Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;John Anthony, post: 1778436, member: 42773&quot;]<font face="Times New Roman">In a nutshell, here are my reasons for attributing the host coin to Antiochus II or III. First off, let me say that I know very little about Seleucid bronzes – this is just a preliminary foray. If any of you folks see something I’ve missed, please chime in!</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font face="Times New Roman">Here are two examples, coins of Antiochus II and III, respectively…</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s17.postimg.org/53eqiz8pb/antiochus_ii.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s21.postimg.org/z6y4frs8n/antiochus_iii.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font face="Times New Roman">The legend on the reverse of these pieces reads ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΥ, with the word ANTIOXOY on the left side, running roughly from 11 to 7 o’clock. If you rotate the reverse of either of these coins 45 degrees counter-clockwise, you get exactly the orientation of the letters on my Proto-Nabataean.</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font face="Times New Roman">By Antiochus IV, however, the words ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΥ appear entirely on the right side of the reverse, and the left has descriptive clauses such as ΦΙΛΟΠΑΤΟΡΟΣ. If the Proto-Nabataean host was a bronze of Antiochus IV or later, the remnant legend TIoXoY would read upside-down and backwards, unless the host coin was struck radically off-center. (That is a possibility of course, and I need to look for other markers to rule it out, if it can be ruled out.)</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><b><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s7.postimg.org/b8dx8zgdn/antiochus_iv.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></font></b></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font face="Times New Roman">There are two other reasons for considering an earlier Antiochus here. One is epigraphic. I’ve noticed that the coins of Antiochus II and III exhibit the most frequent use of a small “o” or dot to represent the letter Omicron. That’s exactly what appears on the Proto-Nabataean. Issues by later rulers use the open, large O almost exclusively, as do the coins of Antiochus I. Of course, this may be accountable simply to differences between individual engravers – I’m not sure. As I say, this is only my first look at Seleucid bronze. In fact, there may be types issued by later rulers that I’m not aware of, and my theories may get blown completely out of the water, but that’s OK – you’ve got to start somewhere.</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font face="Times New Roman">The final reason I’m suggesting the host coin belongs to Antiochus II or III has to do with dating, but that’s still another post.</font>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in