Why no more provincials?

The last Alexandrian tets were produced under Domitius Domitianus. There's some uncertainty of the date of the rebellion, but most experts now believe it occurred in 297/8... thus @TIF's dating of her wonderful example to that Alexandrian year. There are some rare tets for the tetrarchs issued by DD, but prior to that the last tetrarchal tetradrachms date to 295/6, which is year 12 for Diocletian, year 11 for Maximian, and year 4 for both Constantius and Galerius. So look for those dates!

@Broucheion linked a lovely year 4 Constantius example above. Here's a year 11 Maximian, which happens to be ex Emmett:

Fantastic page! I'm jealous of your complete set of Domitianus folles. I still haven't managed to find a Maximian.

Here's one of those (though I have it ID'd as Rhescuporis VI):

This guy's grave goods are to be found in the Hermitage museum. He was killed by the Gothic king Ermanaric around 342, this coin dates to 324/5.

Actually, there are some scarce Aurelians and some very rare issues under Tacitus, all from Pisidia.

Here's my Cremna for Aurelian:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I have not read that anywhere. Do you have a link?

 

Even though I've posted it so many times, I couldn't let this thread runing without showing it off again :


Domitius Domitianus, usurpateur en Egypte (296 - 297), octodrachme - Alexandrie, Emmett plate coin

ΔOMITI-ANOC CEB, Buste radié de Domitius à droite
Serapis allant à droite, branche de palmier dans le champ à gauche, LB dans le champ à droite (2° année de règne)
12.79 gr
Ref : Emmett #4241/2 (cet exemplaire) (R1), Kampmann # 126.2, RCV # 12982 (2000),

Domitius Domitianus, stationed in Egypt, rebelled against Diocletianus in july 296 AD and was proclaimed emperor. He was defeated during spring 297 AD. Diocletian decided to close the alexandrian mint, so the coins of Domitianus are the last provincial coins from Alexandria. Also, Domitianus was the only ruler to strike octadrachms (in parallel with didrachms, tetradrachms and hexadrachms)

For more information, see : http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Domitius Domitianus

Also, the following comment, about another specimen sold at CNG (Triton XI, Lot # 539) "For the most part, scholars agree that the larger coins featuring the radiate bust must be a double, and thereby call it an octodrachm. At half the weight, then, the smallest coins with the Nike on the reverse must be tetradrachms, though these coins have erroneously been called heretofore didrachms. The weights of these tetradrachms appear consistent with the final issues of pre-reform tetradrachms of the Tetrarchs. The middle denomination poses the largest challenge to this arrangement. By weight, it should be a hexadrachm. However, no such denomination was known to have been struck in Egypt, though tetradrachms earlier in the third century achieved this weight. The obvious problem here would be the confusion caused in circulating the same denomination in two different weights. As this type is the rarest of the group, it is possible that it was meant for a special occasion, or more remotely, a stalled attempt to reinstitute the pre-reform coinage on an earlier weight standard. Further investigation may shed more light on this subject.

Q

 

Though some auction houses and dealers continue to describe the Alexandrian DEO SARAPIDI coins as such, they are quite distinct from the Festival of Isis issues that were struck at Rome. The linked Tesorillo page highlights some of the key aspects of the Festival of Isis series, in particular the VOTA PVBLICA legend on the reverse.

There is a separate page on Tesorillo that categorizes the DEO SARAPIDI series as part of the last civic coinages that were struck at Nicomedia, Antioch and Alexandria during Maximinus II's reign: https://www.tesorillo.com/isis/civ/index1.htm

The Van Heesh paper that discusses these civic coins also has in its opening paragraph some info relevant to this thread about the last provincial coins:
"In the reign of Gallienus (253-68) only ten city mints were still active; the last city to strike its own coins was Perga in Asia in AD 275. The last provincial series was that of Egypt, which ended in the reign of Diocletian during the usurpation of Domitius Domitianus in AD 297/8."

I think the Perga issue is the one struck under Tacitus that was mentioned by @Severus Alexander abit upthread.

 

This has been a very interesting thread. I have not considered the coins of client kings or the things of uncertain status (Anonymous Pagan, Festival) to be Provincials. The coins of Aurelian as shown and Tacitus mentioned here meet the criteria I hold: City issues honoring Rome (Emperor or less commonly the Senate).

The Bosporos kings are not Roman Provincials but coins of a foreign king serving perhaps as a puppet or ally but not just a magistrate/governor. This is just a matter of opinion. The ones under Constantine and Licinius have a 'situation' since we can not be sure who is shown. It must be whichever was then in control of the East. Is this Rhadamsades of 314-5 AD Constantine or Licinius? I'm calling it Licinius for reasons that make more sense to me than they would to others.

I would not assume that the hands that made the Domitius coins survived the event but could have been replaced by or survivors augmented from imported workers. Does anyone see a style link between the last pre-reform coins and the first of the new group?

 

Interesting question, here's a first issue follis from Alexandria to help contemplate it:


It seems the first folles came out before Domitianus ("DD") revolted; DD then produced both folles and revived tetradrachms (as well as new hexadrachms? and octodrachms). So there's a question about continuity from pre-DD coins to DD, and another from from DD to post-DD coins.

One commonality between the DD-produced portraits on both folles and tets is the pattern of divergent wreath ties - that is, one of the ties falls down to the neck and takes a sharp turn to travel rightwards. This continues after DD on the folles. As you can see on the above coin, the wreath ties are parallel - that's what distinguishes this pre-DD first issue coin (RIC 14a) from the more commonly encountered (and later) RIC 26a.