The above link 'discusses' the significance of the monograms and the districts (Meris) and rulers--- usually having one or the other...and the lack of them during Roman dominion----but still a bit confusing to me LOL
"Some monograms were abbreviations of cities or names of cities, or names of officials and some still remain a mystery." A quote by Andrew Mcintyre discussing 'Macedonian' monograms...and that's all I can basically discover myself..... unfortunately, which isn't much.
I tried looking as well, and there really doesn't seem to be anything conclusive. Many Greek issues from earlier periods come with a bewildering variety of monograms. I suspect those are going to remain mysterious too.
was thasos somewhat isolated when these coins were made? A lot of thasos tets, especially this type from 1st and 2nd century BC, seemed to feature less wear than one would expect from a 2100 year coin. Is that an advantage of their high relief or alloy composition? Seleucid tets from the same period also had high relief, but are generally more worn?
Coins do not get wear from being old but from being circulated. Large silvers that were kept and traded in large bank pots with a thousand just like them did not get worn. That is why we have so many Athenian owls in great shape. These were too valuable for purchases at the lunch counter. They were more for things that we today would pay by bank check. I agree there are more Seleucid coins that show wear so it is a question what differences in the regional economies made their tets circulate more. Of course it could be a question of finds. Some ancients are known from very few but large finds. If today's entire supply of a coin all came from a chest of 5000 brand new ones found together in 1700, there would be no low grade coins. If all had been found singly in thousands of different plowed fields, there might be no nice ones. There are people who study such things and write books on coin hoard patterns but it has never been an interest of mine.