I have difficulty using the RIC volumes, and this coin is no exception. I believe that this coin is :- AURELIAN, RIC Vi.Siscia 409 Can someone confirm my attribution, or put me straight on which one it is, please? Aurelian, Antoninianus, AE 23.3mm., 3.2gm. Obv: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG Radiate, Cuirassed bust right, Rev: CONCORDIA MILITVM, Emperor standing right clasping hands with Concordia standing left. Mintmark TXXI in exergue. (Note I cannot find reference to this mintmark for Aurelian, but I can find a reference for it on (some) coins of Severina.)
Wow, that OP-example has deadly eye appeal!! (congrats, Topcat) Aurelian. Æ Antoninianus 272-274 AD Cyzicus mint Diameter: 22 mm weight: 3.70 grams Obverse: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG, radiate cuirassed bust right. Reverse: RESTITVTOR ORBIS, woman standing right, presenting wreath to Aurelian standing opposite, A in ex. Ummm, apparently I didn't even try to find my RIC number (maybe after work I'll try to figure it out?)
I think it's RIC 244. According to RIC, coins from Siscia used Latin letters to designate officinas, so yours is the third officina. I also think the dot in the center of the reverse is interesting. It's probably a remnant of a compass-like device that the engraver used to layout the reverse inscription. I remember a long discussion in the Moneta_L discussion group about these dots years ago.
Nice coin! The mintmark is TXX•I Have a look at this link for the attribution and other examples. The link takes you to the online database for the ongoing revision of RIC V part 1. You could call yours "New RIC V.1 Temp #2403; RIC 1st 244".
Pretty amazing neck on the example that you linked to! There have long been rumors that Aurelian's mother was an ostrich; this sure adds support to that argument.
another wealth of info here http://www.catbikes.ch/coinstuff/coins-ric.htm scroll down and download the exel file for aurelian, your coin is listed as ric 244, as zumbly stated, nice coin btw, as stated great eye appeal...the better of my 2... Aurelian AE Antoninianus. Mediolanum (Milan) mint, AD 272-274. IMP AVRELIANVS AVG, radiate cuirassed bust right / RESTITVT ORBIS, Woman presents wreath to Aurelian on right holding spear, S in ex. RIC V 139
A bunch of thanks, guys, for helping me out. @gsimonel @zumbly @ken454 I 'discounted '244' because in my copy of RIC it says "3.A.F." (Correct) "Radiate, cuirassed bust L." but my Rad. cuir. bust is R? Does this not matter? @zumbly I noticed the 'dot' in the mintmark but I couldn't find a corrsponding one in RIC so I went with the closest. @gsimonel Thanks for clearing up the 'dot' in the centre for me. @ken454 Thanks for reminding me of 'Catbikes'. I had forgotten that reference.
Hmmm? ... although my seller stated that my example had a "C" after "IMP", when I actually look at my coin, it ain't got no "C" ... gawd ... am I the fricken worst ancient coin collector "ever"? => I hate looking-up that type of finicky coin-crap ... I just think that they look awesome ...
I like to distinguish between two kinds if finicky data. If the presence of absence of the C (for example) is significant in the placement of the coin to a specific mint or has some other meaning that I might consider important, I am happy to have that information. However when it appears that the guys at the mint just made some dies one way and others another, I have no real interest in the matter. As you may know, I have no use for the concept of catalog numbers in general but sometimes we see new numbers assigned by the authors for such minor situations (here a dot, there a dot) and other cases where one RIC number represents a dozen minor variations (RIC V is bad on this). Cohen assigned numbers with absolutely no notice of mint marks. RIC sometimes changes a number for letter spacing. Are there no middle of the road answers here? I have no idea where you got RIC 409. That listing is back in the forgeries section with M/M ++I. I have little enough use for RIC V as it is but here the answer is to use the online replacement with search capabilities which gives us http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/coin/2403?tempRIC=&asmSelect0=&Reign=Aurelianus&asmSelect1=&Person=Aurelianus&asmSelect2=&asmSelect3=&asmSelect4=&asmSelect5=&asmSelect6=&Titulature=IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG&asmSelect7=&Legend=CONCORDIA MILITVM&asmSelect8=&asmSelect9=&asmSelect10=&asmSelect11=&BustDescription=&ReverseDescription=&Note=&Reference=&page=14&mod=result&hpp=5&from=advanced which says the old RIC number is 244 having 44 different mintmarks one of which works as long as the fact that the author gave the bust direction as left. I know some of you worship a book over anything online but don't use RIC V part 1 when there is the great online replacement free for your use. They show over a dozen photos of various coins of the number allowing you to see where the centration dots fell. Some fell on the hands so you can't see them. One die has two dots which is very unusual. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/coinview/2403/1939695384?tempRIC=&asmSelect0=&Reign=Aurelianus&asmSelect1=&Person=Aurelianus&asmSelect2=&asmSelect3=&asmSelect4=&asmSelect5=&asmSelect6=&Titulature=IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG&asmSelect7=&Legend=CONCORDIA MILITVM&asmSelect8=&asmSelect9=&asmSelect10=&asmSelect11=&BustDescription=&ReverseDescription=&Note=&Reference=&page=14&mod=result&hpp=5&from=advanced&ancre=type-specimen Anyone (not Steve, I know he does not want to ) want to look up the RIC numbers for the two coins below? When you finish, you may better understand why I do not like catalog numbers.
you've posted some cool new coins TC! here's an aurelian i picked up recently... Aurelian, Antoninianus, 270-275 AD O: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG; R: RESTITVT OR_BIS, Female standing right, presenting wreath to emperor standing left, scepter in left hand S in middle field XXI in exergue Antioch Mint; 23mm, 3.8g RIC V: 386
"A. F. Radiate, cuirassed bust l." describes 3 different bust varieties for RIC 244: 1) A = Radiate, draped bust right. 2) F = Radiate, cuirassed bust right. 3) Radiate, cuirassed bust left. 5th line of the mintmark list states "PXX•I to VIXX•I". This covers six workshops, including yours, TXX•I (tertia, the third workshop). At Siscia, there were four workshops during Claudius II's reign and six during Aurelian's.
For me, the main purpose of knowing a RIC number is to fill in missing details about what is depicted on the coin, where or when it was minted, etc. Often with ancients parts of a coin are damaged or weakly struck or whatever, so I rely on RIC to tell me what deity is depicted or what is in her left hand. . . You get the idea. The number itself isn't important, it's the information that it leads you to that I'm interested in. What the authors mean is that they have grouped coins of this reverse type with obverse bust types A, C (both of which are facing right) AND left-facing busts all under the same catalog number. Why they chose to do this, especially when left-facing busts are so rare for this type and probably denote a presentation piece, is a mystery to me.
@dougsmit @zumbly @gsimonel Under my avatar I have chosen the words "Still Learning" for a VERY good reason. What I know about coins can be written on the back of a postage stamp with enough room left over for several chapters of 'War and Peace'. I thank you all for your 'pointers'. You have all assisted me greatly. @Doug I was unaware of the reference material that you refer to. I have (now) glanced at it. I will have to have a longer look, at another time. Thank-you. @zumbly Thanks for clearing that up about left or right facing heads. Understanding how to use this reference material is the key.
I'll bite. Is the first one RIC 244 (Siscia mint, Period III) and the second RIC 59 (Rome mint, Period III)? How'd I do?
