Aurelian - As references get better, attribution gets harder

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Orange Julius, Aug 7, 2020.

  1. Orange Julius

    Orange Julius Well-Known Member

    Hi all,
    Similar to a recent Probus thread that included discussions on issue "phases", I have a question on this common Aurelian coin. It's easy enough to attribute (or maybe not).

    Aurelian
    Siscia mint, 4th officina. 7th emission, AD 274.
    Ob: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG - Radiate and cuirassed bust right
    R: CONCORDIA MILITVM - Emperor standing right, clasping hands with Concordia standing left; Q*.
    RIC V 244

    However with all coins, I like to check the most recent references to have the most accurate and complete attribution.

    The MER RIC program is the "the preliminary step to the revision of the Roman Imperial Coinage V.1." Many errors in RIC V are updated here and more information and relevant examples are available of each coin. http://www.ric.mom.fr/en/home

    If you look up this coin on the site, three results are returned. All exactly the same and attributed to the old RIC 244 number and Issue 7 but with separate updated temporary numbers. The difference between the results is only the "Phase." Seemingly identical coins are listed in the three results as Phase 1, 2 and 3.
    3 returned results

    My question to anyone who may know Aurelian coins to this level of detail is... how can you tell between the different phases? The coins look identical, with identical bust types, inscriptions and officina marks. The weights for examples across the phases are all over the place... how can you tell the difference? I guess many would ask... "Does it even matter?" No, probably not but these are details that I like to figure out if I can.

    AurelianSisciaRIC244.JPG
    As always, show your Aurelian RIC 244 coins or anything else relevant you'd like! Thanks!
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2020
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Victor_Clark

    Victor_Clark standing on the shoulders of giants Dealer

    Estiot has two other books on Aurelian-- La Venèra and BnF XII; which I have; but have not translated the pertinent bits as they are in Italian and French.
     
    +VGO.DVCKS and Orange Julius like this.
  4. Valentinian

    Valentinian Supporter! Supporter

    AurelianCONCORDIAMILITVMoval9057.jpg
    Here is a similar Aurelian, but with obverse legend
    IMP AVRELIANVS AVG (not "IMP C ...")
    27-20 mm. 3.42 grams.
    (Old) RIC V.I 60 "period III" (of three), page 271, Rome.

    I'll have to look it up using both Estiot and the RIC on-line program.
     
    Alegandron, ominus1, Bing and 2 others like this.
  5. dougsmit

    dougsmit Member Supporter

    As with Valentinian's coin with no C, Aurelian spent a lot of time at the gym working on his neck.
    rs2222bb3068.jpg

    This one with the C is not as impressive on the portrait but the metal appears to be better than we are used to seeing in pre-reform Aurelian.
    rs2220bb0427.jpg
     
  6. Bing

    Bing Illegitimi non carborundum Supporter

  7. ancientone

    ancientone Well-Known Member

    Not sure what phase this is but my Aurelian is phasing.
    a41.jpg
     
  8. Orange Julius

    Orange Julius Well-Known Member

    Nice Aurelian coins everyone. I don't know why but I really like coin of the later 3rd century. Scrappy... but super fun.

    @dougsmit I really like your tough guy Aurelian. I have a similar one with a "don't mess with me" bust.

    AurelianRIC216.JPG
    RIC 216 Siscia

    Note: I may re-post my question on the FORVM board to get further comment, in case you see it there too.
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2020
    Alegandron, Johndakerftw and Bing like this.
  9. Alegandron

    Alegandron "ΤΩΙ ΚΡΑΤΙΣΤΩΙ..." ΜΕΓΑΣ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ, June 323 BCE Supporter

    Here is a RIC-I dunno

    upload_2020-8-8_10-49-43.png
    RI Aurelian 270-275 CE AE Ant receiving Globe from Jupiter
    RIC - I dunno
     
  10. Roman Collector

    Roman Collector Supporter! Supporter

    Sorry, OJ, but I have looked and looked at the MIR/RIC listings for the three coins and, for the life of me, I don't see any difference between them.
     
    Orange Julius likes this.
  11. Orange Julius

    Orange Julius Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Aug 8, 2020
    Roman Collector likes this.
  12. hotwheelsearl

    hotwheelsearl Well-Known Member

    I think Aurelian's head is "phasing" to another dimension here.
    Aurelian Milan RIC 135.JPG
     
    Orange Julius, Johndakerftw and Bing like this.
  13. hotwheelsearl

    hotwheelsearl Well-Known Member

    My opinion:

    aurelian1.PNG

    ^ Longest arms between the two reverse figures.

    aurelian2.PNG

    Medium length arms between reverse figures. Shorter neck than above.

    aurelian3.PNG
    Shortest arms on reverse figures. Thickest neck of all three. More detailed cuirass.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page