Ancients => Super Marius Bros.

Oh yeah, I forgot my only example of 'clasped hands'---- Nerva Dupondius I posted recently:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I merely posted the blurbs that I stumbled across ....

Thanks for checking-up on my research

 

Mine be UGLY... but it fills my Marius slot in my album of Roman Emperors! Just 15 left, and my album will be complete...


Marcus Aurelius Marius
Antoninianus
269 CE
Flat strike on one side.
Concordia , Hands clasping rev.
was emperor of the Gallic Empire in 269 following the assassination of Postumus. reign lasted no more than two or three months before Postumus’ praetorian prefectVictorinus had Marius killed in the middle of 269, most likely at Augusta Treverorum

Sooonn... my voyage to the Dark Side of the Empire will be Complete...

 

Awesome coin Steve! The portrait is what does it for me.

Here are my 'hand shakes'.



Vespasian
AR Denarius
Rome Mint, 73 AD
RIC 520 (C), BMC 86, RSC 164
Obv: IMP CAES VESP AVG P M COS IIII CEN; Head of Vespasian, laureate r.
Rev: FIDES PVBL; Clasped hands holding winged caduceus upright, between poppy and corn-ear on either side.


Vespasian
AR Denarius
Ephesus(?) mint, 76 AD
RIC 1475 (R), BMC 490, RSC 163a, RPC 1452 (6 spec.)
Obv: IMP CAESAR VESPASIANVS AVG; Head of Vespasian, laureate, r., a small 'o' mint mark below neck
Rev: FIDES PVBL; Hands clasped over caduceus, two poppies and two corn ears.



Titus as Caesar
AR Denarius
Rome Mint, 73 AD
RIC V528 (R), BMC V91a, RSC 87b
Obv: T CAES IMP VESP PON TR POT CENS; Head of Titus, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: FIDES PVBL; Hands clasped over caduceus, two poppies and two corn-ears.


Titus as Caesar
AR Denarius
Ephesus(?), 76 AD
RIC 1485 (R), BMC p. 102 note, RSC 87, RPC 1459 (2 spec.)
Obv: T CAES IMP VESP CENS; Head of Titus, laureate, bearded, r. 'o' mint mark below neck off flan.
Rev: FIDES PVBL; Hands clasped over caduceus, two poppies and two corn ears.


Domitian as Caesar
AR Denarius
Rome Mint, 79 AD
RIC V1081 (C2), BMC V269, RSC 393
Obv: CAESAR AVG F DOMITIANVS COS VI; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: PRINCEPS IVVENTVTIS; Clasped hands holding legionary eagle set on prow.


Domitian as Caesar
AR Denarius
Ephesus (?) mint, 76 AD
RIC V1495 (R), BMC V491, RSC - , RPC 1467 (4 spec.)
Obv: CAESAR AVG F DOMITIANVS; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r. 'o' mint mark below neck.
Rev: FIDES PVBL; Hands clasped over caduceus, two poppies and two corn ears.


Domitian as Caesar
AR Denarius
Rome mint, 80 AD
RIC T96 (C), BMC T85, RSC 395
Obv: CAESAR AVG F DOMITIANVS COS VII; Head of Domitian, laureate, bearded, r.
Rev: PRINCEPS IVVENTVTIS; Hands clasped over aquila on prow.

 

I regret others let you get away with including Allectus in the bunch but I'm not in the mood for a fight.

I am also extremely disappointed than no one posted their Domitian II who does belong. Come on! The number of them known has doubled in the last two decades (the second was found in 2003) so post 'em if you got 'em.

I suppose someone might have an Laelianus (I don't) but the one I would like is a Divus Victorinus which is common enough that I might get it someday. Most are pretty ugly so the competition might be lower. I do have a Marius.


I certainly agree that the three day business is absurd and the number of coins makes three months strike me as a bit short even. Comparing coins seen by me (how unscientific can you get???), Marius must have been around longer than Laelianus who is given three months in most works. I don't know. The point is that neither do the experts who quote some old sources that gave us the three day figure. One of the big problems with ancient history is that there are huge gaps in our knowledge and even a few places where what we know is from sources like coins that are not well understood by mainstream historians.

Postumus and the guys thought they were Roman Emperors. The Emperors in Rome at the time thought they were Gallic usurpers. They discussed the matter for a few years until Aurelian convinced Tetricus that retirement was in his best interest. The terms are interchangeable with fans on both sides.

 

Thank you for the clarification Doug!

 

Well, I like you => but ERIC-II has Allectus in the gang as well ... oh, and I love my Allectus!!

 

Thomas Bentley Cederlind

... man, he certainly had a lot of nice coins, eh?

Very sad that he's gone

 

No. Turn to page 544 were ERIC II spent as few words as possible (to leave more room for the precious numbers) mentioning that there were several secessionist states and he was going out of his way to avoid be educational by lumping them all there together starting with Regalianus and ending with Allectus. The largest single group in the middle were Gallic (Postumus through Tetricus) but there were problem groups and individuals both before and after that had nothing to do with Gaul. If I were to apply a name to Allectus (and Carausius before him) it would be Romano-British. They came along a generation after Tetricus surrendered and are covered in RIC VI as a problem for the Tetrarchy rather than for Gallienus, Claudius and Aurelian.

I know many of you worship ERIC and that is just something we have to agree to disagree on. I never got a bound copy but still have the unbound galley proofs Ras sent to me for the purpose of the review I wrote when it came out. He never asked for the proofs back and the postage on them would be steep considering the paper is thick and untrimmed. The review is still available if anyone cares.
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/board/index.php?topic=65466.0
I tried to be fair but Ras and I have a severe disagreement on what is important in a book. He avoids being educational and loves lists. On receiving it, I was extremely disappointed but then, as now, wish I could have an edited copy (perhaps 100 pages?) deleting all the tables but retaining the texts. I doubt anyone here will read my entire review linked above but I would like to quote from the last paragraph:
"No coin book, no website, no personal conversation can be relied upon to be without error and ERIC II has weak spots that will require critical evaluation rather than slavish acceptance. It is an admirable effort with much more good than bad. Of course, I wish it were perfect; I wish errors were harder to find. Who wouldn’t? I hope enough people out there are still buying coin books to make writing them less than total and complete idiocy. I can think of hundreds of worse uses for $150 than buying this book. I encourage each of you to consider whether this huge effort fits your needs. While it costs twice as much as ERIC I, it is more than twice as good so owners who liked the old version may be expected to love the new one. There is a lot of information present even if some of it requires more work to extract than we might like. There are errors - possibly a lot of them - but how many good listings are we willing to give up for fear of finding one of the problems? No one will be writing a better book of its kind anytime soon so if you want anything remotely like this work, get it while you can."
I do not know if Ras will send me a review copy of ERIC III. I do not know if I will live long enough to see it published. Ras said when he sent me ERIC II that I was the only person still writing reviews of books on coins. Which of you has a website dedicated to book reviews? Maybe he will be spending time between now and the publication finding someone more in agreement with the format to which he is firmly committed and which I dislike so intensely (as explained in the review).

 

Does anyone know if his entire dealer stock went to market with Steve's coin? I have no idea if he collected or if the coins with tickets like yours were just what was in stock at the end. I know a couple dealers who have collections far in excess of what they will show to customers and several who will not collect coins because it puts them in competition with their customers and they consider that inappropriate. I do not know where Tom stood on that question.

There are many questions that fall into the 'none of my business' category. We saw the huge BCD collection hit the market but I, for one, have no idea what other similar size collections are out there waiting for the owner to pass. I know of one specialist in one city who has well over a thousand coins of that one city including many he has owned for over 50 years. His passing could make a dent in the market (or will it sell intact to a private party who will keep it together for another 50 years???). What is a large collection? A few thousand coins is small unless each is FDC gold and 20,000 is small if all are LRB's. How many 'large' collections exist? How old are the owners and how many have heirs who care? Like I said - none of my business but, still, I wonder.

 

Thanks for your thoughts, my cool friend ... man, you always make me smile when you talk coins (you're always so emotionally involved!! => it's awesome)

I hope that you're having a great night

cheers

 

Is the target audience of ERIC those who don't like or don't want to invest in RIC? Many of the later RIC volumes are in dire need of updating, if that is ever done will ERIC be redundant?

Scholarly works on Roman archaeology and history when citing coins use either RIC or BMCRE, never ERIC. I assume ERIC is just for collectors?

(I don't own a copy of ERIC, so this is not a critique!)

 

Meaning all to CNG? No. A few dealers at Baltimore had stuff from his estate.

 

Sweet coin Steve!

I'm pretty happy with my Marius too:

 

Is your Tranquillina an imperial or a provincial? Provincials of hers aren't too hard to find. But I almost never see Tranquillina imperials anywhere. Would love to see yours!

 

So which Roman emperors don't you have? Are you including family members and usurpers?

I don't have:

Basiliscus
Gordian I
Gordian II
Anthemius
Majorian
Martinian
Romulus Augustus
Avitus
Petronius Maximus
Glycerius
Leo II
Olybrius

Of the usurpers I'm also missing:

Eugenius
Julian of Pannonia
Laelianus
Domitius Domitianus
Constantine III
Jovinus
Alexander
Zenobia
Jotapian
Maximus of Spain
Clodius Macer
Nepotian
Constantius III
Regalianus
Priscus Attalus
Zenonis
Constans II
Sebastianus
Leontius
Valerius Valens
Pacatian
Silbannacus
Domitian II
Saturninus

 

I knew you would ask, lol.

I am filling the Littleton Roman Emperors album. I have 15 slots to fill. However, they have another 30 Emperors and Usurpers that they said were very rare, and the did not create slots for:

Slots to Fill:
Balbinus 238 AD
Didius Julianus 193 AD
Flavius Victor 387-388 AD
Hanniballianus 235-337 AD
Julian of Pannonia 284-285 AD
Laelianus 269 AD
Nepotian 350 AD
Nero & Drusus Caesar 7-33 AD
Nero Claudius Caesar 38-39 AD
Otho 69 AD 12 C
Pertinax 193 AD
Pescennius Niger 193-194 AD
Pupienus 238 AD
Quietus 260-261 AD
Romulus 309 AD

No Slots in Album, but Emperors listed as too Rare:
Alexander of Carthage 308-310 AD RARE
Amandus 285-286 AD RARE
Anthemius 467-472 AD RARE
Avitus 455-456 AD RARE
Basilicus 475-476 AD RARE
Constans II 409-411 AD RARE
Constantine III 407-411 AD RARE
Domitianus 269 AD RARE
Domitius Domitianus 296-297 AD RARE
Glycerius 473-474 AD RARE
Gordian I Africanus 238 AD RARE
Gordian II Africanus 238 AD RARE
XXX Johannes 423-425 AD RARE X (acquired from a fellow CT friend!)
Jotapian 248-249 AD RARE
Jovianus 411-413 AD RARE
Julius Nepos 474-475 AD RARE
Leo II 473-474 AD RARE
Majorian 457-461 AD RARE
Martinian 324 AD RARE
Nigrinian 283-284 AD RARE
Olybrius 472 AD RARE
Pacatian 248-249 AD RARE
Petronius Maximus 455 AD RARE
Priscus Attalus 409-415 AD RARE
Proculus 280-281 AD RARE
Regalianus 260 AD RARE
Saturninus 280 AD RARE
Sebastianus 412-413 AD RARE
Severus III 461-465 AD RARE
Uranus Antoninus 253 AD RARE

 

That's a great ol' portrait of everyone's favorite blacksmith/mechanic/plumber/whatever-turned-emperor/usurper!

Mine might look nicer were it not for its surviving silvering.

 

how'd you get it for free?

 

Of course you can always ask Athena Numismatics or Zurqieh for a jar of bright orange/yellow DIY desert patina gunk to enhance it