VINO REGINA instead of IVNO REGINA If this were a simple typographical error, it would be limited to a single die, but there are at least three reverse dies with this particular inscription. This, coupled with the humorous nature of the inscription (it means "wine queen" instead of Juno the Queen), makes me think it was done on purpose as a joke. Post your coins with typographical errors, Juno reverses, Saloninas, and whatnot -- anything you feel is relevant. First the NORMAL version: Salonina, AD 253-268 Roman billon antoninianus, 3.87 g, 21.1 mm Antioch, AD 264 Obv: SALONINA AVG, diademed draped bust right on crescent Rev: IVNO REGINA, Juno standing left, holding patera and scepter; peacock at feet left; star in left field Refs: RIC 92; Cohen 67; RCV 10641; Göbl 1619f; see Hunter pp. lxxiii-lxxiv. And now the "error" coin: Salonina, AD 253-268 Roman billon antoninianus, 4.64 g, 23.3 mm Antioch, AD 264 Obv: SALONINA AVG, diademed draped bust right on crescent Rev: VINO REGINA, Juno standing left, holding patera and scepter; peacock at feet left; star in left field Refs: RIC 92 var.; Cohen 67 var.; RCV 10641 var.; Göbl 1619f var. Note at least three different reverse dies here at 258.pair.com's Gallienus site: Mine appears to match the first example.
I tend to think it is a joke but there are over three Julia Domna dies with IVLA and I don't see a joke there. I don't know. There are many omitted letters in the series but it does seem odd making the same error repeatedly.
The Augustan History's author levels some scandalous accusations against her, however, drink was not among them. It is too bad Suetonius wasn't around when this coin was struck, perhaps then we would know whether 'Wine Queen' was the word on the street about her or not.
Neat! Amusing error, intentional or not. Here's a Gordie with LIBERALITAS ("generosity") misspelled LIBERATAS ("freed"). GORDIAN III AR Antoninianus. 4.02g, 22mm, Rome mint, early AD 239 - early 240. RIC IV 67 var (rev legend mispelled, cf. Gemini Auction IV (8 Jan 2008) Lot 460 for another example from same rev die). O: IMP GORDIANVS PIVS FEL AVG, radiate, draped, cuirassed bust right. R: LIBERATAS (sic) AVG III, Liberalitas standing front, head left, holding counter in right hand and cornucopiae in left hand.
Liberata means free. Maybe the mint slave working on the die was due to gain his freedom and decided to take some liberties with the inscription out of joy? Remember, being a mint worker was not a prestigious position at all in Rome. The mint workers were all slaves and freedmen. The triumvirs who oversaw the mint were patricians, and they got to put their name on coinage, but the poor guys melting the bars, cutting the dies, and striking the coins were slaves and freedmen, as they could be beaten for debasing the coinage, theft, or other transgressions. As you could not whip a citizen, they were not considered ideal for minting duties and thus the job was a disreputable profession meant only for the lowest of the low in the social ladder. Source: Bond, Sarah. Trade and Taboo: Disreputable Professions in the Roman Mediterranean, Pgs. 130-132. Published 2016.
I do like thinking that this may in fact have been the case here. At the very least, it's a fun story to weave around the coin. I've not read the book you reference, but I think some of what's mentioned here was more likely the case during the Republic than the Empire. Even then, not all moneyers were from Patrician families. They stopped getting their names on coins during the reign of Augustus, and by the time of Aurelian, Felicissimus, the fellow who had overall control of the mints and finances, was apparently a slave (or to my mind more likely a freedman, but referred to as the 'lowliest of slaves' by Aurelian because he had been running a a well-organized racket of silver-thieving under the emperor's nose).
Most likely the person engraving the die was illiterate. He had probably cut several dies before someone who could read caught the error.
Yes, during Augustus' time the mint stopped the practice of putting non-Imperial names in coins, however, the running of the mint largely remained unchanged and slaves and freedmen were used for the coining/die cutting process. We have evidence that slaves continued to be "employed" as mint workers well into the empire. It wasn't until after Aurelian that we see an influx of workers from other professions, with experience in carving and working with metal, being brought in to work at the mints. By the time of Constantine we know London Mint workers were certainly freedmen and citizens, and we have a surviving text that states when the London Mint shut down the workers returned to their former businesses and professions (So it seems very likely we are talking about non-slaves). However, during Gordian III's time the mints would have still been largely staffed by slaves and freedmen, hence my bit of fanciful imagining that maybe Liberatas had a hidden meaning and wasn't just a spelling mistake.
