dating and issuer to be corrected? [solved]

The image of the obverse is upside down. 

Is it possible that the coin depicted here is earlier? According to J. Elayi and A.G. Elayi, Le monnayage de la cité phénicienne de Sidon a l'époque perse (Paris 2004), vol. 1, p. 136, this type, with B on obverse and ' on reverse is from the time of Baalshillem II (401-366). Clear example is no. 855, p. 137, and vol. 2, pl. XXIX. But I am not sure since there are so many variants of the 1/16 shekel. 

Adalbertus

The image of the obverse is upside down. 

 

Welcome to numista.

You can make a change request to turn the image yourself.

It's either upside down or it's medal alignment. It's can't be right side up and coin alignment.

All other related coins are variable alignment. See e.g. N#430760

So probably this is the case here. Certainly not regular coin alignment, closer to medal alignment. I have ordered this type of coin that will arrive next week. I can make presonal observation in  a few days. But this will be valid to my own copy and not the one depicted here. 

Understand. I'm only talking about the coin on the page.  The one on the Numista page is coin alignment or close if the picture of the obverse is upside down.

Clear. Based on the photos, this piece must be medal alignment, since the second variation corresponds to the catalogues. 

Nope. The last one, coin alignment. For medal alignment (after rotating the obverse 180°) the shapes don't correspond.  Remember you have to mirror the reverse picture horizontally to align it to the obverse.

I am sorry to say but the obverse represents a galley, that is correct in the second and third version. The reverse represents king and lion that is only correct in the second version. If shapes do not match, that means that it is irregular alignment. By the way, why do you thing that the second version is medal alignment? The pointed edge points down in the obverse and points up in the reverse in the second version. That means it is coin alignment or close to it. Nevertheless, I suggest to call it irregular. 

yes, I do.  But it doesn’t matter. I was just trying to supporting your opinion that the obverse picture was upside down.