I avidly collect the early denarii of Septimius Severus from the eastern IMP issues currently attributed to Laodicea ad Mare. The following is an insight into the obsessive nature of some of my collecting. Some weeks ago I obtained this first coin. Obv:- L SEPT SEV P[ERT AVG IMP VIII], Laureate head right Rev:- FORTA REDVC, Fortuna (Hilaritas) standing left, holding long palm in right hand, cornucopiae in left Minted in Laodicea ad Mare, A.D. 196 - 197 References:- RIC -, RSC -, BMCRE - Despite the lack of a complete obverse legend I was able to comfortably attribute this to the IMP VIII issue based on style alone. A couple of weeks ago the following coin became available and I simply had to buy it as it is an obverse die match to my first coin. I has a complete obverse legend but this legend still raises some questions. This new coin suffers from a lack of a complete reverse legend but the FORTA is clear leaving me comfortable attributing the reverse to FORTA REDVC. The quesion raised by the obverse legend on this second coin is one that has been plaguing this issue for some years. RIC and BMCRE have alocated some coins to an IMP VII issue. Current thinking by collectors of this issue is that the IMP VII isse does not exist and that allcoins attributed to IMP VII are mis-readings of IMP VIII due to a variety of factors such as blegend breaks of VI-II and VII-I and also unclear legends such as this coin where the engraver has cluttered the Is together. Obv:- L SEPT SEV PERT AVG IMP VIII, Laureate head right Rev:- FORT-A REDVC, Fortuna (Hilaritas) standing left, holding long palm in right hand, cornucopiae in left Minted in Laodicea ad Mare, A.D. 196 - 197 References:- RIC -, RSC -, BMCRE - Martin
How great is it to find a die match nearly 2000 years later. Both are beautiful coins, with very nice portraits. Fortuna on the second coin is better detailed even though it is missing some of the reverse legend. If I had to pick between the two, I suppose I would pick coin 2, but it wouldn't be an easy choice.
I do not have a coin of this die but the situation reminds me of my favorite Laodicea die pair. As Martin said, for years there was controversy about the existence or not of coins dated IMP VI or IMP VII. Current theory denies both giving the coins to misread IMP VIII dies. My pair shows the same obverse die with one clearly reading IMP VI while the other shows that the other II's were hiding where poor strike might lose them. These coins usually are missing some letters. It is nice when die identity can help us fill in the blanks. If anyone reading this does not understand the term 'die match', this page might help: http://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/dielink.html Anyone really interested in getting involved in this great tool for numismatists can even take the little exercise at the bottom of that page.
Well, I gots nuthin' to add, but this humble example of a Septimius Severus ... ... man, you guys have fantastic coins!! (bravo fellas!!)
