Roman empire: silver siliqua of Julian II, ca. 360-363 AD; found in 1887 in the East Harptree Hoard

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

L.M., I gave your coin a 7 based on the many example I've seen from this hoard. The two coins I won wouldn't rate over 5. Your coin has an excellent portrait which should be expected from the Constantinople Mint, & the dies must have been fresh at the time of striking. The branch mint artwork for these coins is usually inferior.

 

I gave it 9, because I'll be getting an East Harptree siliqua when I find one I like that fits budget, and this would be pretty close on the former. These coins are a fascinating view of the end of Roman Britain.

I'm also sold on the romance of hoards, not least because it gives some context. (It's rather surprising to me now that most coins are sold without any idea of where they came from).

I'm certainly more forgiving of appearance if a coin is from a hoard. It already has more character, so a few cracks and chips just add to its story....as is obvious from the siliqua I have, from the Thruxton Hoard (found 2014, much less historical than East Harptree):



Arcadius, siliqua, 392-395, Trier, DN ARCADI-VS PF AVG. VIRTVS RO-MANORVM Roma seated left on cuirass, holding Victory on globe and inverted spear.

There were many hoards ending with coins of Arcadius and Honorius, because of the increased number of raids by Saxons, Picts and Scoti at that time (just after 400, when the Romans had abandoned Britain).

 

8

 

Just fyi, the coin was minted in Arles (Arelatum), not in Constantinople: Arelatum was renamed Constantina in the 4th century AD. Don't let that TCONST mint mark fool you! See https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Constantina :

Constantina - Arelatum (Arles, France)

In 328 Arelatum (Arelate) was renamed Constantina in honor of Constantine II. After Constantine II was killed in 340, the name reverted to Arelatum, only to be changed again in 354 to Constantina by Constantius II. It retained that name, although the mintmark 'AR ' appeared on some of its coins even in the fifth century. Roman mint dates of operation: 313 - 475 A.D. Mintmarks: A, AR, ARL, CON, CONST, KON, KONSTAN.

 

I voted 7. It's a really great portrait, but if I were going to get only one coin of Julian, I would want it to be one of the bulls that set off riots in Antioch.

 

Wow. The provenance is nearly as cool as the coin!

 

...Nope, the provenance was what tipped it to a 10 for me, too. And who among us hasn't been transfixed by news of the last, I don't know, half-dozen, phenomenal Anglo-Saxon and Viking hoards, found by detectorists? I don't think you need to apologize for Anything!

 

10. This coin has everything, provenance, strike, nice surfaces.

 

Seriously, I do not like the portrait style with the lips stuck way out past the mustache or the granular encrustations but the provenance is a plus. Mine shares the portrait style but I have no idea of where it was before I got it from Frank Robinson in 1991. Our coins are not die duplicates but the 'hand' seems to match well enough that I believe they were engraved by the same person.

 

Yes, Gert Boersema had a small number of East Harptree siliquas, I bought one too.

 

The evolution of some mintmarks can be very confusing . I wonder how many contemporary Romans were aware of these changes .

 

I bought a Harptree Hoard coin myself when I saw them hit the market. I am a sucker for Lugdunum so had to make it a Lugdunum coin.

Julian II - AR Reduced

Obv:– FL CL IVLIA-NVS P P AVG, Pearl diademed, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev:– VOTIS V MVLTIS X, within wreath
Minted in Lugdunum (//SLVG), Spring A.D. 360 - 26th June A.D. 363
Reference:– RIC VIII Lugdunum 227

17.26 mm. 2.0 gms. 0 degrees

East Harptree Hoard, which was discovered near Bath in 1887. There were 36 coins of this type found in the hoard.

 

I wonder how many contemporaries cared?

 

Wow, I love how well struck that one is.

 

Hotwheelsearl started a pertinent subthread in Clavdivs's post, "Ancient Idiots: Ask the Experts Anything," relative the varying levels of literacy of "barbarous" (but often provincial) imitations of Roman coins. Valentinian ended the thread, up to now, with a concise summary of the primary dynamics involved.
https://www.cointalk.com/threads/ancient-idiots-ask-the-experts-anything.360637/page-7#post-4628008
Especially with the imitations of 3rd and 4th century prototypes, you get eloquent evidence of how thin the veneer of literacy was, out in the provinces. It would be great to know more about what the literacy levels are likely to have been, however generally, from one century (and era) to another.

 

...Wait, didn't you, and Roman Collector, and probably some other people, have more to say in a related thread somewhere else, just over the past couple of days? Too lazy to find it. (Looked, just not hard enough.)

 

I do not focus on Empire coins. Most of my collection is BCE (The Republic and many of those States that interacted with the Republic.) I enjoy collecting Historically, and never really paying attention too much on mints, LRB’s, etc. I reckon I am a rebel, a pariah... a shiftless ne’er-do-well.