysimachus, Ptolemy had always been a prominent Somatophylax).  It is on these types that we first see a diminutive little Δ on the most beautifully engraved examples from the Alexandria mint.  This was the mark of a die engraver who was a cut above his peers, a true master of his craft.  Svoronos, Poole and Newell believed this was the initials of a single engraver who worked from 314 to at least 282 BC while Hazzard claims in his book (without citing any evidence) that it was several individuals.  Until shown otherwise I will continue to lean toward the former interpretation.  Regardless, it is not disputed that Delta’s work was among the finest of the Hellenistic age. Therefore it’s no surprise that when Ptolemy I was ready to make another bold and unprecedented move by putting his likeness on a coin he would trust Delta to render it, first on gold staters then on silver tetradrachms.  You can see the signature, Δ, behind Ptolemy’s ear on my new coin.  This is the first time in history that we get to see an accurate depiction of a Greek monarch on a coin (a taboo practice in classic Greece) and we are fortunate as numismatists to have had Delta to execute it so beautifully.  I have been searching for just the right example of one of these all year and lost out on one in March.  It was all for the best though because I like the portrait and toning on this example better and the countermark doesn’t bother me in the least.  I have noticed that a very high number of these seem to have graffito of Greek initials on the reverse behind the eagle.  Does anyone know why that is more common for this type? 2. A beautiful Athenian Tetradrachm… No, No Not THAT Kind.[ATTACH=full]716533[/ATTACH]Attica. AthensAR Tetradrachm, struck ca. 167-8 BCDia.: 30 mmWt.: 16.78Obv.:Head of Athena right wearing triple crested attic helmet adorned with PegasosRev.: Α-ΘΕ above MI / KI and ΘΕΟ / ΦΡΑ (Miki[on] and Theophra[stos]) Owl standing facing on amphora Θ, AP below.Ref.: Thompson 320g Why it’s my number 2:I love the coinage of ancient Athens. The classic Athenian Owl (431-404 BC) is my favorite ancient coin (I don’t care if they’re common).  However, the design was frozen in an archaic style due to its success as a world currency and I have often wondered what the Athenian engravers would have come up with if they were given free rein to compete with the masters in Sicily and Sikyon.  We will never know the answer to that but at least their descendants gave us the chance to witness what Athenian engravers could accomplish with the same theme during the Hellenistic era.  These new-style coins are interesting in that they seem to contain so much information (just look at the reverse legends) but seemingly fall just short of giving us anything definitive to satiate our modern curiosity.  When researching these I found it strange that it is standard practice to site Thompson as the main reference and yet ignore her dating conclusions completely.  I have read through a great deal of her book New Style Silver Coinage of Athens and I found it astonishingly researched and expertly executed… and apparently wrong about the chronology.  Subsequent research has proposed a new chronology that seems to have been accepted and yet Thompson’s work is still the main source of a great deal of important information found nowhere else!  Needless to say it has made this a rather difficult coin to study so far.  It is my number 2 coin because it is a large, beautiful and interesting coin that promises to keep me busy learning about it for quite some time to come. 1. Knock Knock… Who’s there…? Hannibal… Hannibal who…? Hannibal at the Gate![ATTACH=full]716534[/ATTACH]Roman RepublicSecond Punic War (218 – 201 BC)Anonymous AR Denarius, Rome Mint, struck ca. 211 BCWt.: 4.2 gDia.: 20 mmObv.: Helmeted head of Roma right. X in left fieldRev.: Dioscuri galloping right. ROMA in exergue and partially incuse on raised tabletRef.: Crawford 44/5. Sydenham 167. RBW 169. Write up:<a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-story-of-the-coin-struck-to-fight-hannibal-the-first-denarius-and-its-influence.300387/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/the-story-of-the-coin-struck-to-fight-hannibal-the-first-denarius-and-its-influence.300387/">The Story of the Coin Struck to Fight Hannibal: The First Denarius and its Influence</a> Why it’s my number 1:What can I say about this coin that I didn’t already say in excessively long-winded fashion in the above linked write up earlier this year?  This type was the first denarius struck by the Roman Republic and was most likely struck from silver looted from some of the most famous ancient cities of the period in an effort to fund the fight with a rampaging Hannibal.  This coin is well centered, has really great old cabinet tone and possesses all the important details, fully identifiable.   This sub-variety of Crawford 44/5 (Brinkman – Group 5) is also rendered in fine style and has the largest portrait of any of the 44/5 denarii which makes the great centering all the more important.  It has a pleasing (to me) amount of circulation wear which leads me to envision a war weary legionary carrying this around on campaign and using it for Jupiter knows what mischief.  I imagine the circulation wear caused a few to overlook this piece at the live auction it was in and I was able to get it for what I consider a great price.  Not only is it my number 1 coin of 2017 but it is also probably my best bargain. To top all that off this coin is also an obverse die match to a coin in the British Museum which also serves as Steve Brinkman’s plate / illustration coin for this group.  If it’s good enough for the British Museum it’s good enough for me. ---------------------------------------------- Well that’s it everyone.  I hope you enjoyed my little list.  I will update the thread here with a few coins and numismatic items that were “top” in one category or the other but didn’t make any of my lists. In the meantime you guys know the drill… PLEASE POST SOME STUFF![/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches