If these coins (Apulia-Teate) were Greek, originally, when did they (Roma/Galley) become Roman Republic coins? I mean, for filing (reference) purposes is there a date when Greek coins should be considered 'Roman', or do we say that because the Roman Republic was 'going' from 750BC then any Greek coins from later than that date were 'minted' during the Roman Republic and are therefore filed as 'R.R.' coins?
At least with the few I have, it varies from location to location. I consider them Roman coins if the area was under Roman control in one form or another when they were minted. So it depends on history. I still separate them from my main collection, though, since they aren't (in my eyes) technically Roman Republic coins, but more akin to the later provincial coinage.
Agreed. It's when the formerly Greek-influenced area came under Roman control. Also, if a coin has "ROMA" written on it, like on the reverse of your second coin, that's a pretty reliable indication that it's Roman. I'm not particularly well versed in RR coins. Is anyone else suspicious of the top coin?
I have been looking for these to complement my Quincunx collection: @Topcat7 's Couple that I have seen on ACSearch: TEATE. Apulia. Ca. 225-200 B.C. Æ Quincunx. Athena head r. wearing Corinthian helmet, five pellets above. Rv. Owl standing r. on Ionic column, five pellets and star at right. SNG ANS 746, SNG Cop 690, SNG Morcom 224. Olive-green and forest green. Very Fine. (Just showing a different version for comparison) TEATE. Quincunx. Spätes 3. Jh. v. Chr. Behelmter Athenakopf r. Rs: Eule steht r. Im Abschnitt 5 Wertkugeln. SNG ANS 742 ff. Grüne Patina. R ss-vz APULIA, Teate . Circa 225-200 BC. Æ Quincunx (20.68 gm). Head of Athena right, wearing Corinthian helmet; five pellets above / TIATI left, owl standing right on Ionic capital; star and five pellets to right. SNG ANS 746 var. (crescent instead of star); BMC Italy pg. 146, 5; SNG Copenhagen 690 var. (same); SNG Morcom 224; Laffaille 28 var. (same). VF, brown and green patina. APULIA, Teate. Circa 225-200 BC. Æ Quincunx (20.71 gm). Head of Athena right, wearing crested Corinthian helmet; five pellets above / Owl standing right on Ionic capital; crescent and five pellets to right. SNG France 1424 (same reverse die); SNG ANS 746; HN Italy 702a. Good VF, dark green patina, slightly weak strike and, bunches more...
I think most numismatists use the principle of "under whose authority were the coins minted?" Autonomous states (client kingdoms) within the Roman Empire are usually classified as Greek until they were absorbed by Rome and placed under Roman administration. At that point they used to be classified as 'Greek Imperial'. In my own collection I place my coins in chronological order so there is overlap of Roman and Greek coins and from the Third Century BC to the First Century AD I have my coins classified on that principle so that a coin from Cappadocia minted in 100 BC with a Cappadocian King is labelled a Greek coin while one from the same kingdom 200 years later under Trajan, with his image (though the language of the inscription is still in Greek) is a Roman coin. Tetradrachmas of Alexandria under the Ptolemies are Greek coins but from Augustus on they are Roman. I find this way of cataloging my coins to be a good one for me but I am not sure if there is some other agreed upon principle that is an 'official' method of cataloging ancients.
One thing to keep in mind is that Roman coins developed out of the broader context of Italian coins. Many cities, some under Roman control, others not, had coins similar to contemporary Roman coins and even once these cities began to come under Roman control many were allowed to continue minting bronzes and the dating is still a subject of debate(the most up to date reference being Rutter's Historia Numorum Italy) so exactly where the cutoff is is hard to say and is different for each city. I personally refer to those coins that were definitely minted under Roman control as Roman Republic Provincials or in some cases Colonial issues(in the case of the Roman colonies) and the rest, some of which may have been minted under Roman control, as Italian issues.
