Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
Diobol - Sparadokos
| Issuer | Odryssa, Kingdom of |
|---|---|
| Year | 450 BC - 425 BC |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | 1.27 g |
| Diameter | Log in to see details |
| Thickness | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Technique | Log in to see details |
| Orientation | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Forepart (protome) of a horse facing left, rendered in bold relief with archaic stylistic conventions characteristic of Thracian coinage of the mid-fifth century BC. The animal's musculature and mane are summarily indicated. The design is contained within a prominent border of large pellets encircling the entire field. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Greek |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | Log in to see details |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Sparadokos ruled as a subordinate dynast under the early Odrysian kingdom during the consolidation period following Teres I's unification of Thracian tribes — his coins are among the earliest struck by any Odrysian ruler, predating the more prolific issues of his better-documented son Seuthes I. The attribution to Sparadokos himself remains debated in some quarters, with a handful of scholars preferring a slightly later date bracket.
The "var." designation against Peykov B0060 is worth noting: Odrysian fractional silver of this period shows considerable die-to-die variation, and clean attributions are genuinely difficult given how few specimens survive in documented collections.