Among the half dozen or so collecting areas that have really tempted me over the years - but that I resisted since I was trying to remain focused on Parthia-proper and Elymais - have been the regions in Eastern Parthia (east of the Caspian Sea and north of the Persian Gulf) that both countermarked official Parthian drachms for circulation within their territories, and that also produced imitative Parthian drachms with faux countermarks that were
actually worked into the coins' dies. (I find that fascinating) The groups I'm referring to here are the Indo-Scythian Sakaraukae in Aria (the most famous of the Sakaraukae rulers was Gondophares, who founded the Indo-Parthian Kingdom) and the Indo-Parthian areas of Sogdiana and Margiana. All of these groups counterstamped Parthian drachms and also produced imitative Parthian issues. Determining which specific group produced a given countermarked coin seems to be problematic at times. Often these coins are listed with non-specific attributions like "Margiana or Sogdiana" or "Aria or Margiana" or "Sakaraukae or Indo-Parthian, Aria or Margiana." Sellwood refers to these coins collectively as "the currency of petty princes claiming independence from central Arsacid authority."
I own no coins of these groups, and so the coins below are courtesy of CNG and various research sites (Parthia.com, ACsearch.info, etc.). Competition for these types, as they occasionally show up in auctions, tends to be aggressive - more than their condition may seem to warrant, and they always end up fetching more money than the original Parthian types they are either counterstamped over, or that they imitate.
The countermarks on these coins take the form of the symbols below. Note numbers iii and iv which show, as Shore refers to it, the "royal symbol of the Sakaraukae" that later became associated with the Indo-Parthians - specifically with Gondophares and his dynasty. This symbol was, according to Sellwood, derived from the earlier, similar Parthian symbol seen on a number of official coins of the Empire at that time. The Parthian archetype is sort of an upside-down version of this one.
Here are some examples of countermarks on official Parthian drachms. Such countermarks were punched on coins of Gotarzes I, Orodes I (Mithradates III), Phraates III, Orodes II, and Phraates IV.
Countermark on a drachm of Orodes I (more recently attributed as Mithradates III)
Listed as Aria or Margiana. Tanlis Mardates.
Countermark on a drachm of Orodes II
Listed as Sakaraukae or Indo-Parthian, Aria or Margiana. Tanlis Mardates.
Countermark on a drachm of Phraates III
Listed as Aria or Margiana
Countermark on a drachm of Phraates III
No specific listing
Countermark on what is probably, but not definitely, an official issue of Phraates IV
More interesting to me are the minted imitatives of Orodes II, Vardanes I, and Phraates IV drachms, typically with "off" styling, that have the so-called "countermarks" actually engraved into the coins' dies. Here are some examples:
Imitating an Orodes II drachm
This type typically listed as Margiana or Sogdiana, unknown king
Imitating a Vardanes I drachm
This type typically listed as Margiana or Sogdiana, unknown king
Imitating a Vardanes I drachm
This type typically listed as Margiana or Sogdiana, unknown king
Imitating a Vardanes I drachm
This type typically listed as Margiana or Sogdiana, unknown king
Imitating a Phraates IV drachm
Listed as Margiana or Sogdiana, unknown king
Posted 12/04/2016 08:02 am
No idea, Dave. The consistent location of the countermark - always at the shoulder of the Parthian ruler's image - is, of course, mentioned in Sellwood and Shore, though neither of them offers an explanation as to why. My assumption is that, with such a small denomination (drachms), and with - as Wayne Sayles points out in one of his books - the countermark required for tariffing in these regions, the image of the Parthian ruler was consistently preserved to verify that the host coin was what it was supposed to be. Only several rulers' drachms were used for these, as I point out above...so, I suppose, given that reverses were so similar (the standardized seated archer type), the preservation of the king's obverse image was considered important for identification of the host coin.
thats 30$ I could have put towards a denarius..................Then they arrive... Wow 
a massive surge of new historical information to digest.
