Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;DonnaML, post: 4412303, member: 110350&quot;][USER=89514]@curtislclay[/USER], a few further thoughts.&nbsp; First, I&#039;ll just note that it seems from other examples of my coin that the &quot;bushy hairstyle&quot; of the figure on the reverse doesn&#039;t consist entirely of hair; a substantial portion of his &quot;hair&quot; looks like some kind of large wreath with a portion protruding in the back.&nbsp; See this example at <a href="https://www.coinarchives.com/e3d6234f3c3819fc220bd14d4f37f340/img/leu_winterthur/e11/image01836.jpg" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.coinarchives.com/e3d6234f3c3819fc220bd14d4f37f340/img/leu_winterthur/e11/image01836.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://www.coinarchives.com/e3d6234f3c3819fc220bd14d4f37f340/img/leu_winterthur/e11/image01836.jpg</a>:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1107738[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Second, I had a chance this morning to look at some examples of the Antoninus Pius &quot;GENIO SENATVS&quot;-type denarius, and agree that its reverse figure of the Genius of the Senate is almost identical to the reverse figure on my Balbinus type. See these examples from acsearch, for anyone not familiar with the Antoninus Pius coin:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1107744[/ATTACH]</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1107745[/ATTACH]</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1107746[/ATTACH]</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1107747[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>There is, however, one obvious and major difference: the scepter held in the left hand of the Genius of the Senate on the Antoninus Pius coin bears no resemblance whatsoever to the object held in the left hand of the reverse figure on the Balbinus coin, whether in size, location, or the way it&#039;s held.&nbsp; Nor is there an orb at the end of the object on the Balbinus coin, as there is on the scepter on the Antoninus Pius coins. </p><p><br /></p><p>Therefore, your conclusion (and, I assume, the conclusions of the authorities you cite) that because the figures are otherwise essentially identical, the object held by the reverse figure on the Balbinus coin -- his &quot;attribute&quot; -- &quot;has to be a short scepter, not a sword,&quot; must be based on the premise that this major and obvious difference between the two objects is meaningless and without significance.</p><p><br /></p><p>Perhaps these authorities explain that premise, but I view it as not proven.&nbsp; Why shouldn&#039;t that one difference have a significance? It seems unlikely to be entirely meaningless. Especially given that the object on the Balbinus reverse is positioned and held exactly like a short sword, and not like a scepter. Why couldn&#039;t the figure combine the attributes of the Genius of the Senate and an Emperor in a time of civil war, and be holding a sword instead of a scepter -- especially given that, as you point out, Balbinus and his co-Emperor came from the Senate?&nbsp; Perhaps it&#039;s supposed to be Balbinus &quot;as&quot; Genius of the Senate, and that&#039;s why Sear equivocates on the issue in RCV III.&nbsp; In any event, the conclusion that the reverse figure on my coin must have been intended to represent the Genius of the Senate appears inescapable, but, absent further elaboration, I view the identity of the object he holds in his left hand as a still-unresolved issue.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in