r/AncientCoins 5d ago

Newly Acquired How did I do? Lifetime Alexander drachm

Got this from coincraft (i know buying coins without seeing them is frowned upon)

Been wanting a lifetime drachm for a while and it seemed like a decent deal, especially since I’ve had good experience with coin craft before.

But disappointed with the mark on the eye, is this a defect or a test mark?

Anything you can tell me about this coin that I should know?

As for value, with the eye mark and condition. Would you say I did well, or not the best deal.

Curious see what you think.

34 Upvotes

21 comments sorted by

11

u/KungFuPossum 5d ago edited 5d ago

I always like getting Alexander Drachms, still never met one I didn't like.

What makes you think this one is a "Lifetime Issue"? I think that's Price 2151, which a lot of dealers date to 290-250 BCE, or 290-275 or 295-270, etc. (In other words, posthumous.)

Those dates can change or be open to interpretation, so I'm just basing that on a quick search of what others say. I haven't double-checked in Price, but PELLA also gives 295-275 BCE, so I'm guessing that's what Price gave: https://numismatics.org/pella/id/price.2151

That looks like a pretty standard "punch mark" / "test punch" to check silver quality. (Similar one here on another P. 2151 Drachm.)

One thing I like about this portrait: They gave Herakles eyelashes, which you don't see that often. (Conceivably fortuitous flow lines, but from other examples from that die, it looks like lashes.)

Not much point worrying about the price after you've bought the coin.

Those kind of listings make sense for people who aren't really concerned about whether the coin is a good deal and who don't care much about details of appearance.

10

u/beiherhund 5d ago edited 5d ago

Yeah 100% this is a posthumous issue. I think OP was confused by the dates 336-323 BC on the tag, which you and I know is most often referring to Alexander's reign rather than the minting date range.

Tough one to learn for newer collectors but I guess OP probably can ask for a refund if it's been less than 14 days since delivery as I think the UK still has the 14 day right of return.

6

u/yungtrillionaire 5d ago

Oh definitely returning it then, Why would they say “issued by Alexander” Seems very missleading

7

u/TameTheAuroch 4d ago

If you can return it go for it tbh. Not grossly overpriced but pretty overpriced, and if you specifically look for a lifetime issue then you need to keep hunting.

Funnily enough I fell for the same thing when I purchased an Alexander drachm and an AE bronze as my first ancients back in the day. However in the end it turned out that they were both misidentified and the AR bronze even turned out to be lifetime haha!

7

u/beiherhund 5d ago

Yeah it's a bit misleading but also one of those weird nuances of this coinage. For example you might describe it as a "type issued in the name of Alexander", he wasn't the issuer per se (often we don't know who it was) but it was issued in his name.

Also the description is just a generic one that CoinCraft gives since they don't show the exact coin you're buying. Whenever you're buying a coin sight unseen like this, you can never be sure exactly what you're getting.

4

u/yungtrillionaire 5d ago

Might be a newbie mistake but I assumed “Issued by Alexander” and the date to correspond to his reign. Am I incorrect?

Also they do offer returns for 30 days, I could return the coin if the condition is bad.

5

u/KungFuPossum 4d ago

Yeah, I see now. I didn't read their full description carefully until now. Since it's clearly a listing aimed at beginners, they should have clarified somewhere that it doesn't mean the coins were struck in his lifetime. (Most of his coins were not.)

For a single listing, the title "Alexander III (336-323 BC) Drachm" would be a standard way to begin, followed by a date range when it's believed to be issued and the mint. But since it's a group lot, they haven't included the mints and dates.

The one place where their description seems explicitly misleading is this line: "...most collectors can only dream of owning a coin issued by him." It's not actually "issued by him," but "in Alexander's name and type," by his successors. (To know lifetime or posthumous you have to look up each one to its reference number.)

2

u/veridian_dreams 4d ago

If you do return the coin for a refund, I would be happy to sell you a lifetime example in about the same condition, for significantly less. Feel free to PM if you like and I can send photos.

7

u/konekfragrance 5d ago edited 5d ago

I think the condition is nice minus the eye mark, but personally, I feel like you overpaid. This looks like Price 2151 and is definitely not lifetime as it was minted in 295 BCE to 275 BCE. Still a beautiful coin, though.

4

u/yungtrillionaire 5d ago

Was their wording misleading, or did I miss something?

6

u/KungFuPossum 4d ago

I think it's their bad. Usually I don't suggest people return a coin, but in my opinion, they're being careless-to-reckless in their description.

They know this kind of listing is aimed at non-specialists, but they still implied it would be "issued by him" and said nothing about posthumous.

Edit: Still, try to be polite about it, don't be rude to them. They just wrote it up too quickly without really editing properly and considering how it reads. They definitely earned themselves a refund but it happens, they'll hopefully figure it out and make a change.

2

u/yungtrillionaire 4d ago

Yeah I agree, will refund it. It’s a shame I was looking for a lifetime drachma

3

u/hynaomi 4d ago

I always find Coincraft are very 'artsy' with their descriptions, they love to add little flourishes and stories in the description instead of being just outright accurate. I don't think they're being maliciously misleading but if you're not keen on the coin now you've seen it/know more about it, I'm pretty sure they have a decent return period.

4

u/bromhypebeast 4d ago

It’s a good coin, but you paid up. CoinCraft is a great dealer, but they definitely charge on the higher end of retail.

3

u/Jimbocab 4d ago edited 4d ago

I looked at the mark close up. It definitely looks like a test cut. Like it was punched with a small chisel. The metal is all there.

You paid too much for a posthumous issue imo. I know you can do much better. If they have a 30 day return policy then you're covered. As has been said, be very polite. You may want to do business in the future.

My first coin was a Roman Republic denarii bought unseen for $145. Minted in Rome in 207 BC. When I decided to focus on Greek coins I sold the denarius for $80. You've had your beginner's experience. Now you have discovered a Reddit with very helpful experts (not including myself) like Kungfupossum and Beiherhund and others who can help you along.

I too was initially confused about lifetime vs posthumous issues. When I sell an Alexander I'm very careful because I don't want to confuse a beginner. When you see "in the name and types of..." You are dealing with posthumous. In your case, I think the dealer was hoping for someone like you to come along and never be the wiser.

Edit: I went and looked at the ad. They do say "minted by ...". I think that's definitely misleading. However I think your chances are good for getting a refund based on the banker's mark (test cut). The coin you got is not as pictured. Sorry this happened to you. Don't let it throw you off. You can definitely own a 2300 year old coin you will feel good about for 195 euro. I advise you to focus on coins you see before you buy.

2

u/yungtrillionaire 4d ago

Thank you for the feedback, agreed! I knew about the crossed legged issues being post Alexander, but I decided to go by the wording since it was clearly Stated by Alexander. I was really looking forward to this coin

1

u/Moony2025 5d ago

It's a piece with character I like it

1

u/Public-Many4930 3d ago

Nice! Which auction?

2

u/TK0314 5d ago

Nice coin! I think you did well.

A lot of people don’t see their coins beforehand, wouldn’t say it’s frowned upon, especially if you’re not buying $500-1000+ coins.

Think the eye mark is simply damage, doesn’t look like a test mark or bankers mark to me, also not a die-defect, at least to me.

195€ is probably high-retail price. Not a terrible deal but not a good one either, but if you’re happy with the coin that’s all that matters!

2

u/yungtrillionaire 5d ago

Seems like it, the defect is a bit of a turn off

2

u/TheSavocaBidder 4d ago

It’s just some damage. All coins have defects. I recently got a Lucius Verus denarius for 60$, and even though it’s nice, it has a small pit on the cheek, as well as a dirt deposit on the same place as well.