Featured Follow the coin theme GAME - ancient edition - post ‘em if you got ‘em

I thought I was going to agree with Valentinian when he noted that we have the same name for a Caracalla and a Claudius so why rename a post reform Aurelian but he lost me saying aurelianus might be better. I have absolutely no use for professional experts who decide that something needs to be changed from the previous wrong guess to their equally random update. If we had some evidence that the people of the day called the coins by a certain name, I would change but not just because it makes some thesis look better.

What should we name the coins? Antoninianus is a made up name acknowledging the role of Caracalla but accepted here mostly because it is what they were called when I first came on the scene. I might prefer we just call them 'doubles' which would anger those who point out the things only weighed a denarius and a half. I would say call them radiates but someone will point out that the coins of empresses had no radiate crown so we could not call them radiates. This would also run afoul of the name postreform radiates for the fractional pieces that accompanied the large folles of Diocletian's reform. Do me a favor and don't point out that we could call them "Diocletiani". returning to fact that the silver of Caracalla was better than that of Claudius we could name the junk series "Galliani" being consistent by making up four names for the four stages named after someone. Has scholarship descended to this?
I might just call them "coins". That is wrong, too, but we don't have to get carried away complicating the matter.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

@dougsmit has some good points. I can tell you why I am thinking of switching. I am writing a web page on coins of the First Tetrarchy (Diocletian, etc.) In 294 Diocletian had a coin reform which created two new AE denominations, the "follis" (or "nummus") and the "post-reform radiate" (an awkward name, but it is "post-reform" and it is "radiate"). Unfortunately, the post-reform radiate looks a great deal like the previous radiates which had much more intrinsic value (perhaps 4 times as much). The significant difference in the two denominations is in their intrinsic value. I want to distinguish the pre- and post-reform radiates. The pre-reform ones had more value, not because they are in the series with declining silver value of coins we call antoniniani, but because they are in the series of reformed coins of Aurelian. So, if you are going to have both denominations in the mix, the pre-reform denomination does not include coins pre-Aurelian.

Maybe we should just call all those radiate coins from 215 to 294 "radiates."

Next is an except from my not-yet-published web page on coins of the First Tetrarchy.

The "post-reform radiate" denomination is copper with no added silver and no surface-silvering. It looks very much like the aurelianus. They can be hard to tell apart. The next two coins are similar in appearance but were actually much different in antiquity.



Compare this coin, an aurelianus, to the next coin, a post-reform radiate.
They are quite similar. They have the same obverse legend:
IMP C C VAL DIOCLETIANVS AVG
They have the same reverse type:
CONCORDIA MILITVM, emperor being presented with Victory on a globe.
This coin does not name the mint, but has the distinctive "XXI" of the aurelianus denomination.
RIC V.II Diocletian 306v, page 253. Cyzicus.

The second coin names the mint: ALE for Alexandria.




Note that the previous coin shows signs of silvering (so, it must be an aurelianus) and this one does not. Also, the second has a larger head.

RIC VI Alexandria 46a. "c. 296-7"

Many aureliani do not have this "CONCORDIA MILITVM" reverse (e.g. the first coin on this page). There are a few (not many) post-reform radiates that have a different reverse.

[Continued on the web page.]

 

Well that was interesting but I admit it hurt my head...

Shapur I:


Next: fire altar showing the bust of Ahura Mazda in the flames.

 

fire altar showing the bust of Ahura Mazda in the flames.


Shapur II

A Sasanian coin with clear mint and date but not by Khusru II

 

No one has done anything with this thread for a while so Seleukos as Satrap Ar Double Shekel 322-312 B.C. Obv. Baal enthroned left. Rv. Lion prowling right Nicolet-Pierre 7 16.59 grms 22 mm Photo by W. Hansen Next coin another Seleukid

 

Antiochus II Theos AR tetradrachm



Next: another Seleucid AR

 

I am not enough of a Seleucid fan to be able to keep posting things that are different. We usually see big tetradrachms and small bronzes so I'll offer a drachm (they get no respect) of Antiochus III 223-187 BC Ekbatana mint?. I wish I had an obol but I do not.

Next: a Hellenistic (post Alexander III) silver smaller than a drachm

 

You have the correct mint. From CNG

My guess is you have a pi on the left field.

 

Bactrian Kingdom, Eucratides I, c. 170-145 BC, AR obol (0.55g, 10mm)
Obv: Diademed and draped bust right, wearing crested helmet decorated with bull's horn and ear
Rev: ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ-ΕΥΚΡΑΤΙΔΟΥ, caps of the Dioscuri with palm fronds; WA monogram below
Ref: SNG ANS 496
Note: Sometimes called Eukratides the Great, his mother, Laodice, may have been a member of the Seleucid imperial house

Next: another coin of the Bactrian Kingdom

 

BAKTRIA


Indo-Greek Baktria Menander I Soter BC 155-130 AR Tet 26mm 9.6g Diad - Athena Alkidemos tbolt Gorgon shield SNG ANS 764-767

Next: Another Baktria

 

Here's a nice and heavy Bactrian trichalkon, a bit earlier. There's not much left of the reverse, but the obverse is good enough. It's a thick coin in a peculiar form, see the second picture.






Bactria. AE trichalkon Euthydemos I, Baktra or Alexandria on the Oxus (Aï Khanoum) (225-206 BC). Obv. Bare head of Hercules right, in a stipple circle. Rev. Horse prancing right. 24 mm, 12.35 gr. Cf. Hoover 53, Mitchiner 87.

I would like to see a nice silver tetrobol, please.

 

Nice is a matter of opinion but the Perdikkas of Macedon is a tetraobol.


Next: a silver coin greater than an obol and less than a drachm

 

Interesting way the die maker cut the border of dots on the obverse.
PtolemAE

 

Parthian AR diobol, Vologases I (51-78 AD )
Mint: Uncertain mint in Persis
Obv: bare-headed bust left with medium beard wearing diadem with loop at the top and two ends; wavy hair; two-line neck torque has no ends; circular border of dots
Rev: archer seated right on throne holding bow; somewhat blundered Greek inscription reading, with emendations, ΟΛΙΓΑCΟΟ(Υ) ΤΟΥ ΚΥΡΙ(Ο)Υ ('Vologases the lord')
Size: 1.29g, 12mm
Ref: Shore 379

Next: a bronze coin of Syracuse

 

Syracuse AE hemilitron Zeus/thunderbolt and eagle


Next: a silver hemilitron of any city (extra credit for Syracuse)

 

Like a phoenix rising out of the ashes! Not silver, but a bronze Syracuse hemiltron:


Sicily, Syracuse
Æ Hemilitron. Dionysios I, circa 405-375 BC. Head of Arethusa right / Star of sixteen rays at centre of quartered incuse. CNS II, 18; SNG ANS 394-397; HGC 2, 1481. 5.19g, 18mm

Next up:a coin that you just had to have, regardless of condition

 

Didn’t care


PUBLIUS QUINCTILIUS VARUS RARE AE OF ANTIOCHEIA, SYRIA
RPC 4252, SNG Cop. 92, About Very Fine / Very Fine, 20.4mm, 8.03 grams, Dated year 27 = 5/4 B.C.E.
Obverse: Laureate head of Zeus to right
Reverse: Tyche of Antioch seated to right, holding palm branch; below, river-god Orontes swimming right, in right field, date ZK (year 27 = 5/4 B.C.E.)

Yeah, the guy who lost 3 of Augustus’ Legions to the Germans... that ticked Augy off until HE died, too.

Next: coin you had to have, who cares about condition.

 

I needed a denarius of Julia Titi, grade be damned!




Next: Somebody leaning on a column, like they are Joe Cool or something!

 

No one leans on a column better than Venus.
Julia Domna, AR denarius, Rome mint


Next: a figure leaning on something besides a column

 

Maximianus Herculius, Antoninianus

Obv:– IMP C VAL MAXIMIANVS P F AVG, Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right
Rev:– VIRTVS AVGG, Hercules, standing right, leaning on club, with lion’s skin on rock.
Minted in Lugdunum (Retrograde C|_). Emission 5. Officina 4. Autumn A.D. 287 – Autumn A.D. 289
Reference:– Cohen 565 Bastien 65 (2 examples cited). RIC V Pt. 2 Lugdunum 437

Weight 3.93g. 22.64mm. 180 degrees



Next:- A Retrograde letter on a Roman Imperial (not provincial) coin