Identification would be appreciated of Antioch Head of Zeus, seated Zeus bronze

[coldavo]

Hi All,

I have just received another Antioch "head of Zeus, seated Zeus" AE21mm 7.03 grams for my collection and would appreciate help, hopefully, as to date and Reference number.

I have shown a photo of the coin, some further photos of the date and that of a second coin with the triangular section of the throne’s leg mentioned. The photos of the date are not much help.

It is in reasonable condition and seems to be the ANTIOCEON MHTROPOLEWS AUTONOMU type which should date it to possibly between the Caesarion  Year 11 (39/38 BC) and Year 33 (17/16 BC). The date is there but is not distinct.
E T Newell in his 1919 article “The Pre-Imperial Coinage of Roman Antioch”  advises that from the year 19 (31/30 BC) the leg of the throne of Zeus on the reverse shows a distinct larger triangular section (see the left centre of the second photograph). If he is correct this should reduce the period in question to between year 11 to year 18. Newell seems to have known of only years 11 and 12 in this range.
Any help with dating the coin would be most appreciated..

All the best,
Col

[Altamura]

I think it looks like AI and then would be year 11. But I have no reference for that  .

Regards

Altamura

[Pekka K]

I see  so possibilities are Caesarean year 9 or 19.
McAlee lists year 19 only with field mark left of Zeus, so only year
9 remains. Thus McAlee 58.

Pekka K

[coldavo]

Hi Pekka K and Altamura,

Thank you both very much for your input. It looks as though it is still "up in the air" for a definite attribution. I can see both the "9" and "11" possibilities but all of the "extras" around the date still worry me. I suppose that they could be explained away as die cracks - but I have never seen another diecrack on these coins.

With such a narrow range of dates to choose from it is disappointing that it is still uncertain. I agree that it is not "19". I have a batch of  illustrations of these coins (not my own coins) from various sources for identification purposes and show a "19" with the field mark.

I have added another photo and have sharpened it but, rather than making it easier to decide, it just muddies the waters more.

Thank you both for your help,
All the best,
Col