Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
My second ancient gold coin: a solidus of Honorius, from Ravenna
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="DonnaML, post: 7829935, member: 110350"]Back in April of this year, I posted my first ancient gold coin, a solidus of Arcadius from Constantinople, with a provenance back to 1960. See <a href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/my-first-ancient-gold-coin-a-solidus-of-arcadius.378975/" class="internalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.cointalk.com/threads/my-first-ancient-gold-coin-a-solidus-of-arcadius.378975/">https://www.cointalk.com/threads/my-first-ancient-gold-coin-a-solidus-of-arcadius.378975/</a> and the subsequent discussion:</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><img src="https://www.cointalk.com/attachments/arcadius-solidus-photo-dr-busso-peuss-jpg-version-from-ma-shops-jpg.1288192/" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>I have intended ever since then to try to buy at least one more ancient gold coin this year (finances permitting), and thought that a solidus of Honorius -- Arcadius's supposedly feeble-minded younger brother who reigned in the West; both were sons of Theodosius I -- would make a nice pair. I was fortunate last month to receive repayment of a $25,000 loan I had made to someone, and decided that I could afford to spend about 4% of it on another gold coin. This is the one I picked. Not quite as nice as the Arcadius, perhaps, and the provenance goes back only to 1998, but still a worthy partner, I think!</p><p><br /></p><p>Western Roman Empire, Honorius (son of Theodosius I and younger brother of Arcadius), 393-423 AD, AV Solidus, ca. 402-408 AD. Ravenna Mint [<i>Note that the capital was moved from Milan to Ravenna in 402 AD.</i>]. Obv. Pearl-diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right [“slender bust” type; see Sear RCV V 20919 at p. 453], D N HONORI-VS P F AVG / Rev. Honorius in military attire, standing right, holding a plain military standard (a <i>signum </i>in the form of a <i>vexillum</i>, i.e., a banner draped vertically from a horizontal cross-bar attached to a pole) in right hand, and Victory on globe in left hand, his left foot set on (RIC: “spurning”) a bound barbarian captive seated left on ground with both legs visible and sharply bent at knees (bent right leg is raised upright; bent left leg lies flat on ground with left knee extending below exergue line and left foot resting against right leg*), VICTORI-A AVGGG, R-V [Ravenna] across fields and COMOB [<i>Comitatus Obryziacum</i> <i>**</i>] in exergue. RIC X 1287 at p. 328 (1994), Sear RCV V 20919 (2014), Dumberton Oaks Catalogue, Late Roman 735-736 & Plate 28 [P. Griessen. & M. Mays, <i>Catalogue of Late Roman Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection, etc.</i> (1992); see <a href="https://archive.org/details/docoins-late-roman/page/432/mode/1up" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://archive.org/details/docoins-late-roman/page/432/mode/1up" rel="nofollow">https://archive.org/details/docoins-late-roman/page/432/mode/1up</a> and <a href="https://archive.org/details/docoins-late-roman/page/430/mode/1up" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://archive.org/details/docoins-late-roman/page/430/mode/1up" rel="nofollow">https://archive.org/details/docoins-late-roman/page/430/mode/1up</a> ], Cohen 44. 21 mm., 4.45 g. <i>Ex. Collection of Egon Gerson [b. 1921; d. 2021]; David R. Sear A.C.C.S. Certificate of Authenticity dated Dec. 16, 1998, issued to Egon Gerson, No. 50AB/RI/CO/CN (“almost EF, flan slightly bent”)</i>.</p><p><br /></p><p> [ATTACH=full]1345280[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1345281[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>The Sear Certificate refers to the flan being "slightly bent," but it's not terribly noticeable in hand, certainly not enough to affect my appreciation of the coin:</p><p><br /></p><p> [ATTACH=full]1345282[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>*This captive type does not seem to be included in the list of captive types (a)-(d) associated with RIC X 1287 (the list is under RIC X 1205 at p. 318), or in the expanded list of captive types (a)-(g) found under RIC X 1287 at Wildwinds; see <a href="http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/honorius/solidi_table.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/honorius/solidi_table.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/honorius/solidi_table.html</a>:</p><p><br /></p><p>a = captive: one leg crossed over the other [from RIC]</p><p><br /></p><p>b = captive: two parallel legs [from RIC]</p><p><br /></p><p>c = captive: one leg visible, more or less straight [from RIC]</p><p><br /></p><p>d = captive: one leg visible, sharply bent at the knee [from RIC]</p><p><br /></p><p>e (added) = captive: kneeling [from Wildwinds]</p><p><br /></p><p>f (added) = captive: sitting [from Wildwinds]</p><p><br /></p><p>g (added) = captive: one leg straight, one leg sharply bent at the knee [from Wildwinds]</p><p><br /></p><p>Looking at examples of all of these captive types oniine, I don't think mine fits in any of these categories. I see nothing in these categories resembling what I see in mine, which I thought at first was a type "d" until I enlarged it and became convinced that one can see not only the right leg sharply bent at the knee, with the knee raised upright, but also the left leg, with the knee bent as well, but lying flat on the ground (and even protruding slightly below the exergue line), with the left foot resting against the raised right leg. Of course, I could be imagining things! (Please let me know if you think so!) I have made no attempt, and have no intention of taking the time, to examine all of the 400+ examples of RIC X 1287 at ACSearch to determine if there are any with the same captive type as mine. Never mind the additional hundreds of examples of the later versions of this design minted at Ravenna, namely RIC X 1319, 1321, 1326, and 1328 (all grouped together under Sear RCV V 20920).</p><p><br /></p><p>** Signifying “pure gold of the Imperial Court (COMOB)” (see <a href="https://finds.org.uk/romancoins/articles/page/slug/officina" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://finds.org.uk/romancoins/articles/page/slug/officina" rel="nofollow">https://finds.org.uk/romancoins/articles/page/slug/officina</a>), used on Late Roman gold coins produced at a number of Western mints including Ravenna. See also <a href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=comob" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=comob" rel="nofollow">https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=comob</a> (“COMOB is a late Roman - Byzantine mintmark abbreviating the Latin, Comitatus Obryziacum. COMOB was originally a mintmark for the comitatensian mint, the imperial court mint that followed the emperor, opened under Gratian. When that mint settled down in Rome and other Western mints were opened, other mint marks were added in the field: RM for Rome, MD for Milan, RV for Ravenna, and AR for Arles. In the east they changed the mark in the exergue to indicate the mint: CONOB for CONstantinople and THESOB for THESalonica”); <a href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=CONOB" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=CONOB" rel="nofollow">https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=CONOB</a> (further explicating “Obryziacum” as follows” “The solidus weighed 1/72 of the Roman pound. "OB" was both an abbreviation for the word obryzum, which means refined or pure gold, and is the Greek numeral 72. Thus the . . . OB . . . may be read ‘1/72 pound pure gold’”).</p><p><br /></p><p>A different interpretation of the COM in COMOB can be found in Jones, John Melville, <i>A Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins</i> (Seaby, London 1990). See the entry for COMOB and CONOB at p. 65, asserting that COMOB stands instead for <i>Comes Obryzi</i>: “The probable explanation is that it is the abbreviated title of the official who is known to have supervised the imperial gold supplies in the western part of the Empire, the ‘Count of Gold’ or <i>Comes Auri</i> . . ., in the alternative form, <i>Comes Obryzi</i>.” The only other authority I have found who states that COMOB means something other than <i>Comitatus Obryziacum </i>is David Sear: see Sear RCV V at p. 15, suggesting that the COM in COMOB “possibly indicat[es] the office of <i>Comes Auri</i> (‘Count of Gold’), the official charged with the responsibility of supervising the Imperial gold supplies in the western provinces of the Empire.” (Presumably, given the similar wording, either Jones took his interpretation from an earlier edition of Sear, or Sear took it from Jones.)</p><p><br /></p><p>Anyone have any thoughts on which interpretation is correct?</p><p><br /></p><p>***</p><p><br /></p><p>Please post your own coins of Honorius -- gold or otherwise -- or of anyone in his family. I'm sure he thought of his legendary pet chickens as part of his family, but he is not known to have issued any commemorative coins honoring them. Or even a set of postage stamps, for goodness' sake![/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="DonnaML, post: 7829935, member: 110350"]Back in April of this year, I posted my first ancient gold coin, a solidus of Arcadius from Constantinople, with a provenance back to 1960. See [URL]https://www.cointalk.com/threads/my-first-ancient-gold-coin-a-solidus-of-arcadius.378975/[/URL] and the subsequent discussion: [IMG]https://www.cointalk.com/attachments/arcadius-solidus-photo-dr-busso-peuss-jpg-version-from-ma-shops-jpg.1288192/[/IMG] I have intended ever since then to try to buy at least one more ancient gold coin this year (finances permitting), and thought that a solidus of Honorius -- Arcadius's supposedly feeble-minded younger brother who reigned in the West; both were sons of Theodosius I -- would make a nice pair. I was fortunate last month to receive repayment of a $25,000 loan I had made to someone, and decided that I could afford to spend about 4% of it on another gold coin. This is the one I picked. Not quite as nice as the Arcadius, perhaps, and the provenance goes back only to 1998, but still a worthy partner, I think! Western Roman Empire, Honorius (son of Theodosius I and younger brother of Arcadius), 393-423 AD, AV Solidus, ca. 402-408 AD. Ravenna Mint [[I]Note that the capital was moved from Milan to Ravenna in 402 AD.[/I]]. Obv. Pearl-diademed, draped, and cuirassed bust right [“slender bust” type; see Sear RCV V 20919 at p. 453], D N HONORI-VS P F AVG / Rev. Honorius in military attire, standing right, holding a plain military standard (a [I]signum [/I]in the form of a [I]vexillum[/I], i.e., a banner draped vertically from a horizontal cross-bar attached to a pole) in right hand, and Victory on globe in left hand, his left foot set on (RIC: “spurning”) a bound barbarian captive seated left on ground with both legs visible and sharply bent at knees (bent right leg is raised upright; bent left leg lies flat on ground with left knee extending below exergue line and left foot resting against right leg*), VICTORI-A AVGGG, R-V [Ravenna] across fields and COMOB [[I]Comitatus Obryziacum[/I] [I]**[/I]] in exergue. RIC X 1287 at p. 328 (1994), Sear RCV V 20919 (2014), Dumberton Oaks Catalogue, Late Roman 735-736 & Plate 28 [P. Griessen. & M. Mays, [I]Catalogue of Late Roman Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection, etc.[/I] (1992); see [URL]https://archive.org/details/docoins-late-roman/page/432/mode/1up[/URL] and [URL]https://archive.org/details/docoins-late-roman/page/430/mode/1up[/URL] ], Cohen 44. 21 mm., 4.45 g. [I]Ex. Collection of Egon Gerson [b. 1921; d. 2021]; David R. Sear A.C.C.S. Certificate of Authenticity dated Dec. 16, 1998, issued to Egon Gerson, No. 50AB/RI/CO/CN (“almost EF, flan slightly bent”)[/I]. [ATTACH=full]1345280[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1345281[/ATTACH] The Sear Certificate refers to the flan being "slightly bent," but it's not terribly noticeable in hand, certainly not enough to affect my appreciation of the coin: [ATTACH=full]1345282[/ATTACH] *This captive type does not seem to be included in the list of captive types (a)-(d) associated with RIC X 1287 (the list is under RIC X 1205 at p. 318), or in the expanded list of captive types (a)-(g) found under RIC X 1287 at Wildwinds; see [URL]http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/honorius/solidi_table.html[/URL]: a = captive: one leg crossed over the other [from RIC] b = captive: two parallel legs [from RIC] c = captive: one leg visible, more or less straight [from RIC] d = captive: one leg visible, sharply bent at the knee [from RIC] e (added) = captive: kneeling [from Wildwinds] f (added) = captive: sitting [from Wildwinds] g (added) = captive: one leg straight, one leg sharply bent at the knee [from Wildwinds] Looking at examples of all of these captive types oniine, I don't think mine fits in any of these categories. I see nothing in these categories resembling what I see in mine, which I thought at first was a type "d" until I enlarged it and became convinced that one can see not only the right leg sharply bent at the knee, with the knee raised upright, but also the left leg, with the knee bent as well, but lying flat on the ground (and even protruding slightly below the exergue line), with the left foot resting against the raised right leg. Of course, I could be imagining things! (Please let me know if you think so!) I have made no attempt, and have no intention of taking the time, to examine all of the 400+ examples of RIC X 1287 at ACSearch to determine if there are any with the same captive type as mine. Never mind the additional hundreds of examples of the later versions of this design minted at Ravenna, namely RIC X 1319, 1321, 1326, and 1328 (all grouped together under Sear RCV V 20920). ** Signifying “pure gold of the Imperial Court (COMOB)” (see [URL]https://finds.org.uk/romancoins/articles/page/slug/officina[/URL]), used on Late Roman gold coins produced at a number of Western mints including Ravenna. See also [URL]https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=comob[/URL] (“COMOB is a late Roman - Byzantine mintmark abbreviating the Latin, Comitatus Obryziacum. COMOB was originally a mintmark for the comitatensian mint, the imperial court mint that followed the emperor, opened under Gratian. When that mint settled down in Rome and other Western mints were opened, other mint marks were added in the field: RM for Rome, MD for Milan, RV for Ravenna, and AR for Arles. In the east they changed the mark in the exergue to indicate the mint: CONOB for CONstantinople and THESOB for THESalonica”); [URL]https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=CONOB[/URL] (further explicating “Obryziacum” as follows” “The solidus weighed 1/72 of the Roman pound. "OB" was both an abbreviation for the word obryzum, which means refined or pure gold, and is the Greek numeral 72. Thus the . . . OB . . . may be read ‘1/72 pound pure gold’”). A different interpretation of the COM in COMOB can be found in Jones, John Melville, [I]A Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins[/I] (Seaby, London 1990). See the entry for COMOB and CONOB at p. 65, asserting that COMOB stands instead for [I]Comes Obryzi[/I]: “The probable explanation is that it is the abbreviated title of the official who is known to have supervised the imperial gold supplies in the western part of the Empire, the ‘Count of Gold’ or [I]Comes Auri[/I] . . ., in the alternative form, [I]Comes Obryzi[/I].” The only other authority I have found who states that COMOB means something other than [I]Comitatus Obryziacum [/I]is David Sear: see Sear RCV V at p. 15, suggesting that the COM in COMOB “possibly indicat[es] the office of [I]Comes Auri[/I] (‘Count of Gold’), the official charged with the responsibility of supervising the Imperial gold supplies in the western provinces of the Empire.” (Presumably, given the similar wording, either Jones took his interpretation from an earlier edition of Sear, or Sear took it from Jones.) Anyone have any thoughts on which interpretation is correct? *** Please post your own coins of Honorius -- gold or otherwise -- or of anyone in his family. I'm sure he thought of his legendary pet chickens as part of his family, but he is not known to have issued any commemorative coins honoring them. Or even a set of postage stamps, for goodness' sake![/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
>
My second ancient gold coin: a solidus of Honorius, from Ravenna
>
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...
