Catalog
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!
| Issuer | Uncertain Cilician city |
|---|---|
| Year | 400 BC - 350 BC |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Hemiobol (1⁄12) |
| 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 | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| 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 | Plain |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | ND (400 BC - 350 BC) |
| Additional information |
Cilicia in the fourth century BC was a patchwork of semi-autonomous cities and dynasts operating under loose Achaemenid suzerainty, which is precisely why attribution of small silver fractions from the region remains contested. Without a controlling ethnic or magistrate's name, pieces like this circulate through the literature reassigned from one candidate city to another — Soloi, Mallos, and Tarsos have all absorbed attributions that were later revised.
At 0.30g, the margin for die-cutting error relative to total coin mass is substantial, making exact weight-based attribution nearly impossible.