I (recently) purchased a number of Alexander III (The Great) coins, where the seller presumed that all coins with Herakles on the Obverse was Alexander The Great. This one turned out to be Kassander. Kassander Kings of Macedon 305-297 B.C.. Obv: Head of Herakles right, wearing lion skin. Rev: Rider on horseback right, raising right hand in salute, monogram before and 'K' below. Uncertain mint in Macedon. Black Patina Bronze, AE21 mm., 5.4 gm., SNG Alpha Bank 906. (See also eBay item No. 321741557902)
Something similar happened to me...not Hercules or Alexander III but Philip II and a horseman. I bought a coin and thought it was a Philip II horseman (coin below) and after I posted it and identified I didn't know what the "symbol" was below the horseman was, the more seasoned CoinTalkers came to my aid and was able to help correctly identify the ruler. Purchased as a Philip II...turned out to be Lysimachus Lysimachus, Kingdom of Thrace, BC 323-305 AE, 5g, 17mm; 5h; BC 317-305 Obv.: laureate head of Apollo right Rev.: ΦΙΛΙ[ΠΠΟΥ]; horseman riding right; ΛΥ beneath horse left, lion forepart right (protome of lion)
With the name Alexander, but likely issued under the rule of Antigonos Monophthalmus. (Kolophon mint,Price 1808)
this coin is philip iii... the seller i purchased this coin from listed it as an alexander iii...i wasn't sure. turned out to be angtigonos ii.
Is it possible that most of the posthumous coins of "Alexander III" were intended to be an image of the current ruler that issued them, but simply copying the style set by Alexander? I'm wondering now. Maybe my Alexander III issued under Seleukos I is really Seleukos I in the style of Alexander.
@> Sallent. I think that you are quite right (to wonder, that is). Here is a 'Posthumous' Alexander III, issued by his son Alexander IV, which may (in fact) be Alexander IV in the style of Alexander III. I don't have the answer. ALEXANDER III 'The Great' Kings of Macedon 336-323B.C. Obv: Head of Herakles right, wearing lion's skin headdress. Rev:BASILEWS bow in bowcase and club, racing torch below. Uncert. mint in West Asia Minor. Struck posthumously323-310BC Black patina Bronze 21 mm, 6.2 gm,Scarce Price2800; SNG München 919.
That has been my understanding, however correct or incorrect, and it seems most list 'lifetime' issues of Alexander as in the 'guise' of Herakles, but with his 'likeness'...so a 'likeness' of the current rulers in the the style of a Herakles/Alexander coin seems likely... Perhaps those more knowledgeable will help clarify this....
I see the continuation of the Alexander types as a statement in two parts: 1. This coin is good value just like the coins of the good old days were. 2. The ruler listed on this coin is the legitimate successor of Alexander in these parts and you should support him. Changing the face might be a political statement and might be a style progression based on the then current idea of what a ruler should look like. Stronger rulers changed to their own portraits quickly. Others might be expected to emulate Alexander longer. Many of the posthumous coins were from cities with some claim to autonomous status. These issued coins of the Alexander style longer than places like Egypt where the face of Ptolemy was quickly on distinct coinage. Lysimakos drachm 323-281 BC Seleukos II 230-225 BC tetradrachm Susa Both of these rulers also issued coins with 'new' types. We might want to avoid reading too much meaning into all this. I believe the most important factor of coin type is to make the economy feel secure about the soundness of the money. Retaining types of the good old days has always been used for this purpose. Lets mention that people who only want to collect coins of nice guys with high minded ideals may want to avoid this period. Some of these people made the evil Romans you love to hate look a bit amateurish.
