Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Ken Dorney, post: 3088527, member: 76086&quot;]I recently received a very interesting and rare coin, the types of which seem quite localized and specific.&nbsp; It originates from Roman Pannonia.&nbsp; But before I get to the coin itself I would like to take a moment to give a couple comments on the area in question which might perhaps lend some understanding.</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]778891[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Pannonia was settled by an Indo-European group by the same name and was something of a ‘backwater’ country and having few resources but of geographic importance.&nbsp; Numismatically the incursions of various Celtic peoples brought with them their artistic interpretations of coinage from other cultures, the primary types being (but not limited to) the Macedonians.&nbsp; As with many other cultures (Celtic and otherwise) very little is known about Pannonia until the Romans invaded and their histories were written, and in this case starting around the time of Augustus.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Much could be written about why the Romans were in Pannonia in the first place (likely geography being the primary reason), but I think for our small numismatic discussion it can be focused down to the resource of precious metals.&nbsp; Although of lower quality than other close locales such as Dardania, the Roman mines in Pannonia produced silver and iron.&nbsp; These mines would be important to the vast machine which was Rome and served to provide the greater economy with much needed raw and finished materials.</p><p><br /></p><p>For this discussion the coin in question is as follows (the attribution of which is contested but of which I agree):</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]778893[/ATTACH]</p><p>Reign of Antoninus Pius, 138 - 161 AD</p><p>AE Quadrans, Pannonian Mint</p><p>16mm, 2.76 grams</p><p>Obverse:&nbsp; Radiate head of Sol right.</p><p>Reverse:&nbsp; METAL PANNONI CIS in three lines.</p><p><br /></p><p>BMC Hadrian 1860&nbsp; //&nbsp; Woytek 111-2</p><p><br /></p><p>Although BMC attributes this type to the reign of Hadrian it may not be correct considering the data that has come to light since that work was produced.&nbsp; While BMC is&nbsp; close in dating these coins all seem to come from a very small time frame, roughly from Hadrian to Marcus Aurelius (in general being 117 to 180 AD).&nbsp; Most significant of the type is the similarity of the portraits to that of Antoninus Pius.&nbsp; But this is not an unknown circumstance.&nbsp; The enigmatic series of anonymous quadrantes of the same period assigned to Rome also bear the portraits of the Imperial personages but differer significantly by their declaration of S C, or Senatus Consulto (marking them as being minted in Rome, but possibly for use elsewhere, which is another discussion).</p><p><br /></p><p>Examples of Imperial portraiture on similar coins:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]778904[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]778905[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]778902[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>But this type is quite clear in that the inscription tells us a great deal.&nbsp; &quot;Metal Pannonia Cis&quot; can be quite easily translated as “Metal (or Mine) of Pannonia.&nbsp; It is without doubt that these coins were minted in that region (but it is unknown exactly where that mint might have been).&nbsp; The real question might be, “Why were they minted?”.&nbsp; They are rare and only survive in very small numbers today.&nbsp; As such the overall mintage was likely limited to specific periods and or purposes.</p><p><br /></p><p>As is already known the quadrans was a denomination of which was in significant decline during this time period, its usefulness being nearly exhausted.&nbsp; It begs to ask, “Why were they minted if they were not in demand?”.&nbsp; Obviously there was a specific event or localized demand for the coinage.&nbsp; The argument that they were minted for a specific event might indeed be the answer, but we must also consider those coins issued in Rome which seem to be contemporary to those issued in Pannonia and other regions, specifically Dardania.</p><p><br /></p><p>Those issues in Rome might have been for a specific event or usage (our imaginations can run wild here, and any theory is as good as another).&nbsp; But these Pannonian issues are interesting.&nbsp; Could they have been issued for the same reason?&nbsp; Were they simply issued to provide small change to a poor and insignificant&nbsp; province of the empire?&nbsp; There is ample evidence to support that small denomination coinage was necessary in the provinces, from Iberia to these Eastern regions.</p><p><br /></p><p>Quandrantes of Rome, bearing imperial portraits:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]778914[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]778915[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>It would seem that these coins were issued specifically for local usage, but their commonality to those of Rome cannot be ignored and one wonders if there is some connection. The issues of Rome suggest that there is some association though they differ significantly in their fabric.&nbsp; Those issued in Rome were ‘generic’ in nature, featuring gods such as Jupiter, Minerva, Neptune, etc. but those issued in Pannonia are primarily Sol and Mars, with those issues of Trajan bearing his portrait the exception.</p><p><br /></p><p>It would seem that these rare and unusual coins will remain enigmatic in their usage and purpose.[/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