Thing seems to be some confusion about the mint for the tiny AR tetartemorion with the roaring head of the lion on the obverse (facing either right or left) and in incuse bird on the reverse (both with and without dots and facing either direction). This example is attributed to Miletos, in Ionia, while this example is to Mylasa, in Caria. Is this debate still going on, or has opinion settled on one site over the other? I've received several of these in a bulk lot of Greek AR fractions. One of them weighs only 0.13g. Would that be considered a hemitetartemorion? The size is similar to the others in the 0.23-0.28g range, but the weight is about half.
Not sure about the attribution, as far as I know these are attributed under Mylasa, atleast SNG Kayhan does so. In the Archaic and early Classical times the Attic standard was not well spread at all. There were a lot of different weight standards. Asia Minor was during that time under Persian authority. The coins were struck on the Persic standard, which was heavier than the Attic standard. An Attic standard tetartemorion would weight around 0.18g, hence why these weight more. I cannot judge about your fraction without seeing it first, I would not be that quickly to say it is a hemitetartemorion. It could be in rough shape and therefore lost some silver weight over the 2500 years. Or it is just an outlier and the minter made a mistake with the weight back in the ancient times. I am atleast not aware of a published example of that type as a hemitetartemorion.
In the early/mid 4th century BC, some of the satraps of Caria "restored" some of the Miletos types. Original Miletos Restored IMO, the ones that are markedly more "classical" are more likely to be from Caria and the early 4th c. BC rather than Miletos and the late 6th c. I have a few, but mostly just pics of my favorite one, which I believe to be Carian Also, it's important to note that we have little evidence of how widespread the Attic standard was prior to the Hellenistic age. Generally, for fractions I use: 1.5 - 1.1g = Diobol 1 - 0.8 = Trihemiobol 0.7 -0.6g = Obol 0.4 - 0.3 = Hemiobol 0.15-0.2 = Tetartemorion Anything below 0.1 is a hemitartemorion - these are quite rare and I have only handled a few out of thousands of AR fractions.
MILETOS Ionia Miletos AR Tetartemorion 5.6mm 0.2g Roaring Lion Hd - Bird Klein 430 SNG Kay 941 Iona-Miletos Late6thC fine lion UNCERTAIN ASIA ASIA MINOR Uncertain mint AR Tetartemorion Lion - Incuse 5mm 0.13g
I suppose it would not take much wear to lose 0.05-0.10g of silver. So at 0.13g, it's probably safe to call this a tetartemorion. Here's the coin in question: Caria, Mylasa 6th-5th Century B.C. AR tetartemorion Obv: Forepart of roaring lion, facing left. Rev: Bird, standing, facing left, within incuse square (no pellets). 5.2 mm, 0.13g
My example was attributed as Miletos by the auction house Strange - your examples were both attributed by Savoca. Probably they are aware of a style difference I cannot see.
Klein came out in 1999. Dieter Klein, Sammlung von griechischen Kleinsilbermünzen und Bronzen AKA Nomismata 3 (1999). I don't have a copy. I wish I did -- I have managed to acquire several of Klein's coins, but not his book! SNG Kayhan came out just a few years later, in 2002. Muharrem Kayhan bought mostly locally, from farmers and detectorists, and made a "commendable efford to record" where the coins were found. For coins of Ionia or Caria, the Kayhan attribution should be preferred. I don't know of any more recent scholarship. HNO is the primary database people are using, and they say Mylasa. Search for "bird" -- there are many variations (left facing, right facing, dots). Regarding denominations, some people don't believe hemitetartemorion are a real denomination. It could be a low-weight tetartemorion. Jury is still out.
There is so much stylistic variation that I don't think style alone can differentiate between mints with a coin this tiny. There's a two-year difference in the auction dates, so I think it's more likely that Savoca just changed their opinion about where this coin was from. I think originally most people assumed it was from Miletos but gradually more people are accepting Mylasa as the correct location. Kayhan attributes these to Mylasa, so based on what @Ed Snible wrote, I'm inclined to accept that.
Yes, I noticed the auction dates. But a week after the second coin ... Miletos again 13.12.2020 - Mylasa https://www.biddr.com/auctions/savoca/browse?a=1444&l=1547709 20.12.2020, a week later, a similar coin (mine eventually) attributed as Miletos https://www.biddr.com/auctions/savoca/browse?a=1462&l=1566415 (notice the weight) I don't know, really. After reading this topic I am also tempted to say Mylasa but I don't understand the criteria they used, perhaps the coins were from different collectors who attributed them differently.
I don't know who catalogs for Savoca. Most auction firms do not name the catalogers. I suspect some catalogers merely verify references, or even copy references from online auctions without checking them. So that I would not be guilty of the same, I checked SNG Kayhan myself. The cataloger, Koray Konuk, does not say "Mylasa". He says "Mylasa? Milesian standard ..." For SNG Kayhan 944, he cites "SNG Keckman I, 922" (I don't have it to check). Keyhan had 10 examples with minor variations, that he acquired between 1995 and 2000. You have no evidence that Konuk lacks, so best to also say "Mylasa?"
One of the hardest lessons to learn in ancient numismatics is that auction catalogers are not infallible. As a matter of course, early on I always gave a lot of weight to the written descriptions; that is until I started to specialize and realized how questionable many descriptions are. Do your research, and if it’s important, verify don’t trust. Just remember, you can learn and understand anything if you try.
