Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
CNG Keystone 3
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="DonnaML, post: 6410763, member: 110350"]Well, according to this description, the book has 21 leaves of plates, which certainly suggests more than a few dozen coins:</p><p><br /></p><p>Title The coins / by A.R. Bellinger.</p><p>Publisher New Haven : Yale University Press</p><p>Creation Date c1949</p><p>Notes Includes bibliographical references and indexes.</p><p>Series The Excavations at Dura-Europos : final report 6</p><p>Format viii, 212 p., [21] leaves of plates : ill., map</p><p>31 cm.</p><p>Language English</p><p><br /></p><p>Plus, there are two other related publications available online; this one makes clear that the discoveries did include (at least) two hoards consisting of close to 900 coins:</p><p><br /></p><p>Two Roman hoards from Dura-Europos,</p><p>by Alfred R. Bellinger.</p><p>Main Author: Bellinger, Alfred Raymond, 1893-</p><p>Language(s): English</p><p>Published: New York, The American Numismatic Society, 1931.</p><p>Subjects: Coins, Roman.</p><p>Numismatics > Numismatics /Syria.</p><p>Physical Description: 2 p. ., 66 p. XVII pl. on 16 . 17 cm.</p><p><br /></p><p>See text at: <a href="http://numismatics.org/digitallibrary/ark:/53695/nnan91147" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://numismatics.org/digitallibrary/ark:/53695/nnan91147" rel="nofollow">http://numismatics.org/digitallibrary/ark:/53695/nnan91147</a></p><p><br /></p><p>Introduction:</p><p><br /></p><p>During the campaign of 1928–1929, the Yale Expedition to Dura-Europos on the Euphrates unearthed two hoards of coins. The more important, which is here treated first, was found on Jan. 26, 1929, in a pot from a house just inside the main gate of the city. It consists, besides a few unidentifiable fragments, of 789 pieces, of which 507 are base silver Antiochene tetradrachms and 282 are Antoniniani. The earliest emperor represented is Caracalla, the latest, Gallienus. The other hoard was found on Dec. 5, 1928, during the excavation for the Expedition's house. Unfortunately it was not found intact, like the other; it is impossible to be sure that we have all the pieces which originally belonged to it, and, on the other hand, at least one of the coins which were gathered up cannot have been a part of it. There are 89 tetradrachms and 5 Antoniniani of which we can be sure; they extend from Caracalla to Trebonianus Gallus. In addition, there are seven bronze coins of Elagabalus, Severus Alexander and Gordian which may well have belonged to the hoard; three illegible bronzes; and one bronze piece of Antiochus VIII, whose presence with the others must be purely accidental. Probably the silver represents most of the original collection and, since it is parallel to the other hoard, it is not likely that what we have lost would affect our general conclusions.</p><p><br /></p><p>Remarks on the significance of these finds in relation to the history of Dura will be found in The Excavations at Dura-Europos. Preliminary Report of Third Season, 1929–1930. Yale University Press. Since it was not possible to treat the numismatic aspect in that place with the fulness it deserves, the American Numismatic Society has generously offered to undertake a fuller publication. Thanks are due to the Society's President, Mr. E. T. Newell, not only for this offer, but for constant advice, to whose value the many citations in these pages testify. Indispensable assistance was also rendered by Mrs. A. R. Bellinger in cleaning the coins and preparing material for illustration, and by Mrs. Hopkins, Clark, 1895-1976. The latter was a member of the Expedition when the hoards were found, and it was hoped that she might publish them herself. This unfortunately proved impossible and she had to abandon the project after much labor, for the benefit of which I am most grateful. Miss Cox, Dorothy Hannah, 1893- has been good enough to arrange the casts for illustration, in the course of which labor she has rectified many errors of detail.</p><p><br /></p><p>The larger part of each hoard, as has been said, consists of silver tetradrachms. They bear on the obverse a portrait of the emperor with his name, in Greek characters, and, on the reverse, an eagle with the legend Δημαρχικimageς έξουσίας and sometimes a mention of the consulship (Ὕπατος τό ά, β' etc.). From the reign of Elagabalus on, this type is restricted to the mint at Antioch, but it was not there that the issue of such tetradrachms originated. The standard is undoubtedly the Phoenician standard which, in 126–5 B.C., replaced the Seleucid coinage at Tyre. The types there used are, obv., bust of Melqarth-Heracles, rev., eagle standing l. on prow. Since this series lasted past the middle of the first century A.D., it is evidently of this that Josephus speaks (Bell. Jud., II, 212) when he mentions "the Tyrian nomisma, which is worth four Attic drachms." Tetradrachms of the same standard were struck at Antioch by the early Roman emperors, but on these pieces the imperial portrait supplanted Melqarth on the obverse and the eagle was abandoned in favor of the Tyche of Antioch or a second portrait. It is not until Nero that the eagle is restored to the reverse; thereafter it is the regular type. It is still a question which of the issues from Nero to Trojan should be assigned to Tyre, which to Antioch. Since it has no bearing on these hoards I shall not enter upon it here. The reader will find it discussed by Hill in the British Museum Catalogue for Phoenicia and by Dieudonné in an article entitled "L'Aigle d'Antioche" in Revue Numismatique, 1909, pp. 458 ff. In the latter place will also be found a consideration of the various elements represented by the eagle type, which, derived ultimately from the eagle on the hand of Zeus on the reverse of the Alexander-type, becomes at last a symbol of the Roman empire. On the pieces in these hoards the eagle always has spread wings and a wreath in his beak. Since these characteristics are constant they are not specified in the catalogue.</p><p><br /></p><p>The closing of the mint of Tyre by Hadrian leaves no problem of attribution until the reign of Caracalla, who initiated the experiment of striking tetradrachms at a number of mints which are distinguished by various symbols placed under the eagle. In this he was followed by Macrinus and Diadumenianus and, since there is no general agreement among the authorities as to which symbols belong to each mint, that question is taken up in the body of the catalogue in connection with each piece of these three rulers. Elagabalus and his successors struck tetradrachms at Antioch only.</p><p><br /></p><p>From Galba to Nerva the tetradrachms bear the legend ЄΤΟϒC NЄOϒ IЄPOϒ A, B, etc., on which, cf. Eckhel, Doctrina Numorum veterum, vol. IV, pp. 416–418. The latest example of this formula is a piece of Trajan with ЄTOϒC NЄOϒ IЄPOϒ B (Dieudonné, R.N., 1927, p. 166). Thereafter the inscription is invariably some abbreviation of Δημαρχικimageς έξουσίας, which is the Greek for tribunicia potestate. Eckhel, p. 418, says: "Inde a Trajano annus novus sacer inferri numis non desiit, sed alia tantum formula adhiberi coepta; nimirum pro ЄTOϒC NЄOϒ IЄPOϒ scriptum deinceps ΔHMAPXIKHC ЄΞOϒCIAC, tribunicia potestate, quae et singulis annis renovabatur, quod aequivalet τimage NЄOϒ, et sacra fuit, quod est pro IЄPOϒ, et singulis annis unitate aucta perinde imperatorum annos numeravit, quam Graecorum ЄTOϒC." The assumption by the emperors of tribunician power goes back to Augustus and, since it was renewed yearly, was the simplest way of dating by the emperor's reign. However, in this case, as in some others on coins, it is noticeable that the phrase is not used for dating, for the number never accompanies it, as it regularly does on inscriptions, so that Eckhel's explanation is not entirely accurate. When dates are used they are furnished by the consulship, which comes after the tribunicia potestate when it occurs.</p><p><br /></p><p>The weights vary considerably. A certain amount of fluctuation is caused by the cleaning: this error is not more than 0.2 grammes, while the weights of pieces not defective run all the way from 8.1 g. to 16.6. The great majority lie between 11 g. and 13.5 g. Application of the frequency table fails to prove any significant variation of the standard from one reign to another.</p><p><br /></p><p>The Antoniniani, coins of a standard originated by Caracalla to check the alarming deterioration of the denarius, are part of the imperial coinage and, as such, bear Latin inscriptions and the variety of types familiar throughout the empire. The specimens before us have a certain importance since most of those before valerian were certainly struck at Antioch. In this period, before the introduction of mint marks to assist in attribution, the solution of that question rests largely on stylistic grounds, and it is therefore useful to have representatives surely of the mint at Antioch to confirm and supplement the arguments from style.</p><p><br /></p><p>The list of the larger hoard is given first. Weights, to the nearest tenth of a gramme, follow the numbers of the coins in square brackets, unless the condition is too poor to make the weight significant. </p><p><br /></p><p>[More at link]</p><p><br /></p><p>See also this article:</p><p><br /></p><p>Seleucid mint at Dura-Europos " [article]</p><p>Alfred R. Bellinger & Edward T.newell</p><p>Syria. Archéologie, Art et histoire Année 1940 21-1 pp. 77-81</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="https://www.persee.fr/doc/syria_0039-7946_1940_num_21_1_4222" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.persee.fr/doc/syria_0039-7946_1940_num_21_1_4222" rel="nofollow">https://www.persee.fr/doc/syria_0039-7946_1940_num_21_1_4222</a></p><p><br /></p><p>Beginning:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1253882[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="DonnaML, post: 6410763, member: 110350"]Well, according to this description, the book has 21 leaves of plates, which certainly suggests more than a few dozen coins: Title The coins / by A.R. Bellinger. Publisher New Haven : Yale University Press Creation Date c1949 Notes Includes bibliographical references and indexes. Series The Excavations at Dura-Europos : final report 6 Format viii, 212 p., [21] leaves of plates : ill., map 31 cm. Language English Plus, there are two other related publications available online; this one makes clear that the discoveries did include (at least) two hoards consisting of close to 900 coins: Two Roman hoards from Dura-Europos, by Alfred R. Bellinger. Main Author: Bellinger, Alfred Raymond, 1893- Language(s): English Published: New York, The American Numismatic Society, 1931. Subjects: Coins, Roman. Numismatics > Numismatics /Syria. Physical Description: 2 p. ., 66 p. XVII pl. on 16 . 17 cm. See text at: [URL]http://numismatics.org/digitallibrary/ark:/53695/nnan91147[/URL] Introduction: During the campaign of 1928–1929, the Yale Expedition to Dura-Europos on the Euphrates unearthed two hoards of coins. The more important, which is here treated first, was found on Jan. 26, 1929, in a pot from a house just inside the main gate of the city. It consists, besides a few unidentifiable fragments, of 789 pieces, of which 507 are base silver Antiochene tetradrachms and 282 are Antoniniani. The earliest emperor represented is Caracalla, the latest, Gallienus. The other hoard was found on Dec. 5, 1928, during the excavation for the Expedition's house. Unfortunately it was not found intact, like the other; it is impossible to be sure that we have all the pieces which originally belonged to it, and, on the other hand, at least one of the coins which were gathered up cannot have been a part of it. There are 89 tetradrachms and 5 Antoniniani of which we can be sure; they extend from Caracalla to Trebonianus Gallus. In addition, there are seven bronze coins of Elagabalus, Severus Alexander and Gordian which may well have belonged to the hoard; three illegible bronzes; and one bronze piece of Antiochus VIII, whose presence with the others must be purely accidental. Probably the silver represents most of the original collection and, since it is parallel to the other hoard, it is not likely that what we have lost would affect our general conclusions. Remarks on the significance of these finds in relation to the history of Dura will be found in The Excavations at Dura-Europos. Preliminary Report of Third Season, 1929–1930. Yale University Press. Since it was not possible to treat the numismatic aspect in that place with the fulness it deserves, the American Numismatic Society has generously offered to undertake a fuller publication. Thanks are due to the Society's President, Mr. E. T. Newell, not only for this offer, but for constant advice, to whose value the many citations in these pages testify. Indispensable assistance was also rendered by Mrs. A. R. Bellinger in cleaning the coins and preparing material for illustration, and by Mrs. Hopkins, Clark, 1895-1976. The latter was a member of the Expedition when the hoards were found, and it was hoped that she might publish them herself. This unfortunately proved impossible and she had to abandon the project after much labor, for the benefit of which I am most grateful. Miss Cox, Dorothy Hannah, 1893- has been good enough to arrange the casts for illustration, in the course of which labor she has rectified many errors of detail. The larger part of each hoard, as has been said, consists of silver tetradrachms. They bear on the obverse a portrait of the emperor with his name, in Greek characters, and, on the reverse, an eagle with the legend Δημαρχικimageς έξουσίας and sometimes a mention of the consulship (Ὕπατος τό ά, β' etc.). From the reign of Elagabalus on, this type is restricted to the mint at Antioch, but it was not there that the issue of such tetradrachms originated. The standard is undoubtedly the Phoenician standard which, in 126–5 B.C., replaced the Seleucid coinage at Tyre. The types there used are, obv., bust of Melqarth-Heracles, rev., eagle standing l. on prow. Since this series lasted past the middle of the first century A.D., it is evidently of this that Josephus speaks (Bell. Jud., II, 212) when he mentions "the Tyrian nomisma, which is worth four Attic drachms." Tetradrachms of the same standard were struck at Antioch by the early Roman emperors, but on these pieces the imperial portrait supplanted Melqarth on the obverse and the eagle was abandoned in favor of the Tyche of Antioch or a second portrait. It is not until Nero that the eagle is restored to the reverse; thereafter it is the regular type. It is still a question which of the issues from Nero to Trojan should be assigned to Tyre, which to Antioch. Since it has no bearing on these hoards I shall not enter upon it here. The reader will find it discussed by Hill in the British Museum Catalogue for Phoenicia and by Dieudonné in an article entitled "L'Aigle d'Antioche" in Revue Numismatique, 1909, pp. 458 ff. In the latter place will also be found a consideration of the various elements represented by the eagle type, which, derived ultimately from the eagle on the hand of Zeus on the reverse of the Alexander-type, becomes at last a symbol of the Roman empire. On the pieces in these hoards the eagle always has spread wings and a wreath in his beak. Since these characteristics are constant they are not specified in the catalogue. The closing of the mint of Tyre by Hadrian leaves no problem of attribution until the reign of Caracalla, who initiated the experiment of striking tetradrachms at a number of mints which are distinguished by various symbols placed under the eagle. In this he was followed by Macrinus and Diadumenianus and, since there is no general agreement among the authorities as to which symbols belong to each mint, that question is taken up in the body of the catalogue in connection with each piece of these three rulers. Elagabalus and his successors struck tetradrachms at Antioch only. From Galba to Nerva the tetradrachms bear the legend ЄΤΟϒC NЄOϒ IЄPOϒ A, B, etc., on which, cf. Eckhel, Doctrina Numorum veterum, vol. IV, pp. 416–418. The latest example of this formula is a piece of Trajan with ЄTOϒC NЄOϒ IЄPOϒ B (Dieudonné, R.N., 1927, p. 166). Thereafter the inscription is invariably some abbreviation of Δημαρχικimageς έξουσίας, which is the Greek for tribunicia potestate. Eckhel, p. 418, says: "Inde a Trajano annus novus sacer inferri numis non desiit, sed alia tantum formula adhiberi coepta; nimirum pro ЄTOϒC NЄOϒ IЄPOϒ scriptum deinceps ΔHMAPXIKHC ЄΞOϒCIAC, tribunicia potestate, quae et singulis annis renovabatur, quod aequivalet τimage NЄOϒ, et sacra fuit, quod est pro IЄPOϒ, et singulis annis unitate aucta perinde imperatorum annos numeravit, quam Graecorum ЄTOϒC." The assumption by the emperors of tribunician power goes back to Augustus and, since it was renewed yearly, was the simplest way of dating by the emperor's reign. However, in this case, as in some others on coins, it is noticeable that the phrase is not used for dating, for the number never accompanies it, as it regularly does on inscriptions, so that Eckhel's explanation is not entirely accurate. When dates are used they are furnished by the consulship, which comes after the tribunicia potestate when it occurs. The weights vary considerably. A certain amount of fluctuation is caused by the cleaning: this error is not more than 0.2 grammes, while the weights of pieces not defective run all the way from 8.1 g. to 16.6. The great majority lie between 11 g. and 13.5 g. Application of the frequency table fails to prove any significant variation of the standard from one reign to another. The Antoniniani, coins of a standard originated by Caracalla to check the alarming deterioration of the denarius, are part of the imperial coinage and, as such, bear Latin inscriptions and the variety of types familiar throughout the empire. The specimens before us have a certain importance since most of those before valerian were certainly struck at Antioch. In this period, before the introduction of mint marks to assist in attribution, the solution of that question rests largely on stylistic grounds, and it is therefore useful to have representatives surely of the mint at Antioch to confirm and supplement the arguments from style. The list of the larger hoard is given first. Weights, to the nearest tenth of a gramme, follow the numbers of the coins in square brackets, unless the condition is too poor to make the weight significant. [More at link] See also this article: Seleucid mint at Dura-Europos " [article] Alfred R. Bellinger & Edward T.newell Syria. Archéologie, Art et histoire Année 1940 21-1 pp. 77-81 [URL]https://www.persee.fr/doc/syria_0039-7946_1940_num_21_1_4222[/URL] Beginning: [ATTACH=full]1253882[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
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
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
CNG Keystone 3
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...