Classical Numismatics Discussion
  Welcome Guest. Please login or register. All Items Purchased From Forum Ancient Coins Are Guaranteed Authentic For Eternity!!! Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Expert Authentication - Accurate Descriptions - Reasonable Prices - Coins From Under $10 To Museum Quality Rarities Welcome Guest. Please login or register. Internet challenged? We Are Happy To Take Your Order Over The Phone 252-646-1958 Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!! Support Our Efforts To Serve The Classical Numismatics Community - Shop At Forum Ancient Coins


FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board  |  Numismatic and History Discussions  |  Biblical & Judean Coins (Moderators: Salem Alshdaifat, Aarmale)  |  Topic: Why the dramatic change in flan size with KP shekels of Tyre? 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Why the dramatic change in flan size with KP shekels of Tyre?  (Read 106 times)
Nemonater
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1132



« on: February 15, 2021, 11:58:44 am »

Has there ever been an explanation (or guess) of why there was a change in the manufacture of the flans on the shekels of Tyre?

The early shekels had large 27-31mm flans, which properly allowed for the size of the die. Later, although the weight remains fairly consistent, the flans become smaller 22-26mm, and allow only a partial strike.

I've included 4 examples, two early and two late, demonstrating the obvious change in size.


* Shekel103:102.jpg (191.02 KB, 800x393 - viewed 4 times.)

* Shekel Year4.jpg (1007 KB, 1654x800 - viewed 4 times.)

* ShekelTyreCY166.jpg (665.28 KB, 1067x540 - viewed 5 times.)

* ShekelTyreCY178.jpg (610.63 KB, 1076x540 - viewed 5 times.)
Logged

Nemonater
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1132



« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2021, 12:47:58 pm »

A better way to see the difference


* IMG2873.jpg (854.68 KB, 1200x1073 - viewed 5 times.)
Logged

DzikiZdeb
Consul
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2021, 12:48:14 pm »

KP shekels were struck  from year 108 (RH) in other mint, most likely Jerusalem.

Here is old thread about it:https://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=70056.0
Logged
Nemonater
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1132



« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2021, 01:02:54 pm »

That would seem to make sense. However, I believe scholars have thoroughly debunked the "Jerusalem mint" theory.
Logged

dwarf
Praetorian
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 80



« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2021, 01:15:32 pm »

Quote
However, I believe scholars have thoroughly debunked the "Jerusalem mint" theory.

Surely they did!
But dealers still like it, as the coins get much better prices

Regards
Klaus
Logged
n.igma
Caesar
****
Online Online

Posts: 848


Life is bigger than a Tweet.


« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2021, 03:02:16 pm »

Smaller diameter flans require less preparation i.e. they are cheaper to manufacture. This improves the issuing authority's arbitrage between the intrinsic value of the silver in the coin and the higher face value of the coin. So its likely to have been a purely economic decision to cut costs in the mintage.
Logged

All historical inquiry is contingent and provisional, and our own prejudices will in due course come under scrutiny by our successors.
Nemonater
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1132



« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2021, 04:00:35 pm »

A simple and logical conclusion. 

I was examining one of my shekels that I initially thought was an overstrike.  After a closer look, I realized the coin was actually struck on a folded flan.  The last fold hadn't been heated or hammered properly, resulting in a slight separation seen on the reverse

Were these smaller diameter shekels reissued to increase revenue, similar to the pi-style Athens owls?


* Tyre Shekel Year 161 35 36 AD.jpg (858.38 KB, 1495x750 - viewed 6 times.)

* Shekel Tyre 161 Side.jpg (162.66 KB, 779x479 - viewed 5 times.)
Logged

n.igma
Caesar
****
Online Online

Posts: 848


Life is bigger than a Tweet.


« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2021, 05:00:28 pm »

Probably a similar motivation. The Athenian analogy is a good one. And it has been argued that the folded Athenian fabric coins became accepted as the norm, a badge of integrity, so that this mode of flan production became a longer term identifying characteristic (equivalent to a brand in modern parlance) of the mint, trusted by the populace among whom the folded owls circulated.

So it was with the smaller diameter Tyre shekels? Speculatively, I suggest that the mandating of this coin type as payment for temple dues may have reinforced the persistence of the smaller diameter mintage, distinguishing it from the more usual larger diameter tetradrachm coinages of the period and giving it an aura of greater legitimacy, harking back to a previous era.
Logged

All historical inquiry is contingent and provisional, and our own prejudices will in due course come under scrutiny by our successors.
Nemonater
Caesar
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1132



« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2021, 06:16:48 pm »

Yes, this particular coin is only 23mm, slightly larger than a typical half shekel, but a good weight of 14.31gm.  Very interesting speculation in regard to the aura of greater legitimacy.
Logged

Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
FORVM`s Classical Numismatics Discussion Board  |  Numismatic and History Discussions  |  Biblical & Judean Coins (Moderators: Salem Alshdaifat, Aarmale)  |  Topic: Why the dramatic change in flan size with KP shekels of Tyre? « previous next »
Jump to:  

Recent Price Reductions in Forum's Shop


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.664 seconds with 39 queries.
All coins are guaranteed for eternity
zoom.asp