I am getting a lot better at attribution as I learn more and more.. mostly with LRBs... BUT it is so great to have the combined knowledge here to reach out to. I think this coin extends beyond my limited knowledge and I require some guidance. My thoughts are: Provincial, Hadrian, Eros, Alexandria..? I started there but could not find more clues to push this to a firm answer. Am I even close? This actually is a beautiful coin "in hand" - my photography setup certainly needs improvement. I love this reverse!!! Any help is appreciated (as always).... and Thank You for any replies!!
Nice coin. I don't think that looks like Hadrian, however, although Provincial portraits can be misleading. I found this interesting page from FORVM with a bunch of examples: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/ayiyoryitika/ProlegomenaEros/ProlegomenaEros.html Down a ways on this site there is one that looks like yours and the legend seems to match: "Æ 16, 12 h, 3.05 g. Obv. Μ ΟΠΕΛ[ΛΙΟC ΑΝΤΩΝ]ΕΙΝΟC. Bare-headed, draped and cuirassed bust of Diadumenian Caesar r. Rev. ΜΑΡΚΙΑΝΟ-ΠΟΛΕΙΤΩΝ. ‘Pensive’ Eros standing l. with legs crossed, leaning with both arms on a burning torch placed downwards on an altar and resting his head on his r. hand. Pick (AMNG) 796"
Well that is certainly an interesting page! Thank you. Will spend some time reading that. It was listed as Hadrian Provincial- .. I certainly agree with you on the bust for sure. Lesson learned on being too focused on descriptions from others. Still not sure
I find that a lot of ancient coins I buy are mis-attributed - sometimes wildly so. Actually I kind of prefer it that way - it is more fun figuring things out for myself. Roman Provincials can be very difficult - I only have a few, so I have a lot to learn. If yours is a Diadumenium, that would be pretty cool - he was around for a very short period of time (especially compared to Hadrian).
I agree with you... I am trying very hard to figure things out for myself - there are so many resources out there. I was just sort of getting myself up to speed on a lot of LRB and then I went out and bought a few Provincials. I am seriously pulling my hair out..lol. I have a few more that I am struggling with but I am going to give it a couple of weeks of research before I look for help.. but I will say it is great to have a place to ask for help! Still not sure on this one... hope someone can help with this.
Welcome to the wonderful world of Roman Provincials . I think Mike has nailed your coin with the attribution to Diadumenian from Marcianopolis. I really like the Eros reverse type. COMMODUS AE20. 4.43g, 19.6mm. THRACE, Philippopolis, circa AD 180-192. Varbanov 1054 var. (obv legend and bust type); RPC Online Volume 4, #7572 var. (same). O: AV KAI MAP AY [KOMOΔOC], laureate and cuirassed bust right, seen from behind. R: ΦIΛIΠΠOΠOΛЄITΩN, winged Eros (in attitude of Thanatos?) standing left, legs crossed, resting on inverted torch. Ex George Spradling Collection
Yes - looks like this is Diadumenian!!! THANK YOU! Not bad for a $6.49 buy! Here is mine: and here the match I have found... Province Moesia Inferior City Markianopolis Size (mm) 16 Weight (g) 2.99 Die Axis 0 Tariff 1 assarion Governor - Ob. Leg. M OPELLIC ANTWNEINOC Ob. Desc. Bare headed and draped bust of Diadumenian right – seen from behind Meaning Marcus Opellius Antonius Rev. Leg. MARKIANO-POLEITWN Rev. Desc. Eros/Thanatos standing left, resting chin on palm, leaning on (extinguished) inverted brand Meaning (Coin) of the people of Markianopolis – A prince crowned by the gods References; Collection; Moushmov 591; Hristova/Jekov (V2) 6.25.41.1 (r6), p.127 - this coin; Varbanov (Eng.) Vol.1. No. 1339; AMNG I 796, p. 251; Notes: Eros was worshiped as a fertility god and associated with love and sexual desire. Sometimes thought of as Thanatos, ‘god of death’, due to his association with the concept of life after death. The symbolism here, of the extinguished torch, may represent joy after sexual fulfilment, or hope for life after death.
Now that we have pinned down the coin correctly, let's learn from the error. Alexandria was a particularly poor guess. As a general rule (there are a few exceptions), most coins of Alexandria have reverse legends limited to the regnal year of the issuing emperor. These are frequently the symbol L (=year) followed by a Greek numeral for the year of the reign. Sometimes L is replaced by ETOYC (=year) and occasionally the Greek numeral is replaced by the year spelled out. Rarely there are words identifying the figure on the reverse but they did not write out 'Alexandria' so a coin reading that will be one of the other cities in the Empire with the same name (not Egypt). For example, below is a tetradrachm of Commodus dated L K S (year 26). It is not rare for the year to be split oddly like this so we have to be careful to realize that a small flan can lose one side or the other. This Maximianus has the L on the right (why ????) and spells out ENATOY (9) While this Carus spells out ETOYC but renders 13 as ΙΓ. Understand there are exceptions but when you see a coin with a simple dated reverse, especially using the L, think Alexandria.
Excellent - thank you Doug. I can certainly see how my first guess was a poor one now. In the lot with the coin above I have this coin that I have been working on. Both coins were sold as Hadrian and it is looking that both were incorrectly assigned. I am thinking this one is actually Diocletian .. with the information you provided this one would be a Alexandria - with LB meaning Year 2. So 286 AD? Am I on the right track?
Actually, your Diocletian is nicer than most of these you see with easily readable letters. The reverse is Eirene holding olive branch and scepter.
Excellent thank you. It was another inexpensive addition. I was very surprised with the quality of the coin when it arrived in the mail... the online picture was terrible.
It isn't quite that simple. At the risk of being overly educational and definitely being too lazy to look it up (you can do that): Alexandria started their new year on one o the last days of August depending on whether a year was a leap year or not. When a new ruler was crowned, he struck year one coins until new years day (August 30, lets say) and then started with year two. If he became emperor in August, year one would be very short. If he started in September, it would be almost a whole year. Similarly, the last year would be shortened according to when he died. Most junior rulers used the year dates of the senior ruler so, for example, Caracalla used dates matching his father Septimius Severus and continued counting when he was himself the senior. This means there are no LA coins of Caracalla since they did not start striking for him until year 5 (LE). Your LB coin was issued from late August to late August starting the year after his first part year ending in late August. You have to know when he became emperor in his mind to know when to start counting. For example, ther are no LA coins of Septimius Severus since Alexandria was under the control of Pescennius Niger until after the end of August 193 but when Septimius took the city, he was into his second year so the first coins are LB. Confusing? Yes. I never have found a list showing which years were leap years but that is only a day here and there. The proper date for your coin may be 294-5 if Diocletian started counting in August or 295-6 if he started in September or later. That is the part I'd have to research so that is the job I leave for you. Dating ancients is part of the fun. No?
Well that is a lot to take in... thank you very much for that response. Looks like I have a lot of research to do. Thank you very much for all of your information on this thread. I have learned a lot .. and have a path forward.
This has been an interesting post - I wanted to add that I have but one Diadumenian - a tiny, fairly ugly one also from Marcianopolis. It was an eBay lot purchase ($1.40!) and the flip it came in was labeled "Gordian III." It took me about two hours to figure it out (if I got it right, that is) - I am not complaining - I really enjoy tracking this stuff down. Diadumenian Æ 16 (217-218 A.D.) Roman Prov. - Marcianopolis, Moesia Inferior M OP[ELLIOC] ANTWNEINOC K, bare head right / MARKIANOPOLEITWN, Tyche standing left with rudder and cornucopiae. SNG Cop 228 (1.69 grams / 16 mm)
