Sale: CNG 60, Lot: 1041. Estimate $500.  Closing Date: Wednesday, 22 May 2002.  Sold For $550. This amount does not include the buyer’s fee.

ELYMAIS. Orodes I. Circa 57-38 BC or later(?). Billon Tetradrachm (15.57 gm). Diademed bust left; star and crescent, pellet and anchor behind, inscription "wrwd" or "urud" before / Blundered legend around diademed bust left. Bell, "New Inscription Alters Elymais Type Chronology," in The Celator, (April 2002 - this coin); cf. BMC Arabia pg. clxxxix (note), pl. LIII, 12; cf. Alram NB3. Good VF, toned, silvery surfaces. Rare, and hitherto unpublished. ($500)

Part of (or related to) a very rare issue first obtained by the BM in 1918. Sir Charles Oman aquired two specimens and presented one to the BM, keeping the piece with the partial legend or additional symbols, which is depicted in the supplementary plates (LIII, 12). That issue is distinguished from its earlier prototypes by the clear articulation of the shoulder guards on the cuirass, the lack of forelocks before the face, and the bushy projection of hair at the back of the head. Some subtle distinctions indicate a date of issue for this coin slightly earlier than that of the BMC specimen: the torques are simpler and end in front rather than back, and the bust is more squared off and has a naturalistic eye gazing to the side. More consistent with later issues, the star within the crescent has degraded to being little more than a pellet, as on the later issues of Orodes I. The inscription on the BMC coin is not at all clear, but appears different. The inscription on this coin clearly bears the name of Orodes, lacking only the later title "Malk" or "Malka." [New paragraph] A search of all previous specimens sold at auction by CNG revealed that only one other specimen of this type has been offered. That specimen, Auction 51 (15 September 1999), lot 647, was not identified as an issue of Orodes. The reason for this going unnoticed is that the inscription was highly incomplete, showing only the last, and part of the penultimate characters. Nevertheless, the inscription is the same, but the die different. This underscores the assumption that this coin is a new type and not merely a single old die with an inscription added. This is the clearest example of the inscription known to this cataloguer, and of a new type which has not seen publication in the BMC, de Morgan, or Alram.[New paragraph] As this type preceeds any previous known design of Orodes I, but bears his name, it could be taken for a very early transitional issue. The alternative is to name this ruler as Orodes I reclassify the all coins bearing a Parthian tiara as issues of Orodes II, making the traditional second Orodes become Orodes III. This may very well be the case, as links in Parthian coinage during the reign of Orodes II of Parthia (57-38 BC), to increased control in Elymais. This is clearly demonstrated by the presence of the Anchor (Elamite) symbol on certain Parthian Drachm reverses. The most likely explanation is that the above coin was minted under the authority of Orodes II of Parthia, or one of his sons, who reintroduced the direct Arsakid rule of in Elymais. This explains the sudden appearance of Arsakid names into the Elamite kingdom and the change in regal iconography. This hypothesis is at sharp odds with the current explanation of the dates and chronology of the Elamites, which places Orodes I at Circa 50-100 AD. (see Bell, in The Celator, May 2002). The existance of this sort of a transitional issue between the Kamnaskirid Dynasty and the Arsakid Dynasty in Elymais weakens the ideological distinction made previously by showing a drastic break in the stylistic continuum.