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!
Stater - Uncertain dynast
| Issuer | Lycia, Dynasts of |
|---|---|
| Year | 500 BC - 480 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 | Log in to see details |
| Diameter | 18 mm |
| 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 | Deep square incuse punch divided by eight raised ridges radiating from a central boss, forming a multi-pointed star or wheel pattern within the sunken compartment. The incuse square is sharply defined with slightly raised borders, typical of early hammered coinage produced in western Asia Minor and Lycia during the late Archaic period. The design is entirely geometric and devoid of inscription or figural imagery, representing the standard reverse type of early Lycian dynastic staters. The incuse technique reflects the influence of East Greek minting practice. |
| 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 (500 BC - 480 BC) |
| Additional information |
Lycian dynastic coinage of the early fifth century predates the region's fuller integration into Achaemenid administrative structures, and these early staters are among the most difficult to attribute — the dynastic sequence for this period remains contested, with some scholars folding several "uncertain" issues into the orbit of Kuprlli or his predecessors based on coin-typology alone. Müseler's ongoing work has progressively tightened attributions, but the earliest bracket remains genuinely unresolved.