Starting from the twenty-ninth issue tetradrachms issues are divided in parts, they are distinguished on the
reverse by letters in alphabetical order reported above the Panathenaic
amphora, and handled by a different monetary magistrate that is supported by two other regular officials that follow the entire issue. Under the
amphora, instead, a progressive number is reported that indicates the coins minting progress. To understand better this elaborated symbol system lets observe the figure here posted which reproduces some tetradrachms from the 166-165 BC. issue distinguished by the symbol with an
anchor alongside a
star. The letter
on the
amphora on the
reverse of the coins no.1 and no.2 indicates the third
part of the issue with a series of 11 parts indicated with progressive letters from A to
. Reconstructing the whole emission with the
anchor and the
star symbol it is noted that within each
part of the emission, distinguished by a different alphabetical letter reported on the
amphora, a
part of the coins have under the
amphora the initials ME (coin no.1, fig.no.18), while the remaining
part of the coins have the
sign (coin no.2). These two signs, interpreted as compound numbers and not like letters, reveal to be a numerical progression formed by two products: ME that is (5) x M (10,000)= 50,000 drachms (equal to 12,500 tetradrachms) -In fact, 50,000 drachms : 4 (value of each
tetradrachm in drachms) = 12,5000 tetradrachms- while
is 200 (
) x 500 (
) = 100,000 drachms (equal to 25,000 tetradrachms). This meant that in each
part of the issue there
had to be 100,000 drachms and so, in reality, 25,000 tetradrachms. The coins on and on minted, then, contained a kind of “counter”, which meant that the progressive notation informed what point the
mint’s production
had reached, at the moment of their minting: they started with minting the first 50,000 drachms (indicated on the ME coins) and, once minted that quantity of coins, they aimed towards the 100,000 drachms amount (indicated on the
:Greek_Phi:coins). Once actually the amount of 100,000 drachms was minted (and so, practically 25,000 tetradrachms) they reset the “counter” and restarted minting a new series of 100,000 drachms (reported first with ME and then with
under the
amphora) indicated in a new
part of the issue, above the
amphora with the following alphabetical letter. For this reason, the parts of the issue were indicated with an alphabetical numbering (the letters on the
amphora) and the quantity of coins falling into each issue’s portion were indicated with the numerical progression (the numbers under the
amphora).
Once minted all the coins falling within a given portion of the issue, then, as well as restarting the numbering of the pieces minted, even the third magistrate was replaced (the third name on the
reverse in the bottom right
field) it was set aside the two regular magistrate that followed the whole issue: in the specific case the magistrate
(coin no.1 and no.2), that
had supervised the coinage of the coins in the
series adding
his name to the other two regular magistrates
and
, it was replaced by
called to
help the
series coinage (coin no.3).