Round 9 Matthew Raica

[Matthew Raica]

Well, here goes a second try.  I hope I have more success this time.  Before photos below:

[Matthew Raica]

Here is the first completed.  I was unable to get a full attribution due to the poor condition. This is the coin in the lower left in the uncleaned photos.

3.9g 15mm

Alexander the Great/Macedonian kingdom bronze,  struck between 336 and 232 BC.

Obv- Heracles bust right draped by lion's skin tied at neck

Rev- quiver and club

Similiar examples found were minted under Phillip III.  Philip's also portrayed an grain ear under the club.  The example minted under Phillip III has ALEXANDPO between the club and quiver and was minted between 323-319 BC.  The Alexander III, which I believe this example is more similiar to, was minted between 336 and 323 BC; ALEXANDR[OU] is written between the club and quiver.  No text is visible on this coin.  I would attribute it to Alexander the Great since there is no evidence of a grain ear visible, the bust is also more similiar.  Examples shown below in a separate post;  The coin in this post is mine.

The reverse has been posted upside down for clarity.  The club completely disappears if the photo is rotated 180 degrees, even when photographed this way!

[Matthew Raica]

The first example was struck under Alexander the Great, the second under Phillip III. Photos are from FORVM's catalog.

[Joe Sermarini]

I don't recall ever seeing a coin with such odd scratches or pits.  I wonder, what caused them?

[Matthew Raica]

I wondered the same thing.  I believe it is obvious they are of ancient origin as the only patina/encrustation on the coin is in the scratches.

[ecoli]

it could also be due to cleaning...that is, the green layer is under the top grey layer.

[Matthew Raica]

The green layer in the uncleaned photo was just a layer of dirt. There was no solid layer of patina on this coin.  The only cleaning that went into this one was a one week soak in olive oil followed by scrubbing with a toothbrush; what you see is the result.  Even after the initial scrub with soapy water when I first received the coins the odd scratched were already visible.

[areich]

They look less like scratches and more like some kind of punchmarks,
like bankers' marks, which they are not, of course.
IMO definitely not due to the cleaning.
Someone damaged this coin on purpose and not recently.

Andreas

[Matthew Raica]

Thank you for the support areich.  I can promise everyone that I did not cause this damage to the coin.  They are interesting though.  There does not seem to be any type of pattern or reason to the markings, and, in agreement with areich, they do appear to be more like punchmarks on the obverse.  As far as the grooves lining the definitions on the reverse, I have no clue.  On another topic, does everyone agree with this attribution?  This is my final call for this coin, to be considered in a future contest, so I believe comments and corrections are not against the rules at this point.  Any ideas from the Greek professionals out there?

[Scotvs Capitis]

On the Greek- Looks like the marks are from trying to punch off encrustation with a small tool, but the green in the punch marks would mean that it was done long ago. You have made it clear you didn't do it, so this is certainly an interesting coin. If only coins could talk!

[bruce61813]

Those are not modern and weren't done during the cleaning. But it is intersting , if you flip the reverse 180 degrees it looks like "Myyi....."

Bruce