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!
Tetrobol - Uncertain Dynast
| Issuer | Lycia, Dynasts of |
|---|---|
| Year | 490 BC - 430 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 | 3.01 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 | A ketos (sea-monster) swimming to the right, rendered in a style closely mirroring the obverse type, set within a raised dotted rectangular frame. The entire design is deeply recessed within a square incuse punch, a hallmark of early Lycian dynastic coinage, with the creature's coiled body and fanged head clearly articulated in relief against the incuse field. The incuse square exhibits slightly irregular borders, consistent with hand-struck production of the Archaic 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 (490 BC - 430 BC) |
| Additional information |
Lycian dynastic coinage of this period emerged from a political structure unique in the ancient world — local rulers operating under loose Achaemenid Persian suzerainty who nonetheless struck their own silver with considerable autonomy. Attribution of many fifth-century Lycian tetrobols remains genuinely unsettled; the dynastic sequence is still being reconstructed from inscriptions, satrapal records, and hoards, and scholars do not always agree on which names belong to which issues.
The Rhodiapolis and Kadyanda hoards have been the primary evidence base for reattributing pieces previously cataloged as "uncertain."