Something a little different

It is hard for me to remember what we have discussed here over the past few years but it seems we discuss the same coins over and over again. I thought I'd start a thread showing coins I don't recall showing before here. Perhaps I forgot; perhaps no one else has such coins; perhaps no one cares. This first post will show the coins as an ID challenge which I will follow by ID's for those who don't want to be challenged. All three have something in common. Feel free to show your coins not ever shown here that also share that characteristic.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

First coin:
AUTONOMOUS TOMIS Severan period?
AE16 Head of city god KTICTHC TOMHC

Grapes TOMEOC 3.2g 6H

AMNG I,2 2563 p670 according to the seller but I have not checked it

Pseudo-autonomous issues often replaced portraits of the ruler on smallest denominations. Anyone have one of these?

 

Is that a cluster of grapes on that top coin?

 

Second coin:
HIEROPOLIS-CASTABALA CILICIA C.150 BC

AE23 Tyche/City Goddess RT. IEPO POLITON

Swimming god Pyramos TONPROCTO PYPAMO
7.8g 6H

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3034947

I see that my records copied from the seller were wrong and this coin was from c.150 BC rather than AD. That means it doesn't belong in this thread. I hope this is the biggest error I make today but it probably won't be.

 

Hey, @dougsmit ! Why don't you do like Buffalo boy used to do and put your name on all of the coins you've posted with a magic marker.

Chris

 

Third coin:
ANTIOCH AD ORONTEM
66AD ? (time of Nero)
AE 21 ZEUS HD. RT. ANTIOXION
seated citizen dropping pebble in urn (voting scene) ETO EIP (YEAR 115)
7.4g 12H

These three coins come from a time when the Romans ruled the world but what we consider standard Provincial norms were not used. Most coins of this type strike most collectors as boring compared to the larger ones or the ones with Imperial portraits. They are not necessarily as common as their price might suggest. On the other hand they are not necessarily worth high prices just because you do not see them every day.

Yes those were grapes on the first coin.

 

Thanks I don't collect ancients, but I do read and look at most of the post in that forum. I find the history of them fascinating and the designs that in most cases are part of the story very interesting. I just wouldn't know where to start but I have given buying a few pieces some thought.

 

Well, it seems you have completed step 1 to buying and becoming addicted to Ancients. Now it's time for step 2.

 

Thanks @dougsmit , I am taking a similar tack, but more towards collecting before the Imperial period of RR Provincial, Occupied territories, and Italic issues (a some Magna Graecia). IE: Macedonian provincials, Frentanii, Samnium, Etruscan, etc... Your OP area is very intriguing.

 

Interesting group Doug. None of these fall in my collecting area => I can tell only a little by a glance. I guessed the obverse dieties of #2 & #3. I guessed a river god for the reverse of #2 and voting for #3. I have no idea of where to find the mint cities.
I liked #3 best. I like coins with voting scenes. It is interesting that your ballot is round and mine is rectangular.

 

i have this coin that would fit right in. i was unsure where to put this coin in my collection, i finally decided it belonged with the roman provincial coins.




Philadelphia. Pseudo-autonomous issue. Time of Titus, 79-81 CE
O: Demeter, countermark (male head?), R: grain, 19 mm, 7.0 g

 

Where to list these autonomous/pseudo-autonomous issues is tricky. I want to tuck everything into a tidy category but that isn't always clear-cut.

Client kings, like Sauromates I of Bosporus-- should those coins be lumped in with Roman Provincials? I guess so. Initially I had my Bosporus coins in the Greek section of my website, but CNG puts them in the Roman Provincial section, so I moved them.

 

There will never be neat lines drawn that work for every case. I keep my Pseudo -autonomous coins at the end of Roman Provincials even though that means that a Nero follows a Diocletian. To me the easiest way is to pick a book like Sear Greek Imperials (or whatever you have) and follow it. Certainly I'd like to have a full set of the new Roman Provincial Coins but the volumes of that likely to be issued during my lifetime are few enough that following the ones that do exist does not seem necessary. Very few of us follow RIC for our Imperials since they mix rulers when there were co-emperors or split things into what seems like meaningless periods. Part of me would use Cohen where it not for his ignoring mints which mean something to me. There is no book on Roman coins that orders things in a way I really like. Provincials are even harder. It seems silly to put coins issued in one city on one day in several separate sections of a catalog according to the head on the obverse but it is what I do. I know no better way.

 

Here is my only example of a quasi-autonomous coin, from the time of Nero. Like @TIF, I used to file this greek imperial issue with my Greek coins, but have recently moved it to my Roman collection.


minted in 65/66 AD, time of Nero
Syria. Antiochia ad Orontern. Seleucis and Pieria
AE 14 - 5.6gm
Obv: ANTIOXEΩΝ before veiled and turreted head of city goddess r.
Rev: lighted altar, on stand; in ex., ET.ΔΙΡ (= year 114 of the Caesarean era = AD 65/66)
Reference: SGIC 5188

 

I think your group is indicative of an advanced collecting bent Doug. Anyone can write a check or follow a list of emperors. I think its advanced scholarship to seek out not just the prettiest coins, (though I love them too), but coins that deviated from the norm, and WHY.

 

The coins posted all seem interesting, but without help I would never be able to properly ID them. Also, categorizing ancients are a bit tricky for me. I'm always contemplating if I should put them by year, ruler or region.

 

I think coins like this, which look Greek, should be called Greek Imperials whereas coins that are Roman looking should be called Roman Provincials. Wouldn't that make sense?

 

I care Doug! I find Imperial coins in general a little boring, even in top condition. Pseudo-autonomous are much more challenging to ID and acquire.


Syria, Seleucia. Autonomous AE21. Legate C. Julius Commodus Orfitianus.
Syria, Seleucia. AE21. Legate C. Julius Commodus Orfitianus. Year 188 of the local era (157 AD).
Obv: EPI KOMODOU PR, female bust (Tyche of Seleucia) right, wearing turreted head-dress and veil, palm-branch behind head, border of dots.
Rev: CELEUKEWN THC IERAC KAI AUTONOMOY above and beneath thunderbolt, with fillet attached, on cushion placed on stool.
BMC 31


Sarmatia, Tyra. Julia Domna AE24. Cybele
Obv: TVPA NWN. Bust of Domna r., draped.
Rev: IOVLADO MNA CE. Kybele seated r., wearing mural crown; in her r., patera; beneath l. elbow, tympanon; behind, delta.
BMC 2


Phrygia, Hierapolis. Pseudo-autonomous AE26. Apollo Lairbenos/Apollo Kitharoedos
LAIRBHNO C; Bust of Apollo Lairbenos r., radiate, shoulders draped.
IERAPO LEITWN; Apollo Kitharoedos (Archegetes) in long chiton and mantle, standing r., holding in lowered r. plectrum, and carrying lyre with l.
26mm. 12.0 gm.
Time of Caracalla (?) and later.


Moesia inferior, Tomis. Pseudo-autonomous Æ16. Lion seated right
Moesia inferior, Tomis. 1st-2nd Century AD. Pseudo-autonomous Æ16mm. Anepigraphic turreted and draped and diademed female bust right, Demeter? / Lion seated right, raising forepaw; + above. AMNG I 2514; SNG Budapest -.



Macedonia, Thessalonica. Pseudo-autonomous AE17 / Pan advancing
City; Province; Region Thessalonica; Macedonia; Macedonia
Date 180–192
Pseudo-autonomous? Yes
Obverse design nude Pan (youthful) advancing, r., carrying pedum over shoulder and nebris; to l., syrinx (or letter D); to r., crescent surmounted by star
Obverse inscription (no obv. legend)
Reverse design in laurel wreath; between, laurel endings, small eagle, facing
Reverse inscription ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΩΝ
Metal Bronze
Average diameter 17 mm
Average weight 2.47 g
Average die-axis various
Type reference Touratsoglou, Pseudoautonomen III C, 1-2 (Commodus), AMNG 30


Lydia, Thyateira. Pseudo-autonomus AE23 Artemis Boreitene
Lydia, Thyateira. Pseudo-autonomus AE23. ΒΟΡEΙ − ΤΗΝΗ, Draped bust of Artemis Boreitene left with bow and quiver / ΘΥΑΤEΙΡΗΝΩΝ, Eagle with spread wings standing facing.

 

I consider this a Greek Imperial coin, but have chosen to file it in my 12 Caesar collection. Others might file it differently; this just makes sense for my particular collection.

 

The problem with that in my view is the way it places two coins of the same city issued the same year in different categories because one had Nero on the obverse while the other had Zeus. What might we call the quadrantes of Domitian etc. that show a god and an animal? Perhaps they are saved by the SC and allowed in Roman. Similarly what do we do with coins of Italian towns of 300 BC? Does it matter that one of those towns was called Rome? The earliest Roman silvers certainly qualify as parallel to staters of the neighbors but none of us keep them in our Greek city box.