Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Ocatarinetabellatchitchix, post: 8132858, member: 99554"]I was very excited to find, bid on and win another « not often seen » coin to add to my Victorinus’ collection (as you can see on this picture…). But before I present it to you, let’s resume the story of these posthumous coins. [ATTACH=full]1416706[/ATTACH] The Divo Victorino coins were struck at the Cologne mint. On the basis of several “hybrids”(the pairing of dies appropriate to different Emperors), the numismatists Lallemand and Thirion suggested that the coinage in the name of Divo Victorino appears at the very beginning of Tetricus’s reign. However, the coins of Divo Victorino with the reverse PROVIDENTIA AVG are not necessarily hybrids: with around 50 specimens recorded, they seem to be as common as the coins with the reverse CONSACRATIO for which 65 specimens have been recorded. It may only be that, for practical reasons, the reverse type of the previous reign had continued to be used before a new one, more suitable for a consecratio coinage, is introduced. [ATTACH=full]1416708[/ATTACH] My very worn PROVIDENTIA [ATTACH=full]1416709[/ATTACH] A nice CONSACRATIO / DIVO VICTORINO PO (sic) [ATTACH=full]1416707[/ATTACH] Another CONSACRATIO with Eagle The coins in the name of Divo Claudio issued a few months earlier, at the end of 270 AD, by Aurelianus may have influenced this choice. Lallemand and Thirion also judge that the Divo Victorino coinage does not constitute an issue in itself as they consider it is not logical that the new emperor would have issued coinage in the name of his predecessor before issuing coins in his own name. But because the mint of Cologne seems to have had the habit of issuing only one reverse at a time, in a single officina, it seems more likely that the Divo Victorino coins were issued first, and that the coins of Tetricus were struck thereafter. It is generally assumed that there are no cross-mint hybrids in the name of Victorinus. However, Weder is again right in stating that there is such a unique coin: the style of the obverse die is characteristic of the work of the engraver of Trier (thin letters, smaller bust, draped bust) whereas the reverse is of Cologne (reverse type, large letters and engraving of the drapery). This coin shares the obverse die with a  cross-mint hybrid (reverse CONSACRATIO) and it also shares the reverse die with two regular coins in the name of Divo Victorino. There is consequently no doubt that this coin was struck after Victorinus’s death. There are also 7 known coins which could be qualified as hybrids since they have the regular IMP C VICTORINVS PF AVG obverse legend and the reverse CONSACRATIO. Six of them have been found in famous hoards discovered in the 20th century: one in the Beachy Head Hoard, one in the Tattershall Thorpe hoard, another one in Ham Hill hoard, two specimens in the Normanby Hoard, and finally one in the Pannecé Hoard; I wasn’t able to find the provenance of the Paris example. I am very happy to present you the eighth coin which is now part of my collection, and I believe it’s the only one not in a museum ( 4 are in the British Museum, one in Paris, another in Oxford and the last one in the Nantes Museum). It is also the heaviest of the group at 2.87g and 18mm. [ATTACH=full]1416710[/ATTACH] My new Museum coin. Another hypothesis: The mysterious Domitianus II is very unlikely to have issued the coins in the name of Divo Victorino, as it would then be difficult to understand why so few coins are known in his own name (2 genuine and 1 doubtful ) and so many in the name of Divo Victorino. But Domitianus II’s revolt certainly reveals that Tetricus’s nomination had been challenged, and some scholars draws the conclusion that Tetricus himself had ordered the Divo Victorino coinage in order to legitimate his power, as did Quintillus and Aurelianus for Claudius Gothicus a few months earlier at the end 270 AD. According to the testimony of Aurelius Victor, Victorinus’s mother, Victoria, had played an important role after his son’s death, buying the support of the legions and choosing the governor of Gallia Aquitania, Tetricus, as his son’s successor. Using that evidence, here is another interesting theory: the coinage in the name of Divo Victorino may have been ordered by Victoria during that short period of time. If, following Eutropius, Tetricus assumed the purple at Bordeaux, it is indeed more likely that this unusual coinage was ordered by Victoria, as the mother of Victorinus and the strongest supporter of Tetricus, rather than by Tetricus himself. The fact that the coins of Domitianus seem to have been struck during the same issue as the Divo Victorino coins points to other possibilities. Mairat in his thesis ask two interesting questions: Could the Divo Victorino coinage have been issued, neither by Victoria or Tetricus, but by the military forces installed at Cologne because of their uncertainty regarding Tetricus’s nomination? Alternatively, might Victoria have chosen to issue coins his Victorinus’s name because of this uncertainty among the military forces at Cologne?Please show us your CONSECRATIO or POSTHUMOUS issue coins ![/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches