Dear Friends! I'm collecting mainly provincial coins. Here I want to share one of my favourites. This coin is remarkable not only because of its beauty but because of its interesting background too. And it demonstrates again what you can get if you pay attention to small details. The Coin: Moesia inferior, Markianopolis, Macrinus & Diadumenian, AD 217-218 AE 27, 13.58g, 26.91mm, 45° struck under governor P. Furius Pontianus obv. AV K OΠΠEΛ CEVH MAKPEINOC beneath in 3 lines K M OΠΠEΛ AN / TΩNINOC ΔI / AΔOVMH Confronting heads of Diadumenian, bare-headed, r., and of Macrinus, laureate, l. rev. VΠ ΠONTIAN - OV MAPKIAN / OΠOΛITΩN Female figure, in long girded chiton, hairs bound in knot, std. on rock l., holding in extended r. hand branch with leaves (or flowers?), resting with l. arm on source, from which water flows; r. below a rabbit r. ref. a) AMNG I/1, 755, pl. XVIII, 8 (1 ex., Bukarest, rabbit not mentioned!) b) Varbanov (engl.) 1265 (cites AMNG 755, rabbit not mentioned!) c) Hristova/Jekov (2013) No. 6.24.5.3 (this coin) The reverse has raised several questions. We see a female figure in long double chiton leaning l., resting with l. arm on vase from which water is flowing l. and holding in extended r. hand twigs with leaves (or flowers?). Who is the depicted female figure? Pick, a knowledgable and precise scientist, who has written the standard work about the coins of Northern Greek (AMNG), writes 1898: mountain goddess, city goddess, Gaia? The great Eckhel discusses Rhodope, a mythological princess after whose the mountain range of the Rhodopes on the Balkans are named. But that should be discarded because the obligate crown is missed. The coin attached below shows the pic. from Seguin, Sel. Numismata,1684, p.150. It is Antoninus Pius from Philippopolis, Varbanov (engl.) 706. The legend across the field is RODOPI. After a longer debate in FAC with numismatists and art historians we have agreed that it is most probably a geographical personification, probably the personification of the province of Moesia, because the same depiction is found in Nikopolis too. Then I have discovered, that right below at the rock the long ears of a rabbit could be seen, a fact that no one has seen before. But what has a rabbit to do with Moesia? Nothing at all! But there was a Roman province which has had as symbol a rabbit. That was Spain! Rabbits were so numerous in ancient Spain, that according to Plinius they have even undermined Spanish cities (Stevenson). Coin: Hadrian, AD 117-138 AR – Denarius, 3.48g, 225° Rome, ca. AD 132 obv. HADRIANVS – AVG COS III PP Bare head r. rev. HISPANIA Hispania, draped, leaning l., holding in raised r. hand olive branch and resting with l. arm on rock; behind her a rabbit r. ref. RIC II, 306; C. 834; BMCR 849 var. (laureate bust) This denarius of Hadrian depicts on the rev. HISPANIA, the personification of the province of Spain. And right below we see the long ears of the rabbit! This rev. could well have been the model of the coin of Markianopolis. The personification std. l. is a standard depiction. We can suggest that the die cutter had a number of submittals which he used to cut his coins. When he needed the personification of a province he pulled out the depiction of HISPANIA without mentioning the rabbit which here was out of place (Curtis Clay). Because of fairness: Already Pick writes on p.194, note 4, that this type reminds on some depictions of provinces of Hadrian, e.g. of that of HISPANIA. Now a historical excursion: When the Phoenicians came to Spain about 1100 BC, they hold the rabbits - which they don't know - for dassies (rock hyrax) of their homeland. Their name was Phoenician 'shaban' and therefore they called Spain after their dassies 'i-shapan', coast of the dassies. From this name the Romans made HISPANIA, from which came Espagna and Spain. So Spain is originally the 'country of the rabbits", actually the 'country of the dassies'! I have attached a pic of a dassie (Procavia caspensis) from South Africa (from Wikipedia). He looks a bit like a rodent and the mistake by the Phoenicians is understandable, but actually it is a relative of - the elephant! Sources: (1) Plinius, Naturalis historiae (2) Pierre Seguin, Selecta Numismata Antiqua, Paris, 1665 (3) Joseph Hilarius Eckhel, Doctrina numorum veterum, Wien 1792-98 (4) Bernhard Pick, AMNG Bd.I (5) Stevenson, Dictionary of Roman Coins (6) Wikipedia Best regards
Excellent coin! The rabbit is obvious after you find it but I can see how it could be missed on a less perfect coin or when working quickly.
Great coin! As for the reverse figure and devices, perhaps in total it is meant to represent spring and fertile/bountiful lands? Beautiful young woman holding budding branches, water, rabbit...
Hi @Jochen , wonderful coin and very interesting discovery. I have a question.. perhaps a very silly question but I am a new collector so perhaps you won't mind: When you state this: We can suggest that the die cutter had a number of submittals which he used to cut his coins. When he needed the personification of a province he pulled out the depiction of HISPANIA without mentioning the rabbit which here was out of place. Is it understood that Mints received artworks, orders, specs, samples, etc. from a central agency or central Mint? This would obviously make sense as mints in remote areas of the Empire would need guidance for portraits, legends, probably production targets, etc. I just wonder if any of this type of documentation (or references to this type of documentation) has survived?
Hi Claudius! It's only a suggestion. But we know that the die cutters always get a picture of the new emperor. Before they get this official pic of the Emperor they used a variant of the last emperor. And we should keep in mind: The ancient die cutters were not so free as today. When they cut a deity they used the pic of a well known statue or a statue of their city. And they have had standard depictions which were wide spread over the empire. Think of Asklepios, Dionysos or Hermes, to name only few. The suggestion for the rabbit pic is logically deduced. Jochen
Thank you .. I am not questioning the deduction.. I am sure it is sound. I was just curious if there are any references or documentation that survived the ages ..
I see no way of proving this. Today's die cutters have very little freedom with designs handed down from above and approved by authorities. We see a lot of variation in ancient details. In some cases we believe the reverse was copied fro a work of art familiar to the cutter. I can not accept the possibility that the city of Nicopolis did not own at least one statue of Apollo Sauroktonos but the variations in those reverses even from the same period make me wonder where the cutters got the idea for, for example, the dart version as opposed to the standard grab version. I envision the cutters being tasked to create beauty and, as long as they were good at doing that in the eyes of management, they had a lot of freedom to practice their art. The cutter may have been a slave (we don't know) but he was a valuable property or employee whichever was the case. Not all were as good as the one that cut the rabbit reverse but I suspect he was considered a valuable treasure to his city and treated accordingly.
Dear Doug! Thank you for your answer. You have shown that the die cutter (or his authority) has more freedom than I have thought, even if it's only about details. With more freedom in our time I thought of contests where artists send in their own individual, fanciful suggestions, something I have not read of ancient die cutters (or authorities). Jochen
I suppose we all have theories but no evidence that I am aware of. Do we even know it was a "he"? Was the person ankle shackled and only fed when the work was deemed acceptable? I hope not. Perhaps the addition of the rabbit was an artistic way of this cutter sliding in a bit of individuality (a form of freedom in itself?) .. no one knows.. but I do hope they were treasured... the theory makes us feel better.
