Roma Numismatics Ltd
Auction XXVII 22-23 Mar 2023
View prices realized
► Sale information
Find similar lots
Kings of Pontos, Mithradates III AR Tetradrachm. Circa 200-185 BC. Diademed and draped bust to right / Zeus Aëtophoros seated to left, holding sceptre; ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ to right, MIΘPAΔATOY to left, eight-rayed star within crescent to inner left field, monogram above Λ to inner right field, monogram in exergue. Callataÿ, First, p. 68, fig. 12 (O3/R1) = Leu 81, 236 (same dies); Mattingly, Studies Price, pl. 56, 4 var. (monogram); SNG Black Sea 1024 var. (same); Kraay & Hirmer 769 var. (same); Jameson 2151 var. (monogram and no letter); HGC 7, 320. 16.12g, 30mm, 12h.
Extremely Fine; evenly toned, boasting an exceptional example of Pontic portraiture. Exceedingly Rare; one of only 3 examples offered at auction since 2001.
This excessively rare tetradrachm is attributed to Mithradates III, a mysterious Pontic king of whom we know startlingly little. His very existence is contested by some historians, though Appian refers to the later Mithradates VI as the eighth king of the dynasty and the sixth of the name, thus making Mithradates III's reign necessary to complete the line of kings. Mithradates III is believed to have ruled during 220-185 BC and was therefore the father of Pharnakes I and Mithradates IV. The attribution of certain tetradrachms to this ruler remains disputed with evidence from the Latakia and Babylon hoards leading Harold Mattingly to conclude that they should actually be attributed to Mithradates IV (H. Mattingly, 'The Coinage of Mithradates III, Pharnakes, and Mithradates IV of Pontos' in Essays Price (London, 1998) p. 255). He argues that if the tetradrachms were struck by Mithradates III, their appearance in hoards dated to circa 160-150 BC would be highly unusual and a more plausible explanation is a reattribution to his son Mithradates IV, who ruled in circa 169-150 BC. However, the case for reattribution is undermined by the idiosyncratic portrait which differs greatly from those seen on other issues confidently attributed to Mithradates IV.
The wonderfully lifelike portraits of the Pontic kings are exceptional in their use of verisimilitude. When compared with other Hellenistic royal portraits on Ptolemaic or Seleukid coinage, which are often idealised, the Pontic portraits are remarkably realistic. The combination of this individualised portrait as a distinctly Pontic feature alongside the familiar Alexander III 'The Great' Zeus Aëtophoros reverse suggests that Mithradates III wanted to both distinguish himself as an individual ruler whilst also drawing on thoroughly Hellenistic imagery to legitimise his position and boost the acceptance of his coinage.
Extremely Fine; evenly toned, boasting an exceptional example of Pontic portraiture. Exceedingly Rare; one of only 3 examples offered at auction since 2001.
This excessively rare tetradrachm is attributed to Mithradates III, a mysterious Pontic king of whom we know startlingly little. His very existence is contested by some historians, though Appian refers to the later Mithradates VI as the eighth king of the dynasty and the sixth of the name, thus making Mithradates III's reign necessary to complete the line of kings. Mithradates III is believed to have ruled during 220-185 BC and was therefore the father of Pharnakes I and Mithradates IV. The attribution of certain tetradrachms to this ruler remains disputed with evidence from the Latakia and Babylon hoards leading Harold Mattingly to conclude that they should actually be attributed to Mithradates IV (H. Mattingly, 'The Coinage of Mithradates III, Pharnakes, and Mithradates IV of Pontos' in Essays Price (London, 1998) p. 255). He argues that if the tetradrachms were struck by Mithradates III, their appearance in hoards dated to circa 160-150 BC would be highly unusual and a more plausible explanation is a reattribution to his son Mithradates IV, who ruled in circa 169-150 BC. However, the case for reattribution is undermined by the idiosyncratic portrait which differs greatly from those seen on other issues confidently attributed to Mithradates IV.
The wonderfully lifelike portraits of the Pontic kings are exceptional in their use of verisimilitude. When compared with other Hellenistic royal portraits on Ptolemaic or Seleukid coinage, which are often idealised, the Pontic portraits are remarkably realistic. The combination of this individualised portrait as a distinctly Pontic feature alongside the familiar Alexander III 'The Great' Zeus Aëtophoros reverse suggests that Mithradates III wanted to both distinguish himself as an individual ruler whilst also drawing on thoroughly Hellenistic imagery to legitimise his position and boost the acceptance of his coinage.