Understand this has come up before but I am interested in peoples thoughts on this.
In my mind, given that Philip III
had tets issued - which were different in
style to
Philip II so definately related to him - how could the 'joint ruler'
Alexander IV not have?
Fair enough they would just use the existing
King (or even plain
Alexander) dies - why change them?
I feel that
his grandmother
Olympius was too strong minded (given her alleged murder of Philip III later and probable implication in murder of
Philip II much earlier) not to force the issue with Antipater and others if at all it was an issue.
So if this theory has any credence could I suggest that coins struck post Alex III death anywhere in empire from say 320BC until death in 311BC would have been new dies (as old ones wear in 2-3 years?) would DEF have to have a chance of being specifically related to
Alexander IV? To be safe maybe 317-311BC?
Maybe worth knowing where Alex IV and Grandmother spent their time post fathers death in Babylon - given my wearing die argument their location from say 320BC onwards would have certainly influenced the local die artists if we cannot say all mints.
I do accept that Alex coins continued to be minted for many, many years and that these were surely in honour of Alex III however that doesnt change the issues as above betwen 323 and 311BC.
Welcome comments especially from Darcy!
Alex
