General summary of results: View coins and compare the differences and similarities of the denominations
The above comparisons of Ptolemy II′s bronze coinage show that each module in the series differs not just in weight and size. If there are six (rather than eight) denominations, then each of these six also has a different combination of obverse and/or reverse types.
The differences noted for the six modules (i.e., closed wings vs. open wings, right vs. left facing eagles, Zeus vs. Ammon vs. Alexander) have been taken to indicate the various denominations.
That a unique combination of obverse and reverse types for each of six (but not eight) denominations can be pointed out does not show that the different designs were meant to denote denomination. The question "Did the Ptolemaic mint purposefully put features on the coins of Ptolemy II that would aid identification of each denomination?" is not answered by the above comparisons.
The differences in obverses and reverses are subtle and complicated in their variety; they seem to make poor denominational markers. On the other hand, differing weights and sizes define the basic characteristic of Ptolemaic denominations and they are the most obvious features of the coinage. With some possible problems regarding identification of the smallest in the series of eight modules, weight and size seem to adequately indicate the relative denominations of all Ptolemy II's coins.
There has been no general review of possible denominational markers on the coinage after Ptolemy II. Comparisons with the coins of other Ptolemies can show whether or not designs on the obverses / reverses were meant to be denominational markers. The question "Are there denominational indicators on the coins of Ptolemy III?" is considered in Part 1a.
Move table to the top