Catalog
| Issuer | Lysimacheia |
|---|---|
| Year | 305 BC - 281 BC |
| Type | Standard circulation coin |
| Value | Chalkon (1⁄48) |
| Currency | Drachm |
| Composition | Bronze |
| Weight | 2.1 g |
| Diameter | 15 mm |
| Thickness | |
| Shape | Round (irregular) |
| Technique | Hammered |
| Orientation | Variable alignment ↺ |
| Engraver(s) | |
| In circulation to | |
| Reference(s) | HGC 3.2#1501 , Moush`25#5509 |
| Obverse description | Helmeted head of Athena right. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | |
| Obverse lettering | |
| Reverse description | Lion leaping right; below, ΠA monogram |
| Reverse script | Greek |
| Reverse lettering |
ΛΥΣΙΜΑΧEΩN (Translation: Lysimacheia) |
| Edge | |
| Mint | |
| Mintage |
ND (305 BC - 281 BC) - - |
| Numisquare ID | 7930324350 |
| Additional information |
Historical Context: This Chalkon was issued by Lysimacheia, the capital city founded by Lysimachos, one of Alexander the Great's most formidable Diadochi. Struck between 305 BC and 281 BC, this period marks Lysimachos' reign as king of Thrace and much of Asia Minor, following the collapse of Alexander's empire. Such bronze issues were vital for facilitating local commerce and paying his extensive armies, underpinning the economic stability of his nascent Hellenistic kingdom amidst constant geopolitical flux.
Artistry: While the engraver remains anonymous, the coin's design reflects the early Hellenistic stylistic school. Typical Lysimacheian bronze types of this era often feature a youthful head of Herakles on the obverse, embodying strength and divine favor, paired with a powerful lion on the reverse, symbolizing royal authority and martial prowess. The artistry, though constrained by the small flan, aimed for robust, recognizable imagery consistent with the ruler's propaganda.
Technical/Grading: As a bronze Chalkon, this issue typically presents with variable strike quality. High-points, such as Herakles' hair and brow or the lion's mane and musculature, are often the first areas to show wear. Flan irregularities, including minor porosity and off-center strikes, are common for small bronze denominations of this period. Collectors should prioritize examples with clear type identification and minimal corrosion, as these factors significantly impact aesthetic appeal and market value for these utilitarian issues.