I understand that the Severan dynasty used several mints besides Rome for some of its coinage. There do not appear to be any marks to denote what mint issued what coin. I know that some posters here know enough about determining a mint from style to be able to pin them down to a particular mint. I wonder if anyone might be able to tell where this Julia Domna denarius was minted and perhaps, even the year. If it helps, the coin weighs 3.3 grams. Thanks.
What is it about the coin that makes it seem like Rome? What are the distinguishing markers that you see? Again, thanks.
That's the "standard" style. Provincial mint coinage generally is much cruder in style. For example, compare yours to this one http://www.coryssa.org/1021291 However, it's often the case that the styles are ambiguous and the situation especially bad if the series is known to be minted in two cities without any changes in legends or design elements. It isn't always possible to say with certainty, especially without the benefit of having the coin in hand to evaluate. Mint marks sure help a lot. Which is one reason why I love me LRB's :- D
US coins require mint marks because the design of the coins is identical for each mint and a mark is added to the dies according to location. On ancients, a different master trained a staff and each mint shows a distinct style for that mint and sometimes or an individual. Those of us who collect Severans have no trouble separating the groups but we do not necessarily know where that mint was located. A mint mark would be nice for that. Below is a group shot identiied by the traditional city names some of which are now considered incorrect. Of course the mints each 'developed' their styles as time passed. Even Alexandria that only operated for a couple years has been divided into three periods by specialists so Rome (19 years) will offer even more oportunity for learning. The coins below are all from the early period of civil wars while Septimius was dealing with other contestants for power. Rome ====================== Emesa Alexandria ================= Laodicea
Thanks for that comparison. Can you tell me what it is about the coin from Laodicia that a collector should look for that makes it likely to be from that mint? It does appear to me that the one I have posted, apparently from Rome, is on a dumpy, thick flan whereas the one from Laodicia appears to be a thinner, flatter and more rounded flan. Also this one seems to give Julia a crescent shaped wisp of hair in front of her ear. Is that something significant?
Jeeze, I had no idea there were so many varieties and variations in herb coins. Actually, I have to admit that I was not aware of the Laodicea mint at all.
The tip off for Domna from Laodocea is a small circle wher her neck meets her garment. Most have it. Some are more clear than others. This one is relatively weak. These two are more bold. They are more constant than the curl before the ear but there are some weaker than these.
There are two PVDICITIA reverse types from the Rome mint for this empress, almost certainly issued separately. Your coin type, Pudicitia seated left, right hand resting on breast and left hand on chair, RIC 576, BMCRE 74: And this one, probably issued later (later hairstyle), Pudicitia seated left, head and torso facing, holding scepter in left hand, RIC 575, BMCRE 72:
Actually three! I forgot this one issued under Caracalla, which has the same reverse type as RIC 575 (Severus) but a different obverse inscription: Julia Domna, AD 193-217. Roman AR denarius, 3.20 g, 17.6 mm, 7 h. Rome, AD 211. Obv: IVLIA PIA FELIX AVG, bare-headed and draped bust, right. Rev: PVDICITIA, Pudicitia veiled and stolate, seated left, head and torso facing, right hand on breast and left hand resting on chair and holding scepter. Refs: RIC 385; BMCRE 19; Cohen 165 (error); RSC 172a; RCV 7105; Hill 1298; CRE 383; ERIC II 210. Notes: Ex E. Button, Frankfurter Münzhandlung 114, lot 619, Dec. 5, 1967. Ex CNG Triton XX, lot 614 E053, Jan. 9, 2017.
