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 | Leontini |
|---|---|
| Year | 450 BC |
| Type | Standard circulation coin |
| 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 | 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 | Facing right, a lion's head with jaws agape and tongue prominently protruding, rendered with bold, expressive detail characteristic of Sicilian coinage of the early Classical period. Four barley grains are arranged in the field around the central device, symbolizing the agricultural wealth of the region. The Greek ethnic legend LEONTINON is distributed between the barley grains, reading LEO – NTI – NO – N. The composition reflects the high artistic standards of Sicilian die engraving in the mid-fifth century BC. |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | LEO – NTI – NO – N |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Leontini's tetradrachms of this period were struck at a Sicilian Greek city that maintained a fiercely independent monetary tradition despite persistent pressure from Syracuse, its dominant neighbor to the south. The city's mint was active only during intervals of genuine political autonomy — issues like this one effectively mark moments when Leontini was not under Syracusan control.
The "var." citations against Boehringer, SNG ANS, and Gulbenkian suggest a die pairing not precisely matched in any single reference corpus — unsurprising given how closely related obverse and reverse dies were shared, rotated, and reused across this series.