Last December, I posted my example of one of the only two trigas ever depicted on Roman Republican coinage, issued by C. Naevius Balbus in 79 BCE (Crawford 382/1b). See https://www.cointalk.com/threads/fi...020-all-roman-republican.371290/#post-5202953. I knew at the time I bought that coin that I wanted a specimen of the other Roman Republican denarius depicting a triga, but it's taken a long time for me to find one that I liked enough (in the sense of showing sufficient detail and not being excessively worn) to buy. The one I finally chose arrived recently, and I'm quite pleased. (Even though I suspect that the patina has had some artificial enhancement -- because it resembles other Roman coins offered by the particular dealer -- it doesn't really bother me.) Here it is: Roman Republic, T. Ma[n]l [= T. Manlius, T. Mallius, or T. Maloleius], Ap. Cl. [= Ap. Claudius Pulcher or Ap. Claudius Nero], and Q. Vr. [= Quintus Urbinius or a reference to the first two moneyers as Quaestores Urbani), 111-110 BCE (Crawford) or 105-100 BCE (Mattingly, Lockyear, and Yarrow]. Obv. Head of Roma right, wearing winged helmet and two-drop earring, with hair beneath helmet tied in back; behind Roma’s head, quadrangular shape with circle inside it/ Rev. Victory in triga right, holding reins in both hands; horses cantering with third horse turning head back to first two; in exergue, T•M[AN]L(or M[A]L) [all ligate]•AP•CL•Q•VR [VR ligate]. Crawford 299/1b, BMCRR Vol. I 1293 [ill. Vol. II Pl. XXX No. 23], RSC I Claudia 3, Sear RCV I 176 (leg. var.), RBW Collection (2014) Nos. 1141-1142 at p. 236. 17 mm., 4.02 gr.* *Identity of Moneyers: The identities of the first (T•M[AN]L or M[A]L) and third (Q•VR) moneyers named on this coin (the first and second moneyers named on another variety, Crawford 299/1a, which is identical except for a reverse legend reading AP•CL•T•M[AN]L(or M[A]L)•Q•VR) -- i.e., with the first two names switched) are “quite uncertain” (Sear RCV I at p. 106), and even the identification of AP•CL has been questioned. First: It is obvious on close examination that the monogram for the first moneyer (on my variety of this coin) includes not only an “ML” but also an “A,” all ligate. It is conceivable that the monogram also includes an “N,” coinciding with the first three arms of the “M.” Thus, as Crawford explains at Vol. I p. 313, scholars have variously proposed a T. Mallius (see, e.g., Babelon and H. Grueber, BMCRR I at p. 199 n. 1), a T. Maloleius, and a T. Manlius as the identity of this moneyer. Crawford prefers the last of the three, and “identif[ies] the moneyer with T. Manlius Mancius, Tr. Pl. [Tribune of the plebeians] 107.” Id. Both RSC I (in its 1978 3rd edition, at p. 31) and Sear RCV I (at p. 106) follow Crawford’s identification. (See also Harold B. Mattingly, “Roman Republican Coinage ca. 150-90 B.C.,” in From Coins to History (2004), pp. 199-226 at p. 207.) Second: Grueber followed Babelon (vol. i p. 345) in identifying the second moneyer, “Ap. Cl.,” as the Appius Claudius Pulcher who was “the military tribune of B.C. 87, and the interrex of B.C. 77, who defended Rome against M. Aemilius Lepidus” (BMCRR I at p. 199 n. 1) -- rejecting Mommsen’s identification of this moneyer with the Appius Claudius Pulcher who was “praetor B.C. 89, having previously held the office of curule aedile, consul B.C. 79, and proconsul in Macedonia B.C. 76, where he died” (id.), and was the father of the notorious Publius Clodius Pulcher. However, almost all the modern authorities agree with Crawford (see Vol. I p. 313) in adopting Mommsen’s view that that this moneyer was “presumably Ap. Claudius Pulcher, Pr. 89 and Cos. 79.” The one exception appears to be Mattingly, who suggests that “Ap. Cl. is more likely to be a Nero than a Pulcher at this time.” (Harold B. Mattingly, “Roman Republican Coinage ca. 150-90 B.C.” (originally published in 1998) in From Coins to History (2004), pp. 199-226 at p. 207.) But he does not explain his reasoning, and the only Appius Claudius Neros I have been able to find lived either a great deal earlier (a praetor in 195 BCE; see https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Claudia_gens) or considerably later (according to some sources, a child of Tiberius Claudius Nero) than the period of this moneyer. Furthermore, if the Appius Claudius Pulcher who was Consul in 79 BCE was not one of the moneyers for this coin, then the fact that the only other Roman Republican coin ever to depict a triga was also issued in 79 BCE (see discussion below) would have to have been a complete coincidence, which appears unlikely. See Liv Mariah Yarrow, The Roman Republic to 49 BCE: Using Coins as Sources (2021), Section 2.1.1 n. 26 at p. 219. Third: In BMCRR, Grueber adopts the early theory of Theodor Mommsen and Ernest Babelon (contra J. Eckhel) that the third name on both varieties of this issue -- “Q•VR” -- was not the name of a third moneyer, forming a triumvirate of the mint, but should be read as quaestores urbani, “showing that Appius Claudius and Titus Mallius (sic) issued these coins in virtue of that office and not as ordinary moneyers. That this interpretation is the more probable one is shown by the fact that the names of Appius Claudius and Titus Mallius are interchanged in the legends, but the title Q•VR is always placed after them.” (BMCRR I p. 199 n. 1.) (The Quaestores Urbani, among other things, were “entrusted with the custody of the public money, with the receipt of tributes and imposts, and with expenditure of the state revenue.” See https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Quaestores Urbani.) Crawford rejects this view (see Vol. I p. 313), adopting the even earlier theory of Joseph Eckhel (Doctrina Numorum Veterum, Vol. III, p. 250 (Vienna 1796)), cited at BMCRR I p. 199 n. 1, that “Q•VR” signifies a third moneyer named Quintus Urbinius: “The consistent recurrence of the letters Q•VR at the end of the legend provides no evidence for the resolution of Q(uaestores) Ur(bani), contra Th. Mommsen [citation omitted]; on one contemporary bronze issue struck by three moneyers (no. 285/3-7b) the name of Cn. Domitius appears consistently on the obverse, the names of Q. Curtius and M. Silanus consistently on the reverse; on two contemporary silver issues (nos. 283 and 284) one moneyer out of three fails to appear at the head of the list. Against Mommsen’s interpretation may be urged the fact that only one Quaestor Urbanus seems to have been in charge of the Aerarium [“The Exchequer or Public Treasury; the place where the annual revenues of the republic were deposited,” see https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Aerarium] at any one time, at any rate down to Sulla [citations omitted]. The letters Q•VR at the end of the legend on this issue should be regarded as representing a name and the whole issue should be regarded as struck by three moneyers.” Therefore, “the third moneyer is presumably a Q. Urbinius, not otherwise unknown, perhaps the father of C. Urbinius, Q[uaestor]. 74.” Id. Moreover, given that the depiction of a triga on the reverse -- the first such depiction on a Roman Republican coin; see below -- may plausibly be interpreted as symbolizing the three moneyers named on the coin, that interpretation would not be possible if the coin was struck by only two moneyers. Dating of Issue: In 1904, Grueber dated this issue to 91 BCE (see BMCRR I pp. 199-200 & n. 1.) But all the more recent authorities have assigned the issue to a date at least a decade earlier. Crawford dates the issue (No. 299/1a-1b) to 110 or 109 BCE (see Vol. I p. 312), based on artistic grounds as well as its inclusion in the El Centenillo hoard (see id. p. 68). However, the current scholarship -- although largely ignored by dealers -- appears to concur, based on an intensive analysis of more recent hoard evidence, that the issue should properly be moved forward to the 105-100 BCE period. See, first, Harold B. Mattingly, “Roman Republican Coinage ca. 150-90 B.C.” (originally published in 1998) in From Coins to History (2004), pp. 199-226 at pp. 200 (calling Crawford’s reliance on the El Centanillo hoard “rather unsatisfactory”), 203 Table 1 (showing the issue’s frequency in, e.g., the Imola and Idanha hoards), 206 Table 2 (grouping this issue with Crawford issues in the 308-318 number range), 207. Kris Lockyear of University College London (responsible for the “Coin Hoards of the Roman Republic Online” [CHRR] database; see http://numismatics.org/chrr/) is in agreement. See K. Lockyear, “Mind the Gap! Roman Republican coin hoards from Italy and Iberia at the end of the second century BC,” Numismatic Chronicle 178 (2018), pp. 123-164 at p. 13, Table 5 & Fig. 7 (relying on a “multivariate statistical analysis” to confirm Mattingly’s conclusions, at least for this issue, and, as a result, grouping Crawford 299/1 with Crawford 308, 316-323, and 327-330). See also Yarrow, supra, Section 2.1.1 n. 26 at p. 219, citing Lockyear 2018 as demonstrating that “299/1 is likely later in the relative chronology of the coin sequence than previously thought.” Quadrangular Device behind Roma’s head on Obverse: The various catalogs all note the presence of a quadrangular shape or device on the obverse behind Roma’s head; a few also note that this device contains a circle inside it. Sear RCV I at p. 106; see also BMCRR I at p. 199. No such circle is visible inside the quadrangular device in the dealer’s photo of my coin. However, this close-up photo does appear to show a small circle inside the quadrangle, near the top -- as well what looks like a faint image of a second circle near the bottom. Note that the quadrangle itself is not fully closed; it is not clear whether the device was originally intended to be open or simply looks that way because of the strike and/or wear: ACSearch shows approximately 450 examples of Crawford 299/1a-1b. In the photos of many of them, to the extent the quadrangular device is even still visible, no circle can be seen inside it. However, a number of the examples do appear to show a single large circle inside the device, touching or almost touching the lines of the quadrangle -- by contrast to the small circle(s) on my example: Thus, here are two examples from Roma Numismatics auctions, sold on 02.10.2011 and 16.06.2021: And here is an example sold by CNG on 09.01.2018, on which the device behind Roma’s head appears almost heart-shaped: The only attempted explanation I have found of the obverse quadrangular device and the circle(s) inside it is by Grueber in 1904, who suggested that they “may be a representation of of a corn-measure seen from the top, similar to such as were discovered some years ago at Pompeii.” (BMCRR I p. 200, continuation of n. 1.) However, this explanation depends upon and derives from Grueber’s proposed dating of the issue to 91 BCE, when “M. Livius Drusus, as tribune of the plebs, proposed and carried out laws for the distribution of corn or for its sale at a low price, for the assignment of public lands, and for the establishing of colonies in Italy and Sicily.” (Id. pp. 199-200 n. 1.) Given that all the scholarship in the last 50 years has rejected Grueber’s dating of the issue, on the basis of the substantial subsequent hoard evidence (see above), there no longer appears to be any basis for his interpretation of the quadrangular device and its interior circle. But, as stated, I have seen no other interpretation. Triga on Reverse: As explained in Numiswiki, a triga is “[a] three horse chariot. In republican coinage usually the deity is being pulled by a Quadriga or four horse chariot. The Triga only appears on two Republican coins. The first appearing in 110 BC [sic] on the denarius of Ap. Claudius Pulcher, T. Mallius [sic] and Q. Urbinius. The only other example being on serrated denarii of C. Naevius Balbus in the time of Sulla.” https://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=Triga. See also Sear RCV I p. 106, noting in its discussion of Crawford 299 that the triga ““is rarely depicted on the Republican coinage, the only other example being on serrate denarii of C. Naevius Balbus issued some three [sic] decades later in the time of Sulla.” Nor, I believe, is a triga depicted on any Roman Imperial coin. (The only example I have found of a Roman Provincial coin depicting a triga was issued in Thyatiria in Lydia under Severus Alexander; see https://rpc.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/coins/6/4376.) Here is my example of the only other Roman Republican representation of a triga, with its description and footnote. Note specifically the boldfaced discussion of the surviving use of the triga in the late Republic: Roman Republic, C. Naevius Balbus, AR Serrate Denarius, 79 BCE, Rome Mint. Obv. Head of Venus [or Juno, see BMCRR p. 366] right, wearing diadem, necklace and long earring, hair long, S • C [Senatus Consulto] behind / Rev. Victory, naked to waist, driving triga right, with rightmost horse turning head back towards the others; control-number CLIII (= 153, with L in form of upside-down T); in exergue, C•NAE•BALB [AE and LB ligate]. Crawford 382/1b, RSC I Naevia 6 (ill.), Sydenham 760b, Sear RCV I 309 (ill.), Grueber, BMCRR 2926-2976 (this control-number at BMCRR 2964), RRM I Ch. 6 at pp. 28-31 [Michael Harlan, Roman Republican Moneyers and their Coins, 81 BCE-64 BCE (2012)]. 19 mm., 3.92 g.* * The moneyer is “not otherwise known” (Crawford p. 398), although he has been speculatively identified with the Sullan cavalry officer named Balbus, mentioned by Plutarch, who reached Rome in time to stop the Samnites’ advance on the Colline Gate. (Harlan at 28.) The deity on the obverse has most often been identified with Venus (Crawford p. 398, Harlan p. 30, RSC I p. 68. Sear RCV I p. 130), particularly given her claimed resemblance to Venus as depicted on earlier coins by Gaius Norbanus (Crawford 357) and Lucius Cornelius Sulla (Crawford 359) (see Crawford, id.). If she is Venus, the depiction could be another allusion to the Sullan victory at the Colline Gate, which took place near the Temple of Venus Erycina. (Crawford and Harlan, id..) However, Grueber identifies the deity as Juno (see BMCRR p. 366), given the similar head expressly identified as Juno Moneta on a later coin of L. Plaetorius (Crawford 396). This was a large issue (as was the next issue, the denarius of Ti. Claudius Ti.f. Ap.n. Nero, Crawford 383, which also bears the “Senatus Consulto” authorization). According to Crawford, there were 280 obverse and 311 reverse dies of this issue in two subtypes, the first bearing the letters of the Latin alphabet on the obverse as control marks (type 382/1a), and the second bearing the letters of the Latin alphabet and the numerals from I to CCXXX on the reverse (type 382/1b, represented in this coin). See Sear RCV I at p. 130:”This and the following type represent further large outputs of coinage specially authorized by decree of the Senate, doubtless necessitated by the extensive military operations during the dictatorship of Sulla.” Specifically, according to Harlan (p. 29), this issue and the next were minted for the use of the proconsul Quintus Caecilius Metullus Pius (see Crawford 374/1, the Pietas with elephant reverse) for paying his troops in Sulla’s campaign against the rebellious Sertorius in Spain. Sear also notes at p. 130 of RCV I that the three-horse chariot (triga) depicted on the reverse “is rarely depicted on the Republican coinage, the only other example being on a denarius of Ap. Claudius Pulcher issued in 111/110 BC” (Crawford 299/1). Harlan also states at RRM I pp. 30-31 that “[t]his is the second and last time that the triga appears on Repblican coinage.” At p. 31, Harlan cites Dionysus of Halicarnassus, who said that “the triga, used long ago by Homeric heroes, was completely out of fashion with the Greeks” by this time. The triga’s current use in Rome in the late second and first centuries BCE, when it was no longer used by the Greeks, “was only found in the celebration of the Ludi Romani, a religious and ceremonial survival of the games originally held by the dictator Aulus Postumius to commemorate [his] victory [over the Latins] at Lake Regillus” in the 490s BCE (famously aided by Castor and Pollux). Id. As the Roman practice in these games is described by Dionysius of Halicarnassus (7.73.2), the “third horse, joined to the team by a trace, runs alongside the two horses yoked together in the usual way” -- explaining why the third horse on the reverse looks back at the other two. According to Harlan, “Naevius’ imagery is intended to recall that ancient victory which established Roman imperium, echoing the caput rerum theme found on the coinage of Aulus Postumius Albinus [Crawford 372/1]. Victory driving the three-horse chariot shows that all efforts to dispute Roman rule were fated to end in Roman victory.” (Emphasis supplied.) By contrast, as stated above, it is reasonable to interpret the first depiction of a triga, on Crawford 299/1a-1b, as representing the triumvirate of moneyers that issued the type. Indeed, as also noted above, there is a possible explanation for the only subsequent depiction of a triga (on the C. Naevius Balbus denarius, Crawford 382/1) that is much simpler than Harlan’s complicated theory of a symbolic represenatation of Roman imperium: assuming that the AP•CL who was one of the three moneyers named on Crawford 299 was the Appius Claudius Pulcher who was later Consul in 79 BCE, the fact that Crawford 382/1 was itself issued in 79 BCE strongly suggests that its otherwise unique depiction of a triga was no coincidence, but was a tribute to Appius Claudius Pulcher and his earlier issue as moneyer. See Yarrow, supra, Section 2.1.1 n. 26 at p. 219: as an example of a moneyer’s issue having some “close connection with the consul” of that year (see id. p. 69), pointing out that “[Crawford] 382/1 copies the reverse of 299/1 in the very year the moneyer of 299/1 became himself consul.” If anyone can think of a possible meaning of the shape or device behind Roma's head on the obverse, please feel free to post it! Otherwise, please post your own examples of Roman -- or Greek! -- trigas, and/or your favorite bigas and quadrigas, or any other coin you think is relevant.
This is obviously a wild guess, but to me, it(quadrangular device) appears to be four dolphins swimming nose-to-tail.
Donna, your Roman Republican posts are wonderful. Lovely examples of these triga types and impressive research as always. To my astonishment, I actually have both of the coins in this post - my RR collection is not very large, thus the astonishment. Quadrangular device! I never noticed; I think it is visible on my budget example, barely: Roman Republic Denarius Appius Claudius Pulcher, T. Manlius Mancinus, Q. Urbinus (111-110 B.C.) Rome Mint Helmeted head of Roma right / Victory in triga right, AP CL T MANL Q VR in exergue. Crawford 299/1a; Sydenham 570; Claudia 2. (3.85 grams / 18 mm) eBay Dec. 2013 Here's the other one - not one of the more flattering renditions of Venus - she looks like a boxer with a fat lip! Roman Republic Denarius C Naevius Balbus (79 B.C.) Diademed head of Venus right, SC behind / Victory in triga right; numeral (I-XXXXIII) above, C NÆ BALB in exergue. Cr382/1b; Naevia 6, Syd 769b. (3.82 grams / 17 mm) eBay Dec. 2013
Wow. That's very creative! But what would the interior circle(s) signify if that were the case? Given all the work that gets done examining control-marks and other symbols on Roman Republican coinage, it would astonish me if it turned out that no numismatist has tried to figure out the meaning of the quadrangular device on this coin since Grueber in 1904. But I haven't been able to find anything more recent discussing this question, in books or articles or elsewhere.
Hi @DonnaML, Congrats on #62! Regarding the quadrangular device - it is interesting to note that it is quite often a triangular device. As in these examples from ACSearch and I think your heartshaped example. It does look oddly familiar - but I have no good explanation: mystical symbols, game piece or weight, crop circles? mine is a quad variety and readable as T•MNA•AP•CL•Q•VR : Appius Claudius Pulcher, T. Manlius Mancius, and Q. Urbinius, 105-100 BC, AR Denarius, Rome mint Obv: . Helmeted head of Roma right; quadrangular device to left Rev: Victory driving triga right, holding reins; T•MNA•AP•CL•Q•VR in exergue Ref: Crawford 299/1b
Thanks! Those do look like triangles containing circles. Interestingly, the dealer's description of my coin described the device as triangular -- which it's clearly not on mine -- and suggested that the three corners represent the three moneyers*. I wonder where he got that idea from. And the theory wouldn't explain all the specimens on which the device is, in fact, quadrangular. Unless they're all just badly executed triangles! I think I see 2 small circles inside your quadrangle. Much like on mine. *I guess it would either be that, or summoning the Devil. Wrong religion, though!
@DonnaML those are always great and interesting research you share with us. Thank you very much. Enjoy very much reading them and learning, although I don't have any of those Roman Republican denarii to share.
One of my favorite RR coins: the Triga. And, @DonnaML , yours is an excellent example! RR Naevius Balbus 79 BCE AR Den Venus SC TRIGA Sulla S 309 Cr 382-1 RR Pulcher Mallius Mancinus Urbinius 111-110 BCE AR Den TRIGA S 176 Cr 299-1a RR Clodius Pulcher T Mallius AR Den 111-110 BCE ERROR Flipover Double-Strike Roma Triga Cr 299-1b S 176
An interesting "device" behind Roma. I'm not sure what I'd call that shape -- which seems to have a point at the lower left -- but it definitely was intended to represent "something"!
John Humphrey in his book on the Roman circus argues that triga-racing was an originally Etruscan tradition that was adopted by the Romans to some extent but never reached the popularity of biga and quadriga horses (John Humphrey, Roman Circuses. Arenas for Chariot Racing, Berkeley/Los Angeles: UC Press 1986, 16–7). Maybe that's the reason why trigae are seldomly found on Roman coins. Roman Republic, moneyers: Appius Claudius Pulcher, T. Manlius Mancinus, Q. Urbinus, AR denarius, 111–110 BC, Rome mint. Obv: Helmeted head of Roma r.; behind, quadrangular device. Rev: T MAL AP CL Q VR; Victory in triga r., holding reins in both hands. 20.5mm, 3.82g. Ref: RRC 299/1b.
