Catalog
| Issuer | Hipponion |
|---|---|
| Year | 192 BC - 89 BC |
| Type | Standard circulation coin |
| Value | |
| Currency | Drachm |
| Composition | Bronze |
| Weight | 5.96 g |
| Diameter | 25.5 mm |
| Thickness | |
| Shape | Round (irregular) |
| Technique | Hammered |
| Orientation | Variable alignment ↺ |
| Engraver(s) | Valentia |
| In circulation to | |
| Reference(s) | SNG ANS 3#cf. 471 |
| Obverse description | Laureate head of Zeus on the right. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | |
| Obverse lettering | |
| Reverse description | Winged lightning bolt (with 8 flashes) and stumbling bull. |
| Reverse script | Latin |
| Reverse lettering | Valentia |
| Edge | |
| Mint | |
| Mintage |
ND (192 BC - 89 BC) - - |
| Numisquare ID | 4133088790 |
| Additional information |
Historical Context: This bronze AE unit from Hipponion, issued between 192 BC and 89 BC, places it within the late Hellenistic period, a time of increasing Roman hegemony over Magna Graecia. Hipponion, a strategic city in Southern Italy, saw its coinage reflect its status as a Roman ally or subject, eventually becoming the Roman colony of Vibo Valentia. The issuance of civic bronzes underscores the city's continued administrative autonomy, demonstrating the gradual integration of Greek cities into the Roman sphere.
Artistry: While the engraver remains anonymous, typical of civic bronzes from this era, the coin's design would adhere to broader Hellenistic stylistic traditions prevalent in Southern Italy. Such issues often feature local deities or personifications on the obverse, rendered with naturalism, alongside civic symbols or mythological scenes on the reverse. The artistic execution, while not always reaching the pinnacle of contemporary silver, would aim for clear legibility and recognizable iconography, reflecting the city's cultural identity.
Technical/Grading: Weighing 5.96 grams and measuring 25.5 millimeters, this AE unit represents a substantial bronze denomination. Key high-points, typically on the obverse (e.g., hair, facial features) and reverse (e.g., device elements), are crucial for assessing wear. As is common for bronze issues of this period, strike quality can vary; off-centering, minor flan irregularities, and areas of weakness are frequently observed. A well-struck example would exhibit strong detail on central motifs, with minimal die wear and a relatively even strike.