I am looking at a Cistophoric Tet of Claudius that is listed as RIC I 120. It is of the type shown below, but the picture is just an example of the type and NOT the specific coin that I am considering. So here is my question, RIC says the coin is from the Pergamum Mint, but Sear says it is from Ephesus. RIC I was updated in 1984 and Sear I was published in 2000, who is correct?
In The Metallurgy of Roman silver Coinage Butcher and Ponting write the following conerning Claudian cistophori: 'Two reverse types have been noted for this issue: the temple of Rome and Augustus, which is distinctly Pergammene; and Diana of Ephesus, which is distinctly Ephesian. But both must be the product of a single mint because the obverse die linkage between the two types is extensive. On the whole, stylistic considerations seem to favour Ephesus as the mint: the cistophori resemble the contemporary bronze coinage of Ephesus, but certainty in this matter seems impossible. The use of two distinct types is perhaps better considered as celebrating the chief cities of Asia rather than indicating the place of minting.'
The answer to this question will have to come from a serious study of the trace metals in the coins and we still will have to address options we don't face generally. We have several later examples where coins were made at Rome and bulk shipped to the intended city or where dies were made in one place and sent to other places. How we tell the difference will require study of the evidence and abandonment of preconceptions. I would have thought this could have been addressed mofre fully by Butcher and Ponting who were pioneers in the study of metals. From what I see so far, there is nothing certain placing the point of manufacture to either city as opposed to the other or a third. It would be interesting to see the current thinking on this in another century. I like the wording of Butcher and Ponting provided by DA. Mint location for 'Roman' coins has always been a matter of study for numismatists. This will not likely change soon.
Butcher and Ponting only provide introductory information about Claudian cistophori since they are outside the scope of the study (which covers the reforms of Nero to those of Trajan). However, they do provide average weight, fineness, and basic trace element data about Claudian cistophorii. Average Weight: 11.1g Average Fineness: 79% Trace element data: moderately high gold and low bismuth, which (unsurprisingly) is not shared by his denarii. Doug, you are correct. Numismatic study is crucial in order to understand and interpret the data modern science provides about these coins. The above stats mean very little without it!
