Among my latest purchases is a dated Gallienus. I believe that these are common but do seem to demand a small premium for Gallienus. Gallienus - Antoninianus Obv:– IMP C P LIC GALLIENVS P F AVG, Radiate, cuirassed bust right Rev:– P M TR P IIII COS III P P, Sol advancing left, raising right hand, holding whip in left hand as chlamys billows behind Minted in Rome. A.D. 256 Reference:– Cohen 806. RIC 119, MIR 59. Cunetio 568 Martin
Any chance you could help lower my ignorance level about these coins by explicitly pointing out what makes this coin "dated?" Most Roman coins have their date ascertained indirectly by the legends -- e.g., COS III on the obverse might pinpoint the minting to a narrow range of dates A.D. Other than these clues, what makes this a "dated" coin vs. an "undated" coin? Thanks in advance.
For Gallienus the majority of coins lack these titles to allow the direct dating using the titles. With this coin the reverse shows P M TR P IIII COS III P P allowing us to date the coin to A.D. 256.
Thanks. Is it specifically the COS III that dates this coin, or do the other legends contribute to the dating?
Here we have a combination of two dated events that allow us to narrow the date. He is Tribunitia Potestas for the 4th time and Consul for the 4th time.
Unlike 2016, the Roman system will require the reader to learn the system for each ruler. TRP usually refers to a year and is incremented every year but some rulers started on the date of their accession while others changed at January 1 (or another date). Consul always refers to a number of times it was held but since most rulers only held that office periodically it only indicates a range with COS II meaning sometime between the time he held his second Consulship and when he assumed his third. The old fashioned Sear Roman Coins and their Values (not Millennium) included a chart for each ruler giving the dates for the various dating legends making it easier to follow the devices as used for that ruler. I recommend everyone have an old fashioned one volume Sear for this easy reference feature if for nothing else. Unfortunately that chart says TRP IIII for Gallienus was 256 while COS III was 257. Perhaps there is error or perhaps the Consulship shown here was what other rules might have listed as COS DES III indicating the intent to assume a consulship the following January. I do not know. We are talking about a 25 year old book that sells now for under $10 so you will have to read critically but anyone who has outgrown theirs can send it to me. Mine is rather worn.
=> ummm, my version may be "too" old?! ... => my sweet first edition is from 1964 (signed by the awesome dude) View attachment 476232 Pretty cool, eh? Doug ... I only have this sweet first edition and I also own the entire Millenium collection (does that mean I need to buy a 3rd version as well?) ... what chart are you talking about? (thanks, Mentor)
Steve, go to the chapter for any emperor, after the description there should be a table which is headed "Titles and Powers".
Thanks for the lead, Pish ... but sadly, in my sweet first edition, there is "not" a table which is headed "Titles and Powers" => it goes from description of the emperor, directly to "commonest forms of obverse legends" and then into the individual coins So, apparently I should buy the 3rd edition-type (then I'll definitely be his biggest groupie, eh?)
As Doug noted the TRP number was incremented every year and is used for dating when available. Usually it changed on December 10, whereas COS numbers, if incremented (and often they were not--emperors did not always assume the consulship), changed on Jan. 1. So, it is possible that most coins of a year are TRPx COSy and most coins of the next year are TRP(x+1)COS(y+1) but coins issued late in December can be TRP(x+1)COSy. This system works under Domitian and other early emperors. However, the OP Gallienus seems not to fit this scenario. The one coin Sear (third edition) lists with TRP V COS IIII does not fit his table of titles and powers at all (TRP V is 257, COS IIII is 261). The more-recent Sear volume III has, for example, that type #10318 TRP V COS IIII and #10323 TRP VII COS IIII #10324 TRP VIIII COS IIII even though his table claims COS IIII lasted only one year. Perhaps the reign of Gallienus was too tumultuous to yield correct legends on coins. I think the regnal year of the emperor was used to date official documents, so I would believe the TRP number over the COS number.
