Classical Numismatic Group, LLC
Triton XXII 8-9 Jan 2019
View prices realized
► Sale information
Find similar lots
SELEUCIS and PIERIA, Antioch. Claudius. AD 41-54. AR Tetradrachm (25mm, 14.34 g, 12h). TIBERI[OΣ KΛAV]Δ-IOΣ KAIΣAP, bare head right / ΣEΒAΣTOΣ ΓEPMA-NIKOΣ, Zeus Nicephorus enthroned left; in left field, ΣΩ above API. Prieur 36 (Antioch's "secondary mint"); McAlee 232/2 (this coin illustrated); RPC I 4113/4 (this coin, uncertain mint). VF, toned, light porosity, metal flaw on reverse. Very rare.
From the Michel Prieur Collection. Ex Lanz 22 (10 May 1982), lot 614.
This coin belongs to a class of Julio-Claudian "Zeus tetradrachms" that have been variously attributed. Seyrig (Syria 20 [1939], p. 39) was the first to propose Tarsus as the place where they were struck, but RPC (p. 604) rejected this attribution as other Augustan and Tiberian tetradrachms, of different style and of a higher silver content, specifically carry the TAP ethnic on their reverses (see lot 513 above). It is suggested there that the "Zeus tetradrachms" were perhaps struck at Laodicea in Syria or more likely an uncertain mint in Cilicia. McAlee (p. 128) argues that the attribution to Tarsus should not be dismissed, noting that the mint of Antioch also struck coins of differing style and silver content, while stressing the stylistic similarities between the "Zeus tetradrachms" and bronze coinage of Tarsus.
From the Michel Prieur Collection. Ex Lanz 22 (10 May 1982), lot 614.
This coin belongs to a class of Julio-Claudian "Zeus tetradrachms" that have been variously attributed. Seyrig (Syria 20 [1939], p. 39) was the first to propose Tarsus as the place where they were struck, but RPC (p. 604) rejected this attribution as other Augustan and Tiberian tetradrachms, of different style and of a higher silver content, specifically carry the TAP ethnic on their reverses (see lot 513 above). It is suggested there that the "Zeus tetradrachms" were perhaps struck at Laodicea in Syria or more likely an uncertain mint in Cilicia. McAlee (p. 128) argues that the attribution to Tarsus should not be dismissed, noting that the mint of Antioch also struck coins of differing style and silver content, while stressing the stylistic similarities between the "Zeus tetradrachms" and bronze coinage of Tarsus.