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 - Uncertain Dynast
| Issuer | Lycia, Dynasts of |
|---|---|
| Year | 460 BC - 430 BC |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Diobol (⅓) |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | Log in to see details |
| 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 | Draped bust of a female figure, tentatively identified as Aphrodite, depicted in right-facing profile. The hair is elaborately arranged and secured within a fine reticulated hair-net, rendered with careful engraving detail characteristic of early Lycian dynastic coinage. The facial features are modelled in a severe archaic-to-early Classical style, with a well-defined eye, prominent nose, and subtly parted lips. No legend or inscription appears in the field. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| 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 | ND (460 BC - 430 BC) |
| Additional information |
Lycian dynastic coinage of the fifth century BC was produced by semi-autonomous rulers operating under loose Achaemenid suzerainty — local enough to mint in their own names, subordinate enough that precise attribution remains contested two and a half millennia later. Without a readable dynast name, this piece falls into the broad unattributed category that has frustrated scholars since Babelon first catalogued the series.
The Traité II reference places it among a cluster of issues Babelon grouped by fabric and type rather than ruler, a methodology that subsequent die studies have only partially refined.