King What's-his-face with the pointy beard

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Parthicus, Feb 9, 2020.

  1. Parthicus

    Parthicus Well-Known Member

    It's time for another excursion into the world of contested Parthian attributions:
    Artabanos II Sellwood 61.jpg
    Parthian Kingdom. AR drachm. Artabanos II (Shore, Sellwood) aka Artabanos IV (Assar) (c. 10-38 AD) or possibly Orodes III (Assar) (c.6 AD). Ekbatana mint. Obverse: Diademed bust of king left, triangular beard. Right: Seated archer and Ekbatana mintmark, standard 7-line Greek legend "Basilews Basilewn/ Arsakou/ Euergetou Dikaiou/ Epiphanous Philellenos" (Of the Great King Arsakes, Benefactor, Just, God Manifest, Friend of the Greeks). Sellwood 61.7, Shore 337. This coin: Purchased from Allen G. Berman at the Baltimore show, November 2019.

    After the mother-son duo of Musa and Phraatakes were overthrown in 4 AD (see my previous article for details: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/if...-dont-you-just-marry-her.350979/#post-3911792 ), Parthian politics became even messier than usual. A king called Orodes III, whose exact parentage is uncertain but was presumably part of the Arsakid family, was appointed by the nobles in 6 AD. However, he was soon accused of cruelty (a plausible accusation, if he was like his relatives) and was assassinated after a short reign. (He issued tetradrachms dated Dystros and Dystros Embolimos 317 SE [February-March 6 AD], which helps set some solid dates for our discussion.) The Parthian nobles then requested from Rome one of their "guests", a son of Phraates IV who would rule as Vonones I (c.8-12 AD). Vonones, however, had acquired rather too Roman an outlook during his time abroad, and no longer cared for the manly Parthian diversions of hunting, feasting, or horseback-riding. Apparently this was enough to make the nobles rethink their choice, and about 10 AD they summoned Artabanos, an Arsakid who was serving as the king of the Parthian vassal Media Atropatene (roughly equivalent to modern Azerbaijan). (This Artabanos was called Artabanos II in the standard works by Selllwood and Shore, but Assar has plausibly renumbered him as Artabanos IV.) Artabanos fought against Vonones, losing a major initial battle but finally defeating and killing his rival in 12 AD.

    Drachms of Artabanos are among the most common of Parthian coins, but most of these are the Sellwood 63 type which show the king with a rectangular beard:
    Artabanos doublestruck.jpg
    The Sellwood 61 type, with triangular beard, has usually been considered an earlier type by Artabanos; it is much scarcer than the rectangular-beard Type 63. However, in his essay in the Sunrise Collection, Assar suggests that Orodes III may have had a longer reign than usually believed, and that the Sellwood 61 type (triangular beard) actually represents a drachm issue of Orodes III. In this case, I don't find Dr. Assar's case very compelling. He does out that the gap of over two years from Orodes III's last known date of ~March 6 AD to Vonones' appearance in 8 leaves a gap of over two years with no one claiming the Parthian throne, which seems like a rather long time. However, he doesn't have any direct evidence for a longer reign by Orodes III, and I think a stylistic comparison of the drachm portraits makes it likely that Types 61 and 63 were issued by the same king, which would have to be Artabanos. Consider that, if Assar's thesis is true, the sequence of drachm issues would be Type 61 (Orodes III)- Type 60 (Vonones I)- Type 63 (Artabanos). However, the drachms of Vonones I have a portrait that is rather distinct from 61 or 63:
    Vonones I.jpg
    Note that Vonones has very short hair in the back, and a slight waviness in his beard, while both Type 61 and 63 show the king with long hair in the back that has a slight wave at the top, and a beard of absolutely straight lines. While this is hardly definitive, given the stylized nature of the portraits, I believe that Types 61 and 63 are different versions of the same king's portrait, and thus Type 61 should retain its attribution to Artabanos. (Of course, I am happy to change my opinion if there is further evidence to be presented.)

    The Sellwood type 61 drachm is not truly rare, but it is considerably scarcer than the type 63 usually seen for the same king. I also like the dark toning on this piece; I was considering trying to clean it, but I have decided to leave the toning intact. Please post your related coins, comments on Parthian chronology, or whatever else you feel is relevant.
     
    DBDc80, ominus1, Volodya and 16 others like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Mat

    Mat Ancient Coincoholic

    [​IMG]
    Artabanos IV (10 - 38 A.D)
    AR Drachm
    O: Bare-headed, left, w/4-strand diadem, 2 loops and 3 ribbons; medium-long, almost straight hair, mustache, long square-cut beard; earring, 3-turn necklace; tunic/cuirass.
    R: Archer, right, on throne, w/bow in vise-like outstretched hand; below bow monogram; 7-line legend: BΛCIΛEΩC BΛCIΛEΩN ΛPCΛNOΔ EVEPΓETO(V) ΔIXAIOV (E)ΠIΦΛNOYC ΦIΛEΛΛXOC.
    3.04g
    19mm
    Ekbatana Mint
    Sellwood 63.6, Shore 341, Sunrise 412 (Artabanos IV)
     
  4. dougsmit

    dougsmit Member

    op0175bb3193.jpg If I consigned a coin of Vonones to an auction and they listed it with their standard lazy cut and paste, I would be upset. They deserve at least a note explaining the differences from other Parthian drachms. IMHO everyone who collects Parthian to any degree needs one of these unusual coins. As mentioned above, Vonones was the least Parthian in spirit a Parthian king could be. He issued coins that must have been quite controversial in their time. On the obverse he added the legend King Vonones. If all Parthian kings had done this we would not be dealing with all these revisions of attribution. On the reverse, there is no seated archer and no name Arsakes. Instead we have "King Vonones Defeater of Artibanos." If you are going to buy one of these, look for one with full legends on flan. They are not hard to find full legend but some are missing one of the words all of which are important.
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2020
  5. dougsmit

    dougsmit Member

    Parthicus, what is the spot in front of the archer's face on the OP coin?

    I have no pointy beard. What I have makes the point that so many of the coins of this period are badly centered (almost always low) making the exact beard style hard to follow. I have two IDed as Sellwood 63.6 (I have not checked recently but both came from people who knew a lot more than I do then or now). Neither matches the 63's shown above. What do you make of the extra pile of dots under the archer on the first?
    op0180bb0358.jpg
    ...or the + in place of the dots on the coin below. These coins cane to me 31 and 27 years ago and I have no idea why I bought and kept both. That is a long time to harbor an error in one's catalog.
    op0190bb0806.jpg

    The more I learn about Parthian coins, the less I know. I do have one other from the period. Below is what I have been calling Artabanos II AE Chalkoi Sellwood 63.19 /Athena with spear(?) and shield. The dealers that supplied these and their ID's have passed so I can not go back and ask them. At least I know why I bought the bronze. It was cheap.
    op0200bb0849.jpg
     
  6. Parthicus

    Parthicus Well-Known Member

    1. The spot on the reverse of my OP coin is a small lump of silvery metal (lighter in color than the coin) that is stuck to the surface of the coin. Possibly solder? Though why someone would get solder on this coin is a bit puzzling- maybe trying to turn the coin into jewelry?

    2. On your first 63.6 coin, note that the reverse is double-struck (most obvious behind the archer- there are three lines of legend visible instead of the expected two). I think the "extra" line of dots between the folds of the archer's coat is the normal line from the first strike, which survived being obliterated by the second strike due to lucky positioning.

    3. Interesting. After looking at many photos of 63.6 drachms (in books and online), it appears there are a couple of unlisted sub-varieties here. It is most common for 63.6 to have a single line of dots under the archer's legs (as the remnants of the chair), but a fair number of these coins also feature two dots to either side of the central line dots, which on coins with some wear easily turns into a cross or plus shape. I have no idea why Sellwood doesn't list this as a variety, given that he lists similar variations for some other types (e.g. type 78 drachms). Good catch!

    4. I think that bronze attribution sounds good. At any rate, in that condition it'd be hard to prove otherwise.

    5. I agree with all the points you made in your post about the Vonones drachm. I didn't talk about how special Vonones' coins are in my original post because it wasn't related to my main point, though I did discuss the coin in detail when I first got it: https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-parthian-drachm-with-no-archer-on-reverse.299522/#post-2793111

    6. "The more I learn about Parthian coins, the less I know." You and me both, brother. Actually, I think this is true of any area of learning: The more you know, the more you realize you don't know. But the first step in gaining knowledge is to understand that there is something you don't know. I suppose some might find that thought frightening, but I prefer to see it as a challenge.
     
  7. Severus Alexander

    Severus Alexander find me at NumisForums

    Thanks for this post - I've often wondered about my what's-his-face:

    Screen Shot 2020-02-09 at 9.34.38 PM.jpg

    One of my favourite Parthians, but geez, I kinda wish Vonones had won and permanently changed the tradition on coin legends!
     
  8. Alwin

    Alwin Well-Known Member

    1- S.61
    I always found it strange that type S.61 was assigned to the same ruler as types S.62 and S.63. I would have found it less surprising that the S.61 type was attributed to Don Quixote rather than Artaban!
    So, even if the arguments can be discussed at length, the new attribution (Assar) suits me much better than the previous one. It is interesting to note that the S.61 drachms, whether struck at Ecbatane, Rhagae, Mithradatkart or Aria, retain remarkably the same style, with this disproportionately long face, very different from the effigy of type S.62 and S.63.

    2- The drachm with a +
    It is a S.65.33 drachm of Gotarzes II, so the + as a left leg/foot is normal. But above all it is the style of the letters above the archer which show that it is not a drachm S.63.6.

    3- The chalkoi below
    This bronze coin is very similar to the ANS 1944.100.83098 coin. For one and for the other we cannot see if the beard is rectangular, but these coins must indeed be the type 63.19.

    Excuse my rough English!
     
  9. Brian Bucklan

    Brian Bucklan Well-Known Member

    Here's one of the more interesting Parthian types that I have crossed paths with over the years:

    Indo-Parthian, Aria or Margiana : Tanlis Mardates. Circa mid-late 1st century BC
    Base coin : Parthia AR Drachm of Mithradates III
    Obv: Diademed bust left, wearing tiara
    Rev: Arsakes I seated right on throne, holding bow : c/m: Head left, legend TANΛHC around
    Parthian AR Counterstamp 1.jpg
     
  10. Parthicus

    Parthicus Well-Known Member

    Thank you @Alwin for you comments.

    1. I admit that the case is uncertain, and while I see similarity between the S.61 and 63 portraits I do recognize that there are differences, so it is at least possible they were issued by two different kings. Actually, it would be better for me if Assar is correct in assigning S. 61 to Orodes III, since it would mean that I get to include Orodes III in my collection (I am not fortunate enough to own one of the rare S.59 tetradrachms). However, I try not to let my wishes interfere with my judgment, and I remain personally unconvinced of the attribution of S.61 to Orodes III. But I freely concede that an intelligent and informed person, looking at the available evidence, could come to the opposite conclusion.

    2. I think you are right about this, the coin does look to be S.65 with the key published identifier (forehead wart) worn off. The difference in inscription style between S.63 and S.65 is fairly subtle and easy (for me) to miss- not nearly as obvious as the difference of both with S.74.

    Also, your English is excellent, there is no need to apologize. It is certainly better than my attempts at any language other than English!
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page