I just purchased a decent looking Alexandria Tetradrachma I thought might have been Probus but now that I have looked closely at it, I think not. Perhaps, Aurelian, Numerian, Diocletian? Anybody know for sure?
Here's a Maximian (top) with eagle and Numerian (bottom) with seated Athena as both are mentioned in the thread. I'm guessing that kevin's coin is Maximian, based on a quick comparison of the obverse legends. (I could be wrong, though)
The Alexandrian mint portraits are generally identifiable until after Gallienus and then they become more generic. Your Maximian tet has Elpis on the reverse. The obverse legend is a bit tough to make out in your tiny image but it is clearly Maximian and a nice coin: A(VTOKPATΩP) K(AICAP) M(APKOC) OVA(ΛEPIOC) MAΞIMIANOC CEB(ACTOC) Translated, Imperator Caesar Marcus Valerius Maximianus Augustus. Reference: Emmett 4114, regnal year 2, rated R1 (most common)
Lets also remember that many of these emperors were never in the owns where the mint was located and some dies might have been made with word descriptions of the new man. Below are Alexandrian tetradrachms of co emperors Maximianus and Diocletian both from year nine which means the one of Diocletian was one year before the one for Maximianus who did not become co emperor until Diocletian was in his second year. I do not see the portraits as easily confused. Maximianus had a bit heavier jaw. There most certainly are some dies that are better or more realistic than others and coins of this period are not the equal of those from preceding centuries but there was some effort being made. It would be interesting to see if one of our Alexandria specialist collectors could separate a hundred mixed coins of this period into piles for each of the two rulers with any accuracy without looking at legends. I know it would be possible to fool any of us buy selecting coins that were more than the average degree of confusing. The portraits from different mints vary more than the difference between subjects. More different mints and the more dies needed in a fast paced, overworked environment would make this situation worse. However, we might even make the point that the same differences can be found in portraits of many earlier rulers. Exact matches are not always found.
Thanks. Seeing the letters spelled out like that I can see the inscription on the coin itself pretty well. I only paid $20 for it but felt it was in nice condition so it will be a "type coin" for later Imperial Alexandrian pieces. It was kind of you to literally spell it out for me.
So far I look for key letters when the legend is a little uncertain. Much like the way @TIF highlighted the X if you can narrow it down to a few emperors then looking for key letters in their names by the distinctive shapes you can usually get there and then compare to a couple of other issues of the same suspected emperor to be sure.
Very good point! One beginners might want to learn is that Diocletian tetradrachms from Alexandria frequently has a 'dot' in the middle of the legend. This is actually the letter omicron (small o) just living up to its name. None of my three examples below have a 'hole' in that o but do in others in the legend Here the dot is pretty large but still a dot betewwn I and K. Here the dot o is small enough it could be missed if you are not careful. By year 9 the shorter legend was in use so the dot o was the third letter from the left. Fewer letters meant there was room for a full size letter but that was not the way they made 'small o'.
