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!
Obol
| Issuer | Uncertain Cilician city |
|---|---|
| Year | 400 BC - 301 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 | 0.77 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 | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | Head of a youthful male deity, likely Ares or a local hero, facing left, wearing a crested Attic helmet adorned with a laurel wreath. The hair is rendered in detailed waves beneath the helmet, and the neck is partially draped. The style reflects the high-quality engraving tradition of 4th-century BC Cilician mints, combining Greek artistic conventions with local iconographic preferences. The flan is irregular, consistent with hand-struck hammered coinage of the period. |
| 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 (400 BC - 301 BC) |
| Additional information |
Cilicia in the fourth century produced a remarkable proliferation of small silver fractions from cities and dynasts whose precise identities remain disputed — a direct consequence of Achaemenid administrative practice, which permitted local authorities broad autonomy in coinage so long as tribute obligations were met. Göktürk's cataloguing of these pieces has brought some order to the series, but attribution of individual issues to specific mints remains contentious among specialists.
The "uncertain Cilician city" designation here is honest rather than evasive.