Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
FEL TEMP Friday! A Fallen Horseman thread.
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="Curtis, post: 6448004, member: 26430"]Glenn, that's a wonderful Magnentius -- and a fascinating idea! I would love to find out it's the case. I went to check my few examples of “Emperor on horseback spearing enemy” types. When I flipped over my Magnentius -- lo and behold -- it turned out to be a Constantius II of the same type as yours (though usually attributed as “struck under Magnentius,” and in the name of Constantius II, not sure if there's any significance to that).</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1256397[/ATTACH]</p><p><font size="4"><b>Roman Imperial. Constantius II (337 – 360) AE Maiorina</b> (5.97g, 24.5mm, 12h). Rome, under Magnentius, 350.</font></p><p><font size="4"><b>Obverse</b>: D N CONSTANTIVS P F AVG // A to left. Draped and cuirassed bust of Constantius to right, wearing laurel rosette diadem and holding globe in right hand.</font></p><p><font size="4"><b>Reverse</b>: GLORIA ROMANORVM // * in upper right field // R B in exergue. Constantius on horseback to right, his horse galloping right over a shield and broken spear, spearing kneeling barbarian enemy wearing a Phrygian helmet with outstretched arms.</font></p><p><font size="4"><b>Reference</b>: RIC VIII Rome 195-196, B.</font></p><p><font size="4"><b>Pedigree</b>: Ex-Antonio Hinojosa Pareja (Lucernae Numismática, Alcalá la Real, Spain), purchased c. 2009-2014. (<a href="https://conservatoricoins.com/constantius-ii-gloria-romanorvm-horseback-spearing-enemy/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://conservatoricoins.com/constantius-ii-gloria-romanorvm-horseback-spearing-enemy/" rel="nofollow">My description page for this coin</a>.)</font></p><p><br /></p><p>Even so, I’d be very interested to learn whether any particular conflicts were intended by the design. Relatedly, <a href="https://d.docs.live.net/cbf0e6f1b8baa8e5/Desktop/Ancient%20Coins%202020/academia.edu/42261456/Fel_Temp_Reparatio_image_audience_and_meaning_in_the_mid_4th_century" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://d.docs.live.net/cbf0e6f1b8baa8e5/Desktop/Ancient%20Coins%202020/academia.edu/42261456/Fel_Temp_Reparatio_image_audience_and_meaning_in_the_mid_4th_century" rel="nofollow">Nick Vanderveegh’s (2017; Revue Belge Numismatique) article on fallen horsemen</a> argues that those issuing such bronze coins (I believe he says it’s <i>procurator monetae</i> or <i>comites sacrarum largitionum</i> in this period) often viewed the military as their primary audience. These were meant to celebrate the military's achievements and glory, and thus help build morale and loyalty to the emperor.</p><p><br /></p><p>This particular image seems to be built upon an older design that appeared under various "VIRTVS..." legends, beginning with Probus (if not earlier). The Tetrarchs added a second fallen enemy underneath the horse (mine is a Galerius, Aquileia, c. 305). <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6880520" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6880520" rel="nofollow">Constantine I also used this type</a> (link to a CNG example, Aquileia, c. 306) – one that I’d love to pick up some day. (All of these fall under the umbrella term I use, “Barbarians, Captives, and Enemies”; in fact, I realize I need to update <a href="https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/" rel="nofollow">my collection page</a> to include these ones.)</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1256398[/ATTACH]</p><p><font size="4"><b>Roman Imperial Galerius (305 – 311) AE Follis </b>(7.65g, 27mm, 6h). Aquileia Mint, 1st officina, struck 305/6.</font></p><p><font size="4"><b>Obverse</b>: IMP MAXIMIANVS P F AVG. Laureate, helmeted and cuirassed bust left, holding spear over right shoulder, shield on left arm.</font></p><p><font size="4"><b>Reverse</b>: VIRTVS AV-GG ET CAESS NN // AQP in exergue. Galerius on horseback right, holding round shield and spearing fallen enemy to lower right; another fallen enemy to lower left.</font></p><p><font size="4"><b>Reference</b>: RIC VI 66b.</font></p><p><font size="4"><b>Pedigree</b>: Ex-Nathan Hochrein / Holding History Coins (DiPere, WI USA; 15 Sep 2013). (<a href="https://conservatoricoins.com/gallerius-follis-gloria-romanorvm-horseback-spearing-enemy/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://conservatoricoins.com/gallerius-follis-gloria-romanorvm-horseback-spearing-enemy/" rel="nofollow">My description page for this coin</a>.)</font></p><p><br /></p><p>Seems Magnentius re-adopted the design but replaced the second enemy with shield/broken spear, and switched the legend from VIRTVS AVG to GLORIA ROMANORVM.</p><p><br /></p><p>One thing I seem to remember learning from collectors of the Tetrarch/Constantine types is that they may have had an at least oblique reference to Roman civil war. If so, it would makes sense that it would be used under Magnentius, since we know the Romans liked to pay homage to past coin designs and apply their meaning to current events. The fallen enemy, kneeling with outstretched arms, does appear to be wearing a helmet or cap (possibly Phrygian, but perhaps not?) that could provide a clue.</p><p><br /></p><p>Designs showing civil war always seem a very touchy topic, even a bit taboo, for the Romans. The emperor would want to emphasize his victory, of course, but wouldn’t want to portray himself as fighting other Romans, even disloyal rebellious ones. Nonetheless, numismatic images presumably did, at times, allude to internal conflict and were read as such by the public. Even with Judaea c. 69-71, being a rebellious Province rather than a barbarian land, Vespasian (et al.) were cautious in how they portrayed the conflict on coins, despite Vespasian being obviously proud of it (e.g., depicting mourning Judaea Capta, but de-emphasizing the military combat itself, and rarely even portraying the captive with bound hands, though on some issues she/they were bound).[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="Curtis, post: 6448004, member: 26430"]Glenn, that's a wonderful Magnentius -- and a fascinating idea! I would love to find out it's the case. I went to check my few examples of “Emperor on horseback spearing enemy” types. When I flipped over my Magnentius -- lo and behold -- it turned out to be a Constantius II of the same type as yours (though usually attributed as “struck under Magnentius,” and in the name of Constantius II, not sure if there's any significance to that). [ATTACH=full]1256397[/ATTACH] [SIZE=4][B]Roman Imperial. Constantius II (337 – 360) AE Maiorina[/B] (5.97g, 24.5mm, 12h). Rome, under Magnentius, 350. [B]Obverse[/B]: D N CONSTANTIVS P F AVG // A to left. Draped and cuirassed bust of Constantius to right, wearing laurel rosette diadem and holding globe in right hand. [B]Reverse[/B]: GLORIA ROMANORVM // * in upper right field // R B in exergue. Constantius on horseback to right, his horse galloping right over a shield and broken spear, spearing kneeling barbarian enemy wearing a Phrygian helmet with outstretched arms. [B]Reference[/B]: RIC VIII Rome 195-196, B. [B]Pedigree[/B]: Ex-Antonio Hinojosa Pareja (Lucernae Numismática, Alcalá la Real, Spain), purchased c. 2009-2014. ([URL='https://conservatoricoins.com/constantius-ii-gloria-romanorvm-horseback-spearing-enemy/']My description page for this coin[/URL].)[/SIZE] Even so, I’d be very interested to learn whether any particular conflicts were intended by the design. Relatedly, [URL='https://d.docs.live.net/cbf0e6f1b8baa8e5/Desktop/Ancient%20Coins%202020/academia.edu/42261456/Fel_Temp_Reparatio_image_audience_and_meaning_in_the_mid_4th_century']Nick Vanderveegh’s (2017; Revue Belge Numismatique) article on fallen horsemen[/URL] argues that those issuing such bronze coins (I believe he says it’s [I]procurator monetae[/I] or [I]comites sacrarum largitionum[/I] in this period) often viewed the military as their primary audience. These were meant to celebrate the military's achievements and glory, and thus help build morale and loyalty to the emperor. This particular image seems to be built upon an older design that appeared under various "VIRTVS..." legends, beginning with Probus (if not earlier). The Tetrarchs added a second fallen enemy underneath the horse (mine is a Galerius, Aquileia, c. 305). [URL='https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=6880520']Constantine I also used this type[/URL] (link to a CNG example, Aquileia, c. 306) – one that I’d love to pick up some day. (All of these fall under the umbrella term I use, “Barbarians, Captives, and Enemies”; in fact, I realize I need to update [URL='https://conservatoricoins.com/selections-from-the-bce-collection/']my collection page[/URL] to include these ones.) [ATTACH=full]1256398[/ATTACH] [SIZE=4][B]Roman Imperial Galerius (305 – 311) AE Follis [/B](7.65g, 27mm, 6h). Aquileia Mint, 1st officina, struck 305/6. [B]Obverse[/B]: IMP MAXIMIANVS P F AVG. Laureate, helmeted and cuirassed bust left, holding spear over right shoulder, shield on left arm. [B]Reverse[/B]: VIRTVS AV-GG ET CAESS NN // AQP in exergue. Galerius on horseback right, holding round shield and spearing fallen enemy to lower right; another fallen enemy to lower left. [B]Reference[/B]: RIC VI 66b. [B]Pedigree[/B]: Ex-Nathan Hochrein / Holding History Coins (DiPere, WI USA; 15 Sep 2013). ([URL='https://conservatoricoins.com/gallerius-follis-gloria-romanorvm-horseback-spearing-enemy/']My description page for this coin[/URL].)[/SIZE] Seems Magnentius re-adopted the design but replaced the second enemy with shield/broken spear, and switched the legend from VIRTVS AVG to GLORIA ROMANORVM. One thing I seem to remember learning from collectors of the Tetrarch/Constantine types is that they may have had an at least oblique reference to Roman civil war. If so, it would makes sense that it would be used under Magnentius, since we know the Romans liked to pay homage to past coin designs and apply their meaning to current events. The fallen enemy, kneeling with outstretched arms, does appear to be wearing a helmet or cap (possibly Phrygian, but perhaps not?) that could provide a clue. Designs showing civil war always seem a very touchy topic, even a bit taboo, for the Romans. The emperor would want to emphasize his victory, of course, but wouldn’t want to portray himself as fighting other Romans, even disloyal rebellious ones. Nonetheless, numismatic images presumably did, at times, allude to internal conflict and were read as such by the public. Even with Judaea c. 69-71, being a rebellious Province rather than a barbarian land, Vespasian (et al.) were cautious in how they portrayed the conflict on coins, despite Vespasian being obviously proud of it (e.g., depicting mourning Judaea Capta, but de-emphasizing the military combat itself, and rarely even portraying the captive with bound hands, though on some issues she/they were bound).[/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
>
FEL TEMP Friday! A Fallen Horseman thread.
>
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...
