In footnote #25 in my recent article about
Parthian fractions in
KOINON: The International Journal of Classical Numismatic Studies, I make reference to the following coin in
Schatz’s
gallery (I
had received her prior permission to mention that coin):
https://www.forumancientcoins.com/gallery/displayimage.php?pos=-124775As
Schatz rightfully points out in her description of that coin, “this coin is considered possibly undocumented and very
rare”
In the
KOINON footnote (#25, page 123) I state: “While the Fars ‘
Parthian’ coins consist mostly of diobols, they do also include a
drachm of Pacorus II and several very
rare hemidrachms of Pacorus II and Osroes I. In addition, an unpublished and unique little bronze coin, typologically similar (but not identical) to the Fars
hoard diobols attributed to Vologases II, also exists – although it is unclear whether it is from the
hoard. The coin, described as a
chalkous, is ex-Hauck & Aufhäuser and is currently part of the extensive
Parthian collection of
Schatz. Given the fact that this coin is roughly the size and
weight of
Parthian diobols, and that base metals are believed to have been sometimes used for test strikes for silver issues, might the coin have been a test strike from a
Persis mint that generated coins from the Fars
hoard? Or is it possibly the only extant example of base metal ‘
Parthian’ coins struck in
Persis?”
I am
writing this post now because of a silver coin, described (correctly, I believe) as a
diobol but misidentified as Vologases I rather than II (the pelleted
tiara pegs it as Volo II), that was listed within the last 24 hours. The coin, which closely matches
Schatz’s, may support my speculation about her coin perhaps being a test strike for an AR issue. (For context pertaining to the
Parthians’ use of non-precious metal for test strikes, see
Robert Gonnella’s “A Previously Unknown
Tetradrachm of Phraates IV: An Ancient
Counterfeit?” in
The Celator,
Vol. 24, No. 8, August 2010, page 36; it may be reasonable to assume the same tradition of test-striking with non-precious metal held true for
Parthian loyalists in
Persis)
Referring to the
Type 3 (plate 42, #3) diobols of Vologases II from the Fars
hoard, David
Sellwood, in
his 1989 article “New
Parthian Coin
Types” (
The Numismatic Chronicle, Volume 149) stated that only “a single
obverse die has been noted for this group.” Thus
Schatz’s coin is an anomaly not only in that it is struck in base metal (AE), but also in that its dies – both
obverse and
reverse – do not match any previously known examples.
Below is
Schatz’s AE above the newly listed AR
diobol. Dies are quite similar, but perhaps not a match – unless reworked between strikes. But, whether or not a match, I think they must be by the same workshop and quite possibly the same die engraver. Could the AR represent the production version, perhaps from newer or reworked dies, of the earlier AE test strike? Or were these two coins intended as different
denominations,
chalkous and
diobol, albeit with almost identical devices? (That seems unlikely to me) In any event the new listing is the first AR
diobol I’ve seen with the same rather distinctive
style as
Schatz’s fascinating coin.